Roman Catholic Church lowers its standards

[Ben Kenobi]

BK's posting is an absolute reflection of his real life persona.

Uh, when did we meet in RL, Sava?

[Ben Kenobi]

Well, that's missing the point of 1964 entirely, isn't it? Orwell was a socialist critiquing the Soviet Union's betrayal of communism.

Umm, ok, Buster.

[rah]

Rah said the same thing Big Brother did. "If you've got nothing to hide, then you shouldn't mind being searched."

I just said that it's more suspicious. And when it's a public relations issue, it's not a good idea.
Yes, legally they're protected, but if they cared about the victims it shouldn't be an issue. Especially when it's all about perception. At least you have to agree that perception is a big part of the issue.

And saying that a few have been caught is proof that they've all been caught is just precious. The IRS catches some tax evaders so that means there aren't any more out there.
Only in Benland

[molly bloom]

You don't see big brother as fascist?

You mean the political movements that so many Roman Ctaholics supported in WWII ?

You know, the genocidal types in Croatia and Lithuania and Slovakia ?

Not to mention those fine upstanding German Roman Catholic National Socialists.

[kentonio]

Given that you stripped Catholics of the vote, and killed off all the priests, bring it on.

Ignoring the fact that your utterly ridiculous lies have been disproven on numerous occasions you seem to have accidentally forgotten to answer my question..

What is the age of consent in the Vatican?

[Pax]

Why do you think I moved to Texas, Pax? The public school system in BC is terrible for this. I have friends who have a ton of horror stories in their time teaching there.

I wouldn't be working for a Catholic school if I didn't trust my boss. I trust my coworkers. Would I want my child to be educated there? Absolutely. My boss is a fantastic lady. Should that change in the future, I would leave and teach somewhere else.

If you want a place that really gives a damn and puts out a quality education, we're the place to be.

Are you going to answer the question, if it was your child that had been molested would you want the person prosecuted or removed from office.
This is my third attempt at getting you to answer this simple question.

[Ben Kenobi]

I just said that it's more suspicious. And when it's a public relations issue, it's not a good idea.

Legal protections are there for a reason, rah.

Yes, legally they're protected, but if they cared about the victims it shouldn't be an issue.

False accusations are a significant problem.

Especially when it's all about perception. At least you have to agree that perception is a big part of the issue.

And that's precisely why the Church should stand up for it's own legal protections. I agree that the welfare of children is important, but if we have to violate laws, we've crossed the line. A far more effective approach is to urge the Church to clean up it's own act. You don't think you've been effective at applying public pressure for the Catholic church to step things up? I'm saying from someone on the inside that they are very careful these days. Why? Because of public pressure. Will they be perfect? No. Nobody's perfect, and there's always going to be things that happen. The best thing you can do is to acknowledge that they are making an effort. Attacking the folks who are trying to clean up the mess is spectacularly unproductive. What you do is remove their ability to clean up the mess while at the same time giving succour to the folks who are responsible.

There are many of us who have zero connection with the stuff from before who are working very hard to keep things clean. You can either help or hinder us. Attacking the Church as a whole does nothing to help us.

[Pax]

It's not a violation for a country to disclose evidence to another country. It's not a violation of the law for the Vatican to disclose information to another government.

[Ben Kenobi]

Are you going to answer the question, if it was your child that had been molested would you want the person prosecuted or removed from office.

If it were my child? I'd feel responsible for putting them in a position where they were molested. Ultimately, it's my job to keep them safe. I'm a teacher. How do you think I'd feel if my child got molested when I could have homeschooled them and done my job as a parent and kept them safe?

[rah]

But when they knew there was a problem and it took years before it was made public before they actually did anything about it, obviously they shouldn't be trusted to handle it internally.

And that's precisely why the Church should stand up for it's own legal protections. I agree that the welfare of children is important, but if we have to violate laws, we've crossed the line.

And this is the crux of your problem. The line was crossed when the church initially discovered there was a problem and did NOTHING real about it. That is saying that the welfare of the children wasn't important.

[Ben Kenobi]

It's not a violation of the law for the Vatican to disclose information to another government.

Neither is it a violation of the law for the Vatican to decline requests. Insinuating that they do so 'because they are obviously guilty', is contrary to how the law works on presumption of innocence. I know some of the folks who are working behind the scenes to fix things. Your criticisms here aren't helping anybody.

[Pax]

I agree that the welfare of children is important, but if we have to violate laws, we've crossed the line. A far more effective approach is to urge the Church to clean up it's own act. You don't think you've been effective at applying public pressure for the Catholic church to step things up? I'm saying from someone on the inside that they are very careful these days. Why? Because of public pressure. Will they be perfect? No. Nobody's perfect, and there's always going to be things that happen. The best thing you can do is to acknowledge that they are making an effort. Attacking the folks who are trying to clean up the mess is spectacularly unproductive. What you do is remove their ability to clean up the mess while at the same time giving succour to the folks who are responsible.
There are many of us who have zero connection with the stuff from before who are working very hard to keep things clean. You can either help or hinder us. Attacking the Church as a whole does nothing to help us.

I will give you credit. This is the first statement that you have acknowledged the problem and a desire to fix it.

[Pax]

If it were my child? I'd feel responsible for putting them in a position where they were molested. Ultimately, it's my job to keep them safe. I'm a teacher. How do you think I'd feel if my child got molested when I could have homeschooled them and done my job as a parent and kept them safe?

Answer the question. What would you want done to the child molester? 4th attempt at straight answer.

[Pax]

Neither is it a violation of the law for the Vatican to decline requests. Insinuating that they do so 'because they are obviously guilty', is contrary to how the law works on presumption of innocence. I know some of the folks who are working behind the scenes to fix things. Your criticisms here aren't helping anybody.

You stated that the Vatican could not disclose the information because it is against the law. It's not.

[Ben Kenobi]

But when they knew there was a problem and it took years before it was made public before they actually did anything about it, obviously they shouldn't be trusted to handle it internally.

Which is why you should be extremely angry at folks like Rembert Weakland. What folks like him were doing was shielding everyone beneath them. It makes it very difficult as his superior to obtain good information if you've got someone like Weakland disposing of evidence for 20 some years. A huge part of the problem is the laxity of the seminaries in the 60s and 70s. Front and centre this is why we had the explosion of child abuse at this time.

If they had the policies they have in place today in the 60s and the 70s - none of this would have ever happened.

The line was crossed when the church initially discovered there was a problem and did NOTHING real about it.

Those bishops are gone now. They've finally all been removed.

That is saying that the welfare of the children wasn't important.

I agree that some of the bishops were motivated to cover things up. Folks like Weakland, et al. But - things change. I'm not saying it's happened overnight. Weakland himself was so bad that he was removed in the 80s by JP II, which was very unusual at the time. If the welfare of children wasn't important to the Church as a whole - none of these priests and none of the bishops would be gone. That they have been removed is evidence to me that the Catholic Church believes that the welfare of these children is more important than their image.

I am not saying you are not right to be angry at the Catholic church for what has transpired. You do have every right. It should have been fixed and dealt with 20 years ago. But, that is not something I can fix. Nor can my boss or my bosses bosses, what transpired back then.