Non-Music: Pope in Toronto: Will he make it?

Subject: RE: Non-Music: Pope in Toronto: Will he make it?
From: katlaughing
Date: 25 Jul 02 - 04:55 PM

No stomping off here, Mick. Just disappointment that you continue to ignore the point about validating victims AND continue to claim I, personally, have attacked the church or its officials in this thread. It's okay for you to react to my words but not vice versa is what I am reading in your posting. I tried to reach out as a friend in my first posting; you saw it as a "scolding," and reacted badly, imo, to that. So I guess we are even.

KT, message received.

Subject: RE: Non-Music: Pope in Toronto: Will he make it?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 25 Jul 02 - 05:24 PM

As I read it, what Big Mick was saying there was that generalising from bad cases where things go wrong is no different from generalising from good cases where they go right; if it's right to go from the bad cases to a generalisation about the whole system being corrupt, it'd be right to go from the good cases to a generalisation about everything being fine.

Which isn't denying the suffering caused in the bad cases, which is how it seems to have been read as meaning. And one of the benefits of the Mudcat being a place where we can get to know each other in some way, surely noone can think that Big Mick was doing that.

Subject: RE: Non-Music: Pope in Toronto: Will he make it?
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 25 Jul 02 - 06:02 PM

I must admit, Mick, that though I meant to keep both possibilities open, I finished up lurching to one rather than the other. I realise with hindsight that it looks quite bad. Many apologies.

Sharon, that's my point. In some countries, what followed communism turned out, almost incredibly, to be even worse. What they've got now are capitalist economies fuelled by rampant and divisive greed, and probably as much corruption as ever. Nobody likes to be ruled with an iron fist, but the alternatives can be worse (cf what followed Tito's Yugoslavia).

As for respecting other people's beliefs, I regard this as a bit of a mindless mantra. The catholic church doesn't do it, and neither do I. For instance I cannot respect people who believe that blacks are inferior to whites, nor that homosexuality is an evil, nor that the moon is made of green cheese.

Subject: RE: Non-Music: Pope in Toronto: Will he make it?
From: GUEST,harpgirl
Date: 25 Jul 02 - 07:02 PM

...I just figured the Pope's handlers thought it would be good press for him to show up at the Toronto children's meeting, cynic that I am...

throughout all this debate Mick, you haven't said what you think of the fact that repeated sexual abuse of children by Catholic Priests has been uncovered. Perhaps it is just too painful for you to consider. hg

Subject: RE: Non-Music: Pope in Toronto: Will he make it?
From: Big Mick
Date: 25 Jul 02 - 07:29 PM

Actually, I detest it and my view, expressed long and hard to the Bishops of two Dioceses (I live midway between them) is that there is absolutely no room for child abuse within the Church or anywhere else, but most especially among our Priests. Anyone who truly has been abused sexually, physically, mentally, or any combination of the three is deserving of all the support available. I don't believe there is any room for forgiveness on this issue. They must give up their collars and face criminal prosecution.

Is that strong enough for you? I also believe that safeguards must be put in place to insure that innocent clergy are not the victims of false accusations.

And I have not heard anyone in this debate acknowledge that the statistics show that this a very small percentage of the Priests that have done these things. In fact one study that I saw reported indicated that it is likely a bigger problem in certain other denominations.

Now, could we get back to the discussion of the issue, or do Harpgirl, Fionn, and Kat want to continue the debate of Big Mick's views on this? I will let you both know when I am back in Toronto and perhaps we could start a thread to talk about my views, eh? And maybe yours as well?

Mick

Subject: RE: Non-Music: Pope in Toronto: Will he make it?
From: GUEST,harpgirl
Date: 25 Jul 02 - 07:33 PM

...actually Mick, your opinion on this means a great deal to me....I did tell you what I think of it...thank you hg

Subject: RE: Non-Music: Pope in Toronto: Will he make it?
From: Big Mick
Date: 25 Jul 02 - 07:36 PM

Then accept my sincere apologies for being snippy, hg.

Subject: RE: Non-Music: Pope in Toronto: Will he make it?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 25 Jul 02 - 07:44 PM

There's always room for forgiveness, but that doesn't mean shrugging it off and acting like it didn't happen, or concealing it or denying it.

I can't see how there can be any possibility of anyone who has abused children being acceptable as a practising priest, or being trusted in any situation where he could do it again, or be tempted to do it again.

In fact that would be what any priest, or lay person for that matter, who repented what he had done, and might hope for forgiveness would insist on in any case.

And, as I understand it, after a period of shameful confusion, arising largely, I believe, out of genuine inability to believe that this kind of thing could happen, that is now the firm position of the church.

Subject: RE: Non-Music: Pope in Toronto: Will he make it?
From: Big Mick
Date: 25 Jul 02 - 08:28 PM

It certainly is in this neck of the woods. In the Diocese of Grand Rapids, the Bishop has gone to great lengths to root out any incidents and remove the Priest. There have been a number of them that allegedly had one incident of some form of sexual abuse of position many years ago, with no sign of anything since. They were all removed from Priestly duties. As they should have been. Several of the Parish communities have been saddened and actually asked for dispensation on the basis of the offending Priests life and service since. But the Bishop, properly in my view, would not relent.

Mick

Subject: RE: Non-Music: Pope in Toronto: Will he make it?
From: Peter T.
Date: 26 Jul 02 - 08:59 AM

The big news today, according to a Catholic commentator, is that the Pope's visit shows there is a "boom in yearning". I think we can all subscribe to that.

yours, Peter T.

Subject: RE: Non-Music: Pope in Toronto: Will he make it?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 26 Jul 02 - 09:56 AM

Think that was supposed to be a pun on "earning"?

Subject: RE: Non-Music: Pope in Toronto: Will he make it?
From: Fiolar
Date: 26 Jul 02 - 10:06 AM

Always amuses me when folk of other faiths criticise the Catholic Church for insisting that members of that church adhere to its teachings. Such teachings (to be blunt) have sod all to do with what others believe. If the folk of Kansas for example wish to teach in their schools that Darwinism is crap that's up to them. If folk want to believe that on the "last day" we'll all go to heaven in a flying saucer, good luck to them.

Subject: RE: Non-Music: Pope in Toronto: Will he make it?
From: SharonA
Date: 26 Jul 02 - 10:33 AM

Fionn: What you say about the state of some countries after the fall of Eastern European communism may be true, but for you to extrapolate from what I'd originally said to an assumption that I align myself with McCarthy and that I've "warmed" to the protection of crooks from the "long arm of the law" was going way too far.

Subject: RE: Non-Music: Pope in Toronto: Will he make it?
From: DougR
Date: 26 Jul 02 - 11:48 AM

The moon ISN'T made of green cheese? Shoot shucks. It's amazing what one can learn on the Mudcat.

DougR

Subject: RE: Non-Music: Pope in Toronto: Will he make it?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 26 Jul 02 - 12:18 PM

Don't believe it Doug - it's a typical liberal libel aimed at the flourishing lunar dairy industry.

Subject: RE: Non-Music: Pope in Toronto: Will he make it?
From: Gloredhel
Date: 26 Jul 02 - 06:35 PM

Peter T:

I found your comment on the ignorence of the youths you met in Chartres interesting, and disturbing. Please be assured that not all of us young Catholics love the Pope only because "he is wonderful." Some of actually have a working familiarity with his writings. Personally, I have been studying a compilation of his writings about human sexuality, and considering they come from a man without direct experience (I assume) they are certainly very beautiful.

And if you wish, I believe I can dig up quotes from some 2nd,3rd,and 4th Century texts which illustrate that at least some bishops believed in papal primacy that far back.

I wish it had been possible for me to be in Toronto this week. Many of my friends went to Rome two years ago, and I could not go then, either. Every two years I wonder if I've missed my last chance to see JP2 at a World Youth Day.

Subject: RE: Non-Music: Pope in Toronto: Will he make it?
From: Peter T.
Date: 26 Jul 02 - 07:01 PM

Some bishops of Rome believed it early on, but so what else is new? Anything 2nd, 3rd, of 4th century that, for example, the Greek Orthodox Church would agree with as representing the consensus of the Christian church? I don't think so.

yours, Peter T.

Subject: RE: Non-Music: Pope in Toronto: Will he make it?
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 29 Jul 02 - 10:15 PM

I hesitate to revive this thread, but Sharon took me to task while I was away for a few days and I didn't want to duck the point. Also Gloredhel, I'd be extremely interested if you could turn up any second-century references to papal supremacy. I'm not questioning that they may exist, just interested as I've had a good look at the early period myself. (For instance looking for a link between Peter and the first Popes. I've not found one, nor any evidence that Peter was ever in Rome, apart from an argument (which may have some merit) that when the bible says he was in Babylon, this meant Rome.)

But back to Sharon. Sharon, it seems to me that your comment "Look at Wojtyla's role in the downfall of communism in eastern Europe, for example" in the context you wrote it, made sense only if you think we all buy into the assumption "communism bad; capitalism good." I for one don't, and I find it disturbing that a large part of a large nation has signed up unqestioningly to so simple a view of a complex question.

JP2 should have kept out of politics, just as Pius IX and his successors had no business knocking democracy.

This partly addresses Fiolar's point: religions do in fact interfere with people other than their zealous adherents, as when popes pontificate on birth control and homosexuality. Or when Jehovah's Witnesses oppose blood transfusions for minors, or when the Hindu custom of suttee required widows to throw themselves on their husbands' funeral pyres. On the whole, communities would surely be better off without all the mumbo jumbo, and those of us who believe this must preach the message with all the evangelic zeal we can muster.

Subject: RE: Non-Music: Pope in Toronto: Will he make it?
From: Rick Fielding
Date: 29 Jul 02 - 10:35 PM

Well, the whole shebang is over and I managed to not hit any jaywalking pilgrims while out on the roads. I would compare certain elements to that of Woodstock (the FIRST one!) except that the music I heard (on the tube) was worse than atrocious. Singer-songwriter stuff in "Celtic meets Andrew Lloyd Webber" mode. The big problem was that the songs went on for fifteen minutes with the same maudlin choruses repeated endlessly. When this happens there are always a few in the heavenly choir who start to extemporize big time....and I heard quite a bit of off-key improvising.

It really IS tricky to watch this going on all around you, when you simply don't relate it to the supernatural in any way......and believe me, I've tried. The tendency is to just shake your head in wonder at the hundreds of thousands of youth (and not so youth) who are so moved by it. I suppose it doesn't help also, that I spent a few hours on the net trying to read objective accounts of this Pope's life from the thirties on. I wasn't that impressed with many of the positions he's apparently taken....but what the heck, it's been an interesting week.

Cheers

Rick

Subject: RE: Non-Music: Pope in Toronto: Will he make it?
From: little john cameron
Date: 29 Jul 02 - 11:04 PM

Rick m'bye,You hit the nail square.It crossed my mind at the start off this"Happening",the similarity to Woodstock.You and I can also remember the early Mariposa festivals.Admittedly there was was no overtly Religious connection but put some flowers in their hair and string a few beads around and there you go. We all thought that "The Times were A-Changing" but the big con still goes on. These young people are to be admired for their aim of trying to get everybody onboard but unfortunately the driver has hijacked the bus. When the time come to move on to the next chapter in this saga there are going to be a lot of surprised people.ljc

Subject: RE: Non-Music: Pope in Toronto: Will he make it?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 29 Jul 02 - 11:12 PM

I'm still pondering this problem of sexual abuse by priests. I can understand why it happens - a very small number of priests are perverts, and they commit horrible crimes. It's as simple as that.
What's caused me trouble is understanding how bishops could let things like this continue to happen. I'm starting to develop a theory. In every diocese I've known (including Rome, where the Pope is bishop), the bishop is constantly surrounded by piranhas - power-hungry, self-seeking men who seek nothing but their own advancement. I suppose you see it in most organizations, but the piranhas seem to be particularly vicious in the Catholic Church.
The piranhas are a breed apart, intelligent, powerful men who aren't trusted by ordinary parish priests. The piranhas form a near-impenetrable shield, making it almost impossible to get through to the bishop.
My friends the nuns say that they've reported errant priests on a few occasions, and they have been frustrated by a constant lack of response from the diocese involved. I'm betting their complaints were intercepted before they ever got to the bishop.
I hope the current crisis will teach the Catholic Church a few things - especially, not to trust the piranhas.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: Non-Music: Pope in Toronto: Will he make it?
From: Blackcatter
Date: 30 Jul 02 - 02:22 AM

Joe,

Reminds me of a comment by Col. Potter on M*A*S*H. He basically said that Majors and Generals are alright to trust, but Colonels aren't because most are so close to being a General they can taste the power.

pax yall

Subject: RE: Non-Music: Pope in Toronto: Will he make it?
From: Rick Fielding
Date: 30 Jul 02 - 09:35 AM

Two of our "youth oriented" TV stations tried to bring up the "child abuse" issue, and asked various young pilgrims what they thought could be done about it. I wasn't surprised that the kids (probably around 18+) seemed dumbfounded at the question itself. From what I saw, at least ten or so were asked for their opinions, and not ONE could articulate an answer that related to the question. They mostly said things like 'we need to pray more....'.

My guess is that among the devout young, victims of abuse and "questioners" are seen as weirdos, best avoided at all cost. I don't mean this as critically as it sounds....it strikes me as the same kind of relationship that "straight kids" had to hippies in the sixties and seventies.

Rick

Subject: RE: Non-Music: Pope in Toronto: Will he make it?
From: Jeri
Date: 30 Jul 02 - 09:57 AM

Rick, it seems like many of the pilgrims want the magic, and to belong to something bigger than themselves. It's the way I believe people feel when they buy into a cult. (Or extreme fandom: early Beatles - scream, faint, etc.) If such a thing is worthy of such devout fanatacism, it can't very well have 'real-world' imperfections, can it? If you're going to follow anything unquestioningly, there can't be anything to question, can there? There are probably kids out there who think and question, but they aren't the ones your talking about.

Subject: RE: Non-Music: Pope in Toronto: Will he make it?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 30 Jul 02 - 11:49 AM

I suspect that a major factor is that when people feel that the questioners are really not concerned for the truth, but are just interested in using the issue as a way of attacking, the tendency is to close up.

It's a universal way for people who have something important in common to respond in this kind of situation. That's not saying it's the right way. In fact it's likely to be the reverse of the right way - there is a lot to be said for refusing to treat an attacker as an attacker even when the attack isn't veiled. And lot of the time what feels like an attack isn't in fact intended that way, and responding to it as if it was is very damaging.

I think something analogous to that, a kind of siege mentality, is a main factor in bringing about the cover-ups and so forth. That and a reluctance in many cases to believe such accusations can be true. (Which in some cases they will not have been, which complicates matters still further.)

Subject: RE: Non-Music: Pope in Toronto: Will he make it?
From: SharonA
Date: 30 Jul 02 - 12:34 PM

Speaking of following without question...

Fionn: I think you're assuming a LOT from my original statement on this thread if you assume that I meant "communism bad; capitalism good". I'm disappointed to read that you've lumped me in with "a large part of a large nation [that] has signed up unquestioningly to so simple a view of a complex question" based solely on your assumptions about my original statement. Where in that statement did I say that all of the ideals or theories of communism were all bad??? Where did I say anything about capitalism??? Answer: Nowhere.

Let's take another look at the context in which I wrote my original statement: the two posts preceding mine. Mrrzy made a statement that the Pope is not "so much in service of others as ...in service of the Catholic Church". Big Mick then contended that JPII had indeed spent his life in service of others. I then agreed with Mick and said, "The term 'service' can mean many things. Look at Wojtyla's role in the downfall of communism in eastern Europe, for example." What I meant by that was that it has been my impression that John Paul II felt that his work in the Solidarity movement – in the pulpit and underground – was done in the service of humanity. As you yourself say, Fionn, no one likes to be ruled with an iron fist... nor to suffer from all that it entails. JPII was instrumental in opening that fist rather than smashing it – i.e. in bringing about a non-violent end to the Soviet empire. Who knows how many lives were saved because it did not end in a bloody revolution? Sounds to me as if he did a good deed there!

Now, as to the post-Soviet-collapse situation in eastern Europe, I think it should have been handled differently to avoid the problems that ensued, but nobody consulted me at the time! I do NOT necessarily think that a capitalist economy is all good; the thing about capitalism is that human greed drives it, but it needs a lot of governing to steer it so that it doesn't run over people. You'll have noticed that the US (I'm guessing that that is the "large nation" of which you speak) isn't completely successful at steering its capitalist economy, either! So maybe another economic system would be more ideal.... but every economic system is subject to greed and corruption and divisiveness and discontent. The thing that I wonder about the "higher proportion of discontented people" you mention is this: are there more people who are discontented now than there were under the Soviet regime, or are there more people who feel free to voice their discontent now that their current governments allow them to do so?

One definition of communism in the OED is "a theory which advocates a state of society in which there should be no private ownership, all property being vested in the community and labour organized for the common benefit of all members; the professed principle being that each should work according to his capacity, and receive according to his wants" (http://www.english.upenn.edu/~afilreis/50s/communism-oed.html). To me it sounds lovely in theory. It would be nice if it could work in practice; however, it does not take into account human greed. As soon as any member of that society decides that his or her wants outweigh anyone else's, the balance is thrown off. When that member is a leader of the community, the greed has a good chance of manifesting itself as oppression. It's the oppression I find objectionable, not the higher ideals of cooperation and community as evidenced in the theory.

See, Fionn, that's where your assumption that my original statement has anything to do with McCarthyism is dead wrong. McCarthy had no right, in the US government, to oppress people in any way for their political views. I most certainly do not agree with, nor approve of, what McCarthy did. People here are supposed to be allowed to voice their discontent without being ostracized or accused of treason; heck, this country already fought its own bloody revolution over that!

Lastly, I'll state again that I do not think that crooks and other criminals should be protected from prosecution. I kinda thought you'd noticed that on the thread about that convicted murder who was appealing with an insanity defense that I did not find credible. Unfortunately, I don't remember the name of the thread, or I'd link to it for those unfamiliar with it. You've seen, too, my reaction to the Andrea Yates child-murder case, where I thought there was enough evidence to indicate that Yates had a bona fide mental illness; in that case I still don't feel she should have been protected from the long arm of the law, but I wish the law had taken that illness into account and sentenced her to mandatory treatment instead of incarceration. ...But as for people who engage in banking fraud and corporate fraud, by all means they should be brought to justice. I said nothing to the contrary in my original statement, and in fact I acknowledged later on in this thread that JPII's service to humanity did not extend to all areas.

I don't know what else to say to dissuade you from the notion that I "sign up unquestioningly" to any view. I think that many of my posts to Mudcat give adequate testimony to the fact that I do give a lot of thought to the opinions I hold. If you knew more about my off-Mudcat self, you'd know just how personally I've explored my questions about communism and capitalism, but I'm not inclined to bare my soul to the internet world about that. If you want to chat about it in a PM, Fionn, please contact me.

Sharon

P.S. – Sorry, everyone, if I've led this thread too far astray. Back to our regularly scheduled discussion...

Subject: RE: Non-Music: Pope in Toronto: Will he make it?
From: SharonA
Date: 30 Jul 02 - 01:26 PM

Hmmm... "off-Mudcat self" doesn't sound right (after all, I'm the same self on- or off-Mudcat!). How about "out-of-Mudcat experience"? *G*

Subject: RE: Non-Music: Pope in Toronto: Will he make it?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 30 Jul 02 - 01:43 PM

John Paul has in fact been very scathing indeed about the damage caused by "free-market capitalism". That part of what he says has probably got a lot less attention in the media than it deserves.

What happened in the collapse of the "communist" regimes in Eastern Europe, w3hich deserved to collapse, was that the Western power structure - more especially that in the USA and the UK - saw it as an opportunity to wade in to exploit every opportunity, with no regard whatsoever for the well being of the people. The result has been, incredibly, that for many many people they now look back on the "communist" period as a kind of flawed golden age, when at least there was food on the table, you could be sure of a steady job, and the mafia weren't running wild.

The truth is, for the people who run things, it wasn't bringing freedom for the people they were really interested in, it was freedom to exploit the people. That's why they get on so well with the regime in China, which is as oppressive as can be, but is friendly to foreign capitalists.

And that has been more or less the way John Paul seems to have seen it.

Subject: RE: Non-Music: Pope in Toronto: Will he make it?
From: SharonA
Date: 30 Jul 02 - 03:45 PM

Thanks for providing that insight, Kevin. Your "flawed golden age" statement reminds me of history lessons about America in the post-Revolutionary-War era, when many people (perhaps even the majority of people) longed to be back under English rule because of the perceived security as well as the factor of wanting to maintain the status quo. They had good reason to complain, as the first new government that was attempted, under the Articles of Confederation, had fatal flaws. If the statesmen of the day hadn't gone back to the drawing board and created the Constitution, who knows what the American (and global) political landscape might look like today? Yet even under the second new government there was plenty of exploitation, dissatisfaction and yearning for the way things were.

Your statement also puts me in mind of the post-Civil-War Reconstruction era, where exploitation was worse than rampant.

No point here, just rumination about a couple of periods in US history that must have seemed worse to its contemporaries than what had gone before. Wonder what the Popes of those days had to say about those situations, if anything?