It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


UN to Vatican: Immediately Remove All Known And Suspected Child Abusers From The Clergy

page: 4
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in


posted on Feb, 5 2014 @ 06:45 PM


I'm waiting with baited breath for the strongly worded letter from the UN to the entertainment industry demanding that they also expel all the child molesters ... waiting ... waiting ....

The entertainment industry is not a country. The Vatican is a nation - a nation with diplomats, a government, stamps, coins, etc.

And the UN is NOT a country, nor does it have any business dictating what another country should and should not do, especially since this is just the UN bureaucracy talking, not the collective will of member states. There is the added problem of "selective attention" in what the UN pays attention to, and the undeniable fact that the UN is as corrupt as any nation or institution on Earth. It's the pot calling the kettle black.

posted on Feb, 5 2014 @ 06:50 PM
I think the church in its greed towards keeping its priests unmaried, so that wives could not inherit property has asked for trouble with its priests simply by making them so-called celibate. I remember my Mother-in-Law telling me that in Italy in the 1950's ginger headed would-be priests were discouraged because their kids could be a give-away. So I don't think unmarried men were ever suitable for giving guidance to families or even understanding family life and clearly many were not trustworthy for the role in life they chose.

posted on Feb, 5 2014 @ 06:53 PM
reply to post by markosity1973

I'm pretty sure you meant to reply to another member. I was trying to work within the framework that is currently accepted, mostly.

Bisexual here, and view sexuality much as you describe it. I prefer female and male companionship equally, though strictly sexual speaking lean towards females.

So few suffice, regardless of gender, which means keeping my options open sexually is best.

posted on Feb, 6 2014 @ 10:26 PM

reply to post by adjensen

I do not like your complacent view. So the percentage of Catholics who are pedophiles is lower than the percentage of the general USA population so that makes it all right then?

I'm glad the UN are putting pressure on the Church to report offenders. I appreciate this is a difficult dilemma for the church which preaches forgiveness for sinners including pedophiles. However, the Catholic church needs to respect the rest of society and turn these people in. Churches of whatever religion should be safe for children. There is no excuse for Churches to protect their own over children. Churches are places and institutions of spiritual purity and the Catholic church should not allow this behaviour to continue.

I agree with you. The leaders of on organization that claims to represent Christ should not be "equal to" or anywhere near the general population in rates of pedophilia. If there is little to no difference can they really claim to be Christ-like? The facts condemn them. They are a corrupt apostate organization, rotten to the core.

posted on Feb, 8 2014 @ 02:42 AM

reply to post by eggman90

What's next? The U.N. launches a war on the Vatican?

Good rhetorical question!
Both the UN and the Vatican don't have real armies. The UN notice what has not been done repeatedly until now by more than one administration.

The trumped reform of pope Francis slowly but surely loses the race against time. The sex scandal dates back to Benedict and even JP2. One of the many issues that cannot be just delayed in a pretty medieval mode of absolute authority of "the eternal city" that can take a millenium or more to allow some change in tradition (as for example of the married priests or the second marriages). Why so slow on such issues that concern hundreds of thousands Catholics AND their partners that may not be Catholics, as well as their children? Why not to adopt some ban of holy communion on those who have sinned with children, THE WAY IT IS DONE with the second marriages for example? Or shall we change the gospel? "Except for adultery" said Jesus. Let alone the married priesthood dating back to the Apostles. Seems the Vatican's double standard is more than double.

Already 11th month and all we can we see from the Vatican (besides pope's own words full of promises), are a handful of prelates not just "fired" but "not confirmed" in the old boards of Vatican's elaborated structures. Good start but is it all?

How many years will it be protracted the so set snail pace of the "reform" that some compared to a third Vatican council? May be for the next generation that will celebrate the 2000 years since the crucifixion of Jesus in 2033? Don't those prelates understand the world is moving in a different pace, and the current generation of Christians are no more willing to sacrifice their lifetime in empty promises and puffed up words in expectation of the "bright future" for some unknown future generation? Perhaps we had enough of that.

I hope pope Francis will hear the voice of the UN, as well as the voice of his own multitudes. Not the voice of prelates who are part of the system, but the voice of the people who suffer from that same system. vox populi vox dei.
edit on 8-2-2014 by 2012newstart because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 8 2014 @ 03:41 AM
Some self-appointed catholic prophets already saw in the UN statement the "persecution of the end times against the holy church". Why don't they see the crimes done by particular members of that church, who are not holy and who deserve some sort of punishment?
Some catholic websites put a headline "Persecution watch" followed by the UN headline. I wonder will the catholic church start at one moment actually persecute those who say the truth?

Where is the historical remorse about clear crimes against humanity? JP2 and Benedict didn't do enough to condemn the crusades, the inquisition, all kinds of abuses made in the name of Christ. Benedict didn't find strength to come clean from students' dispute about Galileo. Why didn't he go to La Sapienza University to bear a little historic burden and shame for the wrongdoings of his predecessors? And to show the catholic church thinks DIFFERENTLY today about Galileo? Actually, he would almost certainly say something like that if he would have gone to the discussion hall in the University and heard about the students' logical questions about PAST TIMES. Nobody would throw an egg, I guess. The intelligent students in Italy who know details about Galileo time are above that primitive street level. Instead of going to discuss, Benedict preferred to hide himself from the intelligent dispute, called the crowds below on the square to "defend him". As if he is the attacked person. Not Galileo, not the wrong way the Catholic church dealt with the issue. May be he was personally innocent, indeed. But he was chosen pope not to play martyr, but to make clear the NEW positions of a NEW church leadership to the outside world. Including to the students and their professors in La Sapienza University. That is what is expected from a pope in modern times. Leadership to the good, using the historically inherited authority, Not backtrack old well known practices. Otherwise, why was he chosen pope? Well, time showed Benedict chose the way to quit papacy. Perhaps he should do so in that 2005 conclave when the cardinals offered him the Peter's seat. He should refuse it back then, and allow the second in the list cardinal Bergoglio to take the post 8 years yearlier. The world lost at least 8 years. (and we could count the years that pope JP2 should resign, thought to resign but was stopped to do so by exactly the same old men around himself who shaped the last decades papacy). The world could get those 10-20 years back. Now they are irreversibly lost. Irreversibly? How long is given for new decisions to be made? May be only God knows.

Now is the turn of Francis, the first pope jesuit in history. Will he change things, and when? What we see is not a change, rather buying time. May be waiting for some big event that we are not told about? And that he knows about being in the secrets of the Jesuit order for centuries? Just guessing, for lack of better info.
edit on 8-2-2014 by 2012newstart because: (no reason given)

edit on 8-2-2014 by 2012newstart because: (no reason given)

edit on 8-2-2014 by 2012newstart because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 8 2014 @ 04:19 AM
The Catholic church must stop dragging feet. The questions are well defined, as well as their possible answers, found also in the Gospels. (that is another entire discussion). They are well known to all the bishops and most priests.

What the UN makes it priority is the most shocking of a long list of crimes, wrongdoings or misconduct of catholic clergy. There aren't two choices before the real Catholic church. The choice is only one, if it is meant to continue beyond this 21st century.

The choice is hard, it stands before pope Francis. But also before all the bishops. WIll they make it possible the catholic church to be the source of inspiration beyond 2033? Beyond 2053? Or it will stop somewhere between on the road?

Another question ultimately pops up. Is there SOMETHING, something BIG to happen that they know and we don't? So they don't care so much of the image of Christ's bride today in the contemporary world, hoping it is they to survive beyond whatever event is on our way? This is just a suggestion. But the lack of desire to move on an inch on the road that is known for the last 2 centuries, fuels such speculation. Especially having in mind the past actions of that same church.

Let they (also bishops) prove before the people they want to stand together with the people in the next 2 centuries as well. And let they stop playing with that phrase that Peter's key is given to them and it depends on them solely what will happen next. It is given to all validly ordained bishops. Let they not be sorry they missed this historic chance given to them in our days, with the unusual change of the papacy thanks to Benedict and all supportive cardinals and bishops. Let it not be too late, as said in their own catholic prophets.

edit on 8-2-2014 by 2012newstart because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 8 2014 @ 04:31 AM
The Pope should have done this when he was elected.
He should have also distributed the wealth..

He should also pursue banks, insurance companies, energy companies, world health organisation, the IMF and also the world bank.

He should be or should have been in hot pursuit of all of these things.

In a position he holds his influence should also be that of ending the great divisions created by those who profit from the loss and misery of others.
The earth and life contained within are all cogs that keep it all spinning yet forgets it.

posted on Feb, 8 2014 @ 04:42 AM
Cardinal O'Brien was exposed as homosexual in the Interregnum when ideas of how the Church should be ruled in the next pontificate were spread out between cardinals but also in the media. Cardinal O'Brien now retired, dared to say the priests should be allowed to marry if they want so. Immediately an old story was exposed of 3 priests (not minors) who allegedly had sex with him years ago. He did not deny it. He was asked to resign immediately in unprecedented move by Vatican for the last decades. Therefore neither to take part in pre- conclave disputes nor to vote. Not that his vote would determine who would be chosen in 2013 conclave. But his ideas might do so, especially his boldness.'Brien

Let those responsible notice the fact that a sexual misconduct, or said otherwise, consensual sex with adults, is not a crime. It is misconduct, sin, or you name it. Nevertheless it was seen as a too big offense for the ruling elite in the interregnum, those same handful of old cardinals who shaped the ultra-conservative policy of the Vatican in the last decades. May be exactly because the cardinal dared to speak on other issues that they preferred to keep silenced.

Why don't the new hierarchy (hope it is new) apply the same method for those who sin with minors instead? Cardinal Schoenborn confessed in the media that one of his predecessors was personally involved in that activity. Perhaps there are others. Why not reinstate O'Brien? Why not change something of the way the things have been done until now? Why not allow condoms to stop abortions???

This is more than just a double standard. It is lack of any willingness to move on any innovation road that is permitted not denied by the Gospels.

I'm sorry and surprised that one year after we discussed those things in pre-conclave threads after the shocking resignation of Benedict, we would have the need to discuss them again. 1 year of lost hopes. Hope it is not even longer. Or worse scenario as I mentioned above.

edit on 8-2-2014 by 2012newstart because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 8 2014 @ 05:10 AM
The case with cardinal Brien shows policy that is not just dirty. It stops any dissent as being said. Perhaps they (the secret establishment) hold documents of each and every important person in hierarchy and expose them the moment he decides to go astray.

Actually, cardinal O'Brien could go to vote. He was not stripped of cardinalate, and nobody could do so in the interregnum. The rules say, that even EXCOMMUNICATED cardinals have the right to vote for a new pope. Presumably, if they have been excommunicated by the old pope, they could gain the favor of a new pope with completely new policies. Thanks God, the Catholic church today doesn't have such examples. Perhaps Cardinal Brien should go to vote and to say to the rest that the truth is not the truth of Rome alone. He preferred the peaceful withdrawal from the hot race.

Should pope Francis change rules immediately he was installed? I think the pace should be different and many things could be done before the year's end. They were not. Today we are at the point of pre-conclave discussion or even backward. Because today no one discusses the way they did in the pre-conclave. It just cannot go on like that.

The UN is actually late to speak.

posted on Feb, 8 2014 @ 05:28 AM
I would not be very surprised if they (secret rulers) hold some sort of exposing documents for the pope too, not necessarily of any sexual content, but of any other kind (as for example collaboration with military junta, just a guess). They may hold him prisoner to his own past. Will we witness a new papal resignation at the first attempt by Francis to make a REAL change?
Let he be bolder than that! It is he who is the pope. Not the secret wolves inside. Let he call the guards if needed.

Or,...after 200 years or more... the history textbooks probably filmed in 4D moving holograms will keep the record of the biggest christian organization on earth that didn't pass the test of the times, because of its own weight. I don't know if any following christian congregation would like to call itself "catholic" after the failed experiment in history...

posted on Feb, 8 2014 @ 05:40 AM
Let also be known, that all human's actions, words (thoughts?) are preserved not only before God. But also in the space-time. Search of paradoxes of curved space-time and the possibility to look back in time in device like stargate (Bob Dean and Clifford Stone, interview Camelot youtube, said they saw in that way the real crucifixion of Jesus).

Let it be known that all the hidden and hideous moves by today's powerful of the day are well recorded for the history and generations to come. I don't know God's judgment. But I can guess the history won't be polite with them. As we are not polite today with the inquisitors.

Let make the things clear, let start doing it today! It is not only for the Vatican insiders. It is also for bishops, priests and laity who want the things done different. According to the real gospels of Jesus.

posted on Feb, 8 2014 @ 11:34 AM
Clarification: I don't want to sound like that pope Francis didn't make any changes. He made already important reshuffles, retirements, and new appointments.
What I wanted to underline though, is that many people (me included) expected more and speedy changes to take place immediately after the election or in the first months.

Seems the UN report sides with those who wanted to see more work done in less time. Not only by the pope himself, of course, but by the entire Vatican.

Sorry if I sounded anti-catholic to anyone (again) that was not my purpose. The mentioned history is for the purpose to show how different today is from that history. In history you wouldn't have a UN to ask popes to do anything on benefit of humanity. Or vice versus, as Benedict spoke in the UN. With that being said, I will take a pause on that topic.

posted on Feb, 9 2014 @ 01:34 AM


Your first sexual experience, becomes your orientation !

edit on 5-2-2014 by Ove38 because: text fix

Interesting premise, and I'm not disputing it, but would you say the same about gays?

Yes I would

posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 11:45 PM
Just like a jigsaw puzzle that has each piece being put in place, first the American embassy gets pulled out of the Vatican, then this warning from the UN, as another poster mentioned the waters are drying up on this lady of the night.
In the past when you were looking for signs of an age old prophesy, you looked for possible precursors to the event, these seem to qualify.

posted on Feb, 13 2014 @ 08:11 AM
reply to post by eggman90

Isn't it interesting how The UN is seen as 'evil' and The Vatican is seen as 'good' by some, even though The Vatican is the one who is condoning such behavior?

Now, this doesn't mean that The UN is 100% good, it just means that it seems to be more 'good' than The Vatican.

And before people mention how The UN is not peaceful, let's remind everyone about The Crusades and all the murdering that they did against people of other religions.

Exposing the injustice or non-compassion of one group, does not automatically make the other group "good".

posted on Feb, 13 2014 @ 08:15 AM
I rather they be left all in one place, that way you know how to find them and avoid them, instead of having them roaming the streets!
All jokes aside though, i've no sympathy for the U.N. and before they go around pointing fingers, they should allow someone to clean the filth THEY have.

posted on Feb, 13 2014 @ 03:53 PM

Of course, the response:

"The Vatican responded by saying it would examine the report - but also accused its authors of interference".

They actually used that word-interference-amazing.

edit on 2/5/2014 by eggman90 because: (no reason given)

I'm probably making a mistake by not reading the thread in it's entirety. There's a good chance that someone else already pointed this out, but the report by the UN is NOT limited to the sex abuse scandal. It extends into social teaching of the Church and matters such as abortion, contraception and homosexuality. So yes, 'interference' would be a legitimate term to use here.

I applaud the UN's assailing of the Church's sex abuse patterns (directly and the coverups) but they have absolutely no place offering critiques of the social teachings of the Church.


posted on Feb, 13 2014 @ 03:57 PM

but if you take all the child molesters out of the Catholic church.....who will be left?

You seem to think that the majority of the members of the Catholic church are child molesters. What percentage would you believe that to be?


posted on Feb, 13 2014 @ 04:36 PM


but if you take all the child molesters out of the Catholic church.....who will be left?

You seem to think that the majority of the members of the Catholic church are child molesters. What percentage would you believe that to be?


it was an attempt at humor..... a failed attempt

I don't think that....obviously. Many, many good people in the Catholic church.

new topics

<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in