Levada brought back accused priest with conditions

[Omaha Steve]

Source: AP

By WILLIAM McCALL

PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) - A top Vatican official who now oversees the office that handles cases of alleged abuse by priests once returned an accused priest to administrative duty in Oregon on the condition that he be barred from direct contact with children or teenagers.

As archbishop in Portland from 1986 to 1995, Cardinal William Levada removed Father Joseph Baccellieri in 1992 after learning about 20-year-old complaints involving teenage boys but allowed him to return on a limited basis under close supervision in 1994.

The move had conditions, according to a letter released Saturday in defense of Levada. The archdiocese's clergy personnel director outlined a plan approved by Levada that prohibited Baccellieri from having contact with children or teenagers.

Other conditions included continuous counseling and therapy, regular reporting by his therapist to the archdiocese, close monitoring, limitations on ministry activities and restrictions on living outside a parish setting or under the supervision of other priests.


Read more: http://apnews.excite.com/article/20100404/D9ERU1AO1.html

[rurallib]

1. maybe states should combine those restrictive living rules for sex offenders

with placement of churches: not allow a church to be built where children can get to it.

[jody]

2. Or use a rating system like movies where some locations would be rated R or X n/t

[anachro1]

3. My theory of this problem

Could it be that we have all along we have been misunderstanding the TRUE purpose of religion? Maybe child sexual abuse was such an original and natural facet of early christianity, that it is perpetuated simply because child rape was normal back then.

This has to be the only reason they move their offending priests around like strategically placed chess pieces. F_ck a few children, then move the priests to another neighborhood, so they can f_ck a few more.

This is the only reason I can think of why priests appear to ADORE raping children. Sort of a little 'treat' or or morsel of flesh they can still allow themselves to indulge in? Like some sinful candy they can mindlessly pop in their greedy mouths because they can?

I realize my premise may sound offensive to some, but this seems to be the only reason the church keeps consistently supporting AND covering up these, by now, thousands of priests, who have been implicated over the past 50 or so years.

Was child rape the norm in then time of christ? We already know how much the old testament devalued women and children.

Seeing how the bible states in Genesis 19:8, Lot thought nothing of whoring off his daughters to houseguests & such, and slavery being the norm of the day, it would make sense that back then there would have been very few boundaries on little boys either. They were bought and sold like chattle.

Perhaps one of the unspoken of (nowadays, at least) traditions back then was that priests preferred young boys, and they have been simply keeping this one tradition alive ever since. That would explain the church's consistent reluctance to finally address this one issue. Maybe with no access to little boys, the church would simply dissolve for lack of clergy?

AND no more money as well?
Inconceivable!

At what point does the church STOP shielding these criminals, or are they hoping to silently approve of their actions forever?

[defendandprotect]

4. Italians, who know the RCC well, say that abuse has been going on since day 1 . . .

[Lydia Leftcoast]

6. No, it's a result of the celibacy requirement

Think about it.

Priests have to vow to abstain from sex with women for their entire lives.

So who is going to be most willing to take such a vow?

Men who aren't interested in sex with grown women in the first place.

That includes gay men, in which case there's no harm done, since they'll restrict themselves to other gay adult men. The number of gay priests and monks in the Catholic church is an open secret.

It also includes pedophiles. The Catholic priesthood is a great hideout for a pedophile, because he has a perfect excuse not to get married or otherwise have relationships with grown women, and lots of access to children and youth.

By the way, Japanese Buddhist monasteries in the medieval period had the same problem. Young boys were sent to school at monasteries, and the monks would pick out the cutest ones, dress them as girls, and abuse them sexually. Since the monks' vow of celibacy literally forbade only sex with women, they figured that boys were OK.

It's the celibacy.

The ancient Romans were into pedophilia, as were the Greeks, but I've never seen any evidence that first-century Jews were.

[valerief]

8. Generally, it's a MALE thing. nt

[valerief]

7. That was South Park's take on the Vatican's attitude toward child rape. nt

[Iowa]

9. I don't think you quite have it...

Here's my take on it:

You're dealing with an organization that is run by an all-male club. Most of the men who enter this club decide to do so at a very young age - many right out of high school. They tend to be very immature in most respects - with psycho-sexuality being only one area. Many are stunted... they do not progress through some of the psychological developmental milestones. These tend to be guys who never dated and who find women to be discomfiting, frightening, and mysterious. They tend to be nerdy types; even their relationships with men aren't entirely "normal". It's like they're 10 years old in some respects, and they never really progress beyond that. They tend to be weak, dogmatic, pathologically introspective, childish, self-loathing, and incredibly self-absorbed.

Suddenly, after a few years in a protected seminary environment, these remarkably weak and ineffectual men don a roman-collar and are thrust into a community where everyone is calling them "father", kissing their ass, hanging on every word they utter, jostling to be near them, and showering them with attention, money, favors, and respect. Most live like kings. They become local celebrities literally overnight. Before long, they begin to believe they deserve it. The worst among them rise to the top and become bishops, monsignors, and cardinals. Some become predators, others are consumed with power, and most will preserve the life they believe they are entitled to at any cost. They will circle the wagons to protect their kingdom, to protect themselves, and to protect one of their own. It's hard to imagine a scenario with more potential to explode with corruption, debauchery, greed, and psychopathy. It's an accident waiting to happen.

All of it... the child rape, the cover-ups, the stonewalling... it all goes back to the truly fucked-up psychological make-up of many of the men who choose to be priests. And the only way to stop them is to (1) cut off their money and (2) prosecute. It's a hopelessly messed up organization, it creates much harm, and it needs to be brought down.

IMHO

[anachro1]

10. Wow!

Brilliantly put!

[defendandprotect]

5. Shouldn't there be a RCC limbo stick of ethics, morals which would prevent this insanity! Oops!

Of course not!

If there were, then this wouldn't be happening in the first place!!

[anachro1]

11. Here's an answer to the whole problem

If the CC must insist on celibacy, the only answer would be to make castration mandatory for the priesthood.

This would weed out the child abusers real quickly.