How does the Catholic Church Explain "The Inquisition" & Rampant Sexual Molestation of Children?

Question

Tens of millions of dollars have been paid out as settlement moneys for the sexual atrocities committed by Catholic Priests for decades against children...Altar boys for the most part.

How does the church explain the covering up of this abomination
by Bishops and other heirarchy and the shuffleing of pedophile / Homosexual priests from one parish to another to prey yet again on more innocents?

Why would anyone want to remain a member of any religion that condems Satan with one hand and carries ouit his work with the other?

Islam for example is open for all to see it's tenets namely violence, hatred, intolerance and murder while the cathloic church has cloaked much of the same...if I were a catholic I would like to know these answers?

And what about the horrors of the Inquisiton all sponsored and carried out by the Catholic church...does any catholic out there
ever ask about these heinous acts and can articulate how the church explains this away to it's members?

Will those that respond please confine your answers to "THE QUESTION"
...please and Thank you.

Romeo and the extensive verbosity...still does not answer the question.

Does The Catholic Church practice the Clinton sacrament of "Don't Ask Don't Tell"?

Does that account for their "priestly" ranks being permeated with Homsosexuals consequently the child predation and the cover-ups over decades?

What actual Bishops and members of the hierachy have been removed, or castigated or better yet defrocked for shuffleing those Homosexual pedophiles from parish to parish preying on children?

Supplemental question:
Can anybody name 3???

Answer 1

They don't feel like they have to explain it - they feel they are omnipotent. They change scripture to suit their needs, they pray on the weak and exploit their powers. Catholic religion is a cult!

Answer 2

"Why would anyone want to remain a member of any religion that condems Satan with one hand and carries ouit his work with the other? "
This is an absurd question. the Catholic church does not carry out Satan's work. There have been abuses/crimes by some priests & some Bishops covered them up. But that doesnt' mean the church approved of these acts. The Pope condemmed these actions. Remember Frank Serpico, the NYC cop? Some NY police were corrupt. Does that mean that police in general are all bad?? These crimes by a minority of priests which happened over the last 40 years are a good excuse for Catholic haters to slam the Catholic Church.
Recently, a federal report, ordered by Congress and chartered by the U.S. Department of Education, exposed rampant sexual abuse in public schools throughout the country. But politicians and the mainstream press corps all but ignored it.
Though the media ran daily stories about old allegations involving Catholics, the federal report estimated that 422,000 California public school students would be victims of sexual misconduct by educators before graduation — a number dwarfing the state’s entire Catholic school enrollment of 143,000.
By contrast, during the first half of 2002, the 61 largest newspapers in California ran 1,744 stories about sexual abuse in Catholic institutions, referring almost entirely to decades-old allegations. During the same period, those newspapers ran four stories about federally exposed sexual abuse in public schools.
Public school students face a much greater risk of molestation. But it's easier to attack the Catholic Church. This is simply Catholic bigoty.

Answer 3

Allow me to say that the boys' situation happens with every human group, not only the Church, but in this country seems to be something personal against the Church and against Spanish.
When it happens somewhere else, the media doesn't make so much noise as when happens within the Church.
Yes, it is wrong. Was not correctly handled by the top people, but that does not make the doctrine wrong. Bad people exist everywhere. Sad , but true.
Concerning the Inquisition, you are forgetting the Protestant inquisition, that carried as many horrors as the Catholic, so to speak. In Geneva, John Calvin burned Miguel Servet, the discoverer of the blood circulation.
In england, henry VIII burned people at the stake too.
The Catholic Inquisition appeared because the kings were burning people under the pretense of religion, but they were really because of the kings' desire. The Inquisition tried to put a stop to that situation. Besides, it was not the Inquisition that burned people. The Inquisition tried the accused person and decided whether he was guilty. Then, the person was delivered to the king's justice and it was they who determined whether the person would be burned and performed the sentence.
The problem with the burning began at the XII, XIII centuries when some people began to show bizarre religious ideas that also threatened the society. The kings saw this as a threat to their authority and began to punish them, sometimes with the stake.
The number of people tried by the Inquisition was increased because sometimes people that otherwise would be tried in a civil court were tried by the Inquisition, because what they did was considered an offense to religion as well.
Finally, in the XIX century, the secretary of the Spanish Inquisition, father Llorente, burned part of the archives and escaped with the rest, using them as "proof" of what the Inquisition had done. It is strange why he burned part of the files if his purpose was to critizice the Inquisition, instead of using all of them

Answer 4

Might Makes Right.

Hey, acording to the Gospel of Judas, jesus said his disciples were pedophiles and murderers who would lead legions astray.

Why would you leave out the crusades, by the way? They were horrific. Why would you leave out the centuries of protestant murder of 'heretics?" Why would you leave out all the sexual abuse in the other churches?

Why are you pretending Catholics are uniquely this way? Pretty much the three 'great' monotheistic religions are awash in blood.

Answer 5

Hey Klu: You're another knowledge pretender here. So you said can not and WILL NOT? Do you know how to eat your words coz here's an answer. Grow up and do your homework and stop bashing.

This is from Catholic.com. Its been there sitting in their website for at least six years now. So if you have questions about catholicsim, ask catholics. Not anti-catholics. That's how you do intellectual research.

The Inquisition

Sooner or later, any exchange of views with Fundamentalists will come around to the Inquisition. To non-Catholics it is a scandal; to Catholics, an embarrassment; to both, a confusion. At the least, it is a handy stick with which to engage in Catholic-bashing, because most Catholics seem at a loss for a sensible reply. This tract will set the record straight.

There have actually been several different inquisitions. The first was established in 1184 in southern France as a response to the Catharist heresy. This was known as the Medieval Inquisition, and it was phased out as Catharism disappeared. Quite separate was the Roman Inquisition, begun in 1542. It was the least active and most benign of the three variations. Separate again was the famed Spanish Inquisition, started in 1478, a state institution used to identify conversos--Jews and Moors (Muslims) who falsely "converted" to Christianity (i.e., not out of faith in Jesus Christ but for purposes of political or social advantage) and secretly practiced their former religion. Its job was also, and more importantly, to clear the good name of many people who were falsely accused as being It was the Spanish Inquisition that had the worst record.

The Main Sources

Fundamentalists writing about the Inquisition rely on books by Henry C. Lea (1825-1909) and G. G. Coulton (1858-1947). Each man got most of the facts right, and each made progress in basic research. Proper credit should not be denied them. The problem is they could not weigh facts well because they harbored a fierce animosity toward the Church--animosity which had little to do with the Inquisition itself.

The contrary problem has not been unknown. A few Catholic writers, particularly those less interested in digging for truth than in giving a quick excuse, have glossed over incontrovertible facts and done what they could to whitewash the Inquisition. This is as much a disservice to the truth as exaggerating the Inquisition's bad points. These well-intentioned, but misguided, apologists are, in one respect at least, much like Lea, Coulton, and the present strain of Fundamentalist writers. They fear, as the others hope, that the facts about the Inquisition might prove the illegitimacy of the Catholic Church.


Don't Fear the Facts

But the facts won't do that at all. The Church has nothing to fear from the truth. No account of foolishness, misguided zeal, or cruelty by Catholics can undo the divine foundation of the Church, though, admittedly, these things are stumbling blocks to Catholics and non-Catholics alike.

What must be grasped is that the Church contains within herself all sorts of sinners and knaves, and some of them obtain responsible positions of responsibility. Jesus and Paul both warned us that there would be a few ravening wolves among Church leaders (Matt. 7:15, Acts 20:29). The wheat and chaff co-exist in the Kingdom until the end, which was how the Founder intended it.

Fundamentalists suffer from the problem that they believe the Church includes only the elect. For them, sinners are outside the doors. Locate sinners, and you locate another place where the Church is not. It seems easy to demonstrate sin operating through the Inquisition--at least to the extent dry records allow us to perceive sin at a distance of centuries--and for Fundamentalists this proves the Inquisition, if it was the arm of a Church, was the arm of a false church.
Thinking that Fundamentalists might have a point, Catholics tend to be defensive. That's the wrong attitude. The right attitude for Catholics is to learn what really happened, to understand events in light of the times, and then to explain to anti-Catholics (hard though this may be) why the sorry tale does not prove what they think it proves. How should a Catholic answer charges about the Inquisition? He should not deny the undeniable; history cannot be wished away. On the other hand, he should not, out of embarrassment, acquiesce to each Fundamentalist slander. What he should try to do is give his challenger a little perspective. If he is able, the Catholic should learn enough about the Inquisition to give his opponent some sort of overview and to demonstrate that while much of what he knows about the Inquisition is true, much is fantasy.

PHONY STATISTICS

Many Fundamentalists believe, for instance, that more people died under the Inquisition than in any war or plague, but in this they rely on phony "statistics" generated by one-upmanship among anti-Catholics, each of whom, it seems, tries to come up with the largest number of casualties.

But trying to straighten out such historical confusions can take one only so far. As Ronald Knox put it, we should be cautious, "lest we should wander interminably in a wilderness of comparative atrocity statistics." In fact, no one knows how exactly many people perished through the Inquisition. We can determine for certain, though, one thing about numbers given by Fundamentalists: They are simply far too large. One book popular with Fundamentalists claims that 95,000,000 people died under the Inquisition.

The figure is so grotesquely off that one immediately doubts the writer's sanity, or at least his grasp of demographics. Not until modern times did the population of those countries where the Inquisition existed approach 95,000,000. It did not exist in Northern Europe, Eastern Europe, Scandinavia, or England. It was confined mainly to southern France, Italy, Spain, and a few parts of the Holy Roman Empire. The Inquisitions couldn't have killed that many people because those parts of Europe didn't have that many people to kill!

Furthermore, the plague, which killed a third of Europe's population, is credited by historians with major changes in the social structure. The Inquisition is credited with few--precisely because the number of its victims was, by comparison, small.

Answer 6

It doesn't explain it. It tries to deny it's existence.
Yes, all these monotheistic "Pillars of Society" are awash with blood. And the laws of God,dess are higher than that of man. So the pedophiles? They get to come back and get molested. Karma works in mysterious ways...

Answer 7

They are not to question what goes on in their parish, or in their religion.

Answer 8

They can not and will not!!

They firmly believe that they are faultless and that nothing wrong has been done.

Otherwise they would not hide it or lie about it!!

Answer 9

What explination? I'm still waiting. Did I miss it?

Answer 10

The weakness's of man/men serving God.......