|
|
Post by elizabeth on Apr 11, 2014 23:07:36 GMT
Pope Francis asks forgiveness for child abuse by clergyPope Francis has asked for forgiveness for the "evil" damage to children caused by sexual abusers in the clergy. He said the abuse was a "moral damage carried out by men of the Church", and that "sanctions" would be imposed. The statement, made in a meeting with a child rights group, is being described as his strongest the issue so far. Last month, Pope Francis strongly defended the Roman Catholic Church's record on tackling sexual abuse by priests, following UN criticism. To continue reading the BBC article, click here
|
|
|
|
Post by shiloh on Apr 12, 2014 0:23:33 GMT
That's all well and fine, but what does the statement below mean? What does "broadening the definition of crimes" entail? Does this mean that these priests will not be protected and moved from parish to parish around countries and nations? Does this mean they will still be allowed to be around children? Does this mean there will be accountability?
Was he pressured because of the UN to broaden the definition of crimes? Will there be consequences?
|
|
|
|
Post by elizabeth on Apr 12, 2014 1:14:12 GMT
Shiloh, I think it means that more actions are defined or classed as sexual abuse, but I could be wrong.
Something I want to know is, if they will pay out lawsuits from a general fund, when a Parrish areas runs out of money. I don't know how it works exactly, but in areas where there was one terrible molester, and where many children were abused, that one area is responsible for paying out lawsuits. Once the money is gone it's too bad, so sad. They claim bankruptcy, or some such thing. I think there should be a Catholic money pool for this purpose, they have enough of it. If the pope is so concerned, he should put his money where his mouth is, so to speak.
|
|
|
|
Post by shiloh on Apr 12, 2014 2:02:53 GMT
I was thinking along those lines too, Liz. That is a punishable crime under the law and anyone (no matter who) should report it to the authorities. That's what I was trying to get at. Defining crimes is one thing but having to pay for their actions is another. They have only protected these priests and covered for them.
They can redefine it all they want but will it change anything? You know what I mean?
|
|
|
|
Post by elizabeth on Apr 12, 2014 3:17:08 GMT
Do you think the fact that this guy might be the fp, might have some bearing on what he might do? To gain greater popularity, maybe he will stop protecting accused priests, and turn documents or whatever, over to the authorities for prosecution. People all over the world would be applauding him for this, I think.
|
|
|
|
Post by Benjamin on Apr 12, 2014 22:08:14 GMT
If the pope is so concerned, he should put his money where his mouth is, so to speak. I've long felt this way about world poverty. Don't get me wrong, I know the Catholic Church actually does a lot of good in this area, and I'm not being critical of those ministries... but no church should hoard money, and the RCC is sitting on literally billions of dollars. Imagine if that money went toward helping people. Churches should never send out less than they take in. Ever. |
|
|
|
Post by elizabeth on Apr 12, 2014 22:30:31 GMT
Absolutely Benjamin:
|
|
