We have one regular poster who will be delighted at this news. But look at it this way - if you were Satan, trying to destroy the human species, isn't it exactly what you would do? Check Satan's Ultimate Weapons on You Tube.

www.aol.com/article/news/2018/08/19/cath...d-scandals/23505113/

A Pope will visit Ireland this coming weekend for the first time in 40 years.


www.tuambabies.org


He will speak to the world near Tuam, In the the west of the country.


That nation wonders will he mention the babies, or perhaps produce the church's records - at last...

Now - at last, the Pope writes a letter about the clerical abuse.

'To the People of God' - the 1.2 billion Catholics in the world.

Hopefully, next, he will release the files on the perpetrators of the child abuse.

Many thousands of these priests exist on every continent - so, far unpunished.


At the very least though, his approach and demeanour have changed.

Since he personally defended the Chilean clergy - and then had to eat his words...

Withholding donations is just cutting off your nose to spite your face.

honey!oh sugar sugar. wrote:
Withholding donations is just cutting off your nose to spite your face.

You think we should donate to an organisation whose head (the Pope) has now admitted widespread child abuse by his underlings?

In Pennsylvania alone, the Grand Jury found that 1,000s of children were systematically abused by hundreds of priests - for over 70 years.

Your attitude, Barney, is like that of the majority who believed Great Ormond Street hospital should return the millions donated to it, after it was discovered that a few dirty old men pinched waitresses bottoms. Or the Savile hounders who preferred his money to go to bent lawyers as opposed to building a heart unit in Leeds. And you are quite entitled to hold that opinion. Others, like myself and Honey, find it absurd that the remedy for corruption should be to withdraw donations intended to save lives.

Your first sentence is an extraordinary assumption, with which I disagree strongly.

With regard to the RCC - the senior clergy of which are responsible for distributing donations - my preference is to direct my charitable payments elsewhere.

As the same gentlemen have for decades (admitted and proven) allowed abuse on a monumental scale - and lied, obfuscated and denied everything - in every continent.

Only now is this Pope coming clean.

And you are quite entitled to kill children because dead old men abused others decades ago.

JK2006 wrote:
And you are quite entitled to kill children because dead old men abused others decades ago.


Another extraordinary post!

Many people in Ireland - where Pope Francis will be, this coming weekend - have stopped donating to the Catholic church.

They are calling for him to bring €1 billion with him to help heal the damage caused by clergy sexually abusing children there for generations.

In the view of most - to give this organisation money, would be as perverse as their personnel.

Particularly, in the light of the recent reports and written admissions - by the Pope.


Retribution is now being called for; hand-outs are in the past.

Oh yes we quite understand your point - not extraordinary at all; you feel that donating to an organisation which, in the past, allowed abuse of children, is wrong. We feel that depriving a currently well meaning organisation of funds to save the lives of many is cutting off your nose to spite your face.

JK2006 wrote:
a currently well meaning organisation


- there's the rub -


'currently' - parents from Chile or Pennsylvania may not describe it as that

if it's 'in the past - why refuse to release any records on their miraculous rehabilitation

or fail to punish/report any or their thousands of paedophiles

Ah fair enough; it's not past crimes that stops you donating, but the feeling that it's still going on. In that case, absolutely right not to donate. If I knew that I wouldn't donate either. I'm not as well informed as you. And given my lack of knowledge, I won't stop donating to causes I think are trying to do good. As opposed to avoiding media condemned charities.

I share your positive view on Francis - who, I see today, will meet abuse victims in Ireland at the weekend.

Like his personal letter to every Catholic, another first as far as I'm aware.

Sadly - until he dies - he will have this can of worms to manage. When all he ever did - was a good job in Buenos Aires.

Barney wrote:
honey!oh sugar sugar. wrote:
Withholding donations is just cutting off your nose to spite your face.

You think we should donate to an organisation whose head (the Pope) has now admitted widespread child abuse by his underlings?

In Pennsylvania alone, the Grand Jury found that 1,000s of children were systematically abused by hundreds of priests - for over 70 years.

If some people's lives and well-being depend on that money, YES!
Why would you want to punish innocent people?

Would you continue to donate to the Catholic church - if one of their paedophile priests (Kevin Murphy/Liverpool and/or his mates/for example) abused your child?

I wouldn't donate to that specific abuser but I certainly wouldn't stop donating to the company he worked for... we're back to the Great Ormond Street fiasco, aren't we?

Barney wrote:
Would you continue to donate to the Catholic church - if one of their paedophile priests (Kevin Murphy/Liverpool and/or his mates/for example) abused your child?

Father John Kevin Murphy just read an account of the trial. So many of these historical sex abuse cases as per news media details which do seem to at times highlight salient points appears to have two possible real stories what one is true? One been as stated as per trial and outcome. Second that the first two colluded and found the other over time to give weight. The priest under duress confessed and the swimming and camping were two activities boys enjoy or if as per trial also two activities to sexually abuse.

Although I can not understand why? I know people do really horrible things so it happens. I also like to see clear cases of "a fair trial" which when I read the article I can see justice was served for sure which in almost all cases can only take place in current time when the evidence does exist (and maybe there was evidence from the actual time of archived parish records noting over time several reports and concerns about the priest as in a very few cases there has been something of the evidence nature)

Murphy is one of thousands of RCC paedophiles - and one of the very few convicted.

Simply because the Catholic church refuses to release its records on these matters, and personnel.

Frequently, diplomatic immunity has been used to justify non-disclosure/compliance - using the unique and powerful status of Vatican City.

Bequeathed by Mussolini!


Father Capella (Washington) is just one example - of one who used this escape route (back to Rome) which was authorised by Francis.