CIVIL RELIGIOUS DISCUSSION: General Religious Discussion...

[foszoe]

Since we are in the general religious thread, I will try to stay general as possible

As I earlier said, I don't want to delve too deeply into this one and would have happily yielded the last word to you. However your chosen example deserves a response.
When I speak of Christianity, and perhaps its my fault that I don't explicitly say ancient Christianity, but that's what I mean. I wouldn't attempt to build any moral, ethical, or theological points off of US Christianity for it is shifting sand. It would be a full time job just keeping up with the latest trends and divisions.

The slavery issue was a fruit of Sola Scriptura, simply speaking, for the contentions and positions on both sides were supported by the interpretations of scripture. This happened because by the 1800s, US Christianity had long cut the mooring lines to ancient Christianity and was basing itself on the reinvention of Christianity that occurred in the Reformation.

Orthodox Christianity is based on Scripture as interpreted by Holy Tradition. We don't get to decide for ourselves what it means in certain matters. This would be one of them. Others, sure we can argue about all day long

And what is the underlying ancient Christian principle. I have mentioned it often enough, but I will do so again. You and I are created in the image of God. That's it. By extension that means if I treat you in any way that does not recognize that in you, I am sinning. It's really that simple.

Orthodoxy is actually very simple, its all the trappings of the west that make it difficult to see that. The difference between the East and West? Every moral decision is a theological decision.

St Gregory of Nyssa 4th Century

"As for the person who appropriates to himself ... what belongs to God and attributes to himself power over the human race as if he were its lord, what other arrogant statement transgressing human nature makes this person regard himself as different from those over whom he rules? 'I obtained servants and maidens.' What are you saying? You condemn man who is free and autonomous to servitude, and you contradict God by perverting the natural law. Man, who was created as lord over the earth, you have put under the yoke of servitude as a transgressor and rebel against the divine precept. You have forgotten the limit of your authority which consists in jurisdiction over brutish animals. Scripture says that man shall rule birds, beasts, fish, four-footed animals and reptiles [Genesis 1.26]. How can you transgress the servitude bestowed upon you and raise yourself against man's freedom by stripping yourself of the servitude proper to beasts? 'You have subjected all things to man,' the psalmist prophetically cries out [Pslams 8.7-8], referring to those subject to reason as 'sheep, oxen, and cattle'."

"Do sheep and oxen beget men for you? Irrational beasts have only one kind of servitude. Do these form a paltry sum for you? 'He makes grass grow for the cattle and green herbs for the service of men' [Psalms 103.14]. But once you have freed yourself from servitude and bondage, you desire to have others serve you. 'I have obtained servants and maidens.' What value is this, I ask? What merit do you see in their nature? What small worth have you bestowed upon them? What payment do you exchange for your nature which God has fashioned? God has said, 'Let us make man according to our image and likeness' [Gen 1.26]. Since we are made according to God's likeness and are appointed to rule over the entire earth, tell me, who is the person who sells and buys? Only God can do this; however, it does not pertain to him at all 'for the gifts of God are irrevocable' [Romans 11.29]. Because God called human nature to freedom which had become addicted to sin, he would not subject it to servitude again. If God did not subject freedom to slavery, who can deny his lordship? How does the ruler of the entire earth obtain dominion ... since every possession requires payment? How can we properly estimate the earth in its entirety as well as its contents? If these things are inestimable, tell me, how much greater is man's value who is over them? If you mention the entire world you discover nothing equivalent to man's honor. He who knows human nature says that the world is not an adequate exchange for man's soul."

St Theodore the Studite, 8th C

Do not obtain any slave, nor use in your private service or in that of the monastery over which you preside, or in the fields, man who was made in the image of God.

Gardner, A. (1905). Theodore of Studium: His Life and Times (pp. 71–72). London: Edward Arnold.

You could equally argue that religion has been the driving force to gain compliance with the social norms the society believes are moral, not the originator. Remember that Christianity was used on both sides of the slavery debate in the US, for example. You'd be hard pressed to find a Christian today that believes their religion promotes slavery or that slavery is moral. Yet, historically that's not always been the case.

 

[Ziggidy]

The most recent comments from the Vatican is nothing more than rhetoric, nothing more. Nothing can be said at this point that has not been said before. The individuals who did the cover up are no less guilty that those who actually committed the crime. More rhetoric will not erase what happened or prevent it from happening again.

I do not know about you, but I am tired of hearing the vatican make empty apologies while they continue to cover up these unthinkable crimes against children and young adults. It's a perversion that runs in the arteries of the catholic church. As long as they cover it up, the more it becomes a growing sanctuary for the perverted who commit these crimes against the children.

 

[T.Lex]

The most recent comments from the Vatican is nothing more than rhetoric, nothing more. Nothing can be said at this point that has not been said before. The individuals who did the cover up are no less guilty that those who actually committed the crime. More rhetoric will not erase what happened or prevent it from happening again.

I do not know about you, but I am tired of hearing the vatican make empty apologies while they continue to cover up these unthinkable crimes against children and young adults. It's a perversion that runs in the arteries of the catholic church. As long as they cover it up, the more it becomes a growing sanctuary for the perverted who commit these crimes against the children.

Then you might be happy to learn that neither the "Vatican" nor local churches are interested in covering it up anymore, and haven't been for some time.

Here is the letter for INGOers to read for themselves:
https://edition.cnn.com/2018/08/20/europe/pope-francis-abuse-full-letter/index.html

Opening paragraph:

"If one member suffers, all suffer together with it" (1 Cor 12:26). These words of Saint Paul forcefully echo in my heart as I acknowledge once more the suffering endured by many minors due to sexual abuse, the abuse of power and the abuse of conscience perpetrated by a significant number of clerics and consecrated persons. Crimes that inflict deep wounds of pain and powerlessness, primarily among the victims, but also in their family members and in the larger community of believers and nonbelievers alike. Looking back to the past, no effort to beg pardon and to seek to repair the harm done will ever be sufficient. Looking ahead to the future, no effort must be spared to create a culture able to prevent such situations from happening, but also to prevent the possibility of their being covered up and perpetuated. The pain of the victims and their families is also our pain, and so it is urgent that we once more reaffirm our commitment to ensure the protection of minors and of vulnerable adults.

I'm not sure what strikes you as "nothing more than rhetoric" or "empty apologies." From the ground level, I can share with you that concrete steps have been, and are being, taken to prevent, identify, and protect against these kind of abuses, and others.

 

[Ziggidy]

I am just curious as to how many years, decades have we been hearing this? How many years have we heard about the coverups? That's just the ones that were found out.

How many more are out there?

You state, ".....not interested in covering it up anymore...."

How do you know that? On what basis do you make that claim? How many times has been said before? WHY should anyone trust the words of the Vatican after knowing what has been going on?

Why now?

 

[foszoe]

I think the frustration is people want full disclosure as to the extent of what has happened even if controls are now in place to prevent it from reoccurring now or in the future.

 

[T.Lex]

I am just curious as to how many years, decades have we been hearing this? How many years have we heard about the coverups? That's just the ones that were found out.

How many more are out there?

You state, ".....not interested in covering it up anymore...."

How do you know that? On what basis do you make that claim? How many times has been said before? WHY should anyone trust the words of the Vatican after knowing what has been going on?

Why now?

All I can speak to is my personal experience, informed by prior disclosures. So, for a bit of that background, my current parish is the same one I attended with my family as a kid. So, although there have been many changes in the world in the last 30 or so years, geographically (and hopefully spiritually), the parish is the same one.

So, back when I was a kid, there was much less parental oversight generally. We talk about it on here sometimes, too. I remember as a pre-teen riding bikes with friends all over the city. Yet, nowadays that doesn't happen.

At the church, this meant that there were some kids who hung out at the priest's rectory and/or at the church. I think parents thought that it was "safe." I mean, how much trouble can a kid get into hanging out with priests? Likewise, there were youth trips to retreats or parish activities (like ski trips) that had youth leaders, but not many adults (as I recall). Everything was pretty loosely organized (at least in my memory) without much oversight.

The priests of the time ran the gamut from old, stodgy, traditionalists to kinda hippy-ish, product of the 1960s, want-to-connect types. I never felt creeped-out by any of them, but looking back, I can see that there would have been all sorts of opportunities for that kind of thing to happen.

Fast forward to the Boston reporting. That came just as we were getting in to volunteer activities with our kids. Specialized training and actual policies about how to interact with youth. These amounted to both safeguards and... well... kinda profiling. Not technical or anything but, "things to watch for" to identify abuse/neglect not just by those inside the church, but perhaps youth that are being abused outside of church. One area of emphasis is that the idea of "Oh that person would never do something like that" is unacceptable. Too, it is ok to question whether another adult is perhaps getting "too close" to any particular youth.

I think the frustration is people want full disclosure as to the extent of what has happened even if controls are now in place to prevent it from reoccurring now or in the future.

The "full extent" is almost impossible, IMHO, given the de-centralization that actually happens. Local bishops had (and still have) a great deal of freedom to assign priests wherever he thinks they are being called to serve. For the Pennsylvania thing, if one (or maybe a few?) bishops hadn't kept a super-secret file, then there would have been no (or at least very little) documentary proof of what happened.

The reasonable best we can do now is fully investigate any allegations (internally and externally) and deliver the appropriate reports from that. But, I also have no doubt there's significant un-reported events in the past that can't be fully disclosed because we just don't know about them.

 

[Ziggidy]

I think the frustration is people want full disclosure as to the extent of what has happened even if controls are now in place to prevent it from reoccurring now or in the future.

I agree totally.

Put it all on the table, no more surprises. Expose it all even if it hurts. Have the leadership show a bit if righteous anger instead of throwing out "i'm sorry, let's forgive".

People are willing to forgive but consequences need to be more than placing some old priest in a retirement t home (example). The church seemingly is harder on its members than themselves. No different from our own political world.....

People are tired of the swamp.....regardless where it is and who is in it.

The church is no different from the world. The church needs to be more than another world in a different dimension. People need to feel save, loved, hope and see an example of Jesus throughout the church.

 

[T.Lex]

I agree totally.

Put it all on the table, no more surprises. Expose it all even if it hurts. Have the leadership show a bit if righteous anger instead of throwing out "i'm sorry, let's forgive".

If there are bishops out there hiding this - even from those supervising him, like the cardinals and up the line - then I'm not sure what more the Pope can do.

This isn't plausible deniability, this is actual deniability from having the facts hidden.

From my perspective, the church has gone to great lengths to change any previous "don't ask, don't tell" into "see something, say something." More than anything, the sense among parishioners is to try and provide opportunities for victims to come forward. Perhaps that isn't as well known or publicized, but it is there.

Here's a real world example:
https://dol-in.org/safe-environment-1

The church is no different from the world. The church needs to be more than another world in a different dimension. People need to feel save, loved, hope and see an example of Jesus throughout the church.

I think the Pope agrees with that last bit. He expressed that sentiment in almost the exact same words.

 

[Ziggidy]

Even though I am not catholic, I feel terribly sad about all this - regardless where it may happen. There is an enormous amount of doubt, fear, skepticism that has surfaced. God is bigger than this and of course has already won the battle, but the flesh (mind, body, soul) is cautious to a point that prohibits full trust in the church itself. I truly believe if the church would have been strict and quick to action, today's news would not be headlines.

The pope, leadership of the church, needs to take a stand that sin is sin and should never be overlooked. The world does not need a watered down image of Jesus that the church leadership now exhibits.

Just think of what the headlines in the last week has been in print. Church leadership covering up child molestation. Church leadership supports a lesbian married social worker who lied. Leadership is what people follow. I have a great deal of difficulty calling any one of them leaders.

 

[foszoe]

Ziggidy,

It is easy with this topic to allow frustration to lead to an emotional response.

What specifically could the Roman Catholic Church do now that would begin to satisfy your concerns?

I think T Lex has been posting responses from the hierarchy but what can the hierarchy do if they legitimately don't know?

If local bishops are covering for priests or other bishops, someone has to break the silence before the Pope even becomes aware.

I do think the Pope has said this activity is sinful and is a blot on the Roman Catholic church.

Even though I am not catholic, I feel terribly sad about all this - regardless where it may happen. There is an enormous amount of doubt, fear, skepticism that has surfaced. God is bigger than this and of course has already won the battle, but the flesh (mind, body, soul) is cautious to a point that prohibits full trust in the church itself. I truly believe if the church would have been strict and quick to action, today's news would not be headlines.

The pope, leadership of the church, needs to take a stand that sin is sin and should never be overlooked. The world does not need a watered down image of Jesus that the church leadership now exhibits.

Just think of what the headlines in the last week has been in print. Church leadership covering up child molestation. Church leadership supports a lesbian married social worker who lied. Leadership is what people follow. I have a great deal of difficulty calling any one of them leaders.

 

[Ziggidy]

I am not sugesting I know how to fix it any way other than it is. My frustration is real, regardless.....as is with others. I'm just venting. It is always easy to look back and see where I went off track in life. The would of's and could of's are always in play - I am sure the innocent leadership feels the same.

It's just unfortunate that we even have this discussion, especially when speaking of christian leaders.

 

[T.Lex]

Agreed. Your frustration is legitimate and intense. Although you have no reason to really believe me, I can assure you that the conversations I've been a part of have expressed even more intense frustration, as well as betrayal, loss of faith in church leadership, introspection and a greater resolve to be more vigilant.

For what its worth, though, in this temporal world, I'm not sure I can expect more than what is being done. There is a growing realization that, for as bad as this is, any more cover-ups will be inevitably discovered and get worse each time. Safeguards are being implemented to do our best to ensure this does not happen.

Will abuse happen again? Probably. Unfortunately. What we can change is how the faith and lay leaders react to it.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

I've read a couple of articles now similar to the one linked below. As terrible as the abuse of minors is, if this story (and the others that I've read) are true, there is way more work to be done than bring child abusers to justice. This stuff is sick and saddening. As I've said before, this doesn't only make catholics look bad, it puts all of Christianity in a bad light.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/3473...m_content=062316-news&utm_campaign=benshapiro

 

[Ziggidy]

I've read a couple of articles now similar to the one linked below. As terrible as the abuse of minors is, if this story (and the others that I've read) are true, there is way more work to be done than bring child abusers to justice. This stuff is sick and saddening. As I've said before, this doesn't only make catholics look bad, it puts all of Christianity in a bad light.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/3473...m_content=062316-news&utm_campaign=benshapiro

The difficulty is that there was wide spread knowledge for many many years. From reading a few a articles, one can see...."birds of a feather flock together".

And yes, it does affect christianity in a not so good light; however, I have never heard of such a "concentration" of such behavior along with such widespread cover-up in any other group. As more is uncovered, the bigger the swamp is realized.

I wonder how high and deep the river flows?

 

[JettaKnight]

What I, as a protestant, don't understand is why all the shuffling of priest, all the deception, .... all the continual employment.

Just how would that phone call go?
"Hey, Fred, how's it going?"
"Just fine, what's up?"
"Well, rev. McPervy raped a 17 y.o. girl... can he come work for you?"
"Awwww hell no! In fact, I'm calling the police after I hang up!"


Can someone explain why there's a an elite class of Christians known as "priest"? Why aren't they fired? Why the protection? Why are they held with so much more esteem? Obviously, they aren't more godly or closer to God.

The veil has been torn. There's nothing a priest can say or do that I can't. Being a priest (or pastor) should be (is) analogous to being a tax professional. Sure, they have schooling and know more, and they can do my taxes better and faster, but I can still do my own taxes. Heck, I can even do other people's taxes! (w/o pay, of course) If I want do it as a professional, there are requirements, and those are laid out in 1 Timothy and other places, but there's nothing describing what a priest/pastor can do that any other Christian can. Pray to God? Take communion? Teach others? Lead someone to Christ? Baptize another Christian? Marry two people? OK, that last one is questionable, but more so from tradition and civil law I believe.

Being a pastor is an occupation. Meaning, if they suck at it, they should fine another occupation. If they **** up (pun intended), they should be fired (or worse).

Our church has several good men that trained and, for a period of time, were pastors. They found out it's really taxing and decided for various reasons, wasn't the career for them. Does that make them any less of a Christian? Any more of a Christian? Or is it simply the reality of work?

The double edge on that statement is the fact that they don't possess any more blessing than I. So if they are to spread the Word and worship God in their occupation, then I'm also called to spread the Word and worship God in my occupation.

 

[T.Lex]

What I, as a protestant, don't understand is why all the shuffling of priest, all the deception, .... all the continual employment.

Just how would that phone call go?
"Hey, Fred, how's it going?"
"Just fine, what's up?"
"Well, rev. McPervy raped a 17 y.o. girl... can he come work for you?"
"Awwww hell no! In fact, I'm calling the police after I hang up!"


Can someone explain why there's a an elite class of Christians known as "priest"? Why aren't they fired? Why the protection? Why are they held with so much more esteem? Obviously, they aren't more godly or closer to God.

The veil has been torn. There's nothing a priest can say or do that I can't. Being a priest (or pastor) should be (is) analogous to being a tax professional. Sure, they have schooling and know more, and they can do my taxes better and faster, but I can still do my own taxes. Heck, I can even do other people's taxes! (w/o pay, of course) If I want do it as a professional, there are requirements, and those are laid out in 1 Timothy and other places, but there's nothing describing what a priest/pastor can do that any other Christian can. Pray to God? Take communion? Teach others? Lead someone to Christ? Baptize another Christian? Marry two people? OK, that last one is questionable, but more so from tradition and civil law I believe.

Being a pastor is an occupation. Meaning, if they suck at it, they should fine another occupation. If they **** up (pun intended), they should be fired (or worse).

The double edge on that statement is the fact that they don't possess any more blessing than I. So if they are to spread the Word and worship God in their occupation, then I'm also called to spread the Word and worship God in my occupation.

First, we - the parishioners - were equally blind to the moving-around part. Some parishes are more... proactive than others. The ones I'm familiar with would have been dangerously close to sinful rage if they knew something like this was being done to them. So, these parishes that received the priests were victims of this, too. NOT equivocating with the actual individual victims, just saying that the entire parish was placed at risk.

Second, I'll politely decline to get into the "why" of a dedicated priesthood. I think that we've covered that before. But, I will agree that the only thing "special" about them is prayerful study. They've spent more time than I have (or feel called to do) studying the Bible, and the related Catholic dogma and teachings. They are more familiar with those things and can speak more intelligently about them. Hopefully. (That's not always the case.)

Finally, some are "fired" from it. For all sorts of reasons. Usually, they quit before that happens. For all sorts of reasons. Broadening the topic to other reasons they might not be good (rape isn't the only indication that someone isn't cut out to be a priest), not all are called to minister to parishes. The Catholic church has many roles available for people to suit their personal strengths. There should be no place in the church administration for rapists/pedophiles.

 

[historian]

What I, as a protestant, don't understand is why all the shuffling of priest, all the deception, .... all the continual employment.

Just how would that phone call go?
"Hey, Fred, how's it going?"
"Just fine, what's up?"
"Well, rev. McPervy raped a 17 y.o. girl... can he come work for you?"
"Awwww hell no! In fact, I'm calling the police after I hang up!"

This is the thing I'm struggling with the most. How did they get moved without anyone up questioning. To me, a bad apple doesn't spoil the barrel, but when the barrel itself is rotten, you have to assume the apples inside are bad. This is what I can't get my head around. Why did the higher ups move the priest. I feel bad for the parishes that had these pervs forced on them, but the entire structure seems rotten.

 

[JettaKnight]

No, no, I didn't mean to imply that the lay people had any idea...

Consider this a result of the recency effect; I just heard a small portion of the details on the radio during my drive in today. Other than that, I really didn't know any details. I'm still not sure I want to know any more.

 

[foszoe]

What I, as a protestant, don't understand is why all the shuffling of priest, all the deception, .... all the continual employment.

Just how would that phone call go?
"Hey, Fred, how's it going?"
"Just fine, what's up?"
"Well, rev. McPervy raped a 17 y.o. girl... can he come work for you?"
"Awwww hell no! In fact, I'm calling the police after I hang up!"

It is the same way it is done in Protestantism; leave and go to pastor another church. It's probably easier to hide in protestant circles because by definition there is no hierarchy. If the rate among protestants and catholics is equal to the rest of the population as studies suggest, then it follows that it is no less prevalent among protestant pastors.

Can someone explain why there's a an elite class of Christians known as "priest"? Why aren't they fired? Why the protection? Why are they held with so much more esteem? Obviously, they aren't more godly or closer to God.

It's biblical. Well not the elite part but certainly people are called to different roles.

The veil has been torn. There's nothing a priest can say or do that I can't.

The bible talks about various gifts distributed among believers.

Being a priest (or pastor) should be (is) analogous to being a tax professional. Sure, they have schooling and know more, and they can do my taxes better and faster, but I can still do my own taxes. Heck, I can even do other people's taxes! (w/o pay, of course) If I want do it as a professional, there are requirements, and those are laid out in 1 Timothy and other places, but there's nothing describing what a priest/pastor can do that any other Christian can. Pray to God? Take communion? Teach others? Lead someone to Christ? Baptize another Christian? Marry two people? OK, that last one is questionable, but more so from tradition and civil law I believe.

Being a pastor is an occupation. Meaning, if they suck at it, they should fine another occupation. If they **** up (pun intended), they should be fired (or worse).

Our church has several good men that trained and, for a period of time, were pastors. They found out it's really taxing and decided for various reasons, wasn't the career for them. Does that make them any less of a Christian? Any more of a Christian? Or is it simply the reality of work?

The double edge on that statement is the fact that they don't possess any more blessing than I. So if they are to spread the Word and worship God in their occupation, then I'm also called to spread the Word and worship God in my occupation.

It used to be that being a pastor was a calling but now its an occupation.

In the past, you have claimed to be a cessationist, if I remember correctly. This post reveals how this plays out in the rest of your theology.

In general, I find it saddening that this is where modern Christianity is. No sense of wonder. A complete loss of mystery.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

This is the thing I'm struggling with the most. How did they get moved without anyone up questioning. To me, a bad apple doesn't spoil the barrel, but when the barrel itself is rotten, you have to assume the apples inside are bad. This is what I can't get my head around. Why did the higher ups move the priest. I feel bad for the parishes that had these pervs forced on them, but the entire structure seems rotten.

I'm getting the impression many times the "higher ups" were complicit in the culture that allowed this to happen. Couple that with the desire we see in other professions to keep things quiet, to try and handle it internally without bringing unwanted attention, I see how this could happen. To the average church goer, who are you going to believe? The rumors and gossip you might hear about a particular priest or the priest himself? Until all of this came to light, I think most of us would tend to believe in the character priest.