Pope Apologizes for Sexual Abuse of Nuns

Question:

This has only been done once, by Pius (?) to establish the dogma of the Immaculate Conception which almost no one understands anyhow.

Twice, actually. Retroactively to the Immaculate Conception in 1854, and then the Assumption ca. 1950 (it’s late. I don’t remember the date.) Both are relatively harmless, but, you are correct, one would be hard pressed to find evidence for them in the history of Catholic Theology prior to their pronouncements. — Gary Kopycinski Frodo Lives!!!

Response:

Does he actually have to sitting in a particular chair to speak "ex cathedra"? That seems like a handy loophole if he ever had to backtrack. Hmmm…

To my knowledge, technically, yes, he must be sitting in his Chair (capitalized to signify his official place of authority, like a monarch’s throne or the president’s desk). In practice, I suppose he could make such a pronouncement anywhere. However, there have only been two in all of history. There were two bishops who voted against Infallibility at Vatican I: the bishops of Pittsburgh and Little Rock. Within a year they reversed themselves under intense political pressure from the Vatican, but they had a good inkling that it was *not* a good idea. I’m not sure about the loophole thing. There are some who would love to see some things made infallible, but popes seem very reticent to use this. It always seemed to me that talking directly to God should in *principle* dramatically reduce the number of times one is wrong, whatever the "rules" say.

Well, if I understand you, I guess I agree. This is one of those religious topics that evokes an image of "God as a lawyer", or maybe "God as a gameshow host", which I for one find extremely bleak.

I’m not sure I understand your analogies here. — Gary Kopycinski Frodo Lives!!!

Response:

This has only been done once, by Pius (?) to establish the dogma of the Immaculate Conception which almost no one understands anyhow. Twice, actually. Retroactively to the Immaculate Conception in 1854, and then the Assumption ca. 1950 (it’s late. I don’t remember the date.) Both are relatively harmless, but, you are correct, one would be hard pressed to find evidence for them in the history of Catholic Theology prior to their pronouncements.

That’s interesting–that the dogma of infallibility has only been invoked to reinforce dogma regarding the special status of the only woman of note in the Catholic mythos. — FF "I will take the ring though I do not know the way." – Frodo Baggins

Response:

Q: How did you spend your childhood, Chive Turkey? A: Why, I was an altar boy, of course. Yep, around here they had to have an 800 number to handle all the reports of sexual abuse by their priests.

Frankly, I wish other professions would follow suit. For far too long bishops tried to "hush-hush" such occurrences, reassigning clergy to places where the abuse would start all over again. I’m glad to see the church taking responsibility. Abuse occurs in all professions. An 800 number does not mean that abuse is that prevalent. But we know it has been a problem. Most such abuse still happens in the home among relatives. — Gary Kopycinski Frodo Lives!!!

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I think there’s generally a get-out clause along the lines of pope B not being in possession of all the divine wisdom that was available at the time, or some such The ‘get out’ clause is that the pope is only infallible when speaking on a matter of faith and when he explicitely invokes the infallibility dogma IRT thaat specific statement. This has only been done once, by Pius (?) to establish the dogma of the Immaculate Conception which almost no one understands anyhow. Is that the one referring to Mary’s birth, *not the virgin birth of Christ? and people generally confuse the two? (sheesh, why do I know all this? I’m not Catholic as far as I know Jani because you’re really… Tim? "She knows many little things!"

*chuckle* You’ve lost me there, Lil. Is it a compliment? Jani

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Not exactly in line with the point I’m sure Chive Mynde was trying to make, I know, but I’ve been wondering about all this apologising the Pope’s cheerfully doing around the world (and which, lest there be any doubt in light of the rest of this post, I respect him for). Firstly, an apology is an admission of guilt, so what he’s essentially saying is that sexual abuse by Catholic priests is (or at least, at some stage was) Church policy. I realised that religion was open to remarkable levels of abuse by its practitioners (particularly those who occupy positions of authority in the hierarchy), but never thought for a moment that it would have been accepted practice in the eyes of the organisation itself. Not an admission that this was ever Church policy. That’s not a fair leap, IMO. He’s apologizing as the leader of the organization, much like a Police Chief might apologize for the misdeeds of some police who serve under him/her. JPII has made a point through the years of apologizing, going much further than some in the Curia would like to see him go. There are even a couple of books out there that summarize his apoligies. There have been many. Secondly, since he is spiritually descended from St Peter (according to Catholic tradition), and God’s representative on Earth, the Pope is by definition infallible. This, of course, means that he does not have to apologise for anything, ever, because he is never wrong about anything. This belief has been the basis of much of the friction between Catholic and Protestant for centuries. So with this new development – the Pope’s official admission that he is NOT infallible, can we look forward to a period of increasing understanding and tolerance between the more radical and militant members of each group, now that one of their key "issues" has been removed? Actually, that’s not a fair understanding of infallibility. Infallibility is rather narrow in definition. It pertains to matters of faith and morals only, and only when the Pope speaks "ex cathedra," from his Chair,

Does he actually have to sitting in a particular chair to speak "ex cathedra"? That seems like a handy loophole if he ever had to backtrack. Hmmm… and basically makes it exceedingly clear that his statement is intended to be infallible. It does *not* pertain to any and everything that the pope says or does. It does *not* mean that he is not wrong about anything, ever.

It always seemed to me that talking directly to God should in *principle* dramatically reduce the number of times one is wrong, whatever the "rules" say. This is one of those religious topics that evokes an image of "God as a lawyer", or maybe "God as a gameshow host", which I for one find extremely bleak. -Eric – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – — Gary Kopycinski Frodo Lives!!!

Response:

Presumably he has already apologised for the sexual abuse of choirboys and girls. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Pope Apologizes for Sexual Abuse of Nuns 11/27/2001 – Pope John Paul last week apologized to those who were victims of sexual abuse and rape committed by clergy members, including priests. The Pope specifically made reference to the sexual abuse of nuns in developing nations. The apology was one paragraph in a 120-page document posted on the Internet regarding a synod of bishops from Oceania held in 1998. In March 2001, the National Catholic Reporter exposed the sexual abuse of nuns by clergy throughout the world, citing cases of abuse and rape in 22 countries and the United States. In at least one case, the sexual abuse led to death, as one nun, at the urging of the priest who raped her, died after a botched abortion. In response to the article, the Vatican formed a working group to study the problem. An American coalition of over 140 religious, human rights, and women’s rights organizations, including the Feminist Majority Foundation, immediately called for an independent fact-finding mission and launched demonstrations in New York and Washington, DC. The Call to Accountability Campaign, led by Catholics for a Free Choice, also highlighted the connection between sexual abuse and the spread of AIDS among nuns. According to reports, sexual abuse is particularly prevalent in sub-Saharan Africa, where priests believe sexual intercourse with nuns is safer because nuns are presumed to be free of the HIV/AIDS virus. In one diocese alone, nine nuns who had been raped by clergy died of AIDS. For more on this topic, see the Feminist Daily News Wire Special Series: Priests, Rape, and AIDS. Media Resources: Reuters, 11/22/01; Feminist Majority Foundation – Science is not belief, but the will to find out.

Response:

When is the Pope going to apologize for the sexual abuse of altar boys? Q: How did you spend your childhood, Chive Turkey? A: Why, I was an altar boy, of course.

Yep, around here they had to have an 800 number to handle all the reports of sexual abuse by their priests. Bob

Response:

I think there’s generally a get-out clause along the lines of pope B not being in possession of all the divine wisdom that was available at the time, or some such

The ‘get out’ clause is that the pope is only infallible when speaking on a matter of faith and when he explicitely invokes the infallibility dogma IRT thaat specific statement. This has only been done once, by Pius (?) to establish the dogma of the Immaculate Conception which almost no one understands anyhow. — FF Betcha didn’t even know that Pope Pius whatever was a Steelers fan.

Response:

because you’re really… Tim? "She knows many little things!" – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Secondly, since he is spiritually descended from St Peter (according to Catholic tradition), and God’s representative on Earth, the Pope is by definition infallible. This, of course, means that he does not have to apologise for anything, ever, because he is never wrong about anything. I think if you discuss this with educated Catholics, you’ll find that is not so. Doctrinal infallibality is not my strong point, but you could drift over to arwm or ukrp and discuss it with janet. I’ve always wondered … if pope ‘A’ makes a doctrinal pronouncement and, later on, pope ‘B’ makes an opposite one on the same subject — if they are both rendered infallible by gawd then what happens ? Does the universe implode or something ? I think there’s generally a get-out clause along the lines of pope B not being in possession of all the divine wisdom that was available at the time, or some such No, sadly, it will be Pope "B" who will claim that Pope "A" was not in full possession of his faculties.

Ah, it’s that way round, is it? I couldn’t remember. And then there’s the ex cathedra thing as well. I know they only make infallible pronouncements on certain matters, but some of the non-infallible ones seem to be pretty weighty as well. Jani

Response:

I think there’s generally a get-out clause along the lines of pope B not being in possession of all the divine wisdom that was available at the time, or some such The ‘get out’ clause is that the pope is only infallible when speaking on a matter of faith and when he explicitely invokes the infallibility dogma IRT thaat specific statement. This has only been done once, by Pius (?) to establish the dogma of the Immaculate Conception which almost no one understands anyhow.

Is that the one referring to Mary’s birth, *not the virgin birth of Christ? and people generally confuse the two? (sheesh, why do I know all this? I’m not Catholic as far as I know Jani

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Pope Apologizes for Sexual Abuse of Nuns 11/27/2001 – Pope John Paul last week apologized to those who were victims of sexual abuse and rape committed by clergy members, Doesn’t this seem to be the most ‘poligizin pope ever ??? Apparently he intends to buy himself a stairway to heaven built of his now-disgraced predecessors. I mean, if your ancestors have DONE things, you might as well be PROUD about it. "Hell – we wuz barbarians way back then – and DAMN GOOD ONES !". Maybe the clergy were far LESS abusive than the general population, so perhaps there’s some spin to be found in that. "We only raped ‘em once a WEEK … not twice a DAY like them godless heathen peasants".

Remember, this Pope is Polish, and witnessed first-hand the horrible events of WWII and the way the Catholic Church officially turned a blind eye to much of what was happening. But do his apologies excuse actions such as preaching that birth control is sinful to the starving masses? Is it "righteous" to apologize for the blindness of one’s predecessors while perpetuating that blindness? Love & Laughter, Nightshade — Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).

Response:

Abstinence is sexual abuse. When will the Pope apologize for centuries of sexual abuse of priests. Bob – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Pope Apologizes for Sexual Abuse of Nuns 11/27/2001 – Pope John Paul last week apologized to those who were victims of sexual abuse and rape committed by clergy members, including priests. The Pope specifically made reference to the sexual abuse of nuns in developing nations. The apology was one paragraph in a 120-page document posted on the Internet regarding a synod of bishops from Oceania held in 1998.

Response:

The pope is only infallible when he speaks "ex-cathedra" and only on matters of faith and morals. I thik it was one of the Leos in 1870 or so who said so. Most of these statements are unquestionable. Mary was assumed into heaven the same way Christ rose into heaven is one example. The popes are politicians and seem pretty careful about making such statements. The church is against birth control and popes have commented on it for some time but they have never spoken ex-cathedra about it. This could be a good sign. The church is a large business with very conservative customers. Change some practices and you will loose customers. There are still some that think only Latin should be used for mass. In another 200 or 300 hundred years it could be in teh 20th century. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –

Response:

When is the Pope going to apologize for the sexual abuse of altar boys? Q: How did you spend your childhood, Chive Turkey? A: Why, I was an altar boy, of course.

Response:

Not exactly in line with the point I’m sure Chive Mynde was trying to make, I know, but I’ve been wondering about all this apologising the Pope’s cheerfully doing around the world (and which, lest there be any doubt in light of the rest of this post, I respect him for). Firstly, an apology is an admission of guilt, so what he’s essentially saying is that sexual abuse by Catholic priests is (or at least, at some stage was) Church policy. I realised that religion was open to remarkable levels of abuse by its practitioners (particularly those who occupy positions of authority in the hierarchy), but never thought for a moment that it would have been accepted practice in the eyes of the organisation itself.

Not an admission that this was ever Church policy. That’s not a fair leap, IMO. He’s apologizing as the leader of the organization, much like a Police Chief might apologize for the misdeeds of some police who serve under him/her. JPII has made a point through the years of apologizing, going much further than some in the Curia would like to see him go. There are even a couple of books out there that summarize his apoligies. There have been many. Secondly, since he is spiritually descended from St Peter (according to Catholic tradition), and God’s representative on Earth, the Pope is by definition infallible. This, of course, means that he does not have to apologise for anything, ever, because he is never wrong about anything. This belief has been the basis of much of the friction between Catholic and Protestant for centuries. So with this new development – the Pope’s official admission that he is NOT infallible, can we look forward to a period of increasing understanding and tolerance between the more radical and militant members of each group, now that one of their key "issues" has been removed?

Actually, that’s not a fair understanding of infallibility. Infallibility is rather narrow in definition. It pertains to matters of faith and morals only, and only when the Pope speaks "ex cathedra," from his Chair, and basically makes it exceedingly clear that his statement is intended to be infallible. It does *not* pertain to any and everything that the pope says or does. It does *not* mean that he is not wrong about anything, ever. — Gary Kopycinski Frodo Lives!!!

Response:

Abstinence is sexual abuse. When will the Pope apologize for centuries of sexual abuse of priests. Bob

I’d actually be more interested in seeing the Pope apologize for the commom practices of priests sexually abusing alter boys. Haven’t you heard the old joke: What’s the fastest way to get a nun pregnant? Dress her up like an altar boy? Hmmmmmmmmmmmm, doesn’t that explain why Devin was so religious in JRHS?

Response:

I know, but I’ve been wondering about all this apologising the Pope’s cheerfully doing around the world (and which, lest there be any doubt in light of the rest of this post, I respect him for).

To speak totally honestly, I really feel that his motivation for doing this is because he knows he is soon going to die. He realizes his time is almost up, and is trying to right any perceived wrongs in his mind. To clear his conscience, so to speak. Just my most humble opinion. Kat

Response:

But isn’t there supposed to be a prophesy buried somewhere in the Vatican concerning the Popes where this or the next will be the last Pope? Something about death by water, I don’t remember exactly. Could it be that all Catholics finally recognize just how the Vatican has been jerkin’ them around all these centuries and piss on the place until it floods … ? Yea, yea … mean, I know … but it WAS xposted to the skeptics group.

Also posted to arw, where such a comment would be considered as positively kind-hearted Jani

Response:

No, sadly, it will be Pope "B" who will claim that Pope "A" was not in full possession of his faculties. But isn’t there supposed to be a prophesy buried somewhere in the Vatican concerning the Popes where this or the next will be the last Pope? Something about death by water, I don’t remember exactly. Love & Laughter, Nightshade — Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – X-No-archive: yes Pope Apologizes for Sexual Abuse of Nuns 11/27/2001 – Pope John Paul last week apologized to those who were victims of sexual abuse and rape committed by clergy members, Not exactly in line with the point I’m sure Chive Mynde was trying to make, I know, but I’ve been wondering about all this apologising the Pope’s cheerfully doing around the world (and which, lest there be any doubt in light of the rest of this post, I respect him for). Firstly, an apology is an admission of guilt, so what he’s essentially saying is that sexual abuse by Catholic priests is (or at least, at some stage was) Church policy. I realised that religion was open to remarkable levels of abuse by its practitioners (particularly those who occupy positions of authority in the hierarchy), but never thought for a moment that it would have been accepted practice in the eyes of the organisation itself.

I would guess that in a court of law you’d have a hard time making a distinction between something that was an "accepted practice in the eyes of the organization" and something that was frequently done by those in positions of authority. Certainly in matters of sexual harrassment in the workplace, the courts have made it clear that no such distinction exists. Secondly, since he is spiritually descended from St Peter (according to Catholic tradition), and God’s representative on Earth, the Pope is by definition infallible. This, of course, means that he does not have to apologise for anything, ever, because he is never wrong about anything.

Well, personally, I have hard hard time with someone who claims to speak for God admitting he’s wrong about anything, but then I have a hard time with anyone who claims to speak for God, period. The fact is, however, that "papal infallability" has lots of wiggle room. In a nutshell, the Pope is only "infallible" when he specifically *says* he’s infallible – when speaking ex cathedra, in matters of faith and morals. As I understand it, this happens only rarely. Here’s the more or less official take on the matter: http://www.catholic.com/ANSWERS/tracts/p-infall.htm (N.B. I and in no way endorsing the "logic" of the above page; merely passing it on for anyone interested.) In summary, papal infallibility has no relevance to this matter – as hard as that is to believe. This belief has been the basis of much of the friction between Catholic and Protestant for centuries. So with this new development – the Pope’s official admission that he is NOT infallible, can we look forward to a period of increasing understanding and tolerance between the more radical and militant members of each group, now that one of their key "issues" has been removed?

I think people will respect the Pope for finally admitting this, and that will probably lead to more tolerance, but I seriously doubt anyone will give a damn how this reflects on "papal infallibility". -Eric – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – — Moz

Response:

I think there’s generally a get-out clause along the lines of pope B not being in possession of all the divine wisdom that was available at the time, or some such Jani

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – X-No-archive: yes Pope Apologizes for Sexual Abuse of Nuns 11/27/2001 – Pope John Paul last week apologized to those who were victims of sexual abuse and rape committed by clergy members, Not exactly in line with the point I’m sure Chive Mynde was trying to make, I know, but I’ve been wondering about all this apologising the Pope’s cheerfully doing around the world (and which, lest there be any doubt in light of the rest of this post, I respect him for). Firstly, an apology is an admission of guilt, so what he’s essentially saying is that sexual abuse by Catholic priests is (or at least, at some stage was) Church policy. I realised that religion was open to remarkable levels of abuse by its practitioners (particularly those who occupy positions of authority in the hierarchy), but never thought for a moment that it would have been accepted practice in the eyes of the organisation itself.

Oh, for – Accepted practice is what is done and sanctioned by those in positions of authority. Secondly, since he is spiritually descended from St Peter (according to Catholic tradition), and God’s representative on Earth, the Pope is by definition infallible. This, of course, means that he does not have to apologise for anything, ever, because he is never wrong about anything.

I think if you discuss this with educated Catholics, you’ll find that is not so. Doctrinal infallibality is not my strong point, but you could drift over to arwm or ukrp and discuss it with janet. This belief has been the basis of much of the friction between Catholic and Protestant for centuries. So with this new development – the Pope’s official admission that he is NOT infallible, can we look forward to a period of increasing understanding and tolerance between the more radical and militant members of each group, now that one of their key "issues" has been removed?

You’ve come to political studies without doing social history last year, right? Jani

Response:

Pope Apologizes for Sexual Abuse of Nuns 11/27/2001 – Pope John Paul last week apologized to those who were victims of sexual abuse and rape committed by clergy members, including priests. The Pope specifically made reference to the sexual abuse of nuns in developing nations. The apology was one paragraph in a 120-page document posted on the Internet regarding a synod of bishops from Oceania held in 1998. In March 2001, the National Catholic Reporter exposed the sexual abuse of nuns by clergy throughout the world, citing cases of abuse and rape in 22 countries and the United States. In at least one case, the sexual abuse led to death, as one nun, at the urging of the priest who raped her, died after a botched abortion. In response to the article, the Vatican formed a working group to study the problem. An American coalition of over 140 religious, human rights, and women’s rights organizations, including the Feminist Majority Foundation, immediately called for an independent fact-finding mission and launched demonstrations in New York and Washington, DC. The Call to Accountability Campaign, led by Catholics for a Free Choice, also highlighted the connection between sexual abuse and the spread of AIDS among nuns. According to reports, sexual abuse is particularly prevalent in sub-Saharan Africa, where priests believe sexual intercourse with nuns is safer because nuns are presumed to be free of the HIV/AIDS virus. In one diocese alone, nine nuns who had been raped by clergy died of AIDS. For more on this topic, see the Feminist Daily News Wire Special Series: Priests, Rape, and AIDS. Media Resources: Reuters, 11/22/01; Feminist Majority Foundation – Science is not belief, but the will to find out.

Response:

Filed under: Feminist

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

TrackBack URL | RSS feed for comments on this post.

Activism Change

Learn, read, react :: Activism