The new Pope is actually far worse (http://americasouthandnorth.wordpress.com/2013/03/13/on-the-selection-of-jorge-mario-bergoglio-as-pope-francisco/) than the "Nazi" Pope we had before:
QuoteBergoglio was the head of the Jesuits in Argentina during the military dictatorship of 1976-1983, during which the military murdered upwards of 30,000 people (as well as kidnapping hundreds of children whose parents the regime had tortured and murdered). Unlike Catholic officials in neighboring Chile and Brazil, where priests, bishops, and even cardinals spoke out against human rights abuses and defended victims of abuses, in Argentina, the Catholic Church was openly complicit in the military regime's repression. Bergoglio wasnot exemptfrom this involvement:military officers have testified that Bergoglio helped the Argentine military regime hide political prisoners when human rights activists visited the country. And Bergoglio himsel fhad to testify regarding the kidnapping of two priests who he stripped of their religious licenses shortly before they were kidnapped and tortured. This isn't just a case of Bergoglio being a member of an institution that supported a brutal regime; it's a case of Bergoglio himself having ties, direct and indirect, to that very regime.
What a piece of work this guy is. Ugh.
I wonder, would it have been possible to elect a new pope that has a clean background?
I'd assume that by the time you reach that level of seniority, you at least know about shady shit.
Quote from: Junkenstein on March 14, 2013, 04:27:35 PM
I wonder, would it have been possible to elect a new pope that has a clean background?
I'd assume that by the time you reach that level of seniority, you at least know about shady shit.
He's infallible. If he didn't have a clean past before he became pope he has it now.
I was gonna ask about that. A powerful figure in Argentina is almost GUARANTEED to have filth on their hands.
If it weren't so fucked up, it would be funny how shitty this Guy is.
Quote from: Junkenstein on March 14, 2013, 04:27:35 PM
I wonder, would it have been possible to elect a new pope that has a clean background?
I'd assume that by the time you reach that level of seniority, you at least know about shady shit.
Yea, not that knowing about and/or being complicit in shady dealings is any better than committing said deeds, and certainly can be even worse, but to go for the guy who was all hands-on about it? I certainly because disillusioned with the Church a while ago, but I'd like to believe that there are priests out there are some good priests out there, genuinely trying to do "God's work", not hatemongering, child molesting/covering up, aiding in torture practices, etc.
But, I suppose those types, should they exist, aren't going to be the ones clawing their way to the top. And the majority of people likely will never hear about this or will try to twist reasoning, "he had no choice", "he didn't know what was really going on", etc.
ugh.
Edit: I see the other cardinal mentioned, Scherer, at least spoke out against those type of abuses, but of course, why would you want someone like that as your figurehead?
I kind of think it's shitty to castigate millions of priests just because some of them are really shitty people. Don't get me wrong, I despise the Vatican itself and trust the upper echelon of the Church about as far as I can throw it, but most priests are no more evil than anyone else.
People on facebook are all like "Yay, he's named for St. Francis of Assisi! He's gonna be great!" :x :x :x
Quote from: Juana Go? on March 14, 2013, 04:58:58 PM
I kind of think it's shitty to castigate millions of priests just because some of them are really shitty people. Don't get me wrong, I despise the Vatican itself and trust the upper echelon of the Church about as far as I can throw it, but most priests are no more evil than anyone else.
Ireland has had about 200 clerical sex abuse cases in the last thirty years out of about 4000 priests.
So that's about a 5% or one in twenty pedophile rate.
Though I'm not sure if that is high, is that high?
There's also the fact that a lot of non-shitty priests in South America tended to die or vanish under mysterious circumstances for pointing out that, like, disppearing and killing political dissidents was not cool with God.
What that means is in South America you mostly have priests who are ideological nutters or cowards. Except Brazil, oddly enough, where the Vatican was instrumental in preventing military abuses and securing a return to civilian rule.
Quote from: Faust on March 14, 2013, 05:27:09 PM
Quote from: Juana Go? on March 14, 2013, 04:58:58 PM
I kind of think it's shitty to castigate millions of priests just because some of them are really shitty people. Don't get me wrong, I despise the Vatican itself and trust the upper echelon of the Church about as far as I can throw it, but most priests are no more evil than anyone else.
Ireland has had about 200 clerical sex abuse cases in the last thirty years out of about 4000 priests.
So that's about a 5% or one in twenty pedophile rate.
Though I'm not sure if that is high, is that high?
Is that 200 cases or 200 priests accused of pedophilia? If it's priests, it's high.
Quote from: M. Nigel Salt on March 14, 2013, 05:41:13 PM
Quote from: Faust on March 14, 2013, 05:27:09 PM
Quote from: Juana Go? on March 14, 2013, 04:58:58 PM
I kind of think it's shitty to castigate millions of priests just because some of them are really shitty people. Don't get me wrong, I despise the Vatican itself and trust the upper echelon of the Church about as far as I can throw it, but most priests are no more evil than anyone else.
Ireland has had about 200 clerical sex abuse cases in the last thirty years out of about 4000 priests.
So that's about a 5% or one in twenty pedophile rate.
Though I'm not sure if that is high, is that high?
Is that 200 cases or 200 priests accused of pedophilia? If it's priests, it's high.
Two hundred confirmed cases, pending accusations are a lot higher but are not publicly disclosed until or if they go to trial.
500 cases in my state, 200 accused priests. I'll figure out how many priests there are total here later. Siince I should actually be doing homework. Also, I looked up the total number of priests world-wide and I was way, way off on the number, which totals in at ~400,000 (there's over a billion Catholics! They weren't kidding about there being a priest shortage.)
Quote from: Cain on March 14, 2013, 05:30:45 PM
There's also the fact that a lot of non-shitty priests in South America tended to die or vanish under mysterious circumstances for pointing out that, like, disppearing and killing political dissidents was not cool with God.
What that means is in South America you mostly have priests who are ideological nutters or cowards. Except Brazil, oddly enough, where the Vatican was instrumental in preventing military abuses and securing a return to civilian rule.
This, I believe for sure. Liberation theology was not well met with by the Vatican, either.
Quote from: Faust on March 14, 2013, 05:59:04 PM
Quote from: M. Nigel Salt on March 14, 2013, 05:41:13 PM
Quote from: Faust on March 14, 2013, 05:27:09 PM
Quote from: Juana Go? on March 14, 2013, 04:58:58 PM
I kind of think it's shitty to castigate millions of priests just because some of them are really shitty people. Don't get me wrong, I despise the Vatican itself and trust the upper echelon of the Church about as far as I can throw it, but most priests are no more evil than anyone else.
Ireland has had about 200 clerical sex abuse cases in the last thirty years out of about 4000 priests.
So that's about a 5% or one in twenty pedophile rate.
Though I'm not sure if that is high, is that high?
Is that 200 cases or 200 priests accused of pedophilia? If it's priests, it's high.
Two hundred confirmed cases, pending accusations are a lot higher but are not publicly disclosed until or if they go to trial.
Oh. I really can't compare statistics without knowing either the number of priests involved, unfortunately, as each offender likely molested multiple people.
Quote from: Juana Go? on March 14, 2013, 06:09:51 PM
This, I believe for sure. Liberation theology was not well met with by the Vatican, either.
The various factions are still fighting like it's Vatican II. Liberation Theology is
almost as bad as mass no longer being given in Latin. No joke.
I''m not hearing many Mafia grumblings. I would have thought something curious and violent would have occurred by now. Cain?
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on March 14, 2013, 04:37:22 PM
I was gonna ask about that. A powerful figure in Argentina is almost GUARANTEED to have filth on their hands.
So why did the college of Cardinals choose him instead of a cardinal who had helped protect people from an abusive regime?
Quote from: Pergamos on March 14, 2013, 07:30:23 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on March 14, 2013, 04:37:22 PM
I was gonna ask about that. A powerful figure in Argentina is almost GUARANTEED to have filth on their hands.
So why did the college of Cardinals choose him instead of a cardinal who had helped protect people from an abusive regime?
I would suspect the word we may be looking for is "patsy"
Because they're still fighting Vatican II.
He was a compromise choice between an Italian and the need to bolster the South American Church against Protestant encroachment.
As for the Mafia, I have no clue. As far as I know, the Mafia-Vatican banking axis is more or less defunct nowadays.
Ah, I thought that was still a thing.
Well, when HSBC practically has a preferential treatment for organised crime program running, there isn't so much need to rely on the kiddy-fiddlers in robes, you know?
True, I just thought it'd be good practice to spread the risk around a few places. Seems a bit eggs in one basket.
If that basket's got state-backed impunity, it's a pretty good basket to choose.
Good point, well made.
Too big to fail, jail or assail really.
Quote from: Pergamos on March 14, 2013, 07:30:23 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on March 14, 2013, 04:37:22 PM
I was gonna ask about that. A powerful figure in Argentina is almost GUARANTEED to have filth on their hands.
So why did the college of Cardinals choose him instead of a cardinal who had helped protect people from an abusive regime?
Because he had the other guy tortured and killed. Ba-dum-tsssh. (rimshot)
Quote from: Juana Go? on March 14, 2013, 04:58:58 PM
I kind of think it's shitty to castigate millions of priests just because some of them are really shitty people. Don't get me wrong, I despise the Vatican itself and trust the upper echelon of the Church about as far as I can throw it, but most priests are no more evil than anyone else.
Oh, I know, I was exaggerating a bit out of disgust. I was raised Catholic and still have a soft spot for it. I felt bad when the sex scandel broke and everyone was painted with the same broad brush. But I also learned what one of the priests at my first parish did to someone close, and how he was just transferred to another parish, or possibly to whereever old creepy priests go to retire. And that it wasn't the first time he had been transferred.
Priest at second parish died under....embarassing circumstances. And while I don't believe anything illegal was involved, or perhaps there wasn't time to find anything illegal, when one of the other priests tried to address it with some of the local higher-ups, he was transferred out of the area.
But that still doesn't speak for EVERY priest out there. I suppose it's really just disgust with the institution as opposed to each priest individually.
http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/03/15/17325546-vatican-says-dirty-war-accusations-about-pope-francis-just-a-left-wing-smear?lite
Ah yes, left wing smears...from all those right wing Argentinian military officers, who testified to his actions during the dirty war.
Sneaky Communist bastards. I bet they secretly make Catholic priests sexually molest kids, too.
Yep. At gunpoint.