Idefinitely don't agree with the actions, but the problem you guys are facing in discussion is because of the analogy you're making.. If the Priests are employees, doesn't that make God the employer? Meaning, he will bring them to justice according to Christianity right? However, in the meantime, they should be treated as any other child molester is treated.
There is no excuse. It is bureaucratic man created evil and bs. Other religions act the same way when there is abuse. Protect the individuals or the insitutution. What else matters. . I agree the Church's practices on sex are medieval. An extreme case of bureucratic stenosis. Nothing to do with religion or certainly God. You see similar practices of stubborn refusal to change in the Muslim religion, Judaism and various Christian sects like the Baptists, also. Ex Catholic. 12 yrs catholic highschool. 4 yrs catholic university. 1 yr grad school at catholic university.
I'm sorry. I've got to call serious BullSh*t on this. If a priest feels it is in his religion to keep confidentiality above and beyond keeping the harmless safe, he has no business in his vocation, and will be going in the exact opposite place of where he thinks he's going. It is intolerable. It's immoral. It's inexcuseable. And the fact that you're arguing otherwise is not impressive. There is no other side to this coin, my friend. The Church was totally to blame for this, at the expense of its own parishoners. The Devil does exist. The Catholic Church chose to ignore him.
I completely agree with Fatty (never thought I 'd say that). There is only one side to this coin. They not only didn't turn them in but they moved them to other parishes where they molested other children. If they truly felt they couldn't turn them in because it violated confidentiality (though I believe alot of these cases were not actually confessions poured out in a confessional by a repentent priest but someone complaining and the priests were confronted).
If they truly felt they couldn't turn them in because it violated confidentiality they could have at least moved them somewhere where they didn't have such free access to more children
If a random individual walked into a confessional and confessed to a crime, then there may indeed be priest-penitent privilege, and the church may have a spiritual and legal obligation not to snitch. But that's not what happened. An employer does have a certain confidentiality obligation to his employees - but that doesn't absolve them from addressing serious matters when they become aware of them. If a client approached his lawyer, and expressed concern that his employee was abusing kids under his care, and the lawyer cautioned him against taking further action for fear of a wrongful dismissal suit, the client should be looking for new lawyer. Even if the only knowledge the church had of the abuse was through 'privileged' information, they would be in a huge conflict position, because the crime that they became aware of was being committed by their employee in the conduct of his duties (to their customers!). Red flags all around. (and i've conveniently ignored the nature of the crime and 'higher standard' we expect from men representing god, and, what most would consider a true moral failure that goes to the heart of their vocation(you've a way with words, ref). So i suppose if you ignore the active role the church took in covering up the abuse through shuffling priest you could draft a theoretical argument on why the church was acting responsibly by not addressing the abuse. But in the end, as Fatty so eloquently put it. It’s all bull****. It's intolerable, it’s immoral, it’s inexcusable.
If the Roman Catholic church would allow it's priest's to MARRY this child molestation problem would mostly, if not all but disapear. The celibacy of the church attracts many who think that the church and Jesus will reform them--clense them into being chaste and asexual. Make them loose their in-pure thoughts and desires. These men go into suspended sexual annimation--and there is NOTHING healthy about that. I'm certainly not saying that all Roman Catholic priests are pedeophiles and degenerates. The majority are honest servants to their flock and to Christ. Look at the Church of England and the Epsicopal church--almost the same structure as the Roman Catholic denomination and NO massive scandals involving priests molesting children. If Father Tim at St. James Episcopal church needs to blow off some steam--Mrs. Father Tim is ready and waiting, no need to feel scandalized for the natural function of sex or suspend it with forced celibacy.
The celibacy thing is a convenient rationalization for abhorrent behavior. There are all sorts of abuse scandals around the world in residential schools (even those not run by the papists) care facilities and the like. Abuse and rape are not about sex. They are about power. Surely Father O'rielly could have sprung for a hooker, visited a mens club -- or dropped by the home of that hot frustrated parishioner who'd just confessed her impure thoughts. I mean, does anybody have better leads on who's ripe for fling then a man who sits and listens to their confessions everyday. Those babes need comforting, so if he's got any game at all, he shouldn't have to chase the choir-boys. And there's always the internet (or so i've heard). Nope. It's structural. Create an environment of secrecy, of no accountability, power and of cover-ups, and that sort of stuff festers. Besides, how do you explain that most abuse comes from family members? Similar circumstance: trust/power/shame/no telling. Sick, really. The catholic church was a champion in building such a dysfunctional culture. Doesn't mean the religion is bad. But their governance needs a MAJOR shake-up. Personally, I find many of the rituals a wee bit out of date – but not so as I’d get all hung up about it, The Baptists produced Jimmy Swaggart and Oral Roberts – and I’d take the Pope and his funky hat over those two any day! I'm not sure if Sane was implying that 'hey...you guys have bad eggs in your religion too" If he was, then he was correct in that individual who claim to be religious sometimes turn out to be degenerates, but a bit off in that no-one was quoting scripture to justify what these assclowns were up to.
I definitely agree with you on the power/secrecy/closed society bit--100% true. There were many Popes through out the ages who fathered entire soccer teams from dipping every two-bit pristitute or mistress they could lay their grubby hands on. So maybe Father O'Mally just needs some good ole, visceral hot love to quench his evil desires--'twould be far better than preying(sorry for the pun)on Albie the Alter Boy... I was pointing out that Celibacy DOES attract the fruitcakes and degenerates who think that the church will transform them. And the suspended sexual development of these older priests who started their journey to the priesthood in their teens is bound to make these men zippy in the noggin... That and the power circle is self-sustaining just like the cycle of child abuse--it's passed down from priest, to alter boy, who becomes a priest and so on...
I'll ask you as well.... How do you explain the number of pedophiles in the world that are allowed to marry? The ability to be married does not erase the pedophilic urges from men or women. Pedophiles should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law whether or not they are Priests, Rabbis, Clerics, athletes, businessmen, etc. To say that allowing priests to marry would make this problem "mostly, if not all but disappear", doesn't begin to explain how all those married 9-5 folks are pedophiles. A quick search found these stats regarding the sexual abuse of minors: The Wisconsin Psychological Association's survey found offenders distributed among the following professions: Psychiatrists 34%, Psychologists 19%, Social Workers 13%, Clergy 11%, Physicians 6%, Marriage Counselors 4%, and Others 14%. Does this mean there are a lot of unmarried psychologists, psychiatrists and social workers? Pedophiles are sick individuals existing across all denominations. A marriage license won't cure them.
I think he is saying the pedophiles would not run to celibate priesthood as a cure for their problem. They see it as an escape, and that's the attraction. Even if they are allowed to marry, it doesn't mean they have too. They still could take a voluntary oath of celibacy. So an attraction would still be there.
You're right Bobrek--I don't think it's the ONLY end all solution. Just making some comparisons to Denominations that don't force Celibacy and how massive child abuse scandals are not an issue--and Celibacy seems to be the only real difference... Surely there are married men and women that sexually abuse children--I in no way ment to imply that it is reserved JUST for the celibant...
Batman: to your original question...before we started discussing other stuff...Catholics ARE outraged. Of the ones identified in this thread, only Refman gave semi-rationalization to the church's actions -- and he did so strictly from a lawyer's perspective. Mateo, pgab, glynch all said they walked away from the church. Rashman said the abusers should be prosecuted. Bobreck questioned some people’s broader assertions, but in no way defended the actions of the abusers. My father now attends once a year, if that, and doesn't participate in communion or other rituals -- he says he lost a lot of faith in the way the church is being run because of their reactions to the scandals. In his words, they lost all credibility in discussing morality. They are not necessarily ready to abandon and condemn the religion in its entirety, (religion, does, after all run pretty deep -- and you can have a very worthwhile and profound religion with poor leadership -- just as you can have a great country with a dope of a president)) but most Catholics are completely outraged by the church's reaction to these scandals (as they should be) many have stopped attending, most would say the church lost a lot of credibility.
I have to disagree. You put a guy in prison where there are no females, he eventually goes to the next option. We have seen this time and time again. Fact of the matter is, if they had wives, it wouldn't have happened on such a large scale. As always, there's always the exception. But this problem wouldn't have existed if not for celibacy. Marriage won't cure them all. But if you make someone say no to sex forever, you're just asking for it.... The reason, I think, the priests didn't just get "some" from a hooker or whatever is because they thought little kids won't tell. Fortunately, they were wrong and got busted. Unfortunately, we had to wait for children to gt mollested to acknowledge the problem. bobrek, What you are saying is that we have pedophiles everywhere. That's fine, that's true. But making someone abstain from sex doesn't help the situation at all. Do you agree with that? I can't see how you'd disagree, it makes perfect sense. It's human nature. it's like you're dying of hunger and you want a burger, but all you could find is a hotdog stand. You'll settle, even though it's not what you want.
But there are women all around them? A lot of pedophiles are married, it has nothing to do with it. The concepts of celibacy/chastity are found in many cultures and religions. I found this to be a good read: http://www.suite101.com/article.cfm/buddhism/93076 And so as with all spiritual lifestyle decisions, motivation is the key factor. Would one strive to maintain chastity while inwardly consumed with lust merely to fulfill some social contract? Or would one see chastity as liberation?
Tell me, is it "natural" for Muslim women to keep their head covered, or are they born that way? Where to you get the "any psychologist or psychiatrist " take? What about catholics who are psychologists or psychiatrists? Do you think they will all say that? I don't think celibacy should be mandatory, but you can not say it can't be a spiritual decision.
Celibacy is Biblically based. Paul said you should try to be celibate but if you can't you should marry. I belive the quote is "It's better to marry then to burn"
