CNN Breaking :Roman Catholic archdiocese of Dublin report says 102 priests

[wakeme2008]

Roman Catholic archdiocese of Dublin report says 102 priests are suspected of sexually or physically abusing at least 350 children since 1940, The Associated Press reports.

Here is the story now http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/03/08/ireland.priests.ap/index.html

[CPschem]

1. only 102 priests? n/t

[mom cat]

32. Only 350 victims? sss... Sure.

[derby378]

2. This is news?

Gee - I somehow thought the number would be higher.

[sybylla]

7. Naw, they just kept moving them around so it seemed like more

With 102 priests in Ireland over that kind of time period, I bet they've had a molester for a few years in each parish by the time these priests retired or passed away.

[AngryOldDem]

28. It most likely is. n/t

[xultar]

3. Not LBN. I'm sure this has happened too frequently for it to be LBN.

:sarcasm:

[elehhhhna]

4. Remember when this was called a Uniquely American Problem by the Church?

I do.

[Bridget Burke]

5. No, I don't.

Reports of sexual misconduct by priests have been reported from many countries. As well as sexual misconduct by non-affiliated men.

Edited to add: The office of Archbishop Diarmuid Martin said it was publishing its findings ahead of the expected formation later this month of a government-appointed commission to investigate the history and handling of such abuse throughout Ireland. This predominantly Catholic nation has been rocked by waves of church sex-abuse scandals since 1994.

The office said the numbers were based on a two-year review of the personnel files of more than 2,800 priests who have worked in the Dublin archdiocese, either as parish priests or in religious orders, during the past 66 years....

"It's very frightening for me to see that in some of these cases, so many children were abused. It's very hard to weigh that up against anything," Martin said. "On the other hand, I know that the vast majority of priests don't abuse, that they do good work, that they're extremely upset and offended by what's happened."

This is not new. And the Church in Dublin is doing something about the problem.

[Hissyspit]

11. He's referring to stuff like this:

http://archives.cnn.com/2002/US/04/15/vatican.cardinals/?related

"Thomas Groome, a professor of religious studies at Boston College, said the fact that only U.S. cardinals have been summoned is significant.

'The fact that he is only calling the American cardinals suggests he is calling them all to the woodshed,' Groome said.

Richard Sipe, a former priest and a retired psychoanalyst who treated priests who had molested children, said it was rare for such a summons to be issued in the wake of a scandal. Bishops and cardinals have, however, been summoned to Rome before for discussions on a variety of issues.

'This is unprecedented as far as I know,' Sipe said. 'I think this is an acknowledgment of how very unique this situation is. This is a major, major crisis in the church, very significant.'

Groome said he thought the Vatican should not limit the meeting to U.S. cardinals. 'It's not just an American problem,' he said."

http://www.geocities.com/lclane2/timecatholic.html
"The Vatican has long dismissed all the fuss as 'an American problem,' as if it plagued no other countries. In the corridors of Rome, prelates disparage the 'litigious' nature of U.S. society and blame abusive priests on lax American sexual mores. Complains a Vatican official: 'In America there is too much reliance on modern psychology in place of the church's traditional wisdom.'"

http://www.post-gazette.com/world/20020324priests0324p1.asp
"Vatican officials viewed child molestation as 'an American problem,' said Nicholas Cafardi, a canon and civil lawyer who is dean of the Duquesne University School of Law."

http://www.rossde.com/editorials/edtl_churchnchidlren.html
"Contrary to statements from officials in the Vatican, this is not uniquely an American problem."

[Bridget Burke]

13. Well, if you believe everything some Church officials say....

Instead of following the international news--you won't get the whole picture.

[krkaufman]

25. Thanks for the links. I *do* recall the Vatican spinning the issue...

.... in this manner. Along w/ the new pope's slant to clampdown on homosexuality*, as though there was a correlation with pedophilia or molestation.

* Wouldn't a don't ask, don't tell policy be moot?

[Canuckistanian]

8. We had Catholic church sex scandals here in Canada

And long before it broke in Massachusetts.

[Hissyspit]

12. See my post #11.

[zann725]

6. 102 Priests...and ONLY 35 "children"? The "math" on this needs adjusted

A pedophile rarely "strikes" once. So over 100 priests, would be SEVERAL HUNDRED children sexually "abused" by said 100+ priests. This is more than a few "rogues"... and more like a predictable "trend."

[MrPrax]

10. It's 350...but point well taken.

Even 350 is too lower for this type of pathology.

Can you think of a single secular institution that would survive if it was revealed that over a hundred child molesters were active in the organization?

Even public schools might be re-thought with that level of molestation going on...

Apparantly if you stick the term 'religious' in front of institution then it's OK and a small problem best handled by the folks that hired them and protected them for decades.

[happyslug]

19. 102 Priests since 1940? In a country where you have one priest per 2000?

Sorry, I DID Children and Youth work and you will be shocked how much molestation occurs. When Freud first started his research on Sex and Psychology he was so shock by his first results that he rejected them and did not do any research on molestation the rest of his life (HE would NOT accept the level of Molestation that occurred even in his time).

Since the 1930 almost all cases involving Children less than 18 years old have Rarely been in Open court (Juvenile Courts and CYS courts tend to be "Closed" to the Public, allegedly to protect the child). Thus most people do NOT hear of these types of cases, such molestation cases occur all the time (and mostly within families as opposed to outsiders like Priests and Teachers).

My point is 102 accusations over a 60 year people among a population of 4 million (i.e. or 2000 priests in any one year or about 10,000 priests since 1940) is NOT that great. Please note these are Priests accused and that the Church had some reason to uphold the accusation, not that all such priest actually did molestation).

The real issue in these molestation cases is NOT if they occurred, but what did the Church do to both prevent them from re-occurring? The Church in the US biggest problem was NOT the molestations themselves, but the failure of the Bishops to properly implement systems to make sure such molestations did not occur in the future (i.e. if the Priest was moved once and the Accusations continued he should NEVER have been permitted around children afterward, the US Bishops kept moving the bad priest around after each accusation and it is for this the Church has been held liable).

Remember every Jury has accepted the fact that people will enter into ANY organization and use that organization to obtaining victims. In such cases the Church (or public School or Charity or even private business) has NOT been held liable. On the other hand ONCE such activities is brought ot the attention of the Church (or other organization) The church (or other reorganization) must do something. The biggest problem is separating Falsie accusations from True Accusation. In Most cases you can not (In cases involving the Catholic Church the Victims are rarely under the age or 10 so often parents do not find out about it till weeks or months later). Thus is the accusation true or is someone just mad at the Priest? If you move the Priest once and the accusations do NOT follow him, then that is clear evidence of a false claim, but if the opposite occurs then that is clear evidence of a True claim. It is in the later situation that the Catholic Church has had a problem.

Thus the Church has always had a problem with Priests molesting parishes, but roughly at the same level as any other organization filled with Humans. The Problem is the US was the Failure of the Bishops to do a proper job of watching over their priests. The Catholic Church in the US and overseas is NOT molestation cases themselves but how did the Church handle theses cases? That has NOT been released and until we know HOW the Church handle these cases we can not judge how the Irish Church handled these molestation accusations.


For population of Ireland:
http://education.yahoo.com/reference/factbook/ei/popula.html

Statistics on the Catholic church in Ireland:
http://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/country/ie.html

Unlike the US where the Priest-Parishioners level is about 1 in 2000, it looks like in Ireland it is closer to 1 in 1000 (with most Parishioners have 1 priest to less than 400 parishioners). I used the 1 in 2000 to keep the numbers of Molestation as high (i.e. I pick a number to keep the Number of molestation as high as possible as opposed to using numbers to keep the number low).

[lagavulin]

22. Thanks...good argument.

I came in with a preconceived idea about the Church, and you've challenged me to question it... Good On Ya, Mate!

[Kber]

9. It's news only in that the administration in Rome

tried to tell everyone that this was a uniquely American problem, not an issue with the priesthood or RCC in general.

[Bridget Burke]

14. I've been accused of being insufficiently anti-Catholic....

But I don't take every pronouncement from a Vatican (or Diocesan) official as absolute truth. Abuse has, unfortunately, been reported in other counties.

And it's been reported in other denominations.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jehovah%27s_Witnesses_and_child_sex_abuse

[Kber]

17. I think it's a common thing for pedophiles to be drawn to

occupations or places where they have frequent contact with children. They might be attracted to teaching, for example. And certainly that doesn't make all teachers suspect because their life's work also makes it a draw for some sick people who would abuse their position of trust to hurt and abuse. Obviously, the same goes for priests.

However, if a school administration knew that it had abusers in its system and let them remain to continue to do harm - well you get the analogy.

Whether you are talking about medical or school or religious administrators, its the bureaucrats that have the power to do the most harm by doing nothing. It's the banality of evil.

[wakeme2008]

18. right jobs like teachers, boy scout leaders

and other non-jobs that bring them into contact with children.

[happyslug]

20. See my previous posts

It is the failure to Supervised that has cost the Bishops so much time and money. If the Bishops had done their job (i.e. move the priest once, and if the accusation followed him put in his folders can NOT be around children and NEVER assign him to be around children. If the Bishops involved in the Pedophile cases and adopted such a system the Church would and could NOT have been sued)).

[Critters2]

26. In a case in Chicago, they DID

say he wasn't supposed to be around children, and assigned another priest to "monitor" him. Guess what? Another boy was abused.

Clergy who do these things should be defrocked, and prosecuted. Period. No grace, no second chances. We're talking about the safety of children, not the rights of priests or the reputation of the church. One instance, well substantiated, should be the end. Period.

[happyslug]

29. Things like this happen, it is sad, but it happens

You thus get into the Two Classic Punishment Dilemmas, first do you want to encourage the Perpetrator to escalate the Crime (i.e. Kill his victim) or do you want him NOT to escalate his crime (i.e. Rape is punishable by so many years in prison, but Murder is for life)? If you make Rape the same punishment a Murder, than the Rapist has every incentive to kill his victim (one less witness). As a general rule the law tries to discourage such escalation so rape and other involuntary sex crimes are rarely punishable by death. As to a priest being de flocked, all that does is release him into the General population, who does that really protect? I am sorry, the better Solution was to assign him away from Children and keep an eye on him. Some perpetrators will strike even in such situation, but if merely released he will have even more opportunities.

The Second dilemma come into play, making sure the prep is punished more than the victim BY THE PREP's PUNISHMENT. Generally this is seen in molestation within a family. A member of that Family (Generally the Father but can be Mother, Grandfather, Grandmother, Uncle, Aunts, Cousins, Brothers, Sisters etc) molests another member of the family. The prep is caught, tried and sentenced. He gets sent to prison where he gets three hot meals a day and a bed to sleep on. On the other hand his victim often loses the home the victim is living in (Lack of income do to his father being in jail), thus has to move generally to a smaller or worse house, has to make new friends in a new neighborhood, has to adjust ot a new School, all the while suffering from the fall in family income do to the fact his father is in jail (And this is NOT counting those Family member who holds the Victim responsible for turning in the bread winner in his family). Is Jailing the father punishing the Victim more than the Prep? If Yes, such punishment is self-defeating. Thus punishment for Molestation tends to be low compared to other crimes, for with the vast majority of molesters staying within their families, if you jailed them all a lot of Children will end up on the welfare rolls. The better solution is to issue an Order to keep the prep away form Children and punish him when he does come into contact with children (But not so much as to encourage him to kill any children he abuses).

Now we are talking about Catholic Priests who are suppose to NOT have Children, but the church is suppose to help both it members and its Clergy. One way to help is to keep such people in the Priesthood but minimize they contact with Children. Often these priests end up in monasteries and other places where they can still work, but have no contact with children (For example in my local, Johnstown PA priest molestation ase, the Priest ended up writing programs for the Church in a New Mexico monastery). Sometime they get out and do harm but in these cases the Church has tried to keep them away from Children which is all you can ask of ANY organization.

Remember I differentiate between Priests ACCUSED and Priest CONVICTED of Molestation. The former does NOT need proof of a crime, the later does. OFten the problem is the Church has enough evidence to know the Priest is NOT innocent, but not enough to show guilt beyond a "Reasonable Doubt". If you have proof beyond a Reasonable Doubt such priests will go to jail, if you do not but enough evidence to know it happened what do you do? The best solution is keeping the prep a Priest but away from Children (If you have enough evidence to convict the Priest he should be de-flocked, even if the Statute of Limitation has expired, as they di with my local Priest).

[MichiganVote]

33. Priests in jail? What a concept.

"You thus get into the Two Classic Punishment Dilemmas, first do you want to encourage the Perpetrator to escalate the Crime (i.e. Kill his victim) or do you want him NOT to escalate his crime (i.e. Rape is punishable by so many years in prison, but Murder is for life)?"

** The public is not responsible for the crime or the intention to be criminal. Factually, perpetrators do not need any incentive to commit the crime. They have their own internal dialogue that grants them permission to abuse the young. For perpetrators, research has shown that some are pathologically predisposed to kill or maim their victims and some are not. Legal consequences have little or no part in the choice to molest regardless of their relationship with the victim.

"As a general rule the law tries to discourage such escalation so rape and other involuntary sex crimes are rarely punishable by death."

**The laws are in place to protect the public, not to discourage the criminal. That may be an outcome in some crimes but it has little effect on those who molest the young or vulnerable.

"As to a priest being de flocked, all that does is release him into the General population, who does that really protect? I am sorry, the better Solution was to assign him away from Children and keep an eye on him. Some perpetrators will strike even in such situation, but if merely released he will have even more opportunities."

**Your reasoning suggests that what is "good" for the priests is "good" for the rest of societies sexual criminals. Factually, the church SAYS it keeps an eye on them but that is as good as having the fox guard the henhouse.

"One way to help is to keep such people in the Priesthood but minimize they contact with Children."

**Ok. But let's remember one thing. This has been the plan of the church. When the heat gets high enough, transfer the criminal priest to a non parish role such as working in a tribunal counseling those who want to annul their marriages, working on Catholic presses...you get the idea. Then, when they are short in a parish for a mass on Sunday, who do they call? They call the guy who buggered little kids to fill in and seldom are the congregants aware of it. The hand that finger raped a child is the same hand that serves the faithful communion, the Catholic churches most sacred sacrement.

**Catholic priests are required to unburden themselves of sin and they do it in record numbers---wmong their private confessors. The Bishops have not so much as raised an eyebrow and hardly turn them into law enforcement themselves. The church cover up is worldwide and has been shown to be over the last five years.

[happyslug]

36. I was making two points, and you missed the important one

Which is any criminal justice system has to make sure it does NOT encourage criminal activity. What you are saying that it is better for the prep to KILL his victim than to have a criminal Justice System that discourages him from KILLING his victim. This argument I made with any reference to Catholic Priest, for it exist both in and outside of the prep being a Religious leader.

Second you seem to have a Non-Catholic view of Sacrament of Catholic Confession. In a confession the confessor is to hear the Confession BUT TO REVEAL IT TO NO ONE. One of the few automatic Excommunications in the Catholic Church is for a Priest to reveal what was told to him in a Confession. Priests have gone to jail over this Concept (Through mostly pre-1800 Europe than in the US which recognized the Confession quite early in our history). Now the Priest can ask the penitent to go to the Bishop with the problem but can not inform the bishop himself (In the early 1950s the Vatican even send out a memo to Priests on what they can and can not do when a pendent tells them in Confession they had been molested, the priest was told he could NOT tell the bishop himself, but had to encourage the Confessor to tell the Bishop him or herself up to an including going with the Confessor to the Bishop).

Thus while a Priest hearing a Confession can not just sit aside, he also can NOT tell the bishop what he was told in the Confession box. Our Court system has recognized this situation since at least the 1830s and will NOT accept it into our Court System (Much like a Lawyer being told of the Criminal Activities of his Client can NOT tell police of those crimes, through like the Priest he has to encourage his client NOT to commit the crime). In fact these type of Confessions have NOT been the subject of any Jury's award against the Church. The Awards were based on statements, letters and other complaints made to the Bishop independent of the Confession box.

[MichiganVote]

38. The criminal justice system exists to exact justice-priest or no priest

The rest of your argument are falacious. There is no part of the criminal justice system that encourages these perp's and there is no part of it that discourages them. The impetous to abuse comes from within, not from outside.

I am well aware of the bogus nature of Catholic confessionals and don't need a lesson in it. I disagree with it when it comes to criminal behavior and have said so consistently. If it were up to me, criminal activity on the part of any priest for any reason should and would be reportable in or out of the confessional.

[happyslug]

39. You also agree that Attorney should be force to tell the court also?

Remember the Attorney-Client Privilege and the Doctor-patient Privilege are almost as old as the Priest-pendent privilege, The law has encouraged all three types of "Confessions" in that all three types are viewed as doing a public good in permitting free exchanged of information between the parties.

The COurts have liked and protected all three privileges. Now none of these are absolute. For Example while an Attorney can NOT tell what a Client told him, the Attorney can NOT further the crime (Just like Doctors and Priests can NOT further the crime). Other exceptions exists (For example when the Penitent/Client/Patient wavies the Privilege or when the Doctor does an operation for a gunshot injury) but even these are rare. Why? The courts have found it best for society that among the above three groups it si best for Society that you have a Complete freedom to exchange ideas KNOWING THAT NONE OF IT WILL BE USED AGAINST the Client/Pendent/Patient). You may disagree with this position but except when the English Common Law Courts were more branches of the King then Independent of both Parliament and the King, these privileges have been upheld (Under the Tudors and Stuarts they was an attack on these "privileged Communications" but these ended with the Restoration or by the expansion of the Freedom OF Religion in the early 1800s). Destruction of Liberty is often tied in with the destruction of ALL three of these Privileges and the reason they are held is such high esteem in the Courts.

[MichiganVote]

40. Attorneys and Doctors must report threats or endangerment

of others even by their clients to law enforcement. So must social workers, psychologists, psychiatrists, teachers, school administrators and anyone else in a position of authority---except priests in a confessional. Where is the justice in that?

[happyslug]

42. Attorney do NOT, except in Extreme Situations.

Lets look at the Rules of Professional Conduct (This is Pennsylvania Rules of Professional Conduct, other states have similar rules):

Rule 1.6

(c) A lawyer may reveal such information to the extent that the lawyer reasonably believes necessary:

1. to prevent the client from committing a criminal act that the lawyer believes is likely to result in death or substantial bodily harm or substantial injury to the financial interests or property of another; to prevent or to rectify the consequences of a client's criminal or fraudulent act in the commission of which the lawyer's services are being or had been used; ....

http://www.padisciplinaryboard.org/documents/Pa%20RPC.pdf#search='Pennsylvania%20Rules%20of%20Professional%20Conduct'

Notice NO REQUIREMENT is made for past crimes, or crimes that the lawyer, IN HIS OPINION ALONE, decides is NOT likely to "result in n death or substantial bodily harm or substantial injury...". A further exception is when the Lawyer believed he had talked the Criminal out of doing the Criminal Act (i.e. the Lawyer no longer believes the Criminal will do the Crime).

Thus unless the Client makes a CLEAR statement of his plans to harm someone, the Attorney can NOT report anything to anyone (and the Client has to walk out of the Attorney' office leaving the Attorney KNOWING that he will commit a crime, not that he MAY commit a Crime). In most confessionals what is confessed may be a desire (which is NOT the same as a Plan to take action on that desire), reports of past activities, or even regret for past activities, but if this is reported to a Lawyer or a Doctor, these are privilege communications just as is the confessional.

Lets also accept reality here, in my 15 years of Practice, I have NEVER had a client tell me anything about a crime he is planing. I have had clients discuss what is the punishment for various crimes (Mostly what is self-defense), but NOT how to get away with a crime. Criminals so not do that. On the other hand Criminals have told me what they did in the PAST and what their desires are, but no plans to exercise on those desires (Desires mostly about other people's property). The same with Doctors and Priests, it is RARE for someone to confined in anyone about a crime that is about to be committed. That is the exception, not the rule. I bring this up for the start of this Thread was NOT the absolute exception to report a potential crime, but what should a Priest do AFTER the crime has been committed the the Criminal Confessed to him in a Confessional? In that case even a lawyer and Doctor has NO OBLIGATION to report what is told to them and neither does a Priest.

[jamesinca]

41. I was reading a few months ago about a US protestant

that had done this. One of the things that came out was a comment of not being able to talk about it. There was such a stigma and guilt trip laid on people that they would not seek help and just kept on with their ways till caught. It was in one of the threads here on DU, I believe in LBN. The issue there was more of homosexuality and a minister if I remember correctly. I believe he was part of the Southern Baptist Convention and could not talk to anybody about what was going on or his feelings because of the attitude of the SBC. He had to have a wife and kids, he had to play the part of the straight male, anything else would have pissed off his religion basically. I wonder if the same idea may apply here. If the church were to set up a way for priest to come forward and say I have a sexual thing for kids, help me. Would that help? It would have to be with out punishment, otherwise nobody would want to come forward.

[hedgehog]

21. It's the problem of a system with no checks or balances

not to mention an ingrained culture of obedience. The Church is in big trouble today because it must change but there is no mechanism for change. We have a group of tired and frightened old men at the top who are frantically trying to replicate the Church of their childhood (a Church that never existed by the way)in a vain attempt to address the needs of today's Church. The sexual scandals are only the tip of the iceberg. We have no priests, women's talents are being wasted, the financial scandals would make Enron blush, etc. etc. If nothing else proves the existence of the Holy Spirit, it's the continuing survival of the Catholic Church. My pastor said last week that we must wait upon the guidance of the Spirit. Before I could stop myself, I said, She's coming to guide us alright, and boy, is she pissed!

[donsu]

15. can a pope be impeached? can a pope be fired?

why don't catholics protect their children?

[Sivafae]

16. Can we apologize to Sinead O'Conner now? N/T

[ReadTomPaine]

23. They are going to need more than a fig leaf to cover this problem.

Those numbers are off by a factor of at least 10, and more likely by a factor of 100 or more. This reminds me of an Air Force investigation.

[0007]

24. Holy jumping catfish! Isn't 102 is a very auspicious number?

NO, I got that wrong it's a 108 according to the Hindus and their beliefs.

[Critters2]

27. It shouldn't be hard to find 6 more abusive priests

[0007]

30. I'm sure that 102 was low balling it for the Pope, don't you?

[Critters2]

37. Absolutely

and now I'm sure they'll institute the same "no tolerance" policy that's worked so well in this country.

[CrazyForKucinich]

31. Magdalene Sisters

Great movie. Watch it.

[AX10]

34. Thank God for Ireland's good sense to reform their economy and...

make education a top priority. It will finally get them away from THAT SATANIC INSTITUTION.

[SoCalDem]

35. I was raised Catholic, and can tell you that almost EVERY priest

I met growing up, gave off "vibes of weirdness"..

The job requirements almost demand an "unusual person" to fill the job.. Other religions have devout people in their ranks and they still have "ordinary" lives too..