# Fuck the Motherfucking Pope **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [May 20, 2010, 9:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-the-motherfucking-pope/540182 "2010-05-20T21:15:26Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 13
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2010, 9:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-the-motherfucking-pope/540182/241 "2010-05-21T21:53:46Z")
> [@Shot\_From\_Guns](#): > > There is a difference between Catholic bashing and Catholic Church bashing. It’s very important to understand that distinction. It’s comparable to the difference between hating Jews and hating the policies of Israel. Agreed. Good point. THAT was Catholic Church bashing. > [@](#): > > Again, you’re completely missing the problem. It was terrible that so many children were abused. But the biggest problem was not the abuse: it was that the abuse was officially and systematically covered up, and done so in such a way that enabled further, continuing abuse by the same abusers. > > Show me \*any \*other institution where abusers were covered for and shuffled from post to post. And if I do, you’ll say [what](http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/otl/news/story?id=5071820)? OK, show me TWO others? > [@](#): > > Youth swimming coaches, many certified by USA Swimming, the sport’s national governing body, have been able to molest young swimmers and then move from town to town, escaping criminal charges and continuing to victimize other under-aged swimmers, an ESPN “Outside the Lines” investigation has found. ---
**Author:** ![Enderw24](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/ba9def/32.png) [@Enderw24](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Enderw24)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2010, 9:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-the-motherfucking-pope/540182/242 "2010-05-21T21:59:42Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Agreed. Good point. > > THAT was Catholic Church bashing. > > And if I do, you’ll say [what](http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/otl/news/story?id=5071820)? OK, show me TWO others? I, for one, would say that’s terrible, but there’s enough hate in my heart for everyone. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2010, 9:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-the-motherfucking-pope/540182/243 "2010-05-21T21:59:58Z")
> [@elbows](#): > > Says you, show us some evidence. What kind of evidence would you expect to see? ---
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2010, 10:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-the-motherfucking-pope/540182/244 "2010-05-21T22:00:15Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I do believe that now, May 2010, the Church has applied appropriate policies for going forward. Any accusation is reported to authorities, period. Any credible accusation results in removal of the priest, period, end - no possibility of reassignment. > > I’d be curious to know if you feel what they’re doing NOW is lacking in any way. Well, it depends what you mean by “lacking,” i guess. If the above paragraph is the current policy, and the Church is following that policy, then i don’t have too much in the way of criticism. But, even if what you say is one hundred percent true, it still falls far short of changing my overall position about the Church on this issue. While you have, in some of your recent posts (most notably, your recent response to **elbows** ) drawn a fairly clear and firm distinction between past and present, i’m not sure that the line is as bright as you suggest. Even if we accept that your statement about current Church policies, and even though you concede that the actions of the past were reprehensible, it seems to me that a not-insignificant part of that reprehensible behavior has been allowed to bleed across the line you are drawing between past and present. There are still people high up in the Catholic hierarchy who not only turned a blind eye to the actions of the past, but who were, in some cases, directly responsible for policies that covered them up, and for decisions such as declining to report criminal behavior to the civil authorities. The fact that some of these people continue within the organization means that the stain of the past behavior remains on the institution. Furthermore, the fact that prominent members of the Church continue, even now, to compare criticism of the Church’s past policies and actions on this issue to anti-Semitism and other forms of prejudice, suggests that, for many of them, the biggest problem here is not what the Church has done to its victims, but the PR disaster that this has caused for the Church. When the CEO of BP devotes more time to covering his company’s ass than to addressing the consequences of his company’s oil spill, i tend to question the sincerity of any claims he makes about caring, but at least he has the excuse that his main job is a largely amoral obligation protect the interests of his shareholders. The Catholic Church is, at its heart, an organization founded on specific notions of morality, and if those ideals are truly important, they should come before PR concerns. To be quite honest, i’m also inclined to wait a bit longer before accepting that actual Church practice has truly changed. Yes, the official policies enunciated in recent years are promising and somewhat reassuring, but the abuse itself went on for decades, covered up and hidden away by Church authorities who abrogated both their moral duties and their civic obligations as members of the broader society. Simple reassurances that policies have changed are not, by themselves, especially compelling when they come from people who have already shown a willingness to dissemble when it appears to be in the Church’s interest. ETA: It just occurred to me that my last sentence could be interpreted as a criticism of you specifically; it was not. I was talking about Church authorities who assure us that things have changed. ---
**Author:** ![Shot\_From\_Guns](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ccd318/32.png) [@Shot\_From\_Guns](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shot_From_Guns)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2010, 10:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-the-motherfucking-pope/540182/245 "2010-05-21T22:01:44Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > And if I do, you’ll say [what](http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/otl/news/story?id=5071820)? OK, show me TWO others? I see two relevant things here: > [@](#): > > ESPN found the abusive coaches, some of whom molested young swimmers for more than 30 years, avoided detection because of a number of factors: USA Swimming and other organizations had inadequate oversight, many local coaches, parents and swimming officials failed to report inappropriate contact they witnessed, and some parents, driven to see their children succeed, ignored or did not recognize what should have been red flags. So, one, this isn’t detailed enough in what they mean by “inadequate oversight.” What it suggests, though, is not nearly the level of an \*official \*coverup _by the organization itself_. Negligence, while terrible, isn’t exactly equivalent. > [@](#): > > A spokesperson for USA Swimming said the organization is evaluating its process for reporting abusive coaches and might establish a hotline for anonymous tips. The organization said it has banned 36 coaches for life who have been accused of sexual abuse. And two, they’ve now banned coaches for life. I’m not actually sure what’s happened to the priests who had previously been given a blind eye. Were they all defrocked, excommunicated, and handed over to the secular authorities? ---
**Author:** ![Uzi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/91b2a8/32.png) [@Uzi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Uzi)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2010, 10:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-the-motherfucking-pope/540182/246 "2010-05-21T22:03:30Z")
> [@elbows](#): > > This is the 21st fucking century. Yeah and the majority still believe in magic skypixies. It is part of the reason that this sort of thing can reach such proportions. No one believes that their particular superfriend would allow his representatives on Earth to do such things. ---
**Author:** ![Uzi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/91b2a8/32.png) [@Uzi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Uzi)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2010, 10:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-the-motherfucking-pope/540182/247 "2010-05-21T22:06:48Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > What kind of evidence would you expect to see? Lol! You’re the one who made the claim that it has stopped! Did the Pope wave his magic wand \ and the matrix was reset back to the ‘good’ setting so everything is now considered fixed? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2010, 10:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-the-motherfucking-pope/540182/248 "2010-05-21T22:21:34Z")
> [@Uzi](#): > > Lol! You’re the one who made the claim that it has stopped! Did the Pope wave his magic wand \ and the matrix was reset back to the ‘good’ setting so everything is now considered fixed? There are two prpblems with this. If I takeyour meaning, it would be impossible to ever prove that it’s stopped. Once it happened, we must assume it has continued and will continue forever. This is why I asked what evidence would be acceptable. In the wake of the scandal’s revelation, the US Conference of Catholic Bishops adopted new guidelines, to replace the individual discretion that bishops had previously had. They include, as I said above, the rule that every accusation is reported to the authorities, and even a single credible accusation requires the permanant loss of public ministry. So my evidence is: there were no rules, the USCCB adopted new rules, and those rules are being followed. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2010, 10:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-the-motherfucking-pope/540182/249 "2010-05-21T22:25:04Z")
> [@Shot\_From\_Guns](#): > > I see two relevant things here: > > So, one, this isn’t detailed enough in what they mean by “inadequate oversight.” What it suggests, though, is not nearly the level of an \*official \*coverup _by the organization itself_. Negligence, while terrible, isn’t exactly equivalent. > > And two, they’ve now banned coaches for life. I’m not actually sure what’s happened to the priests who had previously been given a blind eye. Were they all defrocked, excommunicated, and handed over to the secular authorities? So far as I am aware, every priest from the earlier scandals has been laicized and at least identified to the authorities. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Second\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bbe5ce/32.png) [@The\_Second\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Second_Stone)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2010, 10:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-the-motherfucking-pope/540182/250 "2010-05-21T22:28:02Z")
> [@Polycarp](#): > > [Jesus Was Capricorn](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ofzCZiQ9vjA) (Youtube video) … and somehow strangely appropriate to this thread. Jesus was a Capricorn and I look down upon the Pope. I’m holier than a Cardinal, and I post at the Dope. And I ain’t nothin’ special I give myself some rope, But at least I don’t try A boy or girl to grope. If I did, I wouldn’t be Promoted I hope. To a special Roman See, My chicken for to choke I’d be put in prison Careful to reach for soap Not a Prada wearing queen Like the fucking Nazi Pope. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2010, 10:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-the-motherfucking-pope/540182/251 "2010-05-21T22:29:05Z")
> [@mhendo](#): > > To be quite honest, i’m also inclined to wait a bit longer before accepting that actual Church practice has truly changed. Yes, the official policies enunciated in recent years are promising and somewhat reassuring, but the abuse itself went on for decades, covered up and hidden away by Church authorities who abrogated both their moral duties and their civic obligations as members of the broader society. Simple reassurances that policies have changed are not, by themselves, especially compelling when they come from people who have already shown a willingness to dissemble when it appears to be in the Church’s interest. That’s fair. But at the same time, I can hardly concede an accusation that they have failed to act, or that they are NOT following their procedures now. You absolutely have cause to regard this representation with suspicion, but what else can be said, except “Time will tell?” ---
**Author:** ![The\_Second\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bbe5ce/32.png) [@The\_Second\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Second_Stone)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2010, 10:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-the-motherfucking-pope/540182/252 "2010-05-21T22:30:21Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > So far as I am aware, every priest from the earlier scandals has been laicized and at least identified to the authorities. Your personal awareness is irrelevant. You are not a percipient witness. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2010, 10:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-the-motherfucking-pope/540182/253 "2010-05-21T22:34:42Z")
> [@The\_Second\_Stone](#): > > Your personal awareness is irrelevant. You are not a percipient witness. :rolleyes: I can’t find any reference to any priest from those earlier scandals not removed from the clerical state. I don’t have any personal knowledge of any such priest. You asked me if there were any. How else can I answer? ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2010, 10:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-the-motherfucking-pope/540182/254 "2010-05-21T22:34:57Z")
> [@Shot\_From\_Guns](#): > > There is a difference between Catholic bashing and Catholic Church bashing. It’s very important to understand that distinction. It’s comparable to the difference between hating Jews and hating the policies of Israel. > > Again, you’re completely missing the problem. It was terrible that so many children were abused. But the biggest problem was not the abuse: it was that the abuse was officially and systematically covered up, and done so in such a way that enabled further, continuing abuse by the same abusers. > > Show me \*any \*other institution where abusers were covered for and shuffled from post to post. Prediction: **Bricker** will spring gleefully to answer your last question saying that that is precisely why his first example was youth swim coaches. Of whom a few were in fact given good recommendations by the national certifying body despite persistent allegations of abuse. Of course, the article I read was able to document 20 instances of abuse, of which less than 1/4 were covered up – be generous and say five instances. Nationwide. Total. In the **Bricker** verse, though, this proves something, and our insistence that there is something radically wrong with a system that for years covered up such abuse and facilitated it by simply moving the priests to [del]new harvests of young victims[/del] new parishes, including hundreds of documented cases, and which is still loath to cooperate in investigating and prosecuting abuse and the coverup, is simply “Catholic-baiting, because [we] hate the Church” – because _he_ belongs to the _real_ Church, the sole repository of the Sacraments (my church, which does the same things with the same elements using pretty much the same formulas, doesn’t – because one of the past Popes told Catholics they have to believe our sacraments are null and void. This may be a good place to put in one of the nastiest jokes I’ve ever laughed at: Know the difference between an Episcopal priest and a Catholic priest? If the Episcopal priest fucks another male, he’s probably married to him, he’s above the age of consent and freely consenting to the sex. **Bricker** , if you actually _do_ have any influence in the Church you so fervently defend, you will stop posting pettifogging ‘justifications’ of what it did that strain out gnats while swallowing camels whole, and report back for action the depth of outrage that exists, particularly on this issue. (Harsh as your fellow Dopers have been, they are nothing like the real Catholic-bashers who don’t believe you’re even Christians and who have been having a field day denouncing your Church for both the boy-rapes and more especially the cover-up. When millions a month are dying of AIDS in Africa, and nearly 2% of priests are proven pedophiles, for Benedict to proclaim that one of the major threats to the world is gay marriage is nothing short of staggering. Can you get through the insular shell insulating them from the rest of the world? If so, please do it – in all sincerity, your Church is counting on you. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2010, 10:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-the-motherfucking-pope/540182/255 "2010-05-21T22:48:27Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > You are, still, only now it’s the past with the present. > > Yes, the church DID that. They certainly don’t now, do they? You’ve gone on to say there’s no way to be sure, true. But only under duress. But will you, Mr. Defense Counsel, stipulate a pattern of behavior by your client that places the burden of proof on you? > [@](#): > > This is utterly and completely Catholic bashing, because that was not an inadvertant slip and you have no reason to use the present tense. You did it because you love kicking the Church. That was unusually childish even for you. > [@The\_Second\_Stone](#): > > You are not a percipient witness. Talk lawyer to me, baby! ---
**Author:** ![elbows](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/b3f665/32.png) [@elbows](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elbows)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2010, 11:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-the-motherfucking-pope/540182/256 "2010-05-21T23:02:35Z")
> [@](#): > > In the wake of the scandal’s revelation Now, y’see, therein lies the rub for thinking beings. And seriously, Catholic bashing? In a thread titled **Fuck the Motherfucking Pope** , who’d have thunk it? I am shocked, I tell you, shocked! > [@](#): > > I can’t find any reference to any priest from those earlier scandals not removed from the clerical state. Seriously? How about the Pope himself. He was absolutely complicit in covering up the crime of child abuse. And, against the advice of people beneath him, he is completely, 100% responsible for inflicting the perpetrator of the crime on another parish without so much as warning them. Where he went on to reoffend. This isn’t Catholic bashing, just so you’re aware. This ‘conspiracy to commit child abuse’ bashing. ---
**Author:** ![LavenderBlue](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e95f7d/32.png) [@LavenderBlue](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LavenderBlue)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2010, 11:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-the-motherfucking-pope/540182/257 "2010-05-21T23:07:28Z")
Is the official Catholic church position that a woman really should elect to die if she’s in danger from a pregnancy rather than have an abortion? :eek: Because that’s right up there with the Taliban in terms of pure evil. ---
**Author:** ![Uzi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/91b2a8/32.png) [@Uzi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Uzi)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2010, 11:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-the-motherfucking-pope/540182/258 "2010-05-21T23:15:33Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > So my evidence is: there were no rules, the USCCB adopted new rules, and those rules are being followed. In other words: The people who covered up the mess in the first place are now saying they are no longer covering things up and have made self enforced changes that they say they will follow. You don’t see a problem with this? As a lawyer you don’t see a problem with this? If an adversary in a court case made this statement you’d be okay with it and call the matter settled? If so, I’ve got a bridge to sell ya, too. What external impartial auditors are making sure that the ‘company’ is doing what it says it is doing? ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2010, 11:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-the-motherfucking-pope/540182/259 "2010-05-21T23:29:50Z")
> [@LavenderBlue](#): > > Is the official Catholic church position that a woman really should elect to die if she’s in danger from a pregnancy rather than have an abortion? > > :eek: > > Because that’s right up there with the Taliban in terms of pure evil. Life is _sacred_, you know. Just not hers. I’m shocked this is a revelation to so many. [Straight from the pony](http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19741118_declaration-abortion_en.html): > [@](#): > > It may be a serious question of health, sometimes of life or death, for the mother; it may be the burden represented by an additional child, especially if there are good reasons to fear that the child will be abnormal or retarded; it may be the importance attributed in different classes of society to considerations of honor or dishonor, of loss of social standing, and so forth. We proclaim only that none of these reasons can ever objectively confer the right to dispose of another’s life, even when that life is only beginning. ---
**Author:** ![vivalostwages](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/d07c76/32.png) [@vivalostwages](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/vivalostwages)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2010, 11:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-the-motherfucking-pope/540182/260 "2010-05-21T23:32:31Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > :rolleyes: > > I can’t find any reference to any priest from those earlier scandals not removed from the clerical state. > > I don’t have any personal knowledge of any such priest. > > You asked me if there were any. How else can I answer? See post #217. And this: [http://www.socialistdemocracy.org/Reviews/ReviewDeliverUsFromEvil.html](http://www.socialistdemocracy.org/Reviews/ReviewDeliverUsFromEvil.html) Ratzi, Mahoney, their attorneys, and others did their damndest to cover up or transfer offending priests and then refused to give up information. God knows how many molesters were allowed to run amok because their superiors wanted it hushed up and used/abused their power. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-the-motherfucking-pope/540182.md?page=12) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-the-motherfucking-pope/540182.md?page=14)