Pope resigning

barrow speaking for myself, some of my relatives are catholics. Nothing against catholics. But the RC church as a powerful organisation is a political issue in many ways. It has an impact on world population. It has an impact on AIDS particularly in Africa. It has an impact on legislation about abortion and divorce affecting women in places such as Ireland. It seeks to influence legislation on things like abortion, in many countries. The issue of covering up abuse has been widespread but nowhere more prevalent and embedded than in the RC church. It is too big an organisation and still too powerful not to be treated as a major political force in the world today.
The pope, as chief executive, is a symbol and a spokesman for all that. Why would we not criticise?

No the baddies to not negate the good that is done, but they do give the institutions a bad name if they are protected from prosecution when crimes have been committed. The pope was in a position to do something about that. He didn't, therefore he was in the wrong.

Subtle aint in it Pat Condell on Satan as a Catholic.

barrow, because the pope is the head of the Catholic Church. We 'attack' Cameron when the government he leads is incompetent or worse, so why not the leader of the Catholic Church when it is incompetent or worse?

Hehe, petallus, if you think that's not subtle, you should try listening to Pat
Condell about the Catholic Church.

How has a thread about the resignation of the Pope turned into an attack on the Catholic Church? As I have said on previous threads, what was done in the past cannot be undone, all the Church can do is assure it doesn't happen again and to assist the authorities when they carry out investigations into past abuse.

Many organisations have people who prey on children, Priests, Vicars, Immams, Teachers, Scout Leaders, Youth Workers etc. and yes they must be found and prosecuted but their actions do not negate all the good carried out by the majority of people in those jobs/callings.

If he were a government minister and it was found there were gross abuses of power in his department, which he was not on top of and curbing, he would be blamed.

JO said last night after Galen's mistype of god for good "Yes. Do away with the middle man. #probablycomecheaper"

I was under the impression that the New Covenant that started with Jesus did just that - swept away the old fossilised hierarchy of priests and instituted a new relationship directly between god and individuals. Its interesting how a new hierarchy arose, and still exists, of humans interpreting a basically very simple message, and putting their own fossilised slant on it.

Thanks for link. I usually like the Onion. Thought this article was quite funny but a bit unsubtle.

Would anybody think that the men involved in child abuse in the 1970's should not be prosecuted because they are old?

j08 He was the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith for some time before he was elected Pope.

Just to add, there is actually a law relating to "failure to protect".

I don't think you necessarily have to actually "cover up" anything to be considered complicit, but knowing somethings were happening and failing to take any action with regard to them can be seen as wrong.

Responsible in part but not sure whether they could ever prosecute. Hard evidence of his intent to cover up needed.

He was very young when in the Hitler Youth - presumably it was compulsory.

His older brother, also a priest, has admitted to physically abusing choir boys - said he was 'relieved' when corporal punishment was banned, as though he was forced to do it!

So, by the same token, if priests in the C of E were to rape children and the C of E were to hide this fact and to protect the priests from prosecution, it would have nothing to do with the Archbish who knew about the deception? Or would he have to be held responsible in part?

I don't believe there is anything he could be prosecuted for. He's just old, weak and very tired. That's why he's standing down. No hidden reasons.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/vaticancityandholysee/5314338/Dont-mention-the-Popes-Hitler-Youth-past-says-the-Vatican.html

The UN gives Vatican City special status but does not recognise it as a state.

Well, the pope was in the Hitler Youth movement.......

Why is the Vatican still a phoney-baloney 'state'? It's a relic of the Mussolini era...

Bags - I was tempted to put the Onion article in the Just Jokes thread - it is very funny indeed!

Jingle, if you look up the thread on the child abuse scandal you will see how he was involved before he became pope. (Not of actual abuse himself, but of failing to ensure the safety of vulnerable children).

Because he was involved (by being head of the Catholic Church) in keeping it hidden and protecting the perpetrators from prosecution.

Why would he be charged over the child sex abuse thing?

I don't know if this is really the case but I have heard that the Pope will be more liable to prosecution if he resigns. Apparently, as a "sovereign head of state" he has immunity from prosecution at the moment. There is also the question of whether the new Pope will allow his extradition from the Vatican.

Joan women are Eucharistic ministers have been for years can't take bigger part in mass than that
Did nt care for this pope after reading long time ago he hushed up child abides and protected perpetrator !