It sounds like the author has a rather caricatured view of the Church, and is writing from a pretty hostile point of view. The problem is one of human sinfulness and corruption, which has been going on and been covered up for centuries. What has changed is the publicity it all receives now, due to the media. But the media are not always fair and objective they need to be sensational to sell newspapers. The way bishops and other Church leaders deal with scandals has certainly changed over the past 15-20 years. But this, again, really shows more about changing assumptions in society than about the motivation or honesty of the hierarchy. Keeping the reputation of an institution like the Church unstained used to be seen as the main duty of a bishop in the old days; this called for discretion and privacy, among other things – not for lying, but for a real effort to save people’s reputations if possible.
The defects, scandals and disgracefulness being done by some Catholic priests do not affect the Church established by Christ. It was he who said…”and not even death will ever be able to overcome it.”(Matthew 16:18)
The sins of priests should not affect God’s selection of them.
The priests of God did not take His commandments seriously.
(Malachi 2:1-3)
The question is, did this affect God’s choice of them? NO!
“For the lips of a priest should guard knowledge, and people should seek instruction from his mouth, for he is the messenger of the LORD of hosts.”(Malachi 2:7)
The Apostle Peter denied the Lord Jesus three times.(Luke 22:54-62)
The question is, after Peter’s denial of Christ, did this affect the choice of Christ? NO!
Christ chose him to take care of the sheep. (John 21:15-17).
One of the apostles of Christ was Judas. We all know that but does this mean that there is no truth in them? (John 6:70-71)
