Pedophiles and the Church: What should be done?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Yorick:


I don't believe in institutionalised celibacy for Priests. It is not Biblical, and should be a personal choice. Paul recommends being single, yet allows for marriage, and so should the Roman Catholic Church IMO.

Almost every other Christian denomination allows Preachers and Pastors to marry, and recognise the importance of family support to a ministry.

Whether the said celibacy causes pedophilia or not is not something I have an opinion on.

---

Im not disagreeing, but even though I cant recall what the reasoning was now..I do remember learning that about 600-800 years ago they instituted the celebacy and no marriage thing in the RCC and I remember that when I read the reasoning...it seemed acceptable and reasonable...it almost made sense...which is quite a step up from a heck of a lot of other things that were instituted around the same time. Wish my memory wasnt so swiss cheese....all I can remember is that it made sense at the time.

[Donut]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Yorick:


Whether the said celibacy causes pedophilia or not is not something I have an opinion on.

---

Donut has to sit down, his jaw open in disbelief. To see the two word 'no' and 'opinion' side by side in a Yorick post. Is this the end of the world as we No it?

[Yorick]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Donut:


Donut has to sit down, his jaw open in disbelief. To see the two word 'no' and 'opinion' side by side in a Yorick post. Is this the end of the world as we No it?

---

Yes, yes, I know. I'm an opinionated bastard.

[img]tongue.gif[/img] Phooey to you too. You....werris

[fable]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cloudbringer:



Bravo! Two points I'll make.. celibacy does not *force* a person to do anything. It is an INDIVIDUAL choice based on the person's needs/wants/religious beliefs/philosophy, what have you. Celibacy does not lead to pedophilia for goodness sake! How many NON church member pedophiles are there, hmm?

---

As I recall, the discussion on Connections (referred to in my initial post, above) didn't once even suggest that celibacy led to pedophilia; but it was concerned about a presumed atmosphere of exclusion within the church hierarchy that, however well-intentioned, could be completely shielded from the implications of the act. A sort of "us" and "them" mentality which has been part of the RCC since the European Middle Ages, and has never considered that the shepherd and the flock are ultimately one.

As a result, pedophilia is treated within the Church as a sin, and has been ignored as a crime--the old secular vs. sacred law arguments apply. But it amazes me that an intelligent man like Cardinal Law would assume that a sin (using his own system of weighting) could be so easily purged, and that the sinner should then be put back in environments where the opportunity to sin once more was readily available.

I seriously hope Cardinal Law and his friends have good confessors that are up to the job. The start of an effective penance might be to force every one of those church officials to listen to the full stories of each abuse victim. But somehow, I don't think that will be happening, anytime soon.

[Madman-Rogovich]

sorry for lack ofinspiring input but im short of time

- they sicken me
- they deserve a nastyend
- no excuses

quote:

---

Originally posted by fable:


As a result, pedophilia is treated within the Church as a sin, and has been ignored as a crime--the old secular vs. sacred law arguments apply. But it amazes me that an intelligent man like Cardinal Law would assume that a sin (using his own system of weighting) could be so easily purged, and that the sinner should then be put back in environments where the opportunity to sin once more was readily available.
.

---

What proof do you offer that this is something that is "ignored" or just treated as a sin by the RCC on a casual basis? I hear accusations all the time, I see the media making pronouncents before trials are even held on less than complete facts....are YOU sure the church isn't punishing (turning them in) the people it catches in crimes on a regular basis? or is it a couple of incidents that got publicized that makes you suspect that they don't?

Im just curious.

[ 02-08-2002: Message edited by: MagiK ]

[Spelca]

We should remember when celibacy became necessery. Dunno the exact date, but the only reason it became so was because priests had their own families and since at that time people were poor, priests often stole money from the church to support their own families. Well, now things aren't that bad anymore so there's no need for celibacy. It's in human nature to have sexual urges and I don't see why anybody whould be a bad priest because they have a family. I'd like it better if they had families. I mean, why would I take advice on family from a man (usually - though that's wrong too!)who doesn't have a clue about how it's to have a family. So, I am for priests having families - maybe that way they wouldn't molest children.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spelca:
We should remember when celibacy became necessery. Dunno the exact date, but the only reason it became so was because priests had their own families and since at that time people were poor, priests often stole money from the church to support their own families. Well, now things aren't that bad anymore so there's no need for celibacy. It's in human nature to have sexual urges and I don't see why anybody whould be a bad priest because they have a family. I'd like it better if they had families. I mean, why would I take advice on family from a man (usually - though that's wrong too!)who doesn't have a clue about how it's to have a family. So, I am for priests having families - maybe that way they wouldn't molest children.

---

You know I've heard a lot of things, but I've never heard THAT given as a reason for celibacy...it doesnt even make sense..you can be single (without a family) without being celebate.....

[Garnet FalconDance]

Sorry to blow the theory out of the water, but originally celibacy had nothing to do with poverty and familial relations in the priesthood...it was an idea induced to shed the body and mind of the distractions of the lusts of the flesh in order that one might more closely follow and commune with God. If the mind is less apt to wander, one can then devote all time and thought and energy to a given enterprise...in this case the worship and service of a deity.

[fable]

quote:

---

Originally posted by MagiK:


What proof do you offer that this is something that is "ignored" or just treated as a sin by the RCC on a casual basis? I hear accusations all the time, I see the media making pronouncents before trials are even held on less than complete facts....are YOU sure the church isn't punishing (turning them in) the people it catches in crimes on a regular basis? or is it a couple of incidents that got publicized that makes you suspect that they don't?

Im just curious.

---

That was the whole premise for the show, Magik, discussed in my first post starting this thread. The fact that all these documents are now being gathered that show how reliable, important figures in the medical and legal communities were recommending at the very least the removal of these pedophilic priests as far back in specific instances as the mid-1980s, and the alerting of the civil authorities, while instead the RCC was not only ignoring this advice, but putting the very same priests back in positions where they once again had authority over young boys without other supervision.

If you'll reread my initial post, you'll see that the program I referred to was Connections--one of the most serious discussion programs of its kind; and that the two guests were a Professor of Theology from Boston University, and a journalist who has researched this area for several years, and who admits to being a serious, sincere and regular Roman Catholic. These were not people who were "out to get the Church."

I mentioned some statistics, again, in that first post.

Here are some other recent links on the continuing scandal up in Boston. Please note that none of this is sensationalistic journalism, but really four different news-based perspectives on a continuing problem upon which all sides seem to agree. Nobody speaks of a coverup by the Church hierarchy, but of a complete misunderstanding of the seriousness of the situation, and of an atmosphere which allowed some truly heinous oversights to be committed by dedicated high-ranking Church officials:

http://www2.bostonherald.com/news/lo...ch02082002.htm

http://www.uexpress.com/johnleo/

http://www.boston.com/globe/spotlight/sexabuse/

http://www.hds.harvard.edu/dpa/news/news/scandal.html