Will the priests ever be arrested ?

[Balstrome]

All those law breakers & those protecting them should be thrown away for a LONG time.

No, all the information about these crimes needs to be handed over the the authorities in the countries that these crimes where committed in, together with the alleged criminals, today. Then the organisation can start to work claiming a moral right, but the longer it does not do this, the less it's has a right to have a voice on morality.

 

[armitage]

Arthur. Quick side question. What does "True Bride of Christ" mean? First time I've ever heard the phrase.

Also, a big point that it seems a lot of people who defend catholicism miss is that people are outraged that priests were harming children and even when they were found out, some were sent to other parishes where they continued their abuse on their folk. The biggest transgressors were recalled back to the Vatican, where prayer and meditation were given as punishment.
I am glad the Vatican is taking the abuse more seriously, but justice is being denied for thousand upon thousands of victims of abuse through the Vatican's policy of handling the matter internally, recalling priests to the Vatican where authorities cannot extradite them and withholding evidence till it gets leaked.

Put it this way. Replace the clergy with say police and see what you have then.
Thousands of thousands of children were abused by the police. Bheki Cele rather than prosecute and imprison the ones responsible, rather sent the police force members to different stations and at most recalled them to Head office. Many children's families who came forward were intimidated by the station commander into not saying anything.

Child abuse is everywhere. The fact that your church is being singled out is simply because so many victims were silenced and finally the church's hold on its "flock" has weakened for victims to step forward.


If your church wants to clean itself up the best would be to expose all the clergy who abused children(that they know of). Send them to their respective countries authorities and let the law take its course with them.

 

[Arthur]

Arthur. Quick side question. What does "True Bride of Christ" mean? First time I've ever heard the phrase.

This is a very rich theology and literature on the Church as the Bride of Christ. You can read a rather potted and brief summary on Wikipedia, here. There's more here, and in Lumen Gentium (Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, Vatican II.

Also, a big point that it seems a lot of people who defend catholicism miss is that people are outraged that priests were harming children and even when they were found out, some were sent to other parishes where they continued their abuse on their folk. The biggest transgressors were recalled back to the Vatican, where prayer and meditation were given as punishment.
I am glad the Vatican is taking the abuse more seriously, but justice is being denied for thousand upon thousands of victims of abuse through the Vatican's policy of handling the matter internally, recalling priests to the Vatican where authorities cannot extradite them and withholding evidence till it gets leaked.

Put it this way. Replace the clergy with say police and see what you have then.
Thousands of thousands of children were abused by the police. Bheki Cele rather than prosecute and imprison the ones responsible, rather sent the police force members to different stations and at most recalled them to Head office. Many children's families who came forward were intimidated by the station commander into not saying anything.

Child abuse is everywhere. The fact that your church is being singled out is simply because so many victims were silenced and finally the church's hold on its "flock" has weakened for victims to step forward.


If your church wants to clean itself up the best would be to expose all the clergy who abused children(that they know of). Send them to their respective countries authorities and let the law take its course with them.

Your point is valid, and I agree that the full course of the civil law should be followed. That said, this is a delicate matter, and needs to be handled with prudence and due respect to all parties involved, first of all for the victims, but then also the accused. You are probably also aware that sometimes false accusations are made - there are already many proven cases (in civil courts) of false accusations against priests, just as there are some false accusations of rape and violence and men wrongfully convicted through false accusations by estranged wives/girlfriends. Again, this is not an excuse or hint that cover-ups are OK - far from it! - but rather an appeal that justice needs to be done, and that also applies to those accused of abuse or wrongdoing.

One last minor inaccuracy in your statement: priests cannot be "recalled to the Vatican" or hidden there. The Vatican is not their 'head office', the local diocesan chancery is (ie where their local bishop has his office). The Vatican is a tiny place with no accommodation for anything but a few dozen people - almost all the people who work there live in Italy.

 

[scatlett]

It seems to me that catholics find it easy to rationalise away the rape and cover ups. They feel so persecuted, the poor dears.


Watch this video to put a face to the victims.

 

[scatlett]

Arthur, Can you answer this question?

If a person in the catholic church or any organisation is found to have covered up for a child rapist, what actions should be taken against him?

 

[scatlett]

What really gets my goat is that these churches earn money from donations as well as earning rent/interest/dividends from other assets and its all tax free in the hands of the church. Therefore, as tax payers, we are paying these child rapists as well as the men that cover up the crimes.

I cannot fathom why people who find this untenable are in the minority.

 

[Claymore]

We are grateful to the media for exposing this ugliness. This is exactly what Benedict XVI has said over and over and over again.

And yet, for decades the crimes were covered up, and the perpetrators moved elsewhere. In fact, some reports of abuse were directed to Ratzinger's then-office, where they languished, unresponded to, for years. The words sound nice, but I don't think the actions follow suit.

 

[technofool]

Your point is valid, and I agree that the full course of the civil law should be followed.

So you are also disappointed with the Pope for not co-operating with the local authorities by handing over the documents and transgressors? Why do you not add your voice to all the 'good Catholics', victims, parents of victims HOWLING for the Pope to do the right thing?

That said, this is a delicate matter, and needs to be handled with prudence and due respect to all parties involved, first of all for the victims, but then also the accused.

Surely you are not intimating that these cases are in any way different to cases where a school teacher or sports coach molests children? Why does the Pope not let all these cases be dealt with equally? Or do you think a Priest deserves more respect than a common pedophile?

You are probably also aware that sometimes false accusations are made - there are already many proven cases (in civil courts) of false accusations against priests,

Surely you are not hinting that there is a credible threat of a priest being falsely convicted? As you point out these cases are fairly easily thrown out of court because it is very difficult to make a credible case for something that happened in private 10 or 20 years ago. The burden of proof lies fully with the accuser, the priest does not have to prove anything, he doesn't even have to speak at his trial if he doesn't want to.
In fact a reasonable man would be far more likely to believe that there are many, MANY victims who were abused but have insufficient evidence after the intervening decades to make their case. Why do you choose to proffer the more unlikely scenario?

 

[Arthur]

I'm really not going to respond to awful phrases like "child rape", which is a grotesque mischaracterisation. It's hardly worth debating closed minds tightly shut to facts by their anti-Catholic animus. Much as I detest Wikipedia's patchiness, go read the entry on Catholic Child Abuse Cases and at least look at the figures. Making a plea for facts in perspective is empahtically NOT a defence or plea in mitigation. I've said over and over, this is a horror.

But scan the following:
* Half of all allegations were made between 10 and 30 years after the alleged incident and 25% were reported more than 30 years after the incident. That's 75% of cases that were 10- or more years older.
* Nearly 90% of the cases are homosexual ephebophiliac rather than paedophiliac, ie male priests with pubescent or post-pubescent boys under the legal age of consent, of which 75% did not involve penile penetration.
* About 25% of the abuse did not involve touching of private parts. Of the 25% of all cases that involved sexual penetration, 98.8% were 15 years and older.
* Of the alleged perpetrators who were not removed, laicised, expelled or imprisoned, some 60% of the abuse allegations were made by the victims only after the alleged perpetrator priest had died.
* George Weigel: "In the United States alone, there are reportedly some 39 million victims of childhood sexual abuse... According to other recent studies, 2 percent of sex abuse offenders were Catholic priests—a phenomenon that spiked between the mid-1960s and the mid-1980s but seems to have virtually disappeared... [Yet] the sexual abuse story in the global media is almost entirely a Catholic story, in which the Catholic Church is portrayed as the epicenter of the sexual abuse of the young."
* Philip Jenkins (non Catholic expert on sex abuse history/sociology, writing in Pittsburgh Post-Gazette: "'Pedophilia' is a psychiatric term meaning sexual interest in children below the age of puberty. But the vast majority of clergy misconduct cases are nothing like this. The vast majority of instances involve priests who have been sexually active with a person below the age of sexual consent, often 16 or 17 years old, or even older."
* The Big (and only) Case some activists/media are trying to pin on Pope Benedict (saw it on BBC this weekend) is the so-called "Father Kiesle Coverup" when he was CDF prefect (before pope). In April 2010, there were reports of a letter signed by Cardinal Ratzinger in 1985, in which he allegedly dismissed a request to laicize a Father Stephen Kiesle, a California priest accused of molesting boys. The Vatican responded that "At this stage, Father Kiesle was already dismissed from pastoral duties during the investigation, and he had no contact with any parishioners or children." Australian academic Paul Mees observed: "...Kiesle had already been reported to the police, convicted and sentenced. After completing his sentence, Kiesle left the priesthood and wrote to the CDF (in 1985] asking to be formally defrocked."

All this said, it's marvellous that the Catholic Church today is cleaner and better for this filth being exposed and expunged (and yes, there's no doubt more to come). It is without doubt the only organisation that has systematically addressed the issue of child sexual abuse, and has rigorous processes in place for dealing with allegations. It took some years for the full extent to be realised, that is true. Where allegations are credible, and the victims do not oppose it, the police are brought in.

Human wickedness knows no bounds, and this side of the grave even our human best, it seems, is tarnished by weakness, failure, and sometimes even outright evil. And though Christians and even Christian ministers do and say terrible things, this in no way impugnes the beauty of Christ our Lord or His Mystical Body, the Church. If there be no God, no objective and eternal truth, no objective morality, then on what grounds do you call their actions evil, or even formulate your notion of right and wrong? Yes, they must face the justice of men, but even that is not perfect justice. These bad priests in the end must face a Higher Tribunal, for their have acted against everything the Church teaches, stands for and promotes. They have betrayed not just their victims, but also the Church, and the Church's Lord, Jesus the God-Man.

 

[technofool]

I'm really not going to respond to awful phrases like "child rape",

Actually you're not going to respond to anything other than taking the opportunity to launch into a justificatory monologue.

*edit* Just PMed Arthur to let him know I would really like to hear his reply to post #28. He seems to have an in with the Priestly boys so it should be interesting.

 

[scatlett]

I'm really not going to respond to awful phrases like "child rape", which is a grotesque mischaracterisation.

You obviously did not watch the video I posted in this thread.

If it will allow you to answer the question, I will rephrase;

If a person in the catholic church or any organisation is found to have covered up for a peadophile who molested a child in the most inappropriate way, what actions should be taken against him?

 

[Arthur]

Actually you're not going to respond to anything other than taking the opportunity to launch into a justificatory monologue.

*edit* Just PMed Arthur to let him know I would really like to hear his reply to post #28. He seems to have an in with the Priestly boys so it should be interesting.

Hello Technofool

Apologies for neglecting to answer your specific question.

If prima facie allegations are credible, then the already-defined process should kick in:

* suspend the alleged abuser immediately from any contact with children
* hand the matter over to the competent civil and ecclesiastical authorities for further investigation and prosecution if necessary.

Due regard must be given in the first place to the complainant/victim and then to alleged abuser. Child abuse is one of the gravest crimes conceivable, and the full force of civil and canon law should be brought to bear. It goes without saying that due process should be followed.

That said, a note of caution. There are also false accusations, and innocent priests have been imprisoned and large sums paid to 'victims' who later were exposed (by civil investigators) as fraudulent. Many of these cases are easily found on the web, though they hardly rank as first-line news. Coincidentally, just today I read the link off Arts & Letters Daily about the 'recovered memory' epidemic of false molestation allegations by daughters against fathers, with many innocent men imprisoned for years. You can read the Salon article here (Salon has impecccable secularist credentials).

PS. Your snarky comment about me 'having it in with the Priestly boys' is uncalled for. I hope it doesn't betray prejudice. I've also sent you a PM.

 

[Leostar]

Dear Arthur,

An Aside as you come across as well balanced.

What is the view of the “true bride of Christ” towards all the other Christian faiths regarding saving of souls? Are we as the (un true?) destined to languish in purgatory or hell for eternity? What is the theological position toward those that broke away after Calvin actions?

I ask as I do not have access to Catholics to ask them?

 

[Arthur]

Dear Arthur,

An Aside as you come across as well balanced.

What is the view of the “true bride of Christ” towards all the other Christian faiths regarding saving of souls? Are we as the (un true?) destined to languish in purgatory or hell for eternity? What is the theological position toward those that broke away after Calvin actions?

I ask as I do not have access to Catholics to ask them?

Leostar, we are getting off topic here, but quickly: the most authoritative summary of Church teaching is the official Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC), on the Holy See website here.

There are literally tens of thousands of websites around the world - 99.999% by ordinary lay Catholics and a very large number by converts (ordinary guys llike you and me) - that set out the Catholic faith and answer questions.

A few by former anti-Catholics who understand questions by non-Catholics:

www.defendingthebride.com - a personal website by a convert
Jimmy Akin's blog - also by a convert minister - also see his Resources Library site for many articles
Steve Ray's Board - a discussion blog by an influential convert
Biblical Evidence - Dave Armstrong's large collection of articles, docs, and debates
Chris Tesch's Answers - many Qs&As, articles, topics
Random list of links off someone's website (there are hundreds and hundreds of link lists on various sites)
www.catholic.com - lay apologetics organisation in the USA

 

[scatlett]

Hello Technofool

Apologies for neglecting to answer your specific question.

If prima facie allegations are credible, then the already-defined process should kick in:

* suspend the alleged abuser immediately from any contact with children
* hand the matter over to the competent civil and ecclesiastical authorities for further investigation and prosecution if necessary.

Due regard must be given in the first place to the complainant/victim and then to alleged abuser. Child abuse is one of the gravest crimes conceivable, and the full force of civil and canon law should be brought to bear. It goes without saying that due process should be followed.

That said, a note of caution. There are also false accusations, and innocent priests have been imprisoned and large sums paid to 'victims' who later were exposed (by civil investigators) as fraudulent. Many of these cases are easily found on the web, though they hardly rank as first-line news. Coincidentally, just today I read the link off Arts & Letters Daily about the 'recovered memory' epidemic of false molestation allegations by daughters against fathers, with many innocent men imprisoned for years. You can read the Salon article here (Salon has impecccable secularist credentials).

PS. Your snarky comment about me 'having it in with the Priestly boys' is uncalled for. I hope it doesn't betray prejudice. I've also sent you a PM.

I will repeat my question, what should be done to the people who have been found to have actively covered for the abusers?

 

[hammell]

I will repeat my question, what should be done to the people who have been found to have actively covered for the abusers?

It would depend on the law of that country, but in South Africa they should be charged with obstruction of justice (or whatever the local law is). Essentially, if someone commits a crime, and someone else assists in the cover up, both parties are guilty. And I say this as a Catholic.

Personally, I feel that these immoral and disgraceful acts committed by certain people in the church should be dealt with by the full force of the law of the country they were committed in. It is shameful that they were covered up, and I hope that those responsible for the acts and cover up face justice.

 

[wise_guy]

Priest should be allowed to marry to givd them a place to discharge their seed.Going contrary to the natural order causes problems.