CIVIL RELIGIOUS DISCUSSION: General Religious Discussion...

[T.Lex]

Well, you can count me in, so be it. I will draw attention to past failures until the time comes what trust can be reinstated; if it can.

So here's the problem as I see it: the "trust reinstatement" is a moving target. That is, it keeps getting pushed further away.

I, and foszoe, have shared what is happening to reinstate that trust - among Catholics and non-Catholics. I have shared my experience in working to make sure the church deserves that trust.

I get that you - and many others - may never "reinstate" that trust (which implies some level of previous trust). That is beyond my control and beyond the control of the church. All we can do is to do the work.

Your - and others' - formation of opinion based on things that happened BEFORE reforms were instituted is your choice.

 

[JettaKnight]

So here's the problem as I see it: the "trust reinstatement" is a moving target. That is, it keeps getting pushed further away.

I, and foszoe, have shared what is happening to reinstate that trust - among Catholics and non-Catholics. I have shared my experience in working to make sure the church deserves that trust.

I get that you - and many others - may never "reinstate" that trust (which implies some level of previous trust). That is beyond my control and beyond the control of the church. All we can do is to do the work.

Your - and others' - formation of opinion based on things that happened BEFORE reforms were instituted is your choice.

THIS. We've been waiting 500 years for reform... my trust is being withheld till that happens.

 

[T.Lex]

THIS. We've been waiting 500 years for reform... my trust is being withheld till that happens.

In our defense, it would be MUCH easier to get to those reforms if these other issues didn't keep distracting us.

 

[foszoe]

Reform? We never needed no stinkin' reform

 

[JettaKnight]

[h=1]Pope Francis Replaced By John Piper[/h]

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Topical...


On their way to get married, a young Catholic couple were involved in a fatal car accident. The couple found themselves sitting outside the Pearly Gates waiting for St. Peter to process them into Heaven.
While waiting they began to wonder; Could they possibly get married in Heaven?
When St. Peter arrived they asked him if they could get married in Heaven.
St. Peter said, 'I don't know. This is the first time anyone has asked. Let me go find out,' and he left.
The couple sat and waited for an answer.... for a couple of months.
While they waited, they discussed the pros and cons. If they were allowed to get married in Heaven, should they get married, what with the eternal aspect of it all?
What if it doesn't work? Are we stuck in Heaven together forever?'
Another month passed. St. Peter finally returned, looking somewhat bedraggled.
“Yes,' he informed the couple, 'You can get married in Heaven.'
'Great!' said the couple. 'But we were just wondering; what if things don't work out? Could we also get a divorce in Heaven?'
St. Peter, red-faced with anger, slammed his clipboard on the ground.
'What's wrong?' asked the frightened couple.
'OH, COME ON!!!' St. Peter shouted. 'It took me 3 months to find a priest up here! Do you have ANY idea how long it'll take to find a lawyer?”

 

[T.Lex]

Yep, one of my faves.

 

[Ziggidy]

So here's the problem as I see it: the "trust reinstatement" is a moving target. That is, it keeps getting pushed further away.

I, and foszoe, have shared what is happening to reinstate that trust - among Catholics and non-Catholics. I have shared my experience in working to make sure the church deserves that trust.

I get that you - and many others - may never "reinstate" that trust (which implies some level of previous trust). That is beyond my control and beyond the control of the church. All we can do is to do the work.

Your - and others' - formation of opinion based on things that happened BEFORE reforms were instituted is your choice.

Let me say this, because you claim work is being done to prevent such atrocities in the future, has any work to date improved matters? Maybe there are less frequent occurrences, but there is far more cover up being exposed. My point is just because one goes to rehab, follows the rules, does not mean it will prevent future activities. Just because you are working getting it better does not make it better.

I am amazed at the comments I read. I understand one wishes to defend the church and will fight to make it right, but that does not make it right. I applaud the effort, sincerely. I do not understand your replies that insinuates that I (or others) are wrongly choosing to distrust based on historical data and further insinuating that we are unwilling to trust again - at least that is my perception.

I applaud your effort, your work; however it is not up to you to do anything; you are not guilty. People cannot depend on others to pay for the crime they commit or take the heat for their disgusting activities. Real contrite is only exhibited by the individual who is responsible for the wrong activity; anything less is an empty apology.....which I have heard allot of in recent years. IOW, no "work" you or others can do will take the place of real contrition from "everyone" involved. ONLY then will trust begin to be rebuilt, on a solid foundation. As of this moment, it's like building a house on sand that is washing away. Trust is an over used, abused word that has lost meaning over the years.

For the record, I sincerely respect everyone (yes everyone), but my trust is limited to those who have gained my trust; I do not hand it out freely.

 

[T.Lex]

Let me say this, because you claim work is being done to prevent such atrocities in the future, has any work to date improved matters? Maybe there are less frequent occurrences, but there is far more cover up being exposed.

I'm not sure you're paying attention; I'm not sure that makes sense.

If there are 100 murders in a city in year 1, but 50 in year 2, that's an improvement. It is still a tragedy 50x, but it is qualitatively and quantitatively better.

The Pennsylvania report confirms that, since ~2002, the actual instances of predatory behavior by Catholic clergy in those areas decreased. That's an improvement.

I have shared links and information regarding the greater disclosures by various diocese. I did not search more widely, because these are the ones I'm most familiar with, so these are the ones I feel I can provide the best insight on. Although anecdotal, I believe these measures are being implemented across the US. I REALLY don't know how widespread they are in other countries, but I think Australia's recent issues will also move them in this direction.

I believe the American Catholic church can take a leadership role in these particular reforms.

My point is just because one goes to rehab, follows the rules, does not mean it will prevent future activities. Just because you are working getting it better does not make it better.

If you have information that the actual behavior or the cover ups have remained constant or increased since ~2002, I invite you to share that information.

I am amazed at the comments I read. I understand one wishes to defend the church and will fight to make it right, but that does not make it right. I applaud the effort, sincerely. I do not understand your replies that insinuates that I (or others) are wrongly choosing to distrust based on historical data and further insinuating that we are unwilling to trust again - at least that is my perception.

Let me remove the insinuation and make it explicit: I do not think you will ever trust the Catholic church. I base that on your comments such as those that I've quoted.

And that's ok. I get it.

I applaud your effort, your work; however it is not up to you to do anything; you are not guilty. People cannot depend on others to pay for the crime they commit or take the heat for their disgusting activities. Real contrite is only exhibited by the individual who is responsible for the wrong activity; anything less is an empty apology.....which I have heard allot of in recent years. IOW, no "work" you or others can do will take the place of real contrition from "everyone" involved. ONLY then will trust begin to be rebuilt, on a solid foundation. As of this moment, it's like building a house on sand that is washing away. Trust is an over used, abused word that has lost meaning over the years.

For the record, I sincerely respect everyone (yes everyone), but my trust is limited to those who have gained my trust; I do not hand it out freely.

Again, you appear to have an issue with the Catholic church at a basic level - the "foundation of sand" language makes that clear.

That is not a problem for me; I can accept that. I know Catholics that are basically at the same place. Particularly those who were victims of "regular" (non-clergy) abuse. They feel an even deeper betrayal on this topic.

 

[Ziggidy]

^^^ I feel my last few posts have been quite clear in content. I am not certain if you are purposely not addressing the statements and making an attempt to "turn" the discussion into something that it is not or if you truly do miss the point.

Either way, you are not addressing my point and are stuck on me trusting the catholic church.

In a nutshell, NOTHING YOU CAN DO will change the trust anyone has or does not have for the church. The actions of those who are guilty of the crime and also those who covered it up can only make necessary changes to rebuild / regain that trust......otherwise, it is like building a house on sand.

 

[T.Lex]

Archdiocese of Indianapolis announcing that a long-time Indy priest is suspended pending an investigation into allegations of abuse from "several decades ago."

 

[Ziggidy]

Although the criminal actives may have occurred years / decades ago, the fact there is a continuous cover up is equally as bad.

 

[foszoe]

Although the criminal actives may have occurred years / decades ago, the fact there is a continuous cover up is equally as bad.

When were the allegations made?

 

[T.Lex]

Although the criminal actives may have occurred years / decades ago, the fact there is a continuous cover up is equally as bad.

"Continuous" in this context is a confusing term. They made public the suspension and the fact of an investigation.

 

[JettaKnight]

I think the RCC needs to replace these priests with some that solve murders. We need more Fathers Brown and Dowling.

 

[T.Lex]

I think the RCC needs to replace these priests with some that solve murders. We need more Fathers Brown and Dowling.

Well played.

 

[Ziggidy]

"Continuous" in this context is a confusing term. They made public the suspension and the fact of an investigation.

I'll stand by my statement, regardless how hard you try to spin it differently. By your claim, the criminal activities are from years ago and all your hard work is showing that it is improving; maybe so. My point is this; there is still an ongoing cover up, period. We are hearing reports in recent news of who may have known and when they may have know.....all the way up the ladder. Recent news of coverups and potentially more coverups. Now New York is going to do a new investigation.

Regardless of when it happened, the coverup is equally bad; maybe even worse.

Please stop the spin.

 

[T.Lex]

I'll stand by my statement, regardless how hard you try to spin it differently. By your claim, the criminal activities are from years ago and all your hard work is showing that it is improving; maybe so. My point is this; there is still an ongoing cover up, period. We are hearing reports in recent news of who may have known and when they may have know.....all the way up the ladder. Recent news of coverups and potentially more coverups. Now New York is going to do a new investigation.

Regardless of when it happened, the coverup is equally bad; maybe even worse.

Please stop the spin.

Then we need some common definitions.

If an archdiocese publicly identifies a priest under investigation, how is that a cover-up? If they had earlier reports and did nothing, that would be a cover-up for that period of time. Of course. But if they then make it public, then it can't really be a "continuous" cover-up anymore.

That's not how cover-ups work.

Prior to about ~2002, I will absolutely admit that people who brought complaints of priest misconduct to church officials were asked to not take it to authorities. They were asked to allow the church to "handle it." Clearly, the church rarely "handled it" with much effectiveness. (We don't hear about the times church officials were effective.)

Since ~2002, my perception is that church officials refer the matters to the police or other investigative agency, or at least encourage the person with the complaint to do so. Does that happen 100% - I have no idea, but probably not. Heck, even with "normal" crimes, there isn't a 100% reporting rate.

But, it is a fundamental change in approach that was absolutely necessary.

These observations are not "spin." They are my observations.

 

[JettaKnight]

 

[T.Lex]

Ironic, or coincidental, Bill O'Reilly - Catholic.