成人论坛

How about a committment to investigate itself and cooperate with authorities around the world in order to get it all out in the open and finally put all suspicion behind it or is that too much to ask? The consequence is that in all likelihood we will see these scandals around the Catholic church erupt from time to time all over the globe. It appears those the Church attracts to the priesthood have a propensity for child abuse and the higher ups have a propensity to conceal it. This makes for an organization with dubious future stability. In some coutries the penalties may include executions.

"It appears those the Church attracts to the priesthood have a propensity for child abuse".

There is no basis for this whatsover - the facts and statistics simply don't support this. It would make as much sense to say that marriage attracts child abusers since most child abusers are married.

I think its time for other Churches to be looked at as well, NOT just the Catholic ones?.

But Will, why aren't we hearing the 'outraged' voices of the 'majority of Irish priests'? Where are the newspaper articles? Why are we not hearing their voices on religious & current affairs programmes? Where is the ground-swell of 'outraged' priestly opinion?

Would anyone believe them?

William Crawley;

"I agree entirely with mccamleyc. Marcus, your argument isn't helped by overstatement, particularly an overstatement that does an injustice to the majority of Irish priests and religious who are as outraged as everyone else by the Murphy Report's revelations."

So far evidence in the United States and in Ireland says otherwise. Perhaps if more evidence comes to light about clergy of other religions that statement will be proven wrong but as of now this one seems to stand alone. Have you any evidence to the contrary?

Marcus - it's nothing to do with what happens in other churches. You have said that "those the Church attracts to the priesthood have a propensity for child abuse".

Are you really saying that anyone attracted to the priesthood has a propensity for child abuse? You think that the 99% of priests who have never abused a child have some latent propensity which has attracted them to the priesthood?

mccamleyc;

I don't know where you get your figure of 99% from. Even if you did a statistical analysis and found that only 1% of priests are proven pedaphiles, that may be considerably higher than other religions and possibly only the tip of the iceberg, we just don't know. Until recently, most evidence at all was just anecdotal. Only time will tell what other informations becomes known. However, it is undeniable that the vow of celebacy the priesthood of the Catholic church requires a man to take flies in the face of what for the vast majority of male human beings is a powerful driving force in their lives that is an inescapable aspect of their biological makeup. It also consequently becomes an inescapable aspect of their psychology. Therefore, it seems reasonable to conclude that for those who enter the priesthood, either they must exercise enormous restraint throughout their entire lives which flies in the face of those driving forces or find outlets for them which are in direct conflict with the vows they took or acceptable behavior as defined by our civil and criminal laws or both.

Will outrage is the easy reaction. The difficult option is to cooperate with the various investigations and to whistleblow where necessary.When I see a priest coming forward and exposing abuse/coverup before the investigative media find it, then I will feel that the church has truly changed.

It would be interesting to know where mccamleyc got the 99% non-abuser figure from. A recent thread here on W&T mentioned a higher percentage of abusers:

/blogs/ni/2009/10/the_vatican_hits_back.html

From that thread:

'"Only" 1.5%-5% of Catholic clergy were involved in child sex abuse.'

And as Marcus asks, are there such percentages of child sex abusers in other religions?

PK

Depends on what you mean by child. If you mean pre-pubescent, then paedophilia is as relatively rare in the RC Church in the US (the only area I can find good stats on) as elsewhere.

The sexual abuse of pubescents in the US Church was higher than expected. It would be interesting to have stats from US public Schools for comparison, but that's not going to happen. As for other denominations, I don't **think** that any have been put under the same scrutiny as the RC Church in the US.

The reported rate of sexual abuse of pubescents and pre-pubescents seems
unusually high in the Irish case. I can't find how many Priests with access to children and teens worked in the Dublin diocese over the time period.
Which would be important to know.

GV

Hello Graham,

"It would be interesting to have stats from US public Schools for comparison, but that's not going to happen."

A quick bit of googling (yesyes, I know the other thread is also still waiting for me, I'll see if I have time for that one this evening) led me to the following:



I've not read beyond the first page of that article, not even looked up the Associated Press investigation report that that the WP article deals with. But some very broad preliminary numbers:

- 3 million public school teachers
- 2570 cases reported between 2001 and 2005, or less than 1 in a thousand

I'd need to look up more detail on when the abuses took place, if that was all in the same period in which the allegations were made or also before 2001-2005. The Catholic abuses covered a long period. If the public school teachers abuses cover a shorter period then that would make the ratio less unfavourable to the abusive priests. Although I doubt if it would equal the abuse level. The 2570/3000000 figure for public school teachers means that the percentage of abusing priests (going by the 1.5-5% estimate put forward by the Vatican) is 18 to 58 times higher. Please note: not 18-58% higher, but a factor of 18-58, so 1800-5800%. That seems an impossibly large ratio for the Catholic church to spin its way out of. Especially if their best line of defense is to say that it's all down to homosexuals.

Feel free to read more than I did up to now (you seem to have more time to spare during the day from your RE teacher job than I do from mine) and point out any further corrections that seem appropriate.

Peter - go back and read your article again. Firstly you'll see it's only cases uncovered by an Associated Press investigation - "educators whose teaching credentials were revoked, denied, surrendered or sanctioned".

As the article says "Most of the abuse never gets reported. Those cases reported often end with no action. Cases investigated sometimes can't be proven, and many abusers have several victims."

So I don't think you can extrapolate percentages in the way you are doing. What the article clearly shows is how widespread abuse is and how ignoring it and covering it up has been the standard response of institutions.

On a different note, for those interested, I have checked which countries have the Nuncio as Dean of thd Diplomatic Corps.

As last count, I think about 43 countries had the Nuncio as Dean - most of Europe, including Switzerland, France, Spain, Portugal, Belgium, Germany, Luxembourg, Austria, Poland, Malta, Italy, Hungary, Romania and Ireland. Some of the new Republics also: Croatia, Slovenia, Czech Rep., Lithuania, Slovakia. All countries of Central and South America and, a curious anomoly, Ivory Coast. Only one Asian country follows the practice: the Philipines.

PK

Dear me! You don't seem to lead the same life that most of the post-docs I've met lead. (Or led). But I'm extrapolating from a small sample.

But now that you mention it, I do have reason to be thankful...

I don't have time to read articles during the day, but I can make enough time to scan a blog. And even copy click and paste from my old philosophy and religion files. So no, I don't face the same pressure for deadlines. It's a nice, low pressure life if you get a good school. I like kids, and my subject. So I don't really understand why so many teachers whinge. (Unless they're in a horrible school).

Nothing stopping you joining us you know. My bet is you'd be a very good science teacher. I know one post-doc who made the leap out of research. (Very bright one too.)Temporary drop in pay, but less pressure once your first few years are over, and time to read around his subject. And soon caught up on the pay scale.

Just a thought.

GV

1% of Catholic priests were sexually abusing boys.
But only 50% of those were abusing pre-pubescent boys. Then of course
thats a false figure if each priest had more than one victim. Then its always good to take the lower rather than the higher figure with stats, benefit of the doubt and all that. So really, there were very few abuser priests at all, in fact, hardly worth mentioning.

Some info from personal experience.

1st junior seminary. 7 priest members of staff - 3 abusers.
2nd junior seminary. 3 priest members of staff - 2 abusers.

How unlucky was I???

Those five abusing priests were all products of a pre-Vatican II Church who were very clerical, just loved the black cassock and biretta, werent too fussed about the Gospel put were heavy into Latin, Church Dogma, Gregorian Chant, rubrics, Canon Law and Traditional piety etc..

Strangely enough, the priests who displayed a deep love of the gospel and tried to emulate the teachings of Jesus and who didnt have a 'devotion' to all of the above, didnt seem to have any sort of predatory inclinations towards us at all.

But, hey, what would I know?

Nobledeebee

"When I see a priest coming forward and exposing abuse/cover up.... I will know that the Church has changed."

I did. It hasnt.

Of course I can only speak for myself, but I love the life. And my students aren't doing too badly out of it either. So I don't even have to feel selfish.

But maybe I'm just lucky in the School I found.

Thanks for the article. And don't worry about the other thread time wise. I don't think anyone is in a rush.

mccamleyc,

"Peter - go back and read your article again. Firstly you'll see it's only cases uncovered by an Associated Press investigation"

The investigation covered the whole US. Requests for information were filed at state level and obtained for every state except Maine (where a state privacy law prevented handing over the names). The AP didn't go hunting themselves for individual cases, they took all that was on record.

While many abuse cases by teachers would indeed not have been on record, I don't know if the percentage of abuse cases by priests not on record would be higher or lower. Rather than assuming in favour of the priests, do you have some data?

Speaking of data, anything to support your '99% of priests who have never abused a child' when the Vatican says the percentage of abusers might be as high as 5%?

Graham, my duties as a PhD and later as a postdoc have involved some teaching duties (although no full lecturing). Instructing students who are interested is fine, I'm happy to do that. In fact, I've done some instructing to those in need of some extra help outside regular high school hours. But teaching those not interested sucks. And I fear that the less advanced the school stage is (and therefore the less students have been able to choose the thing they like) the higher the percentage of students for whom it is an obligation they dislike.

Also, while teaching can be good, it simply doesn't have the opportunities to investigate new things that full-time research does. It is more fun.:)

Lads I just took 1% out of the air - the number didn't matter for the point - if you want you can have 10%. That still means 90% are not abusers. To repeat Marcus's ridiculous early statement "those the Church attracts to the priesthood have a propensity for child abuse". For that statement to have anything approaching validity, he'd have to show that more than 50% of priests are abusers.

RJB - yes, you are unlucky.

Yip. I was unlucky. Like thousands and thousands of others.

PK;

""Only" 1.5%-5% of Catholic clergy were involved in child sex abuse.'"

I think that this or whatever number mccamely agrees to is only the number that have been discovered to date. What the true number is is anyone's guess. What should be of equal concern to the Catholic Church is what percentage have broken their vow of lifelong celebacy at least one time after having taking their vows. That might be 25%, 50%, or even close to 100% for all we know. That they never even discuss the subject let along study it seems to me to conform to their true philosophy of hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil at least when it comes to their own. When it comes to everyone else, that seems to be almost all they ever hear, see, or speak.

Mr. Crawley, I'd be as critical of any other religion under comparable circumstances as I am of this one, I am entirely impartial as I am entirely judgemental and hold none of them in any high regard. But the evidence seems to point unusally strongly, almost singularly to this one in particular, at least now. To their equally hypocritical mantra of: "let he who is without sin cast the first stone" I give Ayn Rand's retort: "judge and prepare to be judged."

Marcus

On the subject of abuse and different religions, Billy Connolly once stated that the reason other religions dont have the problem the Catholic Church has is because, "Other religions have celibacy... without whisky!"

For once I agree with Markie - The catholic church practises something the Bible forbids (ie not being allowed to marry) this leads to mental illness, and a mutation of the natural order.
In the very few examples were God empowered men to be single, they were the expeception rather than the rule.
The doctrine of celibacy could very well be the reason the cathoilc church has such a high rate of child abuse

Now the Spirit expressly says that in later times some will depart from the faith by devoting themselves to deceitful spirits and teachings of demons,through the insincerity of liars whose consciences are seared, who FORBID MARRIAGE.

Jas

PK

Yeah, there is that side. I suppose sometimes I worry that lecturers are being given administrative tasks etc. which takes them away from what they love. And I think that hurts education on every level - mine included. Maybe that applies more to Brit Universties.

I also think that NI needs outspoken atheists in secondary/grammar schools.

That'll get me in trouble with some folk.

GV

"The doctrine of celibacy could very well be the reason the cathoilc church has such a high rate of child abuse"

You may as well offer an astrological explanation. Freud aside (please!) there's no accepted explanation that takes us from celibacy to paedophilia.

Quick statistic - there are twice as many unmarried women in the Evangelical Church as there are married women. Has chaos followed?

GV

Aunt Jason - no one is forbidden to marry - - it's a free choice to become a priest, not something you're forced into by caste.

As for other religions - have a look at this report from the US on abuse in protestant churches.

They report about 260 cases a year compared with 228 a year for Catholics. Both figures only cases that surface.

there is a huge danger in people thinking this is aCatholic problem - that's the sort of attitude that got the Catholic Church into the mess - "these things wouldn't happen here"

Aunt Jason

It IS a Catholic problem and any amount of shifting the goal posts, guilt transference and manipulating statistics by MCC, wont change that.

mccamleyc

Post 19, last line. You owe RJB an apology.

Peter - RJB (what happened to Smithy?) said "how unlucky was I???" - so why on earth would I have to apologise for agreeing with him. You think he was lucky?

RJB - I meant it wasn't a uniquely Catholic problem - of course it's a problem for us.

William - I like your "you can take it for granted there are abusers in all denominations" - the point is these guys don't take it for granted - they are arguing it is a Catholic problem with this libel that those attracted to priesthood have a propensity to paedophilia.

I agree the figures are generally suspect - I was merely making the point at that stage in the discussion that paedophilia is a general problem affecting all areas of society.

I think your second point contradicts your first point to some extent - the fracturing of protestantism makes it much harder to determine the levels of abuse within Protestant ecclesial communions.

I suspect no other denomination is facing these allegations because they have never been investigated. To some extent this is due to the relative failure of the media to show any concern for abuse carried out by anyone other than Catholic priests. Invariably they get much greater coverage than any other type of abuser.

You say, William there is "a conspiracy amongst the leadership of one denomination to cover-up clerical abuse" - where exactly in the Murphy Report does it say this? I can find no reference to a conspiracy.

And my last question - where in Murphy is a reference to a conspiracy?

mccamleyc

Think about it.

People are flinging about a lot of lose language. We've been told anyone attracted to priesthood has a propensity to paedophilia. And William has said there was a conspiracy among the leadership. The Report doesn't say this. A conspiracy is quite a specific accusation and it doesn't appear on Murphy.

Still waiting for anyone to respond to the cover up of child abuse by doctors, clinics, NHS, chemists.

15 year old girl turns up at a Brook clinic for contraception - here's a bag, help yourself, no questions asked. She feels relaxed so mentions she's having sex with a Catholic priest - suddenly it's time to call a newspaper!

Hypocrites!

Post 26 mccamley - "Aunt Jason - no one is forbidden to marry - - it's a free choice to become a priest, not something you're forced into by caste."


"no one is forbidden to marry"

Mccamley - priests are *forbidden* by the catholic church to marry, so I conclude the laws set down by the papacy fits 1 Timothy 4&3 exactly.

"it's a free choice to become a priest"

How can a choice be free under the unscriptural bondage of catholic Dogma?



Jas

I was making the point that lots of journalists are using the term "conspiracy" but the Murphy Report doesnt' because it is, as you say, quite a specific legal term. Conspiracy is something you can be charged with and despite all the awful things, and the hopes for resignations etc there doesn't seem to be evidence of a criminal conspiracy. Presumably if there was there would be arrests.

Just to return to the question of lose language. The Irish Times has this in its correction column today:

"An editorial in the edition of November 27th, concerning the Murphy report into clerical sexual abuse in the Dublin archdiocese, said that 鈥渢he vast majority of uninvolved priests turned a blind eye鈥�. This related to those priests who were aware that particular instances of abuse had occured."

I'm not sure how you could describe someone who was aware of abuse as "uninvolved". Sounds like an attempt to wriggle out of a smear.