Fascinating reading (and it simply confirms my long standing belief that any organization, if it lasts long enough, becomes more concerned with its continued existence rather than whatever purpose it was suppose to carry out) but I do see a particular false logic crop up, particularly in the second half of Part I.

The writer seems to equate Vatican II and the "radical" theologies that rose in the 1960s with the increase of sexual abuse amongst the clergy. I really feel like this is a false conflation. The abuse by priests (sexual or otherwise) has been a long standing problem — one only has to look at treatment by clergy at Native Americans in the residency schools in the US and Canada, for example. However, it wasn't until after World War II that there was a concerted effort to report and document sexual misconduct. Before then, it was often either covered up as either too shameful, or blame was placed on the victim.

Moreover, it should be noted according to the data provided, the rise in reported misconduct began in the 1950s, before Vatican II and the "radical" theologies. This suggests there were other factors, and not a move away from tradition that caused the problem. Also, European Catholics were not as heavily under the influence of liberation theology as those in America; liberation theology gained sway here because of the change in demographics from mostly European, upper/middle class to Hispanic working class in many dioceses, particularly in the Southwest. Yet, as we are seeing (and has been simmering for many years now), the European clergy is facing the same issues.

Given that, I have to conclude that the changes in prompted by Vatican II are simply an excuse to urge a return to "traditional" Catholicism, but it's clear that what the Church needs a major shaking up to dislodge the complacency that has settled in. I guess Martin Luther wasn't enough.

Thanks; this series is very thorough. I'm passing it on to a Catholic LJ community.

I read part of Goodbye, Good Men. The friend who gave it to me later said that the practices described therein had reportedly declined significantly.

The part about treatment failure reminds me of C.S. Lewis's insistence that "cures" for criminal behavior were no acceptable substitute for retributive justice.

Want to drastically reduce the sex abuse issue? Don't make celibacy obligatory. As one comedian put it, you have an all-male institution founded on celibacy, put them into dark rooms so they can hear everyone's dirty laundry, and tell them to pray to a virgin if they get aroused by what they hear. Eventually something's going to snap!