Why do Catholics get singled out?

[Seeker1961]

The USCCB does an annual audit of all allegations of abuse within the Catholic Church in the U.S. It is published in April for the previous year, so I don’t think 2012 is available yet.

Here is the last report:

usccb.org/issues-and-action/child-and-youth-protection/upload/2011-annual-report.pdf

The report notes that:

In 2010, only 8 allegations were considered credible by law enforcement.

I’d say the reforms by Pope Benedict are working. The small number of cases are themselves still too many, but show definite improvement in how the Church handles problems, its youth protection programs, and seminary admissions and faith formation policies.

So even for the older cases, 45% of all priests who were accused for 2011 were already deceased, 75% of all priests who were accused for 2011 are either deceased, already removed from ministry, already laicized, or missing; and over 90% of all abuse accusations last year allege incidents from at least two decades ago (the most common time period was from almost 40 years ago: 1975-1979).

Again, this is not to excuse the horrible crimes that did occur, but Pope Benedict made the hard decisions. He correctly recognized the institutional problems and pushed for changes back in the 1980s, as even the NY Times had to acknowledge: nytimes.com/2010/12/02/world/europe/02pope.html?_r=0

Why do Catholics get singled out? Many people hate an organization that says the individual and the government is not the source of moral authority, God is, and that in fact, God established our Church. As many people wish to usurp the role of God, that is a threat to them, and they will do anything they can to tear down the Church because of the failings of its human members. Other institutions get a pass.

The incredible rate of abuse and institutional cover-up in other religions, in schools, in medical care facilities, in juvenile correctional facilities, in the media and the entertainment industry (see the BBC scandal, Michael Jackson, Roman Polanski, and many others) and politics continues and dwarfs the past and certainly the current rate of abuse in the Church.

Any institution with young people in it will attract predators, as the evil are attracted to and prey on the innocence of the young. The Boy Scouts of America (BSA), to its credit, has undertaken similar policies to that of the Church and the rate of abuse has fallen dramatically - so, of course it will be necessary to change all that to suit the demands of the few. ***Pope Benedict ordered in 2005 that the Church “cannot admit in seminaries nor give access to the sacred Orders to those who practice homosexuality, who present deep-seated homosexual tendencies or support the so-called gay culture.” In conjunction with this and other policies, abuse rates plummeted. ***The BSA has barred homosexuals from leadership positions, but are now being pressured to reverse this policy. Those of us who lived through the scandal in the Church shudder when they consider what the results of a changed BSA policy on this issue will bring. Those who cannot learn from the mistakes of the past will be condemned to repeat them.

Just today in my hometown newspaper, there was an investigative report on the sexual abuse of juveniles and resulting coverup in state juvenile treatment centers for abuse and addiction in Arizona: azcentral.com/news/articles/20121120teen-facility-risk-overlooked.html?nclick_check=1

Abuse rates may have plummeted, but science would posit that there are other reasons than the Pope banning homosexuals. There is no scientific evidence that homosexuals are more likely to abuse children than heterosexuals.

psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/facts_molestation.html

I understand that many will immediately dismiss this because it’s from the “wrong” university, or because it’s part of some “agenda”. However, just as Priests have been unfairly labeled as all being pedophiles by people who hate the Church, homosexuals have also been unfairly labeled by people who hate them.

 

[maximus]

Abuse rates may have plummeted, but science would posit that there are other reasons than the Pope banning homosexuals. There is no scientific evidence that homosexuals are more likely to abuse children than heterosexuals.

It was pretty evident that the abuse was towards young boys rather than young girls. It was a prudent move and not motivated by bigotry.

psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/facts_molestation.html

I understand that many will immediately dismiss this because it’s from the “wrong” university, or because it’s part of some “agenda”. However, just as Priests have been unfairly labeled as all being pedophiles by people who hate the Church, homosexuals have also been unfairly labeled by people who hate them.

You make a valid point, however any study at a secular University that would indicate a negative result towards the HS community will be labeled as hateful and that study would be immediately discredited.

 

[_Abyssinia]

But the US school system is composed of thousands of individual districts with different authorities-not one hierarchical structure with one head-a head viewed by many as infallible. Coincidentally, the Penn State football empire was a smaller version of that same type of structure-and people there did view Paterno as pretty infallible. (I have good friends who live in that area and went to Penn State)

Yes, this stuff went on EVERYWHERE there were children, but the larger the institution and the more holy the reputation the bigger the cover up and the harder the fall.

True, but there is no evidence that the abuse rate is any lower in any Christian demonination or other religious traditions, Islam, Buddhism etc than it is the Catholic Church yet when there are abuse stories in other religious traditions there is little coverage compared to if there was a Catholic involved

All abuse is despicable

Schools move teachers accused of abuse to another school district which is known as moving the trash and yet this gets little media coverage

 

[_Abyssinia]

They don’t list how many Catholic clergy were convicted of this. Do you know of a site where the number of convicted Catholic clergy is listed similar to that website?

Archbishop Silvano Maria Tomasi said in September 2009

We know now that in the last 50 years somewhere between 1.5% and 5% of the Catholic clergy has been involved in sexual abuse cases

webcast.un.org/ramgen/ondemand/conferences/unhrc/twelfth/hrc090922pm2-eng.rm?start=01:28:49&end=01:31:56

Clinical volunteer associate proffesor at Stanford University akd pf Santa Clara University, Dr Thomas Plante says

approximately 4% of priests during the past half century (and mostly in the 1960s and 1970s) have had a sexual experience with a minor’ which 'is consistent with male clergy from other religious traditions and is significantly lower than the general adult male population which may double these numbers

psychwww.com/psyrelig/plante.html

psychologytoday.com/files/attachments/34033/pp3article.pdf

 

[Seeker1961]

True, but there is no evidence that the abuse rate is any lower in any Christian demonination or other religious traditions, Islam, Buddhism etc than it is the Catholic Church yet when there are abuse stories in other religious traditions there is little coverage compared to if there was a Catholic involved

All abuse is despicable

Schools regular move accused teachers to another shcool district which is known as ‘moving the trash’ and yet this gets little media coverage

I understand all that-but why are we keeping score anyway? Does the fact that “other people do it too” make it any less despicable?

It doesn’t make the Catholic Church look any less guilty by constantly pointing out other organizations who have pedophile problems. Pedophiles gravitate to positions in the community that involve children and command respect from that community. It stands to reason that they would move into teaching, coaching, volunteer positions like Scout leaders and religious organizations.

The Church is not a victim, there are people within the Church who were perpetrators. The Church is a massive organization-bigger than any school district, sports franchise or volunteer organization AND the men of the Church have traditionally been held up as examples for everyone to follow. Why wouldn’t the abuse of children and the subsequent cover up be a bigger story in the Church than in any other organization?

 

[_Abyssinia]

I understand all that-but why are we keeping score anyway? Does the fact that “other people do it too” make it any less despicable?

It doesn’t make the Catholic Church look any less guilty by constantly pointing out other organizations who have pedophile problems. Pedophiles gravitate to positions in the community that involve children and command respect from that community. It stands to reason that they would move into teaching, coaching, volunteer positions like Scout leaders and religious organizations.

The Church is not a victim, there are people within the Church who were perpetrators. The Church is a massive organization-bigger than any school district, sports franchise or volunteer organization AND the men of the Church have traditionally been held up as examples for everyone to follow. Why wouldn’t the abuse of children and the subsequent cover up be a bigger story in the Church than in any other organization?

As I said, all abuse is despicable, and I am not keeping score

Teachers are held up in a similar way to priests and teachers accused of abuse are not moved around in one school district, if that were not bad enough, they are moved up and down all over the US apparantly and this gets very little media coverage

Religious leaders of all religions are held up to a higher standard than the average person but accused religious leaders in non Catholic traditions have little coverage compared to a Catholic accused of abuse

 

[Arizona_Mike]

Abuse rates may have plummeted, but science would posit that there are other reasons than the Pope banning homosexuals. There is no scientific evidence that homosexuals are more likely to abuse children than heterosexuals.

psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/facts_molestation.html

I understand that many will immediately dismiss this because it’s from the “wrong” university, or because it’s part of some “agenda”. However, just as Priests have been unfairly labeled as all being pedophiles by people who hate the Church, homosexuals have also been unfairly labeled by people who hate them.

I don’t “hate” homosexuals, I consider them my brothers and sisters in Christ, many of whom are suffering. In other aspects of their lives, they may be far better persons than me, as I have my own sins and faults to work through. I don’t consider homosexual acts (at least with another consenting adult) as the nadir of sin, as many other non-sexual sins are as bad or worse. I also don’t think the sum total characterization of a man or woman should be based on a description of their sex interests.

But these decisions must be made based on prudence - weighing the risk of calumny against a group, against the need to protect a vulnerable population. In such cases, I think you will agree, Seeker1961, that we should err on the side of caution and protecting the young. A person may be annoyed or their feelings will be hurt if they are not allowed to become a Boy Scout leader; the cost will be far greater to the victim of molestation if we err in judgment.

We must also be very careful not to state that “science” can posit or make statements, as if “science” is a glowing energy field that speaks ex cathedra; science is an observational method and a way of analyzing data, nothing more (and also nothing less). Scientists are as prone to bad reasoning, observational bias, and political/academic pressure as anyone else. We can point to correlations, we can point to statistical studies, but we must also be guided by our own human experience and reasoning in making prudential choices.

The “science” of the 1970s posited that child abusers could be cured of their attraction and returned to positions of authority, a view that the bishops accepted despite the Church’s millennia-long experience to indicate otherwise; we are all paying the price for that overly-optimistic reliance on the “science” of that era.

The statistical research does, in fact, support a view that homosexuals are more prone to having sex with minors than heterosexuals, in that the research reflects that a) homosexuals who molest boys have far more more victims than do heterosexuals who molest children of the opposite sex, and b) a far greater percentage of homosexuals report that their first sexual act as a minor was with an adult (male) than do heterosexuals with adults of the opposite sex. Who was having all those homosexual sex acts with juvenile boys, heterosexuals?

We also know, based on the research and arrest reports, that homosexuals who are “out” can and do molest teenagers. The LGBT Community Outreach Coordinator for a local police department just got arrested for molesting two teenagers. He was openly gay and claimed to be interested only in adult partners. His visibility as a gay man in a position of authority who was “out” did not protect his victims.

This is not really an issue of “pedophilia.” As the risk group that is represented by Boy Scouts consists of largely pubescent boys, many of whom are sexually (if not emotionally) mature, a prudential judgement tells us that whether a person identifies themselves as homosexual or heterosexual in orientation, many people make a sinful choice to have sex with a minor. It is a rare day when my local paper does NOT have an article about a school teacher, neighbor, explorer post adviser, juvenile correction officer, youth minister, or other individual who was arrested after having sex with a teenager. Although both sexes do this, and the rate for women appears to be rising, males of all sexual orientations seem to do this most often. Because of this, we do not allow males access to pubescent girls on campouts because of this risk, anymore than we should allow those with a sexual interest in other males access to young males in the scouting environment. It is not calumny against* all* homosexuals, any more than it is a calumny against me as a heterosexual male because I am not allowed to accompany a group of young women on a GSA campout. It is practicing prudence, based on our knowledge and experience with human sexual behavior.

 

[Seeker1961]

I don’t “hate” homosexuals, I consider them my brothers and sisters in Christ, many of whom are suffering. In other aspects of their lives, they may be far better persons than me, as I have my own sins and faults to work through. I don’t consider homosexual acts (at least with another consenting adult) as the nadir of sin, as many other non-sexual sins are as bad or worse. I also don’t think the sum total characterization of a man or woman should be based on a description of their sex interests.

But these decisions must be made based on prudence - weighing the risk of calumny against a group, against the need to protect a vulnerable population. In such cases, I think you will agree, Seeker1961, that we should err on the side of caution and protecting the young. A person may be annoyed or their feelings will be hurt if they are not allowed to become a Boy Scout leader; the cost will be far greater to the victim of molestation if we err in judgment.

We must also be very careful not to state that “science” can posit or make statements, as if “science” is a glowing energy field that speaks ex cathedra; science is an observational method and a way of analyzing data, nothing more (and also nothing less). Scientists are as prone to bad reasoning, observational bias, and political/academic pressure as anyone else. We can point to correlations, we can point to statistical studies, but we must also be guided by our own human experience and reasoning in making prudential choices.

The “science” of the 1970s posited that child abusers could be cured of their attraction and returned to positions of authority, a view that the bishops accepted despite the Church’s millennia-long experience to indicate otherwise; we are all paying the price for that overly-optimistic reliance on the “science” of that era.

The statistical research does, in fact, support a view that homosexuals are more prone to having sex with minors than heterosexuals, in that the research reflects that a) homosexuals who molest boys have far more more victims than do heterosexuals who molest children of the opposite sex, and b) a far greater percentage of homosexuals report that their first sexual act as a minor was with an adult (male) than do heterosexuals with adults of the opposite sex. Who was having all those homosexual sex acts with juvenile boys, heterosexuals?

We also know, based on the research and arrest reports, that homosexuals who are “out” can and do molest teenagers. The LGBT Community Outreach Coordinator for a local police department just got arrested for molesting two teenagers. He was openly gay and claimed to be interested only in adult partners. His visibility as a gay man in a position of authority who was “out” did not protect his victims.

This is not really an issue of “pedophilia.” As the risk group that is represented by Boy Scouts consists of largely pubescent boys, many of whom are sexually (if not emotionally) mature, a prudential judgement tells us that whether a person identifies themselves as homosexual or heterosexual in orientation, many people make a sinful choice to have sex with a minor. It is a rare day when my local paper does NOT have an article about a school teacher, neighbor, explorer post adviser, juvenile correction officer, youth minister, or other individual who was arrested after having sex with a teenager. Although both sexes do this, and the rate for women appears to be rising, males of all sexual orientations seem to do this most often. Because of this, we do not allow males access to pubescent girls on campouts because of this risk, anymore than we should allow those with a sexual interest in other males access to young males in the scouting environment. It is not calumny against* all* homosexuals, any more than it is a calumny against me as a heterosexual male because I am not allowed to accompany a group of young women on a GSA campout. It is practicing prudence, based on our knowledge and experience with human sexual behavior.

FTR-I never said any specific person hated homosexuals, I just said that people who DO hate them, like people who DO hate the Cburch seize on urban myths like “all homosexuals are pedophiles” and “all Priests are pedophiles”.

The scary thing about abusers is that they hide in plain sight and they aren’t easily profiled before they offend. People naturally want to do something to protect children, so they latch on to any possible predictable factor to try and eliminate the threat.

Our local news has a story of an abuser at least once a week too, and I think that’s a good thing because it means that kids are no longer afraid to report it. Abusers survive only where they can hide.

 

[Ignatius]

Ok, so I know that Clerical sex abuse is very very evil but, at the same time the Boy Scouts of America had a huge sex abuse cover up which has a 3,200 cases in a 31 period (1974-2005) and had very little media attention.

Persecution is a sign that we’re on the right track
This should be the key to knowing that it is the Church that Jesus Christ founded. He said in John 15:20 “Remember the word that I said to you, ‘A servant is not greater than his master.’ If they persecuted me, they will persecute you”, and Mat 5:11 “Blessed are you when men revile you and persecute you and utter all kinds of evil against you falsely on my account.
Rejoice and be glad, for your reward is great in heaven”

Of all of the Christian churches, Only the Catholic Church is so reviled and lied about, this is proof that we have found the Church of Jesus Christ; so be of good cheer, you’re in the right place.

Yours in Christ.

 

[rfournier103]

There are alot of reasons the Church and it’s members are singled out…

1. Sexual abuse/cover-up. I think we ALL hate that.
2. It’s a massive organization run by MEN. Lots of women don’t like that.
3. Tells us how to live. Most people don’t like being told what to do/how to behave.
4. Stands against birth control/fornication. Most people don’t like that, either.
5. Stands against homosexuality and their false notion of marriage. Not the popular position today.
6. The United States still has a lot of anti-Catholic biggotry in it. The US WAS founded by a group of Protestants from Britain…
7. Stands against abortion (see #4).
8. For some reason Catholics never fight back. Easy pickins…

 

[ericc]

1. A lot of people will lose their livelihood and credibility if the Catholic Church were to be the only credible church left standing.
2. God wants to give a kick on our behind because we were negligent on our holiness.
3. Satan is ever present. Although he knows Christ has given a perpetual guarantee on the Church, he wants to make sure we don’t have it easy. The other “churches”? They are splintering their way to nothingness and don’t need much assistance.

 

[Slaney]

You mean this link: This website ?

Why would I post up a link to a link I already posted ? Catholics get singled out because they don’t fit into the 33,000 Denominational jig saw puzzle…

 

[Bonocorium]

I would not say that Catholics get singled out because of its the true Church.

There are far more anti-Christian books that expose the heretics than exposing the true Church. The very best atheists like Loftus focus their attacks on heretic churches.

The heretical fundies probably get as much flak as the true Church today. Thus, if a certain denomination stands up in a politically incorrect manner, it will be attacked by the secular world. I am interested in knowing why the Eastern schismatics dont get much flak in the media.

In the case of the pedophile scandal, I think that the Catholic church gets singled out because its a global problem and because its such a large church. The fact that there is a man (the Pope) known all over the world involved in this, would also attract far more media attention.

 

[Slaney]

In the case of the pedophile scandal, I think that the Catholic church gets singled out because its a global problem and because its such a large church. The fact that there is a man (the Pope) known all over the world involved in this, would also attract far more media attention.

It gets singled out because it is the ONE TRUE CHURCH & satan knows it, and Jesus warned about it, the gates of hell…etc;

 

[fisherman_carl]

Ok, so I know that Clerical sex abuse is very very evil but, at the same time the Boy Scouts of America had a huge sex abuse cover up which has a 3,200 cases in a 31 period (1974-2005) and had very little media attention. rawstory.com/rs/2012/12/26/la-times-publishes-boy-scout-sex-abuse-records/

catholicbible101.com/thechurchscandals.htm

God can use them to correct corruption in the church. If any organization becomes big and powerful there is the possibility for corruption. Whistle blowers are important to the integrity of an organization.

When we say the church is protected from the gates of hades we can’t mean it’s members never make grave mistakes. You only have to study history to find that out.