Pope John Paul on the fast track to sainthood.

[The Magic Pudding]

I'll comment on some quotes from here: http://www.smh.com.au/world/john-paul-a-step-closer-to-sainthood-20110501-1e2q3.html

Pope John Paul II, the Roman Catholic Church's biggest saint-maker, will be elevated within a step of sainthood himself in a beatification ceremony today led by his successor, Benedict XVI.

Lovely.

John Paul, history's most travelled pontiff, is on track to become the fastest-made saint since popes took over the process around the year 1200. During his funeral in April 2005, mourners in Rome chanted "Santo Subito", or "Sainthood Now", for the pope, who canonized 482 saints, more than all the other Roman pontiffs combined.

So this sort of thing strengthens the faith of some, but it must do the opposite for others.  John Paul's followers find it convenient to credit him with magical powers, this I see as ridiculous, the miracles that are trotted out wouldn't convince any one who didn't want convincing.  But this isn't new, I expect the same thing happened with JC.

Benedict called John Paul an example for the faithful at a time when the church's moral authority has been eroded by the priestly sex-abuse crisis. "Despite all our shame and mistakes, we shouldn't forget that even today there exist illustrious examples of faith -- that even today, there are people who through their faith and love give hope to the world," Benedict, referring to John Paul, said on April 20 at the Vatican.

Ye well maybe he should have used some of his magical powers to heal the pedophiles, or else shown the victims more and perpetrators less of that faith and love.

"He gave hope and strength to Poles at their darkest hour," Andrea Riccardi, an Italian historian and biographer of John Paul, said last month.

I'm not sure this was Poland's darkest hour, but I suppose he helped.  I can't say the same for the AIDS crises in Africa and elsewhere.

[Tank]

I didn't know that he had made more saints than all the other popes combined! Bloody Hell.

[Melmoth]

In fairness to the guy, he was one of the most progressive and thoughtful popes. He was the first to be open about many of the church's shortcomings in the past, and to make any attempt to reconcile them - most obviously their support of slavery, their complicity with the rise of fascism in Europe, and the centuries of antisemitic persecution that they had dished out prior to that. He was certainly better than Cardinal "Palpatine" Ratzinger. I'd say if any pope deserved any respect at all it would be him... though admittedly that's not saying much.

[The Magic Pudding]

In fairness to the guy, he was one of the most progressive and thoughtful popes. He was the first to be open about many of the church's shortcomings in the past, and to make any attempt to reconcile them - most obviously their support of slavery, their complicity with the rise of fascism in Europe, and the centuries of antisemitic persecution that they had dished out prior to that. He was certainly better than Cardinal "Palpatine" Ratzinger. I'd say if any pope deserved any respect at all it would be him... though admittedly that's not saying much.

It bothers me they have to wait centuries, or at least decades to admit their mistakes.
How long do we have to wait until they admit their opposition to birth control is wrong?
If I was a non Catholic Christian I'm sure I'd find that Papal infallibility outrageous.
I understand the Church was becoming more liberal in the 1960s with Paul VI and Vatican II.
# Paul VI (1963-78)
# John Paul I (1978)
# John Paul II (1978-2005)
# Benedict XVI (2005—)

John Paul II was the pope who presided over the wind back of Vatican II, and spreading the fear of hell to Africans.
He gets no points from me.
http://www.cathnews.com/article.aspx?aeid=25402 

[Melmoth]

@Pudding: I stand corrected. What a git.

[PapistItalian16]

Benedict called John Paul an example for the faithful at a time when the church's moral authority has been eroded by the priestly sex-abuse crisis. "Despite all our shame and mistakes, we shouldn't forget that even today there exist illustrious examples of faith -- that even today, there are people who through their faith and love give hope to the world," Benedict, referring to John Paul, said on April 20 at the Vatican.

Ye well maybe he should have used some of his magical powers to heal the pedophiles, or else shown the victims more and perpetrators less of that faith and love.

When were said victims ever "not shown love" by the church? I talked to a guy when I was in DC on the March for Life, as a child he was sexually abused by a priest. He is still a strong Catholic, and if it wasnt for the love that he has been shown to him by the church, then he probably wouldnt be a Catholic at all, let alone a Christian.

As for the idea that the perpetrators should not be shown love I will say this: The message of Jesus Christ is that we should love and forgive each other. "you shall love your neighbor as yourself."- Matthew 22:39   "Take this, all of you, and drink from it: this is the cup of my blood, the blood of the new and everlasting covenant. It will be shed for you and for all so that sins may be forgiven. Do this in memory of me." Matthew 26:28 That's why Christ died, so that sins may be forgiven. Not just the "small stuff" like cursing and the like, but the big stuff too. And who does the Church follow? Jesus Christ.

"He gave hope and strength to Poles at their darkest hour," Andrea Riccardi, an Italian historian and biographer of John Paul, said last month.

I'm not sure this was Poland's darkest hour, but I suppose he helped.  I can't say the same for the AIDS crises in Africa and elsewhere.

The biographer wasnt talking about modern times, he was referring to how the Blessed John Paul II played a key role in putting an end to communism in Europe; especially Poland.

Heres an article about it: http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/news/2011/01/14/new-details-emerge-of-john-paul-iis-war-against-communism/

[hismikeness]

I just can't help but imagine somewhere back in Poland is an old dude going, "That guy?! That guy is going to be saint? I went to high school with him and he was a dick!!"

PapistItalian16, I know for me, I get the idea of Christ dieing for sins- all sins, even the big ones- and I think most people probably get that as well. Myself, as an adult raised as a Catholic, parents are still, and grandfather returned to the priesthood after my grandmother died (currently the vicar (sp?) for the Bishop of his diocese), Catholicism is/was fully ingrained in me. It wasn't so much that the priests were abusing the kids, even though I can't quite imagine anything quite as evil, it was that the church covered it up in many cases. So those priests that were sucking on the kids' little peckers, well, they are as God made them, right? But the leaders of the church, this soon-to-be saint at the helm, what was their justification for not sending those pedophiles packing? (And I mean out of the church, not just to another parish, as happened in some cases.)

[PapistItalian16]

I just can't help but imagine somewhere back in Poland is an old dude going, "That guy?! That guy is going to be saint? I went to high school with him and he was a dick!!"

PapistItalian16, I know for me, I get the idea of Christ dieing for sins- all sins, even the big ones- and I think most people probably get that as well. Myself, as an adult raised as a Catholic, parents are still, and grandfather returned to the priesthood after my grandmother died (currently the vicar (sp?) for the Bishop of his diocese), Catholicism is/was fully ingrained in me. It wasn't so much that the priests were abusing the kids, even though I can't quite imagine anything quite as evil, it was that the church covered it up in many cases. So those priests that were sucking on the kids' little peckers, well, they are as God made them, right? But the leaders of the church, this soon-to-be saint at the helm, what was their justification for not sending those pedophiles packing? (And I mean out of the church, not just to another parish, as happened in some cases.)

I cannot fully speak for the Church, but here is my opinion:

Because the Church doesn't have the right; they can't. Once you are a priest, you are always a priest.

Another point: Think of the Church as a family, If you had a sibling(whom you loved and were very, very close to) and they commited some hienous crime would you just automatically shun them? Would you turn your back on someone who has relied on you for support, for love? "Et tu Brute?" comes to mind if you were to "kick" them out of the family...
...If these priests were to be "kicked out" it could be viewed as a stab in the back.

If one Priest's sins could not be forgiven, then how could anybodys, whether they be Catholic or not?

[Davin]

In my family, if someone were around kids a lot, let's say like a family member that baby sat, turned out to be someone that sexually abused the kids they were entrusted... I'd tell my entire family that this person is not to be around children, I wouldn't silently move them to another part of the family and let the person sexually abuse more of my family.

Of course that's my family, your family might be different.

[PapistItalian16]

In my family, if someone were around kids a lot, let's say like a family member that baby sat, turned out to be someone that sexually abused the kids they were entrusted... I'd tell my entire family that this person is not to be around children, I wouldn't silently move them to another part of the family and let the person sexually abuse more of my family.

Of course that's my family, your family might be different.

That's a good point.

I could be wrong but I'm pretty sure that if a Priest is found guilty of being a sex offender, then they do get put on the national US sex offender registry.

[Ihateyoumike]

In my family, if someone were around kids a lot, let's say like a family member that baby sat, turned out to be someone that sexually abused the kids they were entrusted... I'd tell my entire family that this person is not to be around children, I wouldn't silently move them to another part of the family and let the person sexually abuse more of my family.

Of course that's my family, your family might be different.

That's a good point.

I could be wrong but I'm pretty sure that if a Priest is found guilty of being a sex offender, then they do get put on the national US sex offender registry.

That's not enough. Castration and/or lots of jail time should be added to that. And loads of public humiliation. Oh, and excommunication from the church.

But, once a priest, always a priest. Right?

I guess your god will give them a pass no matter how many childrens' lives they ruin, but I'm the unforgivable one for flat out admitting that I deny your church's holy spirit.

Makes perfect sense to me.

[PapistItalian16]

That's not enough. Castration and/or lots of jail time should be added to that. And loads of public humiliation. Oh, and excommunication from the church.

But, once a priest, always a priest. Right?

I guess your god will give them a pass no matter how many childrens' lives they ruin, but I'm the unforgivable one for flat out admitting that I deny your church's holy spirit.

Makes perfect sense to me.

Well hello, Mr. Angry...

"Not 100 people in the United States hate the Roman Catholic Church, but millions hate what they mistakenly think the Roman Catholic Church is." -- Bishop Fulton J. Sheen

My point in posting this is to state that the Catholic Church is not all made up of child molestors.

From: http://www.religioustolerance.org/clergy_sex6.htm

Unfortunately, precise data on abuse is not available. Data is largely based on experts' opinions. But perhaps the following might be helpful:

In another essay, we describe various estimates of the percentage of Roman Catholic priests who engage in sexual activities with persons under the age of 18. They range from 0.12% to 6%. In the absence of precise data, a value of 3% might be a reasonable guess. 

If the 3% value is accurate, then it is important to remember that 97% of priests are not sexually abusive to children and adults.

In the same essay, investigators have estimated that between 90% and 98% of the abusers victimize post-pubertal adolescents, while the rest assault pre-pubertal children. A value of 95% might be a reasonable guess.

The percentage of males in the general population who sexually abuse young children is unknown. Some estimates are in the range of 1% 

If those data are accurate then: About 0.15% of priests sexually abuse young children.
This is perhaps 1/8 the rate of men generally.
Priests have a much lower rate of abusive pedophilia than does the general population of men.

This same article also has some interesting points about this whole topic.

[Whitney]

In my family, if someone were around kids a lot, let's say like a family member that baby sat, turned out to be someone that sexually abused the kids they were entrusted... I'd tell my entire family that this person is not to be around children, I wouldn't silently move them to another part of the family and let the person sexually abuse more of my family.

Of course that's my family, your family might be different.

That's a good point.

I could be wrong but I'm pretty sure that if a Priest is found guilty of being a sex offender, then they do get put on the national US sex offender registry.

Yes, but that is only if the church actually reports it.  There are various documentaries which have documented cases where the church has covered up offenses and just kept moving the priest to a new town where no one had heard of the previous incidents; all the while more and more kids fell victim.  This is why so many people are upset with the catholic church; if they just had some dirty priests who were quickly turned into the courts it wouldn't be as big of a scandal.

[PapistItalian16]

In my family, if someone were around kids a lot, let's say like a family member that baby sat, turned out to be someone that sexually abused the kids they were entrusted... I'd tell my entire family that this person is not to be around children, I wouldn't silently move them to another part of the family and let the person sexually abuse more of my family.

Of course that's my family, your family might be different.

That's a good point.

I could be wrong but I'm pretty sure that if a Priest is found guilty of being a sex offender, then they do get put on the national US sex offender registry.

Yes, but that is only if the church actually reports it.  There are various documentaries which have documented cases where the church has covered up offenses and just kept moving the priest to a new town where no one had heard of the previous incidents; all the while more and more kids fell victim.  This is why so many people are upset with the catholic church; if they just had some dirty priests who were quickly turned into the courts it wouldn't be as big of a scandal.

Well, I think that in most cases, what an outsider feels as sexual abuse is actually very different than what the Priest is meaning to do. Generally Priests are veryy friendly people, and that over friendlyness kind of creeps people out sometimes. So then that person begins to get kind of paranoid, and might even start reporting very much innocent things as sexual scandal to the Diocese. The Diocese then does not report it, because in the end, the Diocese's investigation didnt lead to any scandal at all.

As for the people who have claimed to be molested by Priests, well that I cant really explain or defend against.

[Whitney]

As for the people who have claimed to be molested by Priests, well that I cant really explain or defend against.

Yes, molestation claims is I was referring to.  Not kindly rubbing a back (in the pat on the back way) or touching a shoulder or even giving a hug...I think all ministers do that whether catholic or not.