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
-
Was trying to edit my post and made a hash of it" :rolleyes:
Even if justice was served, (and it should) it would never be enough.
Thanks for the link Brer Fox.0 -
Brer Fox..
are you for real? that man Brady should have done what any normal human would have done, and protected the children. Instead, he protects his Heavenly Bureaucracy. He may be a Prince to you and your ilk, but not to people who have good humanist morals and ethics.
Biblical Common Sense.. now there's an oxymoron if ever I heard it. The most warped confused conglomeration of ramblings from sun-maddened desert "visionaries".
I grew up having that sexually repressed crap beaten into me. Its taken me 50 years to finally shake it off. That was child abuse too. How many minds were tortured by images of "Hell" etc. The sooner you people face the truth the better for this Country. Either that, or get the Vatican to cough up and pay money for their crimes. That would hurt them. After all, money is the language of the Roman Catholic Church.
To abuse, terrify and rape a child is heinous and unforgivable.0 -
Well yes, sex abuse is heinous, but, thankfully, even a child rapist can repent and receive forgiveness. Now whether such a depraved and hardened sinner would repent is anther matter, but God's mercy is not for those who have no need of forgiveness, but for poor, miserable sinners, even child abusers. So whilst you may not be able to forgive, God can, thank God. SO if the child abuser is brought to his knees and repents, he can be forgiven, although he will have to do a long stint in the purifying fires of purgatory, as will most of us, I suspect.Brer Fox..
are you for real? that man Brady should have done what any normal human would have done, and protected the children. Instead, he protects his Heavenly Bureaucracy. He may be a Prince to you and your ilk, but not to people who have good humanist morals and ethics.
Biblical Common Sense.. now there's an oxymoron if ever I heard it. The most warped confused conglomeration of ramblings from sun-maddened desert "visionaries".
I grew up having that sexually repressed crap beaten into me. Its taken me 50 years to finally shake it off. That was child abuse too. How many minds were tortured by images of "Hell" etc. The sooner you people face the truth the better for this Country. Either that, or get the Vatican to cough up and pay money for their crimes. That would hurt them. After all, money is the language of the Roman Catholic Church.
To abuse, terrify and rape a child is heinous and unforgivable.
Read the article from the Irish Catholic. I wasn't there in 1975, but things were handled differently back then and nobody really knew what to do. The Gardai were as incompetent as the bishops and they often turned a blind eye to things as the reports made clear. There's plenty of guilt and blame to go around.
I bet that if Fr Brady had gone to the Gardai, they'd have probably have asked him if he'd told the bishop. Then they'd probably say ''Ah well, sure we'll hear it from him, to be sure.'' There's all these what ifs? and certainties about what would have happened had Fr Brady gone to the cops, but we can't be sure that the outcome would have been any better.0 -
I wasn't there in 1975, but things were handled differently back then and nobody really knew what to do. The Gardai were as incompetent as the bishops and they often turned a blind eye to things as the reports made clear. There's plenty of guilt and blame to go around.
I bet that if Fr Brady had gone to the Gardai, they'd have probably have asked him if he'd told the bishop. Then they'd probably say ''Ah well, sure we'll hear it from him, to be sure.'' There's all these what ifs? and certainties about what would have happened had Fr Brady gone to the cops, but we can't be sure that the outcome would have been any better.
The Problem with 2012 is that we see a 1970 problem in the light of 2012 and judge peoples actions in accordance to today's standards. 1970 Ireland was sexually repressed, homosexuality was a crime, Divorce not possible, unemployment, and many men who were sexually immature became priests because there have not other avenues in life..
Its not an excuse for the abuse.. but we should put abuse in the context of the era.. Brady didn't to to Gardai because abuse was seen as a failing that could be corrected instead of a real crime.. its the reality of the day.0 -
The Problem with 2012 is that we see a 1970 problem in the light of 2012 and judge peoples actions in accordance to today's standards. 1970 Ireland was sexually repressed, homosexuality was a crime, Divorce not possible, unemployment, and many men who were sexually immature became priests because there have not other avenues in life..
Its not an excuse for the abuse.. but we should put abuse in the context of the era.. Brady didn't to to Gardai because abuse was seen as a failing that could be corrected instead of a real crime.. its the reality of the day.
there was no sex in Ireland before the late late show or so journos of today would have us believe.
I do not buy this sexually repressed business. The English were apparently Godless and were equally repressed. even today in our post god society we fear the naked body. how many secular Irish would go naked into the sauna?
Homosexuality was a crime and at the time Norris was apparently the only gay in the village. it was a crime and people were happy to have it labelled thus. queer bashing was highly acceptable. how attitudes have changed within the last decade!
you could also argue that sexually immature men became farmers.
Brady, like most people then and now, lacked spine.0 -
Advertisement
-
I do not accept that view. Admittedly, counselling and prosecutions have come a long way but nobody normal would have viewed rape as anything but rape. However, rape by a man wearing a collar would have been so scandalous that it was deemed better to keep it quiet. I don't accept that they thought it was a failing - they just didn't want to face a scandal. In terms of the rcc, they also appear to have presumed they were completely above the law (and thanks(!) to God fearing members of society, they were kept on this pedastel).Its not an excuse for the abuse.. but we should put abuse in the context of the era.. Brady didn't to to Gardai because abuse was seen as a failing that could be corrected instead of a real crime.. its the reality of the day.
Non collar wearing rapists were charged and sentenced before the 1990s!0 -
Concern over wrongdoing with children is still an issue today, but one that seems to be a hot button issue for politicans to make a stance, ie to be seen to be doing something in practice it rarely amounts to any concrete changes on the ground. For instance, from an academic course touching on the HSE there were 2000 abuse allegations made in 2007 (ARAIR) of which only 17 successful prosecutions made. This suggests a systematic lack of drive to tackle the issue.0
-
Concern over wrongdoing with children is still an issue today, but one that seems to be a hot button issue for politicans to make a stance, ie to be seen to be doing something in practice it rarely amounts to any concrete changes on the ground. For instance, from an academic course touching on the HSE there were 2000 abuse allegations made in 2007 (ARAIR) of which only 17 successful prosecutions made. This suggests a systematic lack of drive to tackle the issue.
What does ARAIR mean? I Googled it but got no joy.0 -
My Bad - ARAIR should be AFAIR - as far as I remember/recall.0
-
There's a good article on the Cardinal issue in the Irish Catholic -
http://www.irishcatholic.ie/content/casting-stones-cardinal-kieron-wood
There's a lot of food for thought there for all of us.
No food for thought at all, just more apologetics . I lived through the 70's and child abuse was recognised then as now for what it was . Just because we lived in such a centralised top down controlled society does not mean people did not recognise a sin and a crime when they saw it.But as Cardinal Brady has shown they were denied that opportunity.
The criminal was given greater protection than the victim. And there is no defence for anyone that participated in that cover up. And calls from politicians and non catholics for his resignation are perfectly reasonable. He is a public figure and one who has massive influence on the type of society in which we live - regardless of our belief or unbelief .0 -
Advertisement
-
No food for thought at all, just more apologetics . I lived through the 70's and child abuse was recognised then as now for what it was . Just because we lived in such a centralised top down controlled society does not mean people did not recognise a sin and a crime when they saw it.But as Cardinal Brady has shown they were denied that opportunity.
The criminal was given greater protection than the victim. And there is no defence for anyone that participated in that cover up. And calls from politicians and non catholics for his resignation are perfectly reasonable. He is a public figure and one who has massive influence on the type of society in which we live - regardless of our belief or unbelief .
Cardinal Brady has disgraced the Church and so Christ as well as aiding the harm of children, I have absolutely no sympathy for him- that said its a bit crazy of you to say that he has massive influence on Irish society, no?0 -
HamletOrHecuba wrote: »Cardinal Brady has disgraced the Church and so Christ as well as aiding the harm of children, I have absolutely no sympathy for him- that said its a bit crazy of you to say that he has massive influence on Irish society, no?
Not at all- as head of the largest church in Ireland he has influence through that church on Governments policy in Health Education Poverty etc and that church ( as they are entitled ) make many submissions on social and economic policy to government. And that is just through government channels.
As the church itself it still has enormous influence in society and to be headed by someone that may well be a decent man but has shown to have , to put it mildly ,flawed judgement is simply gubu. Any other entity and he would have long gone - instead he is just prolonging the story and doing his own organisation more damage than good.
It just illustrates how institutionalised and cut off from reality the older layers of the church have become.0 -
Not at all- as head of the largest church in Ireland he has influence through that church on Governments policy in Health Education Poverty etc and that church ( as they are entitled ) make many submissions on social and economic policy to government. And that is just through government channels.
As the church itself it still has enormous influence in society and to be headed by someone that may well be a decent man but has shown to have , to put it mildly ,flawed judgement is simply gubu. Any other entity and he would have long gone - instead he is just prolonging the story and doing his own organisation more damage than good.
It just illustrates how institutionalised and cut off from reality the older layers of the church have become.
Mr. Brady will not resign. To do so would be to accept that the RC Church is answerable for its actions.
SD0 -
StudentDad wrote: »Mr. Brady will not resign. To do so would be to accept that the RC Church is answerable for its actions.
SD
Yeah, I suppose there is an element of that involved , they are after all answerable only to a Higher Power . Just get into the bunker mode and it- whatever it is- the Romans, The Barbarians, Julian The Apostate ,Hitler- will pass .It is a policy that has served them well for 2000 years. I doubt if there has been any other organisation better a taking the long view. But they will have to adapt to survive in the information age, particularly in the developed world.0 -
Brer Fox says
That about sums up much of the clerical response to child sex abuse througout the ages.Well Yes.........But...
Well Yes.......But
Means they are not listening, they are dismissing, they are waiting untill you finish with your horrible story so they can say what they have been saying all along.......lets get the focus back on the abuser and get back to telling us the bit that we dont seem to be getting about the power of forgiveness, purgatory and the next life and other abstract spiritual concepts.
This is a kind of ungrounded spirituality which refuses to understand the nature of sexual abuse. You can forgive, but understand the nature of the compulsion the dis/ease and understand the need to keep abusers forever, in this life, here and now, away from anything that has to do with children or from having access to children forever.
Forgiveness is not the same as ignoring or brushing something under the carpet or handing it over to God or avoiding the issue. You forgive fully only when you understand otherwise what is there to forgive.
We have to be adult and accept adult responsibilities. Part of adult responsibility is to educate yourself enough to be able to protect children.
I was there in 1975. I knew what to do. I was a teenager but I knew right from wrong, I knew no one was suppose to be raped and I knew if somoeone did rape they were suppose to go to jail. I also knew that the adults in charge had chosen to ignore this truth and to ignore justice and the voices of those crying and crying begging for it to stop. Anyone with a mind uncluttered with excuses knew it was wrong to rape children and that rapists should go to jail. It is a simple issue it is illegal to rape childern now and it was illegal then. It seems people can use education and power to make issues complicated when it involves the behaviour of people they like or are their friends or when it threatens the organisations they belong to. Rape of children never was a complicated issue or difficult to understand .I wasn't there in 1975, but things were handled differently back then and nobody really knew what to do0 -
Well yes, sex abuse is heinous, but, thankfully, even a child rapist can repent and receive forgiveness. Now whether such a depraved and hardened sinner would repent is anther matter, but God's mercy is not for those who have no need of forgiveness, but for poor, miserable sinners, even child abusers. So whilst you may not be able to forgive, God can, thank God. SO if the child abuser is brought to his knees and repents, he can be forgiven, although he will have to do a long stint in the purifying fires of purgatory, as will most of us, I suspect.
Are you for real? 'Thankfully', a child rapist can be 'forgiven' for raping children? Thank who? Are you saying that God can forgive buggery and abuse of the most vulnerable members in society, thereby destroying or harming multiple human lives in the process, but he holds a grudge over an adult male priest having sex with a female, according to his own design, which involves a normal sex drive? Do you really believe this kind of thing?
If anyone with a scrap of morality a micron above that of a nematode could even think that such a depraved act could be ever forgiven, then it just shows what religion and religious thinking is all about - excuse piled upon excuse for mindless escapism. I wonder how many believers would think this way, regardless of judging it according to any written or unwritten text? Even the most primitive of tribes knows where they stand on such evil, but the supposed higher level theoreticians of orthodox religion can't seem to get it together. There is something very dark and sinister in such ideology, being based on medievalist notions of being somehow 'purified' in some non-biblical oven called 'Purgatory'. Does the oven go 'ping!' when the dish is ready? What's the setting for 'child rapists'? Two minutes short of 'eternity'? Where exactly does this sort of mindset end? Is it even possible to consider it 'thinking' in any balanced way?
So nobody knew what to do in 1975? Didn't they read the bible in 1975? Did it not say then, as it did a thousand and more years before then, that Jesus gave his clear direction for what should be done to such perverts, involving the use of millstones and deep oceans? Was it not even then spelled out in clear English, not in Latin, so why didn't they go the the very tome that they claimed to be the beginning and end of all truth?Read the article from the Irish Catholic. I wasn't there in 1975, but things were handled differently back then and nobody really knew what to do. The Gardai were as incompetent as the bishops and they often turned a blind eye to things as the reports made clear. There's plenty of guilt and blame to go around.
Blaming the Gardai is not the issue if the priest who knew of the perverted actions didn't report it in the first place. If they were told and did not act on what they were told of, then they were protecting not only the church of which they were members, but also their own jobs, which they could not get into, or hope to gain a promotion within, if they didn't attend Mass and other religious functions under the watchful eye of the clergy. It's weird how people see what they want to see.
If, as you say, the Gardai were as incompetent as the bishops, then they were both under the spell of the prevailing culture, with the officers of the State dancing to the tune of the supposedly non-seeing, non-hearing, non-knowing clergy. What did Jesus say about the 'blind leading the blind'? Is that not in the bible too? It just shows that self-interest rules when it comes to fear of loss to the self in societies that operate on such closeted and mentally reserved avoidance of whatever doesn't suit them.
As for "There's plenty of guilt and blame to go around", this is typical of the peculiar rationale of thinking that they more you make the muck spread the less it will smell. Well, it doesn't, it just spreads the smell all the more. Our nation's reputation has truly become tainted with the stench of it, and we've become a gazingstock. I think there are biblical references to that too. Maybe some revision is called for, rather than navel-gazing and gnashing of teeth.
You 'bet'? You 'believe'? There is nothing to 'bet' on, as Brady or his superiors simply didn't do it, so it's all speculation. There is one thing that's for sure: that the reason that there is no certainty of what might or should have happened, is because no action was taken to find out what might have happened, thus determining the outcome.I bet that if Fr Brady had gone to the Gardai, they'd have probably have asked him if he'd told the bishop. Then they'd probably say ''Ah well, sure we'll hear it from him, to be sure.'' There's all these what ifs? and certainties about what would have happened had Fr Brady gone to the cops, but we can't be sure that the outcome would have been any better.
What they did not do had consequences, and evil is done by action and inaction, as both give rise to consequences. Remember that chapter on 'sins of omission'? Deliberate omission is not an 'error' or a 'failing', as they should and could have known better, but their beliefs allowed them to not see. That's Morality 101 material, but if the priesthood who were supposed to be the judge and jury on terms of right and wrong in Irish society could not get what any Paddy in the street could work out to be wrong, then is it any wonder that they are now up to their collars in trouble? Didn't they remember that other cornerstone biblical saying about reaping what you sow? Maybe they believed that the rules didn't apply to themselves? Do they actually believe what they say that they want everyone else to believe? If they actually and genuinely do, then they could never ever even think, never mind alone act in such a manner, could they? Could you?0 -
Are you for real? 'Thankfully', a child rapist can be 'forgiven' for raping children? Thank who? Are you saying that God can forgive buggery and abuse of the most vulnerable members in society, thereby destroying or harming multiple human lives in the process, but he holds a grudge over an adult male priest having sex with a female, according to his own design, which involves a normal sex drive? Do you really believe this kind of thing?
Yes a child rapist both can and should be forgiven.
However there is also the matter of justice and prevention of further evil- so he must definitely be punished, and punished harshly as befits his crime. There is a difference from saying that people can be forgiven no matter what there crime is as long as they repent sincerely- and saying that therefore they shouldnt be punished for that crime, or that that crime isnt heinous.
Child rape by someone in holy orders comes close to being one of the worst crimes imaginable in my view.0 -
HamletOrHecuba wrote: »Yes a child rapist both can and should be forgiven.
No they shouldn't, especially if they've done it multiple times.0 -
No they shouldn't, especially if they've done it multiple times.
I am thankful that God is Judge and not man. That is not to say that He won't punish those who are unrepentant.Matthew 18: 21-22
Then Peter came to Jesus and asked, “Lord, how many times shall I forgive my brother when he sins against me? Up to seven times?”
Jesus answered, “I tell you, not seven times, but seventy-seven times.0 -
HamletOrHecuba wrote: »Yes a child rapist both can and should be forgiven.
However there is also the matter of justice and prevention of further evil- so he must definitely be punished, and punished harshly as befits his crime. There is a difference from saying that people can be forgiven no matter what there crime is as long as they repent sincerely- and saying that therefore they shouldnt be punished for that crime, or that that crime isnt heinous.
Child rape by someone in holy orders comes close to being one of the worst crimes imaginable in my view.
Let me put it like this, even if you do, by virtue of your religious beliefs, believe that a child rapist, (something Jesus clearly stated should be drowned in the depths of the sea), not only could but should be forgiven, and that you clearly understand this act is evil, what possible other way could the highly ranking clergy not 'understand' it? I'm not saying I agree with your ideas, but even so, how did their minds come to accept such excuse to continue? Are these not the men that the collective Irish nation was trained to look up to?0 -
Advertisement
-
gimmebroadband wrote: »I am thankful that God is Judge and not man. That is not to say that He won't punish those who are unrepentant.
But is it not clear to you, even as a mortal and imperfect being, that these perverted ones obviously don't believe in God? How can you believe in God if you rape children? Surely it would be like a kosher-abiding Jew tucking into a plate of fried bacon and still being considered 'clean'?
If you don't believe in him, he has no power over you, surely? Like Buddhists, atheists, Jews, Muslims and many other people who don't believe in the Christian trinitarian God, then they can't be judged by it, can they? Like the concept of Heaven, Hell, Purgatory and other similar ideas, they only exist if you believe in them, as they only exist in your specific beliefs, no?
Perverts can't become un-perverted, as it's a contradiction in terms, as it's the whole mind of the being that's perverted. You can be no more be 'a bit perverted' than you can be 'a bit virginal', as it's an all or nothing thing. You can't undo the rape of a child, can you, as it's not like putting back something you stole, surely?0 -
gimmebroadband wrote: »Quote:
Matthew 18: 21-22
Then Peter came to Jesus and asked, “Lord, how many times shall I forgive my brother when he sins against me? Up to seven times?”
Jesus answered, “I tell you, not seven times, but seventy-seven times.
Why not seventy-eight? What's special about seventy-seven?0 -
There is a book I love and have quoted often called "Forgive and Forget Healing the Hurts we dont Deserve".
It has been personally very helpful to me and I wish everyone would read it.
I like it so much because Smedes spends so much time in the book telling us what forgiveness is not.
There appears often to be a divide between people with a Christian religious outlook and people who are or who stand up for survivors of abuse.
Often the Christians put forgiveness forward as some kind of magical thing that happens or that only God can do or in some other vague non demonstratable way.
If we are going to talk about forgiveness to people who have been badly wronged damaged forever injured it had better be in practical worked out exactly what you mean kinds of ways.
The Irish Churches have been immature in this regard in my opinion and words like the following quotes are the kinds of things I want to hear.
Anyway I think the book is good and well worth a read even if you are not a Christian..
When we forgive evil we do not excuse it, we do not tolerate it, we do not smother it. We look the evil full in the face, call it what it is, let its horror shock and stun and enrage us, and only then do we forgive it.............
Excusing is just the opposite of forgiving. We excuse someone when we understand that they were not to blame. We forgive someone for things we blame them for. Before we forgive we stiffen our spine and we hold a person accountable.
"Forgiveness has nothing to do with forgetting...A wounded person cannot--indeed, should not--think that a faded memory can provide an expiation of the past. To forgive, one must remember the past, put it into perspective, and move beyond it. Without remembrance, no wound can be transcended."...........
"Sometimes choices are made in the name of forgiveness while what is occurring isn't forgiveness at all. It is important not to confuse being
forgiving with denying your own feelings, needs, and desires. Forgiving doesn't mean being passive and staying in a job or a relationship that clearly doesn't work for you or is abusive. It is important that you are clear about your boundaries. What is acceptable for you? If you are willing to allow unacceptable behavior again and again in the name of 'forgiveness,' you are more than likely using 'forgiveness' as an excuse not to take responsibility for taking care of yourself or as a way to avoid making changes."
Having dealt with all the things that forgiving is not the author goes on to talk about why we should forgive."We attach our feelings to the moment when we were hurt, endowing it with immortality. And we let it assault us every time it comes to mind. It travels with us, sleeps with us, hovers over us while we make love, and broods over us while we die. Our hate does not even have the decency to die when those we hate die--for it is a parasite sucking OUR blood, not theirs. There is only one remedy for it. [forgiveness
"You can forgive someone almost anything. But you cannot tolerate everything...We don't have to tolerate what people do just because we forgive them for doing it. Forgiving heals us personally. To tolerate everything only hurts us all in the long run."
"If we say that monsters [people who do terrible evil] are beyond forgiving, we give them a power they should never have...they are given the power to keep their evil alive in the hearts of those who suffered most. We give them power to condemn their victims to live forever with the hurting memory of their painful pasts. We give the monsters the last word."
All the years you have waited for them to "make it up to you" and all the energy you expended trying to make them change (or make them pay) kept the old wounds from healing and gave pain from the past free rein to shape and even damage your life. And still they may not have changed. Nothing you have done has made them change. Indeed, they may never change. Inner peace is found by changing yourself, not the people who hurt you. And you change yourself for yourself, for the joy, serenity, peace of mind, understanding, compassion, laughter, and bright future that you get.
The above quotes can probably be related to by anyone who has been hurt betrayed deeply. Smedes also writes on the issue of Justice.
The issue of Justice in all this religious talk doesnt seem to be too high up on the list of things the church authorities are striving for."When you give up vengeance, make sure you are not giving up on justice. The line between the two is faint, unsteady, and fine...Vengeance is our own pleasure of seeing someone who hurt us getting it back and then some. Justice, on the other hand, is secure when someone pays a fair penalty for wronging another even if the injured person takes no pleasure in the transaction. Vengeance is personal satisfaction. Justice is moral accounting...Human forgiveness does not do away with human justice."0 -
There is a book I love and have quoted often called "Forgive and Forget Healing the Hurts we dont Deserve".
It has been personally very helpful to me and I wish everyone would read it.
I like it so much because Smedes spends so much time in the book telling us what forgiveness is not.
There appears often to be a divide between people with a Christian religious outlook and people who are or who stand up for survivors of abuse.
Often the Christians put forgiveness forward as some kind of magical thing that happens or that only God can do or in some other vague non demonstratable way.
If we are going to talk about forgiveness to people who have been badly wronged damaged forever injured it had better be in practical worked out exactly what you mean kinds of ways.
The Irish Churches have been immature in this regard in my opinion and words like the following quotes are the kinds of things I want to hear.
Anyway I think the book is good and well worth a read even if you are not a Christian.
Having dealt with all the things that forgiving is not the author goes on to talk about why we should forgive.
The above quotes can probably be related to by anyone who has been hurt betrayed deeply. Smedes also writes on the issue of Justice.
The issue of Justice in all this religious talk doesnt seem to be too high up on the list of things the churches are striving for.
That's all very fine and well, but the perverts don't even acknowledge that they have done wrong, with many of them saying that they were 'loving' the children they damaged or destroyed.
I can understand the concept of forgiveness being justified where someone actually does realise the root cause of their actions that allowed them to believe that they had some right to abuse, and stop doing it, but the vast majority of these deviants never will do so, because they have allowed their beliefs to contaminate their minds so as to accept their unjustifiable actions as being justifiable. That's perversion.
There is a lot of talk about rules, laws, canon law church law, lack of law, excuses because of this or that, but you can't have justice unless you look at the facts, and these systems of touchy-feely 'forgiveness' are a cop-out.
To anyone with a scrap of humanity within them, justice is paramount and it's the one thing humans can't live without and remain human, and is much more important than laws, as laws should only exist to serve justice, and not the other way around. Laws without justice is called oppression, so it's hardly surprising that there is so much of it going on.0 -
gimmebroadband wrote: »I am thankful that God is Judge and not man. That is not to say that He won't punish those who are unrepentant.
Just because you believe it, doesn't mean the rest of us have to.
I say, and so does society as a whole, that these people should be put in jail, and stay there until the day they die. (Okay that last bit may be my opinion, but they should get a proper jail sentence.)
If they truly are repentant, and a God does exist, then he can decide. But on this mortal plain, the excuse of "I'm sorry, I repent and God will forgive me" just isn't going to fly.0 -
Just because you believe it, doesn't mean the rest of us have to.
I say, and so does society as a whole, that these people should be put in jail, and stay there until the day they die. (Okay that last bit may be my opinion, but they should get a proper jail sentence.)
If they truly are repentant, and a God does exist, then he can decide. But on this mortal plain, the excuse of "I'm sorry, I repent and God will forgive me" just isn't going to fly.
Exactly. They might also ask as to if God exists, how could he let this stuff happen? The lack of prevention appears to be indication of something, but that's only my own observation.0 -
Exactly. They might also ask as to if God exists, how could he let this stuff happen? The lack of prevention appears to be indication of something, but that's only my own observation.
No no, they can pull the free-will stuff there all they want, and that's fine. It's their belief.
But just because they believe if someone is truly sorry, then they are forgiven, that the rest of us have to as well. Because they aren't. And they should still serve the exact same jailtime as any other person guilty of the same crimes.
No excuses.0 -
Let me put it like this, even if you do, by virtue of your religious beliefs, believe that a child rapist, (something Jesus clearly stated should be drowned in the depths of the sea), not only could but should be forgiven, and that you clearly understand this act is evil, what possible other way could the highly ranking clergy not 'understand' it? I'm not saying I agree with your ideas, but even so, how did their minds come to accept such excuse to continue? Are these not the men that the collective Irish nation was trained to look up to?
Look I have made clear that I believe in the death penalty for all child rapists, but I would prefer a particularly harsh form of it for clerical child rapists-I believe that they should be punished more than lay ones. I have believe in harsh penalties who for those who allowed it to happen (possibly also the death penalty).
I dont understand what was going through their minds, I can speculate- maybe they started confusing what was good for them and their reputation with what was good with God, maybe they believed that the "good name of the Priesthood" overcame the claims of Divine Justice? Maybe they started to believe that no sin was necessarily that serious- after all someone has just said in the Islam forum who claims to be a Christian that being cranky with a loved one in the morning is not that much different from raping a child because "Sin is Sin".0 -
F12 I agree. Many if not most child abusers do not acknowledge the harm they have done and even if they do they should still be kept forever away from children.
The concept of forgiveness in the book I am quoting and the concept I myself am coming to understand better is not the usual understanding of forgiveness.
It is not the kind of forgiveness as presented to us by the bishops forgiving and then relocating child abusers on to other parishes.
It is something you can do even when the person is not sorry and does not understand or admit. It is not dependent on them. It does not mean they dont go to jail or that they dont do extended counselling or that they are ever ever let near children again.
Forgiving is a release you give yourself as the person hurt to free yourself from the constant wheel of mental torment.
Forgiving can only be done by the person wronged not by anyone else.
Forgiveness is not first and foremost a gift to the abuser it is first a gift to yourself.0 -
Advertisement
-
HamletOrHecuba wrote: »Look I have made clear that I believe in the death penalty for all child rapists, but I would prefer a particularly harsh form of it for clerical child rapists-I believe that they should be punished more than lay ones. I have believe in harsh penalties who for those who allowed it to happen (possibly also the death penalty).
I dont understand what was going through their minds, I can speculate- maybe they started confusing what was good for them and their reputation with what was good with God, maybe they believed that the "good name of the Priesthood" overcame the claims of Divine Justice? Maybe they started to believe that no sin was necessarily that serious- after all someone has just said in the Islam forum who claims to be a Christian that being cranky with a loved one in the morning is not that much different from raping a child because "Sin is Sin".
Oh it really is quite simple what was going through their heads.
They thought of themselves, and how such a tragedy going public could affect the Vatican in the eyes of the masses (harr de harr harr), and thus decided to cover it up, hide away the truth and let someone else deal with it.
It's a very common tactic used across the globe by numerous organizations.0
Advertisement