I'm hoping he's going to apologise for not supporting people falsely accused of sex abuse, for the ruination of many good priests' lives, for the lack of Christianity in the face of populist media hysteria.
Some chance!

Nobody in the media ever dares suggest such a thing. Nobody dares to suggest some accusers may lie, some may be motivated by greed or a desire for sympathy or attention or revenge or delusion... Nobody dares to say that some of the abused may have enjoyed or even prompted the behaviour.

Why? Because it is, of course, impossible.
They really think - and they may be right - that we are only capable of seeing black and white caricatures.
And that only extreme acts take place.

If I was the Devil I'd be chortling with delight at the success of my plan to destroy the species.

Nobody ever thought he'd be useless at it.

I don't know if this video has been posted here before, apologies if it has :

www.intelligencesquared.com/events/catholic-church

Stephen Fry conducts a masterclass on how to debate and argue a point of view, pure genius!

Stephen has become a good friend and we agree on many things including some of the bad aspects of organised religion. I believe, however, that there are also many good points.

So many have jumped on the bandwagon of abuse in the Catholic church (including the media) which gives the impression that all priests are suspect when the vast majority only want to do good.

I have one friend who has admitted to me he joined a class action even though nothing had happened to him but said he needed the money and as the case was a slam dunk ..why not ?

The movement to demand apologies from the Pope has been one of outright bullying.

JK2006 wrote:
I'm hoping he's going to apologise for not supporting people falsely accused of sex abuse, for the ruination of many good priests' lives, for the lack of Christianity in the face of populist media hysteria.
Some chance!

Nobody in the media ever dares suggest such a thing. Nobody dares to suggest some accusers may lie, some may be motivated by greed or a desire for sympathy or attention or revenge or delusion... Nobody dares to say that some of the abused may have enjoyed or even prompted the behaviour.

there is much apologiozing to do I agree, but which instance/s of wrongful accusation that warrant apology are you referring to?

That is the sad thing - I have no idea - because the media hasn't printed any and there are no claims that I know of by wrongly convicted priests. So should we assume all convicted priests are guilty of abuse? Or that few if any want to deny the charges because they know they would not get a fair hearing? And should we assume there are no shades of grey in abuse? That it is only one thing or the other? I must admit that would be far more convenient. It is troubling to believe otherwise.

JK2006 wrote:
That is the sad thing - I have no idea - because the media hasn't printed any and there are no claims that I know of by wrongly convicted priests. So should we assume all convicted priests are guilty of abuse? Or that few if any want to deny the charges because they know they would not get a fair hearing? And should we assume there are no shades of grey in abuse? That it is only one thing or the other? I must admit that would be far more convenient. It is troubling to believe otherwise.
I expect there probably are instances of false accusation but putting myself in the position of a newspaper editor,due to libel law, I would be cautious about instigating rumours or suggesting a victim is lying without proof. Certainly, if there have been false accusations reported, the police should properly investigate and prosecute false accusers and the media should accurately report the story. This in my opinion is preferable to 'trial by media'.

Absolutely agree. Sadly, though, trials can proceed without proof; one person's word is enough. And the rewards are enormous - compensation, media interview fees etc. But Editors shy away from printing accusations of lies and quite rightly so. The police also avoid such investigations since they are virtually impossible to prove without a confession and, in many cases, "helpful" officers have assisted the statements of those making false allegations.

So priests, vicars, teachers, fosters found guilty or persuaded by lawyers to admit guilt though innocent (for shorter sentences) suffer in silence. And the better story - POOR INNOCENT CHILD ABUSED - is carried. Some "poor innocent children" now kill others. These days they are even considered guilty of raping others. But they NEVER lie - even thirty years later when they far more poor and far less innocent.

I've said it all in song... come on, Satan (if he exists) is not stupid. Isn't this a far more effective way of destroying humanity?

JK2006 wrote:
Absolutely agree. Sadly, though, trials can proceed without proof; one person's word is enough. And the rewards are enormous - compensation, media interview fees etc. But Editors shy away from printing accusations of lies and quite rightly so. The police also avoid such investigations since they are virtually impossible to prove without a confession and, in many cases, "helpful" officers have assisted the statements of those making false allegations.

So priests, vicars, teachers, fosters found guilty or persuaded by lawyers to admit guilt though innocent (for shorter sentences) suffer in silence. And the better story - POOR INNOCENT CHILD ABUSED - is carried. Some "poor innocent children" now kill others. These days they are even considered guilty of raping others. But they NEVER lie - even thirty years later when they far more poor and far less innocent.

Very true. At least in most countries they are not allowed to prosecute after 10 years or 5 years or 1 year because of time limits. In the UK we have a "False Allegations Charter" to provide work for Lawyers - Police and CPS. The Courts are clogged up with cases with no evidence and just stories from 10 or 20 or even 30 years ago when "Victims" suddenly remembered something ( aided by the compensation payments on offer for such things which make it a viable career move for poor or struggling people )

A real victim will reveal the abuse within 10 years - unless they have decided it is not something they wish to do. Real victims usually dont come out after many years and want to go to court. They are too frightened and wish to move on or their lives are ruined. Those who cooly turn up and give evidence for money are similar to many other chancers in the Legal system -some do it for the attention and others for the potential money. The system needs these cases because they are the only cases which dont need the Police to gather any evidence - often they just present the "claims" of the alleged victim - no collaborating evidence at all except maybe some proof that the victim and defendant knew each other - which is enough to convict in these cases when it is a "Trial" based not on evidence but "Character" - that is why the MYTH that the victim must be telling the truth has been propagated by the Law Enforcement agencies to make their "cases" stronger in the absence of any proof. Often there are no dates for such offences even down to giving a year window of several years - often there are no specified incidents - often there is not one thing to show the victim and defendants were ever alone. In addition the Police often try and fake some sort of link in their Trawling attempts. Finally they IGNORE all evidence and interviews which would stop the case going to court. For instance if a close friend or relative of the victim disagrees that the allegation is untrue they WONT interview that person because the CPS would not prosecute if that was the case - and they rely on getting the case into court for max money and crime prevention stats.

In the case of COVER UPS they actually do the opposite. Many paedophile claims against the ELITE and POLICE are dropped because of lack of evidence or conflicts in evidence. The Police are very good at making sure the right evidence is given to the CPS in the case files. This allows REAL abusers to constantly evade justice.

100% of those denying abuse are probably innocent and probably 50% of those who plead guilty are probably innocent when it comes to historic offences. This is the sad truth of the system. It is time REAL ABUSE VICTIMS like Hollie Greig were listened to - and their abusers charged. The truth is out there and our system is corrupt and not fit for purpose. The crazy release of the Policeman who assaulted the woman is proof of the way the Police bend the system for themselves.