Gemma Therese

Religious order priests serving in a diocese are NOT diocesan priests.

Gemma Therese

Mageth

Gemma, can you answer lunachick's question instead of discussing the irrelevant finer points of various orders?

So how do you feel about the actual crimes, Gemma? Or don't you really care unless the Church gets itself into trouble, or gets bad PR?

Wyz_sub10

You are splitting hairs with no discernable relevance to the issue.

galiel's final comment was based on the assumption that priests - including parish priests - take a vow of poverty. He was incorrect.

Your reply was that it was arrogant to think a parish priest would take such a vow. It is not, because many parish priests do take such a vow, as I pointed out.

Your reply to galiel was defensive and had absolutely nothing to do with the point he was making. Rather than address the issue, you picked on one meaningless statement (which was not even a fact he was claiming) and held it up to scrutiny. He probably does not know the difference in vows - nor is that difference relevant to his issue in any way.

I, in turn, took a point in your post and held it up to scrutiny.

We can keep playing tennis all you like, but you are avoiding the OP in the same way you neglected the meaning of galiel's message and tried to score points by scrutinizing an irrelevant fact.

Why so hostile when the tables are turned? Or is your game a singles match?

Mageth

Perhaps gemma's joined an order that has a Vow of Silence on Matters that Might Embarass the Church [tm].

sullster

For those who haven't heard. Bernie the Pimp, has announced that he will "take a vacation" and then go to a monastery for a while. He is still a cardinal and could still become the first American Pope or at least will be able to vote for the next medieval thinker for the job.

He claimed that "he felt no hatred" for those who oppose him. Now, isn't that sweet. Here is a guy who sheltered child-raping priests and other disgusting men of the cloth, who says he has no hate for his accusers. Who brought up the hate idea, Bernie? You did. Is hate a virtue?

This is a guy who represents a medieval organization which won't allow divorced people from participating in one of its rituals and then finds it alright to care for and console child-rapers.

Bernie should have been kicked out of the church entirely and defrocked. This guy will soon rehabilitate himself as Richard Nixon did. He will ask all to feel sorry for him and then he will speak out on things like abortion and war.

If the catholic church does not divorce itself from Bernie, it is making an enormous error.

Gemma Therese

Document it.

Gemma Therese

Gemma Therese

mecca777

It depends on which kind of "women who do not protect their children from abusive fathers/step-fathers" you're referring to.

If you mean mothers who actively or passively encourage the abuse - they know of it and tolerate it or do not see anything wrong with it - then in your analogy, Cardinal Law is equally guilty. He protected the criminals instead of the victims.

If you mean mothers who do not remove their children from abusive fathers/step-fathers, or who do not report said abusers to the authorities due to fear for their own safety and that of their children, Cardinal Law is more guilty, because he does not have the excuse of fearing retributive violence from the abuser.

lunachick

Stop trying to derail the thread, Gemma. The OP is about paedophile preists and those who protect them. It's about how they are above the Law, and avoid punishment. It's about how angry we are at the Church for 'not being sorry enough' to do anything worthwhile in the name of justice for those who were abused. It's about the constant shirking of responsibility and the endless attempts at sweeping things under the carpet. It's about the Church and how it manilupates it's 'flock' - ie: a sudden run on Saints immediately after the scandal really broke, to shift public focus.

And yet in all this, all you can do pick up on little irrelevant points to obfiscate the real issues. You belong to a corrupt, greedy and criminal organisation, Gemma. It has been since it's inception. Your avoidance in discussing any of the real issues addressed in the OP does little in showing any strength of character on your part. If you can't stick with the OP, then stay out of the topic - start a new thread on Religious orders if you must attempt to educate us on them.

As for your answer to my question - all you could do was find a domestic parallel. Which I agree is equally atrocious, but has little relevance to this topic.

What do you think should be the punishment for Laws and the people he protected? (And lets face it, it sure as hell wasn't the kids that he was protecting here.)

What do you think the Church should do to make amends?

Mageth

Originally posted by Gemma Therese:

The crimes committed by the priests were reprehensible, but no more reprehensible than had they been committed by a father or step-father. And, frankly, is Law any more guilty for protecting abusive priests than the thousands of women who do not protect their children from abusive fathers / step-fathers?

I love the Catholic Chruch, but that does not mean it does not have its faults and bad apples.

I must apologize, gemma. I missed this post before posting my last two posts.

The crimes committed by the priests were reprehensible, but no more reprehensible than had they been committed by a father or step-father.

So? We're talking about the actions of Priests, not fathers/stepfathers. And, frankly, a defense of "What they did is bad, but no worse than what THOSE OTHER GUYS did" doesn't carry much weight. They're priests, for Christ's sake, and are supposed to know better, and to be policed by the Church Hierarchy.

And, frankly, is Law any more guilty for protecting abusive priests than the thousands of women who do not protect their children from abusive fathers / step-fathers?

So? We're talking about the actions of a Bishop, not mothers. But at a minimum, he's just as guilty. Even more so, perhaps, because he and his organization protected multiple molestors who molested who knows how many children when he should have been protecting the children. Do you think God would be more angry at Cardinal Law or at a mother in this situation?