i assume you and i are both reasonable people. let’s assume we are on a jury and the priest in question is charged with being a homosexual. the proof should be such that you and i, as reasonable people, will look at it and both agree it proves the priest is a homosexual.
examples of what is not proof would include hearsay statements from someone you know or pictures of the priest having a meal with another man. think about how you would feel if you were accused of being a homosexual based on hearsay or a picture of you having dinner with a same sex friend of yours!
They weren’t just having a meal...and quit downplaying this!.. it was well known within the church membership...as I said in my e-mail to you.
I’m not so sure I want to give you his name now. I think you’ll just blow it off just like the Leadership has been doing for so long to others who tried to tell someone.
I didn’t ask you what is NOT proof....twisting it around to soft sell behavior that is more than unbecoming amongst Priests is exactly why your church has this problem....by making it sound less than it is.. Well it’s not!... and it is just as disgusting the Vatican has not gone full speed to get these twisted pervets out of the church.
What I did ask you is what proof would be acceptable to you? So what is it?