HOME  Why its a mistake to give the Catholic Church support via membership or donations

 

RELIGION DOES HARM TO CHILDREN 
 
ABUSIVE DOCTRINES
 
Christianity teaches the good news or gospel, that is its essence. But what is this good news? It is that God has saved us from sin and its penalty. You cannot have the good news without knowing and being grateful for what you have been saved from: eternal torment in Hell. So it follows that people should be warned about Hell before invited to receive the good news. It follows that children should be indoctrinated about Hell. How can you really accept Godís salvation right if you donít know that salvation is from Hell? To abandon Hell or to say nothing about it is to fail to teach the gospel.
 
The New Testament claims to be for everybody even children and it speaks of Hell in frightening terms. Jesus spoke of Hell in his sermons to crowds which must have included very young children and older children of about 8 to 12 too. Women that wanted to hear him certainly took all their young children with them. In those days, a female child was a woman at 12 and forced to marry and have babies. Jesus did no protesting against that at all though he did plenty of complaining about the scribes and the Pharisees and people not believing in him. Instead he said knowing that a child of 12 hasnít the consent to get married properly that a woman who divorces her husband commits adultery. To the honest mind these girls were not married at all both because they were forced and because they were so young and because if their husbands really wanted and loved them they would not be making them pregnant at such a young age. Jesus recognising them as married indicates approval for the abuse of these girls. The point is Jesus was capable of wanting children to be taught about Hell and scared half to death. We see from the evidence that he actually taught them the doctrine. Even in apparitions of the Virgin Mary no effort is made to censor the message. At Fatima, she showed three very young children a vision of Hell in all its horror. She supposedly did the same thing at Medjugorje.
 
It is accepted by everybody these days that teaching children who are so vulnerable and impressionable and who take all they believe on authority is child abuse. Christianity is a religion of child abuse and it is no wonder so many of its clerics couldnít keep their trousers on when alone with a child.
 
Love the sinner hate the sin is the chant of all those who have concealed the clerical abuse of children. If you pretend that a sin is a thing and an action that isn't an expression of what a person is or what kind of character that person has, you will find it easy to cover up for paedophile priests in the name of love. You have to pretend like that in order to be able to love the sinner for loving the sinner and hating the sin is impossible. The office monster who plots to get you fired is hating you but loving you in the sense that he wouldn't kill you or hit you so love sinner and hate sin doesn't have anything to say at all to those who wish to learn what doing right is and what wrongdoing is.
 
Many Church doctrines, the doctrine that Jesus was nailed to the cross by our sins, that we were born at loggerheads with God, that we and the people we love can go to Hell forever, that Jesus let demons into people and later put them out for show are horrific. The Church might say that Jesus put demons in and removed them for a complicated good purpose but when we donít know Jesus like we would any ordinary person would it be right to trust him? We gauge other people on what we see when we donít know them very well for what else can we do? The doctrine that God loves us is scary because this love involves using evil on us or letting it happen which is the same thing for God makes all things.
 
It is child-abuse to expose children to these teachings. And they have to be exposed to them for Jesus commanded it. Anybody not just children can be damaged by them and still the Church and its Jesus say, ďGo teach all nationsĒ. Also if it is right to teach the gospel, then the unpalatable doctrines should be taught first for Jesus forbade being deceitful which includes a ban on being manipulative so that people know exactly what they are getting into. To trust God means you have to know the horrifying stuff first for otherwise you canít make an informed decision for Jesus.
 
The clergy preach doctrines that make severe demands on the flock and they ask that one give all to Jesus Christ. They say that the most important man ever gave his life because he refused to stop preaching the good news. They praise him for that. It follows then that the Church and the priests should live up to a harsher standard of holiness than they do. They should live in huts and eat frugally and give all they have to the poor. They should be happy to report paedophile clergy to the police. They should be happy to resign if they fail to report. They should be happy to confess.
 
To tell a child that the Bible or Church has the word of God is dangerous. That book is full of unedifying material such as God commanding murder and genocide and Jesusí insane teachings. The Catholic Church claims to be infallibly guided in interpreting what God says and the interpreter is more important than the revealer and has the most power. It is the clergy then that gets the power through religion and they get it over innocent people and children and that is reprehensible.
 
Most Christians claim that they donít have to keep the Law that God gave Moses in the Old Testament of the Bible.
 
This book commands murder and genocide and killing heretics and those who donít belong to the ďtrue faithĒ for God commanded it and God must be obeyed for God is never wrong. The Bible is more explicit and clear on this being Godís will than the Koran. The fact that some Christians assume these teachings are the Old Law the Jewish Law and Jesus has given us a new law means nothing for the new law doesnít forbid these murders. Also Judaism which is the religion of the Old Law is the one true faith. All Christians believe that except they add their own faith is the fulfilment of Judaism, the completion of the true religion. There are two true religions and you have to belong to the most up to date one which is Christianity. Logically if you canít get people converted to Christianity you have to advise them to go to Judaism instead. This means that the Christians are claiming that the true faith has the right to kill and stir up religious wars if God commands it for they and Judaism are the one religion except that Christians are up to date. They are taking responsibility for those murders. It also means that Christians if they should give any religion freedom should give it to Judaism and insist that Judaism has its legal rights to stone homosexuals and adulterers and so on. Christianity is a murderous religion in a real sense. One of its principal doctrines is the doctrine of St Paul that if you get circumcised you are bound to keep the entire Law of Moses so its valid today. Itís still in force. Paul declared that it is because the Law is right and valid that we need Jesus to save us from its condemnation. Most Christians hold that though we are condemned for breaking the Law and it is valid we are not bound to keep it for Jesus did a lot of the keeping for us. That means then that in principle Christians are not opposed to fanaticism. They are only opposed to it when they think Jesus took care of that obligation for us. Religion like that is dangerous and it is trying to push people towards the borders of religious lunacy. It is particularly dangerous for the impressionable. It desensitises those who are against fanaticism.
 
The atonement doctrine in teaching that Jesus died to save us implies that if you could get hold of the baby Jesus you would save the world by cutting his throat. It blesses child sacrifice or at least sees this evil as a beneficial thing. The pagans thought that the slaughtering of babies was a beneficial evil.
 
To instruct and indoctrinate a child in even the more seemingly innocuous doctrines of these sources is dangerous for you are saying that what you tell them is the word of God meaning that there are other doctrines not so harmless from the same source that must equally be inspired by God. To tell a child then that God says he loves them is to lure the child into acceptance of an authority that will sooner or later expose them to harmful doctrines and distorted thinking. To hang on to the good they have learned and the comforts they have got in religion they will have to learn to stomach and accept and even like the bad parts as well. To tell a child that the Church and the Bible is true and from God is trying to awaken their curiosity about them so that they will find out about the nasty side and likely embrace it. To teach a child religion is child abuse. Would you teach your child that Hitler meant well even if they are not told exactly what he got up to? Of course not. Have some respect for your child. Do not let their Christian teachers and the parish priest pollute them.
 
To induct a baby or child into a religion by baptism by which religion claims the right to indoctrinate the child when she is in a vulnerable position is child abuse. The child could have a very different faith if it was a different religion. The purpose of the whole thing is to make the child narrow-minded with the result that the child will tend to be suspicious of or even hate members of different religions. A man believes that God wants children to be treated this way will naturally have problems seeing molesting children as wrong.
 
Most paedophiles think that they didnít do wrong by sexually abusing children and blame society for the psychological damage that some victims experience. Any religion that abuses children is encouraging this.
 
What children need to learn is the basics of right and wrong and not nonsense that God saved them at their baptism and gives them his son in holy communion and that priests forgive sins. The nonsense that Catholic children are exposed to at 7 or eight years of age when they are taken for their first holy communion is disgraceful. Many children are disturbed at the teaching of the Church that the wafer is really a man's flesh and blood. They will take that very literally. They will think that God is tricking them so that they don't taste the meat and blood. The mystery has been used by some priests to argue, "Let me touch your body. It might feel wrong but it is actually right. Don't you see that you can't understand what I want to do to you just like you can't understand what happens at communion?" Children do not have our kinds of fears and so do not need a God to console them in relation to suffering and death. The reason the clergy wants to manipulate them to adopt the God belief is to intimidate them for children do fear magical beings that may come to scare them or punish them.
 
Christianity and Islam claim that their faiths save people from eternal punishment in Hell at death. If believing in these faiths helps avoid this, the worst imaginable disaster, then it follows that these faiths should be so reasonable and good that they should be able to withstand even the most thorough critical examination and the emphasis should be on the bad or scary side and not on the good side. This is logical. The most important thing is avoiding Hell so when bad leads to Hell people should be able to check the religions out for themselves and should not be encouraged to believe until they do it. But both religions care very little for evidence. The evidence is distorted and known only to some theologians and most theologians have open or hidden abhorrence for this distorting. For example, when the Bible seems to Christians to say there are three Gods, the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, and also says there is only one God the Christians solved the contradiction by saying there are three persons in God. So they only assume there is no contradiction and this assumption is what they stake their faith on not evidence. To do that in the face of possible damnation in Hell is downright evil! It would be impossible for a child never mind a mature adult not to hate people who are perceived as helping the Devil try to get people into Hell.
 
Also, children can spot things adults donít. Jesus and Moses taught on divine authority, ďLove your neighbour as yourself,Ē very obviously says that you must put the welfare of everybody around you on the same level as you do your own which means others come first for you are one person but they are many. You are expected to sacrifice yourself but not them so in practice it really means, ďLet others walk all over you.Ē Children know that lies like that you can condemn the sin but not the sinner are lies for sin is a bad act that expresses the kind of person you are and so cannot be treated as separate from the person. To discipline your child for lying makes the child feel abused and feel that you are a bad hypocrite when you pump the lies of religion into her or him.
 
To tell children that God exists is to abuse them because since God is presented as the best thing and being possible the attraction and devotion to him should be like a drug addiction. That is what religion is for, creating a psychological addiction so that you are at the mercy of prophets, popes and Bible interpreters. All addictions are for making you lose emotional and rational control.
 
Religion is intrinsically violent. It seeks to compel people to believe and do certain things. Often this is done in a subtle way by conditioning the victim but this is still violence. To tell people that x, y, z is their duty or they must or have to do things or believe things like religion does is trying to force them if they are weak enough and people sense that which is why they do not take kindly to such maltreatment. It is trying to make them feel guilty and suffer if they choose to differ. Instead of guiding people to see right and wrong for themselves religion issues commands and duties. It is a terrible misdeed to expose children to religion.
 
The harsh and deceptive doctrines of Christianity encourage people to molest children if they are inclined that way. For example, the marriage bond seeks to create unhealthy relationships in which the husband and wifeís self-esteem depends on one another. It seeks to unite them too much just as Jesus said they have to be one flesh, like one person in mind and feeling and body. In reality relationships should have a healthy level of detachment. To fall apart and hate yourself because somebody cheated on you or rejected you shows great emotional underdevelopment. You should love yourself and only seek a relationship as a means of loving yourself in a different way. You cannot respect others except in so far as you respect yourself. Marriage is intrinsically abusive and based on the lie that the other person is the person you really want for the rest of your life Ė not true there are many people out there who could make you happier. God approving of marriage means he can hardly complain if you abuse a child. The Christian insistence that all wilful enjoyment of anything sexual outside of marriage is gravely sinful encourages people to go after children on the grounds that everybody sins seriously in sexual matters.
 
Jesus Christ said that to look at a woman lustfully was as bad as adultery (Matthew 5:28) and that if your eye makes you sin pluck it out (Matthew 5:29) meaning that this sin should be avoided under all circumstances and no matter what the inconvenience. Jesus then encouraged extreme guilt about sex and sexuality. When guilt is that strong what happens is that people will end up feeling that every sexual feeling they have is a wilful sexual sin. This philosophy is very harmful to children. It increases the natural tendency of child-abuse victims to blame themselves and feel they deserved the abuse. Faith in Jesus Christ facilitates those who want to have sex with children and get away with it. It has been doing it since it started and it is still doing it now. Christianity hurts children and destroys their lives by making them feel worse about the abuse they received than they should. Christianity makes sure the abuser will destroy their lives.
 
Despite being frequently into verbal abuse, Jesus insisted that we must see only the bright side of things and pretend that the evil does not exist. This is proven when he said that we must be kind to enemies for God sends his rain on the just as on the unjust (Matthew 5:44-48) ignoring the fact that nature is more cruel than good and when he said we must repose on his teachings as on a rock (Matthew 7:24). His teachings then are as solid and strong as rock meaning that is how much devotion we must give them, rocklike unshakeable obedience. The gospel says that this was spoken to ordinary people. This shows that the Sermon on the Mount in which these teachings occur is to be taken literally for how else could it be a rock to the ordinary person who needs their morals on a plate salted and ready?
 
The only surprise with religious instruction is that not more damage is done. The potential for damage is a very bad fruit and indicates that Jesus was not a divine emissary for he was the one that said you can tell the prophets of God who are really fakes by their bad fruits. It is not actual bad fruits that count the most but the potential ones. After all if it were not for the potential there would be no actual. It is weird how Jesus would have believed in Old Testament figures who did evil things like killing while they functioned as prophets and then tried to discredit bad prophets as fakes. Clearly he was insecure and was resorting to the fallacy that the badness of a person means their message is wrong because he had rivals he wanted out of the way.
 
The Church teaches that if you go to confession and you want to be forgiven your sin just because you are afraid of going to Hell or if that is your main reason that is okay. So in other words, you love the sin but you fear the punishment which is why you reluctantly give up the sin. How could a paedophile priest feel bad about his sin of child molestation with a doctrine like that? It would be an encouragement to the paedophile tendency to feel that he has done nothing wrong.
 
RELIGION AND CHILDREN
 
Paedophiles have often been the Bibleís biggest fans. In recent years, the stream of priests and clergymen who have been sexually assaulting children has been constant and never-ending.

Any book that teaches the existence of God is an accessory to the crime of paedophilia because it would then seem that God made paedophiles that way and wants them to be like that. Most paedophiles donít feel and think they have done anything wrong. Those that do say they feel remorse are often not telling the truth. The ones that believe in God will consider their faith to have a lot to do with this lack of remorse for they will believe that God made them that way. They will believe that God made the laws that made them paedophiles and that made some of them unable to stop abusing children. It is certain that to say that God exists is logically to imply that he approves of child-abuse. To say that God allows paedophile inclinations for a purpose and has no choice but to allow them is nonsense for God could have created any possible state of affairs he wished. The doctrine of free will says he leaves a lot of change in our hands which proves that God could have made a very different world in which the inclination would not have been needed. The concept of God is pro-paedophilia. God himself is worse than any paedophile for babies are the top targets for his cruelty through their vulnerability to disease and their dependence on adults. To believe in God is definitely to at least partly sanction paedophilia which is so horrific that God should be cursed and blasphemed if that is what it takes to avoid this. It is vital that if you are serious about combating paedophilia that you must remove faith in God from your heart first.
 
It does no good to point to believers who work against paedophiles as evidence that counteracts this. Their example means nothing for it is just an advertisement for inconsistency and it cannot get them off the hook. And we all put our best feet forward too so example does not amount to very much in our minds.
 
The example of God believers in all matters does absolutely nothing to commend belief in God. They say it does which is why they say example speaks louder than words. But that is just asking us to ignore the bad example as if it does not count but it does count if good example counts. The bad example is predominant because most believers do wrong in the eyes of their God. So the good example philosophy is simply just boasting: ďGod shines through us so we are just great. Believe in him for we show you what he is like and put the evidence that the belief can do harm out of your mind.Ē Logically since belief in God does not do much good generally the belief must be bad then if you accept this example logic. You cannot condemn a belief by its abuse but the God belief is different for it is unnecessary. And it can be taken as condoning evil for God himself says he needs evil. To put it another way it encourages harm and it is certain that harm should be stopped whether God wants it or not. The whole point about fighting evil is that harm has to be minimised or stopped. And belief in God does imply that paedophilia is okay so paedophiles are not abusing their faith.
 
A childís perception is very important. If a child feels abused even by people who did not mean to do it for sometimes sexual harassment can be unconscious then the child is entitled to compensation. These things are very subjective therefore if a child feels sexually abused then the child should be taken as a real victim of child abuse. If a child feels abused by the Church then the child has been abused and the Church should pay for it. Much religion is pro-child abuse in many ways and when abuse happens that it does not approve of it does not do enough to stop it. The nastier and more capable of misinterpretation its doctrine is, then the more pro-child abuse it is and the less it should be overlooked. The Roman Catholic Church and the Mormon Church and the Fundamentalist Christians are three examples of cults that in this way openly abuse and demean children. Religion is responsible for upsetting children even if it tries not to upset them because of the way a child can perceive. It is still to be blamed.
 
Religionists hold that even if faith encourages or leads to child abuse it should still be followed. Christians hold that it is better to believe in the Church even if it wonít baptise your children unless you let them be molested by the clergy first. Therefore religion is to be held responsible for child abuse. It takes it so do not let it deny it. If priests abuse children then blame God and blame Jesus and blame the Church. If they are really holy then it follows that the sexual abuse of children is holy. Trying to take over the minds of children is a really horrid and violent act Ė its appalling child abuse.
 
As a child I felt that the God the Church had forbade me to do anything if I was sexually abused. I felt it was a sin for I had to sacrifice myself and encourage evil against me by forgiving the perpetrators. This is as harmful as actual physical sexual abuse for it removes the feelings of safety that a child should have. It diminishes trust in adults who are seen to be grudgingly blindly obeyed and whose opinions about God and Jesus are to be absorbed without hesitation without any regard for yourself. You are just a child and the adults know better- God can communicate with them better because they are bigger and smarter and know the ways of the world better. I was sexually abused by God and the Catholic Church and it is high time that the resources the Church has to do this are cut off. I mean they abused me sexually by making me available. I was made a sex-object. Doctrines that are an accessory to child abuse need to be fought against. When God does not make people realise these things it is clear that the message that is being sent to children is that God wants them to be molested. Even the suspicion that he might which is very easily picked up by a child can have devastating effects. A child will not understand stuff about Godís mysterious ways. There is no doubt that when a child believes that God let some man abuse or rape it that the child believes that God wanted this and the child will feel too guilty and worthless to do anything to stop the abuse. There are scores of thousands of cases where children have believed that the men raping and sexually assaulting them were doing the will of God. That the children believe this so easily shows that belief in God is propagated not out of concern but to please society and some eccentrics in dog collars and to fit in with the sectarian neighbours.
  
Conclusion
 
It is time to get tough. Use your public representative and write to her or him. Make her or him see the dangers of religion for children and eventually the law of the land will preserve them from the pestilence of religion.
 
 
ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS CATHOLICS ARE ASKING, Tony Coffey, Harvest House Publishers, Oregon ,2006 
Breaking the Silence, One Garda's Quest to Find the Truth, Martin Ridge, Gill & Macmillan, Dublin, 2008 order from Gill & Macmillan, Hume Avenue, Park West, Dublin 12
PAPAL SIN, STRUCTURES OF DECEIT, Garry Wills, Darton Longman and Todd, London, 2000
Putting Away Childish Things, Uta Ranke-Heinmann, HarperSanFrancisco, 1992
THE POWER AND THE GLORY, Inside the Dark Heart of John Paul II's Vatican, David Yallop, Constable, London, 2007
The Womb and the Tomb, Hugh Montifiore, Fount Ė HarperCollins, London, 1992
Sex, Priests and Secret Codes, Thomas P Doyle, A W R Sipe and Patrick J Wall, Volt Press, Los Angeles, California, 2006
Son of Joseph, The Parentage of Jesus, Geoffrey Parrinder, T & T Clark, Edinburgh, 1992
God Is Not Great, The Case Against Religion, Christopher Hitchens, Atlantic Books, London, 2007