I can relate to the secrecy of the priests having experienced the lack of answers to questions by avoidance for the years, I was in the Roman Catholic faith. I still consider my self Roman Catholic but can not defend the church.

Though there were questions. There were answers too. Sr. James for me represented the oh well everything is ok. We make mistakes lets not topple the apple cart and all will be well. She saw the t-shirt going in to the locker. She also knew that children wore their street clothes under their cassocks. She in her young and youthful state did not feel she could make a stand after all she was taught to be obedient. I can relate to her. It was in her stand to be first noticing and stepping back that created the struggle that Sr. A was faced with despite what she saw and what she had to do as an administrator.
They maybe on track with the flowers. Other wize he would have left three and not two. Blond bully, yes Finger nails gay…no. Flicking on the hand could mean power over you as an adult. On target with the reference to the discussion in the office towards the end. Had he been demoted then…there would have been questions the church could not answer or defend and larger issue would have to be discussed and as we all know. It took a lot to get those situation to be brought out in public. Light bulb light of truth. Wind, wind of change as in just one more person wanting this terrible secrecy to come out. With each wind more information more truth more speculation more people start to talk.
Seasons…just all the time it took.

The mom and dad and son were not going to be a complaining witness. What school district can fire a teacher when there is no complaining victim, parents and no eye witness? Likely this Priest was challenged and not unlike is parish no parent wanted their family exposed to the criticism or had no knowledge. In today’s world the principal or Priest would have called CPS on the dad as well.

To sin is to turn away from God. Lying is a sin. Funny how she said in the pursuit of wrongdoing.. It sounded like substitution to me.

The other boy who stood up for Donald in Sisters James class and ended in the principals office I think knew the Priest was doing something with Donald and trying to help him in other ways. Maybe cause he was also approached? Also that remark in the hall, though I am not sure what was said.

No idea about the doubt at the end. I wonder why she stopped and didn’t go all the way to the Bishop?

I took the married thing to mean she was more aware of the subtle signs of sexual interest than a young nun never married. Maybe contrasting why one sister suspected and another didn’t.

The undershirt was a huge red flag.

Who sent Sister James to her brother’s? I thought most nun’s of the time couldn’t make such visits to family?

Priests don’t take the same poverty vows nuns do.

I thought it odd the tabernacle was covered during his speaking to the parishioners. Also some strange ‘signs of the cross’ from some of the
sisters.

I also think Sister James was singling out Donald that day in class cause of the trouble with the principal and Father. Blaming the victim? Perhaps concern over her brother? Loved the kid being sent back to class when she was already meeting with the mom.

Loved the movie. Acted well.

I agree strongly with Ena. When she talked about the flowers and what the represented. I would have never thought of that myself and I am glad that was brought to the table.

I also think that Father Flynn was a gay man, and I believe thats what he was referencing when Sr. A told him if he wouldnt leave her office then she would, and she wouldnt stop and then he called her back. He said something to the effect of not being able to fully explain himself to her but hoping she would just try to understand even though she has her certainty or something like that. Im sure you all know what sceen I am talking about. I am not fully convinced that he was molesting or doing anything really with the boy, other than being a companion and someone the boy could talk to that would understand him. I felt so sorry for the black boy durring the sermon at the end when the father anounced he was leaving. I agree with someone else that said ” I wouldnt be crying if my molestor was leaving ” He was sad because the only person who understood him, or stood up for him was going away. And I REALLy feel for his mother as well. Being a mom myself, I cant imagine what she had to be going through. All she knew was one thing, and that was she wanted to protect her sons LIFE no matter what the cost. If I knew no other way to protect my children, I would have done the same thing.

I think that Sr. A’s ” doubt ” at the end of the film was about weather she had done the right thing, and weather Father Flynn was truly guilty or not. That was my gut feeling anyway, although many of you have also brought up some very insighfull thoughts on that as well. I do believe she has A LOT to question as far as her life, and the lives of those around her.. the church… things she couldnt understand. Whew, there was just a lot to chew on with this film. Im really glad I got the chance to see it, and I am deffinatly going to watch it again.

Oh yeah, and on a side note. I think the blonde boy may have been happy that the Father was leaving just because he was being a typical stubborn misbehaved brat of a kid that didnt like anyone of authority telling him what to do and was glad that the Father was leaving because it ” served him right ” so to speak. Does that make sense? I believe that if he had truly been approaced by the Father in a sexual manor, his look wouldnt have been so synical and ” haha serves you right “… you know? I think it would have been a look of relief.

Anyway, thank you to everyone for all of your incredibly insightfull comments and takes on this movie. I have enjoyed everyones points of views.

I have been thinking a lot lately about the lesson of Jesus and the tax collector, the woman who asked of Jesus the dog’s leavings from the table, the Centurion…………….all the friends of Christ who appeared, through the eyes of men and women, as enemies.

Jean

Father Flynn himself is increasingly moved as he gives this sermon of the comfort we can find even during times of doubt. And we see him later walk into (I think) the rectory where there is a stained glass window of God’s eye looking down from the heavens. Encountering the window clearly has some impact – a seemingly sobering impact – on Father Flynn.

I can add that up as the man is guilty of something and allow myself to follow Sr A’s lead about what that is. Or, as I am more inclined to do, I can add that up as the man is guilty of something……………as are we all, simply because we are human and, thus, imperfect (I am speaking here more from my social work training and life experience than from any theological or bibical position). And, in my experience, the process through which awareness of our failings becomes contrition often carries us through periods of shame and doubt and even anger that “Something should make us feel so bad”. These failings can be wholly undetectable to any human being because they can be failings of the heart and mind and soul just as easily and, perhaps, far more often than our failings are actions, words, public. I do not see how a Religious or priest can be in consecrated, intimate relationship with God and not believe that the relationship is an ever-dynamic one in which those very human, very frequent and very private failings are transparent to God. I would expect the same wary glance at the stained glass window whether Father Flynn did molest the boys OR he became aware of his abuse of the pulpit in the gossip sermon, in which he brilliantly and angrily batters St A and St James OR if he discovered himself some lack of charity and compassion for those sisters whose lives were changing in ways they disliked. I am not a great advocate for “Catholic guilt” but I do believe true contrition – and I use that as a general psychology and spiritual term – is often slow in coming. I think we often do not suffer **willingly*** the news of our own failings and harm to others and the healing misery of doubt and guilt and shame and desire for absolution and a new beginning bring us to that willingness that allows the growth of contrition and, when necessary, a desire for and intention of making reparation.

What I saw was that Father Flynn was living that process: awareness of some failing and awareness of God’s intimate presence in watchfulness and in comfort. What that failing was remains entirely up in the air for me. I am anxious for the day when a Catholic priest may again speak of persona failings and a struggle to overcome those failings without being accused of being gay or an abuser of children.

Last thought: blond kid. I think he was a budding Alpha male (blond, light-eyed, white, handsome, smart – still Alpha (fe)male qualities in the States. Imagine in NYC in 1964: Jews assimilating; Blacks integrating and there the blond kid is….as Aryan-looking as can be. The stuff of an Alpha male) . It seemed possible to me —————- given all that Sister A explained about the demographics of the parish and her expectation that the black kid **would** get hit and the later incident in the hallway when blond kid knocked down the black kid ————— that the blond kid yanked his arm away from the priest that morning because the priest had just singled out the black kid, touched him, tousled his hair, spoke affectionately and then reached out to touch the blond kid. My first thought was that the blond kid did not want to be singled out by a friend of the black kid; that the blond kid’s issue was that he was raised in racist times and he was a bully, in part due to his “preferred” appearance, etc., and did not want to be contaminated by or associated with the black kid.

I think Father Flynn’s response was ill-advised as a response to a bully and to racism and I think it was likely to backfire (and it did, as soon as the blond kid figured out that the black kid was on the outside again). Humiliating the blond kid about cleanliness, Fr Flynn’s subtle jabbing of his fingers at the kid in the gym…………all that seemed like the response of an adult who had a lot of anger toward bullies and handled it badly. But I didn’t buy it that it was an indicator that the kid had been molested.

Still wanting to get Sr A a spiritual director, I am

Jean

While our children deserve the utmost protection, years of experience have taught me that children and adults alike can lose out in significant ways if we do not remember that one of the oldest struggles for human beings is careful speech, careful hearing and even more careful discernment about what we are speaking or hearing and whose needs are served. Most of us have known “Boo Radleys” – some of us may, in fact, “Boo Radleys” and many, many, many of our communities are richer and more Christlike when we welcome them into our lives, with whatever accommodations are required to make it safe for our children and our “Boo Radleys”.

Jean

I walked away from the movie with my own doubts about whether or not the priest molested the boys, and I have to admit that I didn’t pick up half of the interesting nuances or interpretations that have been presented here. But what I did take away from the film was the reality that, where children are concerned, it only takes mere doubts for a mother (or in this case a mother superior) to go on the defensive.

If my neighbor were accused of such wrongdoing, I wouldn’t allow him (or her ) access to my children regardless of what a court of law determined. The mere “feathers” would be enough for me to look accusingly forevermore. Perhaps that is my “step away from God” but it would be a necessary step in order to ensure the protection of my children. After all, the only judge that matters is God and he sees and knows all, so who cares if I am wrong? My children are my only concern and I have to react in a way that most assuredly protects them — even if it is unfair to my neighbor.

Am I making any sense?

(I love this forum.)

We have been talking about it for hours, and finally, I looked it up on the web to see what others thought about it, and was thrilled to find this discussion.

Sisters, while I have almost no exposure to nuns (Card-carrying Unitarian, here!) or to the Catholic faith, I have greatly enjoyed reading your views on the film, and on Sr. Aloysius, and the other characters.

I found it interesting to read the commentary about the “stereotypical nun” as portrayed in so much of our media– as an outsider, I can say that is something I never thought about, but I will consider it more carefully. I will now look at nuns differently. Your role is obviously more demanding than I ever knew!

I personally found myself drawn to Sr. Aloysius’ character. As the daughter of a teacher, I think caring for those who can not care for themselves, or, for those who are victimized, is a difficult challenge… We are forced to make judgements without the benefit of omniscience.

Again, Sisters, I greatly appreciate being able to read along with you, and admire your candor. This film and discussion has made me think a great deal more about my faith, and my humanity. Thank you!

“There are three of us in this room. One of us is not telling the truth. And it is not God or me”.

I remember someone telling me that they or some other counselor they knew used that line in counseling or therapy. I was stunned, as a mental health professional and as a human being, by what I perceived as the psychological bullying inherent in such a statement by any human being. It struck me in the same way that I was struck and repulsed by Sister Aloysius’ absolute certainty in her own intuition and judgment (which is not at all the same thing as conviction), a certainty that lacked all humility, the humility that requires that we doubt our own certainties about other human beings.

Incredible movie.

That said, I was stunned and, at times, repulsed by her certainty and her cruelty. Where, I kept thinking, was her discernment? Where was her humility, with its demand that we consider the vulnerability of our own certainty? Where was her love of the sinner, for whom we are taught to have compassion even as we seek justice?

I don’t have a strong sense that Father Flynn abused the boys, though as a former child protective services worker I cannot help but see that aspect of the film through that lens and the information provided is not persuasive of his guilt. I can add it up to abuse and I can add it up to appropriate relationship. Maybe he did but I just don’t see it. I absolutely believe, of course, that priests (and nuns and brothers) did abuse children and that many went undetected or without appropriate intervention.

That caveat about my “lens” on the evidence aside, life has taught me that it is not at all true that “where there is smoke, there WILL be fire”. I sincerely believe we must let that kind of thinking go if our relationships – in every sphere of our lives – are to be fair and worthy. Sometimes there is just smoke. There was a lot of smoke in the film.

We want to believe this sister is intuitive but where does she demonstrate that capacity with something other than her own certainty of it? She certainly asks Sister James to trust the fact of her intuition when she defends her lie by stating that, had there had been no damaging history at his former parish, he would have responded differently to her lie.

But that is not necessarily the case. What she communicated quite explicitly in her words and concretely in her behavior was that she would go to any length to affirm her certainty. She went so far as to slam her Crucifix on the table in a fit of violently passionate certainty that she would succeed in the end. When he asked, “will you leave me nothing then?”, I think he was taking a final measure of her need to affirm her certainty without respect for anything other than her need.
I think he was acknowledging her strength and intelligence and determination. I think he spoke with resignation that the only truth that mattered to Sister A was her own and her own truth was that he was an abomination: as the gay man she seemed to suspect him to be; as the pedophile she seemed to suspect him to be; as the dandy she believed him to be.

I do not believe Father Flynn confessed anything specific to Sister A in that last scene together, when he asked if she had never committed a mortal sin and said that each of them had left their wrongs in the confessional. I think he was trying to understand and engage with her spiritually, in the same way that he asked Sister James – as they talked in the courtyard – to understand his use of the word “love” in its Gospel sense. I think he was trying to connect with her as a child of God while trying to disengage from the poison of her repulsive and solitary certainty and cruelty.

I do believe that sometimes only one person can see or articulate what is truly happening. Or only one person is **willing** to see or articulate what is truly happening. And sometimes they need to take action. I think those occasions are pretty common in our communal lives.

I also believe that discernment is what protects our healthy doubt from being choked to death by our very human need to see our certainties validated. Discernment is what helps us boil down our emotions and passions and fears and desires until what is left, crystallized at the bottom of the pot, is a belief humbly and perhaps steadfastly held. Ideally, though, we emerge from our discernment having relinquished our pride, our cruelty, whatever ugliness it was that made it impossible for us to consider that we – and not the others – are misguided, blind.

And I saw no evidence that Sister A’s need – whatever that need was, beneath her insistent need for certainty – would allow for that possibility, for an admittance that doubt is healthy and helpful, that one can survive doubt. Ironically, Father Flynn seemed to believe he could not survive Sister A’s certainty and she seemed to believe she could not survive her doubt.

And, as I wrote that, the words written on Sister James’ chalkboard flashed in my mind: “We have nothing to fear except fear itself”.

Jean

i think this movie has as much maybe more to do with art and metaphore than catholic, pedophile, or homosexuality ( which i do believe is what Fr Flynn is afraid (fear) will be expose.

Streep is wonderful in this role. Very convincing of her commitments.

People should google father flynn and james joyce. I believe that Shandley is making reference to Joyce’s Dubliners. There is a strong visual imagery in the film itself. Joyce struggled with the contrast in visual and oral literate imagery and used Father Flynn as a figure as well as flowers and the repressive nature of some aspects of catholicism.

Peace Pax Hoa Binh

I meant to type “when the boys mother comes in – Sister A is changing the light bulb suggesting that the mom’s answers to Sister A’s questioning will now “shed light on the situation”. (Which in fact Mrs. Miller’s conversation with Sr. A is the turning point of the movie and does “somewhat” shed some light on the situation with the boy.

Throughout the movie I kept thinking that Fr. Flynn was covering for another priests and/or priests – that they may have been the culprits. (This analysis I got from watching the scene with the priests drinking, smoking and laughing).

The lightbulb scene was very interesting. Notice the bulb “blows” when Fr. Flynn and Sr. James both believe HE is innocent. It’s like a wake-up call saying “no – he’s not totally innocent”.

If you notice when the mother of boy comes in – Sr. A is changing the bulb referring that the “light” will not shed the truth.

I have enjoyed the comments I have read, but I have one remaining question about the authenticity of the story. It is hard for me to believe that a nun in 1964 would have had any consciousness about homosexuality or child abuse, especially with a priest involved. In those days, priests walked on water.

Maybe it’s because I was just too young to be aware of such things, but homosexuality just never crossed my radar screen in 1964.

The entire movie brought back many memories of my Catholic schooling from the early 40′s – 50′s. Great memories of CDP Sisters.

Anyway, most people in this forum mention that at the end, the crisis of Sr Aloysious is because of her lack of faith in the church. I think she had none of it already. In the middle of the movie, when she decides ( in a dialog with Sr. James ) to take down Father Flynn, she says:”go to the bishop? no, the church is directed by men, we have to do it ourselves”. That clearly shows where she stood with the subject.

Therefore her crisis at the end, I think, is because how Father Flynn moving to another parish with a promotion, to cause more harm to children, can fit into God’s plan? She is confronted with two thoughts: God is nuts or he simply doesn’t exists. Tough picks for the poor nun.

I saw Father Flynn as being a man of faith with a sincere understanding of Christ’ message of love and tolerance. Was he gay? Probably. Was he a pedophile? Probably not. I believe his initial confrontation in her office was not to protect his sexual identity, but that of the boy, because as someone else stated he recognized the Donald’s sexual identification. I believe given the period that he didn’t want that revealed to anyone in the school fearing a judgmental retaliation. Remember what happened to children who were left handed in Catholic schools; they were retrained to write with there right hand.

I thought the message of the sermon regarding “gossip” was very poignant and something we should all regard. Once doubts are stated and spread, it is hard to recall them. I am reminded of the McMartin Pre-School incident in California. The owners reputation as well as those of her employees were ruined, because someone believed some of the children had been abused. I knew a psychologist who interviewed those children and the questions that were asked; they were leading and meant to elicit one response just as Sr. A’s questions of all involved were.

She admitted lying about the call to another parish, she admitted fabricating a situation that would ruin the character of a Priest and possibly a student. She was not acting in any way like Christ/God would have expected. She admitted to Father Flynn that she had “made a mistake” in her past, but found absolution in the confessional; yet she would deny him that same comfort.

Many who read what is written on this site will disagree with one persons take or another persons take; we can all agree it was a well done , thought provoking movie. We can also probably agree that unsubstantiated self certainty, may also be self deception or prejudice which is best left to ignorant minds. Thank you again.

I think Sr. A felt doubt about herself, her religion, and could she stay committed to her vows. Isn’t it true there are times we all doubt what we believe in? I think she felt she protected this child, took on the priest and made him leave, but in the end he got promoted. When she brought out her hand with the crucifix in it, there was her doubt about her God. Did he forsake her?

What a powerful movie. What was so great about the whole movie was no nudity. We got the message w/o showing us everything. No swearing.

The script was so well written that even the wind plays a signigicant role as a forshadow. A good question to think about is, “What did the wind mean”? Another good question to ask, “when we feel something in our hearts, do we trust that faith in what we believe to dictate our actions”? Others may call that faith emotion, but I think thats only if we let that faith to dictate what we feel. It just all depends on how deep your faith is I guess.

By the way, I love you Meryl Streep! You are a great actress and on the screen you are so true what you pretray and yet you have fun. I love your emotions and how you can feed off others’ characters to make your character and your mind stand out. I believed in your role. It was awesome. You are an award just to be here on earth. This role shows the world that you are experienced as a well endowed actor or should I say actress. By the way Sister, I loved you in “The Devil Wears Prada”.

Peace, Love and God,
Nique

Irene

My initial impression was that Sister Aloysius was the heroine of the movie. She would need great strength to confront a priest in that day and age, I would think. I thought Meryl Streep was totally believable in the roll. I’m sorry that she didn’t win the Oscar for her performance.

I really enjoyed reading all of the opinions stated here. Makes me want to see the movie again, even more. . . to look for all the things I may have missed the first time.

Thanks for all the input. God bless!

In the case of the latter – if this is true, God does forgive.

One thing I need clarification on: At the end of the movie I thought the Sister said, “In pursuing wrongdoing one steps away from God, but there’s a price.” Meaning, the price she paid for trying to get justice was that she sinned by lying (lying about speaking to the past Nuns). She said this after Sister James said, “I can’t believe you lied.”

Can anyone confirm what Meryl said at the end of her sentence after stepping away from God?

Great discussion – Very thought-provoking.

Moreover, recall that Sister A saw right through this facade when she told him to cut his fingernails. Note also, that when Sister A gave him this instruction, Flynn had his hands in his pocket. As if he had to make a special effort to hide this perversian in front of her.

Just my thoughts, would love to know more of yours!

“Child Abuse Prevention Month Set for Parishes, Dioceses in April
WASHINGTON—Child Abuse Prevention Month will be marked in parishes and dioceses around the United States in April. To assist church groups, the U.S. bishops’ Secretariat of Child and Youth Protection has developed resources in English and Spanish to facilitate activities to highlight the need for prevention efforts. They include posters, liturgical guides, articles on church efforts to reach out to abuse victims and to protect children, and bulletin announcements. All materials may be downloaded for use locally. The materials are available on the USCCB’s website. The Child and Youth Protection Secretariat has made care for minors a key priority and spearheaded nationwide safe environment programs. Through these programs more than five million minors already have been educated on such how to protect themselves from harm and almost two million adults have undergone background screening and training on appropriate relationships with youth in their care. “There are few things more important than protecting our children from harm,” said Bishop Blase Cupich of Rapid City, South Dakota, chair of the bishops’ Committee on the Protection of Children and Young People. “Child abuse in our society is rampant and we are called to do what we can to stop it. Children are gifts entrusted to us by God. All responsible adults must protect the life and dignity of those gifts. Child Abuse Prevention Month deserves our attention in both prayer and action.”

I was moved by this movie that I recommend it to my friends here in the Philippines.

Thank you all for your wonderful insights..

But that was not the only way that I felt as though I was “stepping away from God” by confronting wrongdoing. Even during my illness I had experienced a blossoming of faith, I loved scripture as I had never loved it before, and praying felt like I had entered a landscape of overwhelming love. It was everything I had ever wanted my worship of God to be like. I would pray and read scripture for four hours a day, and I couldn’t keep the tears out of my eyes, I was so overwhelmed by awe and by being loved. There was nothing else I could ever want in my life other than this, it was so completely fulfilling. But when I was separated from my spiritual community, and I confronted the leadership about it, and I entered into a period where I experience what felt like God’s complete absence. It was the most heartbreaking experience of my life. So when Sr. Aloysius says at the end that Confronting wrongdoing is taking a step away from God. And then her rosary get lost in the folds of her garment and she weeps about her own Doubts, the only thing that could resonate with me was how this mirrored my own experience. Confronting the wrongdoing that was done to me filled me with ungod-like feelings: anger, bitterness, the need for revenge, the desire for control, unforgiveness, and a lack of grace; and worse than that, the sweet experience of His Presence also left. And the feeling has remained gone, filling me with heartache, loneliness, and, of course…spiritual Doubt.

And, to prove that I always have a last thought, a related thought is that I believe adults who are concerned a child has been or is being or may be abused, should KEEP TELLING AND TELLING AND TELLING UNTIL THE CHILD IS SAFE. Because systems are imperfect, even the “perfect report” of abuse to the “authorities” might be missed or mishandled, so adults also should KEEP TELLING AND TELLING AND TELLING, and going further and further up the line. Some agencies/employers/organizations require a report to the authorities to go through a supervisor or particular internal office, etc. Obedience to agency policy and chains of command is a good thing, in general. But obedience is not moral or ethical if it leaves a child at risk of abuse and, I believe, if there is ever a time to break policy or chain of command, it is when your agency or supervisor will not involve the authorities when a child has been or is being abused. “Kids come first” as the saying goes, even when it costs us something.

thanks so much for sharing of all this to us. God bless you!

I don’t think anyone has addressed the issue of why Donald was called out during class time to go to the presbytery. I attended a Catholic school all my life and am also a teacher, and this just doesn’t fit in with my experience. I really think that this incident and Father Flynn’s story that he called the boy out because he had been drinking the altar wine absolutely exposes his guilt, and I can’t understand why Sr Aloysius didn’t interrogate him further. He claimed to have called the boy out to discuss his drinking the wine, but the boy came back from this meeting smelling of alcohol!! Hello??

At the same time, it is not really believable that the priest would have called the boy out during class for sexual purposes. Would he not have had opportunities to do this outside of class time?

I also think that, despite her compassionate acts, Sr Aloysius is a bully. To make that poor little nun eat gristle was sadistic.

Another point that I don’t think was mentioned was the juxtaposition of the priests’ “beef ‘n’ burgundy” dinner, (with some rather unChristian conversation) with the austere dining habits of the nuns. I think the author’s (or director’s) standpoint was very clear here.

What a stimulating movie! Thanks for the discussion !

i know what you mean by the bumper sticker. i love our Church as well, and do believe that there are really good, faithful and kind-hearted religious who are truly called by God and who have a sincere desire to serve the Lord by taking care of His flock. i have an uncle who was a priest, Rev. Fr. Sancho Sison, OSJ (he is now with the Lord). when he died, many of his parishioners, students, friends, lay people and religious people came to his funeral to pay respect and testify how he helped them strengthen their faith in God. i think 3 of his students actually entered the seminary after he died, because they were inspired by him to answer God’s call. i have always been proud of him and is still proud of the legacy he has left behind. he is the reason why i hold religious men and women with high regard. but it is because of my love for the Church that is why i am also concerned about how the Church is dealing with abusers within the Church. so i am grateful for the information you have shared about the Church’s efforts. i wanted to ask, well, i actually dont know if you have information about it, but how about the abusers? what is the Church doing about them? before, and as the film has depicted, the Church just transfers abusers from one post to another…are there also changes going on when it comes to this aspect? how about psychological/psychiatric treatments? as someone who has worked in child protection, what should be done to perpetuators of such crimes? what do you suggest should the Church do?

sorry for my endless questions, i am just very curious and concerned. and i do believe that any information disseminated in these posts can help victims heal and gain a stronger, deeper faith in God, and find in our Church the protective, safe, nurturing environment that God has always mandated it to be.

the recent convictions of these awful priets abuse has tarnished the Catholic Church forever–how could they pass these sick priest on to other parishes…the Church needs to change again and let priest get married….until then — membership will never be the same….ever!

(And, as I said in an earlier post, I think many religious communities have become focused on the issue of sexual orientation in an overly dramatic, emotional and unnecessarily specific way. With all the violence and poverty and environmental degragation in the world and what that means about the state of our collective souls, I just can’t quite wrap my mind around the prominence of this other issue. For me, it raises interesting question: in talk of societal sin, it is much easier to deal with behaviors that are easily pinned on specific individuals rather than those behaviors that are appropriately pinned on the collective of individuals that comprise our communities, our “States”: homosexual relationships vs. racist or classist institutional or cultural practices; abortion vs. capital punishment. It was a tremendous relief to me, in the midst of the wide publicity about Catholic concern about potential changes in the law regarding abortion, to hear that Catholic bishops in Washington State issued a public statement of opposition to an imminent state execution. It is not my intention to promote one behavior over another. I simply find it challenging that the public discourse of many religious communities is dominated by condemnation of individual acts when there are so many, many collective acts needing our spiritual and religious attention and needing that attention now, yesterday.

Again, I apologize for the offeensiveness the mitake in my original post.

quite rightly but more

There is a great bumper sticker that I have seen around in my very Catholic city here in the south: “I am grateful for the thousands of good priests”. A Part of the trauma of the sexual abuse by clergy is that victims lost one of the most important sources of consolation and healing available to them ***and*** a whole culture for those victims who came from Catholic families deeply involved in their Catholic Churches and faith.

Whenever I see that wonderful bumper sticker, coupled with my awareness of the safe environment initiatives, I hope victims and those who are concerned about them see an invitation to further healing, to come home, a promise of empathy and support from their fellow congregants (and protection from future harm as well) and a confidence that the spiritual Catholic Church that child once trusted can again exist for them under the guidance and protection of any one of thousands of Catholic clergy and religious. Those of us who were not victimized can help our sisters and brothers who were by communcating clearly and celebrating where safety can be found, and safety from sexual abuse can be found in most Catholic parishes and schools these days. (And I would wager that, to the extent that the risk continues, the risk is equivalent to that in any environment where children are in the care of adults who are not relatives). Again, Nocode, I am glad to hear that the information was helpful to you. I can’t wait to see the movie when it comes out on DVD, so I can then go back and read all these great posts and understand better all these insights. Thanks for yours.

thank you for informing me about the changes that are happening within the Church when it comes to protecting people (especially children) from abuse.

i do not know anything about the pathology of pedophilia or how much it is linked (or not at all linked) with homosexuality (so what you just wrote was informative and educational). what i do believe in is that a person’s sexual nature (whether homosexual or heterosexual) is not a sin, but that what is sinful are the sexual acts committed outside the realms of God’s laws.

You wrote: “And honestly i am very disappointed and confused in the way the church is handling cases of clerics who have abused children. the church’s main mission is to bring souls to God right? so why does it seem like it is protecting people who have abused children and women?” The abuse of children by some Catholic clergy and religious is a devastating and tragic part of the history of the Catholic Church. As a former child protective investigator, I have seen the effects on victims and I have seen the “wagon circling” that often happens in the communities surrounding those who have abused. Both the fact of the abuse and the communal and systemic wagon-circling that soemtimes occur are devastating and enraging and the wagon-circling compounds the original betrayal and trauma. There are hundreds of thousands of people – among them clergy and religious who tried but failed to intervene effectively, looked the other way in disbelief and grief and fear or even those who organized the wagon-circling and/or commit the abuse – who desire to facilitate healing of indivuals and communities as well as to faciliate a proactive strengthening of the cultures and environments in which children live and are, thus, vulnerable. That desire is essential and we must honor it ***for the future protection of children and the healing of existing victims***.
Please check out the websites of various dioceses and archdiocese and look for the language “safe environment”. You will find that the Catholic Church – through its parishes, schools and other institutions – has commited itself to changing those aspects of its culture that allowed children to be abused. If any of us were able to travel around and interview clergy and religious, we would find hundreds and thousands of grieving people who readily, if painfully, acknowledge the great tragdey and wrong accomplished in and by the Church as regards the abuse of its precious children.

I am dismayed by the statements I have found which suggest that the Church may not have been careful enough to differentiate between the completely unrelated issues of the pathology of pedophilia and homosexuality, which is not a pathology. Screening seminarians for sexual orientation will not accomplish the (commonly) desired goal of screening for pedophiles. I have been sorry to see what appears to be muddy thinking or at least a willingness to have congregations and the public’s thinking muddied on these two distinct and unrelated issues.
I always want to put this out there: in eight years of child protective investigations in several communities – one of them a large metropolitan area – I never encountered a sexual abuse case in which the perpetrator was homosexual. My mother and brother were also investigators in that large city – and neither ever investigated a case in which the perpetrator was homosexual. Sometimes the pathology of pedophilia occurs in a person who also has a natural sexual orientation toward the same gender and sometimes pedophilia occurs in aperson who also has a natural sexual orientation toward the opposite gender,
but, as both a professional and a former academic in the field, I never encountered a reliable statistic that link the pathology of sexual orientation to sexual orientation.

I think it can be exceptionally difficult to determine what dynamic is active when a child or child-victim is a same sex older adolescent and, thus, is on the verge of an adult sexuality, with the result that adults – whether gay or straight – may find themselves attracted to that adult sexuality in a person who is nonetheless a child. If the child is engaged sexually (read: abused), then the boundary-crossing and criminality and devastating breach of trust remain the same but, in those instances, only very careful and intimate knowledge of the abuser can reveal what dynamic – pedophilia vs. homosexuality – was active.

Bottom line, while I understand that the movie Doubt raises all kinds of challenging questions and I can’t wait to see it, pedophilia and sexual orientation are completely and utterly unrelated, except in the cultural mythology and rarely, rarely, rarely belong in the same sentence.

Ultimately, I do believe the Church is pursuing both accountability for its deep wrongs and safety for its children. Please do check out the “safe environment” content on any diocese or archdiocese site. The world is changing in this most important area.

i also agree with Lynne…i too have nothing against homosexuals, but i am very much against pedophiles and people who use God to abuse and manipulate other people. and honestly i am very disappointed and confused in the way the church is handling cases of clerics who have abused children. the church’s main mission is to bring souls to God right? so why does it seem like it is protecting people who have abused children and women?

i pray that there will be MORE sr. alloysius (and fr. scully….she did mention that she had fr. scully before to help her when there was a case like this that she encountered the past) in the world, in every parish, in every catholic school, in every convent. hopefully not too strict and tryannical, but very strong and smart in order so that many many children and potential victims may be protected. and i also pray that there will be more sr. james whose real kindness, empathy and honesty are much needed today.

in my humble opinion, i think the doubts that sr. alloysius has are more of doubts about the church, about the faith, about goodness in people. her task is to protect people, to “outwit the fox”, it can be a very tiring job. there is no guarantee that you will be liked or thanked or even understood. and if youve got a very good soul who wants to be holy like Jesus, the guilt of taking some actions which are “step away from God” in order to catch the “fox” and save people from abusors can really hurt you.

I’ve got a lot to think about, but what keeps coming back to me is what a former parish priest of mine said to me years ago when I was struggling with doubt in a huge “dark night” experience: “Doubt is not the opposite of faith. Unbelief is the opposite of faith.”

Doubt to me is wrestling with God – a bit like Job – being prepared to ask the tough questions and live with them. I always want my answers to come easily and quickly, but sometimes God wants me to stay with the questions because its in those times I learn most. Sr Aloysius, Sr James, and Fr Flynn were all asking tough questions and finding the fellowship of doubt. I like Fr Flynn’s image of doubt as being a little like grief – shut up behind a glass wall that you can see through but not reach through (can’t remember the exact words). That is where we grow.

As for the significance of light bulbs breaking, could it be the “light of truth” being broken putting the characters in “the darkness of lies and ‘doubt’ ?

Just a thought.
Best thought provoking movie in a very long time.

Im from Singapore…believe it or not? just saw the movie 2 hrs ago…and still thinking of the many issues discussed here…that to me is a mark of a great movie! and i hope all 3 nominees for the Oscar will get their deserved awards!

• Yes, I agree with others that the long nails is our hint the priest MIGHT be gay.
• The black student was going to get killed at public school because of his demeanor, and his father would kill him as well. He was gay.
• The boy’s mother spoke as if she had been molested as well when younger and you just have to get through it, and she told the sister she didn’t really know about life. I felt like she thought is was just part of life’s struggles from her limited world view.
• The priest had molested or attempted to molest the blond boy. He jerked away from him and showed anger at a priest who was being friendly, and leaned away from his clean nailed hand on the court and smiled when he told the church he was leaving.
• The black boy sobbed. I felt like he was sad because he was losing a friend who didn’t mind he was “different”. I wouldn’t cry if my molester was leaving.
• Long nails don’t mean you are gay… gays are not pedophiles… pedophiles can be gay…
• The boy who shouts out the answer to save the black boy seemed to have some issues as well. I felt like he might have been molested or approached as well. That is why he lashed out…”Leave me alone!” not just to the sister but to the whole system really. And when he saw the black boy’s mom in the office he made a smart remark to the priest, he knew exactly what was going on.
• I thought the flowers were trophies. Literally for each boy he had de-flowered.
• At one point I felt the winds blowing all the time were the “winds of change”… but now I don’t know what to think of them.
• The light bulbs… not even a guess. : )
• The priest was VERY upset when she said she had called his old parishes and found about him from the nuns. He was upset she didn’t call the priest because the “old boys network” would have covered for him. Just like it did in the end… with a promotion!
• In the final scene, when she breaks down about her doubt. I am SURE she is doubting all things religious. How could a loving God allow things like this to happen (remember she had seen it before with another priest) and now this guy was getting rewarded with a promotion, her husband was killed in the war, even that a devoted older sister would be going blind, falling down getting hurt, suffering after a lifetime of devotion. Where was God’s love? Was there even a God? Had her devotion all been a waste of time?

Thanks Sister Julie for providing this forum for all of us! God Bless!