"Blame Woodstock" and Sexual McCarthyism

The New York Times this morning reports on a study commissioned by the American Bishops regarding the causes of sexual abuse by priests. The report finds no support for the view that abuse was caused by celibacy or homosexuality. Instead the approach is to “blame Woodstock.” In other words, poorly prepared priests “landed amid the social and sexual turmoil of the 1960’s and 1970’s.” It is a convenient explanation because it places emphasis on factors outside the Church, factors that the Church has otherwise deplored though the report acknowledges that the Church’s lenient response to the perpetrators compounded the problem.

Nonetheless, the “blame Woodstock” explanation is hard to credit. First, nothing in the Woodstock movement sanctioned pedophilia and to suggest otherwise is a form of sexual McCarthyism. Second, the conclusion depends on the assumption that sexual abuse by priests rose during the 1960’s and 1970’s. To believe this you have to believe that the Church has provided accurate data on the amount of sexual abuse prior to 1960. Third, if Woodstock is the cause, sexual abuse should have risen throughout the culture. It will be interesting to see if the report contains believable data on this subject. Fourth, if sexual abuse rose throughout the culture, more would need to be shown than a correlation with more relaxed sexual attitudes in areas other than sexual abuse.

Beyond its criminal behavior, the Catholic Church has committed one public relations gaffe after another in its attempt to minimize the sexual abuse scandal. This is an insult to the victims. It also strikes a dagger at the claim of the Church to wield moral authority.

Comments

[Steve Shiffrin]

Leaving aside your sarcastic tone, perhaps you could indicate what
facts were made up.

[jhood]

Wow even read the thing yet. I guess if the New York Times Op Ed says it is so so it must be so.

The Catholic Church did not even write the report. But I guess if people want to make up their own facts to fit a talking point go ahead.

[Jimbino]

The last paragraph is telling. Nothing will "strike a dagger" at the authority of the RC church, since most all of us have ceased to acknowledge its authority for a long time, quite apart from the abuse, hypocrisy and cover-up involving children. There are the scandals of supporting of Nazism (or at least failure to come to the aid of the defenseless) and of maintaining a list of forbidden books, maintained until modern times, for starters.

Furthermore, the RC church nowadays consists of little more than public relations, with the result than almost all of its gaffes will perforce involve public relations.