Priests Accused of Molesting Children Hiding in Plain Sight

NBC California ^ | 2/11/12 | Frank Snepp and Tara Kangarlou |

[metmom]

No doubt you have viable documentation of the above. Patiently waiting........................................

Here, while you're waiting, have some popecorn.....

[NakedRampage]

Cute?

[Religion Moderator]

Do not try to finesse the Religion Forum guidelines with the "pronoun removed" tactic.

Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal.

[RobbyS]

You take my point, then. This sort of thing is strange. The person doing this is out to get someone.

A very old man, vague and frail, dies at age 88, probably from stress. And the prosecutor wants him exhumed to get evidence! Last night on Downtown Abbey the plot has a young woman suffering from the deadly Spanish Flu, suddenly relapsing and dying “of a broken heart,” from over hearing and seeing her fiance declaring his love for another woman,
Overdramatic,perhaps, but it does happen. A body compromised by age and/or disease, cannot stand much psychological shock. And with regard to the old Cardinal, even if nothing suspicious is FOUND, yet the prosector has managed to make the public suspicious. The aim being to try the Church in the court of public opinion.

[boatbums]

I was thinking about this a little more tonight and it hit me. So many want to brush off child molestation and rape as "we are all sinners" and "the church has chaff mixed in with the wheat" and "other clergy do bad things" and "even priests are imperfect sinners", blah, blah, blah. I'm thinking, you know this isn't like, oh, the Monsignor was a little irritated with the cleaning lady because she didn't iron his underwear like he likes it, so he sinned when he shouted at her and hurt her feelings. NO! THIS IS CHILD RAPE! How many people in the entire world ever would even THINK to do such a thing, much less carry it out - repeatedly?

You are quite right, CB, when you asked how the Catholic faithful can possibly brush off this condemnation with such platitudes. Yeah, we read where they have gotten angry that such things go on, but why has it not hit them square between the eyes that we are talking about supposed "men of God"? Could anyone imagine Peter or John or James or Paul excusing a follower or fellow Apostle who was guilty of such a horrendous crime? Would they have EVER allowed such a one into a position of leadership ever again? Forgive him? Yes, if he was sufficiently repentant, made it right as best he could with the child and the parents, AND demonstrated a genuine contrite heart and NEVER repeated such a vile act again. But would they have let him back as a church leader? I don't think so! A crime, a sin as grievous and vile as this permanently destroys a man's reputation, or at least it should, and he SHOULD spend time in prison if convicted. Paul reprimanded the Corinthians for not kicking out an adulterer, one who slept with his father's wife who wasn't ashamed of his acts and cease from them. How much more do we think he would have reacted if a Church leader was not only not kicked out from his position, but left in place or moved to another unsuspecting place to continue in depravity and ruin more young innocent lives?

Jesus said such a one would be better off having a millstone tied around his neck and cast into the sea than to harm his little ones. That alone should show that these kinds of sins are to be treated so much differently than other kinds. The Catholic Church is paying - and will continue to pay - a steep price for its complicity. And there is no excuse for what they did, NONE. As I said earlier in this thread, if they had done the right thing at the start, most of this damage could have been averted. I don't know if it was pride, fear of embarrassment, fear of publicity or what, but whatever the reason they have reaped what they have sown. Sow the wind, reap the whirlwind. The wind was sown long ago, the whirlwind - sent by God, BTW - is only getting started.

[NakedRampage]

So I take it I may use the pronoun ‘you?’ instead?

[Joya]

Thanks for the ping. May Light expose all darkness everywhere and may Love redeem and restore victims and predators.

[lupie]

Well said.

[Theo]

You wrote that “it seems that some protestants think that child molesting is perfectly fine ... if the molester happens to be a protestant.”

No. You are wrong.

Read for yourself the Protestant response to a Protetant leader caught in sexual sin, taking special notice of comment 6 (from me):

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/2841532/posts

Nobody defends the man. Nobody tries to deflect. Universally, there is condemnation.

Here’s your starting place: Condemn sexual deviancy, even when it’s your leaders who are accused/guilty of it.

[Theo]

Again, when a Protestant is accused of pedophilia, or is found guilty of pedophilia, Protestants come right out and condemn such behavior. See my comment over here, for example:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/2841532/posts?page=6#6

There I wrote, “Let me say, unequivocally, that if this man is indeed guilty then what he has done is damnable. It reflects badly on him, and it reflects badly on his church.”

On threads where Roman Catholic leaders are linked to pedophilia, I never see Roman Catholics simply come out so boldly against the accusations. Instead, they deflect the charges by implying that everyone’s doing it.

And this discussion is not about mere accusations, but about glossing over actual abuse (e.g., from the article: “Many if not all these priests have admitted to sexual abuse”).

Why, in God’s name, are Roman Catholics so slow at just coming out against abuse committed by some of their religious leaders, rather than primarily coming out in defense of their denomination?

Is Roman Catholicism so fragile that you can’t admit it has some terribly sinful leaders? If the structure is built upon priests, then that makes sense. But if it’s build on Christ, then you should be freer and quicker to condemn such egregious sin committed by some of your religious leaders.

[ArrogantBustard]

No. You are wrong.

I don't agree ... once again, read this thread.

Seriously.

Read it.

Count the number of posts from protestants objecting to the mention of protestant molesters.

What possible GOOD reason could there be for protestants to object to the mention of protestant molesters?

I answer: NONE. NONE at all. The only possible reasons for such objection are evil reasons.

Here’s your starting place:

Do not dare presume to lecture me on "starting places". I have been dealing with this problem since before it was "cool".

Condemn sexual deviancy, even when it’s your leaders who are accused/guilty of it.

Be sure to tell that to the protestants on this forum who object to the mention of protestant perverts.

[ArrogantBustard]

Why, in God’s name, are Roman Catholics so slow at just coming out against abuse committed by some of their religious leaders,

1) Using God's Holy Name to support a false accusation is blasphemous.

2) Why are protestants so blind that they cannot see Catholics objecting to clerical misbehaviour?

Is Roman Catholicism so fragile that you can’t admit it has some terribly sinful leaders?

This question suggests abysmal ignorance and blindness so complete as to be almost inexplicable on the part of the questioner.

May protestantism decrease and Christ increase.

[CynicalBear]

And still no condemnation of any Catholic for the acts.

[ArrogantBustard]

And still no condemnation of any Catholic for the acts.

Spare me the smarm. I have been condemning child molestation of whatever sort for a decade on this forum, and longer in the real world.

May protestantism decrease and Christ increase.

[Petrosius]

I will say again for the nth time, name the individual priests and bishops who are guilty and I will join you in the condemnation. Rather what you are asking, and which I will not do, is that I condemn all Catholic priests and bishops as a group.

What Catholics here object to is the attempt to use the crimes of individuals to condemn the entire Catholic Church and the Catholic faith.

You are trying to play a clever word game with the statement: "Instead of damning pedophiles, Roman Catholics defend their priests" (Post #144). Not one Catholic here has defended a priest guilty of any crime. Indeed we want them weeded out more than you do. But we will not allow you to use the crimes of a small minority of priests how violate Catholic teaching to condemn the entire body of the priesthood.

It is clear from an number of postings that the real objection is the Catholic faith, not pedophilia, as the following postings clearly illustrate:

• # 30 (smvoice): With one important difference: when were homosexuals outside the church given the power to retain or remit the sins of their victims? When did the homosexuals outside the church claim the ability to change wafer and wine into the body and blood of Christ? When were homosexuals outside the church held up to be an alter christus?
• #34 (CynicalBear): I’m utterly stunned that Catholics obfuscate, make excuses, justify, and do whatever they can to take the heat off the priests and totally miss the fact that these men are supposed to be “from God” or even “vicar of Christ”. Yeah right. If that isn’t cultish activity and attitude I don’t know what is.
• #41 (CynicalBear): Do the other “institutions” parade themselves as representatives of Christ? If others don’t see what you are doing as pathetic be advised that I certainly do.
• #49 (smvoice): WHY can they not see the particular heinousness of pedophile priests??? I cannot wrap my mind around why they are missing the very simple point of WHY it such a disgrace. These people shout from the rooftops that they were chosen by Christ to build His church, and the gates of hell, blah, blah..The power they claim they were given by Christ, the responsibility, the respect they demand as "representatives of Christ" and "authors of God's Word", etc. There is no other group on the face of this earth that claim that kind of power, straight from God.
• #78 (caww): Perhaps not...but then others don't claim to be Christ's Representatives either, as Catholicism claims their Priests are....and therein is the difference.
• #105 (CynicalBear): No one is saying it’s “exclusively” a Catholic problem. What we are saying is that the Catholic Church proposes to be the “only” church sanctioned by Christ and claim they are the source of all truth in religious matters. They claim the “vicar” of Christ is their head and that their priests can absolve of sin. No other entity claims those things.
• #107 (CynicalBear): The Catholic Church is the entity that holds itself as the highest authority as it relates to religion. How can they now want to be compared to other entities in this issue?
• #120 (caww): School teachers don't claim to Represent Jesus Christ to their students or their parents. The catholic church does claim their Priests as Representing Christ.....BIG difference.
• #142 (caww): It's about the long term cover-up and continued efforts to fight, deny, and move the blame somewhere other than where it belongs....all the while still pro-claiming their Priests represent Jesus Christ while using that position to feed their demented perversions, then finding safe-harbor behind the curtain of church leadership.

Thus the greater concern for Catholic priest violators than others. If the true concern were pedophilia then all those who so frequently post Catholic crimes would be as aggressive in posting those of non-Catholics. That they harp only on the offenses of Catholic priest shows that this is only a tool for another agenda: attacking the Catholic faith.

And lest I be accused of defending the crimes of Catholic priest guilty of pedophilia I will state that I find them disgusting. And so for the record:

I CONDEMN ALL THOSE INDIVIDUAL PRIEST OR BISHOPS WHO ARE GUILTY OF MOLESTING CHILDREN OR COVERING UP THESE CRIMES.

[Religion Moderator]

The pronoun "you" is not banned on the Religion Forum.

The guideline is to "discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal."

"Making it personal" includes reading the mind of another Freeper or attributing motives to him. It also includes making the thread "about" another Freeper, personally.

Basically, avoid ad hominems altogether. Discuss the message not the messenger.

If you are unsure whether your post is "making it personal" - examine your use of the pronoun "you" and either reword those sentences or remove them. But do not substitute another word or phrase for the "you" because that would still be "making it pesonal."

[NakedRampage]

Okay, now why don’t you address the posts of the other interested party.

[CynicalBear]

Like it or not. The RCC puts itself in a position of being held to a higher standard and when they fail that standard they will be condemned commensurate with that higher standard.

[Petrosius]

Condemn the guilty, not the innocent.

The Catholic Church never claims that priest are without sin by virtue of their ordination. They are called to holiness, as we are all, but are subject to the same temptations and sins as others. Priests too are called to repent of their sins and to go to Confession.

[count-your-change]

The Christian church was commanded to remove the unrepentant and wicked men from among their company but this the Catholic church has been unwilling to do until public scandal and financial strangulation were threatened.

It appears the SOP of protecting molesters has become institutionalized and not just a few personal failings of judgment.

Shall I provide a vivid example?