“self righteous bluster that you personally”
So, is this going to get personal, or is it possible to disagree without becoming disagreeable?
“I am addressing the pedophilia specifically and there was still a lot of it.”
It’s easy to say “a lot,” but what constitutes a lot? Some percentage of the total? Some raw number? A number that is larger than seen in society at large?
“You can go on about the gays in the priesthood all you want, but that is outside of the topic I am bringing to the fore and I won’t really brook your attempt to change the topic of debate.”
The fact is that somewhere between 80% and 99% of the abuse of lay people was homosexual sodomy. What is your purpose in refusing to examine that?
“my primary source has been and continues to be people who were abused as children.”
What is your sample size? Did they report these things to you as counselor of some sort? How did it happen that so many people who were abused as children have chosen to discuss that excruciatingly painful topic with you?
“That does not, however excuse the church”
No, but it does serve to provide some perspective on claims that Catholic clergy are immensely more prone to this dastardly behavior than teachers or protestant clergy.
“You did not address at all the continued failure of the church to provide actual help for those that were harmed.”
You can, of course, insist that whatever has been done is inadequate, but the fact is that “continued failure” is far from the truth.
“absent a thourough and contrite effort to make amends to those harmed, the church absolutely will be judged in the public square.”
Inasmuch as the actions taken to date seem to have escaped your notice entirely, I wonder if any effort could possibly be adequate to placate you.
“While this concept is evidently foreign to your way of thinking”
Weren’t you complaining about assumptions just above? You do a great disservice when you presume that Catholics are less troubled by these things than you are.
We often see people make exaggerated claims, then allege that attempts to bring these exaggerations in line with fact are efforts to “whitewash” or “deny.”
The fact that some very evil things happened is not a license for unlimited accusation. As bad as these things were, a person still has an obligation to check his facts and hold his accusations to those the facts support.
“What goes around comes around, or, to put it another way - You reap what you sew”
That remark sounds like you think it just to browbeat people who had nothing to do with these events, who in many cases were not even born at the time. Do you think you have the right to punish people for transgressions that they neither committed nor condoned?
“It’s harvest time.”
And you’re the reaper? By whom were you appointed to punish the innocent?
Well stated. I frankly did not care to respond. The anti-Catholicism oozed from every word.