By Mark Esposito, Guest Blogger
Fr. Benedict Groeschel is a prominent member of the ultra-right Franciscan Friars of the Renewal with his own religious column and a programming spot on EWTN, the ominous sounding Global Catholic Channel. In a recent article in the Catholic Register, Groeschel takes aim at the Sandusky scandal at Penn State and the objects of his ire are the child abuse victims. Because, to the learned friar, it is Sandusky, and not his prey, that is the rightful recipient of sympathy. Calling Sandusky “this poor guy” he says:
“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.”
Groeschel also went on to explain that, based on his take on history, sexual relationships between men and young boys are not matters of legal concern:
“If you go back 10 or 15 years ago with different sexual difficulties — except for rape or violence — it was very rarely brought as a civil crime. Nobody thought of it that way. Sometimes statutory rape would be — but only if the girl pushed her case. Parents wouldn’t touch it. People backed off, for years, on sexual cases. I’m not sure why. . .
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.”
It’s easy to dismiss this as the ramblings of a crazy old man who has since apologized and blamed his age and the lingering effects of an automobile accident for the inexplicable sentiments. But what is frightening is the absolute silence from Rome or any other Catholic authority decrying the madness. Oh, the Catholic Register hurriedly pulled the piece and apologized but not until the backblast became overwhelming. The CR added that it published the story based on Fr. Groeschel’s “stellar history,” and without the publication’s “usual screening and oversight.” The Franciscan Friars of Renewal went into damage-control and stated the obvious that, ” A child is never responsible for abuse. Any abuser of a child is always responsible, especially a priest. Sexual abuse of a minor is a terrible crime and should always be treated as such.”
But the troubling aspect of the scandal hasn’t been explored. What if Fr. Groeschel’s words aren’t the product of a month-long coma and failing “health, memory and cognitive ability” as the hierarchy suggests? (After all he still has his TV show explaining Catholic dogma). What if the editors of the Catholic Register actually did do the jobs they are paid for and approved the article? And finally, what if these sentiments, far from being on the periphery of Catholic thought, are in the mainstream attitude of Catholic clergy?
Scary?
No more so than the myriad of child sexual abuse scandals that have rocked the church and made Sandusky an amateur by comparison.
~Mark Esposito, Guest Blogger
Folks, The Catholic priesthood evolved into the world’s largest pedophile club many decades ago. I have personal and professional stories that made it clear to me long ago.
Mark, I’ve ranted about the depravity of the Catholic Church, this is exhibit# 2455. Elaine, good link..Donahue is a buffoon and always good for idiotic quotes. It’s like having Joe Biden as your spokeman.
“You want to know what’s really scary? This pervert has been screening candidates for admission to the priesthood for 40 years.” (mespo)
That explains how pedophiles gained such a prominent position within the Catholic priesthood. And he’s still there … merely hypothesizing my eyebrow.
A rifle is a good way to debunk a monk.
I have always said that God made rifles for a good purpose. More humans need to put them to good use. I wanna know what that monk is doing under the robes with the missing arm and hand.
It has to be either the devil or the children because, heaven forbid, it is actually the grown-ups and , gulp, priests (and monks)
Actually, thanks to the miracle of the Internet google can provide you with several links to the whole thing Wally. What the church has taken away technology will reveal. Thank Yahweh the church no longer control the means of communications.
Back in the middle ages when prelates slipped up and told the truth about their organization they would often put on rough garments made of sackcloth (burlap really) smear ashes on themselves and agree to be flogged on the church steps as a sign of penance and devotion to the church.
At 90 this creep is probably too old to withstand the abuse but he certainly could take a vow of silence. While that might save the church from further exposure of its sickness it would have the benefit of sparing us from witnessing their diseased minds.
Waldo,
Here’s an excerpt from the interview that I found on Commonweal:
What happened to NCRegister’s controversial interview with Fr. Benedict Groeschel?
August 30, 2012,
http://www.commonwealmagazine.org/blog/?p=20516
Excerpt:
From the interview:
Part of your work here at Trinity has been working with priests involved in abuse, no?
A little bit, yes; but you know, in those cases, they have to leave. And some of them profoundly — profoundly — penitential, horrified. 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.
Why would that be?
Well, it’s not so hard to see — a kid looking for a father and didn’t have his own — and they won’t be planning to get into heavy-duty sex, but almost romantic, embracing, kissing, perhaps sleeping but not having intercourse or anything like that. It’s an understandable thing, and you know where you find it, among other clergy or important people; you look at teachers, attorneys, judges, social workers. Generally, if they get involved, it’s heterosexually, and if it’s a priest, he leaves and gets married — that’s the usual thing — and gets a dispensation. A lot of priests leave quickly, get civilly married and then apply for the dispensation, which takes about three years. But there are the relatively rare cases where a priest is involved in a homosexual way with a minor. I think the statistic I read recently in a secular psychology review was about 2%.
Would that be true of other clergy? Would it be true of doctors, lawyers, coaches?
Here’s this poor guy — [Penn State football coach Jerry] 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. If you go back 10 or 15 years ago with different sexual difficulties — except for rape or violence — it was very rarely brought as a civil crime. Nobody thought of it that way. Sometimes statutory rape would be — but only if the girl pushed her case. Parents wouldn’t touch it. People backed off, for years, on sexual cases. I’m not sure why. I think perhaps part of the reason would be an embarrassment, that it brings the case out into the open, and the girl’s name is there, or people will figure out what’s there, or the youngster involved — you know, it’s not put in the paper, but everybody knows; they’re talking about it. 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. What has the Church learned in terms of preventing this? We’ve been screening seminarians for decades. That’s nothing new. I’ve been doing it for 40 years, for our old community — the Capuchins — for the diocese, for our small religious community. … It takes a lot of time — four or five hours — to do a psychological screening, and I don’t have a lot of time. There were times in the past when I’d do 30 of them. I’d do it for our community and our sisters. Also, it’s very expensive. Now, I never got a nickel, but it costs between $800 and $1,200 for a psychological battery. I used to teach psychological evaluations. You know, we’ve reduced considerably the number of seminarians, and the Church is going to be in plenty of trouble as time goes on — one pastor for two or three parishes. So permanent deacons, laypeople, deaconesses — if you don’t want to call them that — you’re going to need a lot of people helping to keep the parish going. And that may not be a bad thing at all. Years ago, in the New York Archdiocese, you were an assistant for about 25 or 30 years before you became a pastor. We’re making men pastors with five years’ experience. It was too long before, and it’s too short at present. There have been a number of high-profile priests in recent years who have gone astray.
As a prominent priest yourself, would you say there’s something about fame that goes to the heads of priests like this?
It could. I wouldn’t want to say about any particular person, but people could be foolish enough to take themselves too seriously. It’s true: I’m reasonably well known, and that’s because I broadcast and I write. I don’t write and broadcast to be well known. It’s the opposite. For many years, I was happy as the chaplain of Children’s Village. I’ve written 45 books, but the vast majority of my books are written for devout people [holding up a copy of a recent book, he continues]: Now, this annoys me, when they put my picture on the cover. But it’s also very good to be coming close to death. I just passed, three years ago, the average age of when a man in the United States dies: 75. I’m pushing 79. … When you start getting close to the age where you start thinking about where you’d like to be buried … you do think about the Church’s, the Christian belief — and largely the belief of many other religions — that the individual, as a person, goes through death, and they have to some degree memory and will. What’s missing when you have a dead body? That’s what’s there. The whole personality is gone. That’s on the other side. The Christian belief of the saints … they’re on the other side. I’m looking forward. I’m fascinated by what’s coming next. We’re passing through this valley, and, for a great many people, life has been difficult. Not just for the poor. There’s a sign I put up there on the wall: Be calm and carry on. I am immensely grateful to God that I knew when I was 6 or 7 years old that I was supposed to be a priest — and a friar or a monk when I was 13 or 14. A poem that we had by Longfellow, called The Legend — beautiful — about a monk who had seen a vision of Christ; and he had to leave the vision because the bell was ringing, and the poor people were there to be fed. And he didn’t know — Should I go or should I stay? Should I go to the ragged people at the gate? And he goes, and he feeds the poor for several hours. And he comes back and opens the door, and Christ is standing (there), and Christ said to him, “If thou had stayed, I must have fled.” The nuns taught it to us in the eighth grade. It put it in my mind to be a monk. And I look back — and I didn’t know much about priests. We had very nice priests in the parish. I knew nothing about priests not getting married. Father O’Donnell, a big Irishman who walked up and down every street in the parish every day — one of the great old priests, in Our Lady of Victory in beautiful Jersey City. I was there and very happy.
I wish there were a link to the full article. I know it got pulled, but since the author is quoting from it, I assume he has access to the full article.
Sadly it seem there are many people that believe that it’s ok to molest children because “It never used to be a crime”.
Well it is now you sickos!
The Church has always viewed the child abuse scandal as a PR problem to be managed in order to protect the institution. One Cardinal argued it was a scandal created by an Anti catholic media. This man is not alone in his blame the victim mentality look no further than the Republican Party platform.
Age and infirmity are no excuse for this kind of belief system. I have been evaluating sex offenders for almost a half century and have heard this kind of mental gymnastic before. Almost to a man (most are men, a smaller percentage are women) sex offenders either blame the victim, or try to place blame outside themselves. This guy did not come up with this overnight. He sounds just like a lot of guys we had on the Protective Custody unit of the prison. We had to keep them in PC because even the hardened lifers and gang bangers wanted to kill them.
Thanks, Elaine M. You want to know what’s really scary? This pervert has been screening candidates for admission to the priesthood for 40 years.
Propaganda network……
Zarathustra,
Speaking of Bill Donohue:
Catholic League’s Bill Donohue Defends Priest Who Blamed Children For Their Abuse
by DAVID BADASH
AUGUST 31, 2012
http://thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/1-catholic-leagues-bill-donohue-defends-pedophile-sympathizing-priest/news/2012/08/31/47879
Excerpt:
Bill Donohue, president of the Catholic League, issued a statement yesterday defending Father Benedict Groeschel, who earlier this week blamed child victims of pedophile priests for their rapes. Calling Groeschel’s service “heroic,” and his record “impressive,” Donohue claims Father Groeschel merely “hypothesized how a young person (14, 16 or 18, as he put it) could conceivably take advantage of a priest who was having a nervous breakdown.” Groeschel told the National Catholic Register that in a “lot of the cases, the youngster — 14, 16, 18 — is the seducer.”
Die already, Groeshel, you 90 year old Piece of Crap. You sound like Bill Donahue, that other pathetic Catholickass apologist. Both of you have kept Geebus waiting for far too long…. Go ahead, both of you, disappear… make this a better Planet
Mark,
“But the troubling aspect of the scandal hasn’t been explored. What if Fr. Groeschel’s words aren’t the product of a month-long coma and failing “health, memory and cognitive ability” as the hierarchy suggests?”
“And finally, what if these sentiments, far from being on the periphery of Catholic thought, are in the mainstream attitude of Catholic clergy?”
*****
Glad you wrote a post about this. I had read this story the other day–and just shook my head. One has to wonder why the interview was published. One has to question the judgment of the editors of the Catholic Register. I think Groeschel may believe what many other child sex abusers believe. I think this type of mentality may be more common among the clergy than we’d like to believe.
Excellent find Mark, because it brings focus on psychopathology masking as wisdom.
This adds to what George Monbiot wrote about denialism and the leaders of the world literally going mad:
(The Peak of Sanity – 5, quoting Monbiot). It is getting scary out there … but we have been warned for a long time to closely watch out for and beware of those who are exposed to power.
It doesn’t matter whether they are secularists or religionists.
UV rays are said to combat bacteria. Keep on shining Mark.
WRONG
“Groeschel takes aim at the Sandusky scandal at Penn State and the objects of his ire aren’t the child abuse victims.”