<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Abusive priests and church cover-ups</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.leyton.org/diary/2007/04/26/abusive-priests-and-church-cover-ups/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.leyton.org/diary/2007/04/26/abusive-priests-and-church-cover-ups/</link>
	<description>Thoughts. Comment. Opinion.</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 20 Aug 2008 17:29:55 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Janet</title>
		<link>http://www.leyton.org/diary/2007/04/26/abusive-priests-and-church-cover-ups/#comment-19875</link>
		<dc:creator>Janet</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Apr 2007 19:06:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.leyton.org/diary/2007/04/26/abusive-priests-and-church-cover-ups/#comment-19875</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Whilst certainly not condoning abuse, I think this is another case of applying today's standards retrospectively. There is no reason to disbelieve Pearl Luxon in regard to the situation NOW ( although I agree her performance on "Today" was abysmal). However, 20 years ago the media in particular did not regard such abuse with such vehemence, and after all it is the church's job to encourage repentance. There are numerous other examples of changing perspectives from the trivial ( children today telling their grandparents to stop smoking) to the serious (people making moral arguments in favour of slavery 200 years ago), and I think this is one of them. I would accept the existence of a cover-up if it could be shown that the priest who demanded the choirmaster's resignation knew of his subsequent work with children in spite of the conditions imposed on his leaving his previous post.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Whilst certainly not condoning abuse, I think this is another case of applying today&#8217;s standards retrospectively. There is no reason to disbelieve Pearl Luxon in regard to the situation NOW ( although I agree her performance on &#8220;Today&#8221; was abysmal). However, 20 years ago the media in particular did not regard such abuse with such vehemence, and after all it is the church&#8217;s job to encourage repentance. There are numerous other examples of changing perspectives from the trivial ( children today telling their grandparents to stop smoking) to the serious (people making moral arguments in favour of slavery 200 years ago), and I think this is one of them. I would accept the existence of a cover-up if it could be shown that the priest who demanded the choirmaster&#8217;s resignation knew of his subsequent work with children in spite of the conditions imposed on his leaving his previous post.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mavis</title>
		<link>http://www.leyton.org/diary/2007/04/26/abusive-priests-and-church-cover-ups/#comment-19866</link>
		<dc:creator>mavis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Apr 2007 19:13:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.leyton.org/diary/2007/04/26/abusive-priests-and-church-cover-ups/#comment-19866</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;I loathe 'religious' schools and always have done.  Education should be by the state and have no religious teaching whatsoever.   OK maybe a bit in history - but that is as far as it should go.  Keep religion out of schools and let the parents deal with it - if they so desire.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I loathe &#8216;religious&#8217; schools and always have done.  Education should be by the state and have no religious teaching whatsoever.   OK maybe a bit in history - but that is as far as it should go.  Keep religion out of schools and let the parents deal with it - if they so desire.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
