Monday, March 29, 2010

The Dominion Post states “The Catholic Church has lost its moral authority.”

“Put bluntly, the church is an organisation that harbours child abusers, covers up child abuse and facilitates child abuse by transferring pedophiles to dioceses in which their offending is not known.”

“Until it puts its own house in order by reporting all cases of sexual abuse, historic and present, to temporal authorities and co-operating fully with investigations, its leaders are in no position to lecture anyone about
abortion, contraception, sex outside marriage, spybases or anything else.”

Yes, indeed today’s editorial (excerpts above) in The Dominion Post certainty calls it like it is.

Here we have a mainstream New Zealand newspaper attacking the institution called The Catholic Church, suggesting it no longer has any credibility ‘preaching’ to society on a range of moral issues – when it is clear to the public the Church has operated at times in a deliberate amoral fashion.

Contrast this frank report in The Dom.Post with the sycophantic press-release from Bishop Patrick Dunn (Catholic Bishop of Auckland) that appeared in The New Zealand Herald on the same day.

Dunn indicates the media has wrongly targeted Benedict and he finds these reports “astonishing.” and goes on to-use that tied-old line “it was only a small number of priests.”

Dunn exhibits exactly the traits and arrogance that plague The Catholic Church.

In-fact the root-cause of its current, irrevocable demise.

Essentially Dunn believes in the centuries-old doctrine of papal infallibility – everything is hunky-dory & the church can do no wrong.

Mix this mind-set with a liberal dose of paranoia that The New York Times and Das Spiegel have somehow invented the stories about Ratzingers involvement in two cover-ups – including presumably the falsification of court documents, public records and the sworn testimony of dozens, if not hundreds of witness’s.

Dunn’s article is an insult to ones intelligence, born of ignorance of the truth - he refuses to see.

1 comment:

ZenTiger said...

No, Dunn was sticking to the facts, which emerged after the allegations.

The NYT implied cover-ups, and the facts did not bear this out. The American case, the priest had been sent to court and tried and convicted. How is that a cover-up? His history was in the public domain.

Ironically, he only got a three year "on probation" sentence and was asked to attend therapy to "cure him".

If that's what the secular authorities think appropriate for child abusers, why even bother reporting them?

The Church is not denying the child abuse, and has actively been working to prevent it and change the institutional systems that allowed criminal people to use the Church to commit great evil, and hide from the consequences due to weak or corrupt bishops. Even then, the percentage of these events is still the same as other large institutions.

Statistically, you are safer in a church than your family, as most sexual offenders are related to the victim. It doesn't mean all families are evil though, but that's what your own logic suggests.