Pope Francis likens child sex abuse to 'satanic Mass'
Source: Telegraph
The Pope made the comment while speaking to the media on board a flight back to Rome after his visit to the Middle East.
Pope Francis said that a priest who abuses children "betrays the body of the Lord".
He announced that he would soon meet with a group of sex abuse victims at the Vatican and declared "zero tolerance" for any member of the clergy who violates a child.
The meeting with half a dozen victims will mark the first such encounter for the pope, who has been criticised by victims for not expressing personal solidarity with them when he has reached out to other people who suffer.
Read more: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/the-pope/10857745/Pope-Francis-likens-child-sex-abuse-to-satanic-Mass.html
Unfair to Satanists if you ask me
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Bickle
(109 posts)They needed an "enemy"
If Frankie really has no. Tolerance, then he'll be turning Ratzinger and all the rest who committed the crimes and peotected the. over to authorities immediately.
Yeah, didn't think so.
rug
(82,333 posts)awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts)when i need a really good laugh.
Here's the thing. It is entirely illogical, and against human nature to worship evil. Most of "Satanism" is just the demonization, no pun intended, of whatever religions were in place in whatever area they were trying to take over. The British Isles being the most famous example. Pentagrams, you name it, typically have origins in these pre-Christian religions. They needed to label the competiton as evil to get people to turn away, and they were very successful. The alleged birth of Jesus Christ takes place in the Spring in the text. Why Is it in December? Winter Solstice. Easter in the spring equinox. You can't just take things away from people, you have to offer a replacement.
The Satanic Bible was written by a guy who didn't want to pay taxes and started the church of Satan. He really worshipped Ayn Rand (surprise!), and saw it as a good way to run his scam. Yes, in the 1960s.
They invented Satanism to further their agenda. This is not a Jack Chick thing. Protestantism is just people wanting their own share of the cash and power. Why do you think he says stuff like that? They learned from the best.
rug
(82,333 posts)The earliest mention of the Black Mass goes back to the Borborites in the fourth century.
I won't even point out what's wrong with your description of Anton LaVey.
Bickle
(109 posts)But of course the Church was quick to declare it that anyway
And those talking about Job should stop using modern interpretations of words. In Job you're dealing with what is literally translated as "the adversary", a representation of Evil, devil's advocate/lawyer, and not the root of it
Alternative has a good piece today in Frankie, and the fact that he's very much a believer in satan and demons, how he's encouraging exorcism, and of course, more reminders about how he's not a progressive, but merely putting on a show lest his sovereign scam factory actually be finally brought to justice.
http://www.alternet.org/belief/why-do-many-christians-still-literally-believe-demons-and-satan
Feral Child
(2,086 posts)You take a stand against the True Faith and you'll meet them all in short order.
Welcome to DU!
Bickle
(109 posts)My very first post was pulled for insisting that people believe their religion, and that those who belong to an organization be held legally responsible for its actions, especially if they continue to belong with full knowledge of its activities.
Arugula Latte
(50,566 posts) Feral Child
(2,086 posts)Go to the Religion Forum. Find the 5 most aggressive of the Saved. Then go to your "account" page and put those names on your Jury Blacklist. That keeps those folks from serving on a jury and voting with their bias. It's a small defense, but it helps. I blocked 15 members of a certain clique after I'd been here a month or so and haven't had a single "hide" since.
If/when you become a Star member, you can add 10 more names.
Seriously, it's a futile battle: they consider adamant stubbornness in the face of overwhelming logic to be evidential of their "faith" and virtue. You'll get bored with the "talking point" responces.
rug
(82,333 posts)They taught that there were eight heavens, each under a separate archon. In the seventh reigned Sabaoth, creator of heaven and earth, the God of the Jews, represented by some Borborites under the form of an ass or a hog; hence the Jewish prohibition of swine's flesh. In the eighth heaven reigned Barbelo, the mother of the living; the Father of All, the supreme God; and Christ. They denied that Christ was born of Mary, or had a real body; and also the resurrection of the body.
The human soul after death wanders through the seven heavens, until it obtains rest with Barbelo. Man possesses a soul in common with plants and beasts. According to Augustine they taught that the soul was derived from the substance of God, and hence could not be polluted by contact with matter.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borborites
Why is it that those who detest religion the most understand it the least?
Bickle
(109 posts)So before you mouth off about how we don't know anything about religion, check your facts. Most of us just don't care, as one boogeyman is just as fake as the next. I've been an atheist for 30 years since the age of seven, when I was kicked out of Sunday school for asking mean questions about all the crap that didn't make sense, and I've studied religion since the age of twelve. History, anthropology, and archaeology that surround it.
As far as your facts, I'm glad you're well educated. None of these things are relevant when it came to the church's demonization of the competition in order to supplant it, which is the point. You're simply trying to steer the issue away from the parts you don't want to discuss.
rug
(82,333 posts)If you, or "us" as you put it, "just don't care", it's odd that you had the need to post inaccurate information about something you understand perfectly.
You're arguing semantics in an attempt to derail the bigger picture. It is irrefutable the tactics used by the church to supplant native traditions. Absorbing and assimilating some aspects. and demonizing the competiton as the worship of evil. You think that by tossing out incredibly obscure, to 99% of the population ancient tribes you'll sound sophisticated and an authority it's the same tactics you see creationists use when they're cornered.
rug
(82,333 posts)traditions?
Derailing and obfuscation are going on but the source is evident.
Bickle
(109 posts)When you are looking to attack someone you perceive as your enemy, you often fabricate, or stretch the truth in order to make the competition look bad in a political war. Take the Vince Foster death, or Benghazi, or yes, The Crusades.
In this case it was accusing the local religion of being in league with Satan, and so their rituals were labeled as such. Hence "satanic mass", the wording used by old Jorge.
There are no Satanists, outside of a handful of seriously mentally ill people by any definition, who aren't doing it ironically, or to rebel against their parents. But giving your flock of sheep something to fight and rage against has been the heart of GOP strategy for the last fifty years, and the tools of religions and governments for five millennia or more. Fight the "other".
AllTooEasy
(1,260 posts)...which predates Christianity by atleat 3,000 years. And BTW, be specific when you say "The Catholic Church". Sometimes the evil starts at the Vatican, like Pope John Paul let Cardinal Law resign in Rome when his crimes as Bishop Law were made evident. Sometimes, it's the US Council of Bishops who think they run a religion of their own. In my opinion, they are the absolute worse of the lot when it comes to Catholic sexual abuse.
Stryst
(714 posts)In the Hebrew text the term “satan” (?שׂטןhas a definite article attached to it (i.e., it is “the satan”), and thus is not a personal name. The actual word means “adversary” and is used to refer to human adversaries as well as celestial ones.
In the book of Job, this figure fills the role of a prosecuting attorney. As such, a fitting translation would be “the Adversary” or the like.
he problem with rendering the Hebrew text with “Satan” is that the typical reader will read into the text all the theological and cultural meaning that it has come to signify in later times. But that is not what it means in the book of Job.
http://biblical-studies.ca/blog/2011/02/16/satan-in-the-book-of-job/
AllTooEasy
(1,260 posts)I was taught the same. In addition, I was taught in Catholic school that Satan(pronoun) is the "chief prosecutor" that stands against and accuses you before God on Judgement day...if you believe that sort of thing. Not only is Satan a prosecutor, but he unrelentlessly attempts to entrap you in sin during your entire life...if you believe that sort of thing.
My point was that the concept of Satan(pronoun), derived from Job's satan(noun), predates Christianity and couldn't have been created by Catholicism.
I appreciate your theological background. It's hard to find.
Child sex abuse is horrifying.
Satanic mass is just stupid.
billhicks76
(5,082 posts)I hate to break it to you but Satanic masses are real and often involve child abuse. True Detective is real. Ex CIA director William Colby wrote the forward to John DeCamp's The Franklin Cover-Up. I'm it he says Dick Cheney is involved with occult practices that involve child sexual abuse and murder. Look it up yourself.
AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)I'll call your "William Colby" and raise you an "Alex Jones Show" interview.
I'll bet the Catholic Church has more children than any Satanic baloney.
billhicks76
(5,082 posts)William Colby is a mild mannered man. He was the head of the CIA in Asia from 1966-70. And he was Director of the CIA from 1973-76. He knew Cheney personally and DeCamp served under him in Vietnam. He watched Cheney's rise to power. I read his intro myself. He supported everything in the book and was scared for his life. He was found drowned (he was an Olympic swimmer as a younger man) 6 months after writing that intro where it seemed he was trying to set his conscience straight as he saw true evil rising to power. He was found drowned the morning before he was supposed to testify at a civil trial for the family of George White, the CIA guy who was dosed on acid, freaked out and was pushed out a high rise window or jumped to his death decades before. But Colby saw that Cheney was to be feared and for more than people realized back in '95. People should've listened as he became VP 5 years later(essentially prez like Bush Sr was under figurehead Reagan) and he allowed 911, Patriot Acted us and dragged us into Irag and Afghanistan. Believe what you want.
SummerSnow
(12,608 posts)AllTooEasy
(1,260 posts)Religions, Catholicism specifically, can only defrock, excommunicate, and report to the government authorities.
Angleae
(4,487 posts)And if the US can prosecute its citizens for actions overseas so can they.
AllTooEasy
(1,260 posts)Only 450 people can claim Vatican citizenship. 1/3 of them belong to the Swiss Guard. Catholic Ordainment does not give you Vatican citizenship.
see link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vatican_and_Holy_See_passports
Hekate
(90,721 posts)I think they can prosecute their priests when they choose to do so. If it ends in a priest being defrocked, he no longer has any protection from secular law.
AllTooEasy
(1,260 posts)Well, not in the US. I can't speak for other countries. Malaysia's federal/secular courts routinely claim "Sharia Jurisdiction" to cop-out of prosecuting crimes by Muslim males against women or non-Muslims. Basically, if a Muslim commits a crime against you, the secular courts throw their hands up and forward the case to Islamic courts...where you can be assured a fair trial.
Hekate
(90,721 posts)They have obfuscated, they have moved bad priests around, they have done much in the attempt to prevent tarnishing the Church's name and reputation in the world, all the while letting the inner scandal and rot grow. Defrocking criminal priests and cutting them loose is a very good step -- but opening their records is necessary too.
AllTooEasy
(1,260 posts)RC members should report crimes by their clergy to the government authorities FIRST...and high ranking members should clearly instruct them to do so.
Boomerproud
(7,957 posts)When you finally have that epiphany get back to us.
AllTooEasy
(1,260 posts)Read the transcript before posting erroneous comments.
Pope Francis "Sexual abuse is such an ugly CRIME ... because a priest who does this betrays the body of the Lord. It is like a satanic Mass,'
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2640323/Pope-Francis-Benjamin-Netanyahu-bizarre-row-language-Jesus-spoke.html
Treant
(1,968 posts)See? I can say it even if it's functionally untrue. Just as sexual abuse apparently isn't functionally a crime to the Catholic church.
Otherwise they'd be doing something about it instead of just talking about it. So far, not so much.
AllTooEasy
(1,260 posts)Last edited Wed May 28, 2014, 05:34 AM - Edit history (1)
...in two years! See this link http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/17/pope-benedict-defrock-priests_n_4618932.html
Plus he greatly improved the COMPLETELY ABSURD procedures the church had for handling sex abuse cases before 2001, when he was a bishop...also detailed in the link.
Don't get me wrong, I never appreciated his papacy from the start! Glad to see him in the Vatican's rear view mirror. But I have to asked, do you even bother to Google phrases like "defrocked priests" or something related before you post this stuff? Took me 15 seconds to shutdown your "isn't functionally a crime" and "otherwise they'd be doing something about it" arguments.
SomeGuyInEagan
(1,515 posts)... Seize church property to sell to compensate victims and families.
To paraphrase Dan Savage, if this happened at the Denny's in town, members of the community would be there the next day to burn the place to the ground.
Arugula Latte
(50,566 posts)Remember, actions speak louder than words.
skepticscott
(13,029 posts)More playing the media and the PR game. DO something or STFU, Francis. We're not buying empty feel-goodies.
rug
(82,333 posts)840high
(17,196 posts)skepticscott
(13,029 posts)Did I say "this is what 840high thinks too"?
Uncle Joe
(58,370 posts)Thanks for the thread, uhnope.
Submariner
(12,504 posts)this dickhead is in a battle he can't win. He needs to dissolve the catholic church, sell the vatican and all other church properties and give the money to the poor, then STFU.
Popey can liken clergy child rape to what ever he wants, but it sure isn't comparable to some dork running a satanic mass.
SwollenWeezle
(2 posts)...albeit one with a slightly fancier suit.
The minute I see a priest or six tried, convicted, and sentenced, I will believe the vatican's bullshit declarations of "reform. I live in New Mexico...where all the pedo priests were sent for "counseling".
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)It's not going to happen.
At this point, I'm waiting for some nation to declare war on the 'holy see'. THAT might get their attention.
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)"Pope Francis said that a priest who abuses children "betrays the body of the Lord". "
Never mind the child being betrayed and abused, body and mind.
YOU'VE OFFENDED SOMEONE'S IMAGINARY FRIEND.
THAT"S SUPER IMPORTANT. THAT'S THE ISSUE AT HAND FOLKS.
That's what's top of mind for him, in the face of all these children, these ACTUAL REAL LIFE PHYSICAL HUMAN CHILDREN? He's going to mention that like it's anything on par or comparable to real life victims? That it is worthy of the same BREATH he should be using to apologize and beg forgiveness? That being a victim could deny the victim 'sanctity'? Some metaphysical status taken away from them by some lecherous bastard in a white sack? WTF? THAT is top of mind?
Pathetic. No wonder the church hides and obfuscates for these people. The ACTUAL victims don't matter at all.
Oh well. To the courts then. There are ways to MAKE them pay for this.
Arugula Latte
(50,566 posts)Their delusional deflections and reliance on idiotic medieval explanations make me sick.
sakabatou
(42,159 posts)Is that what he's saying?
tabasco
(22,974 posts)It really doesn't matter which fairy tale they adhere to.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Hekate
(90,721 posts)rug
(82,333 posts)uhnope
(6,419 posts)DU seems to have gone downhill, and it wasn't too high in the first place.
freshwest
(53,661 posts)Humanist_Activist
(7,670 posts)Pope Francis, being of a certain mindset can't conceive of anything worse than desecrating the Host, to a Catholic. To others though, particularly the not very religious, its a silly superstition and any comparison to serious crimes such as child abuse is offensive.
Now, do I think its a silly superstition, yes. Do I think he was trying to be deliberately offensive, or try to make light of child abuse, actually no. Context is everything, and he's basically saying to priests that molesting children is committing one of the worse sins imaginable. This is a step up from how the church treated the issue in the past, at least rhetoric wise.
That being said, this comparison should have been avoided, he could have worded things a lot better, and perhaps avoid context sensitive religious practices/beliefs that most people either won't get or don't believe anymore. Comparing sexual abuse to what most people would consider a, at worse, victimless activity, can be construed as being offensive.
Hekate
(90,721 posts)...relating to some members (ie some priests) of a billion-member world-wide 2,000 year old religious monarchy with its own government and vocabulary, which hitherto has felt itself answerable only to God Almighty?
Especially when he's condemning those crimes in the strongest language he knows?
Humanist_Activist
(7,670 posts)In general, especially when speaking within a context of your religion and sin, its impossible to not be offensive to people in one way or another.
In this example, you have the Pope comparing something that is seriously criminal and demonstrably harmful to children to an activity that is, to most people with secular mindsets(including many Catholics), a waste of time at worst, but largely harmless.
To give a further example, discussing sexuality, orientation, and gender identity with Catholics who stand by the natural law arguments and the Catholic concept of sin, and what the Catechism teaches on these issues inevitably leads to extremely offensive comparisons.
Pretty much any discussion between religious persons, particularly Christians and Muslims and a secular people inevitably leads to the religious people making comparisons of homosexual activity being a sin just like murder, theft, adultery lying, etc.
This is a mirror-flip of the issue I mentioned above, comparing a harmless activity, homosexuality, to activities and actions that demonstrably harm others.
I don't understand your need to mention the size of the Church, nor its supposed age, or the flawed description of its government, its more accurate to call it a Theocratic Elective Monarchy.
Hekate
(90,721 posts)You and I are both writing American English, and yet I fear we are not communicating, either.
The Pope speaks and writes several languages, and is trying his best to communicate his most severe condemnation of the abuse of children. This is a welcome advance for the organization he heads. But as far as I can tell, you are faulting him for not using American politically-correct terminology.
Nowhere in the brief article cited does he mention homosexuality; in fact, as regards homosexuality between adults he has in the past been quoted as saying, "Who am I to judge?"
As regards the abuse of children he is indeed judging it, and in the harshest terms he can think of. I mention that he heads the Roman Catholic Church because his office is at once sacred and secular, and it is appropriate for him to distinguish what is blasphemous and sacrilegious to him within that system. To borrow a phrase from him: Who am I to judge the Pope for seeing the world in those terms, especially if the outcome benefits thousands heretofore harmed?
Humanist_Activist
(7,670 posts)you don't understand what I'm trying to get at, because it has to do with the clash of secular and religious worldviews, no more, no less, and has nothing to do with either political correctness or America.
I tried to use a a comparison with how debates between religious and secular people about sexuality generally devolve into rather offensive and insulting comparisons and such. Even liberal religious people end up doing this eventually if they think that homosexual activity is a sin.
You also seem to enjoy misquoting the Pope in regards to homosexuality, the context of that quote was a discussion involving celibate homosexual priests. The Pope has a decided different, and dare I say, not so politically correct opinion on same sex marriage, same sex parenting, and homosexual activity. I would even go so far as to say its not so politically correct in his home country either. Though his opinions match the Catechism of the Catholic Church, so there's no surprises there.
Orsino
(37,428 posts)Perhaps His Holiness is a bit conflicted on the subject.
Sounds like he is going to be busy for a long time...meeting people.
