Fair enough, no witch hunt. The unpleasant fact of course is that probably all human beings are prone to sexual misconduct when given opportunity and exposed to temptation. One wonders why God felt it necessary to endow humans with such concupiscence, combined with an infinite imagination. Let's not be prim about it, men will hump anything when pressed; thus the need for strict cultural taboos against the various sex crimes. But if we're going to lock the perpetrators up for life, we might reflect that but for the grace of God goes half the congregation--the other half having only wanted for opportunity. I have 3 girls and 3 boys and have never entrusted them to the care of any male, not even my brothers--whom I trust, but don't put that trust to the test. Taboos against sexual misconduct don't work nearly well enough. I wonder how many practicing paedophiles receive absolution on a weekly bases. The Catholic church not only exacerbates sexual misconduct by denying its healthful expression; it also absolves it--to the complete satisfaction, no doubt, of at least the wilfully stupid.
Francis, no church is a legitimate ngo as they build their empires on the largess of tax exemptions and government indulgence, as well as selling their snake oil--the promise of immortality is surely the ultimate anodyne!
My first wife was from a strong Catholic family and they're a fusty, conservative lot full of ersatz good will, which stops abruptly at the parish limits and blends breezily with the gossip within. The Catholic church, from where I sit, is a decadent corporation at the top, which atomises into small-minded, localised hubs of nationalism, without.

Francis,

Though a skeptic, I appreciated much of you your post. The primiive church of the first and second centuries was much more commuinity based and allowed greater involvement by the laity. Local pockets of believers were autonomous and would communicate with their peer with "Letters". During the third and fourth centuries, first came administrative centralisation and ultimately political centralisation (Constantine). In the early days, "Confessors" were more revered than bishops.

Where I would choose to differ is culpability on the anarchistic hierarhcy. Herein, John Paul II and Arch Priest Law and Pope Benedict, should not have be allowed evade Court. The Law situation boggles belief. Benedict could still act against Law by demoting him and sending him to the Congo as a parish priest

Squeers......Some of your statements are outlandish. "Men will hump anything when pressed"!!....is this true of you too? Or only of others. Are you saying that you would "hump" a child "when pressed" or are you exempt?

Since when does the catholic Church deny the healthful expression of human sexuality? Are married couples advised by the hierarchy not to have sex? Just the opposite!

Your last paragraph seems to be more bitter than rational. The last sentence doesn't make sense.

Oliver....spot on! I agree much of the episcopal hierarchy is anachronistic......though the office of bishop need not be so. The vatican hierarchy just makes me bloody livid......all the pomp, lace, funny hats, bowing and scraping and crawling. I agree something must be done re Law though I have doubts about benedict's willingness to do anything (sadly). Benedict moved against Macial after JP II departed the scene (JP II was protecting him). Unfortunately, benedict is, himself, a product of the medievaL institution that the vatican is and I doubt if he has the ability to be empathetic. To the institutionalised protecting the institution is the priority because, I guess, their self-awareness, identity, reason for being is the institution.

Francis, Squeers, Oliver, We Are Unique, Raycom, Further to our earlier posts. How do you feel about the clergy being infiltrated by communists bent on perverting the church?

http://www.fatimaperspectives.com/cs/perspective235.asp

http://www.savethemales.ca/160303.html

Do you think any of these sickos later became paedophiles? Or covered up for any of their communist colleagues who did? What do you think about the poor disabled girl violated by another woman & abandoned by the social workers at a Catholic church NGO, closely linked to "St Vinnie's" BTW?

On another similar forum i mentioned the fate of a man i know who was sexually assaulted by "Nuns" at boarding school, what do you think about that? 2 nuns would line the boys up naked in the showers before they had them. Then go down the line with the first nun digitally stimulating them until achieving erection, whereupon the second nun would hit it with a cane, Nice.

Church NGOs involved in charity/social work is a dreadful corruption of the separation of church & state. What bishop, etc, is going to speak out against incompetent, corrupt, evil, governments, if that will risk the jobs, of 1,000s of their employees?

Or are you all "humanities academics" from the loony, left who are only interested in promoting fauxmanista fantasies about, "only men or priests" being responsible for the abuse/neglect of children?

Kenny, Runner, what do you guys, think about any of the above?

Francis,
I'm cut to the quick. I can take any amount of correction and criticism, but this: "The last sentence doesn't make sense" is more than I can bear. You do realise that I use the word "within" figuratively?
But never mind, onto the lesser innuendos:
<"Men will hump anything when pressed"!!....is this true of you too? Or only of others[?]Are you saying that you would "hump" a child "when pressed" or are you exempt?>
Yes, I fear 'tis true of me too, and others; there was a time when the sexual urge overmastered ethics and reason both, though I never buggered boy or untimely interfered with either sex, thank God (though God seems to consider such matters passe, or at least his representatives on Earth do).
Surely, Francis, you perceive that I was again being figurative and alluding to sexual misconduct generally? Do you deny that sexuality takes Man by storm ever and anon? Or that the imagination is rarely satisfied with sanctioned conjugal congress?
That's why our societies are blessed with prostitution, and the internet awash with porn---to satisfy 'deviant' practices (actually the norm. We're 'stereotypically deviant', as are other species. Isn't nature grand!).
Did you not also discern that by "exacerbates sexual misconduct" I was alluding to the celibacy [sic] of the Catholic priesthood? And what about the hypocrisy and patronage of the institution when in the same breath it celebrates the sexuality of the laity? Hypocritical elitism!
I'll reiterate, we are all of us, every one, 'capable' of gross sexual misconduct during our lives; only the circumstances are sometimes wanting. This is not my doctrine; it's a hard reality.
No wonder Freud despaired--though he wasn't getting rich by the state for keeping up appearances.
Formersnag, I can only hope that the communists were not corrupted by the clergy.