The Catholic Church Should Burn

[Innula Zenovka]

Tax status. It's the same reason people bitch about corporations who've applied for a PPP loan - legally - but are known to pay little to no taxes.

Benefitting from a system they don't pay into. Is it OK that some of us don't happen to like that?

But if Congress wanted to restrict access to the programme to particular types of non-profit organisation, or to corporations who pay in tax more than certain percentage of their turnover, or to make access to the loans dependent on some other criteria, then it was open to it so to do, surely?

Certainly it's reasonable to criticise legislators for passing ill-thought-out or badly-drafted legislation, which may well have happened in this case, but if the legislature passes a particular law that entitles organisations to financial assistance, I don't see how it's fair to criticise organisations simply because they successfully apply for assistance to which the legislature, through a law it's very recently passed, says they're entitled.

 

[Innula Zenovka]

The Catholic Church is worth $10 billion to $15 billion.
Mom and Pop Hardware Store who didn't get the loan because their spot got taken up by a church isn't.

As I recall, the programme was supported by both parties in Congress.

Was this potential issue flagged up at the time, and if it was, why weren't sufficient funds allocated to the programme and who decided to allocate what funds there were on the basis of first-come, first-served?

I understand why people are upset about the way the programme is working, but if the rules are being correctly applied, then surely it's the fault of the legislators who designed and voted for the programme, not that of people administering or benefitting from it?

 

[Dancien]

I think this may be more of an argument of could vs should. Could the Catholic Churches apply for and receive the loan? Yes. According to the way it was written they could. Should they have though? Highly debatable.

 

[Innula Zenovka]

I think this may be more of an argument of could vs should. Could the Catholic Churches apply for and receive the loan? Yes. According to the way it was written they could. Should they have though? Highly debatable.

Certainly, but did, in fact, any legislators from either side actually raise this when the programme was being devised?

We've got to work with the law as it is, not as we might want it to be, and I don't see how it's fair to criticise people or organisations because they've successfully applied for assistance to which a programme set up only a matter of weeks ago says they're entitled.

Criticise the members of Congress, both Republican and Democrat, who voted for the measures, not the people administering or benefitting from them, surely?

 

[Free]

Criticise the members of Congress, both Republican and Democrat, who voted for the measures, not the people administering or benefitting from them, surely?

I have it in myself to criticize both, voluminously.

(Anyone administering the plan is just following the rules of their job, so to speak, so I'm not discussing them.)

 

[Katheryne Helendale]

As I recall, the programme was supported by both parties in Congress.

Was this potential issue flagged up at the time, and if it was, why weren't sufficient funds allocated to the programme and who decided to allocate what funds there were on the basis of first-come, first-served?

I understand why people are upset about the way the programme is working, but if the rules are being correctly applied, then surely it's the fault of the legislators who designed and voted for the programme, not that of people administering or benefitting from it?

My theory: Evangelical (and otherwise religious) Republican senators drafted the bill with wording carefully crafted to allow funding for religious institutions and wealthy corporations. Democrats in both houses could not afford, given the current climate, to be seen as the party resisting preventing wage earners - the average Joes - from getting furloughed or laid off completely, so they quickly sign off on the bill without thoroughly dissecting it first. And Bob's your uncle.

 

[Aribeth Zelin]

Hold your pitchforks against me please. I'm just pointing out things, not saying anything about -agreeing- with it or not.

 

[Kamilah Hauptmann]

You must be new here.

 

[Nostrildamus]

That, though, suggests that these "basic moral standards, lessons and acceptable ways of interacting" are based on pragmatic observation of what works and what doesn't, and that rules and laws that no longer seem particularly relevant -- particularly ones about ritual cleanliness and uncleanliness -- get discarded as no longer useful.

That's my position, too -- most ethical rules are absolutely necessary to a functioning society of any kind, since you can't have any sort of complex social structure, not even a small village or band of nomads -- without an agreed set of basic rules and a consensus about enforcing them, otherwise you end up complete anarchy as marauding bands wage constant war on each other.

However, it follows from all this that, as and when people no longer find a rule particularly useful, it falls into desuetude as more and more people ignore it.

Some rules are longer lasting than others, but none of them are necessarily permanent, as far as I can see, at least not in theory.

As any one time, of course, people will disagree about which rules are necessary and which are not, and differing views will tend to be influenced, to a greater or lesser extent, by the degree to which their general adoption benefits the person who holds them.

So, for example, prohibitions on murder and theft tend not to be particularly contentious, because no one wants to feel their life and property are in constant danger from everyone else, but rules on things like what you can eat, or who may marry whom, are discarded when they no longer matter sufficiently to enough people to be worth trying to enforce.

I think consciousness is at least as mysterious as the weird UFOs recorded by the fighter pilots.

 

[Innula Zenovka]

 

[Aribeth Zelin]

Also, whether or not its true or not, the Catholic Church has a reputation for molesting underage BOYS - if it were just girls, no one would have cared. To the best of my knowledge, protestant victims tend to be girls, even if its not always the truth there either.

 

[Innula Zenovka]

New pupils barred from top UK Catholic school after abuse scandal

Ampleforth college says it will appeal against education secretary’s decision

www.theguardian.com

 

[Arkady Arkright]

Decentralize church authority and let the nuns run it collectively. No popes, no priests, no problems.

Would that be the nuns who ran the Irish children's homes ?

Sorry, didn't realise I was necro-posting - but my point still stands..

 

[Innula Zenovka]

French Catholic church expresses ‘shame’ after report finds 330,000 children were abused

Church asks for forgiveness as it accepts findings of ‘appalling’ abuse by clergy and lay members over 70 years

www.theguardian.com

Evernote link

 

[Romana]

French Catholic church expresses ‘shame’ after report finds 330,000 children were abused

Church asks for forgiveness as it accepts findings of ‘appalling’ abuse by clergy and lay members over 70 years

www.theguardian.com

Evernote link

What is it about Catholic priests that this is such a thing? You don't hear it about other clergy. Is it the celibacy requirement? You don't hear it about other clergy, or hardly ever.
I can only think of one case, I think it was child p0rn, involving a rabbi and his son.
Muslim clergy? If it happened with them, the right wing outlets would have a field day.
So what is it about the Catholic Church that attracts pedophiles?
As much of a difficult time as my Catholic friends have had with their religion (in other ways), I still feel bad for the priests that are sincere and not doing this

 

[WolfEyes]

What is it about Catholic priests that this is such a thing? You don't hear it about other clergy. Is it the celibacy requirement? You don't hear it about other clergy, or hardly ever.
I can only think of one case, I think it was child p0rn, involving a rabbi and his son.
Muslim clergy? If it happened with them, the right wing outlets would have a field day.
So what is it about the Catholic Church that attracts pedophiles?
As much of a difficult time as my Catholic friends have had with their religion (in other ways), I still feel bad for the priests that are sincere and not doing this

It's not just the Catholic Church and not just the US.

https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2021-09-02/report-child-sex-abuse-found-across-major-uk-religions

The report, which follows on from inquiries into the Catholic and Anglican Churches, comes after several weeks of public hearings held last year in which victims of abuse gave evidence.

It covers a series of religious groups including Jehovah's Witnesses, Baptists, Methodists, Islam, Judaism, Sikhism, Hinduism, Buddhism, and non-conformist Christian denominations.

Religious groups in UK failing children over sexual abuse, report says

Some leaders in England and Wales discourage reporting abuse to protect reputations, an inquiry finds.

www.bbc.com

 

[Aribeth Zelin]

What is it about Catholic priests that this is such a thing? You don't hear it about other clergy. Is it the celibacy requirement? You don't hear it about other clergy, or hardly ever.
I can only think of one case, I think it was child p0rn, involving a rabbi and his son.
Muslim clergy? If it happened with them, the right wing outlets would have a field day.
So what is it about the Catholic Church that attracts pedophiles?
As much of a difficult time as my Catholic friends have had with their religion (in other ways), I still feel bad for the priests that are sincere and not doing this

Definitively not only the Catholic Church. Thing is, we rarely hear about the protestant cases, which usually ends up with the victims being the ones blamed.

I think its because, with the Church scandals, that it was until recently only a problem with the male victims. Female victims were prolly to blame, being female. In fact, when any religion starts with blaming women for all the bad things that have happened since the beginning of time seems to be fallow ground for this sort of behavior.

Also, any career where men can [or anyone really] expect to be trusted around young people, and seen as 'Good/Holy/Talented' is going to attract a lot who aren't.

 

[Innula Zenovka]

What is it about Catholic priests that this is such a thing? You don't hear it about other clergy. Is it the celibacy requirement? You don't hear it about other clergy, or hardly ever.
I can only think of one case, I think it was child p0rn, involving a rabbi and his son.
Muslim clergy? If it happened with them, the right wing outlets would have a field day.
So what is it about the Catholic Church that attracts pedophiles?
As much of a difficult time as my Catholic friends have had with their religion (in other ways), I still feel bad for the priests that are sincere and not doing this

It isn't. It's all major (and minor) religious groups. It's also many boarding schools and children's homes and other social care facilities. It's anywhere that there's adults in positions of trust and largely-unsupervised authority over children.

Religious groups in UK failing children over sexual abuse, report says

Some leaders in England and Wales discourage reporting abuse to protect reputations, an inquiry finds.

www.bbc.co.uk

Inquiry report finds child sexual abuse in most major UK religions

The ‘Child protection in religious organisations and settings’ report examined evidence received from 38 religious organisations with a presence in England and Wales, with the figures provided to the Inquiry about known prevalence of child sexual abuse unlikely to reflect the full picture...

www.iicsa.org.uk

 

[Free]

It isn't. It's all major (and minor) religious groups.

Just more so with the Catholics because they're so good at it.

 

[Innula Zenovka]

Just more so with the Catholics because they're so good at it.

More of them, too, if you're looking at organised denominations, I think,

We've had the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse running in the UK since 2015.

IICSA Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse

The Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA), led by Prof. Alexis Jay, is investigating the extent to which institutions in England and Wales failed to protect children from sexual abuse.

www.iicsa.org.uk

This is their latest report, published last month

Millions of children in religious groups in England and Wales vulnerable to abuse

IICSA report finds victim blaming, abuse of power and mistrust of authority to be commonplace

www.theguardian.com

Evernote link

Child protection in religious organisations and settings Investigation Report

A report of the Inquiry Panel Professor Alexis Jay OBE Professor Sir Malcolm Evans KCMG OBE Ivor Frank Drusilla Sharpling CBE

www.iicsa.org.uk

It's maybe different in the US, but I doubt it.