This
"Professor Brubaker stressed there were only a small number of sick perverts in the Roman Catholic Church and the rest of the staff were simply deluded maniacs with a dangerously medieval world view who believed in things like Satan."
coupled with this
http://sify.com/news/d...
suggest it is to me...
I believe that a large number of perverts join the Rat Catchersin order to try and force celibacy upon themselves and to avoid the sexual deprivation which they lust for (I really do feel rather sorry for paedophiles - I'd hate to fancy kids) and I think that them doing so is laudable and that the church helps a lot of perverts.
I deplore the way in which the church has, in the past, covered up the acts of perverts, but that is not for now.
Successful clergymen are generally true believers and genuinely pious men seldom commit perverted acts. I believe that there are more perverts in the RC church than in most sectors of society, but the numbers are still very, very low.
Believing unwaveringly in anything always seems a bit odd to me, but that's not the argument here.
The vatican itself
recently estimated the number of "problem" pirsts to be around 5% ish. That's THOUSANDS of priests.
The Vatican has a track record of protecting, not punishing, priests enganged in paedophilia. Under the previous pope, the current pope was actively involved, as the enforcer of discipline, in this. He coordinated attempts to avoid having them dealt with by secular authorities.
This is not about their beliefs at this point
this is about abuse, of pwer and of a sexual nature, and the ongoing attempts to cover it up coupled to trying to justify it with idiocy such as the "The vatican is posssed by the devil" spiel.
seems so
Indeed. Problem priests are more likely to be shipped off to real life versions of Craggy Island- there is a germ of truth in the set up to Father Ted (different "problems in those cases though, obviously, as embezzlement, idiocy and alcoholism are rather funnier than paedophilia)
So, essentially,
you agree with me on every point?
Please explain why you think that an article saying that the Vatican is full of perverts is 'fucking spot on' when we agree that it is not?
You appear to be aggressively agreeing with me on almost all my points,
save that you seem to suggest that 5% of priests being 'problem priests' means that the Vatican is full of paedos.
Problem priests are not very likely to get into the Vatican.
I like this chap - he appears to be absolutely fucking barking.
"Father Amorth was also one of the voices that made public warnings to parents about J. K. Rowling's Harry Potter novels, noting that the books attempt to make a false distinction between black and white magic, when in fact, the distinction 'does not exist, because magic is always a turn to the devil.' "
Just before casting out a demon by sprinkling on water and ringing a bell, presumably. More lunacy:
http://www.thecatholic...
What the fuck does that mean?
I keep seeing it everywhere at the moment.
I was wondering too
but chose to think that he'd had a small stroke whilst typing.