The Clerical Child Abuse Thread (merged)

gigino

ISAW wrote: »

The cases of priests accused of paedophilia in the true sense have been about three hundred in nine years.
Mostly from the United States which, in the years 2003-2004, represented around eighty percent of total cases. That's 300 over 9 years in at least a million clerics over the same period. fifteen hundredths or 0.15%

In the USA alone when the RCC was examined " Limiting their study to plausible accusations made between 1950 and 1992, John Jay researchers reported that about 4 percent of the 110,000 priests active during those years had been accused of sexual misconduct involving children. Specifically, 4,392 complaints (ranging from "sexual talk" to rape) were made against priests by 10,667 victims. (Reports made after 2002, including those of incidents that occurred years earlier, are released as part of the church's annual audits.)"

http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2010/04/07/mean-men.html


While you downplay reports of RCC clerical abuse, do not forget in the real world most people either know some Catholic priests or have relatives or close friends who who catholic priests. Its no great surprise that a Wall Street Journal-NBC News poll found that 64 percent of those queried thought Catholic priests "frequently'' abused children .
http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2010/04/07/mean-men.html

gigino

The Quadratic Equation wrote: »

The Catholic church had to fund this independent study. Why ?

because there was so many thousands of scandals. Our government in its report found that clerical child abuse was " endemic" in the Irish RCC. Obviously there was a lot of disquiet in the RCC in the States too, and fair play to the RCC for finally facing up to facts, carry out a study and trying to reduce or eliminate the problem. Even the RCC in Ireland nowadays is seemingly quite different to the church of 10 or 30 or 50 years ago.

The Quadratic Equation

gigino wrote: »

because there was so many thousands of scandals. Our government in its report found that clerical child abuse was " endemic" in the Irish RCC. Obviously there was a lot of disquiet in the RCC in the States too, and fair play to the RCC for finally facing up to facts, carry out a study and trying to reduce or eliminate the problem. Even the RCC in Ireland nowadays is seemingly quite different to the church of 10 or 30 or 50 years ago.

Wrong again. No one else was interested in carrying out an independent factual study, as an independent unbiased study would only deal with the actual facts not the bias and prejudice beloved of the vested intrests.

ISAW

gigino wrote: »

In the USA alone when the RCC was examined " Limiting their study to plausible accusations made between 1950 and 1992, John Jay researchers reported that about 4 percent of the 110,000 priests active during those years had been accused of sexual misconduct involving children. Specifically, 4,392 complaints (ranging from "sexual talk" to rape) were made against priests by 10,667 victims. (Reports made after 2002, including those of incidents that occurred years earlier, are released as part of the church's annual audits.)"

And ths significance opf those statistics i.e. that 4 % of US priests had been accused of misconduct with males and fermales up to the age of eighteen is WHAT exactly?

While you downplay reports of RCC clerical abuse, do not forget in the real world most people either kno

so what?
What is the signioficance of people knowing priests? And how do you suggest I am downplaying anything?

Wall Street Journal-NBC News poll[/COLOR][/URL] found that 64 percent of those queried thought Catholic priests "frequently'' abused children .

And the significance of that is?
Probably 99% of US people believed Saddam Hussaen had WMD and was helping Al Khyda with bases in Iraq.
But neither were actually true were they?
People believing things are truye dont make them true.
And the reason they believe is because people like you keep saying it as if it was significant. It isnt ! It does not prove anything.

ISAW

gigino wrote: »

because there was so many thousands of scandals.

REally?
Yet you can'tactually name maybe more than ten priests over 50 years?
And none in the last ten years!
This is when ther are several thousand rapes annually.

Our government in its report found that clerical child abuse was " endemic" in the Irish RCC.

LOL! gigino is still banging on about "endemic" !
What level of child abuse is endemic? Less than 1% or oless than 0.1% ?
If so it is endemic to any group you care to mention.

Obviously there was a lot of disquiet in the RCC in the States too, and fair play to the RCC for finally facing up to facts, carry out a study and trying to reduce or eliminate the problem.

LOL. gigino now accepts the resluts he tried to claim were not valid?
Look gigino that report ssuggestsabuses at levels much lower than outside the RCC. so how come you regard it as showing a problem compared to the rest of society?

Even the RCC in Ireland nowadays is seemingly quite different to the church of 10 or 30 or 50 years ago.

indeed. That is the whole issue! The church has reduced an already tiny level to zero. elsewher outside the church over 200 kids are dead and thousands of rapes happen annually.

gigino

ISAW wrote: »

And how do you suggest I am downplaying anything?

Because in the USA alone ( not even a Roman Catholic Country or a country with a majority of Christians who were RC ) when the RCC was examined " Limiting their study to plausible accusations made between 1950 and 1992, John Jay researchers reported that about 4 percent of the 110,000 priests active during those years had been accused of sexual misconduct involving children. Specifically, 4,392 complaints (ranging from "sexual talk" to rape) were made against priests by 10,667 victims. (Reports made after 2002, including those of incidents that occurred years earlier, are released as part of the church's annual audits.)"



You wrote / claimed "The cases of priests accused of paedophilia in the true sense have been about three hundred in nine years.
Mostly from the United States which, in the years 2003-2004, represented around eighty percent of total cases. That's 300 over 9 years in at least a million clerics over the same period. fifteen hundredths or 0.15%"


Saying you do not downplay anything is like saying Chemical Ali did not downplay the arrival of allied troops in to Bagdad, or Lord Hawhaw did not exagerate the greatness of the third Reich.;)
You have made perhaps a quarter of the posts on this thread and spent thousands of hours doing so : one wonders why you cannot still see what everyone else sees ?:)

ISAW

gigino wrote: »

Because in the USA alone ( not even a Roman Catholic Country or a country with a majority of Christians who were RC )

You must be joking ! it has one of the highest catholic populations in the world.
It has the largest christian and somewhere in the top five for Catholics ( which are the largest Christian group in the US) http://www.adherents.com/largecom/com_christian.html
Who is "downplaying" now?

about 4 percent of the 110,000 priests active during those years had been accused of sexual misconduct involving children. Specifically, 4,392 complaints (ranging from "sexual talk" to rape) were made against priests by 10,667 victims.

And the significance of that 4% figure is WHAT? exactly. And from WHAT page of the John Jay report do these 4,392 complaints come? I don't believe you even read it!

The 2006 Supplamentary Data says the following on page 4
CHAPTER ONE
The Shape of the Crisis of Sexual Abuse of Minors in the Church
1.1 Prevalence and regional patterns

The
dioceses, eparchies, and religious institutes reported information on 4,392 individuals
who had been the subject of at least one allegation of sexual abuse while serving in
ecclesial ministry between 1950 and 2002. We found that this count of priests with
allegations was 4.2 % of all diocesan priests in ministry for that time period and 2.7 % of
all religious priests in ministry in the same period.

You wrote / claimed "The cases of priests accused of paedophilia in the true sense have been about three hundred in nine years.

Yes cases in the Vatican files.

gigino

ISAW wrote: »

You must be joking !

No I am not. The USA is not a Roman Catholic Country, or a country with a majority of Christians who are RC. There are more Protestants in the USA than Catholics. Yet the nearest thing to an official investigation in a given time frame found there was " 4,392 complaints (ranging from "sexual talk" to rape) were made against priests by 10,667 victims"

ISAW wrote: »

And from WHAT page of the John Jay report do these 4,392 complaints come?

Read it and see ( if you read back through this thread you may find out ).

ISAW wrote: »

Yes cases in the Vatican files.

lol vatican files :rolleyes:

ISAW

gigino wrote: »

No I am not. The USA is not a Roman Catholic Country, or a country with a majority of Christians who are RC.

It isnt majority roman Catholic. so what? whatis the significance of that statistic?

There are more Protestants in the USA than Catholics. Yet the nearest thing to an official investigation in a given time frame found there was " 4,392 complaints (ranging from "sexual talk" to rape) were made against priests by 10,667 victims"

And the significance of those statistics are???

Read it and see ( if you read back through this thread you may find out ).

As i thought you have not even read a copy of it.

lol vatican files :rolleyes:

WEll you quoted from my comment on vatican files. i am not surprised you are as ignorant of that source as you are of the contents of the John Jay report which you didnt even read!

gigino

ISAW wrote: »

And the significance of those statistics are???

you claimed "The cases of priests accused of paedophilia in the true sense have been about three hundred in nine years. Mostly from the United States which, in the years 2003-2004, represented around eighty percent of total cases"

Yet the reality is , even if you just take the United States and limiting their study to plausible accusations made between 1950 and 1992, 4,392 complaints (ranging from "sexual talk" to rape) were made against priests by 10,667 victims. (Reports made after 2002, including those of incidents that occurred years earlier, are released as part of the church's annual audits.

I suggest you read some of the reports. Certainly you could learn a lot.

ISAW

gigino wrote: »

you claimed "The cases of priests accused of paedophilia in the true sense have been about three hundred in nine years. Mostly from the United States which, in the years 2003-2004, represented around eighty percent of total cases"

The cases of actual convicted and proved pedophiles known to the Vatican and in Vatican files.

Yet the reality is , even if you just take the United States and limiting their study to plausible accusations made between 1950 and 1992, 4,392 complaints (ranging from "sexual talk" to rape) were made against priests by 10,667 victims.

Complaints are NOT convictions! The Nazis had probably tens of millions0of complaints about Jews - does that mean all the Jews were criminals?
The US had loads and loads and loads of complaints about Saddam having WMD.
Does that mean Saddam actually had any WMD?

You don't even know the figures to which you refer.
How many of the 4,392 complaints related to "sexual talk" and how many to rape.
If ten percent of the figures related to rape and if 75% of them were true you would end up with about 300.

(Reports made after 2002, including those of incidents that occurred years earlier, are released as part of the church's annual audits.

So what? What is the significance of reports after 2002?

I suggest you read some of the reports. Certainly you could learn a lot.

You haven't even read the John Jay Report!

Anyway for your above reference 2010 report: page 4
In the past year
30 accusations were made
8 were plausible - according to law enforcement - that means they believe iot is worth persueing not that it is true. also the clerics concerned may actually already be convicted or dealt with elsewhere.
7 were false
12 were not necessarily child violations
3 still under investigation

thats the 30 from that year. No actual unique new found guilty cases.
There were hundreds of people from previous decades who did complain in 2010. Of 574 priests mentioned by them most were either already mentioned already dealt with or dead.
By "most" I mean:
253 are already dead
239 already removed from ministry or laisised ( note this does not necessarily mean guilty)
275 already mentioned in previous audits

Obviously the above overlap somewhat since it covers more than 574.

It still does not give a picture of more than hundreds of cases not all proven on a wide spread of accusations. I have no reason to doubt the "about 300" figure in the short period I mentioned of the 3,000 or so cases ( including "adult housekeeper having child for local priest" or "priest leaving with local woman and getting married" cases)

You have not read the reports so don't please pretend you have any knowledge about the subject and PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE don't ask me or anyone else to "read the reports" that you yourself have not bothered to read.

By comparison there are about a million and a half of rapes in the US annually.
http://www.nationmaster.com/country/us-united-states/cri-crime

That's 1.5 million per year compared to 300 over 50 years!
To be fair the rape figures include adult rapes but the child sexual abuse ones ( which is quyite broad in the report above - the one you didn't read) are still in the tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands.

It is still less than 1% of abusers!

joseph brand

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/02/world/europe/02church.html?pagewanted=all

Mr. Fesselmann also had no way of knowing that his case would create repercussions for the church that went well beyond his own grievance. His and other cases of abuse caused the church to transfer the abusive priest, the Rev. Peter Hullermann, to Munich in 1980, a decision that required the approval of Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, then the archbishop of Munich and Freising, now the pope. Father Hullermann was given therapy in Munich, but he was allowed to resume his pastoral duties almost immediately.

Father Hullermann went on to molest other boys and was not formally suspended until last month, after the German church acknowledged that “bad mistakes” were made in the handling of his case. The church said the decision to allow the priest to resume his duties in 1980 was made solely by Cardinal Ratzinger’s top aide at the time, but church officials also said the future pope was sent a memo about the reassignment.

Lovely Pope. Almost got away with it.

Typical Irish Catholic: "Ah sure, he was only fiddlin' with them boys, stop having a go at the church". "They're not ALL like that".

Oral sex from a child and anal rape of a minor apparently is classed as fiddlin.

joseph brand

ISAW wrote: »

The cases of actual convicted and proved pedophiles known to the Vatican and in Vatican files.

You haven't even read the John Jay Report!

Anyway for your above reference 2010 report: page 4
In the past year
30 accusations were made
8 were plausible - according to law enforcement - that means they believe iot is worth persueing not that it is true. also the clerics concerned may actually already be convicted or dealt with elsewhere.
7 were false
12 were not necessarily child violations
3 still under investigation

thats the 30 from that year. No actual unique new found guilty cases.
There were hundreds of people from previous decades who did complain in 2010. Of 574 priests mentioned by them most were either already mentioned already dealt with or dead.
By "most" I mean:
253 are already dead
239 already removed from ministry or laisised ( note this does not necessarily mean guilty)
275 already mentioned in previous audits

Obviously the above overlap somewhat since it covers more than 574.

It still does not give a picture of more than hundreds of cases not all proven on a wide spread of accusations. I have no reason to doubt the "about 300" figure in the short period I mentioned of the 3,000 or so cases ( including "adult housekeeper having child for local priest" or "priest leaving with local woman and getting married" cases)

It is still less than 1% of abusers!

The systemic rape of children by the church should never be compared to adult rape. The church prays preys on the weakest and most vulnerable. Many many children here have complained to their parents only to have those complaints fall on deaf ears. By comparison, an adult can go straight to the police. The church knows this. If one of their priests attracts a bit of 'heat', he gets shifted. But still, followers here like to say that it was just the one priest, nobody else knew.

I just cannot fathom what type of person sticks up for the church like you seem to be doing. I must assume that anyone who does, lacks any morals and is absolutely reprehensible. Whatever cases of rape by the church on children come to light, there are ten times as many that will not. So you can post your figures, but it's only the tip of the iceberg. Many priests have gotten away with what they have done, many are dead. They were ALL protected by the Pope. The rot goes all the way to the top. :mad:

gigino

ISAW wrote: »

You don't even know the figures to which you refer.

Yes I do.

ISAW wrote: »

You haven't even read the John Jay Report!

Yes I did.

ISAW wrote: »

You have not read the reports so don't please pretend you have any knowledge about the subject

says you, who was caught out claiming "The cases of priests accused of paedophilia in the true sense have been about three hundred in nine years. Mostly from the United States which, in the years 2003-2004, represented around eighty percent of total cases".

You do not have to cross the Atlantic to find 300 cases of Priests accused of paedophilia, old chap. That is a fact. I suggest YOU read the reports. You have made maybe 1000 posts on this thread and you still either (a) do not understand the figures or (b) misrepresent them / attempt to downplay the facts. One wonders why you cannot still see what everyone else sees ?

ISAW wrote: »

It is still less than 1% of abusers!

And even if we accept that figure of yours, you think that level of clerical child abuse from RC Priests is acceptable considering Priests are less than 00.1% of the population? I agree with the poster who wrote that he just cannot fathom what type of person sticks up for the church like you ( ISAW ) seem to be doing. I must assume that anyone who does, lacks any morals and is absolutely reprehensible.

gimmebroadband

Ahhhh yesssss the famous NY Times......

NEW YORK TIMES GUNNING FOR THE POPE?

Archbishop Dolan right to slam NY times for Anti-Catholic articles

CBS News, Anti_Catholicisim and the NY Times

gigino

I clicked on the first link above. After 10 seconds, I read Bill Donohue of the "Catholic League" writing : " In 2005, the Times reported that in 2002, Ratzinger believed that "less than 1 percent of priests are guilty" of sex abuse (it was later found that 4 percent was a more accurate figure). " Thats on the home page of the website. No need to skip to one of the other chapters on the website titled " why be Catholic".

Even though he is a strong Roman Catholic and his whole website is obviously pro-Catholic, he admits within a few sentences about 4 % of Priests are guilty of sex abuse. I would not waste my time reading the rest of his ramblings. If he is against the NY Times because he does not agree with one or two sentences a journalist there once wrote, then the NY times has gone up in my estimation. Must buy it next time I'm in NY.;)

gimmebroadband

You should actually apply for a job with them, seems like you both have the same thing in common- mis-quoting facts!

gigino

Ha Ha Ha


I quoted word for word from your link " NEW YORK TIMES GUNNING FOR THE POPE? ".

I copied and pasted what the mysterious Bill Donohue of the "Catholic League" wrote. Any oddball can set up a "Catholic League" and their own website and write their own drivel and try to recruit people in to the RCC. If you dispute what he says, take it up with him : I was just quoting him, seeing as you provided his website as a link. He seems to be an extreme Catholic ; I take it you do not agree with his figure of 4% of Priests etc ?
Sure God help him, he is only trying to minimise the problem in the States. People here like ISAW are trying to minimise the figures further, saying it was only 1% etc, but he got caught out in his figures.

gigino

gimmebroadband wrote: »

Ahhhh yesssss the famous NY Times......

and I see our own famous RTE news has a piece today about "
Irish abuse survivor Marie Collins has told a symposium in Rome of the abuse she suffered as a 13-year-old at the hands of a paedophile priest, and the subsequent cover-up."
http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0207/vatican.html

Why is our good Catholic RTE reporting this, they usually do not give coverage to such stories....they get a bit boring and repetitive there are so many of them.....oh its because she is at a symposium in Rome

The Quadratic Equation

joseph brand wrote: »

Typical Irish Catholic: "Ah sure, he was only fiddlin' with them boys

A typically, offensive, prejudiced, sectarian, bigoted slur more like.

I thought this was the Christianity forum ?

Is it permitted to talk about other denominations like that here ?

The Quadratic Equation

gigino wrote: »

Why is our good Catholic RTE reporting this, they usually do not give coverage to such stories....they get a bit boring and repetitive there are so many of them.....oh its because she is at a symposium in Rome

You're right, they usually invent and hype hysterical agenda stories a la slime-time instead of impartially presenting the facts.

How boring and annoying an impartial presentation of the facts must be for you.

gimmebroadband

gigino wrote: »

Ha Ha Ha


I quoted word for word from your link " NEW YORK TIMES GUNNING FOR THE POPE? ".

I copied and pasted what the mysterious Bill Donohue of the "Catholic League" wrote. Any oddball can set up a "Catholic League" and their own website and write their own drivel and try to recruit people in to the RCC. If you dispute what he says, take it up with him : I was just quoting him, seeing as you provided his website as a link. He seems to be an extreme Catholic ; I take it you do not agree with his figure of 4% of Priests etc ?
Sure God help him, he is only trying to minimise the problem in the States. People here like ISAW are trying to minimise the figures further, saying it was only 1% etc, but he got caught out in his figures.

Looks to me like the 4% refers to priests in BOSTON, not globally!

Worse, on Saturday, the Times ran a front-page story saying that in 2002, when the sex abuse scandal in Boston hit, the pope—then Cardinal Ratzinger—"made statements that minimized the problem." No quotes or evidence of any kind were given. "Minimize the problem." Interesting phrase. In 2005, the Times reported that in 2002, Ratzinger believed that "less than 1 percent of priests are guilty" of sex abuse (it was later found that 4 percent was a more accurate figure). The Times characterized his remark by saying he "appeared to minimize the problem." Looks like they got their talking points down just fine.

ISAW

joseph brand wrote: »

The systemic rape of children by the church should never be compared to adult rape.

Which is why I continually refer to "pedophile" abuse of pre pubescent children. I diont even include girls under 18 who look like adults. even though underage is underage by law. But the cases of children ( on the Vatican records) are about 10% i.e. the 300 from the 3000 or so sexual cases. about 250 of these are US, so the US cases are 5/6ths of the world total so dont present a smooth statistical analysis as part of a worldwide pattern.

Andway I wsa not I who compared them! i suggested you leave out the adult cases. And when it comes to child sexual cases I also referred to the hundreds of cases in Ireland and gave a CSO source for it.
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=76082151&postcount=2628
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 witness the anti clerical posters here acknowledging that.

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 might be worse than abuse wouldn't you?

The church prays preys on the weakest and most vulnerable.

Rubbish! the church never had a policy to abuse Children and neverfacilitated one.
Some nasty people who were clergy did abuse children and some ( by some i mean about ten in about a million) senior people ( i.e bishops) not working together but all ten acting alone) erred or protected the abuser by inaction. Since that the church has changed policies for selecting clergy and brought in child protection policies in advance of the State doing it. That is a handfull of abuse or senior management and today it does not happen at all compared to the hundreds of cases of child sexual abuse annually in Ireland and the hundreds dead in HSE care.

Many many children here have complained to their parents only to have those complaints fall on deaf ears.

When ? Fifty years ago? And the parents are surely to blame if they don't listen to their own children.

By comparison, an adult can go straight to the police.

That is a legal problem then not a church one.

The church knows this.

Which is why the church has brought in new policies in advance of legal changes.

If one of their priests attracts a bit of 'heat', he gets shifted. But still, followers here like to say that it was just the one priest, nobody else knew.

Thats rubbish. No policy ever existed to shift pedophiles. Some very rare cases did exist that some bishops facilitated but they were rare. And current policy does not allow that to happen. Even an accusation in the wrong results in the priest being removed from contact with children.

I just cannot fathom what type of person sticks up for the church like you seem to be doing.

I am sticking upi for equal standards. I dont see why people like you are making false claims about abusing priests which dont currently exist and which at their height were in the dozens of 25,000 clergy ( well say 5000 priests plus brothers and nuns) in Ireland.
I dont see why you are hyping this when it is currently zero and hundreds DIED in HSE care and hundreds of kids are sexually abused every year when there are ZERO abused by priests!

I must assume that anyone who does, lacks any morals and is absolutely reprehensible.

I must assume when you can't win the argument you attack the person!

Whatever cases of rape by the church on children come to light, there are ten times as many that will not.

Maybe the space aliens and unicorns are also doing it. If you claim it then show it! Thisis the same baiting they did of the Jews and it is the same thing we hear of Itinerants. One case of a drunken itinerant and they are all labeled as thieves and alcoholics.

So you can post your figures, but it's only the tip of the iceberg.

What TIP? You can't even post a case of clerical sexual abuse of a pre pubescent child in Ireland in the last ten years! And that is wuith hundreds of convictions per year in the courts!
To use your own logic and assume such cases exist. That means if ther are a few priests there are thousands and thousands of non priests given the FACT that records show hundreds of abuse ( not adult but abuse of children) every year

REcorded and detected 2004-2006 page 29
http://www.drugsandalcohol.ie/12894/1/CSO_gardacrimestats_2004-2008.pdf

0212 Defilement of a boy or girl less than 17 years old 137 81 123 66 76 55 77 45 82 52
022 Other Sexual Offences 80 60 55 42 55 37 99 56 72 43

Other includes child porn and insest
On page 30 you will find 23 convictions for these over 5 years

1,752 cases 23 convictions!

Zero cases involving priests!

Many priests have gotten away with what they have done, many are dead.

Please look up "argument from ignorance" under "logical fallacy". Have the unicorns gotten away with it too?

They were ALL protected by the Pope. The rot goes all the way to the top. :mad:

That is a load of bullsh1t! What evidence have you any pope protected any pedophile?

gigino

gimmebroadband wrote: »

Looks to me like the 4% refers to priests in BOSTON, not globally!

and if you look back through the thread you will see other surveys have found the % of clerical child abuse in the RCC to be similar in other places too. Why should Boston be that different?

gimmebroadband

gigino wrote: »

and if you look back through the thread you will see other surveys have found the % of clerical child abuse in the RCC to be similar in other places too. Why should Boston be that different?

Surely not the one's you keep harping on about, that have been endlessly debunked by ISAW? :rolleyes:

ISAW

gigino wrote: »

I clicked on the first link above. After 10 seconds, I read Bill Donohue of the "Catholic League" writing : " In 2005, the Times reported that in 2002, Ratzinger believed that "less than 1 percent of priests are guilty" of sex abuse (it was later found that 4 percent was a more accurate figure). " Thats on the home page of the website. No need to skip to one of the other chapters on the website titled " why be Catholic".

Even though he is a strong Roman Catholic and his whole website is obviously pro-Catholic, he admits within a few sentences about 4 % of Priests are guilty of sex abuse. I would not waste my time reading the rest of his ramblings. If he is against the NY Times because he does not agree with one or two sentences a journalist there once wrote, then the NY times has gone up in my estimation. Must buy it next time I'm in NY.;)

http://www.usccb.org/nrb/nrbstudy/nrbreport.htm#johnjay
based on a study of 10,667 allegations against 4,392 priests accused of engaging in sexual abuse of a minor between 1950 and 2002. The number 4,392 represents four percent of the 109,694 priests in active ministry during that time.

But the FOUR percent were only alleged! If you look into the report the allegations were substantiated for 1,872 priests - less than TWO per cent.

http://www.catholicleague.org/resear...al_context.htm
According to a survey by the Washington Post, over the last four decades, less than 1.5 percent of the estimated 60,000 or more men who have served in the Catholic clergy have been accused of child sexual abuse (iv) According to a survey by the New York Times, 1.8 percent of all priests ordained from 1950 to 2001 have been accused of child sexual abuse.[v] Thomas Kane, author of Priests are People Too, estimates that between 1 and 1.5 percent of priests have had charges made against them.[vi] Of contemporary priests, the Associated Press found that approximately two-thirds of 1 percent of priests have charges pending against them.[vii]

iV Alan Cooperman, “Hundreds of Priests Removed Since ‘60s; Survey Shows Scope Wider Than Disclosed,” Washington Post, June 9, 2002, p. A1.

[v]Laurie Goodstein, “Decades of Damage; Trail of Pain in Church Crisis Leads to Nearly Every Diocese,” New York Times, January 12, 2003, Section 1, p. 1.

[vi] Interviewed by Bill O’Reilly, Transcript of “The O’Reilly Factor,” May 3, 2002.

[vii] Bob von Sternberg, “Insurance Falls Short in Church Abuse Cases; Catholic Dioceses are Forced to Find other Sources to Pay Settlements,” Star Tribune, July 27, 2002, p. 1A.


http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=65509576&postcount=862
According to a survey by the Washington Post, over the last four decades,
less than 1.5 percent of the estimated 60,000 or more men who have served in
the Catholic clergy have been accused of child sexual abuse.
Alan Cooperman, "Hundreds of Priests Removed Since '60s; Survey Shows Scope
Wider Than Disclosed," Washington Post, June 9, 2002, p. A1.
According to a survey by the New York Times, 1.8 percent of all priests
ordained from 1950 to 2001 have been accused of child sexual abuse.
Laurie Goodstein, "Decades of Damage; Trail of Pain in Church Crisis Leads
to Nearly Every Diocese," New York Times, January 12, 2003, Section 1, p. 1.

Thomas Kane, author of Priests are People Too, estimates that between 1 and
1.5 percent of priests have had charges made against them.
Interviewed by Bill O'Reilly, Transcript of "The O'Reilly Factor," May 3,
2002.

Of contemporary priests, the Associated Press found that approximately
two-thirds of 1 percent of priests have charges pending against them.
Bob von Sternberg, "Insurance Falls Short in Church Abuse Cases; Catholic
Dioceses are Forced to Find other Sources to Pay Settlements," Star Tribune,
July 27, 2002, p. 1A.
In fact the stats are HIGHER for Jews and Protestants but that again is a
DIFFERENT topic!

The data on the Protestant clergy tend to focus on sexual abuse in general,
not on sexual abuse of children. Thus, strict comparisons cannot always be
made. But there are some comparative data available on the subject of child
sexual molestation, and what has been reported is quite revealing.

In the spring of 2002, when the sexual abuse scandal in the Catholic Church
was receiving unprecedented attention, the Christian Science Monitor
reported on the results of national surveys by Christian Ministry Resources.
The conclusion: "Despite headlines focusing on the priest pedophile problem
in the Roman Catholic Church, most American churches being hit with child
sexual-abuse allegations are Protestant, and most of the alleged abusers are
not clergy or staff, but church volunteers."
Mark Clayton, "Sex Abuse Spans Spectrum of Churches," Christian Science
Monitor, April 5, 2002, p. 1

In the authoritative work by Penn State professor Philip Jenkins, Pedophiles
and Priests, it was determined that between .2 and 1.7 percent of priests
are pedophiles. The figure among the Protestant clergy ranges between 2 and
3 percent.
Philip Jenkins, Pedophiles and Priests (New York: Oxford University Press),
pp. 50 and 81.

Rabbi Arthur Gross Schaefer is a professor of law and ethics at Loyola
Marymount University. It is his belief that sexual abuse among rabbis
approximates that found among the Protestant clergy. According to one
study, 73 percent of women rabbis report instances of sexual harassment.
"Sadly," Rabbi Schaefer concludes, "our community's reactions up to this
point have been often based on keeping things quiet in an attempt to do
'damage control.' Fear of lawsuits and bad publicity have dictated an
atmosphere of hushed voices and outrage against those who dare to break
ranks by speaking out."
Rabbi Arthur Gross Schaefer, "Rabbi Sexual Misconduct: Crying Out for a
Communal Response," www.rrc.edu/journal, November 24, 2003.

A review in 2006 of child pornography laws in 184 countries by the
International Centre for Missing & Exploited Children (ICMEC) and other
organizations including software giant Microsoft shows that more than half
have no laws that address child pornography
^ "Child Pornography Not a Crime in Most Countries" (pdf). International
Centre for Missing & Exploited Children. 2006.

ISAW

gigino wrote: »

and if you look back through the thread you will see other surveys have found the % of clerical child abuse in the RCC to be similar in other places too. Why should Boston be that different?

I did look back and I re quoted the sources. They say about 1%. I have already shown you Boston or the USA are statistically different. Boston in particular might be different because it is not typical. Why because in general the hierarchy didn't use their authority to avoid prosecution or to cover up. In Boston apparently ( and I can be corrected) they did. The result was that the Boston Diocese was bankrupted. But far far worse than paying out any money is moral bankruptcy. I am not now and have never stated that some priests did abuse children . Just that
1. Priests are a tiny minority 1% or less of pedophile abusers.
2. The Vatican didn't cover up anything.

gigino

ISAW wrote: »

The cases of priests accused of paedophilia in the true sense have been about three hundred in nine years.
Mostly from the United States which, in the years 2003-2004, represented around eighty percent of total cases.

and then you admit it is much much more.:rolleyes: lol

gigino

ISAW wrote: »

. Just that
1. Priests are a tiny minority 1% or less of pedophile abusers.
2. The Vatican didn't cover up anything.

1. Just that Priests make up less than 00.1% of the population, so for this group to be one % ( most surveys say a lot more but you say 1% ) of abusers is very disturbing.
2. The Vatican and hierarchy did cover up abuse / transfer priests etc.

ISAW

gigino wrote: »

1. Just that Priests make up less than 00.1% of the population,

Maybe today in Ireland they do.
But you have no evidence that they did at the time they were a higher percentge of abusere i.e when they were at about 1%

so for this group to be one % ( most surveys say a lot more but you say 1% ) of abusers is very disturbing.

Anything more than zero is disturbing. Most surveys dotn say a lot ,ore. Most say the 1% reguion. In fact today in Ireland it is less than about 0.01% I reckon i.e one in ten thousand abusers over the last decade. so in relation to priests nowadays being 0.1% of the population then it is still less by a fqctor of ten! and that is even considering the fact that maybe 40% of the population is under 178 and so could not be included in the prosecution stats. i.e priests are a larger percentage of the population which could potentially be charged with a sexual offence.

2. The Vatican and hierarchy did cover up abuse / transfer priests etc.

And your evidence of coverups and transfers done by the Vatican ???