I thought that was life time job...of conning people out of their money. Btw, now he should spend remaining years in jail for covering up for pedophile priests.
This statement is disrespectful. Catholic organizations have made a tremendous impact on the lives of the downtrodden and the general public. Numerous healthcare and educational institutions have made a huge difference in the lives of people across the world. True there might have been bad apples, but it is plain stupid to equate him with conning money.
It is not like the fakes who con money out of people by using magic and what not.
It is easy to sit in an armchair and make these kind of unwanted statements.
Calling a spade a spade is certainly not disrespectful, but do you have the entire context to make such sweeping statements. Catholic organization is huge and changes cannot be done overnight. It is a marvel of faith that the institution of papacy continues to this day and prosper.
For all the criticism that is directed to this pope, he ensured that he stood steadfast in what he believed in and decided to go when he realized that his health did not permit him to continue.
You know I like your posts. Allow me to disagree on this. Here is why.
It is a copout to say one should have all the details before forming an opinion. Sometimes connecting the dots is all we can do. Big organization or no, it is known the pope knew about child abuse and looked the other way.
Standing steadfast in what one believes in is not the same as doing things for the greater good. Stance against pro choice and gays not something praiseworthy, IMO. Equal righhts for all - whoever believes in that is more respect worthy than high office holders that don't.
You know I like your posts. Allow me to disagree on this. Here is why.
It is a copout to say one should have all the details before forming an opinion. Sometimes connecting the dots is all we can do. Big organization or no, it is known the pope knew about child abuse and looked the other way.
Standing steadfast in what one believes in is not the same as doing things for the greater good. Stance against pro choice and gays not something praiseworthy, IMO. Equal righhts for all - whoever believes in that is more respect worthy than high office holders that don't.
I too respect you and surprised that you hold such strong opinions against the pope. It is very easy to connect the dots when half the dots are missing and the other half tainted with the mindset that we have. There might be instances when he looked the other way regarding molesters. These will be highlighted when the incidents when he steadfastly pursued cases would be hidden.
The media always likes to portray the bad things. Also we never know on why he did not pursue these cases. It is easy to start a witch - hunt based on hearsay. McAurthy trials might ring a bell.
A religious leader should remain what he is(a religious leader) and not be a political leader. Can you ask a swamiji to advise people to eat beef. That too is pro choice. You would be the first person to disown such a swamiji. There are certain fundamental ethos in every religion. The pope stood by what the fundamental ethos are in Catholicism. It is for us as laymen to debate on what is right and wrong, but for him, he has to stand steadfast in what he believes. It is paramount to his faith.
I too respect you and surprised that you hold such strong opinions against the pope. It is very easy to connect the dots when half the dots are missing and the other half tainted with the mindset that we have. There might be instances when he looked the other way regarding molesters. These will be highlighted when the incidents when he steadfastly pursued cases would be hidden.
The media always likes to portray the bad things. Also we never know on why he did not pursue these cases. It is easy to start a witch - hunt based on hearsay. McAurthy trials might ring a bell.
A religious leader should remain what he is(a religious leader) and not be a political leader. Can you ask a swamiji to advise people to eat beef. That too is pro choice. You would be the first person to disown such a swamiji. There are certain fundamental ethos in every religion. The pope stood by what the fundamental ethos are in Catholicism. It is for us as laymen to debate on what is right and wrong, but for him, he has to stand steadfast in what he believes. It is paramount to his faith.
I will grant you the stance which is based on religion - cant hold it against him.
As to molesters - I did not have any fixed mindset. One can only rely on available infornstion. It is reported he did look the other way. One should not assume he may have pursued molesters actively at times. In fact till a stink ese raised due to various scandals he was actively looking the other way.
I am jot willing tongive him benefit of doubt. Based on hexmight have done some active pursuit. What abt the defenseless children. I have nothing in my sympathy bank for protectors of child molesters.
The child molestation issue came to the forefront when John Paul II was the pope. It was not in the present Pope’s jurisdiction to actively pursue the child molesters. As I have said before, it is very easy to begin a witch hunt. There are numerous examples in the Church history as well as in everyday life wherein witch hunts have turned the lives of ordinary people upside down. Maybe it was not the best decision. But we would not never know the ramifications if there indeed had been a witch-hunt.
I respectfully disagree. This man did cover up child sex abuse by the clergy. Calling a spade a spade is not disrespectful. It is just stating the truth.
I'm completely okay with calling a spade a spade. My objection is to how we make that call.
The bolded example below is in poor taste, per my opinion:
maybe he realized all this stuff is nonsense and decided to become a good human being instead. lets start with getting you off that virgin tag, pal.. that is unnatural.
I've never had a problem with anyone disagreeing on a specific aspect or even holding an opinion that is exactly in contrast to mine or the majority; however the manner/tone and words with which that opinion is expressed should not be objectionable.
This statement is disrespectful. Catholic organizations have made a tremendous impact on the lives of the downtrodden and the general public.
We are taking about Pope & not Catholic orgs. Btw, if pointing out facts about Pope is disrespectful than maybe you don't want to hear about facts about him. For example, did you know that he was part of Hitler's youths? You may think thats disrespectful, but that is also a fact.
Taken in isolation and without context the above comment appears to be in poor taste. But considering as a cardinal for 25 years this person went out of his way to cover up sexual predators, I would say queer was being kind. Note that his primary job description was to look ar sexual abuse!
That this person was subsequently rewarded with this high honor is both laughable and tragic. Here is a link. I don’t understand why anyone would worry about decorum while describing this person. Add to that he was a Nazi as a youngster.
The pope is an essential part of the Catholic Org. He is the main pillar around which the Catholic Organizations revolve. As for his membership of Hitler Youth please read the following
“Following his 14th birthday in 1941, Ratzinger was conscripted into the Hitler Youth—**as membership was required by law for all 14-year-old German boys after December 1939[SUP][14]](Pope Benedict XVI - Wikipedia)[/SUP]— ** but was an unenthusiastic member who refused to attend meetings, according to his brother.” – From Wikipedia.
God !!! Are we clutching on straws here. The statement is not just disrespectful but downright stupid…
Please do not blindly follow statements that are being made.
Southie, I really expected you to do some basic research before making such statements. He was required as per law to join Hitler Youth.
Regarding sexual abuse scandals you are making statement without knowing the entire facts. As I have said before there can be instances wherein he might not have actively pursued some cases. It is not that he was part of the cover-up or was he himself involved in these cases.
By making such vile and inappropriate comments you are hurting the religious sentiments of his followers which is uncalled for.
Let me make a digression here and point out one important fact. Almost all religious groups have been accused of child abuse, sexual abuse etc. Apart from the Catholic orgs which conducted enquiries which other religious institution was brave enough to conduct an internal investigation. Does ISKCON ring a bell here. I know that this is a separate topic and would not want to discuss this here. As religious leaders you cannot blindly go about witch hunting.
And yes he was part of the cover up. That he himself did not abuse is true as far as I know. But HE DID COVER UP.
Stating this is neither vile nor disrespectful to religion.
By the way I could nit care less if a Hindu holy man preached we eat beef. As long as he preaches tolerance and fiarness and doing good and bring good I don't pay attention to food related preachings. And I would call out a Hindu holy man if he does something negative.
I understand when you are blindly opposing a person, it does not matter if facts speak otherwise.
I really do not understand from where you get the number 25 years. Prior to 2001, the primary responsibility for investigating allegations of sexual abuse and disciplining perpetrators rested with the individual dioceses. Not with the cardinal. Please understand this.
The Pope as the cardinal was responsible for making fundamental changes to the cannon law to include offenses related to child abuse.There are numerous instances when the Cardinal made sure that he did the right thing..
Again from wikipedia …
“One of the cases Ratzinger pursued involved Father Marcial Maciel Degollado, a Mexican priest and founder of the Legion of Christ, who had been accused repeatedly of sexual abuse. Biographer Andrea Tornielli suggested that Cardinal Ratzinger had wanted to take action against Marcial Maciel Degollado, but that John Paul II and other high-ranking officials, including several cardinals and notably the pope’s influential secretary Stanisław Dziwisz, prevented him from doing so.[SUP][139]](Pope Benedict XVI - Wikipedia)[/SUP][SUP][143]](Pope Benedict XVI - Wikipedia)[/SUP] According to Jason Berry, Angelo Sodano “pressured” Cardinal Ratzinger, who was “operating on the assumption that the charges were not justified”, to halt the proceedings against Maciel in 1999[SUP][144]](Pope Benedict XVI - Wikipedia)[/SUP] When Maciel was honored by the Pope in 2004, new accusers came forward[SUP][144]](Pope Benedict XVI - Wikipedia)[/SUP] and Cardinal Ratzinger “took it on himself to authorize an investigation of Maciel”[SUP][139]](Pope Benedict XVI - Wikipedia)[/SUP] After Ratzinger became pope he began proceedings against Maciel and the Legion of Christ that forced Maciel out of active service in the Church.[SUP][138]](Pope Benedict XVI - Wikipedia)[/SUP] On 1 May 2010 the Vatican issued a statement denouncing Maciel’s “very serious and objectively immoral acts”, which were “confirmed by incontrovertible testimonies” and represent “true crimes and manifest a life without scruples or authentic religious sentiment.” Pope Benedict also said he would appoint a special commission to examine the Legionaries’ constitution and open an investigation into its lay affiliate Regnum Christi.[SUP][145]](Pope Benedict XVI - Wikipedia)[/SUP] Cardinal Christoph Schönborn explained that Ratzinger “made entirely clear efforts not to cover things up but to tackle and investigate them. This was not always met with approval in the Vatican”.[SUP][138]](Pope Benedict XVI - Wikipedia)[/SUP][SUP][146]](Pope Benedict XVI - Wikipedia)[/SUP] According to Schönborn, Cardinal Ratzinger had pressed John Paul II to investigate Hans Hermann Groër, an Austrian cardinal and friend of John Paul accused of sexual abuse, resulting in Groër’s resignation.[SUP][143]](Pope Benedict XVI - Wikipedia)”
[/SUP]
It helps to understand the big picture before making blind statements.
And yes he was part of the cover up. That he himself did not abuse is true as far as I know. But HE DID COVER UP.
Stating this is neither vile nor disrespectful to religion.
By the way I could nit care less if a Hindu holy man preached we eat beef. As long as he preaches tolerance and fiarness and doing good and bring good I don't pay attention to food related preachings. And I would call out a Hindu holy man if he does something negative.
I really expected better from you. It is not about eating beef my dear friend. It is about the fundamental ethos. The present pope has always preached tolerance and made sure that he connects with people from different different faiths.
Good for you that you would not hesitate to call out a Hindu holy man if he does something negative, though I am yet to hear something like this from you. My perspective is that when you badmouth people who occupy a place of respect in the hearts of millions you need to get facts straight. Not blindly insult !!!
What he did between 2004 and 2010 is irrelevant. By then pressure had mounted. Awareness had increased. What he did in 25 years as Cardinal matters. When public awareness and pressure was negligible.
What he did between 2004 and 2010 is irrelevant. By then pressure had mounted. Awareness had increased. What he did in 25 years as Cardinal matters. When public awareness and pressure was negligible.
Did you read my entire post my dear friend. It helps.
I really expected better from you. It is not about eating beef my dear friend. It is about the fundamental ethos. The present pope has always preached tolerance and made sure that he connects with people from different different faiths.
Good for you that you would not hesitate to call out a Hindu holy man if he does something negative, though I am yet to hear something like this from you. My perspective is that when you badmouth people who occupy a place of respect in the hearts of millions you need to get facts straight. Not blindly insult !!!
I brought up beef because you used it as an example.
As for not hearing criticism of Hindu holy men my earlier post in this thread is critical of Saibaba who recently assert away. Quite frankly I don't know any Hindu holy man. Am not a big fan of such blind following. When in India I go yo temples because I get peace if mind. Listen to bhajans.
Feel free to either provide cases of Hindu holy men who did negative things. I will not hesitate to criticize if they deserve it.