"Because of celibacy, clergy and members of religious orders are all potential child abusers, some just about keeping their instincts under control."

"As for bishops, they are little more than a bunch of twisted, incompetent old men, well aware of evil actions among some of their colleagues but saying nothing in order to protect their power."

"Child abuse was just par for the course."
 
"The Corrupt Church was not just the home of abuse, but the cause of it."

"The Church doesn't have a problem. The Church is the problem."
 
"Such a rotten body should be destroyed."

"The Catholic Church in 2010 is a uniquely safe place for child abusers and a uniquely dangerous place for children."



Each of these are direct quotes from an article by Bishop Donal McKeown.  Sure they have been taken out of context.  But really, the most basic media training will tell you not to quote your oponents.  In this article the bishop presents a caricature of the Church so that he can dispute it.  But in reality the caricature he presents is much clearer, and more memorable than any contrary thing he says.  He's given opponents of the Church ready made soundbites - "a uniquely safe place for child abusers and a uniquely dangerous place for children."

And his desciption of bishops as "little more than a bunch of twisted, incompetent old men, well aware of evil actions among some of their colleagues but saying nothing in order to protect their power."

Well how far from reality is that?