Posted on 06/11/2002 1:21:39 PM PDT by Timesink
----
I'm sitting here, having a little trouble getting started. We have reported on this scandal several times so far. For the most part, the stories are fairly similar, the anguish of the victims, and their anger, and the response by the Church. But it is sort of like profiling each tree, one at a time, and not looking at the forest, to use an old metaphor. Just how widespread is this problem? If it were just one person here, and maybe another there, it might be easier to understand. But there has always been a feeling that this is a systemic problem, that underlying the individual stories that have come into the public eye, and those that have not, is some sort of widespread problem.
Some say the issue is celibacy. Others that the priesthood attracts those disposed towards children. Still others argue that the issue is homosexuality in the priesthood. And there are many other explanations. And they may all be partly true, and party false. But tonight we will address just how widespread this problem is. This week, the bishops are meeting in Dallas to debate a proposed policy to deal with priests who are accused of, or proven to be guilty of molestation. Many of the victims say the policy doesn't go far enough, that it is too lenient. But with the bishops and others beginning to arrive in Dallas today, our friends at the Dallas Morning News came to us with the results of an investigation they conducted. Their story will be in the paper tomorrow, and on their Web site tonight. They tried to track down every credible allegation. And the numbers they found are staggering.
Roughly two-thirds of the bishops have either been accused themselves, actually a relatively small number, or more commonly, are accused of covering up the actions of one of their priests. We'll be reporting on the details of what the Morning News found tonight, but clearly the numbers indicate that the problem is more than just the crimes of isolated individuals. So we'll have a report from ABC News correspondent Bill Blakemore from Dallas on the Morning News investigation, and a preview of what will happen later in the week. Ted will interview the bishop who headed the committee that wrote the proposed policy. But I think tonight's broadcast will make it clear that this is much more than a couple of isolated cases being given too much publicity. Something has gone terribly wrong.
Tuesday, June 11, 2002
Leroy Sievers and the Nightline Staff
Nightline Offices
Washington, D.C.
In the Roman Catholic Church, celibacy is required because the priest is supposed to be 'another Christ.' Christ was celibate, not married--and He is the role model for priests.
It is obvious, too, that priests are quite human.
As to Peter, yes he was married. Do you know for a fact whether he enjoyed relations with this wife AFTER he became Pope?
If you know, beyond a shadow of a doubt, the answer to that question, feel free to ping back.
As to the Eastern Orthodox who have a married clergy, the story is that they simply did not accept the authority of the Council which laid down 'the law.'
Generally, this is up to the Bishop of the diocese. In one diocese where we lived, the priests were rotated every 5 years. But in this one, our priest has been with us for eleven years.
Someone was talking about this a few years ago. As far as anti-Catholic conspiracy theories go, and there is more than a little factual basis for these, they are going to find that some of these sodomites are also members of secret societies and received assistance from such in their careers. Michael Rose has already detailed, in Goodbye! Good Men!, the peculiar circumstances surrounding that psychiatrist in Cincinnati who was screening out heterosexual seminary candidates.
I guarantee that you will hear more along these lines, more bizarre and weirder than yet revealed. This ain't over yet by any means. It might even make Malachi Martin's novel look tame.
[1Cor 7:3.7] "The husband should give to his wife her conjugal rights, and likewise the wife to her husband."
If Peter was married, they should not have denied each other conjugal rights. To speculate that they could have done so is just that: mere speculation. In all likelihood, they did not.
The rule of celibacy ought to be discarded because it is un-Biblical. However, it bears only a marginal relationship to the problem at hand, which is primarily one of senior church leadershipt tolerating homosexuality, pedophilia, and pederasty by other members of the clergy. I am certain that the problem is not confined to Catholics.
This statement is correct because this statement accuses two-thirds of the bishops and then it says that two-thirds of the bishops have been accussed. It's a self fulfilling statement.
Another issue that has generated a measure of criticism against RCF has been the endorsement of RCF’s activities by Fr. Malachi Martin, †R.I.P.† Critics have often cited rumors, innuendo, and gossip to justify their complaints. (Is it possible that Fr. Martin may have committed some wrongdoing 40 years in the past? Of course it is possible. Does any one of us have nothing in our past that caused us subsequent remorse and contrition?) However, when I contacted Fr. Hardon to solicit his opinion and advice about Fr. Martin’s endorsement of RCF, Fr. Hardon explicitly stated that Fr. Martin was “right with the Church.”
From: http://www.rcf.org/docs/FromThePresident.htm
It is absolutely mind-boggling. Widespread, endemic, institutionalized corruption.
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.