 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Clerical child abuse Part 94....
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Clerical child abuse Part 94.... From: Joe Offer Date: 15 Apr 10 - 03:53 PM I suppose we can identify four major types of male molesters - there must be differences, because the acts are so different: Rome's first response to the current sex abuse crisis, was to target homosexuals; and Rome instituted restrictions on homosexuals entering and attending seminaries. Right-wing Catholics were triumphant, because they have long blamed the troubles of the Catholic Church on the "homosexual agenda" of liberals. "Homosexual agenda" has become a buzzword for anything conservative Catholics don't like. But Rome got shot down early on that one, because it's clear to most of us that homosexuality is not the reason for child molestation. There are still a few conservative idiots trying to blow that horn, but Rome has largely backed off its attempt to blame child molestation on homosexuals. It's very obvious that the vast majority of homosexuals wouldn't dream of having sex with a child. There are still forces in Rome that try to blame child molestation on liberalism, and the relaxation of sexual attitudes and taboos. The conservatives like that argument, too - but it's dropping into the background. It's very obvious that the vast majority of liberals wouldn't dream of having sex with a child. The loudest voices now are shouting that the blame for molestation lies in the fact that the molesters are Catholic, and that the Catholic Church is nothing but an international child molestation conspiracy. It's very obvious to me that the vast majority of Catholics wouldn't dream of having sex with a child. And some blame priesthood, as if ordination had some power that induced the tendency to molest children into a man. And others blame celibacy, as if not having sex with a mature, adult partner would cause a person to want to have sex with children (celibacy may create a haven for those drawn to molesting children, but it seems clear to me that celibacy and child molestation are separate matters. Indeed, true celibacy makes child molestation impossible). So, it seems that in all this, people have been barking up the wrong tree, wasting all their energy pointing the finger of blame at false targets and proposing solutions that destroy their favorite targets without actually solving the problem of child molestation. Maybe it's time to stop all the finger-pointing at false targets, and to ask the difficult questions required to find a solution to this terrible web of crime. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Clerical child abuse Part 94.... From: akenaton Date: 15 Apr 10 - 04:52 PM Solution? Simple!....get rid of the celibacy rule and get some normal people into the priesthood....anyone who wishes to give up their sex life .....for whatever reason is not normal. There are a large number of cases of homosexual abuse of young people in the church. There are a disproportionate number of homosexuals in the priesthood. Put these two facts together, stop navel gazing and get it fuckin' sorted...if you dont, the "liberals" will crucify you and your church. They encouraged the liberalisation of homosexuality in society, your church used it to fill the gaps in the priesthood and now the church is being pilloried (perhaps rightly) by the same people who's ideology caused the problems in the first place. You seem to be completely taken in by the "liberal" agenda Joe...don't you realise that people who need religion also need order in society, permanence,conservatism? They dont want some fuckin' new age cult! Time to start asking yourself some pertinent questions I think. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Clerical child abuse Part 94.... From: Jim Carroll Date: 16 Apr 10 - 02:44 AM "Solution? Simple!....get rid of the celibacy rule and get some normal people into the priesthood" You sound just like the priests dictating to the rest of the world what we should be doing with our sex lives - mind your own business. Who are you to dictate what is 'normal' and what isn't? And still you remain silent on your pronouncements. A blatent homophobe and a closet Christian. Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Clerical child abuse Part 94.... From: akenaton Date: 16 Apr 10 - 03:07 AM "A blatant homophobe and a closet Christian" :0) and which is the most evil do you think? :0) Just to set the record straight, the teachings of the philosopher Jesus were fine if a trifle simplistic...if Jesus was alive today I'd be his friend. In fact there are a couple of guys on here who could well be candidates for the second coming! :0) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Clerical child abuse Part 94.... From: akenaton Date: 16 Apr 10 - 03:23 AM Just thought, could we have a female Messiah? Remember how they taunted and cursed Jesus? Could it be Miss Sarah? :0) Shouldn't like to be a "liberal" on Judgement Day if she's the one :0) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Clerical child abuse Part 94.... From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies) Date: 16 Apr 10 - 03:28 AM "anyone who wishes to give up their sex life .....for whatever reason is not normal." And anyone with an extreme interest in other people's sex lives isn't normal either. Catholicism isn't the only religion where celibacy can be a part of one's spiritual discipline. It has an extremely long history within Hinduism and Buddhism too - though as with Catholicism, it's only a percentage of very devoted practitioners who take that path as a life-choice. Within Buddhism, apart from those dedicated to a Monastic ascetic existence, many perfectly ordinary people will choose to undergo a period of celibacy for deepening their spiritual experience. Celibacy, alongside abstinence from and relinquishing of other 'wordly' or sensual attachments is quite usual world-wide, for those called to dedicate their life towards a spiritual focus rather than a worldly one. There is a long history of such strict personal disciplines within the world's spiritual and mystical paths - many hundreds if not thousands of years of it in fact. Just because you, as a non-spiritual atheist will never be able to understand such a calling and just because it doesn't happen to suit your personal political agenda, doesn't make such spiritually motivated people "abnormal". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Clerical child abuse Part 94.... From: Jim Carroll Date: 16 Apr 10 - 05:23 AM " and which is the most evil do you think?" Six of one.... The first is somebody who persecutes somebody for being different, the second is a hypoctite who likes to hear cocks crowing. JIm Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Clerical child abuse Part 94.... From: Jim Carroll Date: 16 Apr 10 - 05:50 AM Bringin' It All Back Home, from today's Irish Times. Jim Carroll POPE ENGINEERED COVER-UP OF CHILD SEX ABUSE, SAYS THEOLOGIAN Irish Times Religious Affairs Correspondent THE POPE has been accused by a leading theologian of engineering a worldwide cover-up of clerical child sex abuse in the Catholic Church and of having made worse everything that is wrong in the church. The accusations have been levelled by Pope Benedict's longtime critic and former colleague, Swiss theologian Fr Hans Kung, in an open letter to the Catholic bishops of the world, published in this newspaper today. It is devastatingly critical of the pope and urges the bishops not to be silent where the current church crisis is concerned but to set about reform and call for another Vatican council. Timed to coincide with the fifth anniversary of Benedict's election as pope next Monday, Fr Kung says in the letter "there is no denying the fact that the worldwide system of covering up cases of sexual crimes committed by clerics was engineered by the Roman Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith under Cardinal Ratzinger (1981-2005)". He continues: "During the reign of Pope John Paul II, that Congregation had already taken charge of all such cases under oath of strictest silence. Ratzinger himself, on May 18th, 2001, sent a solemn document to all the bishops dealing with severe crimes {epistula de delictis gravida ibus), in which cases of abuse were sealed under the secretum pontificium, the violation of which could entail grave ecclesiastical pen-alties. "With good reason, therefore, many people have expected a personal mea culpa on the part of the former prefect and current pope. Instead, the pope passed up the opportunity afforded by Holy Week: On Easter Sunday, he had his innocence proclaimed urbi et orbi by the dean of the College of Cardinals [Cardinal Angelo Sodano]." Fr Kung says that "when it comes to facing the major challenges of our times, his [Benedict's] pontificate has increasingly passed up more opportunities than it has taken". Such missed opportunities included, he says, "rapprochement with the Protestant churches", "reconciliation with the Jews", "the opportunity for a dialogue with Muslims", and "reconciliation with the colonised indigenous peoples of Latin America". Also missed was "the opportunity to help the people of Africa by allowing the use of birth control to fight overpopulation and condoms to fight the spread of HIV" and that of making "peace with modern science by clearly affirming the theory of evolution and accepting stem-cell research". He says that "with a return to pomp and spectacle catching the attention of the media, the reactionary forces in Rome have attempted to present us with a strong church fronted by an absolutistic 'Vicar of Christ' who combines the church's legislative, executive and judicial powers in his hands alone. But Benedict's policy of restoration has failed." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Clerical child abuse Part 94.... From: Joe Offer Date: 16 Apr 10 - 05:59 AM Crow Sister, that's one of the more thoughtful defenses of celibacy I've seen. Celibacy is often not much of a problem for men and women in religious orders, because they choose to make vows of poverty, chastity, and obedience - those vows are an integral part of membership in a religious order (although the "obedience" idea has changed radically in many orders). But most priests are "secular" priests, attached to a particular diocese instead of to a religious order. These priests earn a salary and manage their own expenses, and they live on their own and not in a religious community. They make a solemn promise of celibacy before they are ordained, but celibacy has never been an integral and logical part of diocesan priesthood. As a result, most diocesan priests I know, look on celibacy as a burden they had to accept because they wanted to become priests. But very few priests that I know, see celibacy as something necessary for priesthood (most of my priest friends would like to see women ordained priests, too). so, it's a tough row to hoe for many of them, and it's the reason why I and many others left the seminary. While I don't think celibacy causes child molestation, it eliminates a lot of sexually normal people from the "gene pool" that provides candidates for priesthood. That makes the proportion of sexually abnormal people higher, and creates a situation that is more comfortable for sexual deviates. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Clerical child abuse Part 94.... From: GUEST,Steamin' Willie Date: 16 Apr 10 - 06:07 AM For me, it is quite simple; In most civilised countries, it is against the law to suppress crime from the relevant authorities. Ergo, it is a crime to order your employees not to report serious crime by other employees if you are aware of it. Quite simply, I wonder how the Pope can now visit other countries without relying on diplomatic immunity? the thought of him being welcomed by our politicians when he visits the UK later this year is not an image I am looking forward to seeing. Politicians will be tolerant of this cover up merchant for one cynical reason; He still has followers who are so brainwashed that they believe he cannot do wrong, and these misguided souls have votes..... the dichotomy here is interesting; I don't believe in a police state any more than anybody else, but if I made a stance to say that anything said to me regarding crime whilst sitting in a large box was information I cannot pass onto the authorities, I would be in breach not only of the law, (which is not infallible of course) but also in breach of common decency and civilised behaviour. Like I said on another thread before it was deleted, if any good is to come of this it is for people to wake up to how organised religions really are an irrelevant paper tiger. they only have power because people bestow that power in them. if politicians felt ignoring them would not lose votes, they would not get the time of day from anybody... Your choice, your perpetuation of control mechanisms or your realisation that it is possible to enjoy life without feeling guilty about it. After all, you won't be judged in the afterlife 'cos guess what??? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Clerical child abuse Part 94.... From: Joe Offer Date: 16 Apr 10 - 06:27 AM None of your messages in the "Catholic come all-ye" thread were deleted, Willie. There are no deleted messages in that thread at all. Your message may not have "taken" - that happens sometimes because of a technical glitch. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Clerical child abuse Part 94.... From: GUEST,Steamin' Willie Date: 16 Apr 10 - 08:06 AM Joe, If there has been a technical glitch, then I apologise. I have had posts removed before, and had my IP address suspended for a while. I found this to be a "friend" posting as me, which can't happen now as I have moved house. (he was more outrageous than I am, and I try to get debate going by not holding back.....) So when I couldn't see them, (and somebody did post to support a view I put forward?) then I feared the censor..... Regards, SW. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Clerical child abuse Part 94.... From: Peter K (Fionn) Date: 17 Apr 10 - 10:33 AM There's a lot of logic in the recent posts from Joe and Crow Sister. The Vatican is now saying the Pope would like to meet victims of child abuse during his visit to Malta, but "has a very busy schedule." They really know how to send out the right signals. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Clerical child abuse Part 94.... From: akenaton Date: 17 Apr 10 - 11:59 AM Joe......"While I don't think celibacy causes child molestation, it eliminates a lot of sexually normal people from the "gene pool" that provides candidates for priesthood. That makes the proportion of sexually abnormal people higher, and creates a situation that is more comfortable for sexual deviates." Isn't that exactly what I have been saying? Where we seem to disagree, is in the definition of the abuse which has been perpetrated. While I agree that there has been paedophilia practiced by a very small number of deviant priests, the rates of paedophelia in the church seems to be almost equal to paedophelia rates in society at large. The vast amount of sexual abuse in the Church has been perpetrated by homosexuals, against teenage boys and young adult males. This is an accepted fact....accepted by all except our resident religion bashers, who see this scandal as a handy stick to beatup the church with. The church has many faults and the self serving cover up was disgraceful, but for members here to ignore the evidence and contend that the cover up was the worst crime, is disingenuous in the extreme. If the whole hierarchy of the Catholic church were to resign tomorrow and leave the make up of the priesthood as it is....the abuse would continue unabated. I say, the important thing is to ensure the rates of abuse fall, that is the only way children can be protected. I cite the celibacy rule as a weakness; by that I dont mean that "celibacy causes sexual abuse".....that is a ridiculous statement, if someone decides to become celibate and live a celibate life, then that is a personal choice and of course it does not "cause" sexual abuse. The difference is that to be a priest, celibacy is mandatory, and as such attracts, as you say, "abnormal people into the gene pool" I agree 100%!! get married men with families into the priesthood, men who understand about real life and about children, people who respect our young folk, many of whom are deprived and disadvantaged, men who do not just think of boys and youths as sex objects. It is reckoned that at least 25% of priests have homosexual orientation. As I have said on other threads, homosexuals do not have the constraints to their sexual behaviour that generally come with producing and rearing a family ....I say again they have thrown away the rule book. Time for the church to take a lead in these matters, not be led by the nose like the rest of society......into "something very much worse than religion" as Mr Dawkins contends.....Ake |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Clerical child abuse Part 94.... From: Jim Carroll Date: 17 Apr 10 - 12:30 PM akenaton You continue your homophobic diatribe and ignore requests to qualify your outrageously bigoted statements. As long as you continue to do so I will continue to point this out. Your attitude is no better than racism. Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Clerical child abuse Part 94.... From: akenaton Date: 17 Apr 10 - 12:43 PM Jim.....I have yet to read any ideas from you on how to stop the abuse of boys and youths by homosexual priests. When you start putting forward some effective ideas on how to stop that abuse, then I will accept that you are sincere in what you write. All I hear from you is a blatant attack on religion....religion which many millions worldwide love and need. Who are you to deny them their crutch?......God? or a bigot with a chip? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Clerical child abuse Part 94.... From: Jim Carroll Date: 17 Apr 10 - 01:44 PM Akeneton Not long before I left London I did some electrical work in Soho, a few doors away from the Admiral Duncan Pub. Some time afterwards the Duncan was nailed-bombed by Neo Nazi David Copeland in a homophoebic attack; 3 died, 70 were wounded and maimed. I met some of the staff of the Duncan while I was working in the area, I don't know how they fared in the attack I detest all forms of bigotry, It damages lives, it maims and it kills. As far as I am concerned your persistant unsubsatantiated homophoebic statements that the clerical child abuse is homosexually generated (even the Catholic church have backpeddaled from this), is part of the bigotry that allows such things as the Duncan bombing to happen - as I said, it is no different than the racism that made it possible for five Nazi thugs to murder Stephen Lawrence and get away with it. If you have evidence, (that other apologists for the clerical abuse have failed to produce) that these are homosexual crimes, please produce it. As it stands, they are, and by and large, are accepted as being paedophelic acts perpetrated as displaysd of contempt for children placed in the care of abusers. How would I prevent such things happening again - I would ascertain that no individual or organisation ever gains control over peoples' minds or bodies to allow them to carry out such acts the way the church has been allowed to. What I would not do is to create diversions as to the cause of the atrocities that heve ruined the lives of many thousand children. Whether you like it or not, homosexuality is legal throughout the civilised world - it remains a crime in the minds of bigots like yourself. Suggesting that homosexuality leads to rape and paedophilia is, as far as I am concerned an act of abuse in itself and should be criminalised. Do you honestly believe that if homosexuality led to paedophelia and rape it would remain legal? You have never admitted to being a Christian but your attitude reeks of religious fundamentalism - substaniate your claims, or continue to be part of the bigotry that ruins lives - simple as that. Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Clerical child abuse Part 94.... From: Jack Campin Date: 17 Apr 10 - 01:52 PM As I pointed out, the CofE also has a very large proportion of homosexual priests. But it doesn't seem to have a significant child abuse problem (either of the sexual kind or just plain bullying and violence). The difference is that the CofE doesn't have locally hegemonic power anywhere these days. An abuser priest in the CofE (of whatever sexual orientation) has no effective protection from secular law enforcement. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Clerical child abuse Part 94.... From: Jim Carroll Date: 17 Apr 10 - 03:00 PM Dictionary definition: Paedophilia, sexual attraction of adults, mainly men, towards children of either sex. So if paedopilia is a 'mainly men' tendency and hetorsexual rapes are overwhelmingly commited by men - shouldn't we men all be locked away somewhere to make the world a safer place? Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Clerical child abuse Part 94.... From: akenaton Date: 17 Apr 10 - 04:44 PM Not all men Jim, just you......to safeguard reasoned debate! :0) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Clerical child abuse Part 94.... From: akenaton Date: 17 Apr 10 - 05:18 PM Sorry Jim...I missed your first post. The Boston clerical abuse case instigated a study into sexual abuse in the Catholic Church, its findings are readily available on line, giving statistics and tables with the ages of victims ect As I've repeatedly said the perpetrators were adult males, the victims in the main, were teenage boys and youths. How can you possibly contend these crimes were anything but homosexual assault. Your ideas on controlling the abuse are absurd. "I would ascertain that no individual or organisation ever gains control over peoples' minds or bodies" I take it you are being serious?.....Exactly how do you propose to "ascertain no individual or organisation ever gains control over people's minds or bodies"? Do you not realise that we are continually psychologically manipulated by one organisation or another....most political or financial in origin. You yourself seem to be completely controlled in your thinking by "liberal" ideology, promoted as a diversion by the Captains of Capitalism. If you are not even trying to make sense, why bother to post at all? I never knowingly lie on this forum, and I have already told you that I am an atheist who understands the religious needs of others. I was never baptised, dont go to church,or hold any religious affiliations whatsoever. I do not hate Christians nor homosexuals, I leave the hatred to those who are easily manipulated. If you are interested in viewing hatred, just go to some of the UK political threads, or the Sarah Palin "hate fests"....there's no accounting for personal taste. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Clerical child abuse Part 94.... From: akenaton Date: 17 Apr 10 - 05:35 PM Jack...I dont know if there are so many homosexuals in the Church of England priesthood, as they do not have the celibacy rule. can you produce any figures on that? It is pretty well accepted that the CR encourages homosexuals into the RC priesthood, where their single status can be disguised as celibacy, in many...not all, cases. Also the mix of "married with children" priests with those who are homosexual, would make the concealment of any crimes of abuse more difficult, leading to less abuse. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Clerical child abuse Part 94.... From: Joe Offer Date: 17 Apr 10 - 08:05 PM I've read the National Catholic Reporter (NCR) quite regularly since it was first published in 1964. I've always found it to be honest in its reporting of information, although sometimes I find it a bit strident in its opinions. Benedictine Sister Joan Chittister is a regular contributor on the NCR Website, and her opinions are always very thoughtful. Take a look at her March 15 column on sex abuse. I think you'll be surprised to find something like this in a publication that calls itself Catholic. Chittister doesn't provide the answers that I'd like to learn, but she certainly asks probing questions. I'm afraid that only the bishops can answer why this whole thing happened - and I haven't heard a satisfactory answer from them yet. I get the feeling that a lot of bishops are very puzzled by all this, too - how did this horrible thing happen, and why didn't somebody do something long ago to stop it? I wanted to say something more about "secular" diocesan priests and celibacy. What I think we all need, even more than sex, is family. We need a home to go home to, people who will speak with us with total honesty but without threat. Our families are what keep us human. Religious sisters and brothers and priests have a sort of family in the religious communities where they live. I work for two nuns, and they have had a close, honest friendship for almost fifty years; and I used to work for two other nuns who had the same kind of wonderful, healthy, lifelong friendship. They are sustained by these close relationships, and the are happy, balanced, earthy, passionate women who really make a difference in this world - they've spent their lives teaching high school girls and serving the poor. Religious communities of men do not seem to be quite as supporting as women's religious communities, but some are very good. But secular diocesan priests have no such community or family life, and they often live lives of extreme loneliness. Their parishioners put them on a pedestal, and it's hard for secular priests to find anyone who will be honest with them. With my 8 years of seminary experience, I "speak their language," so I often make it a point to be bluntly honest with priests. Most times, they really appreciate that. If not, I usually find they're people who cannot be trusted. But this is a point to consider, that celibacy forces secular priests to live lives of extreme loneliness. It gives them too much time to brood, and I find that they can develop some really strange perspectives. I figure it's my job as an ex-seminarian to keep them honest. I haven't been able to reach the younger, neo-conservative priests, however - they are far too wrapped up in their own ideology, far too thrilled with their own self-image as priests. I think that many of them are powder kegs, ready to explode - and they make me very worried. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Clerical child abuse Part 94.... From: Ed T Date: 17 Apr 10 - 09:05 PM "But secular diocesan priests have no such community or family life, and they often live lives of extreme loneliness" Let's not forget, these folks are human...and have the same human social needs that we all share, regardless of faith or vocation. I wonder just how many turned to alcohol? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Clerical child abuse Part 94.... From: Joe Offer Date: 18 Apr 10 - 12:12 AM Lots, Ed. Alcoholism among priests is a big problem. I've told more than one priest that he can't go out among the public if he's tipsy or smelling of alcohol. Believe it or not, they listen. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Clerical child abuse Part 94.... From: Jim Carroll Date: 18 Apr 10 - 04:50 AM Akenaton You don't hate homosexuals - you pity them because they don't share your sexual preferences - not hatred but contempt. You ignore the fact that homosexuality is not the same as paedophilia, a form of lying. You evade questions such as if homosexuals are potential paedophiles, why aren't hetrosexuals potential rapist - a form of lying. From the beginning of this you have used the abuse of children to forward your crusade against a legal and widely acceptible way of life - that is despicable. If the object of your contempt was tranfered from homosexuality to racism you would be identified with the Klan or the BNP. Well done. Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Clerical child abuse Part 94.... From: Peter K (Fionn) Date: 18 Apr 10 - 06:12 AM The Boston clerical abuse case instigated a study into sexual abuse in the Catholic Church, its findings are readily available on line Whose study are you talking about Ake, and would it not be a simple courtesy to provide a link? You really provide little evidence to support your sweeping generalisations, yet at the same time you are quick to demand evidence from others. And why is it so important to you that child abuse should be put down to homosexuality, except that it would fortify a prejudice that seems to be distorting your judgment? The problem in the Catholic church will not be solved by pigeon-holing the abusers but by a fundamental rethink, from the present papal incumbent down, so that in future the voices of children will be heard, and those who abuse children will find no shelter but will be treated as the criminals they are. Meanwhile Benedict continues to mumble weasel words ("Malta loves Christ, who loves his Church, which is his body, even if this body is wounded by our sins...") while managing to evade meeting anyone abused by his priests. Pope avoids commenting on sex scandal |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Clerical child abuse Part 94.... From: GUEST Date: 18 Apr 10 - 07:05 AM "those who abuse children will find no shelter but will be treated as the criminals they are." Yes, I would agree with that Peter, but the problem would be that by pinning all of the blame on the offices of the Catholic Church, the abusers....those who actually committed the crimes will evade proper punishment, which should of course include permanent dismissal from the priesthood. Sorry about the link, but it can be googled under Boston clerical abuse. There are many links, the main link being the producers of the study The John Jay College of criminal justice...sorry if I've got the whole name slightly wrong, but to a net savvy chap like you it should be easy-peasy :0) Nice to talk to you again, hope your doing well...Ake |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Clerical child abuse Part 94.... From: GUEST,Peter Laban Date: 18 Apr 10 - 10:55 AM Fintan O'Toole comments in the Irish Times And I intend to agree with him on a lot of his points, the homosexuality debate, the celibacy thing, the anti-church argument it's all smoke and mirrors that takes away attention from the core issues. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Clerical child abuse Part 94.... From: Ed T Date: 18 Apr 10 - 11:29 AM "...permanent dismissal from the priesthood"...and dismissal from church sanctioned activities involving children...in any country? http://thechronicleherald.ca/NovaScotian/1177793.html |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Clerical child abuse Part 94.... From: Peter K (Fionn) Date: 18 Apr 10 - 12:12 PM Whoops - I was too quick to judge the old reactionary: Pope meets abuse victims |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Clerical child abuse Part 94.... From: Jim Carroll Date: 18 Apr 10 - 03:07 PM For those who doubt that SOME journalists don't do a good job, this remarkable piece by one of Ireland's best, Fintan O'Toole, from yeterday's Irish Times. Sorry about the length, Jim Carroll THE TRUTH IS THAT CLERICAL ABUSE AND COVER-UP ARE NOT ABOUT RELIGION OR SEX, THEY ARE ABOUT POWER In a week when the Pope's right-hand man pointed to homosexuality as the cause of paedophilia, Fintan OToole looks at the church's response to the child abuse cover-up and asks what it is all about THERE IS A word that became current towards the fag end of the Northern Ireland conflict, when evil had been reduced to banalities. An atrocity against one community would often be met on the other side, not with either outright support or condemnation but with "what-aboutery". Yes, some would shrug, this is terrible but what about Bloody Sunday? What about Enniskillen? What about Cromwell? That this form of moral evasion had its very own name was a mark of how pitiful and des¬perate it was. Even those who engaged in it knew that it was a last refuge. When the inde¬fensible could not be defended, the only remaining strategy was to present the perpe¬trators as victims, and those who criticised atrocities as hypocrites. As evidenced by this week's attempt by Pope Benedict's right-hand man Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, to blame homosexuals for the crisis in the church, what-aboutery is now the mainstay of the Vatican's response to the continuing revelation of its global strategy of covering up the abuse of children by priests. For a short period leading up to the issuing of Pope Benedict's pastoral letter to the Irish faithful last month, the Vatican seemed to be inching towards some tentative reflection on its own moral responsibility for the protection of abusers. But as the flood of allegations has risen ever closer to the Pope's own door, humility has been replaced by an aggresive backlash. The church leadership has now adopted a three-fold strategy: blame the victims; invoke anti-Catholic persecution; and identify modernity as the root of the problem. Benedict him¬self began the process of blaming the victims in his Palm Sunday sermon when he spoke of not allowing oneself to be "intimidated by the petty gossip of dominant opinion". This was not an accidental or thoughtless phrase. It was directly echoed on Easter Sunday by Cardinal Angelo Sodano, former Vatican secretary of state and currently dean of the College of Cardi¬nals. He urged Benedict not to be dismayed by "the petty gossip of the moment, by the trials that sometimes assail the community of believers". In one magisterial phrase, the sto¬ries of those who were attacked as children and the demands for accountability are dismissed as malicious tittle-tattle. The next step of painting the church leader¬ship, not as powerful people with questions to answer, but as innocent victims of persecution, was taken by the preacher to the papal house¬hold, Fr Raniero Cantalamessa. Showing that no strategy is too tasteless to be deployed, he cited a letter from a "Jewish friend", comparing attacks on the church's record on child abuse to "the more shameful aspects of anti-Semitism". Cantalamessa himself linked demands for accounta¬bility in the church to the "herd psychology" and the search for a scape¬goat through which "the weakest ele¬ment, the different one" is victimised. The ironies in this exercise in self-pity are almost beyond satire. Redefining the Pope, his cardinals and his bishops as the "weakest" members of society would be peculiar in any context. But in the context of child abuse, it is gro¬tesque. And claiming the status of "the dif¬ferent one", the outsider who suffers from stereotyping and discrimination, is a bit rich for a church that is happy to per¬petuate, as Bertone did this week, the vile stereotype that identifies homosex¬uality and paedophilia. If the church insists on drawing analogies with anti-Semitism, it might be well advised to avoid the subject of its attitudes to gay people altogether. Underlying all of this, however, is a more considered strategy of con¬structing an intellectual framework within which an official narrative of the crisis can emerge. That narrative is self-consciously reactionary. The church was fine when it had authority in society. That authority was challenged by liberalism, free thinking and sexual openness, and paedophilia is the result. In his pastoral letter to Irish Catholics, Bene¬dict could not have been more explicit about this. He urged the faithful to understand the crisis as a consequence of "new and serious challenges to the faith arising from the rapid transformation and secularisation of Irish society". "Fast-paced social change has occurred, often adversely affecting people's traditional adherence to Catholic teaching and values." As an explanation for paedophile priests and for the abysmal institutional response to their crimes, this bears hardly a moment's scrutiny. In the Irish context alone, we know from the Ryan report that systematic child abuse by Catholic brothers, priests and nuns goes back at the very least to the 1930s and almost certainly beyond. We know from the Murphy report that "there is a two thousand year history of Biblical, Papal and Holy See statements showing aware¬ness of clerical child sex abuse... it is clear that cases were dealt with by Archbishop McQuaid in the 1950s and 1960s And even if one were to accept the highly dubious contention that paedophile priests are a result of the move towards greater sexual openness from the 1960s onwards, how would that explain the most damaging aspect of the scandal - the cover-up by bishops and the Vatican? These strategies may be as desperate as they are clumsily evasive. But they are argu¬ably necessary to the survival of the church's current power structures. For if the organised cover-up of child abuse is not about petty gossip, not about victimising a defenceless Pope and not about secular modernity, what is it about? This is a question to which Benedict cannot give an honest answer because that answer would threaten the very system he embodies. Some liberal critics of the church often fail to answer the question, too. They may blame Catholicism itself, as if other belief systems did not end up justifying vile crimes. They may blame celibacy, as if the vast majority of attacks on children were not perpetrated non-celibates – often indeed by the child's own parents. The truth is that child abuse and cover-up are not primarily about religion or sex. They are about power. The bleak lessons of human history are that those who have too much power will abuse it. And that organisations will put their own interests above those of the victims. The behaviour of the institutional Catholic church in Ireland and around the world is certainly a stark example of both of these truths. But it is not the only example, even in contemporary Ireland. The Irish Amateur Swimming Association, for example, gave coaches the power to do what they liked to children and then engaged in a process of denial that was, albeit on a much smaller scale, essen¬tially the same as that of the bishops. The problem is not swimming, any more than it is Catholicism. It is power. The church's combination of temporal authority, spiritual control and a closed, internal hierarchy created the power that cor¬rupted it. The backlash of the past few weeks has merely confirmed what was already over¬whelmingly likely: that Benedict is entirely incapable of grasping this reality, let alone altering it. He has spent much of his career crushing dissent and rolling back the anti-hier¬archical spirit of Vatican 2. His solution, as he suggested in his pastoral letter, is more of the same - more obedience, more authority, more resistance to secular modernity. Those who looked to the Pope to respond to one of the most profound crises in the history of the church now know they will have to look elsewhere." WHAT BERTONE SAID Last Monday, while on an official visit to Chile, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, the Vatican's secretary of state, said it was homosexuality, not celibacy, that is linked to paedophilia. Cardinal Bertone also said Pope Benedict would be taking more surprising initiatives regarding the sex abuse scandal, but he did not elaborate. "Many psychologists and psychiatrists have shown that there is no link between celibacy and paedophilia but many others have shown, i have recently been told, that there is a relationship between homosexuality and paedophilia." "This pathology is one that touches all categories of people, and priests to a lesser degree, in percentage terms," he said. "The behaviour of the priests in this case, the negative behaviour, is very serious, is scandalous." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Clerical child abuse Part 94.... From: Ed T Date: 18 Apr 10 - 03:32 PM "Many psychologists and psychiatrists have shown that there is no link between celibacy and paedophilia but many others have shown, i have recently been told, that there is a relationship between homosexuality and paedophilia." Now, that is an odd statement (if accurate and in context) for the Vatican's secretary of state to make, (a posting that one would assume logical thinking would be a requirement)? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Clerical child abuse Part 94.... From: Ed T Date: 18 Apr 10 - 04:14 PM An interesting perspective on gay priests and sexual activitity by priests in the RC church. http://books.google.ca/books?hl=en&lr=&id=hWkHRpryiakC&oi=fnd&pg=PA171&dq=celibacy+and+paedophilia%2Bstudies&ots=zkYb0HFBc4&sig= |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Clerical child abuse Part 94.... From: akenaton Date: 18 Apr 10 - 06:58 PM Jim quotes in his last post. "THE TRUTH IS THAT CLERICAL ABUSE AND COVER-UP ARE NOT ABOUT RELIGION OR SEX, THEY ARE ABOUT POWER" If this is indeed the case, why is the vast majority of the abuse perpetrated against Young MEN and teenage BOYS. Why does the issue of power not apply in the form of sexual abuse against girls, in anything like the same numbers. Before anyone lays the abuse on "OPPORTUNITY", it is clear that abusers do not attack victims to whom they are not sexually orientated, whether they have opportunity or not. The last big child abuse ring in the UK was exclusively homosexual and all the abuse perpetrated against male children. Members of the ring also searched for adult homosexual partners, leaving messages in public lavatories etc. The leader of this ring was, believe it or not, Chief executive of LGBT Youth Scotland.....ex Stonewall youth project.... From The Times...."He cut an impressive figure when, in 2000, he was called to the Scottish Parliament at Holyrood to advise the Local Government Committee on "ethical standards in public life". He commented on equality issues and debated the controversy surrounding the promotion of homosexuality in schools. Invitations to Downing Street and the Royal Garden Party followed." Full details HERE |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Clerical child abuse Part 94.... From: Ed T Date: 18 Apr 10 - 07:52 PM "it is clear that abusers do not attack victims to whom they are not sexually orientated, whether they have opportunity or not" I am not sure that this theory holds as much weight as it may seem at first glance? I suspect if you dangle a young girl, a young boy or an older man or older woman in front of many of those in prisons...the young boy, or older man would not be the first choice...just a thought. I suspect most young alter helpers were young boys in the past RC church. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Clerical child abuse Part 94.... From: Jim Carroll Date: 19 Apr 10 - 03:44 AM Akenatin As you seem intent on turning yet another thread into yet another of your gay-bashing exercises - from the same Irish Times: and then perhaps explain your 'vast majority' - or ignore it, as is your wont. Jim Carroll 'THERE IS NO RESEARCH TO BACK IT UP' The cardinal's link between homosexuality and paedophilia is debunked by six psychiatrists who) spoke to Kate Holmquist ONE IN 25 Catholic priests in the US has been formally accused of sexually abusing minors, according to research commissioned by the US Catholic bishops. We don't have comparable research for Ireland, but between the Ryan and Murphy reports, we can surmise how realistic the US research is. Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone has tried to blame "homosexuality". "You've got to be kidding," was the reaction of Dr Alan Dibble, a clinical psychologist in Co Meath, who has worked with paedophiles and sex offenders in the US and Ireland for the past 20 years. "There is no research to back up what he said. Five per cent of the world's population is gay and to put us all in that category is appalling... This is a mighty inflammatory remark to make based on 'being told', for someone in such a highly responsible position. Is the Vatican bringing old scientifically debunked myths out of the closet in order to avoid confronting the weaknesses inherent in a hierarchy without transparency and without self-reflection on the extreme stresses inherent in the human loneliness of the priesthood?" He adds: "As the Vatican has attempted to back-track on the cardinal's comments... and with their history of minimising the issue of child sexual abuse in the church by blaming others for scapegoating them, the Vatican is using the same cognitive distortions therapists teach child sexual abusers not to use - such as whitewashing, rationalising, minimising and excuse-making as a way to avoid taking personal responsibility," Dibble says. Five other psychiatrists and psychologists interviewed by The Irish Times agreed there is no link between homosexuality and paedophilia, among them Prof Patricia Casey of UCD and the Royal College of Psychiatrists of Ireland. "It has never been demonstrated scientifically. Paedophilia is an attraction to minors - male, female or both." Prof Harry Kennedy, clinical professor of forensic psychiatry at TCD, explains that "there are heterosexual paedophiles, there are homosexual paedophiles and there is no special link between homosexuality and paedophilia and that is the plain science of it based on epidemiology, which is my field. I wonder where the Cardinal got his information. I'd be happy to look at any new evidence he might have and review it from a scientific point of view." Also adamant that there is no link between paedophilia and homosexuality are Dr Joseph Duffy, clinical director of the Granada Institute in Dublin, which has treated priests who have sexually abused children; Prof Donald West, psychiatrist and former head of the Institute of Criminology in Cambridge, UK; and Prof Michael King, of the Royal College of Psychiatrists in the UK, who has treated paedophiles and sex offenders. The greatest threat to children are heterosexual males, says Kennedy. Girls are five times more likely than boys to be abused, usually by their father, stepfather or mother's boyfriend. West says: "Most at risk are girls in the home." Research has shown, since the 1980s, that heterosexuals - 95 per cent of the population - are as likely as homosexuals to be sexually aroused by children. When boys are sexually molested, the predator is most likely male, but that doesn't mean he is gay. As Casey stats, paedophiles are attracted to children and many don't care what gender the child is. One theory, King points out, is that boys are more accessible to the sort of predator who seeks out children in parks because traditionally they have greater freedom than girls to roam. Are there more paedophiles among Catholic priests than among the general population? "Nobody knows," says King. "My own theory is that celibacy may be behind some of this, because we don't seem to get the same reports in other churches. It's only a theory that celibacy is a cloak that puts you in charge of children." Casey also suggests that some abusers were attracted to die Catholic Church because they knew it would give them access to children, and vetting procedures weren't good enough. The stereotype, which is true, is that paedophiles get involved in sports clubs, scout groups and church activities to get access to children. The other classic method is to culti¬vate relationships with single mothers. Paedophilia is a fixation where, for a persistent period of at least six months, the paedophile has sexual fantasies about children and a desire to have sexual contact with children that he cannot control. As Duffy explains, a classic fixated paedophile is so driven that to be prevented from harming others, he has to be kept away from situations where he can have con¬tact with children - families, schools, play¬grounds and so on. The paedophile isn't sexually attracted to adults at all - male, or female, "Homosexuality is irrelevant," says King. "These men are predators in general." Dibble gives the case history of a "true" paedophile who was molested by an adult neighbour, then did the same at age seven to his best friend, which lasted until puberty. When the best mate went on to have girlfriends, "this guy turned to younger children. His sexual development didn't move on". He entered therapy in his 20s, after being caught molesting a child. After a year in therapy, he molested his nephew, and was placed in residential treatment for two years. After his release, he got involved with a woman his age and eventually molested her two sons, and went to prison. "Even with an experience of an adult relationship, his sexual preference was for kids and he couldn't grow out of that." Paedophiles are interested only in children, whereas child molesters are opportunists who will satisfy their needs with anyone, regardless of age. The Vatican stated this week that 10 per cent of abuse cases it has dealt with have been paedophilia, and 90 per cent sex with adolescents. "Studies have shown that men have a low age threshold in who they are attracted to, saying, if they're really honest, that age 14 is no problem whatsoever," says King. "But these young adolescents cannot give consent." Many priests who have sexually abused chil¬dren have been treated at the Granada Institute since 1994. Duffy says many abusers prefer being with a child because it suits their emotional level. Others use sex with children as an abuse of power, dominance and control. Anger against women, due to rejection, is another "driver". As King and Casey suggested, the rule of celibacy may contribute to priests having non-consensual sex with children with impunity. Casey believes that some men may go into the priest¬hood before they have had a chance to develop a mature adult sexuality and are stuck in an immature stage of development. "Perverse reactions" may result, says Duffy when "intimacy, closeness and comfort are expressed in negative and deviant and destructive ways". A book by Karen Leibriech, Fallen Order, argues that celibacy forces people in religious orders to turn a blind eye to the misconduct of others. Kennedy agrees: "In a society with a rule of celibacy, normal heterosexual and normal homosexual activity is regarded as a lapse and is likely to be denied and ignored. That creates a culture in which other things -including paedophilia - may also be ignored * and denied." So, are religious abusers evil, or are they victims? King believes that "we have a horrible way of seeing paedophilia as evil. Paedophiles are not evil, they are caught in this terrible bind. I'm not excusing their behaviour for an instant, but we often forget about the paedo¬phile as a victim of circumstances beyond his. control." But what are the circumstances? "We have no idea what creates a paedophile," says King. And neither does the Catholic church. "This is a complex area full of unknowns, and work to understand it is still in its infancy says Dibble. SEXUAL ABUSE THE NUMBERS Less than 1 per cent of the general population are paedophiles and child molesters 98 per cent of abusers of girls are men 79 per cent of abusers of boys are men Most at risk are children aged eight to 12 75 per cent of sexual abuse occurs within the household, mostly by fathers and stepfathers |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Clerical child abuse Part 94.... From: akenaton Date: 19 Apr 10 - 03:57 AM We are at the moment discussing clerical abuse in the Catholic Church. Please stick to the issue in hand. My last post was simply to illustrate that abusers do not attack children at random, regardless of gender. That means that most of the abuse of teenage boys and youths in the Catholic Church, has been perpetrated by men of homosexual orientation. This is pertinent to our discussions, if we truly want to see rates of abuse fall. I have been reading in Ed's link, that Cozzens reckons that there could be 50% of homosexuals in the priesthood....."the priesthood is, or will soon be a "gay" occupation" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Clerical child abuse Part 94.... From: akenaton Date: 19 Apr 10 - 04:06 AM Sorry, that should read...."50% of the priesthood could be homosexual" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Clerical child abuse Part 94.... From: GUEST,Steamin' Willie Date: 19 Apr 10 - 05:12 AM isn't it funny that in the folk music threads, I generally disagree a lot with Jim Carroll's views. Yet in the BS threads, and especially the sad repulsive threads about clerical abuse, I can do no more than agree with him wholeheartedly. Jim, don't keep rising to the bait. Akenaton is pulling your plonker. Why? Because reading his diatribe, it doesn't take a trick cyclist to see his suppressed tendency to homosexuality has not been admitted to even to himself, so his brain reacts by making him paranoid. As this is about power, domination of others and forcing your will, (a more specific aspect of organised religion) then it is quite normal that most of the abuse is against boys not girls. A man will see another man as a future potential threat to his alpha male complex, so needs to subdue the poor young lad. Nothing to do with being gay, just more to do with power lust. Oh, and depraved criminality, but that goes without saying, unless you are a Cardinal in denial about your colleagues. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Clerical child abuse Part 94.... From: Jim Carroll Date: 19 Apr 10 - 06:07 AM "We are at the moment discussing clerical abuse in the Catholic Church." It is you who persistantly make these threads part of your interminably squalid gay-bashing hate campaign - the article was in direct response to the claim of homosexuality being the cause of clerical abuse. It was you who quoted 'statistics' to back up your bigotry - prove them or are you once ab=gaing going to scurry away from them? "50% of the priesthood could be homosexual" Priest are celibate by their calling so what proof do you have to back up this claim that 50% 'could be' homosexual? Steamin' Willie - I agree about the suppressed homosexuality - let's see if we can't get him out of the closet. Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Clerical child abuse Part 94.... From: Ed T Date: 19 Apr 10 - 08:06 AM I don't know much about this person, his background and research seems impressive. There is some interesting information and articles on his site to stimulate discussion, for example this one: http://www.richardsipe.com/reports/1992-10-17-Sexual_Abuse_by_Priests.html His main site, it may be worthwhile to look around it: http://www.richardsipe.com/ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Clerical child abuse Part 94.... From: akenaton Date: 19 Apr 10 - 11:11 AM Jim....The 50% was not my figure but Fr Cozzen's, as was the remark about the priesthood being a "gay occupation"....I wish you would try to keep up. I am quite unimpressed by the slurs against my personal sexuality, and hope readers of this thread are able to see them for what they are.....personal attacks from people who have nothing to add to the discussion. If we are serious about stopping clerical child abuse, we must understand who is actually perpetrating the crimes. This may be painful to those who hold your views on homosexuality, but I don't give a flying fuck for your synthetic pain......the real pain of abused youngsters far outweighs that! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Clerical child abuse Part 94.... From: GUEST,Peter Laban Date: 19 Apr 10 - 11:18 AM we must understand who is actually perpetrating the crimes But we do, priests, members of religious orders (monks, nuns). And the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic church has been involved in an extensive cover-up. That's what we are talking about is it? For your interest: Kate Holmquist's article in Saturday's Irish Times about the link between homosexuality and abuse : 'There is no research to back it up' |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Clerical child abuse Part 94.... From: akenaton Date: 19 Apr 10 - 11:54 AM Peter, I am prepared to accept that there has been "no scientific research done on homosexuality and paedophilia" as quoted in your link, but this was not true paedopdilia....was it? It was in the main, abuse of teenage boys and young men by adult men. We dont need scientific research to determine what that is, do we? It is called homosexual assault. I really dont understand why you people keep apologising for these criminals...you should be pleased to see them face the courts and make the church a safe place for young folks. There is no doubt that by allowing heterosexual, family orientated men and women into the priesthood(normality into the gene pool), the sexual abuse would all but disappear. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Clerical child abuse Part 94.... From: GUEST,Peter Laban Date: 19 Apr 10 - 11:57 AM There is no doubt that by allowing heterosexual, family orientated men and women into the priesthood(normality into the gene pool), the sexual abuse would all but disappear. Didn't you read or didn't you (want to) understand the article? Never mind, don't answer that. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Clerical child abuse Part 94.... From: Jim Carroll Date: 19 Apr 10 - 12:13 PM "I wish you would try to keep up." And I wish you would start to take responsibility for your bigotry. "personal attacks from people who have nothing to add to the discussion." You are the one who uses the plight of abused children to peddle your bigotry. Why should you think a suggestion that you might be gay is a 'personal attack' - not everyone shares your bigotry. You've read the research and had the percentages - live with them and stop evading the questions. Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Clerical child abuse Part 94.... From: akenaton Date: 19 Apr 10 - 12:52 PM The figures you quote are completely meaningless, as you are doing what you do in all these threads.....comparing real numbers with percentages. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Clerical child abuse Part 94.... From: GUEST,Steamin' Willie Date: 19 Apr 10 - 01:05 PM Akenaton reckons if they had family men in the church, abuse would disappear. mmmmmm... if my Aunty had balls, she'd be my uncle. As I said, this is in the main not just a coincidence of sexually frustrated priests, this is about power alpha male syndrome. Controlling others. Most Gay mates I have can't handle the remote control on the telly, let alone control other people. It is because of the attitude of bigots that this has gone on for so long, and I mean generations. So for an ignorant bigot like Akenaton to perpetuate his hate agenda, it shows that if bigots are in denial, there is no answer to this serious problem. Or at least, as Einstein pointed out; You can't solve a problem with the mindset that created it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Clerical child abuse Part 94.... From: GUEST,Peter Laban Date: 19 Apr 10 - 01:06 PM You're hardly in a position to take that sort argument A. I linked to an article which stated that there is no research to back up the statement that paedophilia equals homosexuality. You come back stating you're willing to accept "no scientific research done on homosexuality and paedophilia" . Which is rather a big twist of what was being said. I.e. that research fails to back up that (in effect, your) position. |