An alleged victim is called negligent

The Boston Globe ^ | April 29, 2002 | Walter Robinson

[a history buff]

A friend of my brother's will be in a wheelchair, and legless, for the rest of his life, because, while drunk he jumped in front of a train after dealings with a homosexual priest. This happened overseas where nothing can really be done about it. This, and similar stories, is why I have been so seething about the whole squalid mess, for years.

I agree that it's disgusting for them to claim "all our priests are holy", and then blame the parents if a child gets screwed. But when the abuse doesn't last a night or a month, but for 6 years, don't you think there was more going on? And if there was more to the story, their lawyers have a duty to mention this, when damages are awarded.

[sneakypete]

But I think you are speaking of those that have blind faith in men. The test (for me, anyway) is to look at what and how the Catholic Church teaches and believes and decide if you believe that is the Truth and the Way of Jesus. My faith in men in the Church has certainly changed, but my faith in the Truth of the Catholic Church is the same, and possibly stronger.

Thank you. You are making the point I was trying to make. When it comes to faith,the institution WILL survive because people will place all the blame on the individual priests and Cardinals. They will be seen as mere agents of the Church in this instance,not as the Church itself.

[sneakypete]

You must have opinions about blacks and Jews too.

Excuse me,but is there some kind of law that says we are required to "like" anybody or any group of people? For the official record,I don't like ANY group of people,and damn few individuals. The people I like the least are the ones who lack the ability to think for themselves.

Don't be bashful.

One thing I ain't is bashful.

[MonroeDNA]

I appreciate the ping.

I am wondering if this guy posts here as, "SMEDLEYBUTLER."

Smedley believes that the abused boys are partially at fault.

I believe Smedley doth protest too much.

[american colleen]

When it comes to faith,the institution WILL survive because people will place all the blame on the individual priests and Cardinals. They will be seen as mere agents of the Church in this instance,not as the Church itself.

Do you put your faith in any Church's teaching? Or are you your own ultimate authority?

Let me explain my belief in the Catholic Church this way. I read the Bible, I read the Catholic Catachism. I see them as perfectly in accord with each other. Period. We have some very holy men in the Catholic Church. We have some very evil sinners in the Catholic Church. Period.

I believe the Catholic Church was left by Jesus Christ. I find the deposit and fullness of faith there. It breaks my heart that there is such evil within the Church. I see this as a sustained, planned attack from the devil, with the help of fallen men. I take heart when I remember that the Lord said that the gates of Hell will not prevail upon His Church. The Lord has kept us, the members of his Church, in the palm of his hand for 2,000 years. He'll do so for the next 2,000.

[sneakypete]

Do you put your faith in any Church's teaching?

No. I am agnostic. I grew up surrounded by religious fanatics,though.

[EverOnward]

My prayers for the decent Catholic people who, in my humble opinion, are being assaulted from within and without of the church. I pray that you'll keep your faith in Christ and have the courage to do what must be done to bring about positive change. It seems the shepard(s) (Law, etc.), far from watching over the flock, has turned viciously against it. I'm sorry to see the Catholic Church marginalized at a time when the influence for good is so desperately needed from all faiths. Very, very disheartening for us nonCatholics who have had great respect for the good works of the Catholic people.

[american colleen]

My husband is an agnostic as well, although he grew up in a lukewarm Lutheran household. I went that way for a little while in my 20s, and then for some reason I picked up a book on Padre Pio - and I read it and realized that no one could spend their life the way Padre Pio did unless Jesus was what he claimed to be.

Don't you ever wonder why we are here?

I look at it like this: even if I didn't believe the bible, Jesus' life is attested to by non-religious historians of his day, so you have to at least believe he walked the earth.

He was either a complete fake and/or insane person or he was who he said he was. If he was fake or insane, why/how has his message survived for 2,000 years.

Anyway, I appreciate your honesty and I can understand (a bit) where you are coming from, as my husband has been an agnostic since he was 12 or 13 (he's 44 now).

Be well!

[american colleen]

Thank you for your kind words. You have a very generous heart.

[sneakypete]

Don't you ever wonder why we are here?

Sometimes,but the answer isn't provided by religion. Or anything else as far as I can tell.

I look at it like this: even if I didn't believe the bible, Jesus' life is attested to by non-religious historians of his day, so you have to at least believe he walked the earth.

Yes,I do believe he was a historical character. Others believe he and others (like Moses) were actually "composite characters" whose stories were the stories of multiple actual people.

He was either a complete fake and/or insane person or he was who he said he was. If he was fake or insane, why/how has his message survived for 2,000 years.

I really don't want to get into theological discussions here on FR because they are so pointless. Nobody ever changes anybody else's mind,and in my case I have no interest in changing anybody's mind about religion,even if I could. If you have found a philoposy of life that makes you happy and you are not harming me or anyone else,I am happy for you.

Having said that,I do believe certain aspects of Jesus's life are fake,such as the "virgin birth" ,resseruction,water into wine,etc,etc,etc. This doesn't mean he was a total "fake" though,as his ideas were and are real enough. It doesn't matter who you are or where you come from,living according to the "10 Commandments" will make your life a lot simplier and happier. I definitely don't think he was "insane",though. I think he was a mortal human with good ideas about how to live life,and a man who had enough charisma to gather followers.

Be well!

You,too!

[Arthur McGowan]

I am not denying the corruption of Cardinal Law or the corruption of the civil authorities in Massachusetts. The Church has been slobbering all over the Kennedys (and all other pro-abortion "Catholics") for decades. I'm sure that the police have slobbered all over the Cardinal.

What I objected to was your bringing the Mass into the picture. NOBODY bows or kneels to the priest at any Mass. The Mass is not the source of corruption in the Church or in society.

[SMEDLEYBUTLER]

Smedley believes that the abused boys are partially at fault.

Paraphrase me accurately you cretin. I wrote that some of the abused teenagers were partially at fault, particularly those who allowed themselves to be orally sodomized "dozens and dozens and dozens of times" over long periods of time without a word of protest.

[MonroeDNA]

"...I wrote that some of the abused teenagers were partially at fault, ..."

And I had written, "Smedley believes that the abused boys are partially at fault."

Smedleybutler believes that some of the boys (sodimized again and again by Catholic Priests) are partially at fault. They were not inoocent. They could have prevented it, if they wanted to. But they didn't. Therefore, some of them wanted it. Right, Smedly? I can quote you again, ya know, from your perevious posts.

I believe I have hit a nerve with Smedleybutler. Are you a Cardinal or Bishop, by any chance?

[marajade]

That's like saying that a wife who lets her husband have sex with her even if she doesn't want to is partially guilty for being raped. That's nuts...

[MonroeDNA]

Let's look at another post which you tried to weasel your way out of:

(MonroeDNA) Let me ask you a simple question: If I robbed a 12 year old, and that 12 year old didn't fight back, is that person partially at fault?

(Smedley) "Let me give you a simple answer that your gray matter may be able to comprehend. If the 12 year old allows you to rob him dozens and dozens and dozens of times then he's an enabler."

(MonroeDNA) Way to duck the question. I again ask you, "Yes," or "No," If I robbed a 12 year old, and that 12 year old didn't fight back, is that person partially at fault?

Yes or no?

You still can't (won't) answer that, right? It leads to the slippery slope of you getting out of the gray, and calling evil, "evil." Can't have that, can we? Good God, if we all had to look into the mirror and say something is just plain evil, why, we might not like ourselves or something, right, Smedley? Hitting more nerves? lol!

Well, Smedley, yes or no?

OK, I get your logic...it depends on the number of times I rob her. How many is too many, before she is partially responsible? 30? 20? 10? 1?

What if I was in an "all powerful" position of authority? What if I were her trusted counselor, and all I did was ask for a "loan?"

Let's clarify: What if a child beleives with all his heart that a Priest is the "ultimate" authority, second only to God? (never mind how THAT happened). Just assume this situation can occur (Alter Boys and Priests--trust me, it is true). What if this child thinks that he can live forever if he is holy enough, and the Priest is his guide. And then the Priest comes on to him gently, and then molests him regularly.

You are a young boy who believes in God with all your heart, but have many questions. The Priest is the ultimate authority, and has all the answers. You want to go to heaven. You are alone with the Priest on many, many occasions, and feel very special for being chosen to do so. You are the envy of your friends. You are often in dark places, with the Priest, with no chance of anyone finding you two together. Under the shadow of God, in a holy place, sith the person you admire most, alone, sacred, dark, holy, he manipulates you (you're 12), guides you, convinces you, and finally he is sodomizing you. All in the name of the Lord.

You can't go against him in any way, he is too powerful. You doubt yourself greatly. It goes on and on. You hide it, and feel ashamed. You avoid him, but there is no avoidance without losing your priveledges. Is it your fault? Perhaps you might kill yourself? Look around you.

Let me put it to you straight: How many times must a boy be anally raped before it is partially his fault? Once? Five times? Thirty times? But you won't answer that question, either, because of your guilt. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------