Logo

Abuse cases show need for greater women's role, Vatican newspaper says

Thursday, March 11, 2010
By John Thavis, Catholic News Service
ShareThis

VATICAN CITY (CNS) -- A greater presence of women in decision-making roles in the church might have helped remove the "veil of masculine secrecy" that covered priestly sex abuse cases, a front-page commentary in the Vatican newspaper said.

The article said that despite calls by popes and others for welcoming women into equal, though diverse, roles in the church, women have generally been kept out of positions of responsibility.

As a result, the church has failed to take advantage of the many talents and contributions that could have been provided by women, it said.

The article, published March 10 by L'Osservatore Romano, was written by Lucetta Scaraffia, an Italian journalist and history professor who has been a frequent contributor to the Vatican paper in recent years.

As an example of what the church has lost by not taking advantage of women's contributions, Scaraffia pointed to the "painful and shameful situations" of sexual abuse by priests against the young people entrusted to their pastoral care.

"We can hypothesize that a greater female presence, not at a subordinate level, would have been able to rip the veil of masculine secrecy that in the past often covered the denunciation of these misdeeds with silence," the article said.

"Women, in fact, both religious and lay, by nature would have been more likely to defend young people in cases of sexual abuse, allowing the church to avoid the grave damage brought by these sinful acts," it said.

Scaraffia used the Italian word "omerta," a term that refers to the Mafia's code of silence, to describe the secrecy surrounding the sex abuse cases.

The article cited statements by Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI in support of a greater presence of women in the church, not in the ordained priesthood but in roles that are important.

The problem is that these theoretical statements have not been put into practice, it said. In reality, women continue to be generally excluded from decision-making roles in the church, it said.

The article said religious orders have long understood better than other church institutions the importance of reciprocal cooperation between men and women, as seen in the fact that most orders have male and female branches.

Copyright © 2010 Catholic News Service/U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Feminist Stats? Who knows?

You wrote: "And while some women may also be abusive, the vast majority of pedophiles are men."

I think you need to be careful about your facts. The modern Feminist Movement has painted men as "bad" and women as "good". The question remains who came up with the numbers and what was their motives?

As far as the stats on homosexual verus heterosexual pedophile priests; that study was done years ago by Mr. Pineta and his group studying the Catholic Church's scandal. Is it fair to paint many, or most homosexuals as pedophiles? Of course not! The vast majority of homosexuals are, undoubtedly, NOT pedophiles. Keep in mind, however, that one sexually sinful activity can lead to another.

Role of Women in Church

This is an American female prgamatic view forged while praying for vocations in the 1980's:

Better to tackle corporate glass ceilings than biblical belligerent sexism. At least some break through in the corporate and political world.

Feminism = Sexism

From the article:

"Women, in fact, both religious and lay, by nature would have been more likely to defend young people in cases of sexual abuse, allowing the church to avoid the grave damage brought by these sinful acts," it said."

Now, we are supposed to believe that women are superior to men with regard to the abuse of children? Anyone who had to deal with an old "battle ax" nun in Catholic school in the 1960's and 70's knows better. As a first grader in 1967, I witnesed an old nun slapping a boy, because he kept coughing. Soon, he was crying and coughing and the nun kept slapping him, while shouting "Stop coughing! Stop crying! Stop coughing! Stop crying......" Yes, women can be abusive, too!

As far as sexual abuse is concerned: in the US, it was found that 82% of the sexual abuse was homosexual (priests molesting boys), while 12% was heterosexual (priests molesting girls). Draw whatever conclusion you want from that.

Megan Sweas's picture

Be careful

Be careful about your facts. Sexual abuse of children is pedophilia and has nothing to do with homo- or heterosexual attraction: http://www.webmd.com/sex-relationships/features/explaining-pedophilia. It's attraction to children. And while some women may also be abusive, the vast majority of pedophiles are men.

Still, while I am a feminist, I worry about this idealization. "If only women were there, none of this would have ever happened." As if they would have been in a position that they really could have stopped the sex abuse crisis. Watch Doubt. They might be able to protect one child but they don't have the power to change the system of cover-ups. And not all women are perfect. Power can corrupt no matter what gender.

Thought about the phenomenon of sexual urges....

Attraction to the opposite gender, attraction to the same gender, and attraction to children are all sexual urges.  

It is hypocritical for those who indulge in their urges for people of the same gender to condemn those who indulge in their urges for children.   Yes, I'm saying it's hypocritical for those who call for the acceptance (and even ordination) of gays and lesbians to loudly condemn pedophiles!  

Since no one really chooses their sexual urges, how can you condemn anyone simply on the basis of what their urges happen to be (since their urges are beyond their control) ??  If it's impossible, as many homosexuals would say, for gays to control their sexual urges for each other, then how is it possible for pedophiles to control THEIR sexual urges? 

And if it's difficult or impossible to control sexual urges, and since urges are not chosen, how can we condemn anyone on the basis of their urges alone?

Of course, I condemn the abuse of kids.  I'm just trying to point out the irony and hypocrisy of it all.  I'd also say there should be an open and accepting structure in place that would help those, who have (disordered) urges for children (pedophiles), as well as for those who have (disordered) urges for those of the same gender (gays / lesbians), to avoid actions that would harm themselves and others.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
U.S. Catholic insists on a civil and respectful dialogue on our website, following our Comment policy. Comments should be charitable, on topic, and brief. U.S. Catholic reserves the right to delete comments deemed inappropriate. We encourage you to choose your words wisely.