Thus, what non criminal recourse did the Church have? Order a canonical trial for one about to die or perhaps urinate on his grave? How many kids would have been saved if this action had occurred? Answer 0 and win the prize.
You need to digest and understand the facts fully before making uniformed judgments.
“Thus, what non criminal recourse did the Church have? Order a canonical trial for one about to die or perhaps urinate on his grave?”
Why not?
“The Council of Constance declared Wycliffe (on 4 May 1415) a stiff-necked heretic and under the ban of the Church. It was decreed that his books be burned and his remains be exhumed. The exhumation was carried out in 1428 when, at the command of Pope Martin V, his remains were dug up, burned, and the ashes cast into the River Swift, which flows through Lutterworth.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Wycliffe#Last_days
I’ll not refrain from expression my opinions on this most reprehensible matter.
You insist on labeling ACCOUNTABILITY under civil and church law as ‘vigilantism’. I have no idea why.
I want the truth out- past and present.
I want no secrecy and no excuses re. child molestation.
I want those whose job it is to uphold the law to be accountable to it- civilly and religiously.
And I want the same shame that would be applied to anyone in society who suspects or knows of child abuse and does nothing to be applied to ALL who may be guilty in the Church. Twenty years ago or now.
Do you want less?
There are those who want to destroy the Church- all I want to do is make sure WE don’t allow them any ammunition.
And- yes- a canonical trial, no matter the condition of the accused. He would die guilty or vindicated, but others would
know they were not beyond the laws of man, or the Church.
You need to stop trying to silence those with whom you disagree. You’re certainly wasting your time with me.