The role of the Catholic church WRT conspiracies

[monster]

78% were 11 to 17 years old.

I wonder why this isn't broken down further, there's a pretty big difference between an 11-year old and a 17-year old.

[chiggerbit]

Keep in mind that this wasn't the John Jay study itself, that there was a lot of opinion offered by the religioustolerance site about the John Jay study. It was that "extra" information that looked like spin to me.

[chiggerbit]

A different look at the study, still with some of the same spin, and some other, but interesting:

http://www.ncregister.com/site/article/16227/

Priest Abuse Revisited

The Research Findings of John Jay College

BY Willard M. Oliver
Share


October 19-25, 2008 Issue | Posted 10/14/08 at 9:52 AM

When the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops met in June 2002, they adopted the “Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People.” One of the goals of the charter was for a nationally reputable research entity to collect information from the Catholic dioceses in order to develop a database for assessing the extent of past priest sexual abuse. The John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York was given that responsibility and in 2004 they released their findings to the bishops and the public in their report titled “Nature and Scope of the Sexual Abuse Crisis.”

As this report was largely descriptive in nature, two years later, a supplementary report was also issued by the researchers at John Jay that presented more analysis of the data. Derived from these findings was a series of research led by one of the prominent researchers at John Jay College, Karen Terry, all of which was recently published in the May issue of the journal of Criminal Justice and Behavior (Vol. 35, No. 5).

The findings from these newly published articles present key information related to the offenses, how they were reported, the characteristics of both victim and offender, the organizational behavior exhibited by the Catholic Church, and they suggest ways in which policies can be implemented to help reduce sexual abuse.

Terry leads this new collection of articles with a review of the findings from the “Nature and Scope” study, which consisted of abuse data from 97% of the Catholic dioceses (representing 99% of the diocesan priests) and 64% of the religious communities (representing 83% of religious priests).

She found that 4,392 priests had allegations made against them by 10,667 victims between the years 1950 and 2002, representing 4% of the total number of priests for this time period.

The majority of accused were found to be diocesan priests, between the ages of 25 and 39, ordained in the late 1960s and early 1970s, accused of acts committed in their residences. The victims were mostly boys between the ages of 11 and 14, and the majority of cases of abuse started between the late 1960s and the early 1980s. When abuse was alleged, 40% of the priests were treated, mostly with psychotherapy and specialized programs for clergy sex offenders.

While the findings of the original study presented the best understanding of the extent of the problem, it did not delve into explaining the findings. These new articles attempt to do just that. One of the research articles found that there was a steady increase in cases through the late 1970s and early 1980s, with the peak year for each diocese being sometime in the 1970s. However, it wasn’t until the mid-1990s and then in 2002, that the majority of these cases were reported to the dioceses.

This finding held, regardless of the geographical region or the size of each diocese.

Hence, largely men in their 40s and 50s came forward in either the 1990s or 2002 to report their victimization. In addition, this study and another found that the priests, on average, did not begin their abuse until 11 years past their ordination and the time frame of their victimization tended to be limited to a five-year period.

This is highlighted by the fact that the median age for the first offense was 39 years of age.

All of this would suggest that the priest abuse cannot be summarized as simply a result of individual behavior or some type of psychoses, but rather, is the result of either a societal problem arising in the 1960s and 1970s, a change in the way in which priests were educated and trained during this time period, or both.

Additional research looked at those factors which were predictors for the priests to commit sexual abuse.

The study found such factors as the age of the priest, the presence of all-male victims, a history of substance abuse, a history of sexual victimization, a history of behavioral problems, and use of threats all suggested that these contributed to the priest committing the sex abuse.

Since we know that the median age for beginning abuse was 39 and age was a predictive factor, this may suggest that something, perhaps mid-life problems, are causing previously non-abusers to become abusers. In addition, the presence of all males or being in situations with all males, contributed to priests becoming abusers.

Although it is not surprising to learn that substance abuse, behavioral problems, and their own sexual victimization increased the odds that a priest would become an abuser, what it does suggest is that careful screening and perhaps refusal to admit individuals with these types of past problems into the priesthood might be a good idea.

Finally, the finding that when priests made threats they were more likely to end up abusing would suggest that we must educate our children that priests do not make threats to parishioners, and that if they exhibit such behavior, which would by its very nature be wrong to begin with, they should be reported.

Further research separated the priests into two categories: those who desired a particular type of victim (specialists), and those who did not seem to care (generalists). Only 693 out of 4,392 priests fell into the former category, the rest in the latter.

Those that specialized tended to come from religious orders, not dioceses, began their abuse much later than generalists, and tended to serve primarily in a teacher role. Generalists tended to start earlier, have more victims, and abuse over longer periods of time.

In addition, the study found that priests who victimized pre-pubescent boys abused over longer periods of time than those victimizing post-pubescent boys. Also, those who were victims of a generalist were more likely to delay their reporting than those who were victimized by specialists.

These particular findings, though greatly mixed, tell us a number of things about the behaviors of abusive priests.

Although the media talks of pedophile priests, those who victimize pre-pubescent boys, this is the exception, not the rule. Pedophiles made up only 2.2% of the priest abusers.

And, while we often hear in the media that child sex abusers have proclivities toward a certain type of victim, that is not true among the priest sex abusers. The behaviors of these abusers are too widely dispersed to categorize a particular “type” of abuser. The most important implication of this study is that prevention programs should not be geared toward a particular “type” of abuser, but rather should address all types of potential abusers.

In fact, when it comes to prevention, another study highlighted the fact that many of the incidents of abuse were situational in nature.

In other words, the priest found himself in a situation with the victim where he should have exhibited self-control, but failed to do so, and found himself committing the offense. Avoiding those types of situations altogether should be the responsibility of all parishioners in the Church. And a final article highlighted the fact that this was not the case of a few “bad apples,” but rather, the case of an institution that wanted to control the abuse, and often by the nature of its structure, contributed to the problem. Avoiding these types of situations, then, is the responsibility of the Church.

This collection of research articles is beneficial in helping to understand this particular population of abusers and begin to explain the pattern of abuse over the 52-year period studied.

By understanding how the offenses occur, how they get reported, the characteristics of both the offender and the victim, as well as the organizational behavior of the Church itself, it allows some insight into the problem and allows for the creation of better policies to reduce future child sexual abuse.

This is certainly, however, not the end of the research and insight that can be gathered on this problem, and the bishops have not eschewed their duties in trying to achieve this end. The U.S. bishops have commissioned the John Jay researchers to conduct a second study, one that would present the causes and context within which the abuse occurred, and it is scheduled to be completed and delivered to the bishops at their annual meeting in 2009.

A better understanding of the causes and context will serve to create better programs for the prevention and response regarding future abuse.

Willard M. Oliver is an associate professor

of criminal justice at Sam Houston State

University in Huntsville, Texas.

[chiggerbit]

Ok, found a link to the original:

http://www.bishop-accountability.org/re ... index.html

The Nature and Scope of the Problem of Sexual Abuse of Minors by Priests and Deacons, by Karen Terry et al., prepared by the John Jay College of Criminal Justice (Washington DC: USCCB, 2004)

[chiggerbit]

This graph is interesting. While the overall average of accused priests was about 4% between 1960 and 2000,, check out the earlier 10-15 years :

Figure 2.3.3 Priests Accused As a Percent of All Ordinations, By Year

[Joe Hillshoist]

Then, you take that same person and when they walk through the doors of that CC, they lose all rational thought. They go in and blinding listen without intuition. Even if they never met that priest in their life...that priest is superior to them in knowledge and opinion just because the CC made that person a priest.

Not every Catholic is a brain dead drone. My mother was a teacher at a catholic school, catholic, and she recommended abstaining from sex before marriage, but said: "obviously you won't do that. Use contraception, and in the age of aids use protection."

Or words to that effect to every year of students she had.

Tho hows this, she was spied on ... a woman called Margaret Tighe, outspoken right wing catholic psycho drone in Australia, had kids who mum taught, they used to tell their mum who used to report to george Pell, who was then Archbishop of melbourn and on his way to heading the committee for preservation and protection of dogma, or whatever its called. (I probably should have punched the crap out of those kids for being dobbing little dogs, but they were smaller than me and I'm not a bully. Truth is I felt sorry for them. I'm sure other kids did it too, all at the instigation of that retarded bitch.

So not all catholics are drones...

Several kids I went to school with became priests and ended up very conservative catholic priests, possibly in Rome. I know two (brothers) ended up thre, one who I went to school with ... he died recently, he was my age. I dunno why but he was definitely the nicest of the lot. Dunno how he would have coped in Rome to be honest.

The more I think about that lot all being priests the wierder the whole thing seems actually. Its definitely creepy tho not specifically ina RSA way.

The Catholic Church is a paradoxical thing. The institution is a disgrace, but some of the people who call themselves catholics probably would make jesus proud.






If he existed.

[Sounder]

Thanks for the props Jeff. Sometimes I get the feeling that my speculations are too obscure even for the adventuresome folk around here, given the lack of responses. (That’s OK; it’s my issue and not others.) So I want to take a chance here and explain my thinking a bit more.

In order for us (society) to move beyond current roadblocks we will have to reassess and change the meaning content of many of our forms of understanding. For starters, like Steiner, I split the ‘devil’ into two components and then diverge (maybe not, I don’t know his work all that well) and assert that neither Ahriman nor Lucifer is negative or all ‘bad’. This is implied by esotericists that connect Ahriman with intellect and Lucifer with the heart. Yet these same folk (Gnostics), will treat Ahriman as negative and Lucifer as being positive, suggesting that Lucifer is the bridge to the transcendent or Christ consciousness. I on the other hand see the polarity existing within the category rather than between the categories. Also because God cannot be placed within a category, it is wrong to say that the contest between good and evil is centered on God and the ‘devil’.
(As an incidental note, Aeolus Kephas, a perceptive proponent of the Luciferic style who advocates for the deconstructing of personal identity or ones ‘assemblage point’, does not care to engage with me. In my imagination, it’s because my take on the nature of being is a threat to his personal identity, har har. Damn, now I have to send this his way because it’s not good to talk about someone behind their back.)

An assessment of the nature of being that wets my whistle, connects Ahriman with repetition and acknowledges that it is a needed element for the survival of social groups while still immature, and children for that matter. However the fixing of conceptual structures can turn negative if, as consciousness develops and naturally begins to questions those structures, it is required to repress those questions. This in turn fuels negative expressions of Lucifer or liberty, even as it presents itself as being ‘good’ in its effort support a different style of personal identity.

The common error of modern thinking is to attach ‘bad’ to one style of thinking, and ‘good’ to another style of thinking. This is absurd because ones style is inherent and not something that can easily be changed. Our current psychical conditioning system tends to validate two styles that set themselves into opposition with each other, and its up to us (society) to create a new psychical conditioning system that reconciles these opposing styles. Currently one style demands obedience to dogma and belief in order to achieve self-salvation, while another sees the self as the problem leading them to demand self-abdignation as their way to achieve transcendence. Thankfully, the great majority, are less self centered and are driven by fellowship. And even while being pulled in both directions by the current system of understanding, may yet find their way to reconcile the other two styles through their desire for fellowship and unity.

For those that are irritated by the substance of my writing, I make no apologies. For those irritated by the form or style, I apologize, as I am not a writer and am only attempting to provide some small inspiration for readers that may be legitimate writers.

Joe, your mom sounds like a wonderful person. My uncle is a Franciscan priest and very cool in his commitment to love and unity, although he may be the worst poet alive.

Joe h wrote...

If he existed.

Probably not, but Christ does.

[sw]

I should qualify my negative comments about Catholics.

I have crossed paths with some very beautiful souls who were Catholic. They were saints and I just loved to be around them. One of these saint like people was the main priest at our church for over a decade.

Amazing people are both part of the church and attend the church. I guess some do think because they often change parishes when a really crummy pastor comes along.

On the other hand, I have come across people who work with the CC who should be in jail. Many of those are higher ups in the CC as in Bishops and the Cardinal.

Just like I'd never judge a person by their race or gender, I also would not judge someone by what they wear. ie: the priest garb does not a saint make.

[Sounder]

Your sentiments illustrate the appeal of this place sw. One cool thing about an anti-fascist stance is that it tends to attract folk that are not attracted to making scapegoats. We know there are problems all over the place, but most don’t place them all at the feet of some monolithic group or another. It’s much healthier than what the wingers, single issue freaks and ideologues do to maintain their self-righteous images (personal identity).

On the flip side, folk are somewhat standoffish around these parts. Ah, but what the hell, I guess I am also.

[Sounder]

I want to add some words about enthusiasm or imagination that is a bit of a spin off from the overpopulation thread. It is relevant because the CC caries certain responsibility for the repression of imagination within society. Folk ought to see that ones thinking is influenced greatly by how others in society think, and it’s not like there’s a switch that can be turned on to light up a truly free imagination. For instance I and others have imaginative ruminations that can in no way be expressed in this society that puts such a high value on conformity. It is so bad that even the PC rebels have conformity as their number one value. (Most of the others with free imagination do not have the balance, cunning or fortitude that I have been blessed with so they die in mental homes.)

Back in the day when Christianity was first taking hold, which I consider to be a Roman psyop, certain elements became a bit too enthusiastic in promoting some of the substantial truths that were the bait that made the psyop attractive. (Surely you don't think psyops started with the CIA, do you? to Hugh.) Folk got enthusiastic about a notion that because Jesus was ‘like’ God, then the common person could have a direct connection with God because Jesus did. This was a ‘bad’ byproduct of the psyop because it encouraged people to think for themselves and made it difficult to create a common doctrine. The Consul of Nicaea cured this deficiency by declaring that Jesus was God. What followed was centuries of repression of imagination in order for the Roman Church to establish its dominance. Things were well in hand until the invention of the printing press which again resulted in a rise in enthusiasm. This threat was dealt with the same way as before. After all, it worked pretty well the first time. That is, God was again put off in the far distance, this time by declaring that the spiritual and the material were fundamentally different, thus insuring the need for priests to mediate between the common man and a far off God. And you always thought of Descartes as a genius, when really he was simply another psyoperator. (OK, he was pretty smart too.) He gave a hint on his gravestone when it was written; ‘to be well hid is to be well lived’. Jokes on you.

My basic point is, we have barely begun to use our imagination. And if it is not often used well, that has something to do with our lack of practice.

[Sounder]

Despite our lack of intercourse, I will still be your lover, always and forever.

[Jeff]

Child porn charges loom in background of Canadian bishops’ meeting


By Catholic News Service

CORNWALL, Ontario – As Canada’s bishops met for their annual meeting, the knowledge that one of their colleagues had been charged with child pornography loomed in the background.

Giving his final president’s report, Archbishop V. James Weisgerber of Winnipeg, Manitoba, said the late-September charges against Bishop Raymond Lahey of Antigonish, Nova Scotia, were “especially painful, because of the seriousness of the charges and also because it involves a former member of our assembly, an episcopal colleague, a close associate and, for many of us, a friend.”

The charges of possessing and importing child pornography merit thorough investigation by competent authorities, Archbishop Weisgerber told about 90 bishops Oct. 19 at the beginning of their weeklong meeting. He reminded them of the presumption of innocence until the charges are proven.

“As bishops we are united in concern and prayer for each other and for all of those whose lives are impacted by the crime and sin of sexual exploitation and sexual abuse,” he said. “These include the victims and their families; the local community and society in general; the Christian community in a special way; and also the perpetrators, as well as anyone who has been accused, whether justly or unjustly.”

He reaffirmed the bishops’ commitment to safeguarding against violations of human dignity in the priorities they agreed on 20 years ago, noting that their 1992 document, “From Pain to Hope,” continued to be an important pastoral resource.

In a speech the same day, the outgoing Vatican ambassador to Canada, Archbishop Luigi Ventura, mentioned Bishop Lahey’s situation without naming him. Archbishop Ventura, who has been named nuncio to France, said he had shared with the bishops, their priests and the church “the tears and cry of suffering” of Archbishop Anthony Mancini of Halifax, Nova Scotia. Archbishop Ventura quoted Archbishop Mancini’s late-September statement, which said, “At this time when so many hearts have been broken we need to know again, or for the first time, the healing grace of God’s love.”

Archbishop Weisgerber also mentioned allegations that the Canadian Catholic Organization for Development and Peace was working with international partners that advocate for abortion rights or contraception.

...

http://www.catholicreview.org/subpages/ ... ction=7040

[smiths]

Not every Catholic is a brain dead drone.

Catholicism is a microcosm of humanity, as is atheism, professionalism, unionism ...
most of the catholics i know are fucking hypocrites, and so are most of the non-catholics,
sickos drift towards places where they can act out their horrible whims,
scouts, teaching, churches, parenthood, anywhere that access to children is easier,

there are great numbers of catholics with good hearts and intentions who dedicate their lives to helping others and trying to do the best they can

i have a good family friend who is a 70 year old jesuit priest,
he has tirrelessly and selflessly devoted his entire life to visiting and consoling those in need, in prisons, mental hospitals and at homes where people have died and at churches very week

very few people i have ever met come even remotely close in terms of giving to other humans

[Hairball]

http://www.independent.ie/breaking-news/national-news/archbishop-accused-of-sex-assault-on-teenager-1924258.html

Archbishop accused of sex assault on teenager

Sunday October 25 2009

An Irish archbishop is accused of sexually assaulting a teenage girl in Africa before having a 20 year affair with her, it emerged today.

The Vatican is investigating a complaint made against Archbishop Richard Burke, who stepped down as Archdiocese of Benin in Nigeria earlier this year.
[...]
It is alleged he sexually assaulted the victim in April 1983, when she was a 14-year-old patient in a hospital.

The victim, a married 41-year-old mother of three who now lives in Canada, maintains she also had a relationship with the cleric for more than two decades.

[Jeff]

From The Times
October 21, 2009
Child abuse: ‘They poisoned my mind against my own mother’
As Ireland is braced for more revelations about paedophile priests, one woman tells of the abuse she endured at the hands of nuns

David Sharrock

Raped and infected with gonorrhoea when she was just 8 years old, then shortly afterwards, seized and sentenced to eight years in a children’s institute run by sadistic nuns, Kathleen O’Malley has spent most of her life hiding from herself. But having emerged stronger from her horrific childhood she has set herself a new challenge: to find the sister who suffered with her.

The facts of Kathleen O’Malley’s life would probably not have been believed ten years ago, not before the dam finally burst on the Roman Catholic Church in Ireland.

A long-awaited report into clerical abuse in the Diocese of Dublin is expected to be published this week and bishops are bracing themselves for another round of public anger. It will be a horror story of how known paedophile priests were shunted from parish to parish by their religious seniors. The number of children who suffered as a result of the Church’s cover-up could run into thousands.

It will also be another shattering blow to the moral authority of an institution that once ruled Ireland with an iron rod, following hard on the heels of the Ryan report, an independent tribunal that concluded in May after a decade of evidence-gathering that there had been “endemic and systemic” sexual, physical and emotional abuse of hundreds of thousands of Irish children in residential institutions run by religious orders. Four years ago, when Kathleen first told her story in her memoir, Childhood Interrupted, there were plenty of cynics around who were prepared to cast doubt on the extraordinary tale of suffering inside a system that seemed akin to the worst excesses of a totalitarian regime.

But a sea-change has occurred in Ireland since the Ryan report: the anger still swirls and will gather strength again this week with the publication of another report.

The proof of Kathleen’s claims is laid out before her on a coffee table in her smart detached Hertfordshire bungalow: pages and pages of official reports whose secrecy was not easily given up by the Irish authorities.

Two legal documents are chilling. The first is the peremptory record of how Kathleen, with her her sisters, Sarah Louise and Lydia, were taken from their mother in a dawn raid on their Dublin tenement home and found guilty in the children’s court of being “destitute” and “having a parent who does not exercise proper guardianship”. The second is a transcript of the trial of Luke McCabe, a neighbour who raped Kathleen in 1950. It’s extraordinary to read the words of a child being cross-examined by Judge McCarthy in open court: “Do you know what would happen if you told lies?”

Answer: “The Lord would light me.” Looking back, reading those words on the page, Kathleen can laugh now. “I meant I’d get a beating; it was all I knew. But look here, when he asks if I’d been taught the Catechism and knew the difference between right and wrong. I said my mother had taught me. But he ignores that answer and asks if the Sisters of Mercy had taught me. Because I was born out of wedlock she and her child counted for nothing in their eyes.

“The people who took us from Mummy were paid a bounty by the religious orders because the nuns in turn received half a man’s wage per week for every child they took. It was a business. They called us destitute and uncared for, but that’s what they condemned us to — we were loved and cared for, but they took us away and, to rub salt in the wounds, Mummy was forced to pay for it. She had to pay for our upkeep at Moate, the industrial school.”

But the court transcript also reveals glimpses of a strong-willed mother determined to fight for her children. Mary O’Malley told the court that in the eight months that had passed since Kathleen had been taken from her, the nuns had “told her not to tell anybody about the dirty thing that was done to her”.

...

“I was ashamed of my name. I remember Sister Cecilia saying ‘I wouldn’t tell anybody who you are or where you’re from’. And they did prepare us for our roles in life as they saw them, which was scrubbing floors. But I don’t care any more. I have nothing to hide.”

http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life ... 882575.ece