Rev Canon Charles Richardson

[miga]

.

[KidKruger]

"..do not assume that everyone who has been abused as a child, goes on to commit abuse as an adult.."

I don't think anyone has said this is what happens. They've said it's not uncommon.

I personally know people who've been abused but have not abused others / are great parents.

I don't think anyone has said compassion should be shown to the Rev, but instead remarked on how the Christians didn't appear to be obliging their advertised traits of 'compassion' is all.

[KidKruger]

"I think it's pretty crap that a couple of posters have chosen this thread to point out how duplicitous Christians/the church/their teachings can be."

Surely if someone is 'waiting in the wings' to make such comments about Christians, a thread where such contradiction is evident is the place to raise it.

However I don't think there was a concerted need on anyone's part to do so - it was obviously observations based on comments from churchgoers.

There's a big need from posters here to assume things that are not occurring.

[je-suis-concerned]

More non Christian reporting....

http://www.dover-express.co.uk/Police-slammed-paedo-vicar-threw-Dover-cliffs/story-25956711-detail/story.html

[TE44]

Kk I do not understand "There's a big need from posters here to assume things that are not occurring."

What do you mean,

[miga]

.

[KidKruger]

"Kk I do not understand "There's a big need from posters here to assume things that are not occurring."

What do you mean"

What I mean is perpetual misquoting or extended attribution of meaning of other posters' comments.

[Mick Mac]

Maybe a few catholic priests might have jumped off a cliff on reflecting on their gross actions towards children in their care.

I have little sympathy for anyone in a position of trust with children, who chooses to act inappropriately on whatever level. Especially if they have religion in their favour such that parents and guardians place outright trust in them by reason of their position.

[Kalamiphile]

Thank you for that Miga.

Personally I didn't sleep last night. This is a man I have known and trusted for many years. Both my adult daughters are devastated by this news having only met him a few times. I wept at his memorial, thinking that he was a troubled man and now I know why. Before anyone yells at me, I am a psychotherapist in the NHS and have worked with both the victims and the perpetrators. I have seen the pain caused by abuse sitting with me so I have no liberal view of child abuse and its consequences.

This does not alter the shock that those of us who knew him feel as we try to come to terms with this revelation and sit it alongside the person we spent time and conversations with. What his family must feel cannot be imagined. For them and for those from St Johns this is a time of great sorrow and grief. The fact that we are experiencing these feelings in no way detracts from the feelings that we might have about the trauma inflicted on the children involved in the downloads.

You are right Miga, this is not an abstract discussion for us.

[Mick Mac]

And that's a very good description of how a breach of trust makes people feel.

[KidKruger]

I think if people are accused of supporting child abusers or excusing them or of apologising for them, they are going to correct the accusers. It's a cheap, horrid and unnecessary accusation and inevitably will provoke a response.

Hardly grandstanding.

[Zebedee Tring]

I am in the very unfashionable position today of seeing both sides of the argument on this thread. I know that the internet "community" generally favours people taking up black and white stances, but too bad.

On the one hand, there are some deeply vindictive comments about Canon Richardson which would be quite at home in the world of the witches of Salem or "The Wicker Man". Way, way OTT

On the other hand, one poster said "People are entitled to download whatever they wish and enjoy whatever they want", which has elements of the view of some people in the late 60s that it was OK (and indeed "cool") to put a picture of a naked pubescent girl on the cover of the Blind Faith album and acceptable for the Paedophile Information Exchange to be affiliated to the NCCL.

My view is that Canon Richardson should be very heavily criticised for apparently downloading child porn. However, unless evidence emerges that he engaged in sexual activity with children (and as yet there is no such evidence), criticism of him should not be on the level of that hurled at the likes of Gary Glitter, Jimmy Savile etc.

[Salsaboy]

Why?

Sorrow and grief at the death of a human being, whatever the circumstances or for his victims, victims although not directly touched by him but by his actions in viewing videos?

Kalamiphile Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

For them and for those from St Johns this is a time of great sorrow

> and grief.

[Salsaboy]

@zt - the man was a paedophile, the definition of which is a person sexually attracted to children, the same as Glitter and Savile. Maybe he didn't do the same things as they did but he is one.

If he had been in possession of say 1 video, maybe just maybe it could have been explained away as trying to understand the subject in connection with his work but to be in possession of over 30. No way. That is a sexual thing.

[Zebedee Tring]

Salsaboy, of course it's a sexual thing; that goes without saying. However, there is a difference between (a) a paedophile who just looks at child porn and (b) a paedophile who actively abuses children. I'm not defending those people in category (a), but they are not in the same league as people in category (b), particularly paedophiles who abuse children who are in their care or with whom they are in close contact for family, work or other reasons.

[Jeremy]

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> The man is dead. I'd have

> hoped a Christian would forgive his sins of this

> life and pray his soul finds some sort of peace

> and redemption in the next. As in "and forgive us

> our sins, as we forgive those who sin against us ..."

Maybe it's because I'm not a Christian, but I don't see why somebody deserves forgiveness just because they're dead. Forgiveness needs to be earned - and no, jumping off a cliff does not count in my book. History is littered with nasty characters not worthy of our forgiveness.

It's also wrong to view him as a passive consumer of this material. I would assume that much of this content wouldn't be made if there were no paying customers. He was a paying customer.

[JohnL]

Zebedee Tring Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Salsaboy, of course it's a sexual thing; that goes

> without saying. However, there is a difference

> between (a) a paedophile who just looks at child

> porn and (b) a paedophile who actively abuses

> children.

Surely they can be one that doesn't do (a) or (b)

[KidKruger]

There is obviously a huge difference between an adult with interest enough in children to watch footage of their abuse versus an adult who (also) acts-out that interest by physically abusing children (whether under his/her care or not).

Although the proposition may sound bizarre, credit would surely be due to a paedophile who's never acted-out his/her desires due to concerns for the welfare of the little ones.

I say this from an assumption that such a person does not 'decide' to have such tendencies, but has to manage the desires he/she's been dealt.

I wonder if an adult with such desires who never looks at, discusses or acts-out those desires is still called a paedophile. If not, then what ?

[Jeremy]

I can't really agree with that KK. Buying this stuff is not a victimless crime. If you're paying for it, then you're supporting the creation of more material. This is not my idea of self-restraint.

[phobic3000]

Quite often you hear of abusers progressing on their levels of interest or activity. I.e what starts with curiosity, then leads to downloading images, then on to videos, and so on. If he's downloaded these videos, there is a possibility he may have one day taken it further and physically acted upon his apparent interests. For that reason although I feel sorry for his family, I'm glad he jumped. One less peodophile on this planet can only be a good thing in my opinion.

[Jeremy]

I won't say "I'm glad he jumped". Rarely does death make the world a better place. But my personal view is that he doesn't deserve your forgiveness or - for what it's worth - your prayers.

[Mick Mac]

KidKruger Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> There is obviously a huge difference between an

> adult with interest enough in children to watch

> footage of their abuse versus an adult who (also)

> acts-out that interest by physically abusing

> children (whether under his/her care or not).

> Although the proposition may sound bizarre, credit

> would surely be due to a paedophile who's never

> acted-out his/her desires due to concerns for the

> welfare of the little ones.

>

Credit? as in credit for having been less awful than he could have been - I don't think so.

In this particular case the breach of trust is significant. He could easily have resigned from his post and taken himself out of a position of trust if he feared he was attracted to child abuse images before being approached by police but (according to earlier posts) he only did it when police became involved.

[RosieH]

> KidKruger Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > There is obviously a huge difference between an

> > adult with interest enough in children to watch

> > footage of their abuse versus an adult who

> (also)

> > acts-out that interest by physically abusing

> > children (whether under his/her care or not).

> > Although the proposition may sound bizarre,

> credit

> > would surely be due to a paedophile who's never

> > acted-out his/her desires due to concerns for

> the

> > welfare of the little ones.

Credit, sure. But a paedophile who doesn't act on his desires is not what we're talking about.

You don't get credit for not raping a child when a child is raped by someone else for your pleasure.

It takes strong cognitive dissonance to paint yourself as worthy of any credit in that scenario.

The paedophiles who deserve credit are those who know that their impulses are wrong, never act on them and seek help.

[Jeremy]

What Rosie said - times 1000.

[MrBen]

KK is not congratulating his behaviour. He is simply looking beyond the pyre to suggest (as only one of several possibilities ) that perhaps paedophiles are born with a condition that they then struggle to manage. We don't have enough research. That might be abhorrent or impossible to contemplate for some, particularly many Christians. But without perspective and analysis to understand root cause we'll never work out how to fix things. Personally I think if you fast forward a century we'll be dealing with it differently.

That said, Miga's point is probably sound..that given the hurt and shock many are suffering locally...this may not be the thread to have that "abstract" discussion.

It doesn't mean it's not a valid discussion to have though.