Santorum’s Sense

It was very curious that many of Boston’s prominent politicians recently took umbrage at remarks by Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum that Boston’s liberal politics contributed to the Catholic Church’s pedophile scandal. The Pennsylvania senator in no way diminished the personal culpability of those who committed the crimes against children or blamed the general public. Boston politicians were instead offended by the suggestion that liberal government policies, their policies, were also partly responsible for the sorry mess. They called for an apology and, right on cue, our local press by-and-large obliged by running supporting stories of their overly righteous indignation.

A Boston native, I was not offended. I agreed with the Senator. He was of course not speaking about us common folks but rather Boston’s leadership. ''It is no surprise” Santorum said in 2002 ” that Boston, a seat of academic, political, and cultural liberalism in America, lies at the center of the storm" of the clergy sexual abuse scandal.”

The reaction of the politicians and press here was odd given that liberals generally pride themselves on the benefits gained by the active role of government in our lives. As well as claiming the benefits shouldn’t they also take the blame? In fact, what did occur in the early 1980s, a time when the church scandal was at its height, clearly points the finger at liberalism. On Aug. 29, 1982 the Boston Globe ran an article by Alan Sipress entitled ‘Catholic Gays Claim Diocese Ignores Them”. The following excerpt concerning the convicted pedophile Paul Shanley illustrates how Boston’s liberal institutions were indeed supportively at the center of the storm described by Santorum. The writer chides the church for not supporting Shanley, an activist then publicly known to be in NAMBLA (North Amercian Man Boy Love Association) to act as “a special priest within the archdiocese to be assigned to ministering to homosexuals”:

“Boston's Rev. Paul Shanley was such a priest. More than 10 years ago, he was the only diocesan priest in the country paid by his bishop to minister specifically to gays and other sexual minorities such as transvestites and transsexuals. His removal from that post in 1979 by Cardinal Medeiros amid controversy concerning the best way to minister to homosexuals was taken by many gays as a slap in the face.

"Paul Shanley was assigned to people who wanted to be part of the church. He was a sign," said Brian McNaught, an experienced Catholic gay activist and now City Hall liaison to the Boston gay community. "When the church removed Paul Shanley, it removed the sign of being welcome."

So, here we have it. Archbishop Medeiros was being slammed in 1982 by the Boston Globe and by the city of Boston through its agent McNaught for acting against priests such as Paul Shanley, a national icon of the homosexual community and , in their eyes, just the right kind of ‘minister’. At the time, none of Boston’s liberal politicians, and certainly not the Boston Globe, stood by the church to support its action against the pedophile priest and to support the church teaching regarding homosexuality. Senator Santorum it would appear was right on target.

Those politicians, some still with us from 1982, who now take offense would do well to eat a bit of humble pie and engage in some retrospection. They might accept that their policies and their capacity to stand by with hands clasped did have consequences. Though accepting responsibility is expensive not only the church should be paying the piper.