"After everything they did to children, you still believe in that?" The sentence can fall at dinner, in a comment under a video, or from the mouth of someone who is suffering. Even a well-intentioned believer can be left speechless. This objection is not like the others: it does not touch an idea first, but wounded children, shattered lives, and a betrayal committed by those who were meant to protect them. The worst possible answer would be to treat it as a debate to win.
This article does not retell the full dossier of facts — that dossier exists: see The Abuse Crisis in the Catholic Church for the chronology, cases, and reforms, and the CIASE Sauvé Report for the figures and method. Its purpose is different and very concrete: to show the right way to answer when the abuse crisis is raised against the faith — without minimizing the horror for one second, and without denying the faith.
The key can be stated in one sentence, and it must be understood before one speaks: we do not defend the guilty; we distinguish Christ from those who betrayed him. Everything else — the figures, the distinction between the holiness of the Church and the sin of her members, Jesus' terrible words about scandal, the ongoing reform — merely unfolds that distinction without ever using it as a screen.
We will first see why this objection is the most legitimate of all; then the first absolute rule (recognize, never minimize); what Christ himself says about those who scandalize little ones; the decisive distinction between the holy Church and her sinful members; how to answer "I can no longer trust"; what the theories about celibacy are really worth; and finally how to adapt one's answer to the person standing in front of us.
Why Is This Objection the Hardest to Hear?
A Real Wound, Not a Talking Point
Most objections to the faith are objections of ideas: the existence of God, miracles, science. One can answer them calmly. The abuse objection is of another order: behind it there is often a concrete pain — a person who was abused, a loved one who was destroyed, or simply someone deeply scandalized in the truest sense of the word. The first fatal mistake would be to treat it as a theoretical question and respond with a polished argument. One does not argue against a wound: one first acknowledges it.
So one rule must be stated before any other: the person who raises the abuse objection is right, on this precise point, to be indignant. That indignation is not an obstacle to Christian faith; without knowing it, it echoes that faith. No one spoke more violently about those who abuse children than Jesus himself. Recognizing this immediately disarms the suspicion that faith is being used to excuse the inexcusable.
Three Very Different People Behind the Same Sentence
A second mistake is to think that everyone who raises this objection is the same. In reality, the same sentence can come from three very different mouths, and one does not answer each in the same way.
| Who is speaking | What they are really seeking | The right attitude | The mistake to avoid |
|---|---|---|---|
| A victim or wounded relative | To be believed, recognized, not betrayed a second time | Be silent, listen, accompany | Defending the institution, reaching for an argument |
| A sincere seeker | To understand how these facts can be reconciled with faith | The whole truth, shame assumed, hope | Minimizing or dodging the figures |
| A bad-faith polemicist | To "corner" the believer, to score a point | Calm, brevity, refusal of escalation | Entering the escalation or justifying oneself endlessly |
This distinction governs everything else. To a victim, one does not "answer": one listens. To a seeker, one owes the whole truth. To a polemicist, one owes neither denial nor capitulation. Keeping these three faces in mind avoids the most common clumsiness: serving an apologetic argument to someone who was simply waiting to be heard.
The First Rule: Recognize, Never Minimize
Begin with Truth and Shame
Before any argument, there is a duty: to tell the truth and to be ashamed. Sexual abuse committed by clergy and religious is an abominable crime and a betrayal of the Gospel. No statistic, no context, no comparison must ever be used to soften that. Pope Francis wrote this plainly:
"With shame and repentance, as an ecclesial community, we acknowledge that we were not where we should have been, that we did not act in a timely manner, realizing the magnitude and the gravity of the damage done to so many lives." — Pope Francis, Letter to the People of God, August 20, 2018[1]
The believer's spontaneous reflex — "yes, but..." — is precisely what must be unlearned. As long as the sentence contains a "but" that relativizes, the victim or sincere interlocutor hears: "he is defending his side." The right answer begins without a "but": "What was done is monstrous, and what was covered up is a second fault." Only once that truth has been recognized without condition can one, perhaps, go further.
The Figures We Must Dare to Face
Answering justly requires daring to face the figures. In France, the report of the Independent Commission on Sexual Abuse in the Church (CIASE), chaired by Jean-Marc Sauvé and delivered on October 5, 2021, estimated that about 330,000 people were sexually abused as minors in a Catholic Church context between 1950 and 2020; about 216,000 when only clergy and religious are counted as perpetrators[2]. In the United States, the independent John Jay College report (2004) documented 10,667 allegations against 4,392 clerics between 1950 and 2002, or about 4% of the clergy during that period[3].
These numbers are not debating ammunition: they are lives. Citing them serves one purpose only — to forbid denial. Anyone who answers "a few bad apples" betrays both the truth and the victims. The scale is such that the only honest attitude is to name it for what it is: the gravest internal crisis of the Church in centuries.
The Trap of "It Is Worse Elsewhere"
Here comes the most widespread error among believers who want to "defend the Church": the argument "but it is worse in families, schools, sports." It must be said clearly: this argument is both false and cowardly.
False, because the data do not say that. The Sauvé Report did compare settings: the great majority of sexual violence against minors does indeed occur in the family and close circle — statistically by far the most dangerous setting. But once one looks at institutions, the finding turns against every temptation to minimize: "outside the family and friendship circles, the Catholic Church is the environment in which the prevalence of sexual violence is highest," Jean-Marc Sauvé declared when presenting the report — namely 0.82% of people by clergy, 1.16% including lay workers in ecclesial mission, compared with 0.36% for holiday camps, 0.34% for public schools, 0.28% for sports clubs[4]. Saying "it is worse in school" is therefore simply inaccurate.
Cowardly, above all, because even if it were true, it would change nothing. That others sin more never makes the sinner innocent. The Church does not present herself as a sports club: she presents herself as teaching holiness in the name of Christ. That is what makes the scandal more serious, not less. The only legitimate use of such comparisons is to refute a precise claim — "Catholicism makes people pedophiles" — never to soothe the Church's conscience. We will return to this below.
What Christ Says about Those Who Scandalize Little Ones
The Millstone Around the Neck
The most powerful reversal a believer can make is this: indignation against those who abuse children is not directed against the Gospel; it comes from the Gospel. No one used harsher words than Jesus against the one who turns a child away from the path of God:
"Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone fastened around his neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea. Woe to the world for scandals!" — Gospel according to Saint Matthew 18:6-7[5]
Saint Luke repeats the warning: "It would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck and he were cast into the sea than that he should cause one of these little ones to sin"[6]. In the mouth of Christ, these words target no one more directly than a minister of the faith who abuses a child. One can therefore say to the objector: "Your anger — Jesus had it before you, and more violently than you."
Scandal According to the Catechism
Far from inventing a doctrine to cover herself, the Church codified the gravity of scandal in her own Catechism. Scandal given to a child is called a grave offense:
"Scandal takes on a particular gravity by reason of the authority of those who cause it or the weakness of those who are scandalized. [...] Scandal is grave when given by those who by nature or office are obliged to teach and educate others." — Catechism of the Catholic Church, § 2285[7]
In other words, the strongest condemnation of abuse is internal to the Catholic faith. The abusers were not applying doctrine: they were trampling it underfoot. Catholic doctrine on chastity, on the respect owed to children, on the holiness of the priesthood, is precisely what condemns their acts. The crime is a betrayal of the teaching, never its application.
The Decisive Distinction: The Holiness of the Church and the Sin of Her Members
The Church, Holy by Her Head, Sinful in Her Members
Here is the heart of every substantive answer. The objection silently assumes that the Church claims to be composed of perfect men, and that one criminal priest would therefore be enough to refute her. But the Church has never claimed that. On the contrary, she confesses herself "holy and always in need of purification" — holy by Christ who is her Head, sinful in her members who remain fallible human beings. The Catechism says it without evasion, citing the Second Vatican Council:
"The Church [...] is held, as a matter of faith, to be unfailingly holy. Christ [...] loved her as his Bride, giving himself up for her so as to sanctify her. [...] Nevertheless, the Church, clasping sinners to her bosom, at once holy and always in need of purification, follows constantly the path of penance and renewal." — Catechism of the Catholic Church, § 827, citing Lumen Gentium 8[8]
This is the famous Latin formula: the Church is "sancta simul et semper purificanda" — "holy and at the same time always to be purified"[9]. Saying this is not a maneuver invented for the occasion: it is her constant doctrine. The holiness of the Church does not come from the moral average of her members; it comes from Christ who gives himself to her. Where a member betrays, Christ has not failed; the man has closed himself off.
Judas Was One of the Twelve
This distinction is not a late theory: it is written into the origin of the Church. The first apostolic college, chosen by Christ himself, included a traitor:
"Did I not choose you, the Twelve? And yet one of you is a devil." He spoke of Judas the son of Simon Iscariot, for he, one of the Twelve, was to betray him. — Gospel according to Saint John 6:70-71[10]
Jesus knowingly called Judas, made him an apostle, entrusted him with the purse — and Judas sold him. If the founding group of the Church, chosen by Christ himself, contained a traitor, then the presence of unworthy members through the centuries does not contradict the promise made to the Church: it accompanies her. One may say it this way: "Scandal inside the Church did not begin in 1950. It began on the first evening, at the table of the Last Supper."
The Wheat and the Weeds until the Harvest
Jesus even gave, in a parable, the rule by which his Church would exist in time: a field where wheat and weeds grow together until the harvest.
"Let both grow together until the harvest; and at harvest time I will tell the reapers, Gather the weeds first and bind them in bundles to be burned, but gather the wheat into my barn." — Gospel according to Saint Matthew 13:30[11]
The Church on earth is therefore not the final sorting of the good and the wicked: she is the field in which both coexist until God's judgment. This excuses the weeds in no way — the Gospel says they will be burned — but it explains why their presence does not ruin the field. To expect a Church made only of saints is to expect the end of the world; it is to confuse today's pilgrim Church with the triumphant Church in Heaven.
Saint Augustine's Answer to the Donatists
The objection is not new. As early as the fourth century, the Donatists held that a sacrament administered by an unworthy minister was invalid and that the Church of traitors was no longer the Church. Saint Augustine answered them with a decisive distinction that became Catholic doctrine: the value of a sacrament does not come from the holiness of the minister, but from Christ who acts through him. The Catechism fixed this in a famous Latin formula: the sacrament acts "ex opere operato", "by the very fact of the action being performed"[12].
"He who puts his trust in God, and not in man, will not be troubled by the evil life of this or that person. When Peter baptizes, it is Christ who baptizes; when Paul baptizes, it is Christ who baptizes; and if Judas were to baptize, it would still be Christ who baptizes." — Saint Augustine, Tractates on the Gospel of John, Tractate VI[13]
Concretely, this answers a real anxiety: "Are my baptism, confirmation, or marriage invalidated if the priest who celebrated them turned out to be a criminal?" No. The grace received came from Christ, not from the man. The minister's crime is immense for himself and for his victims — but it does not reach the grace that God truly gave.
Trusting an Institution That Covered It Up
Distinguish Faith in God from Trust in Men
Once the distinction has been made, the strongest objection remains: not isolated crimes, but systemic concealment — the silence of superiors, the transfer of guilty priests, the protection of the institution preferred to the protection of children. Here, no theological distinction is enough, because the objection is right: there was indeed a grave and repeated failure of governance.
The answer is not to deny it, but to distinguish two things often confused: faith in God and trust in Churchmen. Catholic faith never requires blind trust in every bishop or diocesan institution. It requires belief in Christ and in what he has revealed. A believer can keep the faith whole and demand accountability, denounce concealment, support victims against a failing hierarchy. Seeking justice in the Church is an act of faith, not an act against faith.
Recognize the Governance Failure without Diluting It
The future Benedict XVI, then Cardinal Ratzinger, dared this public recognition on Good Friday 2005, before the whole world, during the Way of the Cross at the Colosseum:
"How much filth there is in the Church, and even among those who, in the priesthood, ought to belong entirely to him! [...] Often, Lord, your Church seems to us like a boat about to sink, a boat taking in water on every side." — Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (future Benedict XVI), meditation for the Ninth Station, Way of the Cross at the Colosseum, March 25, 2005[14]
That the highest guardian of doctrine said this publicly, eight days before the death of John Paul II, demonstrates one thing: criticism of abuse and of its concealment did not come only from outside against a Church dug into denial — it also came from within, from the top, as an examination of conscience. Recognizing the fault does not weaken faith: faith itself demands that recognition.
Why Doctrine Condemns Abuse, Far from Permitting It
Finally, one must defuse a frequent confusion: the idea that the Church's teaching somehow favored abuse. The opposite is true. Catholic morality regards the abuse of a minor as one of the gravest sins, and the law of the Church has always condemned it — insufficiently in practice, certainly, but never in principle. The guilty did not follow doctrine: they denied it. To reproach the Church for abuse in the name of her own morality is, without realizing it, to pay her the tribute of believing that she is bound to better. And that is correct: she is.
Celibacy, Catholicism, and the Facts
Celibacy Is Not a Causal Factor
The popular objection claims that the mandatory continence of Latin-rite priests creates a frustration that explains abuse. It is an attractive thesis, but it is empirically refuted. If celibacy were the cause, settings where adults are not celibate should be spared — yet the opposite is true: the great majority of abuse of minors is committed by married or partnered men, within the family setting. According to psychologist Thomas Plante (Santa Clara University), who has studied clerical offenders, the available data do not make celibacy, in itself, a risk factor for acting out against minors[15]. The real mechanism lies elsewhere: institutional access to children, a culture of secrecy, poor selection and formation of candidates.
Evil Crosses Every Setting, Not Only the Church
The evidence from other settings is decisive. Denominations whose pastors may marry have known their own scandals: the independent Guidepost Solutions investigation into the Southern Baptist Convention (United States, 2022) made public a database of more than 700 cases of alleged abusers, after a 2019 Houston Chronicle investigation had recorded hundreds of leaders accused[16]. The phenomenon is found in schools, sports, entertainment, and families. This does not exonerate the Church in any way — let us repeat it, the argument "it is everywhere" relieves no conscience. But it ruins the causal thesis: neither celibacy nor Catholicism "manufactures" abusers. Evil comes from the human heart, and it prowls wherever adults have power over children. The answer, then, is not to abolish celibacy, but to actually protect children — which doctrine already commanded.
Answering According to the Person in Front of You
To a Victim or Wounded Relative: Be Silent and Receive
Before a person who was abused, or a loved one still wounded, all apologetics is out of place. The point is not to answer an objection, but to receive a wound. The only right attitude is listening, recognition of the injustice suffered, and the assurance that one believes them. "What was done to you is a crime. You have the right to be angry — at them and at the Church that did not protect. I believe you." Trying to "save" the Church before a victim wounds that person a second time. Here faith is silent so that charity may speak.
To a Sincere Seeker: the Whole Truth and Hope
To someone honestly trying to hold these facts together with faith, one owes the whole truth: the scale of the evil, the shame of concealment, and the distinction between the holiness of the Church and the sin of her members. Then one can show the other side: not to excuse, but to offer true hope — the Church has known other crises of corruption and emerged reformed (see the historical dossier), and the present response, still imperfect, is unprecedented. Truth first, hope afterward, never the reverse.
To a Bad-Faith Polemicist: Calm and Brevity
When someone does not expect an answer but seeks to "corner" you, the mistake would be to justify yourself endlessly or enter escalation. The right answer is brief and firm: "You are right about the horror — Jesus was harsher than you against those who do this. And no, the crime of some men does not prove that Christ is false." One recognizes what is true in the attack, refuses the abusive conclusion, and does not feed a fight that is not a real search. Calm disarms more surely than argument.
In One Minute: How to Answer
To conclude, here are three ways to say the essential point, depending on the time and the audience.
The three-sentence version. "What was done to those children is monstrous, and what was covered up is a second fault — I do not minimize it for one second. But the Church has never claimed to be made of perfect men: she is holy by Christ and sinful through her members, and Judas was already one of the Twelve. The crime of some proves that they betrayed the Gospel, not that the Gospel is false."
The reversal version. "Do you know who spoke most violently about those who abuse children? Jesus: 'a millstone around his neck and the sea.' Your indignation is not against the Gospel; it comes from it."
The version for oneself, when one doubts. Remember that my faith does not rest on the holiness of clerics, but on Christ. I can weep for victims, demand justice, be ashamed of my Church — and continue to believe in the One whom no traitor has been able to soil.
The abuse objection is the most painful objection that can be raised against a Catholic, and the most legitimate in its indignation. Answering it does not mean neutralizing it like an argument: it means recognizing the horror without reserve, distinguishing Christ from those who betrayed him, and holding together truth, justice for victims, and hope for a Church that allows herself to be purified.
For Further Reading
- The Abuse Crisis in the Catholic Church — the full dossier: facts, cases, figures, magisterial response, and reform.
- The CIASE and the Sauvé Report (October 5, 2021) — the method, figures, and 45 recommendations.
- How to Explain the Scandal of Evil? — the broader question of evil and God.
- Why Does the Church Say She Is One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic? — the exact meaning of the Church's holiness.
- Can One Be Christian without the Church? — why scandal does not dispense one from the Church.
- How to Forgive When One Has Been Gravely Wounded? — a path for the deepest wounds.
- Can the Pope Be Wrong? — distinguishing infallibility from impeccability.
Notes and References
Pope Francis, Letter to the People of God, August 20, 2018, full text on vatican.va. Written in response to the Pennsylvania grand jury report, the letter recognizes ecclesial responsibility and calls for penance and solidarity with victims.
1Independent Commission on Sexual Abuse in the Church (CIASE), Sexual Violence in the Catholic Church. France 1950-2020, report delivered October 5, 2021 (the "Sauvé Report," after its chairman Jean-Marc Sauvé). Central estimate: ~330,000 minor victims in an ecclesial context, including ~216,000 by clergy and religious. The estimate rests on the convergence of five sources, including an Inserm survey (dir. Nathalie Bajos) conducted in late 2020 and early 2021. 95% confidence interval: 250,000 to 410,000.
2John Jay College of Criminal Justice, The Nature and Scope of the Problem of Sexual Abuse of Minors by Catholic Priests and Deacons in the United States, 1950-2002, study commissioned by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), 2004: 10,667 allegations recorded against 4,392 clerics, about 4% of the 109,694 priests and deacons in ministry over the period.
3Public presentation of the report by Jean-Marc Sauvé, October 5, 2021: "Outside family and friendship circles, the Catholic Church is the environment in which the prevalence of sexual violence is highest." Prevalence (proportion of people reporting that they suffered sexual violence as minors in the setting concerned): family and close circle, by far the most affected setting; Church ~1.16% (including ~0.82% by clergy); holiday camps ~0.36%; public school ~0.34%; sports clubs ~0.28%; cultural activity structures ~0.17%. Cf. franceinfo, "Comment a été évalué le chiffre de 330 000 victimes," October 5, 2021; Aleteia, "Les six chiffres à retenir du rapport de la Ciase."
4Gospel according to Saint Matthew 18:6-7 (Crampon translation in the French source article). Parallel in Mk 9:42. Taken up by the Catechism of the Catholic Church on scandal (§ 2285).
5Gospel according to Saint Luke 17:1-2: "It is impossible that scandals should not come; but woe to him through whom they come! It would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck and he were cast into the sea than that he should cause one of these little ones to sin."
6Catechism of the Catholic Church (definitive edition, 1997), §§ 2284-2287, here § 2285. Scandal is defined as "an attitude or behavior which leads another to do evil"; its gravity increases with the authority of the one who gives it and the weakness of the one who suffers it.
7Catechism of the Catholic Church, § 827, citing Second Vatican Council, dogmatic constitution Lumen Gentium, n. 8, and 1 Jn 1:8. § 827 also cites the rite of Penance: the Church "clasping sinners to her bosom" is "at once holy and always in need of purification."
8Second Vatican Council, dogmatic constitution Lumen Gentium (November 21, 1964), n. 8: "Ecclesia [...] sancta simul et semper purificanda, poenitentiam et renovationem continuo prosequitur" — "The Church, at once holy and always to be purified, constantly follows the path of penance and renewal."
9Gospel according to Saint John 6:70-71. Jesus designates Judas as one of the Twelve who will betray him; cf. also Jn 13:21-30 (the announcement of the betrayal at the Last Supper) and Jn 12:6 (Judas held the common purse and used to take what was put into it).
10Gospel according to Saint Matthew 13:24-30 (parable of the wheat and the weeds), here v. 30; explanation given by Jesus in Mt 13:36-43. Cf. also the parable of the net gathering good and bad fish, Mt 13:47-50.
11Catechism of the Catholic Church, §§ 1127-1128: the sacraments act "ex opere operato" ("by the very fact of the action being performed"), because Christ is at work; "from the moment that a sacrament is celebrated in accordance with the intention of the Church, the power of Christ and his Spirit acts in and through it, independently of the personal holiness of the minister." Cf. also § 1550.
12Saint Augustine of Hippo, In Iohannis Evangelium tractatus (Tractates on the Gospel of John), Tractate VI, 7 (PL 35), against the Donatist position: "When Peter baptizes, it is Christ who baptizes [...] and if Judas were to baptize, it is still Christ who baptizes." The Donatist controversy (4th-5th c.) concerned precisely the validity of sacraments administered by ministers judged unworthy (the traditores).
13Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (future Benedict XVI), meditation for the Ninth Station (Jesus falls for the third time), Way of the Cross at the Colosseum, Good Friday, March 25, 2005, text on vatican.va. The meditations were written eight days before the death of John Paul II (Way of the Cross of March 25, 2005; death of John Paul II on April 2, 2005).
14Thomas G. Plante, psychologist (Santa Clara University), specialist in the study of clerical offenders: according to him, available data do not make celibacy, in itself, a risk factor for acting out against minors. Cf. T. G. Plante (ed.), Sin against the Innocents: Sexual Abuse by Priests and the Role of the Catholic Church, Praeger, 2004; position summarized publicly: "Many argue that celibacy places Catholic clerics at risk of sexually abusing children. This isn't true. […] it doesn't increase the risk of child sexual abuse" ("Top 10 Myths About Clergy Abuse in the Catholic Church", Psychology Today, August 1, 2019, myth no. 6).
15Guidepost Solutions, Report of the Independent Investigation: Southern Baptist Convention Executive Committee, report dated May 15, 2022 (288 p.), made public on Sunday, May 22, 2022 (public release: Baptist Press; Biblical Recorder), with publication of a database of more than 700 cases of alleged abusers (2000-2019). This followed the Houston Chronicle and San Antonio Express-News investigation ("Abuse of Faith," 2019) documenting hundreds of leaders and volunteers accused since 1998. Example cited to refute the causal thesis about celibacy, never to minimize Catholic responsibility.
16