5 ms·
What did I say: people automatically assume that (1)you are fully versed in everything about the situation, (2)you agree with how the Church hand
by assemble 16y ago
What did I say:
people automatically assume that
(1)you are fully versed in everything about the situation,
(2)you agree with how the Church handled it all,
(3)you must be contributing to it by staying in the
Church, etc. We're all generally angry about this
problem. I don't know a single person who approves of
the practice of just moving people around, but there
are so many complexities to the issue.
The complexities of the issue isn't that they were moved around. And as I said, nobody I know agrees with that. Do I know the facts of the case? No.
Do I think that they should have been removed from public activity after the accusations? Yes.
Should these things have been reported to police? Yes.
I'm tired of talking about this stuff. The problem is that there now seems to be a witch hunt against priests, and really all Catholics. Look around here, on reddit, etc: hardly anybody even gives us a chance. Our Church has made mistakes; it has admitted this, and has changed the policies:
- Every person who works with kids in a Catholic organization in the US has to go through a training class on spotting & preventing abuse.
- The Church now reports all of these instances to police.
There really is more to the issue than just moving priests around. You won't get much argument that simply moving them around was the wrong answer, but you won't get anymore out of me when you say that I monetarily and morally support child abuse.
- 20% of the hospitals in the US are Catholic hospitals, they accept anybody--and have longer than other hospitals have. (Remember segregation? Our hospitals in the South accepted blacks and whites.)
- We probably have the most private schools in the country. They don't get money from the government, so essentially public schools are getting more money per pupil than they should. They also tend to have higher test scores on average. (Oh, and Catholics teach evolution in science class...)
- We run numerous soup kitchens, food pantries and homeless shelters. For an amazing example of this kind of charity, read up about the St. Vincent de Paul Society. ( http://svdpusa.org/ http://svdpusa.org/ ) It's fantastic.
Anyway, people are by their nature fallible. Our leaders have worked to fix the problems. The coverup is a horrible problem, but the numbers for abusive priests are actually lower than those for the general male population. ( http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/andrewbrown/2010/mar/11/catholic-abuse-priests http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/andrewbrown/2010/mar... http://www.usccb.org/nrb/johnjaystudy/ http://www.usccb.org/nrb/johnjaystudy/ )
I've spent far too long on this, but this stuff bothers me. We don't know all the facts. We know something bad happened. We think we've fixed it. I'm not saying forgive and forget--on the contrary: don't ever forget it lest it happens again--but give us some of that 'tolerance' everybody keeps saying is so great...
edit: formatting
- redthrowaway 16y agoI don't think you can say you've fixed the problem when the man most directly responsible for the problem is now your infallible leader, and was likely chosen as such so as to avoid direct criminal charges. Regardless, I can appreciate the weariness everyday Catholics feel in fielding these questions. Much of my family is Irish Catholic, and I wouldn't broach the subject with them. As for the good works the Church does, that really is inconsequential. Hamas runs schools, and Pablo Escobar was a pillar of the community. The good works one does do not absolve one of one's sins. My biggest problem with the Church and its apologists is the rather offhanded manner in which these issues are shrugged off. "Yes, we raped thousands of children, and provided the rapists with access to further children, but we're better now." "Yes, we told millions of uneducated people in AIDS-ridden sub-Saharan Africa that condoms increase their chances of getting AIDS, but the jury's still out on that." I would have no problem forgiving the church if they offered a genuine mea culpa, turned in every child-raping priest to the authorities, and reversed their policy on condoms in AIDS-ridden and over-populated areas of the world. Far from that, however, Mr. Ratzinger has only further exacerbated these issues. I don't believe that mere membership provides material support to these activities, but every dollar you put in the donation plate does. As for the "child abuse" issue: My dad was raised in a Catholic neighbourhood, and attended a Catholic school. The nuns would smack him with a ruler if he answered a question wrong. That's child abuse. Putting your penis inside a child is child rape. There is a huge difference between the two, and suggesting that the latter is equivalent to the former smacks of equivocation. I understand that you are not your church, just as I understand that Israelis are not Israel. Like that example, however, the support that you provide the church, be it direct or otherwise, is at least partially responsible for its actions. Just as Israelis are responsible for the atrocities carried out against Palestinians, just as Americans are responsible for the atrocities inflicted on Iraqis, Hell, just as we Canadians are responsible for the actions of our government, so too are you responsible for the actions of your church.
- assemble 16y agoThe pope is not our infallible leader. He's fallible just like everybody else. Popes are only infallible when they are speaking ex cathedra (from the chair). They don't do this very often. Most infallible doctrines have actually been put in place by the college of cardinals. I seriously doubt that Ratzinger was elected pope to avoid criminal charges. I don't have the time to address these things properly, but here's the short form. We are better now, at least in the US--and the other countries are starting to get it together as well. If I remember correctly, any case of abuse (not just child rape, I do mean abuse--rape is a terrible form of abuse, but there are other forms as well) is reported to authorities. The one thing I will say about Africa is that the church teaches abstinence. If you're going to ignore the abstinence teaching, you might as well ignore the condom teaching as well. You can't just pick and choose which parts of Church teaching to follow (but everybody does, and that's why we have problems...) Of the money I give my church, 10% goes to my diocese. I don't think my diocese has had the same problems that other diocese have--so no, I'm not supporting the practice. Some of the diocese's money then goes to the Vatican (and I think the USCCB, but I'm not sure), but I believe most if not all of that goes to charity work. You can't hold people responsible for actions that they did not know about. And I believe that these things are no longer going on. If you want to continue this conversation, feel free to email me and I will try to explain more when I get enough time to properly research and answer things. I think that this is getting way OT for HN, so I do not intend to make any further response on here. Have a good day!