Why do Atheists/Agnostics come to CAF?

[josie_L]

The John Jay report (by Catholic Bishops) shows 4% of all Catholic priests between 1950-2002 were pedophiles. Other reports put the number much higher (as high as 8% with 100,000 victims).

This is unconscionable … at least to me. Imagine if even 4% of all American adults were pedophiles? Then imagine if the number were 8%. Now multiply that by 4 (the average number of victims a pedophile rapes); and about 1/3 of all American kids would have been a victim of a pedophile at some point in their childhood. Thankfully the number is much, much smaller in our general population.

Actually, pedophilia is more rampant than you think within our society (look at all the Internet prowlers enticing girls under 18), heck, the Netherlands even as a pedophilia party wanting to lower the age for consensual sex, this is not a “Catholic priest” problem Yankee.

 

[Marfran]

Marfran, I realize that but I’m getting sick and tired of people bringing up pedophiles priests as if this somehow represents the priesthood.

Josie: Unfortunately it is what it is, and it will not go away, and it will go down in the history books along with other atrocities such as the 13th century Inquisition…

 

[josie_L]

Josie: You wanted to know why agnostics and atheists come to CAF threads. The answer is two-fold. They come for their own benefit (whatever that may be–it is personal to them). They also come for our (benefit). They do not come to infuriate you (don’t think of it that way). Think of it for GROWTH, for understanding. For their growth, for yours, for mine. That is why we are ALL here. Growth is often painful and it isn’t always easy. If you learn to speak and communicate with those who oppose you, you will improve your communication skills. And someday an atheist or agnostic will ring your front doorbell and ask for your help, and you will understand him and will be better able to communicate with him, because of all your experience here at CAF.

BTW: Butterflies are not New Age. God created them–He gets the credit…

But Marfran, that is exactly what I have done, in fact, I have chosen not to retaliate in kind when I’ve been insulted by them. I just get frustrated at times because they are not as open-minded as they would want us to believe.

 

[Marfran]

But Marfran, that is exactly what I have done, in fact, I have chosen not to retaliate in kind when I’ve been insulted by them. I just get frustrated at times because they are not as open-minded as they would want us to believe.

Josie: I hear you. How easy it is to talk with people with whom we agree. But think about it. Is there anyone that you agree with 100% on everything? Even with your best friend or spouse there are topics of disagreement. Catholics communicating with people who disagree with and attack our fundamental beliefs–that is the hardest lesson in communication. If you can remain cool and control your indignation, it will help you to master the art of communication. I am still learning this myself. I am still messing up myself. We are ALL children of God–despite our differences. We have to learn to build the bridges with real work.

 

[josie_L]

Josie: Unfortunately it is what it is, and it will not go away, and it will go down in the history books along with other atrocities such as the 13th century Inquisition…

That’s not my point though. And the inquisitions (the Spanish one anyways) was not as atrocious as you would imagine (although 3000 - 5000 died this was in a span of almost 400 years), I think the state of Texas has probably executed more people on death row. The inquisition was not meant to torture but to inquire into the faiths of those who were believed to be leading duplicitous lives, it was actually quite fair considering the times in that one needed witnesses (ones that didn’t have a vendetta against the accused) and they also had the opportunity to recant if it was believed that they were.

 

[Marfran]

But Marfran, that is exactly what I have done, in fact, I have chosen not to retaliate in kind when I’ve been insulted by them. I just get frustrated at times because they are not as open-minded as they would want us to believe.

I see closed minds all over the place. They come in all shapes, sizes, colors, and religious afilliations…

If you are on a thread and there is someone that aggravates you, you can attempt to converse and respond, and try to bridge an understanding or mutual respect, or you can choose not to acknowlege their remarks. And some people will just not respond to your attempts to meaningfully communicate. Some people are adversarial. Some people live not to build bridges, but to blow them up. You need to recognize the difference. And some people hide behind words that do not expose that they are hurting inside. So be careful. You may post something here that really hurts someone, or helps them, and you may never know it. And again, ***I am still ***learning. I make mistakes too. Plenty of them. And I appreciate the opportunity that CAF presents to be able to communicate with people of all walks of life.

 

[Marfran]

That’s not my point though. And the inquisitions (the Spanish one anyways) was not as atrocious as you would imagine (although 3000 - 5000 died this was in a span of almost 400 years), I think the state of Texas has probably executed more people on death row. The inquisition was not meant to torture but to inquire into the faiths of those who were believed to be leading duplicitous lives, it was actually quite fair considering the times in that one needed witnesses (ones that didn’t have a vendetta against the accused) and they also had the opportunity to recant if it was believed that they were.

Your point is that people are always bringing up the pedophile priests, and it infuriates you because it’s mud in the eye, and it is not reflective of the Church, but rather of a few individuals. Well, it is reflective of the Church when many of those priests were not ex-communicated and were allowed to remain, sent to different parishes, the dirt swept under the rug… Yes, it’s mud in the eye–and will we have to hear this over and over again, and we will have to respond to it over and over again… It’s just not gonna go away. So expect the mud and learn to protect your eye.

Pedophiles ***are ***everywhere. It is not just a Catholic thing. Pedophiles purposefully infiltrate places where they will have access to victims. We need to be on the lookout for them and protect our children from them wherever they lurk.

 

[gearhead]

Marfran, I realize that but I’m getting sick and tired of people bringing up pedophiles priests as if this somehow represents the priesthood.

My issue with the Church and pedophilia isn’t so much the pedophilia itself, but the Church’s response. Pedophilia is awful, but I agree with the sentiment expressed by several posters here that in any organization, there will always be some proportion of people who do awful things. The Church isn’t any more immune to that than any other organization.

However, where I do fault the Church itself is in the way that it covered up and in some cases actually enabled these awful acts to continue, especially in the cases where priests were identified as pedophiles, and rather than being punished, treated or simply defrocked, they were sent to new parishes with no warnings to their new congregations.

I don’t necessarily fault the Catholic Church for the existence of its pedophile priests any more than I fault the Postal Service for the existence of the crazed killers that gave popular culture the phrase “going postal”; however, I absolutely do fault the Church heirarchy for its response to the issue once it was known.

 

[buffalo]

In other words religion is a myth.

Religion is - binding oneself to God.

 

[buffalo]

My issue with the Church and pedophilia isn’t so much the pedophilia itself, but the Church’s response. Pedophilia is awful, but I agree with the sentiment expressed by several posters here that in any organization, there will always be some proportion of people who do awful things. The Church isn’t any more immune to that than any other organization.

However, where I do fault the Church itself is in the way that it covered up and in some cases actually enabled these awful acts to continue, especially in the cases where priests were identified as pedophiles, and rather than being punished, treated or simply defrocked, they were sent to new parishes with no warnings to their new congregations.

I don’t necessarily fault the Catholic Church for the existence of its pedophile priests any more than I fault the Postal Service for the existence of the crazed killers that gave popular culture the phrase “going postal”; however, I absolutely do fault the Church heirarchy for its response to the issue once it was known.

I think reading the John Jay Study is worth your time. You will soon see that this was a crisis of adult males abusing post-pubescent males. It is an issure of homosexuality.

Also keep in mind they went back 50 years well beyond the statutes of limitations. That shows good faith on the part of the Church. I wonder how many other organizations would have done this.

 

[josie_L]

What is the true nature of the sex abuse problem?

In significant ways the media’s coverage of the scandal has been misleading or inaccurate. For example, the media reported the scandal almost exclusively in terms of “pedophile priests.” This is not correct.

According to the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-IV, pedophilia is sexual attraction to children who have not yet arrived at puberty (DSM-IV, 528). While there have been priests who were pedophiles, the overwhelming majority of cases involved a disorder called ephebophilia, a term that refers to sexual attraction to minors who have arrived at puberty (i.e., teenagers). But we shouldn’t give a false emphasis to the clinical term ephebophilia, because it masks the real nature of what is occurring: priestly homosexual activity with under-aged males.

Are there other ways in which the media misreported the nature of the problem?

Yes. The overwhelming majority of the priests involved in these incidents are accused of sexual molestation of adolescent males, not females. This means that nature of the scandal is homosexual. The media downplayed or ignored this fact in its handling of the subject. But it has everything to do with the cause, the extent, and the cure of the problem.

How can we excuse the bishops and their actions in handling reports of sexual abuse?

Unquestionably bishops made mistakes. Nevertheless, media reports frequently painted the bishops’ actions and motives in the worst possible light. That some priests were assigned to new parishes was widely reported as the deliberate, systematic enabling of continued abuse. In fact, in many such cases psychological “experts” had assured bishops-in keeping with the thinking of the time-that the priests in question had been treated successfully, and they presented no further danger. Subsequent wisdom is that such sexual disorders are far too deep-seated to be cured by a month’s stay at a treatment facility. The Christian call to forgiveness and to giving someone a second chance following conversion from even grave sin also played a role.

What about the fact that bishops didn’t report allegations of abuse to the police?

The absence of reporting in particular cases is not de facto evidence of malice. Many victims and their families did not want the matter reported to the police and would share what they knew about a given priest with the diocese only on the condition that they not be put through the trauma of a civil investigation and trial.

How widespread is the problem? The press reports seemed to involve a large number of priests.

The Associated Press reported that 250 priests had been dismissed or had resigned by the time the bishops met last June, though it is not clear that all of the dismissals and resignations were due to abuse. Even if all 250 priests were abusers, it would still amount to about one-half of one percent (0.53 percent) of the 47,000 priests currently serving in America, a proportion far smaller than in most media accounts. Since some of the allegations involved priests who are now dead, the proportion of offenders within today’s priesthood is significantly smaller than one-half of one percent. Nevertheless, the numbers are profoundly disturbing.

catholic.com/thisrock/2002/0211fea2.asp

 

[yankee_doodle]

I think reading the John Jay Study is worth your time. You will soon see that this was a crisis of adult males abusing post-pubescent males. It is an issure of homosexuality.

I will offer some harsh critique, because this is truly my opinion. Those who act as apologists for this behavior are enablers of it & therefore in my view partially culpable of this, the most horrendous crime I can think of (besides perhaps intentional murder).

You say adult males abusing post-pubescent males (and call the issue homosexuality rather than pedophilia)? How old were these post-pubescent males? Were they consenting adults or were they young boys? Your apologetics really disgusts me.

And to think, you people want to stand as the moral judge of others

Also keep in mind they went back 50 years well beyond the statutes of limitations. That shows good faith on the part of the Church. I wonder how many other organizations would have done this.

How many other organizations had an epidemic of priests who molested little boys? Even talking about this makes me sick. The people who these young boys looked to as their moral teachers, raped them.

If you can’t see how much more horrible that makes the crime, then I really have nothing to say to you or anyone else who agrees with you.

 

[josie_L]

I will offer some harsh critique, because this is truly my opinion. Those who act as apologists for this behavior are enablers of it & therefore in my view partially culpable of this, the most horrendous crime I can think of (besides perhaps intentional murder).

You say adult males abusing post-pubescent males (and call the issue homosexuality rather than pedophilia)? How old were these post-pubescent males? Were they consenting adults or were they young boys? Your apologetics really disgusts me.

And to think, you people want to stand as the moral judge of others

How many other organizations had an epidemic of priests who molested little boys? Even talking about this makes me sick. The people who these young boys looked to as their moral teachers, raped them.

If you can’t see how much more horrible that makes the crime, then I really have nothing to say to you or anyone else who agrees with you.

This is not apologetics Yankee, pedophilia and ephebophilia are considered two different types of disorders, the one is an attraction to pre-pubescent children, the other post pubescent (teenagers). The majority of the cases involved the latter.

 

[Marfran]

I will offer some harsh critique, because this is truly my opinion. Those who act as apologists for this behavior are enablers of it & therefore in my view partially culpable of this, the most horrendous crime I can think of (besides perhaps intentional murder).

You say adult males abusing post-pubescent males (and call the issue homosexuality rather than pedophilia)? How old were these post-pubescent males? Were they consenting adults or were they young boys? Your apologetics really disgusts me.

And to think, you people want to stand as the moral judge of others

How many other organizations had an epidemic of priests who molested little boys? Even talking about this makes me sick. **The people who these young boys looked to as their moral teachers, raped them. **

If you can’t see how much more horrible that makes the crime, then I really have nothing to say to you or anyone else who agrees with you.

I agree with the agnostic/atheist here. There is no excuse. The age of the boys makes no difference. Priests vow celebacy. These priests were predators entrusted with children and adolescents. It makes no difference whether the children were 8, 10, 13 or 16, or whether they were boys or girls. What they did was wrong, and sweeping it under the rug was wrong. There **is no **defense. And the technicality of whether it was pedophlia, or other, doesn’t lighten the stain. It’s a STAIN. And now everybody’s eyes are wide open. Hopefully none of these types of individuals gain access to the priesthood again.

 

[Marfran]

This is not apologetics Yankee, pedophilia and ephebophilia are considered two different types of disorders, the one is an attraction to pre-pubescent children, the other post pubescent (teenagers). The majority of the cases involved the latter.

josie: lighten up on him. You will find many people turned off by this scandal in our Church. We can not defend it. It was wrong. It doesn’t matter if it was pedophilia or ephebophilia. Now all the teachers, coaches and volunteers at the parochial Catholic schools must take a course to increase awareness of this situation. We are doing things to combat these abuses and prevent re-occurance. The closet is open.

 

[josie_L]

I agree with the agnostic/atheist here. There is no excuse. The age of the boys makes no difference. Priests vow celebacy. These priests were predators entrusted with children and adolescents. It makes no difference whether the children were 8, 10, 13 or 16, or whether they were boys or girls. What they did was wrong, and sweeping it under the rug was wrong. There **is no **defense. And the technicality of whether it was pedophlia, or other, doesn’t lighten the stain. It’s a STAIN. And now everybody’s eyes are wide open. Hopefully none of these types of individuals gain access to the priesthood again.

But to ensure that this never happens again you have to get to the crux of the matter, and who the perpetrators are (as in what was type of abuse was it or what are the characteristics of the abuser). If we fail in trying to understand the nature of the abuse we can easily fall back into it again.

 

[josie_L]

josie: lighten up on him. You will find many people turned off by this scandal in our Church. We can not defend it. It was wrong. It doesn’t matter if it was pedophilia or ephebophilia. Now all the teachers, coaches and volunteers at the parochial Catholic schools must take a course to increase awareness of this situation. We are doing things to combat these abuses and prevent re-occurance. The closet is open.

I don’t like his attitude.

 

[Marfran]

But to ensure that this never happens again you have to get to the crux of the matter, and who the perpetrators are (as in what was type of abuse was it or what are the characteristics of the abuser). If we fail in trying to understand the nature of the abuse we can easily fall back into it again.

When it is brought up by those unfamiliar with our Church we can inform them of the preventatives in place to combat future occurences. ***Virtus Training ***is mandatory in all parishes. No one may work with children without going through this training. virtus.org/virtus/

 

[josie_L]

I agree with the agnostic/atheist here. There is no excuse. The age of the boys makes no difference. Priests vow celebacy. These priests were predators entrusted with children and adolescents. It makes no difference whether the children were 8, 10, 13 or 16, or whether they were boys or girls. What they did was wrong, and sweeping it under the rug was wrong. There **is no **defense. And the technicality of whether it was pedophlia, or other, doesn’t lighten the stain. It’s a STAIN. And now everybody’s eyes are wide open. Hopefully none of these types of individuals gain access to the priesthood again.

No one is sweeping it under the rug for goodness sake’s it’s been regurgitated ad nauseum since it happened.

p.s. You know what, I think I’ll regurgitate ad naseum the crimes of America, how about slavery, how about Nagasaki and Hiroshima, how about their attempt at colonialism in South America and the Philippines, how about their aim at “manifest destiny” that killed and wiped out in some instances whole tribes of Amerindians (isn’t this genocide), how about the death penalty, how about … etc.

 

[buffalo]

I will offer some harsh critique, because this is truly my opinion. Those who act as apologists for this behavior are enablers of it & therefore in my view partially culpable of this, the most horrendous crime I can think of (besides perhaps intentional murder).

You say adult males abusing post-pubescent males (and call the issue homosexuality rather than pedophilia)? How old were these post-pubescent males? Were they consenting adults or were they young boys? Your apologetics really disgusts me.

And to think, you people want to stand as the moral judge of others

How many other organizations had an epidemic of priests who molested little boys? Even talking about this makes me sick. The people who these young boys looked to as their moral teachers, raped them.

If you can’t see how much more horrible that makes the crime, then I really have nothing to say to you or anyone else who agrees with you.

There is no way I apologize for any of this behavior. However, it is important to want to know the facts and you should want to know them too.