Then how can any catholic "confess" to a Priest as the mediator between them and God....they don't past the test.
Further how can you take the sacrements from the hands which may have previously been touching children where they shouldn't, or had sex with another Priest..."You can't know whether".....
How can you possibly explain when it's membership think a Priest should be gone after for "slanderous claims"...yet current Priests are protected for being sexual perverts of the highest order?
>> Then how can any catholic “confess” to a Priest as the mediator between them and God....they don’t past the test. <<
That a priest persists in grave sin is gravely harmful. Moreso, when a bishop tolerates the sin, without discipline or correction, or when the sin is notorious or grave. The failure to correct or remove sinful priests is what John Crysostom meant when he said, “The floor of Hell is paved with the skulls of bishops.”
Yet, Chrysostom did not abandon the Catholic Church; and in fact, he argued strenuously that the sacraments conferred by such a bishop or his priests are still valid, so long as the outward signs of the sacrament are present. (Hang out on the Catholic threads, and you’ll read the Catholics protesting “he’s doing it wrong!” all the time!) That’s because it matters not what sins the priest has committed. He is ONLY a mediator; he does not make the sacrament sufficient or not.
Crysostom is not a slanderer. In fact, Crysostom is not even his real name. It’s an appellation he was given by the Catholic Church for speaking the truth, which means, “The Golden Mouth.”