My Photo
Location: California, United States

Thursday, July 01, 2010

More on the Belgian raid

Since my post about the police raid of the Belgium church, I've came across an interview by John Allen of a retired Belgian priest on the subject (In Belgium, anti-pedophile priest rips 'silence and omissions' of bishops), and also a post (Deetman commission clarifies agreements with Public Prosecutor) at a Netherlands blog I visit, which may help explain some of what was behind the raid. I almost hesitate to add this, but in my searching on the subject, I also came across an article by Belgian parlament member Alexandra Colen, The Fall of the Belgian Church, which made my hair stand on end. It's hard to believe what it says and I wasn't able to find out more - can anyone substantiate the claims it makes?


Blogger PrickliestPear said...

That article by Alexandra Colen is pretty disturbing. One wonders how a textbook like that could even be published. It's difficult to think of a context in which that cartoon picture of the girl would be anything but completely inappropriate.

I couldn't find any more about it either. It's hard to believe, but it's also hard to understand what could be gained by lying about it -- especially when the person making the accusation is a public figure.

4:30 PM  
Blogger crystal said...

Hi PrickliestPear,

Yes, odd.

One thing about her article I disagree with - she seems to link pedophilia with a liberal church, but I think that's an incorrect assumption, as witnessed by guys like Legionaries of Christ founder Marcial Maciel.

6:03 PM  
Blogger PrickliestPear said...


I noticed too that she repeatedly referred to Daneels as a "liberal." There are a lot of people who would love to believe that the sex abuse scandal is the result of liberals in the Church.

Whatever. These aren't people you can have a reasonable argument with.

7:39 PM  
Blogger Deacon Denny said...

Crystal --
Disturbing, hair-raising, and disgusting. I DO know someone who has a lot of ties in Europe who would be in a position to know or find out more about this. If I find anything out, I'll pass it along.

11:22 PM  
Blogger crystal said...

Thanks, Denny.

1:33 AM  
Blogger Mike L said...

I have not commented on this since something bothered me and I wanted to think about it for a while. What I finally realized was bothering me is that the cartoon was taken completely out of context with no explanation.

I think the cartoon itself is in poor taste, but my standard of judgment is United States Culture, and quite honestly I don't always trust that as a good basis for judgment (think same sex marriage).

If the text that goes with the cartoon talks about the fact the even infants have sexual feelings, then It might be more appropriate. If it goes on to talk about these feelings being the basis of lust, and must be tempered by a more spiritual outlook on sex, then the cartoon might be somewhat more appropriate.

My point is not to justify the cartoon, only to point out that when something is taken out of context, we cannot know what it really says nor how it would be accepted in another culture. I really hope that Deacon Denny finds some further information.

It is certainly an attention getter.


Mike L

8:22 AM  
Blogger crystal said...

Hi Mike,

I was wondering too if it might be a cultural thing. But I think the cartoon and the bubble messages are ultimately wrong for any culture because, whether infants have sexual feelings or not is one thing, but to move from that belief to making assumptions about what that means about infants and their feelings .... that thye want to be sexually handled by others .... is a creepy leap. Infants and kids don't have the mental or emotional maturity to make informed decisions about their sexuality, and kids as young as the one in that drawing cannot really even communicate well what they want in that area anyway. The drawing seems to me to be wishful thinking on the part of adults who want to justify the abuse of kids by basically saying "this isn't abuse because they wanted it too".

12:54 PM  
Blogger Mike L said...


I agree that any leap from the fact that kids have sexual responses to "its not abuse because they like it" is creepy and unfounded.

My only objection to what has been posted here is that we can't really know what the book was saying because the information is not included. I will probably always take the opposite side whenever there is such a lack of information :). I believe the St Thomas once said that the worst lie is one that contains some truth, and I have certainly seen this on both sides.



6:27 PM  
Blogger crystal said...


Yes, I tried looking the catechism book up but couldn't find out any more about it ... maybe someone in Europe will enlighten us.

11:41 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home