Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
The Clerical Child Abuse Thread (merged)
Options
Comments
-
Yes, in some cases it appears that that is what it was. But again I would say that the Catholic Church is not Tesco or Walmart. In administrative terms it is a collection of nearly 3,000 fairly autonomous units headed by bishops or by the heads of religious orders with the same level of independence. Some of these people did things that were completely wrong. Among these, a number may well have been motivated by a sub-culture that put the reputation of the Church ahead of anything else.What the RCC actually did was keep him in position after each offence and 'treatment' - or moved him from parish to parish. That wasn't naivety, that was complicity.
But it is not accurate to say that "the Church" did such-and-such. When I post in this thread I am not trying to conceal, spin or distort any fact. As a Catholic, I want every fact in all of this to come out and every wrong-doing to be pin-pointed and punished by the criminal law. But I do not want the Church of Christ as a whole, which is infinitely bigger than any individual, to be harmed by what individuals might have done or not done.0 -
I appreciate your openness and sincerity. But I suggest you are wrong in thinking the RCC administrative quasi-independence prevented the papacy from properly overseeing it. The Vatican knows well what goes on in the lower orders, for they came from it and have their people in every place.Yes, in some cases it appears that that is what it was. But again I would say that the Catholic Church is not Tesco or Walmart. In administrative terms it is a collection of nearly 3,000 fairly autonomous units headed by bishops or by the heads of religious orders with the same level of independence. Some of these people did things that were completely wrong. Among these, a number may well have been motivated by a sub-culture that put the reputation of the Church ahead of anything else.
But it is not accurate to say that "the Church" did such-and-such. When I post in this thread I am not trying to conceal, spin or distort any fact. As a Catholic, I want every fact in all of this to come out and every wrong-doing to be pin-pointed and punished by the criminal law. But I do not want the Church of Christ as a whole, which is infinitely bigger than any individual, to be harmed by what individuals might have done or not done.
Sexual crimes and the cover-ups were not hidden from the Vatican. They were condoned by it. The decent priests/religious and people were betrayed by the hierarchy. And it is the hierarchy who control the RCC, and give it its character.
Catholics who love Christ can be loyal to God or the RCC, not both. They need to see the Church is not the RCC, but the people of God wherever they meet.0 -
Thank you for your personal comment to me. But you have come to a point where my view is hard to put in words, though I have to try.I appreciate your openness and sincerity. But I suggest you are wrong in thinking the RCC administrative quasi-independence prevented the papacy from properly overseeing it. The Vatican knows well what goes on in the lower orders, for they came from it and have their people in every place.
Sexual crimes and the cover-ups were not hidden from the Vatican. They were condoned by it. The decent priests/religious and people were betrayed by the hierarchy. And it is the hierarchy who control the RCC, and give it its character.
Catholics who love Christ can be loyal to God or the RCC, not both. They need to see the Church is not the RCC, but the people of God wherever they meet.
The Church is at one level a secular organisation headed by the Pope, or Josef Ratzinger if you prefer. It is managed, in secular terms, by bishops and their counterparts in the orders of monks and nuns.
But there is another level, which makes the first one completely irrelevant, at which we (or I, if you prefer) believe that the Church is a supernatural and eternal entity that Christ founded, where he is still and always will be the head. We believe that it is and will always be united with him, and that whatever it tells us about supernatural things like faith, it is speaking for him. We believe that even if the secular administrators at one time or another are bad (some Popes were, but not this one, and I don't think most bishops nowadays are bad either), it is still the same Church.
Also, and this is the heart of the matter for Catholics like me though you might not hear it from some of what are known as "liberals", we believe that at each Mass celebrated by a Catholic priest, Christ's passion and death take place again and the priest – in persona Christi, which for our other readers means in the place of Christ – enacts the sacrifice of Christ which saves us all from death.
I don't know what you believe, but for many readers this is probably complete voodoo nonsense. What I have tried to express is why I believe that the Catholic Church is the Church, and why I will stay with it no matter how many members of its senior or middle management end up in jail.0 -
Thanks PDN, I appreciate your interpretation of your need to police possible abuse of our freedom here. However, it was not a "thinly veiled insinuation" of any such sort. I am punctilious about the words I use. My sarcasm was aimed at making a strong point about the inhumanity and bestiality of his actions, not implying that he is a paedofile, of which possibility I have no information whatsoever.MODERATOR'S WARNING :
This thinly veiled insinuation that Brady is a paedophile is totally unacceptable. If you or any other poster have any evidence to support such an accusation then take it to the Guards. Posting such stuff on here will result in an instant Permaban from this Forum.
Instead, I was making the point that the behaviour of this bishop in this case in formally, legally asking for victims of paedofile abuse by priests to produce actual tangible proof of such a hidden crime, years after the event, is actually akin to abuse itself. Such a request mirrors similar requests by actual abusers in many reported instances, for reasons to do with intimidating witnesses or stimulating themselves or other abusers sexually. This is not something I think you would condone, PDN, or attempt to block critiscism of, once you fully understand where I am coming from with this post.
The bishop should know all this and his decision to formally request such proofs, anyway, should be decried by all right-thinking people.0 -
Sorry friend, you are conveniently forgetting that they did not act as independent units. The present pope's letter to all of them, although then secret, has now been published and shows how the church actively plotted to keep the abuse secret and to undermine and defeat any attempts by police forces toi investigate or punish paedofile priests.Yes, in some cases it appears that that is what it was. But again I would say that the Catholic Church is not Tesco or Walmart. In administrative terms it is a collection of nearly 3,000 fairly autonomous units headed by bishops or by the heads of religious orders with the same level of independence. Some of these people did things that were completely wrong. Among these, a number may well have been motivated by a sub-culture that put the reputation of the Church ahead of anything else.
But it is not accurate to say that "the Church" did such-and-such. When I post in this thread I am not trying to conceal, spin or distort any fact. As a Catholic, I want every fact in all of this to come out and every wrong-doing to be pin-pointed and punished by the criminal law. But I do not want the Church of Christ as a whole, which is infinitely bigger than any individual, to be harmed by what individuals might have done or not done.
It was policy, not human error.0 -
Advertisement
-
Please stop calling me "friend" because you make me sound like an American. Could you you please call me something less offensive, like I just breached the CharterSorry friend, you are conveniently forgetting that they did not act as independent units. The present pope's letter to all of them, although then secret, has now been published and shows how the church actively plotted to keep the abuse secret and to undermine and defeat any attempts by police forces toi investigate or punish paedofile priests.
It was policy, not human error.
I have to go away in the morning and will not be back until Friday evening. If this discussion is still going on, and unfortunately it will be unless you are all silenced by my letter in the Irish Times on Friday, we can resume on Friday evening.0 -
Holy God. Does he mean the Cardinal is riding sheep?My sarcasm was aimed at making a strong point about the bestiality of his actions.
Because that is what the phrase "bestiality of his actions" appears to mean. There is some information about it here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bestiality.
I wish I were a Cardinal with a lawyer. My mortgage would be cleared and I would have a big new car as well.0 -
-
sorry friend, but you cannot take the spotlight away from the fact that ratty's secret letter to all bishops, world-wide, ordered them to cover up abuse cases and to effectively obstruct any local police investigations etc. So, yes, it was official church policy and still is.Please stop calling me "friend" because you make me sound like an American. Could you you please call me something less offensive, like I breached the Charter?
I have to go away in the morning and will not be back until Friday evening. If this discussion is still going on, and unfortunately it will be unless you are all silenced by my letter in the Irish Times on Friday, we can resume on Friday evening.
The full quote was "inhuman and ("thus" being understood) bestial" and no sheep were involved, friend, just an absence of basic decent human ethics and concern.
Why do you think we should freeze comments etc. until you are available or have any particular interest in any letter you may write to the times? Are you speaking sort of un-officially "ex-cathedra"??
But, on the bright side, the vatican response is in broad agreement with you, as with today's Irish Times;
"Cardinal Sodano, who at the weekend said the church would not be distracted by “idle gossip”, in an apparent reference to the child abuse scandal, again defended the record of the pope and bishops on the issue.
“It was not the fault of Jesus if he was betrayed by Judas. Nor is it the fault of a bishop if one of his priests sullies himself with grave crimes. And certainly, it is not the responsibility of the pontiff,” he said.
There, now we know, don't we? This is all not happening and is all just "gossip" which our friend with the dicctionary will no doubt be able to also define for us when he comes back from Rome or wherever he goes to rest from this holy war of his??0 -
as a man who was both sexually and physically tourtured for many years by members of the cloth, as a man who still has the upmost respect and devotion to his faith, how in the name of god can our children have the same respect and devotion to our faith , if our leaders dont pull the few bad apples in to account. SHAME0
-
Advertisement
-
Hello friend. I'm back. My dictionary is here too, though I don't know what you mean by that. I haven't used one or needed one for the last twenty-five years or so.But, on the bright side, the vatican response is in broad agreement with you, as with today's Irish Times;
"Cardinal Sodano, who at the weekend said the church would not be distracted by “idle gossip”, in an apparent reference to the child abuse scandal, again defended the record of the pope and bishops on the issue.
“It was not the fault of Jesus if he was betrayed by Judas. Nor is it the fault of a bishop if one of his priests sullies himself with grave crimes. And certainly, it is not the responsibility of the pontiff,” he said.
There, now we know, don't we? This is all not happening and is all just "gossip" which our friend with the dicctionary will no doubt be able to also define for us when he comes back from Rome or wherever he goes to rest from this holy war of his??
My apologies, but I don't understand your last post. Could you explain it in more detail?0 -
Are you speaking about what happened to you? If you are, then the people who hurt you should be exposed and reported to the Guards, and they should also been put out of the priesthood or any religious orders they might have belonged to. Would you consider sending me an email if you think you have not been given a proper hearing?scienceoverBS wrote: »as a man who was both sexually and physically tourtured for many years by members of the cloth, as a man who still has the upmost respect and devotion to his faith, how in the name of god can our children have the same respect and devotion to our faith , if our leaders dont pull the few bad apples in to account. SHAME0 -
Are you speaking about what happened to you? If you are, then the people who hurt you should be exposed and reported to the Guards, and they should also been put out of the priesthood or any religious orders they might have belonged to. Would you consider sending me an email if you think you have not been given a proper hearing?
I am confused here, are you involved in child abuse hearings? or a community leader/group? or in the judiciary/police/etc?
I am being serious, otherwise that sentence just seems very strange and out of place.0 -
scienceoverBS wrote: »as a man who was both sexually and physically tourtured for many years by members of the cloth, as a man who still has the upmost respect and devotion to his faith, how in the name of god can our children have the same respect and devotion to our faith , if our leaders dont pull the few bad apples in to account. SHAME
I am very sorry that you suffered as you did.
I think also that the damage to the Catholic Church's mission has been enormous and will continue for many years. I was talking to a non-Catholic friend last night, and he said to me, more or less, why would anyone have anything to do with such a seemingly corrupt organisation. I explained to him that the Catholic Faith does not stand or fall based on the sins of its members, even its leaders. I hope you might find this article useful as it explains some of what I tried to convey to my friend:
A Crisis of Saints ~ http://www.catholic.com/library/A_Crisis_of_Saints.asp
On another related matter, this is news - I am pleased to see this and really this is how things should have been dealt with at the start, instead of ignoring (at diocesan level) what would have been reasonably effective Canon Law, and a reliance instead on pop psychology and lots of second chances. Benedict XVI is the key player in dealing with this 'filth' of the priesthood, despite media spin to the contrary. http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/apr/10040904.html
(I hope it is an accurate report.)0 -
Caught pants down so to speak
Most Excellent Bishop
Having received your letter of September 13 of this year, regarding the matter of the removal from all priestly burdens pertaining to Rev Stephen Miller Kiesle in your diocese, it is my duty to share with you the following:
This court, although it regards the arguments presented in favour of removal in this case to be of grave significance, nevertheless deems it necessary to consider the good of the Universal Church together with that of the petitioner, and it is also unable to make light of the detriment that granting the dispensation can provoke with the community of Christ's faithful, particularly regarding the young age of the petitioner.
It is necessary for this Congregation to submit incidents of this sort to very careful consideration, which necessitates a longer period of time.
In the meantime your Excellency must not fail to provide the petitioner with as much paternal care as possible and in addition to explain to same the rationale of this court, which is accustomed to proceed keeping the common good especially before its eyes.
Let me take this occasion to convey sentiments of the highest regard always to you.
Your most Reverend Excellency
Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger0 -
Caught pants down so to speak
Most Excellent Bishop
Having received your letter of September 13 of this year, regarding the matter of the removal from all priestly burdens pertaining to Rev Stephen Miller Kiesle in your diocese, it is my duty to share with you the following:
This court, although it regards the arguments presented in favour of removal in this case to be of grave significance, nevertheless deems it necessary to consider the good of the Universal Church together with that of the petitioner, and it is also unable to make light of the detriment that granting the dispensation can provoke with the community of Christ's faithful, particularly regarding the young age of the petitioner.
It is necessary for this Congregation to submit incidents of this sort to very careful consideration, which necessitates a longer period of time.
In the meantime your Excellency must not fail to provide the petitioner with as much paternal care as possible and in addition to explain to same the rationale of this court, which is accustomed to proceed keeping the common good especially before its eyes.
Let me take this occasion to convey sentiments of the highest regard always to you.
Your most Reverend Excellency
Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger
The media is trying to dig and throw some mud at the Holy Father and hope that some of it sticks. I don't think they will find anything that will stick as they desire, but even if they did, it would not undermine the Faith, just prove that even the Pope could make a bad judgement.
Anyway, the media is putting a definite spin on these stories. Father Z however is able to offer insight - he worked in the Vatican for many years in one of their Commissions so his insight is worth listening to:
http://wdtprs.com/blog/2010/04/ap-throwing-more-spaghetti-at-pope-benedict-this-time-from-california/
This is interesting, from Newsweek:Since the mid-1980s, insurance companies have offered sexual misconduct coverage as a rider on liability insurance, and their own studies indicate that Catholic churches are not higher risk than other congregations. Insurance companies that cover all denominations, such as Guide One Center for Risk Management, which has more than 40,000 church clients, does not charge Catholic churches higher premiums. "We don’t see vast difference in the incidence rate between one denomination and another," says Sarah Buckley, assistant vice president of corporate communications. "It’s pretty even across the denominations." It’s been that way for decades.
.............
Overall, the John Jay study found that 149 priests were responsible for more than 25,000 cases of abuse over the 52-year period studied.
Go read the rest here:
Mean Men
The priesthood is being cast as the refuge of pederasts. In fact, priests seem to abuse children at the same rate as everyone else.
http://www.newsweek.com/id/2360960 -
Like in Germany where there is a law against denial of the Holocaust EU should make all its memeber states pass a law against denying of the child abuse or its cover up in RCC.0
-
The child abuse thing is seriously damaging my mental state. I'm catholic but believe all sex-offenders and deviants should be executed.
Usually when somethings messing with my mental balance I drop it out of my life but I can't just drop God out.0 -
I don't think God is roman catholic or sunni-muslim0
-
I believe the continuing attacks by the media on the Roman Catholic Church and Pope Benedict XVI have become manifestations of anti-Catholicism. The procession of articles on the same events are, in my opinion, no longer intended to inform, but simply to castigate.
The sexual molestation of children, principally boys, is horrendous. This is agreed to by everyone, Catholics, the Church itself, as well as non-Catholics and the media. The pope has on a number of occasions on behalf of the Church admitted fault and asked for forgiveness. For example, The New York Times reported on April 18, 2008, that the pope "came face to face with a scandal that has left lasting wounds on the American church Thursday, holding a surprise meeting with several victims of sexual abuse by priests in the Boston area.... 'No words of mine could describe the pain and harm inflicted by such abuse,' the Pope said in his homily. 'It is important that those who have suffered be given loving pastoral attention.'"
On March 20, 2010, the Times reported that in his eight page pastoral letter to Irish Catholics, the pope wrote, "You have suffered grievously, and I am truly sorry ... Your trust has been betrayed and your dignity has been violated."
The pope also "criticized Ireland's bishops for 'grave errors of judgment and failures of leadership.'"
The primary explanation for the abuse that happened - not to excuse the retention of priests in positions that enabled them to continue to harm children - was the belief that the priests could be cured by psychotherapy, a theory now long discarded by the medical profession. Regrettably, it is also likely that years ago the abuse of children was not taken as seriously as today. Thank God we've progressed on that issue.
Many of those in the media who are pounding on the Church and the pope today clearly do it with delight, and some with malice. The reason, I believe, for the constant assaults is that there are many in the media, and some Catholics as well as many in the public, who object to and are incensed by positions the Church holds, including opposition to all abortions, opposition to gay sex and same-sex marriage, retention of celibacy rules for priests, exclusion of women from the clergy, opposition to birth control measures involving condoms and prescription drugs and opposition to civil divorce. My good friend, John Cardinal O'Connor, once said, "The Church is not a salad bar, from which to pick and choose what pleases you." The Church has the right to demand fulfillment of all of its religious obligations by its parishioners, and indeed a right to espouse its beliefs generally.
I disagree with the Church on all of these positions. Nevertheless, it has a right to hold these views in accordance with its religious beliefs. I disagree with many tenets of Orthodox Judaism - the religion of my birth - and have chosen to follow the tenets of Conservative Judaism, while I attend an Orthodox synagogue. Orthodox Jews, like the Roman Catholic Church, can demand absolute obedience to religious rules. Those declining to adhere are free to leave.
I believe the Roman Catholic Church is a force for good in the world, not evil. Moreover, the existence of one billion, 130 million Catholics worldwide is important to the peace and prosperity of the planet.
Of course, the media should report to the public any new facts bearing upon the issue of child molestation, but its objectivity and credibility are damaged when the New York Times declines to publish an op-ed offered by New York Archbishop Timothy Dolan on the issue of anti-Catholicism and offers instead to publish a letter to the editor, which is much shorter and less prominent than an op-ed.
I am appalled that, according to the Times of April 6, 2010, "Last week, the center-left daily newspaper La Repubblica wrote, without attribution that 'certain Catholic circles' believed the criticism of the Church stemmed from 'a New York Jewish lobby.'" The pope should know that some of his fellow priests can be thoughtless or worse in their efforts to help him. If the "certain Catholic circles" were referring to the Times, the Pope should know that the publisher, Arthur Sulzberger, Jr., is Episcopalian, having taken the religion of his mother, and its executive editor, Bill Keller, is also a Christian.
Enough is enough. Yes, terrible acts were committed by members of the Catholic clergy. The Church has paid billions to victims in the US and will pay millions, perhaps billions, more to other such victims around the world. It is trying desperately to atone for its past by its admissions and changes in procedures for dealing with pedophile priests. I will close with a paraphrase of the words of Jesus as set forth in John 8:7: He [or she] that is without sin among you, let him [or her] cast the next stone.
http://cgis.jpost.com/Blogs/koch/entry/he_that_is_without_sin0 -
Advertisement
-
Many people with a professional interest in priest and religious-commited sexual abuse and other sexual depravity perpetrated by religious on minors, believe that the incidence of sexual deviance towards minors of both sexes among priests and religious could be as high as eighteen to twenty-plus percent. With an estimated 10% of general populations thought by researchers to have strong usually deeply repressed and thus psychologically damaging homosexual tendencies ( which I am certainly NOT equating to necessarily having automatically anything to do with paedofilia) and many of these opting for careers that increase their contact with same sex opportunities, a very high and much increased proportionally percentage of religious are thought to come from not just homosexual but, importantly and very differently, from disturbed homosexual backgrounds. It has been postulated that we are talking about more than thirty to thirty five percent ( 30 to 35%) of entrants having deviant sexual tendencies and perhaps fifteen plus percent having active deviant tendencies leading to sexual abuse patterns.Sancte Raphael wrote: »The media is trying to dig and throw some mud at the Holy Father and hope that some of it sticks. I don't think they will find anything that will stick as they desire, but even if they did, it would not undermine the Faith, just prove that even the Pope could make a bad judgement.
Anyway, the media is putting a definite spin on these stories. Father Z however is able to offer insight - he worked in the Vatican for many years in one of their Commissions so his insight is worth listening to:
http://wdtprs.com/blog/2010/04/ap-throwing-more-spaghetti-at-pope-benedict-this-time-from-california/
This is interesting, from Newsweek:
Go read the rest here:
Mean Men
The priesthood is being cast as the refuge of pederasts. In fact, priests seem to abuse children at the same rate as everyone else.
http://www.newsweek.com/id/236096
Then, active sexual deviants naturally come together in rings or organised cliches to share experiences, share data on victims and assist each other to access and abuse minors through existing and new networks. This tendency and behaviour assists them to form cliches who naturally for them assist each other to access higher levels of power and authority, to promote greater access for participants to vulnerable children.
As a result, and very logically, their concentrations as in presence per hundred members, rise significantly, if not exponentially, the higher up the heirarchy you get.
Many of us believe from reported statements by Dr. Noel Browne who as a family doctor reportedly treated one of his alleged victims, a publican's son in Dublin, that the chief Archbishop of the Irish Church for many years was one such example and that he usually promoted only those who were of a similar disposition, perhaps giving the Irish heirarchy a strong and decisive and very active (as in practising sexual deviance on children) slant if we are to believe the evidence and claims of victims and limited commissions of enquiry.
The pattern was evident world-wide and the levels at bishop and cardinal levels can only be guessed at by those of us not actively collaborating with them in the procurement and sexual abuse of children.
I have no reliable statistics on this but to state that priests are as likely to abuse as any male in the population is not only absurd, it is absolute bosh and the writer knows this. They are very many times more dangerous to children than great white sharks.0 -
The child abuse thing is seriously damaging my mental state. I'm catholic but believe all sex-offenders and deviants should be executed.
Usually when somethings messing with my mental balance I drop it out of my life but I can't just drop God out.
Right so. Anyone commit any sins of impurity? Execution for you. This includes fornication (sex outside marriage) and also anyone who has looked lustfully at a woman (or a man). Any homosexuals among you? They must likewise be executed, according to your standard. If we are going to start executing people, we must be consistent.
Happily, God is nowhere near as vindictive and condemnatory of poor sinners as the people on this thread. Make no mistake - He is horrified by all these sins against chastity. They will be paid for somewhere. But now is the acceptable time, now is the day of salvation. I am glad that God offers forgiveness to all poor sinners who repent from the heart for their sins.
We are all sinners, deserving hell, without exception.
Deep personal scrutiny is needed by all who post on this thread.0 -
Many people with a professional interest in priest and religious-commited sexual abuse and other sexual depravity perpetrated by religious on minors, believe that the incidence of sexual deviance towards minors of both sexes among priests and religious could be as high as eighteen to twenty-plus percent. With an estimated 10% of general populations thought by researchers to have strong usually deeply repressed and thus psychologically damaging homosexual tendencies ( which I am certainly NOT equating to necessarily having automatically anything to do with paedofilia) and many of these opting for careers that increase their contact with same sex opportunities, a very high and much increased proportionally percentage of religious are thought to come from not just homosexual but, importantly and very differently, from disturbed homosexual backgrounds. It has been postulated that we are talking about more than thirty to thirty five percent ( 30 to 35%) of entrants having deviant sexual tendencies and perhaps fifteen plus percent having active deviant tendencies leading to sexual abuse patterns.
Then, active sexual deviants naturally come together in rings or organised cliches to share experiences, share data on victims and assist each other to access and abuse minors through existing and new networks. This tendency and behaviour assists them to form cliches who naturally for them assist each other to access higher levels of power and authority, to promote greater access for participants to vulnerable children.
As a result, and very logically, their concentrations as in presence per hundred members, rise significantly, if not exponentially, the higher up the heirarchy you get.
Many of us believe from reported statements by Dr. Noel Browne who as a family doctor reportedly treated one of his alleged victims, a publican's son in Dublin, that the chief Archbishop of the Irish Church for many years was one such example and that he usually promoted only those who were of a similar disposition, perhaps giving the Irish heirarchy a strong and decisive and very active (as in practising sexual deviance on children) slant if we are to believe the evidence and claims of victims and limited commissions of enquiry.
The pattern was evident world-wide and the levels at bishop and cardinal levels can only be guessed at by those of us not actively collaborating with them in the procurement and sexual abuse of children.
I have no reliable statistics on this but to state that priests are as likely to abuse as any male in the population is not only absurd, it is absolute bosh and the writer knows this. They are very many times more dangerous to children than great white sharks.
You make many claims which you cannot support. I suggest you read the articles. The facts do not support your claims. I think that article from Newsweek is particularly relevant. The link is above in one of my posts.
I believe what you are referring to otherwise has been written about elsewhere, the so-called Pink Mafia operative in, for example, the US Catholic seminary system and indeed among some Bishops and priests. What you said here about that is acknowledged as being the case.
Edit: The 1 in 10 gay figure has been debunked elsewhere - I can't believe you just used that!0 -
Thank you, friend. I readily admit that we cannot provide specific reliable data beyond anecdotal evidence from concerned professionals and deductions based on attributions and guestimates.Sancte Raphael wrote: »You make many claims which you cannot support. I suggest you read the articles. The facts do not support your claims. I think that article from Newsweek is particularly relevant. The link is above in one of my posts.
I believe what you are referring to otherwise has been written about elsewhere, the so-called Pink Mafia operative in, for example, the US Catholic seminary system and indeed among some Bishops and priests. What you said here about that is acknowledged as being the case.
Edit: The 1 in 10 gay figure has been debunked elsewhere - I can't believe you just used that!
Moreover, their experience has been gleaned from countries where roman catholic priests and religious have been the dominant church with corrollary control over schools, youth services and juvenile detention services, where much of the recorded abuse took place.
Clearly, the experieence and extrapolations from same here and in other catholic controlled countries would presumably vary in countries where the RC Church does not enjoy the same unbridled access and opportunity.
The article you cite seems at first reading to be unreliable and designed to move attantion away from the obvious conclusions regarding the very heightened risk of such abuse where roman catholic clergy and religious have access to vulnerable children.
(Sincere apologies for occasional typos as I have a slight visual disability and cannot easily check back. )0 -
You are serious here when you write "We are all sinners, deserving hell, without exception". ??Sancte Raphael wrote: »Right so. Anyone commit any sins of impurity? Execution for you. This includes fornication (sex outside marriage) and also anyone who has looked lustfully at a woman (or a man). Any homosexuals among you? They must likewise be executed, according to your standard. If we are going to start executing people, we must be consistent.
Happily, God is nowhere near as vindictive and condemnatory of poor sinners as the people on this thread. Make no mistake - He is horrified by all these sins against chastity. They will be paid for somewhere. But now is the acceptable time, now is the day of salvation. I am glad that God offers forgiveness to all poor sinners who repent from the heart for their sins.
We are all sinners, deserving hell, without exception.
Deep personal scrutiny is needed by all who post on this thread.
No we are not, even though my definition of sin is an agnostic one, meaning a crime against humanity. It is high toime, friend, that we banned this kind of psychological terrorism from any public forum and especially from anything that impacts on children or vulnerable people.0 -
I am not any of those things. I am a Catholic and the person who posted is evidently one too. I offered to help him or her if I could and if he or she wanted it.I am confused here, are you involved in child abuse hearings? or a community leader/group? or in the judiciary/police/etc?
I am being serious, otherwise that sentence just seems very strange and out of place.
Why is my post strange and out of place?0 -
-
You are serious here when you write "We are all sinners, deserving hell, without exception". ??
No we are not, even though my definition of sin is an agnostic one, meaning a crime against humanity.
It is a bit pointless to argue Christian doctrine from the point of view of a non-Christian.
According to Christianity we are all sinners who fall short of the glory of God and deserving of hell. If you don't believe that don't be a Christian. But that is what Christianity teaches, there is no point saying "No we aren't"It is high toime, friend, that we banned this kind of psychological terrorism from any public forum and especially from anything that impacts on children or vulnerable people.
Why? Just because you don't believe it is true? Then don't be a Christian.
I'm not because I don't believe any of it is true. I don't need to have it banned, I was able to come to that conclusion on all my own.0 -
Sancte Raphael wrote: »I believe the continuing attacks by the media on the Roman Catholic Church and Pope Benedict XVI have become manifestations of anti-Catholicism. The procession of articles on the same events are, in my opinion, no longer intended to inform, but simply to castigate.
That seems to be the current line from Rome anyway!
First it was denied. Then he never saw any of the correspondences that were posted directly to him. Now the letter he personally wrote and signed is being taken out of context.
The facts which we have witness so far is frightening. Spin doctors are working over-time and I don't mean the media, rather the members of the Vatican who wish to stretch the boundaries of what people will believe.
It is the media's duty to investigate matters of public interest. Simply stating that this is an attack by them is a way to spin this that the pope is a victim (of his own words) and this is done by those wishing to destroy the church.
Those who seek an open investigation and public disclose of the facts, no matter what they are, are not anti-catholic.0 -
Advertisement
-
Advertisement