But people who pray at the altar of "choice" can still receive Communion.
And the Church wonders why the parishioners are leaving in droves.
Posted on 01/16/2012 4:26:10 PM PST by mas cerveza por favor
What kind of engineer? Does he have a masters’ degree?
Yet all the pro-homo and abortion legislating Catholic politicians are untouchable.
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.
Any citation - or are we simply to take the author’s word for it?
If they are honestly leaving for this reason, they should move to a traditionalist redoubt which does not put up with such nonsense. This is not the Church's doing, but rather it is the work of treasonous office holders.
The blog is a citation. Here is another:
http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/abbott/090915
Google is thy friend.
Fr. Haley is a lunatic. He claims that 60% of Arlington priests are homosexuals. The problem with that assertion is that for years prior to Loverde, Arlington was the only diocese in the nation to actively screen out homosexuals. “Good Bye, Good Men” actually singled out the Arlington Diocese for being a “good diocese.” (Unfortunately, Bishop Loverde has reversed this screening out, so I’m not defending him, either.)
According to BishopAccountability’s database, Arlington Diocese has been involved in NO lawsuits for any homosexual abuse by its priests. (An Oblates priest residing in the diocese was sued, but was not diocesan; three priests were accused on improper heterosexual relationships; one priest was arrested for possession of child pornography.)
Lousy research by the author you cite.
Arlington is not a suffragan diocese to Washington, where Cardinal McCarrick was archbishop. (McCarrick definitely *is* one of the bad guys.) Despite teh Archdiocese of Washington being directly between Arlington and Baltimore, Arlington belongs to the Archdiocese of Baltimore. When the Washington Archdiocese was created, it was carved out of the Baltimroe Metropolitan, and the Virginia dioceses remained with Baltimore.
“Fr. Haley is a lunatic.”
Back up or withdraw your detraction. You cite “Good Bye, Good Men” by Michael Rose, but this author is on record defending your “lunatic” Fr. Haley:
http://www.newoxfordreview.org/article.jsp?did=0305-rose
Fr. Haley was called as a witness to make a legal deposition. Here is a PDF of the legal deposition that brought the the hammer of Loverde:
http://www.rcf.org/pdfs/hdep.pdf
Unless you can find a lie in this deposition, you owe Fr. Haley an apology. Perhaps you would have prefer that Fr. Haley lie in his deposition.
Please cite where Fr. Haley was convicted of betraying the privacy of confession or withdraw your nonsense.
Making a general observation gleaned from the confessional about the prevalence of a certain sin in a way that does not expose anyone is permitted.
I am rescinding that last comment about repeating what he heard in confessionals. I may be drawing a false inference.
Sorry, FRiend, but Abbott does not do his own research or, for that matter, much of his own writing. He merely cites and retales what others say. His article is as trustworthy or untrustworthy as the authorities he quotes.
I have no idea whether Fr. Haley is a martyr or a lunatic. But citing to RenewAmerica is a half-notch, at best, above the National Enquirer. The site exercises zero editorial control.
As you can see, I was in the process of withdrawing it before your comments.
In fact, I never said he was convicted of it. What he appears to have tipped off to the press and what he heard in the confessional appear to be separate scandals.
Thank you.
I’m not sure how the New Oxford Review attaches Fr. Haley to what Michael Rose says in that article, but the (apparently reprinted) article is about James Gould, not Father Haley, and in it, Michael Rose reaffirms the excellent condition of Arlington Diocese under Bishop Keating, and the work for James Gould to prevent homosexual infiltration.
I am glad you presented the deposition; I am very curious whether the problem is that Haley made many assertions about other priests that were far beyond what he was depositioned to answer... but I have to leave for now.
The citations in post 12 are more substantial.
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.