Another Cardinal (Theodore McCarrick) Getting to the bottom: Self-Investigation or Special Counsel?
The scandal of Cardinal Theodore McCarrick and why no major media outed him
When will it stop? Too many priests, too many children, over too many years. Is there an end in sight? What is the best way to get to the bottom of this ugliness, hurt, pain and shame? No other church organization is given the privilege to investigate itself of child sex crimes. Is the Catholic Church above the law? Is this fair? How many more Priests of the Catholic Church who have served and are still serving today under a sexual scandal cloud?
What makes their settlements difference from President Trump's? Hush monies, betrayal of trust, avoidance of prosecution, and in the public's eyes embedded in this religious organization should we be surprised when it raises its head in the political world-city, state, federal levels? Why the double standards when it comes to addressing priests sex-crimes/allegations compared to others? Are priest allow to marry? Could this be a contributing factor to the vast number of priests, victims, and for so long?
Shouldn't there be a separation of church and state? Do you think a Special Counsel, of non-catholic faith, be appointed to get to the bottom and settle this thing, once and for all? Shouldn't we want the whole truth for our children, communities, families, and peace of mind? What can be said and done? This can't continue. Help! Help! Help!... CM
Comments
-
This is perplexing. I wonder if the job attracts pedophiles. It seems we see more of this in other churches and in schools too.
As a teen, some of the guys would visit a local priest in order to be molested. So I think gray areas exist in the discussion nobody wants to talk about.
-
@Dave_L said:
This is perplexing. I wonder if the job attracts pedophiles. It seems we see more of this in other churches and in schools too.As a teen, some of the guys would visit a local priest in order to be molested. So I think gray areas exist in the discussion nobody wants to talk about.
Are you saying what I think you're saying? Please, clarify your remarks above, before I make any comments. CM
-
Based on what I've seen, sometimes the kids want to be molested. I remember car loads of guys (underage) going to the local brothel. And I think the ones going to the local priest had similar ideas.
-
@Dave_L said:
Based on what I've seen, sometimes the kids want to be molested. I remember car loads of guys (underage) going to the local brothel. And I think the ones going to the local priest had similar ideas.Based on what I read in your post, here, Dave, you have a distorted and disgusting view of these issues.
First, you don't the minds or hearts of the kids who go to their priests, and it is wrong for you to offer such rancid speculation as though you do.
Second, in our culture we assume kids aren't mature persons who have the life experience and moral/ethical foundation necessary to make wise decisions in all circumstances. That's where parents, teachers, pastors, etc come in.
EVEN IF one or more kids "wanted" to be molested - an outrageous claim your post doesn't (and can't) back up - responsibility for the goodness and decency of the relationship between the child and his or her priest is solely the priest's.
-
@Bill_Coley said:
@Dave_L said:
Based on what I've seen, sometimes the kids want to be molested. I remember car loads of guys (underage) going to the local brothel. And I think the ones going to the local priest had similar ideas.Based on what I read in your post, here, Dave, you have a distorted and disgusting view of these issues.
First, you don't the minds or hearts of the kids who go to their priests, and it is wrong for you to offer such rancid speculation as though you do.
Second, in our culture we assume kids aren't mature persons who have the life experience and moral/ethical foundation necessary to make wise decisions in all circumstances. That's where parents, teachers, pastors, etc come in.
EVEN IF one or more kids "wanted" to be molested - an outrageous claim your post doesn't (and can't) back up - responsibility for the goodness and decency of the relationship between the child and his or her priest is solely the priest's.
I don't know how tall the corn was in your parts, but we had some pretty rotten kids doing some pretty rotten things. I remember at least two different occasions where car loads of highschool guys went to brothels in the area. And several went to visit the pedophile priest for similar reasons.
If you look at human nature in the bible, this is par, not the exception.
-
@Dave_L said:
I don't know how tall the corn was in your parts, but we had some pretty rotten kids doing some pretty rotten things. I remember at least two different occasions where car loads of highschool guys went to brothels in the area. And several went to visit the pedophile priest for similar reasons.
If you look at human nature in the bible, this is par, not the exception.
The height of corn in my parts is not at all relevant to the point I made in my last post, Dave. The relationship between priest/pastor/rabbi/imam/whoever and a child is NOT a relationship of equals. The priest/pastor/etc has sole responsibility to make sure that that relationship remains wholesome and decent. Acts of pedophilia are ALWAYS the responsibility solely of the pedophiles, not their victims.
It doesn't matter why kids go to their religious leaders. The religious leaders alone are responsible for the morality of what happens between them when the kids visit.
-
@Bill_Coley said:
@Dave_L said:
I don't know how tall the corn was in your parts, but we had some pretty rotten kids doing some pretty rotten things. I remember at least two different occasions where car loads of highschool guys went to brothels in the area. And several went to visit the pedophile priest for similar reasons.
If you look at human nature in the bible, this is par, not the exception.
The height of corn in my parts is not at all relevant to the point I made in my last post, Dave. The relationship between priest/pastor/rabbi/imam/whoever and a child is NOT a relationship of equals. The priest/pastor/etc has sole responsibility to make sure that that relationship remains wholesome and decent. Acts of pedophilia are ALWAYS the responsibility solely of the pedophiles, not their victims.
It doesn't matter why kids go to their religious leaders. The religious leaders alone are responsible for the morality of what happens between them when the kids visit.
You are making more out of this than what I said. I.e. embellishing for your own advantage. The priest was a known pedophile among the students. And this is why they visited him. They were as bad as he was. And the brothel visiting teens only suggests that they would have been at their teacher's house too, given the opportunity.
This suggests that some of the kids are not the victims you make them out to be. Just that the law is on their side when caught, and not on the side of the adults involved.
-
@Dave_L said:
You are making more out of this than what I said. I.e. embellishing for your own advantage. The priest was a known pedophile among the students. And this is why they visited him. They were as bad as he was. And the brothel visiting teens only suggests that they would have been at their teacher's house too, given the opportunity.
This suggests that some of the kids are not the victims you make them out to be. Just that the law is on their side when caught, and not on the side of the adults involved.
No, I am espousing a principle that is FAR MORE IMPORTANT than the particulars of any given case: When a child visits a priest/pastor/etc it is the priest/pastor/etc who is solely responsible for the morality of what happens between him or her and the visiting child. Will you please comment directly and without evasion on THAT principle.
-
@Dave_L said:
@Bill_Coley said:
@Dave_L said:
Based on what I've seen, sometimes the kids want to be molested. I remember car loads of guys (underage) going to the local brothel. And I think the ones going to the local priest had similar ideas.Based on what I read in your post, here, Dave, you have a distorted and disgusting view of these issues.
First, you don't the minds or hearts of the kids who go to their priests, and it is wrong for you to offer such rancid speculation as though you do.
Second, in our culture we assume kids aren't mature persons who have the life experience and moral/ethical foundation necessary to make wise decisions in all circumstances. That's where parents, teachers, pastors, etc come in.
EVEN IF one or more kids "wanted" to be molested - an outrageous claim your post doesn't (and can't) back up - responsibility for the goodness and decency of the relationship between the child and his or her priest is solely the priest's.
I don't know how tall the corn was in your parts, but we had some pretty rotten kids doing some pretty rotten things. I remember at least two different occasions where car loads of highschool guys went to brothels in the area. And several went to visit the pedophile priest for similar reasons.
If you look at human nature in the bible, this is par, not the exception.
Dave/Bill,
Are we starting off on the wrong foot? It was my intent that you would leave a comment to address the weightier points and concerns of the OP.However, Dave, I wouldn't dismiss you, having direct knowledge of what you stated above or understood to be the norms of the day. If there is any truth to your assertions, you speak of long-standing corruption and defilement of Priests and the Catholic Church; especially, if the said behaviors were wide-spread.
I can begin to understand boys wanting (or going) to "brothels", but to the church and to the "man of God" for sexual activities. I am taken back. Your direct knowledge of such should be a part of a thorough investigation. A culture of behavior is easily passed on in a setting of the size and means of this institution.
Even if there is a child or children predisposed to advance sexual exchanges, with an adult, the onus is still upon the adult or the priest, in this case, to prevent such. Even without state or federal laws, on the then books, the Word and the Priest's position should be a warning flag and resistant. Who will protect our children? CM
-
@Bill_Coley said:
@Dave_L said:
You are making more out of this than what I said. I.e. embellishing for your own advantage. The priest was a known pedophile among the students. And this is why they visited him. They were as bad as he was. And the brothel visiting teens only suggests that they would have been at their teacher's house too, given the opportunity.
This suggests that some of the kids are not the victims you make them out to be. Just that the law is on their side when caught, and not on the side of the adults involved.
No, I am espousing a principle that is FAR MORE IMPORTANT than the particulars of any given case: When a child visits a priest/pastor/etc it is the priest/pastor/etc who is solely responsible for the morality of what happens between him or her and the visiting child. Will you please comment directly and without evasion on THAT principle.
I believe Pedophile Priests and School Teachers should behave too, and not let the kids have their way with them. But all are guilty in God's eyes.
-
@C_M_ said:
@Dave_L said:
@Bill_Coley said:
@Dave_L said:
Based on what I've seen, sometimes the kids want to be molested. I remember car loads of guys (underage) going to the local brothel. And I think the ones going to the local priest had similar ideas.Based on what I read in your post, here, Dave, you have a distorted and disgusting view of these issues.
First, you don't the minds or hearts of the kids who go to their priests, and it is wrong for you to offer such rancid speculation as though you do.
Second, in our culture we assume kids aren't mature persons who have the life experience and moral/ethical foundation necessary to make wise decisions in all circumstances. That's where parents, teachers, pastors, etc come in.
EVEN IF one or more kids "wanted" to be molested - an outrageous claim your post doesn't (and can't) back up - responsibility for the goodness and decency of the relationship between the child and his or her priest is solely the priest's.
I don't know how tall the corn was in your parts, but we had some pretty rotten kids doing some pretty rotten things. I remember at least two different occasions where car loads of highschool guys went to brothels in the area. And several went to visit the pedophile priest for similar reasons.
If you look at human nature in the bible, this is par, not the exception.
Dave/Bill,
Are we starting off on the wrong foot? It was my intent that you would leave a comment to address the weightier points and concerns of the OP.However, Dave, I wouldn't dismiss you, having direct knowledge of what you stated above or understood to be the norms of the day. If there is any truth to your assertions, you speak of long-standing corruption and defilement of Priests and the Catholic Church; especially, if the said behaviors were wide-spread.
I can begin to understand boys wanting (or going) to "brothels", but to the church and to the "man of God" for sexual activities. I am taken back. Your direct knowledge of such should be a part of a thorough investigation. A culture of behavior is easily passed on in a setting of the size and means of this institution.
Even if there is a child or children predisposed to advance sexual exchanges, with an adult, the onus is still upon the adult or the priest, in this case, to prevent such. Even without state or federal laws, on the then books, the Word and the Priest's position should be a warning flag and resistant. Who will protect our children? CM
All of what I'm mentioning happened in the 50s & 60s. Things were out of hand then and worse today. The priest was only one pedophile resource the boys tapped.
-
@Dave_L said:
All of what I'm mentioning happened in the 50s & 60s. Things were out of hand then and worse today. The priest was only one pedophile resource the boys tapped.Dave,
I don't know what part of America you are referring, but the incidents are sickening, nasty and shameful. Where are the Priests and the children today? Was it just the boys? What about the girls? Where was law enforcement? Did any such cases come to light? Were parents and other adults aware of this situation? Was it something that was happening and well known, but not to be discussed, as alleged in the Roy Moore cases in Alabama?Really, regardless of the time and the law, at the time of the incidents, it's a shame and a sin before God. Where are these children and what are their lives like today? Is there forgiveness of priests and church leaders for turning a blind eye? CM
-
I agree this is a sickening situation. But I think the media is giving lopsided info in not spreading the blame around more realistically. In my case, it happened so long ago I don't know how it all turned out. But I think all eventually feel the guilt and have a tendency to unload it on the adults.
In the OT if a victim didn't yell "rape", they became an accomplice. And I don't think rape is taking place in most of these cases, but willing submission leading to guilt and blame.
Post edited by Dave_L on -
Hold up, Mr. Dave,
Are you going soft on crime, sin, morality and the betrayal of a position of trust? You seem to excuse this priest's behavior over bias reporting of the media. This is an old Trump tactic. If the situation didn't happen, there will be no bad media reporting. No excuses. A sin is a sin!Sex with a minor (consenting) is "statutory rape", priest or not. I get the feeling it wasn't a one-time thing (moment of weakness). There are many non-priests recorded on a sex-registry predator list and/or doing hard-time in prison. Are you suggesting one's profession guides his punishment? Is it fair to the thousand currently incarcerated?
Molesters molest. Was this and other priests molested? No help for them and no mercy for the innocent helpless children. This why covering up this practice is so abhorred. The reassignments and the payment of millions of dollars (in hush monies/settlements) send a message of a "corrupt" institution.
If these things happened to little boys/girls, what is the fate of the nuns? Is this another truth or scandal yet to be exposed? If they would admit to a little, there is the likelihood, that the half hasn't been told. The Catholic Church needs a no-holds thorough investigation or some kind of "Truth Commission Panel" to stop the raping of the parishioners most vulnerable members. Children, mothers, families, and the world need to be warned.
Stand on the side of truth, justice, repentance, and accountability. CM
-
@C_M_ said:
Hold up, Mr. Dave,
Are you going soft on crime, sin, morality and the betrayal of a position of trust? You seem to excuse this priest's behavior over bias reporting of the media. This is an old Trump tactic. If the situation didn't happen, there will be no bad media reporting. No excuses. A sin is a sin!Sex with a minor (consenting) is "statutory rape", priest or not. I get the feeling it wasn't a one-time thing (moment of weakness). There are many non-priests recorded on a sex-registry predator list and/or doing hard-time in prison. Are you suggesting one's profession guides his punishment? Is it fair to the thousand currently incarcerated?
Molesters molest. Was this and other priests molested? No help for them and no mercy for the innocent helpless children. This why covering up this practice is so abhorred. The reassignments and the payment of millions of dollars (in hush monies/settlements) send a message of a "corrupt" institution.
If these things happened to little boys/girls, what is the fate of the nuns? Is this another truth or scandal yet to be exposed? If they would admit to a little, there is the likelihood, that the half hasn't been told. The Catholic Church needs a no-holds thorough investigation or some kind of "Truth Commission Panel" to stop the raping of the parishioners most vulnerable members. Children, mothers, families, and the world need to be warned.
Stand on the side of truth, justice, repentance, and accountability. CM
I'm not saying there aren't "innocent victims". But all any need to do is yell rape! and remove all suspicion that they aren't in on it. (some exceptions exist.) Deuteronomy 22:23–24
-
@Dave_L said:
I'm not saying there aren't "innocent victims". But all any need to do is yell rape! and remove all suspicion that they aren't in on it. (some exceptions exist.) Deuteronomy 22:23–24"Innocent victims." What other kinds of child victims of sexual assault are there?
The morally troubling Deuteronomy text you cite...
- Refers to adult women, not minor children - the difference matters
- Commands capital punishment for victims of sexual assault committed within city limits who are engaged to be married, on the assumption they didn't cry for help
- Is followed immediately by a text (Deuteronomy 22.25-26) in which women engaged to be married who are raped "in the country" - out of earshot of help - are assumed to have cried for help, and hence are exempted from death
In what way(s) do you believe the text your cite is actually applicable to children assaulted by adults? If in certain circumstances, adult women can be assumed to have cried for help, doesn't it just seem right to assume in even more circumstances that children did? Or better, not to impose upon kids (or adult women!) the responsibility to cry for help as they are assaulted if they want to avoid punishment for or doubts about their claims?
-
@Bill_Coley said:
@Dave_L said:
I'm not saying there aren't "innocent victims". But all any need to do is yell rape! and remove all suspicion that they aren't in on it. (some exceptions exist.) Deuteronomy 22:23–24"Innocent victims." What other kinds of child victims of sexual assault are there?
The morally troubling Deuteronomy text you cite...
- Refers to adult women, not minor children - the difference matters
- Commands capital punishment for victims of sexual assault committed within city limits who are engaged to be married, on the assumption they didn't cry for help
- Is followed immediately by a text (Deuteronomy 22.25-26) in which women engaged to be married who are raped "in the country" - out of earshot of help - are assumed to have cried for help, and hence are exempted from death
In what way(s) do you believe the text your cite is actually applicable to children assaulted by adults? If in certain circumstances, adult women can be assumed to have cried for help, doesn't it just seem right to assume in even more circumstances that children did? Or better, not to impose upon kids (or adult women!) the responsibility to cry for help as they are assaulted if they want to avoid punishment for or doubts about their claims?
Are we talking babies or teens who know better?
-
@Dave_L said:
Are we talking babies or teens who know better?For most of my previous post, Dave, I was talking about the Deuteronomy text you cited. Hence, I again ask the questions I posed to you there....
In what way(s) do you believe the text you cited is actually applicable to children assaulted by adults? If in certain circumstances, adult women can be assumed to have cried for help, doesn't it just seem right to assume in even more circumstances that children did? Or better, not to impose upon kids (or adult women!) the responsibility to cry for help as they are assaulted if they want to avoid punishment for or doubts about their claims?
As for your question about "babies or teens who know better," again I contend that in a relationship between an adult and a child of whatever age, the adult bears the responsibility for securing the health, safety, and morality of that relationship, just as in any relationship between persons of unequal power (e.g. adult/child and employer/employee) that responsibility falls on the person with greater power.
-
Bill, you are politically correct but morally incorrect and intellectually dishonest. Again.
-
@Bill_Coley said:
@Dave_L said:
Are we talking babies or teens who know better?For most of my previous post, Dave, I was talking about the Deuteronomy text you cited. Hence, I again ask the questions I posed to you there....
In what way(s) do you believe the text you cited is actually applicable to children assaulted by adults? If in certain circumstances, adult women can be assumed to have cried for help, doesn't it just seem right to assume in even more circumstances that children did? Or better, not to impose upon kids (or adult women!) the responsibility to cry for help as they are assaulted if they want to avoid punishment for or doubts about their claims?
As for your question about "babies or teens who know better," again I contend that in a relationship between an adult and a child of whatever age, the adult bears the responsibility for securing the health, safety, and morality of that relationship, just as in any relationship between persons of unequal power (e.g. adult/child and employer/employee) that responsibility falls on the person with greater power.
I appreciate your concern for the victims. But in my experience I knew several who bore the brunt of the blame. And to let these skate, giving them a free pass when they are just as guilty is morally wrong. It's back to some claiming "The devil made me do it" and you sympathising with them.
-
@GaoLu said:
Bill, you are politically correct but morally incorrect and intellectually dishonest. Again.Your analysis of me is, as always, cogent, insightful, detailed, and informed, Gao Lu. Thank you.
Since AGAIN I don't know the truth, please share with me/us the "morally correct" and "intellectually honest" view of the responsibility for securing the health, safety, and morality of the relationship between an adult and a child.
-
Bro. Dave,
I find your remarks and text troubling. It appears to be misapplied to the situation and/or the OP. Even if one were to take your comment at face value, strenuous as it may be, this is why the Catholic Church needs to get from between the "alleged" crime and the victims and let the priest have his "day in court."The Church investigating itself is tantamount to sending the fox to investigate missing chickens in a henhouse. Too many lives have been destroyed under the name of privacy, trust, abstinence, under the cover of black robes, penance, confession, and absolution.
These sex crimes need to be brought to light by the law, judges, acknowledgment, repentance, removal, compensation, zero tolerance, counseling, accountability and jail time (independent of the church). This is a far cry from what has happened over the past century, if not more. Love the priest, love the church, but let's not forget to love the children with justice, protection, counseling, and safety. CM
-
@Dave_L said:
I appreciate your concern for the victims. But in my experience I knew several who bore the brunt of the blame. And to let these skate, giving them a free pass when they are just as guilty is morally wrong. It's back to some claiming "The devil made me do it" and you sympathising with them.In my view, by definition, a "victim" is the recipient, not the perpetrator, of harm. Hence, I don't know how "victims" can held responsible for what happened to them. Please explain.
To whom does the claim that "the devil made me do it" refer? Victims? Abusers?
I hope it's not surprising that I ALWAYS sympathize with victims of abuse.
And for the third time, of the Deuteronomy text you previously cited I ask....
In what way(s) do you believe the text you cited is actually applicable to children assaulted by adults? If in certain circumstances, adult women can be assumed to have cried for help, doesn't it just seem right to assume in even more circumstances that children did? Or better, not to impose upon kids (or adult women!) the responsibility to cry for help as they are assaulted if they want to avoid punishment for or doubts about their claims?
-
@Bill_Coley said:
@Dave_L said:
I appreciate your concern for the victims. But in my experience I knew several who bore the brunt of the blame. And to let these skate, giving them a free pass when they are just as guilty is morally wrong. It's back to some claiming "The devil made me do it" and you sympathising with them.In my view, by definition, a "victim" is the recipient, not the perpetrator, of harm. Hence, I don't know how "victims" can held responsible for what happened to them. Please explain.
To whom does the claim that "the devil made me do it" refer? Victims? Abusers?
I hope it's not surprising that I ALWAYS sympathize with victims of abuse.
And for the third time, of the Deuteronomy text you previously cited I ask....
In what way(s) do you believe the text you cited is actually applicable to children assaulted by adults? If in certain circumstances, adult women can be assumed to have cried for help, doesn't it just seem right to assume in even more circumstances that children did? Or better, not to impose upon kids (or adult women!) the responsibility to cry for help as they are assaulted if they want to avoid punishment for or doubts about their claims?
I do not think things are as black & white as you imagine them to be. There are victims and there are accomplices who unload their guilt claiming to be the victim you and others make them out to be. But the boys I knew certainly were not victims. They were all in it together.
-
@C_M_ said:
Bro. Dave,
I find your remarks and text troubling. It appears to be misapplied to the situation and/or the OP. Even if one were to take your comment at face value, strenuous as it may be, this is why the Catholic Church needs to get from between the "alleged" crime and the victims and let the priest have his "day in court."The Church investigating itself is tantamount to sending the fox to investigate missing chickens in a henhouse. Too many lives have been destroyed under the name of privacy, trust, abstinence, under the cover of black robes, penance, confession, and absolution.
These sex crimes need to be brought to light by the law, judges, acknowledgment, repentance, removal, compensation, zero tolerance, counseling, accountability and jail time (independent of the church). This is a far cry from what has happened over the past century, if not more. Love the priest, love the church, but let's not forget to love the children with justice, protection, counseling, and safety. CM
No matter how troubling my remarks might be, I'm only saying you and the popular buzz do not know as much as you think about the situation. If you were really concerned, you would hold all of reasonable age accountable and not make excuses for them. A pervert is a pervert no matter what.
-
@Dave_L said:
No matter how troubling my remarks might be, I'm only saying you and the popular buzz do not know as much as you think about the situation. If you were really concerned, you would hold all of reasonable age accountable and not make excuses for them. A pervert is a pervert no matter what.
Dave,
You broke my heart! I expect you to be more sober-minded on this subject than you have demonstrated thus far. Just because there are some precocious children with abnormal sex-drives and high inquisitiveness, you want to give an adult male-priest a pass or lessen his responsibility? Even if a child is sexually encourageable, the priest should have the adult maturity and the moral acuity to resist. This is all the more, he needs to be removed from the priesthood.Even if you could "absolutely positively" document what you know, you still can't explain away the hundreds, ye, thousands of women and children, over the years, around the world, abused by priests. Dave, your contentions don't hold water. It's a broken cistern-- the equivalent of trying to sleep in a bed too short with a cover too narrowed.
The only newborn (created) as adults, were Adam and Eve. All others are born as babies-infants and then, to children. They need protection! This is why God established the family unit. How many more children be raped before there is exposure, real protections, and assurances to children and families? We can continue living in a small space, in the corner of a room, on this matter or we can light a candle and see we have a whole lot more room to operate for peace, safety, and resolution. CM
-
@C_M_ said:
@Dave_L said:
No matter how troubling my remarks might be, I'm only saying you and the popular buzz do not know as much as you think about the situation. If you were really concerned, you would hold all of reasonable age accountable and not make excuses for them. A pervert is a pervert no matter what.
Dave,
You broke my heart! I expect you to be more sober-minded on this subject than you have demonstrated thus far. Just because there are some precocious children with abnormal sex-drives and high inquisitiveness, you want to give an adult male-priest a pass or lessen his responsibility? Even if a child is sexually encourageable, the priest should have the adult maturity and the moral acuity to resist. This is all the more, he needs to be removed from the priesthood.Even if you could "absolutely positively" document what you know, you still can't explain away the hundreds, ye, thousands of women and children, over the years, around the world, abused by priests. Dave, your contentions don't hold water. It's a broken cistern-- the equivalent of trying to sleep in a bed too short with a cover too narrowed.
The only newborn (created) as adults, were Adam and Eve. All others are born as babies-infants and then, to children. They need protection! This is why God established the family unit. How many more children be raped before there is exposure, real protections, and assurances to children and families? We can continue living in a small space, in the corner of a room, on this matter or we can light a candle and see we have a whole lot more room to operate for peace, safety, and resolution. CM
I admire your concern for the innocent. But I think you encourage this sort of thing to continue if you do not call sin, sin, and continue making excuses for those who know better.
-
Here's a couple more situations I can think of. One happened about 4 years ago to a music minister I knew personally but not too well. (I sold him some equipment for his church.) They arrested him for having an improper relationship with a teenage boy nearing legal age, apparently on several different occasions. The teen obviously made himself available and built a trust relationship with the minister. As I remember a cop or someone caught them parked together. Long story short. Jr. skates being the victim and the minister is doing time, lots of it.
Then there was the pedophile music store owner who twinked local boys who just loved hanging out at his store. He went undetected by the authorities, but the boys had this to live down for the rest of their lives. The media made this more palatable painting them as victims. But boys will be boys.
-
@Dave_L said:
I admire your concern for the innocent. But I think you encourage this sort of thing to continue if you do not call sin, sin, and continue making excuses for those who know better.
Dave,
I am not under any delusions of the nature, kind and the corruption of sin. Let's not forget sin exist when there is a knowledge of right and wrong (of the land) or the law (God's). Both these a priest knows or should know.I am not clear on what you mean by "I think you encourage this sort of thing to continue..."? CM
-
@C_M_ said:
@Dave_L said:
I admire your concern for the innocent. But I think you encourage this sort of thing to continue if you do not call sin, sin, and continue making excuses for those who know better.
Dave,
I am not under any delusions of the nature, kind and the corruption of sin. Let's not forget sin exist when there is a knowledge of right and wrong (of the land) or the law (God's). Both these a priest knows or should know.I am not clear on what you mean by "I think you encourage this sort of thing to continue..."? CM
When we make excuses for sin, people lend themselves to it more readily.
