While a ministerial student at old Howard College, I heard a piece of wisdom that has stuck with me: Be wary of preachers whose sermons never stray far from the sins of adultery and fornication. They have illicit sex on the brain.
--History Prof. Wayne Flynt
"Are you voting with me, Jesus?"
(Feb. 13, 2000)
To see the gods dispelled in mid-air and dissolve like clouds is one of the great human experiences.
"Two or Three Ideas," 1951
Charles Norman's Poets on Poetry
(Free Press, 1962)
(Submitted by Dudley Duncan)
Our conviction about what is natural or right should not inhibit the role of science in discovering the truth--rather it should inform our judgment about the implications and consequences of the truth science uncovers.
--Tony Blair, British Prime Minister
European Bioscience Conference
(Associated Press, Nov. 18, 2000)
The laws about why discrimination [against gays and lesbians], even revulsion and hatred, are justified have begun to fall away. What remains is largely inchoate, or biblical.
--Columnist Anna Quindlen
(Sept. 10, 2000)
The day after Joseph Lieberman's now-infamous remarks on religion to a black congregation in Detroit, I got a call from Fox TV network inviting me to appear on "The O'Reilly Factor."
As I had never heard of this show, I couldn't help asking the polite assistant: "The host isn't one of these 'hate radio' types, is he?" I was assured that Mr. O'Reilly belonged more in the "devil's advocate" category.
I was the only guest interviewed via satellite hook-up at a local studio for a five-minute opening segment, taped that afternoon and airing that night. The taping started with Bill O'Reilly's opening editorial, called "Talking Points."
He called it "ridiculous" and "madness" to contend it is "dangerous" to "talk about God and to pray in public," attacking the recent court decision against student-led football prayers in public schools. "Spirituality is a positive in our selfish society and if that opinion hurts somebody's feelings, I'm not sorry at all." Then he introduced me, and the fireworks began.
Although I felt brow-beaten during the quick interview, I left the studio mostly bemused.
At 7 p.m. we turned on the TV to watch how it came off. A teaser on Lieberman, O'Reilly's editorial and my interview started the show. When an increasingly excited O'Reilly proceeded to call me "crazy" for correctly stating there were no prayers at the Constitutional Convention, my shocked 24-year-old stepdaughter Kristi loyally exclaimed, "Dad, you shouldn't let him treat her that way!" Even cool and collected Dan shook his head in amazement.
I have to admit I was surprised when my November Brill's Content informed me that O'Reilly appears on its list of this year's top 50 influential members of the media, and that his book is on the New York Times bestseller list. I thought readers might be interested in what O'Reilly's "influential" views are. Here is the transcript from the interview:
O'Reilly: Now our story tonight: Senator Joseph Lieberman's spirituality on the campaign trail. Some people don't like the fact that he often talks about God.
(Videotape of Lieberman in a church, saying, "I hope that it will reinforce a belief, that I feel as strongly as anything else, that there must be a place for faith in America's public life.")
(Different cutaway of Lieberman: "The profound and ultimately most important reality is that we are not only citizens of this blessed country, we are children of the same awesome God.")
O'Reilly: Joining us now from Madison, Wisconsin, is Annie Laurie Gaylor, co-founder of the Freedom From Religion Foundation. So you have a beef with Senator Lieberman?
Gaylor: We certainly do, because Senator Lieberman is saying that there is no freedom from religion under our Constitution, and that is implying that there is no right to reject religion, and that freethinkers--atheists and agnostics--are somehow "less equal" than believers.
O'Reilly: I didn't hear him say that, Ms. Gaylor.
Gaylor: Yes, he said there is freedom of religion but no freedom from religion.
O'Reilly: But I didn't hear him say that nonbelievers were less equal than believers, did you?
Gaylor: This is certainly the implication--
O'Reilly: Oh, the implication? Okay. All right, go ahead.
Gaylor: And he's also courting and sparking a very divisive public debate on religion, saying things like morality is based on a belief in God, and our nation is based on a belief in God, and it makes me wonder if Senator Lieberman is running for Vice-Rabbi rather than Vice-President.
O'Reilly: All right. But if 90% of the population of America believes in God, as they do, the polls show that, and if the founding fathers based the legal system on Judeo-Christian tradition--
O'Reilly: --which they did--
Gaylor: No, they certainly didn't.
O'Reilly: Oh, yes they did. I mean, look. Anybody who reads history, who reads the letters of Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, knows that the framers of the Constitution took into account the Ten Commandments and basing the religious aspect of the government, in the sense that they say this is right, this is wrong, this is what they do and this is what they don't do.
Gaylor: No, I think that Senator Lieberman and you, possibly, have never read our U.S. Constitution--
O'Reilly: Yes, I have.
Gaylor: It is a godless Constitution, and the only references to religion in it are exclusionary. And if you contrast our Bill of Rights, which is couched in positives, the rights we have, versus the Ten Commandments, which are all negative, I think you can see no comparison. There is no religion in our Constitution, and we should be proud of the fact that we were the first country to adopt a secular Constitution.
O'Reilly: Well, look. In every meeting of the framers they had a prayer.
Gaylor: No, that was--
O'Reilly: Yes, they did!
O'Reilly: Yes, they did! In the records of the meetings there is the prayer, Ms. Gaylor.
Gaylor: No, no. Ben Franklin said that they should pray and there was nobody else who wanted to and it's in his records--
O'Reilly: That's not true, that's absolutely not true.
Gaylor: You're confusing the Articles of Confederation with--
O'Reilly: George Washington, in George Washington's letters--the Articles of Confederation I'm not confusing with the Constitution. I know the difference. In George Washington's letters about the formation of the government, God is mentioned all the time.
Now, Senator Lieberman. We may disagree on this and I'm not saying that you're not entitled to your opinion, but I'm quoting historical documents, and if you're going to say that I'm wrong, I'm going to say you're crazy.
But, in this case, Senator Lieberman is basically saying, exercising his freedom of speech, by giving his opinion of what America is and should be. What's wrong with that?
Gaylor: He has crossed the line, not only of what is proper for a politician but what is good manners. I mean we've all been told you don't bring up religion at a party or social gathering, and he's simply pandering. And he's running as Mr. Holier-Than-Thou--
O'Reilly: Wait a minute, wait a minute.
Gaylor: --to pander to voters.
O'Reilly: Let's make it a little personal. If I run for office and I say, you know, one of the reasons I want to be in a position of power is to help other people, because I'm a follower of Jesus Christ and that's what he did, am I wrong?
Gaylor: Well, I think that is what George Bush has said, and many people are very alarmed--
O'Reilly: Are you? Would you say I would be wrong to say that?
Gaylor: I think that if you, at every opportunity, would preach at people who are basically a captive audience, using--
O'Reilly: No, I'm not preaching, I'm just saying I want to help people, because Jesus Christ did.
Gaylor: You are a public servant. You are running for an office that is paid with tax dollars--
Gaylor: --and you have no business telling people what religion they should--
O'Reilly: I'm not telling people anything. I'm telling you what I believe, and you're trying to deny my freedom to do that.
Gaylor: And I think that everyone should beware of pious politicians--
O'Reilly: Well, that's fine.
Gaylor: And it does raise the question, why does Senator Lieberman--
O'Reilly: But you take it further, Ms. Gaylor. You take it further.
O'Reilly: You say they shouldn't be able to say that, and that's wrong.
Gaylor: No, I'm saying it's inappropriate. And I think that he has crossed the line, and it is time for the public to say enough of this! We want to hear your views on politics. We don't need to hear your views on--
O'Reilly: Well, Ms. Gaylor, we respect your opinion. I think you're absolutely dead wrong about your history and I hope you'll go back and read it, and perhaps we'll have another discussion.
Gaylor: Read the Constitution!
O'Reilly: I have, many times. Thank you very much for appearing.
For the record, of course I think candidates may express, but should not campaign on, their views on religion, although I prefer the Bill Bradleys of the world who keep it to themselves.
After the show aired, I went out for some errands. When I got back, Kristi informed me a woman had gone to the trouble of hunting me down and calling long distance to argue. When Kristi told her I wasn't home, she tried to argue with Kristi, saying I was too ignorant to be allowed on "national TV," and concluding her rant with this clincher before slamming down the phone: "You tell that Annie Laurie Gaylor for me that she gives blondes a bad name!" (Which is a neat trick, considering I'm not blond.)
I was surprised how many acquaintances caught the show. We also heard from people around the country who wanted to learn more about our group, and received an email from Nat Hentoff, who kindly faxed his column to us on the Lieberman matter.
Liz Uhr, a longtime volunteer at our office (and one of the smartest and best-read women of my acquaintance), had the moxie to tune in the show the following day, convinced O'Reilly would have to retract. She turned out to be right in her hunch, although the "retraction" left something to be desired.
"Well, I hope you saw our report last night about politics and religion," O'Reilly said. "I was so steamed after the segment that I decided to make it the subject of this evening's Talking Points memo. My guest was Annie Laurie Gaylor, the co-founder of the Freedom From Religion Foundation. Ms. Gaylor's contention is that the founding fathers wanted no spirituality whatsoever associated with the governance of America. I said she was flat out wrong.
"Now after the program I went home and hit my library." What followed was self-serving, but O'Reilly did sneak into the middle of it a semi-mea culpa: "The Constitution itself is a secular document. . ."
Sometimes, in this business of educating about the separation of church and state, we have to be content with tiny victories.
Annie Laurie Gaylor is editor of Freethought Today, and lives in Madison, Wisconsin.
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has grown tenfold since World War II, making it one of the fastest growing U.S. sects. Although it only has a worldwide membership of 11 million--more than half outside the United States--Mormons outrank Presbyterians and Episcopalians combined in North America.
According to a cover story ("The Mormon Way: How a Utah-based church became the world's fastest-growing religion," U.S. News & World Report, Nov. 13), unnamed "experts say Latter-day Saints could number 265 million worldwide by 2080, second only to Roman Catholics among Christian bodies."
Journalists Richard N. Ostling and Joan K. Ostling in their 1999 Mormon America: The Power and the Promise estimate the church's assets at $25-$30 billion, with annual revenue approaching $6 billion. The required tithing of 10 percent of followers' incomes accounts for about $6 billion a year. Its real estate holdings, including more than 12,000 churches and opulent temples, are valued in the billions.
In his book The American Religion (1992), Harold Bloom wrote that "Mormon financial and political power is exerted in Washington to a degree far beyond what one would expect from one voter in 50." That political influence includes killing chances to pass the Equal Rights Amendment in the past, and vociferous antigay and antiabortion lobbying today.
In Salt Lake City, the church finagled the acquisition of a public plaza next to its headquarters, which the ACLU is challenging, saying Mormon repression there is "a little bit of Beijing." Through complicated corporate takeovers, the church is trying to kill off the independent Salt Lake Tribune, a competitor with its poorly-faring afternoon daily.
"The nation will not always be only 2 percent Mormon. The Saints outlive the rest of us, have more children than all but a few American groups, and convert on a grand scale, both here and abroad. . . . Their future is immense," prophesies Bloom.
If this sounds grim, just remember: there are, at the moment, more nonreligious in the world than Mormons.
Priest and AIDS Update
In a follow-up to its January report on Catholic priests dying of AIDS, the Kansas City Star in November reported that the AIDS-related death rate among priests "exceeds earlier estimates."
In its three-part January series, the Star had reported that "hundreds of priests had died of AIDS-related illnesses and that hundreds more were living with the virus that causes the disease." The Star reported that follow-up research based on family interviews and death certificates found an additional 300 AIDS-related priest deaths.
The newspaper was stymied in its research by the fact that nearly two-thirds of states do not disclose death records. In the 14 states allowing the Star access, the newspaper found the rate of AIDS-related deaths by priests was "more than double" the rate among adult males in those states, and six times the rate among the general population.
"There is no longer any question that hundreds of priests have died of AIDS and that many bishops were aware of their plights," the newspaper concluded.
The Church of England revealed this year that at least 25% of its priests had died of AIDS-related illnesses, mandating in September that all Anglican bishops in southern Africa undergo HIV testing.
A complaint last year by the Freedom From Religion Foundation is being credited with the absence of a nativity scene from the lawn of the courthouse in Batavia, New York.
The nativity display has been erected by the Jaycees, who, without going through administrative channels, placed the large scene on the public lawn for many years, with the city providing lighting. A councilwoman last year objected to the display, but was overruled by other council members.
After being contacted by area Foundation member Walter McBurney, the Foundation wrote Batavia officials, pointing out the obvious: the display "is in direct violation of the U.S. Supreme Court decision specifically barring nativity scenes from city hall entrances and property."
The Foundation cited the U.S. Supreme Court decision of County of Allegheny v. ACLU-Greater Pittsburgh Chapter (1989), which held:
"The government may acknowledge Christmas as a cultural phenomenon, but under the First Amendment it may not observe it as a Christian holy day by suggesting that people praise God for the birth of Jesus."
"The City of Batavia needs to obey the highest law of the land, honor the constitutional principle of separation of church and state, and respect the rights of conscience of all its citizens by telling the Jaycees to place the display where it belongs--on private property," Annie Laurie Gaylor wrote Batavia officials on behalf of the Foundation and its complainant.
The Daily News reported on Dec. 1 that the Jaycees had done just that, placing the Christian worship display in front of Oliver's Candies.
The same paper editorialized on December 7 that the "Creche move is a good move": "Its new home has better lighting, and it is more visible than it was at its previous home. And there's no possibility of confusing state and church."
It pays to complain!
Whether you want to admit it or not, there are times when you just have to feel sorry for god. Consider, if you will, that since the creation the almighty has been trying to establish some type of delivery system, some form of reliable communication whereby he can get "the word" out to his clones here on planet earth. But to date all attempts have met with unlimited, unqualified and unrelenting failure.
Poor god. It has got to be nothing but pure unadulterated, exhausting and overwhelming frustration on his part. Can you imagine how totally mortified and humiliated he must feel? Here he is this all-knowing, all-seeing, all-powerful superbeing with all the resources of the cosmos at his disposal and he can't even get a few simple laws and commandments through one quarter of an inch of human skull. Nothing penetrates. No matter what he tries, no matter how routine or how elaborate the plan of attack the result is always the same--complete and abject failure.
Poor god. Look, for example, at the number of times he has tried to communicate via the written word. No matter if he pens his message on stone tablets, gold plates, papyrus, parchment, leather, paper or what have you the end result is always the same--misunderstanding, confusion, contradiction, uncertainty and frustration.
Poor god. Over the centuries he's put his moniker on everything from epistles, encyclicals, gospels, journals, letters, missiles, parables, poems, tracts, treatises, short stories, long stories, holy books and sacred books. He's even written, or inspired madmen to write, different books for different people and different religions in different countries using different languages, different dialects and even different terminology. To add to the continuing chaos every one of his words, each and every inspired work, has been altered, amended, annotated, changed, compiled, copied, corrected, edited, interpreted, revised, transcribed, transformed, translated, cleaned-up, touched-up, updated and sanitized to such a degree that even god himself doesn't know what he said, if he did indeed say it, when he said it or even if he meant what he said when he supposedly said it.
Poor god. Now, because this omnipotent being, this great communicator in the sky, has had such a dismal and disappointing experience with the written word, the spoken word is now, once again, the latest wrinkle in the communication gambit. There was a time when only those of a status of a Moses or a Mohammed ever conversed with god. Face to face encounters were truly miraculous. But now the number of pious parasites has multiplied and holy hucksters of every ilk routinely speak to god, with god and for god.
Today it has degenerated to such a low point that anyone and everyone, regardless of which side of the asylum wall they happen to be standing on, is having a running conversation and a one-on-one relationship with their very own personal savior. But much like before, not surprisingly, everyone is hearing and receiving a different and conflicting message. Currently it's just one big funny farm--the only thing missing are the rubber rooms and the canvas kimonos. Today the din of the deluded is deafening and all-consuming.
God has created a monster in his own image and likeness and the monster is not only out of control and running amok but is reproducing and replicating like a virus--and because god can't effectively communicate with it he can't control it.
Poor god. He's made such a mess out of everything. But then he always does. Fortunately for god, however, when he gets tired and fed up with the messes he makes he just finds himself a new sandbox and starts the process up all over again. While we, on the other hand, have to stay behind and put up with his repeated and never-ending failures. Poor us.
The writer is an artist and Life Member from Florida.
A 1,237-page compendium, Who's Who in Hell: A Handbook and International Directory for Humanists, Freethinkers, Naturalists, Rationalists and Non-Theists, has been edited by Warren Allen Smith, a 79-year-old Foundation member from New York City, and published by Lyle Stuart's Barricade Books.
Smith labored for 50 years to compile a reference on skeptics and nonbelievers, according to an Aug. 14 article in the New York Observer.
The book lists more than 10,000 names, including director Woody Allen, the late Steve Allen, billionaire Warren Buffett, Microsoft chief Bill Gates, actors Paul Newman, Bruce Willis and George Clooney, artist Frida Kahlo, writers Joyce Carol Oates, Harold Pinter, Gore Vidal, New York Times owner Arthur Ochs Sulzberger, Jr., columnist Russell Baker, musicians Billy Joel and Barry Manilow, and a roster of more ordinary folk.
Serving in the Army during World War II, Smith had the word "none" next to religion on his dog tag. After the war, he founded the first humanist club on any college campus in 1948 at the University of Northern Iowa. He founded his second humanist club at Columbia University, signing up John Dewey as his first member.
As for his special "Who's Who in Hell" club, he says: "Don't worry, registration is still open."
The book is available for $99 from Rationalists NY, 31 Jane St. (Box 10-D), New York NY 10014. Why not ask your library to order it?
Below are excerpts of a survey of 52 celebrities asked "Is there a god?" by The Onion newspaper. The responses appeared in The Onion's (bonafide) "A.V. Club" section, 7-13, September 2000).
Isn't believing in God like wearing chain mail? . . . In that you just don't do it anymore.
EP It's Very Stimulating
I'm dyslexic, so I hear dog when you say God.
--Director Robert Altman
If there is a God, He's definitely a rock star.
"Phish" vocalist, guitarist
If there is a God, all evidence shows that He hates me
I'm an atheist.
No, there is no god. Period. End of story.
Radio talkshow host
--Director Steven Soderbergh
No. I don't think there's a God like the God everybody's taught about. As a concept, I think it exists in terms of nature and the greater forces of things. I believe in nature instead of God.
--Pop singer Matthew Sweet
No. No, there's no God, but there might be some sort of an organizing intelligence, and I think to understand it is way beyond our ability. It's certainly not paternalistic and all these qualities that have been attributed to God. It's probably a dispassionate. . . . That's why I say, "Suppose He doesn't give a shit? Suppose there is a god but he just doesn't give a shit?" That's the kind of thing that might be at work.
--Comedian George Carlin
. . . It's possible that there's some kind of life spirit or life force or something; not an old man sitting on a tree. If there's an old man sitting on a stump way up in the sky, 1) he's stupid, and 2) he's somewhat diabolical, you know? He's giving babies diseases, and bombing villages for no good reason, and killing people in airplanes.
--Singer Mojo Nixon
. . . There doesn't need to be a God for me. . . .
--Actress Angelina Jolie
No, I don't think She exists.
--Director Alex Cox
God is, to me, pretty much a myth created over time to deny the idea that we're all responsible for our own actions.
--Actor Seth Green
Originally published May 1990 in Freethought Today.
- Father George Bredemann of Phoenix is asked to counsel children sexually abused by a babysitter. Instead, he molests the brothers himself at, his cabin and during baths. Following his arrest, 250 parishioners attend a support prayer meeting for him. Bishop Thomas J. O'Brien says the support for Bredemann makes him "proud." The priest admits to 20 years of sexually abusing boys. The judge gives him I year in jail and probation following the recommendation of the bishop.
- A 14-year-old girl in foster care is raped and impregnated by Deacon Stephen Andrews of the Advent Christian Church in Kennebunk, Maine, a trusted figure. She gives birth. Andrews gets 5 years in prison, 3 of them suspended, despite the protests of the prosecutor.
- Salvation Army Captain William Douglas is convicted of molesting, sodomizing and sexually terrorizing young Indian boys in a village in British Columbia. Douglas was acquitted of similar charges in 1985; the judge said he could not accept that a minister would lie.
- Supporters of Father Thomas L. McLaughlin say he is "being crucified," following his arrest for pedophilia. He confesses to molesting boys for years. The Columbus Diocese did not report him to police until almost a year after parents first complained to Bishop James A Griffin. "Father Mac" gets 18 months in a plea bargain.
- Born-again Delaware preacher William J. Keichline, Sr. is commended by the legislature for running Mission of Care ministry for the homeless. As a landlord he assaults and rapes a girl for 3 years starting when she is 7, threatening to evict her family if she tells. He gets eight 20 year prison terms for rape, bondage and child pornography.
- The tiny province of Newfoundland is rocked by 20 convictions or charges of priests and Catholic brothers for molesting children, which closes Mt Cashel orphanage. Police, social workers and church officials are all implicated in a cover-up.
These are examples of the criminal cases involving clergy sexual abuse of children being reported at the rate of at least two a week.
That statistic comes from a first-of-its-kind study of recent cases of molesting clergy and church staff conducted by the Freedom From Religion Foundation.
The study focuses on criminal cases against 190 North American priests and preachers charged with sexual molestation of children during 1988 and 1989. Also studied were 60 child abuse cases involving nonclergy church staff, such as Sunday School teachers, counselors and parochial school teachers and principals. Additionally, there were 62 civil suits during those years brought against molesting pastors and their churches. See section below for details on related studies.
Of the accused clergy, 75 were Catholic priests (39.5%) and 111 were Protestant ministers (58%). (Also charged were 1 Mormon clergyman, 1 occult minister and 2 cult ministers.) Protestant cases involved equal numbers of mainstream and fundamentalist/evangelical denominations. This study revealed no rabbis charged with child molestation.
"Although we find the numbers of molesting clergy staggering, our figures undoubtedly reflect only a fraction of these cases," notes Annie Laurie Gaylor, editor of Freethought Today and author of the 1988 book Betrayal of Trust: Clergy Abuse of Children.
Cases in the study were based on those reported in the daily press which were compiled byFreethought Today, with follow-up through prosecutors' offices.
"It has to be stressed that many criminal cases are not necessarily reported by newspapers, and that most cases of clergy abuse of children never reach the criminal courts in the first place. Nor does the study encompass allegations which did not involve criminal charges, such as the scandal this spring involving Father Bruce Ritter of the Covenant House.
"This study shows that child molestation by clergy involves the priest- or minister-next-door," she said.
"Our study proves that these crimes are by no means confined to the Catholic Church. However, the meaningful statistic is that, although priests make up only about 10% of North American clergy, they are 40% of the accused. The Catholic Church, which always complains that the media are 'priest-bashing,' has absolutely no grounds for this criticism."
The study reveals that Catholic priests were acquitted or dismissed of child molestation charges at a higher rate than Protestant ministers. Similarly, Catholic priests received a higher rate of suspended sentences when convicted, and when sentenced, spent considerably less time in jail or prison. Another striking difference between Catholics and Protestants was the sex of their victims. Slightly more than half of the, Protestant ministers molested girls while 90% of the priests molested boys.
In at least half of the cases, dioceses were exposed as engaging in cover-ups. Cover-ups included superiors knowing about molestation but doing nothing or transferring priests to unsuspecting communities, or official stonewalling. Known coverups also occurred in at least 10% of Protestant churches.
The study shows that 88% of all charged clergy were convicted (81% of priests were convicted). Outcome is unknown in about a fifth of the cases, most of these still in progress.
"Since accusing well-known priests and ministers with sexual abuse of children is highly controversial," said Gaylor, "we think prosecutors tend to charge ministers only when they feel very confident of the outcome. This appears to account for a satisfyingly high conviction rate."
A majority of cases did not go to trial, with 61% of accused reverends pleading guilty (53%) or no contest (8%). Threequarters of all clergy who pleaded innocent were found guilty. About half of the Catholic priests pleading innocent were convicted. Seventy-eight percent of convicted ministers were incarcerated (62% imprisoned, 16% jailed), with sentences as brief as 30 days in jail to as long as 3 lifeterms. About 10% received probation only.
Priests were incarcerated at a lower rate than Protestants, with only 68.5% of convicted priests spending time in jail or prison. The average Protestant clergyman sent to prison for child molestation received 11.5 years, while the average Roman Catholic priest received only 3.6 years. Of the 21 priests sent to prison, none received a sentence higher than 9 years. By contrast, of 58 Protestant clergy, 45% received ten or more years, including 3 life sentences.
Similarly, Protestants averaged sentences of 6.6 months in jail, compared to 4.4 months for Catholics.
Both accused molesters who became fugitives (still at large) are Catholic priests.
Overall, 7.4% of the cases against ministers were dismissed and 4.7% were acquitted. Cases against priests were dropped at a slightly higher rate of 12.5% dismissal, and 6.3% acquittal.
Almost twice as many priests received suspended sentences. Additionally, 1 priest was given treatment-only as a sentence and another was channeled into pretrial intervention with charges dropped upon successful completion.
Half of the clergymen were officially involved in youth functions, where they met their victims. About a third were accused of molestations during camping trips, youth group activities, retreats and crusades. About 20% were accused of molesting children at religious schools, 21% at church homes for children or through foster care. Eleven percent were accused of abusing children during counseling sessions exclusively, although many cases involved a counseling relationship. Three percent were charged with molesting children while working at treatment centers, such as drug rehabilitation or correctional institutes.
Crimes occurred at such church locations as the sacristy, in the rectory, or church van. One convicted priest molested victims just before saying Mass.
Most ministers were charged with molesting at least 4 or 5 victims but were believed to have assaulted many others. The sexual assault charges ranged from indecent touching to rape, sodomy, and child pornography. Much of the abuse was longterm with some children assaulted as many as 1,000 times. A majority of victims, 60% of whom were boys, were molested on church property or during church-sanctioned outings,
Included in the study were prominent clergy and evangelists who had made names for themselves through special ministries or "good works."
The profile of the typical minister charged with molesting children: a 45-year-old man (ages ranged from 24 to 80 at the time of arrest), with 4 to 5 named victims, most often boys in their early teens.
Of all the accused, 37% involved female victims, 58% male victims, and 3.2% children of both sexes. (In 1% of the cases, the sex of the victim was not identified.)
Charges for all 190 cases involved a total of 847 victims. Most ministers, however, were suspected of molesting many other children. Conservatively, the 190 clergy had at least 4,000 other victims, for a low estimate of an average of 21 victims each. These children were not included in charges for pragmatic legal reasons, because they had been molested in other cities and times, or because the statute of limitations had been exceeded. Some estimates were anecdotal based on investigations or confessions by the molester.
Convicted ministers averaged 5 victims each, with 133 ministers molesting at least 651 named victims.
Information on the marital status of Protestants, gleaned from newspaper accounts so therefore incomplete, showed that at least 43% were married. This would dispel the idea that celibacy alone triggers ministerial child molestation. Twelve cases involved clergy charged with molesting their own children, stepchildren, adopted children or foster children.
While many see therapy as a panacea for this crime, only about a third of the convicted ministers and priests had had some kind of counseling or psychiatric evaluation, mandated or otherwise.
Studies Show Depth of Scandal in Churches
Church Staff (Nonclergy) Charged In 1988-89 With Molesting Children
Of 60 church staff or employees charged in criminal court with molesting children in 1988-89, 22% were Catholic, 72% were Protestant and 6% were other faiths.
These included nonordained youth ministers, Sunday School teachers, church volunteers, religious daycare staff, parochial school staff (teachers, principals and deans), music personnel, nonpastoral staff, camp counselors, YMCA or YWCA staff and leaders of church-sponsored Boy Scouts.
A quarter of the cases were still in progress, or of unknown disposition.
Of the 45 settled cases, 38 ended in conviction (84.4%), 6 were dismissed (13.3%) including 1 dismissed on the condition of treatment, and 1 was acquitted (2.2%).
Of convictions, 54% were sentenced to prison terms, 17% got jail sentences, 20% received probation, and 9% got suspended sentences.
Catholics received generally lighter sentences: only 20% received prison sentences with 30% given probation and 40% getting jailtime (a Catholic principal became a fugitive prior to sentencing).
The average church staff sentenced to prison for child molestation got 14.5 years (excluding 1 sentence of 2,000 years from the average).
The average jail sentence was 9.3 months.
These sentences are heavier than the average prison and jail sentences given to convicted ministers for the same type of crime over the same time period.
Ministers Accused Of Sexually Abusing Adults In 1988-89
Statistics on ministers criminally accused of sexually abusing adults in 1988-89 were based on a small number of reports: 14 cases, most of them involving Protestant ministers and 3 of them involving ministers in the position of chaplain.
"We know there were many other such cases we simply did not have documentation on," said Annie Laurie Gaylor, editor of Freethought Today.
There was a 71% conviction rate, with 70% given prison sentences, 20% given jailtime, and 10% given conditions. The average prison sentence was 18 years, with the range from 2 years to life.
Jail sentences averaged 2 months.
The average age of the defendant was 40. Convicted ministers had an average of 8 victims each named in the charges. In 88% of the cases, the victims were female.
Almost all the crimes included rape or sodomy. Two of the ministers broke into homes, and one was considered a serial rapist.
These cases were computed separately from the cases involving clergy sexual abuse of children.
1988-89 Civil Suit
Fifty-three percent of the 62 civil suits against ministers and their churches for sexual abuse of children or adults involved the Catholic Church. Of the remainder, 35% involved Protestants, 5% Mormon, 3% Christian daycares, 2% Hare Krishna and 2% cult.
Reasons for Suit
Fifty-four suits were brought by families of children molested by ministers or church staff. The victims were as young as 6, and included a disabled boy, a child patient, and children sent for church counseling, in some cases, for previous sexual abuse.
The remaining eight cases involved adult women sexually exploited during counseling situations by ministers and priests.
Most of the ministers named were accused of having victimized many other women and children.
Most litigants were suing not only the minister but the specific church where the abuse took place, and denominations.
Criminal Record Of Ministers In Civil Cases:
Almost a third of the defendants had been convicted in criminal court. An additional 11% had ongoing criminal charges. Almost half of the ministers named in civil suits were never charged with a crime, and in another 10% of the cases, criminal charges had been dropped.
The suits allege active cover-ups, such as the Catholic Church knowingly assigning a molester to different parishes, not heeding reports that a minister or church employee had molested a congregation member, intimidating victims' families not to call police, failing to check backgrounds or provide adequate monitoring, not warning a congregation that a minister had a previous criminal record, knowingly hiring someone with a history of sexual misconduct, or promising to put a molester in treatment but instead transferring him to a new parish.
Outcomes of 65 Total Civil Cases
10 Secret Settlements (8-Roman Catholic, 1-Mormon, I -Assembly of God)
12 Known Settlements (6-Roman Catholic) totaling $5,500,000+
3 dismissed (2-Roman Catholic)
39 in progress
Where Molestations By Accused Priests* Took Place
Alfred, ME; Altoona-Johnstown, PA; Allentown, PA; Apple Valley, CA; Asheville, NC; Atlanta, GA; Baker Lake, Northwest Territory; Baltimore, MD; Barrington, NJ; Barton, VT; Bothell, WA; Bozeman, MT; Bronx, NY; Calgary, Alberta; Camden, NJ; Chicago, IL; Davenport, IA; Denver, CO; Detroit, MI; District of Columbia; Dubuque, IA; Escambia, FL; Ft. Collins, CO; Gainesville, FL; Hollywood, FL; Honolulu, HI; Houston, TX; Ignacio, CO; Keene, NH; Kingsville, MD; Lena, WI; Lone Tree, IA; Los Angeles, CA; Louisville, KY; Miami, FL; Milwaukee, WI; Minneapolis, MN; Nelson, British Columbia; New Albany, OH; New York City, NY; Newark, NJ; North Bay, Ontario; Oklahoma City, OK; Overland Park, KS; Orange Co., CA; Ottawa, Ontario; Paterson, NJ; Perryburg, OH; Philadelphia, PA; Phoenix, AZ; Pittsburgh, PA; Point Pleasant, NJ; Port Angeles, WA; Portland, OR; Providence, RI; Quebec, Quebec; Rockford, IL; San Antonio, TX; San Francisco, CA; Seattle, WA; St. Paul, MN; Vineland, NJ; Worchester, MA.
* A few locations named here involved nonpriest Catholic staff, such as Parochial school teachers. This list also includes locations of civil cases, and other alleged crimes. Some dioceses, of course, had more than one priest named over this two-year period.
A study released in March 1990 by Rev. Ronald Barton and Rev. Karen Lebaczq for the Center for Ethics and Social Policy of the Graduate Theological Union-Berkeley, reports that a quarter of all clergy have engaged in sexual misconduct.
What Catholic Bishops & Cohorts Say About Molesting Priests:
"We must not imply that the abuser is not guilty of serious crime, but we could easily give a false impression that any adolescent who becomes sexually involved with an older person does so without any degree of personal responsibility. Sometimes not all adolescent victims are so 'innocent'; some can be sexually very active and aggressive and often quite streetwise."
--Milwaukee Archbishop Rembert
Weakland Catholic Herald, May 1988
"A person at 14 should know better. Some children should know it's wrong. A child would have responsibility but the adult would have more responsibility."
Official at Ottawa Diocese
"If the victims were adolescents, why did they go back to the same situation once there had been one pass or suggestion. Were they cooperating in the matter or were they true victims?"
--Bishop Colin Campbell
Antigonish, Nova Scotia
Column, August 1989
"What I'm suggesting is that maybe some--a few, a few of them, many of them, most of them--who knows--had some kind of an inkling that this was wrong and could have said 'No, thank you very much.' I do not want to suggest that homosexual activity between a priest and an adolescent is therefore moral. Rather, it does not have the horrific character of pedophilia."
(Defending his earlier remarks about children molested at an orphanage during a radio interview, reported by Canadian Press)
--Bishop Colin Campbell
"It is not covering up to embrace a man who is suffering." (After placing 2 priests on "sick leave" and not reporting allegations of child abuse until a year later through an attorney)
--Pittsburgh Bishop Donald Wuerl, 1988
"We followed the lead of the alleged victims and the families. We had no desire to cause undue pain or anxiety to them, if they are not disposed to take public action themselves." (Rationalizing not reporting above case)
--Rev. Ronald Lengwin
Pittsburgh diocesan spokesman, 1988
"[The allegation by a social worker that a 15-year-old refugee was molested by Father] was so vague it honestly didn't deserve our concern."
--Miami Chancellor Rev. Gerard LaCerra
(Miami Herald, 11/13,25/88)
"The church exists to pardon and heal . . . There may be cases where the child was chasing after the man, looking for affection and whatever happened, happened only once."
--Toronto Archbishop James Hayes
(Toronto Star, 7/2/89)
Special thanks to Sue Ryczek who diligently and conscientiously compiled and tabulated statistics, and to Dan Barker, for his able computer-programming assistance, and patience.
Superintendent Della Jones of Keystone Public Schools in Sand Springs, Oklahoma, notified the Foundation on Dec. 12 that "Gideons will not be allowed on campus to distribute bibles or any other religious materials."
The Foundation complained on Dec. 5 on behalf of a Sand Springs family offended that their fifth-grader received a New Testament Bible from the Gideons in a classroom this fall.
The Foundation pointed to more than 40 years of legal precedent against distribution of Gideon bibles on public school property.
Della Jones phoned the Foundation office to advise that the school district would change its policy and faxed a letter to that effect.
It pays to complain!
This acceptance speech was delivered on Sept. 16 at the FFRF national convention in St. Paul. Gabe and the Foundation extend their thanks to Foundation Board member Richard Mole for generously underwriting the annual $1,000 student activist award in memory of the late Dixie Jokinen.
Wow, there's a lot of you out there--and you're all going to hell! [laughter]
I'm really honored and excited to get this award, and not just because the award comes with money (with a philosophy degree that's always a good thing). I'm excited that I'm getting this from the Freedom From Religion Foundation.
When I was in high school and was first realizing I was an atheist, I, as many of us did, felt like I was alone and that there wasn't anyone else who thought like me. The Freedom From Religion Foundation was the first organization I found out there for freethinkers or atheists.
I was impressed that not only were there other people who thought like me, but they were organized and they were active--they were out there doing things, writing letters to the editor, filing lawsuits, putting out publications, and it really encouraged me. It wouldn't be an exaggeration to say that I probably would not have been into atheist activism had it not been for the Freedom From Religion Foundation. So it's great to be getting an award for student activism from the Foundation.
My history of activism is a string of acronyms . . . we love acronyms here in the freethought movement, it seems. I started with the FFRF, then I moved to "aol" for the rest of my high school activism. I did a lot of online debating. I would go into fundamentalist chatrooms and say, "hey, I don't believe in god," and watch the sparks fly. I'd pick out the people who were less likely to just stick their caps lock on and swear at me in Christian-speak, and get into extended email debates with them, which I made available through the web. It was an interesting time.
Then I went to college and got involved with the University of Minnesota Atheists and Humanists, which is a great campus group. I was elected the president of that group and served for two years. I got involved with the Campus Freethought Alliance, which at that time was the only national freethought student organization, and was elected vice-president of that group.
While working with them I came to believe that the student movement and thus the movement in general really needed an independent student organization that wasn't part of just one national organization. So several of us resigned our positions with the CFA and started the Secular Student Alliance, of which I'm now the executive director. We just had our first annual conference right next door in Minneapolis about a month ago, which was a really big success.
We had about 90 students coming from around the country, more than double the previous record for a national freethought student convention. Not only did we have more people, we had a lot of programs. We had about seven nationally-known speakers come, including Dan Barker, who gave a great talk. We had a panel discussion, a big Intelligent Design debate, and filled up a huge physics auditorium advertised to the public. It went really well.
I have graduated from college, but I'm still doing student activism and I plan on doing that as I go bald and start to stoop over, even though I won't be a student anymore, because I think campus activism is really vital to our movement.
You've probably heard of the greying of the movement. It's a phrase that's come up repeatedly in publications lately like the AHA's magazine The Humanist. Basically it's just the concern that a lot of the activists in our movement right now are well beyond retirement age and there aren't many middle-aged and younger people coming up behind them to replace them. People look at the demographics, look at the movement, and worry that it's dying out. For this reason I think campus activism is very important. These are our future leaders, our future activists, the people who are going to take over when we're all gone or are in the nursing home.
I also think campus activism is very important because of its potential. Campuses have a concentration of people and potential you don't see anywhere else. You have all these students packed together at a university when they're at their most open-minded stage in their entire lives. It's after they've gotten away from their parents, they've started thinking for themselves, they're away from being forced to go to church every day and it's before they've settled into a rut. This is why you see, statistically, most religious conversions happen on the college campus. Campus Crusade for Christ and groups like that trumpet that. They really focus on this: this is the time to strike, you get these campus kids.
I think it's important for us to get our ideas out there so college students hear about us, know we're out here. Even if we don't get everyone in the world to turn into an atheist--which I don't think is a reasonable hope although it's a nice one--the religious people we deal with who will never be atheist will be much more tolerant of our point of view and know where we're coming from, and will be less likely to equate atheism with amorality and things like that. These students we have on college campuses today are the future politicians, journalists, lawyers, judges, voters, parents. It's important to focus on them.
As I mentioned, the Religious Right is very aware of that. In terms of contrast, the Campus Crusade for Christ, one of many national student organizations on the other side of the "culture war," has an annual budget that is in the hundreds of millions of dollars. It's over $200 million a year and they have literally thousands of full-time paid staff members. On our side of things, we currently have one or two staff members and I don't even want to estimate how much money we have; it's not much. We'll never have as many people as they do, I'm sure. We don't need to have that many because we've got the better arguments. I think if we get there on the campuses we'll really be able to have a major impact in the "culture war."
I think the Secular Student Alliance will be able to make a difference. We're working on building a strong network of durable, active and effective campus groups around the country and around the world. This means that in the years to come, the Freedom From Religion Foundation is going to have a harder and harder time choosing which activist to honor at conventions like this, because there's going to more and more of us, and the scope of our activities is going to get wider. But hopefully the extra difficulty will be dwarfed by the positive results of the heightened student activism.
In closing, I would like to thank Richard Mole for making the generous donation that made this award possible, and I would like to thank the Freedom From Religion Foundation not only for the award itself, but also for getting me started down the road into student activism in the secular community in the first place.
Gabriel Carlson is a recent graduate of the University of Minnesota, where he earned a degree in Religious Studies, Philosophy and Rhetoric. A "student activist" awardee, he lives in Minneapolis, enjoys urban spelunking and punk rock shows.