Pope acknowledges church failures in abuse scandal

[Tirong-say]

---

there has never been a priest arrested, convicted, sentenced because the worst punishment they can receive is to be transferred to another location, and there, they will be at it again.

Perhaps excommunicated,
then it's the victim's turn to file a case and let justice take it's course,
a criminal should be treated as such.

[peewee_toot]

there has never been a priest arrested, convicted, sentenced because the worst punishment they can receive is to be transferred to another location, and there, they will be at it again.

sakto jd kaayu ka sir. mao ni ang gi ingon sa mga suod and parente namo nga pari. mao ng walay bawt ang mo file og case ana nila. hahaiz...

[SPRINGFIELD_XD_40]

^^^

Because there has never been a " victim " who pursued the case . That is if we use the word NEVER . cause and effect ra na siya .

[peewee_toot]

naa na ba juy pari nga na priso tungod naka break cya sa law?

[wikki]

wala gyuy pari na priso, they are corrupt beyond measure and sad thing is due to thier influence and the fanatical support of the people they always get away with it.

religion should be banned, it makes culture go stupid.

[peewee_toot]

^^ayaw lng i-ban. ok ra mn ang religion. ang mga tao lng nga walay ayu nga nagdala ana ang i-ban.

[wikki]

ok ang religion if the country (people) naka sabot unsa gyud na cya. its purpose and meaning and how it should be A PART of thier lives.

sa tanaw nimo naka sa sabot ang majority sa taw dri unsa ang religion? naka pa takX2 gud og presidente ang pari, nya mag sigi mu satX2 democracy, HeLlO PARI na. maypa si Hitler e butang as head og state tabla ra istoryaha.

[SPRINGFIELD_XD_40]

@ WIKKI ... I think its you ang wala nakasabot sa unsay gipangsulti nimo .

[hitch22]

I have no problem with you papi . usahay man gud boring ang forums if wala si HITCH22 hehehehe . ANyways .... rock on !!

In the spirit of making things interesting, I shall proceed...

The POPE can do that but it is not in effect . Have you noticed also the last time MEDIA was truthful in their EXPOSURES ? Thats what you call hate the game not the player . Too bad I dont have to know something because I have read it in the net , worst from links that qualify as online tabloids except for BBC .

Whats the relevance of an EXCORCIST having something to say ?

Did you even justify your source ?

First of all, Crimen Sollicitationis remained in effect until 2001 (Source: THE 1922 INSTRUCTION AND THE 1962 INSTRUCTION “CRIMEN SOLLICITATIONIS,” PROMULGATED BY THE VATICAN by Thomas Doyle, O.P., J.C.D. - October 3, 2008. Click here) to read. Remember that though the child rape uproar is recent, the victims that have surfaced worldwide are adults who had their abuse experience several years ago. Why? When the Pope was still Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, he served as prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. During that time he issued that confidential order to every bishop that all s-e-x abuse investigations were to be kept top secret for up to 10 years after the victim reached adulthood...on penalty of ex-communication!

Remember what Fr. Tom Doyle said (from that BBC link):

You've got a written policy that says that the Vatican will control these situations and you also have I think clear written evidence of the fact that all they are concerned about is containing and controlling the problem.

Nowhere in any of these documents does it say anything about helping the victims.

The only thing it does is say that they can impose fear on the victims and punish the victims for discussing or disclosing what happened to them.

If you don't trust that source, then watch and hear Fr. Tom Doyle talk about it himself: (click here)

Secondly, I only brought up that statement from the Vatican exorcist (along with Fr. Tom Doyle's) in order to give you viewpoints from Vatican insiders...since you've been aggressively accusing me of bias. So I thought "heck, why not have Vatican insiders speak about it."

Thirdly, regarding your reference to the Sunday Times link as tabloid. Well, if you think it is tabloid (although I think the only thing tabloid about it is its tabloid-sized cut, which makes for convenient train reading) and can't be trusted, all you need to do is check if more reputable newspapers carry the same article or report the same thing.

Do you trust CNN? If so, here's that same news about that Vatican exorcist's statement: Top Catholic exorcist: Pedophiles tempted by Satan, not possessed

Or how about ABC News? Pope's Exorcist Says the Devil Is In the Vatican

I hear people whine all the time about people getting their information from the internet. Well, here's news for you. The paper media are all moving their contents to the web. Paper media are fast losing business. And if I am going to back up my statements in an internet discussion forum, what is the best possible way to do that? By providing links, of course. I can't put up a video of myself holding up a book and pointing out the lines in it. Look, like it or not, majority of libraries, news and information would be in the internet in the future (and it makes good environmental sense). One would need to sift out good and bad information though by practicing sound critical thinking. It's the same thing we should all be doing anyway, even with paper media.

Have you read the reaction and replies of the people below the news ? Not to be biased because they favored what i think is going on but you can clearly sense something is wrong in the picture .

Spring, I think you were reading only the few reactions that suited your views and claiming that everyone's agreeing with you. Here's that link again.

Mary McDonald, Glasgow Scotland:

I feel so angry about this abuse and in fact stopped going to mass but the truth is I am very confused because I have not fell out with God or the Catholic Church for that matter, its the abusers.

Richard Merrell, NSW Australia:

Roman Catholics are such that they seem to believe that their Popes are St Peter himself, and that the Pope is someone. Well the popes are 'someone' but not any successors to the Apostle Peter. Now this may sound harsh, but it is true. Pope Benedict XVI, aka Reichsführer - Ratzinger; protected paedophiles.

This Pope will become known as the 'paedophile Pope' he has NOT right by God at all to be in the position he is.

Mike, Tampa USA:

The hypocrisy of the Catholic leadership is unconscionable...If this were any institution other than the Catholic church, its leader would be asked to step down in face of scandal, not defended tooth and nail.

Alan, Stirling Scotland:

The Catholic faith itself is perfect in every single way, however the people that preach it are not, which the Holy see aknowleges. The pedophile preists are demons, truly evil men

An Ex Ex Ex Catholic, Melbourne Australia:

One of my abused friends was paid by the church to be silent. He stayed very quiet! Another committed suicide. Her father died shortly after from a massive heart attack and total despair. Yet another lives with the memory of having a physical relationship with a training priest when she was only 14 yo....For over 50 yrs this hideous crime goes on and on and on! Governments and religious leaders! Friends or foe? Obviously friends! So many people, so sad!

Larry, Wisconsin USA:

As a savior of sexual abuse I can tell you that that abuse is tantamount to spiritual murder! Here, in the USA, the church has shelled out multi-million dolor payments of hush money. One priest, by his self, abused over 200 (two hundred) children, deft children.

Graham Gunn, lombardy canada:

The Pope has become the anti-Christ.

John T Going, Ballston Lake,N.Y:

Benedict has lead the coverup for over 30 years largely because such insanity is systemic within church governance. The pope's lack of credibility is exceeded only by his lack of integrity. There is nothing meritorius to be said in his defense by those ambitious psychophants with whom he surrounds himself.

Cheryl, San Francisco, USA:

It has been known throughout Europe to those who were not naively in denial, that the Catholic Church has always been full of murderers, rapists, and pedophiles. People were buried alive within the walls of monasteries hundreds of years ago. Sado-masochistic erotica emerged from the monasteries. Sadly, people today don't know this history.

The Harlot Of Babylon, Newark, NJ USA:

When is Sinead O'Connor going to get an apology from all the Roman Catholics who booed her and harshly condemned her. Your Cult of Mary has been exposed.

Frances, Cape Town South Africa:

The pedophile priests are very lucky they didn't touch my son and I made sure I didn't send my children to a Catholic school. This sexual abuse on children be it girls or boys has been going on for centuries so it's nothing new. My heart bleeds for the little ones who were and still are being sexually damaged because the powers that be feel we shouldn't make a fuss of "petty gossip."

....AND ON AND ON AND ON.

if I have to point it out again , it has its PROS and CONS . The EXPLOITED PRIEST gets comfort and the GUILTY gets away . I am not saying mas daghan ang gi exploit , I dont know about you if you are ready to sya mas daghan ang nang ABUSE . ANyways ... ngano mga na issue diri sa Cebu alone abou *** SCANDALS , ngano wala man sila sa VATICAN karon or have utilized the CRIME SOLLICITATIONS ? if you see the pattern , it only applies to personalities or thos epeople who hold positions and are important figures in the community . Thats how you bring down something .

To give you a sense of the percentages of exploited and guilty priests, let me throw some numbers from the John Jay Report (The Nature and Scope of the Problem of Sexual Abuse of Minors by Catholic Priests and Deacons in the United States):

The 2004 John Jay Report was based on a study of 10,667 allegations against 4,392 priests accused of engaging in sexual abuse of a minor between 1950 and 2002 (click here to read).

- 81 percent of these victims were male.

- 22.6% were age 10 or younger,
51% were between the ages of 11 and 14,
and 27% were between the ages to 15 to 17 years

- 9,281 victim surveys had information about an investigation.

- In 72% (6,696) cases, an investigation of the allegation was carried out:
* Of these, 80% (4,570) were substantiated;
* 18% (1,028 ) were unsubstantiated (This does not mean that the allegation was false; it means only that the diocese or order could not determine whether the alleged abuse actually took place.);
* 1.5% (83) were found to be false.

Read that again: For cases where investigation had been done, 80% WERE SUBSTANTIATED! No wonder priests/bishops are running away from investigation.

And yes, you're right, Crimen Sollicitationis would make the guilty go scot-free and exploited priest protected. But the point is you should let the justice system sort that matter out, i.e. if the accused priests are guilty or innocent. Crimen Sollicitationis, on the other hand, protects all of them. And that is not the right way to do it. They should let trials decide on that matter, just like what everyone else does. But of course, we all know why they don't like investigations. If you've read what Fr. Tom Doyle said about Crimen Sollicitationis, it's not about protecting the abuse victims; it's all about protecting the name of the church.

Nowhere in any of these documents does it say anything about helping the victims

On your "Ngano sa Cebu...?" Well, how do you know that the Crimen Sollicitationis protocol was not in effect? When it comes to protocol, nobody would say "We're going to apply Crimen Sollicitationis on you." When it comes to protocol, people who abide by it simply operate by those principles. Mas sayon man i-silence ang complainants sa Cebu...if you know what I mean. The Cardinal would only invite that person to his palace residence and everything is settled after that. Besides, it doesn't look good on anyone to go against "men of cloth". They have the benefit of the doubt in the eyes of the public and you don't. All that complaining would do is call attention to yourself as wanting publicity or money. No need for Crimen Sollicitationis.

You just basically said it is a NORM because since when was this SYNONYMOUS ? Become PROMINENT ? mas labawng binuang . I am not saying its not , but obviously as ANTI CHRIST and ATHEIST , these are all about it kay alangan man ug mo bilib mo sa POSITIVE IMPACTS . You will never see that because it defeats the purpose of being an ATHEIST .

MJ will never be labeled as a PEDOPHILE because it is not the norm . he was just a plain victim . On the other hand , sa priest , they will go down the drain straight because they were labeled as such . Kana bitaw ma stereotype dayon and it i wrong .

Why am I an antichrist for being critical at the Pope for his handling of the child rape scandal? You might as well call abuse victims "antichrists" for complaining or filing charges against priests.

I admit to being a non-theist (one who does not subscribe to organized religion), an agnostic. But I'm not one who goes out claiming there is no God. I'm one who responds to people who claim that there is, that I find their evidence not satisfactory. And I'm not against religion, but I do feel its necessary to take them to task when bigotry rears its head; or when they spread lies about condoms; or when they take childish offense over movies, books or cartoon drawings and ban them or burn embassies over them; or when they crash planes into buildings; or when they bomb train stations; or when they use their power to abuse, cover up and silence victims of child rape.

The words "Catholic priest" and "pedophile" are indeed becoming synonymous. It's not only coming from me. You can hear them from punchlines in comedy shows, even in cartoon shows like South Park or The Family Guy. And when it's gotten to that point, you know it's become synonymous. I'm not saying that it's right to call Catholic priests "pedophiles". All I'm saying is that the perception is there. Parents are now wary of leaving their kids at the rectory office, if you get what I mean.

Michael Jackson used to be associated with pedophilia. If you've watched The Tonight Show with Jay Leno in those days, you probably would've heard him crack jokes occasionally about Michael Jackson and kids. Again, the big difference is that Michael Jackson faced his accusers in trial. That's a sign that he had nothing to hide. It's very different with the Catholic priests and bishops. They get re-assigned to different parishes or hide in the Vatican. And you know what they say about "flight" in the legal circles? Complete this sentence: FLIGHT IS A SIGN OF G___T.

He is the HOLYSEE , he should never do that .

I agree. And you know what else? If he keeps covering up these crimes, here's Father Tom Doyle (Catholic priest and canon law expert) had to say:

They ought to sell the Vatican to the Mormons or to Disney or something and go out and start all over again.

* quote is taken from Fr. Doyle's interview with Dateline. Click here to read the transcript.

Cheers.

[SPRINGFIELD_XD_40]

First of all, Crimen Sollicitationis remained in effect until 2001 (Source: THE 1922 INSTRUCTION AND THE 1962 INSTRUCTION “CRIMEN SOLLICITATIONIS,” PROMULGATED BY THE VATICAN by Thomas Doyle, O.P., J.C.D. - October 3, 2008. Click here) to read. Remember that though the child rape uproar is recent, the victims that have surfaced worldwide are adults who had their abuse experience several years ago. Why? When the Pope was still Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, he served as prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. During that time he issued that confidential order to every bishop that all s-e-x abuse investigations were to be kept top secret for up to 10 years after the victim reached adulthood...on penalty of ex-communication!

Isnt it very contradicting that it is a TOP SECRET but then everyone knows about it ? Thats the whole brouhaha all about , do you have background checks and valid identifications of these so called victims ?

If you don't trust that source, then watch and hear Fr. Tom Doyle talk about it himself: (click here)

I cant find any documented information about Fr. Tom Doyle in the net about his whereabouts . I didnt bother to watch the Youtube link either because it will defeat the purpose of listening to someone I dont know and will call it valid but it doesnt mean its not interesting .

Thirdly, regarding your reference to the Sunday Times link as tabloid. Well, if you think it is tabloid (although I think the only thing tabloid about it is its tabloid-sized cut, which makes for convenient train reading) and can't be trusted, all you need to do is check if more reputable newspapers carry the same article or report the same thing.

Do you trust CNN? If so, here's that same news about that Vatican exorcist's statement: Top Catholic exorcist: Pedophiles tempted by Satan, not possessed

Or how about ABC News? Pope's Exorcist Says the Devil Is In the Vatican

Well atleast you could linked CNN and ABC as your sources but mind you , all media are tabloid , its just a matter of who is more presentable and unbiased . Mind you that pwerting palpaka anang CNN sa Gulf War reports . Another reason why I dont trust them just because sikat sila , ok na . Its all about MONEY thru EXPOSURE and EXPOSE .

I hear people whine all the time about people getting their information from the internet. Well, here's news for you. The paper media are all moving their contents to the web. Paper media are fast losing business. And if I am going to back up my statements in an internet discussion forum, what is the best possible way to do that? By providing links, of course. I can't put up a video of myself holding up a book and pointing out the lines in it. Look, like it or not, majority of libraries, news and information would be in the internet in the future (and it makes good environmental sense). One would need to sift out good and bad information though by practicing sound critical thinking. It's the same thing we should all be doing anyway, even with paper media.

Bai .. even paper media doesnt account everything as RELIABLE since they are only there to report . It depends who they talked to , gathered infos from , references and witnesses . So mapa paper or internet , it still carries the same content . Nothing biggie . I am not saying though na tanan sila sayop , its just that , mura bitaw ug AKP and TGP sa una , grabe kaayo ang sales nila basta headlines kay gi lawg man ang duha . That is nothing different from using VATICAN and if linked gani about RAPE , *** ABUSE , CHILD MOLESTATIONS , SCANDALS ... sensationalize dman kaayo because pistahan man jud . I know that you know how the MEDIA controls everything .

Spring, I think you were reading only the few reactions that suited your views and claiming that everyone's agreeing with you. Here's that link again.



....AND ON AND ON AND ON.

I may sound biased with it but I am clearly pointing out that there are still people who believes and dili magpatandog sa criticisms . The ones you posted only suggestively says something about what they feel but based on second hand information and it clearly points out that these people are already pre programmed with their respective views of the church . Still I would respect their opinions but opinions are opinions right ? It doesnt not constitute black and white documentation .

To give you a sense of the percentages of exploited and guilty priests, let me throw some numbers from the John Jay Report (The Nature and Scope of the Problem of Sexual Abuse of Minors by Catholic Priests and Deacons in the United States):

The 2004 John Jay Report was based on a study of 10,667 allegations against 4,392 priests accused of engaging in sexual abuse of a minor between 1950 and 2002 (click here to read).

- 81 percent of these victims were male.

- 22.6% were age 10 or younger,
51% were between the ages of 11 and 14,
and 27% were between the ages to 15 to 17 years

- 9,281 victim surveys had information about an investigation.

- In 72% (6,696) cases, an investigation of the allegation was carried out:
* Of these, 80% (4,570) were substantiated;
* 18% (1,028 ) were unsubstantiated (This does not mean that the allegation was false; it means only that the diocese or order could not determine whether the alleged abuse actually took place.);
* 1.5% (83) were found to be false.

Read that again: For cases where investigation had been done, 80% WERE SUBSTANTIATED! No wonder priests/bishops are running away from investigation.

This came from the EXECUTIVE SUMMARY :

The study of sexual abuse of minors by Catholic priests and deacons resulting in this report was authorized and paid for by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) pursuant to the Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People(Charter) unanimously adopted by the USCCB at its June 2002 meeting. The Charter called for many responses to this victimization of minors within the Catholic Church. Article 9 of the Charter provided for the creation of a lay body, the National Review Board, which was mandated (among other things) to commission a descriptive study of the nature and scope of the problem of child sexual abuse in the Catholic Church.

The mandate for the study was to:

1. Examine the number and nature of allegations of sexual abuse of minors under the age of 18 by Catholic priests between 1950 and 2002.

2. Collect information about the alleged abusers, including official status in the church, age, number of victims, responses by the church and legal authorities to the allegations of abuse, and other characteristics of the alleged abusers.

3. Collect information about the characteristics of the alleged victims, the nature of their relationship to the alleged abusers, the nature of the abuse, and the time frame within which the allegations are reported.

4. Accumulate information about the financial impact of the abuse on the Church.

The study was based only on SURVEYS of ALLEGATIONS but the outcome already sounded like they are GUILTY . The 80% who got substantiated only portrays a number that we dont know what happened . where are or what happened on the 20% ? Are they on state prisons serving time ?

And yes, you're right, Crimen Sollicitationis would make the guilty go scot-free and exploited priest protected. But the point is you should let the justice system sort that matter out, i.e. if the accused priests are guilty or innocent. Crimen Sollicitationis, on the other hand, protects all of them. And that is not the right way to do it. They should let trials decide on that matter, just like what everyone else does. But of course, we all know why they don't like investigations. If you've read what Fr. Tom Doyle said about Crimen Sollicitationis, it's not about protecting the abuse victims; it's all about protecting the name of the church.

Murag comparable na siya sa justice system nato bai . If you remember the judge who valiantly said " I would rather set free 10 criminals than imprison 1 innocent man . " Like I said , because of the labeled , stereotyped image of the Catholic church regarding these scandals , pistahan jud and it involves lot s of money . mao daghan mo take advantage .

On your "Ngano sa Cebu...?" Well, how do you know that the Crimen Sollicitationis protocol was not in effect? When it comes to protocol, nobody would say "We're going to apply Crimen Sollicitationis on you." When it comes to protocol, people who abide by it simply operate by those principles. Mas sayon man i-silence ang complainants sa Cebu...if you know what I mean. The Cardinal would only invite that person to his palace residence and everything is settled after that. Besides, it doesn't look good on anyone to go against "men of cloth". They have the benefit of the doubt in the eyes of the public and you don't. All that complaining would do is call attention to yourself as wanting publicity or money. No need for Crimen Sollicitationis.

Same sa USA bai . People sued KFC at one time for millions because they got served with a chicken head mistaken as a thigh . Same logic . Its all about GREEDINESS .

Why am I an antichrist for being critical at the Pope for his handling of the child rape scandal? You might as well call abuse victims "antichrists" for complaining or filing charges against priests.

No you are not , its a generalized statement and not directed to you though I know you are an atheist . Its a norm because it involves a big name , a hugs religion , a powerful state . The reason why i came up with that statement is because , when ka nakakita ug ANTI CHRIST or ATHEIST ni praise sa mga THEIST in general because of GOOD DEEDS and SPIRITUAL WORKS ? Though I am not closing the doors as these are taken as constructive criticism/s but I cant speak in behalf of the church as I am not authorized to .

I admit to being a non-theist (one who does not subscribe to organized religion), an agnostic. But I'm not one who goes out claiming there is no God. I'm one who responds to people who claim that there is, that I find their evidence not satisfactory. And I'm not against religion, but I do feel its necessary to take them to task when bigotry rears its head; or when they spread lies about condoms; or when they take childish offense over movies, books or cartoon drawings and ban them or burn embassies over them; or when they crash planes into buildings; or when they bomb train stations; or when they use their power to abuse, cover up and silence victims of child rape.

Or AGNOSTIC for the fact it came from you . Anyways ... there are reasons behind it from SPIRITUAL to RADICAL reasons .

The words "Catholic priest" and "pedophile" are indeed becoming synonymous. It's not only coming from me. You can hear them from punchlines in comedy shows, even in cartoon shows like South Park or The Family Guy. And when it's gotten to that point, you know it's become synonymous. I'm not saying that it's right to call Catholic priests "pedophiles". All I'm saying is that the perception is there. Parents are now wary of leaving their kids at the rectory office, if you get what I mean.

Thats because of IGNORANCE bai . Like I said , MEDIA controls lives and how they control it depends on how and what they present on the table . Still the absence of validity is clear if we justify that it is synonymous because it is in stand up comedies , movies qor any other mdeium of entertainment .

Michael Jackson used to be associated with pedophilia. If you've watched The Tonight Show with Jay Leno in those days, you probably would've heard him crack jokes occasionally about Michael Jackson and kids. Again, the big difference is that Michael Jackson faced his accusers in trial. That's a sign that he had nothing to hide. It's very different with the Catholic priests and bishops. They get re-assigned to different parishes or hide in the Vatican. And you know what they say about "flight" in the legal circles? Complete this sentence: FLIGHT IS A SIGN OF G___T.

The thing is , you made JAY LEO look like god now . He is as stupid and funny as his chin . Btw ... I cant complete the sentence , whats the answer ? I know what you are talking about regarding FLIGHT though . ANyways , on MJ issues ... do you know how much money he shelled out of that scandal ? Imagine that happening on Vatican more than ten times fold .

I agree. And you know what else? If he keeps covering up these crimes, here's Father Tom Doyle (Catholic priest and canon law expert) had to say:

* quote is taken from Fr. Doyle's interview with Dateline. Click here to read the transcript.

Cheers.

Bai ... from that statement , it just made Fr. Tom Doyle a lesser person who was supposed to be a CANON LAWYER .