Should Pope apologize for abuse at Canadian residential schools for Indigenous children?

[mrsdizzyd]

What in the actual…!!!

Where do they FIND these people?? I’m serious. My GOD.

I know!!!

One can only hope that they genuinely thought they were doing the right thing. I mean I don’t see how they could have, but one can hope…

 

[Pup7]

I have a stack of comments on that, though…something along the lines of “so did Himmler and Mengele”, but I’ll let them go…

That’s unspeakable.

 

[casslean]

One can only hope that they genuinely thought they were doing the right thing. I mean I don’t see how they could have, but one can hope…

It is dangerous to judge past actions with present knowledge.

We don’t strap children anymore. It doesn’t mean the educators of fifty years ago were terrible, child-hating abusers.

 

[Crocus]

It was more than letting it happen, it was the government’s policy, under which institutions were basically contracted to maintain schools.

 

[mrsdizzyd]

Very true. Ugh! Terrible business.

 

[Pup7]

Oh I get that completely…but again, there was widespread complacency.

Goes back to WWII and the Good Germans theories - which weren’t really theories.

 

[mrsdizzyd]

mrsdizzyd:

One can only hope that they genuinely thought they were doing the right thing. I mean I don’t see how they could have, but one can hope…

It is dangerous to judge past actions with present knowledge.

We don’t strap children anymore. It doesn’t mean the educators of fifty years ago were terrible, child-hating abusers.

Generally I agree with you, but Homemade electric chairs?

This was not that long ago. 1941-1972 apparently.

 

[casslean]

1936-64 actually. The criminal investigation came out in the 1990s. The record-keeping is a moving target with many of these organizations.

The issue of asking the Pope to issue an apology for this happening - which implies some measure of responsibility by the Catholic Church as a whole - is that there is no evidence that the Church hierarchy knew what was going on, and based on the structures of the day, no evidence they had a responsibility to know what was going on. Today we would certainly expect them to have more oversight, but not necessarily then.

That’s why an expression of sorrow is appropriate, and an apology may not be.

 

[mrsdizzyd]

there is no evidence that the Church hierarchy knew what was going on, and based on the structures of the day, no evidence they had a responsibility to know what was going on. Today we would certainly expect them to have more oversight, but not necessarily then.

That’s why an expression of sorrow is appropriate, and an apology may not be

I’m sorry, but this just doesn’t wash. The Church must do better in this regard. You are responsible for the actions of people under your authority. If you did not know that is a failure of leadership not an excuse. If your structure lends itself to creating a culture of abuse that is also a failure of your leadership and not an excuse.

The Church is dogged by these kinds of scandals because of its reflexive defensiveness. I understand that the Church is always under attack from the enemy. Sometimes the Church Is not at fault. But, in instances such as this, when Church organizations and diocese are unquestionably linked to abuses it is prudent to admit your wrongs, apologize, and reconcile. More harm is done by trying to pass the buck.

 

[stpurl]

It is the constant demand that people from x number of years ago be held responsible to the arbitrary, changing standards of this very minute, April 19, 2018, as if those standards (and knowledge) existed THEN, which is a tactic being used for emotional bludgeoning and blackmail and, indeed, to an Orwellian type of mass-engineered ‘rethinking’ for human beings today.

If we can play on emotions enough to override critical thinking and any sort of independent and unbiased research (since we have already spent the last 4 or 5 decades tampering with research, ‘retconning’ history, etc.) so that even THAT has already been made unreliable, we’ll have the ultimate triumph–billions of human beings who believe that they are knowledgeable, responsible, and working for peace and justice who are instead duped victims of falsehoods at worst, biased and ‘tweaked’ half truths and manipulated disinformation, who are working for yet more and more manufactured ‘causes’ which will cause further ‘hate’ and disunity, throughout the world.

No, I am not saying this is manufactured; I’m saying a lot of the information out there has been skewed and a lot of the calls for apology and a lot of what we are told has been tweaked and contains misinformation.

 

[JRS_831]

Well said!

 

[casslean]

I’m sorry, but this just doesn’t wash. The Church must do better in this regard. You are responsible for the actions of people under your authority. If you did not know that is a failure of leadership not an excuse. If you structure lendeds itself to creating a culture of abuse that is also a failure of your leadership and not an excuse

But again, this is judging a past practice by present standards.

The Church does do better in this regard. We don’t have residential schools. We have standards to which all organizations are expected to hold themselves. We say, “If you are going to operate in the name of the Catholic Church, this is what it means to do so.”

Why is it necessary to apologize because it wasn’t doing these same things 80 or 100 years ago, when no one was and there was no reason to believe they should?

From a principled perspective, what does an apology say in this instance? What is the Church apologizing for having done or failed to do? And having identified that action, or failure to act, is it something they could have reasonably been expected know they should have done? If not, why are we expecting them to take responsibility for failing to do something they couldn’t have known to do?

 

[JRS_831]

I agree that you can’t apologize for bringing souls to Christ. You, however, can apologize for abuse.

So, what will be an acceptable apology in your eyes? What else needs to be said?

 

[mrsdizzyd]

mrsdizzyd:

I agree that you can’t apologize for bringing souls to Christ. You, however, can apologize for abuse.

So, what will be an acceptable apology in your eyes? What else needs to be said?

That’s a question you should ask the victims. They are the ones owed the apology. I can’t speak for them.

 

[CRM_Brother]

I do see your point that someone in the Church should apologize for these specific abuses. Pope Francis has not said that someone shouldn’t. He has said that he, personally, shouldn’t be the one to do it. This is because the Vatican and the Papacy had nothing to do with it. Contrary to popular opinion, the buck doesn’t always stop at the Pope. It is even acknowledged that the CCCB did not even have anything to do with it for less than a third of the dioceses participated. The apology should be from the individual bishops of those dioceses who took part in the program in which these abuses took place. Pope Benedict has already expressed sorrow for the events which have taken place. That, thus is the official Papal response.

That being said, there are a few other issues at play if you read the article closely. The motion is asking the Vatican to foot a bill that the Canadian courts have prohibited the government from collecting from the Canadian Dioceses in question due to a legal blunder on the part of the Canadian prosecutor.

Also, if Trudeau’s apology is anything to go by, then the main apology they are seeking from the Church is not about the physical abuses but the loss of their cultural traditions, which includes their former religions. Trudeau only mentioned the physical abuses in a single sentence in his apology.

 

[mrsdizzyd]

But again, this is judging a past practice by present standards.

In 1970 it was no more appropriate to sexual abuse people, beat them senseless, kill them, electrocute them, etc. than it is now. These are the things the victims claim to have suffered.

I will grant that in 1970 we as human beings did not have as fully developed an understanding of cultural “violence” or appreciation of cultural differences as we do in 2018.

 

[phil19034]

I’m sorry, but this just doesn’t wash. The Church must do better in this regard. You are responsible for the actions of people under your authority.

But this is the key… When a religious order committed/s sins, they are NOT under the authority of the Bishops.

Holding the Pope responsible for these crimes is like holding the President of the United States responsible for the crimes of some bureaucrats in the State of Delaware’s government.

The biggest issue here isn’t whether the Pope should or should not apologize. The issue is that Canada has no right to attempt to FORCE the Pope to apologize.

Pope Francis is Head of State of the State of Vatican City.

You don’t see Canada demanding an apology from other Heads of State for other issues. The idea that a legislative body feels they have the right to force the Pope to do something is exactly why Vatican City is it’s own State to begin with.

If Canada didn’t attempt for force an apology, I’m sure the Pope would have said something, similar to Pope Benedict. We can express sorrow for what happened. But to ask the Pope to accept guilt on behalf of the entire, worldwide Catholic Church is insane.

The Church is not one large corporation where everything is being controlled from Rome. The Church is thousands of local Churches & communities (dioceses and religious orders) in union with the Bishop of Rome. But not controlled by Rome.

Personally, things like this is why I’m not a big fan of National Bishop’s Conferences. Each Bishop has his own authority and no conference nor the pope has authority over a bishop of his own diocese (except of course the Pope can reassign the Bishop)

Point is: yes the Pope can and should show sorrow for such things, which Pope Benedict did. But Pope Francis should NOT be forced into giving an apology on behalf of the Universal Catholic Church.

God Bless.

 

[mrsdizzyd]

I agree that he shouldn’t be forced. I am unclear of what is lost by apologizing.

 

[mrsdizzyd]

Also, sometimes the president does apologize for the actions of the state because ultimately, the federal government can intervene when States commit atrocities

 

[phil19034]

I agree that he shouldn’t be forced. I am unclear of what is lost by apologizing.

Because they are asking for the Holy Father to legally admit to guilt on behalf of the Catholic Church and they are looking for the Universal Catholic Church to also be financially responsible.

Basically, they are attempting to sue the Vatican and the Pope.