Catholic Sex Abuse Criticism = Anti-Semitism?

[ToadBrother]

I think the more apt comparison is between modern anti-semitism as practiced in the West - which is generally a kind of sneering contempt - often masked around the public, to the sort of sneering contempt felt by many of the more liberal, secular members of the western media towards the Catholic Church and hierarchy. And I would submit that contempt has nothing to do with sex with minors and everything to do with the Church's politically unacceptable moral pronouncements on social issues dear to the hearts and minds of the Left.

I don't accept that at all. This is once again trying to blame other people for the Church's sins. The Church protected child molestors, and the evidence is growing that it even promoted them. I find your suggestion noxious.

Besides, any organization that protects child abusers has no moral high ground to pronounce from.

[eyeball]

I think the more apt comparison is between modern anti-semitism as practiced in the West - which is generally a kind of sneering contempt - often masked around the public, to the sort of sneering contempt felt by many of the more liberal, secular members of the western media towards the Catholic Church and hierarchy. And I would submit that contempt has nothing to do with sex with minors and everything to do with the Church's politically unacceptable moral pronouncements on social issues dear to the hearts and minds of the Left.

Interestingly enough a good part of my secular contempt for the Church closely mirrors the Leftist contempt I have for the Government, especially the ancient propensity of both organizations to cover up perversion and malfeasance within their ranks.

You appear to know almost nothing about either paedophilia, or the Church, or the incidents of child abuse which took place. Should you even be attempting to take part in this discussion?

Sure why not? I know people who as children were sexually abused by priests and their abuse was enabled by the government. It goes without saying both attempted to cover it all up.

From what direction does your knowledge and insight come from? Apologist, victim or something else?

As I recall you're a government bureaucrat.

The Catholic Church is a huge organization run, inevitably by bureaucrats. This is an unfortunately common human failing...

Promote them (priests) and they become bureaucrats too

Do tell...

[Argus]

But for The New York Times -- the almost unapologetic employer of Walter Duranty, Stalin's most useful idiot in the Western media, now surviving financially on a loan-shark's lifeline from the less than impeccable Mexican businessman Carlos Slim -- for an instant it was like looking for and excitedly producing the Watergate "smoking gun." They reflexively and maliciously threw muck at the Pope and elicited a withering rebuke within a few hours. In setting out to destroy the moral authority of the world's premier religious leader, they did savage violence to what was left of their own.

Media Squandering What's Left of Their Credibility

Edited April 10, 2010 by Argus

[Argus]

I don't accept that at all. This is once again trying to blame other people for the Church's sins. The Church protected child molestors, and the evidence is growing that it even promoted them. I find your suggestion noxious.

I could care less about your emotional response, especially given the absence of facts it contains.

The reaction of the Church was a sign of the times and the sign of a large bureaucracy. It was little different than all the other bureaucracies of the time.

Besides, any organization that protects child abusers has no moral high ground to pronounce from.

Virtually all organizations ignored the problem child abuse, from the Boy Scouts to medical associations to schools. And for a Church which has long had huge hangups about sex, I'm not surprised it took them a while to start moving on this too.

[Argus]

Interestingly enough a good part of my secular contempt for the Church closely mirrors the Leftist contempt I have for the Government, especially the ancient propensity of both organizations to cover up perversion and malfeasance within their ranks

Well no doubt the government propensity for such things will evaporate once the Left gets in. Everyone knows that making government much, much bigger, and giving it far more powers will vastly approve accountability.

From what direction does your knowledge and insight come from?

Intelligent, unbiased inquiry.

As I recall you're a government bureaucrat.

Nope. Again, ignorance showing on your part. Not everyone who molests minors is a pedophile - in fact, only a minority are, and not everyone who works for the government is a bureaucrat - only a minority are.

[eyeball]

Everyone knows that making government much, much bigger, and giving it far more powers will vastly approve accountability.

Like hell it will, it'll mean government workers like you will be promoted to bureaucrats.

Intelligent, unbiased inquiry.

So you don't know anyone who's actually been abused?

Again, ignorance showing on your part. Not everyone who molests minors is a pedophile.

I never said everyone was, that said a paedophile is a person, usually a man, who is sexually attracted to children - like my friend who was a child when he was raped by a priest. Despite the physical abuse my friend still insists it was the priests diddling with his mind that did the most lasting damage. He still has nightmares to this day that involve him burning in agony.

I think Oleg is definitely onto something - there is something very vampire-like about the way priests try to suck people into believing their deluded view of reality.

[Oleg Bach]

IF Jesus the Christ fell out of the clouds tomorrow and landed on the Vatican door step - he would in all probablity enter - say hello to the Pope - punch him in his decrept old yap and leave the planet never to return.

[Argus]

Like hell it will, it'll mean government workers like you will be promoted to bureaucrats.

Then do tell us, little lefty, why the Left believes in big, big government, in putting the government in charge of virtually everything, from industry to what we say, think, read and believe? As for me becoming a bureaucrat - anything is possible, I suppose, but I have so little respect for the rules and so much preference for doing what works best, regardless of the rules, that I rather doubt I'd make a good one.

I never said everyone was, that said a paedophile is a person, usually a man, who is sexually attracted to children - like my friend who was a child when he was raped by a priest.

Was your friend actually raped? I'm not deliberately being insulting here. Most, the vast majority of child molesting which went on under the Church apparently involved persuasion, seduction, coercion, yes, but not actual physical force. The main exceptions were usually religiously run schools where those in charge had absolute authority. Of course, that sort of thing took place in numerous boarding schools and orphanages not run by any church, too.

And most of it involved young boys, not little boys. There is a difference.

Edited April 10, 2010 by Argus

[ToadBrother]

I could care less about your emotional response, especially given the absence of facts it contains.

The reaction of the Church was a sign of the times and the sign of a large bureaucracy. It was little different than all the other bureaucracies of the time.

Save for the singular fact that the Church claimed itself unlike any other organization. What does God need with a coverup?

Virtually all organizations ignored the problem child abuse, from the Boy Scouts to medical associations to schools. And for a Church which has long had huge hangups about sex, I'm not surprised it took them a while to start moving on this too.

Oh I quite agree, and from my standpoint, viewing the Church as simply a government (admittedly an ancient one), and having nothing particular to inform me about morals, ethics, beliefs, philosophy or anything else for that matter (beyond any curiosity I might have about church history, tradition and law), they certainly did behave in a fashion no different than other organizations like, as you mention, the Boy Scouts. The special position they have isn't one I've given them, but one they have proclaimed. They are, for lack of a better phrase, being hoisted by their own petard. They claim Heavenly inspiration, they claim spiritual authority based upon a deity granting it to one of their own (or close enough to their own, the Papacy proper didn't really come into existence until sometime in the 2nd century). The Boy Scouts or most other folks who find themselves in a big heap of trouble over this don't have the resume the Church claims to.

But this odd apologetic you have, where anyone that condemns the church is a leftist, that is indeed pretty pathetic. I mean, are you Mr. Canada today? The Church has done, and by continuing this foolish and ill-informed strategy, continues to do an enormous amount of damage to itself. It certainly isn't worried about guys like me, but just look at the ruination in Ireland, where the Church has stood in the highest esteem for well over a thousand years. Look at the damage being done in Catholic regions of Germany? Blaming "socialists" is both moronic and shooting at the wrong target. The victims have a right to demand better of the Church, and the rest of the society is under no special duress any more to look the other way. That particular power of the Church's was lost, thank goodness, a few centuries ago.

[CANADIEN]

Save for the singular fact that the Church claimed itself unlike any other organization. What does God need with a coverup?

Oh I quite agree, and from my standpoint, viewing the Church as simply a government (admittedly an ancient one), and having nothing particular to inform me about morals, ethics, beliefs, philosophy or anything else for that matter (beyond any curiosity I might have about church history, tradition and law), they certainly did behave in a fashion no different than other organizations like, as you mention, the Boy Scouts. The special position they have isn't one I've given them, but one they have proclaimed. They are, for lack of a better phrase, being hoisted by their own petard. They claim Heavenly inspiration, they claim spiritual authority based upon a deity granting it to one of their own (or close enough to their own, the Papacy proper didn't really come into existence until sometime in the 2nd century). The Boy Scouts or most other folks who find themselves in a big heap of trouble over this don't have the resume the Church claims to.

But this odd apologetic you have, where anyone that condemns the church is a leftist, that is indeed pretty pathetic. I mean, are you Mr. Canada today? The Church has done, and by continuing this foolish and ill-informed strategy, continues to do an enormous amount of damage to itself. It certainly isn't worried about guys like me, but just look at the ruination in Ireland, where the Church has stood in the highest esteem for well over a thousand years. Look at the damage being done in Catholic regions of Germany? Blaming "socialists" is both moronic and shooting at the wrong target. The victims have a right to demand better of the Church, and the rest of the society is under no special duress any more to look the other way. That particular power of the Church's was lost, thank goodness, a few centuries ago.

Thw "we're attacked by out ennemies" defense is indeed pathetic, as you say. And those who use it miss the boat completely. This is not about the percentage of child molestors in the priesthoo, how whether or not the Church's bureacracy acted differently from other bureaucracies. It's about the fact that members of the Church hierachy have betrayed the victims, the universal Church and God.

As a Catholic, I believe the Church has been entrusted with being a witness to the Truth. This denial, this hiding game, this concern for image over justice is not bearing witness to the Truth. Those responsible have to come forward and face the consequences of their actions.

Do I hold my Church and its pastors to a higer standard? You bet I do. The authority the Church claims, and its service to God, demand no less.

[Argus]

Save for the singular fact that the Church claimed itself unlike any other organization. What does God need with a coverup

You have, unintentionally, I think, put your finger on a major part of the issue. To a true believer, and I think you will grant most of the Church hierarchy would be so described, God knows all, and God will, in the end, judge all. The actions of men here on Earth, therefore, do not really need to be judged by men. The Church is predicated upon the belief that sinners can be reformed and so rather than call the police and lock such people in prison - and not incidentally, damage the Church's reputation - the belief was such people could be counseled and treated and, being godly men, after all, would realize the error of their ways, repent, and could then be reformed and carry on service. There is a certain amount of hypocrisy involved in this, I believe, as the Church has always had a bias towards the "godly men" within its own ranks. Many organizations do show an almost unconscious assumption that those like them are somehow special, compared to others - ie, police, soldiers, lawyers, doctors, reporters, politicians, etc. But I also think there was ignorance of the nature of the problem. These people were often considered to have succumbed to temptation and sin, as opposed to having psychological problems, and so were treated for their lapse into sin by an infusion of biblical reformation, as it were. Given the nature of the men involved this actually probably worked quite often, but equally evident, it did not work on numerous other occasions. Seducing or molesting minors shows a weakness of the will, spirit and morality which are unlikely to be remedied by having biblical verses shouted at you.

Something worth noting, as in today's paper, was the determination of the Church to avoid scandal, dating back quite a long ways, and originally unrelated to molesting minors. I'm sure this determination rose out of the Church's view of itself as the home of God, and that any scandal in it would thus shake the faith of their followers, and thus lead to increase in sin and wickedness, and lost souls.

Canon Law Proscribes Scandal

But this odd apologetic you have, where anyone that condemns the church is a leftist, that is indeed pretty pathetic.

Never said, hinted or suggested any such thing.

[eyeball]

Then do tell us, little lefty, why the Left believes in big, big government, in putting the government in charge of virtually everything, from industry to what we say, think, read and believe?

I don't know. Given your convictions about what a Lefty is and that I am one perhaps you could tell me why I'm always in here proposing decentralization, and eschewing big distant governments in lieu of small local ones?

As for me becoming a bureaucrat - anything is possible, I suppose, but I have so little respect for the rules and so much preference for doing what works best, regardless of the rules, that I rather doubt I'd make a good one.

Actually I think you'd excel at it.

Was your friend actually raped?

Yes, he had a holier than thou dink shoved up his ass, apparently repeatedly.

I'm not deliberately being insulting here. Most, the vast majority of child molesting which went on under the Church apparently involved persuasion, seduction, coercion, yes, but not actual physical force.

Yes that's when they diddle with your head and leave you with weird ideas like, those on the left are evil and they want governments to be really really big and use them to enslave your mind. You do realize that left-handedness is considered a sign of Beelzebub don't you? The nun's used to tie my wife's left hand behind her back and hit her with a stick when they found her using it.

The main exceptions were usually religiously run schools where those in charge had absolute authority. Of course, that sort of thing took place in numerous boarding schools and orphanages not run by any church, too.

I find it interesting how closely the hierarchy of authority in the Church not to mention boarding schools and orphanages resembles that of the governments that funneled children into their maws.

And most of it involved young boys, not little boys. There is a difference.

Only a big big government bureaucrat would say that.

[Argus]

I don't know. Given your convictions about what a Lefty is and that I am one perhaps you could tell me why I'm always in here proposing decentralization, and eschewing big distant governments in lieu of small local ones?

You were the one who claimed a "leftist contempt for government". I merely pointed out that one of the more universal traits of the Left is an insatiable desire to make government bigger and more powerful. Are you going to deny that this is a trait among the Left? If not, quite whining.

Actually I think you'd excel at it.

Whatever. You're just being childish now.

I find it interesting how closely the hierarchy of authority in the Church not to mention boarding schools and orphanages resembles that of the governments that funneled children into their maws.

Why? Most hierarchies are similar in nature. Just as most bureaucracies are.

Only a big big government bureaucrat would say that.

No, someone with knowledge would say that. Which is why you didn't and won't. Appreciating nuance is not among your better traits.

[bloodyminded]

You were the one who claimed a "leftist contempt for government". I merely pointed out that one of the more universal traits of the Left is an insatiable desire to make government bigger and more powerful. Are you going to deny that this is a trait among the Left? If not, quite whining.

It is not specifically a trait of the left, since it is equalled by the Right...despite their protestations, which are demonstrably false. Unless, that is, conservative "theory" is more real than their actions.

Edited April 12, 2010 by bloodyminded

[ToadBrother]

You have, unintentionally, I think, put your finger on a major part of the issue.

No, not unintentionally, very intentionally put my finger on it.

To a true believer, and I think you will grant most of the Church hierarchy would be so described, God knows all, and God will, in the end, judge all. The actions of men here on Earth, therefore, do not really need to be judged by men.

This was the theory that the Church posited for about the first thousand years of it's existence, and it was the fundamental root of the friction between its spiritual authority and the temporal authority of the Christian rulers. The Church long held that it was by and large independent of local law and custom. It posited that its clergy were inviolate, and to one extent or another, the Christian princes agreed to it, with some notable exceptions, like the long-standing struggles between the Holy Roman Emperors and the Papacy. In the end, that notion was one of the key factors in a number of European princes adopting some form of Reformationist theology and tossing the Church out. In strict terms, Canada is the successor of just such a kingdom, and while we have no established church now, since the break with Rome, our forebearer state has in every way rejected the idea that the Church was independent of the state (quite the opposite, in fact, in England, the Church is a part of the state and governed by the reigning monarch).

So whatever the Church's theological notions of responsibility and authority, it does not hold a position in Canada, or pretty much anywhere else now, where that approach holds any meaning, save within the confines of Vatican City.

The Church is predicated upon the belief that sinners can be reformed and so rather than call the police and lock such people in prison - and not incidentally, damage the Church's reputation - the belief was such people could be counseled and treated and, being godly men, after all, would realize the error of their ways, repent, and could then be reformed and carry on service. There is a certain amount of hypocrisy involved in this, I believe, as the Church has always had a bias towards the "godly men" within its own ranks. Many organizations do show an almost unconscious assumption that those like them are somehow special, compared to others - ie, police, soldiers, lawyers, doctors, reporters, politicians, etc. But I also think there was ignorance of the nature of the problem. These people were often considered to have succumbed to temptation and sin, as opposed to having psychological problems, and so were treated for their lapse into sin by an infusion of biblical reformation, as it were. Given the nature of the men involved this actually probably worked quite often, but equally evident, it did not work on numerous other occasions. Seducing or molesting minors shows a weakness of the will, spirit and morality which are unlikely to be remedied by having biblical verses shouted at you.

I'm sure they had what seemed to them very good reasons for hiding what was going on. Most organizations that partake in coverups always do, but at the end of the day, it amounts to "we're too big/good/important to be trashed over this, so for the greater good, we're just going to sweep it under the rug." There was a day when that worked, when the authorities, for whatever reason (perhaps shared guilt, perhaps simply not wanting to be seen overthrowing another source of authority and thus giving the Proles any big ideas) went along and essentially permitted the Church the leeway to take care of its own problems.

Something worth noting, as in today's paper, was the determination of the Church to avoid scandal, dating back quite a long ways, and originally unrelated to molesting minors. I'm sure this determination rose out of the Church's view of itself as the home of God, and that any scandal in it would thus shake the faith of their followers, and thus lead to increase in sin and wickedness, and lost souls.

Canon Law Proscribes Scandal

But that's still a rationalization. That's no different than a police department protecting a bad cop because if it gets out there's a bad cop, respect for police officers will be damaged. It's probably even true, but society's interests are not served by allowing police departments, churches, governments or anyone else to bury bad deeds. We are all supposed to be equal before the law. The law, in our country, does not distinguish between bishops are bureaucrats, and demands that all, big or small, powerful or impotent, obey it. The Church hierarchy may still to some extent hold the old medieval view that it is inviolate, but it is not, and when it is party to wrongdoing, then it has to answer for what is has done, and if its governing structure believes itself above the law, then they need to abandon that. There may be a number of reasonable, or at least understandable explanations for why the Church behaved the way it did, but there was never an excuse for it. They knew what the right thing was to do, and if they did not, then they have no moral high ground to speak from.

[eyeball]

You were the one who claimed a "leftist contempt for government". I merely pointed out that one of the more universal traits of the Left is an insatiable desire to make government bigger and more powerful. Are you going to deny that this is a trait among the Left? If not, quite whining.

Yes I am going to deny it because it's a trait among dictators tyrants and their networks of accomplices and enablers. Like pedophilia this is a human failing not an ideological one. What you fail to appreciate is that it's not the pedophilia alone that is so bad. Covering up, excusing or candy-coating it is every bit as disgusting and depraved as the act itself.

Speaking of universal ideological traits it seems to me that every time I turn around its those on the Right who are excusing and candy-coating the sins of our most ubiquitous institutions and hierarchies of authority. The Church, Government, Corporations, Police, Military, all are afforded the same sort of holier than thou place in the scheme of things, how do you explain this?

I ask again, if I'm such a big supporter of big powerful governments as you've clearly implied I must be because I'm a leftist, why am I always in here proposing decentralization, and eschewing big distant governments in lieu of small local ones?

Edited April 12, 2010 by eyeball

[dre]

The poor poor victimized Roman Church...

Clearly people critical of church's rich history of child-rape and cover-ups are just like people who hate jews..

[GostHacked]

You have, unintentionally, I think, put your finger on a major part of the issue. To a true believer, and I think you will grant most of the Church hierarchy would be so described, God knows all, and God will, in the end, judge all. The actions of men here on Earth, therefore, do not really need to be judged by men.

But for the time being they have 'man' to answer to. We have a legal system that is set up to judge those who do wrong. Look at it as doing God's work! We are just saving him the paperwork.

And most of it involved young boys, not little boys. There is a difference.

It does not make it any more right. That is the point you seem to be missing. The events of molestation seem to be the smaller issue compared to the systematic cover up of the abuses.

I'd like public apologies from all of you. The usual private message apology isn't good enough for this. Please post your apology, and your acknowledgement of your ignorance, and Catholic prejudice and bigotry.

As soon as I see an apology from you. You've been wrong in the past, posts here prove it. I won't hold my breath.

[DogOnPorch]

Hello, this is Homer Simpson, a.k.a. 'Happy Dude'. The court has ordered

me to call every person in town to apologize for my telemarketing scam.

I'm sorry.

If you can find it in your heart to forgive me, send one

dollar to 'Sorry Dude', 742 Evergreen Terrace, Springfield. You have the

power.