5%<100% - Edit 2
Before modification by Joel at 15/03/2010 04:34:24 AM
Even if we accept the upper estimate (and stating "1.5-5%" is hardly "admitting" to the full five percent, if 1/20th can be considered "full. " )
The Archdiocese of ONE area in ONE country is clearly an indictment of the entire 2000 year old organization; I see your point (not. )
Even if they had implemented cannon laws, those laws state that-
"As, assuredly, what must be mainly taken care of and complied with in handling these trials is that they be managed with maximum confidentiality and after the verdict is declared and put into effect never be mentioned again (20 February 1867 Instruction of the Holy Office, 14), each and every person, who in any way belongs to the tribunal or is given knowledge of the matter because of their office, is obliged to keep inviolate the strictest secrecy (what is commonly called "the secrecy of the Holy Office"
in all things and with all persons, under pain of automatic (latae sententiae) excommunication, incurred ipso facto without need of any declaration other than the present one, and reserved to the Supreme Pontiff in person alone, excluding even the Apostolic Penitentiary."
Oh yes, you tell anyone and you get excommunicated.
Have you taken into account the remote possibility that having an eight year olds molestation become the talk of the town (or nation) might inflict further harm on the child...?
But surely there can't be that many people doing this?
"we now know that in the last 50 years somewhere between 1.5 percent and 5 percent of the Catholic clergy has been involved in sexual abuse cases." -The Vatican delegation to the U.N. Human Rights Council said in an oral statement Sept. 22, 2009.
If they will admit to upto 5% (that's pretty endemic to me), how much is the real number? After all they've spent 50 years hiding such details, why stop now? And what happened in the hundreds of years before? When rule of law was not so widespread, when religious power was king, when priests were the be all and end all...yeah, i'm sure they were sweetness and light back then...
yadda yadda.
Admitting 1.5-5% is not admitting to 5%; that's the upper bound of an admitted range that starts much lower.
Fine, since you refuse to take it as typical comedy, let us get serious.
"the Dublin Archdiocese's pre-occupations in dealing with cases of child sexual abuse, at least until the mid 1990s, were the maintenance of secrecy, the avoidance of scandal, the protection of the reputation of the Church, and the preservation of its assets. All other considerations, including the welfare of children and justice for victims, were subordinated to these priorities. The Archdiocese did not implement its own canon law rules and did its best to avoid any application of the law of the State"
That's from the official Irish governments report.
"the Dublin Archdiocese's pre-occupations in dealing with cases of child sexual abuse, at least until the mid 1990s, were the maintenance of secrecy, the avoidance of scandal, the protection of the reputation of the Church, and the preservation of its assets. All other considerations, including the welfare of children and justice for victims, were subordinated to these priorities. The Archdiocese did not implement its own canon law rules and did its best to avoid any application of the law of the State"
That's from the official Irish governments report.
The Archdiocese of ONE area in ONE country is clearly an indictment of the entire 2000 year old organization; I see your point (not. )
Even if they had implemented cannon laws, those laws state that-
"As, assuredly, what must be mainly taken care of and complied with in handling these trials is that they be managed with maximum confidentiality and after the verdict is declared and put into effect never be mentioned again (20 February 1867 Instruction of the Holy Office, 14), each and every person, who in any way belongs to the tribunal or is given knowledge of the matter because of their office, is obliged to keep inviolate the strictest secrecy (what is commonly called "the secrecy of the Holy Office"
in all things and with all persons, under pain of automatic (latae sententiae) excommunication, incurred ipso facto without need of any declaration other than the present one, and reserved to the Supreme Pontiff in person alone, excluding even the Apostolic Penitentiary."Oh yes, you tell anyone and you get excommunicated.
Have you taken into account the remote possibility that having an eight year olds molestation become the talk of the town (or nation) might inflict further harm on the child...?
But surely there can't be that many people doing this?
"we now know that in the last 50 years somewhere between 1.5 percent and 5 percent of the Catholic clergy has been involved in sexual abuse cases." -The Vatican delegation to the U.N. Human Rights Council said in an oral statement Sept. 22, 2009.
If they will admit to upto 5% (that's pretty endemic to me), how much is the real number? After all they've spent 50 years hiding such details, why stop now? And what happened in the hundreds of years before? When rule of law was not so widespread, when religious power was king, when priests were the be all and end all...yeah, i'm sure they were sweetness and light back then...
yadda yadda.
Admitting 1.5-5% is not admitting to 5%; that's the upper bound of an admitted range that starts much lower.