BS: Pope on pedophile priests

Subject: RE: BS: Pope on pedophile priests
From: Peace
Date: 21 Apr 08 - 02:00 PM

Uh, I think instead of 'police' I meant to say 'priests'.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope on pedophile priests
From: Donuel
Date: 21 Apr 08 - 01:55 PM

On TV games were pre empted, commercials delayed and a bevy of announcers that sounded like they were doing a Rose Bowl parade, spoke of the POpe in non stopglowing reverential tones of praise.

On CNN, CNBC, FOX, ABC they all glorified the pope in Yankee stadium and cooed how he has ressurected his image.

I'll tell you who ressurected it...the mogul media corp.

The guy still shields the criminal bishops from prosecution with a strict non deportation policy.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope on pedophile priests
From: Peace
Date: 21 Apr 08 - 01:53 PM

I have one question: Why is it that criminal charges have not been laid against the offending police? Or have they? Serious question there, folks.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope on pedophile priests
From: PoppaGator
Date: 21 Apr 08 - 01:48 PM

I recognize the historical fact that the Roman church's requirement of celibacy for priests was propted primarily for economic reasons. Not only did the Church not want to pay for the support of priests' (and seminarians')families, they really didn't want their priests to have heirs claiming property that could remain in the hands of the Church. No "legitimate" heirs with plausible legal claims, anyway.

I also recognize that pedophilia is no more prevalent among offenders of homosexual orientation than heterosexual, and (arguably) perhaps even less so.

Still in all, I think it is entirely reasonable to assert that the celibacy rule has resulted in a proliferation of homosexual men ~ including many who are unhappy and maladjusted ~ among the ranks of today's Catholic priests, a significant number of whom have turned out to be predatory child molesters.

The celibate priesthood has always attracted young men who have been willing to deny themselves expression of their own sexuality. Is it not reasonable to assume that a significantly large number of such young men have always sensed in themselves sexual feelings that they had been taught were sinful, and that had to be denied no matter what?

I'm pretty sure that, over the centuries, the priesthood has been home to huge numbers of men ~ most of them truly celibate, and most of them fine leaders and counselors in their pastoral roles ~ whose sexual orientation was gay. Not actively so, at least not in most cases; but I think it would be fair to say that the sex that many celebate priests were not having, the impulse that they were denying themselves, was homosexual in nature.

Flashing forward to the modern world: In the 1960s, significantly large numbers of Catholic priests left the Church to get married. We did NOT see men leave the priesthood to persue sexual relationships with other men ~ why not? Is it reasonable to believe that, of the many priests suddenly deciding en masse to reject celibacy and enter conjugal relationships, all of them were straight and none were gay? Of course not. Even in the liberalized climate of the times, heterosexual married life was entirely respectable, albeit denied to the celibate priesthood, but open homosexuality was still very much verboten. When thousands of heterosexual priests were leaving, most of their homosexual brethern stayed in, some undoubtedly continuing to practice strict celibacy, but others finding ways to accommodate their desires in some sort of secretive manner.

I would argue that the cases of pedophile Catholic priests have involved disproportionately huge numbers of offenses against boys (as opposed to a relative few involving girls) for the simple reason that today's priesthood includes a similarly high percentage of men who are homosexual in orientation, if not in practice. All but a small minority are child molesters, of course; many are undoubtedly truly celibate, and those who aren't are able to be discreet and inoffensive, and certainly do not harm children.

In the contemporary industrialized world, for now and throughout the foreseeable future, the continued insistence upon an all-male all-celibate priesthood can only result in a priesthood consisting largely of men who, in their youth, believe that ~ even in the light of society's openness and acceptance of a wide range of sexual expression ~ their own sexuality must be stifled, for one reason or another ~ in many cases, I wouldn't doubt, for good reason.

While I'm sure that the priesthood will always attract a number of truly saintly candidiates who are capable of highly virtuous self-denial, I believe that even larger numbers will be young guys with serious psychological problems that won't remain bottled up for the rest of their lives: ticking human time-bombs.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope on pedophile priests
From: wysiwyg
Date: 20 Apr 08 - 08:37 PM

Ake, you show no sign of having read my longer, thoughtful posts. Now here's McGrath restating one of them.

I have not defended the Catholic church at all. I HAVE made observations, from considerable experience and knowledge, on church organizational matters.

What troubles me is your inability to take in information that conflicts with your mindset. Why I think abuse is occurring is why I think it has always occurred-- because there is a clearly demonstrated cycle of abuse where the powerful take advantage of the less powerful, and pass abuse down through generations.

You are so focused on one form of abuse (and so ill informed about the causes of that one form) that I think you are not able to generalize from that form and your prejudices surrounding it, to understand the phenomenon of abuse itself. This is why you are not in a position to create positive change-- for that, a little more detached flexibility will be needed.

You can learn more about how all forms of abuse occur (and can be healed) here: www.rc.org, which site you will probably be very surprised to learn has nothing to do with the Roman Catholic Church or religion at all.

~Susan

Subject: RE: BS: Pope on pedophile priests
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 20 Apr 08 - 08:15 PM

What would be helpful to know is whether there actually is an increase in child sex abuse in our society, or just an increase in its coming to light.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope on pedophile priests
From: akenaton
Date: 20 Apr 08 - 08:05 PM

OK Susan, but you seem to have taken it upon yourself to defend the Catholic Church on this forum and they are very much on the hook.

When even US representatives of the church are stating that the celibacy rule is attracting homosexuals and causing abuse problems.

Why do you think this child abuse is occuring? Please don't mince your words...say what you think

Subject: RE: BS: Pope on pedophile priests
From: wysiwyg
Date: 20 Apr 08 - 07:44 PM

Ake, I'm not ON the hook, because your ideas are not based in reality. You are putting energy into the wrong battle, if what you really want is to change an institution or protect children.

~Susan

Subject: RE: BS: Pope on pedophile priests
From: GUEST,dianavan
Date: 20 Apr 08 - 07:22 PM

"Having an unmarried priesthood in the Catholic Church is a matter of discipline and tradition and economics, not doctrine."

You're right, McGrath, and that tradition started sometime around the Middle Ages because the Catholic church didn't want to have to support wives and children. Its more economical to train priests when you can house them dormitory style and then send them out into the world alone. The Catholic church didn't always insist on celibacy.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope on pedophile priests
From: akenaton
Date: 20 Apr 08 - 07:06 PM

Thanks Bruce...you're a good friend!

Subject: RE: BS: Pope on pedophile priests
From: Rapparee
Date: 20 Apr 08 - 06:58 PM

And let it be said right now -- I have gay friends and relatives, and I am not homophobic.

I just don't like ANYONE abusing children in any way. And you really don't want to hear the suggestions some of my gay friends make about child abusers, sexual or otherwise.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope on pedophile priests
From: Peace
Date: 20 Apr 08 - 06:50 PM

I agree, Ake. Thing I like about kickin' it around with you is that I know what a good person you are and I'm glad we never end up in arguments with each other. I've always understood where you're coming from on the issues associated with homosexuality, and I know you care deeply for children.

It's an honour to be able to disagree with you and still maintain a friendship that outlasts threads.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope on pedophile priests
From: akenaton
Date: 20 Apr 08 - 06:37 PM

Difficult to substantiate these numbers Bruce, as apparently 90% of male abuse victims don't inform police or hospitals.
70% tell nobody including their friends and families.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope on pedophile priests
From: Rapparee
Date: 20 Apr 08 - 06:32 PM

Although denial about sexual abuse in the Church operates on many levels, one of the most difficult aspects of the dynamic for most active Latter-day Saints to believe is that an ecclesiastical leader will fail to respond appropriately when he receives a report of child sexual abuse. President Hinckley appeared to take this position when Mike Wallace asked his response to the statement: "The sociologists tell us, at the root of the problem is the fact that men in effect in your church have authority over women, so that your clergymen tend to sympathize with the men, the abusers, instead of the abused." President Hinckley countered, "That's one person's opinion. I don't think there's any substance to it. Now, there'll be a blip here, a blip there, a mistake here, a mistake there. But by and large the welfare of women and children is as seriously considered as is the welfare of the men, in this church, if not more so."1(See Chapter 3 for a discussion of this point.)

Although reliable generalizable data does not exist to confirm or deny his claim, this chapter provides anecdotal information to indicate that some bishops and stake presidents disbelieve and even punish victims, cover up for perpetrators, and, in extreme cases, harass and intimidate victims to prevent disclosures that they feel are embarrassing to the Church.

You can find a very well-researched, lengthy, discussion of the whole issue of child sexual abuse in the main-stream LDS church here.

I searched, via Google, for "child sexual abuse" (including the quotes) and these names: Buddist, Zen, Southern Baptist, Girl Scouts, Campfire, Boy Scouts, Methodist, Lutheran, Pentecostal, Wicca.

In every search I found records of arrests and charges. I also realize that there are always some who will make false charges for whatever reason.

Child sexual abuse is no more a sex crime -- that is, a crime committed for sexual "relief" (if it were that masturbation and/or nocturnal emission is easily available) -- than rape is. It is a betrayal by someone in authority, an abuse of trust and power.

There is no punishment I can think of that is adequate.
Frankly, I cannot

Subject: RE: BS: Pope on pedophile priests
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 20 Apr 08 - 06:20 PM

Having an unmarried priesthood in the Catholic Church is a matter of discipline and tradition and economics, not doctrine. As has been pointed out there are a number of married Catholic priests - former Anglicans, or members of the Uniate churches in Eastern Europe which are a full part of the Catholic church. I have little doubt that in time the general requirement that priest should be unmarried will in fact cease to apply. It could change tomorrow for that matter, though I doubt if it will.

But the idea that paedophilia has anything particularly to do with people not being able to get married, or with people having a gay sexual orientation is not sustainable. It's far more complicated than that, and not a problem located within particular sub-groups that can be demonised.

Married men, single men, straight men, gay men, priests, teachers, lorry-drivers, parents...

Subject: RE: BS: Pope on pedophile priests
From: Peace
Date: 20 Apr 08 - 06:08 PM

PS The rights and wrongs of homosexuality and child rearing is another topic, IMO, and has been dealt with a few times on the 'cat.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope on pedophile priests
From: heric
Date: 20 Apr 08 - 06:07 PM

The Pope could maybe politely ask his Bishops if they would consider not filing evasive bankruptcies and fraudulent accountings. . . Perhaps he could loan them a few bucks?

Subject: RE: BS: Pope on pedophile priests
From: Peace
Date: 20 Apr 08 - 06:06 PM

I don't wish to engage in a debate on this issue. But the evidence seems to show that children are less likely to be abused by homosexuals than heterosexuals. If anyone has evidence to the contrary I would like to read it.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope on pedophile priests
From: Peace
Date: 20 Apr 08 - 06:03 PM

A study of 930 women in San Francisco showed that of those
who had been incestuously abused, 95% of the abuse had been
perpetrated by a male relative-usually the father or uncle.
    -Russell D. the Secret Trauma, Basic Books, 1986
   
A study of sexual-abuse offenders concluded that a
heterosexual adult is more likely to be a threat to children than a homosexual adult. Groth AN, Men Who Rape, Plenum Press NY. 1979

Subject: RE: BS: Pope on pedophile priests
From: akenaton
Date: 20 Apr 08 - 05:47 PM

Very Christian of you Sue.Much appreciated.

But please don't try to wriggle off the hook.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope on pedophile priests
From: wysiwyg
Date: 20 Apr 08 - 04:50 PM

...today's climate, where we hand our children over to male homosexual foster parents, in some horrific social experiment....

Oh, YEAHhhhhhhh..... that's the scary, messy stuff I was trying to recall about Ake's past posts..... a number of us went around and around with him THAT time..........

I suppose, Mudcat being what it is, here we'll go again. Unless someone closes this thread based on what I think most of us would call a "hate post."

~Susan

Subject: RE: BS: Pope on pedophile priests
From: akenaton
Date: 20 Apr 08 - 02:07 PM

Sorry Al, that statement about apologists was a bit of a generalisation and certainly doesn't apply to you.

Diana,sure there is a power element in child abuse,as there is in many sexual relationships, but to suggest that it is not a "sex crime" is patently ridiculous.
As Amergin is far from being a fool, the statement must have been a tactic and should be treated as such.

As far as i'm concerned there is too much double talk about paedophilia in the church and in youth organisations.
We need a proper scientific study....if that is possible in today's climate, where we hand our children over to male homosexual foster parents, in some horrific social experiment.
Today, the needs and wants of powerful minorities come before the safety and welfare of our children.

The Catholic Church has a chance with this issue to redeem itself and make a stand for decent human behaviour.

We shall not hold our breath.....Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Pope on pedophile priests
From: Rapparee
Date: 20 Apr 08 - 12:38 PM

At the Library we do a police background check on all potential employees and volunteers. At least one person withdrew their application when they found out we did this.

So do the schools, public and private and parochial. So do the Boy and Girl Scouts -- now. There is still a case about abuse by a Boy Scout leader in court here....

Subject: RE: BS: Pope on pedophile priests
From: wysiwyg
Date: 20 Apr 08 - 12:09 PM

A lot of people can't seem to understand that about churches. You just can't impose things on voluntary members of an organization and expect them to obey. You have to guide them into working things out together, and that's a process that can take a long, long time.

And waiting for that to happen can be very frustrating.

AMEN!

When you are part of the leadership that does that kind of work, you also learn how precious are the people whose minds are so stuck, and how really complicated it is to lead them towards a different view where being stuck is not necessary at all. You sure don't do it by bashing them over the head with how "bad" they are for being so stuck! You learn to see where they hurt that is being so fiercely protected by their rigidity. (I'm talking about church structures, not pedophiles.)

Ever had back spasms? They hurt like a son of a bitch. They are not, usually, a result of the back injury itself but are the tired effort of the surrounding muscles that are trying to maintain rigidity-- to encase and protect the injured spot within a cage of strong muscle. They end up injuring themselves in the effort.

Well, it is just like that in the institutions we merely-human people maintain. It is true from folk clubs... to churches... to world powers. What is actually broken is always much simpler to fix, cure, or change than the rigid mass, stuck, protecting what needs to be tinkered.

~S~

Subject: RE: BS: Pope on pedophile priests
From: GUEST,dianavan
Date: 20 Apr 08 - 11:02 AM

"Is there really anyone who believes that they do not get sexual "pleasure" from their activities.........Ake"

I think its about power. Without the feeling of power, there would be no sexual gratification. Thats why pedophile's need to engage in sexual acts with children. They are not sexually satisfied unless there is a young, powerless victim.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope on pedophile priests
From: GUEST,lox
Date: 20 Apr 08 - 07:21 AM

I doubt that the catholic church will change it's position on celibacy at all.

Their view will in all probability continue to be that while times change, God's will remains the same and that changing times are a personal challenge.

Sex is believed by the church to be something legitimized by marriage and they are unlikely to change that view because of alleged increased promiscuity amongst people in general.

I say alleged as I don't agree with the view that todays generation are any more or less immoral/liberated (depending on your value judgement) than any previous generation, with the exception of a brief interlude of restraint around the beginning of thhe 20th century in the upper classes of England apparently.

There's been porn, prostitution, orgy's, fetish's, homosexuality etc etc etc going back thousands of years and the catholic church is unlikely to be intimidated by todays critics any more than it has been in the past.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope on pedophile priests
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 20 Apr 08 - 06:26 AM

I don't think anyone is an apologist. Everyone acknowledges the present situation and past crimes are regrettable.

Realistically, the church is unlikely to ditch the celibacy qualification. An unmarried priest gets about a third the salary of a married one. And that's pretty cynical, or perhaps I mean realistic. the running costs of the priesthood would sudddenly triple.

The church is going to continue. There will always be believers. It needs to speed up changes of things that really do need changing.

Otherwise it will lose the respect of virtually everybody.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope on pedophile priests
From: akenaton
Date: 20 Apr 08 - 05:28 AM

Joe I understand your contempt for the culture of demonisation and thank you for taking the time to explain your position on a subject that obviouly causes you much pain.

The rest of you are apologists for a situation which is completely indefencible.

The person being interviewed on UK TV said the following. "Unfortunately, the celibacy rule seems to encourage homosexuals into the priesthood"

That statement has ramifications for the Catholic Church and society as a whole which go well beyond the issue of "Paedophile Priests"

Amergin states that paedophilia is not a "sex crime". How naive and how dismissive of the children who have been subjected to the attentions of these creatures.
Is there really anyone who believes that they do not get sexual "pleasure" from their activities.........Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Pope on pedophile priests
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 20 Apr 08 - 04:43 AM

I doubt even the most lenient of critics would agree to as low an estimate as 2%. I think with all organisations and charities - we go along with them as long as we can.

Some of us go on for a lifetime without it pushing our buttons hard enough to discard them. In the last instance though, forgivesness is in the remit of those it has wronged, not for the rest to judge.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope on pedophile priests
From: DMcG
Date: 20 Apr 08 - 04:05 AM

And yes, it's true that there should be married priests, and there should be women priests, and there should be a better way of dealing with homosexuality and with sexuality in general. Unfortunately, it's the people in the Catholic Church (including the clergy, but not only them) who haven't been able to sort all that out yet.


While I certainly certainly agree with that, Joe, as it happens my own Roman Catholic priest IS married and his wife is a very active part of the church. (I don't know all the details because I moved into the parish after he did. My guess is that he converted from Anglicanism round about the time the issue of women priests came up.) We had a rather bizarre weekend a while ago when he was away on business so his father-in-law celebrated the Mass.

All of which really goes to show that the average churchgoer may not be as hide-bound as we imagine.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope on pedophile priests
From: Joe Offer
Date: 20 Apr 08 - 12:53 AM

And yes, it's true that there should be married priests, and there should be women priests, and there should be a better way of dealing with homosexuality and with sexuality in general. Unfortunately, it's the people in the Catholic Church (including the clergy, but not only them) who haven't been able to sort all that out yet.
A lot of people can't seem to understand that about churches. You just can't impose things on voluntary members of an organization and expect them to obey. You have to guide them into working things out together, and that's a process that can take a long, long time.
And waiting for that to happen can be very frustrating.
-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Pope on pedophile priests
From: Jim Lad
Date: 20 Apr 08 - 12:09 AM

"He is the head of the only church in the world were women still have to go to a man to seek forgiveness for their sins (confession)."


Oh?





I don't think so!

Subject: RE: BS: Pope on pedophile priests
From: Big Mick
Date: 19 Apr 08 - 11:05 PM

It is easy to be self righteous from the lectern of 20/20 hindsight. These are folks that seem to think they have all the answers. The journey of faith requires one to understand that it is about the trail, and the things one encounters on it. Some of these things are pleasant and joyful, some are dark, dangerous, and frightening. One can go on and on about the abuses of the Roman Catholic Church. It is a sure bet the same could be done with most religions, and most philosophical schools of thought. Remember the cultural revolution of China, an avowed atheist State, where people were imprisoned and killed because they lacked purity of thought with regard to Communism as it was being practiced.

All of that is not to mitigate the guilt of the priests, and the leadership of the Roman Catholic Church. As Joe has said, and the Pope has indicated, it was handled very badly, and the damage done to the victims is horrific. But the worst critics of the scandal still only ascribe these actions to less than 2% of the priesthood. That means 98% are out there tending to their parishes, teaching values to the kids and parents, doing acts of charity, providing first rate educations, and doing missionary work among the poorest of the poor. The same Church that many are so willing to chastise gave the world Mother Theresa, whose works are without equal, and which has spawned a whole order of folks dedicating their lives to working among the people that all others forgot. And done without proselytizing.

All the best,

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: Pope on pedophile priests
From: Joe Offer
Date: 19 Apr 08 - 10:45 PM

I suppose we all have a tendency to demonize. It's important to find something wrong with the other person, or something they did as a teenager, or with something their ancestors did (even if our own ancestors did it, too). If we can find something to make them look bad, and we always can if we look hard enough, then we can feel better about ourselves.

And after all, isn't that what's important, to feel good about ourselves, even if it's at the expense of others?

As lox says, nothing makes self-righteous people more angry than seeing somebody do or say something good. Well said, lox.

I apologize publicly for having been a Boy Scout, because of all those horrible things the Boy Scouts say about homosexuals. And even though I've never held those homophobic opinions and eventually parted with the Scouts because of their right-wing stances, I must hang my head in shame and never have any feeling of self worth, because I was a Boy Scout. I'm so ashamed of myself. I'll have to flagellate myself nightly for going on all those campouts as a kid, and singing "Do Your Ears Hang Low?" and cooking that homophobic foil-wrapped stew.

I dunno. All that guilt about the past misdeeds of my ancestors and associates takes too much energy. Maybe I'll just see what good I can do today, show compassion for those who have been hurt in the past, and do what I can to help them face the future. Yes, I had some friends who turned out to be sex offender priests, and I'm very sorry for the harm they caused and will do what I can to heal the people they hurt. I am ashamed and embarrassed and outraged about what they did, but I can't heal anything by wallowing in shame.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Pope on pedophile priests
From: GUEST,lox
Date: 19 Apr 08 - 08:32 PM

Nothing gives one the moral highground quite as well as criticizing those that they feel should represent it.

Nothing makes self righteous people more angry than seeing somebody do or say something good.

Cuz mother theresa was really a selfish Nazi who wanted all gays to burn in hell and if she'd had the power she would have started a process of ethnic cleansing of some sort and she would doubtless have told rape victims to stop whinging and done her best to increase their suffering ...

And all that stuff she did in calcutta and sudan and ethiopia etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc was just in her spare time and she didn't "mean" it enough ... what a hypocrite she was yeah?

Jolly good then.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope on pedophile priests
From: GUEST,Ed T
Date: 19 Apr 08 - 06:09 PM

Some "popely" quotes to guide us, and the curent pope:

"Silence gives consent"

Pope Boniface VIII

"The future starts today, not tomorrow."

Pope John Paul II

"An excuse is worse and more terrible than a lie, for an excuse is a lie guarded."

Pope John Paul II
                                
"Anything done for another is done for oneself."

Pope John Paul II

"Every man has the right to life, to bodily integrity."

Pope John XXIII

"If God created shadows it was to better emphasize the light"

Pope John XXII

"It often happens that I wake up at night and begin to think about a serious problem and decide I must tell the Pope about it. Then I wake up completely and remember that I am the Pope."

Pope John XXIII

Subject: RE: BS: Pope on pedophile priests
From: GUEST,Ed T
Date: 19 Apr 08 - 05:52 PM

I'm saying I can't afford to make no donations to no Catholic charities. If you need the money that bad, wire the Pope! He's got more money than God!
Quote, Archie Bunker

Subject: RE: BS: Pope on pedophile priests
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 19 Apr 08 - 05:09 PM

Wouldn't a "pedophile" be someone who loved feet?

Subject: RE: BS: Pope on pedophile priests
From: Terreblanche
Date: 19 Apr 08 - 02:41 PM

He is the head of the only church in the world were women still have to go to a man to seek forgiveness for their sins (confession).

That must be addressed.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope on pedophile priests
From: Bert
Date: 19 Apr 08 - 02:36 PM

Well said Susan. I kind and thoughtful response to a somewhat fierce post.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope on pedophile priests
From: wysiwyg
Date: 19 Apr 08 - 02:13 PM

"There are people (and we all know and love some of them) whose whole persona is built on old victimization, and not just here. Hardi and I spend most of every day trying to aim several people's eyes outta the muck they insist in wallowing in. D'ya think if they ever got off their personal soapboxes..."

Hmmm...Sounds like victimizing the victim to me. What did these kids do to deserve a mass grave? I doubt if they had much time to wallow in self-pity. I'm sorry if you think that people suck your time and energy but maybe you are offerring too little, too late.


In that part of my post I was not referring to victims of abuse per se but to the general cultural rush to negativity that is so widespread.

But as far as sympathies for victims, there is no help for them in reinforcing their sense of continuing victimization, once they are in a safe place and can start the healing process. The healing process of course includes telling the story, but if the listener or counselor can only respond with reinforcement, the victim can stay stuck there. A guided word to the safer aspects of reality aids recovery quite a bit. (Anyone who has counseled on incest memorioes knows this.)


Back to the Pope-- since the outrage is so great, the feeling is common that whatever anyone does now is too little, too late. No one with that mindset will EVER be satisfied with ANY positive step, because it will never FEEL like "enough." But steps are, by definition, small and slow. How else does change happen without cataclysm?

~Susan

Subject: RE: BS: Pope on pedophile priests
From: Jim Lad
Date: 19 Apr 08 - 02:04 PM

What?

Subject: RE: BS: Pope on pedophile priests
From: GUEST,dianavan
Date: 19 Apr 08 - 01:48 PM

I wonder what he has to say about the Canadian genocide?

http://www.thecumberlander.ca/cgi-bin/show_articles.cgi?ID=611

I think the attitude of the Church goes much deeper than pedophillia. Native people were considered non-human and their children were treated like animals. Native people had no value and those in positions of responsibility considered their children disposable. Ethics and morality only applied to white, human beings.

Whats a little road kill to a self-righteous, white supremacist?

Susan - "There are people (and we all know and love some of them) whose whole persona is built on old victimization, and not just here. Hardi and I spend most of every day trying to aim several people's eyes outta the muck they insist in wallowing in. D'ya think if they ever got off their personal soapboxes..."

Hmmm...Sounds like victimizing the victim to me. What did these kids do to deserve a mass grave? I doubt if they had much time to wallow in self-pity. I'm sorry if you think that people suck your time and energy but maybe you are offerring too little, too late.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope on pedophile priests
From: wysiwyg
Date: 19 Apr 08 - 09:45 AM

Thanks, Beer. I was in a rare black mood last night. We get SO TIRED of hearing about this. (The collar is a target.)

Ake, I did respond. Read my post. It's been argued here ad naauseum while having NOTHING to do with pedophilia.

~Susan

Subject: RE: BS: Pope on pedophile priests
From: Jim Lad
Date: 19 Apr 08 - 03:04 AM

Akenaton:
         I think most would agree that the celibacy rule has outlived it's usefulness and that its implementation has a tendency to attract eccentric candidates more than it does those would serve us well.
JP II went a long way towards bringing the church up-to-date and his years of ill health allowed the seeds that he had planted, time to grow.
Benedict is no spring chicken but has refused to be just a caretaker in his declining years.
He has chosen to tackle this subject head on and is probably quite prepared to take what's coming to him from the victims and the faithful.
The rest is just static.
The problem has more to do with the abuse of power than homosexuality and has manifest itself in Sex Abuse probably but not entirely because of the celibacy rule.
Case in point... That bloke that picked him up at the airport.... he's married, right?

Subject: RE: BS: Pope on pedophile priests
From: Joe Offer
Date: 19 Apr 08 - 02:53 AM

Well, ake, the celibacy rule is why I left a Catholic seminary after eight years. There have been studies made, and no causal relationship has been found between celibacy and child molesting. Child molesters are child molesters, whether they're celibate or not. The requirement of celibacy does not turn people into child molesters.

On the other hand, I know a number of good, normal people who would have made good priests - but they left before or after ordination because they could not live with the celibacy rule. So, I suppose the case could be made that people with normal sexuality tend not to choose celibacy. That was what happened to me, and to a number of friends who would have made terrific priests. We had one guy in our class who showed enormous potential. He was sent to Rome to study for a doctorate after he was ordained. He didn't last ten years as a priest. Now he's a married lay person working for a diocese - removed from his job as a theology professor in a Catholic college because he is a former priest. What a shame.

But the celibacy rule didn't turn him into a child molester - it turned him into a married former priest.

I had two classmates who were accused of sex offenses. One is no longer allowed to function as a priest, and I don't know the story of what happened to him at all. I heard he had "retired" from Wisconsin to Florida at the age of 50, and then recently read he was no longer allowed to function as a priest. The other was accused of something that happened thirty years ago. He had served as a missionary in Africa for over twenty years. About the time the accusation surfaced, he was working at a desk job in Rome. The guy in Florida was a little "swishy" and was known as one of the "fems," but nothing that would make you think he would end up a sex offender (and maybe he isn't - I don't know what happened except that he's not allowed ot be a priest any more). The guy in Rome didn't seem unsual to me when we were college students.

That's my personal experience, not a scientific study.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Pope on pedophile priests
From: akenaton
Date: 19 Apr 08 - 02:18 AM

By the way Lox, Amergins post is simply his opinion.

We need a proper study of the celibacy law, homosexuality and links to child abuse before any conclusions can be drawn.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope on pedophile priests
From: akenaton
Date: 19 Apr 08 - 02:15 AM

Interesting to see that not one poster has responded to my point about the celibacy rule.
This rule seems to me to be the biggest problem for Catholisism and the cause of most of the child abuse.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope on pedophile priests
From: Beer
Date: 18 Apr 08 - 10:51 PM

I hear ya Susan.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope on pedophile priests
From: wysiwyg
Date: 18 Apr 08 - 10:36 PM

... seems to become more and more prevalent...

Well is it a surpise that it SEEMS that way considering (A) the general trend toward empowerment of victims that increases reporting, (B) the advances in counseling approaches on tough topics that allows memories to surface which increases retroactive reporting, (C) the free flow of information on the cybersuperhighway and CNN, and (D) the effect of the womens lib movement as a foundation for advances in empowerment?

Not to mention the societal advances in litigiousness combined with the financial incentive for lawyers to "help" victims? Not saying there are not real victims, but didja ever consider the thought that during the "consciousness-raising" part of any trend toward eliminating specific oppressions, it's gonna be hard NOT to hear about cases of abuse?

Then there's the gay thing. As gay liberation moves forward, all KINDS of voices come out of the closets they've been in, and subject people didn't use to discuss openly are right out there.

More people nowadays are taliking about more things, and more media is covering the salacacuious angles, and more peope ar etuning in. Why right here at Mudcat iut's all OVER the forum, who is being victimized by whom, on a daily basis.


Nobody wants to hear good news anymore. God isn't "dead"-- it's just that nobody wants to hear messages of hope anymore if they can have a quick argument (or air an old grievance) instead. (And the media capitalizes on this fascination with the negative.)

There are people (and we all know and love some of them) whose whole persona is built on old victimization, and not just here. Hardi and I spend most of every day trying to aim several people's eyes outta the muck they insist in wallowing in. D'ya think if they ever got off their personal soapboxes, the daily drip of media badnews might not seem so negative?

~Susan