13 April 2010

Notes To Support A Counter-Narrative

It shouldn't be me doing this. It should be somebody more competent, who could make a better job of it.  This is no more than a start.  If you can do better, please do, and encourage the Hierarchy to come out and fight.

1     This is not about the Catholic Church.  This is about some bad men who committed acts of sex abuse against children for whom they had a responsibility of pastoral care.  Secondarily, it is about other men, some more, some less bad, who found out what was happening and reacted inappropriately

1.1     The Catholic Church is not a unitary body apable of imposing and maintaining discipline.  It is a confederation of dioceses.

1.1.1     The legal system used by the Church - Canon Law - was first codified less than a hundred years ago and uses the principle of subsidiarity to attempt to resolve problems at the lowest level.

1.1.2     Cases can gradually move up the system to Rome but, as in civil and criminal cases in UK courts, this takes time.

1.2     The Catholic Church's responsibility for the actions of its members is limited, to say the least.

2     The crime these men have committed is sexual abuse of minors, not paedophilia.

2.1     Paedophilia is a condition, not a crime.

2.2     Sexual abuse has taken place when adults commit sexual acts with under-16s.

2.2.1     The sexual abuse is aggravated because of the position of responsibility in which these men found themselves and their use of the position to procure the children they abused.

3     Those within the Church who discovered what had happened and did not deliver the abusers to the civil authorities did a great wrong.

3.1     In some cases this was done purely to protect abusers: in these cases the protector is as culpable as the abuser, because he created an objective circumstance in which the abuse could continue.

3.2     In some cases, this was done to protect the reputation of the Church.  While laudable as an aim, the damage done to children and the need to remove the abuser from a position in which he could continue to abuse were so much greater that the judgement of these men must be called into question.

3.3     In some cases, this was done because the discoverer could simply not believe that such abuse could be committed by a priest.  With hindsight, it is clear that these people should not have been put into a position where they were responsible for such decisions.

4     Anybody who uses a position of power to entice or procure an under-16 for sexual gratification is guilty of the same crime of abuse as has been committed by some Catholic priests.

4.0.1     They may be members of a national or local government organisation with formal responsibility for children, such as a local authority's child protection scheme.

4.0.2     They may work in a sector through which vulnerable children pass, for example the legal sector in a devolved administration.

4.0.3     They may work in the voluntary sector in schemes in which vulnerable children may become available to them, such as local housing schemes for asylum seekers.


Mike Cliffson said...

If thus they treated the master, how shall it go with his servants?

Lord make of me Thy servant, without Thee already have I quested through to mine uselessness.

for benefit of English-studying Spaniards, trying to put abt 40 folios together for over a month.

Net result:
ONe, count them one, whose faith in no danger anyway, is now beginning to doubt the infallibilty of the New york times and is getting, a bit, the varios meanings v trawling.

It's too many-sided and diffuse. Ireland, sociopaths, homossexuals,.../.. legions of innocent accused priests, etc. It's THEIR turf, not ours.
Satan's message is spreading all over, maybe will be with us as long as the whole reformation legend and history twisting, which still continues to bore, half a millenia on.

Bishops sure oughter be out fighting
with something.
IT oughter be the kerigma, for starters.

Think the same for rest v us. Back to simple basics.
Theyll drag us onto their own turf soon enough, for which we have the responsabilty to take onboard the lampoil for the Holy spirit to work with. Hence your condensation. And others.

Just don't know.
God may send us an Intellectual Cyrus,
with Dawkin's, say, communicative gifts ...

or he may not.

Just don't know.

But How many gullible souls ll end in hell thru leaving, or staying away, from the church, triggerred by this grotesque distortion of the truth, this outright lying, this sheer lack of perspective......? On how many will the the lord of the Flies sop his insatiable hunger?

I'm 33. 3 recurring % Irish, and I'd rather start from somwhere else.

Anonymous said...

Comment on your no.3
Another reason which nobody seems to have mentioned is that sometimes an adult, who had been a victim when a child, would report their case to church authorities asking them to remove the priest-perpetrator from priestly ministry, but would not want the case reported to the civil authorities because they did not want any publicity about what had happened to them. This certainly happened in the 1990s. In such cases the church authorities should still have reported the case to the police, although this would be going against the wishes of the victim.

Church bishop said...

Contary to your assertion - paedophilia most certainly a crime, whether or not it is a condition also.