Catholic sex crimes unworthy of child bullying expert’s attention?

My former co-author, Barbara Coloroso, who is a former nun, pushed back several years ago when l used the Catholic Church as an example of a toxic culture in the book we were writing together. 

In her role of teaching, writing and speaking on the bullying of children, she had a responsibility to weigh in on this serial criminal saga, and she still has. It is now becoming more and more apparent that the reason she reneged on her agreement with me was her discomfort with our reporting on the Catholic Church sex abuse scandal. 

Prior to our writing the book, and subsequent to our falling out, I cannot find any evidence of her writing anything at all about the child abuse scandal, which is perplexing given she presumably had some inside knowledge during her tenure as a nun. When queried by the social media director for the Faas Foundation about what Ms. Coloroso had written about abuse in the Catholic Church, we received no response.

Representing herself as an advocate for bullied children, this begs the question of why. Could it be blind faith; could it be blind loyalty; could it be complicity; could it be that she herself was an abuser?  

One of the reasons this kind of horrible behaviour goes on for so long is that experts in the area don’t come forward. The message is, particularly given the current social/political climate, people who are thought leaders and experts need to take a stand.

Given Ms. Coloroso’s prominence and profile, her weighing in on the scandal when it was starting to gain some media attention could have prevented the warranted attention it is getting today. I also believe it could have saved a number of lives.

Why people distrust the establishment

This New York Times story on the tenth anniversary of the U.S. financial meltdown shows that the checks put in place have had little impact. It also shows that people who blow the whistle on wrongdoings pay a price.  

The resentment caused by the 2008 financial crisis set off a populist backlash that fomented distrust of expertise and political division, which could have worrying consequences.

When we look at all of the checks that were supposedly put into place, nothing has really changed. In fact, one could argue that if we look at the occurrence of wrongdoing reported every day, what happened ten years ago did not register with the financial sector, nor any other sector for that matter.  

This Goldman report is coming out ten years after the fallout. A senior banker called Goldman Sachs’s whistle-blower hotline, a rare dissent by a partner at the firm. His superiors, including the next chief executive, told him to relax. 

The Edelman Report indicates there has been an even further erosion of trust. Finally, people are starting to recognize why there is the polarization. People are angry. They are angry because of the betrayal by people whom they should be able to trust. They can’t trust their bank, church, employer, or the associations they belong to. So, who can they trust? What is it going to take?  

When the victim becomes the villain

At first blush when reading this New York Times story, many will assume what happened to this Marine is an exception. Male-on-male sexual assault may not be as common as males sexually assaulting women; however, because it is so deeply buried for reasons so eloquently described in this story, we are not able to determine the magnitude of it. 

What we are discovering with the Catholic Church scandal is that it is more significant than most assume. The commonality of sexual abuse, whether it is male - on - male or male - on - female, when the victim comes forward, the predator attempts to turn the victim into the villain. The most recent example of this is what Bill Cosby attempted to do with his victims. The outcome of this is also common, which is the victims blaming themselves. 

Freedom of expression

By making our educational institutions safe and accommodating has denied students the benefit of hearing and understanding different perspectives which, if they are shielded from them, leave them unprepared to challenge them when they enter “the real world”. 

What we need to do is better equip people on how to respond to and challenge different perspectives, regardless of how offensive they may be. As I have written before, this is missing in our society today. 

One way to do this is teaching people the art of debate where facts and logical arguments are framed in the context of how people feel, and why they feel the way they do about the issue or situation. This is called civil discourse. 

Talking about mental health issues can save lives

Although this very powerful and brave story is about fathers talking to their children about their mental health, it is about having people be comfortable in talking about mental health to a much broader group - everyone they are close to. 

The sad reality is that one of the reasons people are not comfortable is most are isolated by those they feel they are close to, which has led to not just the mental health issue, but an epidemic of loneliness. To have people be comfortable in talking about their mental health condition, we must all be comfortable in having that discussion with them. 

Bargaining in bad faith

Having spent over a decade as a labour negotiator for management, I can say with some authority, those who suggest Canada should have been more open to compromise earlier, don’t know what they are talking about. 

Canada’s leadership knew early in the negotiations that they were dealing with someone who is unwilling to compromise. As this Star article describes, his ‘Art of the Deal’ is always one sided - his side. Canada should refuse to have any further discussions unless the other side is prepared to bargain in good faith.

Either Gross Negligence or Lies

Having written extensively about the Catholic Church and the Pope’s inadequacies in dealing with the ever-growing scandal of sexual misconduct and coverups, this allegation confirms for me the deep rot in the church’s hierarchy, where the priests are more important than the flock. 

Similar to many organizations such as the United NationsOhio StateNew York University, the Government of CanadaCBS,Texas InstrumentsTesla, and plenty of others, coverups by high level executives is the norm rather the exception. When these various organizations feign ignorance, only one of two things can be true. They actually did not know about the problem, in which case they exhibit gross negligence and ineptitude, or they were lying.   

The old boys’ club is alive and strong at VW

The U.S. monitor’s report that VW “still has work to do to protect potential whistle blowers” is too narrow in scope for what VW needs to do. It is obvious that the board and senior executives do not have the will to make the changes required. The fact they are still standing by a senior executive who is in jail validates this. What they need to do is create conditions necessary to engage all to find sustainable solutions. The conditions I advocate are:

1. Trust

2. Diversity and inclusion

3. A sense of purpose

4. A sense of efficacy 

5. Freedom of expression

Creating these conditions will make protections for whistleblowers a moot point because when these conditions are in place everyone will feel comfortable and safe in putting their hand up to say - “This is not right, and WE need to change it.” 

Mary Barra, a woman, created these conditions at General Motors after the ignition switch scandal. I assert that unless VW sheds it’s ‘old boys' club’ mentality, it will be impossible for them to create these conditions, and they will fall.

The true character of people

I’ve been writing a series of articles for Moneyinc entitled A Boomer’s Guide to Millenials: the ABC’s of Leadership, which highlight an A to Z array of various leadership qualities, which will become a book retitled ‘Profiles of Character’. Last week before Senator McCain passed away, I wrote ‘U is for Unifier’. Unifier is arguably the most important characteristic, because a unifier must embody all of the other characteristics identified in this series of articles.

When I compare the characteristics from A through U, John McCain scores high as opposed to the current occupant of the White House who scores incredibly low on all of these traits. Trump’s diminutive response to McCain’s death validates the low score. 

This morning on CNN, John Sununu criticized CNN and other media outlets for highlighting Trump’s reaction. CNN quite rightly pushed back stating that they were merely reporting on what actually happened and that they didn’t make up that news. 

This reminds me of when Bette Davis received word of Joan Crawford's heart attack and subsequent death in 1977, she allegedly said, "My mother taught me never say bad things about the dead, only good. Joan Crawford – dead - good.”

It may be inappropriate for me to add levity to this solemn occasion, but in essence that’s how Trump reacted because that’s what’s sadly in his mind. McCain crossed him, and like everyone else who crosses the man, he wants them gone. And indeed, if the allegations related to his mafia connections are true, he wants his opposition dead.

If McCain were to have had to react to the death of Trump, he would have responded with grace, class and dignity much in the same way that he responded to the woman, referred to in this Washington Post article. The bedrock quality of John McCain’s character, captured in a single moment during his 2008 campaign run, when he took the microphone from a woman spouting false statements about his opponent, Barack Obama. Her remarks revealed an unsettling core of right-wing conservatives that served as a warning shot for Trump’s populist rise. 

The measure of a man can often be found in how he behaves under adversity. John McCain was steadfast in his quest to always do what he felt was the right thing to do for the greater good. Selfishness was not in his wheelhouse, and he inspired others to develop positive leadership qualities through example as they faced their own challenges. The tributes that have poured in about his incredible service to the people of the United States bear testament to the great legacy he has left behind – one where thinking of others was his first priority, and by his humility and innate sense of what was right for the country, never putting personal gain ahead of human decency.

So tragic is Trump’s character in sharp contrast to McCain’s that today, as a nation mourns, this Washington Post article reveals how the White House – the people’s house – could not bring itself to issue an appropriate message honoring Senator McCain as a widely acclaimed national hero.  Another article from the Post suggests that Trumps delayed reaction to the passing of McCain was calculated to appeal to his core who dislike McCain. 

As we look back over the Senator’s decades of service, we cannot help but hope that the current occupant of the oval office reflects on how he will be remembered and perhaps take a page or two from McCain’s playbook.