He's been accused today of covering up child abuse. How does anybody feel about this?
Replies sorted oldest to newest
Hi cologne 
It is a hard one as there has always been cover ups about child abuse in the catholic church, I would like to think the popes were not part of the cover up and would honestly only be guessing either way, I could have a guess on my gut instinct but would rather not, saying that I have probably given you my answer..
It is a hard one as there has always been cover ups about child abuse in the catholic church, I would like to think the popes were not part of the cover up and would honestly only be guessing either way, I could have a guess on my gut instinct but would rather not, saying that I have probably given you my answer..
Did he not make a public apology a few days ago? Not that - that really makes amends but surely in making an apology (albeit rather stilted) doesn't smack of a cover up does it?
He's been accused tonight of actually covering up a case of child abuse himself. He was approached about it in 1996 as the executer and nothing was done about this priest called Murphy who had been abusing deaf children in a special school in America.
Cologne ....................I seem to always be a day or two behind. I'll read up on it and get back to you.
If that's the case though it's despicable and makes a mockery of his apology. It's so very, very sad to think of all the children who've suffered abuse though. Unimaginable really ..............but horrific all the same.
If that's the case though it's despicable and makes a mockery of his apology. It's so very, very sad to think of all the children who've suffered abuse though. Unimaginable really ..............but horrific all the same.
imo the Catholic church has been systematically covering this subject up for generations. His Holiness' apology is nothing more than a damage limitation exercise.
Apparently the children were deaf but what makes it more infuriating no charges were brought against the priest .....Pope or not even he is answerable to god.
Reference:
If that's the case though it's despicable and makes a mockery of his apology
Yes it would be. I was brought up in the catholic faith and, although I don't believe in God, I'm really shocked by this. I always thought that the Pope was beyond reproach (mind you Pius the 12th didn't exactly behave like God's representative on earth about the Jewish question). The whole thing is despicable and if it is proven that he was involved, than I really hope he will resign or whatever Popes do when they can't hold on to their office.
This sort of cover up has been systematic in the Catholic Church. It is their policy to cover up anything of this nature. In the past, it wasn't really questioned and in Ireland in particular, the Church held far too much power and allegations of abuse were conveniently ignored (NOT just by the Church it has to be said, but by the authorities at the time also) and swept under the carpet ... The can of worms has now been well and truly opened ... and it would appear (and why am I not surprised?) that it stretches as far as the Vatican itself ...
I too was raised as a Catholic in Scotland,but I grew a brain and ditched their outdated ,bigoted theories.It is a horible thing that they ,alas,got away with for so many years,especially in Ireland where they covered themselves with the fact that they thought folk won't go against the church,no matter what.Well they can't hide now..shameful! and the pope etc dare to preach to us about morals etc..
religion of any kind sucks...
religion of any kind sucks...
From what I saw on the news tonight, they have documents PROVING that he was in charge and was informed.
As far as I can see, people only appologise for things if they are caught out, not for the actual deed itself.If you were trully bothered about something you wouldn't have done it in the first place. Or in a case like this, you would have tried a bit harder to do something about it, even if you were only a Cardinal at the time.
As far as I can see, people only appologise for things if they are caught out, not for the actual deed itself.If you were trully bothered about something you wouldn't have done it in the first place. Or in a case like this, you would have tried a bit harder to do something about it, even if you were only a Cardinal at the time.
Though it's not just the Catholic church,the church of England/Scotland etc has paedo's too,though because they are not demanded celibates..like the Catholic Church,the number is fewer..hmmmm.
The house of cards is falling down ... Another bishop has resigned in Ireland citing personal guilt and shame for his eventual standing down ... As I said, cover-up was systematic and it didn't matter what the priests did or who was aware of it, the Church's main concern was that it would all just go away ...
Well considering Ratzinger was 12 yrs old when he entered the minor seminary you can't tell me he never knew there were no perverts around him....
Reference:
As far as I can see, people only appologise for things if they are caught out, not for the actual deed itself.If you were trully bothered about something you wouldn't have done it in the first place.
That is so true fluffy. I'm really bothered by all this because, as I said earlier, I thought the Pope was beyond reproach. I know one thing, if my parents were still alive, this would hit them very hard and it must do all the millions of faithfuls around the world.Reference:
Well considering Ratzinger was 12 yrs old when he entered the minor seminary you can't tell me he never knew there were no perverts around him....
True and, of course, there's the physical punishment his brother admitted to shelling out. Ratzinger must have had that at first hand too by his teachers.Reference:
Well considering Ratzinger was 12 yrs old when he entered the minor seminary you can't tell me he never knew there were no perverts around him....
And that's half the problem stonksy ... if priests accept these things from the beginning, then how is anyone to be held accountable afterwards? I'm not saying that all priests are tainted by this, but it is quite obvious that the cover-up was widespread ... on every level ...Reference:
this would hit them very hard and it must do all the millions of faithfuls around the world.
But all the faithfuls can flock back now they know it was'nt paediaphilia but possesion of the Vatican by the devil himself..I was gobsmacked when I read that one....Reference:
But all the faithfuls can flock back now they know it was'nt paediaphilia but possesion of the Vatican by the devil himself..I was gobsmacked when I read that one....
Classic wasn't it. 
Reference:
And that's half the problem stonksy ... if priests accept these things from the beginning, then how is anyone to be held accountable afterwards? I'm not saying that all priests are tainted by this, but it is quite obvious that the cover-up was widespread ... on every level ...
9yrs I think it is to become a priest they must see and take part in some bad stuff in the seminary....Reference:
9yrs I think it is to become a priest they must see and take part in some bad stuff in the seminary....
I don't know what they see or experience in the seminary (there are so few that enter it nowadays anyway) and I have to qualify what I say with the knowledge that I have met some decent priests along the way ... but you can bet your life on the fact that any priest with half a conscience who wanted to report on something that was either told to them in confession or which they had become aware of through other methods, would have been gagged ...Reference:
True and, of course, there's the physical punishment his brother admitted to shelling out. Ratzinger must have had that at first hand too by his teachers.
I have'nt read about that..Reference:
Classic wasn't it.
Well as a Catholic you know catholics have to forgive to bypass pergatory, its a get out of jail free card for the catholic church and the faithful plus it gets money back into the collection trays..I think they're fecked after the older generation have gone....
I'm now 54 years old,When I saw our "Mentor" priest when I was 12 I knew he was a wrong 'un...though I was probably safe at all girls convent school,those nuns were fugly!
Reference:
I don't know what they see or experience in the seminary (there are so few that enter it nowadays anyway) and I have to qualify what I say with the knowledge that I have met some decent priests along the way ... but you can bet your life on the fact that any priest with half a conscience who wanted to report on something that was either told to them in confession or which they had become aware of through other methods, would have been gagged ...
I suppose thats true on some parts shar, you do have good ones but how can they expect any man not to get aroused but they hid the paedophiles and defrocked the ones caught with women so they threw the ones who were normal to the wolves and kept the perverts on the payrole....Reference:
I'm now 54 years old,When I saw our "Mentor" priest when I was 12 I knew he was a wrong 'un...though I was probably safe at all girls convent school,those nuns were fugly!
I think you were more lucky, as they might not have been looking at the nuns....
I have always had a problem with the issue of celibacy in the Catholic Church and IMO if priests were allowed to marry, many of the 'problems' that have dogged the Church for years wouldn't exist ... 
Indeed Stonks,though my heart goes out to those kids that did suffer.
Hmm..Shar I don't know if it would have reduced it.It was so "concentrated"for want of a better word,,
Reference:
I have always had a problem with the issue of celibacy in the Catholic Church and IMO if priests were allowed to marry, many of the 'problems' that have dogged the Church for years wouldn't exist ...
Each priest is allowed a percentage of the collection.. if they were allowed to marry and have a large family which with no contraception they would then that would be less money to the Vatigan so I can never see them allowing marrage unless it was to as damage limitation..As a bishop said in the press last week celibacy has nothing to do with paedophilia, so they are still defending it....
Reference:
Indeed Stonks,though my heart goes out to those kids that did suffer.
Me too Katty, lets hope all this coming out will stop the dorty feckers harming more....Reference:
I have'nt read about that
http://www.bild.de/BILD/news/b...for-forgiveness.htmlCame to light a few days ago stonksy.
Reference:
Hmm..Shar I don't know if it would have reduced it.It was so "concentrated"for want of a better word,,
True ... and I'm not saying abolishing celibacy would eliminate the institutionised problems of the Church ... BUT I do believe it would go some way to reforming the CC ... I know this is probably going to throw things off on a tangent, but I do believe that this needs to happen, as admissions to the seminaries are not as such to keep the Church alive and kicking ...Reference:
Came to light a few days ago stonksy.
Thanks Cologne I will read that..
shar, I agree that celibacy doesn't help, it's so unatural and should be dropped forthwith.
Martin Luther broke away from the Catholic church because he was against many of its reforms, he invented the Prodistant faith where priest were allowed to marry and shit loads of money were'nt sent to a fella on a fake thrown..Why the feck are we meant to idolise the pope, I have never laid witness to him speaking to god or doing anything special....
Cologne, I was v suspicious about Benedict's so called apology and his watering down of the bishop's actions to 'mistakes,' and 'errors of judgement,' and did, at the time wonder why that might be! His complete failure to adequately address and apologise for the fact that the victims and their families were silenced, bribed and intimidated by the highest ranking clergy, now makes perfect sense:
A recent report indicates that while he was still Cardinal Raztinger, he was personally responsible for issuing a document in 2001 instructing all bishops to put the interests of the church ahead of those of law enforcement - and children.
The document recommended that rather than reporting sexual abuse to the relevant legal authorities, bishops should encourage the victim, witnesses and perpetrator not to talk about it. And, to keep victims quiet, it threatened that if they repeat the allegations they would be excommunicated. ...
Five years ago he sent out an updated version of the notorious 1962 Vatican document Crimen Sollicitationis - Latin for The Crime of Solicitation - which laid down the Vatican's strict instructions on covering up sexual scandal. It was regarded as so secret that it came with instructions that bishops had to keep it locked in a safe at all times.
What the Hell happened there ^^^^
Think it had something to do with the cogs when I was trying to reply. So, I'll try again:
Cologne, I was v suspicious about Benedict's so called apology and his watering down of the bishop's actions to 'mistakes,' and 'errors of judgement,' and did, at the time wonder why that might be! His complete failure to adequately address and apologise for the fact that the victims and their families were silenced, bribed and intimidated by the highest ranking clergy, now makes perfect sense:
Think it had something to do with the cogs when I was trying to reply. So, I'll try again:Cologne, I was v suspicious about Benedict's so called apology and his watering down of the bishop's actions to 'mistakes,' and 'errors of judgement,' and did, at the time wonder why that might be! His complete failure to adequately address and apologise for the fact that the victims and their families were silenced, bribed and intimidated by the highest ranking clergy, now makes perfect sense:
A recent report indicates that while he was still Cardinal Raztinger, he was personally responsible for issuing a document in 2001 instructing all bishops to put the interests of the church ahead of those of law enforcement - and children.
The document recommended that rather than reporting sexual abuse to the relevant legal authorities, bishops should encourage the victim, witnesses and perpetrator not to talk about it. And, to keep victims quiet, it threatened that if they repeat the allegations they would be excommunicated. ...
Five years ago he sent out an updated version of the notorious 1962 Vatican document Crimen Sollicitationis - Latin for The Crime of Solicitation - which laid down the Vatican's strict instructions on covering up sexual scandal. It was regarded as so secret that it came with instructions that bishops had to keep it locked in a safe at all times.
Nope, 3rd time lucky?
Cologne, I was v suspicious about Benedict's so called apology and his watering down of the bishop's actions to 'mistakes,' and 'errors of judgement,' and did, at the time wonder why that might be! His complete failure to adequately address and apologise for the fact that the victims and their families were silenced, bribed and intimidated by the highest ranking clergy, now makes perfect sense:
A recent report indicates that while he was still Cardinal Raztinger, he was personally responsible for issuing a document in 2001 instructing all bishops to put the interests of the church ahead of those of law enforcement - and children.
The document recommended that rather than reporting sexual abuse to the relevant legal authorities, bishops should encourage the victim, witnesses and perpetrator not to talk about it. And, to keep victims quiet, it threatened that if they repeat the allegations they would be excommunicated. ...
Five years ago he sent out an updated version of the notorious 1962 Vatican document Crimen Sollicitationis - Latin for The Crime of Solicitation - which laid down the Vatican's strict instructions on covering up sexual scandal. It was regarded as so secret that it came with instructions that bishops had to keep it locked in a safe at all times.
Cologne, I was v suspicious about Benedict's so called apology and his watering down of the bishop's actions to 'mistakes,' and 'errors of judgement,' and did, at the time wonder why that might be! His complete failure to adequately address and apologise for the fact that the victims and their families were silenced, bribed and intimidated by the highest ranking clergy, now makes perfect sense:
A recent report indicates that while he was still Cardinal Raztinger, he was personally responsible for issuing a document in 2001 instructing all bishops to put the interests of the church ahead of those of law enforcement - and children.
The document recommended that rather than reporting sexual abuse to the relevant legal authorities, bishops should encourage the victim, witnesses and perpetrator not to talk about it. And, to keep victims quiet, it threatened that if they repeat the allegations they would be excommunicated. ...
Five years ago he sent out an updated version of the notorious 1962 Vatican document Crimen Sollicitationis - Latin for The Crime of Solicitation - which laid down the Vatican's strict instructions on covering up sexual scandal. It was regarded as so secret that it came with instructions that bishops had to keep it locked in a safe at all times.