Gates of Hell, One True Catholic Apostolic Church, and the abuse question.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guyonthestreet
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
SSTeacher said:
It is indeed very difficult. However, as you pray and reflect it might be worth pondering whether or not you’re looking at this difficulty in perspective. Perhaps a reasonable starting point for such a brown study would be the question,

What exactly was I expecting the Church that Christ founded to look like?
Click to expand...
Mick - thank you for your feedback and for giving me lots to think about again.

I dont have any unrealistic expectation of the average catholic. As I said elsewhere, if I based my knowledge of catholicism on the people around me, I would think cohabitation, contraception, drunkedness and extra-marital affairs were a requirement of the church :eek:

I guess maybe I do have too high an expecation of someone who claims they are in the role they are within the church because of a direct calling from God.

I am also as I said struggling to understand the machinary of the church that allowed this to happen. I linked this in another thread but I would be interested in your view on what Prof Elliott has to say about how the church developed its mechanisms for dealing with scandal. Since watching the lecture, I have a better understanding now I think. And it stinks to me to be honest.

youtube.com/watch?v=9GV0mAD3en8&feature=related

One thing I did find very interesting was that most of the women who sufffered a lifetime of abuse at the hands of nuns and priests in the so called Magdaline Laundrys never renounced their catholic faith.

See, stuff like that gets me - gets me thinking what do they know that I don’t, that no matter how much they have suffered they are not prepared to reject the church that did it to them. Is it because they know it’s the true church, or some other reason, like institutionalisation, inertia, fear … I don’t know.

Thanks for the pointer to the parable. I’ll pray on it tonight.
 
Guyonthestreet said:
Mick - thank you for your feedback and for giving me lots to think about again.

I dont have any unrealistic expectation of the average catholic. As I said elsewhere, if I based my knowledge of catholicism on the people around me, I would think cohabitation, contraception, drunkedness and extra-marital affairs were a requirement of the church :eek:

I guess maybe I do have too high an expecation of someone who claims they are in the role they are within the church because of a direct calling from God.

I am also as I said struggling to understand the machinary of the church that allowed this to happen. I linked this in another thread but I would be interested in your view on what Prof Elliott has to say about how the church developed its mechanisms for dealing with scandal. Since watching the lecture, I have a better understanding now I think. And it stinks to me to be honest.

youtube.com/watch?v=9GV0mAD3en8&feature=related

One thing I did find very interesting was that most of the women who sufffered a lifetime of abuse at the hands of nuns and priests in the so called Magdaline Laundrys never renounced their catholic faith.

See, stuff like that gets me - gets me thinking what do they know that I don’t, that no matter how much they have suffered they are not prepared to reject the church that did it to them. Is it because they know it’s the true church, or some other reason, like institutionalisation, inertia, fear … I don’t know.

Thanks for the pointer to the parable. I’ll pray on it tonight.
Click to expand...
I think that you have to make a clear distinction between the people (broken and concupiscent) and the institution (created by Christ). Nowhere did Christ say that the peope would be perfect, or that those within the Church would be free from scandal. NT authors are quick to warn about wolves that will come among us. This has been the case in the Catholic Church, and every single breakaway group from that Church from the very beginning. Protestant communities are not imune from even the most heinous sins. I’m recalling a very prominent christian minister in Colorado whose problems with drug abuse and homosexual infidelity cost him his ministry. I’m also recalling some very horrible abuse cases involving christian school teachers and youth ministers documented recently in California. This is no basis for rejecting the underlying doctrines of these communities either. It is simply evidence that the Church (and all church communities apart from her) are hospitals for sinners and not museums for saints.

Peace,
Robert
 
Robert_in_SD said:
I think that you have to make a clear distinction between the people (broken and concupiscent) and the institution (created by Christ). Nowhere did Christ say that the peope would be perfect, or that those within the Church would be free from scandal. NT authors are quick to warn about wolves that will come among us. This has been the case in the Catholic Church, and every single breakaway group from that Church from the very beginning. Protestant communities are not imune from even the most heinous sins. I’m recalling a very prominent christian minister in Colorado whose problems with drug abuse and homosexual infidelity cost him his ministry. I’m also recalling some very horrible abuse cases involving christian school teachers and youth ministers documented recently in California. This is no basis for rejecting the underlying doctrines of these communities either. It is simply evidence that the Church (and all church communities apart from her) are hospitals for sinners and not museums for saints.

Peace,
Robert
Click to expand...
So is it the structure of the church is wrong? A structure that has next to no accountability to the state systems set up to protect the child/vulnerable adult. A structure that does not think it is accountable to anyone other than the pope. Another part of the problem I think, as identified in Ireland, is the unquestioning reverence shown to members of the church by inspectors who were there to audit services. Priests nuns and brothers were simply taken at their word.

Do catholics respect their clergy a little too much. Do some of the clergy use a perverse fear of God against their congregations to use and abuse them.

The catholic chuch may indeed be the church Christ instituted, in terms of the sacraments necessary for eternal life, but I’m pretty certain if Christ where here now, He’d be none too pleased with a structure set up in His name that has allowed the most evil of abuses to be inflicted against His children by those He called to the priesthood, to go unaccounted for.
 
Guyonthestreet said:
So is it the structure of the church is wrong? A structure that has next to no accountability to the state systems set up to protect the child/vulnerable adult. A structure that does not think it is accountable to anyone other than the pope. Another part of the problem I think, as identified in Ireland, is the unquestioning reverence shown to members of the church by inspectors who were there to audit services. Priests nuns and brothers were simply taken at their word.

**Do catholics respect their clergy a little too much. Do some of the clergy use a perverse fear of God against their congregations to use and abuse them. **

The catholic chuch may indeed be the church Christ instituted, in terms of the sacraments necessary for eternal life, but I’m pretty certain if Christ where here now, He’d be none too pleased with a structure set up in His name that has allowed the most evil of abuses to be inflicted against His children by those He called to the priesthood, to go unaccounted for.
Click to expand...
I believe that we need to pyschologically screen candidates who wish to enter religious life and the priesthood. This is probably something we have failed to do well and the reason why abuse like this was committed. There is no way people who truly had a calling for the priesthood (maybe they became priests out of convenience or tradition) or religious life could do this.
 
josie_L said:
There is no way people who truly had a calling for the priesthood (maybe they became priests out of convenience or tradition) or religious life could do this.
Click to expand...
This I totally agree with.
 
Guyonthestreet said:
This I totally agree with.
Click to expand...
I think that if we had more people willing to be saints this whole world (not just the CC) would be a better place. Do you wish to be a saint? And I don’t mean in the sense that you need to perform miracles (or get canonized) kind of saint (although that is up to God really)?
 
Guyonthestreet said:
I’m interested in your responses to the following that I have been thinking about a lot over the past few days:

On the basis that the catholic church is the one true catholic and apostolic church founded by Christ, and protected by the Holy Spirit, how could the abuses of the past decades have happened?

There is now no dispute by the church itself that the abuse of vulnerable children and adults, perpetrated by nuns, brothers, priests, and covered up by bishops and cardinals, took place and was badly dealt with.

I dont really want to get into the abuse per sae, rather I’m more interested in the roles of the main players and the role of the Holy Spirit within the church.

If as is claimed, the bishops are the direct successors to Peter, to whom the keys were given, how could they possibly have allowed this to happen?

Where was the Holy Spirit when these men and women were carrying out their evil deeds.

I am really really struggling with the idea of joining a church where a religious could emotionally, psychologically, physically or sexually abuse a child, and then receive Christ Himself in the Eucharist maybe one hour later? Or start their day with the Eucharist and go on to sexually abuse a vulnerable child in the afternoon.

I know in every big organisation, there will be bad apples. Thats a given. But for it to be so widespread and to reach to the highest levels within the church, I cant understand. Especially when those doing the abusing and covering up the abusing are direct successors to Peter.

Im also sure abuse is not confined to the catholic church alone.

But why the catholic church Im asking when the Holy Spirit has promised to keep it true and protect it from the gates of hell? How much closer to the gates of hell does it get when a child is abused?

I dont really want to hear anti-catholics venting their spleen on the church - Im more interested to know if you are a catholic how you have reconcilled these things. At the moment I cant. Not because the abuse happened, but more because of who is was that was abusing and how they were protected by the church.

What does it all mean for the integrity of the preisthood and religous, the power of the mass and the Eucharist, and the claim the church is Christ’s church?
Click to expand...

Now we know what the clergy & religious get up to when they are in their natural habitat 🤷​

Maybe you can explain why anyone should pay the slightest attention to the teaching of men who behave as many bishops have. If they did not understand that shuttling abusers from parish to parish was wrong, why should we imagine they have the discernment & wisdom needed for sanctifying, ruling & teaching the faithful ? As for the sacraments: how is a Mass offered by a ruiner of the young anything but an abomination ? :mad:

This whole business is not bad. It’s worse - there are no words for it. People often say that, but on this occasion, it is true. One of the worst aspects of it is the readiness with which Catholics seek to cover the Church’s guilt by pointing at other bodies.

Not much has been said about the nuns who have been raped by priests, & it is too much to expect that there are not more horrors to be uncovered. As long as Rome refuses to change its ways, so long will these disclosures continue.

Ten years ago:
As for bashing the Church - that is what it deserves. And one fine day, that is just what it will get - ***if ***there is any justice. Which is some consolation: but it won’t repair the enormous damage done to so many. It won’t bring back the faith & innocence & lives & trust that have been lost.
 
Gottle_of_Geer said:

Now we know what the clergy & religious get up to when they are in their natural habitat 🤷​

Maybe you can explain why anyone should pay the slightest attention to the teaching of men who behave as many bishops have. If they did not understand that shuttling abusers from parish to parish was wrong, why should we imagine they have the discernment & wisdom needed for sanctifying, ruling & teaching the faithful ? As for the sacraments: how is a Mass offered by a ruiner of the young anything but an abomination ? :mad:

This whole business is not bad. It’s worse - there are no words for it. People often say that, but on this occasion, it is true. One of the worst aspects of it is the readiness with which Catholics seek to cover the Church’s guilt by pointing at other bodies.

Not much has been said about the nuns who have been raped by priests, & it is too much to expect that there are not more horrors to be uncovered. As long as Rome refuses to change its ways, so long will these disclosures continue.

Ten years ago:
As for bashing the Church - that is what it deserves. And one fine day, that is just what it will get - ***if ***there is any justice. Which is some consolation: but it won’t repair the enormous damage done to so many. It won’t bring back the faith & innocence & lives & trust that have been lost.
Click to expand...
The Church consists of the laity as well (we are the body of Christ, i.e., the Church) so it is not an “it” but a “who”.
 
josie_L said:
No he’s not saying they are one and the same, but the majority of cases were of priests who abused male minors.
Click to expand...
No, the majority of cases were of priests who had relationships with male teens or adults.
 
Gottle_of_Geer said:

Now we know what the clergy & religious get up to when they are in their natural habitat 🤷​

Maybe you can explain why anyone should pay the slightest attention to the teaching of men who behave as many bishops have. If they did not understand that shuttling abusers from parish to parish was wrong, why should we imagine they have the discernment & wisdom needed for sanctifying, ruling & teaching the faithful ? As for the sacraments: how is a Mass offered by a ruiner of the young anything but an abomination ? :mad:

This whole business is not bad. It’s worse - there are no words for it. People often say that, but on this occasion, it is true. One of the worst aspects of it is the readiness with which Catholics seek to cover the Church’s guilt by pointing at other bodies.

Not much has been said about the nuns who have been raped by priests, & it is too much to expect that there are not more horrors to be uncovered. As long as Rome refuses to change its ways, so long will these disclosures continue.

Ten years ago:
As for bashing the Church - that is what it deserves. And one fine day, that is just what it will get - ***if ***there is any justice. Which is some consolation: but it won’t repair the enormous damage done to so many. It won’t bring back the faith & innocence & lives & trust that have been lost.
Click to expand...
Hi Gottle,

I won’t try to make a detailed response to your post right now (later, maybe). I’ll just say that I think it’s an interesting illustration of the diversity of opinion among Catholics – not just with respect to the abuse cases specifically, but with respect to the general lack of perfection among Catholics.

In particular, compare the above post with

“Telling Catholics that they aren’t perfect makes as much sense as telling fish they’re wet. We know already. Move on.”
  • Fr. Philip Neri Powell, O.P., Ph.D., Church is not Wal-Mart (Updated).
 
Sellers1 said:
Christ never being our Savior and our future being doomed.
Click to expand...
I was talking about sins. This has nothing to do with sin.

Anyway, not sure why you want to take issue with the idea that the sins of Judas were the worst ever committed.
 
Guyonthestreet said:
SSTeacher;5539560:
It is indeed very difficult. However, as you pray and reflect it might be worth pondering whether or not you’re looking at this difficulty in perspective. Perhaps a reasonable starting point for such a brown study would be the question,

What exactly was I expecting the Church that Christ founded to look like?
Click to expand...
Mick - thank you for your feedback and for giving me lots to think about again.

I don’t have any unrealistic expectation of the average catholic. As I said elsewhere, if I based my knowledge of Catholicism on the people around me, I would think cohabitation, contraception, drunkenness and extra-marital affairs were a requirement of the church :eek:
Click to expand...
I’m reminded of Saint Paul’s warning in his first letter to the very immoral Corinthians:

Do not be misled: “Bad company corrupts good character.”
Guyonthestreet said:
I guess maybe I do have too high an expectation of someone who claims they are in the role they are within the church because of a direct calling from God.
Click to expand...
I think there’s a subtle difference between a standard and an expectation. Saint James gives the following warning in his general letter to the Church:

Not many of you should presume to be teachers, my brothers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly.

So that’s the godly standard and we can safely leave it to God to do the judging. The point I’m emphasizing is that although it’s natural to feel disappointed when we encounter people that we assume have been called by God failing to teach us properly by exampling sinful behavior, we do well to remember that the Evil One will probably play upon that disappointment and attempt to discourage us to the point that we begin to lose interest in spiritual matters altogether.
Guyonthestreet said:
I am also as I said struggling to understand the machinery of the church that allowed this to happen. I linked this in another thread but I would be interested in your view on what Prof Elliott has to say about how the church developed its mechanisms for dealing with scandal. Since watching the lecture, I have a better understanding now I think. And it stinks to me to be honest.

youtube.com/watch?v=9GV0mAD3en8&feature=related
Click to expand...
I think she articulated it cleverly and engagingly and I rather liked her nonchalant delivery but I agree with you that it stinks.
Guyonthestreet said:
One thing I did find very interesting was that most of the women who suffered a lifetime of abuse at the hands of nuns and priests in the so called Magdalene Laundries never renounced their Catholic faith.
Click to expand...
Interesting, indeed.
Guyonthestreet said:
See, stuff like that gets me - gets me thinking what do they know that I don’t, that no matter how much they have suffered they are not prepared to reject the church that did it to them. Is it because they know it’s the true church, or some other reason, like institutionalization, inertia, fear … I don’t know.
Click to expand...
In order to get an insight I guess one would have to put oneself in the position of one of those abused women and consider her options. It seems to me that they are very few. I’d like to give this representative woman a name: Mary. I think it’s reasonable to assume that Mary is not a confident, educated, purposeful, ambitious, well–connected career woman like the learned professor. Mary is more likely to be unlettered, overwhelmed, frightened, perhaps from a broken home, without friends, almost certainly without means or resources and probably feels completely rejected and worthless. Consider what the word “faith” would mean to Mary. She may have grasped some rudiments of Church teaching and may even have briefly experienced a little love in her life. Then, again, she may not. Mary probably knows that she’s supposed to go to Mass every Sunday and every Holy Day of Obligation because if she doesn’t she’ll have committed a mortal sin in the eyes of the Church and that she’s also supposed to say the rosary, give up something or other during Lent, and fulfill her Easter duties. I suggest that this would possibly be the full extent of her Catholic faith. And if after Mary has been shamefully abused and tortured she continues with this routine she can be described as “remaining devout.” I’m not trying to portray this as learned behavior – although it may well be – I’m suggesting that Mary has probably always performed her familiar routine in isolated silence. So, what reason does she have to change it? Indeed, it’s possible Mary has been scorned and treated cruelly all her life and therefore the loveless viciousness she experienced at the hands of her Catholic predators would have seemed to her to be part of the settled order of suffering to which she has become so wearily and despairingly accustomed. It seems to me that Mary doesn’t necessarily know something that you don’t. You are on the outside looking for meaning. Mary was on the inside living a life that had no meaning so she did the best she could and compartmentalized. May the Lord have mercy upon those depraved and corrupt religionists who are responsible for causing such pain and suffering to their fellow human beings.
Guyonthestreet said:
Thanks for the pointer to the parable. I’ll pray on it tonight.
Click to expand...
God bless you.

Sincerely,
Mick
👍
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top