Talk:Episcopal Diocese of Bethlehem

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Episcopal Diocese of Bethlehem. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071013001931/http://www.diobeth.org/teamdirectory.html to http://www.diobeth.org/teamdirectory.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:52, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Proposed merge with Kevin D. Nichols

Too short 'Bethlehem' unclear (article incomplete). List of bishops already on target page and should be updated. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:46, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

"Between the 1970s and the 2020s, the diocese has been a major epicenter for clerical sexual abuse claims regarding priests, youth leaders, and organists, with multiple thousands of criminal charges against clergy and lay employees.^{[original research?]}"

I would assume that this statement is flagged as lacking original research because there is none out there to be cited. The above statement is false. There have been no incidents of clerical sexual abuse at all, let alone "multiple thousands of criminal charges."

Beyond the fact that it's lacking proof, the statement is also also numerically highly improbable. As cited in the article, this is a small jurisdiction with a little over 8,000 members spread over only 57 congregations. A reasonable assumption would be that the total number of current clergy and lay employees would be somewhere in the neighborhood of a couple of hundred people. Most of these staffers have been with the diocese for many years, and several parishes are staffed by clergy who are still hanging in there well past retirement age.

Logically, even going back over the past 50 years as cited in the above statement, the total number of employees would be less than a thousand. To have generated "multiple thousands of criminal charges," every single employee would have to have been one very busy, very wicked beaver.

The statement is inaccurate, wildly improbable, and clearly malicious disinformation. 168.91.163.62 (talk) 19:19, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

Not done for now: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Lightoil (talk) 06:02, 3 April 2023 (UTC)