Posted on 12/29/2010 10:28:03 AM PST by marshmallow
Any statistics we get are going to be comparing apples to oranges so far. My points are:
1. Sexual abuse of minors is not at all isolated to the Catholic Church; The problem exists similarly in scope in Protestant denominations.
2. Because of the lawsuits, and specifically NOT because of any moral inferiority or superiority, the scope of the problem is far better measured within the Catholic Church.
3. Similar lawsuits do not exist in non-hierarchical chuches because the denomination has no legal or fiduciary responsibility for the individual congregations.
4. The various denominations have declined to take measures to make themselves more responsible for preventing serial abuse. Those measures would make them more legally and fincancially exposed, but would be very helpful at preventing further abuse.
I’ll go one step further.
Of all these sex abuse cases you read about in the Catholic Church, the vast majority of them come from the 1960s and 1970s. By 1990, the Catholic Church very well cleaned up its act, and the surge of abuse complaints coming in the past decade are still from past decades: people are feeling safe coming forward, they’re more open about it, and yes, to some extent, the fact that there’s large amounts of money is drawing people out of the woodwork... but there are many whose actions have little to do with money.
The Catholic Church did have a problem that was unique to itself in the 1960s and 1970s. Vast numbers of homosexuals had entered the priesthood. Some Catholics around here think this was some sort of conspiracy to infiltrate the priesthood. That might have been on Satan’s mind, but I think the individuals were thinking that if they couldn’t have a productive marriage, they could at least become priests, where sex wouldn’t be an issue. An appealing thought, perhaps, but terribly psychologically naive.
Had they remained laity, they could’ve confessed their tendencies, received counseling, etc. As priests, many likely (and deeply ironically) avoided confession, for fear it would strip them of their livelihood. Suppressed, their desires mutated. BUt you’ll note that very few of the cases involved true pedophilia, but rather almost exclusively post-pubescent boys.
Long BEFORE the lawsuits. however, the Catholic Church responded to the problem. BY 1990, the number of abuse cases OCCURRING had dropped by 90%. (These counts of abuse cases that are constantly cited are based on when they are REPORTED.) http://www.usccb.org/nrb/johnjaystudy/
So there are key differences between the Catholic sex abuse and Protestant sex abuse. For one, sexual abuse by Catholic clergy was far more likely to be homosexual in nature. But it was also far more likely to be in the distant past.
No wonder that the majority of Catholics voted for Obama. That kind of thinking fits in so well with the liberal view.
I can name several congregations that perform a full criminal background check on even their own Sunday School teachers. I wouldn't be surprised if in some places one would need a Security Clearance before being admitted into the presence of children.
I think that in today's post Christian culture, where neither Rome or most Protestant denominations give a whit about doctrinal integrity, settling for attendance numbers as their sole performance metric, this will always be a problem. It doesn't matter if one is an unsaved pervert wearing priestly garbs, or a walk-in pedophile at the local Big Box "who only wants to serve in the children's ministry"
Since Rome is more like McDonald's, where theoretically one can go from parish to parish and have the same thing fed to them with only differences are in quality of service and local flair, it would seem that they could find it easier for the corporate office to establish better control of the final product weeding out the Sodomites who prey upon young boys. But alas, like any bureaucracy, that has set itself artificial restraints, like "bachelors only", finding qualified candidates becomes more difficult. It becomes even more difficult when the artificial constraint is also a leading symptom of a personality disorder or social dysfunction. Men who can't commit, unmotivated, abnormally low sex drive, misogynists, Sodomites, Libertines, Satyrs and sexual predators, career criminals, the insane or severely retarded. Only once in a blue moon does one find a mature single guy who isn't a deviant, divorced and who loves the LORD, like Bill Gothard - but he isn't a Roman Catholic.
That leaves Rome with moles and wolves in sheep's clothing who put on a show so that they can get on the inside and engage in real mischief that is almost always selfish or oppositely, masochistic. For the former, you get fellows who "want to change the world" like your garden variety Marxist, many of whom have taken up the collar in border cities and who are outspoken critics of American immigration law and spend much of Rome's money on subverting the western culture and legal structure much to the dismay of the larger community and eventually to the detriment of the Church and State.
The American Religion though, like school districts, have a problem with walk-up perverts. Those who have come from another town or community usually with reconstructed or missing pasts, speak the required shibboleths, and are admitted into positions that allow them unfettered access to children.
True Protestant denominations (those who have and abide strongly to a Confession) are often pretty quick in vetting out perverts since the Reprobate are very uncomfortable being surrounded by the Saints of God, true κοινωνία, and conversational, amiable discussions of things deeper than "are you filled with spirit?" For denominations like PC-USA and ELCA who are willfully ignorant and dismissive of the Confessions, they just simply knowingly and enthusiastically install open perverts and Sodomites into the clergy.
So I can see the problem that many would have in this discussion. Depending on how large and inclusive one draws their Venn diagrams, usually generous when defining the opposition, and stingy when defining their own (I tend to be very stingy leaving only a remnant among the masses when defining the Corpus Christi), each has their own criticisms of the other.
Because Rome is set-up to be like McDonald's corporate stores, the American Religion like Mom & Pop operations, and orthodox Protestants like controlled gourmet chains, they have very different attitudes and policies and thus it is hard to make accurate generalities.
I don’t consider it true that “various denominations” failing to take quality and effective measures against such more or less = all Proddy denominations.
Some are wonderful. Some are as bad as the Vatican affiliated groups.
Most of the congregations I know of would insure a professional law enforcement investigation was implemented immediately.
It isn’t necessary to take my words and mock them ...”Catholics think of their congregations as sheep” and then to put a political twist on them as well.
As for politics, the contemporary expression “sheeple” belongs primarily to the political , secular world, where it has its origin. Even so, some who have certain biases, can try to put the concept of “sheeple” into a religious context.
That’s not so easy, because Jesus called Himself the Good Shepherd...”I know My sheep and they know Me”.
The very root meaning of the word pastor is “shepherd”.
St. John called Jesus the “Lamb of God”
So, you post a comment that twists the true meaning of my words.
So be it.
I don’t mind being in a “bunch of sheep”, as long as Jesus is the Shepherd.
Nice, sweeping generalizations.
Define "vast majority," and actual data would be nice.
Granted this is anecdotal, but it seems that priestly shenanigans aren't ancient history.
Clerics preying on young boys has been going on for many centuries as comments attributed to Basil of the fourth century shows.
“There were 400 cases of sexual abuse involving Catholic priests catalogued the John Jay study (2002) at the Johns Hopkins University over 50 years. On the other hand, the insurance industry reported 260 cases PER YEAR of sexual abuse with minors by Protestant clergy.”
It takes some kind of sickness to be comparing child molesters and categorizing them based on the religious views of the perpetrator - and then crowing about how your team is winning by not molesting as many kids.
I don’t care what denomination they are, these pervs-in-a-collar deserve equally cruel treatment to that which they dished out.
Let me go out on a limb - this guy got caught diddling his little cousin 40 years ago. I suggest that there are probably hundreds of victims that could be identified before and after this time, if someone cared enough to do so. These guys don’t stop just because they were caught (or even caught multiple times).
Where is the concern for the victims - both identified and not identified here?
Only concern I see from this post is for what team he’s on. That is a sick, sick pedophile-enabling attitude.
Your the one that called the congregation sheep and feel that the selection of a pastor should come from a higher authority within the church that thinks they know what's best for their sheep.
That's fine if you feel that way, but own it. Don't accuse me of twisting your words around while now making references to Jesus as the Shepperd.
Try this on for sweeping generalizations:
By 1990, the number of cases of sexual abuse had dropped by more than 90% since the late 1970s. By 2000, it dropped another 70%.
Source: http://www.usccb.org/nrb/johnjaystudy/
>> Granted this is anecdotal, but it seems that priestly shenanigans aren’t ancient history. <<
Oh, no! A priest went jogging in the nude!
>> It takes some kind of sickness to be comparing child molesters and categorizing them based on the religious views of the perpetrator - and then crowing about how your team is winning by not molesting as many kids. <<
It takes some kind of sickness to yield that from my comments!
First, let’s not forget that this is PRECISELY what the PROTESTANTS on this thread ARE doing.
Second, read my points:
1. Sexual abuse of minors is not at all isolated to the Catholic Church; The problem exists similarly in scope in Protestant denominations.
2. Because of the lawsuits, and specifically NOT because of any moral inferiority or superiority, the scope of the problem is far better measured within the Catholic Church.
3. Similar lawsuits do not exist in non-hierarchical chuches because the denomination has no legal or fiduciary responsibility for the individual congregations.
4. The various denominations have declined to take measures to make themselves more responsible for preventing serial abuse. Those measures would make them more legally and fincancially exposed, but would be very helpful at preventing further abuse.
“It takes some kind of sickness to yield that from my comments!”
Only one of us is sick. I am concerned for past identified and unidentified victims of collared criminals.
One of us is more concerned with what team the perpetrators are on.
I get your point - it’s just not the right point for this thread. It’s just inappropriate. You’re not the only one.
Is it your contention that this priest only molested ONCE?
If it is not, what do you think should be done about it?
He thrived in a bureaucracy for 40 years, given what pedophiles are, it is a certainty that he had many more victims. Who cares about them? Or do they matter only when they file an insurance claim? I care about the victims not insurance claims. I am curious as to why you care about insurance claims, before caring about the actual victims of this gay pedophile.
I’m happy to let this exchange with you come to an end.
May God bless you always.
>> I get your point - it’s just not the right point for this thread. It’s just inappropriate. You’re not the only one. <<
I agree it’s not appropriate for the thread, but I intend to defend against slander. Why do you call me out on it, and not the ones who twisted this thread to this purpose?
>> Is it your contention that this priest only molested ONCE? <<
By “this priest,” you mean the would-be nobel-laureate in the article?
If so, I have no idea. But I think we share a strong suspicion that there are more, since such miscreants are usually serial offenders.
>> If it is not, what do you think should be done about it? <<
Well, the goals certainly need to be bringing the guilty to justice, preventing further abuse, and righting any damage done to the best extent possible. To answer in any greater detail HOW to do that, I’d need a more specific question.
>> Who cares about them? Or do they matter only when they file an insurance claim? I care about the victims not insurance claims. I am curious as to why you care about insurance claims, before caring about the actual victims of this gay pedophile. <<
My point about bringing up insurance claims was to CRITICIZE the fact that that seems to be the only thing driving action on the part of several Protestant denominations, even to this date, and that it also seems to be the only way of tracking how widespread the problem is.
I thought that was Pat Buchanan's title.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.