The Pope and the Murphy case: what the New York Times story didn't tell you

  • Thread starter Thread starter lemonbeam
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
To my statement that: “The Church protects “its own” but NOT its innocent children”, ***maryj ***said:
maryj said:
Holy cow, how’s that for a blanket statement. I’m going to assume you really didn’t think about that before you typed it.
Click to expand...
No, I have thought about it a lot and for a long time. The institutional Church, just like any other large organization, will circle the wagons and protect its own. There are a lot of management studies about this, and you can see it happen in all kinds of corporate, governmental and institutional settings. The Catholic Church heirarchy is no different.

The problem is that the innocent children and their families deserved protection too. They are as much the Catholic Church as any Priest or Bishop. But the Church failed, and in a spectacular way, to understand this and to apply the basic teachings of the Gospel. I look for some glimmer of light, for some evidence of Christian love and charity, for some indication that someone, somewhere, acted unselfishly to protect the innocent. I don’t see much evidence of that anywhere.
 
“Nothing is covered up that will not be revealed, or hidden that will not be known. 3Therefore whatever you have said in the dark shall be heard in the light, and what you have whispered in private rooms shall be proclaimed on the housetops.”
Saint Luke 12, 2.
 
aj10 said:
Dear Anode,
I agree with you. The New York Times, London Times, and Der Spiegel would like nothing more than to bring down the church, but that doesn’t mean that they shouldn’t expose wrong-doing. The U.S. sex scandal came to light, not by the Church, but by the secular press. American Catholics in the pews had written letters, sent videos and complained to their bishops and the Vatican about this evil and were told “Trust us.” Apparently only the secular press has the power to bring this darkness into the light of day. Even though our accusers hate us and spin the data, they are ultimately doing us a favor.
The Church heirarchy wants to walk through this muddy sex abuse scandal with clean robes, and I don’t think it can be done. They need to roll up their sleeves, get dirty and clean house for the sake of all Catholic children past, present and future.
Click to expand...
👍
 
chaunceygardner said:
To my statement that: “The Church protects “its own” but NOT its innocent children”, ***maryj ***said:

No, I have thought about it a lot and for a long time. The institutional Church, just like any other large organization, will circle the wagons and protect its own. There are a lot of management studies about this, and you can see it happen in all kinds of corporate, governmental and institutional settings. The Catholic Church heirarchy is no different.

The problem is that the innocent children and their families deserved protection too. They are as much the Catholic Church as any Priest or Bishop. But the Church failed, and in a spectacular way, to understand this and to apply the basic teachings of the Gospel. I look for some glimmer of light, for some evidence of Christian love and charity, for some indication that someone, somewhere, acted unselfishly to protect the innocent. I don’t see much evidence of that anywhere.
Click to expand...
The Church back then did make mistakes, and innocent children where not protected. But for every child that was not, a million other children where clothed, fed and gave opportunities that they otherwise wouldn’t of had. This is not take away from the abused children, but we can’t go around circles forever, and neither can we hide out faces in the dirt, the only things we can do for the victims now are to assure them that such cover ups of abuse can never happen again with the reforms, that if there are Bishops or Priests that where involved in sexual abuse or cover ups, and they are still alive, they should resign or be ‘sacked’ ? WE NEED A CLEAN HOUSE. And try and preach forgiveness, although it must be hard for them.

:signofcross:
 
I can not believe some of the comments that I’ve seen from Non-Catholic Christians who are jumping on the bandwagon of hate towards the Catholic Church. Blaming celibacy, and blaming the Pope. Why don’t they address the fact that through insurance companies who underwrite churches, it is proven that abuse is much higher in their institutions, with NONCELIBATE priests, and without a Pope either. What a load of rubbish. Sad.

Their Churches should be looking to the reforms the Catholic Church has taken and try adopting them.
 
lemonbeam said:
T
FACT #4
In the overwhelming vast majority of cases where sexual abuse was reported in the Catholic Church, the alleged victim was a male between the ages of 12 and 18. Victims younger than 12 were almost never reported, and sexual abuse of females was also rare. This is not the clinical definition of pedophilia. It is however a type of predatory homosexuality that seeks to take advantage of underage young men. Therefore the term “pedophile priests” is a misnomer and not based on hard statistical data. A more accurate term should be "predatory homosexual priests."
FACT #5
Homosexual men are not allowed to become priests in the Catholic Church. In order for a homosexual to become a priest he must lie about his homosexuality just to get into seminary and remain “in the closet” indefinitely. If he is ever discovered to be gay, he would be fired and laicized (defrocked).

catholicknight.blogspot.com/2010/03/pope-to-be-crucified-this-easter.html
Click to expand...
Lemonbeam, Your whole post was GREAT. However, I’m most impressed by the fact that in stating that this scandal was one of homosexuality, you have faced an “un polititcally correct” fact.

I’m anxious to see how many of those who are so indignant over the fact that boys were hurt (beyond my anything that imagination can absorb)will answer your message. Will they come down as hard on the gays (especially Archbishop Weakland whose gay affair cost the Church financially & morally) who have caused this, or will they totally ignore your message. We shall see!

Thank you, again, for your links.
 
CradleCath said:
Lemonbeam, Your whole post was GREAT. However, I’m most impressed by the fact that in stating that this scandal was one of homosexuality, you have faced an “un polititcally correct” fact.

I’m anxious to see how many of those who are so indignant over the fact that boys were hurt (beyond my anything that imagination can absorb)will answer your message. Will they come down as hard on the gays (especially Archbishop Weakland whose gay affair cost the Church financially & morally) who have caused this, or will they totally ignore your message. We shall see!

Thank you, again, for your links.
Click to expand...
I saw this posted on the Pelosi Vatican Demonstration Post on the Catholic forum earlier, it was a little off topic, but hopefully the person on the Politics forum won’t have a problem with me posting it here:

This is the John Jay Report: usccb.org/nrb/johnjaystudy/
http://img34.imageshack.us/img34/5299/gender.jpg

http://img156.imageshack.us/img156/1827/agekn.jpg
81% of the victims were male and that 77% were 10 years old or over

Homosexual/heterosexual is not so much of an issue in cases of true pedophilia, pederasty is a homosexual phenomenon. Knowing what the problem makes it easier to find out what the solution is.
 
CradleCath said:
Lemonbeam, Your whole post was GREAT. However, I’m most impressed by the fact that in stating that this scandal was one of homosexuality, you have faced an “un polititcally correct” fact.

I’m anxious to see how many of those who are so indignant over the fact that boys were hurt (beyond my anything that imagination can absorb)will answer your message. Will they come down as hard on the gays (especially Archbishop Weakland whose gay affair cost the Church financially & morally) who have caused this, or will they totally ignore your message. We shall see!

Thank you, again, for your links.
Click to expand...
This article here on the myths of priestly pedophilia says:

Homosexuals are three times as likely to be pedophiles as heterosexual men. Although exclusive pedophilia (adult attraction to prepubescent children) is an extreme and rare phenomenon, one third of homosexual men are attracted to teenage boys (Jenkins, Priests and Pedophilia). The seduction of teenage boys by homosexual men is a well-documented phenomenon. This form of deviant behavior is the most common type of clerical abuse and is directly connected to homosexual behavior.

As Michael Rose shows in his upcoming book, Goodbye! Good Men, there’s an active homosexual sub-culture within the Church. This is due to several factors. The Church’s confusion in the wake of the sexual revolution of the 1960s, the tumult following the Second Vatican Council, and the greater approval of homosexual behavior in the culture at large created an environment in which active homosexual men were admitted to and tolerated in the priesthood. The Church also came to rely more on the psychiatric profession for screening candidates and for treating those priests identified as having problems. In 1973, the American Psychological Association changed its characterization of homosexuality as an objectively disordered orientation and removed it from the Diagnostic and Statistic Manual IV (Nicolosi, J., 1991, Reparative Therapy of Male Homosexuality, 1991; Diamond, E., et. al., Homosexuality and Hope, unpublished CMA document). The treatment of deviant sexual behaviors followed suit.

While the Church’s approach to those who struggle with homosexual attractions has been compassionate, she has been consistent in maintaining the view that homosexuality is objectively disordered and that marriage between a man and woman is the proper context for sexual activity

Read more here: catholiceducation.org/articles/facts/fm0011.html
 
catholicleague.org/release.php?id=1810

NEW YORK TIMES AND THE CATHOLIC CHURCH

March 25, 2010

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments today on the front-page article in today’s New York Times about priestly sexual abuse:

Media requests to deal with this subject make it difficult to provide an adequate response to today’s article by Laurie Goodstein. But the time has come to ask some serious questions about why the Times is working overtime with wholly discredited lawyers to uncover dirt in the Catholic Church that occurred a half-century ago. Those questions will be raised in an ad I am writing that will be published in next Tuesday’s New York Times; a rejoinder to the article will also be made. All I can say now is that this is the last straw.

Copyright © 1997-2010 by Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights.
*Material from this website may be reprinted and disseminated with accompanying attribution.
 
chaunceygardner said:
To my statement that: “The Church protects “its own” but NOT its innocent children”, ***maryj ***said:

No, I have thought about it a lot and for a long time. The institutional Church, just like any other large organization, will circle the wagons and protect its own. There are a lot of management studies about this, and you can see it happen in all kinds of corporate, governmental and institutional settings. The Catholic Church heirarchy is no different.
Click to expand...
We all know there have been weak members in the hierarchy of the Church. So your accusation is what exactly? That the Church actually secretly condones this behavior? You know well that it doesn’t. What is your solution? To abandon the Church because of the failings of some of its members? What other church is out there, free from corruption of the world?

To me, the answer is simple. The Church with Jesus at the head is pure, guided by the Holy Spirit. None of its members are perfect as Jesus is perfect, but some exceptionally bad ones slipped in during the crazy years. I for one do not judge the Church by the actions of a few bad apples, and I know it will recover from this demonic attack. I believe in its truth, and will continue to defend the Church that Jesus established. Besides, where else would I go? To a different church that would boast a superior track record in moral matters? Such a church would be fooling itself.

-Tim
 
timotheos said:
We all know there have been weak members in the hierarchy of the Church. So your accusation is what exactly? That the Church actually secretly condones this behavior? You know well that it doesn’t. What is your solution? To abandon the Church because of the failings of some of its members? What other church is out there, free from corruption of the world?

To me, the answer is simple. The Church with Jesus at the head is pure, guided by the Holy Spirit. None of its members are perfect as Jesus is perfect, but some exceptionally bad ones slipped in during the crazy years. I for one do not judge the Church by the actions of a few bad apples, and I know it will recover from this demonic attack. I believe in its truth, and will continue to defend the Church that Jesus established. Besides, where else would I go? To a different church that would boast a superior track record in moral matters? Such a church would be fooling itself.

-Tim
Click to expand...
To be fair, most other churches don’t have as many opportunities. They don’t function in such a closed hierarchical structure. Priests answering to priests. Big bureaucracy. Often with the local police, who are mostly members of your faith, in cahoots–as in Milwaukee. Protestant churches usually have active lay participation, and ministers and their families are always being watched, for one thing or another. Abuse tends to happen in the context of the large independent evangelical churches, denominations of one, founded and led by one man, who is potentially a loose cannon.

Otherwise, sinning pastors in the Protestant context tend to be alcoholics, the occasional embezzler, although with so much fiscal oversight by the laypeople in his/her congregation, that isn’t going to go far, or adulterers, ditto. To my mind, these are serious sins, but not like pedophilia.
 
anode said:
To be fair, most other churches don’t have as many opportunities. They don’t function in such a closed hierarchical structure. Priests answering to priests. Big bureaucracy. Often with the local police, who are mostly members of your faith, in cahoots–as in Milwaukee. Protestant churches usually have active lay participation, and ministers and their families are always being watched, for one thing or another. Abuse tends to happen in the context of the large independent evangelical churches, denominations of one, founded and led by one man, who is potentially a loose cannon.

Otherwise, sinning pastors in the Protestant context tend to be alcoholics, the occasional embezzler, although with so much fiscal oversight by the laypeople in his/her congregation, that isn’t going to go far, or adulterers, ditto. To my mind, these are serious sins, but not like pedophilia.
Click to expand...
Thats a broad statement. based on what exactly, just your assumptions?

(Chicago Sun Times): The three companies that insure the majority of Protestant churches in America say they typically receive upward of 260 reports each year of young people under 18 being sexually abused by clergy, church staff, volunteers or congregation members.

There where 10 alleged such cases in America in all 50 states, to the Catholic Church in the year of 2008, according to the Catholic League.

And not to mention, the Protestant Church has had it’s own cover ups.

Child abuse papers has gone uncovered amid cover up by Bishops in the Church of England: telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1566826/C-of-E-child-abuse-was-ignored-for-decades.html

Among clergy offenders Catholic priests are least likely to offend.

gkupsidedown.blogspot.com/2010/03/pedophile-priests.html
 
timotheos said:
We all know there have been weak members in the hierarchy of the Church. So your accusation is what exactly? That the Church actually secretly condones this behavior? You know well that it doesn’t. What is your solution? To abandon the Church because of the failings of some of its members? What other church is out there, free from corruption of the world?
Click to expand...
No accusation at all. More of a plea for right thinking and definitive action. And no, I do not think the Church condones any immoral behavior. But they allowed it to continue.

My solution is not to abandon the Church. It is that the Church leadership take the necessary steps to clean out the cancer inside it, and to make the biggest act of contrition the world has ever seen. The Church has lost most of the moral force it once claimed, and won’t get it back until it looks within itself and cleans up its act.

I really don’t think most people are only angry about the behavior of some Priests and others who abused children. I think that much of the anger and disbelief is regarding the actions of those who knew about it and acted inappropriately. That would include fellow priests, Bishops and others in positions of authority who did not do enough to stop it.

No one wanted to rock the boat. Unfortunately, it is now taking on water very fast and Benedict and others are trying to bail it out with a spoon.

I would like the Pope to show some backbone and make the difficult but necessary decisions to restore trust and faith in the Church’s heirarchy.
 
I can’t believe any of this. When it makes him look good, Weakland says that a bishop is boss of his own diocese and Rome shouldn’t butt in. All of a sudden he supposedly can’t do anything without Rome micromanaging him. When Fr. Dennis Pecore was abusing boys at Mother of Good Counsel school, teachers wrote to Weakland and he told them that he would sue them for saying so. It was Weakland’s job to deal with Fr. Murphy and all the other errant priests in the Milwaukee Archdiocese. He knows it. Give me a break, pulllleeeeeze. I’m so furious at all this.
 
Simple and straight forward. Should be an insert in every church bulletin.
 
thereseozi said:
catholicleague.org/release.php?id=1810

NEW YORK TIMES AND THE CATHOLIC CHURCH

March 25, 2010

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments today on the front-page article in today’s New York Times about priestly sexual abuse:

Media requests to deal with this subject make it difficult to provide an adequate response to today’s article by Laurie Goodstein. But the time has come to ask some serious questions about why the Times is working overtime with wholly discredited lawyers to uncover dirt in the Catholic Church that occurred a half-century ago. Those questions will be raised in an ad I am writing that will be published in next Tuesday’s New York Times; a rejoinder to the article will also be made. All I can say now is that this is the last straw.

Copyright © 1997-2010 by Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights.
*Material from this website may be reprinted and disseminated with accompanying attribution.
Click to expand...
 
The big problem is that there are too many abuse cases always coming up! What are we to believe? The Pope has too many questions to answer. The ordinary Catholic is perplexed. I, for one, will not give any more money to help pay for thes abuse cases. I am disgusted with the Pope, Cardinal Mohoney, and the Church, I once loved.
 
Then you better quit paying taxes too, which help fund public schools, where abuse cases are a hundred times more prevalent than in the Church…Which are never reported in the secular media.

Yes, abuse in the CC is terrible. Yet it’s much more prevalent elsewhere, and yet there’s never a peep about it in the paper.

Also, how many claims of child sex abuse have there been since 2002 (when the priest sexual abuse story really broke)? 40? And yet, things are going along just as they always have, (i.e. on a much larger scale, and unabated) in the public schools because they don’t receive the scrutiny that the Church does.

PS - I am also disgusted with Cardinal Mahoney, and can’t wait until his mandatory retirement at the age of 75 (next February, I think!).
 
I happened to be touring Ireland when Bill Donohue was interviewed by someone on RTE radio.

Victims of abuse were calling the program to tell of their experieces and the host involved Donohue for comment.

The most charitable way I can put this is his tone and manner won no friends that day.

And possibly lost many.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top