Sexual Abuse in SOcial Context: Catholic Clergy and Other Professionals

Catholic League Website ^ | February 2004 | Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights

[PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain]

So why the question to me, about How I knew?

Becky

[sitetest]

Dear PNAMBC,

I know as certainly about my parish as you know about your congregation.

Which is why I said, "known", and which is as far as you can claim for your own congregation.

I suppose a difference between the Catholic Church and the Independent Baptists is that when we discover terrible evil in a parish community, even in its leadership, we try to mend it. Catholics are not supposed to be surprised by the evil men do, even those in the Church.

It appears that you believe (I won't impute your particular belief to all Independent Baptists, but it may be a general belief of them), that should you find terrible evil in your leadership, you should pack up and leave, sundering the community of believers, either finding a new one for yourself, or creating a new one.


sitetest

[PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain]

sigh-----Please note that I said before I would leave my church, I would work first to fix the problem. Why must you always twist what I say.

Also note, please, I am not saying one way or the other that things aren't being done to prevent this again. THAT'S NOT THE POINT. I want to know how gathering the data presented in this article will help fix the problem in the RCC. Why, this data is pertinent?

IMO, it seemed that no other reason then to get the monkey off the RCC and point fingers.

You had a different take on it, fine, that is your perogative. Very few of the posts I have recieved have been anything about the article. Most of them have just been personal flames. Don't get me wrong, I'm not whining or on a rant about that, if I was I would have pinged the Mod., I'm just point out the facts of the flames.

Can't you guys just discuss the article and then let it drop?

Becky

[sitetest]

Dear PNAMBC,

"Also note, please, I am not saying one way or the other that things aren't being done to prevent this again. THAT'S NOT THE POINT. I want to know how gathering the data presented in this article will help fix the problem in the RCC. Why, this data is pertinent?"

Asked and answered.

Multiple times.

Read the posts.

"Most of them have just been personal flames."

Rather than trying to give the benefit of the doubt (a requirement of charity binding on all those who think they are Christians), you came into this thread with hostility that could easily be interpreted as anti-Catholicism.

If you would like, I will gather up all the obnoxious posts that you made when you entered into this discussion.

Your inappropriate, uncharitable posts got folks backs up. And then, after you attacked, when others gave it right back to you, you complained about others' lack of Christian response. LOL.

Many have offered you, right in this thread, the reasons why this was important work. Frankly, to me, some of the reasons are so obvious, that I can scarcely believe that you don't see or understand them. It is beyond a charitable explanation.

But even if it is in good faith that you can't understand these reasons in your own mind, try to step out of your own skin for a moment, and try to see it from our perspective. Give us the benefit of the doubt, that we, too, act in good faith.

If you cannot do that, then you have not met the obligation of Christian charity, in which case, you really ought to fall silent about others' charity or lack thereof.


sitetest

[Desdemona]

I've been following this conversation for the past couple days.

I'm one of the only people on this forum/caucus who has been a member of a parish where a priest was accused of abuse of any sort, and in my case it wasn't one, it was three - in a row. The first was laicized and is in prison and has been for 20 years. The second was a verbal abuser and an alcoholic. There were never legal charges against him, but he was still removed and laicized before dying of an alcohol induced brain hemorrage. The third was accused of something borderline but has been laicized. All were sent to us after previous incidents in the 70's and early 80's. All this happened before 1990. In some places the cleanup started long before the scandal itself hit.

My question to Becky is why is comparing the incidence of such abuse in the different segments of society such a problem? Everyone seems to be going through it and yet the segment that gets the most attention is Catholic priests.

[Aquinasfan]

So why the question to me, about How I knew?

i>

Because a claim of such knowledge requires omniscience. If you look at the stats, clergy in your church are about as likely to be abusers as Catholic clergy.

[PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain]

It isn't a problem. I never said it was a problem. Is what I said was from the aritcle I gathered WHY I thought such data was being gathered. Obviously you all have a different take. FINE. But why should my husband and I being called all the PERSONAL names we have been called. I never attacked anyone PERSONALLY. Now I'm being accused of whining about the attacks. I'm not, I'm just point out, and also BTW, asking WHY, the personal attacks started first from the Catholics. IMO, it's because that is all you can do knowing that my take on the article is the correct one, which leaves you no defense but to throw out personal insults. Please do not get me wrong I am not directing this at you PERSONALLY. That is just the way the discussion went.

You're right most churches are going thru similar problems either/or abuse, and coverup. The reason, IMO, why the Catholic church is recieving so much attention is because, as you all are so fond of reminding everyone, THE RCC IS THE LARGEST.

You stick your head above a crowd you're going to get shot at.

WHINING about being singled out when you are forever pointing out about being the LARGEST, is just that, WHINING.

Becky

[PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain]

And I never denied that fact.

But show me where any other denomination went out and dug up dirt about other denominations, and wrote an article about it claiming they needed this info to fix their own problems. Can you?

Becky

[PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain]

You've answered why you believe the article was written. Thank you. I disagree.

You want to end this here, or do you want to call me an anit-catholic bigot flamer because I disagree?

Becky

[Desdemona]

The reason, IMO, why the Catholic church is recieving so much attention is because, as you all are so fond of reminding everyone, THE RCC IS THE LARGEST.

Well, I'm going to disagree. The RCC, in a way, because of the teaching, is considered to by hypocritical. Some members of the hierarchy are not in line with the teaching. We know that and that is what is behind the problem. Being the largest has nothing to do with it.

The other thing is that the RCC is the most hated and least understood institution on the planet. Not directed at you personally. Just a fact.

[Aquinasfan]

But show me where any other denomination went out and dug up dirt about other denominations, and wrote an article about it claiming they needed this info to fix their own problems. Can you?

Show me another denomination that has had "dirt dug up" against its clerics and played relentlessly in the media without putting it in its proper statistical context.

And this article doesn't simeply represent a "digging up of dirt." It's a compilation of existing sociological data that's available to anyone with an open mind willing to examine the problem of child abuse by clerics truthfully.

[sitetest]

Dear PNAMBC,

You asked why (in a rather obnoxious manner) this data needed to be: 1. researched; 2. reported.

We answered. You didn't like the answers. That's fine.

But then you repeatedly asked the "why" question as if no one had provided you any answers. That was an unreasonable response.

If you were posting in charity, you would say to yourself, "Well, those reasons really don't cut it for me, but let me see if I can understand why they might work for these folks. Hmmm... they seem to be trying to work out the problems in their own church, and they think this helps them. I don't quite see it, but if they do, perhaps it is helping them."

And that would have been the end of your snide remarks.

But it was not. You continue to press for answers to questions which have been repeatedly answered. You reject the answers, but they have been provided.

I haven't called you any names, yet. I have stated that many of the things that you've said are part of anti-Catholic bigotry. It may be that you argue thusly out of ignorance, or out of misconceptions, or out of an inability to draw logical conclusions. I don't really know.

All you are to me are words over the Internet. I can only read the words. I can't read the intentions behind them. So, I'm careful to draw conclusions about intentions. Why you say what you say, I'll try not to guess.

But your initial posts, especially, closed the loop on the anti-Catholic attack on the Catholic Church. Why you have allowed yourself to be made part of that attack, I won't guess.

" THE RCC IS THE LARGEST.

"You stick your head above a crowd you're going to get shot at.

"WHINING about being singled out when you are forever pointing out about being the LARGEST, is just that, WHINING."

LOL. Telling comments. Not those of our friends.

sitetest

[AlguyA]

"I am truly glad that your particular parish has never had a problem, and I believe your statement 110%. But the fact remains that your parish is still part of the RCC, therefore it makes it suspect. Ever hear the old adage "Your known by the company you keep.""

Yes, Becky, I have heard it. And it is just as wrong today to judge someone by "the company they keep" as it was when the Pharisees did it to Jesus.

"That is one reason why I believe being part of a large world wide denomination is not what Jesus intended his churches to do. Members can seperate from a church that has gotten off the narrow path."

I see. You base your theology on an uncharitable cliche. How about trying Scripture? Specifically, give some thought to the parable of the wheat and the tares. Are there any tares in your church, Becky? If not, then by all means, cast as many stones as you wish.

"You guys want to lump my church in with all other Baptist, Protestant, and NC churches and say we have had problems too. But that is not correct. We are under the guidance of the Pastor, he answers to no one, other then God and the members of the church.

We, too, in the final analysis, are under the guidance of the Pastor -but in our case, He's not just answerable to God, He is God. And, frankly, he doesn't have to answer to us at all.

"But ONCE AGAIN, none of this has anything to do with the article, you all are leading the topic off on a rabbit trail."

(sigh) Becky, please read your own posts before visually screaming at me, "ONCE AGAIN." It was YOU, Becky, who stated abuse had never been a problem in your church. When I say it hasn't been one in mine, you accuse me of straying from the topic of the article, ONCE AGAIN.

Seriously, Becky, what has gotten into you? You bring up a topic(abuse in our particular churches), we respond to it, you jump on us for addressing the topic YOU brought up. We present data(child abuse in other segements of society), you question why the data was necessary. We respond. You then criticize us for not presenting more data on cover-ups.

To quote one of my confirmation class students, "What's up with that, dude?"

[big'ol_freeper]

bump

[sinkspur]

It is clear that the statistics used by the Catholic League in regards to Catholic Priests are clearly low. The Review Board found that 4.3% of Catholic priests were credibly accused of abuse.

There is no similar baseline for other denominations nor other occupations.

It is likely that all figures presently avaialable are lowball figures, since, like rape, sexual abuse is underreported by children.