The thing that bothers me the most is not that I think being a Catholic means that person condones what the hierarchy has done. What bothers me is that I cannot, for the life of me, think of an organization that I would hold so dearly that I could allow myself to continue to identify with it after such a heinous cover up and refusal to compensate victims, especially when that organization claims to be the voice of a loving god. How can anyone see fit to look for spiritual guidance from people that are more concerned with a holy image than they are from preventing child rape?

I get that not all Catholics are like that and that Catholicism is more than insecure men in robes and pointy hats, but we're talking about the leaders of this religion. The head people that are supposed to get their guidance from a loving god are shuffling around child molesters, because protecting their image was more important than protecting the bodies and minds of little children. There just comes a point where you have to jump ship no matter what, and what I'm stuck wondering is where do these Catholics that remain draw the line? How much is too much before you're willing to stop supporting and identifying with an organization?

/suppressed emotions from having Catholic in-laws

(September 25, 2015 at 12:15 pm)Faith No More Wrote: The thing that bothers me the most is not that I think being a Catholic means that person condones what the hierarchy has done.  What bothers me is that I cannot, for the life of me, think of an organization that I would hold so dearly that I could allow myself to continue to identify with it after such a heinous cover up and refusal to compensate victims, especially when that organization claims to be the voice of a loving god.  How can anyone see fit to look for spiritual guidance from people that are more concerned with a holy image than they are from preventing child rape?

I get that not all Catholics are like that and that Catholicism is more than insecure men in robes and pointy hats, but we're talking about the leaders of this religion.  The head people that are supposed to get their guidance from a loving god are shuffling around child molesters, because protecting their image was more important than protecting the bodies and minds of little children.  There just comes a point where you have to jump ship no matter what, and what I'm stuck wondering is where do these Catholics that remain draw the line?  How much is too much before you're willing to stop supporting and identifying with an organization?

/suppressed emotions from having Catholic in-laws

Ok, I honestly can see BOTH sides of this.  I fully understand the emotional pull many have on here being ex-Catholic or family members who are Catholic as well as seeing the innumerable stories of pedophilia in the Church and the associated cover ups.  

Let's be fair here.  We all agree that child molestation is abhorrent.  We all agree that perpetrators and those that help them should be held accountable.  We all agree that victims should be compensated. 

Every day we support things that we may or may not know are doing immoral things or shady things.  Ever buy something at Wal-Mart?  Ever buy Nike shoes?  I'm sure you are aware of the child labor in the sweatshops over products these brands sell.  Sure it's not molestation, but is it right?  Are you supporting it when you make a purchase there, when other options are available?  

Catholics are not giving their money to intentionally support pedophilia or help cover it up, we all know this.  Just because those in power do those things, does not mean those doing good for the church need to suffer.  This is not something that can be fixed over night and admittedly they had steps in the right direction, IMO.  Most people are tithing to the local church/diocese.  If there is found something going on there and it is not swiftly dealt with, then I would agree an appropriate response would be to withhold tithing or move to a different diocese, but that's not what you seem to be proposing.  You seem to be saying, please correct me if I'm wrong, that all Catholics should stop supporting their local churches/diocese, because of the faults of others in different states/countries.  I just don't think that's fair to those doing things the right way.  I understand the motivation, but not sure it's the right answer.

Quote:Ever buy something at Wal-Mart?  Ever buy Nike shoes?

Wal-mart and Nike are scumbag corporations.  They do not pretend to be a moral arbiter which tries to tell people how to live their lives.

Quote:Let's be fair here.  We all agree that child molestation is abhorrent.  We all agree that perpetrators and those that help them should be held accountable.  We all agree that victims should be compensated.

If only the bishops, archbishops, cardinals and popes did.

(September 25, 2015 at 12:48 pm)Minimalist Wrote:

Quote:Ever buy something at Wal-Mart?  Ever buy Nike shoes?

Wal-mart and Nike are scumbag corporations.  They do not pretend to be a moral arbiter which tries to tell people how to live their lives.

Quote:Let's be fair here.  We all agree that child molestation is abhorrent.  We all agree that perpetrators and those that help them should be held accountable.  We all agree that victims should be compensated.

If only the bishops, archbishops, cardinals and popes did.

There are equally as many scandals and cover up in our local, state and federal governments.  I think what might be a better option is if the RCC operated more like an electoral democracy where leaders are voted in and can be voted out.  But it's more of a theocracy and top down appointment.  This leaves the masses little option when decrying the moral failures of their leaders.

The chuch, IMO, remains profoundly lucky to not have been prosecuted under RICO statutes.

IIRC, it was PBS that illustrated the abuse at a Wisconsin catholic institution for disabled kids. That place was a magnet for pedos since for the most part, the kids were unable to complain about it, and the dioceses was aware of the problems, and not only did they ignore/facilitate the continuation of the abuse, they harrassed (via their legal department) any families that complained about the abuse.

I'm not likely to ever ameliorate my stand just from this one outrage, that there are many, many more remains incomprehensible to me that anyone could support such a corrupt and base organization.

(anyone knowing the title of that PBS documentary, I'd appreciate seeing it here. Realistically, I am aware the WILLFULLY IGNORANT that need to see it the most will not bother to watch it, still it needs to publicized)

Frontline:

Secrets of the Vatican


I'd urge everyone who hasn't seen it to watch it.

(September 25, 2015 at 12:36 pm)lkingpinl Wrote: Ok, I honestly can see BOTH sides of this.  I fully understand the emotional pull many have on here being ex-Catholic or family members who are Catholic as well as seeing the innumerable stories of pedophilia in the Church and the associated cover ups.  

Let's be fair here.  We all agree that child molestation is abhorrent.  We all agree that perpetrators and those that help them should be held accountable.  We all agree that victims should be compensated. 

Every day we support things that we may or may not know are doing immoral things or shady things.  Ever buy something at Wal-Mart?  Ever buy Nike shoes?  I'm sure you are aware of the child labor in the sweatshops over products these brands sell.  Sure it's not molestation, but is it right?  Are you supporting it when you make a purchase there, when other options are available?  

Catholics are not giving their money to intentionally support pedophilia or help cover it up, we all know this.  Just because those in power do those things, does not mean those doing good for the church need to suffer.  This is not something that can be fixed over night and admittedly they had steps in the right direction, IMO.  Most people are tithing to the local church/diocese.  If there is found something going on there and it is not swiftly dealt with, then I would agree an appropriate response would be to withhold tithing or move to a different diocese, but that's not what you seem to be proposing.  You seem to be saying, please correct me if I'm wrong, that all Catholics should stop supporting their local churches/diocese, because of the faults of others in different states/countries.  I just don't think that's fair to those doing things the right way.  I understand the motivation, but not sure it's the right answer.

I'm not saying that all Catholics should stop supporting the church(although they probably should).  I'm just saying that that's what I would do, and it's hard to swallow the reasons given for continuing to support such an organization.  I get that people's motivations are complex and that Catholicism resembles Judaism in the respect that it goes beyond simply being a religion.  It's a cultural identity passed down from generation to generation that is hard to escape from mentally.  What I don't get, however, is how people can become so ingrained to an identity that they will cling to it even when it has become so tainted.

Yes, we support all kinds heinous acts indirectly with our purchases and our Western lifestyles.  That's a guilt we should all bare, and we should do our best to minimize the effects corporations have.  However, if Wal-Mart had been guilty of what the Catholic Church has done, it would have been shut down and erased from existence.  

And I understand that people want to donate to their local diocese to benefit the less fortunate around them, but the reality is that a percentage of every dollar trickles up and supports the leaders and hierarchy that see fit to rest on thrones of gold and pass around pedophiles to protect their image.  And on top of that, all of this is done under the belief that the organization is sanctioned by god.  I realize that Catholics believe in the corruption of man, which makes criminality in the Catholic Church nearly certain, but how can one believe god was either too impotent or uncaring to protect children in his own house?

The question then becomes, when is enough enough?

(September 25, 2015 at 12:36 pm)lkingpinl Wrote: This is not something that can be fixed over night and admittedly they had steps in the right direction, IMO.  Most people are tithing to the local church/diocese.  If there is found something going on there and it is not swiftly dealt with, then I would agree an appropriate response would be to withhold tithing or move to a different diocese, but that's not what you seem to be proposing.

From Wikipedia:

Quote:In July 2007 the Los Angeles Archdiocese settled 508 cases for $2 million.[2] On July 16, 2007, the day before he was to testify under oath, Mahony and the Roman Catholic Church in Los Angeles apologized for abuses by priests after 508 victims reached a record-breaking settlement worth $660m (£324m), with an average of $1.3m for each plaintiff. Mahony described the abuse as a "terrible sin and crime", as a series of trials into sex abuse claims since the 1940s were to begin. The agreement, if approved by a judge, will settle all 15 upcoming pedophilia trials against the Los Angeles archdiocese and avoids the threat of Mahony being forced to testify about how the Church dealt with abuses in the period from the 1940s to 1990s.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_abu...os_Angeles

[Emphasis added -- Thump]

Archbishop Mahony was allowed to retire despite documentation demonstrating his active participation in covering up criminal activity. I have no doubt he breathed a sigh of relief on the settlement being accepted. Mahony actively stone-walled law-enforcement officials in Southern California for a decade or more, and as recently as 2009. His is obviously not nearly the only case I could mention; it's simply the one I'm most familiar with. The fact that several dioceses have declared bankruptcy on the eve of proceedings makes it difficult to argue that they are interested in justice.  Note that the most recent was less than five years ago. As the MinnPost reports:

Quote:Stretching from Delaware to Alaska, these bankruptcy proceedings often have taken years to hammer out, as the church and victims negotiate the terms of how much victims should be compensated. The payouts to victims have been in the millions of dollars – in San Diego, the diocese paid more than $198 million to 144 abuse victims, the largest clergy sexual abuse settlement to date.

Bankruptcies can help to bring order to chaos, says Pamela Foohey, an associate professor at Indiana University’s Maurer School of Law. They ensure that hundreds of lawsuits become more manageable and that all victims get paid – not just those who file cases early.

But victim advocates and attorneys say churches that declare insolvency often do it for a less noble purpose. They say it has become a go-to move for dioceses to stop damaging trials and avoid putting church officials on the witness stand.

“Bankruptcies don’t protect kids,” said victims attorney Patrick Noaker, whose suit against Stitts was supposed to go to trial last week. “Trials and disclosures do.”

Rather than turning over to law enforcement priests accused of molestation, the RCC is still moving them around so that they cannot be prosecuted. Still.

The problem is not limited to the level of the diocese. This is what tithing supports, whether it is the intention of the donor or not; and this remains an ongoing problem. I wouldn't dream of donating to an organization with this track-record, that to this day rejects the transparency of testimony taken under oath for the obfuscation of placing alleged criminals beyond the reach of the law.

And on the topic of the Los Angeles Archdiocese:

Quote:The prices for some cathedral furnishings have also caused consternation. $5 million was budgeted for the altar, the main bronze doors cost $3 million, $2 million was budgeted for the wooden ambo (lectern) and $1 million for the tabernacle. $1 million was budgeted for the cathedra (bishop's chair), $250,000 for the presider's chair, $250,000 for each deacon's chair, and $150,000 for each visiting bishops' chair, while pews cost an average of $50,000 each. The cantor's stand cost $100,000 while each bronze chandelier/speaker cost $150,000.[12] The great costs incurred in its construction and Mahony's long efforts to get it built led critics to dub it the "Taj Mahony"[13] and the "Rog Mahal".[14]

Even without the pedophilia scandal, such misplaced priorities in spending would keep me from actively tithing. What a skewed sense of priorities! A million-dollar chair?!

(September 25, 2015 at 1:56 pm)Parkers Tan Wrote: And on the topic of the Los Angeles Archdiocese:

Quote:The prices for some cathedral furnishings have also caused consternation. $5 million was budgeted for the altar, the main bronze doors cost $3 million, $2 million was budgeted for the wooden ambo (lectern) and $1 million for the tabernacle. $1 million was budgeted for the cathedra (bishop's chair), $250,000 for the presider's chair, $250,000 for each deacon's chair, and $150,000 for each visiting bishops' chair, while pews cost an average of $50,000 each. The cantor's stand cost $100,000 while each bronze chandelier/speaker cost $150,000.[12] The great costs incurred in its construction and Mahony's long efforts to get it built led critics to dub it the "Taj Mahony"[13] and the "Rog Mahal".[14]

Even without the pedophilia scandal, such misplaced priorities in spending would keep me from actively tithing. What a skewed sense of priorities! A million-dollar chair?!

While I agree with you, would you say this is equivalent to government spending on things you deem needless, but alas it's far worse in that you cannot choose not to pay taxes to support it, and if you do, you go to prison.