So, my wife and I used to go to Church in the downtown Westend of Vancouver. The priest, Father Edwin, was the greatest priest we had ever heard. He started the sermon with two jokes every week. His jokes were hilarious, often racier than you think, and always tied in to the sermon. He was awesome and made our Sundays.

He often sang solo with the keyboardist as well. Because the West End is extremely 'gay positive', he would read things given to him by the Church but you could see he didn't want to offend the Gays in the audience (yes, believe it or not, there are lots of gay Catholics). We eventually bought a house and moved away but we knew he was still there. He was a main fixture of that church for 13 years.

He was also recently charged with fondling two 14 year old boys. It seriously makes me wonder about the inner workings of the Catholic church, man. Sort of like, 'yeh, it happens and it's terrible but not in our neighbourhood' and then it did. It just happens so much I'm totally disgusted. I also hope he's guilty. Not because I hope he did it but because he's on the front page of all our newspapers and if he's innocent, he's toast anyways.

Time for Priests to marry? Time to disband 'organized religion'? Time for the Church of LOA? Many thoughts going through my head.

Like I said, the Faith is being tested today. I just keep thinking 'Come on, not him, not him'.

Thoughts? This should be interesting on this forum.

He was also recently charged with fondling two 14 year old boys. It seriously makes me wonder about the inner workings of the Catholic church, man. Sort of like, 'yeh, it happens and it's terrible but not in our neighbourhood' and then it did. I also hope he's guilty. Not because I hope he did it but because he's on the front page of all our newspapers and if he's innocent, he's toast anyways.



Tom

I'm confused. You hope he's guilty because he's done for anyway? What sort of Christian attitude is that?

From what I understand, its strictly forbidden for Catholic priests to have sex with women. Thats it. Young boys? If it doesnt say not to, then hey, why not?

I'm sure someone will correct me if I am wrong.

About the priest fondling the two boys, that I can't judge. In this chaotic world even the good are put in jail and the bad guys set free with twisted politics etc.

What is important is that you base your faith on sound doctrines and not on a single man. Are they sound? biblical? logical? consistent? Even King Solomon's writings are considered inspired by God, even when he turned against God (commited idolatry) his previous writings still speaks of truth and wisdom. Hope you got the point.

I don't know if you guys heard, the new pope just denied the existence of "limbo" a century old doctrine of the Catholic Church. Anyway, that might be uncalled for... so I'll just stop here. :D




So, my wife and I used to go to Church in the downtown Westend of Vancouver. The priest, Father Edwin, was the greatest priest we had ever heard. He started the sermon with two jokes every week. His jokes were hilarious, often racier than you think, and always tied in to the sermon. He was awesome and made our Sundays.

He often sang solo with the keyboardist as well. Because the West End is extremely 'gay positive', he would read things given to him by the Church but you could see he didn't want to offend the Gays in the audience (yes, believe it or not, there are lots of gay Catholics). We eventually bought a house and moved away but we knew he was still there. He was a main fixture of that church for 13 years.

He was also recently charged with fondling two 14 year old boys. It seriously makes me wonder about the inner workings of the Catholic church, man. Sort of like, 'yeh, it happens and it's terrible but not in our neighbourhood' and then it did. I also hope he's guilty. Not because I hope he did it but because he's on the front page of all our newspapers and if he's innocent, he's toast anyways.

Time for Priests to marry? Time to disband 'organized religion'? Time for the Church of LOA? Many thoughts going through my head.

Like I said, the Faith is being tested today. I just keep thinking 'Come on, not him, not him'.

Thoughts? This should be interesting on this forum.

Did you read the thread title, Chuck?? It says 'faith tested' so there you have it. It doesn't matter what I think. Being a priest on the front page of every paper in town and being accused of fondling, like too many other priests, is what makes him guilty in the eyes of many whether he is or not. This is already obvious from the reaction it's getting from this community. I don't hope he did it, but whenever people get accused of something and they are splashed all over the papers, I always hope they aren't innocent because it's a terrible thing for a person to have to go through. If he's guilty, I hope they punish him to the full extent of the law (which is something the Church is notorious for not doing i.e. transferring or burying the guilty with another post).

As for the Church officially allowing fondling boys, I don't need to comment on your incorrect assumption but I don't blame anyone for thinking that any more because it seems to happen so often.

Like I said, Faith tested, man, not in my belief in God, that will not waiver but my belief in the Catholic Church is definitely on the rocks.

I'm really, really pissed off at the organized religious community that I belong to today. Hope it shows.

Did you read the thread title, Chuck?? It says 'faith tested' so there you have it. It doesn't matter what I think. Being a priest on the front page of every paper in town and being accused of fondling, like too many other priests, is what makes him guilty in the eyes of many whether he is or not. This is already obvious from the reaction it's getting from this community. I don't hope he did it, but whenever people get accused of something and they are splashed all over the papers, I always hope they aren't innocent because it's a terrible thing for a person to have to go through. If he's guilty, I hope they punish him to the full extent of the law (which is something the Church is notorious for not doing i.e. transferring or burying the guilty with another post).

As for the Church officially allowing fondling boys, I don't need to comment on your incorrect assumption but I don't blame anyone for thinking that any more because it seems to happen so often.

Like I said, Faith tested, man, not in my belief in God, that will not waiver but my belief in the Catholic Church is definitely on the rocks.

Tom

Of course it matters what you think. Thats the only thing that matters.

I'm not saying that it allows, or encourages it. Just that it doesnt forbid it. Why is it that more priests get caught fondling choirboys than having affairs with female members of the congregation?

Could it be that its because they - via their ongoing indoctrinations - see it as less of a sin?

Tom

Of course it matters what you think. Thats the only thing that matters.

I'm not saying that it allows, or encourages it. Just that it doesnt forbid it. Why is it that more priests get caught fondling choirboys than having affairs with female members of the congregation?

Could it be that its because they - via their ongoing indoctrinations - see it as less of a sin?

Let me re-phrase that. In the eyes of the community, it doesn't matter what I think.

Your last post definitely has me thinking.

Could it be that its because they - via their ongoing indoctrinations - see it as less of a sin?

Nope Bible is pretty clear on man on man action as well - stands to reason that man on boy wouldn't go over well with the big guy upstairs

I'm curious to know what percentage of all priests actually molest children. Is it a higher percentage than the percentage of molesters among the general population?

Also, do you think the church makes them more prone to turn to molestation because of the rigid policies against priests marrying? Perhaps its more a case of they are sexual predators to begin with, and being a priest (a trusted person in a position of power) is just their means to an end.

Im about as far from a Catholic, or religious, as you can get, but heres my take nonetheless from the FWIW file....

Priests are human beings, no more or less flawed than anyone else. They are not called to the cloth by any supernatural forces, nor are the infused with a higher level of consciousness than anyone else. It seems as though there are "so many" Priests being accused of these heinous crimes because there are less Priests than laypeople, so you are drawing from a smaller sample, thus giving the appearance of higher incidence of occurence.

Abusers are criminals, no matter what their vocation. Yes, members of the cloth should be held to a higher standard since many place their trust (albeit blindly sometimes) in these people, but their shortcomings should not cause you to question your faith.....

Don't know- but I suspect you are spot on, M. If you have a normal heathy male drive- complete abstinance sounds like a miracle........


But as to faith? All religions have bad ones- they are attracted by the power over people. And there are good ones, as well- the bad ones get the press. They actually did a study (I'll see if I can find a link later) that said Catholics were the most well-adjusted; and they surmised it was because of the Confession part of that church. So if it works for you- stay with it. But don't let a bad one scare you off.

My thoughts........

So, my wife and I used to go to Church in the downtown Westend of Vancouver. The priest, Father Edwin, was the greatest priest we had ever heard. He started the sermon with two jokes every week. His jokes were hilarious, often racier than you think, and always tied in to the sermon. He was awesome and made our Sundays.

He often sang solo with the keyboardist as well. Because the West End is extremely 'gay positive', he would read things given to him by the Church but you could see he didn't want to offend the Gays in the audience (yes, believe it or not, there are lots of gay Catholics). We eventually bought a house and moved away but we knew he was still there. He was a main fixture of that church for 13 years.

He was also recently charged with fondling two 14 year old boys. It seriously makes me wonder about the inner workings of the Catholic church, man. Sort of like, 'yeh, it happens and it's terrible but not in our neighbourhood' and then it did. It just happens so much I'm totally disgusted. I also hope he's guilty. Not because I hope he did it but because he's on the front page of all our newspapers and if he's innocent, he's toast anyways.

Time for Priests to marry? Time to disband 'organized religion'? Time for the Church of LOA? Many thoughts going through my head.

Like I said, the Faith is being tested today. I just keep thinking 'Come on, not him, not him'.

Thoughts? This should be interesting on this forum.

My first thought is that if you've ever respected the man, then place yourself in his shoes and think of how you'd want to be treated. Then behave that way towards him and think about him in that way. These boys could just hate the guy for some reason and they've conspired to smear his good name in this manner because they know that people are more likely to buy it after the recent scandals. Or it could be that he is guilty and he feels remorse for what he has done. Perhaps he is guilty and he is only sorry because he got caught. No matter what happens in the trial you must remember that one or two people making a mistake is no reason to condemn an entire group and walk away from them in disgust.

I never understood why they didn't just do away with alterboys. They should replace them with alter MEN - then you would know just which priests were guilty of fondling, because every time they smiled you would see the gap where their front teeth used to be...

just my two cents....
:)

I'm really, really pissed off at the organized religious community that I belong to today. Hope it shows.

Welcome home son!:biglaugh:

A lot of interesting points have been raised here. For starters, I think it is high time that priests, etc. have the right to marry. Politicians do, Royalty does, so why not a man of the cloth? Yes, I understand the religious reasons behind it - but let's face it, we are living in modern times. With each new millenium that passes, the churches should be revamping thier guidelines.

One poster suggested that the boys may be calling wolf to get back at this man. Possibly, but highy unlikely. The younger the child that complains, the more serious the situation usually is. IF it is true, and there have been many cases of it in BC, the man should face the full extent of the law. If it is found to be a false and mailcious attempt by the accusors, they should face the consequences.

I stopped believing in "Men of the cloth" many, many years ago. One Minister convinced my elder cousin to divorce her husband, get half the money for their residence and donate the majority of her half, to the church. Ever since, I haven't been too impressed by "Men of the cloth". Too much temptation to abuse that power, is too often the result.

It shook my faith in my church and my religion too. I stopped believing in men of the cloth, but chose to keep my faith in God. God is perfect, humans are not. It is a major part of the reason I am more "spiritual" than "religious" now. I have been to many churches: Lutheran, Baptist, United, Pentecostal, Unitarian. I once considered converting to Catholisism. (sp?) My Catholic friends swayed me away from it. Many years later I went to a Baptist church for a time, and was relieved to find they had gotten more modern. Gone were the fire and brimstone speeches. It was more focused on current events and times.

You have every right to be questioning your faith right now, and your local church. Think about this Tom: What if it had been YOUR kids that were molested by this man? How would you feel? It is all fine and good to feel sorry for, or think about this Priest - but what about his young victims?

We all go on auto pilot, thinking "This will never happen to me..." and then it does happen right in our own back yard or communities or homes. My friend who was a sexual abuse survivor, said "It will never happen to my kids!" and then it happened. Her little boy was sexually abused by another kid at kindergarten, who was acting out the abuse that had also been done to him!

It is also understandable, to want to tear this man's limbs off his body. However, neither of those thoughts are going to make you pro-active in stopping further abuses of power in your local church. Should you decide to remain a member of the church, perhaps you could start or join a committee to ensure it doesn't happen again. When a major trust is breached, and they break their fudiciary duty - they must pay the price for it legally. The sad truth is, if priests were allowed to marry - this problem would be cut in half. There will always be those who get into a profession, with the hopes of being able to exert power over the younger or weaker ones. Priests, doctors, sports coaches, teachers, police officers... they are in all walks of life. No profession is immune to them. Molestors can be anyone. Can wear any type of uniform, or be in any kind of position of trust -anywhere.

It is important to teach kids about "good touching" and "bad teaching". Have the rapport with them as their parents, to ensure that should anyone try anything with them - they come to you and tell you about it. Your local police dept offers pamphlets on this topic. Call the Victims Services Unit, and ask for more info. Perhaps the VPD will even come out to a meeting with the church members in the future, to assist you in those measures. Probably not while the investigation is on-going, but the Liaison Officers are well informed and ready to help. The Attorney General's office also has pamphlets, info, etc.

Hope this is somewhat helpful to you Tom. I feel for you in this situation. I do know that by taking Pro-active measures - it empowers the congregation, neighbourhood and families. The help and info is there, if you know where to look. Good luck and I hope this gets resolved soon...

Guilty until proven innocent. Terror suspects and child molesters.

They are the only two types of criminals where society gets away with that.

Children get molested. But children also lie. For various reasons. Police make mistakes. So do all human beings. Priests are humans. Not pseudo-Gods.

I think we need laws like Argentina. People who get accused of sexual offenses do not get their names released until they are guilty. Victims, neither. Takes the media scandal and ruination aspects out of it.

Jennifer

I'm curious to know what percentage of all priests actually molest children. Is it a higher percentage than the percentage of molesters among the general population?

Also, do you think the church makes them more prone to turn to molestation because of the rigid policies against priests marrying? Perhaps its more a case of they are sexual predators to begin with, and being a priest (a trusted person in a position of power) is just their means to an end.


I think this is the big argument. Where do they come from and why do they seem to be so abundant in the priesthood. Also, how long before the Church does something about it. And I mean really, really do something about it.

Cat Lover, please read my posts. I did say that if he were caught, he should be punished to the full extent of the law. Don't for a second think I would give a crap about anyone but the victims. I most certainly think about if it were my children. My brother in law settled out of court with a church in Ontario. Again, this is why it's getting to me. Even my own brother in law had a terrible experience with it and it rears it's ugly head time and time again.

Argentina seems to have it together, Jennifer.

Tom,

You have to decide for yourself as a Catholic if the spirit of forgiveness that Jesus calls us to trumps your desire for earthly justice, assuming that the allegations are true and the priest is actually tried AND convicted.

It is my belief that throwing the baby out with the bathwater and judging the whole of the largest organized religion on the planet by the highly sensationalized but incredibly uncommon exception to the rule is simply unwise.

I am very troubled by the accusations of abuse against priests but I know from family experience that children, well into their teens, will lie about these things. Now I am not saying these two kids are lying, nor am I saying all alleged victims of sexual abuse are liars, I am only pointing out that confabulation all the way to downright fabrication does, in fact, happen. That a few Dioceses made the terrible decision to try and cover-up crimes like this is certainly bad but to use that to paint the entire Catholic faith is no more accurate than believing that a snapshot of an unhappy person at a party means the whole party sucked.

When you consider the number of priests, the number of children they minister to, the number of children that they mentor, the number of children whose confessions they hear, the number of children in the choir, or in the altar service - the actual number of cases of alleged abuse are, thankfully, very small.

That said, any suggestion of abuse should be investigated, and if the evidence warrants it, should be tried. Anyone found guilty should be removed from any access to children as pedophilia has a terribly high rescitivism rate.

This issue is in no way limited though to Catholic priests, and THAT more than anything really bothers me. Same thing happens with Baptists, non-denominational preachers, etc., but again, in thankfully small numbers. Unfortunately, the media and others seem only to care when it is a Catholic priest and that smacks of bias.

My last suggestion is to ask yourself if the teachings of Christ, and the incalculable good the Church does, worldwide, on a daily basis, can be overcome by these limited although heinous acts.

We are called to forgive, to have pity on our fellow man, and to be as Christ-like as we can be - seems to me that Christ would not write-off over 1.5 billion people, their faith, and their good works due to the crimes of a few bad apples.

I did read your posts Tom, honest I did. I know you are upset with this man. That is apparent. It seemed to me that you were conflicted in your feelings about him though, which is only natural.

Jenni, excellent idea! I have never heard of that before. That is an awesome idea. I fully agree NO ONE's reputation should be harmed unless it is proven TRUE. Rumors or innuendo don't count. Charges have to be proven. Where I STRONGLY disagree, is with this "oh the kids made it up" stuff.

I am a sexual abuse survivor. I was raped at age 11 by a grandfather. I know all too well how those little kids feel. The fear about telling. The fear the abuser can hide it or get away with it. There is so much FEAR for a child to even come forward... especially if it has to do with someone they like, or thought they could trust. It makes my blood boil, to hear it casually thrown around.. "Oh the kids are probably trying to get back at them..." BS!!! For every TRUE reported case of molestation or incest, there may be 10% that are false. The fact of the matter is, MOST cases of sexual abuse and incest go UN-REPORTED, and that is even a sadder statistic! Also the younger the child is, the less likely it is they "are making it up to get back at them..." That may happen with teenage accusors, but the chance of it happening with someone younger, the chances of that get slimmer and slimmer. THAT was the point I was trying to make.

Tom, my post to you, was to try to help you - with where to turn for advice or info...I wasn't picking on you. I did read your posts. I did and do understand what YOU are saying.

I felt compelled to say what I have, because other posters are saying the kids might be lying. Maybe they are... but chances of that are slim. Also, in Canada - teenagers have been charged and prosecuted for lying about abuse of this nature. It isn't taken lightly. To say the kids are lying though, does such a great dis-service to the real victims of these crimes. These crimes are NOT about sex, they are about power and control. Issues that OUR children should not have to endure... ever. No child deserves that, I am sure you will all agree with that much. But so too, should the child be given the benefit of the doubt first and foremost, before any alleged abuser is.

We have to protect our children, and that starts with making laws to protect them. Does the alleged abuser have rights too? Of course. It is called the legal system. Their rights are quite protected! I know police officers who take extra care to dot the i's and cross the t's and be totally thorough in cases like this. The police officers I know personally, do NOT want to charge an innocent person. The police officers I know do not believe in the death penalty either. My point is, don't assume that our Canadian judicial system is identical to yours in the USA... it isn't. I am not saying you are, I am just saying.... I have seen first hand as a child and as an adult what happens on BOTH sides of this coin, here in Canada. The laws protect the abuser, until proven guilty. Could we also implement this law like Argentia does? Yes... that would be a good move. I just hate to see the children who have been abused, being called liars..... that is the cruelest thing a society can do to a child who has been abused in this way...truly!

Tom,

You have to decide for yourself as a Catholic if the spirit of forgiveness that Jesus calls us to trumps your desire for earthly justice, assuming that the allegations are true and the priest is actually tried AND convicted.

It is my belief that throwing the baby out with the bathwater and judging the whole of the largest organized religion on the planet by the highly sensationalized but incredibly uncommon exception to the rule is simply unwise.

I am very troubled by the accusations of abuse against priests but I know from family experience that children, well into their teens, will lie about these things. Now I am not saying these two kids are lying, nor am I saying all alleged victims of sexual abuse are liars, I am only pointing out that confabulation all the way to downright fabrication does, in fact, happen. That a few Dioceses made the terrible decision to try and cover-up crimes like this is certainly bad but to use that to paint the entire Catholic faith is no more accurate than believing that a snapshot of an unhappy person at a party means the whole party sucked.

When you consider the number of priests, the number of children they minister to, the number of children that they mentor, the number of children whose confessions they hear, the number of children in the choir, or in the altar service - the actual number of cases of alleged abuse are, thankfully, very small.

That said, any suggestion of abuse should be investigated, and if the evidence warrants it, should be tried. Anyone found guilty should be removed from any access to children as pedophilia has a terribly high rescitivism rate.

This issue is in no way limited though to Catholic priests, and THAT more than anything really bothers me. Same thing happens with Baptists, non-denominational preachers, etc., but again, in thankfully small numbers. Unfortunately, the media and others seem only to care when it is a Catholic priest and that smacks of bias.

My last suggestion is to ask yourself if the teachings of Christ, and the incalculable good the Church does, worldwide, on a daily basis, can be overcome by these limited although heinous acts.

We are called to forgive, to have pity on our fellow man, and to be as Christ-like as we can be - seems to me that Christ would not write-off over 1.5 billion people, their faith, and their good works due to the crimes of a few bad apples.

Extremely well written, KG. Perhaps you missed the part about my brother in law because that's what makes it all the worse. And again, I just keep thinking, not him, not father Edwin. I really hope he's innocent. The Church here, though, did some investigating and pulled him immediately so it doesn't look good.

Like I said, my faith in God is not in question but my faith in the Church is. I am aware of the good the Church does. I've always defended church goers by stating that 99.99999% of them want peace and goodwill to their fellow men and women. My wife and I also speak at our local Marriage course that Catholics take before marrying. It is actually an excellent course that all couples should go through. It teaches finances, the 'children' question (it's amazing how many couples DON'T discuss this) etc....

Anyhoo, all points well taken.

Charges have to be proven. Where I STRONGLY disagree, is with this "oh the kids made it up" stuff.

I am a sexual abuse survivor. I was raped at age 11 by a grandfather. I know all too well how those little kids feel. The fear about telling. The fear the abuser can hide it or get away with it. There is so much FEAR for a child to even come forward... especially if it has to do with someone they like, or thought they could trust. It makes my blood boil, to hear it casually thrown around.. "Oh the kids are probably trying to get back at them..." BS!!! For every TRUE reported case of molestation or incest, there may be 10% that are false. The fact of the matter is, MOST cases of sexual abuse and incest go UN-REPORTED, and that is even a sadder statistic!

I agree with all of this but I have a friend, a person that I hung out with probably the most in Jr High that I hadn't seen in years. She was never quite "right" as the southerners here would say but she was basically fun and cool. Well she is in prison now for making up a story about abuse to get back at someone she disliked, a teacher, or to get a settlement, we're not sure.

I have another male friend who was accused of soliciting someone underage. What it basically amounts to is entrapment by the letter of the law. The case was thrown out, but he's ruined. His wife left him and he lost his job and the worst part was that he was in an ADULT chat room that involved role playing and was pinched by someone who was a cop pretending to be 14. Everyone pretends in role playing rooms. But part of the "role" involved him agreeing to meet which he never did or intended to. That, by the letter of the maverick police law, amounts to solicitation.

The thing about the law is that, in these cases, it's even difficult to find a lawyer who will take your case and law enforcement is allowed a lot of leeway in prosecuting these crimes where with other crimes they have to be held to the letter of the law, depending on the judge.

I was telling a story in chat the other day about when my husband and I were trying to set up our DirecTV dish. We bought walkie-talkies to be able to talk between the roof and the TV. We literally had to keep changing channels because extremely young girls, like 10-12, were CONSTANTLY hitting on my husband while we were working and trying to talk sexually to him. They were pretending to be 16 but there was no way. With the range of these walkie talkies, they were definitely somewhere in our area which creeps me out because they could be the kids of someone we know.

Now what if they really did get someone to come and meet them that turned our to be older? Do you think they would honestly tell their mom that they spent three hours luring these guys over? No way, they would make up some story to save their asses. More likely than not, that man would be arrested.

We have to protect our children, and that starts with making laws to protect them. Does the alleged abuser have rights too? Of course. It is called the legal system. Their rights are quite protected!

After being the shoulder to cry on for my arrested and ruined friend, I learned about the rights of those accused of molestation, etc. I believe strongly that the bad people need to be taken down, hard. But there are people getting caught in that net that aren't molesters. No one has the balls to take this battle to the supreme court though. It's so vile an accusation that everyone settles or pleads to avoid the press. So the police are basically un-bound and constantly test new ways to attract the losers. No lawyer would speak to him without a $50,000 retainer and basically they claimed outright that their practices are at risk taking on cases of this nature.

I think the rights of kids are at risk BECAUSE of police officers that are allowed to stretch the boundaries and stomp on civil rights. Because all it's going to take is one sympathetic judge to overturn one of these rulings and it may end up freeing people that really need to be behind bars.

Jennifer

From what I understand, its strictly forbidden for Catholic priests to have sex with women. Thats it. Young boys? If it doesnt say not to, then hey, why not?

Oh no you DIDN'T go there....

Jenni,

I truly understand what you are saying, and I get your points - I do. In the cases you present in your post - yes there are major discrepancies and major problems at work there. Police, Justice system, neighbours gossiping, lives ruined... but no where in those arguments, does your post back up your previous statements about the victims being the ones to blame.

Now, here in Canada we are lucky. Police are para-milatary, all "organized" or allowed to exist, through Provincial or Federal Govt.'s. In the USA, you break it down into "counties" with Sherrifs, etc. Our system of policing, and police politics is different here in Canada... In Canada all major cities have Municipal run (city wide) police. In rural parts, it becomes the job of RCMP, which is Federal and can be located in any Province. In Ontario, there is also what is known as "OPP" (which stands for Ontario Provincial Police), which are similar to RCMP, but only with jurisdiction in Ontario. OPP cannot move laterally across the country with their powers like the RCMP can.

So, having explained that - we are talking here about a CANADIAN case... so keep that in mind. It may well still be the Catholic church, but is in Canada. There IS a difference up here. Not with the catholic religion, but with the way our judicial system handles things.

Those kids with the walkie talkies need a darn good talking to! What they don't understand necessarily, is the full weight and consequences of their actions in a court of law. They think they are being cute, and practising how to flirt. They have NO idea to the full extent of it, of what they do. They may have SOME idea, but certainly not the full weight of it.

However in my books, there is no excuse for an adult sexually abusing a child. Ever. The incidences here are far and fewer between, of silly teen girls accusing an adult. Does it happen here? Sure it does, and they help give the true victims of abuse a bad rep. But we have less than 40 million people in our country called Canada. The abuses of the law, how people are treated, etc... are not the same here as they are in the USA. We have very little police corruption here, in comparison to other countries. I understand you are an American, who has seen more injustice in your inner circle down there in the USA... but if you use that same brush to paint the picture of what happens here in Canada, it will be a very distorted view. The only commonality here is the Catholic church. I don't see that as changing, whatever country it is in.

The entrapment issues that you have down there, are not nearly as bad here. Does it happen? Yes. Mostly with shame the johns campaigns within city limits and in person though. Internet policing is a fairly new thing here to Canada, and politicians are still busy arguing over what freedoms they should allow police in Canada to have, in regards to internet crimes.

Our lawyers here are happy to take anyone and everyone's money! It's been my experience here, that lawyers can't wait for someone like your friend to come along, so they can challenge it all the way to Supreme Court and make a name and reputation for themselves off it, along the way!

See, we don't have the extremes of prejudice that you have in your country. In the south, black people are singled out, as in L.A ala Rodney King. We may have one or two cops in every station who may get found out to be racist or power tripping... but it certainly isn't as pervasive and infectious like the LAPD, not by a long stretch!! Canada is very multi-cultural, almost too much so. We bend to please all nationalites, for fear of hurting anyone's feelings or stomping on any group's rights and freedoms. To our own expense at times, giving up our "Canadian Heritage" and rights. So all our laws are already based on and interpreted by, this multi-cultural point of view. We allow and accept same sex marriages under our laws. We are quite liberal and open to all groups. So intolerance is quickly spotted here, focused on, magnified and totally exposed. It is probably deemed even more heinous here in Canada, because we as a nation are so opposed to unfair treatment, it is even more shocking when it comes to light.

So for someone like Thinktom, who is both a Catholic and a Canadian, this is in many ways, a double whammy for him to learn about. I am not trying to speak for Tom here, but as Canadians, we share a common view in many ways. VERY different from the American ways of thinking. I am merely trying to point out those differences. I hope this helps explain some of the Canadian views you may see posted here. It is in that vein, I make this post.

:)

Nope Bible is pretty clear on man on man action as well - stands to reason that man on boy wouldn't go over well with the big guy upstairs

Batman

I'm not talking about the Bible.

We all know what a load of tosh that is anyway. If we started taking the Bible literally, we'd all have to kill each other for wearing cloths of a different colour, and selling our sisters into slavery. Oh, and eat fish on a friday.

I'm talking about the situation regarding the sexuality of priests. They are forbidden to take a wife. If a priest rocked up to a "Priest Convention" with his wife in tow, they would strike him off.

If he had a little boy sent to his room, maybe no one would "notice".

Batman

I'm not talking about the Bible.

We all know what a load of tosh that is anyway. If we started taking the Bible literally, we'd all have to kill each other for wearing cloths of a different colour, and selling our sisters into slavery. Oh, and eat fish on a friday.

I'm talking about the situation regarding the sexuality of priests. They are forbidden to take a wife. If a priest rocked up to a "Priest Convention" with his wife in tow, they would strike him off.

If he had a little boy sent to his room, maybe no one would "notice".

Again, I say...Oh no you DIDN'T go there....

Hi Tom, first I would like to say that I'm very sorry for whatever your brother-in-law experienced.

IMO, I don't think it would make a difference if priest were to get married because the majority of them are fondling boys not girls.

I don't think that it should be posted all over the front page until he is found guilty but what do the boys have to gain by lying and saying they were fondled? So I'm betting that he is 100% guilty.

Tom

I'm confused. You hope he's guilty because he's done for anyway? What sort of Christian attitude is that?

From what I understand, its strictly forbidden for Catholic priests to have sex with women. Thats it. Young boys? If it doesnt say not to, then hey, why not?

I'm sure someone will correct me if I am wrong.

We're you fullly awake when you wrote this? Maybe on a hallucinogenic substance?

We're you fullly awake when you wrote this? Maybe on a hallucinogenic substance?

Very much awake Jo.

I dont get what you think I was "hallucinating" about?

Can you show me where it says that priests are not to marry? Or where it says that they are not to touch up young boys?

Very much awake Jo.

I dont get what you think I was "hallucinating" about?

Can you show me where it says that priests are not to marry? Or where it says that they are not to touch up young boys?

I honestly do not know where it says priests should not marry. As for touching young boys, I refuse to discuss this with you...you're being ridiculous.

I honestly do not know where it says priests should not marry. As for touching young boys, I refuse to discuss this with you...you're being ridiculous.

Why am I being ridiculous? I'm not suggesting its right, far from it.

If you are suggesting it doesnt go on, I think you are blind.

Whats important here, is why its allowed to continue. The reason I'm putting forwards is that it is seen as less of a sin than having sex with a woman.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Catholic_Church_sex_abuse_allegations

Why am I being ridiculous? I'm not suggesting its right, far from it.

If you are suggesting it doesnt go on, I think you are blind.

Whats important here, is why its allowed to continue. The reason I'm putting forwards is that it is seen as less of a sin than having sex with a woman.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Catholic_Church_sex_abuse_allegations

I knew you had a reason behind your madness :D

I didn't get a chance to look at the link. Gotta run to work, I'll try to sneak it in while I'm there :lildevil:

Batman

I'm not talking about the Bible.

We all know what a load of tosh that is anyway. If we started taking the Bible literally, we'd all have to kill each other for wearing cloths of a different colour, and selling our sisters into slavery. Oh, and eat fish on a friday.

I'm talking about the situation regarding the sexuality of priests. They are forbidden to take a wife. If a priest rocked up to a "Priest Convention" with his wife in tow, they would strike him off.

If he had a little boy sent to his room, maybe no one would "notice".

:batman: EJECT EJECT EJECT

Why am I being ridiculous? I'm not suggesting its right, far from it.

If you are suggesting it doesnt go on, I think you are blind.

Whats important here, is why its allowed to continue. The reason I'm putting forwards is that it is seen as less of a sin than having sex with a woman.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Catholic_Church_sex_abuse_allegations

It's your wording, Chuck. In your line of thought 'if it doesn't say not to', then bestiality, necrophelia...all the nasty stuff must be o.k. too by the Church and, again, 99.999% of people who attend Church are peace-loving, gentle and kind human beings and you are tellling them the Church encourages this?

Therefore, You've drawn up a pretty offensive and rather close minded conclusion, especially to those who have children.

It doesn't bother me one bit, however, because I'm not in the mood to defend the Church right now. However, your first post was a little 'much' IMHO. Many of your points are very valid, however. Perhaps the Church does think as you say, their behaviour is reprehensible regarding sweeping things under the rug.

You are obviously an intelligent guy so I'm pickin' up what you're puttin' down.

It's your wording, Chuck. In your line of thought 'if it doesn't say not to', then bestiality, necrophelia...all the nasty stuff must be o.k. too by the Church and, again, 99.999% of people who attend Church are peace-loving, gentle and kind human beings and you are tellling them the Church encourages this?

Therefore, You've drawn up a pretty offensive and rather close minded conclusion, especially to those who have children.

It doesn't bother me one bit, however, because I'm not in the mood to defend the Church right now. However, your first post was a little 'much' IMHO. Many of your points are very valid, however. Perhaps the Church does think as you say, their behaviour is reprehensible regarding sweeping things under the rug.

You are obviously an intelligent guy so I'm pickin' up what you're puttin' down.

Tom

I know that you "get" what I am saying.

I'm not drawing any conclusions that anyone is doing anything. What I am saying is that the literal interpretation allows a lot of scope.

I dont think its "close minded" at all. In fact, to say "no, a priest would never do that" is much more close minded - not that I'm suggesting thats your view - though I would guess that some would see their priest as above any of this.

There is some evidence that there is almost as much abuse of children in the school system, as there is in the church - its in a link off that Wiki link - the difference, as you noted, is what happens when it comes out.

The schools fire the teachers, they have a big investigation, and they try to stop it happening again.

Hi Thinktom,

How are you doing and feeling now, that it's been a few days since you learned of this? Hope you are doing well... You and your family are in my thoughts.

That's an interesting thought that priests maybe are doing this molesting as sexual relief & view it as less of a 'sin' than being with a woman. I had never thought of it like that - I do wonder though if that theory works, because surely there's enough gay men out there that would happily partake in the activity?? It's a bit of a stretch to see that a priest wouldn't see paedophilia as less of a sin than sex with a woman?

My own personal theory is that these men that DO molest boys go into priesthood as a way of trying hard not to give into their temptations. Maybe they think god will save them. And that total abstinence is the way not to harm children. I really don't know.

I just know that I find it hard to believe that a normal man (straight or gay) would find it possible to make the leap into paedophilia.

I have a theory. People develop their sexuality like any other sense. Over time and with experience.

For people that have profound, strong sexual experiences at an early age, like being attracted to a sister's friend or having a youthful relationship with the little girl next door with whom you play "doctor" or other innocent exploration games, but then do not progress to the next level of sexuality, owing to shyness, geekiness, social issues or becoming a priest etc, your sexual growth is stunted and frozen at that point. Or if you are a person that, over your teens, never finds anything else that gives you as strong a sexual reaction as your youthful explorations, you always will fall back on those experiences to get turned on.

I think there are true monsters out there who prey on kids. But I think there are alot of sexually stunted people that know in their heads that sex with young people is wrong, and they KNOW society frowns upon it, but the wiring in their primal, deep-seated, reptile brain sexuality is stuck back in the old days.

I'm not trying to make excuses, even though it seems like I am, I am just a 'cause and effect' person. Whereas the criminal justice system just sees "law broken" and "criminal arrested," I am more interested in what motivates people to go down that road. We are talking about otherwise very well-adjusted members of society. Police, judges, businessmen, teachers...Doesn't that make anyone else scratch their heads?

You can't cure this just by putting people in prison. But you can cure it if you seek to understand it.

Jennifer

I have a theory. People develop their sexuality like any other sense. Over time and with experience.

For people that have profound, strong sexual experiences at an early age, like being attracted to a sister's friend or having a youthful relationship with the little girl next door with whom you play "doctor" or other innocent exploration games, but then do not progress to the next level of sexuality, owing to shyness, geekiness, social issues or becoming a priest etc, your sexual growth is stunted and frozen at that point. Or if you are a person that, over your teens, never finds anything else that gives you as strong a sexual reaction as your youthful explorations, you always will fall back on those experiences to get turned on.

I think there are true monsters out there who prey on kids. But I think there are alot of sexually stunted people that know in their heads that sex with young people is wrong, and they KNOW society frowns upon it, but the wiring in their primal, deep-seated, reptile brain sexuality is stuck back in the old days.

I'm not trying to make excuses, even though it seems like I am, I am just a 'cause and effect' person. Whereas the criminal justice system just sees "law broken" and "criminal arrested," I am more interested in what motivates people to go down that road. We are talking about otherwise very well-adjusted members of society. Police, judges, businessmen, teachers...Doesn't that make anyone else scratch their heads?

You can't cure this just by putting people in prison. But you can cure it if you seek to understand it.

Jennifer

That had some interesting comments in it, but how do you propose to "cure" the abusers? How do you propose to help the victims they leave in their trail of destruction?

My theory is that is more powerplay than anything else. Catholic priests have a lot of power, almost god-like, and the more I get exposed to the church the more I am awed by the whole idea. It takes a very self-actualized person to not abuse that power. Unfortunately, self actualization is not a requirement to become a priest.

Like thinkigal said, I don't see how an otherwise normal man can be turned ON by little kids, especially really little kids. It's beyond unfathomable.

But even if one were turned on by kids, that does NOT give them a right to act upon it. So they are not punished for being turned on by kids, they are punished for damaging a child forever. Look, if for example I came across a guy that I really got turned on by, and I was in a relationship, I don't have to act upon it. I choose not to act upon it. That is simple logic to me.

So, while we busy ourselves finding a cure for these pedophiles, we can't let them run around hurting children. They need to stay where they belong. PUT THEM IN JAIL, NAIL THE DOOR SHUT. LOSE THE KEY.

If the priest is guilty... he should be excomunicated and put in jail. :mad:

About forbiding priest to marry... it's their doctrine.

1Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;

2Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;

3Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.

1 Tim 4:1-3

It is not surprising if they do such things... they are possesed by a different kind of spirit.

Hi Thinktom,

How are you doing and feeling now, that it's been a few days since you learned of this? Hope you are doing well... You and your family are in my thoughts.

Thanks CL. It's just very, very disappointing if you knew how many people loved this man. I'm almost speechless and for me, that says a lot (ask my wife).

We can't do anything about it. It's in the courts hands now.

We'll move forward. It hasn't affected my faith, as I said, but it makes me doubt the Church as a whole. We'll see what happens over time.

Really great posts. Lots of excellent advice and thoughts. Thanks everyone for taking the time to write.:tiphat:

Chuck, love the Suzy picture:)

Sorry to hear about all your Troubles ThinkTom.

This is exactly why we shun Religion over here in Japan, nobody can be truley pure without the help of our God Buddha.

I've never seen a Priest Meditate but it should be a daily ritual for everyone.

The Catholic faith has helped create these conditions with their unwillingness to embrace change as an inevitibility. As well, their desire to control and correct from day one, as opposed to simply teaching and guiding, has caused them to be in such a convoluted dilemma, they spend inordinate amounts of effort, time and money trying to shore up their house of cards.

Their MO is dependant on too many superstitious aspects of religion of old. As humans grow and learn, advance and evolve and discard superstitions, every aspect of human life, including religious institutions, should grow, learn and discard what no longer works or that established system will grow redundant. Which the Catholic church has become. Many other religions as well.

It's simply a choice for them. Grow or don't grow. Change or don't change. They are choosing the stubborn, ego-based "we are right no matter what we learn or discover that conflicts with our dogma" rather than the more humanistic response which would be to find excitment in change, rather than resistance to change.

A priest is a conduit to God. Celibacy is based on the mistaken notion that Christ was celibate and therefore priests should strive to imitate his "pureness." I don't doubt that there was an aspect of backlash against prevailing pagan thought which involved any number of "impure" sexual rituals when Catholicism was writing it's rulebook. St. Paul, who spread the word of Christ, was a misogynist and he perpetuated the "pureness" of celibacy in his teachings.

So they made mistakes from day one and rather than correct and change, they cling and grasp desperately. Priests are put in an unnatural state for no real good reason at all having nothing to do with actual faith or goodness or holiness. If sex was unholy, why did God give us sexual pleasure, sexual desire and the ability to reproduce the species as a result?

I know, I know. Catholicism has handy answers for all of those questions because I am surely not the first to ask them.

It's a shame too because in my humble opinion it's the most fascinating of all the religions with Judaism coming in a close second.

I am officially a christian but I don't belong to any religion except my own. My own conduit to God is stronger and more direct than any middleman can grant me. But if I do attend services, it's more likey to be catholic than any other. I will never convert because of the massive conflict their dogma creates in my heart and mind. That would be "pretending" and would represent an incongruency and inauthenticity that I would not be able to justify in myself. Other people manage just fine. But I can't live that lie.

Jennifer

Mistaken assumption Christ was celibate? WTF? That is one inflammatory statement if I have ever seen one. Outside of the delirious DaVinci Code, have you proof of this?

Come on Jen, the Catholic faith is the largest organized religious body on the planet, and it continues to GROW.

At least put 'in my opinion' in there somewhere when you go off on we Catholics and our Church please.

Where to even start with the misunderstandings you gave:

The Church changes all the time, at the local and global level - sometimes in minute spurts, other times at a much larger scale (Vatican Council and Vatican II). Despite all the iron-fisted pope conspiracy theories from folks outside the Church itself, in truth the Church is barely homogenous in practice, with Bishops, Cardinals and Priests having a fair amount of latitude in style and message. As an example, just here in ABQ there are parishes that I like and attend, and others I do not care for based on the consistent message of the Priests there. Just within our Diocese, there are 'liberal' parishes and there are 'conservative' parishes, and there are 'musical' parishes.

Priests are not conduits to God, they administer the sacraments, lead the Mass, hear confessions, etc. A priest is completely unnecessary for me to pray, to meditate, to read the bible, or to meet with other Catholics to discuss religious matters. Based on specific interpretation of the Bible, a Priest is not necessary for Mass insofar as a meeting of the body.

The Church makes no more attempt to control or correct than any other social institution - and is in fact far less invasive\controlling than say Judaism, Buddhism, or Islam. Once you get beyond encouraging basic good and decent behavior (those evil bastiges), it IS about teaching and guiding, NOT about obsession with sin, sex, or any other such nonsense. You are seeing only the 60 second 'soundbite Church', defined and packaged by the mainstream media and their anti-religion bias.

Seems to me that the Church you are describing is really that of approximately 1000 years ago, when the Church was the only functional 'government' for the whole of Europe, e.g., the Dark Ages. The Church has grown and changed significantly since then, thanks to Martin Luther (who was not patient enough to witness the changes he sought, leading to the Schism), and other leaders from within and without the Church.

The conflict you believe would exist between you and Catholic Dogma is only because you do not understand it, in my opinion.

I would not and do not have to lie to myself about anything within the Dogma, and I am a very happy, lifelong, Catholic.

So if the Church is only too willing to change and adapt, I suppose the announcement that priests can get married and women can enter the seminary will be forthcoming any day now.

Scotty, I am a lot like Tevye from Fiddler on the Roof, I am a man of tradition, personally.

I do not believe there is a need for Priests to get married and currently that is the position of the Church as well. Not to say it could not change. If we were not able to ordain enough Priests say to keep up with the global growth of the Church, maybe they would consider it then.

Married clergy works fine in some other denominations, but it has not been part of our faith for 2000 years. Why the fascination with Catholic Priests? Why not married Buddhist Monks?

Remember, all 'protestant' sects originated within the Roman Catholic Church. Somebody would decide they did not like a particular element of the Faith or the Dogma, and they would split off.

Want to be a priest AND be married? Find the faith that allows you to do it and go - you cannot do that in the Catholic Church.

But if you believe in the Catholic faith as practiced, decide if you are being called to a religious vocation or to the vocation of marriage. I have friends who attended but left Seminary because they clarified what they felt to be their calling, and are now happily married with great kids.

I also know Priests and Nuns who left their vocations and were later married.

The Church is not this oligarchical machiavellian boogeyman folks make it out to be.

Think of it in LOA terms. If you want the Church to be 'evil' or 'wrong', you will find it so. I choose to see it in empowering terms as a force for good that help me and my family.

Im sure if we were having a discussion of the_______ faith we would as well find doctrines that seem incongruent with so called "modern" times.

But since Tom, a Catholic, started a thread dealing with same, here we are nevertheless.

I often ask my Father In Law "Dad, if the Catholic Church told you that it was tradition to smear yourself with Jello and go down a sliding board while yelling "Banzai!" does that mean that you should do it?"

Tradition for the sake of tradition does not mean that said tradition isnt wrong-headed and about as outmoded as orange shag.

I know...it is a cornerstone of faith to take from it what you wish and make a personal choice to reject the rest. What I find curious is the reluctance of some (not nec. you, my friend) to stare something straight in its face and say "WTF did we ever start doing this for...and why praytell are we still doing it?"

Such questioning of what many believe to be divinely inspired doctrine is frowned upon, in my humble and unscientifically tested opinion.

It is that "faith by fear" approach that I find so distasteful.

Im sure if we were having a discussion of the_______ faith we would as well find doctrines that seem incongruent with so called "modern" times.

But since Tom, a Catholic, started a thread dealing with same, here we are nevertheless.

I often ask my Father In Law "Dad, if the Catholic Church told you that it was tradition to smear yourself with Jello and go down a sliding board while yelling "Banzai!" does that mean that you should do it?"

Tradition for the sake of tradition does not mean that said tradition isnt wrong-headed and about as outmoded as orange shag.

I know...it is a cornerstone of faith to take from it what you wish and make a personal choice to reject the rest. What I find curious is the reluctance of some (not nec. you, my friend) to stare something straight in its face and say "WTF did we ever start doing this for...and why praytell are we still doing it?"

Such questioning of what many believe to be divinely inspired doctrine is frowned upon, in my humble and unscientifically tested opinion.

It is that "faith by fear" approach that I find so distasteful.Fair enough Scotty.

FWIW, I myself have never felt fear or 'intimidation' with respect to my faith, and I have asked some havy questions, especially during my agnostic teenage years, dealing with the loss of my foot and such. But I also do not feel that Catholicism is based on guilt and that is definitely a popular opinion both within and without the Church. I do not see it.

Admittedly, I could be 'out of touch' with my own faith that I have been in and around for about 30 years now, but if that is possible than it is also possible that ex-Catholics and non-Catholics may be out-of-touch with it, or just ill-informed.

We've had this fight many times before. I stand by my opinions, which I love to share, as we both know...and you stand by yours. So there we are. :thumb:

Lez be friends...

Jennifer

Think of it in LOA terms. If you want the Church to be 'evil' or 'wrong', you will find it so. I choose to see it in empowering terms as a force for good that help me and my family.

I with you on this one, KG......and also on the point of Catholicism being based on guilt. I don't see it either. When I go into the church for Mass, I focus my heart and my eyes on the crucifix. Nothing else exists for me during that time....just JC and me.

That would work for me, but I don't believe Christ died on the cross either. And just for John, The Da Vinci Code plot wasn't news to me.

So I look at the priest and I feel sympathy that they can't live normal lives AND still guide people in the amazing message of Christ. Celibacy is meaningless when all is said a done. Their contribution would still be the same. I look at the crucifix and I feel betrayed by one lie upon another. I look at the bible and see a gazillion revisions, omissions and additions and feel angry that such an important piece of history was brutally modified to suit agendas far and wide.

That's not to say I get nothing out of going to church. Otherwise I would never go. WHy do I choose to attend services of a religion that I disbelieve so many tenets of? Because it's infinitely interesting. It's a grand study in human motivation and the ultimate quest for power. The dichotomy between Christ the man and the myth they turned him into after his death is marketing genius. Also because I try to see past the things that bother me so much and get a message.

But to me membership is a statement: I believe in this. I live this. I accept this as true and real. And I simply don't. I cannot justify handpicking what I believe and what I don't and ignoring what is blatantly destructive to society. So I am a perpetual guest.

Jennifer

A priest is a conduit to God. Celibacy is based on the mistaken notion that Christ was celibate and therefore priests should strive to imitate his "pureness." I don't doubt that there was an aspect of backlash against prevailing pagan thought which involved any number of "impure" sexual rituals when Catholicism was writing it's rulebook. St. Paul, who spread the word of Christ, was a misogynist and he perpetuated the "pureness" of celibacy in his teachings.

So they made mistakes from day one and rather than correct and change, they cling and grasp desperately. Priests are put in an unnatural state for no real good reason at all having nothing to do with actual faith or goodness or holiness. If sex was unholy, why did God give us sexual pleasure, sexual desire and the ability to reproduce the species as a result?


Amen :D