Paul Kengor: Direct your anger at the true abusers |

Paul Kengor: Direct your anger at the true abusers

Last Tuesday night, following a special solemnity Mass honoring the Virgin Mary, a model of purity, I came home and read the grand jury report on sex abuse in six Pennsylvania Catholic dioceses.

It’s an 884-page report. I first went to the specific allegations against priests in my diocese of Erie and the Pittsburgh diocese in which I was baptized. I saw names of priests and bishops I know or have met. I was, of course, mortified.

The most heinous case involves a “group of four” in the Pittsburgh diocese, which allegedly forced a boy to stand on a bed in a rectory, stripped him, and made him pose as Christ on the cross. They reportedly snapped photos of their victim, which they added to a prized collection of child porn.

These devils marked their favored boy-toys with gifts: gold-cross necklaces.

Imagine. This isn’t merely twisted, perverse, psychologically warped, but diabolical — right out of the pit of hell.

I felt sick to my stomach.

If there was a degree of reassurance in the report, however, it was this: in many cases, a good priest or bishop stepped in and took effort to stop the abusive priest or remove him from ministry. This included some cases with the much-maligned and criticized (deservedly so) Bishop Wuerl.

And yet, as I worked back to the report’s introduction, I read this summary statement, which has become the most-quoted passage in the media: “Priests were raping little boys and girls and the men of God who were responsible for them not only did nothing: they hid it all.”

Stop right there. The latter part of that line outraged me because it isn’t what I saw; it is categorically untrue. The very report itself contradicts that. In fact, I found the name of my previous priest — a longtime friend — in the report. He was not one of the abusers. Quite the contrary, I was gratified to see Father Mark listed for immediately reporting an accused abuser based on just one allegation. He is one of many men of God who did something, who hid nothing. And yet, good men like Father Mark endure nasty looks of shame when wearing their collar in public out of suspicion they’re child molesters.

To repeat the line of the report: “Priests were raping little boys and girls and the men of God who were responsible for them not only did nothing: they hid it all.”

That kind of hyperbole is outrageous and damaging.

It’s clear from the language, including some of the remarks by Attorney General Josh Shapiro, who condemned what he called a “sophisticated” and “systematic cover up” aimed at protecting “the institution at all costs,” that the target is the institutional Catholic Church. This should not be pursued with a broad brush. Too many decent men get smeared.

Now, this is not to say that the good work and intentions of the likes of Father Mark were not dealt with effectively enough up the chain of command. The failures were clearly significant.

So, my word of caution: Prosecute the abusers, punish them to the fullest extent, and let them ultimately answer to God. But please, realize that there are so many more fine men who wear the collar and don’t engage in such sick depravity. Direct your anger not at them but at the true abusers.

Paul Kengor is professor of political science and executive director of
The Center for Vision & Values
at Grove City College.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.