Wednesday, February 17, 2010

Carmelite dominatrices

L'Osservatore Romano

Following recent revelations that his predecessor used to perform self-flagellation, Benedict XVI has issued an Apostolic Letter instituting the Order of Carmelite Dominatrices.

In place of the standard habit, the habit of Carmelite dominatrices consists of a leather catsuit and stiletto thigh-boots.

Benedict XVI also amended the Codex Iuris Canonici to include a new provision on holy spanking.

Carmelite dominatrices will be assigned to the pope, the college of cardinals, and visiting bishops to assist the princes of the church in their sanctification.

13 comments:

  1. It's certainly not funny but the image you portrayed is highly appropriate from multiple perspectives.

    I've been reading just generalized news commentaries about the pope meeting with bishops from Ireland over the multiple abuse and sexual abuse scandals over there. In a country known for its Catholic identity, the scandal reached proportions that would be considered unimaginable over here.

    http://www.justice.ie/en/JELR/Pages/PB09000504

    http://www.justice.ie/en/JELR/Part%201.pdf/Files/Part%201.pdf

    A couple of quotes:

    The Dublin Archdiocese Commission of Investigation report was completed shortly after the publication of the Report of the Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse, generally known as the Ryan Report. Because of this, and because the abuse of children by clerics and religious was the underlying reason for both reports, there has been a tendency to assimilate the two reports in public and journalistic commentary. They are, in fact, quite different in subject, scale and nature.

    1.7 The Ryan Report was concerned with establishing whether or not abuse occurred and the nature and scale of that abuse. It was not confined to sexual abuse. This Commission had no remit to establish whether or not abuse occurred although it is abundantly clear, from the Commission’s investigation as revealed in the cases of the 46 priests in the representative sample (see Chapters 11 to 57), that child sexual abuse by clerics was widespread throughout the period under review. This Commission’s investigation is concerned only with the institutional response to complaints, suspicions and knowledge of child sexual abuse. The Ryan Commission was required to make recommendations. The Dublin Commission has no specific remit to make recommendations but the Commission has given its views on a range of matters which it considers significant at various stages in the report.

    Number of Complaints

    1.8 The Commission received information about complaints, suspicions or knowledge of child sexual abuse in respect of 172 named priests and 11 unnamed priests. (Some or all of the 11 unnamed priests may, of course, be included in the 172 named priests.) After a preliminary examination, the Commission concluded that 102 of these priests were within remit.

    1.9 It is important in the Commission’s view not to equate the number of complaints with the actual instances of child sexual abuse. While a significant number of the priests against whom allegations were made admitted child sexual abuse, some denied it. Of those investigated by the Commission, one priest admitted to sexually abusing over 100 children, while another accepted that he had abused on a fortnightly basis during the currency of his ministry which lasted for over 25 years. The total number of documented complaints recorded against those two priests is just over 70. In another case, there is only one complaint but the priest has admitted to abusing at least six other children.

    1.10 The Commission examined complaints in respect of over 320 children against the 46 priests in the representative sample. Substantially more of the complaints relate to boys – the ratio is 2.3 boys to 1 girl.

    1.11 Of the 46 priests examined, 11 pleaded guilty to or were convicted in the criminal courts of sexual assaults on children.

    1.12 There is one clear case of a false accusation of child sexual abuse – Fr Ricardus*1 (see Chapter 55). There are two cases where there were suspicions or concerns but no actual complaint of child sexual abuse – Fr Guido* (see Chapter 51) and Fr Magnus* (see Chapter 49).

    The Archdiocese and Church authorities

    1.14 The volume of revelations of child sexual abuse by clergy over the past 35 years or so has been described by a Church source as a “tsunami” of sexual abuse.2 He went on to describe the “tsunami” as “an earthquake deep beneath the surface hidden from view”. The clear implication of that statement is that the Church, in common with the general public, was somehow taken by surprise by the volume of the revelations...

    ReplyDelete
  2. http://www.justice.ie/en/JELR/Part%202.pdf/Files/Part%202.pdf

    Betrayal
    58.14 One unifying strand in all of the complainants‟ evidence heard by the Commission was the sense of dismay and anger felt by them that their Church, in which they had placed the utmost faith and trust, had in their view, duped and manipulated them over the years and that it had done so in order to preserve its reputation and its assets. Unlike Church authorities, complainants did not perceive any distinction between their local church and the universal church. They were shocked by the growing realisation that their Church founded on a gospel of love, truth and justice could treat its own members, many of them defenceless children, so shabbily.
    58.15 A common refrain amongst the complainants was that the nature of the apologies issued by the Archdiocese was general rather than specific. They stated that this type of apology was not sufficient to ease their personal pain. They felt that if they could meet someone in authority who would personally apologise to them for the hurt and trauma they had suffered this would greatly help them. Some acknowledged the fact that Archbishop Martin had met them personally and apologised to them.

    58.19 Marie Collins was particularly angered by the use by Church authorities of ‘mental reservation’ in dealing with complaints. Mental reservation is a concept developed and much discussed over the centuries, which permits a churchman knowingly to convey a misleading impression to another person without being guilty of lying. For example, John calls to the parish priest to make a complaint about the behaviour of one of his curates. The parish priest sees him coming but does not want to see him because he considers John to be a troublemaker. He sends another of his curates to answer the door. John asks the curate if the parish priest is in. The curate replies that he is not. This is clearly untrue but in the Church’s view it is not a lie because, when the curate told John that the parish priest was not in, he mentally reserved to himself the words ‘to you’.
    58.20 Cardinal Connell explained the concept of mental reservation to the Commission in the following way:
    “Well, the general teaching about mental reservation is that you are not permitted to tell a lie. On the other hand, you may be put in a position where you have to answer, and there may be circumstances in which you can use an ambiguous expression realising that the person who you are talking to will accept an untrue version of whatever it may be - permitting that to happen, not willing that it happened, that would be lying. It really is a matter of trying to deal with extraordinarily difficult matters that may arise in social relations where people may ask questions that you simply cannot answer. Everybody knows that this kind of thing is liable to happen. So, mental reservation is, in a sense, a way of answering without lying.”

    ReplyDelete
  3. In viewing your website I find no revelation of any Christian qualities and question your moral compass. You should spend your energy feeding the poor, clothing the homeless, visiting the sick etc, visiting prisons.

    I agree the abuse in world and most specifically Ireland is outrageous, and feel those priest and those in the cover up will be held accountable on judgment.

    I also wonder how so many married baptist ministers could be charged and convicted of these same crimes. (throws out the celibacy card to blame)

    http://stopbaptistpredators.org/index.htm

    ReplyDelete
  4. ROISENBUD SAID:

    "In viewing your website I find no revelation of any Christian qualities and question your moral compass. You should spend your energy feeding the poor, clothing the homeless, visiting the sick etc, visiting prisons."

    Interesting how your definition of "Christian qualities" manages to leave Christ out of the picture.

    Who needs the gospel when we have UNICEF?

    ReplyDelete
  5. You should spend your energy feeding the poor, clothing the homeless, visiting the sick etc, visiting prisons."

    Interesting how your definition of "Christian qualities" manages to leave Christ out of the picture.


    Matthew 25:40 "The King will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.'

    ReplyDelete
  6. RAYMOND SAID:

    "Matthew 25:40 "The King will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.'"

    Which, in context, has specific reference to the treatment of persecuted Christians.

    ReplyDelete
  7. "Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world." – James 1:27

    I wonder how many Catholics have been drawn away from the Catholic Church and into the bosom of a Reformed Church on account of this blog? Maybe this sort of thing is effective? Or are you just trying to get your pals to have a good laugh at the expense of pius women who devote their lives to Jesus?

    ReplyDelete
  8. Roisenbud said:

    In viewing your website I find no revelation of any Christian qualities and question your moral compass. You should spend your energy feeding the poor, clothing the homeless, visiting the sick etc, visiting prisons.

    Among other things, this assumes we don't "spend [our] energy feeding the poor, clothing the homeless, visiting the sick etc, visiting prisons." But you don't know we don't do these things.

    Raymond said:

    I wonder how many Catholics have been drawn away from the Catholic Church and into the bosom of a Reformed Church on account of this blog? Maybe this sort of thing is effective?

    It's better to attend a church which strives to teach and live the truth of the gospel than one which compromises it in so many ways.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Posts like this are merely mean-spirited and aren't doing a lick to advance the Gospel. Your use of coarse joking to put down churches with which you disagree has little if any place on a blog that prides itself on being a beacon of Christianity. It wasn't even that funny. So go ahead and have your cheap laughs; I say you should stick to theology where you might do some good.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Dan Lower / KKairos said...

    "Your use of coarse joking to put down churches with which you disagree has little if any place on a blog that prides itself on being a beacon of Christianity."

    Consider the fact that one of your favorite films is the very R-rated Donnie Darko, I think you can spare us the faux-prudery.

    ReplyDelete
  11. This is not a very charitable post my friends.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Which, in context, has specific reference to the treatment of persecuted Christians.

    Have you actually read the passage? It refers to all people, to strangers even. Persecuted Christians would be included, but so would persecuted Buddhists or Atheists Yours is the arguement of a moral cretin; if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck...

    "For I was hungry, and you gave me to eat; I was thirsty, and you gave me to drink; I was a stranger, and you took me in: Naked, and you covered me: sick, and you visited me: I was in prison, and you came to me."

    "Then shall the just answer him, saying: Lord, when did we see thee hungry, and fed thee; thirsty, and gave thee drink? And when did we see thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and covered thee? Or when did we see thee sick or in prison, and came to thee?"

    ReplyDelete
  13. You know, I may have questioned your charity, but I didn't come here and question your sincerity. If you had questioned my charity in making that particular comment, I might not have been taken aback; perhaps it was slightly lacking. Nobody involved in Donnie Darko thought they were making a Christian movie (though it raises lots of spiritual issues). I'm not a prude, but I don't think an unnecessarily sexual satire of corporal mortification is really all that charitable or Christian, no. The point about Darko is rejected outright, as is your ad hominem about my "faux prudery." I say (right alongside John C. Wright) that were I a prude, that would be an improvement on what I am. (It has no relevance to the applicability of my point how consistent I am or how sincere I am, though I believe I am generally both.)

    All that said, Mr. Hays, please pray for me in my continued search for Truth and justice in the world; I hope you do not mind if I do the same for you.

    ReplyDelete