You know what, AlbG, I've always loved my Catholic uncle and, of course, my Baptist dad. But, the story is true, and confirmed. Nothing more to say about it other than the effect it had has lasted 70+ years.
Having both of them (and their sisters) in my life mitigated the report my father gave. Arrogant Bustard talks of the evil that one man caused, and he's right about that.
But, that is theological. "What the hell is that guy up to?" when it is a Church Leader (priest) being discussed, IS a theological question.
My dad was baptized Catholic as an infant. He clearly is now a dyed-in-the-wool Baptist.
A good theological question is: "Is he still a Roman Catholic?"
I know the feeling x. It isn't that you can't forgive, it's that you can't forget. And you'd give a lot to forget. And it's theological in this sense, they've linked God with the terror and abuse in a very big way.
A good theological question is: "Is he still a Roman Catholic?"
Very good question and observation.
Yes, he is. In fact, ANYBODY who has received a valid Trinitarian Baptism (I'm assuming this includes you) is in some limited sense a Catholic. Should you ever receive the Grace to abandon your wayward ways (;'}) and enter full communion with the Church, you would not be "rebaptised".
"What the hell is that guy up to?" when it is a Church Leader (priest) being discussed, IS a theological question.
Yes it is, and it's also a theological question when the malfeasant minister is protestant. Or "I'm-not-a-protestant". And this gets back to my point. It's a natural human tendency to associate personal virtue in general with truth-telling. And the opposite. This tendency is embodied in the logical fallacy argumentum ad hominem. Satan knows this, and accordingly attacks ministers. How many folks have been "turned off" by the Catholic priest scandals, and the various misbehaviours of protestant and evangelical ministers of all stripes? How many people can't see the Gospel, because their eyes are clouded by the scandalous behaviour of some supposed ministers of the Gospel?
You don't know; I don't either. But we all know it isn't zero.
There are "powers and principalities" behind this.
Well, I don't think it's a good question, but it is a question. And it's been answered many times of FR. The RCs tell a formerly baptized Catholic that they're "only one confession away" from being a member of the fold again.
And that's because the RC erroneously believes that their priestly baptism has conferred a salvation neither you nor I possess. Ex-Catholics are viewed as "lapsed Catholics," not Protestants.
And another thing that takes it into the realm of theology, in my view at least, is that when something is fairly widespread then some question of formation comes into play. How were these people formed by their church. We knew the nuns as the brides of Christ, because that's what we were taught.
All this said, I doubted very early on a bit of what they were teaching me. When I returned to the church after being away for a couple of decades and I began to become better catechized my doubts only increased and I don't really think that's linked to my bad experiences. I don't believe all of what they teach. I don't believe it. And the orthodox priests I encountered were exactly in the same mold as those I knew as a kid, nothing really had changed and yet I had the sense because of Vatican II, that something had changed. It was schizophrenic.