Ask them yourself. It doesn't matter. Rome still sends out convicted felons into the community to head up unsuspecting churches.
Posted on 09/16/2010 4:54:58 PM PDT by Dr. Eckleburg
"...Britain’s Channel 4 News reported that an investigation had found that 14 of 22 Catholic priests convicted of serious sexual offenses since 2001 in England and Wales, and sentenced to more than one year in jail, have still not been defrocked and remain members of the clergy..."
(Excerpt) Read more at thelede.blogs.nytimes.com ...
Although it's also been stated in the RCC catechism and posted dozens of times.
It doesn't take much to realize how that licentious, blasphemous title could result in abuse.
Ask them yourself. It doesn't matter. Rome still sends out convicted felons into the community to head up unsuspecting churches.
You argue like a liberal. It's not my responsibility to show evidence to support your ugly charges. I didn't make them. You did. You do understand the concept of "burden of proof," don't you?
I'm content to post, read and understand the writings of a well-respected Roman Catholic priest who teaches us that he and all Roman Catholic priests are "another Christ in their public as well as private lives."
Nothing in what you posted said a single word about a priest having some sort of right to any illicit pleasure, whether sexual or any other kind.
Although it's also been stated in the RCC catechism and posted dozens of times.
The catechism doesn't back up your claim any more than Fr. Baker does. If you think it does, post the citation.
Priests who are suspended a divinis aren't "heading up unsuspecting churches", or anything else, for that matter.
I'd say that matters quite a bit, at least for those of us who are actually interested in the truth.
lol. "There are none so blind as those who will not see."
Your church is riddled with homosexuals and pedophiles. Protect your children. Protect Christianity. You're losing both.
So you tell us. Watch the DVD. Rome is not telling you the truth.
I will rephrase my statement. It was written that
“Why? Because “another Christ” is not like the rest of us. The RCC says the priest is greater than the rest of us, more holy, closer to God, and therefore entitled to whatever pleasurable larks he might feel the need to experience.”
Please cite any Catholic teaching that verifies the above statement. Please show where the Church says priests are entitled to whatever pleasurable larks he might feel the need to experience. I am not accusing you of lying as that is not tolerated but I believe perhaps you have gotten a hold of an unauthorized catechism or maybe even a fraudelent one. I know in the interest of ecuenemical dialogue you would want to reject any suspect sources.
I don't believe the responsibility of the Church ends when the police put the cuffs on the accused. I also think it's a HORRIBLE idea to turn these... people loose on society after the civil authorities have finished with them. I believe that in most cases they should be reduced to the lay state with all haste. Regardless they should be suspended from the exercise of priestly ministry including being forbidden to wear clerical clothing or use ecclesiastical honorifics, I believe that is being done universally now.
Perhaps it hasn't been clarified, there are two things being discussed: Suspension (Suspended a divinis) which is what I think you're asking for, I believe all of the... persons discussed in the article have been suspended. There's another level called "Reduction to the Lay State" which takes a long time and involves Rome. I don't know, perhaps the process could be streamlined, I'm not sure that's prudent though.
Still speaking for myself I believe that these... men should be suspended and then after whatever civil penalties have been satisfied they should be sent off to a monastery permanently for a lifetime of penance. Let them grow weeds in barren fields.
I'm not sure that janitors are the same sort of problem. Because... and someone hold DR. E... I think there SHOULD be a different set of rules for priests who commit sins against chastity with minors. They have betrayed Christ and His Church in a way no janitor ever could. When hiring a janitor we don't call in a bishop to say: "keep yourselves blameless in a life of chastity and sanctity. Be well aware of the sacredness of your duties. Be holy as you deal with holy things. When you celebrate the mystery of the Lord's death, see to it that by mortifying your bodies you rid yourselves of all vice and concupiscence. Let the doctrine you expound be spiritual medicine for the people of God. Let the fragrance of your lives be the delight of Christ's Church, that by your preaching and example you help to build up the edifice which is the family of God. May it never come about that we, for promoting you to so great an office, or you, for taking it on yourselves, should deserve the Lord's condemnation"
So yes, when the civilians are done with them let them be punished until they die and may God have mercy on their souls.
Every bishop who has ordained one of these... people should do annual public penance for each one ordained. Whatever luxuries intended for the use of the hierarchy left over after victims have been appropriately compensated (however that's possible) should be disposed of in some way that reflects a true intention of amendment on the part of the bishops.
Oh, and they need to stop hiding the Cross in their coat pockets, what the heck kind of symbolism is that?! We should have picked up on that years ago! Seriously, watch a bunch of US bishops together, they're all wearing finely tailored black business suits with a long chain that goes around the neck and off to the side... you know what's on the end of that chain? A CROSS stuffed in the inside coat pocket. I know that sounds ridiculously petty when put up alongside the horrible nature of this discussion, but doesn't it sort of SAY something? Don't you think it's kind of a sign? And don't you have to wonder what MORON thought it would be a good idea? My gut reaction is it was Bernadine. But I'm digressing as usual.
I don't think anyone can legitimately say that I don't take this seriously or that I'm any less horrified than anyone on this forum who hasn't been personally involved. I may have peculiar resolutions to offer but that comes from my devotion to what I believe is in fact the Church established by Christ Himself.
I hope this helps.
Mr. Barnett reported that Church officials explained that only half of the 14 priests who were convicted of sexual abuse might eventually be dismissed. Three proposed dismissals have either been rejected by the Vatican or not pursued because of the ill health of the priest, and in four cases no moves have been made to remove the men from the priesthood.
My interest is what's going on after they've been convicted.
Then what... in Catholic language they should be reduced from the clerical state... all of them without regard to the particulars of their crimes?
It's simple, you get convicted of committing heinous crimes your on the street.
Is it possible to make a case that certain individuals could or should be better monitored by keeping them "in the ranks" so to speak? NOT functioning as priests of course.
NO!
What expertise does your church have in dealing with sexual abusers? Clearly, your church did not do a great job of protecting it's parishioners in the first place. Why all the sympathy for the criminal? Where is the empathy for the victims?
I can't believe RC's put up with this garbage. As a Baptist I would be meeting with the elders the second the pastor is convicted and would make sure the criminal was on the street and any pastor who protected him. Yet all we see on these threads from RC's is defend the priests, defend your church, don't say much about the victims.
Exactly right!
Words don't mean a heck of a lot if they aren't followed by action.
Why are they even associated with your church?
We are talking about convicted criminals who raped young boys.
This is not an issue where we disagree about interpretation of Scripture.
I don't believe the responsibility of the Church ends when the police put the cuffs on the accused. I also think it's a HORRIBLE idea to turn these... people loose on society after the civil authorities have finished with them.
This position assumes some type of expertise in dealing with convicted sex offenders. I don't believe the RCC can come close to arguing this position.
Still speaking for myself I believe that these... men should be suspended and then after whatever civil penalties have been satisfied they should be sent off to a monastery permanently for a lifetime of penance. Let them grow weeds in barren fields.
Doing this means they are still associated with your church. They are still supported by your church. IOW, they did a bad thing, but it wasn't so bad that we won't provide for them for the rest of their lives.
These sex crimes are about as bad as it gets. The victim is scarred for life. The victims suffer all kinds of emotional trauma as well as the family.
I think there SHOULD be a different set of rules for priests who commit sins against chastity with minors. They have betrayed Christ and His Church in a way no janitor...
Yet I don't see anyone saying the janitor should continue on as an employee of the RCC, or that the janitor should be sent to a monastery. I suspect the vast majority of RC's would say fire the janitor, toss him on the street and never let him in the doors again.
I have a question? Do you know if they are put on the pedophile register?
I don't know about the U.K., but in the USA they are. All sex abusers, once they are convicted, are put on the registry.
To give the know-nothings an official means of eliminating posts that bring their ignorance, at best or their bald-face lies to light.
The Catholic church seems to be so infected with this cancer that if they don’t ccompletely root it out it will continue to grow.
Just an interesting side bit....some have mentioned the Anti-Christ may very well be Homosexual...based on his description that may very well be. Every major concern we in politics has sexual issues from Abortion to Homosexuality....these remain on the forefront...just shows how corrupt we have become.
Dan 11:37 He shall regard neither the God of his fathers nor the desire of women, nor regard any god ; for he shall exalt himself above them all.
The Antichrist will have a Jewish ancestor and not be interested in women (celibate/homosexual?).
Thanks for posting the scripture reference. But I was not aware He will have Jewish ancestors. Interesting.
I don't think it's clear how observant, or how direct the connection. It could be grandparents, etc.
Well, when I think about it He is going to counterfeit all He can of who Christ was and is...so since Jesus came from the Jewish lineage it makes sense he might claim a Jewish lineage as well.
I don’t spend allot of time looking at who or what he will be about... but enough to share with others when the topic might come up...it is quite interesting to read information and possibilities though.
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.