quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:
Of course, it helps keeping this crisis in perspective, if one knows that problems with sexual abuse are at least as bad among non-Catholic ministers, and much worse among teachers. Perhaps one should consider it as a compliment to priests that they are being held to a much higher standard than comparable professionals. Another interesting fact is that abuse by sexual priest was to about 90% homosexual ephebophilia (abuse of adolescent boys). It appears thus that the instruction by the Vatican to dissuade candidates for the priesthood that practice homosexuality or present deep-seated homosexual tendencies, so much beloved by "liberals", was timely and appropriate to avoid such problems in the future.

---

[/URL]

There is really no excuse for this horseshit from an intelligent man. In an extremely short amount of time I was able to find this example study in a peer reviewed journal. There are many others.

[corrected another Hosts's botched link code. mucho host points ]

[ 29. December 2014, 22:01: Message edited by: Kelly Alves ]
 

---

Posted by fletcher christian (# 13919) on :
 
Ingo, have a read of the Ryan report and the Dublin report, then see if you can still manage to assert what you have said with any credence.
 

---

Posted by IngoB (# 8700) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Think²:
There is really no excuse for this horseshit from an intelligent man. In an extremely short amount of time I was able to find this example study in a peer reviewed journal. There are many others.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by fletcher christian:
Ingo, have a read of the Ryan report and the Dublin report, then see if you can still manage to assert what you have said with any credence.

---

quote:

---

First link from Google for "Ryan report" states:
The report found that molestation and rape were "endemic" in boys' facilities, chiefly run by the Christian Brothers order, and supervisors pursued policies that increased the danger. Girls supervised by orders of nuns, chiefly the Sisters of Mercy, suffered much less sexual abuse but instead endured frequent assaults and humiliation designed to make them feel worthless.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Think²:
The problem is single sex institutions not homosexuality you moron.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Think²:
You are less likely to get a boy pregnant.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Think²:
But perhaps more importantly, it is an error to try to extrapolate and adult's sexual orientation from an incident of child abuse, see here.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Think²:
It would make much more sense, for example, to persuade people who know they are sexually attracted to children - but at this time have no offending history - seeking ordination.

---

quote:

---

...problems with sexual abuse are at least as bad among non-Catholic ministers, and much worse among teachers.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zach82:
Most cases of molestation are homosexual, so all homosexuals are liable to molest boys?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:
Yet if the US Church had somehow managed to keep homosexuals out of the priesthood, then she would have avoided the majority of abuses that in fact occurred.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ken:
Do we actually know that? If so how?

NB IngoB's link points to a dead site put up by a domain farmer - is there a typo in the name?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:
...I consider it highly unlikely per se that attraction to teens has nothing to do with sexual orientation. Typing "teenage boys" into google image search with SafeSearch switched off should provide some circumstantial evidence...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Think²:
IngoB - do you believe homosexuals are more likely to abuse children / adolescents than heterosexuals?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Think²:
Really?!? Do you think that they would not have abused children in any other context? Or that they would have been more likely to get caught?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Think²:
IngoB - do you believe homosexuals are more likely to abuse children / adolescents than heterosexuals?

---

I have no idea, since I have not studied the question. I have however no a priori reason to assume so.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:
It has the data references you are looking for, here it is again.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ken:

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:
It has the data references you are looking for, here it is again.

---

Thanks.

Though neither that site nor the references from it have an estimate for the numbers of Protestant ministers accused of sexual abuse, nor for teachers. There is a reference to some papers about sexual "misconduct" by teachers - but it includes no real numbers and uses a much wider definition of "misconduct" so there is no comparison possible - its basically a rather stringy polemic against teachers unions supported by allegation and anecdote rather than data.

So there is no basis here for saying that priests are more or less likely to abuse children than those other groups.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:
It may or may not be true that child (pre-pubescent) molestation has little correlation with gender preference. Yet here (early) teens were targeted, and I consider it highly unlikely per se that attraction to teens has nothing to do with sexual orientation.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by kankucho:
I've read that through several times now within its context, yet can't for the life of me see what pertinent point you're making with it. Still, whatever floats your boat...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Think²:
Then don't you think that obliges you to be particularly careful in implying this particular libel?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ken:
There is a reference to some papers about sexual "misconduct" by teachers - but it includes no real numbers and uses a much wider definition of "misconduct" so there is no comparison possible - its basically a rather stringy polemic against teachers unions supported by allegation and anecdote rather than data.

---

quote:

---

One of the nation’s foremost authorities on the subject of the sexual abuse of minors in public schools is Hofstra University professor Charol Shakeshaft. In 1994, Shakeshaft and Audrey Cohan did a study of 225 cases of educator sexual abuse in New York City. Their findings are astounding.

All of the accused admitted sexual abuse of a student, but none of the abusers was reported to the authorities, and only 1 percent lost their license to teach. Only 35 percent suffered negative consequences of any kind, and 39 percent chose to leave their school district, most with positive recommendations. Some were even given an early retirement package.

Moving molesting teachers from school district to school district is a common phenomenon. And in only 1 percent of the cases do superintendents notify the new school district. According to Diana Jean Schemo, the term "passing the trash" is the preferred jargon among educators.

Shakeshaft has also determined that 15 percent of all students have experienced some kind of sexual misconduct by a teacher between kindergarten and 12th grade; the behaviors range from touching to forced penetration. She and Cohan also found that up to 5 percent of teachers sexually abuse children.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Think²:
This makes an interesting read.

---

quote:

---

To prevent the abomination of ground beef, we're going to carefully screen our beef to make sure that only nice, normal cuts of un-perverted beef are selected to go into our grinder.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by RooK:
Don't you see, Spiffy? Isn't it clear? Sexual orientation is a nice, easy and simply-defined black-and-white absolute, isn't it?

---

quote:

---

if the US Church had somehow managed to keep homosexuals out of the priesthood, then she would have avoided the majority of abuses that in fact occurred.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:
Bullshit, ken. To quote in part:

quote:

---

One of the nation’s foremost authorities on the subject of the sexual abuse of minors in public schools is Hofstra University professor Charol Shakeshaft. In 1994, Shakeshaft and Audrey Cohan did a study of 225 cases of educator sexual abuse in New York City. Their findings are astounding.

All of the accused admitted sexual abuse of a student, but none of the abusers was reported to the authorities, and only 1 percent lost their license to teach. Only 35 percent suffered negative consequences of any kind, and 39 percent chose to leave their school district, most with positive recommendations. Some were even given an early retirement package.

Moving molesting teachers from school district to school district is a common phenomenon. And in only 1 percent of the cases do superintendents notify the new school district. According to Diana Jean Schemo, the term "passing the trash" is the preferred jargon among educators.

Shakeshaft has also determined that 15 percent of all students have experienced some kind of sexual misconduct by a teacher between kindergarten and 12th grade; the behaviors range from touching to forced penetration. She and Cohan also found that up to 5 percent of teachers sexually abuse children.

---

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by PhilA:
I call bullshit on those figures. I am not suggesting that IngoB made them up, but they are clearly bollocks.

---

quote:

---

These boys had reached the age of moral consent in the RC. Many (nearly all?) were in a consensual relationship. Why is this such a big deal? Why destroy the boys life by making this into a notorious crime? It's just sex.

I don't mean to imply that I think this is acceptable behavior for priests or anyone else. Catch the priests and throw them in prison like anyone else. But I don't view this as particularly egregious either because they were priests or because of the homosexual relationship.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by RooK:
Don't you see, Spiffy? Isn't it clear? Sexual orientation is a nice, easy and simply-defined black-and-white absolute, isn't it? And there is never any sort of spectrum of proclivity that can shift during a lifetime, right? And that there's absolutely no possibility at all that the very setting of Catholic ministry is itself a driving factor in these seemingly systemic sexual predations, is there?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by RooK:
Get rid of all Catholic clergy. No clergy, no clergy abuse.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by fletcher christian:
It appears that your entire argument rests on the notion that sexual abuse of minors to a large extent (if not entirely) involves sexual attraction and sexual gratification.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by PhilA:
15% of all students have been sexually abused by a teacher? Bullshit. If it was 15% of children are abused, I could accept it, but seeing as how (in the US) 75% of cases of child sex abuse is committed by family members (84% if you count all abuse) - these figures would have people believe that a massive proportion of kids were abused.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by PhilA:
I do believe 225 cases of reported abuse - no problem, but there are so many kids that make shit up, if a quarter of them are true or based on anything more than a rumour, I would be shocked.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:

Typing "teenage boys" into google image search with SafeSearch switched off should provide some circumstantial evidence...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:

- I meant to illustrate that the rather massive presence of "teen porn" (both pretend and not) suggests that sexual interest in teens is fairly common, and hence mostly found in people who do have a clear sexual preference.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:
We are talking here about adult sexual orientation, right?

---

quote:

---

NARTH

---

quote:

---

Your extrapolation fails: Catholics need to have clergy for religious reasons, they do not however require them to be homosexual.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief:
Is it no longer widely believed that sexual abuse has to do with power and intimidation, and not sexual gratification per se? I've been out of the loop and new studies may have arisen since I was reading about rape in the mid 1980s.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jengie Jon:

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief:
Is it no longer widely believed that sexual abuse has to do with power and intimidation, and not sexual gratification per se? I've been out of the loop and new studies may have arisen since I was reading about rape in the mid 1980s.

---

The studies I come across all still suggest it is about power.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:

quote:

---

Originally posted by PhilA:
15% of all students have been sexually abused by a teacher? Bullshit. If it was 15% of children are abused, I could accept it, but seeing as how (in the US) 75% of cases of child sex abuse is committed by family members (84% if you count all abuse) - these figures would have people believe that a massive proportion of kids were abused.

---

Some further googling finds this interview, which has her say "10% from the time they started school through the 11th grade". I do not know whether the lacking 5% somehow get assigned to the missing kindergarten + 12th grade elsewhere. It also becomes clear that she operates on a very general definition: "Any behaviour that’s sexual in nature directed toward a student, no matter the age of the student. So, it might be anything from touching a student on the breast, from talking about sexual activities that are specifically personal activities, not the kind of thing you do in a class, showing pornographic pictures, telling pornographic jokes or telling jokes that are sexual in nature to intercourse, kissing, any other kind of sexual touching." Note that the Catholic League correctly identifies this as sexual misconduct, rather than sexual abuse. Here is her review of the literature, which (according to the foreword by the Deputy Secretary), is not always careful in maintaining the distinction.

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by PhilA:
I do believe 225 cases of reported abuse - no problem, but there are so many kids that make shit up, if a quarter of them are true or based on anything more than a rumour, I would be shocked.

---

The significance of those case studies is more that this was real sexual abuse, but got handled by the school authorities in much the same "hush it up, move the perp" way that some US bishops were guilty of.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief:
Is it no longer widely believed that sexual abuse has to do with power and intimidation, and not sexual gratification per se? I've been out of the loop and new studies may have arisen since I was reading about rape in the mid 1980s.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by RooK:
Want to play the spurious ad-hominem game?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by RooK:
Your beloved Catholic church produces clergy with a proclivity for sexual offense that is only exceeded by one other kind of institution: prisons.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by RooK:
You'll keep defending the decisions of your spiritual leaders, for religious reasons. They do not, however, seem particularly well-conceived to anyone else not thus hobbled.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dumpling Jeff:
... in general teens need to learn to question authority early and often.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dumpling Jeff:
... Priests aren't special in this.

---

quote:

---

I simply refuse to believe most of these teens didn't know what they were doing was wrong. Maybe they didn't have the experience to understand why, but both RC and cultural teachings condemn homosexuality and adult-child sex.

By seducing these children into having sex before they had worked out their own thoughts and feelings about these subjects the priests did these teens a grave disservice. But that's just as true for other molesters as well. Priests aren't special in this.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dumpling Jeff:
Kankucho, the RCC teaches the supremacy of the individual conscience. This is a firm teaching of the Church through the centuries. It also contrasts with many (most?) other religions. Questioning authority is what we do.

Of course we also feel there's a right answer to those questions.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dumpling Jeff:
Priests are special in a liturgical sense. Pro basketball players are special in an athletic sense, so this quality is not unique. It should not give them authority beyond teaching faith and morals.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Think²:
I am invoking Dumpling's law, which is that:

When creepy Jeff starts talking about sex, the thread is officially a trainwreck and should be abandoned.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by saysay:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Think²:
I am invoking Dumpling's law, which is that:

When creepy Jeff starts talking about sex, the thread is officially a trainwreck and should be abandoned.

---

Seconded.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:
QLib has probably a point above.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:
...Typing "teenage boys" into google image search with SafeSearch switched off should provide some circumstantial evidence...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:
The decisions of the bishops covering up the scandal were in some sense worse than the actions of the sex offenders themselves. A wolf attacking lambs is more understandable than a shepherd moving a wolf from one herd to the next while hiding the bones best he can.

---

So why did The Vatican arrange for his Eminent Pimpness Bernard Cardinal Law to stay out of prison and is he still in several top-jobs in the Curia?
Apparently the divinely guaranteed leadership of our church rather rewards the wolfs than do the right thing.
 

---

Posted by Ricardus (# 8757) on :
 
Fuzzipeg -

I think Rossweisse is saying that heterosexuals might be dissuaded from seeking ordinations because they want to marry, whereas homosexuals mostly don't want to marry anyway so they don't have that particular dissuasion from entering the priesthood. Therefore there is likely to be a lower proportion of heterosexuals among Catholic clergy than in the population as a whole.

Which seems reasonable to me, though I don't know whether it's true.

[Cross-posted]

[ 25. January 2010, 10:08: Message edited by: Ricardus ]
 

---

Posted by opaWim (# 11137) on :
 
For what it is worth, in my neck of the woods I suspect there are at least two other relevant factors.
With the provision that I might be wrong in giving too much credence to stereotypes:

1. Male gays may be more into caring professions than male straights.

2. The smells-and-bells part of being a RC priest may attract males who are into campiness.


(And yes, I'm aware that campiness isn't the exclusive domain of gays.)
 

---

Posted by kankucho (# 14318) on :
 
3. They're into wearing frocks

4. They like saying 'Aah! Men!'


 

---

Posted by opaWim (# 11137) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dumpling Jeff:
Kankucho, the RCC teaches the supremacy of the individual conscience. This is a firm teaching of the Church through the centuries.

---

quote:

---

Lyda*Rose, why do you seek to blame the victims? Can't you accept that as the injured party they, not society, should decide how to handle the consequences of their behavior.

---

Is this your idea of "irony" or something? Geez Louise, you are not only a sick puppy but a dumbass puppy! Look again:

quote:

---

I simply refuse to believe most of these teens didn't know what they were doing was wrong.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief:
Is it no longer widely believed that sexual abuse has to do with power and intimidation, and not sexual gratification per se? I've been out of the loop and new studies may have arisen since I was reading about rape in the mid 1980s.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by dj_ordinaire:

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief:
Is it no longer widely believed that sexual abuse has to do with power and intimidation, and not sexual gratification per se? I've been out of the loop and new studies may have arisen since I was reading about rape in the mid 1980s.

---

Exactly.

In other words, Ingo's argument collapses at the first hurdle because it assumes that committing same-sex abuse of adolescents or children indicates that the abuser is gay. This is simply not the case.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Think²:
IngoB - do you believe homosexuals are more likely to abuse children / adolescents than heterosexuals?

---

I have no idea, since I have not studied the question. I have however no a priori reason to assume so.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by saysay:

quote:

---

Originally posted by PhilA:
I call bullshit on those figures. I am not suggesting that IngoB made them up, but they are clearly bollocks.

---

I suspect they may be using the definition of abuse that includes 'someone looked at you and it made you uncomfortable.'

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lyda*Rose:
I wouldn't allow a teenager near you, you twisted fart.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ken:
...They have what they call three levels of sexual misconduct by a teacher. ...They include things like ...hugging a boy who has just scored a goal...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ken:

The idea that "up to 5%" (see, no real numbers) of teachers in New York City in 1995 were guilty of "misconduct" on that level is hardly "astounding".

---

quote:

---

Why we as a society can't often manage to tell the difference between/outcomes of a hug of caring done in an open way in a classroom/church setting and some sinister sexual abuse or grooming is what worries me.

---

quote:

---

From The perspective of RC moral theology, homosexuality is a sin. Like it or not, the vast majority of these kids were brought up with that system.

As adults most of us move past the black/white, right/wrong, sex is sinful beliefs we had as a child, but these kids were seduced into sex before they had a chance to make that movement.

So they would see what they did as wrong. But that doesn't mean they can't move on from there afterwards. We as a society should not place the added burden of our social disdain on them as well. And if you think having society tell them, "What the priest did to them ruined them for life." doesn't add to their burden, your an idiot.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dumpling Jeff:
All you parents feel free to live in fear. (Apparently of me if I'm reading Lyda*Rose correctly.)

---

quote:

---

2. The smells-and-bells part of being a RC priest may attract males who are into campiness.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spiffy:
Nope, current research has strengthened the link between sexual violence (both when the victims are children and when the victims are adults) and power/intimidation.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by teddybear:
As a survivor of sexual abuse by a religious brother, I think IngoB is full of crap. My abuser abused both boys and girls.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by RooK:
Agreed. Simply screening for sexual orientation when sex of any orientation is supposed to be suppressed is completely missing the point of the problem.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rossweisse.:
I suspect that by refusing to let its priests marry ..., the Roman Catholic Church is guaranteeing that a high percentage of candidates will be men whose orientation is homosexual.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by opaWim:
So why did The Vatican arrange for his Eminent Pimpness Bernard Cardinal Law to stay out of prison and is he still in several top-jobs in the Curia?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by dj_ordinaire:
In other words, Ingo's argument collapses at the first hurdle because it assumes that committing same-sex abuse of adolescents or children indicates that the abuser is gay.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Adeodatus:
On one level, IngoB is a very wise man. He studiously avoids studying questions to which he suspects he might not like the answer. The world would be a quieter place if there were more like him. A worse place by far, to be sure. But quieter.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ken:
And the papers IngoB referred to to support his assertion that teachers are more likely to be involved in sexual abuse show no such thing.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spiffy:
Nope, current research has strengthened the link between sexual violence (both when the victims are children and when the victims are adults) and power/intimidation.

---

If this sexual violence we are talking about was purely about power / intimidation, then it would not differentiate between boys and girls. But it does, massively so. No other explanation has been advanced for the fact that boys were in 80-90% of the cases the targets, and not girls.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ricardus:
I think Rossweisse is saying that heterosexuals might be dissuaded from seeking ordinations because they want to marry, whereas homosexuals mostly don't want to marry anyway so they don't have that particular dissuasion from entering the priesthood. Therefore there is likely to be a lower proportion of heterosexuals among Catholic clergy than in the population as a whole. ...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
Jeff is beyond twisted. He's completely sprained.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:

quote:

---

Originally posted by dj_ordinaire:
In other words, Ingo's argument collapses at the first hurdle because it assumes that committing same-sex abuse of adolescents or children indicates that the abuser is gay.

---

See above. It's not me who has considerable explaining to do. If the priests were not "gay" in some loose definition of the term, then why did they target almost exclusively boys?

---

Really, I think you need to understand something - wanting to rape twelve year old boys is not part of being gay. Being homosexual means being attracted to members of your own sex: the desire to abuse adolescents is something entirely different, not part of being 'gay' in even a very loose term. This may be a delicate point to appreciate, especially if one insists on defining human sexuality in the rather crude mechanical terms that the Roman Curia seem to favour. Nevertheless, I assure you that it is so.

I simply do not find it creditable that most of the priestly abusers would have lived as gay men had they not been in the priesthood. If you want to know why the victims are in the majority of cases male, I would suggest that the obvious answer is that abuse tends to establish itself in cycles, so priests who were abused by older clergy when young, or at all-male seminaries, would be more likely to respond by themselves abusing younger men. I don't think has anything to do with what is normally thought of as 'sexual orientation', difficult to pin down though this concept might be.
 

---

Posted by The Blessed Pangolin (# 13623) on :
 
Prof. Shakeshaft


 

---

Posted by Rossweisse. (# 2349) on :
 
Yes, is "Shakeshaft" a real name?
 

---

Posted by PataLeBon (# 5452) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rossweisse.:
I suspect that by refusing to let its priests marry ..., the Roman Catholic Church is guaranteeing that a high percentage of candidates will be men whose orientation is homosexual.

---

Well, it is apparently true in practice that a larger fraction of priests is homosexual than among men in general. Nevertheless, I think there are deeper issues here. Clearly, a priest is giving up sex anyway, so why would that be more attractive to gays?

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by dj_ordinaire:
In other words, Ingo's argument collapses at the first hurdle because it assumes that committing same-sex abuse of adolescents or children indicates that the abuser is gay.

---

See above. It's not me who has considerable explaining to do. If the priests were not "gay" in some loose definition of the term, then why did they target almost exclusively boys?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by comet:
Please take the reasonable discussion of homosexuality to Dead Horses. This thread is for verbally abusing Bingo, not sanely discussing real issues.

Comet
Hellhost

I can't believe I just wrote that.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spiffy:

Now, these statistics are general, not to do with the priest abuse cases, but they illustrate the culture you've never had to deal with, Ingo, being a male-- women are taught not to talk about this. Ever. Because when we report the crime, we're treated like the criminal. Like whores. Like sluts who wanted it, who deserved it, who *made* the man lust after our flesh and commit violence against us.

---

quote:

---

I wonder, Ingo, about that demon whispering in the minds of any women wandering through here reading your attempts to queerwash the sex abuse scandals. I wonder if that demon's speaking in their minds using your voice.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by comet:
This thread is for verbally abusing Bingo, not sanely discussing real issues. ... I can't believe I just wrote that.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by fletcher christian:
originally posted by opawim:

quote:

---

2. The smells-and-bells part of being a RC priest may attract males who are into campiness.

---

You might be able to argue this line of thought if this were in fact true of Roman Catholicism in Ireland - but it's not. You would be very, very hard pushed to find what some would classify as 'high' or a 'smells n bells' Roman Catholic Church anywhere in Ireland. They do exist, but are as rare as hens teeth. But maybe you still have a point though, cos in Ireland the abusive priests mainly came from evangelical style churches - normally classed a 'low'; so maybe gays are attracted to 'low' churches. Then again, this whole ridiculous line of thought may in fact be more about your own stupid and inane bias and a wonderful demonstration of your own ignorance.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:

quote:

---

Originally posted by opaWim:
So why did The Vatican arrange for his Eminent Pimpness Bernard Cardinal Law to stay out of prison and is he still in several top-jobs in the Curia?

---

I do not know enough to comment, really, but I certainly do not assume that the Vatican comes up with one good decision after the next.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by multipara:
OpaWim; re young Bingo; the heat was too strong and he got out of the kitchen..

Once an idiot, always an idiot.

m

---

quote:

---

Wah! Mean men rape women and there's nothing we can do about it. Wah!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dumpling Jeff:
No men I know would take a sympathetic view of actual rapists.

---

• She wasn't "asking for it" by the way she dressed or the way she spoke or the signals she was giving up?
• She didn't say 'yes' first and then change her mind?
• She didn't accept his offer of 'a cup of coffee back at my place'?
• She was stone cold sober?
• She hadn't let him buy her a meal?

quote:

---

Originally posted by QLib:
I'm not sure I believe the high percentage of reports that "turn out to be false" either. Proven false allegation is pretty rare - I suspect the figure you give is where the woman decides not to prosecute

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dumpling Jeff:
Spiffy wrote,

quote:

---

Wah! Mean men rape women and there's nothing we can do about it. Wah!

---

Although it differs on cop shows, in real life cops always take a close look at those who report crimes. This is because so often their the ones committing them. Two groups get singled out whenever a crime goes down. First is the reporter; second is the rent a cop.

And with rape they have double the cause. Nearly half (40%) of all rape reports turn out to be false.

So what Spiffy is whining about is that women are to afraid of being called a slut to see justice done. But they are apparently not to afraid of being called a slut to make up tales to get men they don't like thrown in prison. Hmm.

And who calls the sluts for being raped? No men I know would take a sympathetic view of actual rapists. Of course I was raise to be such a sick bastard that I think no means no.

IMO, the reason rape exists as a major crime is because women don't report it when it happens and when women do report rape it they often lie. Any guilt or shame felt seems to come from women directed at other women.

Of course it's not fair to blame one woman for what a man and other women women do. My heart does go out to actual rape victims. But it's hard to know who those are, isn't it.

Still a good course of action would be for every woman who's actually raped to file a report. It would also be good if women didn't decide they were raped after the fact or because they're angry at their boyfriend or whatever, though that's asking a lot. Then serial rapists would quickly be taken off the streets.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:
At worst one can say that Catholic clergy is no better in this regard than comparable professionals. Why do you spread FUD?

---

quote:

---

]The decisions of the bishops covering up the scandal were in some sense worse than the actions of the sex offenders themselves.

---

quote:

---

The idea that these abuse structures are somehow special to Catholic clergy is simply false.

---

quote:

---

Specifically, FBI officials report that out of roughly 10,000 sexual assault cases since 1989, about 2,000 tests have been inconclusive, about 2,000 tests have excluded the primary suspect, and about 6,000 have "matched" or included the primary suspect."

---

quote:

---

You do realise that 2000 are not clear, so you should have said 20%. Even that 20% is up for interpretation, what of the woman who blames rape on a casual acquaintance because the actual rapist is her father or brother. That woman is in that 20%. Was she raped, yes, just not by who she says she was raped by.

---

How can men be so mean?
Words fail.
 

---

Posted by Spiffy (# 5267) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dumpling Jeff:
But then I'm a twisted pervert.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by opaWim:
I am not at all convinced IngoB merits the title "idiot", or a number of other redeeming titles he has been given, or which have been implied.

---

quote:

---

And they were entirely in line with the official pronouncements from the Vatican. In May 2001, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger sent a letter to every bishop confirming that they were to cover up any act of sexual misconduct by a priest and handle it internally under threat of excommunication. This meant that every bishop who followed the orders from the Vatican was a de facto member of a paedophile ring (even if they did not personally abuse any children). And every bishop who openly didn't would be excommunicated.

Since then the Roman Catholic Church has made this organiser of a paedophile ring into its head.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rossweisse.:

quote:

---

Originally posted by opaWim:
I am not at all convinced IngoB merits the title "idiot", or a number of other redeeming titles he has been given, or which have been implied.

---

IgnoB is not an idiot, but he can be incredibly stupid.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jengie Jon:
what of the woman who blames rape on a casual acquaintance because the actual rapist is her father or brother. That woman is in that 20%. Was she raped, yes, just not by who she says she was raped by.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dumpling Jeff:
I always assumed Cardinal Law was being "kicked upstairs". He was "promoted" from a position of power (which he was forced to resign) to a titular post with no congregation.

He was not charged with any crimes because he didn't commit any.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dumpling Jeff:
...sexual morays...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dumpling Jeff:
There are laws on the books that don't need scapegoating feminazis who think that it's ok to blame the wrong man for rape just because the rapist wasn't a popular sex partner.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by multipara:
Bingo is an idiot.

---

quote:

---

...Apologist Extraordinaire for the Scarlet Whore of Rome...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Louise:
Oh dear, that must be a really big need for negative attention!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Justinian:
In May 2001, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger sent a letter to every bishop confirming that they were to cover up any act of sexual misconduct by a priest and handle it internally under threat of excommunication.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Justinian:
In May 2001, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger sent a letter to every bishop confirming that they were to cover up any act of sexual misconduct by a priest and handle it internally under threat of excommunication. This meant that every bishop who followed the orders from the Vatican was a de facto member of a paedophile ring (even if they did not personally abuse any children). And every bishop who openly didn't would be excommunicated.

Since then the Roman Catholic Church has made this organiser of a paedophile ring into its head.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by FCB:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Justinian:
In May 2001, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger sent a letter to every bishop confirming that they were to cover up any act of sexual misconduct by a priest and handle it internally under threat of excommunication.

---

You really should work on your reading comprehension. If you want to give it another try, the document mentioned is
found here, unless you want to read it in the original Latin. The instruction had to do with the confidentiality of ecclesiastic proceedings against those accused of grave delicts (among which is the sexual abuse of minors). It has nothing to do with enjoining silence with regard to criminal prosecution.

---

quote:

---

In fact, the guideline approved by the Vatican in 2002 specifically calls for the pursuit of criminal prosecution in such cases.[/qb]

---

quote:

---

But don't feel bad. You still have the story of all the babies buried underneath the convent.

---

quote:

---

I’m astonished anyone of good will still trots it out.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chesterbelloc:
Vicious bullshit, Justinian. This old lie has been debunked so many times since 2001 I’m astonished anyone of good will still trots it out.

The 2001 document clarified an earlier one (Crimen Sollicitationis, 1962) which wasn’t even about child abuse in the first place – it was about the horrible offense of priests abusing the secrecy of the confessional. One such abuse (therein explicitly condemned) would be to solicit sexual favours from the penintent, and the document makes it clear that the abused penitent was under an absolute obligation to report such attempted abuse immediately.

---

quote:

---

If proved against the priest, such behaviour could lead to the immediate and permanent reduction of the priest to the lay state and says NOTHING about not reporting serious offences to the civil authorities.

---

quote:

---

Similarly, Ratzinger’s 2001 clarification and beefing-up of CS made it more, not less, strenous in its protection of abused persons and once again NEVER even implies that criminal offenses are not to be dealt with by the civil authorities.

---

quote:

---

Since you accuse the Pope so blithely of being part of a pedophile ring, I expect you’ll be along to tell us what precisely in that 2001 document (chapter and verse please) led you to such a conclusion. If not, an admission of error would do. A public calumny deserves a public apology, don’t you think?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fuzzipeg:
IngoB is certainly not an idiot, that's just calling someone names because you disagree with him.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gildas:
Justinian, AIUI, cases of this sort are subject to the Pontifical Secret but the events in question are not. So if a Catholic Priest offers you a good seeing to instead of the usual Three Hail Marys and two Our Fathers the resulting trial will be covered by the Pontifical Secret but there is nothing stopping you bringing the matter to the attention of Plod if you are a minor.

---

quote:

---

but, really, does anyone seriously think that in a middle of an ess-eaitch-one-tee storm of this nature the head of the CDF would forbid everyone from co-operating with the civil authority on pain of excommunication?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:

quote:

---

Originally posted by ken:
And the papers IngoB referred to to support his assertion that teachers are more likely to be involved in sexual abuse show no such thing.

---

Well, one of the authors of these studies, Prof. Shakeshaft, seems to think otherwise. See here, which is a free copy of an article in Education Week.

---

quote:

---

Those figures suggest that "the physical sexual abuse of students in schools is likely more than 100 times the abuse by priests,"contended Ms. Shakeshaft, who is a professor of educational administration at Hofstra, in Hempstead, N.Y.

---

What that doesn't say is that she is not talking about numbers of teachers but numbers of students. And she is not talking about proportions but about absolute numbers. She is (or maybe the reporter talking about her) is claiming she is being she thinks about 100 times as many people have been abused by teachers as by priests.


And she only says that her literature search (and it was a literature search, not original research) "suggests" that the problem is 100 times greater in education. Weasel words, but she must use them to stay ion the right side of her college's ethics committee because of course the studies she is talking about are not claiming like for like. She is comparing on the one hand people who report serious sexual abuse from priests, such as rape, and on the other hand people who report much wider categories of "sexual misconduct" from teachers.

But even if her claim is true, so what?

I think there are about 40,000 Roman Catholic priests in the USA.

The largest teacher's union, the National Education Association, has over three million members. There are millions teachers who are not members.

So there ARE OVER A HUNDRED TIMES AS MANY TEACHERS AS CATHOLIC PRIESTS IN AMERICA. So if teachers and priests were equally likely to abuse children YOU WOULD EXPECT A HUNDRED TIMES AS MANY REPORTS OF IT.

And, what's more, kids typically spend maybe 20-30 hours a week with their teachers. Very few spend more than an hour or so in the presence of a priest. So if the number of incidents abuse per abuser was the same (IYSWIM) you would have to infer that the rate of incidents was much greater from priests than from teachers. (Remember she is NOT just talking about stuff that goes on behind closed doors - or not with teachers anyway)

And, what's more, people pass through the hands of many teachers in their school career. I'd guess I was taught by about 40-50 teachers in the two schools I went to, anyone who moves home a lot will see far more. Few kids get to go to fifty churches during their childhood. So a comparitively small number of abusive teachers would deal with many, many kids in their career, far more than most priests would (and the few priests who did would probably be teachers themselves (hey, maybe those figures fro teachers are being skewed by a few bent priests?)

Anyway the reports quoted by Dr Shakeshaft (it still sounds like a weird made-up name) do NOT say anything about how many teachers are abusers, or even how many teachers are guilty of her more generalised "sexual misconduct". So they do NOT help us know if teachers are better or worse than priests. She doesn't even claim that they do - she is making a demand for more research money.

Look, I know you are an engineer of some sort and so maybe haven't had a decent education in statistics. (I know what its like - I'm a biologist - we are crap at all maths except statistics). And maybe you are used to scholarly papers being full of deterministic equations and actual data. Unlike this one.

So lets use an analogy without the emotional blinders of children, sex, violence, and religion (no wonder this topic has legs, it hits all the buttons)

Say you wanted to know if car drivers were more or less likely to be hurt in an accident than motorbike riders. And someone told you that in 2002 approximately 175,000 occupants of cars were seriously injured in Britain, but only 3,000 motorcyclists were killed - so that is evidence that driving is about 60 times more dangerous than riding. You wouldn't fall for that for a moment. But that is exactly what you have done with Ms Shakewhatever's papers.

Hey! I pass the Comet test! I verbally abuse BingoBee BY rationally discussing real issues.

[ 27. January 2010, 17:52: Message edited by: ken ]
 

---

Posted by Spiffy (# 5267) on :
 
No worries, Ken, someone will be along shortly to mansplain to you why you're wrong. Since Ingo isn't reading this (in theory), it'll probably be Dumples.
 

---

Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Well, it seems that ken's completely ignorant of the whole subject because he's had to do research before he could post. Obviously, if his opinion had any validity he would just know the Truth™ without having to put in all that effort. Clearly the sign of an inferior mind.


 

---

Posted by Dumpling Jeff (# 12766) on :
 
KK, let me mansplain it to you.

No one is arguing the sex scandals in the RC church were the church's finest moment. I find what the priest's did and what the administrators did sick and wrong.

What Ms. Shakeshaft supposedly reported was that a random child in the U.S. is about a hundred times as likely to be the target of unwanted sexual attention by a teacher as that child is by an RC priest. (The entire study sounds like an April Fools prank to me. Shakenshaft, lol)

She further stated that this was a wild ass guess because no one tracks the teachers who are molesters.

This second point was the main point I think.

Where are the studies? If this is about the children, shouldn't someone at least get some real data? Society is willing to turn a blind eye to teacher perpetrated sex abuse while holding the entire RC church responsible for the actions of a few clerics.

Is an RC priest a bigger risk than a public school teacher? On a per hour basis, probably. But if you have a child which is more likely to molest her/him? If your child is in public school (nearly mandated in the U.S.) and your not an RC, the answer is clearly the teacher. Yet we can't be bothered to even track that problem.

Those outside the church look at it and see a classic pyramid power structure. But to the average RC, Rome is at best a dream vacation. It has nothing to do with our real lives. When we look at our hierarchy it's usually because it screwed up somewhere. Real Catholicism is based on the individual and family.

So there are plenty willing to bash the RCC but ignore the same problem in secular institutions. This was true when Christ was a corporal. It hasn't changed.

Now go ahead and tell me I'm being unfair to all those upstanding teachers who never molested anyone, how I'm comparing apples to oranges, and how I must be a sick puppy because I disagree with the leftist party line.

All those things are true. Deal with it.
 

---

Posted by Spiffy (# 5267) on :
 
Oooh, I'm PSYCHIC! I wonder if I can get a fabulous turban and an infomercial.
 

---

Posted by IngoB (# 8700) on :
 
I've three deadlines to deal with at the moment, so I will just post three short comments here:

quote:

---

Originally posted by ken:
Look, I know you are an engineer of some sort and so maybe haven't had a decent education in statistics. (I know what its like - I'm a biologist - we are crap at all maths except statistics). And maybe you are used to scholarly papers being full of deterministic equations and actual data. Unlike this one.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:
Finally, I think Catholics like opaWim and multipara are like a husband with a fairly normal wife trying to channel Hosea.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chesterbelloc:
Justinian, you really are a spineless, graceless, mendacious, squirmy little arsebiscuit. Yes, 5 adjectives: because you're worth it.

---

quote:

---

Meaning that it's the investigating authorities who are banned from helping the secular authorities due to the Papal Seal. There's nothing directly preventing the victim and the victim's family doing so. There would have been Catholic priests strung up from pullpits if they'd tried that.

As it is, there are two possible cases:
1: The victim's family doesn't trust the RCC and turns things straight over to the secular authorities. The RCC can't do much about that and any attempt to directly interfere would be politically impossible at the time.

2: Despite the problems, the victim's family trusts the RCC to do something. They take it through the RCC's own chanels. Which are set up to slow things down (meaning that any secular investigation is much harder due to the ground being cold), produce the most charitable result possible for the priest, and to otherwise protect the reputation of the Roman Catholic Church. In short to cover up and throw as much of a smokescreen as possible while appearing to be doing something.

Putting the whole thing under the auspices of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and under the Papal Seal is a wonderful way of doing this latter alternative. While appearing to be doing something positive so fewer people depart for category 1 or leave the RCC entirely.

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

but, really, does anyone seriously think that in a middle of an ess-eaitch-one-tee storm of this nature the head of the CDF would forbid everyone from co-operating with the civil authority on pain of excommunication?

---

They'd do whatever they could to do so that wouldn't make it screamingly obvious that that was what they were doing. They couldn't gag the victim/victim's family. But effectively could anyone investigating from their side.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:
I'm also glad that FCB and Chesterbelloc already competently answered Justinian, whose claim about the RCC as giant pedophile ring I consider to be in quite the same league as "the Jews poisoned our wells". That opaWim then told Justinian "The facts you supply are correct as far as I know." speaks for itself.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:
Thanks ken, but I'm not going to claim that excuse...Sorry about that, and I appreciate you catching this nonsense from me.

---

A quick for a gracious apology.

- Chris.
 

---

Posted by Justinian (# 5357) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gildas:

---

quote:

---

You're still getting the wrong end of the stick. A Roman Catholic Bishop who is involved in a tribunal of this nature is obliged to keep the proceedings of the tribunal secret.

---

quote:

---

He is not obliged to refuse to help the civil authorities by sharing any information he has gained from other sources. So if Cardinal Fang pops round to the Presbytery and catches Father Mulcahy in flagrante with the St. Winifred's School Choir he is entitled and expected to inform the civil authority.

---

quote:

---

Again, I think that you are misunderstanding what was happening. It wasn't as if Ratzinger was seeing the headlines and thinking: "Ooh, sexual abuse. Must cover that up". The cover up had already been perpetrated in spades.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Justinian:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chesterbelloc:
the document makes it clear that the abused penitent was under an absolute obligation to report such attempted abuse immediately.

---

And report it to the Roman Catholic authorities rather than the secular ones.

---

quote:

---

"Cases of this kind are subject to the pontifical secret." Which means that those within the church who could help the civil case the most are banned from doing so.

---

quote:

---

I believe I have said what led me to that conclusion above.

---

quote:

---

I am also often bewildered by the idea that Cardinal Law was somehow rewarded and promoted by being given a largely ceremonial job in Rome. The last Archpriest of St Mary Major was a Welshman who was a complete nutter. Law was forced to resign from a pretty important job and in effect sent into exile. Now he is in an insignificant job.

---

quote:

---

He is also a member of the Congregations for the Oriental Churches, the Clergy, Divine Worship and Discipline of the Sacraments, Evangelisation of Peoples, Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life, Catholic Education, Bishops as well as the Pontifical Council for the Family.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Triple Tiara:
Well let's unpack this a bit then.

Why are you impressed? What do you think being a member of those Congregations actually means?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Triple Tiara:
Put another way, the RCC does not succumb to vigilante justice.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Erin:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Triple Tiara:
Put another way, the RCC does not succumb to vigilante justice.

---

Wow, what a total dick answer. I expected the RCC to defrock the son of a bitch, not give him a mouthful of honorary titles. I don't care if they are meaningless.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Shadowhund:
In any rate, Cardinal Law's offenses, as they really are, have been grossly exaggerated

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Triple Tiara:
Law resigned from the pastoral responsibility for the Archdiocese of Boston. He then went into virtual exile and was given a ceremonial job in Rome. Personally, I think that appointment was a bit of an insult to him, but that's just me. He did not resign from being a Cardinal. His responsibilities as a Cardinal therefore continue.

What should have happened? Should he have simply been put out to retire somewhere and not do anything productive? I would find that far worse than what has in fact happened to him.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Erin:
I believe there are good RC men and women. I do not believe that any of them are part of the RCC leadership. It is corrupt, power-hungry, and self-serving. It long ago gave up the claim to be the One True Church by virtue of its utter indifference to everything that Christ has taught.

---

quote:

---

the medical professionals in the 70s and 80s who dealt with these issues were generally far too optimistic about the ability to rehabilitate sexual offenders than they should have been. This was in keeping with the so-called "enlightened" opinion of the time which tended to favor rehabiliation over retribution for sex offenses. The climate, however, has now gone the opposite extreme by saying (incorrectly) that no pedophile can ever be rehabilitated and that all sex offenders of whatever kind should either be locked up forever or forced to live under bridges.

Thus, Law did not behave "immorally" by returning Geoghan to ministry under the circumstances that he did. It was, nonetheless, a disastrous decision that caused people harm. Not every harmful or incompetent decision is sinful...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chesterbelloc:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Erin:
I believe there are good RC men and women. I do not believe that any of them are part of the RCC leadership. It is corrupt, power-hungry, and self-serving. It long ago gave up the claim to be the One True Church by virtue of its utter indifference to everything that Christ has taught.

---

No good Catholic leaders at all. Wow. You do realise that, with that depth of self-confessed prejudice, any Catholic would have to be an idiot to take anything you say about anything to do with the Church (let alone Cardinal Law) seriously, right?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Justinian:
FCB provided a link to the document in question. Chesterbelloc asked me which parts of it lead to my accusations. I answered both of them using the letter itself. Neither of them apparently is able to show how my reading of it is anything other than accurate.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dumpling Jeff:

Your not just a bitch, your a crazy bitch.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Triple Tiara:
Why are you impressed? What do you think being a member of those Congregations actually means?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dumpling Jeff:
I've seen evidence that the odds of a rehabilitated child molester reoffending are less than the odds of a combat veteran offending.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dumpling Jeff:
Cardinal Law was told, by the best advise he had, that these men were not dangerous. He should have been more cautious. But he was not deliberately trying to hurt children.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dumpling Jeff:
Your not just a bitch, your a crazy bitch.

---

You're not just a moron, you're an illiterate moron. Didn't you also defend the crazy-ass child-molesting LDS cult out in Arizona or wherever the fuck it was?

Triple Tiara, I'm not sure whether or not I should laugh or cry at the thought of going to pre-Vatican II schools. I graduated high school in 1989. That said, mdijon and RuthW have both articulated my opinion on the subject, which admittedly leaves me incoherent with rage. Unless he's cleaning Vatican toilets with his own toothbrush, it's not a punishment. Honestly? The way I see it, the only reason he's not still presiding over the Archdiocese is because the press got too bad even for the Magisterium. If they could have continued to keep it quiet, he'd still be there.

ETA: I want to make it clear that my seething hatred is reserved for the Vatican and all the people who issue the edicts and such. Well, and turds like Chesterbelloc, Dumpling Jeff and Shadowhund, whose "defend even the most heinous abuses by my ideological heroes" stance leaves an unpleasant taste in any compassionate human's mouth.

[ 28. January 2010, 21:24: Message edited by: Erin ]
 

---

Posted by Dumpling Jeff (# 12766) on :
 
Lyda*Rose, your article dated Jan. 6, 2002 was thin on facts about the church decision process but long on speculation about a deliberate cover up. Fortunately they said:

quote:

---

But the appeal was denied last month. The records, including depositions of bishops and personnel files, are scheduled to become public on Jan. 26

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Triple Tiara:
Make the punishment fit the crime. Law was removed from office in Boston (well, forced to resign). That's quite a major thing. From being Archbishop of one of the primary dioceses in America to being Archpriest of a Vatican Basilica. I think that speaks volumes about how his aptitude was judged in Rome. That is a HUGE demotion.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dumpling Jeff:
Of course what did happen was bad enough. You are right that Geoghan should have been removed and criminal charges filed.

Yet that solution isn't as simple as it sounds. Cardinal Law had every reason to believe the criminal justice system was unfair. Charging Geoghan would have been the equivalent of killing him.

It was a tough call and there were no clear cut guidelines.

For those who doubt the justice system was unfair, when Geoghan was ultimately arrested he was placed in special custody to "protect" him. If you search the internet you can find the video of the guards cheering while they killed him. Does that make Geoghan a martyr for dying for his faith? Will he be one of your siblings in heaven?

I have long been blathering about how we need to lower the emotional level in these decisions. If there were a good civil law solution, perhaps Cardinal Law would have come to the right administrative decision. As it was, the solution we have come up with is an effective death sentence (often without trial) for the priests.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Erin:
Chesterbelloc [...] whose "defend even the most heinous abuses by my ideological heroes" stance leaves an unpleasant taste in any compassionate human's mouth.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Triple Tiara:
Josephine, the usual expectation in the RC Church is that bishops clean up their own mess - unless that mess is so severe that the bishop has to be withdrawn lest more damage is done. But the clamour for Law to go was so great that his position was untenable. Imagine the outcry if he had been left in position and told to sort it out! I think what has happened, with the appointment to Boston of Cardinal O'Malley, a wise and holy man, who has been assiduous in dealing with both the victims and with future safeguarding, is a mark of the Church's real intentions in this regard.

---

quote:

---

These matters are confidential only to the procedures within the Church, but do not preclude in any way for these matters to be brought to civil authorities for proper legal adjudication. The Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People of June, 2002, approved by the Vatican, requires that credible allegations of sexual abuse of children be reported to legal authorities.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anselmina:
I don't know enough about the Cardinal Law situation to comment. But surely Bishops are not supposed, or qualified, to clean up the mess of alleged criminal sexual behaviour (which seems to have been the approach at least in Ireland)? Isn't that the function of law enforcement agencies, with the full cooperation of the Church?

I say this knowing that in the CofE we came very late to the proper establishment of diocesan procedures for enabling that this was explicitly the case, because - wrongly - it was seen as being a grey area.

---

quote:

---

Do the Church authorities in Rome really feel no clearly out-worked accountability is required of them, for the decades-long corruption of the Catholic Church in some countries, with regard to this issue?

---

quote:

---

Lyda*Rose, your article dated Jan. 6, 2002 was thin on facts about the church decision process but long on speculation about a deliberate cover up.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Triple Tiara:

Rome does not micro-manage the local Church. It establishes norms and it responds to situations. How would they have been aware of things happening at the local level if they were not informed? [/QB]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dumpling Jeff:
Lyda*Rose, your article dated Jan. 6, 2002 was thin on facts about the church decision process but long on speculation about a deliberate cover up.

---

I have to admire your fucking nerve - you make sweeping assertions about non-existent evidence and then call someone else for posting a link that is 'thin on facts'.

Well, I won't bother you with the link, but I have to tell you that I read somewhere that a reliable scientific analysis of internet posts showed that there is a much higher probability of the poster proving to be a fucking useless twat, if the letters F and U appear in their chosen name, and the odds are doubled if either of those appear more than once, apparently. Who would have guessed?
 

---

Posted by Triple Tiara (# 9556) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by jacobsen:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Triple Tiara:

Rome does not micro-manage the local Church. It establishes norms and it responds to situations. How would they have been aware of things happening at the local level if they were not informed?

---

TT, There are such things as visits and inspections. Yes, Rome should have known. The buck stops with the boss, and ignorance is no excuse. Would you have accepted that argument from any other institution? "Nobody told us" - forsooth. [/QB]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Triple Tiara:
By the way, what visits and inspections does Rome carry out? Who does them and why have I never heard of them?

---

quote:

---

Officers of the Leadership Conference of Women Religious met April 22 with Cardinal William Levada, prefect of the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, after having been informed weeks earlier that his congregation had begun a “doctrinal assessment” of the women’s organization.

---

quote:

---

As part of the blame-shifting process, the Vatican has appointed visitors to inspect and interrogate the faculty and students in nearly three hundred Catholic seminaries in the United States

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Triple Tiara:

But I can now see why it looks less like a punishment and more like a cushy number. Sorry I missed that.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Triple Tiara:
But I can now see why it looks less like a punishment and more like a cushy number. Sorry I missed that.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Triple Tiara:
But I think we should not romanticise the reality of having to live and work in Rome. That's a very different thing from going there on holiday! I would call to mind other prelates who have had a similar summons, such as Archbishop Emmanuel Milingo. The message is very clear: get yourself here to Head Office, you are no longer going to have pastoral responsibility in the place where you screwed up.

---

Your likening Emmanuel Milingo to card. Law is extremely unfortunate.
For Milingo Rome has proven a hostile and poisonous environment. I'm convinced it isn't for card. Law.
Furthermore Emmanuel Milingo did not screw up as archbishop of Lusaka. His only sin was openly associating himself with the Catholic Charismatic Renewal, and if you're not careful that earns you few friends and lots of enemies.
His screw-ups (and terrible they are) came later, after a period of 18 or so years of being confined to Rome and having every ministry he engaged in sabotaged in every conceivable way, and being isolated from any serious work for the Church he dearly loved.
It was only a matter of time before he would collapse under the pressure, and he lasted much longer than most would have.

I am not going to defend his actions since 2001, those are inexcusable, but I certainly hope that God will have mercy on the people who with such success drove him into these actions. They have a lot to answer for.

[ 29. January 2010, 17:34: Message edited by: opaWim ]
 

---

Posted by Triple Tiara (# 9556) on :
 
Poppycock. Archbishop Milingo was called to Rome specifically to get him away from Lusaka, not simply because of charismatic involvement but because of a range of questionable practices. While in Rome he built up something of a personality cult with his healing ministry. Those cruel authoritarian persecutors were trying to rein him in, not oppressing some innocent holy person.

Spiffy, thank you. You provide precisely the evidence for the point I made: Rome responds. I am fully aware of both the canonical visitations you refer to. They have been in response to serious questions having been raised about US women's religious orders and seminaries. They are, you will have noted, extraordinary events, not routine ones.

Really folks, Rome does not have a hit squad going round inspecting and unearthing things. Accountability is via the 5 yearly ad limina visit of the bishops to Rome (our English hierarchy is in Rome right now for theirs). Then there is the Nuncio in each country. Again, he does not go around inspecting. If a bishop "covered up" then he likely "covered up" quite comprehensively. Which is not to say (I don't know either way) that the matter was not raised in Rome. I was simply responding to Jakobsen's assertion about inspections and control from those people in Rome.

However, when the matter did come to light the US hierarchy was summoned to Rome to explain themselves.

There is general acceptance that the sexual abuse cases were handled appallingly. The various bishops' conferences where this has been an issue have been required to respond properly and put safeguards and procedures in place to deal with such matters. This is the outcome of that in England and Wales.
 

---

Posted by Jahlove (# 10290) on :
 
Bottom line is, yes, the Church fucked up, big style. We are addressing it (hopefuly, won't ever happen again). However, I do get pissed off by people like Justianian, who scream *Roman Catholic Priest= Paedophile* at every possible opportunity. A variant of Godwin's Law
 

---

Posted by Anselmina (# 3032) on :
 
Thanks, TT, for your answers which I find very helpful. I can imagine it is complicated, given the structure of how authority must be devolved and delegated etc, throughout the worldwide Catholic Church. And I confess my own ignorance of the set-up.

I guess I just can't imagine that - given how wide the abuse was, how long it continued, how acknowledged among the national Church it was, albeit secretly for the most part, and how thorough was the cover up - there was no knowledge of this in the Vatican.

I suppose, too, I've got it into my head that the Catholic Church has a strong central exercise of authority over its member congregations across the world. Unlike we flakey old Anglicans who are always being accused of suiting ourselves - in doctrine and practice - country to country, regardless of our alleged areas of unity!

I guess a lot of folks are smarting here because no-one seems to be admitting where the culpability lies. A few bishops, who were in place in the involved dioceses, have reluctantly 'resigned'.

Maybe some people have been hoping for some institutional and concrete sign of remorse, if not repentance. But as I can't easily imagine how this would manifest itself in the most helpful and healing way, I'll leave that point there. I understand the Pope is preparing some statement or response to the reports, having been in discussion with some of the Irish Bishops, so maybe some healing may yet still be possible?

Thanks again, TT, for your posts.
 

---

Posted by opaWim (# 11137) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Triple Tiara:
Poppycock.

---

quote:

---

Archbishop Milingo was called to Rome specifically to get him away from Lusaka, not simply because of charismatic involvement but because of a range of questionable practices. While in Rome he built up something of a personality cult with his healing ministry. Those cruel authoritarian persecutors were trying to rein him in, not oppressing some innocent holy person.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Triple Tiara:
Poppycock.

---

 

---

Posted by Spiffy (# 5267) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Triple Tiara:

Spiffy, thank you. You provide precisely the evidence for the point I made: Rome responds.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spiffy:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Triple Tiara:

Spiffy, thank you. You provide precisely the evidence for the point I made: Rome responds.

---

Ah, so your choice was to shift blame. If you're ok with a church hierarchy that's reactive instead of proactive, well, more power to you. I'll just be keeping away, thanks. Bureaucracy and the tendency to cover one own's ass instead of helping someone else makes me break out in hives.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jahlove:
if that's how you choose to see it - with ill-will - i imagine the Church will survive even without the doubtless immeasurable benefits your membership would bestow upon her.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Think²:
I think what people are basically saying, is why wasn't Cardinal Law just fired ? Rather than moved sideways, romewards or whatever else.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Triple Tiara:
This is one of those damned if you do, damned if you don't situations, innit?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Triple Tiara:
And even if you knew that everyone in Rome walked on the water of the Tiber every day you would say that's because they don't know how to swim.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Triple Tiara:
OMG! Isn't your axe sharp enough yet? Why do you just have to keep grinding away? I got the message a long time ago. You think Archbishop Milingo is a saintly and honest man.

---

quote:

---

And even if you knew that everyone in Rome walked on the water of the Tiber every day you would say that's because they don't know how to swim.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by opaWim:
Milingo was called to Rome because he had been fabricated into a controversial figure...and lasted a surprisingly long time before finally loosing his marbles and falling into the trap of accepting help from the Unification Church.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Triple Tiara:
...And even if you knew that everyone in Rome walked on the water of the Tiber every day you would say that's because they don't know how to swim.

---

...or because the city authorities really need to clean up the pollutants.

But anyway.

I think that, from the perspective of one who's an RCC insider, Law probably really is being punished. From the perspective of almost anyone else, however, especially those of us who've read a lot about what went on in Boston and the cover-up, he's got a too-soft gig.

I would have been more impressed if they'd sent him to minister to lepers, or to AIDS patients in Uganda, or something similar in a place where good restaurants and decent vintages are few and far between.

If they had to call him to Rome but had done something really purgatorial like making him drive all day every day in Roman traffic, I would be a little more trusting that justice had been done.
 

---

Posted by PeteC (# 10422) on :
 
Ministering to lepers is considered a reward. Certainly Cardinal Leger did that in his retirement.
 

---

Posted by Spiffy (# 5267) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rossweisse.:

I would have been more impressed if they'd sent him to minister to lepers, or to AIDS patients in Uganda, or something similar in a place where good restaurants and decent vintages are few and far between.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by opaWim:
But since any discussion of the possible authenticity and purpose of miracles, healing, etc. can inevitably end up nowhere but in DH

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
You're right about straying into off-topicness though. What was this thread about again?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fuzzipeg:
Maybe he's going senile!

---

That's what the RCC does to you if you oppose it.
 

---

Posted by Chesterbelloc (# 3128) on :
 
You'd better believe it. So, like, watch it, right?
 

---

Posted by multipara (# 2918) on :
 
Fuzzipeg; go back to the OP and all will be revealed. The thread was well and truly derailed several pages ago.

Unfortunately for himself (and the rest of us) Bingo has set himself up as the apologist for all things (Roman) Catholic; he'd do best to stick to his own navel-gazing private board because an effective evangeliser he ain't.

Bingo is one of that subspecies of tiresome blowhards who know everything and since his (fairly recent ) reception into the RCC he has set himself up as the local pundit on who is "out" and who is "in". Bad enough when the professionals get started but he's a rank amateur and a singularly ineffective one.

It would be salutary for the rest of you to consider that the church belongs to all of us not just to the self-styled "elect". I guess we got on to the unspeakable Law (no doubt living the life of Riley as Archpriest of Santa Maria Maggiore) and the deluded Zambian suggests to me that we all got bored with Bingo.

m
 

---

Posted by jacobsen (# 14998) on :
 
I call him Foot. Because it's rude to tinker with the guy's chosen name.

[ 02. February 2010, 13:21: Message edited by: jacobsen ]
 

---

Posted by IngoB (# 8700) on :
 
I subscribe to the official version of Catholicism, on all points, consciously and to the best of my abilities. opaWim and multipara don't. The heat they so desperately wish to generate here is hence really rather pointless. Choices have been made, and that's all there is to that.

As for me being an "apologist" here, well, maybe. Personally, I think I am more a "pugilist". Whereby it should be instantly clear that I'm not here to convert anyone, other than accidentally (which by the way is sort of forbidden anyway). I can't count the number of times people have told me what turn-off I am to them concerning the Catholic faith. Apparently, people believe I am either deaf or stupid, as they keep repeating that sort of thing. I am not. I really just don't give a rat's arse about that. Here, on these boards (Purg & Hell, particularly). Because if you come here to find faith, and expect other people to bring it to you, then you are enough of a moron to deserve the disappointment you'll have 99 times out of a 100.
 

---

Posted by Amazing Grace (# 95) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:
I subscribe to the official version of Catholicism, on all points, consciously and to the best of my abilities. opaWim and multipara don't.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:
I subscribe to the official version of Catholicism.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amazing Grace:
Not if you think you are in any way qualified to think and say who is "in" ('real Catholic' or whatever) and who is not.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spiffy:
OH! I know! It's Cosmo!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fuzzipeg:
Come off it IngoB, you are far too intelligent to reduce Catholicism to the level of a motor car manual. I just don't believe you can think it is that simple....maybe I'm wrong!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:
Many people however think that freedom consists in ignoring the motor car manual, or better still, in shredding it to pieces ceremoniously.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:
I subscribe to the official version of Catholicism, on all points, consciously and to the best of my abilities. opaWim and multipara don't. The heat they so desperately wish to generate here is hence really rather pointless. Choices have been made, and that's all there is to that.

As for me being an "apologist" here, well, maybe. Personally, I think I am more a "pugilist". Whereby it should be instantly clear that I'm not here to convert anyone, other than accidentally (which by the way is sort of forbidden anyway). I can't count the number of times people have told me what turn-off I am to them concerning the Catholic faith. Apparently, people believe I am either deaf or stupid, as they keep repeating that sort of thing. I am not. I really just don't give a rat's arse about that. Here, on these boards (Purg & Hell, particularly). Because if you come here to find faith, and expect other people to bring it to you, then you are enough of a moron to deserve the disappointment you'll have 99 times out of a 100.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spiffy:
OH! I know! It's Cosmo!

---

I'm by far not witty enough to be Cosmo.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spiffy:

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spiffy:
OH! I know! It's Cosmo!

---

I'm by far not witty enough to be Cosmo.

---

Sweetie, if you consider yourself less witty than a magazine whose cover currently touts "Hairstyles Men Love Most!" and "How to deal with a Jealous Bitch... when that Jealous Bitch is YOU!" then you're really nothing less than a stick in the mud.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by dj_ordinaire:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spiffy:

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spiffy:
OH! I know! It's Cosmo!

---

I'm by far not witty enough to be Cosmo.

---

Sweetie, if you consider yourself less witty than a magazine whose cover currently touts "Hairstyles Men Love Most!" and "How to deal with a Jealous Bitch... when that Jealous Bitch is YOU!" then you're really nothing less than a stick in the mud.

---

I suspect he's referring to the, ahem, EX-shipmate of that moniker.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spiffy:
Puhlease. He either needs to learn to read for comprehension

---

Hell, even I thought you were talking about the shipmate, as I never remember the magazine Cosmo exists in this world until some woman complains about how horrible it is.
 

---

Posted by Spiffy (# 5267) on :
 
Then you get an F in Reading Comprehension, also.

No grade negotiations accepted.

(P.S. who the fuck was shipmate Cosmo? Or do I care?)

[ 02. February 2010, 22:27: Message edited by: Spiffy ]
 

---

Posted by Lyda*Rose (# 4544) on :
 
I think this might tweak your memory. Cosmo's planking was full of drama and hard feelings, if you care about that sort of thing. The mighty fell hard, and we lost a number of interesting shipmates who disagreed strongly with the outcome. (Scroll up to the beginning of the Oblivion/Styx thread.)

[ 02. February 2010, 22:46: Message edited by: Lyda*Rose ]
 

---

Posted by IngoB (# 8700) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by QLib:
That's quite an offensive comment

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
I find it disturbing that I've heard some British Muslims describe the Koran in exactly those terms, as being like a motor car manual.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
Given the Islamic approach to religious text, I find your ready agreement that the Magisterium and official Catholic doctrine are like a car manual quite dismaying.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief:
It's as if he thinks that all there is to Catholicism, indeed to Christianity, is what's in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Not that the Catechism sums it up. That that's exactly -- no more, no less -- what there is.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Erin:
This post encapsulates every single thing that is wrong with you.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Erin:
I know I'm a piss-poor Christian witness, but at least I have the guts to admit and don't parade myself as the True Shining Example of the One True Church. Jackass.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lyda*Rose:
I think this might tweak your memory. Cosmo's planking was full of drama and hard feelings, if you care about that sort of thing.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spiffy:
Then you get an F in Reading Comprehension, also.

No grade negotiations accepted.

(P.S. who the fuck was shipmate Cosmo? Or do I care?)

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spiffy:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lyda*Rose:
I think this might tweak your memory. Cosmo's planking was full of drama and hard feelings, if you care about that sort of thing.

---

Mmm, nah, I've decided I don't care.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:
I subscribe to the official version of Catholicism, on all points, consciously and to the best of my abilities. opaWim and multipara don't. The heat they so desperately wish to generate here is hence really rather pointless. Choices have been made, and that's all there is to that. ...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rossweisse.:

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:
The heat they so desperately wish to generate here is hence really rather pointless. Choices have been made, and that's all there is to that.

---

Oh, Bingo, you're such a hate-filled prig.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rossweisse.:
There actually are disagreements on what should be the "official" version of Roman Catholicism, at the very highest levels. Things are subject to interpretation, and there are gray areas, even in the Vatican.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rossweisse.:
The RCs here who might win a few souls for Christ and your denomination are those who have compassion, understanding, and a sense of humor. Unfortunately, those are three hugely important attributes which you appear to lack entirely.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:
Roma locuta, causa finita. (Rome has spoken, the case is closed.)

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
Some of us prefer to actually think for ourselves, rather than tying strings to our mental limbs and becoming someone else's intellectual and theological puppet.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:
We all have our own set of conceptual "sine qua non"s. That many of mine can be read up in the official writings of an institution does not per se make them better or worse than those stored in your brain, ever since you acquired them from God knows where.

---

That's about the closest I think I've ever seen you come to adknowledging that someone else may have ideas that are just as valid as yours. It's a step in the right direction

quote:

---

The concrete question is here whether the Church is a human institution, or a Divine institution that is merely employing humans. Depending on what one answers to this question, a rational and faithful response simply looks fundamentally different.

---

quote:

---

As I've said above: Choices have been made, and that's all there really is to it. It is of course possible that you've made the wrong choice because you are stupid, or evil, or whatever. But it is at least as possible that you are none of these things. As far as I am concerned, the problem - your problem - is in the first place simply your wrong choice, not you.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chesterbelloc:
the Catholic Church can't and doesn't see itself in through those syncretitist lenses.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by saysay:
Just don't imagine it'll get you any respect.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chesterbelloc:
the Catholic Church can't and doesn't see itself in through those syncretitist lenses.

---

Of course it can. It just doesn't.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chesterbelloc:
It seems to humble wee me that there are several distict reasons that IngoB gets so badly on some people's nerves - as evidence this thread - and that most of them really have very little to do with IngoB himself.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chesterbelloc:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
Of course it can. It just doesn't.

---

Only on pain of not being the Catholic Church.

---

It'd still be the Catholic Church. It just wouldn't be exclusivist any more.

I'd settle for seven small words from the magisterium: "but we could be wrong about that". Would that really cause the whole of creation to come tumbling down?
 

---

Posted by Chesterbelloc (# 3128) on :
 
Fr enough, Ruth - mileage varies.

Marvin, imagine you're talking to an Orthodoxen.

The Cathoolic Church identifies itself as the Church founded by Christ and the Apostles, not a church or a branch of the Church. Therefore, if she is wrong about this and lots of other non-Cathoolic communities have as good a claim to being the Church or to being on an equal ecclesialogical footing, then she isn't the Church she said she was - she's not the Church as she defines it at all.

Catholic dogma is that there is a clear and visible Church of Christ which is infallible (in certain doctrines, including this one about who she is) and against whom the gates of Hell will not prevail, etc. - and that she is it. Heck, it must seem like a big camel to swallow from the outside, but it's what she has always taught. If she abandons that, it turns out that there was no such Church (as the RCCC defines it) at all. ER, unless the Orthodox... Nah!
 

---

Posted by Chesterbelloc (# 3128) on :
 
Aw shit - preview post is my friend, and I don't even return his calls or nuthin'. My bad.
 

---

Posted by saysay (# 6645) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spiffy:
Matter of fact, I think I even enumerated on an earlier post on this thread the two people whose opinions and respect I desire. You get another F for reading comprehension.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by saysay:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spiffy:
Matter of fact, I think I even enumerated on an earlier post on this thread the two people whose opinions and respect I desire. You get another F for reading comprehension.

---

Damn. You're not mocking Bingo, you're serious.

And completely missing the point.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
Not quite. Even if one sees the church as a divine institution, one still has to decide what (and where) the church is.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
And the possibility that it is you who has made the wrong choice never crosses your mind. That's what makes you so damnably unlikeable.

---

1. Follow the likely "good" GPS device.
2. Follow one of the likely "bad" GPS devices.
3. Follow one GPS device, then try another one for a bit, then perhaps a third, or the first again...

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chesterbelloc:
Q.E.D., opaWim!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jahlove:
Not that anyone gives a toss -but a lot of IngoB's posts (even prior to his reception) helped influence my journey into the bosom of the Whore of Babylon

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:
To give an analogy: You get dropped without water in the Death Valley. You are handed several hand-held GPS devices.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:

To give an analogy: You get dropped without water in the Death Valley...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by PeteC:
I would just like to explain to those who find this thread a perfect place to dump on the Catholic Church that you are dumping on the Catholic Church in Ingo's universe.

It's not anything I recognise in my universe. My church is made up of imperfect people.

---

I've made that mistake before.
 

---

Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by dj_ordinaire:

I've no idea what this means. But on this thread I don't think that marks me out as particularly unusual.

---

I am a hairsbreadth from making this my sig.
Is there a quote contest running? I would like to nominate this one.
 

---

Posted by Spiffy (# 5267) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by lilBuddha:

quote:

---

Originally posted by dj_ordinaire:

I've no idea what this means. But on this thread I don't think that marks me out as particularly unusual.

---

I am a hairsbreadth from making this my sig.
Is there a quote contest running? I would like to nominate this one.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by opaWim:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chesterbelloc:
Q.E.D., opaWim!

---

And what would that "Q." be?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chesterbelloc:
Geez, that way some of you are going on, it's as if I'd accused you of actually burning the actual man behind IngoB's posts in effigy

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spiffy:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chesterbelloc:
Geez, that way some of you are going on, it's as if I'd accused you of actually burning the actual man behind IngoB's posts in effigy

---

That's scheduled for Saturday night. Covered dish supper to follow.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by opaWim:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chesterbelloc:
Q.E.D., opaWim!

---

And what would that "Q." be?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
Imperfect analogy or not, if you're viewing faith in those terms then there's no hope.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
Faith isn't about picking the best way to escape this world, it's about coming to a greater understanding of God and the wonders of life.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
To use an (equally imperfect!) analogy from my point of view, closing your mind to other possibilities is like having a box of Quality Street but only ever eating the green triangle. OK, you might really like that one, but there are so many other tasty treats in there that you might like as well!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by PeteC:
I would just like to explain to those who find this thread a perfect place to dump on the Catholic Church that you are dumping on the Catholic Church in Ingo's universe. It's not anything I recognise in my universe. My church is made up of imperfect people.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:
There clearly must be the hope to make it out alive. Otherwise you would just sit down and die.

---

quote:

---

Again, the same problem: you believe that there is, fundamentally, no problem. What happens to your analogy though if some chocolates are systematically filled with rat poison?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chesterbelloc:
I don't know about anyone else, but my mum always warned me about accepting sweeties from strangers. And they don't come no stranger than Martians, young Marvin.

---

quote:

---

Actually, of course, most of we convert-types have had a fair sampling of the other faith-fancies before settling for the Roman Ripple.

---

For sure. I guess I just can't understand someone consciously deciding to restrict themselves to only one variety.
 

---

Posted by Major Disaster (# 13229) on :
 
Of course there is no point in quarreling about tastes. However, strawberry creams


While I am here, I would add that the title surprises me. Although I am unable to discuss anything with IngoB because I find his style beyond my personal patience, I don't think him either ignorant or a bigot. He is very clear in his thinking, und uncompromising clear in his expression of his thoughts.
The fact that he takes no account of his disputants' weakness or sensibilities does not make him a bigot. He is like a knight who gives no quarter in battle, or perhaps samurai may be a better simile. He makes no effort to attract allies or friends, and perhaps his strengths excite more than a little envy.
But I have no role in this fight with him. I just dislike the waste represented by nasty chocolate. Thorntons Continental will do me very well.
 

---

Posted by multipara (# 2918) on :
 
Re Bingo and his world view, you picked an unfortunate analogy, Major Disaster.

The knightly class of feudal Europe and the samurai class of feudal Japan were both the epitome of ignorant bigotry.

m
 

---

Posted by opaWim (# 11137) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chesterbelloc:
I don't know about anyone else, but my mum always warned me about accepting sweeties from strangers.

---

quote:

---

Actually, of course, most of we convert-types have had a fair sampling of the other faith-fancies before settling for the Roman Ripple.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by opaWim:
those who are convinced by him to stay away from or leave the RCC.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
Nobody makes it out alive, but dying doesn't bother me too much.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
My hope is for humanity, not my microscopically tiny share in it.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
Now, you may be the spiritual equivalent of someone who is allergic to every single chocolate apart from the green triangle. But from where I sit it looks more like you're the sort of person who has decided that they only like the green triangle and refuses to even consider trying any of the others.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
Nobody makes it out alive, but dying doesn't bother me too much.

---

I was talking about the analogy there, not life. Introducing Christian resurrection into the analogy would have overloaded it.

---

quote:

---

I always wonder when people make statements about how they will deal with death. Personally, I have absolutely no idea how I will react to imminent death.

---

Oh, no doubt I'll go kicking and screaming against the inevitability of my demise. But from the perspective of the relatively fit and healthy 31-year-old that I am, I refuse to make my decisions based on that inevitability. I'll die one day, but I've got a life to live first

quote:

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
My hope is for humanity, not my microscopically tiny share in it.

---

I think this dichotomy is false on many levels. For one, based on nature alone there is no hope for humanity either. Just the time scale of deterioration and death is longer.

---

quote:

---

What I'm trying to get across is a sense of urgency. Your analogy, whether with "bad" chocolates or not, lacks any urgency. You are munching chocolates, enjoying yourself - a bit more carefully if you have nut allergy, but that's it. If that is the case, then it seems silly to not try out different things. But I don't think that that is the case.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:

I always wonder when people make statements about how they will deal with death. Personally, I have absolutely no idea how I will react to imminent death.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
Why does hope have to extend to infinity? sure, the heat death of the universe will get us eventually, but there's a heckuva long time for humanity to better itself before then.

---

The heat death? You are being incredibly optimistic, even on purely physical grounds. After all, we must then have somehow survived the sun turning red giant, and jumped from energy source to energy source across the universe till they all started running out... I myself would be seriously impressed if we ever managed to have a permanent presence anywhere other than on earth. And I would be gob-smacked if we stuck around as long as the saber-toothed cat. And how and why precisely should humanity try to better itself in your scheme?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
Where does that urgency come from though? Where's the rush?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by opaWim:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chesterbelloc:
I don't know about anyone else, but my mum always warned me about accepting sweeties from strangers.

---

Well, there you have it!
That is precisely why many of us cradle-catholics are wary of the sweets that converts of the IngoB type force upon us.

---

quote:

---

I for one consider the RCC to be a lot more than a faith-fancy.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chesterbelloc:
But, opaWim, those are sweeties that your mother (the Church) has already popped in your lunchbox.

---

You're serious, aren't you?
 

---

Posted by Chesterbelloc (# 3128) on :
 
Sure. What bit(s) are you taking issue with?
 

---

Posted by Spiffy (# 5267) on :
 
The fact that said sweeties are equal to half a squished Oreo that fell on the ground on the School Cafeteria Black Market.
 

---

Posted by GoodCatholicLad (# 9231) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by RuthW:
Triple Tiara: To this non-Catholic non-European, it sounds like Cardinal Law got a very cushy retirement in Rome -- nice work if you can get it! That may not be the reality, but that's how it plays here for most people. Child abuse survivors were ignored and shamed for decades, but Law gets to eat authentic Italian food every day and sit around and drink espresso in a picturesque setting. I'm not one of those who thinks he ought to have been flogged on Boston Commons, but it's hard to see that he's suffering.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spiffy:
The fact that said sweeties are equal to half a squished Oreo that fell on the ground on the School Cafeteria Black Market.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by GoodCatholicLad:
How about being a parish priest in some high crime area like Newark or Elizabeth New Jersey not knowing if the electrical bill for next month will be paid?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chesterbelloc:

quote:

---

Originally posted by GoodCatholicLad:
How about being a parish priest in some high crime area like Newark or Elizabeth New Jersey not knowing if the electrical bill for next month will be paid?

---

Did you miss the bit about removing him from direct pastoral control?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chesterbelloc:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spiffy:
The fact that said sweeties are equal to half a squished Oreo that fell on the ground on the School Cafeteria Black Market.

---

*Snork*

Maybe, Spiffy - but we ("converts") are only picking it up off the floor and proffering it, not baking and squishing it up first. And to us, it looks pretty wholesome.

Oreo pro nobis, innit.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chesterbelloc:
Sure. What bit(s) are you taking issue with?

---

quote:

---

But, opaWim, those are sweeties that your mother (the Church) has already popped in your lunchbox.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by opaWim:
1. If this were true

quote:

---

But, opaWim, those are sweeties that your mother (the Church) has already popped in your lunchbox.

---

don't you wonder how IngoB came into possession? I didn't give them to him.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by opaWim:
2. IngoB's sweeties may look genuine to you, even to himself. That doesn't necessarily mean they aren't counterfeit or interfered with.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by opaWim:
3. I presume you don't accept sweets from strangers, why should I?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by opaWim:
4. Seen from where I am, you are insulting my mother.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by opaWim:
Just curious, why are people like IngoB and you so indifferent to the bad reputation you earn converts, and the RCC?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by opaWim:
Is it some kind of prophet-delusion?
Or is it the usual nagging insecurity about the validity of your current Absolute-BetterThanAnyOther-Truth?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by opaWim:
Why is it so blindingly obvious irritatingly unacceptable to you that cradle-RC's can be quite secure in their relationship with God without necessarily subscribing to all the sweets (be they genuine, relevant, etc., or not) that convinced you to convert?

---

I say nothing about people's own personal interaction with the faith - that's their business - but I don't think their difficulties with embracing the fullness of what is taught in their own Church give them a right to misrepresent the nature of those teachings altogether.

If a lawyer were speaking to non-lawyers about her difficulties with some of the constitutional statutes of the land, misrepresented some of them and tried to tell those folks that they shouldn't worry about them - they could be just as good lawyers by rejecting them, that wouldn't make her a very trustworthy advisor on the law. Just as another lawyer might very well come in to correct the comments of the first, so if some Catholics see the faith being misrepresented we sometimes chime in. Where's the problem with that? We are usually doing inresponse to being "corrected" by others in our exposition of soem aspect of the faith anyway.

[ 06. February 2010, 10:00: Message edited by: Chesterbelloc ]
 

---

Posted by opaWim (# 11137) on :
 
O, come of it!
You've just wasted away any benefit of the doubt remaining.
You're just another bully.
And when, in time, you and IngoB convert to yet another church, you'll most likely be bullies still.
 

---

Posted by Chesterbelloc (# 3128) on :
 
Yeah, and I want your lunch-money, sis.

[ 06. February 2010, 10:57: Message edited by: Chesterbelloc ]
 

---

Posted by Rossweisse. (# 2349) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:
Rat's arse.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chesterbelloc:
The Cathoolic Church identifies itself as the Church founded by Christ and the Apostles, not a church or a branch of the Church. Therefore, if she is wrong about this and lots of other non-Cathoolic communities have as good a claim to being the Church or to being on an equal ecclesialogical footing, then she isn't the Church she said she was - she's not the Church as she defines it at all.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by opaWim:
Just curious, why are people like IngoB and you so indifferent to the bad reputation you earn converts, and the RCC?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rossweisse.:
Recognizing that you have the problem is the first step toward solving it. Congratulations on achieving that much.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Erroneous Monk:
However I find it hard to accept that our God, who is Love, will punish people who have been genuinely mistaken about him - not malicious, not faithless, just not 100% right about his nature and what he requires of us.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by opaWim:

Why is it so blindingly obvious irritatingly unacceptable to you that cradle-RC's can be quite secure in their relationship with God without necessarily subscribing to all the sweets (be they genuine, relevant, etc., or not) that convinced you to convert?

---

Can we loose the tedious 'convert' vs. 'cradle Catholic' stuff? I was received into full communion with the RCC as an adult. I frequently find myself holding less conservative positions than ChesterBelloc and IngoB.
There are no 'cradle Catholics' - nobody is born Catholic. There are just Catholics. And, to be fair, I don't see either CB or IngoB claiming otherwise. You are the one reading the 'getting at cradle Catholics' stuff into what they are saying.

[ 07. February 2010, 15:00: Message edited by: Divine Outlaw Dwarf ]
 

---

Posted by fletcher christian (# 13919) on :
 
well said
 

---

Posted by RooK (# 1852) on :
 
I would have thought it significant that all the commandments of christianity are essentially earthly in nature. There are no commandments to "know god".

Likewise it is significant that IngoB treats some virtual discussion space as unimportant in terms of how he conducts himself. Because, clearly, his religion is about scoring numbers. What he does to the least of us is unimportant, according to his faith.

He's a dogma quick-draw, and a self-taught faith-maze solving rodent. He's found a handy-dandy rosary-cranked Answer For Everything (it says so right on the box!), so he hardly needs to waste his valuable time considering the value of those Answers. He just gives it another crank, and out comes Reassurances. See how straightforward it is? Aren't we foolish to not partake?

Being a miserable excuse for a human being hardly impinges on his sensibilities at all.

[Crossposted. He Who Must Be Changed needed a changing.]

[ 07. February 2010, 15:34: Message edited by: RooK ]
 

---

Posted by El Greco (# 9313) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by RooK:
I would have thought it significant that all the commandments of christianity are essentially earthly in nature. There are no commandments to "know god".

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Divine Outlaw Dwarf:
Can we loose the tedious 'convert' vs. 'cradle Catholic' stuff?

---

quote:

---

I was received into full communion with the RCC as an adult. I frequently find myself holding less conservative positions than ChesterBelloc and IngoB.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Divine Outlaw Dwarf:
There are no 'cradle Catholics' - nobody is born Catholic.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by El Greco:
Um, did you have a different nickname in the past?

---

Yes - I was Paul M

(we met at the Globe - London shipmeet)
 

---

Posted by El Greco (# 9313) on :
 
Ah, nice to see you
 

---

Posted by Divine Outlaw Dwarf (# 2252) on :
 
A love-in in Hell. It's like the South Park movie.
 

---

Posted by wilson (# 37) on :
 
Fuck you dickhead
 

---

Posted by Divine Outlaw Dwarf (# 2252) on :
 
That's better.
 

---

Posted by Rossweisse. (# 2349) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:
...I should just ignore your existence as fallacious.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by RooK:
...He's a dogma quick-draw, and a self-taught faith-maze solving rodent. He's found a handy-dandy rosary-cranked Answer For Everything (it says so right on the box!), so he hardly needs to waste his valuable time considering the value of those Answers. He just gives it another crank, and out comes Reassurances. See how straightforward it is? Aren't we foolish to not partake?

---

quote:

---

Being a miserable excuse for a human being hardly impinges on his sensibilities at all.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rossweisse.:

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:
...I should just ignore your existence as fallacious.

---

That's right, Ingo. If you can't face points and people which make you uncomfortable, just pretend they don't exist. Whatever you do, don't consider the possibility that you might be mistaken about something.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by RooK:
Likewise it is significant that IngoB treats some virtual discussion space as unimportant in terms of how he conducts himself.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by RooK:
He's a dogma quick-draw, and a self-taught faith-maze solving rodent.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by El Greco:
As for IngoB, I feel sad that he scapegoats homosexuality for the horrible abuses that have been going on for a long time.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by QLib:
If by "generalized catholic-bashing" you mean, "expression of any opinion at variance with the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church"

---

quote:

---

the unintelligible in defence of the unspeakable

---

quote:

---

The Roman Curia has ignored reality for centuries.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by multipara:
Re Bingo and his world view, you picked an unfortunate analogy, Major Disaster.

The knightly class of feudal Europe and the samurai class of feudal Japan were both the epitome of ignorant bigotry.

m

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:
What's with this urgent need to turn me into a TLC-dispensing freethinker? Get a grip on your missionary fervor, please.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:
Charming.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by comet:
If you lot insist on continuing this tired and insufferably dull little spat I will be forced to torture an innocent and cute puppy just to feel better.

Let it be on your heads.

---

quote:

---

Certainly neither class of warriors was likely to produce lecturers in Liberal Arts, or campaigners for Gay Rights, but then, you choose horses for courses.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by fletcher christian:
posted by major disaster:

quote:

---

Certainly neither class of warriors was likely to produce lecturers in Liberal Arts, or campaigners for Gay Rights, but then, you choose horses for courses.

---

I think that if you get beyond Western impressions of the Samurai and read some of their own texts and stories that they did do the things you mention above (at least before the Emperor became the puppet of the Shogonate)

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fuzzipeg:
All the other major irritants in other churches don't have the consistency or intelligence of IngoB. Also they tend to disappear or walk the plank after a while. Where as IngoB, likethe poor, is always with us. I raise a glass to him...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by opaWim:
You do realize that you can afford to be so generous because of the existence of the unique release-valves Hell and Dead Horses, and because SOF is not owned in any way by the RCC?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mdijon:
[QUOTE]That is also why we can be generous about the evanglicals, the high church anglicans, the orthodox, the orthodox apostates, the atheists and the cradle RCs who would also have ruined the place given a free run.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by opaWim:
Over the years I have seen at least three RC discussion boards being ruined by the likes of IngoB and their helpmates.

---

Are you really criticising IngoB for what other (unidentified) posters have done on other (unidentified) boards, solely on the grounds that they are (in your view) the same sort of person?

Would you not agree that attacking someone because of what "the likes of" them do, as if they belonged to a class whose sins are interchangeable is:

a) ignorant; and
b) bigoted?

And if you didn't mean that, what the fuck relevance is it to this thread that there are some obnoxious RCs somewhere on the internet?

For what it's worth (and not expecting him to give a rat's ares for my approval or not) I find IngoB a consistently smart, thoughtful and honest poster. He's as tactless as all Hell sometimes (but he's not alone in that, and Ship of Fools culture is not exactly intolerant of a thick-skinned/sharp-tongued discussion), but rarely, if ever, malicious; opinionated but not bigoted; and about as far from ignorance as you're likely to find.

I like the Roman Catholicism which IngoB portrays. It's a form of the faith which challenges those inside and outside the Church, it provides solid reasons for what it believes, and it is possible to engage with its dogmas and learn from the process of engagement, whether one is ultimately persuaded of their truth or not. I'm not especially likely to convert to Catholicism, but IngoB's witness is more likely to influence me thataways than most.
 

---

Posted by Eliab (# 9153) on :
 
On the ‘Death Valley/GPS' metaphor (because I liked it):

It works only if you accept that there is one correct denomination (GPS) which will lead you to safety, and othersthat are more or less misleading.

In my worldview, we don't have several distinct GPS units - we have a mass of sketches, maps, journals, notes and musing by other travellers, all of them incomplete, written while still in the valley by authors whom we do not know made it to safety. Catholicism is one of the most complete and clear of the maps in our collection, and it's verified against many landmarks, and useful for navigating past many obstacles, but there's not much sense in throwing all the other useful information in the file - that could be useful for finding our way home, too.

And, of course, the RC map, while generally reliable on the basic landscape, has quite a few flaws when checked against the evidence of our senses (reason and conscience). It requires, for example, a big detour around Mount Contraception, when it is plainly obvious that that particular feature was levelled years ago, and almost everyone who looks up from the map has managed to walk unhindered right across the valley floor where it once stood. Also the notes on the Catholic map say that one must first climb the double-peaked hillocks of Marian Dogma to mark out and follow the path of True Faith, whereas one can, in fact, see that path with equal clarity from the Sola Scriptura plateau on the other side of the valley. And, as Gildas points out, the map has recently been revised so that the difficult descent into, and perilous climb out of, the Chasm of Intolerance is no longer mandated at the outset of the journey, and travellers are wisely advised to go around it entirely. I'm going to stop now, before I get all Pilgrim's Progress.

The basic principle that faith is practical, and that having made a judgement on which doctrines are true, the point is to follow them diligently unless a compelling reason to re-think appears, is a good one, but it does not follow that one's best judgement on which path to take must be of a single tradition, ignoring the rest. If the guidance is of a sketch-map-plus-notes nature, where more details can complement and confirm the chosen route, rather than of a GPS nature, where different advice can only contradict, then accepting some RC guidance but not all is not irrational, but might well be the only sane thing to do.
 

---

Posted by Fuzzipeg (# 10107) on :
 
Oupa.... Over the years I have seen at least three RC discussion boards being ruined by the likes of IngoB and their helpmates

What does that mean? I didn't think IngoB need helpmates? I never managed to get into one of those Catholic/Orthodox boards probably for reasons of lethargy more than anything else.

In any case what do you say to each other that you wouldn't say on the open boards? Perhaps it was more domestic such as what has your Parish contributed to Peter's Pence this year? Or, "Psst! Do you know where I can get an annulment quickly?" I don't know.

Thanx Eliab for your two enjoyable posts!
 

---

Posted by Matt Black (# 2210) on :
 
Eliab,
 

---

Posted by FCB (# 1495) on :
 
I've got to say that I do find the generalized charge of bigotry against Ingo somewhat odd. There are a few things I might fault him for -- I tend to think you catch more flies with honey than with vinegar (but then again he's pretty clear on the fact that his purpose on the Ship is not to catch flies) -- but generalized bigotry is not one of them.

Maybe I'm just overawed by the fact that he can usually think circles around me (though I still think he's wrong on the question of whether extra-terrestrial rational animals would, for theological purposes, count as "human").
 

---

Posted by Matt Black (# 2210) on :
 
"Dogmatic", perhaps, which I suppose can be construed as "bigotted" by someone who dislikes the dogma concerned.
 

---

Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :
 
One can be dogmatic without being rude. One can be dogmatic without being judgmental. One can be dogmatic without being an ass about it. So the whole "you just think he's bigoted because you don't like the teachings of the RCC" is a red herring.
 

---

Posted by Spiffy (# 5267) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by FCB:
I've got to say that I do find the generalized charge of bigotry against Ingo somewhat odd.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief:
So the whole "you just think he's bigoted because you don't like the teachings of the RCC" is a red herring.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mdijon:

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief:
So the whole "you just think he's bigoted because you don't like the teachings of the RCC" is a red herring.

---

I suppose it's odds-on that someone has said that on this thread, but I can't get it out of any of the recent posts.

---

quote:

---

"Dogmatic", perhaps, which I suppose can be construed as "bigotted" by someone who dislikes the dogma concerned.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spiffy:
he's a very specific bigot-- he hates anyone who's not himself and treats anyone who's not himself dismissively and rudely.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fuzzipeg:
Oupa.... Over the years I have seen at least three RC discussion boards being ruined by the likes of IngoB and their helpmates

What does that mean? I didn't think IngoB need helpmates?

---

quote:

---

I never managed to get into one of those Catholic/Orthodox boards probably for reasons of lethargy more than anything else.

---

Apparently lethargy can be a blessing

quote:

---

In any case what do you say to each other that you wouldn't say on the open boards?

---

quote:

---

Perhaps it was more domestic such as what has your Parish contributed to Peter's Pence this year? Or, "Psst! Do you know where I can get an annulment quickly?" I don't know.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spiffy:
If you follow his postings out and about and around the Ship, he's a very specific bigot-- he hates anyone who's not himself and treats anyone who's not himself dismissively and rudely.

---

© Ship of Fools 2016


UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0