Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Pope : “In 70s, paedophilia was theorised as something fully in conformity with man & even children"

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
kpete Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 12:29 PM
Original message
Pope : “In 70s, paedophilia was theorised as something fully in conformity with man & even children"
Edited on Tue Dec-21-10 12:30 PM by kpete
In his traditional Christmas address yesterday to cardinals and officials working in Rome, Pope Benedict XVI also claimed that child pornography was increasingly considered “normal” by society.

“In the 1970s, paedophilia was theorised as something fully in conformity with man and even with children,” the Pope said.

“It was maintained — even within the realm of Catholic theology — that there is no such thing as evil in itself or good in itself. There is only a ‘better than' and a ‘worse than'. Nothing is good or bad in itself.”

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101220/ap_on_re_eu/eu_vatican_church_abuse_10

.......

Pope’s child porn 'normal' claim sparks outrage among victims

Tuesday, 21 December 2010

Victims of clerical sex abuse have reacted furiously to Pope Benedict's claim yesterday that paedophilia wasn't considered an “absolute evil” as recently as the 1970s.


Read more: http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/world-news/popersquos-child-porn-normal-claim-sparks-outrage-among-victims-15035449.html#ixzz18lhhP3mx
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/world-news/popersquos-child-porn-normal-claim-sparks-outrage-among-victims-15035449.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
BrklynLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 12:31 PM
Response to Original message
1. What f^cking plane of reality does this man exist on???????????
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Initech Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 03:00 PM
Response to Reply #1
55. Whenever I see those "NOTW" bumper stickers Xtians proudly display on their vehicles...
I always cant help but laugh that they do live on another plane of existence.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cognoscere Donating Member (381 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-22-10 01:02 PM
Response to Reply #1
90. That would be the plane of reality where liars, cheats,thieves, murderers,
and other assorted assholes who front for the powers that be are generously rewarded for their service.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Velveteen Ocelot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 12:34 PM
Response to Original message
2. WTF?
Sorry, Your Popishness, but child molestation and kiddie porn have always been considered no-nos in polite society. Apparently only the Catholic Church considered those things to be kind of OK. No meat on Fridays; that's a sin -- but fiddling with the altar boys? No problemo.

:puke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kalyke Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 01:09 PM
Response to Reply #2
23. Hell, it's long been considered a no-no in impolite society.
You know what other prisoners do to convicted pedophiles, don't you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dmr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 12:35 PM
Response to Original message
3. OMG! This actually makes me physically sick
I can't believe this. I really can't.
:cry:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boston bean Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 12:36 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. you describe my feelings perfectly. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
damntexdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 12:38 PM
Response to Original message
5. So he's claiming that RC moral theology was screwed up in the 1970s.
We could have told him that -- just as it's screwed up today.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maru Kitteh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-22-10 12:36 PM
Response to Reply #5
86. In other words, he's trying to explain away the coverups and switcharoos by saying
"hey man - it was the 70's! We was doin' all kinds of crazy stuff! Hey *everybody* was bangin' kids back then, it wasn't no big deal back then we just did it and everybody was cool, ya know?"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eShirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 12:38 PM
Response to Original message
6. very telling. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jack Rabbit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 12:39 PM
Response to Original message
7. Gee, I didn't know that
I lived through the seventies, and I thought there was as much contempt for pedophiles then as there is now. I'm so glad Pope Benedict is around to set me straight about the way it was.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elehhhhna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 12:42 PM
Response to Original message
8. HORSESH!T
Gosh I miss the last one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
and-justice-for-all Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 12:44 PM
Response to Original message
9. The 'church' has a history of paedophilia
and it was acceptable for clergy to have young males in their myst...

http://www.economist.com/node/15731518?story_id=15731518&fsrc=rss
Their is far more to it than what is in the article, but it is a start.

THe church's history is also a bloody and murderous one; torture was one of their specialties.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
and-justice-for-all Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 12:46 PM
Response to Original message
10. The church needs to shut the fuck up...
they are NOT an authority on jack shit, the church is nothing more than a fraud wrapped in lies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stevenleser Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 12:46 PM
Response to Original message
11. Does anyone do a once over of his material before he says it or sends it out?
WTF. I mean really.

:wtf:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Karenina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 01:12 PM
Response to Reply #11
26. I think his PR people are pixilated...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Democrats_win Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 12:47 PM
Response to Original message
12. Holy Sh*t!
Hey, Pope, sometimes it would be better just to STFU!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hannah Bell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 12:49 PM
Response to Original message
13. lots of knees jerking
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
derby378 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 01:03 PM
Response to Reply #13
20. I don't want to hear about jerking right now
Edited on Tue Dec-21-10 01:04 PM by derby378
I still remember watching The Boys of St. Vincent's. Gives me the chills even today. Henry Czerny was too damn good as an abusive pedophile priest.

:yoiks:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hannah Bell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 01:08 PM
Response to Reply #20
22. which is irrelevant to the misinterpretation of the article or the pope's remarks
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lucky 13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 01:39 PM
Response to Reply #22
33. I think I understood the article quite well. If I may...
... there was a flawed ideology within the church in the 70's that made pedophilia acceptable... which has lead to today's crisis. So he is criticizing that "past" mentality.


HOWEVER... FROM MY PERSPECTIVE...
He JUST admitted that pedophilia was accepted in the church's culture in the 1970's (and presumably well before and well after that). But it wasn't PUBLICLY accepted or preached. It wasn't PUBLICLY acknowledged that it was occurring. So at the same time as it was ACCEPTED in their culture... it must have also simultaneously been recognized as WRONG, otherwise they'd have been more open about it. Which makes him, them, and the church sick, perverted, twisted liars.


FURTHER...
I find that his statement is just another in a long line of pitiful excuses and explanations that attempt to defend the indefensible. "It wasn't the priests fault! In the 70's that was the culture!"


Of course I'd like to see him do the RIGHT, CHRISTIAN, GODLY thing which is admitting HORRENDOUS failures of the church, turn over priests accused of these atrocities along with any evidence they've heretofore concealed, and take definitive measures to punish those who cross a line - either in action or mentality.

But naturally, that is too much to ask of the almighty Pope. So, I guess second best, if the first option is off the table, I'd like him to just SHUT THE FUCK UP about it because all he does when making ignorant, un-Christian, un-justice-seeking comments like this is to rub salt in the wounds of the victims his church has created over the years, decades, and centuries.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hannah Bell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 02:00 PM
Response to Reply #33
38. no, not just "within the church". I have no love for the pope. but his remarks are being
misinterpreted & don't constitute apologetics for pedophilia.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lucky 13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 02:49 PM
Response to Reply #38
46. So you're saying that he's saying that pedophilia was accepted in society as a whole in the 70s?
Lets play along and assume for the moment that's what he was saying...

That is just BLATANTLY FALSE.

Pedophilia was no more or less accepted in the 1970s than it was in the 1960s or the 1980s. There was no sudden rise in acceptance of pedophilia, punctuated by a drop in tolerance by the end of the decade. Can anyone provide ANY evidence that acceptance of pedophilia JUMPED from levels in the 70s and magically decreased in the 80s? Can the Pope? Is he really making the argument that the 1970s was a random decade where child sexual abuse was deemed OK by society?

It seems to me, IF that what he is saying, that he pulled that "factoid" completely out of his ass and is still LYING to justify the behavior of his "brothers".

And if that "factoid" IS true, how does that make a lick of difference? So because SOCIETY magically got more immoral in the 1970s that should explain why clergy did too? Are they not held to some moral standard? Doesn't it just AMPLIFY how depraved his church really is?

Frankly, whether he was saying acceptance of pedophilia increased in the 1970s within the CHURCH or within SOCIETY as a whole... his whole argument is STILL as STUPID as I pointed out in my previous post. AND he is still trying to JUSTIFY the behavior of the clergy. He is still attempting to defend the indefensible.

I don't normally respond to posts about the Pope or the church or sex abuse or whatever, but I found your defense of his statement quite odd. If everyone is "misinterpreting" his statement, at a MINIMUM, don't you agree that his overall message was poorly constructed and it's not unreasonable for normal people to take it in a bad way?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hannah Bell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 02:51 PM
Response to Reply #46
48. um, no, i'm not saying anything like that & i'm not sure why you think i am.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lucky 13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 02:52 PM
Response to Reply #48
50. because you just said, "no, not just "within the church""
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hannah Bell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 02:56 PM
Response to Reply #50
54. but i didn't say: "pedophilia was accepted in society as a whole". nor did the pope.
Edited on Tue Dec-21-10 02:59 PM by Hannah Bell
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lucky 13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 03:02 PM
Response to Reply #54
59. This is getting to be like a Who's on First kind of conversation. So I'll end it...
Here is what he said:

"In the 1970s, pedophilia was theorized as something fully in conformity with man and even with children," the pope said. "It was maintained — even within the realm of Catholic theology — that there is no such thing as evil in itself or good in itself. There is only a 'better than' and a 'worse than.' Nothing is good or bad in itself."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hannah Bell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 03:46 PM
Response to Reply #59
63. "was theorized" "within the realm of catholic theology" doesn't mean accepted by society as a whole
Edited on Tue Dec-21-10 03:47 PM by Hannah Bell
it means there was theoretical discussion, within the context of theoretical discussion of moral relativism generally.

and there was.

sorry the knee-jerks can't parse english.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trotsky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-22-10 12:20 PM
Response to Reply #63
84. Why did you leave off the word "even" from the 2nd quote fragment?
Is it because its presence indicates the pope is blaming OTHER realms as well, thus destroying your defense of him?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hannah Bell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-22-10 12:49 PM
Response to Reply #84
89. no. & "even" then, my "defense" is nothing to do with the pope *not* "blaming"
"other realms".

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Donald Ian Rankin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-22-10 11:30 AM
Response to Reply #38
81. No, just apologetics for having tolerated it.
He's clearly not trying to defend paedophilia.

What he *is* doing is trying to make excuses for having covered it up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uncommon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 01:56 PM
Response to Reply #13
36. Even upon careful reading, he is kind of trying to mitigate a PR disaster by
blaming society at large and not systemic problems within the church specific.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hannah Bell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 02:35 PM
Response to Reply #36
43. the speech was given to cardinals & bishops.
also no secret that the church is a political-economic force in opposition to other political-economic actors, & that plays into the visibility accorded to the scandals of various factions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lucky 13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 02:52 PM
Response to Reply #43
49. In my mind, it's WORSE that this speech was given to Cardinals and Bishops vs. the Press
... because it demonstrates that they are still lying to THEMSELVES about their behavior and their church.

"It's ok if you abused little children in the 70s and after, because apparently it was accepted in society at large! No need for guilt or justice"

Spin spin spin.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hannah Bell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 03:00 PM
Response to Reply #49
57. the only one spinning is you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lucky 13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 03:04 PM
Response to Reply #57
60. Wow. Ok. Whatever you say.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hannah Bell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 03:48 PM
Response to Reply #60
65. it's no use talking to knee-jerkers, i already know that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uncommon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-22-10 08:57 AM
Response to Reply #43
74. And that is relevant why?
The substance of what he said is still the same.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pisces Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 12:52 PM
Response to Original message
14. The Pope and the Church are in a downward spiral. They elevated themselves to Gods and thou shalt no
pray to false idols.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Crunchy Frog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 12:53 PM
Response to Original message
15. Yes, and it's only been since the 70's that priests have been abusing children
and the Church has been covering for them. If not for the evils of the 60's and 70's there would be no problems with the Church at all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
derby378 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 12:53 PM
Response to Original message
16. Just because Denmark tried that decriminalization experiment in the 70s...
...doesn't mean that it was in any way a good idea. Dude, come on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lugnut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 12:54 PM
Response to Original message
17. Gag me.
What a crock of shit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
adigal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 12:58 PM
Response to Original message
18. Except birth control - that is evil
playing with boys is OK.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
avaistheone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-22-10 05:00 PM
Response to Reply #18
92. Women is general are evil
Eve, ya know...

:sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 12:59 PM
Response to Original message
19. So his 1962 policy instructing bishops to conceal sex crimes and silence the victims was what?
The Church just trying to keep up with the times?

Yeah, they're famous for that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lars39 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 03:01 PM
Response to Reply #19
58. Self-preservation.
He's obviously done his share of molesting. :puke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 03:19 PM
Response to Reply #58
62. Yep. That creep's sweaty little hands were all over every one of those kids - by proxy.
He's obviously complicit so why is he not liable?

When will he have to answer for his crimes?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sofa king Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-22-10 10:10 AM
Response to Reply #62
78. Or perhaps by more than proxy, since he's familiar with 1970s child porn.
Edited on Wed Dec-22-10 10:26 AM by sofa king
Edit: Man, that's a cold thing to say, and I hope the more sensitive among you realize that it's meant at least half in jest.

When he starts talking about tentacle hentai, that's when you'll know he's finally found his way around the Internet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-22-10 12:34 PM
Response to Reply #78
85. "tentacle hentai" LOL!
No worries here, I inherited a love for black humour from my dad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MilesColtrane Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-22-10 05:41 PM
Response to Reply #19
93. Bazinga!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
originalpckelly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 01:07 PM
Response to Original message
21. How much will it take for our government to ban donations to them?
This is beyond freedom of religion, this is active excuse making for criminal activity that's very damaging to the people on the other side of it and society as a whole.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kolesar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 01:10 PM
Response to Reply #21
24. Donations to IRA terrorists were stovepiped through the Catholic Church a few decades ago
That's how the IRA go their Thompson submachine guns.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
originalpckelly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 01:11 PM
Response to Reply #24
25. Who would Jesus shoot?
In this case it has a dual meaning.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 02:41 PM
Response to Reply #24
44. "Roland - the Headless Thompson Gunner!"
Sorry.

Geez I miss Warren Zevon.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kolesar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-22-10 09:25 AM
Response to Reply #44
75. Talkin' about the man
My buddy just gave me MP3s of that album.
The chorus on "Excitable Boy" was just so damn clever.
OOOO-wah, excitable boy
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-22-10 12:41 PM
Response to Reply #75
88. I can hear it in my head now.
Although it makes the thought of the pope watching kiddie porn even more creepy...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FiveGoodMen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 01:20 PM
Response to Original message
27. You listening, Catholics?
Dump this motherfucker already!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Doctor_J Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 01:20 PM
Response to Original message
28. Naziism was cool when this pope was doing that too
he's a real charmer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Iggo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 02:49 PM
Response to Reply #28
47. That is a goddam motherfucking excellent point!
:fistbump:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Doctor_J Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-22-10 12:09 PM
Response to Reply #47
82. Joe Ratzinger - Nazi/NAMBLA spokesperson/Pope
"May you live in interesting times"...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alterfurz Donating Member (723 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 04:10 PM
Response to Reply #28
66. "At 50, one has the face one deserves"
Pope Grinch!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WinkyDink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 01:22 PM
Response to Original message
29. This Pope has some serious mental problems.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lucky 13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 01:24 PM
Response to Original message
30. Pedophilia's normal, but homosexuality between two consenting adults... that's an abomination!
Edited on Tue Dec-21-10 01:25 PM by Lucky 13
Fuck these guys.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
originalpckelly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 02:55 PM
Response to Reply #30
53. Exactly.
They call gay guys like me sickos, but they're out there buggering kids.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lucky 13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 03:00 PM
Response to Reply #53
56. I'm bloody tired of it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Iggo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-22-10 12:41 PM
Response to Reply #53
87. Beautiful world, ain't it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vickers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 01:26 PM
Response to Original message
31. Of course it was....by fucking scumbags. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NashVegas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 01:28 PM
Response to Original message
32. Of Course It Was Normal - LOOK WHO WAS CONTROLLING THE CONVERSATION!
Edited on Tue Dec-21-10 01:35 PM by NashVegas
It sure as hell wasn't the victims.

Paedophilia was unspoken of until well after the sexual revolution had begun. There were no conversations about it in the newspapers, in living rooms, not anywhere until entertainment and humanities vehicles started opening the topic from the POV of victims.

A few sniggering jokes about it, perhaps in passing in a satirical one-liner. The only places I ever saw child sexual abuse referred to in the 1960s/70s was - in order:

Tommy
Sybil
Something About Amelia

In the newspapers, if someone was arrested, the charge was contributing to the delinquency of a minor. "What's that, Mom?" "He gave them drinks."

There was a huge murder trial in the area I grew up, a teenaged girl killed her father. I saw the TV coverage the whole time but don't ever recall hearing the anchors talk about how the step-dad was raping her the whole time. Just wasn't polite.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jwirr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 01:40 PM
Response to Original message
34. What 70s did he live in? I suspect he was one of the people who
demonized the left for their protest against the status quo and assumed that this is what was happening. This is an insult to all of us who lived in the 70s and worked for a better world.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 01:51 PM
Response to Original message
35. Yeah, I remember something about that...
...people arguing that adult male sexual mentorship of boys goes back to the Greeks (which it most certainly does). This was one of Oscar Wilde's arguments in his defense when the Brits jailed him for homosexuality (though his lover was a young nobleman, not a boy). Another argument along these lines (not Wilde's) was that the presumed total pristine "innocence of children" was a strange Victorian convention (super-puritanical) and not normal or natural. (The Victorians also applied this social convention to "good" women). Sex was a taboo subject, and the ikon of "purity" was used to enforce the taboo.

What is peculiar about Benedict's statements--besides their seeming design to offend--is that he states them in the passive tense. I don't have his full statement and don't read Italian, so I can't be sure of this, but the translation puts these statements in the passive tense (i.e., "It was maintained that...".) He thus doesn't say WHO was arguing this and why what they argued would have had ANY influence on the behavior of priests and bishops, or provide any excuse for their use of their power and authority to sexually abuse weaker people. As I recall, it was a very small segment of people--thinkers, writers--who advanced these arguments, and it was not in a religious context. Benedict is INVENTING a connection between this small secular interest group and the non-absolutist, non-authoritarian ecumenical theology of Pope John XXIII and the Vatican II revolution, or liberalizing of the Church.

THAT is foul play of the worst kind. He is saying that "liberal" Catholics invited priests to abuse children!

The male sexual mentorship of the Greeks and the Brits worked more as a 'right of passage' TO empowerment of boys as adult males, rather than as an abusive or powermongering relationship. Don't know if it always worked out that way, but that is the "ideal" that Wilde was talking about. He considered it a very high relationship, indeed, on the level of sacred. His views and his reputation were rehabilitated in the sexual revolution of the 1960s and 1970s, of course. The puritan Victorians, though such relationships were common in British boys' schools extending into adulthood, jailed Wilde because he was more open about it. (He never admitted to sexual acts--he said it was "Platonic"--but if he'd admitted sexual acts, he would have been hanged.) The Victorians were meanwhile engaging in all sorts of licentiousness beneath the surface of Victorian society, including male relatives taking advantage of young female daughters, sisters and cousins--as Virginia Woolf experienced--common abuse of servant girls (including cruel banishment if they got pregnant), and the fostering of a huge class of poor sex workers who had no rights. The U.S. has inherited this weird Victorian combo of obsessive puritanism and sexual prurience. I think it may account for what seems to be a prevalence of very sick minds in our society who really do abuse children, sometimes in quite horrible ways. Social alienation--a consequence of the cruelty and hypocrisy of our national political/cultural establishment--pushes people over the edge. We are individuals, responsible for what we do (if we are sane) but we are also creatures of society, some with more spirit than others as to maintaining moral/ethical equilibrium in an immoral, exploitative, uncaring, greed-first, me-first social context.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CanSocDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-22-10 09:54 AM
Response to Reply #35
77. Always a rational analysis....(eom)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SpiralHawk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 01:58 PM
Response to Original message
37. Pope Ratzingers zings another rat
Ptoooey on his all-too-damn-frikkin-fallible theology...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
surrealAmerican Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 02:03 PM
Response to Original message
39. Is he hinting about something in his own past ...
... something he's afraid will be revealed some day?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
malaise Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 02:06 PM
Response to Original message
40. But it was paedophiles who
decided that in the 1970s - he and his cardinals.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
musette_sf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 02:06 PM
Response to Original message
41. Gee, Joey Ratz, actually all your statement tells me
Edited on Tue Dec-21-10 02:07 PM by musette_sf
is that you spent an inordinate amount of time in the 70s thinking about this. Which, in itself, tells me quite a lot.

Speaking as someone who as a young adult lived in NYC, the epicenter of the swinging 70s, I can tell you that NO ONE I knew or met from the "alternative lifestyles", from Al Goldstein to denizens of Plato's Retreat and Studio 54, considered p@edo cr@p to be "normal" in any way, shape, manner, or form.

The 70s sexual freedom meme was "CONSENTING ADULTS".

Although I can see how a celibate dress-wearing dude might not have gotten that message.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Angry Dragon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-22-10 09:35 AM
Response to Reply #41
76. Don't forget the designer red shoes
No man of god is complete without the red shoes
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeftishBrit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 02:08 PM
Response to Original message
42. I DON'T THINK SO!
Ugh! The idea sickens me to the core, perhaps especially because I was a child in the 70s myself.

And this is one further way of implying that evil secular liberal 'moral relativists' have no morals and are the ones who caused paedophilia.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Iggo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 02:46 PM
Response to Original message
45. Um yeah no. That's a big bullshit Mr. Nazi Pope.
Wasn't that way at all, and you need to start telling the truth, 'cause you suck at lying.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ZombieHorde Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 02:53 PM
Response to Original message
51. People will keep sending him money no matter what he says.
I don't know if there is anything he could say that would make his flock turn against him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Iggo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 02:54 PM
Response to Reply #51
52. Not even the fact that they're referred to as a flock, huh.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sarcasmo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 03:06 PM
Response to Original message
61. Delusional!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren DeMontague Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 03:47 PM
Response to Original message
64. I knew it! It was DISCO'S fault!
Ah, finally, now we can move on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
happyslug Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 05:01 PM
Response to Original message
67. Here is the actual Speech, given on 12/20/2010
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/speeches/2010/december/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20101220_curia-auguri_en.html

ADDRESS OF HIS HOLINESS BENEDICT XVI
ON THE OCCASION OF CHRISTMAS GREETINGS
TO THE ROMAN CURIA

Sala Regia
Monday, 20 December 2010


Dear Cardinals,
Brother Bishops and Priests,
Dear Brothers and Sisters,

It gives me great pleasure to be here with you, dear Members of the College of Cardinals and Representatives of the Roman Curia and the Governatorato, for this traditional gathering. I extend a cordial greeting to each one of you, beginning with Cardinal Angelo Sodano, whom I thank for his sentiments of devotion and communion and for the warm good wishes that he expressed to me on behalf of all of you. Prope est jam Dominus, venite, adoremus! As one family let us contemplate the mystery of Emmanuel, God-with-us, as the Cardinal Dean has said. I gladly reciprocate his good wishes and I would like to thank all of you most sincerely, including the Papal Representatives all over the world, for the able and generous contribution that each of you makes to the Vicar of Christ and to the Church.

Excita, Domine, potentiam tuam, et veni. Repeatedly during the season of Advent the Church’s liturgy prays in these or similar words. They are invocations that were probably formulated as the Roman Empire was in decline. The disintegration of the key principles of law and of the fundamental moral attitudes underpinning them burst open the dams which until that time had protected peaceful coexistence among peoples. The sun was setting over an entire world. Frequent natural disasters further increased this sense of insecurity. There was no power in sight that could put a stop to this decline. All the more insistent, then, was the invocation of the power of God: the plea that he might come and protect his people from all these threats.

Excita, Domine, potentiam tuam, et veni. Today too, we have many reasons to associate ourselves with this Advent prayer of the Church. For all its new hopes and possibilities, our world is at the same time troubled by the sense that moral consensus is collapsing, consensus without which juridical and political structures cannot function. Consequently the forces mobilized for the defence of such structures seem doomed to failure.

Excita – the prayer recalls the cry addressed to the Lord who was sleeping in the disciples’ storm-tossed boat as it was close to sinking. When his powerful word had calmed the storm, he rebuked the disciples for their little faith (cf. Mt 8:26 et par.). He wanted to say: it was your faith that was sleeping. He will say the same thing to us. Our faith too is often asleep. Let us ask him, then, to wake us from the sleep of a faith grown tired, and to restore to that faith the power to move mountains – that is, to order justly the affairs of the world.

Excita, Domine, potentiam tuam, et veni: amid the great tribulations to which we have been exposed during the past year, this Advent prayer has frequently been in my mind and on my lips. We had begun the Year for Priests with great joy and, thank God, we were also able to conclude it with great gratitude, despite the fact that it unfolded so differently from the way we had expected. Among us priests and among the lay faithful, especially the young, there was a renewed awareness of what a great gift the Lord has entrusted to us in the priesthood of the Catholic Church. We realized afresh how beautiful it is that human beings are fully authorized to pronounce in God’s name the word of forgiveness, and are thus able to change the world, to change life; we realized how beautiful it is that human beings may utter the words of consecration, through which the Lord draws a part of the world into himself, and so transforms it at one point in its very substance; we realized how beautiful it is to be able, with the Lord’s strength, to be close to people in their joys and sufferings, in the important moments of their lives and in their dark times; how beautiful it is to have as one’s life task not this or that, but simply human life itself – helping people to open themselves to God and to live from God. We were all the more dismayed, then, when in this year of all years and to a degree we could not have imagined, we came to know of abuse of minors committed by priests who twist the sacrament into its antithesis, and under the mantle of the sacred profoundly wound human persons in their childhood, damaging them for a whole lifetime.

In this context, a vision of Saint Hildegard of Bingen came to my mind, a vision which describes in a shocking way what we have lived through this past year. “In the year of our Lord’s incarnation 1170, I had been lying on my sick-bed for a long time when, fully conscious in body and in mind, I had a vision of a woman of such beauty that the human mind is unable to comprehend. She stretched in height from earth to heaven. Her face shone with exceeding brightness and her gaze was fixed on heaven. She was dressed in a dazzling robe of white silk and draped in a cloak, adorned with stones of great price. On her feet she wore shoes of onyx. But her face was stained with dust, her robe was ripped down the right side, her cloak had lost its sheen of beauty and her shoes had been blackened. And she herself, in a voice loud with sorrow, was calling to the heights of heaven, saying, ‘Hear, heaven, how my face is sullied; mourn, earth, that my robe is torn; tremble, abyss, because my shoes are blackened!’

And she continued: ‘I lay hidden in the heart of the Father until the Son of Man, who was conceived and born in virginity, poured out his blood. With that same blood as his dowry, he made me his betrothed.

For my Bridegroom’s wounds remain fresh and open as long as the wounds of men’s sins continue to gape. And Christ’s wounds remain open because of the sins of priests. They tear my robe, since they are violators of the Law, the Gospel and their own priesthood; they darken my cloak by neglecting, in every way, the precepts which they are meant to uphold; my shoes too are blackened, since priests do not keep to the straight paths of justice, which are hard and rugged, or set good examples to those beneath them. Nevertheless, in some of them I find the splendour of truth.’

And I heard a voice from heaven which said: ‘This image represents the Church. For this reason, O you who see all this and who listen to the word of lament, proclaim it to the priests who are destined to offer guidance and instruction to God’s people and to whom, as to the apostles, it was said: go into all the world and preach the Gospel to the whole creation’ (Mk 16:15)” (Letter to Werner von Kirchheim and his Priestly Community: PL 197, 269ff.).

In the vision of Saint Hildegard, the face of the Church is stained with dust, and this is how we have seen it. Her garment is torn – by the sins of priests. The way she saw and expressed it is the way we have experienced it this year. We must accept this humiliation as an exhortation to truth and a call to renewal. Only the truth saves. We must ask ourselves what we can do to repair as much as possible the injustice that has occurred. We must ask ourselves what was wrong in our proclamation, in our whole way of living the Christian life, to allow such a thing to happen. We must discover a new resoluteness in faith and in doing good. We must be capable of doing penance. We must be determined to make every possible effort in priestly formation to prevent anything of the kind from happening again. This is also the moment to offer heartfelt thanks to all those who work to help victims and to restore their trust in the Church, their capacity to believe her message. In my meetings with victims of this sin, I have also always found people who, with great dedication, stand alongside those who suffer and have been damaged. This is also the occasion to thank the many good priests who act as channels of the Lord’s goodness in humility and fidelity and, amid the devastations, bear witness to the unforfeited beauty of the priesthood.

We are well aware of the particular gravity of this sin committed by priests and of our corresponding responsibility. But neither can we remain silent regarding the context of these times in which these events have come to light. There is a market in child pornography that seems in some way to be considered more and more normal by society. The psychological destruction of children, in which human persons are reduced to articles of merchandise, is a terrifying sign of the times. From Bishops of developing countries I hear again and again how sexual tourism threatens an entire generation and damages its freedom and its human dignity. The Book of Revelation includes among the great sins of Babylon – the symbol of the world’s great irreligious cities – the fact that it trades with bodies and souls and treats them as commodities (cf. Rev 18:13). In this context, the problem of drugs also rears its head, and with increasing force extends its octopus tentacles around the entire world – an eloquent expression of the tyranny of mammon which perverts mankind. No pleasure is ever enough, and the excess of deceiving intoxication becomes a violence that tears whole regions apart – and all this in the name of a fatal misunderstanding of freedom which actually undermines man’s freedom and ultimately destroys it.

In order to resist these forces, we must turn our attention to their ideological foundations. In the 1970s, paedophilia was theorized as something fully in conformity with man and even with children. This, however, was part of a fundamental perversion of the concept of ethos. It was maintained – even within the realm of Catholic theology – that there is no such thing as evil in itself or good in itself. There is only a “better than” and a “worse than”. Nothing is good or bad in itself. Everything depends on the circumstances and on the end in view. Anything can be good or also bad, depending upon purposes and circumstances. Morality is replaced by a calculus of consequences, and in the process it ceases to exist. The effects of such theories are evident today. Against them, Pope John Paul II, in his 1993 Encyclical Letter Veritatis Splendor, indicated with prophetic force in the great rational tradition of Christian ethos the essential and permanent foundations of moral action. Today, attention must be focussed anew on this text as a path in the formation of conscience. It is our responsibility to make these criteria audible and intelligible once more for people today as paths of true humanity, in the context of our paramount concern for mankind.

As my second point, I should like to say a word about the Synod of the Churches of the Middle East. This began with my journey to Cyprus, where I was able to consign the Instrumentum Laboris of the Synod to the Bishops of those countries who were assembled there. The hospitality of the Orthodox Church was unforgettable, and we experienced it with great gratitude. Even if full communion is not yet granted to us, we have nevertheless established with joy that the basic form of the ancient Church unites us profoundly with one another: the sacramental office of Bishops as the bearer of apostolic tradition, the reading of Scripture according to the hermeneutic of the Regula fidei, the understanding of Scripture in its manifold unity centred on Christ, developed under divine inspiration, and finally, our faith in the central place of the Eucharist in the Church’s life. Thus we experienced a living encounter with the riches of the rites of the ancient Church that are also found within the Catholic Church. We celebrated the liturgy with Maronites and with Melchites, we celebrated in the Latin rite, we experienced moments of ecumenical prayer with the Orthodox, and we witnessed impressive manifestations of the rich Christian culture of the Christian East. But we also saw the problem of the divided country. The wrongs and the deep wounds of the past were all too evident, but so too was the desire for the peace and communion that had existed before. Everyone knows that violence does not bring progress – indeed, it gave rise to the present situation. Only in a spirit of compromise and mutual understanding can unity be re-established. To prepare the people for this attitude of peace is an essential task of pastoral ministry.

During the Synod itself, our gaze was extended over the whole of the Middle East, where the followers of different religions – as well as a variety of traditions and distinct rites – live together. As far as Christians are concerned, there are Pre-Chalcedonian as well as Chalcedonian churches; there are churches in communion with Rome and others that are outside that communion; in both cases, multiple rites exist alongside one another. In the turmoil of recent years, the tradition of peaceful coexistence has been shattered and tensions and divisions have grown, with the result that we witness with increasing alarm acts of violence in which there is no longer any respect for what the other holds sacred, in which on the contrary the most elementary rules of humanity collapse. In the present situation, Christians are the most oppressed and tormented minority. For centuries they lived peacefully together with their Jewish and Muslim neighbours. During the Synod we listened to wise words from the Counsellor of the Mufti of the Republic of Lebanon against acts of violence targeting Christians. He said: when Christians are wounded, we ourselves are wounded. Unfortunately, though, this and similar voices of reason, for which we are profoundly grateful, are too weak. Here too we come up against an unholy alliance between greed for profit and ideological blindness. On the basis of the spirit of faith and its rationality, the Synod developed a grand concept of dialogue, forgiveness and mutual acceptance, a concept that we now want to proclaim to the world. The human being is one, and humanity is one. Whatever damage is done to another in any one place, ends up by damaging everyone. Thus the words and ideas of the Synod must be a clarion call, addressed to all people with political or religious responsibility, to put a stop to Christianophobia; to rise up in defence of refugees and all who are suffering, and to revitalize the spirit of reconciliation. In the final analysis, healing can only come from deep faith in God’s reconciling love. Strengthening this faith, nourishing it and causing it to shine forth is the Church’s principal task at this hour.

I would willingly speak in some detail of my unforgettable journey to the United Kingdom, but I will limit myself to two points that are connected with the theme of the responsibility of Christians at this time and with the Church’s task to proclaim the Gospel. My thoughts go first of all to the encounter with the world of culture in Westminster Hall, an encounter in which awareness of shared responsibility at this moment in history created great attention which, in the final analysis, was directed to the question of truth and faith itself. It was evident to all that the Church has to make her own contribution to this debate. Alexis de Tocqueville, in his day, observed that democracy in America had become possible and had worked because there existed a fundamental moral consensus which, transcending individual denominations, united everyone. Only if there is such a consensus on the essentials can constitutions and law function. This fundamental consensus derived from the Christian heritage is at risk wherever its place, the place of moral reasoning, is taken by the purely instrumental rationality of which I spoke earlier. In reality, this makes reason blind to what is essential. To resist this eclipse of reason and to preserve its capacity for seeing the essential, for seeing God and man, for seeing what is good and what is true, is the common interest that must unite all people of good will. The very future of the world is at stake.

Finally I should like to recall once more the beatification of Cardinal John Henry Newman. Why was he beatified? What does he have to say to us? Many responses could be given to these questions, which were explored in the context of the beatification. I would like to highlight just two aspects which belong together and which, in the final analysis, express the same thing. The first is that we must learn from Newman’s three conversions, because they were steps along a spiritual path that concerns us all. Here I would like to emphasize just the first conversion: to faith in the living God. Until that moment, Newman thought like the average men of his time and indeed like the average men of today, who do not simply exclude the existence of God, but consider it as something uncertain, something with no essential role to play in their lives. What appeared genuinely real to him, as to the men of his and our day, is the empirical, matter that can be grasped. This is the “reality” according to which one finds one’s bearings. The “real” is what can be grasped, it is the things that can be calculated and taken in one’s hand. In his conversion, Newman recognized that it is exactly the other way round: that God and the soul, man’s spiritual identity, constitute what is genuinely real, what counts. These are much more real than objects that can be grasped. This conversion was a Copernican revolution. What had previously seemed unreal and secondary was now revealed to be the genuinely decisive element. Where such a conversion takes place, it is not just a person’s theory that changes: the fundamental shape of life changes. We are all in constant need of such conversion: then we are on the right path.

The driving force that impelled Newman along the path of conversion was conscience. But what does this mean? In modern thinking, the word “conscience” signifies that for moral and religious questions, it is the subjective dimension, the individual, that constitutes the final authority for decision. The world is divided into the realms of the objective and the subjective. To the objective realm belong things that can be calculated and verified by experiment. Religion and morals fall outside the scope of these methods and are therefore considered to lie within the subjective realm. Here, it is said, there are in the final analysis no objective criteria. The ultimate instance that can decide here is therefore the subject alone, and precisely this is what the word “conscience” expresses: in this realm only the individual, with his intuitions and experiences, can decide. Newman’s understanding of conscience is diametrically opposed to this. For him, “conscience” means man’s capacity for truth: the capacity to recognize precisely in the decision-making areas of his life – religion and morals – a truth, the truth. At the same time, conscience – man’s capacity to recognize truth – thereby imposes on him the obligation to set out along the path towards truth, to seek it and to submit to it wherever he finds it. Conscience is both capacity for truth and obedience to the truth which manifests itself to anyone who seeks it with an open heart. The path of Newman’s conversions is a path of conscience – not a path of self-asserting subjectivity but, on the contrary, a path of obedience to the truth that was gradually opening up to him. His third conversion, to Catholicism, required him to give up almost everything that was dear and precious to him: possessions, profession, academic rank, family ties and many friends. The sacrifice demanded of him by obedience to the truth, by his conscience, went further still. Newman had always been aware of having a mission for England. But in the Catholic theology of his time, his voice could hardly make itself heard. It was too foreign in the context of the prevailing form of theological thought and devotion. In January 1863 he wrote in his diary these distressing words: “As a Protestant, I felt my religion dreary, but not my life - but, as a Catholic, my life dreary, not my religion”. He had not yet arrived at the hour when he would be an influential figure. In the humility and darkness of obedience, he had to wait until his message was taken up and understood. In support of the claim that Newman’s concept of conscience matched the modern subjective understanding, people often quote a letter in which he said – should he have to propose a toast – that he would drink first to conscience and then to the Pope. But in this statement, “conscience” does not signify the ultimately binding quality of subjective intuition. It is an expression of the accessibility and the binding force of truth: on this its primacy is based. The second toast can be dedicated to the Pope because it is his task to demand obedience to the truth.

I must refrain from speaking of my remarkable journeys to Malta, Portugal and Spain. In these it once again became evident that the faith is not a thing of the past, but an encounter with the God who lives and acts now. He challenges us and he opposes our indolence, but precisely in this way he opens the path towards true joy.

Excita, Domine, potentiam tuam, et veni. We set out from this plea for the presence of God’s power in our time and from the experience of his apparent absence. If we keep our eyes open as we look back over the year that is coming to an end, we can see clearly that God’s power and goodness are also present today in many different ways. So we all have reason to thank him. Along with thanks to the Lord I renew my thanks to all my co-workers. May God grant to all of us a holy Christmas and may he accompany us with his blessings in the coming year.

I entrust these prayerful sentiments to the intercession of the Holy Virgin, Mother of the Redeemer, and I impart to all of you and to the great family of the Roman Curia a heartfelt Apostolic Blessing. Happy Christmas!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hannah Bell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 05:06 PM
Response to Reply #67
68. Thanks. makes it even clearer that rats wasn't saying what the kneejerkers claim.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
closeupready Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 05:10 PM
Response to Original message
69. To the contrary - I remember the Newsweek issue reporting on child prostitution in Times Square.
That was the beginning of a huge clean-up of the Times Square district, and this was in 1979 or 1980. So no, far from being considered legit, child prostitution and sexual abuse of minors was ended as soon as the media started to shine a spotlight on it. Which doesn't speak well, perhaps, of civil society back then, but does demonstrate that pedophilia was NEVER considered acceptable or mainstream, and certainly NOT in the 70's.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Brother Buzz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 05:11 PM
Response to Original message
70. FAIL!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GeorgeGist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 09:45 PM
Response to Original message
71. That man is evil itself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HEyHEY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 09:49 PM
Response to Original message
72. Maybe in the church, yeah
Edited on Tue Dec-21-10 09:50 PM by HEyHEY
The rest of us? Not so much.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Johnny Harpo Donating Member (330 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-21-10 11:01 PM
Response to Original message
73. Ok...I'm Not Catholic...But I Want A Re-Count On The College of Cardinals Vote...
that elected this guy. What a jerk-ball thing to say!

What the heck world is he living in?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MilesColtrane Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-22-10 10:24 AM
Response to Original message
79. Otherwise known as the Polanski Defense
"Hey, it was the swingin' 70s, man!"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hedgehog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-22-10 10:31 AM
Response to Original message
80. This is Pope Benedict trying to blame the pedophilia crisis on the liberals -
for example, the liberals (we're talking Church liberals here, not political liberals) who would say that while in general abortion is wrong, there are occasions, such as the recent case in Arizona where the mother's life was in immediate danger, where performing an abortion is the only way to prevent two people dying instead of just one. Benedict's implied arguement is that if you think pedophilia is always wrong, you must also think that situational ethics is always wrong, that is, eveil things are always evil, good things are always good. Oddly enough, conservatives are on board with situational ethics when it comes to war; it's OK to kill someone if you're a soldier.

So, while the liberal theologians never said that pedophilia is OK, Benedict is trying to hang the entire crisis on them. Let's just ignore the fact that it was the bishops in lock step with the Vatican who allowed the crimes to fester and spread! Let's also ignore that this little game of inside politics just makes the Church look even worse (and who thought that was possible!) to those in the otside world!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Love Bug Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-22-10 12:18 PM
Response to Original message
83. What? Since when has the Catholic church embraced relative morality?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
avaistheone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-22-10 04:58 PM
Response to Original message
91. Stunning
and sickening. Something is very wrong with this pope. imo
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Elmore Furth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-22-10 06:57 PM
Response to Original message
94. Society Made Me Do It? The pope is a jerk.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kgnu_fan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-22-10 07:48 PM
Response to Original message
95. Pope must have molested so many children in his entire life, he is a dirty fellow
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kgnu_fan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-22-10 07:52 PM
Response to Original message
96. Pope, the molester, the abuser, the evil
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 23rd 2024, 06:22 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC