Posted on 03/27/2002 8:02:13 AM PST by LarryLied
Edited on 04/13/2004 2:07:36 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
The Catholic Church's most reliable supporters, conservatives who have traditionally leapt to defend the institutional hierarchy whenever its practices have been questioned, are increasingly irate over the church's handling of the clergy sexual abuse crisis.
Commentators William J. Bennett, William F. Buckley Jr., and Patrick J. Buchanan have harshly criticized Cardinal Bernard F. Law. Self-described orthodox Catholics are denouncing the church's bishops.
(Excerpt) Read more at boston.com ...
The FSSP seminary is constantly begging money from me. They want to expand their facilities so they don't have to tur applicants away.
AB
Summer,
The seminary directors responsible for much of our problems today are feminist nuns who are all but apostate, and prefer homosexual priests to orthodox, law abiding priests. They caused much of this, and we should never consider rewarding thier evil by granting them the object of their efforts.
patent
patent
The discipline of celibacy predates Pope Gregory VII and the Roman Synod in 1075 reaffirming it for priests. Many priests were celibate prior to that Synod. Do Will and Ariel bother to mention the concilar legislation of the Council of Elvira, canon xxxiii, dated 295-302 AD? Can Will and Ariel, or anyone else, show in Scripture where the Apostles weren't celibate?
Do Will and Ariel address Matthew 19:12, 26-29 or 1 Corinthians 7:7-8, 32-35?
Hogwash. Why then do Protestant denominations and the Orthodox Church have pedophiles and sexual misconduct when they allow married clergy?
Are there are ties to outside homosexual groups? Difficult to believe ACT-UP, GLAAD and GLSEN haven't known what was going on for a long time.
Is that what you got out of that paragraph? I doubt if I have ever seen anyone miss the point as widely as you just did. I hope you didn't do it on purpose.
Tell you what! Let's just take that little phrase out of the paragraph, break it up in smaller bites, and see if you can get the point this time:
"Romanism especially does not thrive in a republic, but there Calvinism finds itself most at home.
An aristocratic form of church government tends toward monarchy in civil affairs, while a republican form of church government tends toward democracy in civil affairs.
Says McFetridge, "Arminianism [Romanism] is unfavorable to civil liberty, and Calvinism is unfavorable to despotism.
The despotic rulers of former days were not slow to observe the correctness of these propositions, and feared Calvinism as republicanism itself."
It might also be helpful to you to go back to reply #53, click on that paragraph link, and go read the rest of it.
It's about time conservative Catholics rose up in justifiable anger. Let's pick up the bullwhips and drive the hedonistic lavender clergy out of the sanctuary.
It angers this WASP also.
This must be why Catholic Switzerland was a republic long before the reformation, eh? And why the barons of a Catholic England wrote the Magna Carta?
The idea that church government should be selected based on what sort of civil polity we want is worse than backwards; it is absurd. Jesus and the Apostles established a church government: you can see it clearly in the Pastoral Epistles and in the writings of the early Fathers. It's not ours to amend, throw away, or modify.
Oh, BTW: heaven is a monarchy, not a "republic" or a "democracy". Was yesterday, is today, will be tomorrow. Get used to it!
Almost certainly drafted by the Archbishop of Canterbury, Stephen Langton, btw.
Someone thought nuns would fix the problem or ordaining women perhaps. I agree completely that the main problem is with priests having sex with youths and children, mostly homosexual sex. Homosexuality seems to be widely accepted among the Roman clergy. That by itself is a major problem. Naturally the corruption spills over in many different evil ways.
I contend that no one in a position of trust (teacher, scout leader, clergy, nun, shrink, youth worker, social worker) should violate that trust by taking advantage of a vulnerable person. That applies not only to children and teens but also to that new self-absolving category..."consenting adults." Those who abuse that trust should be banished from the profession forever. That is especially true of religious vocations since they alone have the ability to knock on a door and invite themselves in.
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.