Sexual Abuse in SOcial Context: Catholic Clergy and Other Professionals

Catholic League Website ^ | February 2004 | Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights

[PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain]

Nice spin!

BigMack

[sinkspur]

Yeah anything to get the focus off the RCC. The focus should be on ALL of it anywhere, anytime, anyplace. And when it is an organization as large as the RCC AND covered up that is exactly where the focus should be.

The focus is there. If you've been keeping up, every employee that works with young people in a Catholic parish, school, scout troop, or religion class must have a background check done and take mandatory sessions on identifying child abuse.

I take a back seat to no one in condemning abuse, abusers, and bishop's who covered up.

But your attack has a very sectarian tinge to it.

And you've got some abusers in your own back yard to deal with.

[sinkspur]

Deal with your own abusers, Mack. As you can see, your denominations have plenty of them.

[Polycarp IV]

PNMBC are the worst offenders on the Religion Forum. Don't expect reason and logic to sway them from their self-righteous bigotry.

[PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain]

I have called no one here a name personally, I am addressing the article and some of the posts.

What is logical about saying that since every denomination has abuses that makes the catholis less nasty????

Why am I a self rightous bigot when I have not called any names, or flamed catholics any worse then I flamed ALL abusers.

Tell me, what does this article say if not what I am pointing out?

Becky

[PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain]

Find me some in the Independent Fundamental Baptist Church.

BigMack

[PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain]

If you've been keeping up, every employee that works with young people in a Catholic parish, school, scout troop, or religion class must have a background check done and take mandatory sessions on identifying child abuse.

That is not what I or this article was addressing.

And No, I don't have abusers of my own to deal with. I go to an independent church. As of right now, it has never had a problem like this. If it did, I would demand the preps be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, any one who tried to cover it also should be prosecuted. If this was not done, I would leave. I will not be associated with an organization who thinks that because everyone has this problem it makes it less offensive.

Becky

[PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain]

Happens in all religions, scout troops, schools, nursing homes, and medical practices.

I agree.

Catholics are simply pointing out that fact.

Why? What is the point of doing that?

Does that threaten you?

No. You all seem the one threatened since you have to always say "well your denomination does it too"

Becky

[PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain]

Oh boy this should be fun to watch you in action again. :)

BigMack

[PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain]

I went back and read this post again that you got so many pats on the back for:), It doesn't even address the issue of the article or what I am discussing. What the church has done or has not done, is not the point of the article. The point of the article is that everyone has these problems so that fact lessens our culpability.

That is what I am addressing. You're the ones throwing up a smokescreen with your name calling. You're the one's turing this into something it is not.

Becky

[PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain]

So what is the point of the article?

Indeed, to discuss the incidence of sexual abuse committed by Roman Catholic priests without reference to the level of offense found among the clergy of other religions, or to that of other professionals, is grossly unfair.

Why is it unfair excuse me, GROSSLY unfair to discuss the incidence of sexual abuse by priest without referenceing the level found among others? What is the point of that?

[GirlShortstop]

So what is the point of the article?

     The purpose of this special report is to put the recent scandal in the Catholic Church in perspective.

IN PERSPECTIVE - i.e., to present the facts that are known about sexual abuse.  It is after all, right at the top of the article.
It does not seek to exculpate anyone who had anything to do with priestly sexual misconduct, but it does seek to challenge those who continue to treat this issue in isolation.

You keep yipping about "this article says, the point of the article...."  It seems pretty clear that at least one of these conclusions can be reached:

• either you did not read it (the number of your posts that include a cited excerpt is ZERO) or,
• it's beyond your comprehension, or,
• the "challenge" disturbs your anti-Catholic "reality".

[PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain]

Nice formating!

BigMack

[sitetest]

Dear PNAMBC,

Certainly I've addressed the point of the article.

It was done as part of the total response of the Catholic Church in the United States to deal with the serious problem of sexual abuse by priests, deacons, and Catholic laity of children (yes, it isn't only priests who have been guilty, and we Catholics are trying to address the ENTIRE problem).

Part of the response has been a draconian policy of background checks, fingerprinting, training, and study, for EVERY SINGLE CATHOLIC involved in ANY CHURCH-RELATED ACTIVITY dealing with children. My executive assistant has kids in the local Catholic school. She is required to monitor recess after lunch twice a month. She was finger-printed, had a background check, and took a mandatory class.

Our Knights of Columbus Council sponsors Basketball Free Throw Contests, Soccer Shoot-Outs, Oratory Contests, and other child-centered events. Any person wishing to assist in putting on these functions must receive a background check, be fingerprinted, and take training. Including the guy who catches the basketballs under the hoop.

Our response, once we realized the extent of the problem, has been to take the most drastic measures to bring it to an end.

Another part of our response to see if our share of this regrettably universal problem is worse than other folks. Why? Because that might mean that all the background checks in the world are insufficient. If there is something endemic to the Catholic Church in the United States that is causing this problem, then we needed to find out. One clue would be if we found that the rates of abuse in the Catholic Church in the US were worse than those of comparable non-Catholic organizations.

As well, the anti-Catholic bigots, here at FR, and in the wider world, were telling us that our problems are a result of the "unbiblical, unnatural" practice of celibacy, a product of our "false teachings", the natural outcome of our "non-Christian" Church.

Well, lo and behold, we find now the shoe is on the other foot! It turns out that we Catholics, overall, have the LOWEST abuse rate of any organization of any size.

So much for celibacy being the problem! So much for our "false teachings", etc., etc.

We aren't saying, "Oh, we're doing pretty good compared to the rest of you."

If we were as wicked as the anti-Catholics, we might impugn Protestants and others by saying, "Oh, what is wrong with your denominations that your rates of abusers are higher than ours? You must be unbiblical, blah, blah, blah."

But that isn't what we wish to say. We wish to say that if our rates are the lowest, than the false, anti-Catholic, bigoted remarks that we have had to live with recently are just that: false, anti-Catholic, and bigoted.

We aren't "comfortable" with anything. Otherwise, our Church would not be going through the upheaval we are experiencing, doing what we're doing to try to eradicate this abomination. It is at great expense, terrible inconvenience, significant disruption to parish life, personal embarrassment (try explaining to a non-Catholic co-worker that you have to go get FINGERPRINTED to watch the playground at recess) that we have implemented these policies. Are these the things "comfortable" folks do??

That we gathered data to assess the problem is not something to be used against us. It is a real sign of someone's moral sickness that they would use this against us, to say, "Oh, you're just trying to get yourselves off the hook."

We are trying to find the truth about these things, so that we may understand how to make things better.

As well, the results here vindicate us against our bigoted enemies, who maligned us when we were down and hurting. Now our enemies are proven false by the data, that their false, hurtful words against the Catholic Church are entirely without merit.

And our enemies now attack us for using the data to defend our Church against calumny.

Sick, just sick.


sitetest

[PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain]

What is the point of putting it in prespective according to other denominations amount of abusive people? I honestly cannot see a point to that.

I did excerpt part of the article (i.e #40) my posts. Your saying I didn't shows you haven't read all the posts. I will be honest also, and say I did not read the whole article.

Alot of my responses have been directed at the catholic responses to the article.

Becky

[sitetest]

Ping to #76.

[GirlShortstop]

What is the point of putting it in prespective according to other denominations amount of abusive people? I honestly cannot see a point to that.

I did excerpt part of the article (i.e #40) my posts.

Firstly, I apologize, when I read all the postings, and your's at 40, I did not see your excerpt.  Regarding the presentation that The Catholic League has made:  have you ever considered that we Catholics want to know the truth?   The topic of sexual abuse is not presented in a secular way when it is raised.  We need to know about that "non-secular world" of facts.  I don't see that as wrong.

[PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain]

We need to know about that "non-secular world" of facts.

Why?

Becky