Priest Scandal Facts

[thessalonian]

I wish I was a good writer.  I would have written this article long ago.  It comes to the exact same conclusions I have come to about all of this.  Any child abuse is a very trajic thing.  But so is the anti-catholicism that comes from all of this.   I actaully heard a radio host say that 2.4% of all Catholics in the US have been abused by priests.  Does he realize that that would be 1.3 million Catholics have been abused by 46,000 priests?  Every single priest would have abused 13 kids.  There is no end to the nonsense and bigotry this fuels.  Rationality goes out the door when it comes to the sins of Catholics.

 

 

http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2010/04/07/mean-men.html

[GregorMendel]

To be disgusted and take action against child sexual abuse is not to be anti-catholic.

[thessalonian]

To be disgusted and take action against child sexual abuse is not to be anti-catholic.

 

Where did you draw the conclusion that I am not disgusted by any child sexual abuse?  What kind of action are you talking about?  Exagerate the facts to make it more horrible than it already is so that people hate Catholicism more than it is already hated?  Does child abuse give anti-catholics license to bear false witness?  1.3 million Catholic children abused by priests type license?  Your comment is exactly what I am talking about.

 

Again what action are you participlating in?  I will bet nothing but throwing stones.

[Basilisa Marie]

I think part of the problem is that many Catholics are hurt by all the people who say that all Catholic priests are evil or something...but at the same time, we can't do anything that looks like we're defending abusers (and rightly so).  It's a hard line to walk. 

 

Personally I think it's better to just go ahead and not do anything that looks like defending abusers (not that I'm saying you are, thess), and take comfort in the Beatitudes. 

[thessalonian]

What I am defending is the 96% of priests who have not harmed children in any way.  Non-Catholics always say I am defending the abusers when I make points such as this article makes.  They hurl all sorts of insults at me.  That is where I take comfort in the beautitudes.  However I post artciles like this and make points like this so that the "weak sheep" who are rightly offended by these things can put them in their proper perspective.  Sin and scandal does not give license to throw rationality out the widow. 

 

I love those who say "Oh it's about the cover up, not the abuse".  Those ones are saying "well it's not really about the children but about those nasty prelates". It is about every single incident of abuse and every child abused.  If any Bishop or priest covered it up it is about that also.  It is not about one or the other.  All of it that happened is disgusting.  To have righteous anger over this, yes, but then use it to distort the facts and bear false witness is just as disgusting.  I have had non-catholics call me a child predator because I post things like this.  They have accused me of being a priest as if this is really an insult, though in the context of the conversation I know exactly what they are saying.  Yes, the beatitudes are well stated. To hurl insults of abuse and coverup at any and all priests and bishops and exagerate the facts, without proof is what I am speaking again.  1.3 million Catholics abused by 46,000 priests?  Really? 

Edited February 5, 2013 by thessalonian