feedback.pdxradio.com » Politics and other things

Catholic Church: Don't blame us for our pedophile priests

(60 posts)

  1. Vitalogy

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 6,838

    A report on the child abuse scandal in the US Catholic Church has provoked condemnation for concluding that the permissive society of the 1960s was to blame for the rise in sexual offences by priests.

    The investigation commissioned by Catholic bishops said that the peak incidence of sexual abuse by priests in the 1960s and 70s reflected the increased level of other deviant behaviours in American society in the period, including "drug use and crime, as well as social changes, such as an increase in premarital sex and divorce."

    The Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests dismissed the report as "garbage in, garbage out" because the bishops providing much of the funding for the report.

    But the study noted that church leaders remained more concerned with rehabilitating priests than with helping victims until 20 years later after those who suffered abuse mounted legal action.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/may/19/us-catholic-church-sexual-abuse-report

    Yep, rather than take responsibility, shift blame to someone else. That's the catholic way. What a disgusting organization.

    Posted on May 18, 2011 - 07:01 PM #
  2. Maybe that's why they want to protect babies from you guys who want to slice them up. It's a diversion tactic.

    Posted on May 18, 2011 - 07:21 PM #
  3. NoParty

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 11,411

    Oh come on Vit! They're not all bad....

    Posted on May 18, 2011 - 07:21 PM #
  4. Brianl

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 5,100

    "Maybe that's why they want to protect babies from you guys who want to slice them up. It's a diversion tactic."

    Or, they consider it "fresh meat".

    Posted on May 18, 2011 - 07:26 PM #
  5. Vitalogy is bored today.

    Posted on May 18, 2011 - 07:31 PM #
  6. Vitalogy

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 6,838

    Nope, just tired of hearing the holier than thou attitude from someone who belongs to an institution that has allowed thousands of children to be abused by the priests they employ, and then try to shift blame to elsewhere.

    Posted on May 18, 2011 - 07:34 PM #
  7. edselehr

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 3,015

    F&B, your vitriolic rhetoric is tiresome. Name a "guy" on this board that wants to slice up babies.

    If that's the way you want to play it, from now on I'm going to refer to you as the person who wants women to be slaves of the state. Because outlawing abortion = taking away women's freedom = slavery.

    Posted on May 18, 2011 - 07:45 PM #
  8. The Catholic Church did not abuse anyone.

    Some bad homosexual priests did the dirty deeds, and unfortunately bishops did not do their duty and weed them out.

    The Catholic Church stands firm against sexual abuse and all forms of sexual immorality, and cries out against the grave injustice against the MILLIONS you and your kind cheer about, Vitalogy.

    Yes, there are Catholics who have sinned and who have gone against their own Catholic teachings.

    Hopefully closer scrutiny will be paid to those seeking priestly vocations in the future, and those with serious disorders will be encouraged not to apply.

    There are Catholics who should take the blame, and many have suffered for this, including many of the blameless. You've got your pound of flesh and the hurt was put not only on those responsible but on the average joe in the pew.

    So give me an example of "holier than thou." I've never claimed any holiness or even that I'm a good example. My main gripe is when someone invents a new Jesus that approves of whatever they want approved at the time.

    Posted on May 18, 2011 - 07:45 PM #
  9. "F&B, your vitriolic rhetoric is tiresome. Name anyone of the "guys" on this board that wants to slice up babies."

    Give me a break.

    This was in response to a thread that was nothing more than baiting, and deserved no better response than that.

    Posted on May 18, 2011 - 07:47 PM #
  10. Vitalogy

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 6,838

    The catholic church, over decades, supported and enabled the pedophile priests, as an entire institution from the pope on down. And let's be clear, it has nothing to do with homosexuality. Both boys and girls by the thousands were abused over decades, even after being aware of the issue. The dirtbag priests just happened to have better access to boys than girls, and people like you look the other way. Even more shameful is that they try to shift blame elsewhere.

    The catholic machine was more interested in protecting the pedophile priests than tending to the victims. What a group of nice people!

    Google "catholic abuse" sometime. Over 36 million hits come up. Everyone of them deserved.

    Posted on May 18, 2011 - 07:52 PM #
  11. edselehr

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 3,015

    "Give me a break."

    No.

    Posted on May 18, 2011 - 07:54 PM #
  12. NoParty

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 11,411

    It's about MONEY for them. If the public was to know about it a long time ago they would have lost BILLIONS! Well, it look like karma has come back to bite them in the ass! They going to be out BILLIONS when this is over.....

    WOW!

    Posted on May 18, 2011 - 08:24 PM #
  13. Skybill9

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 9,517

    I knew who started this thread before I even opened it.

    I suspect most of us did.

    Posted on May 18, 2011 - 08:45 PM #
  14. Brianl

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 5,100

    "If the public was to know about it a long time ago they would have lost BILLIONS! Well, it look like karma has come back to bite them in the ass! They going to be out BILLIONS when this is over....."

    Yep. Which is why the following Catholic dioceses have filed for bankruptcy protection in the wake of the sexual abuse claims:

    -Archdiocese of Portland, OR
    -Diocese of Tucson, AZ
    -Diocese of Spokane, WA
    -Diocese of Davenport, IA
    -Diocese of San Diego, CA
    -Diocese of Fairbanks, AK
    -Oregon Province of Jesuits
    -Diocese of Wilmington, DE and MD
    -Archdiocese of Milwaukee, WI

    "The Catholic Church did not abuse anyone."

    The cloth of the Catholic Church did. And they used their pulpit, their position of power and authority, to do so. And what's just as bad is that the Catholic Church not only didn't nip it in the bud, but they ENABLED it by keeping mum for so long, and when allegations came out by the thousands, denounced those allegations. For many many years, generations, the Catholic Church covered their own asses, in order to avoid paying out millions and millions of dollars. And these priests, for the most part, WERE STILL ALLOWED TO SERVE!

    So, yes, the Catholic Church is absolutely guilty here. And your complete ignorance to it is laughable. You choose to do what the highers-up in the Church did, which is stick your head in the sand.

    This isn't some random, obscure thing happening in some outpost. This is an epidemic. And to say otherwise is ludicrous.

    Posted on May 18, 2011 - 08:54 PM #
  15. NoParty

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 11,411

    The Catholic Religion must be a business if they're filing for bankruptcy????

    Posted on May 18, 2011 - 08:59 PM #
  16. missing_kskd

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 14,316

    It was hidden, and that is a endorsement. I have a very hard time with that level of corruption, over very long periods of time.

    The first question on my mind?

    What else has happened? Serious about that.

    And to be clear, the vast majority of Catholic people just want their faith and their culture. Understandable. But, it's tainted big. There is no way I can ever assign any credence to it. Sorry about that. It sucks.

    The only real fix on this is strong statements and actions to clean it up. All of it. Right now I see inertia and management holding things together and that's not pretty.

    Pedophiles are not well tolerated. That particular issue crosses so many boundaries, and it's near universal, with even most of the vile people unified with everybody else on that. You don't fuck with the kids.

    Posted on May 18, 2011 - 09:06 PM #
  17. "And to be clear, the vast majority of Catholic people just want their faith and their culture."

    True for the laity and the and the priests. There are many good priests who have had to live with this shame and feel the anger, even though they did nothing to deserve it.

    "Pedophiles are not well tolerated."

    The vast majority were not "peophiles" but "hebephiles." The vast majority were homosexuals. Do you think this is also a blight on homosexual men?

    Nobody is more horrified and saddened by this than Catholics.

    It's too bad that the focus in the secular world tends to be on this evil over and over, while overlooking entirely the spiritual benefits of the Church and the good things it does.

    Posted on May 18, 2011 - 09:18 PM #
  18. Brianl

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 5,100

    There is no doubt that the majority of Catholics just want their faith and their culture. No question in any rational person's mind.

    But you still cannot ignore the ten-ton elephant sitting in the corner of the room.

    The repercussions from this will be felt for a very long time. Inside AND outside of the Church. The secular world points out this evil because, honestly, it bears pointing out. And the Catholic Church did everything to hide these atrocities. The secular world has a lot of shame and animosity towards the Catholic Church for this, as they well should.

    You lay the blame at the priests who did this. And you're absolutely right to do so. But you have no blame or animosity whatsoever towards the Catholic Church for many years of silent approval, and flat-out denying it when the doors blew off of the story? You contend the Church was innocent.

    Posted on May 18, 2011 - 09:30 PM #
  19. "You lay the blame at the priests who did this. And you're absolutely right to do so. But you have no blame or animosity whatsoever towards the Catholic Church for many years of silent approval, and flat-out denying it when the doors blew off of the story? You contend the Church was innocent."

    If there are bad cops, do you blame the law?

    If a cop breaks the law, do you say the law or the government is bad or the cop is bad? If the cop's supervisor is in on it too, it still is not "law enforcement" that is corrupt but a couple of people in the organization.

    I don't blame "the Catholic Church" anymore than I blame "law enforcement" when a cop steals something.

    The Catholic Church teaches that it is unjust to harm someone and that such an act is a serious sin. I don't blame the Church because some failed to do as the Church teaches. It's their fault, whether they're in the laity, a priest, a bishop, or the pope. I think our pope is a good holy man, but if he were to do something horrid, I would not blame "the Catholic Church," because the pope is not the Church. The Church is of God. The Church is the Body of Christ.

    Posted on May 18, 2011 - 09:41 PM #
  20. The cloth of the Catholic Church did. And they used their pulpit, their position of power and authority, to do so. And what's just as bad is that the Catholic Church not only didn't nip it in the bud, but they ENABLED it by keeping mum for so long, and when allegations came out by the thousands, denounced those allegations. For many many years, generations, the Catholic Church covered their own asses, in order to avoid paying out millions and millions of dollars. And these priests, for the most part, WERE STILL ALLOWED TO SERVE!

    Exactly. They were agents of the organization. Like that other heated thread from last week or so. (I didn't like that verdict, BTW.)

    I'm a Christian and a member of another denomination. The Catholic sex abuse scandals hurt everyone because those who are not Christian and/or don't attend church see this as representative of all Christians, Roman Catholic or not. Heck, those who did this crime against God and God's people don't even represent the entire Roman Catholic Church!

    However, this is an organization that requires its members who serve in this capacity to never marry yet perform marriages; as well as take a vow that they will never fulfill a certain natural and biological function because something written thousands of years ago when humans lived for many decades less than they do now forbade it.

    I don't want to and will not get into a religious and/or doctrine fight with anyone on this. I'm simply stating this as my non-expert, non-authoritative opinion on the subject.

    Posted on May 18, 2011 - 10:34 PM #
  21. skeptical

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 5,721

    I'm amazed people still show up for Mass. This is religion at its ugliness. The government had to step in to control their conduct. Far as I know, Rev. Phelps hasn't abused anyone yet. So who is the worse offender here?

    When it comes to religion, way too many people are stupid, stupid, stupid.

    Posted on May 18, 2011 - 10:35 PM #
  22. Brianl

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 5,100

    "If a cop breaks the law, do you say the law or the government is bad or the cop is bad? If the cop's supervisor is in on it too, it still is not "law enforcement" that is corrupt but a couple of people in the organization."

    Do it once, shame on you. Do it twice, shame on ME.

    If a cop is habitually bad, and uses their power of authority in a negative light and does illicit, illegal things, and is enabled by the police department, his supervisor, and the system, then absolutely I blame the system. And if the supervisor is in on it, and it's swept under the rug from higher up, you're damn right I blame "law enforcement" for being corrupt.

    The Church KNEW. For MANY years. And did NOTHING. Again, silent approval. And when it came out, with countless victims coming out, the Church called them liars.

    Not only were the guilty priests wrong, and corrupted, so was the Church.

    Posted on May 18, 2011 - 10:50 PM #
  23. Brianl

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 5,100

    "I don't want to and will not get into a religious and/or doctrine fight with anyone on this. I'm simply stating this as my non-expert, non-authoritative opinion on the subject."

    Well, you should feel free to join. Because you hit it spot-on.

    Posted on May 18, 2011 - 10:50 PM #
  24. missing_kskd

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 14,316

    I would have to agree.

    IMHO, this dilemma is exactly why it's important to speak out on these kinds of things. The harm is often real, and silence is often taken as a endorsement, leading to more harm.

    Posted on May 18, 2011 - 11:16 PM #
  25. "However, this is an organization that requires its members who serve in this capacity to never marry yet perform marriages; as well as take a vow that they will never fulfill a certain natural and biological function because something written thousands of years ago when humans lived for many decades less than they do now forbade it."

    ALL unmarried in the Church are called to be celibate. And the vast majority of priests fulfill their vows.

    What is needed is better screening and keeping those out who show signs of disordered behavior. Also, parents need to make sure there is a proper distance between their children and anyone who could exploit their position.

    Do you think married people are less inclined to sexual immorality? Do you think married politicians are less likely to seduce vulnerable young interns and staff, than those who would take a vow of celibacy?

    But there could be married priests and there are some. That priests be unmarried is a discipline and not doctrine. But I can't imagine how a parish priest could have the time to do all his duties as well as take care of a family. It's better this way. And this is what they want--to serve God and sacrifice for God and his people. Sad that a few rotten apples spoil it for the rest. It's also sad that so many on the outside have such phony outrage over it. Their "secret" delight is obvious. And they will use it to fight the Church when it pleads for justice for the unborn, or speaks out against immoral and destructive behavior.

    (Note that the purpose of this thread was not because of a concern for victims, but to smack me down, because I'm a Catholic, who expressed some "holier than thou" ideas. We've got some hardcore anti-Catholic bigots on this site).

    But I think the house has been cleaned out and will continue in that direction. The laity will demand it, and note that the laity does not blame "the church," but the those who have infected it.

    It makes me sad to see so many who want only to focus on the negative, and totally disregard the positive and the purpose of the Church, which is to help souls get to Heaven.

    Posted on May 19, 2011 - 12:02 AM #
  26. From a 2002 article in "This Rock" magazine:
    http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2002/0211fea2.asp

    Are there other ways in which the media misreported the nature of the problem?

    Yes. The overwhelming majority of the priests involved in these incidents are accused of sexual molestation of adolescent males, not females. This means that nature of the scandal is homosexual. The media downplayed or ignored this fact in its handling of the subject. But it has everything to do with the cause, the extent, and the cure of the problem.

    How can we excuse the bishops and their actions in handling reports of sexual abuse?

    Unquestionably bishops made mistakes. Nevertheless, media reports frequently painted the bishops' actions and motives in the worst possible light. That some priests were assigned to new parishes was widely reported as the deliberate, systematic enabling of continued abuse. In fact, in many such cases psychological "experts" had assured bishops-in keeping with the thinking of the time-that the priests in question had been treated successfully, and they presented no further danger. Subsequent wisdom is that such sexual disorders are far too deep-seated to be cured by a month's stay at a treatment facility. The Christian call to forgiveness and to giving someone a second chance following conversion from even grave sin also played a role.

    What about the fact that bishops didn't report allegations of abuse to the police?

    The absence of reporting in particular cases is not de facto evidence of malice. Many victims and their families did not want the matter reported to the police and would share what they knew about a given priest with the diocese only on the condition that they not be put through the trauma of a civil investigation and trial.

    So how can we explain the actual nature of the scandal?

    Like this: A handful of pedophiliac priests and a much greater number of other priests, almost exclusively homosexuals, engaged in varying degrees of inappropriate contact with minors, up to and including coercive sex (rape). The problem was exacerbated by the fact that when many of these acts occurred they were regarded at first as moral matters only, then as matters involving curable or at least treatable psychological disorders.

    How widespread is the problem? The press reports seemed to involve a large number of priests.

    The Associated Press reported that 250 priests had been dismissed or had resigned by the time the bishops met last June, though it is not clear that all of the dismissals and resignations were due to abuse. Even if all 250 priests were abusers, it would still amount to about one-half of one percent (0.53 percent) of the 47,000 priests currently serving in America, a proportion far smaller than in most media accounts. Since some of the allegations involved priests who are now dead, the proportion of offenders within today's priesthood is significantly smaller than one-half of one percent. Nevertheless, the numbers are profoundly disturbing.

    What are the best statistics available about priestly sex abuse?

    A 1992 study conducted in the Archdiocese of Chicago is the largest such study done to date. It examined the personnel files of all priests serving in the diocese. It found that out of the 2,252 priests who had served from 1951 to 1991, allegations of sexual abuse had been made against 59 of them, or 2.6 percent.

    The study adopted a policy of favoring the accuser in cases of doubt, accepting hearsay testimony (which would not be allowed in court), and adopting a "preponderance of evidence" standard (as opposed to the "proof beyond a reasonable doubt" standard used in criminal trials). With this methodology, it concluded that 18 of the allegations of sexual abuse did not stand up, leaving 41 probable offenders, or 1.8 percent of the priests who had served in Chicago in four decades. Again, "the overwhelming number of cases . . . involved homosexual ephebophilia-in other words, priests sexually attracted to young teenage boys. . . . There was only one founded case of pedophilia, involving a priest-uncle with two six-year-old nieces" (Philip Jenkins, Pedophiles and Priests: Anatomy of a Contemporary Crisis [1996], p. 81).

    A recent study conducted in the Archdiocese of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania showed a 1.7 percent figure of priestly sexual abuse involving minors (cited by Philip Jenkins on "Catholic Answers Live," May 17, 2002, archived at http://www.catholic.com).

    While there may be new accusations in the future, the national percentage of priests accused of abuse-0.53 percent-likely will never approach these figures of 1.8 and 1.7 percent. It appears that the archdioceses of Chicago and Philadelphia have had levels of abuse more than three times higher than the national average.

    How do these numbers compare against the general population?

    It's unclear, again because of inadequate scientific studies. To our knowledge no study has been conducted that isolates the primary problem: adult male homosexual abuse of adolescent boys. One expert in pedophilia, Dr. John Bradford, "estimates its [pedophilia's] prevalence at maybe four percent of the population" (John Cloud, "Pedophilia," Time, April 29, 2002).

    If so, the percentage of pedophiles in the ranks of Catholic priests is significantly lower by all accounts than in the general population. This may be due to the psychological screening candidates for the priesthood are subject to prior to ordination-and to the practical fact that priests have less access to children than do typical pedophiles.

    How do the numbers compare to sexual abuse by the clergy of other religious groups?

    Though there is again an absence of proper studies, the numbers appear similar. The fact that most Catholic priests are celibate (unmarried) does not seem to make a difference.

    In his book Pedophiles and Priests, Prof. Philip Jenkins—a Protestant and an expert in the subject of pedophilia—stated, "The most-quoted survey of sexual problems among Protestant clergy states that some ten percent are involved in sexual misconduct of some kind, and that 'about two or three percent' are pedophiles, a rate equal or higher than that suggested for Catholic priests. These figures should be viewed skeptically; the methodology on which they are based is not clear, and they seem to rely disproportionately on individuals already in therapy. However, it is striking to find such a relatively high number suggested for both celibate and non-celibate clergy" (pp. 50-51).

    Then why do cases of Catholic clerical abuse attract more attention than non-Catholic cases?

    Because the Church expects higher standards of its clergy and members than do other bodies. Because the requirement of celibacy in particular rankles contemporary mores. Because the Church keeps a detailed dossier on members of its clergy, giving prosecutors more extensive evidence to work with. It is not paranoia to suggest that anti-Catholicism also plays a role.

    Jenkins points out also that journalists often interpret new stories in terms of existing archetypes. Once the "pedophile priest" became an archetype in the press's mind, new accounts of priestly misconduct were poured into that mold. The fact that there is no corresponding "pedophile pastor" profile in the press's mind tends to cause instances of non-Catholic clerical abuse to be viewed as isolated incidents rather than as symptoms of a larger social problem (Pedophiles and Priests, pp. 3-12).

    What is the real cause of the sex abuse problem in the Church?

    Human sinfulness is the real cause. But this isn't helpful, since sin is the explanation for every problem in the world. The fact that the great majority of cases involved male homosexual abuse of adolescents suggests that if there were fewer homosexuals in the priesthood there would be fewer cases of clerical sexual abuse.

    So it's a homosexual problem? Why isn't this talked about more in the press?

    The secular media in the United States are overwhelmingly sympathetic to the homosexual movement. This was admitted recently by Al Rantel, a talk-show host on KABC, a major Los Angeles radio station, during a June 14 interview on CNN:

    "I do not say this happily . . . because, as you may know, I happen to be gay myself. I'm openly gay here on the radio in Los Angeles and have been for many years.

    "But I have to tell you that, you know, even if you are gay, two and two is still four, and there's this proverbial 3,000-pound elephant sitting in the room that no one wants to talk about. This is not a pedophile issue, although the media called it a pedophile issue, because they do not want to insult the gay community. They do not want to be politically incorrect.

    "But what you have here are not pedophiles. You have predatory gay men—and there are some of us, believe me. I do not happen to be one of them, but there are some, and we should all admit they're there. And these predatory gay men found their way into the Catholic priesthood in inordinately large numbers—you know, it makes the Boy Scouts look prescient with what they did. And these gay men have gone after young males. And I think it's disgraceful, and I think the media needs to address this. The gay community needs to address this." (For the program transcript, see http://www.cnn.com/transcripts/0206/14/tl.00.html. )

    Have homosexuals found their way into the priesthood in disproportionately large numbers?

    This is not clear, but it appears to be the case.

    The most commonly cited figure—particularly by homosexual activists—is that ten percent of the population is homosexual. (This figure, based on a flawed 1948 study done by researcher Alfred Kinsey, was discredited years ago. Twenty-five percent of Kinsey's study subjects were convicted criminals, though criminals make up less than one percent of the general population [Tony Marco, "Kinsey '10%' Figure for Gays Doubtful," http://www.leaderu.com/marco/special/spc11b.html.) Better, more recent studies have indicated that the percentage of the general population that is homosexual is between one and two percent.

    One survey done by the Kansas City Star found that "three-fourths of [priests] responding described themselves as heterosexual, 15 percent said they were homosexual, and 5 percent bisexual" (Judy Thomas, "AIDS in the Priesthood," Kansas City Star, Jan. 29, 2000; online at http://www.kcstar.com/projects/priests/poll.htm).

    The difficulty with this study, as with all others that have been done, is that it was unscientific. The Star mailed questionnaires randomly to 3,013 priests, of whom 801 responded. This means that almost three-quarters did not respond. Because responding to the survey involved time and inconvenience, only those most motivated tended to do respond. The newspaper issued the disclaimer, "The Star cannot ensure that the priests responding are demographically and geographically representative of all Roman Catholic priests" (www.kcstar.com/projects/priests/survey.htm) .

    What is clear is that the powerful homosexual subculture that exists in some dioceses and seminaries-what liberal priest Andrew Greeley has dubbed "the Lavender Mafia"-remains a significant problem. When the U.S. cardinals met with the Pope at the Vatican this year , Bishop Wilton Gregory admitted, "It is an ongoing struggle . . . to make sure that the Catholic priesthood is not dominated by homosexual men-not only [that is it] not dominated by homosexual men but that the candidates that we receive are healthy in every possible way psychologically, emotionally, spiritually, [and] intellectually" (www.abc.net.au/am/s539005.htm).

    Posted on May 19, 2011 - 12:24 AM #
  27. http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2010/1007fea5.asp

    The Response to the Abuse Scandal Is Fueled by Hypocrisy

    There is no need to reiterate the obvious points that sexual abuse is always a grave moral evil, that it is particularly deplorable in organizations claiming to offer moral leadership, and that it is most deplorable of all in the Catholic Church, which makes unique and unparalleled claims about truth and grace. But I also observe the following:

    The prolonged and unremitting secular attack on the Catholic Church for a sexual abuse problem overwhelmingly in the past

    The confiscation of the ecclesiastical wealth of the Catholic people (who, in general, have no guilt in this matter)

    The changing of statutes of limitations to permit vast financial settlements in cases where the perpetrators are long dead

    And the effort to implicate the pope despite the complete absence of evidence

    All of this, even in those cases where justice is served, is a monumental hypocrisy. What we have here, in essence, are people who favor sexual licentiousness—and who hate the Catholic Church because of its very condemnation of sexual licentiousness—exploiting one of the few remaining sexual taboos for the purpose of discrediting and breaking the Church.

    I’ve been fighting an ecclesiastical culture that has permitted consistent abuse of the rights of the faithful, including sexual abuse, for over 40 years. Though hardly alone (Catholic Answers comes to mind), I take a back seat to no one in this. So, if your view of the results of the sex abuse scandal is that the Church is getting exactly what it deserves, I would be sympathetic:

    if you could demonstrate any similar effort against other institutions, including public schools, where the rates of abuse are higher than in the Church,

    or if guilty priests, religious, and bishops were being held personally responsible rather than the Church as a whole,

    or if the same people who are attacking the Church were also calling for a return to sexual self-control and sexual restraint in order to address the problem at its root,

    or if those of us who point out the large role homosexuality has played in this abuse were not excoriated for daring to suggest there is anything disordered about homosexuality.

    No, this is a clear case of the pot calling the kettle black, enjoying it, profiting from it, and getting away with it big time.

    So the first lesson of the abuse scandal is that the extent to which the Church is under attack is determined in large part by the hatred many people feel for the Church’s stance against the prevailing sins of the surrounding culture, including sexual sins. Surely far more people have been discomfited by the Church’s insistence on traditional sexual morality than have suffered at the hands of those priests and bishops who have failed to live the gospel in this particular way. But the secular world regards insistence on sexual morality as another form of abuse, doesn’t it? How delightful, then, to be able to exploit the chinks in the Church’s own armor!

    Posted on May 19, 2011 - 01:02 AM #
  28. "So, yes, the Catholic Church is absolutely guilty here. And your complete ignorance to it is laughable. You choose to do what the highers-up in the Church did, which is stick your head in the sand.

    This isn't some random, obscure thing happening in some outpost. This is an epidemic. And to say otherwise is ludicrous."

    Do you think Jesus is guilty? Do you think the Blessed Virgin is guilty? Do you think the saints in Heaven are guilty? Is Mother Teresa guilty? Is the devout old lady who I see in church every Sunday guilty? Is my good pastor guilty? Is Fulton Sheen guilty? Is the dying man who just received the annointing of the sick guilty? Am I who have been a Catholic for 17 years guilty of something that happened years before I considered becoming a Catholic? All of the above and many more are "the Church."

    I know it's horrible and I know you love to rub our noses in it because you hate our message, but it's not an "epidemic." And it's now mostly behind us.

    If the Church were not so outspoken against abortion, contraception, homosexual unions, and fornication, this would not be much of a concern to you, I guarantee it. A much greater percentage of this type of behavior happens in the school system, yet there is no outrage against any institutions.

    Lastly, I have not "put my head in the sand." I have two children and I would have been devastated if someone in the church harmed them. You think Catholics like this? You think we excuse it? You're a fool if you do. We're just tired of this being used as excuse to slam us, as this thread obviously is.

    Posted on May 19, 2011 - 01:46 AM #
  29. skeptical

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 5,721

    Is it okay for Catholics, especially ones named after famous saints, to slam the Catholic Church?

    I think we need to boil the Pope. Not only for what he didn't do before becoming Pope, but also for what he hasn't done since becoming Pope.

    Posted on May 19, 2011 - 02:00 AM #
  30. The Pope is a Nazi.

    Posted on May 19, 2011 - 06:11 AM #
  31. Brianl

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 5,100

    F&B - you do realize that your credibility on the issue, already lower than low, goes down even further when you copy and paste from a Catholic website to exonerate the Church, don't you?

    That's like an anti-Semitic person quoting from Mein Kampf to justify his views.

    You have to do better than that.

    Posted on May 19, 2011 - 06:28 AM #
  32. "F&B - you do realize that your credibility on the issue, already lower than low, goes down even further when you copy and paste from a Catholic website to exonerate the Church, don't you?

    That's like an anti-Semitic person quoting from Mein Kampf to justify his views.

    You have to do better than that."

    I don't have time to reinvent the wheel and do all kinds of research to defend against your attacks. Others have done that work. Refute what they say if you have the goods to do so. (And you didn't exactly conduct your own investigation to get your info about bad priests).

    And I resent your comparison to Hitler and anti-semites. The Church is a force for good and not evil. The vast majority of Catholics are striving to be better people and the Church is their means to that end.

    Posted on May 19, 2011 - 08:56 AM #
  33. Brianl

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 5,100

    "I don't have time to reinvent the wheel and do all kinds of research to defend against your attacks. Others have done that work. Refute what they say if you have the goods to do so. (And you didn't exactly conduct your own investigation to get your info about bad priests)."

    Maybe you've heard of a search engine called Google. It works pretty simple; you type in the info you're looking for and it gives you a ton of websites that will have said information. You find what you're looking for, and post accordingly. It's not hard, it's not rocket science. You're just too lazy to do it. Either that, or too uncomfortable to look outside of your religious dogma. I mean, wow, you might just see something you don't like!

    And I DID conduct my own research. I used that wonderful aforementioned search engine Google, which led me to a Website that gave the info on the Catholic dioceses that have declared bankruptcy because of lawsuits rendered based on the sexual abuse scandal.

    "And I resent your comparison to Hitler and anti-semites. The Church is a force for good and not evil. The vast majority of Catholics are striving to be better people and the Church is their means to that end."

    Have you never heard of an ANALOGY? Comparing one thing to another to make your point? I was using it as an ANALOGY. If this offends you, well that's on you, not me. If you'd like, I'll dig up two quarters out of my pocket, give them to you, and you can use them at a pay phone to call someone who cares.

    And you're right - the vast majority of Catholics ARE striving to be better people, and the Church IS their catalyst. I also firmly believe that, as you stated, the vast majority of Catholic priests, bishops, and other folks involved ARE well-meaning people that did not participate in these heinous acts.

    But it still doesn't take away the facts, which are this:

    -A number a Catholic priests sexually abused children. It was nationwide, and it went on for many years.
    -The Catholic Church did nothing about this for many years.
    -When the accusations came to light, hundreds (if not more) of them, the Catholic Church denounced the accusers, calling them liars. The cover-up was on.
    -Because of years of enabled abuse and the subsequent cover-up, the lawsuits flew.
    -These lawsuits (won by the victims, mind you) drained the banking accounts of many dioceses. Several of which had to go into bankruptcy, as I listed above.

    All I am doing is pointing out facts. The courts of law found that these atrocities happened, and that there was a cover-up.

    "You were on the borderline, but I'm now convinced you belong in the same boat with littlesongs, vitalogy, and skeptical, as anti-Catholic bigots, not that I think that label will bother you.

    Your disdain and hatred of the Church goes far beyond the acts of a tiny minority of bad priests. It's all about what the Church stands for and stands against. That's what you really hate about it, and the priest scandal gives you an excuse to dump on it."

    Oh wow. I'm quaking in my size-14s. I'm SO bothered by your labeling.

    I have a disdain and hatred of hypocrisy. I grew up in several denominations of Christian churches. I witnessed, first hand, the absolute utter bullshit my mother went through. Because she was divorced. Because she was seeking salvation because of who she is. We were asked, TOLD, that we weren't welcome to some. Others condemned her to hell for questioning her sexuality. I grew up witnessing this, and THAT is what drove me away.

    I also have issue with small-minded people that are either unwilling or incapable of thinking for themselves outside of their religion. People that would jump off of the Empire State Building because "Jesus told me to."

    And you, sir, are one of those people.

    If this makes me a bigot towards Catholicism, well I am guilty as charged. And I will wear that badge with honor in front of you, because I have no problem with it. It's not MY fault that you are completely blind and oblivious to the atrocities that happened. It's not MY fault that you continue to justify them. That is 100% on YOU, and I will call bullshit out when I see bullshit.

    Posted on May 19, 2011 - 10:04 AM #
  34. "If this makes me a bigot towards Catholicism, well I am guilty as charged. And I will wear that badge with honor in front of you, because I have no problem with it. It's not MY fault that you are completely blind and oblivious to the atrocities that happened. It's not MY fault that you continue to justify them. That is 100% on YOU, and I will call bullshit out when I see bullshit."

    You've got some reading comprehension issues, dude.

    I've condemned this behavior along with everyone else. What I resist is the condemnation of the entire church, and using this as a means to get the church to shut-up when it speaks out against injustices (like abortion) or immorality.

    "I also have issue with small-minded people that are either unwilling or incapable of thinking for themselves outside of their religion. People that would jump off of the Empire State Building because "Jesus told me to."

    And you, sir, are one of those people."

    Well, I've been on the top of the Empire State Building, and am still here, and if I make it there again, expect to arrive on the ground floor via elevator. And I know Jesus wouldn't ask me to jump off a building.

    What you want is for me to "think for myself" and reject the hard things the Church teaches that make the secular world so uncomfortable. If I said I thought fornication, men having anal sex with each other, and abortion are all good things, and thumbed my nose at the Church, you'd say I was a very cool Catholic.

    Note that I had to "think for myself" to become a Catholic in the first place, in spite of the fact that my entire life prior to that, I believed all the propaganda and bigoted bs against the Church.

    I have accepted that the Catholic Church was established by Jesus, God in the flesh, and that it is guided by the Holy Spirit. So I am not smarter than God. Are you? I'm not capable of outhinking God. Tell me how a mortal man can know better than an infinite God who created him.

    Posted on May 19, 2011 - 10:27 AM #
  35. "Oh wow. I'm quaking in my size-14s. I'm SO bothered by your labeling."

    Sorry if I ruined your day.

    "I have a disdain and hatred of hypocrisy. I grew up in several denominations of Christian churches. I witnessed, first hand, the absolute utter bullshit my mother went through. Because she was divorced. Because she was seeking salvation because of who she is. We were asked, TOLD, that we weren't welcome to some. Others condemned her to hell for questioning her sexuality. I grew up witnessing this, and THAT is what drove me away."

    What denominations? This would not have happened in the Catholic Church.

    Posted on May 19, 2011 - 11:06 AM #
  36. NoParty

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 11,411

    If the Catholic Church was established by Jesus then why do they use the Mother Mary as an idol when it says in the Bible that NO idols from the Heavens should be worshiped! And in another passage someone comes up to Jesus at a party and says "Jesus, you mother is here". And he replies "My mother is nobody, you are my brother, she is my sister.
    And They use a confessional to have people confess to a MORTAL FLAWED MAN the things they've done wrong? Ummm That's what God is for!!!!!!

    I could go on.....

    Posted on May 19, 2011 - 11:15 AM #
  37. You want to debate Catholic doctrine NoParty? That's an entirely different subject.

    Of course the reason this thread was started was not because Vitalogy woke up yesterday concerned about Catholic youth, and so he had to make yet another post condemning the Catholic Church. This thread was nothing more than a sophisticated personal attack against someone he deemed to be "holier than though" for sharing his opinions and perspective, knowing that others would happily pile-on.

    But to briefly address your concerns, Mary is not worshipped. She is revered. She is not an "idol." And I think you got your information a little skewed about Jesus' response. Jesus knew very well the commandment to "honor your mother and father," and nobody could do that better than God, so he would not have put her down, as you have suggested. Confession is "through" a priest to God.

    Posted on May 19, 2011 - 11:25 AM #
  38. Vitalogy

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 6,838

    To attempt to blame all the abuse on homosexuality is shameful, yet typical of the kind of people who call themselves catholic.

    This is called child rape. It's less about sex and more about power and control over helpless children who trust that person 100%. Boy or girl, what the fuck does it matter? An adult in a position of power took advantage and the entire catholic organization enabled it for decades.

    Even more shameful is that some people still try to deflect the blame. This is as ugly as it gets.

    Posted on May 19, 2011 - 11:31 AM #
  39. NoParty

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 11,411

    Ummm okay....

    When you have pictures, statues and such all over the place that's idolized.

    Posted on May 19, 2011 - 11:32 AM #
  40. Do you have a wife or children NoParty? Do you have photographs of them on your wall?

    If not a wife or children, do you have friends or relatives and photographs of them?

    Is it idolatry to have a photograph of a loved one? Is it idolatry to be reminded of that person by looking at the photograph?

    Many of the paintings and statues in the ancient churches served to tell a story to people who coudn't read.

    An image or statue of Jesus on the cross is a reminder of his suffering for out salvation and a reminder of the crosses we too are called to bear. Nobody in the church "worships" these images.

    Posted on May 19, 2011 - 11:38 AM #
  41. "To attempt to blame all the abuse on homosexuality is shameful, yet typical of the kind of people who call themselves catholic."

    The Church teaches against abusive and immoral behavior. These men violated the teachings they vowed to uphold.

    I think it's been established that the majority of offenders were homosexual men. To put our heads in the sand about that doesn't serve any good purpose.

    But the blame lies squarely on those who did the acts, and appealing to their homosexual disorder does not excuse them, or anyone who strove to protect them.

    Catholics condemn this outrage. I don't know how many times I have to say that, but it's never heard.

    But I don't think you do. I think it thrills and delights you.

    You and your ilk have the blood of 50 million innocent babies on your hands, and the Church begs you to stop the slaughter, and you don't like having to face what you're doing, so you're happy to take a dump on them whenever you can, so you can discredit them and their message.

    Yes, we Catholics hate the priestly abuse. We want it to stop. The laity will put the pressure on to make sure this never happens again. And there will be pressure from the top down too.

    But at least we are saddened and ashamed, while you proudly stand on top of your gigantic pile of the remains of millions and millions of people who never got to see the light of day in the name of "reproductive rights." Now THAT'S disgusting.

    Posted on May 19, 2011 - 12:12 PM #
  42. missing_kskd

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 14,316

    Whether or not they were gay isn't material. What is material is the abuse and rape of kids.

    I think linking gay to that abuse is lame, and some attempt to marginalize the matter.

    There should be no such link.

    Posted on May 19, 2011 - 12:15 PM #
  43. In another post you agreed that the reason for this behavior is because of vows of celibacy.

    Do you think celibacy is the cause?

    If for some reason you were forced to be celibate, would you develop a sexual interest in any young men around you?

    Posted on May 19, 2011 - 12:24 PM #
  44. skeptical

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 5,721

    I wonder what went wrong in children's catechism classes that I was forced to attend causing me to become anti-Catholic and suggest Pope boiling???

    Posted on May 19, 2011 - 12:41 PM #
  45. Skybill9

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 9,517

    Was it catechism or skepticism?

    Sorry! I just had to ask!

    Posted on May 19, 2011 - 12:52 PM #
  46. "I wonder what went wrong in children's catechism classes that I was forced to attend causing me to become anti-Catholic and suggest Pope boiling???"

    I wouldn't know. I wasn't so lucky to be raised that way.

    Did a mean nun smack your knuckles with a ruler?

    Posted on May 19, 2011 - 12:55 PM #
  47. NoParty

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 11,411

    I'm just lucky to be a free thinker and I know I don't have to be preached to in a huge church to know that God is there. If you believe he knows!

    Posted on May 19, 2011 - 03:02 PM #
  48. It's great to be a "free thinker"!

    And believe it or not, you're allowed to think in God's church AND at home! You're allowed to pray to God at his church AND at home or work or anywhere else.

    Posted on May 19, 2011 - 03:06 PM #
  49. NoParty

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 11,411

    And I don't need a MAN telling me what to do if I believe in God. God is everywhere and NOT in one certain place. Plus I shouldn't have to give money to anyone to be there. Jesus NEVER asked for cash or payment for anything EVER....

    Posted on May 19, 2011 - 03:11 PM #
  50. Broadway

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 2,477

    >>Jesus NEVER asked for cash or payment for anything EVER....
    All He wants is just you---to live for Him!

    Posted on May 19, 2011 - 03:16 PM #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply »

You must log in to post.