Pope Apologises To Australians For Clerical Sexual Abuse But Still Fucks Up

I see Ratzo has finally said Sorry, but should anyone be grateful?

I don’t think so.  This statement was dragged out of him, kicking and spitting, and even then he couldn’t bring himself to say categorically that priests had abused children. 


He had to qualify his apology by saying that the abuse was committed by some priests

See?  Some priests. 

These fuckers are incapable of saying a single direct word.

What would have been wrong with Ratzo talking about abuse committed by priests and leaving it at that?  Nothing, that’s what.  Absolutely nothing, but Ratzo had to follow the instinct of his kind and talk about some priests, to diffuse the accusations.  What a miserable, begrudging way to treat rape victims.

Look, Ratzo, we know they weren’t all child-rapists.  We know that some of them were all right, so what’s this some priests shit about?

Stop insulting my intelligence, and maybe I’ll start taking you seriously, you silly old gobshite. 

No.  Wait. Here’s a better idea: stop insulting the intelligence of abuse victims.

How about it, Ratzo?

13 thoughts on “Pope Apologises To Australians For Clerical Sexual Abuse But Still Fucks Up

  1. Seemed to me more of a statement of regret than an apology! – Notice how he said how sorry he was for the hurt that they had experienced rather than sorry for the hurt that the church has caused to them – subtle perhaps but a significant linguistic nuance. Sorry really is the hardest word to say! – Ironic for a church that puts such store on Confession!

  2. I don’t see your point.

    Whats wrong with saying some priests?

    Just saying priests leaves it vaguely open to be all.

    You seem to be frothing over nothing.

  3. You’re missing the subtlety of the statement.

    Rape of children isn’t nothing, and it needs a more full-blooded acknowledgement than this watery attempt.

  4. All Tommy Cooper needed to do his stand-up routine was a fez cap. The only laughs this Ratzinger will get from abuse survivors is laughs of derision.

  5. Not sure if you have them all cached in your browser but every image on the site is ‘Bandwidth Exceeded upgrade to photobucket pro’

  6. That’s because the site traffic is so busy I exceeded my bandwidth allocation. It should be all right now.

  7. Bock,

    Why can’t he ever apologize for the institutional cover up that has characterized church responses to these issues? Only a tiny minority believe in infallibility these days, but he continues as though living in some medieval age when to say that the church got things wrong was some kind of heresy

  8. None of them are able to talk straight. They always start off with “if anyone was hurt …”

    By the way, that infallibility doctrine is widely misunderstood.

    While it’s certainly bollocks anyway, they don’t say he’s always infallible. Only when he’s pronouncing on matters of faith and morals. There’s no point asking him who’s going to win the 3.30.

  9. He is a critic of homosexuality, same-sex marriage, euthanasia, and abortion and he served Adolf Hitler as a soldier for 2 years, what more can you say?.
    He does not give a Feck for the abused but only for the money that the Catholic church has to pay out. Bet his lawyers worked on the so called apology

  10. I know infallibility is only assumed on matters of dogma, but its assumption in any circumstances does suggest a certain mindset.

    Here he was at a world youth celebration with media from all around the world, the smart thing to do would have been to have held his hands up and said “I’m sorry, we got things seriously wrong.” John XXIII would have fully apologized, as would John Paul I.

    I know good and faithful Catholic priests who have given their lives serving other people. They have been betrayed by the paedophiles and betrayed by a hierarchy that protected those paedophiles. For Benedict to have publicly acknowledged that the church was complicit with evil doing would have been to recognize that abuse was the antithesis of the work of the faithful clergy.

  11. Whenever anybody apologises using the passive as opposed to the active voice, you can reasonably suppose that they have not fully absorbed the responsibility for what they’re apologising for. Politicians use the passive voice all the time to deflect blame for their decisions. I think they learnt it from the church.

  12. ProblemSam —

    Exactly. Precisely.

    “If anyone was hurt”

    “If somebody was raped”

    Like they’re talking about an unexpected shower of rain. Nobody did it. It just happened.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.