Regarding wife-beating, Shambles sez:

But the scipture exist and if it is taught by the organised religion and accepted by the perpetrator to be the literal word of God - does not the organised religion at least share in the responsibilty? Whatever may be taught by organised religions - what seems to be leaned well - is the ability to make excuses?

Well, Shambles, I would suggest that it would be a misinterpretation of the sacred writings of most religions if one understands them to support spousal abuse. I can't make a general statement that all the writings of all religions thoroughly condemn spousal abuse because spousal abuse has been an aspect of some cultures, and religious writings usually reflect the cultures from which they sprimg. Generally, religions call people to a higher standard of conduct and higher ideals. There are some corrupt religious groups and groups within organized religions who do exactly the opposite - but they are generally the exception, not the rule.

On the other hand, I have to admit that religions do seem to attract people with strange ideas and conduct, and I don't know exactly why. Every congregations seems to have at least a few whackos - maybe these people find a home in church because church people are conditioned to tolerate others, even if those people are a bit strange. The whackos may be a nuisance at times, but they're generally harmless unless they're allowed to take a position of leadership in the congregation - and then all hell can break loose and it can be well-nigh impossible to break the whacko's grip on the power they've gained. An abusive battleaxe in the Altar Society can wreak havoc throughous an entire congregation. If one of those whackos becomes Mother Superior, you can end up with a situation like happened often in Ireland, as depicted in the films The Magdalene Sisters and Evelyn, or the scandal with abusive priests in the U.S., Ireland, and elsewhere. In another thread, Fionn implies (as always) that this was the norm for conduct within the Catholic Church - but in my experience, abusive conduct within churches has always been a deplorable exception to the rule, even though I have to admit that the Catholic Church has failed to deal with the abusers as it should have.

If I understand him correctly, Shambles says that "the ability to make excuses" is something that is taught by religions. In my experience, the exact opposite is true - religions generally call their members to a higher standard of conduct, and require errant members to repent and take responsibility for their misconduct. However, most Christian denominations have a fundamental belief in repentance, forgiveness, and starting anew (conversion) - and if this is misunderstood, it can cause real problems.

In the Catholic Church, I have never heard or seen an official statement condoning any sort of sexual abuse. However, I have heard sincere expressions of a belief that a molester can repent and reform, or that a molester can be given psychiatric treatment and cured. I believe in repentance and reform, too - that's one of my core beliefs, that no person is so depraved that he cannot change his life and turn toward good. However, I have interviewed a number of "former offenders" for government security clearances and I know that they can be very convincing in their statements of remorse and promises of reform. I tended to believe those statements, but I also knew that the recidivism rate was very high; so I knew that former thieves should not be given access to large amounts of money, and former molesters should not be given access to children. Church people tend to be unrealistically idealistic, and the Catholic Church made many tragic mistakes in allowing "reformed" molesters access to children.

The Magdalene Sisters problem was a bit different, since it was generally physical abuse instead of sexual abuse. When I was of school age, corporal punishment was still considered to be an appropriate method of discipline for children - and some people still think it is appropriate. Maybe it is appropriate at times for a parent to slap or spank a child - but every parent knows how easy it is to cross the line and do something regrettable when disciplining a child. It's often very hard to know where that line is, between what is appropriate and what is not. In an institutional setting like a school or an orphanage or a scout troop, that can be a real problem because it is so hard to define that line. The hard-liners were very reluctant to abandon corporal punishment, but I'm happy that it has been abolished in most settings in the Western world. There was a lot of harm done by people who "crossed the line," and institutions like the Catholic Church are going to be burdened with making reparations for a good, long time to come.

Still, it's important to analyze these situations fairly and honestly, and to avoid the temptation to demonize all the members of an organization for the misdeeds of some. Yes, there has been serious misconduct in almost every religious organization (and in almost every human institution) - but these problems will not be resolved if they are dealt with unfairly and if blame is placed where it is not due. Most religious people are very good people, and they do not deserve to be punished for the misdeeds of a few. Some religious people have used their religion as a vehicle for deplorable conduct, and they need to pay the price for their actions. And yes, religious institutions need to make reparations for the misdeeds done in their name, to at least some extent.

The matter of reparations is a very difficult matter. How long and how much must Germany pay for the misdeeds of the Nazis? How long and how much should Americans and Australians pay for harm done to the indigenous peoples of their countries? How long and how much must Catholics pay for the sexual abuses commited by priests? If I put twenty dollars in the collection plate to support the church, how much of my twenty dollars should be paid to somebody who was molested by a priest thirty years ago? It's not an easy question to answer. Yes, there should be reparation made - but to what extent, and by whom?

-Joe Offer-