 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Clerical Abuse of Children
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Joe Offer Date: 26 Jul 17 - 10:29 PM Well, Rap, BS threads get so nasty as time goes along. Maybe it's better to start out fresh every once in a while. It's an issue I've been concerned about for forty years, and I've had to deal with it directly on occasion. It arouses a lot of concern, and rightly so. I think that it is vitally important that we as a society learn how to react to crime. Too often, the reaction is hysteria. Demagogues like to take advantage of the rightful anger and fear that people have about crime, and then stir it into a frenzy of prejudice. How do we deal with crime in constructive ways? Too often, our responses to crime can be more damaging than the crime itself. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Big Al Whittle Date: 26 Jul 17 - 11:50 PM I think the thing is Joe - you misunderstand. i've never been to America - but i get the impression from the Americans who come over here, that religion is something from the old country - you take it as seriously as you feel it warrants. People call themselves Jewish who've never been in a synagogue in their lives. Ireland and the Catholic ghettos in English cities like Liverpool. It is the old country. In Ireland since Devalera's time - Catholicism is part of the constitution, and really there isn't personal space for an opt out. I was from an orange and green background - my mother was the only one of four kids not brought up in the church. The totality with which my Catholic relatives submitted themselves to the rulings of the church was intense - mentally you took a step back. The brutality of the teaching brothers was something no one questioned, or queried their right to behave cruelly like that. Divorce, contraception were totally forbidden - and the rulings were adhered to absolutely. Little kids knew every word of the service and all the hymns - in Latin! Scariest was the way the kids talked to the priests. We were always respectful to our teachers - but the Catholic kids acted as though it was their duty to love the bastards who were for no real reason, beating them unmercifully. They owned their souls, in a way which I think a non-Irish person would find hard to understand. if i'm wrong in my observations Jim - I apologise. That's just the way it seemed to me. I worked in Germany for a while. Theres lots of Catholics there, and they seem more relaxed - but Irish Catholicism seems qualitatively different. something a bit mad about it! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Donuel Date: 27 Jul 17 - 02:51 AM Some things you can equivocate Joe but not this. This is not an issue you can say "well but..." about. You should not hedge yourself about this. To give arguments like 'other people do the same crime elsewhere' - is an excuse that taints yourself. No second hand defense whatsoever should be given. Nor should you offer a Mea culpa unless you are guilty directly or by offering moral or physical support to the perpetrators in any way. If they are guilty that is all you need to say. Some things are cut and dried, set in stone or beyond absolution. Or is this against your religion? You will be better off NOT trying to reconcile the two. I believe some things are irreconcilable. But that's just me. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Joe Offer Date: 27 Jul 17 - 03:09 AM No, Al, I don't think I misunderstand. I've studied the sociology of the Catholic Church with a very critical eye since my seminary days in the 1960s - and I've seen a lot of places where the Catholic Church is very, very sick. I have visited many churches and convents in Ireland, and I've seen both the good and the bad. I certainly acknowledge and deplore the bad, but I've also seen good in the Catholic Church in Ireland. But yes, there's an awful lot of bad, a repressive air that seems to pervade everything in some parishes. In the Sacramento Diocese where I've lived for almost 40 years, there is an unusually large number of Irish-born priests and nuns - and I know dozens of priests and nuns here who were born in Ireland. I had a 30-year relationship with an Irish-born priest here who was a particular bastard who did his best to make Catholic life miserable for me - but lots of people loved the m----f----. But for the most part, the Irish-born priests and nuns I know are wonderful people. I've asked a number of them what it was like when they were growing up, and almost all of them had a very positive experience. It's the same in the U.S. Many Catholics grew up in very severe surroundings, and their experience of the Catholic Church was severe. Most are no longer Catholics, but some grew up thinking that severity is an inevitable part of life. They do their best to make their parishes the unpleasant places they think churches should be. I met a sacristan in a church in County Clare who was like that - I'm sure she gave a sour attitude to the whole parish. And the Cathedral in Galway was like that. The two priests I met there were quite nice, but the entire congregation was somber and sour. My sister was a very active and happy Catholic until she lived in Boston during the era of Cardinal Law. All of the Catholic Church in Massachusetts seemed to be set on denying the sexual abuse that had gone on in a number of parishes, and that air of denial caused a sickness in the entire archdiocese. That soured my sister on Catholicism, and rightly so. She left, and hasn't been back since. My other sister lived in Connecticut, and her husband got sick and died when she was 40. A local priest made friends with my brother-in-law during that time, and visited him often. But there were times when the priest would be alone with my sister, and he made sexual advances toward her - while her husband was near death in the next room. So, yeah, Al, I see the bad stuff - and I fight it wherever I find it. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Jim Carroll Date: 27 Jul 17 - 03:16 AM if i'm wrong in my observations Jim Can't see why you have to apologise Al - that's exactly the way it seems to me Joe I really can't see why you feel this is "too broad a brush" What is unique about these abuses is the power used to carry them out - I can't think of another group of people who could tell the children that what was happening to them was "God's will" as Brendan Smythe did to hes 100 or so victims, or the access to childrens' minds enjoyed by the clerics. The arrogance of the church hierarchy and the continuing refusal to co-operate fully has done and will continue to do enormous damage It is true that such abuses happen in all walks of life, but the obvious immunity felt by the church shown in the way they behaved and are still behaving separates it from all other forms I didn't start this thread; had I done so I might have chosen a different title - 'The Religious Abuse of Children' maybe - that's what it is. Other religious and non religious bodies are involved - the Church of Ireland still need to examine their own consciences as to what happened in the Six Counties - care and medical homes are now coming under scrutiny This really is a multi-faceted affair The victims need to be satisfied that their case has been heard fully - it still hasn't - blanket solutions and deals never do that I've met a few who still won't speak up about what happened to them - the self-hatred, guilt and shame is palpable. The revelations have called into question the position of the church in society - whether a group with such a powerful influence should ever be entrusted to care of the vulnerable again being the foremost It is misleading to say that these reports first emerged in 2010 - similar reports in the form of innuendos and hints have been circulating throughout my life - dodgy priests, scoutmasters, teachers..... all grist to the child's oral culture "Bad apples", "recent events" miss the point by miles I would have thought that handling this in a correct and open manner is a matter of self-interest for the church I am saddened to see the effect it has had on lifelong devotees who are still trying to cope with the damage it has done to their own faith. Rap This affair has opened up a massive can of worms which goes far beyond that actual abuses I really do believe that 'you ain't seen nuffin' yet' Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Joe Offer Date: 27 Jul 17 - 03:30 AM Jim, Brendan Smyth was an incredibly evil man. But he was one man. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Donuel Date: 27 Jul 17 - 03:41 AM Brush sizes are irrelevant. That which is irreconcilable only leaves criminals and victims in need of repair. For the criminals, justice. For the victims, healing. Hence, reparations are in order. As long as Priest's crimes are put in a separate category outside the code of criminal justice those who enable sick Priests are an accomplice to the crimes. One can pile excuses high or bury evidence deep but that only aids and abets the criminals. It appears Pope Francis agrees with me. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Joe Offer Date: 27 Jul 17 - 04:17 AM Jim sez: I would have thought that handling this in a correct and open manner is a matter of self-interest for the church I think so, too, Jim. But I think that since about 2002, the Catholic Church has fairly quickly turned itself around on this matter. Yes, there are still some offenses and some coverups - but I think that the tide has turned and that Catholics are insisting on full disclosure about everything that has happened. I said that the offense named in the original post - the Regensburger Domspatzen offenses - was first reported in 2010, and then re-reported in 2016 and again in 2017. In earlier posts in this thread, I said that my diocese was aware of a problem in the late 1960s and responded to it then by giving us seminarians rigorous psychological testing, and that other U.S. dioceses responded by building treatment centers in the 1970s, and that the National Catholic Reporter began reporting church sex offenses in 1983 and has published hundreds of critical articles since then. How is that misleading? I think we need to examine the hundreds of individual offenses one by one, in detail, and determine exactly what happened and why. What's happening is that people are getting the distorted impression that sexual abuse happens all the time, everywhere there is a Catholic church. Catholic priests are incredibly disheartened because they're all suspects of crime now, and yet only 5 percent of them have actually committed the crimes - maybe up to 10 percent in some places, but the most credible percentage I've seen is 5 percent. In the U.S., http://bishop-accountability.org/ has a database that reports on every diocese and every priest. It's not a pretty picture, but it reports the truth. And part of the truth is that at least 90 percent of priests are not guilty of sex offenses. Presenting a distorted view of crime, whether it's shoplifting or child abuse, doesn't help anyone. -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Iains Date: 27 Jul 17 - 04:19 AM https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/andrewbrown/2010/mar/11/catholic-abuse-priests https://theukdatabase.com/uk-child-abusers-named-and-shamed/facts-and-stats-on-child-abuse/ All child abuse needs to be uncovered and punished. Concentrating on a small minority of Catholic priests as the sole perpetrators is taking the spotlight away from far more people that are guilty of the crime. The above 2 links shed a little more light on the scale of the problem. This quote from the second link illustrates my point; "Very few children (less than 1%) experienced abuse by professionals in a position of trust, for example a teacher, religious leader or care/social worker." For absolute clarity the statistics apply only to the UK and Ireland. However I would be surprised if the breakdown of the statistics would show much variation worldwide. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Jim Carroll Date: 27 Jul 17 - 04:19 AM "But he was one man." He was one of many Joe You continue to avoid the point This happened because (at best) the church ignored it It spread because they allowed the passing on of perpetrators to other parishes It continues to be a problem because of the refusal of the church to acknowledge the damage that was done and continues to be done - that reaches the very top of the organisation Things cannot and will not be allowed to happen again and the only way to make the best of that is for the many good people in the church to face it head on The longer it is not resolved the more damage that will be done to the thinks I believe you hold to be important Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Joe Offer Date: 27 Jul 17 - 04:28 AM Ah, you're a stubborn man, Jim Carroll. You're wrong, but you're a stubborn man.... I don't deny the offenses that happened - and there were indeed many. But there were many more who did not offend, and who did not participate in coverups. They don't deserve your blanket accusal. Broad brush, Jim, broad brush. -Joe Offer- And Donuel, the width of the brush does indeed matter. It's an injustice to accuse those who have done nothing wrong. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Jim Carroll Date: 27 Jul 17 - 04:43 AM Sorry Joe You are taking the same line as your church Can you7 explain why your church has taken the nosedive it has |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Big Al Whittle Date: 27 Jul 17 - 05:01 AM what i meant was -i'm not being racist -not in this case at least! it really seemed to me that Irish Catholicism seemed to have this mad intense thing that's not there in the mediterranean or the northern european church. The Spanish Inquisition aside! Theres this wonderful scene in a Ken Russel film - the one about Delius, where his young scribe Eric Fenby arrives at church in northern europe somewhere one afternoon where he finds the local priest having sex in the pews with an eager parishoner. THe priest looks up, and Fenby says ,will you take my confession? Without saying a word they both just walk towards the confessional. So relaxed - you can't imagine that story amongst the Catholics I know. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Steve Shaw Date: 27 Jul 17 - 05:09 AM The Church has got itself into a mess by appearing to be institutionally complicit in cover-ups, Joe. This is slightly redolent of the ugly Labour Party thread (don't go there...) in which the party has been accused of harbouring antisemitism. There has been a lot of hand-wringing and self-examination inside the party, of which I'm a member, over that issue (never enough to satisfy some outsiders, naturally) and it's been played out in full public gaze. I will not be a member of a party that is institutionally antisemitic but I'm happy that the party is not such, despite the rotten apples. This doesn't appear to have happened in the Church. I say "appear." Sexual abuse is a criminal offence and we need to see the thing fully and frankly out in the open, not priests quietly moved from their parishes or the Church taking decades to reluctantly admit that widespread abuse has gone on. That's called making a rod for one's own back, ironically in an attempt to save one's own arse, when the Christian thing to do would have been to immediately put the victims first. If you're happy (not you personally) to be in an organisation that appears institutionally corrupt, fine. If you're not happy to be a member of an organisation that's perceived that way, you have to organise and fight like mad from within and you have to be seen doing it. As a now-outsider seeing a fight that looks from the outside to be reluctant, patchy and drawn-out I'd say it isn't anywhere near enough. And this post is not an invitation for the usual opportunists to start rattling on about antisemitism. I hope you'll delete any posts of that nature that appear. I could be wrong but I thought the comparison was apt in some regards. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Joe Offer Date: 27 Jul 17 - 05:38 AM Jim asks: Can you7 explain why your church has taken the nosedive it has Well, yes, Jim.
It never should have been a "state religion." Putting Church into bed with State, was a huge misdeed. Constantine didn't do religion any favors. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Joe Offer Date: 27 Jul 17 - 05:44 AM And Steve, you say the Christian thing to do would have been to immediately put the victims first. That's what happened in my diocese. We had a bishop who was a good guy. And that's what happened in a lot of dioceses. But not all, regrettably. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Steve Shaw Date: 27 Jul 17 - 06:15 AM Which is the problem. I don't doubt that the vast majority of Catholics are good people. As you'd expect, I still know lots myself. But a large part of this issue is about perception. Once you've made that rod for your back it's damned hard to put things right in the public eye. Bad reputations are easy to collect but hard to shed. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Jim Carroll Date: 27 Jul 17 - 06:33 AM None of that explains the animosity being expressed against the church particularly in represent to the abuses, the Laundries and the violence of the industrial schools - it's fairly specific. If what you say happened in your parish happened everywhere, there wouldn't be a problem It didn't and there is Simple as that Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Rapparee Date: 27 Jul 17 - 10:12 AM Mormons. Jews. Baptists. Methodists. Aetheists. etc. etc. etc. Like rape, this seems to be a crime based upon control. Not sexual, just one person wanting, needing, to enslave another to (usually) his desires. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Joe Offer Date: 27 Jul 17 - 02:20 PM I would say that there have been between five and ten percent of priests doing the sexual assaults. And another five to ten percent covering up. These are mostly motivated by cowardice, I believe. The percentage of offenders is small, but a few wrongdoers can have a vast effect. Brendan Smyth had 143 victims, spread over a number of parishes. His criminal conduct poisoned every one of those parish communities. I don't know how a congregation can survive such a betrayal - even though it was just one man who did the crime. Smyth was first suspected of sexual misconduct in the 1970s, but he was not arrested until 1991. I can't figure out the dynamics of what went on during that period. Did Smyth's superiors in the Norbertine order not believe the allegations, or were they trying to protect themselves from financial claims, or what? This is what I cannot understand. With all of this going on, how could church authorities continue to allow it? To my knowledge, no church official has come forward to speak with total honesty about what happened. I do have a theory. Almost every chancery office (administrative office) in almost every diocese, is staffed mostly by priests who are social misfits. They're the milquetoast types who cannot relate to people, so they cannot function for long as parish priests. I've met a lot of very creepy priests in chancery offices, and they quietly wield a lot of power. They serve to insulate bishops from honesty, and they deal with problems in cowardly, secretive ways under the bishop's authority - and without the bishop's knowledge. But in the end, the bishop is responsible for their actions. I can picture that - chancery people quietly moving offenders from one place to another while hushing everything up. Two or three quiet transfers a year can happen easily without anybody noticing - and can multiply the damage exponentially. And if a priest dares to speak up in complaint about a problem with another priest, he can easily be transferred to a remote, rural parish. The bishop is out making official visits all around the diocese, totally aware of what is going on in the chancery office. And bishops are usually transferred in from other locations, so they don't really know the priests they supervise. And regular parish priests are isolated, rarely aware of what goes on oiutside their own parish - managing a parish is all they can deal with. And to a great extent, sex offender priests are very charming and engaging on the surface - and they often do their jobs as priests very well. Who would ever expect that such a charming, gentle person would be a child molester? -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Raggytash Date: 27 Jul 17 - 02:34 PM Given that this abuse is not a new phenomena I find your suggestion difficult to believe Joe. This abuse has been widely known in the Catholic church (for example) for decades. I should expect, as a minimum, that a responsible leader, eg a bishop, should be constantly vigilant for such abuse. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: akenaton Date: 27 Jul 17 - 02:40 PM One question Joe why are there so many homosexuals in the priesthood and why is abuse of minors in the general population overwhelmingly against females, while in the Catholic church 4 out of 5 victims are youths between 14 and eighteen (post pubescent) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Joe Offer Date: 27 Jul 17 - 02:46 PM But the bishops tried, Raggytash. They gave us seminarians rigorous psychological testing in the 1960s, and they believed that would solve the problem. They spent millions on state-of-the-art treatment centers in the 1970s and 1980s, and were proud that these centers could do such wonderful things to turn around the lives of wayward priests. And when the bishops lost faith in the treatment centers in the late 1980s, they began referring criminal priests to criminal prosecution. The number of offenses dropped dramatically in the 1990s, but that was too late. Most people really don't know how to deal with crime. Should bishops be expected to be all-wise in such matters? Hindsight is easy, but what was in the minds of these people when all this was happening? I have worked with children all my life, and I have been in situations where I found out later that people were committing sex offenses with children - and I had no idea at all what was happening, until the criminal was arrested. Child molestation is the quietest of crimes. There was a guy who lived across the street from me who was physically and verbally abusive to his children and to his wife. I'd say things to him about it on occasion when I felt he was getting out of hand, and he'd stop. I never thought about calling the police. Maybe I should have, but would that have solved the problem or made it worse? How have you responded to similar situations? -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Raggytash Date: 27 Jul 17 - 02:53 PM Should bishops be expected to be all wise . . Frankly yes Joe they should. They are promoted to a position of being responsible for all that happens in their diocese. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Joe Offer Date: 27 Jul 17 - 02:57 PM You got a broken record on your machine there, Ake? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Shakey Date: 27 Jul 17 - 04:05 PM Should bishops be expected to be all-wise in such matters The church generally doesn't hold back it's opinions on the big questions of how we should all live our lives. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Greg F. Date: 27 Jul 17 - 05:14 PM You got a broken record on your machine there, Ake? Yup - as well as a broken head. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Shakey Date: 27 Jul 17 - 05:25 PM Yup - as well as a broken head. Insightful - No Funny - Nope Cutting - Not Even Why bother |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Greg F. Date: 27 Jul 17 - 06:41 PM Why Bother 'Cause its The truth. Not that it would matter to you, Sharkey. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Shakey Date: 27 Jul 17 - 07:25 PM 'Cause its The truth. Not that it would matter to you, Sharkey. Oh, so his head is broken is it, you know that and it's the truth? And just to help Shakey |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Jim Carroll Date: 27 Jul 17 - 07:39 PM "You got a broken record on your machine there, Ake? " Sounds like a dose of latent homosexuality to me Joe Why else would anybody be so obsessed with other people's sexual inclinations? Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Greg F. Date: 27 Jul 17 - 08:10 PM OK, thanks, got it now, Sharkey. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Rapparee Date: 27 Jul 17 - 08:37 PM http://www.nytimes.com/1991/12/03/us/priest-resigns-post-at-notre-dame-amid-accusations-of-sex-abuse.html The students were seminarians. He died in 2015. The author of the antiabortion book "Rachel Weeping" among others. The original story was in the South Bend Tribune, confirming rumors that had circulated for years. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Rapparee Date: 27 Jul 17 - 09:25 PM Here's another on Burchtaell. Notre Dame didn't talk about such things when I lived a couple blocks away (1982-2000). Then the Burtchaell thing hit. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: akenaton Date: 28 Jul 17 - 02:31 AM There is nothing wrong with my head, and my questions are pertinent to the thread.....it is also interesting that no one has tried to answer civilly. The facts that I mention were brought up in the John Jay report linked to by Joe......As you say in the US, "If it walks, talks and looks, it generally is" Of course the real answer is that the question is inconvenient and strikes at the whole ethos of "liberalism" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Teribus Date: 28 Jul 17 - 02:55 AM Thanks Iains - 27 Jul 17 - 04:19 AM for those two links that attempt to inject some perspective into this thread - unfortunately it will not be appreciated as it runs counter to the mistaken dearly held beliefs of some of the "usual suspects" on this forum. Plainly stated if the subject under discussion is "child abuse" then it would appear that some here feel that those responsible for less than one percent of all child abuse are worthy of separate condemnation while the remaining 99% are not - funny that - must be that time of year reserved for the hobby-horse "Grand National", or was it created by Raggy to deliberately troll Joe Offer? Like most of Raggy's efforts this one gets shot down with the ease of all the others. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Jim Carroll Date: 28 Jul 17 - 03:06 AM "it is also interesting that no one has tried to answer civilly." You are an obsessive homophobe Ake Homosexuality is now recognised as a natural state of being for a large section of the population - it has become fully accepted in our society In the near future it will be as illegal for you and people like you to behave the way you do as it is for racists to behave as they do - it is one of society's remaining great hates. By no stretch of the imagination can your behaviour be described as "reasonable" particularly when it is uses as a platform the long running and large scale rape o children Your continuing obsession is unhealthy and your gleeful reveling in the health risks brought on by a natural condition is more than a little stomach-turning The health risks are in fact no different than those brought on by other forms of human contact, sexual or otherwise - the fact that (the natural state of) homosexuality has been suppressed for so long is the cause of society not having got to grips with the solution to those problems yet - if it were to take up your "gay plague" "unnatural" argument, the problems of this "natural state" would never be solved. Homosexuality is not God's punishment' or 'evil' or 'unnatural' - it is a fact of life for many millions of people - a nautural state of being Live with it and stop persecuting people who have done nothing to you. Paedophelia has nothing whatever to do with homosexuality, it is predominantly an act carried out by heterosexuals, largely by family members and close friends - documented fact. Is that "civil" enough for you or is it just another of my "rants"? Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Joe Offer Date: 28 Jul 17 - 03:35 AM Ake says in the Catholic church 4 out of 5 victims are youths between 14 and eighteen (post pubescent). He says he gets his information from John Jay report on sexual abuse in the U.S. Catholic Church. Wikipedia gives a pretty good summary of the statistics in the Jay report:
11.6% were age 15 8.6% were age 16 6.5% were age 17 That totals 39.9%, or approximately 4 out of 10 - half the number you cite. As for gay priests, the number I most often hear is that about a third of priests are homosexual. Why so many? Although the Catechism of the Catholic Church says that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered" (par. 2357), homosexuals who are not sexually active can be quite comfortable in a seminary and in the priesthood. When I was in the seminary, nobody hassled homosexuals. Nobody made fun of them. Nobody told anti-homosexual jokes. There were times in the seminary when I felt that I was in an atmosphere that was overly sexualized, and it seemed to be a homosexual sexualization. As for why priests are more likely to molest boys than girls, I think it's mostly because priests at one time were more likely to have unsupervised contact with boys. A priest from our parish took five of us seventh-grade boys from Wisconsin to his order's motherhouse in Ontario. He would never have taken a carload of girls on such a trip. And nowadays, it would be unthinkable for a priest to take boys on a 600-mile trip, either. That's too bad - we had a wonderful time, saw Niagara Falls, milked cows for the first and only time in my life, and bought lots of firecrackers (and my neighbor the Sheriff confiscated all of mine, but he was nice about it). But ake, many of us suspect you use threads like this to promote your anti-homosexual agenda. And we want no part of it. -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Joe Offer Date: 28 Jul 17 - 03:58 AM Raggytash answers my question: Should bishops be expected to be all wise . . Frankly yes Joe they should. They are promoted to a position of being responsible for all that happens in their diocese. In other words, they're Chief Executives (CEOs). They're administrative people who have limited insight into the human psyche. Rarely are they spiritual gurus. And on top of that, nobody really has a full understanding of child molestation. You expect celibate bishops to understand? And answering the same question, Shakey says: The church generally doesn't hold back it's opinions on the big questions of how we should all live our lives. You're right about that, Shakey, but I'm thinking that you're thinking that bishops spend all their time dictating sexual mores. If you study what Catholic bishops do, I think you'll find that most of them target their efforts against poverty and other economic issues, against racism, against mass incarceration, and especially against discrimination against immigrants. They really don't know much about sex, and they generally avoid talking about it because their lack of knowledge embarrasses them (despite stereotypes to the contrary). That's what the Popes talk about too, for the most part. They botched the child molestation scandal horribly, but what they say about other issues is quite worthwhile. Lesson: don't go to bishops for sex advice - but please listen to what they say about immigration and refugees. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: akenaton Date: 28 Jul 17 - 10:13 AM Jim....The vast majority of the sex crimes committed by priests were not paedophilia.... Paedophilia is an extremely rare crime, and is perpetrated at a lower rate amongst priests than in the general public. The crimes were mainly sexual assault of minors and young men by adults who had previous homosexual contact. "After the Boston Globe broke the story on priestly sexual abuse in 2002, the American bishops established an independent panel to study this issue. When the National Review Board released its findings in 2004, noted Washington attorney Robert S. Bennett, who headed the study, said, "There are no doubt many outstanding priests of a homosexual orientation who live chaste, celibate lives, but any evaluation of the causes and context of the current crisis must be cognizant of the fact that more than 80 percent of the abuse at issue was of a homosexual nature." Furthermore, the panel explicitly said that "we must call attention to the homosexual behavior that characterized the vast majority of the cases of abuse observed in recent decades." One of those who served on the National Review Board, Dr. Paul McHugh, is former psychiatrist-in-chief at Johns Hopkins. He is on record saying, "This behavior was homosexual predation on American Catholic youth, yet it's not being discussed." More recently, the New York Times ran a story on Leslie Lothstein, another psychologist who has treated abusive priests. He concluded that "only a small minority were true pedophiles." Roderick MacLeish Jr. was the Boston lawyer who pressed the case against the Archdiocese of Boston; he examined all the files on this subject. As reported by Michael Paulson in the Boston Globe, MacLeish concluded that "90 percent of the nearly 400 sexual abuse victims he has represented are boys, and three quarters of them are post-pubescent." Once again, the issue is homosexuality, not pedophilia. Dr. Richard Fitzgibbons is a psychiatrist who has spent years treating sexually abusive priests. "Many psychologists and psychiatrists have shown that there is no link between celibacy and pedophilia," he said earlier this year. Instead, they have found a "relationship between homosexuality and pedophilia." Fitzgibbons goes further, saying, "Every priest whom I treated who was involved with children sexually had previously been involved in adult homosexual relationships." Notice he didn't saysome priests. Need more proof? When the John Jay College of Criminal Justice released its findings, the Boston Globe, which won a Pulitzer Prize for its investigation, commented that "more than three-quarters of the victims were post pubescent, meaning the abuse did not meet the clinical definition of pedophilia." So if the definitive study, which covered the years 1950-2002, concludes that pedophilia was never the issue, why does elite opinion insist that there is a "pedophilia crisis" in the Catholic Church?" Joe, I have no anti homosexual agenda. I strongly object to the "liberal" ideology which seeks to conceal truth in all matters, not just the crimes of Catholic priests, but this issue is an excellent example. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Jim Carroll Date: 28 Jul 17 - 11:44 AM "The crimes were mainly sexual assault of minors and young men by adults who had previous homosexual contact." You have the advantage over the rest of us -you appear to have information that none f us have access to There is no overall breakdown of the victims ages or backgrounds - this is exacerbated by the fact that much of the evidence remains locked up and inaccessible I suppose if you are on a mission, as you appear to be, you may as well make up what suits and ignore what we do know. Joe's points - not even referred to by you, make the most sense - particularly "I think it's mostly because priests at one time were more likely to have unsupervised contact with boy" We 'ave already been bombarded with "plague carriers" and "unnatural perverts" by you - why not add "rapist" to the list You really do hate homosexuals, don't you Isn't it about time you saw somebody about your crisis of identity? One of significant facts of all this is that we are seeing only the tip of the iceberg, largely due to the personal shame attached to these crimes Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Raggytash Date: 28 Jul 17 - 12:29 PM I seem to reçall that there was some condemnation of ad hominem attacks one of the people who raised the complaints has no objections to doing the same to other posters. Terminus if you do not wish to discuss the subject in hand, fine, leave it to those that do. We have a group of people, religious leaders, who try to show the rest of the population how to lead their lives. When those same people perpetrate acts of abuse on vulnerable children, most rational people are appalled. It would appear you are not. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Raggytash Date: 28 Jul 17 - 12:54 PM Joe, just for the record, this was in no way meant as an attack on you. I was concerned that a previous thread was deleted for a reason I did not understand. There are many people of faith posting on here and I do not believe this issue should be swept under the carpet, that has happened too often and for too long. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Greg F. Date: 28 Jul 17 - 01:17 PM Ake, can you PLEASE take your homophobic bullshit somewhare else? I think that everyone here with a pretention to intelligence is more than tired of seeing your shit slung across the page. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Joe Offer Date: 28 Jul 17 - 03:53 PM Wikipedia's summary of the John Jay report: The John Jay report found that 81% of the victims were male; and of all the victims, 22% were younger than age 10, 51% were between the ages of 11 and 14, and 27% were between the ages of 15 and 17 years. Ake, you failed to acknowledge that your "4 out of 5 victims are youths between 14 and eighteen" allegation is completely false. I think the division above makes better sense out of things. There's definitely something different about what drives a person to have sex with a child under the age of 10; but sex with those between 11 and 14 is equally deplorable - even if one calls it by a different name. Sex with willing partners between 15 and 17 is more understandable, but that's only 27 percent of the total number of victims. Nonetheless, the sex with those between 15 and 17 is illegal in most locations. The victims are, for the most part, ten or more years younger than the priests committing the crime. This is not normal conduct, for either heterosexuals or homosexuals - and it's not legal. Ake, your approach seems to target normal, adult, law-abiding homosexuals. That's why we object. Don't target the people who don't do the crimes. -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: akenaton Date: 28 Jul 17 - 05:41 PM "Ake, your approach seems to target normal, adult, law-abiding homosexuals. That's why we object. Don't target the people who don't do the crimes." I do not accept that Joe, and have never suggested such a thing. I am talking solely about the perpetrators within the Catholic Church. The reason for this abuse seems clear from the evidence, to say that any man would abuse a young boy given the opportunity as you stated earlier is obviously false.....sexual orientation must come into it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Greg F. Date: 28 Jul 17 - 06:23 PM Ake, can you PLEASE take your homophobic bullshit somewhare else? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Rapparee Date: 28 Jul 17 - 06:50 PM Hmmm... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Jeri Date: 28 Jul 17 - 10:03 PM Y'all should just give up trying to get Ake to understand, because he's not capable of it. Either that, or he's just pretending to be that thick to keep you trying to do the impossible, and that really IS "trolling". Just leave him alone in his impenetrable shell of intentional ignorance. But if you have any pre-pubescent daughters or grand-daughters, keep them well away from him, because he's obviously a heterosexual. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Donuel Date: 28 Jul 17 - 10:27 PM Being fictional, Ake has consistently offered a talented representation of a nightmare conservative and a monument to failed communication or John Q Public. You be the judge. |