The stories just get worse and worse. The Catholic priesthood hasn’t just been abusing children in various places, but also has a history of abuse of women, especially in Africa and India.

The crisis of religious abuse in Africa and India was brought to Rome’s attention in 1998 when a four-page paper titled “The Problem of the Sexual Abuse of African Religious in Africa and Rome” was presented by Sister Marie McDonald, mother superior of the Missionaries of Our Lady of Africa. A March 2001 National Catholic Reporter article detailed McDonald’s claims, which included accounts of sexual abuse by priests and bishops.

McDonald quoted a vicar general in one African diocese who talked “quite openly” in Rome in 1996 about celibacy in Africa, saying, “Celibacy in the African context means a priest does not get married, but does not mean he does not have children.”

The AIDS pandemic in Africa and India is said to have made nuns “safer” sex partners and, also for that reason, targets of priests seeking sex. (Some nuns also reported sexual abuse by mothers superior.) The women, culturally brainwashed not to challenge men or female figures of authority, felt they had no choice, and the priests took further advantage by arguing that Catholic rules for priests required them to have sex “only with virgins.”

More allegations came from Sister Jesme, an ex-nun from the Indian state of Kerala, who told of sexual abuse and forced homosexual relationships in a 2009 autobiography. But when the book was released, a spokesman for the Syro-Malabar order of the Catholic Church in India dismissed it as a “book of trivialities.”

“It’s her experiences,” he said, “but these are things that might creep into a society of communal living.” He added that the church would not be shocked by the allegations, concluding, “The church knows about these things.”

I’m pretty sure Catholic dogma does not say priests are allowed to have sex with virgins, so on the one hand, this is clearly a bunch of exploiters in clerical collars going well off the reservation; on the other hand, these abuses were plainly spelled out to the Vatican, which seems to have responded with its well-practiced negligence.

Of course, another factor might be that, just as is the case in remote Inuit villages, running a diocese in Africa or India is probably a high-profit-margin affair. The Vatican patriarchy might see little to gain in helping women.

The bishop of Bruges,Roger Vangheluwe, has suddenly resigned over sexual abuse — he has confessed to abusing and harming a young man years ago. I’d be more impressed with his contrition if it hadn’t arisen after the media started making a lot of noise about the issue.

It seems there is a small wave of resignations sweeping through the high ranks of Catholicism.

The bishop’s resignation came just one day after church authorities in Germany said that Bishop Walter Mixa, one of the country’s most prominent and outspoken conservative clerics, had tendered his resignation to the pope after being accused of beating children decades ago.

On the same day, the Vatican said the pope had accepted the resignation of Bishop James Moriarty of Kildare and Leighlin, Ireland, under a code of canon law that allows a bishop to resign before the retirement age of 75 for a “grave reason” that makes him “unsuitable for the fulfillment of his office.”

Keep it up.

It would be only fair, after all. They frustrate me with their ridiculous beliefs all the time, and with their bigoted intrusions into national politics. A few Mormons are planning a youtube challenge, coordinated on FaceBook: on 3 May, they intend to all visit one particular pro-Mormon video, comment on it, uprate it, etc., and attempt to turn it into a notable event that will bring wonderful, uplifting exposure of the Mormon Church to the public.

That ain’t gonna happen.

Here is their complete plan. We’re going to start working against it already.

Dear friends,

On May 3, 2010 (perhaps as part of your Family Home Evening program) if all reachable members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints–and any non members interested– would follow the link http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CkKblIMfmjI and watch the YouTube video of Jeffrey R. Holland bearing testimony of the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon, we could potentially achieve promoting that video to the YouTube homepage, based on volume of views.

The repercussions of this could be great. YouTube reports:

YouTube Stats (US)
(comScore MediaMetrix April 2009)

"The YouTube Homepage is the highest-profile placement on the site… eleven million unique visitors a day in the US [and] 89.7 Million unique monthly visitors."

The exposure that the Church–even the Book of Mormon–could receive in one day is astronomical. Please keep in mind though, while it is ideal that this video be promoted to the homepage, it is the spirit felt from the message wherein the success lies.

TIPS ON HOW TO ACHIEVE THIS:

1 views
2 comments (the more comments, the more valuable Youtube sees your video.) Comments almost carry as much weight as views.
3 favorites – everyone needs to "favorite" the video.
4 thumbs up
5 subscriptions – daily subscriptions have a major impact on popularity. This also has longterm impact on the future videos coming to the channel because they will get emails from Youtube letting them know when MormonMessages posts new stuff.
6 reshare. The more things are shared on Facebook and Twitter the better the video’s rankings will be.

Please send this to anyone you think would be interested. Maybe you don’t have to invite them to be a part of the cause, but even just sharing the link with non-member friends on May 3 could achieve the same effects (multiple views by one viewer in a day bumps the view count as well.)

As a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints blessed with the knowledge contained in the Book of Mormon I seek to share with the world what I know to be true; what I know to bring happiness and hope in the times of travail; what I know to be the word of God.

For this challenge May 3 is calculated from 12 am to 11:59:59 pm Eastern Standard Time (for those participating from different time zones), but viewing before and after the event is helpful as well. Please mark your calendars and gather round in your families, wards and stakes and join me, May 3.

All my best,

Erin Jakob

*** As the group has more than 5000 members I am not able to send out a reminder email for the event so I will update the event details a couple days before (so you can send out your last minute reminder emails) and the day off. These updates will appear in your notifications and serve as a reminder.

Also, I am deleting all links that are not the video itself, mormon.org or lds.org, and any disputes that may arise. If you would like to discuss something with someone please private message them.***

I’m sure you’re all itching to take a look at the video — and I’ll give you the link in a moment, so you can witness the dumbassery in all of its pompous inanity — but here’s the deal: when you go look at it, you must also click on the little “don’t like” button to downrate it (and yes, it’s true, you won’t like it), and ideally, leave a negative comment behind (if you can, it’s censored, as you might expect). Not one of the stupid profanity-laced misspelled ungrammatical comments so typical of youtube, but one that points out the absurdity of the video. And then ignore it. Don’t go back to look at it again, since that will just jack up the page views.

The second step is a more positive one. Leave some suggestions in the comments here for a great godless pro-science video that we can promote. I’ll pick one and announce it on the evening of 2 May, and we’ll send the horde there to uprate and promote it — so even if the Mormons do make a push for their video (and it’s entirely possible that, after we trash Holland’s idiocy, they’ll shift their target to a virgin Mormon message), we’ll still dilute their efforts.

Got all that? It’s a two-pronged attack: downrank their awful video now, then ignore it; and give me suggestions for a good atheist/science video that I’ll highlight before their big day. Easy.

---

As for the video they are promoting — it’s appallingly illogical. In case you don’t even want to watch it at all, I’ll summarize. It’s a well-produced video of a prophet, seer, and revelator of the Mormon Church, Jeffrey Holland, who is also a member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, so he is quite highly ranked in the hierarchy. He’s telling a story — and actually, he’s a good speaker, if you discount the dead-eyed glaze of the true believer — of the deaths of Joseph and Hyrum Smith. Joseph Smith was the crazy leader of the cult who had led his people to Nauvoo, Illinois, where he started to build his theocratic polygamous empire. It’s a typical story for the beginnings of a major cult — think Jim Jones in Guyana, David Koresh in Waco, Elizabeth Clare Prophet and her Montana compound.

Unfortunately for the Smith brothers, they were still a batty minority, and outraged members of the community assaulted the Mormon leadership and managed to kill them both. This was a criminal act that also made a couple of martyrs for the cause.

Holland’s version of the story is supposed to be a testimony of the truth of the Book of Mormon, and his reasoning is sadly familiar. It’s a Mormon version of the Trilemma argument of CS Lewis! He claims that Hyrum and Joseph had been reading from the Book of Ether in the Book of Mormon before they were killed, and while in jail, Joseph Smith had written that the Book was true. That’s his starting premise.

From that, he concludes that well, if the Smiths knew they were under threat of death, they wouldn’t be turning to a book that they knew was false for comfort. Therefore, the book must be true!

Using this logic, of course, means that every cause for which someone has died — both sides in the American Civil War, communism, the Nazi party, the love of a woman, the Albigensian heresy, Al Qaeda’s cause, every shift of every border, every battle over religious dogma, the fight between the caves of Og and Thag for the local water hole, the cults of Jim Jones and David Koresh — has been absolutely true. Holland is assuming that no one ever dies for stupid causes, or for cherished delusions, or for greed…and we know that is false.

It’s not at all intellectually persuasive, but it pulls out all the standard Christian tropes: the self-sacrificing prophet, martyrdom as a substitute for reason, pious emotionalism, a self-serving twisting of the facts, overstatement, and the conclusion that does not follow from the premises, but still appeals to what they want to be true.

So somebody find a video that represents our cause without those flaws. Something by Sagan or Feynman, perhaps? Someone new, since we don’t rely on simple authority?

I’m feeling a bit light-headed, and wondering if I’m still asleep. Or if it’s April Fools’ Day. Ruse actually concedes some ground to Dawkins in the religion wars. Of course, it’s in the HuffPo, so it could be some perverse nonsense, anyway.

Recently, the New Atheists’ most prominent representative, Richard Dawkins, wrote a highly emotive piece for the Washington Post, in which he derided the present pope and expressed glee and satisfaction that such a person was now leading the Catholic Church. In Dawkins’s judgment, not only was this no less than the Church deserved, but such leadership could only hasten the Church’s demise. I thought at the time that Dawkins was over the top and wrong. I now think that he was right and that it was I who was wrong. Let me say at once that, unlike Dawkins, I don’t necessarily want to see this as the end of religion or even of the Catholic Church in some form. I stress that although I cannot share the beliefs of Christians, I respect them and applaud the good that is done in the name of their founder. But I do now think that as presently constituted, the Catholic Church is corrupt and should be eradicated.

…

Dawkins is right. The moral mess gets worse and worse. Hope of change is illusory. Götterdämmerung beckons. Although we have different motives and undoubtedly hope for different outcomes, I join Dawkins in welcoming the prospect.

He also points out that one of the most damning things about the church’s problems is that they are responding by digging in and resisting change. He’s not alone in noting that Ratzinger’s papacy has been bad news for Catholicism.

However, just a note of reality, though: this is what the Catholic Church has always done. They have never been a bastion of liberal thought, and what they’ve always done in response to problems is recover by retrenchment — and it doesn’t hurt them. Those who revel in arcane dogma will not be deterred by the material aberration of wicked priests engaging in buggery.

Seriously — Catholicism survived the Reformation and the Thirty Years’ War, blatantly political and corrupt popes, schisms and violence. The current events are trivial in comparison.

The church is going to exist for a long, long time to come. What we should expect, though, is that as the more liberal membership boils off to join progressive churches or to abandon religion altogether, as the elements lobbying for change give up and go elsewhere, what will be left behind is exactly what we’re seeing: a hard kernel of very conservative Catholicness that will become increasingly crazy and detached from reality. It will become much worse…but it will still exist, and will be populated by the devout ranks of the truly fervent, the Bill Donohues and the Father Coughlins, and they aren’t going to be dissuaded at all by us weird atheists or those wishy-washy Anglicans. Don’t expect demise, just a diminishment and a hardening.