Pope apologises for sexual abuse in Catholicism

Russ · 20-03-2010, 15:00

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8577740.stm

In an ideal world he wouldn't have had any need to apologise but kudos to the Vatican for this which was a LONG time coming.

**Maggy** · 20-03-2010, 15:21

Too long Russ and too little and too late.

The Catholic church has been seriously damaged and still the acknowledgement that it was covered up by senior clergy has not been addressed.

Neither has the situation of what will happen in the future if paedophile priests are discovered.Will the cover-ups continue or have procedures been put in place that will prevent that happening again? If not the whole exercise is a waste of time.

ceedee · 20-03-2010, 15:23

And he's not apologised for his own very direct involvement in the cover-ups.

Gary L · 20-03-2010, 15:37

If you can't trust these men in a cloth with your little boy or girl. who can you trust.

**Damien** · 20-03-2010, 15:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gary L

If you can't trust these men in a cloth with your little boy or girl. who can you trust.

Well most child abuse takes place within families so definitely don't leave your kids with them.

Anyway the issue is not Priests are Peados but the cover up within the church.

**Hugh** · 20-03-2010, 15:42

<pedant on>
shurely "definitely".....

(and "men of the cloth", rather than "men in a cloth").
<pedant off>

Gary L · 20-03-2010, 15:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damien

Anyway the issue is not Priests are Peados but the cover up within the church.

It covers all doesn't it?
"sexual abuse in Catholicism"

20-03-2010, 15:51

When the catholic church hands over priests who abuse children to the authorities and does not ship them off to somewhere quiet to continue abusing then i might applaud them. When those in the upper levels of the catholic church are thrown out for their involvement in this whole sorry episode i might applaud. But the pope getting up and apologising no sorry that i won't applaud because without the actions to back the words it is pretty meaningless.

Russ · 20-03-2010, 16:20

Well he does say those guilty should be held accountable. I think in this case a half-assed apology is better than no apology, after all it is acknowledgement of what happened.

Spectato · 20-03-2010, 16:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by foreverwar

<pedant on>
shurely "definitely".....

(and "men of the cloth", rather than "men in a cloth").
<pedant off>

Shurely?

Such is the problem with policing grammar on the Web.
We all screw up occasionally!

(Besides which, it would take a team of ten, full-time grammar Nazis, just to deal with the offences committed on this board!)

Gary L · 20-03-2010, 16:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spectato

Shurely?

Such is the problem with policing grammar on the Web.
We all screw up occasionally!

He always screws up if you just leave him to it

**Maggy** · 20-03-2010, 16:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Russ

Well he does say those guilty should be held accountable. I think in this case a half-assed apology is better than no apology, after all it is acknowledgement of what happened.

I would possibly agree Russ but the fact that there are no assurances or mention of mechanisms within the clergy to PREVENT and protect vulnerable children in the FUTURE it is rather a demeaned apology.

**Hugh** · 20-03-2010, 16:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spectato

Shurely?

Such is the problem with policing grammar on the Web.
We all screw up occasionally!

(Besides which, it would take a team of ten, full-time grammar Nazis, just to deal with the offences committed on this board!)

The "shurely" is a recurring joke from Private Eye.....

Quote:

"(Shome mishtake, shurely? Ed)" is a frequent comment supposedly scribbled into the copy by the editor and mistakenly printed as part of the article. The slurred 's'-sounds refer both to drunkenness, which Private Eye has for a long time associated pejoratively with journalists, and the distinctive speech patterns of Bill Deedes (who became Lord Deedes, but was known within the magazine as "Shir Bill Deedesh"), former editor of The Daily Telegraph and the eponymous 'Bill' of the Dear Bill letters. As an editor, Deedes was known for his complete lack of knowledge of contemporary slang and culture.

I wasn't being a "Grammar Nazi", but if you had seen the original post from Damien, it said "defiantly" instead of "definitely", and I was trying to be helpful. Gary, however, I was correcting, as I have never heard of Catholic clergy being called "men in a cloth".

(violent pervs, yes, men in a cloth, no).

Lord Nikon · 20-03-2010, 17:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spectato

[snip]
(Besides which, it would take a team of ten, full-time grammar Nazis, just to deal with the offences committed on this board!)

There is a 14 person admin team?

**Paul** · 20-03-2010, 17:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lord Nikon

There is a 14 person admin team?

Which is totally irrelevant to this thread.

Stick to the topic people, not spelling, grammar or whatever else, otherwise 1 admin will be removing posts.