Dear mjpb,

As I've stated previously (while quoting from
the website):

"These stories failed to paint the whole picture of
what actually occurred, of Benedict's role in the
decision-making process about the priests, and allowed
the media to depict abuse in the Catholic Church as
a "growing" problem when all evidence indicates the
reverse is true..."

Of course no one is going to tell the flip-side to
these stories or paint an accurate picture. That
doesn't sell. As stated in my previous post,
"It's not the problem of abuse that's "growing,"
but rather the media interest in the story -
conveniently giving broadcast networks (and newspapers,
TV outlets) the opportunity to disparage
the Catholic Church during its most
Holy Time of the year..."

A bit limp Foxy... "or paint an accurate picture".

So, are you trying to suggest that the sexual and mental abuse that the Vatican, and other churches, are so good at is not an 'accurate' picture?

If so, does that mean you think the exposure to-date is but the tip of an iceberg, or the full extent of it?

Frankly, it has nothing to do with newspapers being 'unfair' and selecting the great Pagan festival of Easter to expose further cracks in the corrupt facade, but in fact, far more to do with a greater awareness by punters that the churches are all too frequently scammers and are not to be trusted.

The 'magic', in short, has been seen to be that...an illusion, and a dangerous one at that.

Dear BC,

May I suggest that you go back and re-read
my posts on this thread - then you can
react appropriately. At present it seems
that you're not aware of what's being discussed.

It would also help if you were to read the website
that I cited as well.

Foxy,
Thanks for the link. I have been following many articles on this issue, but this one apparently escaped me.

Those interested in the other side of the story might do worse than follow the links collected, and steadily updated, on http://www.mercatornet.com/justb16/. Never mind the articles or comments themselves - I know the mercatornet.com point of view is not popular with most of the people on this OLO: I am referring to the LINKS to the original articles. Nevertheless, the most recent article here offers a comment (explanation?) on the Kiesle case (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8612596.stm) which started this thread.

Those who can read German (remember, the scandal disclosures peaked lately in Germany) might also be interested in the interview given by the best known German forensic psychiatrist Hans-Ludwig Kröber (atheist of Lutheran family background) about pedophilia and the Catholic Church: http://cicero.de/97.php?ress_id=9&item=4907.

suzeonline,
>>I also looked at the authors and the organisation<<
You might also wish to look at the author and the paper that published for instance this:
http://cgis.jpost.com/Blogs/koch/entry/he_that_is_without_sin.

If anyone in Australia deliberately obstructed the police in an investigation of a serious offence like paedophelia and concealed the suspect or hid him that person is culpable before law and is deemed to be guilty of the offence of obstruction of justice. Such a person should not be allowed to enter the country or at least should be prosecuted and if guilty should be imprisoned.
There is on the record from many countries around the world evidence of priests,bishops,cardinals and the pope himself who are guilty of such offences, such acts of heinous pwrversion. These are criminal acts of the most disgusting and perverted criminal acts . Why do we pussy-foot about when dcealking with them? Is it just that they like to dress in flagrant drag and silly hats and put on solemn and superior-than-thou expressions that we hesitate?
Is it enough that they reluctantly having been dragged protesting to say sorry?

socratease

"He has been most reactive and proactive of any international church official in history with regard to the scourge of clergy sexual abuse of minors. Instead of blaming him for inaction on these matters, he has truly been a strong and effective leader on these issues."

The obvious question is whether he has done what he has because he was forced to do so by the outrage of the public, or whether he has done so from the goodness of his own heart.

The answer lies in some of the actions or lack of actions taken during his tenure. For example the inquiries by the church in Ireland are still sealed by papal decree, and the priests involved sworn to silence at pain of excommunication. In spite of several requests to the present pope, this has not been reversed.

It would appear that the pope is doing the minimum he can to deflect serious condemnation. There has been no effort to uncover any more than the journalists and courts have already done.

This pope is as corrupt as those preceding him.