FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Sexual Terror in Action

by BINOY KAMPMARK

Cardinal George Pell is a terrier of the wrong sort. Combative for the Catholic church, he does the Pope’s bidding down under with a loud bark and occasional bite.  Much of it has proven disastrous for the Church’s reputation in Australia and elsewhere.  That particular institution is very much in the spotlight of the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Sexual Child Abuse, and things are not going well. Before Victorian parliamentarians, Pell demonstrated, as he has done for so long, that he shows a distinct “sociopathic lack of empathy” for his victims.

Certainly, for Pell, a degree of blamelessness has been cultivated.  This might well be his own interior justification.  The abusive, institutional mechanism that so typified the church institutions might well have been a cultural monstrosity – but Pell was immune to it.  Or at least, that’s the impression he gives. Governance, and action, are not necessarily the same thing in the Pell book of revelations.

His response, for example, to questioning about why the former Melbourne archbishop Frank Little did conceal instances of abuse is suggestive of that.  “Yes, archbishop Little did cover up but he inherited a situation where there were no protocols and no procedures and, for some strange reason, he never spoke to anybody about it” (The Australian, May 28).  The suggestion is specious, if for no other reason that the Catholic church remains one of the most protocol driven institutions on the planet, a hybrid creature of legal sophistication.  Errors and heresies are noted; behaviour punished, when required. When necessary, bad behaviour has been concealed.

The sociopathic appellation was aptly coined by Anthony Foster, whose daughters had been raped by a priest.  Pell’s response to the man, given in a furniture storage room at a Melbourne presbytery, was not one of much emotion.  When shown a picture of Emma, one of the daughters who ultimately killed herself, Pell said blandly, “Hmmm, she’s changed, hasn’t she?” (The Age, Nov 23, 2012).

Then, the terrier sprung into action.  “If you don’t like what we are doing, take us to court.”  This is the Pell script, one of inscribed institutional violence and protection when necessary. Dissent will be quashed, and detractors punished.  But those engaged in criminal acts…  Well, that’s just something else.  Canon law is a formidable shield, and one that continues to resist the incursions of Parliament and the common law. The current inquiry in Victoria is largely based on teasing out the links of a “Catholic mafia” that systematically frustrated police attempts to account for abuses.

Every concession to inappropriate, and in some causes fraudulent practices adopted by church institutions to complaints of abuse, is always qualified with a steel-like resistance. Pell has expressed his apologies that there was repeated sexual abuse of children, notably those taking place at the hands of priests and lay teachers connected with the church. He even goes so far as to admit that the church handled matters poorly some 25 years ago when a series of complaints came out of the rotting woodwork.

Before Victoria’s parliamentarians, he conceded that “lives have been blighted.” In his mind there was “no doubt about it that these crimes have contributed to many suicides” (The Australian, May 28).  But, while being fully apologetic and “absolutely sorry” for those clergy responsible for abuse, the culture of silence had to be seen differently.  “The primary motivation would have been to respect the reputation of the church.”  There was no inkling that this “mess” was “widespread”.

Once, however, he took that stance, terrier Pell assumed his aggressive posture. As Jack Waterford, editor-at-large at The Canberra Times observed, he did act decisively in setting up a mechanism of dealing with the abuses.  Abusers were identified and punished; victims were embraced, at least to a degree.  Job done, which is precisely why Pell has assumed a legalist posture that takes issue with the continued insistence on church mismanagement.

Some of his colleagues have done the same thing – Bishop Anthony Fisher, and the archbishop of Canberra, Mark Coleridge, for example, assuming stern rebuking positions of victims who remind them about what happened and continue to do so. Both men have taken issue with that they see as bleating on the part of the abused, the unnecessary spirit of “vengeance that drives them and conspires with the culture of violence”.  But the victims, far from speaking to a culture of vengeance, have sought one defining attribute so often missing in Church governance: the presence of accountability in the face of violence that was normalised, ever present yet concealed.

Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge.  He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne.  Email: bkampmark@gmail.com

 

Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. Email: bkampmark@gmail.com

More articles by:

CounterPunch Magazine

minimag-edit

bernie-the-sandernistas-cover-344x550

zen economics

Weekend Edition
January 20, 2017
Friday - Sunday
Paul Street
Divide and Rule: Class, Hate, and the 2016 Election
Andrew Levine
When Was America Great?
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: This Ain’t a Dream No More, It’s the Real Thing
Yoav Litvin
Making Israel Greater Again: Justice for Palestinians in the Age of Trump
Linda Pentz Gunter
Nuclear Fiddling While the Planet Burns
Ruth Fowler
Standing With Standing Rock: Of Pipelines and Protests
David Green
Why Trump Won: the 50 Percenters Have Spoken
Dave Lindorff
Imagining a Sanders Presidency Beginning on Jan. 20
Pete Dolack
Eight People Own as Much as Half the World
Roger Harris
Too Many People in the World: Names Named
Steve Horn
Under Tillerson, Exxon Maintained Ties with Saudi Arabia, Despite Dismal Human Rights Record
John Berger
The Nature of Mass Demonstrations
Stephen Zielinski
It’s the End of the World as We Know It
David Swanson
Six Things We Should Do Better As Everything Gets Worse
Alci Rengifo
Trump Rex: Ancient Rome’s Shadow Over the Oval Office
Brian Cloughley
What Money Can Buy: the Quiet British-Israeli Scandal
Mel Gurtov
Donald Trump’s Lies And Team Trump’s Headaches
Kent Paterson
Mexico’s Great Winter of Discontent
Norman Solomon
Trump, the Democrats and the Logan Act
David Macaray
Attention, Feminists
Yves Engler
Demanding More From Our Media
James A Haught
Religious Madness in Ulster
Dean Baker
The Economics of the Affordable Care Act
Patrick Bond
Tripping Up Trumpism Through Global Boycott Divestment Sanctions
Robert Fisk
How a Trump Presidency Could Have Been Avoided
Robert Fantina
Trump: What Changes and What Remains the Same
David Rosen
Globalization vs. Empire: Can Trump Contain the Growing Split?
Elliot Sperber
Dystopia
Dan Bacher
New CA Carbon Trading Legislation Answers Big Oil’s Call to Continue Business As Usual
Wayne Clark
A Reset Button for Political America
Chris Welzenbach
“The Death Ship:” An Allegory for Today’s World
Uri Avnery
Being There
Peter Lee
The Deep State and the Sex Tape: Martin Luther King, J. Edgar Hoover, and Thurgood Marshall
Patrick Hiller
Guns Against Grizzlies at Schools or Peace Education as Resistance?
Randy Shields
The Devil’s Real Estate Dictionary
Ron Jacobs
Singing the Body Electric Across Time
Ann Garrison
Fifty-five Years After Lumumba’s Assassination, Congolese See No Relief
Christopher Brauchli
Swing Low Alabama
Dr. Juan Gómez-Quiñones
La Realidad: the Realities of Anti-Mexicanism
Jon Hochschartner
The Five Least Animal-Friendly Senate Democrats
Pauline Murphy
Fighting Fascism: the Irish at the Battle of Cordoba
Susan Block
#GoBonobos in 2017: Happy Year of the Cock!
Louis Proyect
Is Our Future That of “Sense8” or “Mr. Robot”?
Charles R. Larson
Review: Robert Coover’s “Huck out West”
David Yearsley
Manchester-by-the-Sea and the Present Catastrophe
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail