I can think of a more pertinent Jewish idea. Has the good Father heard of chillul hashem?
Ok… you are on. How much?
Here, knock yourself out. The bbc news article actually had that part of speech in video, which I thought was long enough to make the context pretty clear.
Topeka is your friend for next time, btw.
OK, fine, it is as bad as it sounds.
I think I was just used to the media trying to pull people’s words constantly into hyperbole or inappropriate simile like this.
But I guess in this case the truth is pretty damning.
Great, Ratzinger has his own Reverend Wright now.
Let’s look at what is involved here. It wasn’t only a matter of a certain small percentage of priests as predators. It was also matter of an entrenched system to cover up for them. While even a single such predator is one too many, and the harm they did should never be minimalized, it stands to reason that the cover-up system was far worse a thing than even the total number of predators.
And since the cover-up system wasn’t limited to a diocese, archdiocese, or nation, the entire “Vatican” * or at least the Magisterium, is culpable.
Is it a shame that some people may use this as an excuse to be more anti-Catholic? Yep. It also would be unfair for non-predator priests to be tarred with the same brush. Any such individual priest, while probably knowing of the cover-up system, may have been completely clueless about other individual priests as dangerous. Even with some reason to be suspicious in some case, he may not have had any proof to dare make an accusation, or any power to make a move in any case. Really, the real responsibility for prevention or sanctions would seem to start at the ordinary bishop level, at the lowest.
And, as has been pointed out upthread, there isn’t any parallel historical root for anti-Semitism.
All in all, it just seems to me to be a case of No-Criticism-Allowed when a powerful religious institution is involved.
- Og
- “Vatican” in quotes because it may connote different things.
There can also be an issue with egos so strong that they literally can’t comprehend the notion that they themselves might be doing wrong. These men are all where they are, and are doing what they’re doing, because they, quite literally, believe God called them to be there and do it. How can God be wrong?
From His Holiness Pope Cliffy Claven I, greetings:
You have used the contraction form of “it is” in place of the possessive pronoun for the third person singular. By the authority vested in us by Our Lord Jesus Christ, it is our papal decree that for this grievous offense, you are to burn for eternity in the fires of Hell.
We trust that this response will suffice to fulfill your needs. It is the only one you are going to get.
A while ago Andrew Sullivan proposed that anyone saying “my Gay friend said to me” had to produce at least a note from the alleged friend. I want know who put this idea in the preacher’s pointy little head.
That is a VERY VERY good concept. The Pope and Bishops should take careful note of something the link said:
They took NO action to address the situation or to prevent further crimes, they simply shuffled the perps off to some other place (to do it all over again). There’s your inaction.
Oh, and at the risk of turning this into a “hate the sin but not the sinner” argument, I’ve not heard a single person say that this is a reason to condemn catholics (though I wouldn’t be surprised if this was reason for more than a few of them to leave the church). The allegations and criticisms are directed clearly at the higher levels of the catholic hierarchy, which is where they should be directed.
But did the pope say “that’s not cool” or “he shouldn’t have said that”?
But Rev. Cantalamessa chose to repeat what that Jewish guy said. That implies that he agrees with him.
There’s nothing about being Jewish that keeps you from saying dumb things. That includes saying dumb things about anti-semitism. It’s not as if our people’s experience with anti-semitism makes everything every Jew has to say about anti-semitism infallible.
To my mind it is a problem inherent in having such a powerful hierarchy.
It has been one of the strengths of Judaism that it lacks a powerful religious hierarchy. The relationship between a Jewish congregation and its Rabbi is very different from the relationship between a Catholic congregation and the Church as an institution. When rabbis offend against congregants, there is less pressure to cover the matter up, because the congregation has more power within the institution than the religious functionaries.
To my mind, what the Catholic Church as an institution needs to avoid problems of this sort is more local power within the institution to the congregations. This goes against millenia of history, though.
Wonder who the mystery “Jewish guy” is? :dubious:
A couple things to keep in mind about this grotesque attempt to paint the Catholic hierarchy as victims:
Advocates for genuine victims (those abused by priests) seem more outraged over Cantalamessa’s remarks than Jews (for example, Abraham Foxman of the Anti-Defamation League commented that he thought Cantalamessa was speaking from ignorance rather than malice).
The idea that the Vatican doesn’t in some way approve of Cantalamessa’s statements is hard to believe.
*"The Vatican spokesman, the Rev. Federico Lombardi, stressed that Father Cantalamessa’s sermon represented his own thoughts and was not an official Vatican statement.
Father Lombardi said the remarks should not be construed as equating recent criticism of the Catholic Church with anti-Semitism.
“I don’t think it’s an appropriate comparison,” he said. “That’s why the letter should be read as a letter of solidarity by a Jew.”
Yet the official Vatican newspaper, L’Osservatore Romano, published the remarks in its Saturday edition, which appeared online on Friday evening.* (bolding added).
The Times article also mentions that some Italian media are seeing a conspiracy (ies) behind criticism of the Catholic Church. Cited is an article in a center-left Italian newspaper stating that in certain unnamed Catholic circles it’s believed that criticism of the Church over sex abuse is being generated by a “New York Jewish lobby”.
Yep, no one could possibly be pissed off otherwise. :rolleyes:
The sickness runs deep with some of these people.
Shit. Whose side is a decent antisemite to take in this matter anyway?
I’d like to see them borrow another concept from us: “Never again”.
I’d love to hear them say “Never again will we cover up for a priest who is molesting children.” Or “Never again will we not fully cooperate with civil authorities in bringing a child molester to justice”. Or “Never again will we swear victims of molestation to silence”.