By Archbishop Gregory M. Aymond

Why are national celebrations such as Father’s Day and Mother’s Day so important?

It’s significant that we as a country designate a day every year to give special honor to our fathers and our mothers. It reminds us that we should not take for granted their care and their sharing in creation with God and all the ways in which they have supported and loved us. We’re all aware that the composition of a family today can be very different from what it was years ago. So when I talk about extending Father’s Day greetings, I am aware there are some children who have never known their father or who have not been treated well or even abused by their father. There are some children who rarely see their father and live in a very conflicted situation. I pray on this Father’s Day for them that their wounds can be healed. Please join me in that prayer.

Do people sometimes forget that fatherhood is a vocation?

That’s true, and this day allows us to honor those good fathers who have taken their vocation seriously and have lived it out. Marriage is a call from God for two people to unite themselves in love toward each other and through that love to be co-creators with God. Father’s Day is an opportunity for us to recognize that fathers do not have an easy vocation. It requires a lot of love and sacrifice, especially given some of the values our world espouses today and some of the financial challenges in simply making ends meet. Father’s Day is a chance for both children and fathers to say thank you and to acknowledge the good, and also to try to heal any wounds and move on to a renewed commitment to one another in family life.

What was your dad like?

In terms of personality, he and I were quite different, but we had a deep love and mutual respect for each other. Both of my parents are deceased, but my family was and still is very close. My dad and I were different in terms of hobbies and interests, so there was not as much of a bond at that level. There was a deep, mutual love and respect. He was a successful businessman, so I think when I first mentioned that I was interested in the priesthood, he might have been surprised and even a little disappointed. But he never discouraged me from taking that step. That is something we were able to work out over the years. We were very different people, yet in the midst of that we were able to go well beyond those differences and love and respect each other.

These days so many children are raised by a single parent. How difficult is that for both parent and child?

It’s very challenging when a father has to be both mother and father or when a mother has to be both father and mother. We honor and pray for people who have to take on that challenging responsibility. Years ago, parents, the family, the church and the community formed children in values. I’m not a sociologist, but I think right now there are so many influences that it’s safe to say there is a great deal of competition between the family and the culture. The media, the Internet and peer pressure are extremely powerful influences. Today’s families not only have to try to form their children in values but also try to counteract some of the values their children are picking up from other sources in our society. That’s a real challenge that requires prayer, commitment and sacrifice on the part of fathers.

How is St. Joseph a model for fathers?

We have these images of St. Joseph doing his carpentry work with Jesus at his side, and we know that he helped form Jesus in values. But even in that relationship, there were some tensions. Even before Jesus was born, Joseph asked, “How can this be?” because he and Mary weren’t married. Then when Jesus was a baby, Joseph knew Herod was trying to kill his son. When Jesus stayed behind in the temple, his mother and father were searching for him. Those are incidents to which all fathers can relate. It’s easy for us to sugarcoat Joseph, but Joseph was a man who faced many challenges as a husband and father that we sometimes don’t give him enough credit for. He is a true model for fathers. St. Joseph, pray for our fathers in their vocation of fatherhood.

What does the John Jay report tell us about sex abuse?
By Archbishop Gregory M. Aymond
Clarion Herald 5/28/11 -

You served for several years as the first chairman of the U.S. bishops’ Committee for the Protection of Children and Young People. What is your initial reaction to the report by the John Jay College of Criminal Justice that there was no single cause or predictor of sexual abuse by priests?

The report and its conclusions are not surprising. When I was chair of the committee, the data on the scope and nature of the sex abuse crisis had been gathered, and John Jay was working on the report that would help identify the causes and contexts of the abuse. As the information was coming in, John Jay was sharing some of the information they had gathered, so the report is not a surprise. I’m glad that we spent the money, the time and the effort to do the survey and the investigative work because, it seems to me, there are always three stories: the one presented by the media; the one presented by advocacy groups that have a negative impression of the church and of the priesthood; and the one that is the reality. The John Jay researchers are reputable people, and they went to primary sources for their information. This isn’t second-hand information.

Some people are already saying you can’t trust the information because it came from the bishops.

The information did not really come from the bishops. The information that John Jay compiled came from treatment centers, from individual priests who had been accused and from other people who had been involved.

Ultimately, the report seems to indicate the sexual and social revolutions of the 1960s – the “Woodstock” generation – had much to do with the clergy abuse crisis.

I agree with that, and that shouldn’t surprise us. We saw in the 1960s what happened regarding sexuality in general, the harmful effect on family life, the rising use of contraception, higher rates of infidelity, divorce and remarriage and couples living together. Whether you call it “Woodstock” or whatever you name it, there was a sexual revolution. There also was a revolution against authority. Those two things came into play. People were increasingly doubting objective moral standards. That happened in all aspects of society, and it certainly happened in the church. We have to bow our heads and realize we embraced some of the darker questions – and it led to sin.

In retrospect, how badly did bishops respond to the crisis?

Any of us would say that if we knew then what we know now, we would have handled many of those situations differently. We did not have the same level of research in terms of psychology. We did not have the same understanding of pedophilia and sexual abuse of minors. People can say that’s an excuse, but it’s also a fact. We did not. As we were gaining some of this information, some of the bishops were quicker than others to utilize those new insights. But it’s very clear that if we knew then what we know now, we would have handled those situations differently. We would have been less tolerant. We would have gotten people more permanent help. This isn’t to pass the buck, but bishops and priest personnel directors around the country were following the advice of treatment centers. When psychologists told them, “This guy is OK, put him back in ministry,” the bishops put him back in ministry. Or when they recommended limited ministry, the priest was put back into limited ministry. That’s not passing the buck. All of us – as church leaders, people in the social sciences and people in society – have learned a great deal more. Because of that, we are far more cautious and realistic today. We should be because one case of sexual abuse by a church leader is one case too many.

What about the report’s findings that neither homosexuality nor celibacy played a role in the abuse?

Though a large number of youths abused by clergy were boys, the study does not indicate that the basic orientation of abusers was homosexual. John Jay goes on to say that it was a crime of opportunity, that boys were more available to the abusers. The report also indicates there are a lot of things about sexuality that we don’t really understand. When a person is a pedophile, he can be attracted to boys or girls. As we know, some pedophiles are married and some are single, so it doesn’t seem as though from the research that it’s a homosexual issue.

What about celibacy as a possible cause?

To say that it’s a celibacy issue does not seem to ring true. In the research, what we see is that in general there were many people during the ’60s and the ’70s who were going through a lot of confused times regarding sexuality and sexual understanding. The report indicates that while the number of abuse cases spiked in the ’60s and ’70s, the commitment to celibacy was constant over that same period of time. Many sex offenders in society are not celibate.

What would you say to people who think the report might be a case of whitewashing the facts?

I was involved in these studies from the very beginning, and we engaged the best people in the world to collect the research. We did not interfere in their research. We got periodic reports from them, but we and they did everything possible to allow them to do their work in an independent way. They have their reputation on the line. It would be foolhardy for John Jay to say something they don’t believe in. Again, much of the information did not come from bishops at all. It came from perpetrators, treatment centers, personnel directors and seminary directors. There will always be naysayers, no matter what we say or do. There will always be an opposite view. There are people who don’t like the church or who think we have been dishonest, and they will always find a reason to paint a dark picture.

Is it true this is the widest ranging study of sexual abuse of minors ever undertaken by one organization?

There has been no system-wide study like this anywhere in the world. This is the first.

How is seminary training today better equipped to handle this issue?

There is certainly continued attention and emphasis on pre-seminary psychological testing. Once a person has been accepted to the seminary, there is a great deal of human formation – helping the man become the very best human being he can be to live out his potential. Also, there are many additional formation seminars and courses on self-knowledge, sexuality, boundaries, safe environment and what it means to be a person of integrity.

What have bishops learned over the last 10 years?

We must be overly cautious, we must be transparent with the information we receive, we must investigate and we must have objective investigators look at cases. We cannot do these investigations internally. It takes someone from the outside to give us a professional opinion as to the legitimacy of an accusation. We also have to provide, first and foremost, pastoral care for victims. We as a church have to provide rehabilitation when that’s possible for the perpetrator.

Do you believe the statistics that say the worst of the crisis occurred in the ’60s and ’70s?

There’s no doubt about that. The statistics from the bishops’ conference and also from John Jay show that there are very, very few accusations – I’m talking in the single digits – that are current accusations. The vast majority go back 30 and 40 years. At that time, sexuality was not dealt with the way that it’s dealt with in the seminary today.

Is this report another reminder to pray for the victims of sexual abuse?

It’s always time to pray for victims. They are certainly part of my prayer every day, given my ministerial responsibilities as a bishop. I have met with victims. I continue to meet with victims. I will always want to meet with victims in order to work with them in a spiritual and pastoral way. We can never, ever give excuses for a priest abusing a child or an adolescent. We simply can never excuse it. It’s not only a crime, but it’s also an embarrassment to the church, and it’s a sin. We must continue to speak loudly about that. What has happened in the church over the last 10 years has made us aware that sexual abuse takes place in schools, families and in youth groups of all denominations and in the secular world. As a society we have to be more attentive. The accusations against the church and the purification of the church have led us to see this as a more global, societal issue, which we may not have seen otherwise. I’m sorry that it took us to see the reality, but it did.

By Archbishop Gregory M. Aymond
Clarion Herald – 1/29/11 – English; 2-5-11 – Spanish

You have made an interesting parallel between the earthquake in Haiti and the Roe vs. Wade decision 38 years ago. Can you share that with us?

First of all, I do ask everyone to continue to remember the people of Haiti in prayer and with their sacrificial offerings. The earthquake in Haiti in 2010 lasted 43 seconds. Layers of the earth moved, and the destruction caused by those seismic movements wasn’t restricted to the epicenter of the quake. The quake had rippling effects throughout the entire country. That serves as an image of what happened on Jan. 22, 1973, in our own country. The Supreme Court of the United States of America bestowed a legal right to abortion. That decision is commonly known as Roe vs. Wade. The earth shifted. Not only did the earth shift on a very, very important issue, but the earth also shifted in such a way that it allowed us to call into question other issues of life. The very fact that in our country a woman has a right to bring to death her unborn child – the very fact that we have the right to take from an unborn fetus its human life, which is a gift from God and parents – has had incredible rippling effects for nearly 40 years.

You celebrated a Mass for Life at St. Angela Merici on Jan. 21 and then went to Washington, D.C., for the annual March for Life. How was that experience and what can Catholics do to share in these efforts?

I would implore all of us to be people of prayer and to pray for the dignity and the respect of human life that God intends for us. We need to pray that we can have the same reflection on human life that God has for us. For the first time this year, we held a state pro-life rally by marching to the state capitol in Baton Rouge. I was privileged to be in Washington last weekend with about 500 or 600 young people from all dioceses in the state of Louisiana. The students were there to learn more about pro-life issues, to march and to ask God’s blessings upon our efforts to be voices for life. That’s what this is all about – not only being people of prayer but also being voices for life for those who have no voice. We need to be willing to proclaim with courage and boldness that we believe in the dignity and the life of the unborn, but not just the unborn. That’s why I say the 1973 Roe vs. Wade decision had rippling effects. Because we can justify taking the life of the unborn, it is much easier to justify taking the life of someone who is terminally ill, engaging in embryonic stem cell research that destroys embryos or taking the life of someone on death row. We call that capital punishment, but it’s really the death penalty. It becomes much easier to justify taking those lives when we say we can take the life of an innocent human being.

You have stressed the multiple dimensions of the pro-life issue.

For us as Catholics and Christians, we certainly start with saving the unborn child. Pro-life also means we are concerned about those in poverty, those who do not have a place to live, those who live under I-10 in New Orleans, those whose families are affected and divided by immigration law, those who exploit women and children through pornography and the recent increase in bullying in our schools and communities. In the city of New Orleans, we have multiple murders every day. These are all pro-life issues. When we talk about being pro-life people, hopefully we are talking about the whole gamut of pro-life issues, which starts with the unborn child and then goes through many stages and culminates in taking the life of someone who is terminally ill.

What can we do?

Recently, I had the opportunity to participate in the Proudly Pro-Life dinner in our archdiocese, and I applaud what courageous women and men are doing on the local and state level to promote the sanctity of life. I ask everyone to do two things: first, to include pro-life activities in our prayer and ask for God’s guidance, and, second, to reach out if there is someone in their lives who is struggling with a life issue. It could be someone thinking about an abortion, someone who is terminally ill and has lost hope, someone who is distraught because someone they know is on death row. We need to be present to that person and allow God to work through our words, comfort and encouragement. May God bless us with peace in our very violent time. As I said at the annual Mass of Thanksgiving in honor of Our Lady of Prompt Succor on Jan. 8, the new “Battle of New Orleans” is murder, racism and violence. Let us commit ourselves to being the peacemakers that God calls us to be.

Archbishop Aymond welcomes questions from readers. Please e-mail questions to clarionherald@clarionherald.org.