|
|
Post by goz on Aug 22, 2019 21:15:03 GMT
No although they should have went to police. So, yes, then?
|
|
|
|
Post by goz on Aug 22, 2019 21:16:49 GMT
No although they should have went to police. I certainly would have if I had any information about a particular clergy member. Yes, kls, you have always been a stanch supporter of your church, though with a pragmatism that is healthy. Why did you think that other parishioners didn't?
|
|
|
|
Post by goz on Aug 22, 2019 21:21:17 GMT
Victims and their families were pressured by church (Catholic or otherwise) leaders to remain silent, so the membership at large was ignorant of what was happening until the media began reporting. What I find noteworthy these days is that there are, among the laity, a good number who seem much more offended at the reporting than they are at the cover ups. ...and this is the point of this thread. Do you think that there is any sense of embarrassment that the laity has been so quiet for so long? IMHO there should be. Some, however seem to subscribe to the infallibility and sanctity of their OWN church which is precious to THEM, so it is an ego thing. IF you believe that your church and its hierarchy is fallible, your whole religious world could seem on shaky foundations. Better not to shake the foundations?
|
|
|
|
Post by goz on Aug 22, 2019 21:28:31 GMT
The coverage feels like universal condemnation while the cover-up is not. Most priests are guilty of nothing except maybe confidentiality of confessions and trusting their cardinals but it sure does feel like all of them are boinking kids once "media" gets done with them. So, you think that Catholic (or any church) hierarchy endemically buggering little boys and it being hidden for years, decades and even centuries is not worth universal condemnation for those crimes and that those who covered them up are not guilty of some responsibility for this behaviour being enabled to continue unabated? It is interesting that most priests were content to put the welfare of other criminal cardinals and priests and their church, over the interest of crimes against the youth they were supposed to protect? And this is moral and just? Has the media ever implied that all priests are guilty of this despicable behaviour? No. It is just people like you making excuses for the individuals involved, the hierarchies' failures and this Church being rotten to the core.
|
|
|
|
Post by goz on Aug 22, 2019 21:32:27 GMT
Aw, sure we can. When an abuse case is unknown because it was covered up for decades, you don't give the concealers a reward by not reporting when they're found out. Refusing to join the cover up is not anti-Catholic bias. (But your comment illustrates what I said in my first post.)
You should see some Muslims jumping the bandwagon although their circumcision rituals are a phenomenon that violate children's rights on a much bigger scale than these abuse scandals collected from various decades. Yay, Congratulations, you just used one of the many logical fallacies, this ne called.. .'but Muslims'... saying that Catholics are not guilty because 'Look...someone else is worse'! You are a pathetic apologist.
|
|
|
|
Post by goz on Aug 22, 2019 21:37:06 GMT
It’s a list of NCR (a Catholic Magazine) with pending abuse cases...most against the hierarchy. This thing is not over for Catholics. And slamming the Church for their obvious choice of evil for decades does not put down Catholic theological teachings. Right. If it brings down the church it brings it down anyway. My point is that most Catholics don’t encounter kiddy diddlers among their clergy and they also understand the notion of confessions being between the priest and contrite alone. There would be no reason for them to be upset about a known tenet. However if they are in a church and knew then they should have reported the crime themselves. It’s just not a common occurrence and even in places where it did occur, they may have held back because they were told not to which would still not make them too culpable if they truly believed eternal punishment was the result. I’m not Catholic. Oh right! You think that the laity were more concerned with eternal punishment for themselves in dobbing in a paedophile priest, than a child's welfare? GREAT moral religion that is. I mean it really says it all, that priest have been told for centuries to cover up crimes admitted in 'confidence' and secrecy of the confessional. It is archaic and immoral. End of story.
|
|
|
|
Post by goz on Aug 22, 2019 21:40:18 GMT
This is another thread designed to open a can of worms, from the same poster who wants all of us to bear the responsibility for manmade "global warming" simply because we're here. Look Erjenious! Like it or not this is a 'discussion' forum. You and Molar and Clusium can post as many pro-Catholic YouTube videos as you like and I can open as many religious 'cans of worms' as I like especially when it does what this forum is designed for... DISCUSSION. BTW I have not blamed the Catholics for man made global warming so to be on topic, you may have to start that thread yourself.
|
|
|
|
Post by goz on Aug 22, 2019 21:42:07 GMT
No although they should have went to police. Many Catholics did go to the police. This, by my memory goes back to the1960s. They were met with a stone wall. That is a fair comment.
|
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Aug 23, 2019 3:24:35 GMT
Right. If it brings down the church it brings it down anyway. My point is that most Catholics don’t encounter kiddy diddlers among their clergy and they also understand the notion of confessions being between the priest and contrite alone. There would be no reason for them to be upset about a known tenet. However if they are in a church and knew then they should have reported the crime themselves. It’s just not a common occurrence and even in places where it did occur, they may have held back because they were told not to which would still not make them too culpable if they truly believed eternal punishment was the result. I’m not Catholic. Oh right! You think that the laity were more concerned with eternal punishment for themselves in dobbing in a paedophile priest, than a child's welfare? GREAT moral religion that is. I mean it really says it all, that priest have been told for centuries to cover up crimes admitted in 'confidence' and secrecy of the confessional. It is archaic and immoral. End of story. I said "if". I have no idea what a Catholic thinks in relation to their faith any more than you have a clue about devoutness of any religious person.
|
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Aug 23, 2019 3:36:56 GMT
The coverage feels like universal condemnation while the cover-up is not. Most priests are guilty of nothing except maybe confidentiality of confessions and trusting their cardinals but it sure does feel like all of them are boinking kids once "media" gets done with them. So, you think that Catholic (or any church) hierarchy endemically buggering little boys and it being hidden for years, decades and even centuries is not worth universal condemnation for those crimes and that those who covered them up are not guilty of some responsibility for this behaviour being enabled to continue unabated? It is interesting that most priests were content to put the welfare of other criminal cardinals and priests and their church, over the interest of crimes against the youth they were supposed to protect? And this is moral and just? Has the media ever implied that all priests are guilty of this despicable behaviour? No. It is just people like you making excuses for the individuals involved, the hierarchies' failures and this Church being rotten to the core. If the teaching involves boinking little kids, then of course. If the teaching condemns it and the church is face repercussion for not following their own teachings, then so be it. That's what is happening right now. If the majority of priest or even a sizeable minority were bonking kids, then maybe since it would show how utterly corrupt the organization is. However, that isn't really the case is it? Honestly if it happened even one time, it is entirely your right to condemn them for all eternity, but please refrain from arrogantly trying to dictate what others should feel and especially those who belong to a religion you hate and thus are biased against. After all, it doesn't matter one hoot if I condemn them since I'm not Catholic anyway.
|
|
|
|
Post by goz on Aug 23, 2019 4:00:35 GMT
Oh right! You think that the laity were more concerned with eternal punishment for themselves in dobbing in a paedophile priest, than a child's welfare? GREAT moral religion that is. I mean it really says it all, that priest have been told for centuries to cover up crimes admitted in 'confidence' and secrecy of the confessional. It is archaic and immoral. End of story. I said "if". I have no idea what a Catholic thinks in relation to their faith any more than you have a clue about devoutness of any religious person. … and you know this and make this claim knowing how and why? I know for fact that for centuries that Catholics have put their devoutness and faith before the welfare of themselves and their children!
|
|
|
|
Post by goz on Aug 23, 2019 4:06:17 GMT
So, you think that Catholic (or any church) hierarchy endemically buggering little boys and it being hidden for years, decades and even centuries is not worth universal condemnation for those crimes and that those who covered them up are not guilty of some responsibility for this behaviour being enabled to continue unabated? It is interesting that most priests were content to put the welfare of other criminal cardinals and priests and their church, over the interest of crimes against the youth they were supposed to protect? And this is moral and just? Has the media ever implied that all priests are guilty of this despicable behaviour? No. It is just people like you making excuses for the individuals involved, the hierarchies' failures and this Church being rotten to the core. If the teaching involves boinking little kids, then of course. If the teaching condemns it and the church is face repercussion for not following their own teachings, then so be it. That's what is happening right now. If the majority of priest or even a sizeable minority were bonking kids, then maybe since it would show how utterly corrupt the organization is. However, that isn't really the case is it? Honestly if it happened even one time, it is entirely your right to condemn them for all eternity, but please refrain from arrogantly trying to dictate what others should feel and especially those who belong to a religion you hate and thus are biased against. After all, it doesn't matter one hoot if I condemn them since I'm not Catholic anyway. What a load of bollocks! Yes, it is the case. How dare you minimise the crimes that have been inherent in the Catholic Church for centuries just because of their and your stupid religion! What a hypocrite, condemning me for condemning them, and you saying it doesn't matter if YOU do the same. Double standard much? I am not religious and you are, so my opinion is bad and yours is OK because you are religious only of a different denomination? Get over yourself!
|
|
|
|
Post by geode on Aug 23, 2019 5:41:34 GMT
I am not keen on sweeping generalities. The way you have worded this no rank and file Catholics complained about the transgressions of errant priests. Undoubtedly some have done do in multiple places through the years. I am more familiar with the situation in the Mormon church, where some men in leadership positions and contact with the youth committed similar transgressions as Catholic priests. I have read of similar problems in the Baptist Church and other faiths. In instances in the Mormon church some committing crimes were shielded by the leadership above them. This is not just a Catholic problem. Some of the rank and file Mormons have complained about what has happened and had church lawyers attempt to discredit their stories. Some have been excommunicated, some have left the church over what is happening. Sometimes it is the victims and their supporters who get blamed by church authorities. I'll bet some of the same has happened in Catholic circles. The complaints by LDS members, and members who have left over these matters have caused top leadership to react and improve procedures to lessen the chance of men being able to molest children. Unfortunately the leadership takes credit for the changes or even day that God revealed the changes. It is difficult for very believing individuals to find fault in their religious leaders, who they have been taught to follow without questioning. Churches act defensively and try to protect their image. This is human nature, but covering up serious troubles ultimately does not do right by the organizations in question. That is a very interesting and 'almost' believable viewpoint. To me it just re-enforces the power of hierarchies in churches, and the level of delusion in the laity. Just one of the many reasons I am an agnostic atheist and have no wish to be associated with ANY quasi atheist movement if there were such a thing. I am sure you are right, yet it amazes me that there was not and is not, a greater uprising amongst the laity now that these matters are open knowledge. Catholics STILL support their church and give any manner of special pleading for things that were and still are endemic in the Catholic ( and other) churches. Witness the Vatican wishing to 'handle' ( pardon the pun) the case of Cardinal George Pell 'in house' with little credence to the fact that he is in jail in Australia a convicted criminal and paedophile. To me it sucks donkey balls. I think you still misunderstand what the Vatican position is on Pell. They have acknowledged his conviction in Australia. All they are doing is pondering what to do about his status as a Cardinal.
|
|
|
|
Post by goz on Aug 23, 2019 7:06:55 GMT
That is a very interesting and 'almost' believable viewpoint. To me it just re-enforces the power of hierarchies in churches, and the level of delusion in the laity. Just one of the many reasons I am an agnostic atheist and have no wish to be associated with ANY quasi atheist movement if there were such a thing. I am sure you are right, yet it amazes me that there was not and is not, a greater uprising amongst the laity now that these matters are open knowledge. Catholics STILL support their church and give any manner of special pleading for things that were and still are endemic in the Catholic ( and other) churches. Witness the Vatican wishing to 'handle' ( pardon the pun) the case of Cardinal George Pell 'in house' with little credence to the fact that he is in jail in Australia a convicted criminal and paedophile. To me it sucks donkey balls. I think you still misunderstand what the Vatican position is on Pell. They have acknowledged his conviction in Australia. All they are doing is pondering what to do about his status as a Cardinal. They must defrock him despite any 'in-house' enquiry which will actually be useless...just more face saving lip service to justice, from the corrupt Catholic Church..
|
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Aug 23, 2019 7:56:46 GMT
This is another thread designed to open a can of worms, from the same poster who wants all of us to bear the responsibility for manmade "global warming" simply because we're here. Look Erjenious! Like it or not this is a 'discussion' forum. You and Molar and Clusium can post as many pro-Catholic YouTube videos as you like and I can open as many religious 'cans of worms' as I like especially when it does what this forum is designed for... DISCUSSION. BTW I have not blamed the Catholics for man made global warming so to be on topic, you may have to start that thread yourself. If humanity is to blame for global warming, that includes Catholics too. Or are you saying Catholics aren't human? When you post crud like this, you may expect your motivations to be scrutinized.
|
|
|
|
Post by geode on Aug 23, 2019 9:02:08 GMT
I think you still misunderstand what the Vatican position is on Pell. They have acknowledged his conviction in Australia. All they are doing is pondering what to do about his status as a Cardinal. They must defrock him despite any 'in-house' enquiry which will actually be useless...just more face saving lip service to justice, from The corrupt Catholic Church.. Neither you nor I have the right to tell the Catholic Church what to do with their own members. As I have already posted I think they are going through the motions of a process where they think they are protecting the rights of their own. If Pell had been a Mormon leader he would not only have been removed from his position upon conviction in a civil court, he would have been automatically excommunicated by a church court. Some innocent people have been thrown out of the church this way. I think the Catholics are superior to the Mormons in this regard. Pell should be given what amounts to better ''due process" and not just suffer religious ramificationd by them just accepting civil authority being correct when it comes to conducting internal church affairs.
|
|
|
|
Post by goz on Aug 23, 2019 9:49:57 GMT
Look Erjenious! Like it or not this is a 'discussion' forum. You and Molar and Clusium can post as many pro-Catholic YouTube videos as you like and I can open as many religious 'cans of worms' as I like especially when it does what this forum is designed for... DISCUSSION. BTW I have not blamed the Catholics for man made global warming so to be on topic, you may have to start that thread yourself. If humanity is to blame for global warming, that includes Catholics too. Or are you saying Catholics aren't human? When you post crud like this, you may expect your motivations to be scrutinized. Could you be any more stupid? Humanity is to blame for global warming. ( It was you who brought this stupid red herring onto this thread and I made a joke of it) Catholics form part of humanity. I post interesting and challenging topics for discussion. Others are discussing the topic, why can't you?
|
|
|
|
Post by goz on Aug 23, 2019 9:52:08 GMT
They must defrock him despite any 'in-house' enquiry which will actually be useless...just more face saving lip service to justice, from The corrupt Catholic Church.. Neither you nor I have the right to tell the Catholic Church what to do with their own members. As I have already posted I think they are going through the motions of a process where they think they are protecting the rights of their own. If Pell had been a Mormon leader he would not only have been removed from his position upon conviction in a civil court, he would have been automatically excommunicated by a church court. Some innocent people have been thrown out of the church this way. I think the Catholics are superior to the Mormons in this regard. Pell should be given what amounts to better ''due process" and not just suffer religious ramificationd by them just accepting civil authority being correct when it comes to conducting internal church affairs. Are you serious? He is a convicted criminal!!! FFS!!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Aug 23, 2019 9:54:17 GMT
If humanity is to blame for global warming, that includes Catholics too. Or are you saying Catholics aren't human? When you post crud like this, you may expect your motivations to be scrutinized. Could you be any more stupid? Humanity is to blame for global warming. ( It was you who brought this stupid red herring onto this thread and I made a joke of it) Catholics form part of humanity. I post interesting and challenging topics for discussion. Others are discussing the topic, why can't you? I certainly am discussing it, by challenging your reason for posting it.
|
|
|
|
Post by geode on Aug 23, 2019 10:13:47 GMT
Neither you nor I have the right to tell the Catholic Church what to do with their own members. As I have already posted I think they are going through the motions of a process where they think they are protecting the rights of their own. If Pell had been a Mormon leader he would not only have been removed from his position upon conviction in a civil court, he would have been automatically excommunicated by a church court. Some innocent people have been thrown out of the church this way. I think the Catholics are superior to the Mormons in this regard. Pell should be given what amounts to better ''due process" and not just suffer religious ramificationd by them just accepting civil authority being correct when it comes to conducting internal church affairs.Are you serious? He is a convicted criminal!!! FFS!!!! Of course I am serious. If you actually read all that I wrote you seem to have not understood what I have been saying. Why do you continue to not understand what I and others have posted about church courts? You keep attempting to make them equivalent to civil courts, when they are not. My guess is that you lack the knowledge that comes either through academic study or actual experience with a church organization. You seem to be mired in the 12th Century when there was a real debate in England over jurisdiction to try criminal offences by clerics. Henry II and Becket are long gone, and this is no longer a debate.
|
|
