Catholic church - time to call it a day?

[Chil1234]

I truly hope that the latest scandals and accusations have hit the catholic church hard or preferably killed it stone dead. If it were isolated incidents or if the problems had been handled considerately, it might be put down to the vagiaries of life or the human condition. If other religious organisations had the same breadth of complaints one might make a faith connection. But it isn't the case.

The catholic church's position of absolute authority, of 'doing God's work', and expecting unthinking obedience, has resulted in apalling corruption and terrible abuse..... from the Magdalen Laundries, the Holly Mount Orphanage, the organisations that shipped children off to terrible conditions in Australia to the cover-ups surrounding abusive priests today. People in my own family have been direct victims of 'pastoral care', having their lives ruined when they most needed help. It's not enough to say that the church does a lot of good work or that there are good people in the organisation... that does not compensate for the instutionalised megalomania and abuse of privilege.

When the Pope visits I, for one, will not be there to greet him. Shame on the lot of them

"She says that a priest at her church was accused and cleared of abuse so she won't let her child go there. But he was cleared?"

It is extremely difficult to prove a sexual allegation of any nature, especially one where the only witness is a child.

I wouldn't let anyone accused of child molesting come near DC, either. Then again, neither would I go on a date with a man accused of rape.

LadyBiscuit, it's not a question of not being able to trust any priest -- it's a matter of protocols that have been developed in order to help ensure the safety of children. Protocols apply to all regardless of whether individual priests would ever dream of abusing a child in any way.

I find these posts which attempt to justify the behaviour of the RC church incredible in their inaccuracy for a start, but also very, very sad. It's obvious to all right thinking and decent people that this church is built on so many fundamentally offensive ideas that leaving it, though it may be hard for various reasons, is the only decent thing to do. Hatred of homosexuals, second-class citizenship of women, the shocking attitude to contraception, especially in AIDS ravaged Africa, and now the cover up of the rape of children: what more do you want? What would make you leave? Would you stay under any and all circumastances? These are not incidental issues, or minor mores which define the church in a vague kind of way. They are central doctrinal beliefs and I would have more respect for those of you who had the courage to come and say that you actually agree with all of those moral positions rather than trying to justify or down play them.

By the way, the idea that the church is and always has been dedicated to free thought and enquiry as evidenced by the centres of higher learning it established is incredible. You could look at the case of a certain Italian scientist for evidence of this, and a basic text book would tell you all about how open the Church was to free thought and intellectual enquiry. Apart from the fact that their universtities were closed to everyone but Catholic religious men for centuries, when unviersities did become more open to lay Catholics from the early 19th century, science and philsophy in particualr were taught according to Catholic ideas which were absolutely fixed. Have you seen the list of prohibited books which dominated Castholic teaching in schools and universities? Have a look and tell me the church was open to free thought. On the contrary, the church was the single biggest bulwark against free intellectual enquiry and debate and liberalism in the 19th and 20th centuries. Any historian will tell you that the idea of intellectual liberty and catholicism existing hand in hand is simply nonsense.

I find it bizarre the way that you're all saying 'oh well no child would be alone with a priest anyway' and 'all Holy Communion training is done by lay people who've been on more child protection courses than you can imagine'.

Oh well, that's alright then. Talk about closing the stable door after the horse has bolted. Your Church is still headed by a man who did nothing to stop children being abused. And I noticed that SK did not respond to my question about the difference between covering up abuse and failing to act. I wonder if anyone else would like to tackle that one.

@ Methanxiety

Wow, thank you for letting me of the hook there. I was a bit scared you might want to get rid of my post rather than argue against it. But you had the courage to come out and defend your beliefs with a vaguely coherent rant. facing those who's view is contra to your own and not burning them publicly is your first step into the modern age.

In reality I have never heard any thing so sad. I stand by my posts, just as you stand by your church. and people will judge both. The difference is that a couple of posts back I admitted an error and looked for a reference to straighten it out. but as it was about the Vatican but not by the Vatican you feel it is "eye-rolling- ridicule-masquerading-as-thought/research/argument".

Debate has left the building and now we are just dealing with abuse so I'm sorry but I'm not going to play with that. I will debate any point you can put without insult.

I was responding to specific parts of India Knight's article, LadyBiscuit. Not attempting any kind of justification.

The problem with this discussion is that every time someone corrects a point of fact or inaccuracy they are immediately accused of trying to cover up or justify things that nobody reasonable would wish to defend! Every time someone points out that big reforms have already taken place they're immediately jumped on and told it's irrelevant because that is only in England. Or that it's closing the stable door.

I'd also like to point out that some of us, me included, were ourselves children at the time of the abuse. Some of us had brothers and friends who were altar servers. It's not good to sit here and worry that something may or may not have happened to people you love. In the case of my brother I am pretty sure it did not as I think he would have been secure enough to tell us. As to other of his friends, I'm not sure. Who knows. It makes me feel sick and worried.

I still think we don't know all the facts about the Pope and what he did or didn't do. Personally I feel there has to be an enquiry, but I am still reading and making up my mind.

If I feel that he covered up abuse and/or failed to act I shall be deeply angry. As to what course of action I shall take as a result of that anger, I don't know yet. It's been a matter of days. You can't make big, life-changing, decisions in days, as I'm sure you'll understand.

Tinnitus, I have never before encountered such outright hatred. If this is the sort of claptrap you sincerely believe, then I am more sorry for you than angry.

What I referred to as 'eye-rolling-ridicule-masquerading-as-thought..' was your other link. "Holy UFO - Mary Starts Regular Shuttle Service Between Heaven and Earth" (?)

From the youtube rant:
"...I've often thought that if Satan were a Christian, he would be a Catholic...
If Satan ... is a Catholic then it might help to explain some of the events of the last 2,000 years.." (Followed by about 9 minutes of 'historical' exposition -- although to be fair, he didn't drag the Kennedy assassination into it.) MNers I invite you to have a look at this link, and wonder, as I did, how the speaker kept from frothing at the mouth, plus how he managed to (1) explain 2000 years of history in 8 minutes and, (2) do it all in one sentence.

No, I will not be debating that ridiculous, illogical and hate-filled rant. It's pure bigotry, prejudice, call it what you will. It's anti-religion, anti-Catholic, anti-Jewish, anti-Muslim, self-satisfied, and ignorant. Debate has indeed left the building.

May I add, now that I've got my audio sorted, that the glib 'joke' right at the start of your last link, about the choirboy on the end of Satan's penis, is egregiously inappropriate, given that the context of this thread is child rape.

the "joke" is in seriously bad taste - but the rest of the video does spell out in stark terms the behaviour of the Catholic Church power base down the centuries. It is undeniable that there have been continual iniquities perpetrated by the Church and apologists do no good to their cause. This is not an attack on individual catholics, lay or clerical. It is an attack on the holders of power - the hierarchy. They have much to answer for.

And on those here who are too stupid to understand and appreciate what some of were put through us children and who still carry it around with us.
Or maybe the arrogance of the Catholic Church is contagious? It certainly seems to be the case from some of the stuff I've read here.

What jenny said.

The idea that the Catholic Church espouses "free thought and enquiry" is a laughable exercise in rewriting history. Ask Galileo - I suppose he is the Italian jenny was referring to.

Do you know when the Catholic Church accepted that the sun is at the center of the solar system?

1990!

I'm with mathanxiety. I think those who have nothing but contempt for religion will seek to use these horrible actions as vindication for their opinions, which is self-serving and disgusting in its own right.

Well, I'm glad I didn't offend EVERYONE.

I'm sure I didn't preface that post by saying "this is the law and all must observe it and concur." I mean, that would be a terrible imposition on people. So feel free to watch it and take from it what you will. I'm only here to state my opinion, and the fact that I feel strongly about it is a indication that there might be something to feel strongly about. not a sign that I am in the habit of despising benign institutions.

The argument that I should not say any thing bad about the Vatican because some people like it is spurious at best. Asking me to moderate my views because they offend people simply show a failure to engage in debate. As far as I'm aware, every Catholic on here has admitted deviations from doctrine and dogma, so they are defending an institution that wouldn't accept them as members and until recently would have burned them "without strangulation".

And the argument that it does many good deeds and works has been put to counter the OP. But now we know that the problems run from top to bottom, and all people seem to want is for the abusers, their facilitators and their apologists to face (earthly) justice. Saying that they are somehow above the (earthly) law because "it is the Vatican and some people quite like it so please don't upset them," is the most radically offensive thing I can imagine.

The point about the Vatican's past, and the merits of its influence, is over. there is no defense for their action then as now. We all know that they don't care what we think because they maintain that they alone hold the keys to Heaven, so don't question them or your not going. It may be hard for some to accept, but the reaction to this scandal is in part a reaction top the church in general and I think that shows that the game is up and it's time to hand the keys over.

Yes, Cote, he was the one, but the list is a very long one, as you know.

I just saw "If I feel that he covered up abuse and/or failed to act I shall be deeply angry"

Now I'm confused. Don't we KNOW that the pope covered up abuse by his own admission? Don't we KNOW that previously he gave official instructions that abuse be kept quiet within the church and not reported to the authorities.

Are those not facts?

Yes they are!

@ zzz

"I'm with mathanxiety. I think those who have nothing but contempt for religion will seek to use these horrible actions as vindication for their opinions, which is self-serving and disgusting in its own right."

Ever thought that these recent event DO vindicate our opinions.

I do not want to get too involved in this thread as I have been involved in so many similar ones before... I have to say the opening post and title actually made me laugh out loud - vintage mumsnet

I want to share this information which I received presenting the catholic view of things in a coherant and non-emotive way. If you are only interested in catholic/faith bashing don't bother reading the post further. If you genuinely want to know why it is not time for the Catholic church to 'call it a day' please have a read.

''Here?s how the media have played out the story in the last 3 weeks. In the context of the really bad situation on child abuse in Ireland following the Murphy report, the Pope wrote a letter to the Irish bishops. Then historical cases, some going back decades started to appear in Germany, Austria and the Netherlands. It seemed this problem was only going to get bigger and bigger.

The idea of some in the media was then to find a story that involved Cardinal Ratzinger directly, before becoming Pope. First there was a story based in Munich, where Cardinal Ratzinger had been archbishop and he had authorised for a priest from another German diocese to come to Munich for treatment. He was an abuser. Without Cardinal Ratzinger?s knowledge, he was placed in a parish situation where he abused again. By the time this was found out Cardinal Ratzinger had been in Rome for a few years. So he was not involved.

The second story broke in the New York Times on 25 March and was about a Fr Murphy who had abused deaf children in the 70?s. He had been reported to the civil authorities who investigated him but dropped the case. In the early 90s his archbishop decided he was guilty and withdrew him from public ministry. He then wrote to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) because some of the offences included solicitation in the confessional, which always had to be reported to the Holy See. A process of laicisation started but in 1998, Fr Murphy himself wrote to Cardinal Ratzinger saying he was dying, he had lived in isolation for some years, had not abused for many years ? could the process be stopped? Cardinal Ratzinger agreed and thee priest was not defrocked. Fr Murphy died 4 months later. Now one can argue whether the decision was right or wrong, but one cannot say Cardinal Ratzinger was either complicit in the abuse or helped to cover it up in any way.

Details of the case can be found in two pieces in Zenit, which explain it well:
www.zenit.org/article-28750?l=english
www.zenit.org/article-28746?l=english

Actually the truth is the opposite to what the media are trying to portray. Since 2001, when Cardinal Ratzinger was asked by Pope John Paul II to take over these types of cases, he speeded up the procedures and made everything much more transparent than had been up to then. In other words, it is thanks to Pope Benedict that the Catholic Church has such good procedures in place. This is well explained here

An excellent piece well worth reading is Archbishop Nichols writing in the Times yesterday: www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article7076344.ece''

here is a link to the pope's letter to the Irish Bishops which is well worth reading if you want to know what he actually has to say (instead of what the media says he says!)

"in 1998, Fr Murphy himself wrote to Cardinal Ratzinger saying he was dying, he had lived in isolation for some years, had not abused for many years ? could the process be stopped? Cardinal Ratzinger agreed and thee priest was not defrocked."

And that isn't covering up or collusion? He took pity on a dying paedophile. Great

No Ladybiscuit he did not cover it up or collude. Yes he took pity of a dying sinner who was truly sorry his sins. My personal opinion is that is what Jesus would do - the whole basis of christianity is that everyone can go to heaven if they truly repent, even the devil himself. Feel free to disagree, but it is in fact incorrect to say that the pope covered anything up.

"In other words, it is thanks to Pope Benedict that the Catholic Church has such good procedures in place."

I hardly think it can be said that the Catholic Church has such good procedures!
Good for the debate to get another viewpoint. FreddoBaggyMac - what is the source of the info you've quoted?

@ FreddoBaggyMac

Sorry but I'm with ladybiscuit on this one, failing to inform the police about child abuse is not an option for anyone. Ever. Not sure if I care about him being "defrocked" though as I don't recognize papal authority or value its vestments.

This is just an example of how the Vatican feels they are above the law. And implying "catholic/faith bashing" in any way devalues our comments is ridiculous as to many people feel any and all criticism of the church is "catholic/faith bashing" so only apologists would have a voice in this. I hope you can see how flawed that is.

Info was forwarded to me from an Opus Dei representative. he is interviewed on sky news here.
As he points out the procedres are good compared to how they used to be - and improving in part thanks to the Pope's efforts.

OMG Opus Dei, say no more.

I feel now I know which definition of "improved" is being used.