The Catholic Church Should Burn

[Aribeth Zelin]

I have lno doubt that the real reason against it is because spouse/child costs are prohibitive. Sufficient easier/cheaper to send one guy whenever, wherever around the world as needed than it is to uproot a family move then and lodge then some place new. Refusing to deal with any of that means more profit for the church.

Also saw just today that the religious organization that calls themselves "the boy scouts" (*) just filled for bankruptcy protection due to some 4000 sexual misconduct allegations again them that are now possible to pursue due to changes to some states statute of limitations.

(*) Ironically, autocorrect made "the but scouts" until I fixed it!

That really only addresses the first option. Women don't have to have families, any more than men do.

 

[Jopsy Pendragon]

Ummm no. That may be a small side-benefit, but it's far from the underlying rationale, even if you discount the historical reasons for celibacy among priests. This restriction started as a way to concentrate wealth in the church, with worldly goods bequeathed to the Church rather than to heirs. It's persisted in part out of dogma but also as an institutional culture of male supremacy, influenced by the preponderance of closeted gay men who run the church.

Well the ideological reasoning was little more than "we don't priests to have split loyalty between church and family" .. it was just a means of keeping junior clergy enslaved to the whims of senior officials. But as you point out about inheritance... it still comes down to concentration of wealth and power. the notion of
"Purity" is just a tool employed in service to that end.

 

[Jopsy Pendragon]

That really only addresses the first option. Women don't have to have families, any more than men do.

True, though the HRCC's method for dealing with unwanted pregnancies is so much worse than a first trimester abortion that after what they did much of last century in Ireland should have been cause enough to burn the Vatican to the ground even before the whole rapist priest thing got blown open.

 

[Free]

Related.

Kennedy Catholic HS students, parents protest teacher resignations

BURIEN, Wash. -- Students, parents and alumni protested Tuesday the recent resignations of two teachers at Kennedy Catholic High School in Burien. Administrators say Paul Danforth and Michelle Beattie resigned voluntarily, but Danforth’sfiancé Sean Nyberg says Danforth was forced out because of...

komonews.com

 

[Beebo Brink]

How weird is this?

NFL Saints backed by church in effort to keep emails secret

NEW ORLEANS (AP) — An attorney for New Orleans' Roman Catholic archdiocese Thursday strongly defended the New Orleans Saints' behind-the-scenes help in dealing with the clergy sex abuse crisis, saying the legal effort to release hundreds of confidential emails between them is aimed at trying to...

apnews.com

 

[Free]

How weird is this?

NFL Saints backed by church in effort to keep emails secret

NEW ORLEANS (AP) — An attorney for New Orleans' Roman Catholic archdiocese Thursday strongly defended the New Orleans Saints' behind-the-scenes help in dealing with the clergy sex abuse crisis, saying the legal effort to release hundreds of confidential emails between them is aimed at trying to...

apnews.com

Is it sad if I say "not really all that weird " ?

 

[Brenda Archer]

Harrisburg (PA) Catholic Diocese Declares Bankruptcy After Sex Abuse Lawsuits

 

[Roxanne Blue]

Today’s Washington Post has an investigative article about child rape and other sexual abuses by Catholic priests against kids at a deaf residential school: Alleged Abuse of Deaf Children Points to Vatican’s Failings

Here are some quotes:



WARNNG: Brief graphic quote follows. Sorry, I tried to put that part behind spoiler tags but couldn’t get them to work.





A victim traveled to Rome, met Francis, and handed him a letter that named 14 priests and lay officials who had raped and abused kids. This was at least the third time Francis was contacted about this and the second time the names were given to him. Francis did nothing.

This institution is corrupt to its core. Burn it down, salt the earth, and let it serve as a warning about the dangers of too much religious authority.

I've been saying since his election as pope, that Francis was just as bad as Benedict, but he had a better PR team and was more likable. The cover-up and abuse has only continued.

The Roman Church - almost all organized churches in Western society - elevate the priesthood (Ministers, pastors, doesn't really matter what you call them) to a position of relative moral authority - and moral impunity.

I'm with you, Ari. Burn it down, salt the earth, (I'd add piss on their holy see), and let it serve as a lesson.

Save the art and treasures for a victims' fund.

Let us never do this again.

 

[Innula Zenovka]

More on organised sexual abuse in the UK, and on the authorities turning a blind eye to it, which seems to support my thesis that the problem is to do with power structures rather than particular religious organisations:

Police and politicians ‘turned blind eye’ to Westminster child abuse claims

Inquiry into child sexual abuse also criticises prosecutors but rejects claims of ‘organised paedophile network’

www.theguardian.com

Allegations of child sexual abuse linked to Westminster 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

 

[Arilynn]

I wish I could find this in full text:

The grooming of children for sexual abuse in religious settings: Unique characteristics and select case studies, Raine, S. & Kent, S. A, The Journal of Aggression & Violent Behavior 48, 180–189 (2019)

This article examines the sexual grooming of children and their caregivers in a wide variety of religious settings. We argue that unique aspects of religion facilitate institutional and interpersonal grooming in ways that often differ from forms of manipulation in secular settings. Drawing from Christianity (Catholicism, Protestantism, and Seventh-day Adventism) and various sects (the Children of God, the Branch Davidians, the Fundamentalist Latter-day Saints, a Hindu ashram, and the Devadasis), we show how some religious institutions and leadership figures in them can slowly cultivate children and their caregivers into harmful and illegal sexual activity. A number of uniquely religious characteristics facilitate this cultivation, which includes: theodicies of legitimation; power, patriarchy, obedience, protection, and reverence towards authority figures; victims' fears about spiritual punishments; and scriptural uses to justify adult-child sex.

 

[Beebo Brink]

More on organised sexual abuse in the UK, and on the authorities turning a blind eye to it, which seems to support my thesis that the problem is to do with power structures rather than particular religious organisations:

I'm torn on that interpretation, not because I disagree with you so much as I'm not sure how you can neatly divorce those two concepts. Religious organizations derive much of their power from people's belief in their divinity, and that reverence adds an extra layer of protection from civil authorities. As the Boston Globe journalists discovered, back when this was not front page news yet, the strong Irish roots in the city police department served as a barrier to disclosure. They would not cross or anger the Catholic clergy, even when they knew allegations were true.

In the case of private schools in New England, class status offered some of the same immunity from prosecution that the Catholic Church enjoyed, which would, at first glance, support your thesis. But there's another layer to this issue.

The governance mechanisms within the schools to further child abuse were much less developed, just a few loosely associated teachers. Whereas the institutional longevity of the Catholic Church, as well as its breadth and wealth, has enabled it to create a persistent and deliberate power base run by child abusers, for child abusers. This isn't just a rogue priest here and there that the Church wishes it could whisk away, it's a hierarchy within the priesthood that promotes fellow abusers, grooms them, funds them, colludes with them and shelters them from prosecution. It's become so pervasive within the church governance structure that even the pope can't root them out.

To my mind, it's this institutional promotion -- which is separate from institutional coverups -- that marks the Catholic Church as an especially egregious offender.

 

[Aribeth Zelin]

I'm torn on that interpretation, not because I disagree with you so much as I'm not sure how you can neatly divorce those two concepts. Religious organizations derive much of their power from people's belief in their divinity, and that reverence adds an extra layer of protection from civil authorities. As the Boston Globe journalists discovered, back when this was not front page news yet, the strong Irish roots in the city police department served as a barrier to disclosure. They would not cross or anger the Catholic clergy, even when they knew allegations were true.

In the case of private schools in New England, class status offered some of the same immunity from prosecution that the Catholic Church enjoyed, which would, at first glance, support your thesis. But there's another layer to this issue.

The governance mechanisms within the schools to further child abuse were much less developed, just a few loosely associated teachers. Whereas the institutional longevity of the Catholic Church, as well as its breadth and wealth, has enabled it to create a persistent and deliberate power base run by child abusers, for child abusers. This isn't just a rogue priest here and there that the Church wishes it could whisk away, it's a hierarchy within the priesthood that promotes fellow abusers, grooms them, funds them, colludes with them and shelters them from prosecution. It's become so pervasive within the church governance structure that even the pope can't root them out.

To my mind, it's this institutional promotion -- which is separate from institutional coverups -- that marks the Catholic Church as an especially egregious offender.

I'm not sure I agree that its more prevalent within the Catholic Church. Partially because for the longest time, unless a girl or woman 'belonged' to someone of importance or somehow was lucky enough to be important on her own, no one cared, and the same attitude exists now we don't 'belong' to some man...

And even now, when it happens in protestant church circles, it mostly seems to involve female victims, not male ones, so not as much of a fuss is made. For example, while its now come out that quite a few convents were treated as harems for priests, and might even still be, no one says much. The biggest fuss is over the male children that are and were victims.

And the Catholic church is not the only large religious organization - a few are global now [though they might be having some fragmenting].

In other words, tl;dr version is, while the Catholic Church obviously has problems in this area, I think it is getting more of a spotlight than similar offending organizations.

 

[Beebo Brink]

I'm not sure I agree that its more prevalent within the Catholic Church.

Prevalence is difficult to judge, given the size of the Catholic Church and the sheer numbers of clergy around the world, compared to the much smaller size of individual Protestant denominations.

More importantly, however, there doesn't appear to be much evidence of institutional support for child predators rooted in the governance of any of the Protestant denominations. They may be just as eager to cover up and hide abuse when it occurs, just as sensitive about bad publicity, but being a sexual abuser of children or young seminarians doesn't seem to be an asset for promotion. It's this INTENTIONALITY within the Catholic Church that fuels my revulsion for their institution.

 

[Innula Zenovka]

I'm really not sure.

Obviously I don't know how it was anywhere else, but certainly up until some time in the 80s, at least, attitudes in the UK to what we now rightly regard as the sexual abuse of children were somewhat different, as evidenced by the far more lenient view taken by statute law of offences against young adolescents, at least, and by the sort of official attitudes now revealed by stories like this

David Steel quits Lib Dems after child abuse inquiry report

Liberal leader ‘abdicated responsibility’ by failing to confront Cyril Smith

www.theguardian.com

Since the available information about how organisations, and groups within organisations, acted then when confronted with such cases is necessarily going to be partial when it's derived primarily from successful prosecutions, I'm really wary of generalising here, or, indeed, of speculating about people's motives when I have no detailed knowledge of the specific case.

I just feel more confident analysing this in terms of hierarchies and power relationships, because I feel confident we have clear evidence about those.

How people acted in particular institutional settings, and why, and how they were able to get away with it, are all questions of fact about specific cases, and certainly when I consider what we now know, as a result of public inquiries as well as criminal prosecutions and civil actions, I can't see any particular significant differences between the way the Roman Catholic and Anglican churches in the UK, and also particular ultra-Orthodox Hasidic communities, handled child sexual abuse at the time.

One particular characteristic of large religious congregations, it occurs to me, is that as people move up the group's religious hierarchy, they frequently tend to accumulate personal patronage that enables them to appoint their friends and proteges to positions within the congregation's hierarchy and bureaucracy in a way that few other organisations allow.

That might have something to do with the careers of abusive priests and other ministers of religion.

 

[Roxanne Blue]

I'm really not sure.

Obviously I don't know how it was anywhere else, but certainly up until some time in the 80s, at least, attitudes in the UK to what we now rightly regard as the sexual abuse of children were somewhat different, as evidenced by the far more lenient view taken by statute law of offences against young adolescents, at least, and by the sort of official attitudes now revealed by stories like this

David Steel quits Lib Dems after child abuse inquiry report

Liberal leader ‘abdicated responsibility’ by failing to confront Cyril Smith

www.theguardian.com

Since the available information about how organisations, and groups within organisations, acted then when confronted with such cases is necessarily going to be partial when it's derived primarily from successful prosecutions, I'm really wary of generalising here, or, indeed, of speculating about people's motives when I have no detailed knowledge of the specific case.

I just feel more confident analysing this in terms of hierarchies and power relationships, because I feel confident we have clear evidence about those.

How people acted in particular institutional settings, and why, and how they were able to get away with it, are all questions of fact about specific cases, and certainly when I consider what we now know, as a result of public inquiries as well as criminal prosecutions and civil actions, I can't see any particular significant differences between the way the Roman Catholic and Anglican churches in the UK, and also particular ultra-Orthodox Hasidic communities, handled child sexual abuse at the time.

One particular characteristic of large religious congregations, it occurs to me, is that as people move up the group's religious hierarchy, they frequently tend to accumulate personal patronage that enables them to appoint their friends and proteges to positions within the congregation's hierarchy and bureaucracy in a way that few other organisations allow.

That might have something to do with the careers of abusive priests and other ministers of religion.

You're arguing against the RCC being a "special case", by saying "the Roman Catholic and Anglican churches in the UK, and also particular ultra-Orthodox Hasidic communities, handled child sexual abuse at the time." What all three of those religious institutions embody (Hasidism is more of an institutional culture, but I think the term still applies) is institutionalized patriarchy in a way that empowers them to "groom" victims both within their own institutions and their wider communities.

I have no more love, nor intellectual respect, for protestant religious organizations, but I'm fairly sure if such a thing existed, we'd have more evidence for it. We've certainly had enough "gay hating" pastors caught with boyfriends, and others frequenting sex workers, but the pattern in the WASP churches does not seem to be "duck and cover".

We have abundant evidence at this point that the last several popes knew about the problem and how prevalent it was. Their "Christian" impulse? Cover it up. Tell the victims they must forgive their abusers. Tell the victims it is they harming their communities.

 

[Innula Zenovka]

You're arguing against the RCC being a "special case", by saying "the Roman Catholic and Anglican churches in the UK, and also particular ultra-Orthodox Hasidic communities, handled child sexual abuse at the time." What all three of those religious institutions embody (Hasidism is more of an institutional culture, but I think the term still applies) is institutionalized patriarchy in a way that empowers them to "groom" victims both within their own institutions and their wider communities.

I have no more love, nor intellectual respect, for protestant religious organizations, but I'm fairly sure if such a thing existed, we'd have more evidence for it. We've certainly had enough "gay hating" pastors caught with boyfriends, and others frequenting sex workers, but the pattern in the WASP churches does not seem to be "duck and cover".

We have abundant evidence at this point that the last several popes knew about the problem and how prevalent it was. Their "Christian" impulse? Cover it up. Tell the victims they must forgive their abusers. Tell the victims it is they harming their communities.

Here's what the UK's Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse discovered about the Anglican Diocese of Chichester and (a separate case) Peter Ball, the sometime Bishop of Lewes and Bishop of Gloucester:

Church of England put reputation above abuse victims' needs, inquiry finds

Report into Peter Ball case criticises ex-archbishop George Carey as well as Prince Charles

www.theguardian.com

Executive Summary

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

I don't dispute that the Catholic Church had, and still has, a major problem with its institutional tolerance for the sexual abuse of children, and quite possibly a greater problem than other organised religious organisations.

But, at least in the UK, it does not seem alone among religious organisations in that respect.

 

[Aribeth Zelin]

Again, the reputation of the church is molesting altar boys. Yes, girls were also sexually abused, and nuns, but that's not what anyone thinks of, or pays mind to. My point is, that as long as its just female, or majority female victims, no one cared for the longest time [and could argue, still don't]

*no one being society as a whole. Obviously people as individuals or groups care.

 

[Brenda Archer]

Again, the reputation of the church is molesting altar boys. Yes, girls were also sexually abused, and nuns, but that's not what anyone thinks of, or pays mind to. My point is, that as long as its just female, or majority female victims, no one cared for the longest time [and could argue, still don't]

*no one being society as a whole. Obviously people as individuals or groups care.

I have come to the grim conclusion that a lot of society doesn’t really believe raping girls and women is a crime. They blame the victims for their suffering and seem to feel women owe men.

I can’t wrap my brain around the many women who think this way, or the people who still think children are property. It’s medieval, and I don’t think that’s an exaggeration. The idea human beings have rights is not really understood by a lot of people. They want to attach too many riders and exceptions to the idea.

If we say girls are humans and humans have rights, we have lots of people who don’t really accept or understand either idea.

I think society is the abuser. Needless to say I have never managed to survive therapy, they want me to conform to society, but society is still medieval. I just can’t.

I can stick up for my child self who was abused, or I can conform to society, but I can’t do both.

 

[Free]

Sort of related.

The Catholic Church proposes AI regulations that “protect people”

IBM and Microsoft are the first companies to sign the ethical guidelines.

www.theverge.com

The “Rome Call for AI Ethics” lays out six broad principles: transparency, inclusion, responsibility, impartiality, reliability, and security and privacy.

OK, now go ahead and pick out the broad principles that DON'T apply to the Catholic Church.

 

[Aribeth Zelin]

Sort of related.

The Catholic Church proposes AI regulations that “protect people”

IBM and Microsoft are the first companies to sign the ethical guidelines.

www.theverge.com

OK, now go ahead and pick out the broad principles that DON'T apply to the Catholic Church.

They all -kinda- do... if you're male, except transparency - but only kinda.