Abuses by the Catholic Church

[psalm90]

Here’s one review of a book I will cite below:

“the best-balanced story yet told of the Protestant Revolt and the
accompanying Catholic Reform” America magazine.

A popular history of the Reformation by (Fr.) Philip Hughes, Doubleday, 1957

amazon.com/popular-history-Reformation-Philip-Hughes/dp/B00005WOAV

It was worth digging through a mound of books to locate my copy of this book. I had it for years until I decided I had an obligation to read it. Then, I couldn’t stop reading it.

Hughes gives a good snapshot of the Catholic Church at the time after the beginning of the Protestant reformation. The bishops of the Church were so “laid back” shall I say that of 750 bishops in the world, there weren’t enough that showed up to convene the Council of Trent. it took one or two more attempts to get even a working percentage of bishops to show up, and I recall that no more than 20% of the bishops EVER showed up – One reason may have been that they didn’t take the reformation seriously or they didn’t take the problems IN the Church seriously.

But, Hughes describes the opening session where there was a scathing lecture to the bishops about all the lax practices and abuses that they allowed in the church.

It’s been a while since I read this book, but I assure you that it is worthwhile to the interested person about the Council of Trent itself and the backdrop of problems in the Church at the time.

In places, it seems to be speaking about OUR era of Church history, as well. That is the frightening aspect of this book.

 

[YiSan]

I am reading a book called “The Church Under Attack” by Diane Moczak. I am about half way through it and I cannot believe that my entire view on history was, in reality, a bad fiction novel.

All of the so called abuses by the Catholic Church in the last 500 years are completely false or so over exaggerated that there is hardly any truth left in them.

So I guess my question would be: is there any truth to any of the claims of Catholic oppression and abuse so well taught in the American school system?

Further, my statement would be that all should read this book, and while I’m sure there is a Catholic slant to it, there are so many facts and proofs that any pro Catholic bias is pretty much overshadowed and wiped out…

USMC_Convert:

Well, I can say that growing up in Ohio in the 60s and 70s, I was definitely taught in school that the Crusades were the product of Catholics trying to force their beliefs on to anyone and everyone even if they had to exterminate them in the process. I remember the teacher too (Mr. Hackney). He was also a baptist minister…

 

[psalm90]

USMC_Convert:

Well, I can say that growing up in Ohio in the 60s and 70s, I was definitely taught in school that the Crusades were the product of Catholics trying to force their beliefs on to anyone and everyone even if they had to exterminate them in the process. I remember the teacher too (Mr. Hackney). He was also a baptist minister…

That’s quite turning history on its head, isn’t it? The Crusades were undertaken to RECOVER the lands that had been overrun by the Saracens (Muslims).

When I was growing up many years ago, people used to talk about “-isms” – socialism, communism, atheism, fascism, and whatnot.

I’m reading a recommended book entitled The Drama of Atheistic Humanism by a Jesuit priest, written around 1950. It really explains the attacks on the Catholic Church just for being the Catholic Church. If you’re atheistic, you don’t need any special reason to attack it for what it is - a system of belief and worship of God. We are surrounded by this, like you say, in public schools, where all religion, but especially the Catholic faith, is singled out for attack – except Muslim beliefs. Not many people have the courage to publicly attack that.

The CC has been attacked from the beginning, at all sides, for just what it is. And, one of the chief methods of attacking it is to attack its morality. Certainly, the Church has had internal problems with this, and we all are sinners for sure, but we are attacked by really malicious people who have no morals except the motivation to attack.

I’m quoting someone famous now, who said that the prejudice against Catholics is the last accepted form of prejudice, notwithstanding our US Constitution.

 

[otjm]

Sorry I am only up to the 1800s so I don’t know if the book addresses the sexual abuses which were obvious, evident and irrefutable. However, with as much love, care, compassion and sorrow for what happened I would say this, while the Church probably mishandled the situation, the Church was not, as far as I know, the culprit, that was a few misguided and sinful members of the Church. I hope and pray for those who suffered from those abuses.

That being said, I did not mean to bring up any of the sexual abuses I was more talking about things like the top 4 mentioned several posts above, things that The Church has been accused of, things that were heaped upon all Catholics as a whole.

Part of the issue is how one defines “The Church”.

There is a tendency, in some circles, to define it as those segments of the Catholic Church with which one disagrees.

At other times, it is the local Church - that is, a diocese, and likely the bishop, and some of the priests (it is easy to forget that other priests even exist in that diocese)

On occasion, it is priests, and/or bishops and/or Cardinals, and perhaps a Pope, who acted or failed to act; some of the issues arise out of cultural clashes.

People, particularly those who are wont to use and abuse the words “always” and “never”, see things through their own colored lens. And not necessarily a rose-colored one. The Church, the oldest and largest organization in the world, is going to make an easy target for anyone who wishes to shoot. That here have been problems with clergy and with laity, and with the both over history should come as no surprise; and it should also be no surprise that the whole ends up tarred and feathered for the wrongful actions and inactions of some. And at times, the"some" is many individuals.

I have not read the OP’s book, nor do I intend to, as I am willing to let history present itself through all the various shadings historians give - pro, con, and neutral. The Church has had plenty of bad actors - including a few Popes, and I am willing to leave it at that.

 

[Russell_SA]

I am reading a book called “The Church Under Attack” by Diane Moczak. I am about half way through it and I cannot believe that my entire view on history was, in reality, a bad fiction novel.

All of the so called abuses by the Catholic Church in the last 500 years are completely false or so over exaggerated that there is hardly any truth left in them.

So I guess my question would be: is there any truth to any of the claims of Catholic oppression and abuse so well taught in the American school system?

Further, my statement would be that all should read this book, and while I’m sure there is a Catholic slant to it, there are so many facts and proofs that any pro Catholic bias is pretty much overshadowed and wiped out…

I would go ask historians that do not have a conflict of interest with this topic and see how they would go about arguing conclusions based on the data at hand. If the book you are referring to came from someone of the faith, then you must assume that they had bias in the writing of that book. However, that is not to dismiss their conversation per say. Just as David Irving’s writings about denying the Holocaust is outrageous, his research into the field for what he was able to recover and discuss was important. I’m not equating David to the level of what you read, just giving an example as to someone who has an agenda in writing about a topic can still reveal documentation and new dialog about the topic. Since I can not address the points in the book for its conclusions, I will make an assumed leap and state that official reasons for going down a rabbit hole may be well intentioned, but the resulting devastation is what the world holds them accountable to. Cloaking one’s self in self-righteousness for the “betterment of the greater good”, has a long history of bodies left in it’s wake. We still celebrate Christopher Columbus’ birthday every year, despite the fact we know he committed genocide, and don’t teach that in schools. To remove the obvious conflict of interest that the author and yourself may have for wanting to conclude that the church has been maligned in the history books, I’d continue to look at other works not written by a catholic, but maybe by a Hindu historian? A jewish historian? etc. Someone without a dog in this hunt. Just because I watched the Intelligence Squared debate over “Is the Catholic Church a force for good?” or the movie, “Spotlight”, am I now justified in concluding that the catholic church is the equivalent as a sexually abusive husband to our daughter and we keep counseling our daughter to stay with him because of all the good he does for her, paying her bills, providing healthcare for their children he rapes, etc?

 

[edwest2]

USMC_Convert:

Well, I can say that growing up in Ohio in the 60s and 70s, I was definitely taught in school that the Crusades were the product of Catholics trying to force their beliefs on to anyone and everyone even if they had to exterminate them in the process. I remember the teacher too (Mr. Hackney). He was also a baptist minister…

Yes, I know someone who believes that - uncritically.

Ed

 

[edwest2]

That’s quite turning history on its head, isn’t it? The Crusades were undertaken to RECOVER the lands that had been overrun by the Saracens (Muslims).

When I was growing up many years ago, people used to talk about “-isms” – socialism, communism, atheism, fascism, and whatnot.

I’m reading a recommended book entitled The Drama of Atheistic Humanism by a Jesuit priest, written around 1950. It really explains the attacks on the Catholic Church just for being the Catholic Church. If you’re atheistic, you don’t need any special reason to attack it for what it is - a system of belief and worship of God. We are surrounded by this, like you say, in public schools, where all religion, but especially the Catholic faith, is singled out for attack – except Muslim beliefs. Not many people have the courage to publicly attack that.

The CC has been attacked from the beginning, at all sides, for just what it is. And, one of the chief methods of attacking it is to attack its morality. Certainly, the Church has had internal problems with this, and we all are sinners for sure, but we are attacked by really malicious people who have no morals except the motivation to attack.

I’m quoting someone famous now, who said that the prejudice against Catholics is the last accepted form of prejudice, notwithstanding our US Constitution.

As much as we are taught to love our neighbor, we need to understand that Catholics, and Christians in general, have been lied to - for a long time. The current version covering the last 40 years of “don’t trust the Church, trust us!” and abusing that trust with lies and giving us introductions to falsehoods and perversions.

Ed

 

[abucs]

I am reading a book called “The Church Under Attack” by Diane Moczak. I am about half way through it and I cannot believe that my entire view on history was, in reality, a bad fiction novel.

All of the so called abuses by the Catholic Church in the last 500 years are completely false or so over exaggerated that there is hardly any truth left in them.

So I guess my question would be: is there any truth to any of the claims of Catholic oppression and abuse so well taught in the American school system?

Further, my statement would be that all should read this book, and while I’m sure there is a Catholic slant to it, there are so many facts and proofs that any pro Catholic bias is pretty much overshadowed and wiped out…

Hi convert,

yes a lot of the Catholic history that has been mis-taught is particularly untrue and had with it the intention of maligning the church. Slowly this is being sorted out in an internet age where any ‘gatekeepers of knowledge’ cannot get away with blatant lies.

The sexual abuse problem in the wider society is massive but we don’t hear about it. The Catholic church to it’s shame also was a part of that in the decades from 1960 to 1990, though much less now than the society at large.

The term ‘abuse’ has been widened as has the term ‘sexual abuse’ and even ‘rape’ to include cases that we would not consider to be so. However, like in the society at large, many in Catholic care were abused in all the different categories and as a group apologies, recompense and a resolve to be faithful Catholics need to be made.

If priests, teachers etc were taking part in abuse then they cannot have taken the faith or sin very seriously. They were committing so many sins that it is obviously anti-Catholic behaviour. Sex with a minor, homosexual sex (usually), sex outside of marriage. sex after holy orders, betrayal of trust of the victim, family and the church etc etc.

In the time of the 1960’s there was a craziness that said there was no sin, if it felt good do it, certain institutions should be rebelled against, etc etc. People became very liberal with sin and with religion in particular. When we stop being strong Catholics we regress, even if some call it Progress.

The church’s big fault is that not enough people stepped in to rigidly enforce what the church stands for.

For example, there were Catholic seminaries where homosexuality was practiced between priests and people felt a higher calling to Progressivism than to Catholicism and looked the other way. When these priests went out to have flocks of their own they were already not taking their faith seriously and the outside culture saw abstinence from sex as a taboo and quaint and aggressive sex behaviour as liberating, modern and progressive.

We’ve lived with those mistakes for the last few decades now.

So in short yes, a lot of the old history was biased against the church to an embarrassing degree but a lot of the sexual abuse from the 1960’s was very real.

 

[Rosebud77]

Hi convert,

yes a lot of the Catholic history that has been mis-taught is particularly untrue and had with it the intention of maligning the church. Slowly this is being sorted out in an internet age where any ‘gatekeepers of knowledge’ cannot get away with blatant lies.

The sexual abuse problem in the wider society is massive but we don’t hear about it. The Catholic church to it’s shame also was a part of that in the decades from 1960 to 1990, though much less now than the society at large.

The term ‘abuse’ has been widened as has the term ‘sexual abuse’ and even ‘rape’ to include cases that we would not consider to be so. However, like in the society at large, many in Catholic care were abused in all the different categories and as a group apologies, recompense and a resolve to be faithful Catholics need to be made.

If priests, teachers etc were taking part in abuse then they cannot have taken the faith or sin very seriously. They were committing so many sins that it is obviously anti-Catholic behaviour. Sex with a minor, homosexual sex (usually), sex outside of marriage. sex after holy orders, betrayal of trust of the victim, family and the church etc etc.

In the time of the 1960’s there was a craziness that said there was no sin, if it felt good do it, certain institutions should be rebelled against, etc etc. People became very liberal with sin and with religion in particular. When we stop being strong Catholics we regress, even if some call it Progress.

The church’s big fault is that not enough people stepped in to rigidly enforce what the church stands for.

For example, there were Catholic seminaries where homosexuality was practiced between priests and people felt a higher calling to Progressivism than to Catholicism and looked the other way. When these priests went out to have flocks of their own they were already not taking their faith seriously and the outside culture saw abstinence from sex as a taboo and quaint and aggressive sex behaviour as liberating, modern and progressive.

We’ve lived with those mistakes for the last few decades now.

So in short yes, a lot of the old history was biased against the church to an embarrassing degree but a lot of the sexual abuse from the 1960’s was very real.

Thank you.

The results of a public inquiry here in Ireland

breakingnews.ie/ireland/brendan-smyths-sex-crimes-ignored-to-protect-good-name-of-church-773328.html

I hope the mods will leave this up as this aspect is what destroys faith in the Church most and yes it iS the fault of the Church.

This thread worries me greatly for that reason.