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

That idiot, the pope

13567…11

Comments

  • #62
    farna_boy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,763 ✭✭✭farna_boy


    Bduffman wrote: »
    This is possibly one of the most disturbing & saddest posts I have ever read. Proof that the RCC have learned nothing.

    Nice generalisation there.

    As for Ultravids comment, about people getting the priest they deserve, absolute bull****. The priests who did this should all be strung up as far as I'm concerned and all the Catholics I know would agree with this. There is no excuse for what they did and anyone who tries to defend them is an idiot.

    With regards the popes comment about a lack of faith being the cause of this, I can only assume that he is talking about priests and bishops, although I'm not sure faith is the correct word to use.

    I assume that what he meant was that for a priest/bishop, your faith is how you live your life, its not just a job. Anything that would cause you to do anything that would contradict your faith or teachings of the church is therefore a sin. So if you sin, it is a sign that you have weak faith.

    I'm not sure I have phrased the last paragraph very well so feel free to take it apart, and I will try to post something more accurate and concise.

    As for the bishops kissing the popes ring, I think it is a total non-issue. It's a sign of respect and that is it. The best analogy is in certain parts of Asia you still have to kowtow to certain people. Even in Japan, you still have to bow to those who are older or to those who have more power than you as a sign of respect.


  • #63
    Sam Vimes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,611 ✭✭✭✭Sam Vimes


    Ultravid wrote: »
    You have to try to see this through the eyes of faith. If you believe, then you will know that bishops are especially under attack by Satan and prone to making really bad decisions

    Besides any other considerations about your truly appalling post, what you're showing here is that the last people who should be put in a position of trust are the church hierarchy, what with them being especially prone to making bad decisions due to being targets of Satan


  • #64
    pinksoir
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,737 ✭✭✭pinksoir


    farna_boy wrote: »
    With regards the popes comment about a lack of faith being the cause of this, I can only assume that he is talking about priests and bishops, although I'm not sure faith is the correct word to use.

    Careful now, Pope's infallible 'member.


  • #65
    MrPudding
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,779 ✭✭✭MrPudding


    pinksoir wrote: »
    Careful now, Pope's infallible 'member.
    Pope's infallible member? Does that mean his penis is always correct?

    MrP


  • #66
    Bduffman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 520 ✭✭✭Bduffman


    farna_boy wrote: »
    Nice generalisation there.
    What you have to remember is that ultravids comments seem to reflect the popes message. Therefore, when I say that the RCC has learned nothing, it is based on that. I think it is a fair comment about the RCC hierarchy & not about most catholics.
    farna_boy wrote: »
    With regards the popes comment about a lack of faith being the cause of this, I can only assume that he is talking about priests and bishops, although I'm not sure faith is the correct word to use..
    Yes - he probably was talking about the lack of faith of priests & bishops. But do you not think that implies that the less faith you have, the more likely you are to commit or cover upheinous crimes?
    farna_boy wrote: »
    As for the bishops kissing the popes ring, I think it is a total non-issue. It's a sign of respect and that is it.
    Perhaps it is a non-issue. But things like that just puts another nail in the RCC coffin as it is so far removed from real people leading real lives.


  • Advertisement
  • #67
    dvpower
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,182 ✭✭✭dvpower


    farna_boy wrote: »
    With regards the popes comment about a lack of faith being the cause of this, I can only assume that he is talking about priests and bishops, although I'm not sure faith is the correct word to use.

    Perhaps he was also talking about himself?
    He is at the head of an organisation that facilitated and covered up child abuse on a massive scale. Shouldn't he resign in shame over what he allowed to happen?


  • #68
    lynski
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,585 ✭✭✭lynski


    Wow, Ultravid, your post is beyond compare. the level of insult you have heaped upon innocent victims od the catholic church and innocent people is mind-bending.
    that any person in this day and age could blame ANYONE but the criminal priests and criminal bishops and criminal cardinals and criminal popes who committed such foul acts and who facilitated the commimiment of such foul acts flies in the face of the only message any religon has that is worth listening to ' love one another'.
    If i was a manager of a sports center who found out that my basketball coach was an active, vicious, child rapist and i simply slapped his wrist and moved him to the tennis courts and continued to recruit children for his personal unsupervised tuition until the next set of complaints came in, i would be prosecuted as an accomplice.
    From the bottom of the catholic heirarchy to the top they all deserve suspicion, because we as non-catholics or as non-religous do not know who has and has not abused children, the cover-up is that widespread.


  • #69
    farna_boy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,763 ✭✭✭farna_boy


    Bduffman wrote: »
    What you have to remember is that ultravids comments seem to reflect the popes message. Therefore, when I say that the RCC has learned nothing, it is based on that. I think it is a fair comment about the RCC hierarchy & not about most catholics.


    Yes - he probably was talking about the lack of faith of priests & bishops. But do you not think that implies that the less faith you have, the more likely you are to commit or cover upheinous crimes?


    Perhaps it is a non-issue. But things like that just puts another nail in the RCC coffin as it is so far removed from real people leading real lives.

    1. Doesn't my post also reflect what the pope said? Yet I have a view which massively contradicts Ultravids. Just because Ultravid was the first Catholic to post in this thread, it doesn't mean that his view is representative of all the Catholic Church or even the pope.

    2. Not necessarily. I think that priests and bishops should have a much stronger faith then the rest of the Church (i.e. lay people and followers of the churches teachings) since they dedicate their lives to it and should only act and live how their faith dictates. By this reasoning, priests and bishops should lead exempliary lives and it is only by a lack of faith that they would stray from this path. The weaker a persons (read priest/bishop) faith would then cause them to more tempted to commit worse sins. In the case of a lay person though, the Church hopes that they live as their teaching dicates but still accepts that this is not the case, hence the existance of confession.

    Edit: After re-reading your post I think I can understand what you are getting at. I don't think that the Church is saying that without religion, people are more likely to commit crimes (well actually it probably does, to justify its own existance) but you could also look at it that if everyone lived as per Jesus' teachings (i.e. had faith in Jesus' teachings), there would be no sin in the world and acts such as this would never be committed by anyone.

    Again not sure if I'm being clear in my points. Let me know and I will try to expand or be more concise if I can.


  • #70
    pinksoir
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,737 ✭✭✭pinksoir


    MrPudding wrote: »
    Pope's infallible member? Does that mean his penis is always correct?

    MrP
    Precisely. Precisely.


  • #71
    farna_boy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,763 ✭✭✭farna_boy


    dvpower wrote: »
    Perhaps he was also talking about himself?
    He is at the head of an organisation that facilitated and covered up child abuse on a massive scale. Shouldn't he resign in shame over what he allowed to happen?

    As far as I know (open to correction on this), the majority of these crimes were committed before he was appointed and he is now trying to fix it. If you are saying simply he is the head of the church and these revelations are coming out since he was appointed and therefore he should resign, can anyone ever be elected pope since it is and will be still the same organistation?


  • Advertisement
  • #72
    farna_boy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,763 ✭✭✭farna_boy


    lynski wrote: »
    From the bottom of the catholic heirarchy to the top they all deserve suspicion, because we as non-catholics or as non-religous do not know who has and has not abused children, the cover-up is that widespread.

    Totally disagree with this. I know a lot of priests who have done nothing but good all their lives and now because the acts of a few they are all labelled as paedos.

    It's guilt by association at the worst possible level and if that were to be applied to everyone you have ever known and shared an organisation with, what labels and accustations could be levelled at you?

    I was in scouts when I was younger and was a scout leader for a while so therefore I would be labelled a paedo as well.
    I played soccer in a relatively rough area so I would also be labelled a drug dealer and a member of the RIRA, therefore a murderer as well.

    How does it add up for you?


  • #73
    Lemegeton
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 598 ✭✭✭Lemegeton


    farna_boy wrote: »

    but you could also look at it that if everyone lived as per Jesus' teachings (i.e. had faith in Jesus' teachings), there would be no sin in the world and acts such as this would never be committed by anyone.

    what about the people in haiti who commited a crime and they believed they were working in gods name. saying that living by jesus teachings would eliminate sin is rubbish because they are millions of examples of how those teachings were mis-interpreted and people commited crimes such as murder and believed it was jesus's will. human beings are not mindless drones (as the church would like us to be) and different people will always interpret the same message in different ways. that is human nature.


  • #74
    Bduffman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 520 ✭✭✭Bduffman


    farna_boy wrote: »
    1. Doesn't my post also reflect what the pope said? Yet I have a view which massively contradicts Ultravids. Just because Ultravid was the first Catholic to post in this thread, it doesn't mean that his view is representative of all the Catholic Church or even the pope..
    But he effectively stated the position of the pope as per the latest vatican statement!! Albeit in a particularly nasty way. And I did state that it seemed to be the view of the hierarchy and not necessarily the typical catholic. However, it is interesting how few christians have condemned ultravids post - their silence is deafening.
    farna_boy wrote: »
    2. Not necessarily. I think that priests and bishops should have a much stronger faith then the rest of the Church (i.e. lay people and followers of the churches teachings) since they dedicate their lives to it and should only act and live how their faith dictates. By this reasoning, priests and bishops should lead exempliary lives and it is only by a lack of faith that they would stray from this path. The weaker a persons (read priest/bishop) faith would then cause them to more tempted to commit worse sins. In the case of a lay person though, the Church hopes that they live as their teaching dicates but still accepts that this is not the case, hence the existance of confession. .
    Well thats what I read into it. they think we eat babies you know. :pac: Seriously though, when people are supposed to lead exempliary lives, & yet fall way short of - say - even me, an atheist (I definitely would have shopped the paedophiles trust me) then why do people follow them?
    farna_boy wrote: »
    Edit: After re-reading your post I think I can understand what you are getting at. I don't think that the Church is saying that without religion, people are more likely to commit crimes (well actually it probably does, to justify its own existance) but you could also look at it that if everyone lived as per Jesus' teachings (i.e. had faith in Jesus' teachings), there would be no sin in the world and acts such as this would never be committed by anyone.
    Even as an atheist, I can see that Jesus' message is sound enough - hardly revolutionary - but not disagreeable. However, I don't see what the RCC has got to do with Jesus' teachings. They act in the opposite manner so often that I don't understand why people have anything to do with them any more.


  • #75
    axer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,518 ✭✭✭axer


    farna_boy wrote: »
    As far as I know (open to correction on this), the majority of these crimes were committed before he was appointed and he is now trying to fix it. If you are saying simply he is the head of the church and these revelations are coming out since he was appointed and therefore he should resign, can anyone ever be elected pope since it is and will be still the same organistation?
    But he sent a letter to all catholic bishops in 2001 before he was pope telling them the "Crimine solicitationies" law is still in effect. This law says that the priest involved in the abuse and the victim have to keep things secret. It threatens to excommunicate those who don't follow the "law.

    He is as guilty as any of them. He has "sinned" more than me. He will burn in the imaginary hell.


  • #76
    farna_boy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,763 ✭✭✭farna_boy


    Lemegeton wrote: »
    1. what about the people in haiti who commited a crime and they believed they were working in gods name. 2.saying that living by jesus teachings would eliminate sin is rubbish because they are millions of examples of how those teachings were mis-interpreted and people commited crimes such as murder and believed it was jesus's will. human beings are not mindless drones (as the church would like us to be) and different people will always interpret the same message in different ways. that is human nature.

    1. Not familiar with what you are talking about here?
    2. I totally agree with you. I was talking about the ideal case of everyone having the same beliefs or if you prefer the same moral ideas, not necessarily just the teaching of Jesus.


  • #77
    dvpower
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,182 ✭✭✭dvpower


    farna_boy wrote: »
    As far as I know (open to correction on this), the majority of these crimes were committed before he was appointed and he is now trying to fix it. If you are saying simply he is the head of the church and these revelations are coming out since he was appointed and therefore he should resign, can anyone ever be elected pope since it is and will be still the same organistation?

    No. I am saying that he, as an individual, is knee deep in cover up.


    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/aug/17/religion.childprotection
    The Vatican instructed Catholic bishops around the world to cover up cases of sexual abuse or risk being thrown out of the Church.
    The Observer has obtained a 40-year-old confidential document from the secret Vatican archive which lawyers are calling a 'blueprint for deception and concealment'.

    [...]

    Lawyers point to a letter the Vatican sent to bishops in May 2001 clearly stating the 1962 instruction was in force until then. The letter is signed by Cardinal Ratzinger


  • #78
    farna_boy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,763 ✭✭✭farna_boy


    axer wrote: »
    But he sent a letter to all catholic bishops in 2001 before he was pope telling them the "Crimine solicitationies" law is still in effect. This law says that the priest involved in the abuse and the victim have to keep things secret. It threatens to excommunicate those who don't follow the "law.

    He is as guilty as any of them. He has "sinned" more than me. He will burn in the imaginary hell.

    Fair enough I can't really defend that if it is that straight forward. Could it be something to do with ongoing criminal proceedings though? As in the victim and defendant can't talk about a case until it is heard in court? Isn't there some law that says something like this in Ireland? Not really sure but it rings a (very distant) bell.


  • #79
    Ultravid
    Closed Accounts Posts: 436 ✭✭Ultravid


    Let me state this as clearly as I can so there can be no misunderstanding: The people who are at fault are the priests who raped children and the individuals who helped them get away with it.

    ^ For the record, I do agree with this statement.

    When I said the people get the priests they deserve, I am not saying people deserve to be abused (they don't) but that Ireland is and was such a sorry, hypocritical little place that it's hardly surprising everything got so rotten.

    I was careful in my post to underline imho as I do not speak for the Pope only giving my own personal interpretation of what he meant.

    If it was up to me, I would get rid of most of the Irish Bishops and appoint new ones, and not only because of this latest fiasco.

    I am in no way an apologist for the Irish Bishops. They have failed the Church in Ireland big time, and as I said, not only with regards to the abuse of young people. Some posters have made me out to be a ridiculous bishop-defender, but the truth is I am deeply frustrated with the leaders of the Church in Ireland for so many different reasons, but all summed up in what the Pope referred to as a loss of faith.

    This article is about the USA, but the principals are the same for Ireland, perhaps worse in Ireland, since a dreadful form of clericalism (which is not authentically Catholic) was operative here for so long.

    Roots of Sexual Abuse in the Church: Homosexuality, Dissent and Modernism
    US Bishops' actions seen to be far from adequate in addressing sexual abuse
    http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2002/jun/020618a.html


  • #80
    Teferi
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,320 ✭✭✭Teferi


    I've never really been bothered to declare myself out of the church but since this response I've been thinking of giving countmeout a look see. It was a ridiculous response from the pope. He should have gone hellfire and brimstone on the Bishops. He didn't. Sad.


  • #81
    farna_boy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,763 ✭✭✭farna_boy


    dvpower wrote: »
    No. I am saying that he, as an individual, is knee deep in cover up.


    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/aug/17/religion.childprotection

    Fair enough. Wasn't aware of this until now. Point conceded.


  • Advertisement
  • #82
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,465 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    axer wrote: »
    He is as guilty as any of them..
    The policy document from Pope John XIII is here:

    http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-files/Observer/documents/2003/08/16/Criminales.pdf

    In May 2001, Ratzinger reminded everybody that this policy was still in force.

    On the basis of this, Ratzinger implemented a policy of cover-up and is, therefore, frankly, in it up to his neck.


  • #83
    axer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,518 ✭✭✭axer


    farna_boy wrote: »
    Could it be something to do with ongoing criminal proceedings though? As in the victim and defendant can't talk about a case until it is heard in court? Isn't there some law that says something like this in Ireland? Not really sure but it rings a (very distant) bell.
    The law Ratzi was talking about was not a statutory law but a Canon law (or whatever church laws are called).

    @Ultravid: This problem is not just with Irish bishops when it is the case that the current pope does not understand pedophilia and is the signatory of a letter such as the one sent out in May 2001. When the top is guilty then the organisation as a whole is guilty.

    I cannot understand good priests and good christians who stay in this organisation. Surely these priests/christians believe more in a god than the catholic church as an institution thus why are they still members of this evil organisation?


  • #84
    Dades
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 25,609 Mod ✭✭✭✭Dades


    Firstly, thanks for coming back to defend your original post.
    Ultravid wrote: »
    Roots of Sexual Abuse in the Church: Homosexuality, Dissent and Modernism
    US Bishops' actions seen to be far from adequate in addressing sexual abuse
    http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2002/jun/020618a.html
    This kind of rubbish analysis simply ignores the origins of pedophilia. Anything to put the blame on a society that has moved on from the outdated teachings of the church.

    It has far less to do with homosexuality than it has to do with unfit men taking vows of celibacy being put in charge of children.


  • #85
    Ultravid
    Closed Accounts Posts: 436 ✭✭Ultravid


    Dades wrote: »
    Firstly, thanks for coming back to defend your original post.

    This kind of rubbish analysis simply ignores the origins of pedophilia. Anything to put the blame on a society that has moved on from the outdated teachings of the church.

    It has far less to do with homosexuality than it has to do with unfit men taking vows of celibacy being put in charge of children.

    ^ That I agree with.

    Now maybe you can tell us about the origins of pedophilia? The Church teachings emphasise purity, holiness, Christian perfect: imitation of Christ. The Church teachings are not at fault. Church leaders failed, but the moral teaching, especially relevant here pertaining to sexual morality, is not at fault. If it had been lived, then it wouldn't have happened. I do agree though, that a MAJOR problem was unsuitable candidates becoming priests.

    As regards that document which was featured in the BBC documentary: I am not sure that document was concerning priestly sexual abuse of minors, but rather concerning priestly solicitation in the confessional. I need to check up on that, if possible, but I think that particular document has been spun into a role it was not intended for by the media.


  • #86
    Xluna
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,329 ✭✭✭Xluna


    garyowen wrote: »
    The Rat's 2001 letter to ALL Catholic bishops telling them to keep clerical sex abuse cases secret from the civil authorities has been cited in a number of court cases brought by abuse survivors against the Church hierarchy. The Rat has so far avoided being successfully prosecuted by claiming diplomatic immunity as a head of state.
    i.e: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_sex_abuse_cases#cite_note-118

    http://www.bishop-accountability.org/AtAGlance/church_docs.htm
    The co-signatory of that letter, Archbishop Bertone, was reported to have said in 2003:

    "The demand that a bishop be obligated to contact the police in order to denounce a priest
    WHO HAS ADMITTED THE OFFENCE OF PEDOPHILIA [my emphasis] is unfounded".

    the same Archbishop Bertone who co-signed the 2001 letter with the then Cardinal Ratzinger and who was said to have made that disgraceful statement is now Cardinal Bertone, Vatican Secretary of State. His obfuscating and dissembling remarks to the Irish bishops would seem to confirm Andrew Madden's view yesterday that the Vatican will persist in its denial of ultimate responsibility for the horrors that have been committed:
    http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2010/0215/breaking13.htm

    So,should'nt the Pope be in jail?:confused:


  • #87
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,465 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    Ultravid wrote: »
    The Church teachings are not at fault. Church leaders failed, but the moral teaching, especially relevant here pertaining to sexual morality, is not at fault. If it had been lived, then it wouldn't have happened.
    While I don't recall that Jesus Christ said anything that condoned the abuse of children -- do try not to call them "minors" -- many of the institutions that trade upon Jesus' generally good name, such as the Vatican, have elevated the protection of its employees and its own good name far, far above the good of the children concerned, as well as applicable state law, quite apart from any of its own "moral" commentary.

    The church most certainly is at fault, as its own documents, as well as the Murphy and Ryan reports, make hauntingly clear.


  • #88
    Dades
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 25,609 Mod ✭✭✭✭Dades


    Ultravid wrote: »
    Now maybe you can tell us about the origins of pedophilia? The Church teachings emphasise purity, holiness, Christian perfect: imitation of Christ. The Church teachings are not at fault. Church leaders failed, but the moral teaching, especially relevant here pertaining to sexual morality, is not at fault. If it had been lived, then it wouldn't have happened. I do agree though, that a MAJOR problem was unsuitable candidates becoming priests.
    I don't mean 'origins' in the Adam & Eve type of way, more the working of the psychological disorder that it is. I wouldn't blame church 'teachings' directly, but church practices in recruitment and ultimately lifestyle to my mind must be contributing factors.


  • #89
    eoin5
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,141 ✭✭✭eoin5


    Ultravid wrote: »
    When I said the people get the priests they deserve, I am not saying people deserve to be abused (they don't) but that Ireland is and was such a sorry, hypocritical little place that it's hardly surprising everything got so rotten.

    When I said that <insert bad thing I said> i didn't mean <clear as day thing I meant by bad thing I said>, what I really meant was <totally unrelated thing to bad thing I said>


  • #90
    aidan24326
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,925 ✭✭✭aidan24326


    garyowen wrote: »

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_sex_abuse_cases#cite_note-118

    From this Wiki article

    A study conducted by Georgetown University Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate (CARA) in 2006 found that:

    76% strongly approved of removing from ministry people credibly accused of sexual abuse of a minor

    Really makes you wonder what the other 24% think.


    Ultravid wrote: »
    There is a saying that the people get the priests they deserve.

    No there isn't.

    Ultravid wrote: »
    As regards that document which was featured in the BBC documentary: I am not sure that document was concerning priestly sexual abuse of minors, but rather concerning priestly solicitation in the confessional. I need to check up on that, if possible, but I think that particular document has been spun into a role it was not intended for by the media.

    And what on earth is that? Just curious.


  • Advertisement
  • #91
    Xluna
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,329 ✭✭✭Xluna


    Dades wrote: »
    I don't mean 'origins' in the Adam & Eve type of way, more the working of the psychological disorder that it is. I wouldn't blame church 'teachings' directly, but church practices in recruitment and ultimately lifestyle to my mind must be contributing factors.

    As vile as it is I have to wonder is it a psychological disorder? Homosexuality was once considered a psychological disorder but now it's considered a genetic variant or whatever. Perhaps it's the same with paedophillia. From what I've heard experts have had the same success in curing paedophiles as fundamentalists have had in curing homosexuals.Of course the difference is that homosexual relations are consenual while paedophile relations are rape. So we can't tolerate paedophillia while we can tolerate homosexuality.


Advertisement