“Your post is a pretty pathetic attempt at branding my post as an attempt to brand him as a pedophile.”
Your reply is a pretty pathetic attempt to have it both ways. To accuse someone of being a statutory rapist of an underage girl with no evidence, and wresting this from a partial quote from his book when he was still a young priest, is rather disgusting and underhanded.
You should stick with dealing with all the Catholic Priests the RCC shuffles around wh oare actually pedophiles.
Also you should do something about the molestation of Korans by elderly Popes.
“Your reply is a pretty pathetic attempt to have it both ways.”
Nope. I just posted what was true.
“To accuse someone of being a statutory rapist of an underage girl with no evidence,”
I never once accused him. I said: “What’s the legal consent age in the Philippines? I wonder if he was a statutory rapist?”
“and wresting this from a partial quote from his book when he was still a young priest, is rather disgusting and underhanded.”
I do not own the book. Therefore, I, JUST LIKE YOU MOST LIKELY, must use an online source and the most obvious online source cannot be used here at FR because it is banned. I therefore used another source which had a shorter quote - which in no way changed the context of the information. Also, it had nothing to do with his being a “young priest”. He was well into adulthood when ordained (age 26 at his own reckoning of years from the full passage).