just saw this tonight, failure to report bishop idicted

[LexiaFira]

I have to agree, they brought it on themselves why should anyone feel sorry for them. IMO the kid shouldn't have been taken aside for speaking his mind.

It was more of that it was a freshman and all that was done that I recall was that he was reprimanded for interrupting the person giving the tour and that if you had to say such a thing, please wait until the right time and audience. Or join the debate team. At worst I think he was given a few days of detention. This i recall from having asked one of his siblings in sophomore year.

When Australia was having the 'Sorry' debate about apologising to the Aboriginal people, we had the head-honcho of the Church from my capital city visit my school. (I have no clue what the order of hierarchy is in the church.) He was trying to convince us that it was our duty to say sorry and it was the Aboriginal peoples duty to forgive us.

This is not going to end anytime soon.

of course not, mostly angry that more effort was put into hiding things than paying penance for your sin in god's eyes and man's law

I hate that Catholic/Christian guilt bullshit.

They have a way to make you feel like a horrible person for daring to criticize, question, or even just disagree with church beliefs. Good for the kid for calling them out on it and being strong enough to withstand the guilt trips.

The private high school I attended was/is Bishop Dunne Catholic high school of which we had a very tolerant principal - I don't know if she is still there - and it was more the faculty was shocked than omg how dare you embarrass us or speak out.

[Kheldarson]

What exactly are "uncomfortable" acts of sexuality?

Apparently, the guy included references to anal as appropriate sexual acts. I can't find any first edition works so...*shrugs*

[Rapscallion]

Probably not. I still can't wrap my head around the insistence of the Church in protecting these freaks.

I think some of it stems from the concept of how the catholic church works. For them, the system is that if you confess, and follow the correct procedures (say some hail Marys, some our fathers, etc), then you're clean. With that sort of background, I could understand it, though not appreciate it. Render unto Caesar and all that, and when they commit crimes they become Caesar's to put through the legal mill.

What really gets my goat is that they seem to allow the guilty more access to children after. It shows a touching level of idiocy and, indeed, malevolence.

Rapscallion

[HYHYBT]

I think if the priests were allowed to marry maybe this would not be an issue. I have not come across any other religion that has this type of nasty behavior from their clergy. I am not saying it doesnt happen somewhere out there but you have to wonder.

Allowing married priests might fix things, but I doubt it would by by such a direct link. If I understand correctly, it's not so much that Catholic priests turn to children (and to each other, which their church views as at least nearly as bad) because they have no other outlet. Surely that does happen, but then there really *are* people who are fine with having no sex of any kind. It's more a matter of people whose sexual interests would not be allowed in any case being attracted to a position where they're supposed to give up sex anyway. That way, theoretically, the question never comes up. Some, no doubt, do well with this; others fail, and others still probably went in precisely because, up until recently at least, no one was suspicious of priests so it gave readier access.

What exactly are "uncomfortable" acts of sexuality?

Oh, the fun that could be had with that question!

As for the child taken aside... I strongly suspect it was a matter of manners, and it's good to hear that schools at least sometimes try to teach that. The middle of a tour is an appropriate time for the person giving the tour to explain why the place is a mess, and even perhaps to mention how you might help if you feel so inclined; but it's not the time to start an argument over it. Doubly true if, as is virtually certain in this case, the guide is as opposed to molestation as anyone else.

[FArchivist]

I think some of it stems from the concept of how the catholic church works. For them, the system is that if you confess, and follow the correct procedures (say some hail Marys, some our fathers, etc), then you're clean.

Except that doesn't apply to mortal sins, which kiddy-touching is. Venial sins, you may be forgiven. Mortal...shit, you're done, son.

Render unto Caesar and all that, and when they commit crimes they become Caesar's to put through the legal mill.

Doctrine Fun Time! Interestingly, the main Catholic viewpoint of that quote from Jesus is that His Christliness was being hella sarcastic. Sure you render unto Caesar what is Caesar's...but what IS Caesar's? In the Catholic doctrine, all legitimate government, law, courts, and judicial punishment are divinely inspired by God. Everything you ever do, create, own or otherwise have contact with comes from God. So you render under Caesar what is his...nothing.

Note that this does not prevent governments from saying "Aaaaaah, yeaaaah - no."

Frankly, as a Catholic I would like to purify the Church. I think that would be readily accomplished by taking all the pedo-priests, declaring them guilty under canon law [which they are], and extraditing them to the Vatican. We then proceed to have a big fucking bonfire in Saint Peter's Square, where every pedo-priest is lashed to a stake and set on fire, all while proclaiming the New Catholic Inquisition and the cleansing of the Church. That would end this bullshit once and for all. Pedo-priests can't go pedo if they're dead.

[Eisa]

And shit like this is why I basically agree with this -sighs-

There is no excuse. I'm sorry. Child molestation isn't one of those "oh it's all right, just don't do it again" things.

[Blue Ginger]

I think some of it stems from the concept of how the catholic church works. For them, the system is that if you confess, and follow the correct procedures (say some hail Marys, some our fathers, etc), then you're clean.

Yep, that is pretty much what we were taught at school. So by that reckoning, I could make the vatican go ka-boomy and as long as I say a few hail Mary's, etc, I would be saved. I would much rather see the arseholes in jail where they can't hurt anyone.

Note that this does not prevent governments from saying "Aaaaaah, yeaaaah - no."

Problem in Ireland was there was no one in government who would stand up and say this until recently. Everyone was happy being able to be catholic that they never questioned what was happening behind closed doors.

In Australia, until at least the 70's, there was no one to say this. And even then most of the claims of abuse were dismissed. There are still battles being fought to bring about charges on priests and religious groups.

It is probably similar in other countries.

Makes me wonder about all the kids in the missions in Africa and Asia.

[wolfie]

Interestingly, the main Catholic viewpoint of that quote from Jesus is that His Christliness was being hella sarcastic. Sure you render unto Caesar what is Caesar's...but what IS Caesar's? In the Catholic doctrine, all legitimate government, law, courts, and judicial punishment are divinely inspired by God.

My understanding of that quote is that Jesus was being baited by some trolls ("Is it legal to pay tribute to Caesar?"). In those days "pay tribute" didn't mean what people are doing now regarding Steve Jobs - it meant "we conquered you, now pay up". The trolls were trying to put Jesus in the position of either getting in trouble with the Roman authorities (No, it's not legal to pay tribute to Caesar) or being unpopular with the general public (Yes, it's legal to pay tribute to Caesar). That quote was an elegant way to dodge the question.

[FArchivist]

Yep, that is pretty much what we were taught at school. So by that reckoning, I could make the vatican go ka-boomy and as long as I say a few hail Mary's, etc, I would be saved.

That would still be a mortal sin, and so confession wouldn't work for that.

[Kheldarson]

Actually confession does...and doesn't. Part of the problem with the understanding of confession is that people forget that it's a several part process.

1. Being sincerely sorry for the sin and sincere in attempting to never repeat it again. So, easy example: kids being disobedient to parents. Breaks 4th commandment. Confesses particular disobedience to the pastor and sincerely doesn't want to do it again...but ends up anyway cuz he's a kid? You're good.

2. Full confession. Not necessarily out loud to the pastor, but at least to God in the confessional. Not hiding anything.

3. Completion of penance. This one's the tricky part. For venial sins, a few Hail Mary's, Our Father's cover it. Venial sins are like dry erase markers on a dry erase board. Easy to get off. So easy penance. Mortal sins are like Sharpies. Hard as fuck to get off a dry erase board. So mortal sins, you can't just say the few prayers. You legitimately have to make a change or try to fix the problem. So...you murdered someone. The priest will absolve you, but it won't be complete until you fix it with the family...which means turning yourself in. Until then, the absolution doesn't take, so you're still in mortal sin.

Major issue that came up, and is still affecting the Church, is that the Jesuits, trying to get more converts and trying to get more power (*sigh*), encouraged expatriation, or a lessening of penance, in France and much of Europe. And that view has continued today.

[Blue Ginger]

1. Being sincerely sorry for the sin and sincere in attempting to never repeat it again.

But I would never repeat it because there would be nothing left to go ka-boom again.

That's why people still try to buy their way into heaven. 'But i'm really really sorry. I'll give you more money to prove it.'

It's sort of a great big not nice game of 'don't piss off the gatekeeper.' Which unfortunately meant people didn't question what was happening when they should have been yelling from the roof tops that this was very wrong.

[Kheldarson]

It's a good in theory, but in practice falls apart because of human element thing, I know. But that's most things, right?

[bara]

What exactly are "uncomfortable" acts of sexuality?

The back of a Volkswagen?

Sorry, obligatiory.

[Canarr]

Depends on the Volkswagen... have you ever seen a Phaeton?