Posted on 07/12/2004 10:26:32 AM PDT by Land of the Irish
Roman Catholic leaders in Austria called an emergency meeting today after officials discovered a vast cache of photos and videos allegedly depicting young priests having sex at a seminary.
About 40,000 photographs and an undisclosed number of films, including child pornography, were downloaded on computers at the seminary in St Poelten, about 50 miles west of Vienna, the respected news magazine Profil reported.
Officials with the local diocese declined to comment but were meeting privately on the scandal, Austrian state television reported.
It said the seminary’s director, the Rev Ulrich Kuechl, and his deputy, Wolfgang Rothe, had resigned.
The Austrian Bishops Conference issued a statement today pledging a full and swift investigation.
“Anything that has to do with homosexuality or pornography has no place at a seminary for priests,” it said.
Church officials discovered the material on a computer at the seminary, Profil said. It published several images purportedly showing young priests and their instructors kissing and fondling each other and engaging in orgies and sex games.
The child porn came mostly from web sites based in Poland, the magazine said.
Bishop Kurt Krenn, a conservative churchman who oversees the St Poelten Diocese, told Austrian television he had seen photos of seminary leaders in sexual situations with students. Krenn, however, dismissed the photos as “silly pranks” that “had nothing to do with homosexuality”.
A group of St. Poelten Diocese officials planned to ask the Vatican to remove Krenn as bishop, Austrian radio reported.
Vatican spokesman Ciro Benedettini told the Austria Press Agency that the Holy See had no comment.
Krenn, 68, issued a statement calling the accusations groundless while conceding that he “may have made some wrong personnel decisions” at the seminary.
You need rest. Perhaps a couple of weeks in the penalty box would do you good.
I already have. You insist on going around the same tree dozens of times.
2. The Masses they celebrate are also valid, but it is considered morally illicit for the faithful to participate in these Masses unless they are physically or morally impeded from participating in a Mass celebrated by a Catholic priest in good standing (cf. Code of Canon Law, canon 844.2). The fact of not being able to assist at the celebration of the so-called "Tridentine" Mass is not considered a sufficient motive for attending such Masses.3. While it is true that the participation in the Mass and sacraments at the chapels of the Society of St. Pius X does not of itself consititute "formal adherence to the schism", such adherence can come about over a period of time as one slowly imbibes a mentality which separates itself from the magisterium of the Supreme Pontiff. Father Peter R. Scott, District Superior of the Society in the United States, has publicaly stated that he deplores the "liberalism" of "those who refuse to condemn the New Mass as absolutely offensive to God, or the religious liberty and ecumenism of the postconcilliar church." With such an attitude the society of St. Pius X is effectively tending to establish its own canons of orthodoxy and hence to separate itself from the magisterium of the Supreme Pontiff. (Commission Ecclesia Dei, Protocol 117/95)
Let's make a deal -- how about if you actually READ the material in question before you make inane personal slams. As long as you've read the article, then you can say anything about me that you like.
Take the article "Springtime Decay," for instance. It is written by a mathematician and it totally blows away that neo-Catholic garbage about "post hoc propter hoc." At least read what a mathematician has to say before you expose your ignorance:
It would give me some relief from your bird-dogging, that's for sure.
No you have not. You keep harping, on thread after thread, about where Catholics attend Mass. How is that relevant?
I asked one question, on this thread, narses.
Not on "thread after thread."
And I don't keep "harping."
You sure like to scrap. Were you ever a boxer?
Yes, it's true. If I were a young man again, I'd be attending Mass at a traditional chapel just for the women that you can meet. It's like Mohammed's paradise: 72 beautiful virgins.
"2. We have already told you that we cannot recommend your attendance at such a Mass and have explained the reason why. If your primary reason for attending were to manifest your desire to separate yourself from communion with the Roman Pontiff and those in communion with him, it would be a sin. If your intention is simply to participate in a Mass according to the 1962 Missal for the sake of devotion, this would not be a sin."
Sincerely yours in Christ, Rev. Msgr. Camille Perl Secretary Pontifical Ecclesia Dei Commission
I've read this thread, narses. Its a load of wickedness being thrown about on all sides, by all sides. It is truly a sad thing to see. I hope the mods have mercy on us Catholics and pull this thread. Maybe then the article can be reposted and actually discussed.
God have Mercy on us all.
More lies. This is the secon thread this week you have tried to make an issue out of where I attend Mass.
HOW IS THAT RELEVANT TO THIS THREAD?
This is an old letter. It was superceded by a more recent Letter by Msgr. Camille Perl from Pontificia Commissio "Ecclesia Dei" dated January 18, 2003. It says in part:
_____________________________________________________
Points 1 and 3 in our letter of 27 September 2002 to this correspondent are accurately reported. His first question was "Can I fulfill my Sunday obligation by attending a Pius X Mass" and our response was:
"1. In the strict sense you may fulfill your Sunday obligation by attending a Mass celebrated by a priest of the Society of St. Pius X."
His second question was "Is it a sin for me to attend a Pius X Mass" and we responded stating:
"2. We have already told you that we cannot recommend your attendance at such a Mass and have explained the reason why. If your primary reason for attending were to manifest your desire to separate yourself from communion with the Roman Pontiff and those in communion with him, it would be a sin. If your intention is simply to participate in a Mass according to the 1962 Missal for the sake of devotion, this would not be a sin."
His third question was: "Is it a sin for me to contribute to the Sunday collection a Pius X Mass" to which we responded:
"3. It would seem that a modest contribution to the collection at Mass could be justified."
It appears that the Modernists here want two things: 1 - the banning of those who are Traditionalists, and 2 - the end of threads that demonstrate how ill the hierarchy has become. I have run out of cheeks to turn. When attacked personally for where I attend Mass, I will call the attacker on the carpet. Either the attacks stop or the abuse button will get regular use.
I can read Deacon. Concelebration with heretics is sufficient though, at least in my mind and conscience. BTW, when will you answer my question? What relevance has attendance at SSPX services to this thread?
Mud-rasslin'. Mud-rasslin' right here on the Roman Catholic bench!
It's not "wickedness." If we were to meet, tomorrow night, we'd all have a beer together.
What's there to say about about a bunch of gay priests and seminarians en flagrante delicto?
I don't care where you attend Mass. Drop it.
I don't see these 2 statements as contradictory. Look at these comparisons:
"The Bolshevik Revolution was not responsible for bringing Communist government to Russia. It was the infiltration of socialists that occurred before WWI."
Clearly we can see an earlier infiltration, but at the same time, the actual Bolshevik Revolution was the catalyst that caused the overthrow of the one (Christian) government and its replacement by a different (anti-Christian) government.
"The French Revolution was not responsible for the reign of terror, it was the earlier infiltration of France by people like Voltaire and Diderot and Rousseau."
Once again we see that it's true that there was a gradual corruption going on in France beforehand, but the actual revolution is what brought Robespierre and the other murderers to power. There had to be a cataclysmic explosion at one point. It's like a nuclear reaction reaching critical mass. It can perk along below critical mass for centuries without ever exploding.
By the way, Perl's comment that if someone attended with a desire to separate himself from the Pontiff, it would be a sin, is too ludicrous for words. If Perl really believes such drivel, it would be proof positive the Vatican is completely out of touch with reality. As it is, I don't think for a second Perl actually believes this. It is a mere sop to cover the Pope's unjust charge of schism. There is a need for Vatican bureaucrats to PRETEND there is this terrible urge some traditional Catholics have to separate themselves from the Pope. The truth is, HE has separated himself from us--and this is made clearer and clearer as each year goes by.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.