In not wanting The Pope to visit uk at the taxpayers expense?

[Alouiseg]

Apparently The visit wil cost 12m pounds. That's 12 million pounds to be pinched from other budgets. For a man who has been responsible for covering up crimes against children.

My MP will receive an email today and I will make my abhorrence very clear.

onagar, I can't say I've followed every thread on the subject and I find it bizarre that anyone would deny that there hasn't been a single cover up by anyone in the Catholic Church anywhere in the world but that says more about them than you or me. Certainly neither of the first two of the points you made would be views that I've heard in the Catholic community where I live - in fact I'd have heard the opposite expressed frequently.

As for Catholic-bashing I think it would be naive to suggest that some long-time opponents of the Church, of various backgrounds, aren't 'making hay while the sun shines' so to speak, but then again, the actions of the people involved in the abuse and cover ups are entirely indefensible and deserve all the criticism and vitriol they have attracted.

What I can understand though is why many Catholics get riled by the "how can you stay in the Church when some (senior) people in it behave in this manner?" as if somehow by staying in the Church you're condoning the actions in some way. That entirely misunderstands the fact that Catholics quite properly separate the teachings of their faith from the actions of some of our fellow sinners within it.

The reason his visit is costing so much is because there has to be so much security surrounding him because of the hate campaigns being stirred up by mumsnetters

As a Catholic I do not agree with abortion yet my taxes are used year after year to fund abortions. I am lambasted from every angle if I complain about this! That's the way taxes have to work unfortunately, we can't all agree with everything they're used for.

I repeat: the OP was about the Pope's visit here and that flowed into a discussion about why some of oppose this visit. If the people who were in any way implicted in covering up the abuse mathanxiety has pointed out were coming to this country I would protest against that too. We are ALL here against child abuse and we are all angered by it but pointing out one case (in the context of a post about the pope) doesn't mean we don't condemn it universally.

jenny60, there will always be "real inconsistencies in what it says and what it does" insofar as we are all human, fallible and sinners, whether you're you, me or the Pope. Of course Church leaders should try and set an example and they understandably and properly will be held to a higher standard than most, given that they choose a position that involved preaching on morality.

But the fact that not all of them will live up to those standards does not IMO make the Church's teachings and standards wrong.

I can understand why that's easier for me to say as someone who has never suffered abuse (sexual or physical) at the hands of a Church figure, and I have close friends whose faith was destroyed by the actions of Priests and Brothers and their hypocrisy. But while I'm disgusted by the actions of the abusers and those who covered up for them, for me nothing has changed in relation to what the Church teaches or stands for in terms of its beliefs. And that's why it hasn't altered my faith.

Has it been mentioned that the Pope is coming here to honour Cardinal Newman (a great hero of the church in Britain) and not actually to promote child abuse?

HAd someone better tell him that cardinal newman was gay? That'll make him change his plans pretty damn quick!

It would be great to see a thread about Cardinal Newman and the Catholic church instead of the hundred odd that are already here about child abuse and homosexuality... I wonder if I'd get any responses if I started one?

seeker, he would not be in the slightest bothered that Cardinal Newman was gay. There is no proof that he did not live a celibate life, and his sexuality is not what made him famous believe it or not

"is sexuality is not what made him famous believe it or not"

REALLY? And there was me thinking it was his ability to sing a selection from Cabaret.......

No to mention his unique talent to accessorize....

Well it was you that mentioned it seeker!

Noyoucant, I'm glad that at least where you are and probably then in other places Catholics are expressing their disapproval.

It's possible that my perception is partly skewed by reading MN and the media as far as the denials/excuses go. It seems like everywhere I turn someone is trying to justify it.

Certainly there are bound to be some people who are glad of an excuse to have a go at Catholics. I would assume they were members of other religions though. As an atheist I consider religion to be undesirable for many reasons, but I have no special reason to single out a particular one. Living in the UK the CofE affects me the most directly, though I foresee a time soon when Islam will become the biggest problem.

As for ordinary Catholics appearing to condone the crimes I've been one of those talking about that. I've made it clear again and again that I do not mean all 'Catholics are abusers' or even that 'all catholics think it is ok' but it seems that's all anyone ever hears.

Catholicism didn't cause these atrocities. However like many religions and quasi-religious organisations that stress obedience, loyalty and secrecy on internal matters it provided a fertile ground for it to grow.

It should have been dealt with, but the hierarchy put the welfare of the institution before that of the victims.

I'm not convinced that the hierarchy realise that even now and some seem to see all this as just anti-catholic feeling. Something to be countered or endured. I want ordinary Catholics to tell them they are wrong in that view. That all decent people deplore it.

The power and moral authority of the church comes from the ordinary members. Without that support they are just a bunch of old men. I think anyone who derives any comfort from the church has an obligation in turn to speak out against its misuse in any way great or small that they can.

There're is a world of difference between taxes paying for abortions as part of the NHS and paying for some religious leader to parade about the streets.
The latter has more in common with paying for an MPs duck house than with part of the healthcare services.

Onagar I agree with you (and I'm a catholic!) but we also have a right to celebrate what we believe in as well as point out the problems with the church. The Pope is coming here to celebrate the life of Cardinal Newman who as a British Catholic I feel pretty proud of. Surely the good stuff should be given some attention too?

I know lots of Catholics and none of them approve of child abuse or want to cover it up. The thing is we are constantly being attacked (with child abuse being used as an opening to attack the whole faith generally - just look at some past mumsnet threads for examples) and we feel the need to defend ourselves and our faith.

I think I will stand for many Catholics when I say yes the child abuse scandals are truly horrible, but they are not part of my faith, they are a corruption in an institution which has hundreds of good things about it (and Cardinal Newman was one of those!)

SoupDragon I know I'm in the minority but I have to tell you that I don't see any difference. What I believe is that a baby is a human being from conception and so to me abortion is the ultimate form of child abuse. Given that that is my belief you must see that it is a 'big thing' for me that my taxes are used to fund abortions.
I know that most people on here will not share this belief and I'm not here to ask you too (although it would be nice ) - I'm just putting forward a different side of the arguement which I feel is perfectly valid.

I do not believe in abortion for myself but I would defend others rights to do what is right for them.
There are many things offered by the NHS which I do not think should be publicly funded but I do not begrudge the taxes I pay going towards a "free" health service for all.

I do, however, have a problem with shelling out for some religious leader to come and wave from the back of a van in the current economic climate. It is entirely unnecessary and thus is a duck house. Abortions on the NHS do have the benefit of preventing damage/death by backstreet abortions or limiting them ono to people who can afford them.

"Yes, many cultures traditionally treat children appallingly. That is not the point."

It actually is the point, Seeker. What you are saying is that in the institutional Catholic Church there is an active culture of horrible treatment of children. What a lot of Catholics understand, and probably many non-Catholics too, is that what any individual priest or nun or bishop or whatever did was as a result of how they themselves were brought up and not due to the exhortations of the church they are members of. Most Irish Catholics know that treatment of children in Ireland across the board, but especially of the poor, left a lot to be desired in days past (cf Angela's Ashes) and there are probably plenty of children living through abuse right now.

I can't speak for the experience of children in the UK, of whatever religion, but I believe the phrase "spare the rod and spoil the child" is an English one, and I am pretty sure episodes like the one reported on BBCnews.com today are not the only instance of child abuse ever heard of in Britain.

To all who think it's outrageous that the Pope should come to the UK and deliver a speech, have a parade, meet with Church leaders, etc. -- you don't have to listen. You don't have to watch it on TV. You don't have to read about it in the papers. You are perfectly free to go about your business as if none of it was happening. None of the dudgeon and ire and high blood pressure is necessary. All you have to do is refrain from the sanctimonious flapping and spouting, and breathe.

I'm writing to the Pope to invite him to my house for tea and cake. This should circumvent all this fuss and bother.

I don't want to get into a debate on whether abortions should be tax funded as I've been through it before and my stance in that respect is unbudgable so I'd be wasting everyone's time. I'm just saying that that is my belief (just as others have the belief that the Pope covers up child abuse) and I think it gives some balance to answers to the OP question.

I agree Soupdragon that it is a lot of money to shell out in the current climate but money is wasted on lots of other things too (not a good excuse I know!) and as I mentioned before perhaps so much money wouldn't have to be spent on security if there weren't so many hate campaigns being stirred up!

I think it's great that the Pope is coming to make a new British saint. This is a time where the Catholic church in Britain really needs a bit of an uplift...I agree it's a shame it has to cost so much money. Can't comment any more on it really!

oo victoria that would be a lovely gesture I'm sure he'd love to come... but will you have enough cake for the 9000 bodyguards who will have to accompany him? Perhaps some kind of loaves and fishes miracle will occur with your cupcakes... can you bake them in the shapes of little fish?

Depends if it's over 9000 really Freds. Would it be rude just to set up a marquee in the garden and just do a hogroast for the security people?

I doubt the Pope would like Hogroast,unless I am gravely mistaken and he would prefer that to cake? Oh God.

It's a bloody social minefield.

Anyone have an email address for the pope?

I actually feel a bit sorry for the Pope. The last one was cuddly looking; this Pope looks a bit grumpy. I'm sure he's not though, i'm sure he's lovely

Well it was pretty popular in the Victorian era and earlier when children worked in mills and mines, as chimney sweeps, as farm labourers, skivvies and housemaids, etc. Or got deported for poaching or other crimes against property, all under the benevolent eye of the established church.