I hate the "everybody does it" comments. Would a defense attorney say to the jury, "Sure my client murdered someone, but everybody does it?"
There is one issue at hand, the consummate depravity of the Catholic empire, from Pope to cardinal, to bishop to priest.
When individuals within an institution commit a crime, the institution is defined not by the crime but by its response to the crime.
There is bound to be institutional inertia with respect to instituting reform but that's why most institutions are LED by individuals and not committees. The INDIVIDUAL who failed Catholic children the world over was John Paul.
The Pope may not have been a pedophile himself, but he was an enabler, therefore a facilitator, therefore as good as a procurer. Where decisive action was required he was passive. How is that different from Bernie Law's own conduct? It doesn't matter whether John Paul's scented hands weren't in some kid's pants. He protected those whose hands were guilty.
Until things change, any Catholic who knowingly sends money to Rome, directly or indirectly, is funding institutionalized pedophilia. The church's hesitation to purge itself of the practice suggests the practice is rampant, and more, that it does not wish to purge itself.
Long but worth the read for chuckle..and on a personal note, I know that PJP, was this super great dude, but u do realize they exhummed another pope to bury this one....
oh and in his favor this one (pope)did admit to the catholic church's involment in the holocaust. as for the pedophilia, to deep to go into, but i will say this it is unnatural for anyone to be seperated from human touch and intamcy,
HEAVEN—The soul of Pope John Paul, which entered heaven last week following a long illness, expressed confusion and disappointment Saturday, upon learning that the Celestial Kingdom of God to which the departed faithful ascend in the afterlife is significantly less luxurious than the Vatican's Papal Palace, in which the pope spent the past 26 years of his earthly life.
Above: St. Peter's Basilica, with its 90-foot bronze baldachin designed by Bernini, is one of the many Vatican splendors no longer enjoyed by Pope John Paul II (below).
"Where are all the marble statues, sterling-silver chalices, and gem-encrusted scepters?" the visibly disappointed pope asked. "Where are the 60-foot-tall stained-glass windows and hand-painted cupolas? Where are the elaborately outfitted ranks of Swiss Guards? Why isn't every single surface gilded? This is my eternal reward?"
Heaven, according to the New Testament, has "brilliance like a very costly stone... of pure gold, like clear glass..." with "twelve gates... each gate a single pearl." Yet the pope, who spoke from the afterlife, said heaven is nothing like the "solid-gold city" detailed at length by John of Patmos in the Book of Revelations.
"Evidently, the Bible was not intended to be taken literally, after all," John Paul II said. "Don't get me wrong: It's very nice up here—quite beautiful and serene. It's just not as fancy as what I'm accustomed to. If I'd known heaven was going to be like this, I would've taken one last tour through my 50 rooms of velvet-draped thrones and priceless oil paintings before saying 'Amen' and breathing my last."
I'm not responsible for the actions of people I will never meet, either VPW or JP2. If I spend money at McDonalds am I intentionally supporting institutionalized obesity? If I buy beer am I part of a conspiracy of institutionalized alcoholism? The truth is that for every molested catholic or even TWI girl there are over a thousand who will never have to worry. I once read a pamphlet that said JP2 was into molesting young boys as far back as when he was a priest in Poland.
I hate the "everybody does it" comments. Would a defense attorney say to the jury, "Sure my client murdered someone, but everybody does it?"
If this was in reference to my post, then stop twisting my words and learn how to read. There's no reason for you to act like a jackass, even though that's your SOP.
quote:
Originally posted by satori001:
There is one issue at hand, the consummate depravity of the Catholic empire, from Pope to cardinal, to bishop to priest.
That's pure B.S. Yes, there are leaders in the Catholic church that are corrupt, there are leaders who molest kids. Those people are bad, but that does not make every single one guilty or bad.
quote:
Originally posted by satori001:
When individuals within an institution commit a crime, the institution is defined not by the crime but by its response to the crime.
So if I wear my badge from work, go out and run a red light on my way to the office, you think the cops should send the ticket to my boss? I suspect you wouldn't, but even so, why would my boss have to come out and defend the company I work for because I ran a red light? Granted, there is a huge difference in seriousness, which I suspect you will try to use to point out how "bad" I am for comparing pedophilia to running a red light, which I only did to point out how things work with a crime that is not as emotionally charged, and not a direct comparison as you would undoubtably read into it.
Nobody should have to come out and make a clear statement that child molestation is wrong, because it's clear that the normal view of society is that it's wrong. Very very few people would disagree that it's wrong to molest kids. Why do we need to demand people to make speeches about how bad it is when we all already know that?
quote:
Originally posted by satori001:
There is bound to be institutional inertia with respect to instituting reform but that's why most institutions are LED by individuals and not committees. The INDIVIDUAL who failed Catholic children the world over was John Paul.
You're free to believe that, but I find it hard to believe that an old guy in his 80's with Parkinsons and a host of other illnesses was in charge of anything. I seriously doubt he was running the Catholic church for years, and instead let others make decisions in his name. Either way though, it doesn't matter anymore because he's dead.
quote:
Originally posted by satori001:
The Pope may not have been a pedophile himself, but he was an enabler, therefore a facilitator, therefore as good as a procurer. Where decisive action was required he was passive. How is that different from Bernie Law's own conduct? It doesn't matter whether John Paul's scented hands weren't in some kid's pants. He protected those whose hands were guilty.
How far removed from a crime do you have to be to be not guilty? I'm sure you got your attitude from being in The Way but in the real world, people don't get prosecuted for being ok with a person who was ok with a person who was protecting a pedophile. If you want to call for the death penalty for molesting priests I'm right there with you, if you want to throw Bernard Law in jail as a facilitator, I'm there with you, but beyond that it's hard to really make a case against anyone.
quote:
Originally posted by satori001:
Until things change, any Catholic who knowingly sends money to Rome, directly or indirectly, is funding institutionalized pedophilia. The church's hesitation to purge itself of the practice suggests the practice is rampant, and more, that it does not wish to purge itself.
If you really believe this, then you're no better than a terrorist. Al Qaeda attacked us on 9/11 because their followers believed that all Americans were guilty because we allow our government to murder innocents in the middle east. They blamed us for the deaths of all those kids in Iraq who failed to get the food or medicine that they needed because of the embargo. They blame us for helping Israel continue to occupy land that they don't own, and kill Palestinians for simply existing.
Do I feel responsible for the deaths of innocent kids in Iraq, because I am an American? No. I didn't make the choice to harm anyone. Am I responsible for any innocent deaths of Palestinians or Israelis because my government would rather sell weapons to them than work towards a solution? No, I have no control over that, and I never said it was ok.
If Usama bin Laden is wrong about blaming all Americans for the harm our government has done, then you are just as wrong for blaming all Catholics for the harm a few priests have done. Yes, their crimes are immense, but you have to put it squarely on the shoulders of those who are guilty, not on everyone around them for simply existing. You are the type who stirs **** up to lead to things like the Salem witch hunts, the Oklahoma City bombing, or even 9/11. When you blame an entire group of people for the sins of a few among them, then you are a bigot, and are trying to be just as evil as the ones you blame.
I find it hard to believe that an old guy in his 80's with Parkinsons and a host of other illnesses was in charge of anything. I seriously doubt he was running the Catholic church for years, and instead let others make decisions in his name. Either way though, it doesn't matter anymore because he's dead.
(snip)
If you want to call for the death penalty for molesting priests I'm right there with you, if you want to throw Bernard Law in jail as a facilitator, I'm there with you, but beyond that it's hard to really make a case against anyone.
I made much the same point earlier, as did Garth. There's evidence that Ratzinger
Even penned one or 2 of the previous encyclicals.
quote:
Originally posted by satori001:
Until things change, any Catholic who knowingly sends money to Rome, directly or indirectly, is funding institutionalized pedophilia. The church's hesitation to purge itself of the practice suggests the practice is rampant, and more, that it does not wish to purge itself.
quote:
Originally posted by Mister P-Mosh:
If you really believe this, then you're no better than a terrorist. Al Qaeda attacked us on 9/11 because their followers believed that all Americans were guilty because we allow our government to murder innocents in the middle east. They blamed us for the deaths of all those kids in Iraq who failed to get the food or medicine that they needed because of the embargo. They blame us for helping Israel continue to occupy land that they don't own, and kill Palestinians for simply existing.
Do I feel responsible for the deaths of innocent kids in Iraq, because I am an American? No. I didn't make the choice to harm anyone. Am I responsible for any innocent deaths of Palestinians or Israelis because my government would rather sell weapons to them than work towards a solution? No, I have no control over that, and I never said it was ok.
If Usama bin Laden is wrong about blaming all Americans for the harm our government has done, then you are just as wrong for blaming all Catholics for the harm a few priests have done. Yes, their crimes are immense, but you have to put it squarely on the shoulders of those who are guilty, not on everyone around them for simply existing. You are the type who stirs **** up to lead to things like the Salem witch hunts, the Oklahoma City bombing, or even 9/11. When you blame an entire group of people for the sins of a few among them, then you are a bigot, and are trying to be just as evil as the ones you blame.
I hate to sound obtuse, but I just want to remove any ambiguity from your statement in your last post.
So, do I understand that you are saying that any practicing Catholic is guilty of conspiracy to commit pedophilia?
Mark, no that's not what I said. Conspiracy may include funding. Funding does not necessarily imply conspiracy.
To the degree that Catholics are aware of church practices (cover-ups, pay-offs to victims tied to non-disclosure agreements, transferring pedophiles to new churches - stuff like that), they may be perceived as complicit.
That's why I believe the corruption goes from the papacy right down to the priesthood. There may be good priests. There may have been "good" Nazis too. At what point does the individual realize he or she can no longer belong to the corrupt institution? When sould they be held accountable?
PMosh, I haven't twisted your words. They were already twisted. I've un-twisted them for you. From your twisted perspective, all things that are straight appear twisted. I can't help that.
There are degrees of guilt and complicity. Not every Nazi was a member of the SS. Some were watch-makers, accountants, mechanics, scientists... Did they all commit genocide? Much of the genocidal practice was secret. What about the watch-makers and accountants who were in on the secret? What do you think?
PMosh, try to handle one point at a time. So much confusion, in a single post, is more than I have time for. You go on and on.
" ... girls are married off to a temple deity in their infancy and spend the rest of their lives celibate, but grant sexual favours to temple priests and even their own relatives. Some are sold to brothels in Mumbai and Pune.
"And we have had evidence of these girls being sold off to brothels in Mumbai after a few years of living as devdasis. The National Human Rights Commission has informed us that almost all Kannada-speaking prostitutes in Mumbai are from Belgaum. But the veracity of this claim is not yet verified," Suresh said."
"You truly explain the dilema. i was trying to research the history of temple dancers throughout time and cultures, and this clearly presents not the Independent Woman, not the sacredness of a woman and her body, or the magic and beauty of dance, but the realism of the price paid in yet another horrifying and dehumanizing way. the spiritual contradictions are astounding but so prevalent worldwide and throughout history. Hopefully, steps will be made through awareness to resolve these autrocities. Thank you."
"The tradition of converting young girls into Devadasis is a religious practice prevalent in the southern parts of India. Parents marry their daughters off to a temple, and when the girl attains puberty she is expected to perform sexual favours for the upper-class men of the society – at least initially. Later on the devadasis become public property, and anyone with the money, whether truck drivers or landlords, enjoys access to their bodies. This heinous practice is largely thrust upon dalit women, who are otherwise thought of as untouchables – but apparently not when it comes to having sex with them."
"Deflowering: The next stage or Second Pattam is that of deflowering the girl. The deflowering ceremony is generally conducted after the girl’s first menstruation period. While devadasis were originally deflowered by the temple pundits, as time passed, they slowly started being sold to the village landlord. He would patronize the dedication ceremony, and then go on to deflower her – thus effectively completing the process of dedication of the innocent girl, and throwing her to a life of forced prostitution. The girl, who is at an age when she is barely able to comprehend the changes of puberty, is forced to have sex with a middle-aged man chosen by her parents."
"Prostitution in the name of religion"
"Parents of a devadasi usually receive proposals from local landlords or businessmen. Usually parents prefer to have upper caste well-to-do men deflower their girl. These ‘clients’ contact the parents of devadasi through senior ‘jogatis’ who serve as mediators. If the client wishes, the devadasi may become his personal concubine, and he may or may not forbid her from entertaining other clients. Other clients leave the devadasi after deflowering her, and she then becomes public property."
"NEPAL. The word evokes an image of a far off place of wonder. The ultimate travel destination: trekking through the mountains and countryside, exotic locations, hiking through the mountain kingdom nestled in the Himalayas. Yet underneath the wonder and majestic landscape lives one of the poorest countries in the world, rife with human rights violations, especially towards women and children. Every year approximately 10,000 girls from the ages of 9 to 16 are sold, stolen or forced into the brothels of Bombay or Kathmandu. At a time when technological innovation could help prevent human rights violations through education and awareness, the Internet has become a tool to find the locations where young girls are available for prostitution, perpetuating the need for young girls to work in the sex entertainment trade."
"The sale of women and girls has its roots in Nepalese culture and religion. The sex industry in India has been active since the Vedic period, made reference to in the Ramayana and Mahabharata spiritual texts of the Hindu religion. Sex workers were called "Vaishyas' and have accompanied kings to the battlefield, formed the main bodyguard of Emperor Chandra Gupta Maurya, and engaged in intelligence services for the kingdom. During the Vijayanagara Empire (1336-1565) the highest honor bestowed on a young girl was to be sold as a Devadasis, a temple prostitute, literally meaning, "slave of god." The devadasi is a Hindu temple servant who, before reaching puberty, is dedicated for life to the goddess Yallamma."
"In other cases, a young girl is "married" to the temple. Traditionally, the divine marriage would transport a low-caste girl into a devotional career of temple singing and dancing. In modern times, this outlawed ritual is believed to absorb nearly 10,000 girls a year, often condemning them to a life of sexual enslavement to temple priests or city brothels. "Untouchable" caste women are also traditionally prostitutes, while other castes allow unmarried women and children to be offered to the temple as offerings. In many cases, there is an established network between the temples and the city brothels. Temple leaders take advantage of the ignorance of the law and the cultural and traditional beliefs of the local communities. In the majority of the cases, this invariable results in the children being sold to the temples then in turn sold to brothel madams. "Some of these forms of child prostitution in India emerge from deeply rooted, traditional practices and beliefs which still prevail," said Richard Young, chief of community development for the United Nations Children's Fund in India. " They may be legally outlawed, but they do continue."{7} Without helping the population overcome some of the historically rooted prejudices, such as women as second class citizens, the birth of a Nepalese child will be rejoiced, but for all the wrong reasons - such as the money she will bring to the family when she is sold."
"The number of prostitutes in Thailand is almost equal to the number of monks. If young, rural girls could be given the same opportunity as the boys to enter a monastic life, they would have access to education and at the same time be able to repay spiritual gratitude to their parents. These opportunities could provide girls and women with proper monastic education and spiritual guidance so they can become important spiritual guides for the rural folks, particularly other women and girls. Due to male dominance within Thai Buddhism, however, girls and women have been deprived of such an opportunity. Consequently, they have been victims of different forms of violence against girls and women, such as domestic violence, rape and forced prostitution."
"Articles about monks can be found in Thai newspapers. Some related bad affairs like raping young girls, seizing fake money in temples, black magic ritual that caused death to people, seizing amphetamines pills carried by monks, monks who visited a resort island and observed beauty contestants in their swimsuits, donations embezzlement (monk who has got 60 Mercedes Benz cars and so violates the religion anti-materialist precepts, monk who stole over 300,000 baht from his temple to gamble on World Cup matches), abbots having intercourse with women, monks wearing laymen clothes and going to karaoke, an abbot wearing an army colonel uniform and entertaining women in a remote house, monks involved in murder."
"Bangkok is a deeply spiritual city which revers its Buddhist heritage. This reverence is most dramatically conveyed through the countless wats (temples) which dot the city and the entire countryside."
"Bangkok is widely regarded as the “sex capital” of the Orient. To a large extent this statement is true (or at least was true until certain incurable venereal diseases started to provide customers of the earthlier pleasures with a souvenir for which they had not bargained) but the underlying reasons for this condition are complex and often horrifying. “Sex tours” from Japan, Germany and elsewhere, along with the hard currency that these provide, have raised the stakes in the game of physical pleasure to the point where pretty, pre-pubescent girls (and some boys), mostly from the countryside, are sold into virtual slavery by poor, unscrupulous parents. These youngsters end up in Bangkok “clubs” catering to the sex trade where they have to “work off” the “debt” incurred by their parents."
P.S. I so love it when all I have to do is cut and past, and maybe provide a few quotation marks and bolds.
In no way did I take any responsibility for the pedophelia and the coverup thereof off of JP2's shoulders, however much that might be. From what I could see, he might not have been directly supportive wholesale in those practices, but from what I've read/heard about the Vatican responses and discussions about the matter, he knew to a sizeable degree, and his 'denouncing' thereof was largely ceremonial or for image.
For one thing, he was supportive of Law by declining his first resignation, but was forced to accept it later, due to the public outcry. If JP2 was really against what was going on, Law wouldn't have a chance to resign the first time, as he would have been sacked from his cardinal position in a heartbeat, and I do believe the Pope (being the 'Vicar of Christ' and all) had that authority.
No, that Law was allowed to give one of the homilies at the Pope's funeral (something that could have been forbidden by the Pope when he was alive, since he knew about these kinds of rituals at a pope's funeral) clearly indicates a calloused disregard for the abuse victims, ... a disregard that was shared by the Pope.
Maintaining their authority was more important to them. :(-->
P.S., and suffering from Parkinson's usually doesn't affect the mental clarity of a person; Jack Northrop was suffering from that same disease in his 90s, yet he still had a keen engineering understanding of the B-2 Northrop Stealth Bomber when it was presented to him shortly before it was introduced to the public.
When individuals within an institution commit a crime, the institution is defined not by the crime but by its response to the crime.
Then launched into an inaccurate analogy and erroneous conclusion.
quote:
So if I wear my badge from work, go out and run a red light on my way to the office, you think the cops should send the ticket to my boss? I suspect you wouldn't, but even so, why would my boss have to come out and defend the company I work for because I ran a red light? Granted, there is a huge difference in seriousness, which I suspect you will try to use to point out how "bad" I am for comparing pedophilia to running a red light, which I only did to point out how things work with a crime that is not as emotionally charged, and not a direct comparison as you would undoubtably read into it.
The "church" is an institution of our culture and society. Where you work is NOT. (Even if it's IBM.) So no one will expect your boss to explain anything.
quote:
Nobody should have to come out and make a clear statement that child molestation is wrong, because it's clear that the normal view of society is that it's wrong. Very very few people would disagree that it's wrong to molest kids. Why do we need to demand people to make speeches about how bad it is when we all already know that?
Well... apparently not...
quote:
You're free to believe that, but I find it hard to believe that an old guy in his 80's with Parkinsons and a host of other illnesses was in charge of anything. I seriously doubt he was running the Catholic church for years, and instead let others make decisions in his name. Either way though, it doesn't matter anymore because he's dead.
YOU MISSED THE WHOLE POINT OF THE POST.... JP2, as HEAD of his church was responsible for the actions of it's leaders....
Hmmmm any other "churches" come to mind where abused followers want to hold the "head" responsible for the actions of it's leaders????
He was/is ALSO responsible for the climate in which such absuses are allowed to happen, and continue to happen.
quote:
How far removed from a crime do you have to be to be not guilty? I'm sure you got your attitude from being in The Way but in the real world, people don't get prosecuted for being ok with a person who was ok with a person who was protecting a pedophile. If you want to call for the death penalty for molesting priests I'm right there with you, if you want to throw Bernard Law in jail as a facilitator, I'm there with you, but beyond that it's hard to really make a case against anyone.
NOT hard at all... we're talking about an institution not, a guy, who knows a guy, etc. etc. etc. ad. stupidium... Yeah... we can make a case against someone... right up the way tree.... oops... catholic higharchy.
You want to hold vpw and his leadership responsible for what happened in twi.... yet refuse to hold JP2 accountable for what happened under his watch. Makes no sense. Where's the difference???
quote:
If you really believe this, then you're no better than a terrorist. Al Qaeda attacked us on 9/11 because their followers believed that all Americans were guilty because we allow our government to murder innocents in the middle east. They blamed us for the deaths of all those kids in Iraq who failed to get the food or medicine that they needed because of the embargo. They blame us for helping Israel continue to occupy land that they don't own, and kill Palestinians for simply existing.
Do I feel responsible for the deaths of innocent kids in Iraq, because I am an American? No. I didn't make the choice to harm anyone. Am I responsible for any innocent deaths of Palestinians or Israelis because my government would rather sell weapons to them than work towards a solution? No, I have no control over that, and I never said it was ok.
If Usama bin Laden is wrong about blaming all Americans for the harm our government has done, then you are just as wrong for blaming all Catholics for the harm a few priests have done. Yes, their crimes are immense, but you have to put it squarely on the shoulders of those who are guilty, not on everyone around them for simply existing. You are the type who stirs **** up to lead to things like the Salem witch hunts, the Oklahoma City bombing, or even 9/11. When you blame an entire group of people for the sins of a few among them, then you are a bigot, and are trying to be just as evil as the ones you blame.
AGAIN your analogy is erroneous and your logic is flawed. You compare an apple to an orange tree. This one's the funniest (stupidest?) and longest strecth of all. Why do you think so many people left twi? Yes lots of the obvious stuff. But I NEVER saw the sex abuse and other related things going on. I knew the ORGANIZATION, (okay let's use another word... institution) was corrupt and I would not support a corrupt organization. SIMPLE.
That was easy. Twi had no redeeming charitable purpose that I could see, unlike the catholic church whose numerous catholic charities held 100's of 1000's. Yet indirectly/technically when you give to them (the r.c.church) you would be supporting a system that has sheltered abusers/pedophiles.
If JP2 wanted the abuse to stop, he could have PUBLICALY and plainly made an edit.... "you play, you pay, we will excommunicate you, throw you to the civil authorities,and assist them with your prosecution. Could that BE any clearer???
BUT HE DIDN'T So he condoned the behavior my omission... but he condoned it none the less.
Like you shpould know better if you belong to the RC church, YOU should KNOW that priests have comminted Sex crimes... so your just as guilty if you get molested?
I think not. As far as turning the other way and NOT seeing issues within structures (nearly ANY structure or govt.) We are ALL guilty of it some how or some where , name your price.
Most of us have jobs and know of "unfairness" or even down right discrimination , in family units it goes the same way.. I honestly cant think of any group that doesnt "enable" their own in some manner.. again name your price and what is important to you.
principles to live by are set by individuals and it is a happy day when we find a structure that meets our own in much , But it is NEVER absolute for everyone in any form or dictate.
The RC church has never doctrinated sex with minor children. They and particularly this POPE has santicfied Life beyond most churches really...
When it gets to the point a person compromises to much of their intregrity they leave groups until then we enable the group to survive on its bad and good.
As far as money people give money because they want to give few detail exactly what it is doing HENCE the ability of groups to survive. Scandal is not only in The RC church it is everywhere money and people are involved everywhere..
PMosh, I haven't twisted your words. They were already twisted. I've un-twisted them for you. From your twisted perspective, all things that are straight appear twisted. I can't help that.
Typical seagull posting from you. I've come to expect you to troll this site by posting something inflamatory, calling for absurd things, then sit back and insult everyone who calls you on your stupidity. Personally, when I see you attacking broad groups of people like how you have attacked all Catholics here, I like to respond in putting just as much condemnation back on you as an individual.
quote:
Originally posted by satori001:
There are degrees of guilt and complicity. Not every Nazi was a member of the SS. Some were watch-makers, accountants, mechanics, scientists... Did they all commit genocide? Much of the genocidal practice was secret. What about the watch-makers and accountants who were in on the secret? What do you think?
First of all, there is no policy of condoning child molestation in the catholic church. Your analogy is completely worthless there and is just an attempt to get people's emotions up and stir up anti-catholic hatred. Instead, we all pretty much just hate pedophiles and don't fall for your tricks.
Secondly, what you said was:
quote:
Originally posted by satori001:
Until things change, any Catholic who knowingly sends money to Rome, directly or indirectly, is funding institutionalized pedophilia.
You were not ambiguous. If you said that "any Catholic who sends money to Rome may end up paying salaries of people that molest children" then it could be realistic and reasonable. Instead, you said that they are either directly or indirectly funding "institutionalized" pedophilia. There was no ambiguity, and you left no room for possible innocence, and you set up the catholic church as an organization that spends money on pedophilia and that's about it. You didn't talk about their charity work, you didn't talk about any of the good they've done, or even any of the other bad that they've done. You said that if anyone gives money to the catholic church they are funding pedophilia.
Perhaps your attention span to your own words is too limited for you to realize what you have said, but you can't just backtrack on this as you would like to. You've made your statement, no need to shy away from it now that people are calling you on it. You hate catholics, so be proud of yourself for it and don't deny your hatred.
quote:
Originally posted by satori001:
PMosh, try to handle one point at a time. So much confusion, in a single post, is more than I have time for. You go on and on.
Perhaps you should go to school so you don't have to be confused by such advanced concepts as "words", maybe even "sentences" and hopefully by the time you've been learning for a good decade or so, you just might be able to grasp what a "paragraph" is. One can dream.
I also think if a person leaves something that is important to them because it has issues such as sex crimes they are not helping they are hurting the group and leaving those who can harm another in charge. In twi I got wise and said I didnt want to fight the fact few would admit to problems... and that is the problems in most groups people do not want to admit the problems.. just go along and play your part.
personaly I do not thiink I can advocate "change" in twi,, some still do and some just do not hear or see any problems becuase they chose not to. it is the same in RC .
I will not shame those who want to make a positive difference in any group.
In no way did I take any responsibility for the pedophelia and the coverup thereof off of JP2's shoulders, however much that might be. From what I could see, he might not have been directly supportive wholesale in those practices, but from what I've read/heard about the Vatican responses and discussions about the matter, he knew to a sizeable degree, and his 'denouncing' thereof was largely ceremonial or for image.
Sorry then.
I understood your previous comments-
Saying "I agree" (I thought you agreed with me, since you quoted me when you said it)
and agreeing with my comment that Ratzinger (or someone before him) squelched the
reports and rewrote them in a fashion making Law look like some sort of victim of
hysteria, rather than someone who deliberately facilitated the criminal actions of
despicable criminals who sought to continue living in a free society and continue
their despicable criminal acts. SOMEONE, SOMEWHERE along the line (I don't know
precisely WHO) facilitated this, in each case. In some of the cases, Cardinal Law
(ironic name) himself aided and abetted them in this, and engaged in conspiracy,
both of which are criminal acts. (It was illegal to let them get away with it and only
relocate them, and illegal to bury the reports.)
We both DO agree that at Ratzinger's level, there's another step of burying the
scandals and so on.
I thought you agreed with me.
I was saying that JP II was guilty of being "asleep at the switch"-being uninformed
in situations where extensive information was called for, and this in its fashion
helped facilitate the evil deeds. Personally, I think that, if he REALLY HAD known
what we ourselves know, let alone the parties involved, then he would have acted
decisively. I'd go so far to say that such a lapse is criminal at that level,
and say thay he failed in his fiducuary responsibility as officer over all the
cardinals, bishops and priests. He did so by failing to act, by failing to perform
duties of his office, IMHO, and NOT by deliberately aiding their criminal acts.
I thinking it may be a long process to do anything politcal in the RC church... If the pope made enough risky politcal moves to remove certain problems.. would HE be allowed to be the POPE?
If it is as accepted and wide spread as some claim .. maybe not.
To win friends and influence people takes more than a pretty face for some and the climb is a struggle once seated who wants to be dethroned? I actualy worked with a defrocked priest at a store once and he was the slimy nasty man, still wore the black shirt and all . Now he didnt have the what it takes to go with the system I imagine those who can and do make it to such power in the church ... are tough players indeed. POPE included.
why would he jepordize it? They like all religous leaders truly think they are God like to the degree many do not "get". YET in their own ranks they 'get " it.
"VATICAN CITY - Cardinal Bernard Law, whose failures to stop sexually abusive priests sparked the worst crisis in American church history, led a Mass for thousands mourning Pope John Paul II at St. Peter's Basilica on Monday after police whisked away a victim protesting outside."
First, please understand that I am not slamming the RC church.
They are suffering through a severe shortage of priests.
They need to try and keep so many slots in churches filled with an ever shrinking community of priests.
A popular doctrine is that after 'true' remorse has occured than the person is as good as if they had never done wrong.
So anytime one priest has 'problems' [of any sort], they obviously need to be taken from that parish but then if the priest goes to a monestary to work out his forgiveness and he proclaims his remorse to his bishop, then he is off again to a fresh parish.
If the man has made life-long vows and has been ordained, then so long as he still teaches the doctrines of his church, what else should they do with him, but to put him back into another church?
The only reason by this thought, that he would be 'de-frocked' would be if he later recanted of church doctrine.
If a preist does some wrong and is caught; then goes to work out his forgiveness and proclaims remorse; then by their own doctrine [and admited shortage of priests] they would be 'required' to put him in charge of another church.
Basically I think that it goes beyond JP2 having been 'asleep at the switch'. Remember the accounts of the Vatican meetings about this very same topic, and the Pope himself was in attendance in at least some of the meetings? (I at least saw the pics) For whatever effectiveness Ratzinger's filtering might have been, sorry, but there is no way anybody can persuade me that John Paul had no idea, no idea at all that that kind of behavior was going on.
I do think that (unless corrected) his actions were more in line with keeping the public image of the church and its doctrines and traditions sancrosanct, rather than a direct malevolence or disregard for the children. More of a "I can't allow this scandal to upset and stop the Church." loyalty kind of thing. But then again, I could be wrong, as I have nowhere near all the facts. But I remain unconvinced that he didn't know about the sex abuse to any sizeable degree. ... Nope. No way.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
13
17
6
6
Popular Days
Apr 14
23
Apr 13
21
Apr 15
11
Apr 12
6
Top Posters In This Topic
excathedra 13 posts
satori001 17 posts
mj412 6 posts
Mister P-Mosh 6 posts
Popular Days
Apr 14 2005
23 posts
Apr 13 2005
21 posts
Apr 15 2005
11 posts
Apr 12 2005
6 posts
satori001
I hate the "everybody does it" comments. Would a defense attorney say to the jury, "Sure my client murdered someone, but everybody does it?"
There is one issue at hand, the consummate depravity of the Catholic empire, from Pope to cardinal, to bishop to priest.
When individuals within an institution commit a crime, the institution is defined not by the crime but by its response to the crime.
There is bound to be institutional inertia with respect to instituting reform but that's why most institutions are LED by individuals and not committees. The INDIVIDUAL who failed Catholic children the world over was John Paul.
The Pope may not have been a pedophile himself, but he was an enabler, therefore a facilitator, therefore as good as a procurer. Where decisive action was required he was passive. How is that different from Bernie Law's own conduct? It doesn't matter whether John Paul's scented hands weren't in some kid's pants. He protected those whose hands were guilty.
Until things change, any Catholic who knowingly sends money to Rome, directly or indirectly, is funding institutionalized pedophilia. The church's hesitation to purge itself of the practice suggests the practice is rampant, and more, that it does not wish to purge itself.
Edited by satori001Link to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
you are being way too kind satori
gotta love you though for even starting this stupid thread
and i'm disgusted with most exwayfers for staying away from it
**
edited to say i'm sorry, i'm not really disgusted with exwayfers, i'm disgusted with the catholic church
what else is new ?
Edited by excathedraLink to comment
Share on other sites
sharon
Long but worth the read for chuckle..and on a personal note, I know that PJP, was this super great dude, but u do realize they exhummed another pope to bury this one....
oh and in his favor this one (pope)did admit to the catholic church's involment in the holocaust. as for the pedophilia, to deep to go into, but i will say this it is unnatural for anyone to be seperated from human touch and intamcy,
HEAVEN—The soul of Pope John Paul, which entered heaven last week following a long illness, expressed confusion and disappointment Saturday, upon learning that the Celestial Kingdom of God to which the departed faithful ascend in the afterlife is significantly less luxurious than the Vatican's Papal Palace, in which the pope spent the past 26 years of his earthly life.
Above: St. Peter's Basilica, with its 90-foot bronze baldachin designed by Bernini, is one of the many Vatican splendors no longer enjoyed by Pope John Paul II (below).
"Where are all the marble statues, sterling-silver chalices, and gem-encrusted scepters?" the visibly disappointed pope asked. "Where are the 60-foot-tall stained-glass windows and hand-painted cupolas? Where are the elaborately outfitted ranks of Swiss Guards? Why isn't every single surface gilded? This is my eternal reward?"
Heaven, according to the New Testament, has "brilliance like a very costly stone... of pure gold, like clear glass..." with "twelve gates... each gate a single pearl." Yet the pope, who spoke from the afterlife, said heaven is nothing like the "solid-gold city" detailed at length by John of Patmos in the Book of Revelations.
"Evidently, the Bible was not intended to be taken literally, after all," John Paul II said. "Don't get me wrong: It's very nice up here—quite beautiful and serene. It's just not as fancy as what I'm accustomed to. If I'd known heaven was going to be like this, I would've taken one last tour through my 50 rooms of velvet-draped thrones and priceless oil paintings before saying 'Amen' and breathing my last."
Taken from The Onion
Link to comment
Share on other sites
markomalley
Satori,
I hate to sound obtuse, but I just want to remove any ambiguity from your statement in your last post.
So, do I understand that you are saying that any practicing Catholic is guilty of conspiracy to commit pedophilia?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
shar, haven't read your post yet, going to bed
mark, just skimming yours, don't know what you're addressing with satori
**
my feeling, any catholic who is a catholic should think twice about why they think what they think
:)-->
will never happen
ALL MY FAMILY is catholic, nuns, priests, etc., etc.
too bad so sad your holy dad
Link to comment
Share on other sites
markomalley
Exc:
Satori said,
So, I just want him to come out and draw the conclusion for what he is alleging there. Lay it out on the table.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
johniam
I'm not responsible for the actions of people I will never meet, either VPW or JP2. If I spend money at McDonalds am I intentionally supporting institutionalized obesity? If I buy beer am I part of a conspiracy of institutionalized alcoholism? The truth is that for every molested catholic or even TWI girl there are over a thousand who will never have to worry. I once read a pamphlet that said JP2 was into molesting young boys as far back as when he was a priest in Poland.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mister P-Mosh
If this was in reference to my post, then stop twisting my words and learn how to read. There's no reason for you to act like a jackass, even though that's your SOP.
That's pure B.S. Yes, there are leaders in the Catholic church that are corrupt, there are leaders who molest kids. Those people are bad, but that does not make every single one guilty or bad.
So if I wear my badge from work, go out and run a red light on my way to the office, you think the cops should send the ticket to my boss? I suspect you wouldn't, but even so, why would my boss have to come out and defend the company I work for because I ran a red light? Granted, there is a huge difference in seriousness, which I suspect you will try to use to point out how "bad" I am for comparing pedophilia to running a red light, which I only did to point out how things work with a crime that is not as emotionally charged, and not a direct comparison as you would undoubtably read into it.
Nobody should have to come out and make a clear statement that child molestation is wrong, because it's clear that the normal view of society is that it's wrong. Very very few people would disagree that it's wrong to molest kids. Why do we need to demand people to make speeches about how bad it is when we all already know that?
You're free to believe that, but I find it hard to believe that an old guy in his 80's with Parkinsons and a host of other illnesses was in charge of anything. I seriously doubt he was running the Catholic church for years, and instead let others make decisions in his name. Either way though, it doesn't matter anymore because he's dead.
How far removed from a crime do you have to be to be not guilty? I'm sure you got your attitude from being in The Way but in the real world, people don't get prosecuted for being ok with a person who was ok with a person who was protecting a pedophile. If you want to call for the death penalty for molesting priests I'm right there with you, if you want to throw Bernard Law in jail as a facilitator, I'm there with you, but beyond that it's hard to really make a case against anyone.
If you really believe this, then you're no better than a terrorist. Al Qaeda attacked us on 9/11 because their followers believed that all Americans were guilty because we allow our government to murder innocents in the middle east. They blamed us for the deaths of all those kids in Iraq who failed to get the food or medicine that they needed because of the embargo. They blame us for helping Israel continue to occupy land that they don't own, and kill Palestinians for simply existing.
Do I feel responsible for the deaths of innocent kids in Iraq, because I am an American? No. I didn't make the choice to harm anyone. Am I responsible for any innocent deaths of Palestinians or Israelis because my government would rather sell weapons to them than work towards a solution? No, I have no control over that, and I never said it was ok.
If Usama bin Laden is wrong about blaming all Americans for the harm our government has done, then you are just as wrong for blaming all Catholics for the harm a few priests have done. Yes, their crimes are immense, but you have to put it squarely on the shoulders of those who are guilty, not on everyone around them for simply existing. You are the type who stirs **** up to lead to things like the Salem witch hunts, the Oklahoma City bombing, or even 9/11. When you blame an entire group of people for the sins of a few among them, then you are a bigot, and are trying to be just as evil as the ones you blame.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
I made much the same point earlier, as did Garth. There's evidence that Ratzinger
Even penned one or 2 of the previous encyclicals.
I thought that response bore repeating.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
satori001
To the degree that Catholics are aware of church practices (cover-ups, pay-offs to victims tied to non-disclosure agreements, transferring pedophiles to new churches - stuff like that), they may be perceived as complicit.
That's why I believe the corruption goes from the papacy right down to the priesthood. There may be good priests. There may have been "good" Nazis too. At what point does the individual realize he or she can no longer belong to the corrupt institution? When sould they be held accountable?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
satori001
PMosh, I haven't twisted your words. They were already twisted. I've un-twisted them for you. From your twisted perspective, all things that are straight appear twisted. I can't help that.
There are degrees of guilt and complicity. Not every Nazi was a member of the SS. Some were watch-makers, accountants, mechanics, scientists... Did they all commit genocide? Much of the genocidal practice was secret. What about the watch-makers and accountants who were in on the secret? What do you think?
PMosh, try to handle one point at a time. So much confusion, in a single post, is more than I have time for. You go on and on.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Galen
oenophile:
"Galen,
You should be sure of your facts before you hit the "post now" button."
http://www.ambedkar.org/buddhism/Minister_...es_devdasis.htm
" ... girls are married off to a temple deity in their infancy and spend the rest of their lives celibate, but grant sexual favours to temple priests and even their own relatives. Some are sold to brothels in Mumbai and Pune.
"And we have had evidence of these girls being sold off to brothels in Mumbai after a few years of living as devdasis. The National Human Rights Commission has informed us that almost all Kannada-speaking prostitutes in Mumbai are from Belgaum. But the veracity of this claim is not yet verified," Suresh said."
http://www.indiaparenting.com/indiancultur...ce008book.shtml
"You truly explain the dilema. i was trying to research the history of temple dancers throughout time and cultures, and this clearly presents not the Independent Woman, not the sacredness of a woman and her body, or the magic and beauty of dance, but the realism of the price paid in yet another horrifying and dehumanizing way. the spiritual contradictions are astounding but so prevalent worldwide and throughout history. Hopefully, steps will be made through awareness to resolve these autrocities. Thank you."
"The tradition of converting young girls into Devadasis is a religious practice prevalent in the southern parts of India. Parents marry their daughters off to a temple, and when the girl attains puberty she is expected to perform sexual favours for the upper-class men of the society – at least initially. Later on the devadasis become public property, and anyone with the money, whether truck drivers or landlords, enjoys access to their bodies. This heinous practice is largely thrust upon dalit women, who are otherwise thought of as untouchables – but apparently not when it comes to having sex with them."
"Deflowering: The next stage or Second Pattam is that of deflowering the girl. The deflowering ceremony is generally conducted after the girl’s first menstruation period. While devadasis were originally deflowered by the temple pundits, as time passed, they slowly started being sold to the village landlord. He would patronize the dedication ceremony, and then go on to deflower her – thus effectively completing the process of dedication of the innocent girl, and throwing her to a life of forced prostitution. The girl, who is at an age when she is barely able to comprehend the changes of puberty, is forced to have sex with a middle-aged man chosen by her parents."
"Prostitution in the name of religion"
"Parents of a devadasi usually receive proposals from local landlords or businessmen. Usually parents prefer to have upper caste well-to-do men deflower their girl. These ‘clients’ contact the parents of devadasi through senior ‘jogatis’ who serve as mediators. If the client wishes, the devadasi may become his personal concubine, and he may or may not forbid her from entertaining other clients. Other clients leave the devadasi after deflowering her, and she then becomes public property."
http://www.american.edu/projects/mandala/TED/nepalsex.htm
"NEPAL. The word evokes an image of a far off place of wonder. The ultimate travel destination: trekking through the mountains and countryside, exotic locations, hiking through the mountain kingdom nestled in the Himalayas. Yet underneath the wonder and majestic landscape lives one of the poorest countries in the world, rife with human rights violations, especially towards women and children. Every year approximately 10,000 girls from the ages of 9 to 16 are sold, stolen or forced into the brothels of Bombay or Kathmandu. At a time when technological innovation could help prevent human rights violations through education and awareness, the Internet has become a tool to find the locations where young girls are available for prostitution, perpetuating the need for young girls to work in the sex entertainment trade."
"The sale of women and girls has its roots in Nepalese culture and religion. The sex industry in India has been active since the Vedic period, made reference to in the Ramayana and Mahabharata spiritual texts of the Hindu religion. Sex workers were called "Vaishyas' and have accompanied kings to the battlefield, formed the main bodyguard of Emperor Chandra Gupta Maurya, and engaged in intelligence services for the kingdom. During the Vijayanagara Empire (1336-1565) the highest honor bestowed on a young girl was to be sold as a Devadasis, a temple prostitute, literally meaning, "slave of god." The devadasi is a Hindu temple servant who, before reaching puberty, is dedicated for life to the goddess Yallamma."
"In other cases, a young girl is "married" to the temple. Traditionally, the divine marriage would transport a low-caste girl into a devotional career of temple singing and dancing. In modern times, this outlawed ritual is believed to absorb nearly 10,000 girls a year, often condemning them to a life of sexual enslavement to temple priests or city brothels. "Untouchable" caste women are also traditionally prostitutes, while other castes allow unmarried women and children to be offered to the temple as offerings. In many cases, there is an established network between the temples and the city brothels. Temple leaders take advantage of the ignorance of the law and the cultural and traditional beliefs of the local communities. In the majority of the cases, this invariable results in the children being sold to the temples then in turn sold to brothel madams. "Some of these forms of child prostitution in India emerge from deeply rooted, traditional practices and beliefs which still prevail," said Richard Young, chief of community development for the United Nations Children's Fund in India. " They may be legally outlawed, but they do continue."{7} Without helping the population overcome some of the historically rooted prejudices, such as women as second class citizens, the birth of a Nepalese child will be rejoiced, but for all the wrong reasons - such as the money she will bring to the family when she is sold."
http://www.american-buddha.com/thai.buddh.patriarchy.htm
"The number of prostitutes in Thailand is almost equal to the number of monks. If young, rural girls could be given the same opportunity as the boys to enter a monastic life, they would have access to education and at the same time be able to repay spiritual gratitude to their parents. These opportunities could provide girls and women with proper monastic education and spiritual guidance so they can become important spiritual guides for the rural folks, particularly other women and girls. Due to male dominance within Thai Buddhism, however, girls and women have been deprived of such an opportunity. Consequently, they have been victims of different forms of violence against girls and women, such as domestic violence, rape and forced prostitution."
http://www.thaiworldview.com/bouddha/bouddha3.htm
"Articles about monks can be found in Thai newspapers. Some related bad affairs like raping young girls, seizing fake money in temples, black magic ritual that caused death to people, seizing amphetamines pills carried by monks, monks who visited a resort island and observed beauty contestants in their swimsuits, donations embezzlement (monk who has got 60 Mercedes Benz cars and so violates the religion anti-materialist precepts, monk who stole over 300,000 baht from his temple to gamble on World Cup matches), abbots having intercourse with women, monks wearing laymen clothes and going to karaoke, an abbot wearing an army colonel uniform and entertaining women in a remote house, monks involved in murder."
http://www.awid.org/go.php?list=analysis&p...ysis&item=00241
"In Thai culture, it is a tradition for all Thai men to be ordained,
usually before they get married, in order to pay gratitude to their parents
(especially their mother since she herself cannot be ordained). By having a
son ordained, it is believed that the parents can cling to the yellow robe
of their son and reach heaven after their death? Whereas rural boys have
access to education and resources through the monkhood, girls do not have
the same opportunity because there is no ordination for women. To pay
gratitude to parents, in particular, to provide economic security, they
have very few choices - to become a maid, a factory worker or a prostitute.
Because boys repay gratitude to their parents by being ordained in their
youth, they fulfill their duty early in life. A girl's way to repay
gratitude to her parents is usually to take care of them when they are old.
In the past ten years, girls as young as eight have been sold by parents
and the money used to pay debts, to send her brothers to school, to build a
new modern house or to buy a pickup truck for her family."
http://www.deutsche-rundschau.com/archiv/0...99/thailand.htm
"Bangkok is a deeply spiritual city which revers its Buddhist heritage. This reverence is most dramatically conveyed through the countless wats (temples) which dot the city and the entire countryside."
"Bangkok is widely regarded as the “sex capital” of the Orient. To a large extent this statement is true (or at least was true until certain incurable venereal diseases started to provide customers of the earthlier pleasures with a souvenir for which they had not bargained) but the underlying reasons for this condition are complex and often horrifying. “Sex tours” from Japan, Germany and elsewhere, along with the hard currency that these provide, have raised the stakes in the game of physical pleasure to the point where pretty, pre-pubescent girls (and some boys), mostly from the countryside, are sold into virtual slavery by poor, unscrupulous parents. These youngsters end up in Bangkok “clubs” catering to the sex trade where they have to “work off” the “debt” incurred by their parents."
P.S. I so love it when all I have to do is cut and past, and maybe provide a few quotation marks and bolds.
:-)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Al Poole
WELL.... Galen.... I guess that says it ...
Hmmm oenophile???? Seems "budda" means one thing here and another there... NO????
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GarthP2000
Wordwolf,
In no way did I take any responsibility for the pedophelia and the coverup thereof off of JP2's shoulders, however much that might be. From what I could see, he might not have been directly supportive wholesale in those practices, but from what I've read/heard about the Vatican responses and discussions about the matter, he knew to a sizeable degree, and his 'denouncing' thereof was largely ceremonial or for image.
For one thing, he was supportive of Law by declining his first resignation, but was forced to accept it later, due to the public outcry. If JP2 was really against what was going on, Law wouldn't have a chance to resign the first time, as he would have been sacked from his cardinal position in a heartbeat, and I do believe the Pope (being the 'Vicar of Christ' and all) had that authority.
No, that Law was allowed to give one of the homilies at the Pope's funeral (something that could have been forbidden by the Pope when he was alive, since he knew about these kinds of rituals at a pope's funeral) clearly indicates a calloused disregard for the abuse victims, ... a disregard that was shared by the Pope.
Maintaining their authority was more important to them.
:(-->
P.S., and suffering from Parkinson's usually doesn't affect the mental clarity of a person; Jack Northrop was suffering from that same disease in his 90s, yet he still had a keen engineering understanding of the B-2 Northrop Stealth Bomber when it was presented to him shortly before it was introduced to the public.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Al Poole
"Mister" P Mosh....
You quoted (my friend) Satori thus":
Then launched into an inaccurate analogy and erroneous conclusion.
The "church" is an institution of our culture and society. Where you work is NOT. (Even if it's IBM.) So no one will expect your boss to explain anything.
Well... apparently not...
YOU MISSED THE WHOLE POINT OF THE POST.... JP2, as HEAD of his church was responsible for the actions of it's leaders....
Hmmmm any other "churches" come to mind where abused followers want to hold the "head" responsible for the actions of it's leaders????
He was/is ALSO responsible for the climate in which such absuses are allowed to happen, and continue to happen.
NOT hard at all... we're talking about an institution not, a guy, who knows a guy, etc. etc. etc. ad. stupidium... Yeah... we can make a case against someone... right up the way tree.... oops... catholic higharchy.
You want to hold vpw and his leadership responsible for what happened in twi.... yet refuse to hold JP2 accountable for what happened under his watch. Makes no sense. Where's the difference???
AGAIN your analogy is erroneous and your logic is flawed. You compare an apple to an orange tree. This one's the funniest (stupidest?) and longest strecth of all. Why do you think so many people left twi? Yes lots of the obvious stuff. But I NEVER saw the sex abuse and other related things going on. I knew the ORGANIZATION, (okay let's use another word... institution) was corrupt and I would not support a corrupt organization. SIMPLE.
That was easy. Twi had no redeeming charitable purpose that I could see, unlike the catholic church whose numerous catholic charities held 100's of 1000's. Yet indirectly/technically when you give to them (the r.c.church) you would be supporting a system that has sheltered abusers/pedophiles.
If JP2 wanted the abuse to stop, he could have PUBLICALY and plainly made an edit.... "you play, you pay, we will excommunicate you, throw you to the civil authorities,and assist them with your prosecution. Could that BE any clearer???
BUT HE DIDN'T So he condoned the behavior my omission... but he condoned it none the less.
...... if you are not for me you are against me.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mj412
Well is this about blaming the victims Satori?
Like you shpould know better if you belong to the RC church, YOU should KNOW that priests have comminted Sex crimes... so your just as guilty if you get molested?
I think not. As far as turning the other way and NOT seeing issues within structures (nearly ANY structure or govt.) We are ALL guilty of it some how or some where , name your price.
Most of us have jobs and know of "unfairness" or even down right discrimination , in family units it goes the same way.. I honestly cant think of any group that doesnt "enable" their own in some manner.. again name your price and what is important to you.
principles to live by are set by individuals and it is a happy day when we find a structure that meets our own in much , But it is NEVER absolute for everyone in any form or dictate.
The RC church has never doctrinated sex with minor children. They and particularly this POPE has santicfied Life beyond most churches really...
When it gets to the point a person compromises to much of their intregrity they leave groups until then we enable the group to survive on its bad and good.
As far as money people give money because they want to give few detail exactly what it is doing HENCE the ability of groups to survive. Scandal is not only in The RC church it is everywhere money and people are involved everywhere..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mister P-Mosh
Typical seagull posting from you. I've come to expect you to troll this site by posting something inflamatory, calling for absurd things, then sit back and insult everyone who calls you on your stupidity. Personally, when I see you attacking broad groups of people like how you have attacked all Catholics here, I like to respond in putting just as much condemnation back on you as an individual.
First of all, there is no policy of condoning child molestation in the catholic church. Your analogy is completely worthless there and is just an attempt to get people's emotions up and stir up anti-catholic hatred. Instead, we all pretty much just hate pedophiles and don't fall for your tricks.
Secondly, what you said was:
You were not ambiguous. If you said that "any Catholic who sends money to Rome may end up paying salaries of people that molest children" then it could be realistic and reasonable. Instead, you said that they are either directly or indirectly funding "institutionalized" pedophilia. There was no ambiguity, and you left no room for possible innocence, and you set up the catholic church as an organization that spends money on pedophilia and that's about it. You didn't talk about their charity work, you didn't talk about any of the good they've done, or even any of the other bad that they've done. You said that if anyone gives money to the catholic church they are funding pedophilia.
Perhaps your attention span to your own words is too limited for you to realize what you have said, but you can't just backtrack on this as you would like to. You've made your statement, no need to shy away from it now that people are calling you on it. You hate catholics, so be proud of yourself for it and don't deny your hatred.
Perhaps you should go to school so you don't have to be confused by such advanced concepts as "words", maybe even "sentences" and hopefully by the time you've been learning for a good decade or so, you just might be able to grasp what a "paragraph" is. One can dream.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mj412
I also think if a person leaves something that is important to them because it has issues such as sex crimes they are not helping they are hurting the group and leaving those who can harm another in charge. In twi I got wise and said I didnt want to fight the fact few would admit to problems... and that is the problems in most groups people do not want to admit the problems.. just go along and play your part.
personaly I do not thiink I can advocate "change" in twi,, some still do and some just do not hear or see any problems becuase they chose not to. it is the same in RC .
I will not shame those who want to make a positive difference in any group.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
Sorry then.
I understood your previous comments-
Saying "I agree" (I thought you agreed with me, since you quoted me when you said it)
and agreeing with my comment that Ratzinger (or someone before him) squelched the
reports and rewrote them in a fashion making Law look like some sort of victim of
hysteria, rather than someone who deliberately facilitated the criminal actions of
despicable criminals who sought to continue living in a free society and continue
their despicable criminal acts. SOMEONE, SOMEWHERE along the line (I don't know
precisely WHO) facilitated this, in each case. In some of the cases, Cardinal Law
(ironic name) himself aided and abetted them in this, and engaged in conspiracy,
both of which are criminal acts. (It was illegal to let them get away with it and only
relocate them, and illegal to bury the reports.)
We both DO agree that at Ratzinger's level, there's another step of burying the
scandals and so on.
I thought you agreed with me.
I was saying that JP II was guilty of being "asleep at the switch"-being uninformed
in situations where extensive information was called for, and this in its fashion
helped facilitate the evil deeds. Personally, I think that, if he REALLY HAD known
what we ourselves know, let alone the parties involved, then he would have acted
decisively. I'd go so far to say that such a lapse is criminal at that level,
and say thay he failed in his fiducuary responsibility as officer over all the
cardinals, bishops and priests. He did so by failing to act, by failing to perform
duties of his office, IMHO, and NOT by deliberately aiding their criminal acts.
Sorry I misinterpreted you, Garth.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
Each day they are unable to decide, the smoke is black.
The day they decide, the smoke is white.
This won't take as long as it might, since JP II made changes that said that if
nobody can get a 2/3 majority after several weeks, then whoever gets the simple
majority gets the chair.
My favourite anecdote about that was one century when they were deadlocked over
2 years,
so those outside the sequester stopped sending in FOOD.
After that, I think it was another 1-2 weeks of debate.
(Well, I figure a week of supplies...)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mj412
I thinking it may be a long process to do anything politcal in the RC church... If the pope made enough risky politcal moves to remove certain problems.. would HE be allowed to be the POPE?
If it is as accepted and wide spread as some claim .. maybe not.
To win friends and influence people takes more than a pretty face for some and the climb is a struggle once seated who wants to be dethroned? I actualy worked with a defrocked priest at a store once and he was the slimy nasty man, still wore the black shirt and all . Now he didnt have the what it takes to go with the system I imagine those who can and do make it to such power in the church ... are tough players indeed. POPE included.
why would he jepordize it? They like all religous leaders truly think they are God like to the degree many do not "get". YET in their own ranks they 'get " it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Galen
Al Poole:
"WELL.... Galen.... I guess that says it ...
Hmmm oenophile???? Seems "budda" means one thing here and another there... NO????"
Now be nice.
:-)
There was some 'assuming' envolved.
I had heard about it from Paul Harvey, once in an area that he was being broadcast in. And I 'assumed' that Mr. Harvey was reporting correctly.
Oenophile was 'assuming' that I would not rise to the challenge.
He was also 'assuming' that Google would not have lots of information on: "Buddhist girls sold to temple for prostitution".
Fortunately in this case, my assumption that Mr. Paul Harvey was right and that Google would have the topic covered, was correct.
:-)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Galen
excathedra:
"VATICAN CITY - Cardinal Bernard Law, whose failures to stop sexually abusive priests sparked the worst crisis in American church history, led a Mass for thousands mourning Pope John Paul II at St. Peter's Basilica on Monday after police whisked away a victim protesting outside."
First, please understand that I am not slamming the RC church.
They are suffering through a severe shortage of priests.
They need to try and keep so many slots in churches filled with an ever shrinking community of priests.
A popular doctrine is that after 'true' remorse has occured than the person is as good as if they had never done wrong.
So anytime one priest has 'problems' [of any sort], they obviously need to be taken from that parish but then if the priest goes to a monestary to work out his forgiveness and he proclaims his remorse to his bishop, then he is off again to a fresh parish.
If the man has made life-long vows and has been ordained, then so long as he still teaches the doctrines of his church, what else should they do with him, but to put him back into another church?
The only reason by this thought, that he would be 'de-frocked' would be if he later recanted of church doctrine.
If a preist does some wrong and is caught; then goes to work out his forgiveness and proclaims remorse; then by their own doctrine [and admited shortage of priests] they would be 'required' to put him in charge of another church.
:-)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GarthP2000
No prob, Wordwolf.
Basically I think that it goes beyond JP2 having been 'asleep at the switch'. Remember the accounts of the Vatican meetings about this very same topic, and the Pope himself was in attendance in at least some of the meetings? (I at least saw the pics) For whatever effectiveness Ratzinger's filtering might have been, sorry, but there is no way anybody can persuade me that John Paul had no idea, no idea at all that that kind of behavior was going on.
I do think that (unless corrected) his actions were more in line with keeping the public image of the church and its doctrines and traditions sancrosanct, rather than a direct malevolence or disregard for the children. More of a "I can't allow this scandal to upset and stop the Church." loyalty kind of thing. But then again, I could be wrong, as I have nowhere near all the facts. But I remain unconvinced that he didn't know about the sex abuse to any sizeable degree. ... Nope. No way.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.