This past week, the Catholic church was scandalized when a prominent friar was quoted as saying that victims of sex abuse are sometimes to blame for the abuse they suffer at the hands of first-time offending priests. He even said he felt sorry for Jerry Sandusky.
CNN excerpts two of Rev. Benedict Groeschel, of the Franciscan Friars of Renewel’s statements:
“People have this picture in their minds of a person planning to – a psychopath. But that’s not the case. Suppose you have a man having a nervous breakdown, and a youngster comes after him. A lot of the cases, the youngster – 14, 16, 18 – is the seducer,” he said.
Regarding Sandusky, the Friar said:
“Here’s this poor guy – Sandusky – it went on for years. Interesting: Why didn’t anyone say anything? Apparently, a number of kids knew about it and didn’t break the ice. Well, you know, until recent years, people did not register in their minds that it was a crime. It was a moral failure, scandalous; but they didn’t think of it in terms of legal things.”
Now, Groeschel clarifies that he did not intend to blame the victims, and the National Catholic Register also issued an apology for printing such damaging statements.
“Child sexual abuse is never excusable,” the newspaper said in a statement. “The editors of the National Catholic Register apologize for publishing without clarification or challenge Father Benedict Groeschel’s comments that seem to suggest that the child is somehow responsible for abuse. Nothing could be further from the truth.”
What do you think the newspaper should have done with Groeschel’s statements? What should be done with Groeschel now? Is there a way in which it’s better to have Groeschel put this twisted, faulted logic of victim-blaming out in the public so that it can be challenged and dismantled?
About Joanna Schroeder
Unfortunately, we have heard similar comments from other Catholic and Protestant clergy. Something in the religious culture of these religious groups inducesthe clergy to see themselves as victims, and see those children as the aggressors. What is it that attracts a tiny number of predators into the clergy? Are they looking for some type of salvation, and when faced with a huge temptation, succumb? Is there a culture within religious leaders that they can do no wrong because they believe they have been chosen by their god?
I don’t know any of the answers.
“Seem to sugest…” Yeah, that sound like something one say in a real apology.
The most WTF part was that according to the embedded CNN video this Rev. Benedicte Groeschel runs a retreat for priests and offering them guidance. And that include priests being involved in sexual abuse of children. Either he’s suffering a variand of Stockholm syndrome or he’s outright an enabler, nevertheless he should not be anywhere near a mentor role for priests who commit, have commited or are afraid to commit sexual abuse towards children.
“Now, Groeschel clarifies that he did not intend to blame the victims …”
Baloney! He said what was in his heart. It’s too late to put the proverbial cat back into the proverbial bag. The damage has already been done.
As a Christian these people make me want to scream! At this point I’d better stop now before I say something I’ll regret. I swear, words fail me …
Your man is 79 yrs old. Maybe it’s time to take him off the interview circuit.
“On January 11, 2004, Groeschel was struck by an automobile while crossing a street in Orlando, Florida. He received a head injury and broken bones and over a four hour period, had no blood pressure, heartbeat or pulse for about 20 minutes. A few days later the trauma triggered a near-fatal heart attack”
Khttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benedict_Groeschel#Car_accident
So let’s remember he has been doing good works since 51 and maybe have some compassion.
OK – Groeschel’s old – he’s infirm – he’s had recent trauma and a cerebral incident …. and the explanation of the comments being published by The National Catholic Register (EWTN News, Inc) are?
Has their whole editorial team had a recent cerebral incident?
To quote them: “Given Father Benedict’s stellar history over many years, we released his interview without our usual screening and oversight. We have removed the story. We have sought clarification from Father Benedict.”
Now what is that minor issue of abusers and enablers having community presence and trust as part of their known Modus Operandi? How Sandusky can you get! For He’s a Jolly Good fellow…. And So Say All Of Us?
The way some are talking about Groeschel’s comments fails to address all of his work – not just the Public, but the private too. Context is needed to grasp the gravity of his comments – which I have to say are Unconscionable.
My alarm bells (Read Sirens Blasting) are ringing over Groeschel’s directly involvement in providing pastoral care and guidance to (accused) Abusers …. and then as his gears are slipping, it would seem he is letting slip what his attitudes have been.
Groeschel holds a doctorate in psychology (Columbia University) and has taught pastoral counseling for more than 40 years at the archdiocesan seminary, St. Joseph’s Seminary in Yonkers and other University venues? There may need to be a review of the students who have passed out and are now in the wild!
“At this point, (when) any priest, any clergyman, any social worker, any teacher, any responsible person in society would become involved in a single sexual act — not necessarily intercourse — they’re done. And I’m inclined to think, on their first offense, they should not go to jail because their intention was not committing a crime.”
Hmmmm? So given Groeschel’s background in Psychology and Counselling – at which point does “Mens Rea” come into play? What is the Psychological Boundary of Intent? It is also an interesting statement given that The Catholic Church have attempted to plead that it’s better to control within their own structures than publicly reveal what they themselves see as an immediate cause for banishment.
It should be remembered that, as it is impossible to actually get inside a person’s head and see intent, it has to be inferred from surrounding facts and circumstances. …. and he says that abusers are unlikely to be Psychopathic – Sociopathic, and yet one of the most alarming factors is the lack of interest and even ability to balance personal intent against another person’s life – rights – personal integrity and convince others and even themselves of what needs to be said, heard and accepted to get out from under.
It seems that Groeschel just was not up to speed on the subject … which is odd, given that the Vatican was writing about it back in the 1930′s. Most disturbing of all, is that under the Vatican and Canon Law procedures for dealing with abuse cases, the procedure “Specifically Prohibits” a Church Officer acting as Judge from making the accused swear to tell the truth. Once you put on the Catholic Drag you do not need to swear to tell the truth, only after you have been found guilty and swear to not do it again!
Groeschel’s comments also have to be seen in light of the Catholic Churches position on Abusive Priests, and the Secret Internal Vatican Documents (Supremae Sacrea Congregationis Sancti Officii – in force since 16 March 1962 under the instruction of Pope John XIII) which required absolute secrecy on the conduct of such priests and all who knew of them, came into contact with them and “Counselled” them – on pain of excommunication! Groeschel would have been party to the operation of that internal procedure.
Section 73 does make clear what is seen as “The Worst Crime”. The document even has all the pro forma paper chase included, so any one who did not keep the “Strictest Secret” – a “Secret of the Holy Office”, the paper work has already been rubber stamped for the Excommunication to be processed with out any delay! Church documents even say that the most “Distasteful” way for cases to come to light is through independent state and federal authorities pressing charges. It’s best kept quite and private! .. and that was the view in 1995, after the balloon had already gone up.
It should also be considered that in the investigation of such cases, all papers were channelled through the Vatican Embassies back to Rome, and so treated as Diplomatic Papers and exempted from federal and state law – and Groeschel would have authored reports that made their way haste post haste under diplomatic cover to Rome to the Congregation Of The Faithful (Spanish Inquisition) and direct to the Office of The Pope. No matter which way you turn you find the distinct whiff of body corporate submerged in it’s own internal politics, machinations and concerns – and Groeschel was swimming neck deep in that soup.
In light of that Groeschel’s comments and views are beyond alarming. It’s also worth considering very carefully that Groeschel was also fully aware that any person who accused a priest of sexual abuse (be that the child, parent, teacher etc) was also sworn to secrecy under pain of excommunication! People giving any form of evidence were also sworn to secrecy – which explains why those who were not seen as catholic were not called to give evidence as to what they had seen, that which had been reported to them and that which had been DONE to them.
In 1974, Groeschel is asked(?) by The Diocese of New York to set up Trinity Retreat, to meet the needs of Clergy. Prior to that, Groeschel had been hands on with young male delinquents wanting a fresh start St. Francis House, Brooklyn (1967), and also young women who were with child and unmarried, or women with children who were homeless….. and as a founding member of a Franciscan Group he would have been only allowed to do that after he was vetted by the Vatican and had sworn to comply with all Papal Bulls and Canon Law. Given Groeschel’s extended contact with youth – and his educational background and position – it is inconceivable that he has not at some point in his career become the person who has uncovered clergy abuse – and his comments stink of “Post hoc ergo propter hoc” rationalisation for his own exposure and what would be his activity under Canon Law, under Secret Code and pain of his own excommunication.
In light of all the background and canon law jiggery pokery, I have to say that what has been said by Groeschel stinks to the High Heavens … and then some! No wonder there has been outcry – and there is more than just Victim Blaming at play! If you know your bible you should be considering Pontius Pilate and hand washing!
The papers and rules of supposed Canon Law are out there very publicly – many have fought hard to have such papers made public, and they do make very interesting reading! They also show just who has been silent, why and for how long! It’s odd too how some authors of highly questionable materials have expressed concern that what they thought were private documents have been made public.
Even more can be found at BishopAccountability.org – the Document Bank.
So let’s remember he has been doing good works since 51 and maybe have some compassion.
Since 51 and compassion in context is a better way to view matters. I think that Groeschel may have made his last public statement and will be prevented from making others on Compassionate Grounds. Others are unlikely to publish anything else on Corporate Policy Grounds.
@mediahound- nice research- should be MediaBullDog.
My gut level reaction continues to be Catholic Bashing is antisemitism for liberals so based on the limited info in the lead-in is whoa.
I don’t know rev Groeschel- but do know of him and until this absurd interview vis children came out had heard nothing bad of him.
Song of Solomon 1:3 Pleasing is the fragrance of your perfumes; your name is like perfume poured out. No wonder the maidens love you!
MediaBullDog? Nah ! Media”Blood”Hound – bred specifically to track human beings! Track by smell and stench and not by sight and appearance. An ancient breed too, at over 1000 years old – also known as St. Hubert Hound, as the breed comes from Belgium and from within the Catholic Church.
…. Catholic Bashing is antisemitism for liberals…? How near Godwin can you get, without pulling a full Godwin? P^)
Personally, I am happy to call out any Institution which due to internal Dogma, Zealotry and Financial Concerns fails to deal with abuse of any kind – religious or otherwise. I’m also in the unenviable position of knowing where the bodies are buried and just how much gets covered up – and more to the point “How” it gets covered up! That’s not just the administration of a cover up – it’s the Psychology of the Cover Upper’s..
layer upon layer – bureaucracy upon bureaucracy – system gaming whilst those in the know claim they could do nothing or had their hands tied behind their backs ……. it’s all been seen far too often.
There is a great deal of concern about the conduct of certain religious groups and child abuse – Catholic, Presbyterian, Protestant, Methodist and the Pot-Noodle Confused. Then you have the Moslem, Buddhist, Shinto and many other groups who equally need to be looked at very closely, both at home and globally. Hell – there was even that Rabbi, David A. Kaye, on “To Catch A Predator“. 6 1/2 years in prison. Do watch the video – it reveals the attempts at manipulation and cover up using social convention and supposed deference for men of god – such a small “g”!
Paedophile and all forms of sexual abuse are far too easily hidden, when you have a social construct such as religion, and power dynamics that facilitate that abuse. There is a known time bomb of some, who in Ministry, have been moved abroad to destinations lacking infrastructure, eduction of the masses and even media. The extent of bad management really is so poorly understood and the scale of global victimisation so poorly grasped. It’s so easy to convert some into Missionaries and hide them up some back water of the Congo, Nile or Amazon…. It’s been going in, most embarrassingly, for centuries. .. and please don’t mention the Orinoco, Limpopo and Zambezi. Papua New Guinea could do with a great deal of oversight too!
I too had heard nowt of Groeschel until the last week – but it took me very little time to get profiling and that was when the *Sirens* went off! Boy did they go Off! Duck and Cover comes to mind!
I also have the advantage that a brother-in-law is an ex-catholic priest who left due to the abuses he saw and the cover ups – and he’s not been silent. That was 25 years ago – and it’s taken that long for the snow flake on the tip of the iceberg to get some attention. Maybe after another generation or two covering up clerical sexual abuse will be a thing of the past?
I’m seen as rude and unwholesome because I ask about three periods of time – the past – the present – and the future. Both myself and my Brother-in-law carry whistles 24/7, and when people see us pucker up ….. they blow… maybe hot or maybe cold … but they do blow!
On 25 November 1981, Pope John Paul II named Joseph Aloisius Ratzinger as the Prefect of the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith – which is the group within the Vatican which has had full knowledge of all activity of abusive priest (the one’s who have been caught) and what has been done with them – and Ratzinger as Prelate knows it all! Of course, Mr Ratzinger had his name changed by ecumenical deed pole to Pope Benedict XVI. He could in one fell swoop lift the lid – but I fear (LOL) that the coffers of the Vatican would not survive the revelations. Nor would the Catholic Church. as it presently stands .
Oddly, Mr Ratzinger became a priest in 1951, the same time as Groeschel – Mr Ratzinger is also Professor and academic in his own right, and it is also noted that his elevation to Cardinal in 1977 was quite odd, as he lacked any relevant experience in the field of “Pastoral Care”. His background in theology is great, allowing him to debate the number of angels that can dance on the point of a needle – but there has been long-standing concern that reality has not been a forte!
On a related and Un-Catholic issue (I’m very Liberal in my focus) – Only last week The Church Of England took a step that has not been seen for 100 years, and placed a whole of the Diocese of Chichester on notice that they are under specific scrutiny for on-going failures in “Safeguarding” both children and vulnerable adults concerning abuse, including sexual abuse. The language of the report is guarded and most carefully chosen – but anyone reading the report (An Interim Report) issues 28 August, has alarm bells ringing – and internal cover up within Chichester is the conclusion. Only last month a further three cases of child sexual abuse became public – and the report even has the authors hinting that they know of more cases still. To quote Marcellus in Hamlet, Act 1, Scene 1, “Something is rotten in the Diocese of Chichester”.
Ecclesiastical skirts can only go so far when people wish to hide, and are using others to help/facilitate/cause the hiding! Mind you – those who hide within systems and institutions are relatively easy to flush out – given that the system gaming can be detected. It’s the lone wolves who really need close attention – and when they have been sent up a creek with a one way paddle and no oversight – well, it’s called shit creak for a reason – and for those afflicted, it’s also known as hell!
… and it’s all been done under the guise of “Supremae Sacrea Congregationis Sancti Officii” – and anyone who speaks out and tells the truth gets cast out and ex-communicated …. Jesuit motto “Give me a child until he is seven and I will give you the man”.
Interesting to have such a Motto and then get choirs to sing “Suffer Little Children to Come Unto me”. Luke 18:16 and Matthew 19:14. Some evidently have decided that their actions are for the benefit of the child, and bring the child closer to the construct of God, through the experience!
Never underestimate the human capacity to take ideas and written words as a way of justifying their own mindset and resultant conduct. That’s why this hound deals in stench and not appearance. Lucifer is called the bringer of light – it’s easy to illuminate and shine the light where you want people to look. It’s far harder to sniff out reality in the darkness, and get that illuminated.
Are you suggesting that we should have compassion (read: let it slide) for a man who are unable to be compassionate himself since he suffered a head-injury in a horrible traffic accident? It’s almost as you argue that his stated attitudes towards children who have been sexually abused by priests and other authoritative persons magically appeared due to his accident. Perhaps he had a vision/epiphany of these seducing children? If the brain injury had anything to do with this interview it’s probably that he now lacks capacity to hide what he really thinks about priest sexually abusing boys (and girls as I am sure also have happened).
You say he have been doing good work since 51. He probably have done some good work since 51, but if this attitude towards sexual abuse victims have influenced any advice and counseling to “wayward” priests I certainly wouldn’t call it good work.
@tamen- I’m suggesting that if I’m not pissing my pants & drooling at 79 i’ll be happy, my Dad died at 79 and he was no longer the intellectual giant he once was.
Benedicte Groeschel were not incoherent. I think he said those things because that’s what he really believes, I don’t think this belief is something which only recently aroused in him due to diminished mental capacity after some injury and old age. His injury and old age perhaps have impaired his ability to censor his beliefs before he expresses them. In the average Joe that would perhaps merely be problematic, but here we have a friar who have spent considerable time of his life counceling and guiding wayward priests, some of them wayward because of inappropriate contact (and worse) with children. I don’t think telling those priests that those pesky kids keep coming on to the priests are somewhat to blame does much for the recidivism rate.
This is so nauseating!
@ media- I’m sure you can cite the speaker- and here we are at Godwin. Someone is supposed to,have told the Nazis – what makes you think you can topple the catholic church? We’ve been trying for 2,000 yrs and it is still here.
Drop,the whistle & get a horn.