RCC bans ordination of Gays and supporters..

Originally posted by lucifershammer
The white elephant in the room has been flogged black and blue for five years.

The question now should be - can we stop this happening in the future?

"The white elephant in the room has been flogged black and blue for five years."

Really? ---> I thought it was the choirboys getting flogged black and blue!

Originally posted by lucifershammer
Here's the full document (footnotes and all):

http://www.usccb.org/instruction.pdf

If you don't have Acrobat, then you can read the document (without the footnotes) at:

http://www.cwnews.com/news/viewstory.cfm?recnum=40891

Thanks.

Originally posted by lucifershammer
The white elephant in the room has been flogged black and blue for five years.

The question now should be - can we stop this happening in the future?

Just a second, LH.

It has NOT been flogged back and forth. The Church has NOT
apologized for its egregious behavior in hiding sexual abuse cases,
continuing to harbor them on their payroll, and allowing them to be
in positions when they were in regular contact with children.

In fact, this document -- about focusing on gay men who are
considering a vocation -- is all about deflection of the real
problem.

The problem wasn't sexual abuse per se -- as you said, the
number of abusers within the Church was commensurate with the
averages in the population. The problem was that the Church hierarchy
enabled abusers. That Bernard Law remains in the employ of
the Church is criminal, given his complicity in the actions in Boston.
His utter dismissal as a man of low moral fibre, interested in protecting
his reputation rather than the interests of his flock, would be a start
in the recognition that the Church failed outright in its duty to
protect its flock (like the Good Shepherd).

Find me one official Church document -- USCCB or higher in the
hierarchy -- that says that the Church hierarchy in many dioceses (not
just individual priests) screwed up. If you can't do that, then you will
never be tackling the real problem: abuse of the hierarchy.

Nemesio

Originally posted by Nemesio
I'm astounded that we are focusing on the homosexuality issue here.
I agree with LH in that the incidence of sexual abuse within the Church
is commensurate with rates outside of it.

The issue here was that many of the priests were known to be abusers
and the Church continued to let them be in ministry, often shifting them
from church to churc ...[text shortened]... ts own interests above the
interests of its parishioners and, especially its youth.

Nemesio

Nemesio: " .... did nothing to remedy the situation"


Well, now the Church is doing something to remedy the situation .... and that is the issue of this thread.

Originally posted by KnightWulfe
Yes, that is true, but the priests are more than teachers, they are leaders. In their positions, they should not only talk the talk, they should walk the walk - They should be SHINING examples of what it means to be Christian. Quite bluntly, they (as a whole) are not even close.

On a side note - being a Christian, how can you not be a YEC, given that ...[text shortened]... y (or so it seemed each time I read it.) - There is no explanation for the pre-historic, at all.

Knightwulfe: " the priests are more than teachers, they are leaders. In their positions, they should not only talk the talk, they should walk the walk - They should be SHINING examples of what it means to be Christian. Quite bluntly, they (as a whole) are not even close."

Quite right, hence the Church's instruction we are discussing here.

Originally posted by Nemesio
the number of abusers within the Church was commensurate with the averages in the population.

The more I look into this, the more I am becoming convinced that this is a myth.

According to www.bishop-accountability.org, there were over 4000 priests accused of molestation in the last 50 years.

There are 400,000 priests worldwide, says http://www.worldpriestday.com/

We thus have an incidence rate of 1% of priests being at least accused of molestation, assuming priests remain priests for roughly 50 years.

The U.S. Department of Justice states that there are between 250,000 and 500,000 pedophiles in the States. I'll give the church the edge and take the upper bound.

The U.S. population is about 295,000,000. This gives an incidence rate of .2%, a fifth of the rate among priests.

Even if only half of the priests accused are actually guilty, their incidence rate is still over twice as high. Further, consider that the molestation charges for priests are in the U.S. Let's say half of the 400,000 priests worldwide live in the U.S. Then we're back to about a factor of five difference, with 4000/200,000, then divided by 2 to account for false charges (a generous discount, in my opinion) giving an incidence rate of 1%, compared to the population rate of .2%.

From what statistics do you derive your finding of commensurate averages?

Originally posted by ivanhoe
Well, now the Church is doing something to remedy the situation .... and that is the issue of this thread.

Note what I wrote:

Find me one official Church document -- USCCB or higher in the
hierarchy -- that says that the Church hierarchy in many dioceses (not
just individual priests) screwed up. If you can't do that, then you will
never be tackling the real problem: abuse of the hierarchy.

Purging the 'queers' out of the vocation process is not the answer
because that wasn't the real problem. The problem was that, after
discovery, the hierarchy of the Church hid, harbored and enabled offenders
to repeat their actions.

I agree that the Church is not stained by the actions of a single errant priest's
behavior. She is stained by its covering up of that priest's actions. Until
She recognizes her egregious sin, there cannot be any true healing and,
consequently remedying of the situation.

The gays in the priesthood are just becoming a scapegoat.

Nemesio

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
From what statistics do you derive your finding of commensurate averages?

I've simply heard it reported that way from a variety of independent and
unrelated sources. I don't have a means to back it up.

Perhaps Ivanhoe or LH can find a study (not derived from the interested
party, the Church) to back it up.

Nemesio

I just noticed I forgot to include my reference to the DOJ statistic.

http://www.rasac.org/education/statistics.html

I think we can all agree upon the U.S. population and the number of priests worldwide. Any differing reports would have to deny the Bishop Accountability numbers or the DOJ numbers, or argue that the incidence rates ought to be computed differently than I have done. I have attempted to apply the most straightforward calculation.

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
The more I look into this, the more I am becoming convinced that this is a myth.

According to www.bishop-accountability.org, there were over 4000 priests accused of molestation in the last 50 years.

There are 400,000 priests worldwide, says http://www.worldpriestday.com/

We thus have an incidence rate of 1% of priests being at least accused ...[text shortened]... lation rate of .2%.

From what statistics do you derive your finding of commensurate averages?

According to www.bishop-accountability.org, there were over 4000 priests accused of molestation in the last 50 years.

Could you provide a specific page link? According to the NY Times study published on the same site [1], that number is closer to 1200.

There are 400,000 priests worldwide

We should be looking specifically at the US. There are about 45,000 priests in the US, of whom 30,000 are diocesan priests [2].

We thus have an incidence rate of 1% of priests being at least accused of molestation, assuming priests remain priests for roughly 50 years.

Using the methodology you've employed and the NY Times figure, that's 2.7%.

However, there is a flaw with your method. The numerator has all priests accused of abuse in the past 50 years regardless of whether they are serving today or not (or even whether they are still alive!) whereas the denominator only contains [active][3] priests today.

To calculate a correct incidence rate, you need to consider all priests who served during the period. I'll try to do this using some simplistic assumptions:

1. All priests are active from ordination to death.
2. The average period between ordination and death is 50 years.
3. The number of priests has been constant over the 50 years in question.[4]

It should be easy to see that the estimate of the number of individual priests for the period is 90,000.

So, the correct incidence rate would be 1.3%. The upper limit proposed by Philip Jenkins in Pedophiles and Priests [5] was 2% [6].

The U.S. Department of Justice states that there are between 250,000 and 500,000 pedophiles in the States... The U.S. population is about 295,000,000. This gives an incidence rate of .2%, a fifth of the rate among priests.

One issue can be identified right away - does this refer to pedophiles (i.e. people with sexual attraction to prepubescent children) or child sexual offenders (including postpubescent minors)? If the former, then the figure is very similar for Catholic priests (refer Jenkins' study mentioned above).

---
[1] http://www.bishop-accountability.org/resources/resource-files/timeline/2003-01-12-NYT-PortraitOfAccused.htm
The NY Times covered the period 1952-2002.

[2] Bureau of Labor Statistics:
http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos063.htm

[3] Not sure if the OCD lists retired priests or priests who have been removed from public office or defrocked.

[4] In fact, the number of priests in the US has declined over the decades:
http://www.beliefnet.com/story/164/story_16491_1.html

[5] http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0195145976?v=glance
[6] For instance:
http://www.catholicity.com/commentary/hudson/tenmyths.html

Originally posted by lucifershammer
[b]According to www.bishop-accountability.org, there were over 4000 priests accused of molestation in the last 50 years.

Could you provide a specific page link? According to the NY Times study published on the same site [1], that number is closer to 1200.

There are 400,000 priests worldwide

We should be looking specifically at the ...[text shortened]... 95145976?v=glance
[6] For instance:
http://www.catholicity.com/commentary/hudson/tenmyths.html[/b]

"A study released in February by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops found that allegations of sexual abuse had been made against 4,392 priests from 1950 to 2002. But the survey did not identify individual clergy." -- http://www.bishop-accountability.org/about-us/2004-10-30-Swanson-ChurchAbuse.htm
approximately halfway through the article.

This is a more recent source than that which you cite.

I'm will to accept your alternate calculation of the incidence rate. I'm also willing to go with my original, in the spirit of granting as much concession in favor of your position as the numbers allow.

I will try to find more specific numbers concerning pedophiles and non-pedophile child molesters.

In the meantime, is it your claim that the numbers I find will lead to an incidence rate in the population not signficantly less than 1.3% ?

Originally posted by lucifershammer
[b]According to www.bishop-accountability.org, there were over 4000 priests accused of molestation in the last 50 years.

Could you provide a specific page link? According to the NY Times study published on the same site [1], that number is closer to 1200.

There are 400,000 priests worldwide

We should be looking specifically at the ...[text shortened]... 95145976?v=glance
[6] For instance:
http://www.catholicity.com/commentary/hudson/tenmyths.html[/b]

Here is a rough approach which you should find biased completely in your favor.

The state of Oklahoma has 5096 registered sex offenders, which you can find by doing a search at
http://docapp8.doc.state.ok.us/servlet/page?_pageid=190&_dad=portal30&_schema=PORTAL30
Also, all sex offenders are required to register, so while this number may underestimate the actual number, it's not a significant underestimate.

I'm willing to assume - much in your favor - that all of these are child molesters. In reality, I would suppose a significant portion have adult victims, but I will not quibble over this.

Now, Oklahoma - a state chosen merely for its early listing in my Google search - has a population of 3.5 million.
That gives an incidence rate of .1% .

Alternatively, multiply the 5096 times 50 to approximate the number of molesters in the U.S., and divide that by the U.S. population to get a rate of .1%.


Further note that this is consistent with the DOJ range that I originally gave, so it is likely that the DOJ isn't as obsessed with distinguishing between pre- and post-pubescent molestation as you are.

At any rate, given your estimate of 1.3% among priests, and various ways of estimating a population incidence of less than .2%, how do you say that the two are commensuarate? One is six times as high as the other - that is, give me a random priest and a random citizen, and the priest is 6 times more likely than the citizen to be a molester.

Do you still dispute the numbers or methods of the population estimate? I'm willing to find other state statistics if you're not satisfied that Oklahoma is representative.

Originally posted by Nemesio
Just a second, LH.

It has NOT been flogged back and forth. The Church has NOT
apologized for its egregious behavior in hiding sexual abuse cases,
continuing to harbor them on their payroll, and allowing them to be
in positions when they were in regular contact with children.

In fact, this document -- about focusing on gay men who are
consideri ...[text shortened]... at, then you will
never be tackling the [b]real problem: abuse of the hierarchy.

Nemesio[/b]

It has NOT been flogged back and forth. The Church has NOT
apologized for its egregious behavior in hiding sexual abuse cases...

Find me [b]one official Church document -- USCCB or higher in the
hierarchy -- that says that the Church hierarchy in many dioceses (not
just individual priests) screwed up. [/b]

http://www.usccb.org/bishops/presidentialaddress.shtml

Confession

The Penance that is necessary here is not the obligation of the Church at large in the United States, but the responsibility of the Bishops ourselves. Both "what we have done" and "what we have failed to do" contributed to the sexual abuse of children and young people by clergy and Church personnel. Moreover, our God-given duty as shepherds of the Lord's people holds us responsible and accountable to God and to the Church for the spiritual and moral health of all of God's children, especially those who are weak and most vulnerable. It is we who need to confess; and so we do.

We are the ones, whether through ignorance or lack of vigilance, or – God forbid – with knowledge, who allowed priest abusers to remain in ministry and reassigned them to communities where they continued to abuse.

We are the ones who chose not to report the criminal actions of priests to the authorities, because the law did not require this.

We are the ones who worried more about the possibility of scandal than in bringing about the kind of openness that helps prevent abuse.

And we are the ones who, at times, responded to victims and their families as adversaries and not as suffering members of the Church.

Contrition

Our confession is matched by a heartfelt contrition.

To the victim-survivors, I want to say this. If we Bishops have learned anything, it is how devastating are the effects of sexual abuse on the children and young people who suffer it. Even the passage of many years does not wipe away the memory of these terrible crimes. And so often, beyond the wounds inflicted on the memory, a person's whole personality also shows the results of these violations of innocence. Those of us who have not experienced sexual abuse in our childhood can never fully understand what it has done to you. But I promise you this: we Bishops will make every effort to take on your perspective, to see the world and the Church through your eyes, and to look at our own actions over the last decade from your point of view.

More importantly, in my own name and in the name of all of the Bishops, I express the most profound apology to each of you who have suffered sexual abuse by a priest or another official of the Church. I am deeply and will be forever sorry for the harm you have suffered. We ask your forgiveness.

Originally posted by Nemesio
Just a second, LH.

It has NOT been flogged back and forth. The Church has NOT
apologized for its egregious behavior in hiding sexual abuse cases,
continuing to harbor them on their payroll, and allowing them to be
in positions when they were in regular contact with children.

In fact, this document -- about focusing on gay men who are
consideri ...[text shortened]... at, then you will
never be tackling the [b]real problem: abuse of the hierarchy.

Nemesio[/b]

That Bernard Law remains in the employ of
the Church is criminal, given his complicity in the actions in Boston.
His utter dismissal as a man of low moral fibre, interested in protecting
his reputation rather than the interests of his flock, would be a start
in the recognition that the Church [b]failed outright in its duty to
protect its flock (like the Good Shepherd).[/b]

Bernard Law is "out of commission", so to speak.

The ordination of a priest or a bishop is about what you are, not what you do. It's not a "job" they can be "dismissed" from - any more than you can erase all traces of your parents in your being.

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
"A study released in February by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops found that allegations of sexual abuse had been made against 4,392 priests from 1950 to 2002. But the survey did not identify individual clergy." -- http://www.bishop-accountability.org/about-us/2004-10-30-Swanson-ChurchAbuse.htm
approximately halfway through the article.
...[text shortened]... umbers I find will lead to an incidence rate in the population not signficantly less than 1.3% ?

"A study released in February by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops found that allegations of sexual abuse had been made against 4,392 priests from 1950 to 2002. But the survey did not identify individual clergy."

The study can be found at:

http://www.usccb.org/nrb/nrbstudy/nrbreport.htm#response

The Review Board believes that the overwhelming majority of priests serving the Church in the United States fulfill their roles honorably and chastely. According to Church records, however, there were credible allegations that several thousand priests, comprising four percent of priests in ministry over the last half-century, committed acts of sexual abuse of minors. There appears to have been a significant surge in acts of abuse beginning in the 1960s and continuing into the mid-1980s. The fallout resulting from this epidemic of abuse and the shortcomings in the response of a number of bishops and other Church leaders to that misconduct continues to this day...

The bishops were right to recognize their part in the crisis and the extent and gravity of the crisis. The Review Board believes, however, that effective measures have been taken to ensure the safety of minors in the Church today. Actions taken by many, but not all, dioceses in the 1980s and early 1990s significantly reduced the number of reported incidents of abuse. More recently, in the wake of the Charter, several hundred abusers who had not yet been removed from ministry were laicized or otherwise removed from ministry over the last two years...

Why did so many priests sexually abuse minors? Although it is not possible to pinpoint any one "cause" of the problem of sexual abuse of minors by priests, there were two overarching contributing factors:

Dioceses and orders did not screen candidates for the priest¬hood properly. As a result, many sexually dysfunctional and immature men were admitted into seminaries and later ordained into the priesthood.
Seminaries did not form candidates for the priesthood adequately. As a result, seminarians were not prepared for the challenges of the priesthood, particularly the challenge of living a chaste, celibate life.
In addition, although neither the presence of homosexually-oriented priests nor the discipline of celibacy caused the crisis, an understanding of the crisis is not possible without reference to these issues. There are, no doubt, many outstand¬ing priests of a homosexual orientation who live chaste, celibate lives, but any evaluation of the causes and context of the current crisis must be cognizant of the fact that more than eighty percent of the abuse at issue was of a homosexual nature. Likewise, celibacy does not cause sexual abuse; but the Church did an inadequate job both of screening out those individuals who were destined to fail in meeting the demands of the priesthood, and of forming others to meet those demands, including the rigors of a celibate life...

In American society as a whole, sexual abuse of minors appears to be far more widespread than earlier thought. According to some estimates, one out of every four women and one out of every seven men experienced some form of sexual abuse as minors. Most abuse occurs in families. Because there are no reliable estimates of the percentage of American adults who have engaged in sexual abuse of minors, there is no way to determine whether the percentage of priests who reportedly have engaged in such conduct is higher than the percentage in the general population or in any other segment of the population, such as teachers, coaches, and youth leaders.

It is clear that the abuse of minors is not unique to the Church. However, given the moral stature of the Church, the role of priests and bishops in providing moral leadership within the Church, and the obligations of priests and bishops to foster the spiritual and moral development of children and young people, when sexual abuse of minors occurs in the Church it is particularly abhorrent. Thus, Catholics take no solace from the fact that the sexual abuse of minors occurs outside the Church as well...

Church records indicate that 4,392 priests were accused of engaging in sexual abuse of a minor between 1950 and 2002.11 This number represents four percent of the 109,694 priests in active ministry during that time. There were approximately 10,667 reported minor victims of clergy sexual abuse during this period, and the Church expended more than half a billion dollars in dealing with the problem.

Eighty-one percent of the victims were male. Although more than three-quarters of the victims were of an age such that the conduct does not meet the clinical definition of pedophilia, there were substantial numbers of very young children who were victimized by priests during this time period. In addition, although many of the reported acts of sexual abuse involved fondling or unspecified abuse, there was also a very large number of allegations of more grave abuse, including acts of oral sex and intercourse.

The number of priests who engaged in sexual abuse of minors and the number of victims of that abuse changed dramatically during this time period. Although there were reported acts of sexual abuse of minors in every year, the incidence of reported abuse increased by several orders of magnitude in the 1960s and 1970s. After peaking in the 1970s, the number of incidents decreased through the 1980s and 1990s even more sharply than the incidence rate had increased in the 1960s and 1970s.

The incidence of sexual molestation of a minor under eleven years of age did not vary as greatly throughout the period as did the incidence of molestation of older children. In addition, the incidence of abuse of females did not change as dramatically as did the incidence of abuse of males. There was, however, a more than six-fold increase in the number of reported acts of abuse of males aged eleven to seventeen between the 1950s and the 1970s.

Finally, the data indicate that the problem of sexual abuse of minors by priests affected all areas of the country, and not simply certain dioceses that have received sustained public scrutiny, but there was significant variation from diocese to diocese. Some dioceses, even certain large dioceses, had very few or no reported acts of sexual abuse whereas many other dioceses had twenty-five or more priests with accusations of sexual abuse of minors, and one diocese reported that 165 priests in the diocese had been accused of sexual abuse of minors...

According to the survey data, four percent of priests who were in ministry between 1950 and 2002 have been accused of an act of sexual abuse of minors. The prevalence was highest among diocesan priests. There were 75,694 priests in diocesan ministry between 1950 and 2002. Of those priests, allegations of sexual abuse of minors had been made against 3,265, or 4.3%. By contrast, allegations of sexual abuse of minors had been made with regard to approximately 2.7% of the approximately 34,000 religious order priests in ministry during the time period. The remaining approximately 200 priests alleged to have sexually abused a minor during this period were "extern" priests; that is, priests resident in a diocese different from the diocese in which they had been incardinated.12

Fifty-six percent of the accused priests had one reported allegation levied against them. Twenty-seven percent of the priests had two or three allegations levied against them. Nearly fourteen percent had four to nine allegations levied against them. Three percent had ten or more allegations levied against them; these 149 priests with ten or more reported allegations were responsible for almost 3,000 victims, or twenty-seven percent of the allegations...

Diocesan and order records identify 10,667 reports of minor victims of sexual abuse by priests. More than ten percent of these allegations were characterized as not substantiated. In addition, for approximately twenty percent of the allegations, the priest was deceased or inactive at the time of the receipt of the allegation and typically no investigation was conducted in these circumstances.13

Eighty-one percent of the reported victims were male, and nineteen percent were female. The proportion of male and female victims changed over time. In the 1950s, approximately sixty-four percent of the victims were male. That percentage increased in the 1960s to approximately seventy-six percent and increased again in the 1970s to approximately eighty-six percent and remained at or near that percentage through the 1980s.

Approximately seventy-eight percent of the reported sexual abuse victims were between the ages of eleven to seventeen when the abuse began. Sixteen percent were between the ages of eight to ten, and slightly less than six percent were younger than eight years old. Thus, although more than three-quarters of the victims were between eleven and seventeen when the abuse began, a significant number of pre-pubescent children were victimized.14 The number of reported victims under the age of eleven has fallen each decade since the 1960s, but the fact remains that almost two thousand young children were victimized by "pedophile priests," a number that is very troubling.

The majority of the victims were males between the ages of eleven and seventeen.15 The number of reported male victims in this age group increased from 353 in the 1950s, to 1,264 in the 1960s, to a peak of 2,129 in the 1970s. The number then decreased to 1,403 in the 1980s and 363 in the 1990s. The number of girls who have been the victims of sexual abuse by priests has varied much less over time. The total number of female victims between eleven and seventeen when the abuse began peaked in the 1960s at 305 and has decreased every decade since then.