Touched By Jesus

I have not read the UN’s report about the Catholic priest sex issue and have no intention of doing so. The UN is intellectually dishonest and their reports and condemnations are a joke more often than not. The UN telling countries how to live are as impotent as people arguing politics online. But I am surprised that they found the time to criticise somebody besides Israel. It is not as though Israel and the Vatican have historically been best friends.

I realise that “Vatican” and “Holy See” are not interchangeable but I call it the Vatican anyway. Deal with it.

From what I gather the UN is opposed to priests raping children. Mazel tov. I know of no person or organisation that supports priests raping children. Even a few popes have spoken out against it. I have never come across anybody in favour of it. Though to be fair I rarely associate with sociopaths.

How long did it take the UN to arrive at this groundbreaking decision? Why did this report come out now and not 20 or 100 years ago?

Apparently the UN thinks that the Vatican is legally responsible for the actions of priests all over the world. My first thought was that yes, of course they are. There is a hierarchy in the Catholic church with Vatican leaders and the pope at the top of the ladder. But is that true? Is a priest living in Indonesia bound by Vatican law or Indonesian law? Obviously he should follow his church’s rules, which likely do not include raping children, but if he ignores the laws of where he lives in favour of the laws of his religion then he can find himself in an uncomfortable position. Raping children is often acceptable in places like Saudi Arabia. Does that mean a priest in Saudi Arabia is free to practice local customs?

Obviously I know the answer to that last question but I sincerely have no idea about the others. My religion has no such international hierarchy. Rabbanim are hired and fired by the community and answer to their shul, not to any committee in Israel or anywhere else. A rabbi in Saudi Arabia could theoretically eat at KFC every day and tattoo a giant swastika on his forehead. That is if being Jewish in Saudi Arabia was not punishable by death.

How does the Catholic church deal with local laws that contradict their own rules? Staying with Saudi Arabia as an example, since it is a such a fun loving country, how do priests ignore their mission to proselytise in a country that will happily kill them for proselytising? I would assume that Vatican leaders have already thought about such issues but has the UN? If the UN is saying that all priests are under the direct supervision of the Vatican then have they considered the international differences in cultures and customs? Somehow I think the Vatican has whilst the UN, ironically, has not.

The UN report demands that the Vatican do things their way. This is common practice for the UN. It is their version of the American policy of spreading democracy to weaker countries whether they want it or not. I even think the UN is genuinely surprised when countries choose not to do things their way.

The one part of the report that I read calls on the Vatican to change its teachings to bring them closer to the 20th century. While I do agree that some Catholic rules are painfully out of date, as are some rules of Judaism and Islam, I find it laughably appalling that the UN is telling any church how to be a church. I thought the UN was supposed to favour freedom of religion. Does that only apply to religious teachings of which they approve? Is it not exceptionally dangerous for the UN to be the arbiters of religious dogma?

If the UN decided that all Jews should pray a certain way, which they more or less already do from time to time, then there would be a large collection of middle fingers rising in the air.

Some people say keep your religion out of my bedroom. I agree with that. I would also add to keep the UN out of religion.