The End of History and the Last Pope

[Soutane]

Umm… it was you that (incorrectly) stated that 10% of Protestant pastors were found guilty of pedophilia and only 1.7% of Catholic priests had been accused. As you will see below I only used the word in reference to the incorrect statistic about Protestant pastors when I said we need to be sure to have accurate information if we are going to accuse people of pedophilia. Whew, you need to calm down a little bit.

Originally Posted by mini_me640
I wasn’t disagreeing with what you said; you seem kind of defensive about this… You made the statement that the 10% figure was probably hyperbolic and absurd; I agree. I was just saying, in general (not directed at you personally) that we need to be sure not to spread false information about other groups if we are going to be upset when the same is done to us. It was not meant as a personal attack on you in any way. Don’t you agree that all of us need to be sure not to throw out incorrect information about such a grave matter as pedophilia?

I made my position clear by refering to that particular part of the statement that I was QUOTING that in retrospect it was hyperbolic and absurd and I have asked you not to perpetuate the media myth that the problem is pedophilia which it is not.Pedophilia is primarily a heterosexual affliction with the victims USUALLY being of the opposite sex.Hebephilia(Canadian) or Ephebophilia(American) is a homosexual affliction wherein the object of desire are young men and pubescent boys which is PRECISELY the problem that the Church faces today.80% of the victims fall within that category.Ever wonder why the Church is pilloried by homosexuals for it’s condemnation of so-called same sex marriage but nary a word is said about THE SCANDAL because they understand EXACTLY what is going on.Why is the media repeating the lie of pedophilia when the problem is primarily predatory homosexual “chickenhawk” behaviour,a derisive term that ORIGINATED in the homosexual culture.
Could it be that homosexuals are the new Sacred Cows of the PC media?THINK about it.It’ll eventually come out in the wash then we’ll be labeled pedophiliac homophobes.

I’m willing to be crucified or martyred emotionally or physically for the One True Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church and the horrible sins of some of its members but I’m not willing to suffer and die for a lie,without insisting that the TRUTH be spoken.

 

[secular_sam]

The end of history and the last pope is quite an assumption. History by scientific terms is likely to continue with humans involved for millions of years to come before our eventual extinction.

The last pope, who knows? I’d imagine there is still popular support for decades at least if not centuries.

 

[Teelynn]

When speaking of credibility we must make a very important distinction between Church teaching and the behavior of individuals. These abhorrent behaviors do not cast any shadows on the teachings of the Catholic Church. Christ, the Gospels, the Sacraments, the Creed, our dogmas and our morals have not changed because there are many sinners in the Church. Those sins do not change the truth that the Church teaches.

If someone is going to say that the Church’s truths are not credible, because of the sins of her people, then that person has a very serious challenge. He or she must prove that these truths are no longer truth.

Our Holy Father Francis was confronted with the same issue when he founded our order. There were many priests in the area who were less than model citizens, maybe even child abusers for all we know. But he wrote something into our admonitions that made perfect sense.

“If I were to meet an angel and the corrupt and sinful priest in the world, I would still show respect first to the priest and then to the angel, because the truth does not change. Even the most corrupt and sinful priest can give me something that the angel does not have the poewr to do. It is only through the words of the priest that we can see the physical body and blood of Christ that we consume in the Eucharist and it is only through the words of the priest that we can be absolved from sin. No angel can consecrate bread and wine and confect the Body and Blood of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. No angel has the power to absolve our sins.”

At the time there were many hostile feelings toward priests, because of the corruption among many clerics in the Middle Ages. Many of our early brothers expressed the same hostility. Francis laid the point out for them. He accepted that some of the most corrupt and sinful men in the world were priests (obviously other corrupt and sinful people were not priests). But he also accepted that the corruption and the sin had no power over the truth regarding the sacraments. The brothers were to convert the priest, but also teach the laity to separate the sin from the faith. The former does not change the latter.

What Francis taught us that only those who cannot separate faith from sin have an issue with credibility, because they have an unrealisit vision that Truth is dependent on the holiness of the messenger. Francis did a great deal to convert errant priests and was very successful. Many of them became brothers in our order. He also made a great effort to convert Catholics and was also very successful. He was so successful that he ended up founding the first order for married people, which today has 600,000 members, 800 years later.

We need to take this approach again. We need to separate sin from faith. Sin does not change the truth of the faith. It hurts the individual, not the Truth.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

Excellent. The problem with this is that society holds the clergy and especially Catholic clergy to a higher standard. They expect no sin to be rearing it’s ugly head among the clergy in the Church of Christ. I remember “back in the day” when the priest’s word was revered. The priest himself was revered no matter what. If “Father says this is the way it is, then this is the way it is. You do what Father tells you to do.” Society now has evolved to think a little more independently. To discriminate for themselves right from wrong. The people that are anti Catholic, use this “back in the day” mindset against the Church to cry foul. If I am not mistaken, most of these charges go back to the 1970’s. Well, back in the 70’s the Church handled these things the only way they knew how to. I mean, if you think about it, what would have happened back then if the Church would have handed these pedophile priests over to the authorities? Would they have even known what to do with them? Didn’t they expect the Church to handle her own problems? PLEASE, DON’T MISUNDERSTAND ME, the Church screwed up big time. This scandal was way beyond HORRIBLE!! WHAT HAPPENED TO THOSE CHILDREN WAS ABSOLUTELY DIABOLICAL!!! But what kind of mechanism did the Church have in the 1970’s in order to deal with these Priests? I really don’t recall any “Pedophile Farm for Priests” that they could have shipped them off to. The common solution I believe to them was to take them out of their current environment and problem solved. Did they or anyone know then, that once a pedophile always a pedophile? I believe their thinking was that these Priests could be “curred” of their affliction. Of course we know now, they cannot. But did we know that then? There is so much more knowledge now about pedophiles then we even had a handle on “back in the day”.

This all being said I do believe the Church is at least moving in the right direction presently. There is still a very long way to go, but moving forward and not backward.
BTW, I don’t claim to have all the answers, but am just trying to understand what the mindset could have been, and not just for the purpose of “covering up” for these Priests knowing that they would just keep on molesting children. I could be all wet, but I have always thought there was more to the story than just a “cover up”. Of course they wanted to avoid scandal, but could it have been that they actually thought a change of environment would help them? I guess I’ll get hammered for this but it is food for thought.

 

[mini_me640]

I made my position clear by refering to that particular part of the statement that I was QUOTING that in retrospect it was hyperbolic and absurd and I have asked you not to perpetuate the media myth that the problem is pedophilia which it is not.Pedophilia is primarily a heterosexual affliction with the victims USUALLY being of the opposite sex.Hebephilia(Canadian) or Ephebophilia(American) is a homosexual affliction wherein the object of desire are young men and pubescent boys which is PRECISELY the problem that the Church faces today.80% of the victims fall within that category.Ever wonder why the Church is pilloried by homosexuals for it’s condemnation of so-called same sex marriage but nary a word is said about THE SCANDAL because they understand EXACTLY what is going on.Why is the media repeating the lie of pedophilia when the problem is primarily predatory homosexual “chickenhawk” behaviour,a derisive term that ORIGINATED in the homosexual culture.
Could it be that homosexuals are the new Sacred Cows of the PC media?THINK about it.It’ll eventually come out in the wash then we’ll be labeled pedophiliac homophobes.

I’m willing to be crucified or martyred emotionally or physically for the One True Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church and the horrible sins of some of its members but I’m not willing to suffer and die for a lie,without insisting that the TRUTH be spoken.

Again, in my response posts, I merely agreed with you that we need to be sure our information is accurate. Again, I have not referred to the main problem as pedophilia except in response to your use of the term when you referred to Protestant ministers. You are inventing adversarial positions where they’re aren’t any. I’m on your side when it comes to the Church.

 

[Lex]

I am saddened by those who are seeking to make hay while the sun shines in their attacks on Catholicism and am equally dismayed by those who will attempt to shrug it off using the old ‘anti-Catholic’ chestnut.

I was saddened to read an article in America and watch the display of ignorance in the BBC television programme it related to.

You can find the show and the article and a response to it at

bit.ly/axifDi

Prayer and openness are the only way forward with this. To make Benedict the scapegoat would be as wrong as having him stay if he is in any way culpable. Mind you, those who are and who in the BBC broadcast were labelled as ‘obstructive’ demonstrate something very concern-making within the institution that is Rome!

 

[Soutane]

Again, in my response posts, I merely agreed with you that we need to be sure our information is accurate. Again, I have not referred to the main problem as pedophilia except in response to your use of the term when you referred to Protestant ministers. You are inventing adversarial positions where they’re aren’t any. I’m on your side when it comes to the Church.

Peace