Skip to comments.Priests, Abuse, and the Meltdown of a Culture. The lessons of an important new study.
Posted on 05/19/2011 7:00:15 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
click here to read article
First of all, many are married. There are plenty of converted Anglican Priests AND many more Eastern Catholic Priests (full communion with the Pope, mostly married, not converts). So the issue is just with the various orders of Priests not allowing it. Over all there is not a prohibition on married Priests. The Church's rule not mine!
I think the historical reason for the prohibition of priest marrying is well understood. We didn't want priesthoods passing from father to son. In fact, if you look at a lot of early church writings it talks about excluding people from being Bishop if their family wasn't in order.
I am Anglican, and we say our church is built on Tradition, Scripture, and Reason. LIke the Catholic Church we hold Marriage as a sacrament. It makes no sense to me to say that Priests can not participate in one of the sacraments. In fact, I don't think it does to Catholics either - they get around this by saying that the Priest is necessary for the sacrament of marriage between two people to occur. So they are participating in the sacrament just not in their own marriage. At least that is what Catholic priests have explained to me. The church is a little schizophrenic on this - because when not talking about Priests being unable to participate it is just said that they are the chief witness and the couple are the givers of the sacrament. My marriage for instance isn't valid according to the Catholic Church (my priest was Anglican).
This tradition is not based on scripture but has a clear historical purpose that is no longer necessary, wasn't universal in the church until around 1000 years ago, and isn't even now universally enforced but is still dictating other major changes to doctrinal believes. Yet, more Catholics support women priests than married priests.
Yup. That sounds about right. They can make up new terms until the cows come home. It doesn't change the fact that these are some seriously twisted dudes.
And that happened in 2010? Somehow I doubt it.
Maybe of the cases (and I’m not condoning the molestation of children) were false and proven so in court. Only a small number of priests were ever found guilty.
You are aware, though, aren’t you that the press hates the Catholic Church? So we get the news (negative news, that is) about the Catholic Church and other abuse cases in other denominations are not reported.
“The Conference, through the Board, commissioned a research group at the John Jay College of Criminal Justice of the City University of New York to produce a descriptive study through a comprehensive survey of all dioceses and religious orders in the United States. These surveys requested detailed information about the number of allegations of sexual abuse of minors by priests, the nature of the alleged abuse, responses of Church leaders to allegations of abuse, and many other areas.7 The applicable time period is 1950 to 2002.”
This study was based on self-reporting. That may be why most of the cases involved priests who had died...and why there is a dramatic drop-off in incidents occurring within the last 30 years. Guess no one wanted to report that they had pedophile priests still in their diocese.
The other possible explanation is that the problem is gone - but to conclude that based on this study would be foolish.
And I knowpersonally of at least two priests who were accused falsely.
Does anyone know if the writer is describing confirmed sexual abuse, or some diluted catch all category?
Fact: The John Gay study denied that homosexuality caused the problem.
Do you support this contention?
Have you not noticed that the bishops that Pope Benedict SVI is putting in place in the United States are quite conservative and pro-life.
Are you not aware, either, of the rigorous examination that seminarians undergo? Two day psyche exams, character witnesses galore, personal interviews by many — and these go on for days and days........and then the seminarian gets to study for SEVEN or EIGHT years before being ordained?
Then you should support dealing with the problem instead of running away from it. All priests became suspect and many souls lost the faith.
All of the Baptist information is based on self-reporting, and there has been no Baptist study over ANY time period.
Are you only focused on the Catholics?
“Are you not aware, either, of the rigorous examination that seminarians undergo? Two day psyche exams, character witnesses galore, personal interviews by many and these go on for days and days........and then the seminarian gets to study for SEVEN or EIGHT years before being ordained?”
Won’t help if homosexuals are doing the choosing...
No blog, just the facts:
Sources: Reuters, Munich archdiocese
Then why did you choose to criticize the report?
Prolife? I have my gripes on that as well, but you change the subject. We were discussing the homo-abuse scandals and you avoided my question:
If they are not still in cover-up mode, why do they continue denying the homosexual infestation?
The report and article are a white wash of events.
They both attempt to minimize the evil that occurred.
Set in "FR concrete", too.
I'm not surprised some posters are wetting their pants.
These are precisely the exact points made by the "whack-a-mole" gang on FR, week in, week out and no studies, irrespective of their origins, no statistics, no arguments, are ever going to alter their attitude. Never.........ever. Of course they're going to scream "whitewash".
It's entirely evident by now that the general issue of sex abuse holds little interest for the FR hoi polloi unless the adjective "Catholic" is placed in front of it.
So be it.
The Church is being purified, painfully yet assuredly of this plague and in spite of the lavender mafia and their episcopal enablers, it will be just fine.
The report is flawed but not for the reasons parroted by the compulsive naysayers. It's flawed because it skirts around the issue of homosexuality. It says nothing about the widespread flouting of the Church's own discipline by bishops and seminary rectors concerning who may be ordained. It totally ignores this elephant in the living room, as Weigel states.
The fact that this study was even commissioned suggests that the USCCB is still groping around, hoping to be able to avoid the conclusion which is patently obvious to everybody else. This is their legacy. It's the legacy of AmChurch. The chickens coming home to roost. The American hierarchy thumbed its nose at Rome for decades with the "we'll do it our way" attitude and this is what they got.
It's a fitting epitaph for the AmChurch tombstone.
RE: Source for all of that?? Or are you fabricating it?
I believe TSgt is quoting from Reuters:
Factbox: European Catholic sex abuse cases in 2010
If you look at the bottom of the Reuters article, they cite their sources:
Sources: Reuters, Munich archdiocese
(Writing by Tom Heneghan and David Cutler, London Editorial Reference Unit)