More big problems for Church

[Lormar]

Don’t know why this has taken so long to come out into the open. Better late than never I guess.

Honestly don’t know what happens to these men. It’s a pity. God have mercy on all of us.

 

[Pup7]

But it seemed as though you ignored one of my central statements while vehemently defending the Church as faultless. Well, if the system appears to be set up in a way that is conducive to attracting certain types of individuals, it needs to be investigated and condemned if necessary.

You’ve misinterpreted my use of the word Church despite my explanations and examples, so I’m not beating that horse any more than it’s already been done. You can’t kill a dead animal.

I’ll requote you here:

Well, if the system appears to be set up in a way that is conducive to attracting certain types of individuals, it needs to be investigated and condemned if necessary.

And it HAS, which is what I’m trying to tell you. This didn’t happen three years ago. This is more horror coming out from the OLD system. As an outsider, I think you’re missing that. As I said, you seem to think we’ve done nothing, are trying to do nothing. Apart from time travel, we can’t correct what has already failed. We can only discipline the offenders NOW and help the victims.

We in the pews cannot possibly know everything that’s happening or has happened when it comes to this. That is also my point, and I feel like you’re not even recognizing that fact.

As I said, I happen to think some draining needs to occur to dig further into the root of the problem. I think introspection from the top down is lacking. The military buzzword for that is “toxic leadership”, and I think there’s been a lot of that for, well, decades. (I actually see a lot of parallels in that regard in my world and in the Church, and it’s scary.) That won’t stand in the modern era, which is why all of this is coming out now.

THAT is the leading source of my offense.

 

[JanetF]

Exactly.

Not one soul here is defending the action - either the abuse or the ensuing cover-up. Not ONE SOUL. But I’ll defend the Catholic faith until they lower the lid over my head.

This isn’t the fault of my faith.

 

[laylow]

You’ve misinterpreted my use of the word Church despite my explanations and examples, so I’m not beating that horse any more than it’s already been done. You can’t kill a dead animal.

Ok, then to clarify, my comment was in response to the Church rules. If the Church has rules for priests to be celibate, that could (and I argue does) encourage, molesters to become priests due to the encouraging environment. This is problematic in my eyes.

And it HAS, which is what I’m trying to tell you. This didn’t happen three years ago. This is more horror coming out from the OLD system. As an outsider, I think you’re missing that. As I said, you seem to think we’ve done nothing, are trying to do nothing. Apart from time travel, we can’t correct what has already failed. We can only discipline the offenders NOW and help the victims.

We in the pews cannot possibly know everything that’s happening or has happened when it comes to this. That is also my point, and I feel like you’re not even recognizing that fact.

As I said, I happen to think some draining needs to occur to dig further into the root of the problem. I think introspection from the top down is lacking.

THAT is the leading source of my offense.

Ok. I think maybe you are offended because I responded to your personal quote. For my perspective, I responded to the quote, not the person. Again, I tend to think that way, for better and for worse. I am not personally calling out you, or any of the individual church members for the abuses. I do think the rules are flawed and I think many church members are loyal (which should and often times is a very desirable trait) but in my opinion can be bad when the rules are not subject to scrutiny.

 

[Pup7]

Acknowledgement accepted.

but in my opinion can be bad when the rules are not subject to scrutiny.

You’ve missed it again.

The rules have been and are being subjected to scrutiny. My guess is that as an outsider you don’t know this.

As I said, this isn’t a recent happening.

It’s still not believed that celibacy is the supreme cause, though there are a lot of advocates for dropping it.

What good that would do I have no idea, because this stuff just isn’t confined to celibate priests.

We do have a few married priests out there (we actually have had two at the military chapel just in the last year - Anglican converts). But to say “well, they’re not celibate, and they’re not abusers” has nothing to do with child abuse in and of itself. All that proves is that they didn’t possess that inclination in the first place (or it can be assumed that they didn’t - I’ll be fair). But other churches and other sex scandals involving clergy not bound to a vow of celibacy says the complete opposite. Correlation can’t equal causation.

 

[laylow]

You’ve missed it again.

The rules have been and are being subjected to scrutiny. My guess is that as an outsider you don’t know this.

As I said, this isn’t a recent happening.

It’s still not believed that celibacy is the supreme cause, though there are a lot of advocates for dropping it.

What good that would do I have no idea, because this stuff just isn’t confined to celibate priests.

Thanks. I didn’t know it was being seriously considered. I apologize, my reading comprehension skills must be failing me a bit today.

 

[laylow]

But other churches and other sex scandals involving clergy not bound to a vow of celibacy says the complete opposite. Correlation can’t equal causation.

I agree of course to some level. It would be incredibly irresponsible to deny it has no bearing, (which I know that you are not doing)

 

[wkj_123]

Do I think the RCC needs some swampland drained? Yes, I actually do. And I think that’s coming.

That’s a great start. Unfortunately I don’t believe it will ever be eliminated. When innocent people believe other humans speak for God they are no longer “just sinful humans” in the eyes of the believers. This breeds a place where abuse can take place without much speaking out. I hate that you are offended but it’s an unfortunate fact.

It is STILL not the fault of every Catholic in the pew. We are also the Church.

I agree the people in the pews hold no blame for the abuse. I disagree they hold no blame for some of the culture though. I have seen many times on this forum how much more respect is given priests then regular people. They enjoy a very protected status of clergy due to the Catholic views on priesthood. Place yourself now in the victims shoes. They have just been molested by a loved community priest. All the members of the parish have deep admiration for this man. I mean he even acts in persona Christi. That’s huge! Now this young victim is faced with telling what the priest has done. How do you think he feels? My point is the double standard culture. If priests are just sinful men then the office holds no more importance than the local plumber.

 

[Pup7]

Oh there are whole books on the subject.

Funnily enough, I’m a thrift store hound and always check out the religious section of the thrift store because I buy current secondhand Catholic Bibles and donate them to the military chapel. I say this because I just bought the book by Richard Sipe - if you saw “Spotlight” (and I recommend you see it or read the book - it’s neither anti- nor pro-Catholic, both just let the story unfold), he’s the former priest they only talk to on the phone.

His argument is that celibacy actually IS the cause. It’s called CELIBACY IN CRISIS. He’s a psychologist and therapist (as well as former clergy) so I’m interested in what he has to say on the matter.

 

[Pup7]

I agree the people in the pews hold no blame for the abuse. I disagree they hold no blame for some of the culture though. I have seen many times on this forum how much more respect is given priests then regular people. They enjoy a very protected status of clergy due to the Catholic views on priesthood. Place yourself now in the victims shoes. They have just been molested by a loved community priest. All the members of the parish have deep admiration for this man. I mean he even acts in persona Christi. That’s huge! Now this young victim is faced with telling what the priest has done. How do you think he feels? My point is the double standard culture. If priests are just sinful men then the office holds no more importance than the local plumber.

As I’m saying, you have no idea if I’ve done that or not.

This is why I continue to be upset. You’re assuming I’m completely oblivious.

I don’t assume every priest and every bishop is a molester and I don’t assume every clergy I see had some role in this entire thing. Like I said, I might not like an incumbent but I won’t disparage or disrespect the office he holds. Same thing here.

It’s like assuming every welfare recipient is buying lobster with SNAP benefits. Or that every person on welfare is lazy. No. Just no.

 

[wkj_123]

As I’m saying, you have no idea if I’ve done that or not.

This is why I continue to be upset. You’re assuming I’m completely oblivious.

Again maybe you haven’t I don’t know. Do you feel extra clout and admiration should be given to priests over other people? I’m not judging you personally I keep saying that You seem to be very defensive of the institution. Maybe that’s because you feel I’m attacking your personal character(I’m not).

 

[laylow]

Oh there are whole books on the subject.

Funnily enough, I’m a thrift store hound and always check out the religious section of the thrift store because I buy current secondhand Catholic Bibles and donate them to the military chapel. I say this because I just bought the book by Richard Sipe - if you saw “Spotlight” (and I recommend you see it or read the book - it’s neither anti- nor pro-Catholic, both just let the story unfold), he’s the former priest they only talk to on the phone.

His argument is that celibacy actually IS the cause. It’s called CELIBACY IN CRISIS. He’s a psychologist and therapist (as well as former clergy) so I’m interested in what he has to say on the matter.

Yes, it is complex. It is generally unnatural for most (not all) of humans to be celibate. The act of even attempting it could I would think have physiological effects leading to unintended consequences. I hope the Church strongly considers lifting these requirements in some way. It may allow for more priests and therefore lessen the load on the current ones so that they could have family also.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

Yes, it is complex. It is generally unnatural for most (not all) of humans to be celibate.

It is generally unnatural for a man to be faithful to one woman for life rather than go around impregnating as many females as he can in order to make his line continue. Maybe the Church should do away with the need for spouses to be faithful to each other as well. It’s all about our natural animal instincts. We shouldn’t deny them, we might give ourselves a complex.

 

[laylow]

It is generally unnatural for a man to be faithful to one woman for life rather than go around impregnating as many females as he can in order to make his line continue. Maybe the Church should do away with the the need for spouses to be faithful to each other as well. It’s all about our natural animal instincts. We shouldn’t deny them, we might give ourselves a complex.

Don’t give me any ideas! If you can make an open relationship work, have at it. As long as it not at the mercy of your children and your spouse is cool with it. Probably not easy to pull off, but I’m sure some do it successfully.

 

[Pup7]

You seem to be very defensive of the institution.

I’m defensive because your elaborate statements on putting myself in the victim’s shoes seemed condescending and were assuredly directed at me. Like I said, that’s what’s annoying me.

Do you feel extra clout and admiration should be given to priests over other people?

Clout? No. Admiration? That’s something that’s felt personally. I take people on face value because that’s all I have to work on. I can’t go around second guessing folks - most people don’t; we don’t tend to sit around and assume someone has a personal agenda (unless we know or have figured out they do). I admire anyone - man or woman - who says they will dedicate their lives to serving God. I can’t always know exactly what they do when the doors shut. I think admiration is subjective and I don’t think anyone should be required to admire anyone.

People tend to formulate an opinion about me based on what they think about the Air Force when I have to go out and about in uniform. I expect a certain amount of deference to my rank, but I don’t expect to be able to use that rank to get what I want or to get out of things I do. And I don’t expect a thing from a civilian, to be honest, other than common courtesy. I think a collar has the same effect - but I don’t think it commands admiration. Little does, to be honest.

So I expect common courtesy and an acknowledgement of that vocation, but admiration? That’s a personal thing to me. And like with the rank on my collar or shoulder, I don’t expect a Roman collar to invoke any specific immediate reaction from anyone, really. Though I would expect it to get a deference from Catholics in particular.

But clout? No.

I’m likely not explaining myself very well here for some reason. It’s a pretty difficult thing to explain.

 

[Pup7]

The act of even attempting it could I would think have physiological effects leading to unintended consequences.

There aren’t any real physiological effects for adult humans who don’t have sex (though there is some evidence linking it to prostate cancer in men - and then again, the male body is equipped to deal with that, shall we say, lack of activity - there are kids here, so I don’t know how medically graphic I should get). They’re primarily psychological. I would agree that humans are indeed wired to do the deed.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

If we have adapted to the point where many couples can be faithful to each other without the need for an “open relationship”, then we can adapt to the point of celibacy.

It is a mistake to blame every problem the Church has on the fact that some men apparently can’t control themselves sexually. (And yes in this case it is men, since the clergy is exclusively male.) I’m pretty sure there are also a lot of male priests and religious we never hear about who have been able to stay celibate without it ruining their life or personality. Perhaps sometimes it is not easy. It’s not always easy for spouses to stay faithful to each other either. But people manage it.

This culture has elevated sex so high in the spectrum of human needs, people think of it as being like food, water and shelter. It is not.

 

[laylow]

There aren’t any real physiological effects for adult humans who don’t have sex (though there is some evidence linking it to prostate cancer in men - and then again, the male body is equipped to deal with that, shall we say, lack of activity - there are kids here, so I don’t know how medically graphic I should get). They’re primarily psychological. I would agree that humans are indeed wired to do the deed.

I meant psychological. Rough day of typing.

 

[laylow]

If we have adapted to the point where many couples can be faithful to each other without the need for an “open relationship”, then we can adapt to the point of celibacy.

It is a mistake to blame every problem the Church has on the fact that some men apparently can’t control themselves sexually. (And yes in this case it is men, since the clergy is exclusively male.) I’m pretty sure there are also a lot of male priests and religious we never hear about who have been able to stay celibate without it ruining their life or personality. Perhaps sometimes it is not easy. It’s not always easy for spouses to stay faithful to each other either. But people manage it.

This culture has elevated sex so high in the spectrum of human needs, people think of it as being like food, water and shelter. It is not.

Well, the closed-minded approach hasn’t seemed to be working to well. When something doesn’t work, considerations need to be made.

 

[Pup7]

When something doesn’t work, considerations need to be made.

I think that’s the reason behind all this research that’s being done - and not all of it is from the inside. And yes, I sense a reluctance by leadership to probe into that possibility further.