In Cork we get envelopes at Christmas and Easter looking for "offerings." (Don't they in other counties?) People put money, usually quite a bit, into the envelope and it's collected by the local lay person who delivered it first day. In Co. Cork, they have "stations." A station is when mass is said in a house in a particular townland (twice a year in every townland) and every household makes a contribution to the priest. Station dues were to be what the priest survived on, along with payments for signing mass cards, saying masses for dead people, weddings, funerals, baptisms, etc. Sunday church collections were for parish funds.... upkeep of the church building, etc.
QUOTE]
Ah OK, think my Parents get something similar. Never seen one myself though, but I think I have technically moved parish 3 years ago. Niot that I'd contribute.
I must say though, I feel bad for the honest priests.
He also didn't tackle one of the core reasons why I believe abuse happened, namely celibacy. After all, it was never a requirement in the early days of the church and I never really understood why it was brought in at all. My father told me once how after a dance in the 40s and 50s, the parish priest would be cycling around with a torch looking for "courtin" couples. In the plain speak of a country farmer, Dad described him as being like a bull in heat in a field with no cows.
My opinion is that in the same way we've seen abusers in positions with children's sports, education, care etc, it's access to and power over the victims that is the "attraction" to those vocations. I feel it is the same in the church, those who abused, chose that occupation because of the access to vulnerable children rather than the role turned them into abusers.
mpsox, i 100% agree with every thing else in your excellent post, but even as an atheist i don't think the prevalence of abuse is as simplistic in its roots as celibacy.
My opinion is that in the same way we've seen abusers in positions with children's sports, education, care etc, it's access to and power over the victims that is the "attraction" to those vocations. I feel it is the same in the church, those who abused, chose that occupation because of the access to vulnerable children rather than the role turned them into abusers.
Mpsox, I 100% agree with every thing else in your excellent post, but even as an atheist I don't think the prevalence of abuse is as simplistic in its roots as celibacy.
My opinion is that in the same way we've seen abusers in positions with children's sports, education, care etc, it's access to and power over the victims that is the "attraction" to those vocations. I feel it is the same in the church, those who abused, chose that occupation because of the access to vulnerable children rather than the role turned them into abusers.
I'm not saying it is the reason but I do believe it is one of many reasons. Hans Kung, the theologian, has blamed much of what has happened on the churches "uptight" attititude to sex, which is perhaps a better explanation then just celibacy. Interestingly a German cardinal has also said that celibacy is a reason
He is correct in everything he says here.Fintan O'Toole writing in The Observer on Sunday with regard to the Benny letter... [etc]
And while this article was written in jest a few years back, I sometimes wonder is this the real attitude of the vatican...?
http://www.theonion.com/articles/pope-forgives-molested-children,101/
NoDid the pope actually say that?
Firstly, the welcome parts, his stated willingness to meet abuse victims
Well one ought to contrast that with how the congegration in Kerry greeted the man who shouted at the Bishop last Sunday. Did the Bishop and congregation welcome him?
How quick the gardai were to step in for this minor transgression and contrast that with the gardai interviewing Brady who had in law committed an offense by not reporting the fact that children had told him about the rapes they had been subjected by a priest.
Jayz Bronte you didn't seriously believe that!! Read the link on that article to another article which talks about North Korea's jealosy at that time that the US was attacking Iraq and not it. The Onion seems to be a permanent April Fool and not very witty.I thought nothing else could shock me. Did the pope actually say that? What is wrong with these men, every last one of them.
Jayz Bronte you didn't seriously believe that!! Read the link on that article to another article which talks about North Korea's jealosy at that time that the US was attacking Iraq and not it. The Onion seems to be a permanent April Fool and not very witty.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?