Being a man, being a priest, missing the point.
And yet I cannot understand anyone who suggests not being affectionate with children is nearly as bad as sexually abusing them, for that is what this article boils down to. That and the suggestion that his very maleness makes him suspect in other's eyes.
Well maybe it does. But when it comes to children and their welfare people ought to be slightly more wary than less. And when it comes to a catholic priest people have a very recent history to study on whether their suspicious worries have grounds or not.
Yes it must be hard to feel suspected, to sense hostility or doubt merely because of your gender or ethos, but in this case it's understandable. The catholic church has a lot to answer for and a lot of grief on its hands. Decrying people as practically hysterical because they are wary is not good enough.
"This imbalance in our reaction is brought about by a naivete in modern Irish life, and particularly the media presentation of it,"
When in doubt blame the media. Doubtless there was a lot of amping in certain quarters when the sex scandal began to surface, but that does not lessen the enormity of what occurred. And his use of the word 'naivete' perplexes me. It was naivete that allowed priests to have so much power in the first place, and naivete that allowed so much to go on for so long behind closed doors.
Recalling things through a haze of rose is not going to alter entrenched views, and things that are done cannot be undone, no matter how much Fr Tony Flannery might wish it.
Labels: abuse of power.