Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: "Liberal believers are going to be the people who ultimately bring change to their own religions." [View all]RainDog
(28,784 posts)114. Andrew Sullivan, a Catholic, stated the church should be charged with crimes against humanity
I suppose that makes him a fascist, too, to expect the rule of international law to apply to an entity that is a state.
http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2013/02/04/nostra-maxima-culpa/
...the good folks in the church tried to do something as early as the 1950s and were stopped in their tracks
by the Vatican. The number of souls violated by child-rape in the coming decades would not have happened if all the Popes since Paul VI had acted with more moral sense than most maximum security murderers. (Even the worst prisoners regard child-rapists as the lowest of the low. Popes? Not so much). Were not talking about priests who are drunks, or priests who fall in love, or break their vows in fallible, victimless ways; were talking here about priests committing one of the most heinous felonies imaginable: the systematic rape of children using the authority of the Church as cover.
John Paul II emphatically cannot be somehow removed from this picture. He personally protected one of the worst offenders, Marcial Maciel, who was a serial rapist, drug trafficker, bigamist and rapist of his own son. In fact, John Paul II elevated Maciel to the highest honors of the church backed by the theocon wing of the American church, from Richard John Neuhaus to Bill Bennett and Mary Ann Glendon. They all adamantly denied that Maciel was anything but a living saint and he was never prosecuted, merely allowed a gentle retirement from running his order, The Legion of Christ, which continues.
Joseph Ratzinger, when he was Archbishop of Munich, personally signed off on sending a priest to therapy, after that priest had raped several children, never notified the police, never told the parents of the children at the parish the priest was then assigned to, and because of this negligence, was, in my view, complicit in the rape of several more children before the priest was finally caught, arrested and sent to jail. Let me repeat that: the (then) current Pope enabled and abetted the rape of children and his only way out was to blame a lower official, who subsequently said hed been pressured. More than that, no one else in the church knows more about this long record of child-rape than Ratzinger. From 2001 onwards, all cases of child rape or abuse were ordered to be sent to his personal office, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. And all of it had to be kept completely hidden from the outside world.
I can hear my devout Irish grandmother who also worked as a cleaning lady for priests, scrubbing her floors day after day till they looked like glass asking the same question whenever I questioned ecclesiastical authority. Its a question that simply tells you: do not disobey a priest; do not malign a priest; do not question a priest. And it is that deference, that lingering, profound subservience to the priestly office that also allowed this to happen. Where, after all, were the nuns at St Johns School? Did they seriously not know what was going on? Where were the parents of the deaf boys, when they warned them about Father Murphy as early as 1974? Where are we now as a church if we vaunt one of the biggest enablers of child-rape, John Paul II, to the status of sainthood without a thorough investigation of these matters?
John Paul II emphatically cannot be somehow removed from this picture. He personally protected one of the worst offenders, Marcial Maciel, who was a serial rapist, drug trafficker, bigamist and rapist of his own son. In fact, John Paul II elevated Maciel to the highest honors of the church backed by the theocon wing of the American church, from Richard John Neuhaus to Bill Bennett and Mary Ann Glendon. They all adamantly denied that Maciel was anything but a living saint and he was never prosecuted, merely allowed a gentle retirement from running his order, The Legion of Christ, which continues.
Joseph Ratzinger, when he was Archbishop of Munich, personally signed off on sending a priest to therapy, after that priest had raped several children, never notified the police, never told the parents of the children at the parish the priest was then assigned to, and because of this negligence, was, in my view, complicit in the rape of several more children before the priest was finally caught, arrested and sent to jail. Let me repeat that: the (then) current Pope enabled and abetted the rape of children and his only way out was to blame a lower official, who subsequently said hed been pressured. More than that, no one else in the church knows more about this long record of child-rape than Ratzinger. From 2001 onwards, all cases of child rape or abuse were ordered to be sent to his personal office, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. And all of it had to be kept completely hidden from the outside world.
I can hear my devout Irish grandmother who also worked as a cleaning lady for priests, scrubbing her floors day after day till they looked like glass asking the same question whenever I questioned ecclesiastical authority. Its a question that simply tells you: do not disobey a priest; do not malign a priest; do not question a priest. And it is that deference, that lingering, profound subservience to the priestly office that also allowed this to happen. Where, after all, were the nuns at St Johns School? Did they seriously not know what was going on? Where were the parents of the deaf boys, when they warned them about Father Murphy as early as 1974? Where are we now as a church if we vaunt one of the biggest enablers of child-rape, John Paul II, to the status of sainthood without a thorough investigation of these matters?
You talk about caring about minorities and the poor, as a political chess piece. It's those groups who are most likely to be abused by the powerful, whether in political or religious life.
Jerry Sandusky's religious organization also provided THE PERFECT protection for pedophiles and the children, who were from disadvantaged families, had no power to go against this "upstanding citizens," including that pedophile enabler Joe. And JUST AS NOW, those who cared more about the institution of Penn State than the lives of those who were abused, DEFENDED THE PEDOPHILES.
This is what you call "fascism." Those who are repulsed by such abuse of power.
What you are engaging in is morally corrupt.
Cannot edit, recommend, or reply in locked discussions
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
122 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
"Liberal believers are going to be the people who ultimately bring change to their own religions." [View all]
WilliamPitt
Mar 2013
OP
And anyone who descriminates against someone's religion needs to accept the consequences
liberal_at_heart
Mar 2013
#17
We now have an interfaith group that is a safe haven for members of all faiths.
hrmjustin
Mar 2013
#2
Well I'm not going to take it easy on people who insist they know that the only way to bring
liberal_at_heart
Mar 2013
#13
then you were certainly free to leave. That does not mean everyone has to leave.
liberal_at_heart
Mar 2013
#45
I see very little "dumping on people" (except the Pope/s), but well-deserved
Arugula Latte
Mar 2013
#11
I've always been fascinated with the way Christianity got African Americans
liberal_at_heart
Mar 2013
#23
Thank you, ReRe, for that side discussion within this thread, and the others who have joined in
We People
Mar 2013
#56
From what I've heard this is the guy to address those particular issues.
liberal_at_heart
Mar 2013
#43
Here is what amazes me. The religion is named after 'the Christ' who clearly told his followers
Bluenorthwest
Mar 2013
#68
Good on you Will for trying to reason with the unreasonable. But you are confronting the fascism
Douglas Carpenter
Mar 2013
#54
There are all kinds of movements and tendencies within the Catholic church and other religious
Douglas Carpenter
Mar 2013
#100
no I am not. backing away from anything. I am seeing exactly the same kind of brain dead vitriol
Douglas Carpenter
Mar 2013
#108
Andrew Sullivan, a Catholic, stated the church should be charged with crimes against humanity
RainDog
Mar 2013
#114
there you go again launching into the same fascistic hateful brain dead vitriolic response
Douglas Carpenter
Mar 2013
#115
oh for crying out loud! nobody is defending that - so cut the crap!!
Douglas Carpenter
Mar 2013
#119
I don't think that's true at all, especially in the case of the Catholic church.
LeftyMom
Mar 2013
#55
Here is what Francis has said about my people seeking rights. Do you agree with him or not, Will?
Bluenorthwest
Mar 2013
#59
Thank you Will. I am a student of religions, have many dear Catholic friends and have many
Bluenorthwest
Mar 2013
#70
"Change comes from within for those who are willing to take all the shit to get that change."
Zorra
Mar 2013
#80
Catholic church is often about politics; an insidious and invasive and often intolerant politics
bigtree
Mar 2013
#63
Right. They don't operate in a vacuum. People are hurt by their policies.
Arugula Latte
Mar 2013
#73
I agree that shitting on fellow DUers is unproductive, but liberals won't change the churches.
JVS
Mar 2013
#69
It wasn't my Savior who instructed me to attend to the beam in my own eye first
Fumesucker
Mar 2013
#76
Nah, it's more fun to troll the forum with "religious people are stupid/brainwashed/etc"
YoungDemCA
Mar 2013
#81
As far as I'm concerned anyone who belongs to a religion is complicit in the evil that they do.
alarimer
Mar 2013
#95
Liberal believers have changed many denominations, but they can't change the Catholic Church.
kwassa
Mar 2013
#101
well what can you say, some of us want to build a progressive majority which will NEVER happen and
Douglas Carpenter
Mar 2013
#103
Locking, despite my misgivings, as per the near unanimous vote of the gd hosts.
Warren Stupidity
Mar 2013
#122