Posted on 11/16/2006 9:54:57 AM PST by presidio9
The US Roman Catholic Church has asked a criminology school to delve into the darkest pages of its history by probing the causes of a priest sex abuse scandal.
At a meeting due to end Thursday in the eastern city of Baltimore, the US Conference of Catholic Bishops voted to disburse 335,000 dollars to fund the first three phases of a study by New York's John Jay College of Criminal Justice.
"It will be a groundbreaking study, never done before in the US, nor in the world," Bishop Gregory Aymond, who chairs the Committee for the Protection of Children and Young People, told AFP.
"We don't know what would come out of it, but we are going to tell the truth," said Aymond, of Austin, Texas.
In 2002, the John Jay College of Criminal Justice had made a list of complaints and pedophilia cases in the US Catholic Church since 1985, when one of the first scandals came to light with the case of a Louisiana priest.
The university will now look into the "social and historical context" of sex abuse to see if such cases are more frequent in the Church than in the rest of society, notably in schools and youth clubs, Aymond said.
The Church wants to "look at what is unique" in the priest sex abuse crisis, he said.
The first part of the study would be completed in 2008 and made public, although the names of suspected priests would be omitted.
In the second part, the university will evaluate the Church leadership's response to sex abuse cases.
"We want to see where we failed and made some mistakes, and learn from those who handled it well," Aymond said.
The study will also paint a psychological profile of pedophiliac priests by reviewing cases in treatment centers.
The review will aim to show "to what extent is a priest sexual abuser profile the same as the psychological profile of the non-priests who are sex offenders," Aymond said.
The university will also interview abuse victims and examine education at seminaries over the decades.
The majority of priests accused of sex abuse were trained in the 1960s and 1970s in seminaries where psychological tests and sexuality education have since been introduced.
A final phase of the study will make proposals on how to prevent sex abuse and help victims.
"Our goal is to ascertain the causes of the clergy sexual abuse crisis and if we need to change any method we have now," said Teresa Kettlekamp, the executive director of the bishops conference's Office of Child and Youth Protection, which was created in 2002, in the wake of the sex abuse scandal.
But the study would also be useful to schools and youth groups, Church officials said.
"The pathology of abusing children isn't unique; it's a societal problem," Kettlekamp said.
"We are hoping it will be a big, big help to the society in general," she said.
For the record, I agree and I don't claim to be superior to anyone, spiritually speaking, Christian or not as a matter of fact. It's a different thing to claim that a Church as a WHOLE is the only "true Church", and to claim that I, MYSELF, am superior. Those are two entirely different concepts.
Unfortuantely, the Catholic Church has been the one that excommuncates those that disagree with it.
In actuality, it's individual actions that excommunicate oneself from the Church. The Council of Trent, and others that listed "...let him be anathema" lists were just that, lists of things one would do, that would make ONESSELF an anathema. BTW, this is a Biblical concept as St. Paul himself directed in Gal 1:8 that anyone who preaches another gospel, "let him be accursed", which is another way of saying "anathema". Was St. Paul being unreasonable there?
Luther did you guys a favor by challenging church authority. It was then that the Catholic Church tried to clean up its act. If it did not it would have faded into oblivion
I actually tend to agree with this assertion to a certain point. I believe that God may have used Luther, in the beginning, to bring much needed change to the Church at the time. However he over extended himself, by not only trying to fix some wrongs in the Church (which, by the way, weren't official Church teachings, simony never was or is; they were the sins of powerful leaders in the Church, thus personal sins by fallible people again), but then leaving the Church to start his own. Luther was quite egomaniacal, btw, I'm sure you knew that.
Apart from the reference to Peter's mother-in-law, what basis do you have for this?
Because there's sin in the world. It's really not that hard to see.
Exactly. They need an expensive study to figure this out?
The church is acting hypocritically when it accepts a married priest who converts to Catholicism.They only do that to subvert the protestant or orthodox wings of Christianity. Its another political move on their part.Did it ever occur to you that since you accept the fact that the Church is evolving that Christ is sending a message today which is , "Please clean up my church and bring in the women and the married men". The vineyard needs some new workers.
I have friends who went to Catholic schools too. You would think they would know their faith better than the next person, but they don't. If you don't understand the above, you have a lot to learn, and FR is not the best place to learn it.
Just that the phrase 'fall from grace' was used inaccurately.
The Bishops could buy and read Michael Rose's books and save themselves (and the parishioners who pick up the tab) the big expense of a "study".
One reason why I no longer donate to any "Bishops' Appeals".
You aren't a Catholic anymore, are you...
Beam me up!
"One robin don't make a Spring!"
That sums it up.
That's funny, I thought they did it because those men had a calling to the ministry and have no other way to support their families.
What do you call it when a married Protestant minister enters the Catholic church as a layman, because he wants to go where he's free to hear and believe the truth? I'm thinking specifically of former Episcopal priests who aren't willing to subscribe to calling homosexual acts anything but "sin", as they're being forced to do in the ECUSA.
Well, if it's some grand conspiracy to suck "good men" away from Orthodoxy and/or Protestantism, then it's failing miserably. Do you know how many married men are permitted to be priests in the Latin Church every year? Probably less than 1, on average. By the way, all this talk reminds me of the simple fact that it's not the "Catholic Church" that prohibits married priets, it's the "Latin Rite of the Catholic Church". There are approximately 20 rites in the Church, most (if not all) except for the Latin permit married priests. So, at worst, there's a "problem" with ONLY the Latin Rite; NOT with the Church as a whole.
Did it ever occur to you that since you accept the fact that the Church is evolving that Christ is sending a message today which is , "Please clean up my church and bring in the women and the married men". The vineyard needs some new workers.
I will admit it's possible; anything is possible with God. It's highly unlikely though, especially the part about "women priests" (assuming that's what you meant). That's about as possible as denying the Trinity. The discipline of celibacy might be changed, although that's highly unlikely.
Here is a FACT for you. Luther never wanted to leave the church. It was the Pope who excommunicated him and the Pope who did excommunicate him was a very flawed individual. Luther wanted to reform the church but the church was in no mood to listen to an upstart priest.The selling of indulgences and one way tickets to heaven for contributions was an example of how things got out of hand.Luther also got married. So thank God for Luther. He had his role to play.Have to go now but I enjoyed the exchange. God Bless You.
Evangelicals are spreading because they compromise with the culture? I'm not sure they would consider that a compliment!
Besides, we're not declining. Mainline Protestantism is declining. Catholicism is growing, especially in Africa and Asia.
I still maintain that ultimately it was Luther's choice to leave the Church. Ultimately he had a choice: To continue to stay to try to improve and/or reform from within, or go out and start his own church. I believe history showed he elected the latter. So, by his own actions, he excommunicated himself; the Pope may have formalized this in a statement, but Luther evidently didn't want to stay. Again, he was quite hotheaded and arrogant, as I believe some of his own writings show.
The last word is yours, if desired. I've enjoyed our exchange as well. God bless!
Do you know anyone who is a eunuch?
I try!!
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.