[Hodar]

"Grave consequences" means that once he holds the breakaway service, Hausen is excommunicated and those who attend "become excommunicated when they understand that that is the penalty," said the Rev. Ronald Lengwin, spokesman for the diocese.

I find this fairly interesting. A man who speaks out against the way the church has conducted the child raping, is punished. And if he conducts a service, he and any who attend will be excommunicated. Meanwhile, the priests who fancy sodomizing children are welcomed into the fold .....

[tbird5]

This is what Martin Luther did long ago and the rest is history. Now the Lutheran church and Anglican church want full communion with Rome. Never going to happen. To complain is one thing but a break from the mother church is another.

[patent]

"Grave consequences" means that once he holds the breakaway service, Hausen is excommunicated and those who attend "become excommunicated when they understand that that is the penalty," said the Rev. Ronald Lengwin, spokesman for the diocese.

I find this fairly interesting. A man who speaks out against the way the church has conducted the child raping, is punished. And if he conducts a service, he and any who attend will be excommunicated. Meanwhile, the priests who fancy sodomizing children are welcomed into the fold .....

I’m pretty sure you don’t care much for the truth here, but your comment is wrong on both counts. The article indicates he gave a “vulgar” homily on Easter that advocated the ordination of women and married men. He conflicted with doctrine, that was why he was punished by being transferred. As to your claim he was punished for talking about the sex scandal, there is no evidence of that, in this article or otherwise. Thousands of priests have talked about the sex scandals and not been disciplined. In short, you made it up.

As to your claim that priests who sodomize children are welcomed into the fold, that is also plainly false. They get booted automatically.

patent  +AMDG

[TalBlack]

The Church is comprised entirely of mortals, humans. They err, they have erred, they will err.

You find it "fairly interesting" that they should look after the moral standing of the Church in this instance because they failed to do so in another. Which is it? Should the Church try to do the right thing or not?

The Church may properly lay claim to much of the moral advancement of the past millenium. The Church may also lay claim to a certain amount of the bloody mischief of that span of time. As human beings of a stripe they're doing a hell of a lot better than any other group, force or government, bar none.