The Clerical Child Abuse Thread (merged)

ISAW

Zorbas wrote: »

Gynaecology v priest ; quiet a difference in pastoral and medical care – do you not agree?. In which case you have introduced a red herring!

Nope! The idea is thata person should have to have the same experience as those they deal with. It does not stand up! The fact that they are different jobs does not change that. Police don't have to commit crime so that they understand how criminals operate.

2010 but 8 even though in state not church care are not under HSE remit.” - There you go again – somewhat incoherent!

The HSE were responsible for them.

HSE deaths – despite policies there are deaths and there is no dispute so far as I know. Not sure how this is relevant to child rape by priests

It is relevant to the argument of current abuse.
Currently we have no deaths and no abuse by clergy.
Currently we have over 200 dead when not in Church care.
I would think someone ending up dead is worse than abuse wouldn't you?

Protection policies: The most common event or setting in which the abuse (by priests) occurred was during a social event (20.4%), while visiting or working at the priest’s home (14.7%), and during travel (17.8%).”

When did this happen? Not currently?
And was the abuse not always when alone with the child?

Do you think that a dedicated paedophile would respect policies if such opportunities arose?

No I dont. which is why "fail safe" methodologies are used.

How will a priest be able to function if he has to be accompanied / supervised at all times?

When left alone with single children. Otherwise it isnt required. If they are in a public group or visible to all it isnt required. It applied to teachers too AFAIK.

Do you think that the role of the priest can be fulfilled if he is prohibited from counselling / providing pastoral care to anyone on a one to one basis?[/COLOR]

Very few professional councillors of children are priests. and yes because people might accuse them it is probably best not to put them under suspicion. This is what happens when a group is demonised - victims suffer all the more.

The same study in the US found that;largest group of alleged victims (50.9%) was between the ages of 11 and 14

Thisis a US study on which i will have to ask you for more details. It does not contradict the evidence that RCC clerical sexual abuse is mostly of older teenage boys.

Less than 13% of allegations were made in the year in which the abuse allegedly began, and more than 25% of the allegations were made more than 30 years after the alleged abuse began

Because ther was no culture or structure of reporting. Are you claiming that abuse today wont be reported till 2042?

In July, a report by the Irish government said the Roman Catholic Church in Ireland was covering up the sexual abuse of children by priests as recently as 2009, long after it issued guidelines meant to protect children.

What report?
Where in that report?
About how many clerical abusers?

That report accused the Vatican of tacitly encouraging the cover-up.

That report was wrong then! Where does hte report say it and what evidence does it use?

An example of a policy to protect the church was the practice of getting those abused to sign statements of confidentiality which precluded them from making such allegations in the future.

All covered earlier in the thread especially
- in the rare case of solicitation during confession crimen solicitatis
- to also protect the victim
- to enable quick processing of a case for example to award damages in redress cases without having to go through long trials on a case by case basis

ISAW

gigino wrote: »

Not now, but it was permitted of course in the early centuries of the church.

You missed the point. Priests can not marry but married people can become priests. Then should the spouse die it means they cant remarry.

How else can it be explained that 00.1% of the population is responsible for 4% of the abuse ?

It can be explained in your total misuse of statistics.

gigino

ISAW wrote: »

Priests can not marry but married people can become priests.

But the RC priests who abuse are not married.

Perhaps if the Priesthood had not the un-natural culture of enforced male celibacy, we would not have the situation where 50% or 48.5%* of priests are homosexuals.

There are obvious reasons why clerical child abuse is "endemic" in the RCC, to use an official report concluding adjective on the matter.


*Father Donald Cozzens, an author, psychologist, and Catholic seminary president in his book, "The Changing Face of the Priesthood," -- published in the year 2000 -- estimates that 50% of Roman Catholic priests have a homosexual orientation. Author and sociologist James G. Wolfe estimated that 48.5% of priests were gay.

Fanny Cradock

Zorbas, if you want to quote somebody correctly then you have to open and close the quote tags.

[quote!] the quote goes in here [/quote!]

Just delete the exclamation mark. I had to enter this in so you can see the example of the code.

ISAW

gigino wrote: »

But the RC priests who abuse are not married.

Almost allRC priests are not married. So from a sample of RC priests who do anything ( juggling, singing, soccer) almost 100% i mean 99.99% unmarried.
I would reckon abusing priests wh9o were married would be less that one in ten million 0.0001%.

Perhaps if the Priesthood had not the un-natural culture of enforced male celibacy, we would not have the situation where 50% or 48.5%* of priests are homosexuals.

Perhaps you might follow the other discussions in this thread instead of spouting your own opinions with a tabloid style "statistic" attached?
Linking homosexuality to celibacy is not proven butif it was it would be important because....????

There are obvious reasons why clerical child abuse is "endemic" in the RCC, to use an official report concluding adjective on the matter.

Which official report would that be?
From what page?
Ill bet you haven't even read it.

*Father Donald Cozzens, an author, psychologist, and Catholic seminary president in his book, "The Changing Face of the Priesthood," -- published in the year 2000 -- estimates that 50% of Roman Catholic priests have a homosexual orientation. Author and sociologist James G. Wolfe estimated that 48.5% of priests were gay.

You dint read Cozzens either did you?
AS usual you just copied out MY reference (http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_rcc.htm) and cherry picked what suited you.
But your academic plagiarism will be exposed when your ignorance of his work shows you haven't bothered to read the source.

lmaopml

Any kind of insinuation that homosexuality or indeed celibacy leads to peadophilia is daft and unfounded imo.

Keylem

gigino wrote: »

But the RC priests who abuse are not married.

Perhaps if the Priesthood had not the un-natural culture of enforced male celibacy, we would not have the situation where 50% or 48.5%* of priests are homosexuals.

There are obvious reasons why clerical child abuse is "endemic" in the RCC, to use an official report concluding adjective on the matter.


*Father Donald Cozzens, an author, psychologist, and Catholic seminary president in his book, "The Changing Face of the Priesthood," -- published in the year 2000 -- estimates that 50% of Roman Catholic priests have a homosexual orientation. Author and sociologist James G. Wolfe estimated that 48.5% of priests were gay.

You forgot to mention that the author is referring to the 'American' Priesthood. Your wording whether intentional or not gives the assumption that it's all Priests. I just thought that needed pointing out.

Quotation from a reader in feedback from Amazon.

What he (Author) has given us is a courageous and unblinking analysis of the crises of the American priesthood.

http://www.amazon.com/Changing-Face-Priesthood-Reflection-Priests/dp/0814625045

gigino

ISAW wrote: »

Linking homosexuality to celibacy is not proven

True enough, if 50% of American Roman Catholic priests are homosexual ( as reports indicate ) but how many are celibate ?

It may make an interesting different thread / poll : what percentage of Irish priests do you think are homosexual + how many do you think are celibate ?

There is nothing wrong with being homosexual. However think of the pressure of not " coming out". Of being trapped in a lifetime of un-natural forced celibacy. Think of the pressure on being on call sometimes 24/7, and the emotional and sexual frustration of not having a partner. So its no surprise some priests exploited the opportunity of ( they thought ) boys who were easily bullied. Bullied spiritually, phychologically and mentally. How else can you explain the "Endemic" ( to use the word the govered used to desibe it in the RCC ) child abuse in the RCC ?

Keylem wrote: »

You forgot to mention that the author is referring to the 'American' Priesthood. Your wording whether intentional or not gives the assumption that it's all Priests.

So given that the studies found 48.5% and 50% of American Roman Catholic priests were homosexual, do you think the figure for Ireland is less, the same or more ? A lot of American Catholic Priests have Irish blood. Maybe you think all the gay people emigrated and all that was left in Ireland was good celibate Priests , who never abused anyone?

Zorbas

The US report referred to in my previous post was:

The Nature and Scope of the Problem of Sexual Abuse of Minors
by Catholic Priests and Deacons in the United States

A Research Study Conducted by the John Jay College of Criminal Justice

http://www.jjay.cuny.edu/churchstudy/main.asp

Zorbas

soterpisc wrote: »

Also there are no current abuse cases before the courts abuse current day priests. ( I am saying abuse that occurs today or in the last 10 years)

For example a Priest will never have kids over to his house alone, give them lifts etc.. Even if he has never abuse or even inclined do, he simply won't put himself in the position to be even suspected.

So unless you are tell me that there are current cases of abuse before the court then we have to go with the facts, which are that no current abuse cases against priests have been reported. No Bishop can cover them up because it will land him in Jail.

However what we do now is that in the Ireland of 2011 that abuse is not happening,
So harassing current day priests for the failings of others is wrong, If they haven't done anything wrong they should not be made to feel guilty.

Looks like we wont have long to wait to prove you wrong:

[HTML]Serious failures in the handling of child sex abuse allegations against a priest in the Diocese of Cloyne are expected to be published tomorrow.

The final section of an inquiry will outline how former Bishop John Magee failed to deal with complaints in his Co Cork diocese against a cleric known as Fr Ronat
[/HTML]
Read more: http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/diocese-of-cloyne-priest-expected-to-be-charged-tomorrow-532698.html#ixzz1gubBDHmL
Last July the Cloyne Report found Bishop Magee, a one-time Vatican aide and papal envoy, deliberately misled authorities and failed to report clerical abuse allegations as recently as three years ago.


Read more: http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/diocese-of-cloyne-priest-expected-to-be-charged-tomorrow-532698.html#ixzz1guXHgGdn

Fanny Cradock

Zorbas, it's difficult to read your responses when you use code tags. Would you please use quote tags instead?

ISAW

Zorbas wrote: »

The US report referred to in my previous post was:

The Nature and Scope of the Problem of Sexual Abuse of Minors
by Catholic Priests and Deacons in the United States

A Research Study Conducted by the John Jay College of Criminal Justice

http://www.jjay.cuny.edu/churchstudy/main.asp

Have you read it?
Have you also red the "corrected" version?
Do you know the difference?

ISAW

Zorbas wrote: »

soterpisc wrote: »

Also there are no current abuse cases before the courts abuse current day priests. ( I am saying abuse that occurs today or in the last 10 years)



Looks like we wont have long to wait to prove you wrong:

Serious failures in the handling of child sex abuse allegations against a priest in the Diocese of Cloyne are expected to be published tomorrow.

The final section of an inquiry will outline how former Bishop John Magee failed to deal with complaints in his Co Cork diocese against a cleric known as Fr Ronat

It seems the Ronat complaint were from 1989 and the abuse happened before that.
So even in this cast the abuse isn't in the last 20 years let alone ten.

ISAW

Zorbas wrote: »

The US report referred to in my previous post was:

The Nature and Scope of the Problem of Sexual Abuse of Minors
by Catholic Priests and Deacons in the United States

A Research Study Conducted by the John Jay College of Criminal Justice

http://www.jjay.cuny.edu/churchstudy/main.asp

Zorbas why dont you just post EDIT: *Source for above as a edit into the previous post instead of a new post? And would you give a page reference in that report while you are at it?

soterpisc

Zorbas wrote: »

Looks like we wont have long to wait to prove you wrong

Zorbas.. on the cloyne report, bad as it is. It does not show any new cases of abuse committed by any priest over the last decade.

So I ask again. Do you agree that currently there are no new cases of abuse by priests in Ireland.

And if so then priests today are all innocent as any other citizen (teachers/ Sports trainers/ Doctors...) And they should be treated with respect on their own merit if they have nothing wrong.

So please.. Name 1 new case of abuse that was committed in Ireland by a priest in the last decade. Just 1 from 2000 to 2011.

Cato Maior

soterpisc wrote: »

Zorbas.. on the cloyne report, bad as it is. It does not show any new cases of abuse committed by any priest over the last decade.

So I ask again. Do you agree that currently there are no new cases of abuse by priests in Ireland.

And if so then priests today are all innocent as any other citizen (teachers/ Sports trainers/ Doctors...) And they should be treated with respect on their own merit if they have nothing wrong.

So please.. Name 1 new case of abuse that was committed in Ireland by a priest in the last decade. Just 1 from 2000 to 2011.

I would say that the chances are probably small as for the last ten years many parents have been utterly paranoid about leaving their children unattended with priests and likewise most priests are utterly paranoid about being unattended with a child for fear of a false allegation. The RCC has also greatly improved its child protection policies. The opportunity element of the criminal triangle (motive, means, and opportunity) is no longer as available as it once was.

I feel quite sorry for the many, many priests that are innocent of any crime or wrong doing in this regard who now live under a cloud of suspicion and prejudice. I still know a few priests and they do find it upsetting. One priest that I know works in a parish were their is a minder for the alter servers who never allows him to be on his own with the servers and monitors and conversation that he might have with any of them. Another priest I know had a mother snatch her child away from him when he leaned down to talk to the child after mass.

Still though, even thought there are no cases, one cannot logically say that no clerical child abuse is currently happening, but I would judge it to be far less likely that it would occur in today's situation.

ISAW

soterpisc wrote: »

Zorbas.. on the cloyne report, bad as it is. It does not show any new cases of abuse committed by any priest over the last decade.

So I ask again. Do you agree that currently there are no new cases of abuse by priests in Ireland.

And if so then priests today are all innocent as any other citizen (teachers/ Sports trainers/ Doctors...) And they should be treated with respect on their own merit if they have nothing wrong.

So please.. Name 1 new case of abuse that was committed in Ireland by a priest in the last decade. Just 1 from 2000 to 2011.

Meanwhile:
http://www.drugsandalcohol.ie/12894/1/CSO_gardacrimestats_2004-2008.pdf

Sexual offences:
There were 1,407 Sexual Offences (ICCS 02) recorded in 2008 representing an increase (3%) on the 1,366 recorded offences in 2007.

On page 29 you will note about 1,500 sexual offences every year Thats 15,000 in ten years. None of them priests as far as I know.

Even taking just child sexual offences there are hundreds per year and these are only the ones reported. None relating to priests there. But i don't wittness the anti clerical posters here acknowledging that.

marienbad

ISAW wrote: »

Meanwhile:
http://www.drugsandalcohol.ie/12894/1/CSO_gardacrimestats_2004-2008.pdf

Sexual offences:
There were 1,407 Sexual Offences (ICCS 02) recorded in 2008 representing an increase (3%) on the 1,366 recorded offences in 2007.

On page 29 you will note about 1,500 sexual offences every year Thats 15,000 in ten years. None of them priests as far as I know.

Even taking just child sexual offences there are hundreds per year and these are only the ones reported. None relating to priests there. But i don't wittness the anti clerical posters here acknowledging that.

Why should they ISAW ??

ISAW

Cato Maior wrote: »

I would say that the chances are probably small as for the last ten years many parents have been utterly paranoid about leaving their children unattended with priests and likewise most priests are utterly paranoid about being unattended with a child for fear of a false allegation. The RCC has also greatly improved its child protection policies. The opportunity element of the criminal triangle (motive, means, and opportunity) is no longer as available as it once was.

Sadly it seems elsewhere such policies are still trying to catch up with the Church.
Mind you even when it was at its worst and opportunity was ther for evil pedos to get into the priesthood the numbers of them were small compared to non clerical abuse e.g. less than one per cent of abusers.

I feel quite sorry for the many, many priests that are innocent of any crime or wrong doing in this regard who now live under a cloud of suspicion and prejudice. I still know a few priests and they do find it upsetting. One priest that I know works in a parish were their is a minder for the alter servers who never allows him to be on his own with the servers and monitors and conversation that he might have with any of them. Another priest I know had a mother snatch her child away from him when he leaned down to talk to the child after mass.

Not alone thata Bishop hugged a young man of 17 who had decided not to join the priesthood and told him he had dreamed he would make a priest butthat he loved him anyway and after all the media polaver, that Bishop was reported for suspected abuse and even after the 17 year old was told by the Gardai the DPP and everyone else it was not child abuse the story was made into a media myth and the Bishop resigned.

Still though, even thought there are no cases, one cannot logically say that no clerical child abuse is currently happening, but I would judge it to be far less likely that it would occur in today's situation.

The chances are hundreds of times higher that a child is even in risk of death when in non church hands. Over 200 dead while under the charge of the HSE in a decade.

ISAW

marienbad wrote: »

Why should they ISAW ??

Look up "balance" and "double standards" and "fair comparison" would you please?
Or read the Bible passage about beams and splinters.

marienbad

ISAW wrote: »

Look up "balance" and "double standards" and "fair comparison" would you please?
Or read the Bible passage about beams and splinters.

What utter condescending tosh, read the thread title for Ch&*$t's sake !
For all you know we could be campaigning every day for safety in sports work etc etc.

A crime is a crime end of, what is this obsession of yours always migating by comparision.

If you want a thread on Sex abuse in ireland fine - lets go for it.

If you want a thread on - is child abuse an Irish phenonenon lets go for it.

But please just stop this constant argument by comparision, it does neither your or your points any justice

gimmebroadband

What I believe ISAW wants to point out is the overstated blown up hype the media spews out to make it appear that 99% of the clergy were abusers instead of the 1% that were! Even when people on the street were asked how many of the clergy they thought were abuser, some said 50%, which goes to show how well the hype worked.

I was sexually abused as a child, by a family member (now deceased) and a school bully. I never told my parents until I was an adult, and I regret it to this day, it hurt me more to see them in so much anguish, it wasn't their fault as they didn't see any danger in letting our grandfather babysit us, especially when he was living with us! After I told my parents, I found out that he abused my other 4 siblings as well, who were all younger than I was! I forgive my abusers, but I'll never forget!

Many children don't tell because of shame and hurt and that it would upset the rest of the family! My father who died last year was tormented by what his own father did!

ISAW

marienbad wrote: »

What utter condescending tosh, read the thread title for Ch&*$t's sake !
For all you know we could be campaigning every day for safety in sports work etc etc.

A crime is a crime end of, what is this obsession of yours always migating by comparision.

The thread being about clerical abuse and sexual abuse of young children in particular
This particular comparison being:
sexual offenses by non RCC priests over the last ten years = about 15,000
Offenses by priests against young children =zero

If you want a thread on Sex abuse in ireland fine - lets go for it.
If you want a thread on - is child abuse an Irish phenonenon lets go for it.
But please just stop this constant argument by comparision, it does neither your or your points any justice

the point being the likes of you ranting about the media myth of clerical abuse when the comparison is
Priests=zero
Non Priests = 15,000!

But you would rather spend all your time looking for one priest so you can go on about it at length. It is the same tabloid media thinking that goes on about "dole spongers" robbing the state of thousands in rent allowance fraud when it happened in the 1980s and the houses they were renting were since rezoned and involved in a property scam costing the State hundreds of millions. But it is easy to photograph the few welfare spongers then go after the real big problems.

marienbad

ISAW wrote: »

The thread being about clerical abuse and sexual abuse of young children in particular
This particular comparison being:
sexual offenses by non RCC priests over the last ten years = about 15,000
Offenses by priests against young children =zero



the point being the likes of you ranting about the media myth of clerical abuse when the comparison is
Priests=zero
Non Priests = 15,000!

But you would rather spend all your time looking for one priest so you can go on about it at length. It is the same tabloid media thinking that goes on about "dole spongers" robbing the state of thousands in rent allowance fraud when it happened in the 1980s and the houses they were renting were since rezoned and involved in a property scam costing the State hundreds of millions. But it is easy to photograph the few welfare spongers then go after the real big problems.

Before going on another rant like this yourself ISAW and again going all over the place , do try reading my posts please.

Your tactic of spreading the blame everywhere and bringing all but the kitchen sink into every post is just boring at this stage and so demeaning to those who have suffered abuse at the hand of the clergy. You should know better.

The Quadratic Equation

marienbad wrote: »

Before going on another rant like this yourself ISAW and again going all over the place , do try reading my posts please.

Your tactic of spreading the blame everywhere and bringing all but the kitchen sink into every post is just boring at this stage and so demeaning to those who have suffered abuse at the hand of the clergy. You should know better.

ISAW has only ever presented an accurate and factual position. Nothing more, nothing less.

What is truly intresting, is the repeated ad nauseam spin from your side, in stark and glaring contrast to ISAW, has yet to produce a single, in context, correctly quoted, credible fact.

soterpisc

marienbad wrote: »

Before going on another rant like this yourself ISAW and again going all over the place , do try reading my posts please.

Your tactic of spreading the blame everywhere and bringing all but the kitchen sink into every post is just boring at this stage and so demeaning to those who have suffered abuse at the hand of the clergy. You should know better.

No. A recent poll said that people thought over 40% of priests had abused.. Media distortion has caused wrong perception of innocent priests who have never abused.

Facts are, and its not wrong to state them. There have been no allegations of abuse that has taken place in the last 10 years, none, nada, not one.

So how can it be demeaning to those who have suffered abuse at the hands of some clergy to defend that vast majority who have never abused. Why is it wrong to highlight that not one single abuse case has been brought forward in the last 10 years.

We need perspective... The Church has changed. Todays Priests are good honest people and are not those of 20/30 years ago.

Zorbas

Now all back to church - you have heard it exclusivley on Boards.ie The church has changed and over the past 10 years it has become respectable like all the rest of us who do not abouse and rape children and have some form of morality which demands that we live a life respectful of others. The church no longer sets itself above the ordinary citizen and is accountable to those it serves. It does not pass off responsibilty for its actions up to Rome but will face the court of justice and public opinion like everyone else. Cover up and shifting the problem elsewhere is a thing of the past lads.
Geepers the churches will be full again and you will be able to talk to the priest as long as you have a chaperone. Great!!

soterpisc

Zorbas wrote: »

So do you finally accept the facts...? Any current cases of abuse of the last 10 years?

All your posts are laced in biased cynicism. Show a little respect for both parties on this topic and argue the facts.

Manach

Zorbas wrote: »

Now all back to church - you have heard it exclusivley on Boards.ie The church has changed and over the past 10 years it has become respectable like all the rest of us who do not abouse and rape children and have some form of morality which demands that we live a life respectful of others. The church no longer sets itself above the ordinary citizen and is accountable to those it serves. It does not pass off responsibilty for its actions up to Rome but will face the court of justice and public opinion like everyone else. Cover up and shifting the problem elsewhere is a thing of the past lads.
Geepers the churches will be full again and you will be able to talk to the priest as long as you have a chaperone. Great!!

Pity the majority of the Irish chattering classes have not also changed. Always on the look out for another 3rd party to blame - from my youth it was the Brits, then up till lately it was the Church and now it is the EU.

marienbad

Manach wrote: »

Pity the majority of the Irish chattering classes have not also changed. Always on the look out for another 3rd party to blame - from my youth it was the Brits, then up till lately it was the Church and now it is the EU.

But from time time it was the Brits and the Church, I will give the EU a pass for the moment, But I agree with you though we are always very slow to accept responsibility our selves without laying some of it off on someone or something else.

This applies to us as a nation , as individuals and to our institutions , be they the Church , the banks , the Public service, the trades unions , the lot. Post colonial mentality I suppose.