As a survivor of clergy sexual abuse, I wonder as we see the same behavior by Cardinal George in Chicago as Cardinal Law in Boston, six years after Law’s disgrace, do Catholics believe things have changed?
There seems be be tremendous apathy.

My family turned away from the Catholic Church in the wake of the sex-abuse scandal, which was quite a shift for a Latin-American family. Since then, I’ve felt uncertain about how to “find” faith again — resuming Catholicism is difficult because the wounds in the Church certainly haven’t healed yet, but conversion to Protestantism of some sort feels very drastic. What does Ms. Kennedy say to the post-scandal dilemma?

As a professional astronomer and a feminist, I, too, struggle with what it means to be Catholic and whether I do more harm to humanity and myself by leaving or staying in the church. I’ve written a book about my journey from a Catholic childhood through atheism and back to a practice of Catholicism in constant tension with the hierarchical church. It’s “The Sky is not a Ceiling” published by Orbis Books and available on Amazon.com.

I didn’t want to post twice but I keep hearing Ms. Kennedy talk about Catholics quest for “social justice” yet there has been very little in regards to the victims and survivors of sexual abuse.
Where are these strong activists? I see very few standing with us.
To repeat, I say this as a survivor of clergy sexual abuse.

As a non-Catholic, I actually find it problematic that someone would be Roman Catholic because of a commitment to social justice while simultaneously denying the doctrinal propositions of the Roman Catholic Church specifically or even Christianity more generally. Surely the doctrinal content of the Catholic Church is an important distinction between itself and other institutions.

To put it bluntly, if one is Catholic because of the sense of community but disagrees with the Church doctrinally, then they should join the Rotary; if they are committed to social justice but not the doctrine, why not Amnesty International instead of the Church? If one wants a sense of spirituality or connection to “the Almighty” but not worship of the Trinity, why be Catholic instead of Jewish or Muslim? At some point, we must accept the Church on its own terms rather than trying to make the Church in our own image.

For myself, while supporting many of the social stands of the Catholic Church, I am not Catholic because I cannot ascent to all of its beliefs, nor do I belong to a church whose beliefs I share if there is no practical application of those beliefs. Pope Benedict is perhaps correct that there should be a smaller, more committed Catholic Church if the Church is to survive as a single camp.

Some women had ‘back alley’ abortions once, and some women and men strangled their babies in bathrooms. But when societies take over the task of murdering children we have returned to pagan savagery, sanctioned barbarism, however antiseptic it is made to appear.

The abortion holocaust strikes at the root of the matter of the sacredness of human existence. No one is safe in a world of legalized abortion where human persons are reduced to disposable meat.

Thank God the Catholic Church almost alone has not wavered on this, even as other talk—despite the horrific numbers of abortions of convenience—of “decreasing the number of abortions” in particular years. No. It is right or wrong, evil or good.

I am Catholic and strongly disagree with the caller that tells us that Ms. Kennedy is not Catholic.

Being Catholic is spending your life devoted to a life of social justice. If you are Catholic, I don’t know how you can NOT vote for Obama. His message of social justice is more in tune with the message of Jesus than the intolerance of McCain/Palin.

Overturning Roe v. Wade endangers women’s lives — if you are pro-life then you are pro-social justice — that translates into remedying social ills that lead to abortion such as poverty and limited access to a good education.

One thing I find infuriating is people inside and outside the Church whose reverence for life seems to begin and end with unborn children such as the caller who said he can’t vote for Obama, but is apparently willing to give a pass to someone who supported bombing innocent civilians in an unprovoked war, cutting social programs, supported the death penalty even after obvious miscarriages of justice … etc.

One thing I find disappointing with those who are pro-choice is the unwillingness to require people – men and women – to accept responsibility for their choices. If a woman and man choose to have sex, they are responsible if the outcome is a new human life and they shouldn’t be allowed to end that life merely because they find it inconvenient. Rape, of course, is another matter. There is no choice there.

I point out “Article 6, Section C.” of the US Constitution. “Oath of Office; No religious test.
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.”

This is not in the Bill of Rights. It is in the original text. Those who use a religious test to vote or not vote for a candidate are in grievous error. You will note that “all executive and judicial officers” includes the President and Supreme Court.

I am Jewish and I voted for Kennedy for president. I used no religious test in my vote. I ask that others will be guided by this principal this November. I heard a comment during this “show” that he would not vote for Barak Obama because of a religious test.

“Those who use a religious test to vote or not vote for a candidate are in grievous error”

I disagree completely.

How is using religion any different than using whether one is liberal or conservative as an indication of the decisions they’ll make in office?

No one can predict every situation a candidate will face in office, so we must infer what we can about the candidate’s values and understandings of the world. If a candidate used to be a member of white-supremacist organization or the Communist Youth League, or if they are currently a member of a club that bans women, blacks or Jews, we would certainly take it into account.

Religion informs people’s values and world views. Why shouldn’t I take it into account? N.B I’m referring to someone’s actual, personal religious beliefs – not the nominal religion they were born into but don’t practice.

Uh…so human life is only reverenced if it wasn’t a rape? Kill the rapist then, not the baby! He’s the one committing the crime. No child is unwanted, there are thousands upon thousands of childless couples who are seeking newborns elsewhere because of the astronomical abortion rate in this country.

How can you say you’re pro-life of the unborn but it’s OK in the case of rape, incest? It’s a human life or it isn’t….and who says it isn’t fit to live because it’s from a violent situation? That baby committed no crime! Why should that little life pay for the crime of its father?? People are so fickle!

Since before the wheel was rounded, all men and women, from all religions, from all over this world, take aim at each other and fire at will. How are we ever going to get any of our needs met, be they personal, social, economical or spiritual, if we continue this “my way or the highway” approach to life and God? Perhaps some self-reflection, cleaning up our own personal lives and realizing that the grace God speaks of is not filled with hate, but love, maybe then we can move a mountain or two.

Have any of us posted here adhered to the purest form all of the Lord’s 10 commandments? I think not. All those who claim to be Christians, whether, Catholic, Evangelical or Protestant, should be setting examples, not tearing into each other.

Imagine this, Catholic against Catholic, never thought I’d live to see this.

Ms. Kennedy was great and keeping her composure while listening to the judgmental caller from Boston. Nice work, Kerry.

I think, it is very important for us to get the message from Jesus Christ. Thank you Kerry, I will look for your book at the bookstore about being Catholic in the 21st Century
Manuel

Ms. Kennedy attributes the drop in the number of abortions during President Clinton’s administration to the administration’s pro-women policies.

However, statistics from the Guttmacher Institute (www.guttmacher.org) show that the abortion rate (number of abortions per 1,000 women, aged 15 – 44) peaked in 1981 (the start of President Reagan’s first term) and has been steadily declining since.

It is not clear that any one thing is causing this decline, but I think it would be hard to attribute it to President Clinton, since the decline started 12 years before the start of his first term.

It is always important to make sure facts and statistics are not being distorted, but especially during debates as emotional as the one about abortion.

For those who are expecting any kind of reform in the Catholic church, I can only say dream on! Or maybe pary a lot, but like any other prayer, not supported by effort, it will not be answered. The previous Pope has ensured that all the Popes in the near future, will be a clone of his by appointing the maximum number of Cardinals, who think like he did. Since only they can elect the Pope, the church is doomed to live in the dark ages. The Church is like any dictatorship or totalitarian regime, where the population have no voice. Only a popular revolution will bring change. Luckily unlike a dictatorship, dissenters cannot be executed or jailed, only excommunicated (which to some catholics is the same thing). But if you believe that God does not like good people, just because they disagree with the Pope and his coterie, you deserve your misery. As a lapsed Catholic, I am glad I am out of the ridiculous idea or original sin and feeling of catholic guilt.

Just a note to the non-Catholics listening to this program: Ms. Kennedy, as nice as she is, does not present the views or beliefs of the Catholic Church, but her own views. Since they are in some degree different from those of the dogmas of the Catholic Church, she is to that degree separated from the Church. As to pro-life, the Catholic Church’s goal is to end all abortion, not to decrease the number, so leaving it legal and educating people is not an answer (would one do that with armed robbery?). Love the Kennedy’s, but don’t follow their version of Catholic practice.

This interview was heaven sent. I was on my way to St. Joseph’s Oratory in Montreal to try and get some answers for my life’s direction. I am a deacon candidate a year from ordination. I am also a diocesan director of youth ministry. My faith is my life, but instead of feeling closer to the church I feel alienated. Recently I have been told toe the party line – that I am expected to represent the church in all of its teachings – my opinions no longer count. That attitude is enough to make me think twice about my decision to serve the church, but what is the the real problem is the more I study and the more I learn about the church and its doctrines the less I believe. I have spent six years in study, the last three at Notre Dame and our own seminary. I won’t tick off the issues that I question, but I feel a distint ultra-conservative movement within the church whose aim is to stifle all thoughts and practices that aren’t 100% Catholic. Thus I agree with the author in saying the Catholic Church has become irrelevant. It is operating under the same mentality as the Bush admisitration’s isolationist policies. If you’re not with us you’re against us. This church needs real change – we need another Martin Luther, or his female equivalent.

I am a Catholic because I believe in the Holy Trinity, because I believe in the saints, because I believe Jesus died and rose again. My spiritual needs are met by these beliefs. However, faith and church are different. My faith is a personal relationship with God. The Church is run by men; men who are human with personal biases and failings. So my belief in the right for women to choose whether a pregnancy is right for them is different than the Church’s position. I believe that the greatest gift God gave each of us is free will. The right to choose our own path. At the end of our days we stand before God ALONE and answer for our choices. No one else knows the challenges I face in my daily life. No one else has to live with the consequences of an unplanned pregnancy. And no one else, as well intentioned as they may be, will provide the emotional, financial and medical support that some women cannot get from their family during the long 9 months of an unplanned pregnancy. With social programs constantly cut there is very little practical support for women. The truth is, Pro-Life supporters think that adoption is the cure all and end all for poor women. If you can’t afford to keep the baby, give the baby away. That solves your problem and our conscience will be clear, right? Of course, the emotional scarring that comes from some circumstances of unplanned pregnancy do not seem to be of concern to those who would take away a women’s right to choose. But, this is the wonder of being a Catholic. I can choose my own political beliefs and maintain my personal relationship with God. I do not owe anyone an explanation or a justification, do I?

I thought the presentation by Kerry Kennedy thoughtful, balanced, and intelligent. Her poise under attack was inspiring to me.

There are two factors that seem to me significant in explaining current divisions and movements for change in the Catholic Church, my church:

1. There is in the Catholic Church a systemic pattern of abuse by the clergy of the faithful.
a. Abuse is endemic and is not limited to sexual abuse.
b. It exists at every level; there is a pecking order.
c. Because of abuse, many leave or stop participating in the Church or in their stations in the Church.
d. There exists toward clerical authorities an underlayment of smoldering resentment.
e. There exists a credibility gap between clerical authorities and the faithful.
f. The Church has lost a large part of a generation of the young.
g. This pattern of abuse is unavoidable in a feudal organization, such as the Church. It is of the nature of feudal power. Absolute authority favors the development of tyrannical, insensitive attitudes among those in authority. It favors the development of an attitude that one rules by divine right. It leads to unresponsiveness toward those lower in the pecking order. It leads to arrogance.
h. There has been in the Church a modern movement toward greater centralization of clerical power; this has aggravated the effect of this process.

2. Among the Catholic young who are still interested in the Church and among new Catholics, there is a hunger for what it is that is positive in the Church, as they say, for what it is that has attracted sixty generations of the faithful to the Church.
a. They are curious about pre-Vatican II forms and traditions, but not in a doctrinaire way.
b. They are not acquainted with the theology that many of their elders have taken for granted.
c. They want the Church to speak with a strong teaching voice.
d. They are repelled by the in-your-face badgering that has often passed among their elders for confrontation and dialogue in the Church.
e. They are curious about classic non-violence, as exemplified by Martin Luther King, Cesar Chavez, Dorothy Day, Mohandas Gandhi, and others.
f. They are thrilled with opportunities for courageous spiritual adventure and respond with enthusiasm and fervor when much is asked of them.
g. They are not interested in endless talk about what’s wrong with the Church; they’d rather go elsewhere to find challenge and leadership.

I was struck by this latter phenomenon (2.d-g, above) among the young people who came in considerable numbers this past June to the recent 75th Anniversary Gathering of the Catholic Worker movement in Worcester, MA. It is also evident to me in the responsiveness of high school students at Xavier High School, New York City, where my wife is Director of Campus Ministry, to the program of summer service projects in Tennessee and Mexico that is offered by the school.

Most people’s perception of the RCC is based on pure ignorance. The Church does not, nor has ever advocated any kind of sex of its celibate clergy. It amazes me how the Church’s sexual indiscretions make front page news when a study has proven the Protestant Ministers are five times more likely to have a sexual affair with a prepubescent child (Philip Jenkins, “Pedophiles and Priests”, 1.7% Catholic Clergy vs. 10% Protestant Clergy). In Spite of what many self proclaiming experts on the Church may believe (who are both “Catholic” and non-Catholic), all of the Church’s Dogma/Sacraments has its origins in either the Bible (a book the Catholic Church put together 404 A.D.) or Sacred Tradition. Incidentally, anyone who votes for a pro-death (pro-choice is an erroneous, misleading term) candidate CANNOT BE CATOLIC. Not only are you ignorant of Church Dogma/Doctrine, you are ignorant of basic biology as well as what may be the most important and beautiful of phrases ever written from a “secular” document “…that All men are created equal, and are endowed by their Creator certain unalienable rights, among them, Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” (The U.S. Decalration of Independance). Notice that “Life” is first, for without this, everything else is moot. Also note that in our country, you are innocent before proven guilty and have a right to a trail by a jury of your peers. I would behoove all (especially the unborn) to study and do their homework before believing and/or making ignorant proclamations.

I am taking the liberty of writing twice to respond briefly to “bill”.

1. The issue in the sexual abuse crisis within Catholicism has never been about sexual abuse–which occurs everywhere, as you rightly observe. The issue has been about secrecy, denial, lack of accountability, hypocritical deflection of blame, arrogance, betrayal of trust, inappropriate financial practices, and above all abuse of POWER (not sex) by clerical authorities at the highest levels. In order for the faithful to share blame, as some bishops have asked, there must be openness and accountability within the Church.
2. Do you remember Kerry Kennedy saying that she has aborted or collaborated in abortion–resulting in excommunication and exclusion from the sacraments? Or remember her favoring abortion? I don’t. I remember her saying that she did not think that government conviction of aborters could solve the problem. And that improving social conditions has a track record of reducing the number of abortions much more than criminalization.
3. There aren’t any candidates who are not pro-death in some respect (war, abortion, execution, stem cell research, neglect of the poor, euthanasia). Do you believe in not voting? The last Pope said that there is nothing worse than teaching the young to kill.

I was born in the late fifties, and I can remember in the early days in childhood, the gradual changes that appeared in Our Catholic Church. It was recieved with approval for the most part, when we first participated in Mass from the first Missalettes that contained experimental liturgies that would lead to the novus ordo. People were happy! The acts of Faith, Hope, and Charity were still the beggining and end of our faith, and now the Church under Pope John was trying to become more tangible and relevant to share her vast spiritual treasures! Then it happened. I was a sophomore in Public High School when some of my Catholic friends from CYO started passing out pamhlets condeming abortion. The Church had always taught against it–but now, The new Pope, Paul VI had ruled on the Papal commisions report on reproductive health that birth control as well as abortion were wrong. Slowly, and gradually, ones views on abortion, and how identical they are to these encyclicals from Rome were becoming the “gold standard” of Orthodoxy. And our own parish seemed to slowly bipolarize into a liberal/progresive camp, and a conservative/traditional camp–but not tradition as we had understood it as children. Our priests in the 70’s urged us to follow our consciences—and now the magesterium is claiming over us that our consciences our not valid if they disagree with certain teachings. In other words, abortion trumped, not only the death penalty, but the Holy Trinity itself! Being Catholic has become gradually in the twentieth and into the twenty-first century a cult of sexual behaviour and a preocupation with it in all its aspects. I applaud Ms. Kennedy. She is trying to help us all keep our faith and our integrity intact….and in a just and truthful manner I am no biblical schollar, but I know Jesus warned his disciples against imitating the religous leaders of his day who were preocupied with power. “Do what they say but don’t do as they do” are Jesus’ words. I respect and recieve the magesterium of the Church–but on the terms of my conscience…and my vote this year…would not make my archbishop happy I am sure….but had I voted otherwise, I could not live with myself……and that is what I have to answer God for………Thank you……Ms. Kennedy…because the form AND matter, matter….and we have to figure out how to be the Catholic Church in these ruthlessly conflicting and complex realities of a world on the verge of extinction from want of ethic…that is indeed life………Peace to All