Pope says raping kids is ok as long as it's the 1970s. (sott.net)

[LeftishBritInPA]

Vatican Christmas Shocker! Pope says child rape isn't that bad, was normal back in his day -- Society's Child -- Sott.net

Victims of clerical sex abuse have reacted furiously to Pope Benedict's claim yesterday that paedophilia wasn't considered an "absolute evil" as recently as the 1970s.

In his traditional Christmas address yesterday to cardinals and officials working in Rome, Pope Benedict XVI also claimed that child pornography was increasingly considered "normal" by society.

"In the 1970s, paedophilia was theorised as something fully in conformity with man and even with children," the Pope said.

"It was maintained - even within the realm of Catholic theology - that there is no such thing as evil in itself or good in itself. There is only a 'better than' and a 'worse than'. Nothing is good or bad in itself."

The Pope said abuse revelations in 2010 reached "an unimaginable dimension" which brought "humiliation" on the Church.

Asking how abuse exploded within the Church, the Pontiff called on senior clerics "to repair as much as possible the injustices that occurred" and to help victims heal through a better presentation of the Christian message.

"We cannot remain silent about the context of these times in which these events have come to light," he said, citing the growth of child pornography "that seems in some way to be considered more and more normal by society" he said.

But outraged Dublin victim Andrew Madden last night insisted that child abuse was not considered normal in the company he kept.

Mr Madden accused the Pope of not knowing that child pornography was the viewing of images of children being sexually abused, and should be named as such.

He said: "That is not normal. I don't know what company the Pope has been keeping for the past 50 years."

Pope Benedict also said sex tourism in the Third World was "threatening an entire generation".

Angry abuse victims in America last night said that while some Church officials have blamed the liberalism of the 1960s for the Church's sex abuse scandals and cover-up catastrophes, Pope Benedict had come up with a new theory of blaming the 1970s.

"Catholics should be embarrassed to hear their Pope talk again and again about abuse while doing little or nothing to stop it and to mischaracterise this heinous crisis," said Barbara Blaine, the head of SNAP, the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests,

"It is fundamentally disturbing to watch a brilliant man so conveniently misdiagnose a horrific scandal," she added.

"The Pope insists on talking about a vague 'broader context' he can't control, while ignoring the clear 'broader context' he can influence - the long-standing and unhealthy culture of a rigid, secretive, all-male Church hierarchy fixated on self-preservation at all costs. This is the 'context' that matters."

The latest controversy comes as the German magazine Der Spiegel continues to investigate the Pope's role in allowing a known paedophile priest to work with children in the early 1980s.

 

[dyanaprajna2011]

I don't do this too often here, but I'm calling Poe on this one.

 

[Revoltingest]

Who'da thunk that the Pope embraces moral relativism more than every atheist I know?
His comments are so outrageous, that I wonder about the article's accuracy.
Is he really so out of touch?

I did find....
http://www.opposingviews.com/i/reli...-xvi-suggests-pedophilia-was-acceptable-1970s
http://mojoey.blogspot.com/2011/05/popes-pedophilia-advisor-arrested.html
http://www.livescience.com/9179-pope-blames-1970s-society-pedophile-priests.html

It's odd that such newsworthy comments haven't surfaced in more mainstream sources.

 

[Faxecura]

A rather childish attempt at character association.

Notice that the article states the following:

"In the 1970s, paedophilia was theorised as something fully in conformity with man and even with children," the Pope said.

"It was maintained - even within the realm of Catholic theology - that there is no such thing as evil in itself or good in itself. There is only a 'better than' and a 'worse than'. Nothing is good or bad in itself."

This gives the impression that the Pope was condoning abuse, but in reality he was not speaking about the Church. He was saying that in the 70's, there was a theory among some secular scientists that there are some people with a behavioral disposition to do such things. In between those two statements was a single sentence. You can read the entire speech here:

Address by the Holy Father on the occasion of Christmas greetings to the Roman Curia

I will restore the excised sentence, with emphasis:

In the 1970s, paedophilia was theorized as something fully in conformity with man and even with children. THIS, HOWEVER, WAS PART OF A FUNDAMENTAL PERVERSION OF THE CONCEPT OF ETHOS. It was maintained – even within the realm of Catholic theology – that there is no such thing as evil in itself or good in itself. There is only a “better than” and a “worse than”. Nothing is good or bad in itself.

That article twisted what the Pope was saying, and seeing how they had to remove key sentences, it would seem this was a deliberate attempt at deception.

 

[dyanaprajna2011]

A rather childish attempt at character association.

Notice that the article states the following:



This gives the impression that the Pope was condoning abuse, but in reality he was not speaking about the Church. He was saying that in the 70's, there was a theory among some secular scientists that there are some people with a behavioral disposition to do such things. In between those two statements was a single sentence. You can read the entire speech here:

Address by the Holy Father on the occasion of Christmas greetings to the Roman Curia

I will restore the excised sentence, with emphasis:



That article twisted what the Pope was saying, and seeing how they had to remove key sentences, it would seem this was a deliberate attempt at deception.

I figured it had to be something like that. I just couldn't see the Pope excusing what happened in such a nonchalant kind of way.

 

[waitasec]

He was saying that in the 70's, there was a theory among some secular scientists that there are some people with a behavioral disposition to do such things.

good grief!

and...?

 

[Gaura Priya]

I figured it had to be something like that. I just couldn't see the Pope excusing what happened in such a nonchalant kind of way.

I still think they could use a younger, hipper pope... >__>

The Catholic Church's ideals, like the Orthodox Church and other mainline Protestant Churches are so outdated and out of touch with modern values and the changing of times.

Especially with the child abuse scandal, which has occurred in almost every religion and outside of religion, in any organisation with power, you would think that with such occurrences they would reform something as simple as celibacy in the priesthood.

As a former Catholic, born and raised, this Church has so many beautiful traditions, meditations, saints and sages that have come through the spirit and devotion of Jesus Christ. However, its stance on chosen euthanasia, homosexuality, women in positions of clergy and other such issues are so outdated, it's just screaming for reformation that will take centuries to come.

 

[Revoltingest]

Even if we presume the Pope isn't ostensibly justifying child sexual abuse by clergy, he still appears to misrepresent the 1970s view towards it.
Such abuse was not even remotely acceptable then, even if he does locate some fringe attitudes otherwise. This still smacks of an attempt to
indirectly excuse child abuse within the church.

 

[fallingblood]

Even if we presume the Pope isn't ostensibly justifying child sexual abuse by clergy, he still appears to misrepresent the 1970s view towards it.
Such abuse was not even remotely acceptable then, even if he does locate some fringe attitudes otherwise. This still smacks of an attempt to
indirectly excuse child abuse within the church.

I would agree with this. Even though the title of the OP is very misleading and simply false, what the Pope said was nothing more than a lame excuse.

 

[waitasec]

I would agree with this. Even though the title of the OP is very misleading and simply false, what the Pope said was nothing more than a lame excuse.

when one holds that much power as the pope, their responsibility is just as viable.
that wasn't just a lame excuse that was an astronomically lame excuse
which is why i think the title of this thread describes the crime of the pope's hubris

 

[Renji]

Are you sure it's the Pope or a poe?

 

[fallingblood]

when one holds that much power as the pope, their responsibility is just as viable.
that wasn't just a lame excuse that was an astronomically lame excuse
which is why i think the title of this thread describes the crime of the pope's hubris

I agree that the responsibility that the Pope holds is immense. Such stupidity should not have been spoken by him. However, I don't see him condoning the molestation of children. He spoke out against it, even though he made excuses for it in previous generations. He still did not condone it, and spoke out against it.

 

[waitasec]

I agree that the responsibility that the Pope holds is immense. Such stupidity should not have been spoken by him. However, I don't see him condoning the molestation of children. He spoke out against it, even though he made excuses for it in previous generations. He still did not condone it, and spoke out against it.

i see it like this. if one makes excuses then they are condoning what happened by holding a double standard... it's lame. lame is lame. there is no in between lame or sort of lame. it's lame. and if it's the pope who is supposed to be the bullhorn of morality...it's undeniably lame.

it's like a banker telling you 'oh that little incident, the one where we took out all the money from peoples savings account in order to keep us afloat, that'll never happen again' :sarcastic

 

[no-body]

Priest molested children because of gays and hippies.

 

[waitasec]

Priest molested children because of gays and hippies.

it all makes perfect sense now
:sarcastic

 

[Skwim]

I don't do this too often here, but I'm calling Poe on this one.

HERE'S the original article in the Belfast Telegraph. (Dec 21, 2010)

 

[Quiddity]

I wish they would have quoted the actual article. It's so bizarre that it's just candy for the conspiracy theorist. I mean, it's one thing to disagree with the Catholic Church but this is just ridiculous.

 

[Skwim]

I wish they would have quoted the actual article. It's so bizarre that it's just candy for the conspiracy theorist. I mean, it's one thing to disagree with the Catholic Church but this is just ridiculous.

The OP did quote the article, word for word. Compare the OP with the link of the original article I provided in post #16. AND the linked article in the OP did quote the article, just not in its entirety.

 

[Quiddity]

The OP did quote the article, word for word. Compare the OP with the link of the original article I provided in post #16. AND the linked article in the OP did quote the article, just not in its entirety.

They both got it from some catholic news agency or Vatican article of sorts. It would be nice to see that source.

 

[waitasec]

good grief...