Not the best of time for the |Catholic Church

[Ramirez]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,505183,00.html

You know at a time when the Church is engulfed in scandals about pedophile priests in Italy and Ireland and showing little concern for the victims it also now shows callous disregard for one of its flock in an ugly situation who probably needs the comfort of her religion.

Yeah there is an official stance against abortion, there is also understanding and compassion.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

I am Catholic. I agree that it is not the best of times for the Church. However, the story you linked to is apparently from 2009. What is your purpose in posting it now?

 

[Ramirez]

I am Catholic. I agree that it is not the best of times for the Church. However, the story you linked to is apparently from 2009. What is your purpose in posting it now?

My mistake, thought it was from March 2010.

 

[Ramirez]

Actually like most large institutions the Catholic Church is an enigma, I have great admiration for its work in Africa, but can't understand its stand against condoms.

I might ask for this thread to be removed, discussing the pedophile situation is like piling on at this point.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Actually like most large institutions the Catholic Church is an enigma, I have great admiration for its work in Africa, but can't understand its stand against condoms.

I might ask for this thread to be removed, discussing the pedophile situation is like piling on at this point.

Its your call, but I don't mind discussing the ills of the Church. Like many Catholics, I too am hurt, shocked, and offended by what has been going on with reference to pedophile priests. There's even a tie-in to MA if we want to discuss pedophile sensei.

With regard to condoms, it's simply Church doctrine. Like many such things, it doesn't make sense to the outside world, but it wasn't promulgated go make the outside world (or the laity) happy.

 

[Ramirez]

Its your call, but I don't mind discussing the ills of the Church. Like many Catholics, I too am hurt, shocked, and offended by what has been going on with reference to pedophile priests. There's even a tie-in to MA if we want to discuss pedophile sensei.

With regard to condoms, it's simply Church doctrine. Like many such things, it doesn't make sense to the outside world, but it wasn't promulgated go make the outside world (or the laity) happy.

okay Bill, let's have a go, what is your take, was Benedict complicit in protecting the priests, and if he was what then?

I think popes can resign, so should he?

 

[Bill Mattocks]

okay Bill, let's have a go, what is your take, was Benedict complicit in protecting the priests, and if he was what then?

I absolutely have no idea. Like many of those in power, I suspect that no effort would be spared to shield him from the appearance of impropriety, whether or not he did anything improper when he was a priest and later Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith. I have no doubt many would seek to protect him even if he had done nothing wrong, so we may well never know.

I think popes can resign, so should he?

Popes can indeed resign, but whether or not he should is not my call and I have no opinion on the matter. Unlike an elected official, even though Popes are elected, they are potentates and monarchs of the Church, serving for life if they so choose (which of course most do).

Like many Catholics, I am very conflicted on these issues.

On the one hand, I do not believe that the Laity has any business dictating to the Church what policy should be; the Church is not a democracy or a republic. We do not vote.

On the other hand, it is a horrible thing to read about these horrible events in the USA and elsewhere, stories of pedophile priests abusing children; it's sickening. Seeing the Church staggering around attempting to repair the damage by ducking responsibility, avoiding addressing the issues, and even shielding pedophile priests is horrifying. There is no way a decent human being can excuse or ignore such offenses to both man's law and the law of God.

I also note, in no particular order, that most of the offenses we are hearing about now took place in the 1950's, 1960's, and 1970's. They are still horrible things, I would never seek to minimize them; but I would note that we cannot go back and prevent them from having happened now; more stories are likely to come out as time goes on, this is a crop whose seeds were sown decades ago, so I suspect it will get worse before it gets better.

Likewise, I know that the Church has enemies. Those from within and those from without. From militant atheists who despise all things religious to rival churches of various sorts, from breakaway Catholic orders to inner factions. These will seize upon any issues that the Catholic Church has and seek to maximize them. Perhaps it is true that they need to be publicized in order to force change; this I cannot deny. However, when the intention is to simply destroy the Church, obviously I have a problem with that.

I am concerned that if we begin the blame game of associating any priest, bishop, arch-bishop, or cardinal with blame regarding any particular situation involving a pedophile priest, there may simply be no end to it. We sometimes hear stories about a criminal who commits a heinous crime and it comes out that years before, he was let go by a lenient judge or not prosecuted for a lesser crime by a DA for unknown reasons, and public sentiment is outraged; but we don't generally go for the throat and seek the removal of that judge or DA unless they had a pattern of doing such things. If a person who later becomes a pope makes a mistake, or is in a position of authority when a case comes through their office that is not prosecuted heavily enough in hindsight, what is the correct way to deal with it?

I am not overly fond of our current Pope. I wish I didn't feel that way, but I do. Hey, I'm allowed to not like him. He's my pope, but that doesn't mean I have to think he's nifty keen. The Church in many ways is not going the direction I would wish it to go, or to address issues such as this in ways I think it ought to. None of those things are in my control, and I don't feel it proper for me to seek the ouster of the pope.

I also worry about the precedent it sets for the Church if the Pope were to resign. In my opinion, every succeeding pope would have a bullseye on his chest and from the moment he became Pope, whomever disliked him would be digging, digging, digging, to find dirt, rumor, innuendo, or whatever else could be done to discredit him. In the end, it would be damaging to the Church, and of course I'm against damaging the Church.

 

[dbell]

As a relatively new Catholic, I very much echo Bill's comments. And I would like to add, that you have as many, if not more, lawyers, doctors, police, EMTs, etc., doing the same or worse, and they are getting caught, but not receiving the lime light as the Catholic Church. I guess the people that publicize these events are going for the money and the effect more than the desire to fix things.

While I do not condone the actions of the priest that committed these crimes of humanity and law, nor do I condone the "cover up" by the Church, I can, to an extent understand it. In those cases where it was brought to the attention of the Church while the priest was still in the position of committing the crime, he was removed and placed in a position where he could not do it again, and the Church moved on. IF, and few were initially, it was taken to the police, the Church assisted in the investigation.

Like any such organization, if it went to civil court, the Church "paid out" to keep it from going on and on. That wasn't a "cover up" per say, but what any organization would do to keep it from costing even more and lasting even longer.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

As a relatively new Catholic, I very much echo Bill's comments. And I would like to add, that you have as many, if not more, lawyers, doctors, police, EMTs, etc., doing the same or worse, and they are getting caught, but not receiving the lime light as the Catholic Church. I guess the people that publicize these events are going for the money and the effect more than the desire to fix things.

While I do not condone the actions of the priest that committed these crimes of humanity and law, nor do I condone the "cover up" by the Church, I can, to an extent understand it. In those cases where it was brought to the attention of the Church while the priest was still in the position of committing the crime, he was removed and placed in a position where he could not do it again, and the Church moved on. IF, and few were initially, it was taken to the police, the Church assisted in the investigation.

Like any such organization, if it went to civil court, the Church "paid out" to keep it from going on and on. That wasn't a "cover up" per say, but what any organization would do to keep it from costing even more and lasting even longer.

I actually think there were and have been cover-ups, and they're ugly, sinful things. The Church is not without blame, both for the actual events themselves and for the attempts made by others to cover them up, hush up victims, or deny culpability. I think (my opinion) that any priest involved in any illegal activity, including sexual molestation, should immediately be reported to civil authorities, not just removed from positions where he could re-offend.

However, many of these incidents coming to light now actually occurred many decades ago. Things were different then, and whilst cover-ups are abhorrent seen in the light of our eyes now, they were neither unusual nor unacceptable at that time. That doesn't change how wrong they were; it only gives us perspective on how things were done back then.

We live in a more open and transparent society now, which can be both good and bad. It is good in the sense that we can all agree that such cover-ups should never happen, ever. It's bad in the sense that no one who was an adult in the 1940's through the current time is immune from having their reputations today stained by what was once acceptable then.

 

[Ramirez]

As a relatively new Catholic, I very much echo Bill's comments. And I would like to add, that you have as many, if not more, lawyers, doctors, police, EMTs, etc., doing the same or worse, and they are getting caught, but not receiving the lime light as the Catholic Church.

.

surely we don't hold the church to the same level of conduct and morality that we do secular institutions and laity. It is that much worse with a priest because theyir vocation is guiding the souls of the faithfull, they have much more trust than a policmen, doctor etc.

 

[dbell]

surely we don't hold the church to the same level of conduct and morality that we do secular institutions and laity. It is that much worse with a priest because theyir vocation is guiding the souls of the faithfull, they have much more trust than a policmen, doctor etc.

Very true, as a "leader" of morals and faith they should be held to a very high standard, but I do feel that police, doctors, or others of authority or special position should be held to the same standards, very high.

Yes, Bill, there may have been cover up, and probably was, in the early years, and I agree, that is not acceptable. And yes, the priest should have been immediately turned over to the authorities, but as you said, in that day and time, that was not the norm. Yes, the Church should have done so anyway, to stay within it's moral and ethical teachings.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Very true, as a "leader" of morals and faith they should be held to a very high standard, but I do feel that police, doctors, or others of authority or special position should be held to the same standards, very high.

Yes, Bill, there may have been cover up, and probably was, in the early years, and I agree, that is not acceptable. And yes, the priest should have been immediately turned over to the authorities, but as you said, in that day and time, that was not the norm. Yes, the Church should have done so anyway, to stay within it's moral and ethical teachings.

The Church has a special obligation, not just to Man, but to God. Men err, but God does not. The problem with any institution created by man is that it is flawed by nature. The Church seeks to protect not just God (who does not need or want the protection of the Church) but also itself as an institution. This leads to situations where what is morally right is balanced against what is best for the Church; and that is always going to lead to problems.

The Church is unique in that it is not truly a government, with sovereign temporal authority, nor is it a business, seeking to protect its interests and maximize profits for shareholders. But it is an institution that seeks to continue, and for that reason, people in places of authority within it are liable to do things they should not in order to protect it as an institution.

 

[Ramirez]

The Church has a special obligation, not just to Man, but to God. Men err, but God does not. The problem with any institution created by man is that it is flawed by nature. The Church seeks to protect not just God (who does not need or want the protection of the Church) but also itself as an institution. This leads to situations where what is morally right is balanced against what is best for the Church; and that is always going to lead to problems.

The Church is unique in that it is not truly a government, with sovereign temporal authority, nor is it a business, seeking to protect its interests and maximize profits for shareholders. But it is an institution that seeks to continue, and for that reason, people in places of authority within it are liable to do things they should not in order to protect it as an institution.

Good points, the church is a massive institution with a broad and not very defined mandate, you can find lots of admirable noble things it does and lots things that are not so.

Unfortunately these incidents over shadow a lot of the good things the church does, and maybe it should so the mistakes are not repeated in the future.

 

[JDenver]

One of the most damaging things the Roman Catholic church has done, and continues to do, is to stick its head in the sand, ignore any sense of responsibility, and apologize about 1,000 years later.

The apology from the Pope gave me some teeny sense of hope for the future, and the subsequent barracading and deflecting from the Vatican is sad and familiar.

 

[Bruno@MT]

The Church has a special obligation, not just to Man, but to God. Men err, but God does not. The problem with any institution created by man is that it is flawed by nature. The Church seeks to protect not just God (who does not need or want the protection of the Church) but also itself as an institution. This leads to situations where what is morally right is balanced against what is best for the Church; and that is always going to lead to problems.
.

I am a Catholic. Have been for 30 years. Although in all honesty, you can classify me more accurately as a breakaway Catholic. I grew up in an area that was ruled by Catholic clergy in all but name. I could list endless examples of abuse of power. Not just sexual and physical, but it seems that the clergy is a welcoming place for sociopaths, sadists, and other likeminded individuals. And the nuns and sisters were not any better. Although admittedly, things were not as sick as in Ireland.

These are the people supposed to follow and teach the laws of God, yet that seems to take second place to acting out their power trip. Just last month, a Catholic priest of my neighboring village was arrested for child molestation.

There there is also the matter of Catholic dogma. That has been based supposedly on the gospels. Yet in the recent decades, we have learned that there have been many alternative gospels. The gospel of Thomas, Mary and Judas to name but a few. They paint a different picture of Jesus and his teachings. In truth, the new testament and the foundation of Catholicism have come to be by censoring all opposing views and opinions that the handful of people in power did not agree with. So knowing that, how can we even think that the teachings of the Catholic church are correct?

If I look at the Catholic church from the early beginnings up to now, I see immense ammounts of betrayal, abuse, and a hunger for power. Today it is still no different. If the Catholic God does exist, I highly doubt that he has anything to do with the Catholic church at all. But like all age old institution, it will probably (sadly) keep on existing by the sheer momentum of its age, in all its rotten glory.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

There there is also the matter of Catholic dogma. That has been based supposedly on the gospels. Yet in the recent decades, we have learned that there have been many alternative gospels. The gospel of Thomas, Mary and Judas to name but a few. They paint a different picture of Jesus and his teachings. In truth, the new testament and the foundation of Catholicism have come to be by censoring all opposing views and opinions that the handful of people in power did not agree with. So knowing that, how can we even think that the teachings of the Catholic church are correct?

In my opinion, there is no way to know. The books selected for inclusion in the New Testament left an Apocrypha, and as you mentioned, other documents have surfaced in the years from the 1800's to the 1970's (primarily Coptic and Gnostic documents). We laity have no way of knowing which were true writings and which were not. It is understood by most biblical scholars that none of the Gospels were written during the time of Christ.

In addition, we know that it was Paul of Tarsus that truly introduced the seeds of what has become known as Christianity; not Jesus and not His Disciples. Without Paul, there would be no New Testament, no Christianity, and Paul's notion of what Jesus meant and what Jesus taught is what we know know as Jesus' teachings, whether they were or not.

If I look at the Catholic church from the early beginnings up to now, I see immense ammounts of betrayal, abuse, and a hunger for power. Today it is still no different. If the Catholic God does exist, I highly doubt that he has anything to do with the Catholic church at all. But like all age old institution, it will probably (sadly) keep on existing by the sheer momentum of its age, in all its rotten glory.

I can't disagree with your statements, but I remain Catholic. It's as likely to be right (or wrong) as anything else.

 

[Bruno@MT]

I can't disagree with your statements, but I remain Catholic. It's as likely to be right (or wrong) as anything else.

+1.

And I don't think any less of you for it. After all, I still call myself a Catholic despite having the aforementioned opinion about the Catholic church. I realize it is illogical, but there you are...

 

[CoryKS]

One of the most damaging things the Roman Catholic church has done, and continues to do, is to stick its head in the sand, ignore any sense of responsibility, and apologize about 1,000 years later.

The apology from the Pope gave me some teeny sense of hope for the future, and the subsequent barracading and deflecting from the Vatican is sad and familiar.

It's likely that the Catholic Church tries to cover up these incidents in order to avoid giving ammo to those who would seek to discredit them. That's a human response, if not an honorable one. Threads like these serve to prove their suspicions.

 

[Ramirez]

It's likely that the Catholic Church tries to cover up these incidents in order to avoid giving ammo to those who would seek to discredit them. That's a human response, if not an honorable one. Threads like these serve to prove their suspicions.

The cover up though ends up being almost as bad as the original crime , now they have the stigma of looking like they were protecting pedophiles and allowing further abuse by just transferring them to other parishes when they should have defrocked the priests, preferably with a few severe beatings on the way out.

The Church ends up looking like it is more concerned with the Church than the abused children.

 

[jks9199]

+1.

And I don't think any less of you for it. After all, I still call myself a Catholic despite having the aforementioned opinion about the Catholic church. I realize it is illogical, but there you are...

Actually, it's not. I refer you to Fr. Andrew Greeley's book The Catholic Myth, where he examined just that question: Why do people who are at odds with the Church still remain Catholic? In very brief -- it's because the Catholic teachings reflect they're world view... and that's much harder to change than the name you call yourself. For the record -- I am Catholic. I have served as a catechist and helped with youth ministry, though my current schedule doesn't permit this.

The issues involved here are complicated, and some are rooted in the Catholic belief of redemption and self-perfection. I am sadly confident that some priests were moved and victims or their families bought off solely to hide the offensive action -- whether that was with an adult or a child. But in other cases, the priest in question probably made his Confession (perhaps even unprompted!), and accepted and performed his Penance -- and the Catholic belief is that we can overcome our failings, and "go and sin no more." We know now that for many of these offenses, it is unlikely that a person will change their attraction -- but Catholic belief is that we can overcome our urges. It's also worth noting that, as far as I know, very few of these cases were true pedophilia; many if not most involved teens. This is not to minimize the abuses -- but is important to recognize the difference.

With that said -- my personal opinion is that, while it may not have been necessary to defrock a priest, especially if his remorse was true and self-motivated, he should have never been placed in such a position of temptation again. Allow him to serve his ministry within the walls of an abbey, or in some other location where he will not have an opportunity to repeat the abuse. And the pastors, abbots, and other appropriate personnel should have been aware of the issue -- and been able to take steps to act on it. It is mind blowing that a priest who abused a child or teen in one parish could be moved, and permitted to become the priest involved in youth ministry in his next parish assignment.

It's also important to recognize the distinction between The Church and the members who make it up. The Church is made up of very fallible human beings, who are hopefully always striving to become closer to the ideal of Christ. We all stumble along the way, and we hope through the graces received through the Sacrament of Reconciliation (Confession of sins, forgiveness, and penance) to find the strength to avoid those temptations in the future. The Church's infallibility isn't extended to the personal acts of it's members -- only it's teachings on faith and morality. And Papal infallibility is limited to very specific circumstances, not his personal actions and decisions.

Let me make it absolutely clear: I am not defending the abuse of children by priests, nor am I defending actions taken with the intent to hide these abuses and scare people out of reporting them. But some of the actions of the Church's leaders weren't driven by a desire to hide offenses or protect the offenders -- but in the Church's belief and teachings on individual redemption.