He said, “The use of stereotypes and the passing from personal responsibility and guilt to a collective guilt remind me of the more shameful aspects of anti-Semitism.”
I think his point is that he feels it’s wrong to call all Catholic priests “child abusers” because of the actions of a bunch of rotten ones, in a class-action sort of way. It’s hyperbole, but if he toned it down a notch, I would agree somewhat. It’s wrong to think all Catholics are child-screwing coverups, just like it’s wrong to think that all black people are criminals simply because there are a disproportionate number of them in prison, or to feel like all straight white males are rapists because some of them rape.
Where I have the problem is this: The church scandal here has given us a reason to think some priests are bad, and the fact that some priests are bad gives us a reason to question, but maybe not condemn, the church as a whole. In other words, criticism of priests is fact-based. However, I can’t think of anything that Jewish people did to earn anti-Semitic views except be a minority group in the wrong place at the wrong time. It’s not fact-based. This is where the preacher screws up, and deserves any tongue-lashing he gets.