sexual abuse by protestant ministers

[jen_fla]

and again, the suffering of children is reduced to numbers, and these numbers are used to sling mud.

“look at how many the Protestants got! see? see?”

for every number there is an abused child.

that you guys would stoop so low and be so, so intent on defending your Church and her priests to use statistical representations of child sexual abuse by religious leaders to prove a point or shift emphasis is insane.

so instead of worrying about the kids abused by leaders within your own church, or setting up a thread where these survivors (from any church) can be prayed for, a natural response is to start a thread exposing Baptist child abuse. nice.

have you gone into all the threads that are about the abuse in the Catholic Church and told them the converse thing? i doubt it. please show me one Catholic poster on this thread or anywhere on CAF for that matter that isn’t worried about abuse of the children in our Church OR ANY church for that matter. you can’t because you are making assumptions and sadly enough you can’t or don’t want to admit how widespread this sick problem is.

maybe reporters digging into these scandals will come across this information:
*
NEW YORK (ABP) – Time Magazine ranked the Southern Baptist Convention’s refusal to establish a database of clergy sex offenders one of the most under-reported news stories in 2008.

A ranking of under-reported stories in Time’s “Top 10 Everything of 2008” special feature placed the story at No. 6, behind a mix-up that accidentally sent U.S. nuclear-warhead fuses to Taiwan, the Congolese civil war, violence in Sri Lanka, and new guidelines for insurance coverage for mental health and regulation of food from animals that are genetically altered.

“Facing calls to curb child sex abuse within its churches, in June the Southern Baptist Convention – the largest U.S. religious body after the Catholic Church – urged local hiring committees to conduct federal background checks but rejected a proposal to create a central database of staff and clergy who have been either convicted of or indicted on charges of molesting minors,” the magazine noted.

“The SBC decided against such a database in part because its principle of local autonomy means it cannot compel individual churches to report any information. **And while the headlines regarding churches and pedophilia remain largely focused on Catholic parishes, the lack of hierarchical structure and systematized record-keeping in most Protestant churches makes it harder not only for church leaders to impose standards, but for interested parties to track allegations of abuse.” *** rest here

if you are baptist, and you weren’t aware of that, don’t you think you’d be better off for having been made aware of this issue?.. for the safety of the baptist children?

the answer is yes. awareness is a good thing.

maybe the baptist members can get more involved and see that change happen. maybe it will prevent another case of abuse!

and you are making false accusations by stating that this thread is just to “sling mud.”

peace.

 

[jen_fla]

A few observations

1. Hope you read the article on the sex scandal within Catholicism in the current Newsweek. It tries to acheive balance. A second piece, by George Weigel, also in the current Newsweek, does its best to defend the church, as Weigel always does.

 2. There is no doubt that sexual exploitation and/or misconduct is and has been a problem within Protestantism, also. Remember these differences, however. a) Most such problems have involved consenting adults - ministers with adult parishioners, often who came for counseling which led to a relationship. Such ministers, when exposed, usually have been tossed out immediately; b) in this area, at least, the worst cases seem to arise among 'ministers' who are not really ministers in that they have never been ordained by recognized denominations, have little formal education, set up shop in storefronts, and hide various forms of exploitation behind religion - hardly to be included among legitimate Protestant ministers; c) I know of no cases in which denominational officials have reassigned or recommended ministers who have behaved badly as sexual predators to other churches; d) in general Protestant churches are much more democratic, smaller congregations, and closely knit, providing sexual predators less opportunity to exploit and get away with it; and e) while denied by Weigel and others, **I strongly believe that married clergy are less likely to exploit children and teenage boys. **

 3. Catholicism seems to have attracted a high percentage of gay clergy, which helps account for the exploitation of teen boys. Why? a) The Catholic priesthood attracts gays because no one will ask them why they're not married. b) Many gay priests believe and sincerely hope that being a priest will safeguard them from acting upon their sexual impulses. c) Many gay priests are attracted to an all-male fraternity, even when they fully intend to remain totally celibate. d) There are things in Catholicism - such as the vestments, the refined liturgy, etc. - that have a special appeal to gays, many of whom are appealed to by theatre, fashion, and such.

  Christians should be loving one another and not engaged in the sort of 'gotcha' dialogue that goes on and on here at CAF. "All have sinned...." and we need to let God be the ultimate judge. Meanwhile, if someone, priest or layman, violates the civil law, then we have other judges here on earth for that. The Catholic church's failure as a worldwide church lies with a hierarchy which has shown more interest in protecting the 'good name' of the church rather than show concern for the victims. Threatening victims, or even secretly paying them off, is outrageous. Protestantism does not have such a hierarchy, and offending clergy, therefore, have been provided no such protection. The notion that the issue in Catholicism is like that in Protestantism is false, though there is guilty to go around. 

  God bless the whole world - no exceptions.

addressing bolded statement which i bolded:

and roy that is just it, your opinion and nothing more. what are your feelings based on? that you don’t understand why scripture would say marriage is great, but celibacy is even better? a bias perhaps?

the facts are that married men are overwhelmingly (around 77%) more likely to be a predator.

you can verify from this secular source.

peace.

 

[jen_fla]

Good show, Roy, and a good article.

that wasn’t an article, but rather roy’s opinion of some things he has read. just clarifying. :tiphat:

 

[jen_fla]

Wow, that silent lamb website is an eye opener…There are six priest’s right around me…

When the media was first approached with this story the Home Office of Jehovah’s Witnesses immediately sprang into a misinformation campaign. They informed members there was no problem with current abuse policy and anyone who spoke to media was in effect speaking against God. Members were required to inform the public there was no problem with the abuse policy and anyone that spoke to media were liars. This was the basis for the start of the silentlambs website which began in March 2001.

strange how they only have TWO databases you can search, the secular sex offender registry and one specifically for Catholic priests. i think the Catholic database is good. you can look up and see what the courts decided, who was guilty, how many priests were accused after they died etc. so that is all good.

but where are records of abuse from other denominations? funny how that works when the basis of this website was supposedly to expose the crime in the JW sect. rather odd isn’t it?

 

[jen_fla]

Dear Catholics,

Blaming gays, deflecting attention onto Protestants, blaming the victims, and generally acting like this all a public relations issue instead of an issue of justice is all atrocious and absurd. How you deal with these abuse cases reflects on all of us Christians. Please make an effort to deal with them better.

Sincerely,

Episcopalians

dear zach,

1. please show me which Catholic blamed this on gays? in fact, i think you will find that it is our non-Catholic posters that have insinuated such.
2. “deflecting attention onto protestants” would imply that this thread was solely about the abuse in the CC which it is not. are you of the opinion that we can only discuss this topic as long as it’s only about the CC? explain to me how expanding on a topic means one is deflecting from an area in that topic? as has been pointed out earlier there are already numerous other threads on CAF focusing on the sins of the CC.
3. please show me where anyone blamed a victim. that one really hurt to read.
4. please make an effort to quote whatever it is that you are offended by.

peace.

 

[jen_fla]

There are several threads dealing with the Catholic abuse scandal.

I believe the OP was trying to point out (rightly so), that it happens everywhere. It doesn’t make it right. It doesn’t make it better or worse because it is another faith. It is just trying to get people to realize that it is all around us.

That is why this thread is talking about protestant ministers.

to be fair i was also shedding light on the secular institutions as well.

just wanted to say thanks for being literate! i am amazed at how many people don’t seem to have decent reading comprehension skills. they read what they already believe if that makes sense. perhaps i am just a really poor communicator when it comes to the written word, but i have spelled certain things out over and over and yet it’s like the words are somehow invisible.

peace.

 

[jen_fla]

I noticed something. A day before this was posted there was a post about the priests molesting children. Now that post has been take off and this one is still on. Why? Is there a double standard. We don’t want a discussion about what the priests done but its alright of discuss what protestant ministers have done. Lets slam the protestant ministers but not the priests. Seems like a double standard to me.

there are many threads about the topic, but more than likely members got really heated and started name calling or something. i’ve seen many threads get shut down, not for the topic, but for the manner in which caf members handled themselves.

even the best of us can lose our tempers from time to time.

peace, rev.

 

[jen_fla]

addressing bolded statement which i bolded:

and roy that is just it, your opinion and nothing more. what are your feelings based on? that you don’t understand why scripture would say marriage is great, but celibacy is even better? a bias perhaps?

**the facts are that married men are overwhelmingly (around 77%) more likely to be a predator. **

you can verify from this secular source.

peace.

sorry. i meant to write, 77% of predators are married.

 

[Zach82]

dear zach,

1. please show me which Catholic blamed this on gays? in fact, i think you will find that it is our non-Catholic posters that have insinuated such.
2. “deflecting attention onto protestants” would imply that this thread was solely about the abuse in the CC which it is not. are you of the opinion that we can only discuss this topic as long as it’s only about the CC? explain to me how expanding on a topic means one is deflecting from an area in that topic? as has been pointed out earlier there are already numerous other threads on CAF focusing on the sins of the CC.
3. please show me where anyone blamed a victim. that one really hurt to read.
4. please make an effort to quote whatever it is that you are offended by.

peace.

Is this like a thing on this forum? Every single generalization about Catholic is decried as malicious and false? Can’t I just throw out some common defenses I have seen and say “Hey, these aren’t a good idea!” This seemed like as good a place to post it as any, since this whole tread is predicated on the idea that “See, Protestants do it too! People are so mean for ganging up on the Catholics.” I even clarified myself and said I wasn’t talking about most Catholics.

Zach

 

[tweetymom]

I noticed something. A day before this was posted there was a post about the priests molesting children. Now that post has been take off and this one is still on. Why? Is there a double standard. We don’t want a discussion about what the priests done but its alright of discuss what protestant ministers have done. Lets slam the protestant ministers but not the priests. Seems like a double standard to me.

Sure seems that way.

 

[twopekinguys]

Is this like a thing on this forum? Every single generalization about Catholic is decried as malicious and false? Can’t I just throw out some common defenses I have seen and say “Hey, these aren’t a good idea!” This seemed like as good a place to post it as any, since this whole tread is predicated on the idea that “See, Protestants do it too! People are so mean for ganging up on the Catholics.” I even clarified myself and said I wasn’t talking about most Catholics.

Zach

:whacky::whacky:

 

[Zach82]

Two, don’t you have anything better to do than follow me between threads being snarky and aggressive?

Zach

 

[twopekinguys]

Two, don’t you have anything better to do than follow me between threads being snarky and aggressive?

Zach

Now who’s being paranoid? Don’t flatter yourself. You are nothing but a blip on the radar.

 

[Zach82]

Now who’s being paranoid? Don’t flatter yourself. You are nothing but a blip on the radar.

Well, that is what you did on the Catholic/Episcopal thread. It’s not paranoia if that’s exactly what you did.

Zach

 

[twopekinguys]

Well, that is what you did on the Catholic/Episcopal thread. It’s not paranoia if that’s exactly what you did.

Zach

Oh please!! Give me a break!!

Not that I have to justify anything to you, but…I have been reading that thread since the time it started. By the way, look how long I have been here as opposed to you. I read lots and lots of threads.

There was no reason for me to post because Gurney is, and was doing a wonderful job on that thread. In seeing and reading his exasperation, and I show my support for him, that is somehow following you? Was that post directed at you? Did it mention you? No,

I have a news flash for you. It’s going to come as a big shock to you I’m sure. But here goes.

The Earth does not revolve around you. Oh yeah, and look behind you, the boggie man is going to get ya.

 

[Zach82]

I suppose your are right. Barring any attempt to comprehend subtext or implication, your post over there didn’t technically mention me. Mea culpa.

Zach

 

[Holly3278]

It is true that the Protestant Church is far from innocent of this sort of thing. And what infuriates me is that some Protestants will point out the abuse in the Catholic Church and say that the Catholic Church must be false because of this abuse but yet they fail to see the plank in their own eye.

 

[4Squarebaby]

there are many threads about the topic, but more than likely members got really heated and started name calling or something. i’ve seen many threads get shut down, not for the topic, but for the manner in which caf members handled themselves.

even the best of us can lose our tempers from time to time.

peace, rev.

Of course the danger of blind moderator or administror actions is seen as no different then the claim that Bishops are actively participating in cover ups. A simple note by the moderator that he/she acted will help to defuse such thoughts.

 

[Deo_Volente]

Grace & Peace!

Is this like a thing on this forum? Every single generalization about Catholic is decried as malicious and false? Can’t I just throw out some common defenses I have seen and say “Hey, these aren’t a good idea!” This seemed like as good a place to post it as any, since this whole tread is predicated on the idea that “See, Protestants do it too! People are so mean for ganging up on the Catholics.” I even clarified myself and said I wasn’t talking about most Catholics.

Zach

I think that, to be fair to our Roman Catholic brothers and sisters, we have to recognize a variety of tensions which are exacerbating some sensibilities here.

This is the situation as I see it. Here, to me, are a couple givens which contribute to ruffled feathers:

1–Most people, including most Roman Catholics, do not understand the official teaching regarding papal infallibility.
2–RC ecclesiology consistently conflates the bureacratic administration of the Roman Catholic Church with the reality of the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.

Here is the problem: Taken together, both points have led many to believe (even Roman Catholics) that Roman Catholics hold that the Pope is above criticism–in fact, that he cannot be criticized nor can he be questioned–and that unquestioning loyalty to the Pope and to the hierarchy/administration of the Roman Church is what makes one a true Roman Catholic because the hierarchy is the Church and the Church is always right.

What is often privately or even subconsciously understood, however, is that while the OHCA Church is always right and cannot fail, the Roman Catholic hierarchy can fail and can get things wrong. But this understanding produces an incredible cognitive dissonance. If the hierarchy fails, does that not mean that the Church fails? But the Church cannot fail!

Which leads to one of a couple reactions a) we need to unconditionally and unquestioningly rally round the Church, meaning we need to support the hierarchy/Pope or b) maybe Roman Catholicism has failed, I need to find a new church, I’m very disillusioned or c) Christianity has failed. Another reaction would be d) I realize that bureaucratic institutions, even bureacracies that are constructed to administer Spiritual Realities and/or Revelations, are bound to fail in one way or another, but that is immaterial to the Spiritual Realities and/or Revelations that the bureaucracy purports to administer; I will remain a Roman Catholic and pray for justice and forgiveness for the hierarchy which I realize is both fallible (because it is human) and uniquely remarkable (because God has nonetheless chosen it to be a particular vessel of grace in the world).

When a priest is shown to be a sexual predator and that a Bishop colluded administratively (either through action or action, consciously or unconsciously) in that predation, and that such collusion was largely a byproduct of official administrative policy, folks outside of the Roman Church say: The Church has a problem which jeopardizes its moral credibility.

Folks inside the Church are often divided into camps a, b, c, and d above.

Camp d can agree with the criticism and qualify it with: I’m disappointed too, but thankfully, the moral authority of the Church does not depend on the Roman Catholic hierarchy. Pray with me for justice and peace!

Camp c (with many outside Rome and Christianity generally) will often say: It’s all a lie! I thought the Church was supposed to be good! Now I know we were lied to!

Camp b will often agree with Camp c but say: No no no, it’s just the Roman Catholic Church that’s awful!

Camp a will disagree and say: You cannot criticize!! You’re all just as bad!! Except the Church (by which I mean the Roman Catholic Church) is not bad!! Why are you picking on us!! You can’t pick on us!! No one has done anything wrong!! The Church has *never *done anything wrong (except insofar as the Pope has stated on occasion that the Church has done something wrong, but he doesn’t mean the Church, he means people in the Church)!! The Pope is blameless!! That’s what it means to be Pope!! To the extent to which anyone has done anything wrong, it’s the fault of the infiltration of homosexuals, liberals, naysayers and cafeteria Catholics–none of which are really Catholic anyway!! (By the way, Episcopalians are awful!!)

In the meantime, the press has sadly focused some on Camp b and c, but public perception admits mostly just what they hear or attribute to Camp a (which accords with the general stereotype of Roman Catholics)–leaving most people outside Roman Catholicism believing that all Roman Catholics are lemmings or morally autistic. Leading many outside Rome to say: You guys all believe you’re morally upright and infallible. Well look at the mess you’re in! You’re hypocrites! You don’t have a credibility problem anymore–credibility has left the building!

Lots of schadenfreude is produced.

Leaving those in Camp d sadly shaking their heads and quietly going to Mass.

My feeling is that if points 1 and 2 above could be publically addressed and corrected, a lot of the problems and a lot of the outrage could be avoided. Until then, I think we should cut our Roman Catholic brothers and sisters a little slack. It’s a very trying situation for them to be in.

Under the Mercy,
Mark

All is Grace and Mercy! Deo Gratias!

 

[twopekinguys]

Grace & Peace!

I think that, to be fair to our Roman Catholic brothers and sisters, we have to recognize a variety of tensions which are exacerbating some sensibilities here.

This is the situation as I see it. Here, to me, are a couple givens which contribute to ruffled feathers:

1–Most people, including most Roman Catholics, do not understand the official teaching regarding papal infallibility.
2–RC ecclesiology consistently conflates the bureacratic administration of the Roman Catholic Church with the reality of the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.

Here is the problem: Taken together, both points have led many to believe (even Roman Catholics) that Roman Catholics hold that the Pope is above criticism–in fact, that he cannot be criticized nor can he be questioned–and that unquestioning loyalty to the Pope and to the hierarchy/administration of the Roman Church is what makes one a true Roman Catholic because the hierarchy is the Church and the Church is always right.

What is often privately or even subconsciously understood, however, is that while the OHCA Church is always right and cannot fail, the Roman Catholic hierarchy can fail and can get things wrong. But this understanding produces an incredible cognitive dissonance. If the hierarchy fails, does that not mean that the Church fails? But the Church cannot fail!

Which leads to one of a couple reactions a) we need to unconditionally and unquestioningly rally round the Church, meaning we need to support the hierarchy/Pope or b) maybe Roman Catholicism has failed, I need to find a new church, I’m very disillusioned or c) Christianity has failed. Another reaction would be d) I realize that bureaucratic institutions, even bureacracies that are constructed to administer Spiritual Realities and/or Revelations, are bound to fail in one way or another, but that is immaterial to the Spiritual Realities and/or Revelations that the bureaucracy purports to administer; I will remain a Roman Catholic and pray for justice and forgiveness for the hierarchy which I realize is both fallible (because it is human) and uniquely remarkable (because God has nonetheless chosen it to be a particular vessel of grace in the world).

When a priest is shown to be a sexual predator and that a Bishop colluded administratively (either through action or action, consciously or unconsciously) in that predation, and that such collusion was largely a byproduct of official administrative policy, folks outside of the Roman Church say: The Church has a problem which jeopardizes its moral credibility.

Folks inside the Church are often divided into camps a, b, c, and d above.

Camp d can agree with the criticism and qualify it with: I’m disappointed too, but thankfully, the moral authority of the Church does not depend on the Roman Catholic hierarchy. Pray with me for justice and peace!

Camp c (with many outside Rome and Christianity generally) will often say: It’s all a lie! I thought the Church was supposed to be good! Now I know we were lied to!

Camp b will often agree with Camp c but say: No no no, it’s just the Roman Catholic Church that’s awful!

Camp a will disagree and say: You cannot criticize!! You’re all just as bad!! Except the Church (by which I mean the Roman Catholic Church) is not bad!! Why are you picking on us!! You can’t pick on us!! No one has done anything wrong!! The Church has *never *done anything wrong (except insofar as the Pope has stated on occasion that the Church has done something wrong, but he doesn’t mean the Church, he means people in the Church)!! The Pope is blameless!! That’s what it means to be Pope!! To the extent to which anyone has done anything wrong, it’s the fault of the infiltration of homosexuals, liberals, naysayers and cafeteria Catholics–none of which are really Catholic anyway!! (By the way, Episcopalians are awful!!)

In the meantime, the press has sadly focused some on Camp b and c, but public perception admits mostly just what they hear or attribute to Camp a (which accords with the general stereotype of Roman Catholics)–leaving most people outside Roman Catholicism believing that all Roman Catholics are lemmings or morally autistic. Leading many outside Rome to say: You guys all believe you’re morally upright and infallible. Well look at the mess you’re in! You’re hypocrites! You don’t have a credibility problem anymore–credibility has left the building!

Lots of schadenfreude is produced.

Leaving those in Camp d sadly shaking their heads and quietly going to Mass.

My feeling is that if points 1 and 2 above could be publically addressed and corrected, a lot of the problems and a lot of the outrage could be avoided. Until then, I think we should cut our Roman Catholic brothers and sisters a little slack. It’s a very trying situation for them to be in.

Under the Mercy,
Mark

All is Grace and Mercy! Deo Gratias!

Your item 1. What makes you think most Catholics don’t understand Papal infallibility? What is your understanding of it?

Once we clear that up, we can move onto other things in your post.