This one goes straight to the pope

[Matt J]

It just keeps getting better. Hey y'all, let's blame it on gays.




AP News : NWFDailynews.com

So if I'm reading that right then abortion=bad, gay marriage=bad, but rape of a minor=gods will?

What gets me the most is that this is an institution based on rigid rules and requirements. However, Jesus himself never wrote anything down and never really defined anything to be a definite and absolute. It's almost like someone with a serious mental disease co-opted his teachings and built an empire.

 

[Miss Critter]

It's almost like someone with a serious mental disease co-opted his teachings and built an empire.

No "almost" about it, sweetie. And unfortunately, the co-opting doesn't only apply to Catholicism. It's just one of the more egregious examples.

You've touched on something that's long bothered me about many "Christian" religions - that is, their adherance to Bblical "principals" even when they are in direct opposition to Jesus' teachings. I'm a Christian, not a Biblian (or whatever you would call it). And Jesus even said "I come to bring a new covenant," which would seem to imply that much of the "old" covenant was wrong. Much of the old covenant had to do with ego. The God of the Old Testament is terribly ego-based - full of vengeance, judgment and wrath - an eye for an eye. The Father that Jesus teaches of is only love, light and hope - turn the other cheek. If I'm a Christian, and Jesus is my leader, then I choose to believe in the God he reveals.

I received a mailing-list email from a local paster last week that included the words "God hates. . ." I quit reading. MY God hates nothing. MY God does not know what hate is. And if He did, I believe the thing HE would "hate" most is. . . . hate. We choose to believe the outdated stuff because it appeals to the petty human side of us - the ego. And many church leaders become leaders because of their ego. Letting go of the ego is hard, and I don't mean to imply in any way that I've been successful, but I keep trying. Because Jesus - and all the great spiritual teachers in history- teach that it is the only way to heaven (a discussion for another time), which sounds like a pretty groovy state of being.

 

[scooterbug44]

The Vatican can spin all it wants, but my feelings have nothing to do with propaganda/theology/family values/politics and everything to do with what is right and wrong at the most basic level of humanity.

You do not hurt children and you do not protect those who do.

 

[Mango]

I agree. Not to mention that the NYTs article was based on official correspondence about father Murphy to the vatican.

Hitchens had a scathing op ed about this last week in Slate:

The pope's entire career has the stench of evil about it. - By Christopher Hitchens - Slate Magazine

Hitchen's should have done his homework because most of his interpretations are flawed. Hitchen's claimed that Ratzinger sent out a confidential letter to Cardinals that they are not to speak of child cases or they would be excommunicated. This was what was actually sent out publicly regarding canon law, which has been on the Vatican website since 2001:

[quote]The four-page document, written in Latin and entitled "Sacramentorum sanctitatis tutela," is dated May 19, 2001, and has already been conveyed to all the world's bishops by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, the prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.
[/quote]

This rule also extended the limits of prosecution which hampered investigations prior to that date. It was extended to 10 years past the victims 18th birthday.

What is true is that canon law regarding these situations is that anyone involved in the case being investigated by the Congregation must keep the case secret, that includes the accuser. This is not uncommon in our public judicial system. It goes further to include excommunication of anyone who knowingly had information about sexual abuse and not reporting it to the Congregation. The Church claims that it has the seal of confession to protect and to protect the victims.

What irks me about all this is why the Church has their own laws and how to handle them these cases outside of any Countries judicial system. I can't imagine any Country in the world not having laws about child molestation that has a large Christian population. I can understand having canonical laws on how to treat the accused as to whether to defrock him, but if someone is a victim and reports the accused, then, IMHO, should become a judicial pubic case outside of the Church.

There was an interesting piece done by the BBC about all this in 2008.

Here's Part 1 of 4 on Youtube

[nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-wBExdblRNY&feature=related"]YouTube- Sex Crimes and Vatican - Part 1 of 4[/nomedia]

 

[LuciferSam]

Maybe the seal of confession is part of the problem. Members of the church accept the possibility of horrible crimes going unreported to the authorities, and it's all legal.

 

[scooterbug44]

No, it's that they are keeping it secret so the parishioners don't know of or the true extent of the issue.

Confession doesn't cover all sins. You may get forgiven, but there are still legal consequences.

And many priests/clergy are supposed to be court mandated reporters due to their contact with children in schools and other programs.

 

[Mango]

Maybe the seal of confession is part of the problem. Members of the church accept the possibility of horrible crimes going unreported to the authorities, and it's all legal.

I believe the seal of confession extends to knowledge of an unlawful act, so it may be that some priests, depending on how they interpret it, may not be bringing these cases to the Church's attention. One could argue that a man of the cloth could not give absolution to the violator if the other priest does not accept any form of contrition, like turning themselves in to the authorities.

I am not sure. I am not a canon law expert. But, it certainly gives the Church an excuse to hide these heinous acts. :roll:

 

[Matt J]

No, it's that they are keeping it secret so the parishioners don't know of or the true extent of the issue.

Confession doesn't cover all sins. You may get forgiven, but there are still legal consequences.

And many priests/clergy are supposed to be court mandated reporters due to their contact with children in schools and other programs.

Not true, it comes down to their personal decision. Priests have been exonerated in court due to separation of church and state upholding their vow. It's similar to attorney client privilege or doctor patient privilege. The difference being that there are laws for the latter 2 and no laws regarding the first.

 

[scooterbug44]

To clarify, priests CAN tell (it's easy to circumvent the seal of the confessional - all you need is permission from the person confessing OR to discuss/witness something outside the confessional), but cannot be FORCED to tell by a court of law etc.

So once again it comes down to CHOOSING to protect child molesters.

And of course it's useless when the priest hearing the confession is the molester............or is actually molesting people in the freaking confessional.

 

[Geo]

I'm a fan of the onion and it's no secret how I feel about the church with respect to this scandal. That said, (and I'm surprising myself with this one) I think this satire is in poor taste.