…and this is a 
When I visited Australia last year, the media was all gaga over the idea of an Australian saint — the Catholic church was going to canonize Mary MacKillop (the people I hung out with while I was there, though, didn't give a good goddamn for the nonsense). Well, now there's some ironic news going around: during her lifetime, Mary MacKillop had been temporarily banished from the Catholic church and thrown out on the street. What had she done, you might ask.
Go ahead, guess.
A hint: she had complained about and reported some priests in the church. Can you guess what they had done?
Sure you can. Catholic priests doing something wrong, getting angry for being reported? It's the same old story as always.
Yep, they'd been raping children, nuns made complaints to the Catholic hierarchy (apparently not to the secular authorities), and the church responded as it always does…by transferring the offending priests to a new diocese, a fresh hunting ground.
This was all in 1871.
It's as if child-rape is a hallowed tradition within Catholicism.
Comments
Posted by: waynerobinson4
|
September 24, 2010 7:33 PM
On a slightly related topic, Archbishop Pell has published an opinion piece in "the Australian":
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/relationships-market-after-50-years-of-the-pill/story-e6frg6zo-1225929083359
justifying the Catholic Church's prohibition of the oral contraceptive as empowering women ...
Posted by: mistereveready
|
September 24, 2010 7:48 PM
PZ Meyers: "It's as if child-rape is a hallowed tradition within Catholicism."
Well if Ratzinger had his way, we'd probably have a remake of "Fiddler on the Roof", catholic style. Don't let your imagination wander too much on that or you'll feel a bit dirty.
Posted by: tsig0
|
September 24, 2010 7:49 PM
It's a right of passage.
Posted by: tsig0
|
September 24, 2010 7:52 PM
"Well if Ratzinger had his way, we'd probably have a remake of "Fiddler on the Roof", catholic style. Don't let your imagination wander too much on that or you'll feel a bit dirty."
Diddler on the Hoof?
Posted by: jeffery.g.davis
|
September 24, 2010 7:59 PM
Maybe it's just me, but if I was a priest and really hurting for sex, I have to think I'd be sleeping with female parishioners and nuns . . . but maybe I'm just too logical to become a priest.
~Rhaco
Untitledvanityproject.blogspot.com
Posted by: jschmeau
|
September 24, 2010 8:27 PM
*figuratively pukes on the rcc*
Posted by: Crudely Wrott , Drinking Solo Since Death's Back On The Wagon
|
September 24, 2010 8:34 PM
Part of the romance of religion is a sense of timelessness, of eternity. Within eternity is an assumed continuity which is expressed in ritual as well as in devotion, prayerful meditation and piety. What results is something like a temporal illusion as what is new suddenly becomes old. Again.
This is the subtlety of superstitious thinking. It regards repetition as a tacit confirmation of veracity. Imagine a navigator applying this subtlety. Such a navigator would interpret passing the same landmark repeatedly as evidence that he was on his intended course, regardless of the actual geographic location of the intended destination.
Truly, these continuing revelations that confirm what many already know are as entertaining as they are damning.
Posted by: butterflyfish.heidi
|
September 24, 2010 8:36 PM
Wow. I wish this was in any way surprising to me.
Posted by: erpease
|
September 24, 2010 8:37 PM
I assume you mean adult female parishioners; many of the child abuse cases involve girls and underage women.
As for adult women, priests do and did and not always with freely consenting partners. However adult women have a lot more power now and for several decades to say no. (But see the 2001 article on priests raping nuns)
Posted by: Urmensch
|
September 24, 2010 8:41 PM
Even more evidence that supports Benedict's contention that this is all the fault of the liberal secular societies of the West.
Oh wait. Because that's ridiculous.
Posted by: Buster
|
September 24, 2010 8:42 PM
1871? That's a bit desperate, isn't it? I don't know how you'll be able to arrest the Pope for that one.
Anyway, here's a short film that describes the atheist predicament well, I feel.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5spUtCNpLbQ
Posted by: Antiochus Epiphanes
|
September 24, 2010 8:44 PM
At first I thought this was Teh Thread. Sorry.
But, about the Catholic church in Oz? Yeah. Gross.
Posted by: rufustfirefly66
|
September 24, 2010 8:47 PM
But former Senator Rick Santorum said the priests abusing children problem was because of the liberalism and permissiveness of the 60s and 70s.
Posted by: Buster
|
September 24, 2010 8:49 PM
"But former Senator Rick Santorum said the priests abusing children problem was because of the liberalism and permissiveness of the 60s and 70s."
He didn't say which 70's.
Posted by: Uzza
|
September 24, 2010 8:51 PM
This has been going on for at least 18 centuries.
Posted by: John Morales
|
September 24, 2010 8:52 PM
Buster, your sentence cut off rather abruptly. What do you feel?
--
PS Did you even read the linked piece?
No doubt, if they last the course, in another 100 years they'll be apologising for the wrongful acts of today. Fat comfort that is.
Posted by: NitricAcid
|
September 24, 2010 8:55 PM
Perhaps she'll become the patron saint of abused children and whistle-blowers.
Posted by: Buster
|
September 24, 2010 9:00 PM
"Perhaps she'll become the patron saint of abused children and whistle-blowers."
And Pope Benedict can become the patron saint of abused whistles and ... ooh...er...
Posted by: Cath the Canberra Cook
|
September 24, 2010 9:01 PM
Suddenly I'm liking McKillop a whole lot more.
Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM
|
September 24, 2010 9:10 PM
Depends on the jurisdiction. Some offenses have no end date. Rape should be one of them. And the present poopie is complicit in hiding child rape.Posted by: Ring Tailed Lemurian
|
September 24, 2010 9:12 PM
Poor Oz!
First Oprah, now Ratty?
Sheesh.
They've already got the flies, so what's next?
A Plague of Blood?
Death of the Firstborn?
Posted by: Rorschach
|
September 24, 2010 9:21 PM
Gratian mentions "stuprum pueri"(sex with boys)in 1140.
St Peter Damian wrote his Book of Gomorrah in 1051, in which he mentions sodomy, unclean acts, defiling boys, and the failure of the clergy to exclude the perpetrators from their ranks.
I could go back further.
Posted by: Ring Tailed Lemurian
|
September 24, 2010 9:23 PM
PS to #21
I was forgetting they've just had a Plague of Locusts too.
Posted by: RawBob
|
September 24, 2010 9:26 PM
Of course, you need to have performed a couple of miracles to become a saint. With a couple of clicks, I tracked hers down:
Seems that she cured one person of leukemia and another of some form of cancer.
All verified. Done deal. Nice.
...except that they never did explain why she stopped at just two miracle cures.
Sounds a little fishy to me. Or am I being too skeptical?
Whaddy'all think?
Posted by: John Morales
|
September 24, 2010 9:29 PM
RTL, at least we do something about the locusts and other natural pests.
Posted by: John Morales
|
September 24, 2010 9:32 PM
RawBob, the Church finds your doubts disturbing.
(They have a rigorous process in place.)
Posted by: Ichthyic
|
September 24, 2010 9:36 PM
(They have a rigorous process in place.)
We have top men working on it right now.
Who?
Top.
Men.
Posted by: Buster
|
September 24, 2010 9:36 PM
"...except that they never did explain why she stopped at just two miracle cures.
Sounds a little fishy to me. Or am I being too skeptical?"
You make it sound like performing miracle cures is easy. We have no way of knowing that.
Posted by: Ichthyic
|
September 24, 2010 9:38 PM
You make it sound like
performing miracle curesmaking up shit is easy.yeah, we know it takes lots of practice.
Posted by: Joe Bloe
|
September 24, 2010 9:45 PM
@24
It is worth noting that the second woman has chosen to remain anonymous, so nobody can check the details!
Speaking outside Mary McKillop Chapel in North Sydney today, Sister Anne Derwan said the woman at the centre of Mother Mary's second miracle did not yet wish to be identified, but would tell her story when the time was right.
http://www.smh.com.au/national/woman-cured-by-mackillop-hopes-for-compassion-20091220-l73t.html
Also, when the Sisters "miraculously" discovered a lock of McKillop's hair, it was decided that evidence was not required:
Sister McCreanor said the hair would not be DNA-tested. "We know it's the authentic hair of Mary Mackillop because there was documentation around it," she said.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/red-gum-relics-made-for-mackillops-sainthood/story-e6frg6nf-1225889564163
Posted by: Ring Tailed Lemurian
|
September 24, 2010 9:47 PM
"Buster"
Just stick to copying all your fellow childrape apologists by posting that unamusing "Downfall" parody*. You don't make any sense when you try and say something original.
Better still, just fuck off, huh?
* It's all over the "Comments" section of the Guardian's posting of Dawkin's speech. (Which the Guardian no doubt ran in a desperate attempt to stop him suing them over Andrew Brown's libellous article).
Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM
|
September 24, 2010 9:51 PM
Buster, showing ignorance and stoopid from day one. Do yourself a favor boy, and delete Pharyngula from your bookmarks. You have said nothing cogent to date, and there is no expectation you will say anything cogent in the future. Silence is the only way not to confirm your stoopid, which you do every time you post.
Posted by: Bergasms
|
September 24, 2010 9:58 PM
I grew up about 40 k's from Penola near Naracoorte. There has always been stuff about Mary MacKillop in Penola but until recently it was just a tourist trail that dealt with the history (Although they omitted any history of kiddy fiddling).
I was hoping the people there would take that tornado that went through a month or so ago as a sign that they should leave it that way, seeing as they are often want to interpret natural phenomena that way, but alas, no.
We don't need a saint, we don't need the church either for that matter.
Posted by: Reality Enforcer
|
September 24, 2010 10:10 PM
I'm pretty sure it is a hollowed tradition.
Posted by: raven
|
September 24, 2010 10:15 PM
That happens sometimes. There are any number of priests who have girlfriends, common law wives, and children. As to how common it is, we are talking about the RCC here. They are very secretive.
In the old days, many of the Popes were married and/or had mistesses and children. IIRC, a few years ago it came out that an Irish Bishop had a child stuck away somewhere.
Celibacy is just something a Pope made up and not even that long ago. It isn't in the bible. They really ought to deep six it. These days no one wants to be a life long, childless, unmarried virgin. The type of priest they are getting seem to be mostly very weird, twisted old men who aren't too bright and it shows all the way up the heirarchy.
You can see why the Reformation occurred and why they won. Way past due for another Reformation. Adapt or die.
Posted by: Rorschach
|
September 24, 2010 10:24 PM
In the 11th century, and codified at the Second Latern Council in 1139.
There was child abuse before the 11th century, abuse of the penance laws and mischief in confessionals, but it would seem it only became organised and widespread after the formalisation of the celibacy laws.
Posted by: Robster
|
September 24, 2010 10:33 PM
At last there's something to be interested in regards the 'canonisation' of that woman McKillop. We've been bombarded with, mainly on cable, various programs about the "saint for all Australians" crap. What presumptuous nonsense. McKillop maybe a saint for the rc's in Australia, but for most of us, it's rubbish. Good on her for trying to get the child rape thing sorted, seems little's changed since 1871, except for the muzzies where it's 1271 still. We ven had ratzie here last year to consider it. He must have 'coz it seems ur rather godless nation will have one whether we want it or not. Betcha there's tax payer funds being used here somewhere.
Posted by: SteveL
|
September 24, 2010 10:36 PM
They won?Posted by: Larry Lipit0r
|
September 24, 2010 10:36 PM
The catholic church IS all about the screwing of children and the protection of those who screw.... and nothing more. This is why it is so important to arrest Ratzi the Nazi as soon as possible, and consider him guilty until he can prove his innocence.... just like during the Inquisition. Actually, the police need to wheel into the vatican and arrest anyone wearing a red cassock.
Posted by: 'Tis Himself, OM
|
September 24, 2010 10:37 PM
And the gays. And the Jews. And the children themselves. And the demons.
Posted by: Buster
|
September 24, 2010 10:42 PM
My Confession:
I am very sorry if my remarks trivialized child abuse. I only put that Downfall video there because I thought it was funny.
:(
Please forgive me.
Buster
Posted by: Rorschach
|
September 24, 2010 10:44 PM
Yup.
Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM
|
September 24, 2010 10:46 PM
Provided you cease posting here permanently, yes. If you post here again, no. And you aren't funny, just pathetic. Get it?Posted by: dezinerau
|
September 24, 2010 10:49 PM
It doesn't even seem that way. She was long dead before either of those people were even born, but sainted because the idiots with cancer thought about her as their cancer went into remission.
Posted by: DLC
|
September 24, 2010 10:58 PM
Well, you see, the whole thing is about The Sovereign Church, whose priests are Not Subject To Temporal Law. Oh, and they don't have to pick up their bar tab either. . .
Romsan Catholic Church -- Redlining BS detectors for centuries.
Posted by: A Bad Idea (♀)
|
September 24, 2010 11:05 PM
I know of someone who was adopted out to a monsignor's sister after a nun got pregnant. She knew she was adopted and lived and died a devout Catholic but I don't think she ever put two and two together. Or maybe she did, and had to live with the terrible implications from the Catholic point of view.
Posted by: DLC
|
September 24, 2010 11:05 PM
[Roman... ]
Change my name to Crown Prince of Typos.
Posted by: rippingrich
|
September 24, 2010 11:10 PM
Makes me wonder who she had to blow to get back in.
Posted by: Divalent
|
September 24, 2010 11:12 PM
Sounds like she learned the secret that Louis CK uncovered. But it's a different time now.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VABSoHYQr6k
Posted by: Michelle R
|
September 24, 2010 11:18 PM
@rippingrich: From what the article says, the guy that banished her had remorses on his deathbed.
So unless she was making his final minutes happy.... I don't think she blew anyone.
Posted by: Great Waves
|
September 24, 2010 11:27 PM
Here was a sympathetic television story on the other miracle; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iK2UOMXU5no A woman's inoperable cancer 'miraculously' healed with no treatment. "There is no explanation in human terms, it was simply an intervention by god".
Posted by: Josh, "Raquel Dommage," Porte-parole Gay Official
|
September 24, 2010 11:32 PM
Take your stupid ass out of here. No one with a brain has any time for Catholic necrophiliac Virgin-Whore-worshipping idiots.
If it's not immediately obvious to you that Catholicism is a cult of cannibalistic sexual stupidity, you're either 11 years old or you're irredeemable. Either way, leave, please.
Posted by: rippingrich
|
September 24, 2010 11:39 PM
Oh come now Michelle, you don't really believe that do you?
I would expect the conversation went something like this...
Well sister, it seems father MacKillop felt it would be gracious to allow you back into the fold. I would love to see you come hither, however there is this one small problem I would request you attend to...
As he whips out his knarled old penis....
Sorry, I know the visual was not necessary but I just had to throw that in there.
Posted by: Ken Pidcock
|
September 24, 2010 11:45 PM
C'mon, y'all don't think this has just been uncovered, do ya?
The soulless materialists have been agitating that we haven't done enough to atone for the evil done by priests who betrayed their calling. Yet, here we are, canonizing a woman who risked her immortal soul to protect children threatened by one of these reprobates, who was probably influenced by Huxley.
Mark, this part of MacKillop's story will be emphasized by the Church.
Posted by: Cath the Canberra Cook
|
September 25, 2010 12:11 AM
Ken, that may play well with the Catholics but to the rest of us it's a lovely bit of schadenfreude. They get their saint, but it's at the cost of reminding the rest of us about the sex abuse scandal again. Patron saint of whistleblowers, lol, yes, she looks like a proper old-fashioned Aussie with all due respect for authoritah.
Posted by: Grahame
|
September 25, 2010 12:12 AM
They've been doing this for 2,000 years. Why would anyone think that anyone is more likely to rape a child because it's the 21st century?
Posted by: A Bad Idea (♀)
|
September 25, 2010 12:18 AM
Walton, the comic strip character I imagine you as is blushing tonight. http://sinfest.net/comikaze/comics/2010-09-25.gif
*blush*
Posted by: A Bad Idea (♀)
|
September 25, 2010 12:20 AM
FRIG WRONG THREAD I KNEW I'D DO THAT
Posted by: Patricia, OM
|
September 25, 2010 12:36 AM
Three free spankings, two extra tickles, and a gallon of swill dashed over you, while being lashed to the mast added to your bar tab.
Carry on.
Posted by: Pogsurf
|
September 25, 2010 1:07 AM
..Camping?
Classic! I'm try to get tickets for the Wiff-Waff Finals today, any idea whiv spiv is flogging them?
Posted by: Pogsurf
|
September 25, 2010 1:09 AM
Fucking shut up moaning, Melissa, but .. ..you're hair looks Great today.
Posted by: Pastor Farm
|
September 25, 2010 1:11 AM
No need, simply cast Ratzi as Uncle Ernie.
Posted by: Pogsurf
|
September 25, 2010 1:13 AM
TOTALLLY Irelverent, but I quite liked #57.
==========================================
I'd pay good money for that sort of thing. How about a fiver?
Posted by: Pogsurf
|
September 25, 2010 1:18 AM
TOTALLLY Irrelevrent, but I quite liked #57.
==========================================
I'd pay good money for that sort of thing. How about a fiver?
btw: I had fuck all to do with the not so recent FSM gag, near Garston, Watford the other day. I think it was the Paddies.
Posted by: https://www.google.com/accounts/o8/id?id=AItOawlARhxz_EZad2_PPNvQmVelK-U8LVLTYeA
|
September 25, 2010 1:36 AM
I wonder how many children Jesus raped.
Assuming he even existed.
Posted by: jschmeau
|
September 25, 2010 1:52 AM
@#60, 61, 63, 64, and so on....
Frogsoup,
You really are an irritating twit aren't you? You can now add creepy to the long list of adjectives that describe you.
Trolling this blog cannot be a very fun thing to do while your stoned. There are so many alternatives, here are a few:
- Have you ever heard of Pink Floyd?
- Watch Adult Swim on the cartoon network
- Try chewing a pretzel on one side of your mouth while chewing a peanut M&M on the other
- Stare at your hand
- Surf for porn
- Play online games (sorority life, maybe)
- Smoke another bowl
- Write stupid shit on your own stupid blog
So many options, use your imagination.
Posted by: Pogsurf
|
September 25, 2010 1:53 AM
#65 there we're at least NINE rapes by Jesus in the New Testement, but only one SUSp'ious incident was reported in the Old Test'ment.
Posted by: Pogsurf
|
September 25, 2010 2:03 AM
- Surf for porn - Concur.
Posted by: jrsutter
|
September 25, 2010 2:19 AM
Well, for once she sounds like a good person. I dont mind if she is given an honorific after her passing,
Posted by: P_Smith
|
September 25, 2010 2:24 AM
Why should anyone be surprised? I've read of rumours/suggestions that various nunneries and churches across Europe have numerous dead babies buried in the walls.
Religion is, and always has been, the quickest route to money, sex and power. It requires less talent or skill to get there than any other profession, including politicians. Those who choose religion don't do so because they have any noble intentions, they do it because they get attention.
Even those rare few who don't choose a career in religion for money, sex, and power are still in it to say, "Look at meeee! I'm special and better than you!" They're all attention whores.
.
Posted by: Andreas Johansson
|
September 25, 2010 2:32 AM
That thaumaturgy is a bit of an odd criterion for saintliness that crept in somewhere along the way. The original requirement was dying for your faith (which was felt excessively strict about as soon as the Roman authorities stopped executing people for being Christians), and in many modern canonizations it's obvious that the (often ridiculously unconvincing) miracles are dug up solely to tick that box for someone who is being sanctified for other reasons.
Posted by: SEF
|
September 25, 2010 3:14 AM
@ Grahame #56:
Because they desperately want to believe that's the case (in order to shore up their faith in their otherwise blatantly evil religion).
Posted by: bernarda
|
September 25, 2010 3:23 AM
It is not just the Catholic Church, look up on your search engine "Rabbi child abuse", or "Afghan pedophilia".
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSISL1848920071119?sp=true
http://articles.sfgate.com/2010-08-29/opinion/22949948_1_karzai-family-afghan-men-president-hamid-karzai
"As for Karzai, an American who worked in and around his palace in an official capacity for many months told me that homosexual behavior "was rampant" among "soldiers and guys on the security detail. They talked about boys all the time."
..."So, why are American and NATO forces fighting and dying to defend tens of thousands of proud pedophiles, certainly more per capita than any other place on Earth? And how did Afghanistan become the pedophilia capital of Asia?
Sociologists and anthropologists say the problem results from perverse interpretation of Islamic law. Women are simply unapproachable. Afghan men cannot talk to an unrelated woman until after proposing marriage. Before then, they can't even look at a woman, except perhaps her feet. Otherwise she is covered, head to ankle."
Posted by: shonny
|
September 25, 2010 4:34 AM
Shouldn't that be 'Suddenly I am disliking McK a lot less'?
After all, regardless of her conscience, she was still propping up that vile institution.
Posted by: shonny
|
September 25, 2010 4:46 AM
And the worst of all the plagues: John Howard (the PM, not the actor).
Posted by: chainpuller
|
September 25, 2010 5:01 AM
I was unfortunate enough to attend a school run by nuns until I was 11. I still remember the endless tedium of daily mass (one of the nuns had a brother who was a monseigneur, when he visited the convent the final year children had the privilege of being his congregation every day), the nausea of the incense during weekly benediction and the regular beatings from one particularly sadistic nun (for context, I was probably the best-behaved boy the school has ever had and even I regularly got hit). So, while I was never buggered by a priest, I was subject to the sadistic thrill-seeking of a nun.
Posted by: Moggie
|
September 25, 2010 6:10 AM
#69:
But it's not just an honorific, is it? The church isn't saying she was a good person, they're saying she's a magic ghost. I don't believe magic ghosts exist - the evidence for them isn't good - and encouraging millions of people to believe they do isn't a good thing.
Posted by: http://www.clarkcox.com/blog/
|
September 25, 2010 7:00 AM
#5:
Remember, women are Teh Evul, and vaginas are the source of original sin. But having sex with little boys, on the other hand, will make you immortal…
… Duh! didn't you get the handbook?
Posted by: rtrtobin
|
September 25, 2010 7:02 AM
Archbishop Pell has published an opinion piece in "the Australian":
What would George Cardinal "Go To Hell" Pell know about Women? Has he ever been married? Of course we don't know if "His Eminence" has bedded any.
At least he got done like a dinner by Dan Barker just before the Global Atheist Convention.
Posted by: Donald Oats
|
September 25, 2010 7:40 AM
I enjoyed the Global Atheist Convention greatly, but as an Australian I must apologise for the MacKillop malarkey in the media all the time - it is still going strong, of course, since it is an easy news story to cobble together.
I'm still traumatised by the fact that so many Aussies think the "miracles" are true, rather than just bullsh*t (as in Frankfurt's essay: On Bullsh*t philosophical essay) to serve the purpose of meeting the Church's rules on sainthood.
I'd have thought that the greater story for the media would have been to examine why lies (let's call a spade a spade here) are presented as truth - so that a long-dead person may add to the legion of saints - and this by a bunch of Christians who are self-appointed keepers of morality? Self-appointed paedophiles who operated even in her contemporary time. Aahhh, how much irony can a human stand?
Posted by: Silič O'Nopolitanopoulos, Färschdbischuf Beesknees aus Ulm und Klein Elguth, Elector Pharynguline.
|
September 25, 2010 7:55 AM
Funny that. I'd rather the Mother Church didn't adapt. Whom she had to blow.And to whomever's testing their AI software Pogsurf on this thread, please turn it off and go back to the drawingboard.
Posted by: David Marjanović
|
September 25, 2010 8:07 AM
That was the worst adaptation of that Downfall clip I've ever seen. The least funny, the one with the most strawmen stuffed in, the most clueless...
You just have to believe atheism is an organized movement with a leader, don't you?
Dirty little secret for you: not only is there no god, there is no devil.
I don't think so. The previous* parish priest here once told, as part of a sermon, why he had wanted to become a priest: because he liked ritual so much. As a little child he had played eucharist at home.
* Depression, alcohol, kidney problem, death.
Give up, Sili. Hundreds of millions of native speakers haven't got whom in their active vocabulary anymore. It's over.
Seconded.
Posted by: Cath the Canberra Cook
|
September 25, 2010 8:57 AM
Shonny, actually, no. My mathematical pedantry notes that it's the same thing anyway. But I don't actually start from an automatic negative here. I tend to give older and historical nuns the benefit of the doubt. There were so few good choices for women in those days. If my options were 19th century baby-making house slavery or being a nun, then hell, sign me up for the convent and prepare your where's the soap jokes.
Posted by: echidna
|
September 25, 2010 9:04 AM
I like it - the Compass McKillop story hurts the church where it needs to be hurt, while getting in under the radar because it supports McKillop.
Posted by: Schenck
|
September 25, 2010 9:06 AM
" but if I was a priest and really hurting for sex, I have to think I'd be sleeping with female parishioners and nuns"
Oh no, you wouldn't want to do that, THAT would get you punished, even excommunicated. Recall recently that some married priests (I think there were several in africa) were threatened publically with excommunication. If they'd've gone after kids, they'd've been given given confession and a vacation.
"St Peter Damian wrote his Book of Gomorrah in 1051, in which he mentions sodomy, unclean acts, defiling boys, and the failure of the clergy to exclude the perpetrators from their ranks."
Wow, even before there was a Norman England they were doing this!
Also, as far as the 2 miracles, they just require that for sainthood, so there can be others, but they don't need to be verified, only 2 need to be 'verified'. And as far as it being anonymous and no one else can check it, i understand the desire to confirm these sorts of things, but really its not a public matter, its not like the public has anything riding on whether or not someone is a saint in the RCC or not.
Posted by: RawBob
|
September 25, 2010 9:15 AM
@81
whoever
Posted by: pasadena beggar
|
September 25, 2010 9:18 AM
I rarely have something to say that most of you don't say better which spares me the trouble of commenting.
Every now and then--say, like two or three times a day--PZ writes something that, when I read it, I can feel the blood pressure throbbing at the base of my head. This is one of those times.
It is really not possible for me to have more contempt for the Catholic hierarchy than I do, but I'm always wrong when I think this.
Posted by: RawBob
|
September 25, 2010 9:26 AM
"whoever's testing their AI software" is a noun clause that is the object of the preposition "to," actually functioning as an indirect object in this sentence. Within the clause, the subject is "whoever." By virtue of the fact that it is the subject, it has to be in the nominative case - whoever, rather than whomever.
Posted by: Alice Bluegown
|
September 25, 2010 9:53 AM
George Santayana's maxim in action - the Catholic Church has a shitload of history, but they don't seem to have been paying attention at any point.
Plus ca change...
Posted by: Silič O'Nopolitanopoulos, Färschdbischuf Beesknees aus Ulm und Klein Elguth, Elector Pharynguline.
|
September 25, 2010 11:40 AM
Why is it so easy to pull the legs of grammar mavens?
(I was very tempted to keep it up with "off" and "grammer".)
Posted by: Lynna, OM
|
September 25, 2010 12:00 PM
raven @35
I think the celibacy doctrine may eventually be rescinded. Either that, or the the clergy will shrink to an ever more fetid pool of warped individuals.The Catholics are not the only fools pushing the "virtue" of chastity, especially for gays.
The story goes on to note that: And, of course, we all know that mormons think gay mormons are okay as long as they carry their burden of SSA (same sex attraction) nobly, by not engaging in any sex whatsoever. There are rumors that there have been gay General Authorities within the mormon church, but to out oneself as gay in that culture would be social and financial suicide.Rorschach @36
It was all about money and goods. The catholic church wanted to keep land, money, buildings, etc. to itself, and did not want to have the children of priests inheriting their fathers' estates.With the mormons, it's also about money in a roundabout way. They fear that gay members will not bring as many children into the church, and that equals less tithing for the church. They also feel they'll lose the absolute control they have over the lives of members, and that would also equal less tithing for the church.
Power and Money, not morality.
Wherever there are inhumane restrictions placed on human sexuality, there are also associated problems of secrecy surrounding abuse. This includes abuse of both adults and children. They make a problem that affects a small percentage of adults (tendency to abuse children) into a big problem by warping the sexual inclinations and the reasoning capacities of large groups of men. Then they throw a dirty cloak over the whole issue and try to pray it away.
If women or girls are abused, it is, of course, their fault. Or as the mormons say, "It's not my place to judge. That's between her and God."
Posted by: Lynna, OM
|
September 25, 2010 12:09 PM
Rorschach @42, What the hell is the atheist Prime Minister on about? She says the catholic church has made great contributions to the social fabric of Australia, but it looks more like great rents in the social fabric to me.
Posted by: Rorschach
|
September 25, 2010 12:16 PM
Lynna, she was at the time pandering to the religious vote ahead of the election, it did not help her in the end.
Posted by: raven
|
September 25, 2010 12:17 PM
One Bishop estimates that 1,000 children in the UK and Ireland are children of priests.
This is what the RCC gets for bottling up a normal and pervasive human drive. They really should take the advice of jesus and just castrate the priests. After all, supposedly they aren't going to be needing their gonads.
Even the other Catholics, Anglican and Orthodox have married priests. So far, the world hasn't ended.
Posted by: masksoferis
|
September 25, 2010 2:28 PM
Well, that's the really horrible possibility. For all we know, this shite and its cover-up may have been going on for hundreds, for near two thousand years, ever since someone had the hubris to say the good of the church was more important than the good of human beings. It isn't like any component of this is anything new. Problem is, I think there's no way to be sure. Who would write such a thing down? Who would tell the priest he's the bad one, and the cardinal that he's not the supreme authority, and the pope that he's got his priorities all mixed up?
Posted by: timgueguen
|
September 25, 2010 3:05 PM
I think people are getting it backwards. Celibacy isn't causing people to abuse kids. Rather it's a case of people who feel a sexual attraction to kids becoming priests in the hope it will help dampen the attraction, with the celibacy requirement being another barrier they hope will prevent them acting on that attraction. But of course it doesn't work for many, especially if they find themselves in an enviroment where instead of being isolated they meet others like them.
Posted by: David Marjanović
|
September 25, 2010 4:05 PM
I'm with comment 96.
Didn't you read comment 22?
Posted by: Seraphiel
|
September 25, 2010 4:21 PM
If she never reported it to the civil authorities, she is as guilty as the priests. Conspiracy after the fact, obstruction of justice.
For all the people who only ever reported it to the church authorities (who, for centuries, have refused to address this problem) without following up with the police, there should be a special punishment. Perhaps a prison where any acts of abuse committed against them must first be reported to their fellow rapists and murderers and thieves, who can surely be trusted to pass the complaint on to the proper authorities.
Posted by: Al B. Quirky
|
September 25, 2010 5:15 PM
Child-rapers are not following the teachings of Christ, therefore they are not Christians. Yes, I've heard the 'no true Scotsman' fallacy and its a load of crap; it lends support to the creeps who use religion as a cover for their criminal activities. I support the call for a thorough investigation of the Catholic church's pedophile activities by secular authorities. And so-called followers of Christ who say 'oh, but their sins are forgiven' should be confronted with what Christ actually said about pedos: it would better for them to be drowned in the depths of the sea.
Posted by: Ichthyic
|
September 25, 2010 5:21 PM
Yes, I've heard the 'no true Scotsman' fallacy and its a load of crap;
quirky, YOU'RE a load of crap.
get lost.
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp
|
September 25, 2010 5:21 PM
So sinners aren't Christians?
Posted by: Ichthyic
|
September 25, 2010 5:27 PM
it would better for them to be drowned in the depths of the sea.
I've always wondered about that line...
why the depths and not the shallows?
...or am i just being silly.
well, whatever fits.
Posted by: Amphiox, OM
|
September 25, 2010 5:41 PM
By that criteria, there are no Christians in this (or any other) world.
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp
|
September 25, 2010 5:42 PM
yep
Posted by: FossilFishy
|
September 25, 2010 8:04 PM
RTL #21
You forgot the massive bushfires of a year and a half ago. A month ago we had major flooding and now: locusts!
http://www.abc.net.au/rural/nsw/content/2010/09/s3020067.htm
Come to sunny Australia they said, it's beautiful there they said....
Posted by: monado
|
September 25, 2010 10:57 PM
Sex with women or girls is not uncommon. It doesn't get as much press. Priests used to be so irresponsible and likely to rape anything that moves, that around AD 1000 the Catholic church forbade them to have a woman living in their church-supplied home, even their sister or mother. That's why they have daily help. But Men who are troubled by their sexual preference and wrestling with a sense of sin are more likely to end up in the church. It seems pretty clear that with marriage being pushed as the norm, becoming a priest was a way to escape the question of marriage, secure masculine companionship, and get access to altar boys.
Posted by: monado
|
September 25, 2010 11:04 PM
Eat the locusts! After all, any logical, unprejudiced mind can see that they're a great source of fat and protein.
C'mon, if you think people can dump lifelong religious indoctrination at the drop of a hat, please get working on your own food prejudices.
Posted by: Rorschach
|
September 26, 2010 4:40 AM
Err, I mean time flies when you're having fun and all, but I just realised something :
PZ :
Roughly 6 1/2 months that we had multivitamin drinks with the Horde at the Hilton Bar and wherever else man...I know, it feels like years...:-)
Curious.The Pope is supposed to be god's representative on Earth, and yet, the current Pope has actively and knowingly suppressed evidence of sexual abuse of clergy for decades.A tradition many popes before him have followed as well, going back to the 5th century.So, by your own quirky logic, that would mean the Pope is not a Christian ?
Posted by: Al B. Quirky
|
September 26, 2010 5:35 AM
@#108
Absolutely.
Posted by: SEF
|
September 26, 2010 7:31 AM
@ Rorschach #108:
PZ might most naturally work in scholastic years. In the UK, those run from autumn (ie harvest-end) to summer (harvest-start). Wikipedia claims the US is broadly similar.
Posted by: Andreas Johansson
|
September 26, 2010 7:39 AM
Any logical unprejudiced mind would note that the cost of procuring them compared to other sources of fat and protein makes them not worth the effort, for me and for many others.
Posted by: Philip Legge
|
September 26, 2010 7:51 AM
BTW, the MacKillop doco is about to start in ten minutes’ time on ABC1; I’ll summarise any interesting new info here, once it’s over.
Posted by: Philip Legge
|
September 26, 2010 8:05 AM
Or rather it’s not on this week: I must have gotten my wires crossed somewhere. I’ll shut up now...
(Apparently it’s not airing until October 10. D’oh!)
Posted by: lykex
|
September 26, 2010 8:31 AM
I'd be willing to accept that IF the priests were immediately excommunicated and reported to the police as soon as their misdeeds were discovered. But they haven't been and it doesn't look like they will be.
Btw, since I doubt Al is a catholic, I'd like to point out that the same problem exists in protestant churches, and the same approach to "solving" the problem is taken there.
Posted by: https://me.yahoo.com/a/nDWEarwQlP5JUUSg7yR5hFRCT8gTMYAR#e349c
|
September 28, 2010 1:53 PM
October 14, New York Times, reporter Paul Vitello exposed the sad extent of Child Sexual Abuse in Brooklyn’s Orthodox Jewish Community and details Cover-ups that have long been Aided by law enforcement.
According to the article, there were Forty cases of such Abuse in this tiny community last year alone.
Orthodox Rabbis were allowed by the D.A.’s office to settle these cases “internally.
Where are the professional victims’ groups staging protests outside synagogues?
Or sue-happy lawyers been seeking to plunder the Orthodox? Or comedians and late-night entertainers been in cracking jokes about rabbis raping kids? '
(Smell the Kosher controlled media?
40 in 1 town!
Yet the Catholic Church had just 9 cases in the same year across the entire USA
Smell the Hypocrisy & Kosher controlled media?)
Sexual Abuse of Minors in Protestant Churches
By Jonathan Morris
(Fox News) The mainstream media has all but ignored the recent Associated Press report that the 3 major insurance companies for Protestant Churches in America say they typically receive 260 reports each year of minors being sexually abused by Protestant clergy, staff, or other church-related relationships.'
260 Protestant Incidents to 9 in the Catholic Church!
Abuse in School 100 Times Worse than by Priests
April 1, 2010
(LifeSiteNews) Charol Shakeshaft, researcher of 2004 study prepared for the U.S. Dept of Education, "physical sexual abuse of students in schools is likely more than 100xs the abuse by priests"
2004 study most accurate data available at this time indicates nearly 9.6% of students are targets of educator sexual misconduct
6 credible cases of clerical sexual abuse in 2009 reported in the bishops annual audit- 65,000,000 members'
2002, Christian Science Monitor on national survey results by Christian Ministry Resources
Despite headlines focusing on the priest pedophile problem in the Catholic Church, most US churches being hit with child sexual-abuse allegations are Protestant.
Penn State professor Philip Jenkins, on Pedophiles & Priests:
0.2 & 1.7 percent of Catholic priests are pedophiles.
While Protestant Clergy Ranges between 2-3%'
Posted by: Seraphiel
|
September 28, 2010 7:10 PM
#115:
Is that you, Bill Donohue?
Whoever you are, fuck you and the horse you rode in on. Making excuses for the rape of children, particularly the "they did it too" defense, is among the most evil things someone could do.
Too bad there's no Hell, because people like you would have a special place in it.