Religion
Related: About this forumSome are confusing condemnation of the Roman Catholic Church
and its hierarchy for condemnation of all Catholics. That's idiotic.
It is the organization that is being condemned, not its members, or even those individuals who work for it.
On the other hand, If I were part of an organization that behaved in a criminal way, I would resign from that organization to demonstrate that I was not part of it.
I suggest that priests and others who are disgusted at the RCC's covering up and thus condoning sexual abuse of children resign forthwith from any association with that church and its hierarchy.
That would speak clearly of their disapproval and refusal to be part of such an organization.
That's what I'd do. I will not be associated with a group that commits such horrendous acts or condones them. My person ethics would not allow me to remain in such an organization.
AlexSFCA
(6,137 posts)this is a criminal organization that has paid billions in the US alone to shut its victims.
MineralMan
(146,317 posts)Given the patriarchal relationship between church and parishioner, most people who simply attend services know very little about the internal workings of the organization.
Now, once that information is known, I'd think people would walk away and not come back. Many have done exactly that, and churches are shutting down due to congregation shrinkage.
But, I do not extend blame to individual members. They are not part of the hierarchy.
AlexSFCA
(6,137 posts)it was widely publicized long before the Pennsylvania report. There is even a movie Spotlight made about it. Anyone parent with half brain would keep their kids away from it. Moreover, those who donate money to this enterprise are helping to pay to shut off victims.
MineralMan
(146,317 posts)be part of any church activities in which I did not also participate. It's that simple, really. Actually, I would have left the church long ago, had I not already left all religion behind over 50 years ago.
Voltaire2
(13,042 posts)become complicity with its crimes?
AlexSFCA
(6,137 posts)MineralMan
(146,317 posts)I would never support any such organization. Period. There was a long, long discussion in this group, in which a person who is no longer part of DU tried to argue that it was OK to continue to provide support, even with the knowledge of the organization's wrongdoing.
I could not agree with that support. I left the Religion group over attacks from that individual.
If one is aware of wrong-doing, contributing to the organization that does the wrong is wrong, in itself. Instead, active insistence that those responsible are punished is the appropriate response.
Not everyone agrees, obviously.
Major Nikon
(36,827 posts)trotsky
(49,533 posts)What has been the church's response to prevent this sort of thing in the future?
Even with Wonderpope Frank, there's been a lot of talk, but no ACTION. The only real positive steps have been FORCED on the church by secular authorities.
It's one thing to be a member of an organization that has been responsible for some pretty nasty stuff but exhibits a genuine effort to change.
It's quite another to continue giving your time and money to an organization that doesn't give a fuck.
thucythucy
(8,064 posts)that is, accusing critics of Church policies (and crimes) of being anti-Catholic, seem to forget that all of the victims are (or were at one time) Catholics as well.
If it's a choice between standing with Catholics who are perpetrators and enablers of these crimes, and standing with Catholics who are the victims and survivors--well, isn't it obvious where anyone with an ounce of compassion should stand?
Keep doing what you're doing, MM. I may not always agree with you on every detail, but I have tremendous respect for your devotion to and focus on this subject.
Permanut
(5,609 posts)is painting it with a really broad brush. The organization is an artificial construct, as are corporations, political parties and governments. They can be here today, gone tomorrow; meanwhile, they provide a convenient way for evil people to legitimize their hate, lust and cruelty. We hear often that "the White House said", or "Nike stated", or "The NRA endorses", but it is patently absurd to argue that the White House can talk.
All of these things are said and done by individuals, who have found a flag or a company logo or a slogan or an ideology to hide behind I'm not willing to let them hide.