Pope Francis apologizes to abuse victims at Vatican Mass

posted at 2:01 pm on July 7, 2014 by Ed Morrissey

Pope Francis met for the first time with sex-abuse victims today, celebrating Mass with them at the Vatican and meeting separately afterward for 30 minutes at his residence. Francis begged their forgiveness and pledged to combat abuse throughout the church and the world, an effort begun earlier with a new task force to oversee the effort. One member of that panel, an abuse survivor herself, attended the Mass and the meeting:

Pope Francis begged forgiveness Monday from the victims of clergy sex abuse as he held his first meeting with several abuse survivors — but another victim called the gathering nothing more than “a PR event.”

The Vatican quoted Francis as expressing personal “sorrow” in his homily at a private Mass with six victims for the “sins and grave crimes” of clerical sex abuse against them.

Francis pledged “not to tolerate harm done to a minor by any individual, whether a cleric or not,” and promised that bishops “will be held accountable.”

“I beg your forgiveness, too, for the sins of omission on the part of Church leaders who did not respond adequately to reports of abuse made by family members, as well as by abuse victims themselves,” the pope said.

“This led to even greater suffering on the part of those who were abused and it endangered other minors who were at risk,” the pope said, according to the English translation of his homily, which was delivered in Spanish.

CNN framed the meeting as a long-overdue recognition from the papacy, but that’s not quite the case:

This may be the first time that Francis has met with the abuse victims, but it’s not the first apology from Francis or from a Pope. The Associated Press notes that Pope Benedict XVI met several times with abuse survivors before retiring last year and launched significant reforms within the church. Francis almost immediately escalated the effort with a demand to his administration to take “decisive action” against abusers within the first month of his papacy, and the subsequent launch of the Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors. 

All of this depends on actual results, though, and the Catholic Church has a long-acquired reputation of opacity on this issue to overcome. Small wonder that some advocacy groups consider this meeting as nothing more than “a PR stunt,” as one German group described it to the Associated Press. Begging forgiveness is one step toward ending that opacity, but that’s been happening for several years now. The personal meetings with Pope Francis, conducted privately, at least conveys that the determination to address the scandal reaches to the highest level of the Church. While the six survibors of abuse chose not to speak to reporters immediately afterward, the Vatican press office issued readouts of both the homily and the meetings, although not in detail for the latter:

“The invitees arrived at the Domus Sanctae Marthae by the afternoon of Sunday 6 July. While they were dining in the refectory, the Holy Father appeared to address a first brief greeting to them. The Pope first offered them a Mass, celebrated in the Sanctae Marthae chapel at 7 a.m., attended also by the companions, members of the Commission and a limited number of other collaborators. The formula of the Mass was for peace and justice.

During Mass, the Pope pronounced a homily for them in Spanish; each participant was given a translation of the text in his or her own language. After Mass, the Pope greeted the individuals present, as usual”.

“After breakfast, the Pope received the individual visitors, with their companions, for a private personal discussion in a room in the Domus Sanctae Marthae, one after the other.

The discussions lasted from 9 a.m. to around 12.20 p.m. The participants, after the discussions, expressed their emotion and their satisfaction at having been listened to by the Pope with such attention and willingness”. The director of the Holy See Press Office concluded, “the Pope showed that listening helps to understand and prepare the way to reinstate trust, heal wounds, and to open up the possibility of reconciliation with God and with the Church”.

In the homily for the Mass today, Francis emphasized the “toxic effect” that abuse has on faith and hope, and the betrayal by the Church to its victims. He praised the courage of those who have spoken out, and declared that the Catholic Church would purge itself of abusers and those who shelter them — and significantly mentioned better care in “priestly formation” in the future:

“On the other hand, the courage that you and others have shown by speaking up, by telling the truth, was a service of love, since for us it shed light on a terrible darkness in the life of the Church. There is no place in the Church’s ministry for those who commit these abuses, and I commit myself not to tolerate harm done to a minor by any individual, whether a cleric or not. All bishops must carry out their pastoral ministry with the utmost care in order to help foster the protection of minors, and they will be held accountable.

“What Jesus says about those who cause scandal applies to all of us: the millstone and the sea.

“By the same token we will continue to exercise vigilance in priestly formation. I am counting on the members of the Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors, all minors, whatever religion they belong to, for they are little flowers which God looks lovingly upon.["]

The Church has to endure some skepticism on these points, given the years of silence and cover-up that preceded these efforts over the last decade to address abuse. The proof will be in the delivery on these promises.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

I’m still waiting for the Church to repudiate Pelosi and her pro-abortion hordes.

Rix on July 7, 2014 at 2:06 PM

The infiltration of the priesthood by the gay activists and their agenda over a several decade period is at the root of this problem. The Church has taken major steps toward reforming the seminaries, and by and large the newly ordained priests coming out of the seminary have, for a number of years, been faithful to the truths of the Church. But it is going to take many years before the Church is purged of the perverse and corrupt elements that so invaded the priesthood.

That being said, expecting the media to provide the Church a fair shake on issues such as this is a pipe dream at best. The media is not interested in anything other than tearing down the Church. Don’t think that just because we have a socialist-leaning Pope now, who the media happens to agree with on a couple of issues, means that they are any less out to destroy the Church.

Shump on July 7, 2014 at 2:15 PM

The Church has to endure some skepticism on these points, given the years of silence and cover-up that preceded these efforts over the last decade to address abuse. The proof will be in the delivery on these promises.

Frankly, the statements of one or more popes means very little. The way that victims will be healed and others will not be harmed will be by individuals who are not popes.

I can understand that individual priests sinned. What I cannot understand is how the higher ups colluded and conspired to keep these situations quiet over many years in many different geographic areas.

EA_MAN on July 7, 2014 at 2:17 PM

Don’t just apologize. Do something to change things.

crankyoldlady on July 7, 2014 at 2:18 PM

The Church has to endure some skepticism on these points, given the years of silence and cover-up that preceded these efforts over the last decade to address abuse. The proof will be in the delivery on these promises.

I don’t anticipate much of a change of behavior for the American Catholic Church. A large percentage of American priests are homosexual.

I know, I know – everyone will be enraged and say “being Homosexual does not make one a pederast”. OK. That is fine. I don’t claim (or believe) that every homosexual is a child molester.

But, if the vast majority of Priest child-molester victims of the church are boys, doesn’t that indicate something? If the molesters were not homosexual, would they not have victimized little girls rather than little boys? I know, there is a huge brigade of people out there who will claim that gender has nothing to do with it, homosexuality has nothing to do with it, etc.

But common sense tells us that if that were true – the gender of victims would be at best even between girls and boys. In reality, if the perpetrator’s sexuality mirrored society’s (i.e., about 2-4% gay), than the vast majority of victims would be little girls, not little boys.

Of course, again, the usual suspects will argue that sexuality and gender have nothing to do with it, that child molestation is only about power, etc. Again, common sense tells us if that were true, then adult rape (which we are told is also about power) would have much higher numbers of men raped by men (not counting prison rape). But, those numbers (outside of prison) are staggeringly low.

So, common-sense tells us that sexuality does have something to do with whether the perpetrator targets male or female victims. Again, I am not arguing or claiming (and don’t believe) that all homosexuals are child molesters. But, if we are not honest about what happened, we cannot hope to solve the problem.

Swinging this all around back to the main point – the American Catholic church has a homosexuality problem in its priesthood and the “lilac mafia” (as it is called within the seminaries) will fight tooth and nail against being more open, etc. regarding abuse, because the truth is that the vast majority of the perpetrators are homosexual, and that is not something the lilac mafia wants out in the open.

There is a reason so many homosexuals joined the priesthood. And, the reason appears to be that these particular homosexual were also child molesters. Until that is explored and dealt with, the child-abuse issues will not be dealt with in the American church.

Monkeytoe on July 7, 2014 at 2:19 PM

When is the NEA going to apologize?

malclave on July 7, 2014 at 2:21 PM

The infiltration of the priesthood by the gay activists and their agenda over a several decade period is at the root of this problem. The Church has taken major steps toward reforming the seminaries, and by and large the newly ordained priests coming out of the seminary have, for a number of years, been faithful to the truths of the Church. But it is going to take many years before the Church is purged of the perverse and corrupt elements that so invaded the priesthood.

Shump on July 7, 2014 at 2:15 PM

I’m not convinced the Church has “taken major steps toward” reforming this issue.

I hope so, but only time will tell.

That being said, expecting the media to provide the Church a fair shake on issues such as this is a pipe dream at best. The media is not interested in anything other than tearing down the Church. Don’t think that just because we have a socialist-leaning Pope now, who the media happens to agree with on a couple of issues, means that they are any less out to destroy the Church.

Shump on July 7, 2014 at 2:15 PM

Monkeytoe on July 7, 2014 at 2:21 PM

I can understand that individual priests sinned. What I cannot understand is how the higher ups colluded and conspired to keep these situations quiet over many years in many different geographic areas.

EA_MAN on July 7, 2014 at 2:17 PM

The same sort of thing happens in sports. Remember the Penn State story. It isn’t always about sex. Gambling, cheating, etc. It’s always something.

crankyoldlady on July 7, 2014 at 2:24 PM

That being said, expecting the media to provide the Church a fair shake on issues such as this is a pipe dream at best. The media is not interested in anything other than tearing down the Church. Don’t think that just because we have a socialist-leaning Pope now, who the media happens to agree with on a couple of issues, means that they are any less out to destroy the Church.

Shump on July 7, 2014 at 2:15 PM

Hit submit too soon on the last comment.

I agree with you that the media hates the Church. But, I don’t agree with you regarding “a fair shake” regarding the abuse issue. The Church, based on its own behavior on this issue, does not deserve “a fair shake”.

The Church truly failed us, and failed itself for decades on this issue. At best the Church condoned the abuse. At worst it helped perpetuate it.

Monkeytoe on July 7, 2014 at 2:24 PM

I see it as a PR stunt.

As you note, Ed these meetings and requests for forgiveness have been done several times before, so this is not a newsworthy event. But the Pope got what he wanted — a PR story, including a non-newsworthy post out of you.

Dusty on July 7, 2014 at 2:24 PM

The infiltration of the priesthood by the gay activists and their agenda over a several decade period is at the root of this problem.

Shump on July 7, 2014 at 2:15 PM

It’s a good thing that you have no role here – either in determining the ‘root cause’ of clergy abuse or in enacting reforms to prevent it in the future.

verbaluce on July 7, 2014 at 2:25 PM

The same sort of thing happens in sports. Remember the Penn State story. It isn’t always about sex. Gambling, cheating, etc. It’s always something.

crankyoldlady on July 7, 2014 at 2:24 PM

I understand your point, but there is a huge difference between some football coaches who didn’t want to see their precious football program get tarnished and the Church.

there’s also a difference between looking the other way and ignoring someone’s crimes and covering-up crimes, while transferring the criminal and giving them access to more innocent victims to commit more crimes.

Monkeytoe on July 7, 2014 at 2:27 PM

It’s a good thing that you have no role here – either in determining the ‘root cause’ of clergy abuse or in enacting reforms to prevent it in the future.

verbaluce on July 7, 2014 at 2:25 PM

It’s an even better thing that you have no role in making any important decisions about anything anywhere.

Monkeytoe on July 7, 2014 at 2:28 PM

But, if the vast majority of Priest child-molester victims of the church are boys, doesn’t that indicate something?

Monkeytoe on July 7, 2014 at 2:19 PM

You left out how the abuse by Boy Scout leaders was mostly boys.
Well there you have it!
/

You might be havin’ a hard time understanding indicators….and factors.

verbaluce on July 7, 2014 at 2:29 PM

The same sort of thing happens in sports. Remember the Penn State story. It isn’t always about sex. Gambling, cheating, etc. It’s always something.

crankyoldlady on July 7, 2014 at 2:24 PM

Very similar, except that were talking about dozens, if not hundreds of priests over many years instead of Jerry Sandusky over a dozen or so years and in many geographic areas, Boston, Philadelphia, Minnesota, Ireland, etc… instead of Penn State. But other than that, very similar.

EA_MAN on July 7, 2014 at 2:29 PM

I understand your point, but there is a huge difference between some football coaches who didn’t want to see their precious football program get tarnished and the Church.

there’s also a difference between looking the other way and ignoring someone’s crimes and covering-up crimes, while transferring the criminal and giving them access to more innocent victims to commit more crimes.

Monkeytoe on July 7, 2014 at 2:27 PM

I’m sure there’s a nit-picky difference in legal terms and I bow to your expertise in the matter but the cover up and protect and circle the wagons attitude is in any group. Especially government.

crankyoldlady on July 7, 2014 at 2:30 PM

verbaluce on July 7, 2014 at 2:25 PM

It’s an even better thing that you have no role in making any important decisions about anything anywhere.

Monkeytoe on July 7, 2014 at 2:28 PM

Well you’ve shown above how much thinking you do on the basics.

verbaluce on July 7, 2014 at 2:31 PM

You left out how the abuse by Boy Scout leaders was mostly boys.
Well there you have it!
/

You might be havin’ a hard time understanding indicators….and factors.

verbaluce on July 7, 2014 at 2:29 PM

You really are a dishonest idiot. Please explain where I am wrong. Refute my argument – don’t add to it.

Or, is your point that homosexuals are pure of spirit and could never molest a child?

Is that your point?

You truly are one of the dumbest people I encounter on the internet. I have yet to see you make one logical argument supported by facts. Yet, you continue to think highly of yourself. It is amusing.

Monkeytoe on July 7, 2014 at 2:31 PM

Well, I mean, good on him.

In the homily for the Mass today, Francis emphasized the “toxic effect” that abuse has on faith and hope, and the betrayal by the Church to its victims.

This, especially.

I was at a high school reunion last weekend, and one of my best friends told me that his son had been molested by our local priest. Gene’s a lot stronger man than I am. He didn’t kill the priest, and he didn’t quit the church. But he did talk a lot about betrayal – by the church hierarchy, by the local law enforcement and county attorney’s office, by some of our classmates and so-called friends.

Betrayal by the church, of course, is worst – because we expect the most of them, since God is supposedly first in their lives. Betrayal by the local government, however, means there’s no recourse. Betrayal by friends just means they weren’t really friends.

notropis on July 7, 2014 at 2:31 PM

It’s a good thing that you have no role here – either in determining the ‘root cause’ of clergy abuse or in enacting reforms to prevent it in the future.

verbaluce on July 7, 2014 at 2:25 PM

Why? Because I link homosexuality and sexual abuse of children? Which is one of the cardinal sins of our modern society? Sorry, but it’s true. Homosexuality is a perversion and a mental disorder, and the vast majority of child sexual abuse comes from homosexuals. Don’t believe me? Look up the statistics.

And, while we’re on the subject, just how many cases have you heard of priests molesting young girls instead of young boys? I’d wager very few. Further proving my point.

It’s like those who argue that if we’d just let priests get married, all of this would go away. No, if that were the issue, priests would be getting caught fooling around with adult women, not underage boys.

Shump on July 7, 2014 at 2:31 PM

Well you’ve shown above how much thinking you do on the basics.

verbaluce on July 7, 2014 at 2:31 PM

Again, you do not refute anything I wrote.

You seem to believe snark (unintelligent snark at that) is an argument. It is not.

You have never, in about 5 years I have interacted with you, offered an argument on any point, at any time, that is based on logic and supported by facts.

Perhaps today will be the day you try?

Monkeytoe on July 7, 2014 at 2:33 PM

When is the NEA going to apologize?

malclave on July 7, 2014 at 2:21 PM

If this refers to teachers who molest children, then the NEA is somewhat disanalogous to the RCC. Each parish priest reports to and is accountable to his bishop. Each bishop has authority within his diocese. Each school teacher is accountable to their local / regional school board an union. The NEA does not have the power to reassign teachers to different teaching localities in order to cover up wrong doing.

EA_MAN on July 7, 2014 at 2:34 PM

You might be havin’ a hard time understanding indicators….and factors.

verbaluce on July 7, 2014 at 2:29 PM

You really are a dishonest idiot. Please explain where I am wrong. Refute my argument – don’t add to it.

Monkeytoe on July 7, 2014 at 2:31 PM

By your ‘logic’ – prison rape is proof that homosexuals commit most of the bank robberies and murders in this country.

verbaluce on July 7, 2014 at 2:36 PM

All of this depends on actual results, though, and the Catholic Church has a long-acquired reputation of opacity on this issue to overcome.

Exactly.

The abuse in itself is horrific enough, but the subsequent cover-ups and a “pass the buck” mentality is even worse. Especially considering these are men representing Christ’s Church. Although as Catholics we’re taught to forgive those who trespass against us, it’s difficult to muster up forgiveness for child abuse and avoiding confronting the problem at the source.

For the perpetrators, may God have mercy on their souls.

JetBoy on July 7, 2014 at 2:37 PM

You might be havin’ a hard time understanding indicators….and factors.

verbaluce on July 7, 2014 at 2:29 PM

And you might have trouble understand what an argument is, and what a refutation of an argument is, and what a fact is, or even what logic is.

I laid out my argument. Please refute it if you can.

The point is quite simple – sexuality has a bearing on whether a child molester picks a female or male victim.

You – and all liberals – argue with no facts that such is not true. And the reason is that like abortion, homosexuality is one of the few religious sacraments the left has. You believe that homosexuals are sacrosanct and can do no wrong.

In order to maintain the fiction that homosexuals are all pure and sacrosanct – liberals created the fiction that the molester’s sexuality has no bearing on whether his victims are male or female (this is due mostly to the fact that boys are molested at a higher rate, which would indicate, statistically, that homosexuals have a higher rate of being child molesters). So, in order to keep your religious beliefs intact, you must take on faith that sexuality plays no part in the choice of victims.

Interesting little bit of kabuki you have going on there.

Regardless, if you bothered to comprehend (or had the ability – not sure you do) I never argue that all homosexuals are bad or that all homosexuals are child molesters. I argue that in this instance that many homosexuals who became priests were child molesters.

And, until that fact is dealt with, the Church is not going to make much headway in solving the problem. One can’t solve a problem you refuse to admit exists.

Monkeytoe on July 7, 2014 at 2:39 PM

The infiltration of the priesthood by the gay activists and their agenda over a several decade period is at the root of this problem.

Shump on July 7, 2014 at 2:15 PM

I’m certainly no friend to the Leftist gay activists…but you’re waaaay off base there, Shump.

JetBoy on July 7, 2014 at 2:41 PM

By your ‘logic’ – prison rape is proof that homosexuals commit most of the bank robberies and murders in this country.

verbaluce on July 7, 2014 at 2:36 PM

wow. I am truly stunned at your lack of honesty in debate and your lack of ablility to grasp logic.

I did not think you could prove yourself even lower on the intellectual scale than I had you pegged – but you have outdone yourself.

But, I will accept your honest refusal to actually debate as an admission that you know I am correct.

thank you for your honesty in admitting my correctness.

Monkeytoe on July 7, 2014 at 2:42 PM

You have never, in about 5 years I have interacted with you, offered an argument on any point, at any time, that is based on logic and supported by facts.

Perhaps today will be the day you try?

Monkeytoe on July 7, 2014 at 2:33 PM

Oh now…come on.
You have just never acknowledged it.

(I refuted your argument above.)

verbaluce on July 7, 2014 at 2:42 PM

The Pope is a socialist who opposes gay rights/ SSM, so I can’t say that I’m a big fan (not that it matters that much since I’m not a Catholic), but it does seem like he’s doing what he can to fix this problem. He can’t go back and change the past. All a new leader can do is apologize on behalf of his institution and work to improve things. He’s doing both of those things. Bravo, I say.

DisneyFan on July 7, 2014 at 2:45 PM

I’m certainly no friend to the Leftist gay activists…but you’re waaaay off base there, Shump.

JetBoy on July 7, 2014 at 2:41 PM

Knowing several people that attended seminary in the 60s and 70s, and a few who actually became priests, I beg to differ.

A large part of the protection offered to the offenders did in fact stem from a kind of brotherhood amongst the homosexual priesthood. Not all – a lot was also just routine corruption of the Church protecting itself and/or the belief that the priests should be “forgiven” and that the Church could somehow cure them of doing it again.

But, the lilac mafia in the priesthood is real and did seek to protect its own.

Monkeytoe on July 7, 2014 at 2:46 PM

Kinda creepy…

Galtian on July 7, 2014 at 2:47 PM

In order to maintain the fiction that homosexuals are all pure and sacrosanct…

Monkeytoe on July 7, 2014 at 2:39 PM

Let’s try this –
are you trying to make an argument against this statement:
‘Homosexuals are all pure and sacrosanct.’
or this one:
‘It is false that pedophile priests are predominantly or most likely to be gay.’

verbaluce on July 7, 2014 at 2:47 PM

Oh now…come on.
You have just never acknowledged it.

(I refuted your argument above.)

verbaluce on July 7, 2014 at 2:42 PM

Dear god you are dishonest.

I don’t know why it surprises me each time I encounter you that you lie so blatantly and so often. But it does surprise me. I would think that knowing you have to lie constantly to try and salvage some iota of belief in your world-view would eventually inform you your world-view is wrong. but, you are apparently to dishonest or too dense for that.

Regardless. Please re-post the comment you claim “refutes” me with logic and facts. I went back and re-read all your comments and do not see it, so am wondering what in your little mind equals “logic” and “facts” that refutes, or even addresses, what I posted.

If you do not do so, again, I will accept your inability as admission that you admit I am correct.

I thank you in advance for such admission because we both know you cannot point to anything containing facts or logic refuting or addressing anything I wrote.

Monkeytoe on July 7, 2014 at 2:50 PM

In order to maintain the fiction that homosexuals are all pure and sacrosanct…

Monkeytoe on July 7, 2014 at 2:39 PM

Who ever said that?

JetBoy on July 7, 2014 at 2:50 PM

By your ‘logic’ – prison rape is proof that homosexuals commit most of the bank robberies and murders in this country.

verbaluce on July 7, 2014 at 2:36 PM

wow. I am truly stunned at your lack of honesty in debate and your lack of ablility to grasp logic.

I did not think you could prove yourself even lower on the intellectual scale than I had you pegged – but you have outdone yourself.

But, I will accept your honest refusal to actually debate as an admission that you know I am correct.

thank you for your honesty in admitting my correctness.

Monkeytoe on July 7, 2014 at 2:42 PM

You are just ranting now.

Did you miss that I wrote:
By your ‘logic’ – prison rape is proof that homosexuals commit most of the bank robberies and murders in this country.

?

Did you want to respond to that?
Do you understand the point I am making?

verbaluce on July 7, 2014 at 2:51 PM

Everything this Pope does is calculated for PR effect. Everything. His entire global outlook was formed by his background in Peronist Argentina and his full exposure to Liberation Theology.

It’s become clear that this pontiff is the most passive-aggressive politician to occupy the Chair of Peter in centuries. I’ve never seen a man who is more proud of his “humility”. He can’t go to the bathroom without kissing 12 babies and hugging 7 handicapped people… but only when the cameras are around. Oh and, his little stunt of going to confession while the cameras were on him was pure theater. You can even see him glance at the camera as he walks right past it.

He’s a socialist politician who’s more concerned with politically punishing wealthy people than he is with advancing Christ’s Truth and actually saving souls. His election was clearly the last gasping effort of the Progressive Clerics desperate desire to hijack the Church with their destructive politics of Modernism. And this recent stunt is only an effort to further endear him to the secular world. The vast majority of the abuse cases were actually perpetrated by homosexual priests. But hey, “Who am I to judge?”…

“The road to hell is paved with the skulls of erring priests, with bishops as their signposts.” – St. John Chrysostom

“It must be observed, however, that if the faith were endangered, a subject ought to rebuke his prelate even publicly.” – St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica II, II, q. 33, a. 45

Augustinian on July 7, 2014 at 2:54 PM

Let’s try this –
are you trying to make an argument against this statement:
‘Homosexuals are all pure and sacrosanct.’
or this one:
‘It is false that pedophile priests are predominantly or most likely to be gay.’

verbaluce on July 7, 2014 at 2:47 PM

Please go back and re-read what I wrote. If you cannot understand it, come back and admit that. Otherwise, stop playing games.

Your second quote – where do you get that?

As to this:

‘It is false that pedophile priests are predominantly or most likely to be gay.’

verbaluce on July 7, 2014 at 2:47 PM

because you say so?

Let me try to break this down in easy questions for you.

1. Do you believe that a rapist’s sexuality plays a role in choosing the rape victim’s gender?

2. If not, why are the vast majority of rape victims female?

3. do you believe that a child-molester’s sexuality plays a role in choosing his victim’s gender?

4. If not, why are the majority of child molestation victims boys?

You want to claim that sexuality plays no role in child molestation. That’s fine. Such a premise is based solely on faith, however. and the reason you hold such a premise – based solely on faith – is that you cannot allow yourself to believe homosexuals capable of evil. Because, again, the left’s two religious sacraments are homosexuality and abortion.

Monkeytoe on July 7, 2014 at 2:55 PM

Shump on July 7, 2014 at 2:31 PM

Homosexuality is a perversion and a mental disorder.

I think you mean Homophobia.

It’s like those who argue that if we’d just let priests get married, all of this would go away. No, if that were the issue, priests would be getting caught fooling around with adult women, not underage boys.

I’m not sure you understand the argument against celibacy…
or why children become the prey.

verbaluce on July 7, 2014 at 2:57 PM

Myth: Children have been the main victims of priestly sexual abuse.

Fact: Since more than 95 percent of all the victims of priestly sexual abuse, as reported by the John Jay College of Criminal Justice, are not prepubescent, that means that adolescents have been the primary victims.

Myth: Pedophile priests have been the problem.

Fact: Homosexual priests have been the problem. Proof: 81 percent of the victims have been male, and more than 95 percent have been postpubescent. When males have sex with postpubescent males, it is called homosexuality.

Myth: The problem is on-going.

Fact: The homosexual scandal took place mostly between the mid-1960s and the mid-1980s. In the last ten years, the average number of credible accusations made against 40,000 priests is in the single digits.

Myth: The Church’s repressive teachings on sexuality are the problem.

Fact: It was liberals outside the Church who pushed for the sexual revolution, and it was liberals in the Church who abetted the revolution in the seminaries. Moreover, it was liberals who promoted therapy as the way to deal with molesters, instead of using punitive measures.

Myth: The Church has done nothing about the problem.

Fact: Pope Benedict XVI made it more difficult for active homosexual priests to enter the priesthood, thus getting directly to the source of the problem. Also, steps have been taken in every diocese to ensure that anyone who works for the Church must participate in a training program aimed at curtailing the abuse of minors.

Augustinian on July 7, 2014 at 2:57 PM

You are just ranting now.

Did you miss that I wrote:
By your ‘logic’ – prison rape is proof that homosexuals commit most of the bank robberies and murders in this country.

?

Did you want to respond to that?
Do you understand the point I am making?

verbaluce on July 7, 2014 at 2:51 PM

Really – that is what you point to as a “logical” argument based on facts that responds to what I wrote?

You are too dim witted for words.

Your snarky straw-man is not a logical argument, nor is it based on fact, nor does it respond to or refute what I wrote.

And, I’m pretty sure even you aren’t dumb enough to believe it is.

But, because I like seeing you try, I’ll play along.

the point you think you are making is that because there is prison rape, prisoners are homosexuals, which in turn means that most crimes are committed by homosexuals.

And you think this “argument” is clever and somehow refutes my point. It is not clever and does not refute anything.

male-on-male Prison rape is a different thing altogether, based on the condition of being locked up and having no access to another gender. I actually made it clear in my earlier comment that I distinguished prison rape. So, I addressed your “point” before you even raised it. but, because you are dishonest and stupid, you still thought you were being clever.

Again, your position, based on nothing but your own assertion, is that the perpetrator’s sexuality has no bearing on the gender of the child molestation victim and that the fact that more boys are molested by men than girls is irrelevant and should be ignored.

I understand your “thinking” such as it is. it is called argument based on faith. I pointed this out several times.

And yet you still do nothing but one-line snark and think you are clever and intelligent?

Please.

Monkeytoe on July 7, 2014 at 3:01 PM

male-on-male Prison rape is a different thing altogether, based on the condition of being locked up and having no access to another gender.

Monkeytoe on July 7, 2014 at 3:01 PM

That is utterly ridiculous. So the male sex drive is so uncontrollable that any hole and a heartbeat will suffice? Really? So the typical man is nothing but a farm animal? Really?

Augustinian on July 7, 2014 at 3:06 PM

male-on-male Prison rape is a different thing altogether, based on the condition of being locked up and having no access to another gender.

Monkeytoe on July 7, 2014 at 3:01 PM

Ok now… you are understanding that the environment is a factor here.

Next one:
Why in the Boy Scouts abuse scandals, where the victims mostly boys?

verbaluce on July 7, 2014 at 3:07 PM

Victims of sex assaults in military are mostly men

“For male-on-male assaults, 73 percent happened on base and 26 percent in a combat zone.”

And do note, there are women present on bases.

Augustinian on July 7, 2014 at 3:09 PM

How Homosexualists Redefine

Homosexual Child Molesting

“To support their agenda of selling homosexuality and homosexual marriage to the people, the homosexualists have come up with the idea of changing the meaning of the words “homosexuality,” “homosexual,” “pedophile,” and the phrase, “child molesting.” The purpose is to try to avoid the effect of the statistics and information showing the strikingly high percentage of homosexuals that engage in child molesting in comparison to heterosexuals.”

Augustinian on July 7, 2014 at 3:12 PM

That is utterly ridiculous. So the male sex drive is so uncontrollable that any hole and a heartbeat will suffice? Really? So the typical man is nothing but a farm animal? Really?

Augustinian on July 7, 2014 at 3:06 PM

No, you are correct I did not fully explain. Prison rape also has a lot to do with dominance and control. But, male-on-male rape is not used for that purpose outside of the prison system. So, it does seem to indicate that it meets more than one purpose – dominance and control together with the perpetrator getting his rocks off. But, added to that – male-on-male prison rape (while truly a problem) is not as widespread as movies and television would have us believe. the vast majority of people spending time in prison don’t get raped.

But, I sense your objection to my point is that you think all male-on-male prison rape is driven by homosexuality? I don’t think that can be accurate unless we want to adjust the percentage of homosexuals in the general population significantly upward.

Monkeytoe on July 7, 2014 at 3:12 PM

Yes, this is a meaningless PR stunt, but it’s really not Francis’ fault that the Church didn’t give “gay” priests the boot as soon as they were discovered to be into homosexuality. Sowing and reaping.
Less stunts, more excommunications.

whatcat on July 7, 2014 at 3:15 PM

It’s a good thing that you have no role here – either in determining the ‘root cause’ of clergy abuse or in enacting reforms to prevent it in the future.

verbaluce on July 7, 2014 at 2:25 PM

Goofie of HA, lots of illegal invasion and obama’care’ thread await you today.

Schadenfreude on July 7, 2014 at 3:16 PM

threads, alas, but the trolls are absent.

Monday is usually re-ed time.

Schadenfreude on July 7, 2014 at 3:17 PM

Do you understand the point I am making?

verbaluce on July 7, 2014 at 2:51 PM

Irony will hit you…some day.

Schadenfreude on July 7, 2014 at 3:18 PM

Ok now… you are understanding that the environment is a factor here.

Next one:
Why in the Boy Scouts abuse scandals, where the victims mostly boys?

verbaluce on July 7, 2014 at 3:07 PM

too funny. You still are unable to make a real argument based on facts or logic, but you continue blindly along.

Yes, environment certainly is involved. Homosexual child molesters seek out situations where they have access to boys. Such as the boy scouts.

Hmmmmmm. Can you grasp that?

Or, in your little minds, are these just decent men who are trying to do some good in the world volunteering for the boy scouts when suddenly an irresistible urge overcomes them and they must, must molest a young boy in their charge? And that these individuals could never, ever, in their entire lives, find a girl to molest and therefore are forced – due to the environment – to molest a young boy?

Is that your “logical” and “factual” argument? Really?

Again, you have yet to put forth anything remotely logical or factual. You never do. Not once in over 5 years of me interacting with you. You return to the same one-line snark that I guess you believe is intelligent?

Your argument is summed up this:

1. the sexuality of the molester plays no role in choosing victims;

2. more boys are molested then girls because “the environment” (I guess that molesters can never find ways to be alone with girls in your mind?);

3. Homosexuals would never, ever do anything wrong.

Oh yeah. I forgot your conclusion: “prison”!! “boy scouts!!”

Monkeytoe on July 7, 2014 at 3:18 PM

Goofie of HA, lots of illegal invasion and obama’care’ thread await you today.

Schadenfreude on July 7, 2014 at 3:16 PM

Scrooge McDuck of HA, is there a day there isn’t lots of illegal invasion and obama’care’ threads?
I’ll try and read some of your quacking about it later.

Hope you had a nice 4th.

verbaluce on July 7, 2014 at 3:19 PM

Archives of Sexual Behavior, the official publication of the International Academy of Sex Research

“…. only men with histories of childhood sexual abuse were significantly more likely than controls to report same-sex sexual partners (OR = 6.75, 95% CI = 1.53-29.86, p = .01). These prospective findings provide tentative evidence of a link between childhood sexual abuse and same-sex sexual partnerships among men….”

Augustinian on July 7, 2014 at 3:20 PM

Too little, too late. It took until 2011 to dump Roger Cardinal Mahony. No one believes the Church anymore. No one should. This is, indeed, a publicity stunt.

The key issue in this scandal was that the prelates cared more about the Church as an institution, including its solvency, than they cared about the victims. They were determined to avoid lawsuits. And so, they covered up and lied for the abusive priests. Now they’ve got the lawsuits and damaged the Church’s dignity. The entire episcopacy of the American Church should have been purged, every cardinal, archbishop and bishop right down the line. I quit the Church over this.

Esaus Message on July 7, 2014 at 3:21 PM

3. Homosexuals would never, ever do anything wrong.
Monkeytoe on July 7, 2014 at 3:18 PM

I’ve found that when you ask “Do you believe there are “gay” pedophiles?”, those who hold to that #3 belief timidly slink away and disappear.

whatcat on July 7, 2014 at 3:24 PM

But, I sense your objection to my point is that you think all male-on-male prison rape is driven by homosexuality? I don’t think that can be accurate unless we want to adjust the percentage of homosexuals in the general population significantly upward.

Monkeytoe on July 7, 2014 at 3:12 PM

Gay is as gay does. And since homosexuality is already a depraved abuse of our natural ordered design – it would hardly be surprising to find that criminals would be more inclined to stem from depraved lifestyles and desires.

But isn’t is interesting that one never hears of homosexual men raping women? Funny that.

Augustinian on July 7, 2014 at 3:26 PM

Gay is as gay does. And since homosexuality is already a depraved abuse of our natural ordered design – it would hardly be surprising to find that criminals would be more inclined to stem from depraved lifestyles and desires.

But isn’t is interesting that one never hears of homosexual men raping women? Funny that.

Augustinian on July 7, 2014 at 3:26 PM

That’s a keeper right there. Filed under “WTF?!??”

JetBoy on July 7, 2014 at 3:30 PM

But, I sense your objection to my point is that you think all male-on-male prison rape is driven by homosexuality? I don’t think that can be accurate unless we want to adjust the percentage of homosexuals in the general population significantly upward.

Monkeytoe on July 7, 2014 at 3:12 PM

What makes you think that the percentage of homosexuality in prisons has to coincide with the percentage in the general population?

Augustinian on July 7, 2014 at 3:33 PM

But isn’t is interesting that one never hears of homosexual men raping women? Funny that.

Augustinian on July 7, 2014 at 3:26 PM

That’s a keeper right there. Filed under “WTF?!??”

JetBoy on July 7, 2014 at 3:30 PM

I do not agree with the entirety of Augustinian’s arguments re homosexuality, but the point that if rape/child molestation were only about power and the sexual orientation of the perpetrator played no role in choosing victims, we would indeed have cases of homosexual men raping women and/or homosexual men molesting little girls.

that evidence of either ever happening does not exist, it adds to the evidence that the perpetrator’s sexuality is involved in choosing the gender of the victim.

In other words, male homosexual child molesters tend to molest little boys and straight male child molesters tend to molest little girls.

The left would have us believe that homosexuals never engaged in bad behavior and that the choice of victim gender has nothing to do with a perpetrator’s sexuality.

Monkeytoe on July 7, 2014 at 3:38 PM

That’s a keeper right there. Filed under “WTF?!??”

JetBoy on July 7, 2014 at 3:30 PM

The point is that criminal sexual behavior by homosexuals is intentionally spun and downplayed and ultimately attributed to everything under the sun except the pathology of homosexuality itself.

In 1973 the American Psychiatric Association removed homosexuality from its diagnostic glossary of mental disorders, but not because there was not sufficient evidence – but rather – because the Association was heavily lobbied by Gay Activists.

Augustinian on July 7, 2014 at 3:38 PM

I do not agree with the entirety of Augustinian’s arguments re homosexuality, but the point that if rape/child molestation were only about power and the sexual orientation of the perpetrator played no role in choosing victims, we would indeed have cases of homosexual men raping women and/or homosexual men molesting little girls.

that evidence of either ever happening does not exist, it adds to the evidence that the perpetrator’s sexuality is involved in choosing the gender of the victim.

In other words, male homosexual child molesters tend to molest little boys and straight male child molesters tend to molest little girls.

The left would have us believe that homosexuals never engaged in bad behavior and that the choice of victim gender has nothing to do with a perpetrator’s sexuality.

Monkeytoe on July 7, 2014 at 3:38 PM

Yep.

Augustinian on July 7, 2014 at 3:40 PM

And by the way, there is no credible evidence to suggest that the gay priests who molested teenage boys – did not also have relatively equal access to young girls and women as well.

Augustinian on July 7, 2014 at 3:44 PM

I’m certainly no friend to the Leftist gay activists…but you’re waaaay off base there, Shump.

JetBoy on July 7, 2014 at 2:41 PM

Don’t you know that the gays have been plotting since the 1960s from their den of fabulousness to destroy the Catholic Church?.. Sarc off/

It is worth noting that three of the victims that Francis met with this morning were women. One of the women, Marie Kane, was repeatedly abused by a priest for years. The reason why the victims are overwhelmingly male is because of opportunity. Up until the 1990s only little boys were allowed to be altar servers and that is the most access that a priest would have to children. The pastor at one of the parishes I attended used to take the altar boys fishing at the end of the year as a thank you, so there was lots of time that the priest and altar boys spent alone. Pious Catholic families also didn’t question if a priest took an interest in their sons because the assumption was that the priest was helping the boy discern a religious vocation. However, in situations where priests had access to little girls in schools, orphanages, etc., predators weren’t above preying on little girls.

As to what needs to be done, I think firing a few bishops for protecting abuser priests would show that Francis is serious. He certainly isn’t above firing bishops for building fancy mansions for themselves and this is way more serious than purchasing a marble jacuzzi bathtub. Francis can start with Finn in KC who was actually convicted of failure to report a predator priest.

Illinidiva on July 7, 2014 at 3:47 PM

Hope you had a nice 4th.

verbaluce on July 7, 2014 at 3:19 PM

You too!

Schadenfreude on July 7, 2014 at 3:48 PM

The reason why the victims are overwhelmingly male is because of opportunity. Up until the 1990s only little boys were allowed to be altar servers and that is the most access that a priest would have to children.

Illinidiva on July 7, 2014 at 3:47 PM

Do you have evidence that these victims were predominantly altar boys? Do you have evidence that these priests were not also in significant contact with women and girls as well?

Augustinian on July 7, 2014 at 3:56 PM

Augustinian on July 7, 2014 at 3:56 PM

It strikes me that for those who want to believe that the perpetrator’s sexuality has no baring on choice of victim-gender, there is nothing that can be argued to change their minds.

We are constantly informed, when it comes to homosexuality, that it is not a choice, that it is hard-wired, etc.

But, according to those who refuse to believe sexuality has any bearing on victim choice for child molesters, sexuality is not hard-wired and can safely be ignored, such that straight men will consistently choose to molest boys rather than girls.

There is no proof offered to prove this point other than to claim “opportunity” based on conjecture.

But, in reality, that is not true. Studies tend to show that child molesters generally molest one gender. So, the studies tell us it is not the case that child molesters could go either way and just happen to have the opportunity to molest boys. No, the studies show that child molesters seek out the gender they prefer to molest, and seek out situations to get access to that gender.

Monkeytoe on July 7, 2014 at 4:06 PM

But, in reality, that is not true. Studies tend to show that child molesters generally molest one gender. So, the studies tell us it is not the case that child molesters could go either way and just happen to have the opportunity to molest boys. No, the studies show that child molesters seek out the gender they prefer to molest, and seek out situations to get access to that gender.

Monkeytoe on July 7, 2014 at 4:06 PM

The sex abuse cases in public schools verifies this.

BTW the incidents of sexual abuse of children in public schools dwarfs that of the clergy.

Augustinian on July 7, 2014 at 4:11 PM

BTW the incidents of sexual abuse of children in public schools dwarfs that of the clergy.

Augustinian on July 7, 2014 at 4:11 PM

Per capita or total?

Monkeytoe on July 7, 2014 at 4:15 PM

In other words, male homosexual child molesters tend to molest little boys and straight male child molesters tend to molest little girls.

The left would have us believe that homosexuals never engaged in bad behavior and that the choice of victim gender has nothing to do with a perpetrator’s sexuality.

Monkeytoe on July 7, 2014 at 3:38 PM

Totally agreed…male homosexual child molesters go after boys, and straight male child molesters go after girls. No argument there. But Augustinian (yes, I’m aware you don’t fully agree with him) seems to be suggesting homosexual men are automatically pedophiles…amongst a host of other innate evils.

As for anything the Left says…do I really need to get into it? They’re a bunch of bs peddlers no matter what they’re babbling about. They wouldn’t know truth and facts if they walked into them head-on.

As to what needs to be done, I think firing a few bishops for protecting abuser priests would show that Francis is serious. He certainly isn’t above firing bishops for building fancy mansions for themselves and this is way more serious than purchasing a marble jacuzzi bathtub. Francis can start with Finn in KC who was actually convicted of failure to report a predator priest.

Illinidiva on July 7, 2014 at 3:47 PM

Absolutely. Francis needs to confront the abuse problems with a heavy hand. Firing clergy isn’t enough…cooperation with law enforcement is required, so The Church won’t simply be seen as releasing pedophiles out in the public. It’s a touchy “church and state” issue, for the state as well as The Church. And it’s no easy task to accomplish.

But it must be confronted and dealt with, and it must be more transparent.

JetBoy on July 7, 2014 at 4:21 PM

BTW the incidents of sexual abuse of children in public schools dwarfs that of the clergy.

I’d like to see the report that this assertion is based upon. For instance, what is the definition of sexual “abuse”? There are frequently reports in the news of female teachers who have “relationships” with underage male students. Many times the teacher will be charged with many counts of “statutory rape”. Do the statistics that you are citing consider each act a separate “incident”?

EA_MAN on July 7, 2014 at 4:31 PM

Per capita or total?

Monkeytoe on July 7, 2014 at 4:15 PM

AP: Sexual Misconduct Plagues US Schools

Augustinian on July 7, 2014 at 4:45 PM

I’d like to see the report that this assertion is based upon. For instance, what is the definition of sexual “abuse”? There are frequently reports in the news of female teachers who have “relationships” with underage male students. Many times the teacher will be charged with many counts of “statutory rape”. Do the statistics that you are citing consider each act a separate “incident”?

EA_MAN on July 7, 2014 at 4:31 PM

The definition of “abuse” attributed to priests followed the same broad standards.

Augustinian on July 7, 2014 at 4:48 PM

AP: Sexual Misconduct Plagues US Schools

Augustinian on July 7, 2014 at 4:45 PM

Getting a 404 error on that link

EA_MAN on July 7, 2014 at 4:49 PM

EA_MAN on July 7, 2014 at 4:49 PM

Google “AP: Sexual Misconduct Plagues US Schools”

Augustinian on July 7, 2014 at 4:56 PM

The proof will be when Rome turns over evidence and the accused to local authorities rather than abuse diplomatic immunity to protect clergy and staff from prosecution.

This is good PR but they have a mountain of bad PR which seems to grow higher every year as more abuse is uncovered (ie Ireland).

It’s certainly a step in the right direction for the institution. We should all welcome their efforts to change and be better. It’s up to the victims to forgive.

lexhamfox on July 7, 2014 at 5:47 PM

The entire argument of whether sexual predators of children are more prevalent among homosexual men (indisputably they are: this >2% of the male population accounts for fully 1/3 of all child rape) is a bit of a red herring as relates to the Catholic Church.

The overwhelming majority of those abused by priests were post-pubescent boys.

This means those priest weren’t pedophiles, but WERE chicken hawks , behavior which is certainly considered “normal” among homosexual males.

Hardly seems fair, does it, to penalize these nice gay men for a little sexual adventurism?
/

Dolce Far Niente on July 7, 2014 at 6:10 PM

Google “AP: Sexual Misconduct Plagues US Schools”

Augustinian on July 7, 2014 at 4:56 PM

BTW the incidents of sexual abuse of children in public schools dwarfs that of the clergy.

Thanks. I found it.

The question I have at this point is: when you say that incidents of sexual abuse in school dwarfs that of the clergy, do you mean that the number of reported incidents is higher than the number of reported incidents in the RCC abuse scandal?

If so, I would point that “there are 3 million public school teachers nationwide…” while there are approximately 60,000 priests & deacons in the US. http://cara.georgetown.edu/caraservices/requestedchurchstats.html

Therefore, if the rate of incidence were even over the two groups, I would expect that the number of victims would be fifty times larger in raw numbers in the public schools than in the clergy.

You could also include religious orders I suppose for another approximately 40,000. In round numbers then a population of about 100,000. In this case, that would be a thirty times more incidents in raw numbers. But, I’m still not sure how the numbers of incidents themselves are accounted for. For instance, if a 16 year old student and an adult teacher have a “relationship” over a number of months, does each hug or kiss count as separate “incident”?

EA_MAN on July 7, 2014 at 8:24 PM

EA_MAN on July 7, 2014 at 8:24 PM

According to the AP Report: Sexual Misconduct Plagues US Schools

4,400 of 110,000 priests were accused of molesting minors from 1950 through 2002.

That is a rate of 4%. And its just the accused, not convicted. And the 4,400 is over a period of 50 YEARS.

But according to Charol Shakeshaft, the researcher of a 2004 study prepared for the U.S. Department of Education, “the physical sexual abuse of students in schools is likely more than 100 times the abuse by priests.”

According to the 2004 study “the most accurate data available at this time” indicates that “nearly 9.6 percent of students are targets of educator sexual misconduct sometime during their school career.”

However, according to a report earlier this year by the Government Accountability Office, the actual rate of abuse in schools is probably even higher:

NBC Jan 2014 – Sexual abuse of children by teachers or other public school employees is likely underestimated because of a patchwork reporting system and involvement of numerous local, state and federal agencies in investigating such claims, according to a new government report obtained exclusively by NBC News.

Augustinian on July 7, 2014 at 10:16 PM

There is no place in the Church’s ministry for those who commit these abuses,

Unfortunately … there is. The liberal tolerance showed to homosexuality that is prevalent in the church positions their trainees for more abuse of parishioners children. Yes, I know gay doesn’t mean pedophile, but there is a big blurry line that many are prepared to cross.

Harvey Milk crossed it and he is a saint of the left, as we know.

The church’s problem is really simple: they need to get out of the crime-fighting business and hand over miscreants immediately to civil authorities. The time when canon law (like sharia-law) applies here has long passed.

virgo on July 8, 2014 at 1:53 AM

Augustinian on July 7, 2014 at 10:16 PM

These are not apples to apples comparisons. You’re using the number of accusations for the priest sex abuse scandal and estimates of incidents for the public school figures, they are not the same thing.

Additionally, these numbers on the public school side include any school employee, not just teachers.

In this review, “educator” includes any person older than 18 who works with or for a school or other educational or learning organization. This service may be paid or unpaid, professional, classified or volunteer. Adults covered by this review might be teachers, counselors, school administrators, secretaries, bus drivers, coaches, parent volunteers for student activities, lunchroom attendants, tutors, music teachers, special education aides, or any other adult in contact in a school-related
relationship with a student.

Shakeshaft’s report includes “misconduct” as well as “abuse”. Further the definitions go far beyond that which is included in the Jay Report:

The behaviors included in the review are physical, verbal, or visual. Examples include touching breasts or genitals of students; oral, anal, and vaginal penetration; showing students pictures of a sexual nature; and sexually-related conversations, jokes, or questions directed at students.

Again, these are not apples to apples comparisons. How many of the incidents in Shakeshaft’s report apply to only teachers and to only sexual abuse, not misconduct or other non-physical activities?

EA_MAN on July 8, 2014 at 6:39 AM

These are not apples to apples comparisons. You’re using the number of accusations for the priest sex abuse scandal and estimates of incidents for the public school figures, they are not the same thing.

Additionally, these numbers on the public school side include any school employee, not just teachers.

On the contrary, the original comparison was the clergy abuse versus the public schools at large – not just teachers. And why? Because the accusations against the clergy are in fact a direct implication of the systemic nature of the universal Church itself. Ergo, it would be remiss of you not to compare systemic abuses head to head. If a Catholic teacher is accused, the public perception will be “See! There goes those sick Catholics again!” The condemnation would be an all encompassing criticism of the Universal Catholic Church. And I guarantee that you would be one of the loudest of those voices. Because you obviously have an anti-Catholic bias.

But more so, many of the ongoing accusations against priests are not validated. But the media rarely if ever reports that follow-up. And so, the damage of public perception is already done and left to fester. Also, the vast majority of accusations against priests spans 50 years. The rate of incidents in public schools is contemporary. That alone greatly tips the relevant statistical and moral implications against the schools.

But more to the point: The Catholic Church has indeed put policies in place over these last 10 years that have made it virtually impossible for predators to remain hidden for long. Not to mention the feeding frenzy that unscrupulous lawyers have created by placing a veritable bounty on the clergy as a whole – regardless of innocence or guilt. But contrast that with the fact that (by the Fed Govt own admission) the public school system remains rife with an internal environment of corruption that greatly hampers the efforts to detect predators and protect present and future victims. Many teachers are simply dismissed with full pay and benefits.

And what’s more, Catholic schools are an option for parents – not a requirement. However, most parents have no alternative to the public school system. So they have to send their children off for most of the day to an environment that is steeped in systemic corruption. And not just with sexual abuse incidents either. The curriculum itself has become its own form of abuse on objective Truth.

But none of this matters to you. You will parse and sift and try to tilt any statistic you can to implicate the Church and exonerate the public schools. Because you are absolutely convinced that the Catholic Church is fundamentally flawed, corrupt, and ultimately dangerous. Your objections go much deeper than the immediate topic at hand.

“Some individuals use statistics as a drunk man uses lamp-posts; for support rather than for illumination.” – G.K.Chesterton

Augustinian on July 8, 2014 at 12:15 PM

Shakeshaft’s report includes “misconduct” as well as “abuse”. Further the definitions go far beyond that which is included in the Jay Report:

The John Jay report covered abuse that occured over 50 years. How many years did Shakeshaft’s report cover for the public schools?

Again, these are not apples to apples comparisons. How many of the incidents in Shakeshaft’s report apply to only teachers and to only sexual abuse, not misconduct or other non-physical activities?

I challenge that assertion. From the John Jay Report on Clergy abuse:

Profile of the alleged abuses

The John Jay report catalogued more than twenty types of sexual abuse ranging from verbal harassment to penile penetration. It said that most of the abusers engaged in multiple types of abuses. According to the report, only 9 percent of the accused performed acts limited to improper touching over the victim’s clothes. Slightly more than 27 percent of the allegations involved a cleric performing oral sex and 25 percent involved penile penetration or attempted penile penetration, reported the study.

The study said sexual abuse “includes contacts or interactions between a child and an adult when the child is being used as an object of sexual gratification for the adult.” The report categorized allegations of sexual abuse even if the allegation did not involve force or genital or physical contact.[66]

And the report by the Government Accountability Office clearly stated that incidences remain woefully under reported by the public school system.

Augustinian on July 8, 2014 at 12:38 PM

On the contrary, the original comparison was the clergy abuse versus the public schools at large – not just teachers.
And why? Because the accusations against the clergy are in fact a direct implication of the systemic nature of the universal Church itself.

Ergo, it would be remiss of you not to compare systemic abuses head to head. If a Catholic teacher is accused, the public perception will be “See! There goes those sick Catholics again!”

The condemnation would be an all encompassing criticism of the Universal Catholic Church. And I guarantee that you would be one of the loudest of those voices. Because you obviously have an anti-Catholic bias.

Two points here:

The Jay Report does not focus on personnel other than “priests”, so no Catholic school teachers, parish secretaries, CCD volunteers, day camp counselors, retreat leaders, etc…So these statistics are dissimilar in that they employ different criteria, procedures, and methodologies.

Secondly, why do you feel the need to make statements for me? Why can’t you interact with what I’m actually saying? Have I offered you the level of invective that you are offering me? Have I attributed to you motives that you have not overtly stated?

Also, the vast majority of accusations against priests spans 50 years. The rate of incidents in public schools is contemporary. That alone greatly tips the relevant statistical and moral implications against the schools.

It certainly indicates more ways in which they are dissimilar.

As far as moral implications go, I would say this; I would be among the first to grant that all people (including priests) are sinners. The most galling aspect of the Priest Abuse Scandal for many Catholics was not the abuse itself, but rather the betrayal of laity by those (the bishops) that were supposed to be shepherds of the flock. While I believe that teachers and other school personnel have a moral duty to protect children, I think that you may agree that a general moral duty differs in kind and nature from a sacred duty and obligation.

The Catholic Church has indeed put policies in place over these last 10 years that have made it virtually impossible for predators to remain hidden for long.

The Catholic church should be be given credit for what it has done right, I agree. Too bad so many had to be hurt for something to change.

Not to mention the feeding frenzy that unscrupulous lawyers have created by placing a veritable bounty on the clergy as a whole – regardless of innocence or guilt. But contrast that with the fact that (by the Fed Govt own admission) the public school system remains rife with an internal environment of corruption that greatly hampers the efforts to detect predators and protect present and future victims. Many teachers are simply dismissed with full pay and benefits.

I think that this misconstrues some litigation. To my mind and to the extent that malfeasance, collusion, and damages can be proven by abuse victims, I hope that they get every penny that they are asking for. Frankly, I think it is a healthy dynamic when all of the members of the church; laity as well as clergy, are fully engaged. That goes for teachers, as well. I’m no defender of public teachers, their unions, or of government run anything, quite the contrary, in fact. I try not to use a secular institution as a point of comparison to people who are supposed to be serving God.

And what’s more, Catholic schools are an option for parents – not a requirement. However, most parents have no alternative to the public school system. So they have to send their children off for most of the day to an environment that is steeped in systemic corruption. And not just with sexual abuse incidents either. The curriculum itself has become its own form of abuse on objective Truth.

See above – At best, public schools are a mixed bag. My kids went to public school up through the eighth grade.

But none of this matters to you. You will parse and sift and try to tilt any statistic you can to implicate the Church and exonerate the public schools. Because you are absolutely convinced that the Catholic Church is fundamentally flawed, corrupt, and ultimately dangerous. Your objections go much deeper than the immediate topic at hand.

I suppose that you’re entitled to your opinion. I will say this though, the teachers and administrators at the Catholic High School where I send both my kids to the tune of $10,000 per year, per kid, would be very surprised to find out that I’m such an anti-Catholic bigot. Thanks for your time.

EA_MAN on July 8, 2014 at 1:48 PM

Two points here:

The Jay Report does not focus on personnel other than “priests”, so no Catholic school teachers, parish secretaries, CCD volunteers, day camp counselors, retreat leaders, etc…So these statistics are dissimilar in that they employ different criteria, procedures, and methodologies.

Secondly, why do you feel the need to make statements for me? Why can’t you interact with what I’m actually saying? Have I offered you the level of invective that you are offering me? Have I attributed to you motives that you have not overtly stated?

On the contrary, As I stated, the Church at large is implicated in these charges. Therefore feel free to produce any statistics that show further abuse from Catholic personnel. If it were an issue, I find it hard to believe that law firms and the media would let that slide. So I stand by my original point.

Secondly, the fact that you feel the need to incessantly chase this down by sifting through the statistics while ignoring the overall systemic implications of the two comparisons clearly indicates your motives. But if that is wrong, then tell me – what exactly are your motives here?

It certainly indicates more ways in which they are dissimilar.

Ah yes, you choose the word sterilized word “dissimilar”. When the fact that the Clergy abuse charges span 50 years as opposed to the contemporary charges of the public schools actually proves that the all encompassing nature of the Clergy charges are far more stringent in sheer scope alone. But of course you don’t note that context in terms of advantage or disadvantage towards either the schools or church the way you did with the supposedly dissimilar parameters of the definitions of abuse in the two paradigm. Again – your bias is self-evident. The answer lies within your question.

As far as moral implications go, I would say this; I would be among the first to grant that all people (including priests) are sinners. The most galling aspect of the Priest Abuse Scandal for many Catholics was not the abuse itself, but rather the betrayal of laity by those (the bishops) that were supposed to be shepherds of the flock. While I believe that teachers and other school personnel have a moral duty to protect children, I think that you may agree that a general moral duty differs in kind and nature from a sacred duty and obligation.

On the contrary, where there is a call for exceptional holiness there will always be accounts of exceptional evil. For two reasons, as you implied, moral standards are indeed higher, and as such, the devil’s attempts to deceive and destroy are logically more concentrated. Did the Twelve Apostles not include two that were refered to as “Satan” by Our Lord? Why yes. Yes indeed. But here we see your bias again. The fact that education is mandated by law, and as such, the vast majority of parents have no choice but the public school option, means that the victims are virtually held captive by the very system that is inherently corrupt. And yet- you downplay that most salient reality.

The Catholic church should be be given credit for what it has done right, I agree. Too bad so many had to be hurt for something to change.

Really? And why do you not express the same reservations towards the public schools which are still in a much worse state of dysfunction? Again, your bias is overt.

I think that this misconstrues some litigation. To my mind and to the extent that malfeasance, collusion, and damages can be proven by abuse victims, I hope that they get every penny that they are asking for. Frankly, I think it is a healthy dynamic when all of the members of the church; laity as well as clergy, are fully engaged. That goes for teachers, as well. I’m no defender of public teachers, their unions, or of government run anything, quite the contrary, in fact. I try not to use a secular institution as a point of comparison to people who are supposed to be serving God.

Again, your bias is showing. I’m sure the attorneys intentions are as pure as the driven snow. Yeah. I’m sure.

False Accusations of Sexual Abuse Can Leave Lasting Scars

See above – At best, public schools are a mixed bag. My kids went to public school up through the eighth grade.

Again, your bias is showing with that morally tepid response. Your rationale follows that since the public schools have a much lower moral standard they can be forgiven of far greater abuses in both frequency and scope. Oh but, you’re just concerned with the “dissimilar” aspects if they do not implicate the Church in the worst possible light. I personally attend Catholic Parochial school for eight years, as did all eight of my siblings – and there was never any sexual abuse. And the education was exceptional, especially compared to the public schools at the time.

I suppose that you’re entitled to your opinion. I will say this though, the teachers and administrators at the Catholic High School where I send both my kids to the tune of $10,000 per year, per kid, would be very surprised to find out that I’m such an anti-Catholic bigot. Thanks for your time.

On the contrary, some of the worst anti-Catholic bigots I have encountered in my own parish were Liberal-Progressives who also send their kids to the Catholic school. These people believe very little of the moral doctrines of the Church and in fact, they are currently in upheaval because our new priest has reestablished the Tradition teachings of the faith. The fact that you send your kids to a Catholic high school is hardly a testament to your pro-Catholic attitude as much as it is of your awareness that the public schools truly are a dysfunctional disaster by comparison. Which of course makes your dismissal and downplay of the public schools moral failings all the more hypocritical.

Have a great day.

Augustinian on July 8, 2014 at 2:49 PM

Which of course makes your dismissal and downplay of the public schools moral failings all the more hypocritical.

I don’t see it that way.

Luke 12:47-48

And that slave who knew his master’s will and did not get ready or act in accord with his will, will receive many lashes, but the one who did not know it, and committed deeds worthy of a flogging, will receive but few. From everyone who has been given much, much will be required; and to whom they entrusted much, of him they will ask all the more.

The priests who abused their parishioners are the first group. Public school teachers who abuse their students (if they are not Christians) are the second group. Those that know what they should do are more culpable than those that do not.

EA_MAN on July 8, 2014 at 4:51 PM

The priests who abused their parishioners are the first group. Public school teachers who abuse their students (if they are not Christians) are the second group. Those that know what they should do are more culpable than those that do not.

EA_MAN on July 8, 2014 at 4:51 PM

Wait a minute. According to your rationale, public school employees who sexually abuse kids are not as morally reprehensible as priests because priests should know better whereas public school employees may now know any better?

Are you friggin serious here? So you are clearly implying that the secular world (by its very nature has no moral compass) And by this assumption on your part you are indeed giving the public schools a moral pass here. So apparently we should forgive the perverts in the public schools because they didn’t know any better. Amazing.

Thanks for proving my point about you. Your bigotry is overt and repulsive.

Augustinian on July 8, 2014 at 5:11 PM

Which of course makes your dismissal and downplay of the public schools moral failings all the more hypocritical.

I don’t see it that way.

EA_MAN on July 8, 2014 at 4:51 PM

Of course you don’t see it.

And yet, you just displayed it.

Augustinian on July 8, 2014 at 5:17 PM

The priests who abused their parishioners are the first group. Public school teachers who abuse their students (if they are not Christians) are the second group. Those that know what they should do are more culpable than those that do not.

EA_MAN on July 8, 2014 at 4:51 PM

Those passages speak of God’s punishment towards those individuals. Because only God can truly read the human heart and merit justice accordingly.

Augustinian on July 8, 2014 at 5:33 PM

Are you friggin serious here? So you are clearly implying that the secular world (by its very nature has no moral compass) And by this assumption on your part you are indeed giving the public schools a moral pass here.

I’m not giving anyone a pass – I’m indicating that the HIGHER standard is applied to those that know.

So apparently we should forgive the perverts in the public schools because they didn’t know any better. Amazing.

I’m not talking about about a blanket amnesty or turning a blind eye to it. Call it out. Call it what it is, no problem here.

For those that seek forgiveness, yes, we should forgive. What would you do, not forgive when forgiveness has been asked for?

You seem so intent on pointing the finger of blame at non-Catholics that you’re the mirror image of what you claim to despise. You’d make quite the Pharisee.

EA_MAN on July 8, 2014 at 6:32 PM

Those passages speak of God’s punishment towards those individuals. Because only God can truly read the human heart and merit justice accordingly.

Yes, so who is in a better position to know the moral gravity of the type of acts that we have been speaking about, the Catholic priest and Bishop, or a public school teacher? Granted that the teacher MAY know as much as the clerics. But who has sworn an oath and received a Sacrament setting them apart for the purpose of serving God’s people and Church?

And that slave who knew his master’s will and did not get ready or act in accord with his will, will receive many lashes, but the one who did not know it, and committed deeds worthy of a flogging, will receive but few.

EA_MAN on July 8, 2014 at 7:01 PM

I’m not giving anyone a pass – I’m indicating that the HIGHER standard is applied to those that know.

That standard is applied by God- not you. And only He knows what is truly in a person’s deformed and fallen heart.

For those that seek forgiveness, yes, we should forgive. What would you do, not forgive when forgiveness has been asked for?

You seem so intent on pointing the finger of blame at non-Catholics that you’re the mirror image of what you claim to despise. You’d make quite the Pharisee.

Incredible. What makes you think any of the offenders aren’t asking for forgiveness? But you seem hell bent on singling out the clergy from the even greater threat of teachers and school personnel – and you have the hypocrisy to label me a pharisee. Apparently that beam in your eye is distorting your vision. BTW there is no statute of limitations with the clergy accusations like their is with the teachers. Again, these claims against the priests go back decades.

Augustinian on July 9, 2014 at 1:10 AM

Yes, so who is in a better position to know the moral gravity of the type of acts that we have been speaking about, the Catholic priest and Bishop, or a public school teacher? Granted that the teacher MAY know as much as the clerics. But who has sworn an oath and received a Sacrament setting them apart for the purpose of serving God’s people and Church?

Knowledge of doctrine and mental pathology are two very different things. Only God has the moral authority to sort out those hidden secrets of the heart. And you’re not God. You’re just a hypocritical pharisee who thinks he’s God.

And what’s more, if teachers are somehow held to a lower moral standard then perhaps you think they should receive less stringent penalties. In fact – why wouldn’t you?

So go ahead – call for leniency for the public school predators. Live your philosophy.

I’ll ask again – what exactly are your motives in here?

Augustinian on July 9, 2014 at 1:22 AM

And since you insist on masking your anti-Catholic bigotry behind such noble and fair-minded concerns over “dissimilar” statistics, consider this most relevant fact:

In most states, the public schools are given special protections. In cases involving abuse, a victim student has only 90 days to file suit. After that, it is too late. What this means is that laws that suspend the statute of limitations for cases of the sexual abuse of minors that do not specifically mention the public schools (they almost never do) leave in place the 90-day rule. Thus, public schools get a pass. In other words, the goal of those who want to suspend statute of limitations laws is to “get the Catholic Church.” It is not to protect kids or to render justice.

Now juxtapose that little jewel of criteria against the fact that the charges against the clergy span over 50 years – with most of the offenses occurring in the 70′s 80′s and early 90′s.

So to wit: as I stated before – if you compare apples to apples then you will find that the Catholic clergy abuse is almost nonexistent nowadays. Whereas the prevalence of sexual abuse in public schools is rapidly increasing. But of course – that doesn’t help you to vent your bigotry in the form of feigned concern, so you’ll have to ignore these inconvenient little trifles of reality and go back to meting out God’s justice on His behalf. Because, you’re just that qualified. Because the Catholic Church is evil in your eyes – isn’t it. Well yes. Yes it is.

Augustinian on July 9, 2014 at 1:56 AM

Augustinian on July 9, 2014 at 1:56 AM

Goodbye, Augustinian. I’ll leave you to curse the darkness.

EA_MAN on July 9, 2014 at 9:54 AM