Do You Think Its Fair That The Boston Archdioces..

[fides quarens intellectum]

so curious as to who keeps bumping six and seven-year-old threads.

[MIKolbe]

seems to happen alot...

I don't understand why they bump it, then erase all trace of said 'bumpage'.

[Norseman82]

[quote name='MIkolbe' date='02 June 2010 - 04:53 PM' timestamp='1275512001' post='2122839']
seems to happen alot...

I don't understand why they bump it, then erase all trace of said 'bumpage'.
[/quote]

Probably just that someone voted in the poll - that bumps the thread without any posts.

[dominicansoul]

i don't think its fair...

[iheartjp2]

<commence rant>

I read a book by the guy who started Voice of the Faithful in the Boston Archdiocese when the scandal broke out. It was honestly a piece of garbage, but reading his description of how people who were genuinely concerned over what the Archbishop was doing (and not doing) were treated by him and the diocese, I don't see why it would be a bad thing. The reason everyone there is going through this in one way or another is because of him. He messed up. Sometimes when other people mess up, people who are completely innocent have to pay. It's just how the world works. Whatever is decided, I'm not going to complain. I'm sick of hearing about the matter altogether. I know people get all these little ants in their pants when someone criticizes the Church over ANYTHING, but she needs to get it together. Parts of her body messed up and she just needs to come clean and fly right from now on. :l

For those who think the matter is complicated, just think of the inquisitions and the crusades. They weren't very complicated if you really think about them. Yes, terrible things were done, but honestly, what would happen if they hadn't been? I think the Church does a great job of cracking down on everyone but itself. If they can pull off things like keeping Europe from falling off the face of the planet, then they can surely keep priests from abusing kids IF THEY TRY.


</end rant>

[sistersintigo]

[quote name='iheartjp2' date='06 June 2010 - 03:45 PM' timestamp='1275849942' post='2124661']
I read a book by the guy who started Voice of the Faithful in the Boston Archdiocese when the scandal broke out. It was honestly a piece of garbage, but reading his description of how people who were genuinely concerned over what the Archbishop was doing (and not doing) were treated by him and the diocese, I don't see why it would be a bad thing. The reason everyone there is going through this in one way or another is because of him. He messed up. Sometimes when other people mess up, people who are completely innocent have to pay. It's just how the world works. Whatever is decided, I'm not going to complain. I'm sick of hearing about the matter altogether. I know people get all these little ants in their pants when someone criticizes the Church over ANYTHING, but she needs to get it together. Parts of her body messed up and she just needs to come clean and fly right from now on.
[/quote]

Yes, I have not read this book, but I understand how it could be garbage....with a little food for thought mixed in. Just one other thing:
it isn't just one archbishop, or cardinal; the Archdiocese of Boston took a long long time, through many terms of cardinals/bishops, to get the way it got when the top blew off. This is no mere opinion. I can't link to this myself, however one could look at the documentation of THAT court trial. Not only was it argued about what the then-bishop had done, but also how the then-bishop had perjured himself by COVERING UP WHAT PREVIOUS BISHOPS HAD DONE BEFORE HIM.
The more one studies the documentation about all the Boston archbishops -- especially all those who were made cardinals, until the present one -- the more persuasive the case for a long-term, entrenched culture which was reinforced, not by one archbishop, but by a whole series of them:
O'Connor, Cushing, Medeiros, as well as Law....
I do agree, straightening up is a requirement, not an option.

[Anomaly]

[quote name='sistersintigo' date='22 June 2010 - 05:18 PM' timestamp='1277237884' post='2132902']
Yes, I have not read this book, but I understand how it could be garbage....with a little food for thought mixed in. Just one other thing:
it isn't just one archbishop, or cardinal; the Archdiocese of Boston took a long long time, through many terms of cardinals/bishops, to get the way it got when the top blew off. This is no mere opinion. I can't link to this myself, however one could look at the documentation of THAT court trial. Not only was it argued about what the then-bishop had done, but also how the then-bishop had perjured himself by COVERING UP WHAT PREVIOUS BISHOPS HAD DONE BEFORE HIM.
The more one studies the documentation about all the Boston archbishops -- especially all those who were made cardinals, until the present one -- the more persuasive the case for a long-term, entrenched culture which was reinforced, not by one archbishop, but by a whole series of them:
O'Connor, Cushing, Medeiros, as well as Law....
I do agree, straightening up is a requirement, not an option.
[/quote]
Exactly! The is no denying that sexual predators within the Church has been an endemic problem for quite some time. Horrifically, the problem has also been known and ignored (or worse) by the Church. The Catholic Church, while seemingly a good idea in theory, has always been unable to effectively deal with a culture of selfishness, power mongering, and oppression. Way too many people have naively accepted the bad for the perceived good or just outright live in denial of the evil reality of a human run organization which has allowed it to continue, grow, and fester for millenium. A perfect set-up for many who simply seek power.

It's obvious that an endemic culture of ethics in the Church clergy does not exist when such evil has been protected and effected (and fostered) by lay, brothers, nuns, monks, priests, pastors, bishops, archbishops, cardinals, and popes. It's ironic and sad the Pope instructs the 'faithful' to repent and sacrifice for the evil done by others.

What, the Civil Justice System was going to appeal to the moral authority of the Church and expect ethical reform? LOL! The only effective option is to sue for money and appeal to the base human motives of selfishness and greed. It's an viable business decision to punish a rogue institution.

[Winchester]

Holy Cr[i][/i]ap! You mean that the hierarchy reacted in the exact same way as the bulk of humanity and [i]hid[/i] sexual abuse? Stop the presses!

Yeah, the justice system that still can't deal properly with sexual predators and only recently has attempted after short stints in prison, to monitor the presence of predators (which doesn't work). And of course "everyone knew" it was going on, but apparently, parents and others outside the church didn't care enough to take action. Now, 30 years later, armed with words, it only makes sense that a big payout is in order.

Just be sure to focus on the church, not on the wimpy assed reaction of society in general toward predators.

None of this is about protecting anyone: it's about making money or attacking the Church.

[Winchester]

[quote name='iheartjp2' date='06 June 2010 - 02:45 PM' timestamp='1275849942' post='2124661']
they can surely keep priests from abusing kids IF THEY TRY.
[/quote]
If by 'stop' you mean react to them after they are discovered, then yes, they can. They can turn them over to the law, who will shuffle them about, imprison them (maybe) and then release them to offend again. Let's all pretend that if the Church had turned over the offenders, the "justics system" would have protected children. Don't give yourselves aneurysms straining to imagine that scenario.

If by 'stop' you mean prevent it, then you're wrong. The best you can do is attempt to weed out potential predators. But they are smart, these predators, and they join the priesthood for the same reason hunters camouflage themselves. This is why they become teachers, ice cream men, husbands... the only way to stop a sexual predator is to kill him when he is discovered. Give them an opportunity to confess and then execute them. No imprisonment, no "registration."

Edited July 7, 2010 by Winchester

[Socrates]

[quote name='iheartjp2' date='06 June 2010 - 02:45 PM' timestamp='1275849942' post='2124661']
For those who think the matter is complicated, just think of the inquisitions and the crusades. They weren't very complicated if you really think about them. Yes, terrible things were done, but honestly, what would happen if they hadn't been? I think the Church does a great job of cracking down on everyone but itself.
[/quote]
Yeah, we all know how the Church conducts inquisitions and crusades all the time these days.

It's the same weak mush-minded liberalism and "tolerance" krept into the modern Church that has left many churchmen unable to stand up strongly against evils in the world that has allowed seminaries to become safe-havens for perverts, and pederasts to be quietly shuffled around.

[MichaelFilo]

They should tear down the dioceses financially. The State has the right to punish those in civil and criminal court and is one of it's few proper functions. The diocese have all shown an attempt to hide it and are responsible for it financially if it is being facilitated by the head of the diocese.

55 million isn't meant to make spiritual restitution, since law courts cannot offer compensation for the spiritual. It is for the debilitating effects of abuse, the years of depression, the fear, and worst of all, the sexual perversion that is put into these kids (alot of abuse is done by those who have been once abused.) 55 million, even if every dime went to the victims, would not be enough.

And how many parishioners covered up the scandals? My manager was telling me about his old church and the scandals.. I asked if he ever reported, he said no, the Catholic Church is full of perverts anyway. What do you make of that? There can be very little sympathy for those who prey on the weak, and those that will not stand up to them ought to be held responsible as well. Someone always knows.

[Winchester]

It's sure worth it to destroy a diocese and all the good that it does to seek revenge on abuse. Great idea.

[Anomaly]

[quote name='Winchester' date='08 July 2010 - 03:03 PM' timestamp='1278612205' post='2139365']
It's sure worth it to destroy a diocese and all the good that it does to seek revenge on abuse. Great idea.
[/quote]It's your kind of logic that has been used to justify all the cover-ups, hush money, and predator shuffling. It's better to have a few lives destroyed instead of admitting the problem that will harm the priest/parish/bishop/diocese/church when it does so much other good. The civil courts should not have been forced to be the party to cause change. If the Church clergy were truly doing their job, these priests would have been de-frocked at the get go.
The reality is, the predeators were shieled from punishment in order to protect the Church. Obviously it wasn't a good plan.
Do you really think it's unreasonable to expect (or even hope) the Catholic Church, the 'Bride of Christ', should put forth a bit more effort in correcting a sexual predator problem then the local school board?

[sistersintigo]

[quote name='Winchester' date='07 July 2010 - 11:07 AM' timestamp='1278511661' post='2138888']
Holy Cr[i][/i]ap! You mean that the hierarchy reacted in the exact same way as the bulk of humanity and [i]hid[/i] sexual abuse? Stop the presses!

Yeah, the justice system that still can't deal properly with sexual predators and only recently has attempted after short stints in prison, to monitor the presence of predators (which doesn't work). And of course "everyone knew" it was going on, but apparently, parents and others outside the church didn't care enough to take action. Now, 30 years later, armed with words, it only makes sense that a big payout is in order.

Just be sure to focus on the church, not on the wimpy assed reaction of society in general toward predators.

None of this is about protecting anyone: it's about making money or attacking the Church.
[/quote]
I remember the refectory at suppertime, in a priory where religious sisters across the spectrum of orders were doing one of those "renewal Programs" -- all older women, still active, who went someplace for several months and lived together retreat style. Ah, you ought to have heard those holy women at table, when Cardinal Law resigned as archbishop. "Power" with a capital P, that was the subject. Good thing he wasn't within a mile of the women, they would have gone after him with the silverware....and probably thrown crockery as well.

[Winchester]

[quote name='Anomaly' date='08 July 2010 - 05:09 PM' timestamp='1278623367' post='2139450']
The reality is, the predeators were shieled from punishment in order to protect the Church.[/quote]
Sometimes to protect priests whose own secrets were known to the predators. Your point?

[quote]
Do you really think it's unreasonable to expect (or even hope) the Catholic Church, the 'Bride of Christ', should put forth a bit more effort in correcting a sexual predator problem then the local school board?
[/quote]
I never said it was. But turning them over to the law (especially at the time these abuses were occuring--does very little more. Ask the kid John Couey killed. Oh, you can't because the government isn't any better at dealing with them. Remember, I'm the guy who says execute them.

Are we still pretending this isn't common human behavior?

[Winchester]

[quote name='sistersintigo' date='08 July 2010 - 05:27 PM' timestamp='1278624458' post='2139469']
I remember the refectory at suppertime, in a priory where religious sisters across the spectrum of orders were doing one of those "renewal Programs" -- all older women, still active, who went someplace for several months and lived together retreat style. Ah, you ought to have heard those holy women at table, when Cardinal Law resigned as archbishop. "Power" with a capital P, that was the subject. Good thing he wasn't within a mile of the women, they would have gone after him with the silverware....and probably thrown crockery as well.
[/quote]
I think that would be fine. I would support the victims killing their attackers and beating the hell out of those who didn't stop their attackers. I fully support that.

[MichaelFilo]

I don't know, if priest X is in jail, or even goes to court for child abuse, you bet your best friend that everyone will know, and the bishop will too. Even if not convicted, it will go a long way to keep people on gaurd. This was a violation of the law, which is in strict adherence with Church morality. There should have been no question as to what should be done, unless there was a confessional seal. The priests should turn themselves in and accept the just punishment for their crime, even with the statute of limitations in place.

What would it have done for those hurt? Nothing more than knowing some kind of justice exists. It will not make it better, but no crime against the body, whether violent or sexual can be made good by punishment of the perpetrator, but that is not the point of a criminal justice system. Civil courts attempt to do that, and that money is of value.

As to the parishioners who donate, as with all donations, they are given with a spirit of charity and will be rewarded in Heaven, but as with all financial, spiritual, emotional, and temporal investments, not all of them are worthwhile. Not to say that the Church isn't a good investment in those regards, but as with all of them, they come with a risk of loss of investment.

[CatherineM]

If a priest abused my child, I wouldn't expect the Pope to do a thing about it. I would expect the local special victims unit of the cops to do something. I would expect myself to do something, namely lots of therapy for my child. I don't mind adults abused as kids suing the church, but I want every dollar they are awarded to be matched by their parents. If their parents reported it to the police, who did nothing, then the money should be matched by the local police. One of the current cases to be decided whether the Vatican can be held financially responsible involves an abuse that happened in the 20's, and the priest involved died in the 50's. If you can't make up your mind to sue for 70 years, there is something wrong with the legal system too.

[Anomaly]

[quote name='Winchester' date='08 July 2010 - 08:06 PM' timestamp='1278630385' post='2139506']
Sometimes to protect priests whose own secrets were known to the predators. Your point?[/quote]
I apologize for my poor comprehension. The aboe makes no sense whatsover (to me). What secrets? How does that relate to what I said. Please 'splain.


[quote name='Winchester']I never said it was. But turning them over to the law (especially at the time these abuses were occuring--does very little more. Ask the kid John Couey killed. Oh, you can't because the government isn't any better at dealing with them. Remember, I'm the guy who says execute them.

Are we still pretending this isn't common human behavior?
[/quote]Her name was Jessica... The 'Law' was doing a halfway decent job as far as tracking him and having him report. HOWEVER, family members aided John by letting him stay with them in a trailer park without reporting to the parole board. Then, they lied when asked if they knew where John Couey was. Then they told John who buried Jessica while she was still ALIVE!

Was that tragedy an epic fail of the Law community, or an epic fail of morality on the part of uneducated, unsophisticated, regular joe/janes in a trailer park. Maybe they never were exposed to philosophy, ethics, morality, theology, and spiritual development for 3 years in a seminary.

What is your standard for 'common human behavior'? A behavior that cuts accross all strata of social standing, level of education and most people commit as in 'typical', like paying taxes? Or a behavior that is generally committed by a minority with a relativley low level of gravity, like smoking pot. Or does murder and bank robbery fall under your definition of common human behavior?

Do you think that school teachers and priests commit armed robbery at the same percentage rate as the general population because it's a common human behavior? There's no denying that school teachers and priests have and will commit armed robbery, by the rate of occurence is/would be much lower than the persons living in an urban setting with a lower level of education and standard of living.

[Winchester]

[quote name='Anomaly' date='09 July 2010 - 07:38 AM' timestamp='1278675524' post='2139809']
I apologize for my poor comprehension. The aboe makes no sense whatsover (to me). What secrets? How does that relate to what I said. Please 'splain.
[/quote]
I was merely giving you ammunition in your fight to prove that priests are ordinary humans, which in turn proves that the Church is horrible and there is no God. After all, if preserving your own sexual affairs is more important than outing a pedophile, it's obvious that derails all of Christendom. As usual, you know poo about your subject beyond some AP information.

[quote]
Her name was Jessica... The 'Law' was doing a halfway decent job as far as tracking him and having him report.[/quote]
So releasing him and "monitoring" him worked. She's come back to life, right? I guess in Monitoring 2.0, monitoring will magically keep them from committing the same crime. Is that an implant, or what? How's that accomplished? Because what that state is doing lookis awfully similar to what every one else does.

[quote]HOWEVER, family members aided John by letting him stay with them in a trailer park without reporting to the parole board. Then, they lied when asked if they knew where John Couey was. Then they told John who buried Jessica while she was still ALIVE![/quote]
Oh, so the monitoring didn't work. Gotcha.

[quote]Was that tragedy an epic fail of the Law community, or an epic fail of morality on the part of uneducated, unsophisticated, regular joe/janes in a trailer park. Maybe they never were exposed to philosophy, ethics, morality, theology, and spiritual development for 3 years in a seminary.[/quote]
Both. And Couey's not the only example of a reoffender released by the state because the state is run by nancies who won't do the job right. I took two years of French. Still can't speak it.


[quote]What is your standard for 'common human behavior'? A behavior that cuts accross all strata of social standing, level of education and most people commit as in 'typical', like paying taxes? Or a behavior that is generally committed by a minority with a relativley low level of gravity, like smoking pot. Or does murder and bank robbery fall under your definition of common human behavior?[/quote]
Hiding sexual abuse is common human behavior. You didn't know that? You didn't know that's one of the main pillars of protection on which sexual predators depend?

[quote]Do you think that school teachers and priests commit armed robbery at the same percentage rate as the general population because it's a common human behavior? There's no denying that school teachers and priests have and will commit armed robbery, by the rate of occurence is/would be much lower than the persons living in an urban setting with a lower level of education and standard of living.
[/quote]
Is pedophilia (the disorder) more common amongst poor people? Are you honestly comparing robbery and murder (which may be motivated by survival) to sexual predation, which is motivated by a desire for power over another human being?

I'll repeat this for you: Predators seek good hunting grounds. I'm surprised there aren't more pedophiles in these jobs. You cannot distinguish between a robber, who needn't obtain a job within the places he robs to a pedophile who surrounds himself in his daily life with potential victims and clothes himself in a respectability that presumes trust to give him time alone with his victims?