Catholic Sex Abuse Hearing Descends Into `Shut Up' Order and Charge of 'Abomination'

Courthouse News Service ^ | March 25, 2011 | Reuben Kramer

[Turtlepower]

The concern that non-catholics have when news such as this come out is that the Catholic church hasn’t done a good enough job of weeding out the evil priests who perform the criminal acts, but even worse - they maintain a culture of keeping these incidents internal instead of involving the proper authorities.

The arguement that other groups, such as schools and protestant churches have evil leaders who prey on children doesn’t address the second concern, which is the culture of not involving authorities. If this was just one isolated incident where a local priest was responsible, it would be more understandable. Instead, it is just one of many with a similar pattern: accused priest doesn’t face formal punishment or criminal investigation and church authorities who know about the accusations don’t alert the authorities or punish the priest.

It gives the appearance that church authorities are more concerned with hiding problems with priests rather than dealing with them openly and showing more concern for the victims. The church has said they’ve corrected their mistakes and abuse cases are from the distant past, but this case occurred starting in 1999.

[RnMomof7]

Exactly

[HossB86]

I try to take into account the limitations of those I converse with.

Really. Mind reading again, I see. And, as usual, failing at it.

Keep trying.

Hoss

[HossB86]

As an aside, I think this is an appropriate prayer for Catholics to pray when coming on threads such as these:

Saint Michael the Archangel, defend us in battle; be our protection against the wickedness and snares of the devil.[...]

That's funny... Roman Catholics seem to spend so much time trying to explain how the only "prayer" that occurs is to God. Thanks for being truthful.

Where are we taught in scripture to pray to anyone other than God?

Hoss

[Quix]

THE BIAS, TO WHATEVER DEGREE IT EXISTS,

IS *ENTIRELY* IN FAVOR OF THE RC'S!

A fairly programmed computer could confirm that.

A fairly constructed atheist ran research study by communications students would verify that.

Y'all's wailing is outrageous and grossly hypocritical.

Just further confirmation that

RC's can't operate in normal reality

without their

RUBBERIZED HISTORIES,
RUBBERIZED PSEUDO-'BIBLES,'
DAFFYNITIONARIES,
IRRATIONAL 'LOGIC' TEXTS,
RUBBERIZED MATH TEXTS,

. . .

And, it just confirms that RC's are soooo thin-skinned that not only are they desperately uncomfortable when FR is not 100% biased in their favor instead of 90%--they can't stand conventional reality in the world at large unless the Vatican has 100% control. Witness all their wailing about the tardy courts finally beginning to deal with their altar boy physical ed classes!

But please, do go on, It make's y'all's absurd whines all the more ridiculous to all the more lurkers.

[Smokin' Joe]

...accused priest doesn’t face formal punishment or criminal investigation and church authorities who know about the accusations don’t alert the authorities or punish the priest

If the priest is treated by the Church as guilty until proven innocent, they do indeed face official (within the church) recriminations while the incident is being investigated.

As many of these 'incidents' are only coming to light years, sometimes decades, after they allegedly happened, some of this reeks of lawsuit lotto.

I'm not saying that no incidents ever occurred, but consider that the taint of accusation, if unwarranted, not only removes a priest from his current contact with the public, but even if proven false, will follow that priest for the rest of his life. Needless to say, that would be a career wrecker.

Before one goes calling for heads on pikes, consider that this would be an excellent way for someone bent on damaging the Church to proceed, through baseless accusations, to cripple the clergy.

There are those who just might have such motivation, because the Catholic Church will not accept nor perform homosexual marriages, nor will it sanction abortion. When one considers the people who believe their ends justify any means, the abortionists, homosexuals, and others just might employ such tactics.

With the willingness of the media to belabor any accusation, justified or otherwise, it is only prudent that the Church isolate the accused (to prevent any further incidents, if indeed wrongdoing has occurred) and perform its own investigation before calling in authorities, otherwise, the tactic would be entirely effective.

[Quix]

Are you REALLY expecting the number of mature, adult RC’s on FR to rise above 3 or 4?

[Religion Moderator]

When you ask for a post to be removed and then repeat its contents, your own post must also be removed.

[presently no screen name]

Before one goes calling for heads on pikes, consider that this would be an excellent way for someone bent on damaging the Church to proceed, through baseless accusations, to cripple the clergy.

So now you have the 'motivation' of the law, etc. Talk about baseless accusations.

With the willingness of the media to belabor any accusation, justified or otherwise, it is only prudent that the Church isolate the accused (to prevent any further incidents, if indeed wrongdoing has occurred) and perform its own investigation before calling in authorities, otherwise, the tactic would be entirely effective.

So now the media is belaboring the accusation and totally ignoring what was shown in the 2005 grand jury report of harboring of the RCC. Just what catholics do best - it's someone else's fault. Another liberal tactic.

[FourtySeven]

So, I’m going to venture a guess here and say, you are probably NOT in an RCIA program, expecting to be received into the Church during the Easter Vigil Mass?

Just a guess.

[Religion Moderator]

There are a few biases on the Religion Forum but not what you allege.

When oldtimers are belligerent, I try to be very patient. But when newbies are belligerent, their behavior is logged and they are either banned then and there or else put on the fast track to being banned.

And because this is a Religion Forum, atheists are trolls here. Some atheists are tolerated so the RF preachers will have someone to preach "to." But they will be instructed to leave the RF altogether if they misbehave.

Finally, Free Republic is pro-God meaning pro-Judeo/Christian God. Wiccans, for example, do not have a voice here. And pro-God posts are favored.

[Iscool]

Your words make common sense and a true sense of justice for all concerned—the need for right and just punishment for the guilty and also justice for all who are innocent, including priests who have remained faithful to their calling.

It’s over-the-top to paint all priests as homosexuals, as men who are not “normal”. That approach does take on the attributes of the kind of media smearing that is thrown at political conservatives. And it also “brands” all Catholic priests as predators, and all Catholics in the pews as defenders of predators. That is an injustice and a mirror of liberal tactics-—the smearing and the targeting of a particular people.

Perhaps you could provide of list of clergy who have been prosecuted and found to be innocent...

We can see that your religion has been very successful at hiding and protecting these criminal priests and even promoting them to higher positions...Cardinal Law comes to mind...

One can only assume then that for the few who are caught, many, many more are successfully passed thru the system...How many would you think become bishops, cardinals and popes???

[presently no screen name]

By some wild coincidence, each time the freeper was questionably booted of a thread, he/she was Catholic.

Reading the thread, one can't help but think some push the envelope - ignore the rules - it gives them something to whine about instead of staying on topic. This goes on in many threads - so, IMO, it's the catholics only defense - victimhood - control through intimidation.

This is nothing short of the liberal tactic of crying racist in their attempt to shut down an opponent through intimidation. If this were not a conservative site - that tactic would not be so glaringly obvious.

[Quix]

Reading the thread, one can’t help but think some push the envelope - ignore the rules - it gives them something to whine about instead of staying on topic. This goes on in many threads - so, IMO, it’s the catholics only defense - victimhood - control through intimidation.

This is nothing short of the liberal tactic of crying racist in their attempt to shut down an opponent through intimidation. If this were not a conservative site - that tactic would not be so glaringly obvious.

---

INDEED.

Only on FR, they’ve developed it into an art form . . . a BLACK ART form.

[presently no screen name]

I’m not Alex Murphy......Right now or always?

What difference does it make who the moderator is? What does it have to do with the victims in these cases who have been violated spiritually, emotionally and physically by priests and the RCC harboring them? What does it have to do with catholics, themselves, not coming out in 2005 and vehemently demanding the officials do something about their covering up 'sinful actions' against children? Here, in 2011, it's still looking the other way, change the subject and point the finger.

IMO, catholics share the guilt of harboring, also. Reading the posts - they come against anyone speaking out against evil whether it be the media that reports it, the law who is bringing it to light, posters commenting on it or about victims who may be 'in it to win it'/lotto - and not against where the evil rests. I would say that is more in line with them being 'anti-catholic' than anyone they accuse of it. Anyone with an ounce of brains knows that the finger pointing tactic is not a way to solve anything nor does it give the appearance of wanting to solve anything. Yet, the RCC/Vatican/catholics have not been aggressive in keeping their 'name' worthy of anything - judging by the Grand Jury reports and reading these posts.

[MarkBsnr]

Your history is missing some important facts. It was not until the 1200’s under Pope Innocent II that the church rules changed to only prohibit married priests.

1) “For the first 1200 years of the Church’s existence, priests, bishops and 39 popes were married.” - Source: Kelly, J. N. D. Oxford Dictionary of Popes. New York, Oxford Press. 1986.

Your posting is missing some significant facts - I posted from Church councils and from Patristic sources about celibacy - and those excerpts quite clearly mention the fact that many priests and bishops were married, but living a continent lifestyle. The Church certainly did not disdain unmarried priests, but wanted the married ones to be concentrating on God, not on temporal lifestyles. At any rate, why does a misreading of my post supported by the Oxford Dictionary of Popes (an Anglican undertaking) trump my original post supported by quotes from the Vatican paper which is liberally sprinkled with quotes from Patristic and Church sources from the fourth and fifth centuries in support of that post?

2) “Celibacy is not essential to the Priesthood.” - quote Pope John Paul II - Source: Time Magazine. July 1993.

Nobody said that it was.

3) “You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church.” St. Peter, the pope who was closest to Jesus, was married.

Yes? And? Many of the Apostles were unmarried and Jesus and Paul both had good things to say about celibacy in the service of God.

Paul was unmarried (and so was Jesus, obviously). Barnabas was unmarried. Scripture is silent on the married status of any of the rest - excepting Peter. The Church from the beginning believed in continency of its clergy and over the centuries, strengthened that belief.

[Turtlepower]

I can understand your defensiveness of your church, but at the same time you and many other catholics seem to diminish known problems of the church. This particular case in Philadelphia is based upon a grand jury, which reviewed very damaging evidence and wrote a blistering report.

Of course, not every allegation is true, but the natural defense mode of the church is dismiss allegations as "lawsuit lotto" instead of appearing to be serious. You say the church should "isolate the accused (to prevent any further incidents, if indeed wrongdoing has occurred) and perform its own investigation before calling in authorities..." but that is exactly the problem. In many cases, the accused priest wasn't removed from ministry and still had plenty of access to new victims. This case in Philadelphia involves Monsignor Lynn who supervised 2 of the abusive priests, but failed to adequately investigate and kept those priests active.

You fail to understand that church leaders, such as Lynn are part of the problem and can't be trusted to perform legitimate investigations. They have a conflict of interest to protect the reputation of the church and not take allegations seriously. The church would have more credability if they immediately involve a third party, such as the police (a novel concept), to perform an adequate investigation.

[MarkBsnr]

BTW, does anyone know why Petronski doesn’t post here anymore?

He and I spoke privately about it before he left. He simply got tired of correcting the lies about the Church over and over again. Same lies about the same things over and over. I know that his wife occasionally comes on, but I don't believe that he even monitors FR any more, or if he does, it is very infrequent.

[muawiyah]

Hardly ~ your typical pedophile could as easily be married, with chilluns, or be a club hopping homosexual ~ a regular gay blade. What he or she likes is sex with kiddies.

ALL organizations that put adults in contact with children serve their interests, and I am certain you understand that better than anyone else on this thread.

[presently no screen name]

Liberals are clueless - they keep doing the same thing over and over on a conservatives forum and think no one is the wiser to their victimhood, whiny intimidation tactics. They wouldn't do it on DU because there is no one there to convince. In the name of 'religion' they think anything should fly here and one should submit or they are bias. That's the papal authority mindset - no one has salvation except through the RCC and has the smell of Islam - if one converts, there is the threat of death.

Meanwhile there is only ONE we must submit to and that is God as HIS Word is The Final Authority. Something else the Vatican/RCC/catholics do not agree with. IMO, there is no common ground - if the foundation isn't the same - God's Word is The Final Authority - we stand on different ground.

Have a good day, Quix.