ramses (imported) wrote: Fri Mar 26, 2010 6:03 am I don't understand how anyone could identify as a member of that organization. How could anyone believe that these men are representatives of their god? The Catholic Church has way too much blood on it's hands to be the "one true religion". I think kids would be safer with jihadis than with priests...

Wow you're incredibly naive if you don't think there is widespread abuse of children in the Muslim world. Not only of underage girls who are forced to marry, but in many parts, the rule is "women are for babies, men/boys are for pleasure".

I'm pretty sure he was speaking sarcastically, which is sometimes hard to understand.

lilolme4 (imported) wrote: Fri Mar 26, 2010 5:07 pm Just to play devil's advocate (pun? poor choice of words? you decide)...

There is in fact an official at the Vatican with the title Advocatus Diaboli and it is his job to contest decisions of the church like canonization.

gareth19 (imported) wrote: Fri Mar 26, 2010 7:16 pm There is in fact an official at the Vatican with the title Advocatus Diaboli and it is his job to contest decisions of the church like canonization.

Reminds me of a South Park episode about

Red Hot Catholic Love.

If not children, who?

Does the Advocatus Diaboli propose no sex with children too?

Thanks for the reference.

How about if by U.N. action, pedophilic Catholic Priests are given some months to immigrate to

Vatican City, The Papal State or face possible future prosecution.

Do you think they will have to import children to Pope-land.

Moi

It's the Gemini in Moi

Paolo wrote: Fri Mar 26, 2010 6:50 pm I'm pretty sure he was speaking sarcastically, which is sometimes hard to understand.

Of course I was. They are both evil institutions. The road to hell is paved with good intentions and childmolesters.

How then, would you decide who is a pedophile? If they are found guilty in a court of law, they go to jail. If not, they're innocent until proven guilty, right?

Another point this article fails to mention is that one, the reports were decades old, two, there had been no allegations of abuse after he left the school for the deaf, and three, when this case went to the Vatican, the priest was on his death bed. He in fact died about four months later.

It also conveniently forgets to mention the then Cardinal Ratzinger was responsible to updating and strengthening the procedures used to investigate child abuse.

First, Pope Benedict (then Cardinal Ratzinger) problem is that there was no trial or internal church investigation. In this case, they let him die without any punishment.

Second, there is a similar case in Germany (From 1980) where the priest was merely transfered to other duties and a few years later convicted of molestation. So there is a pattern here that mirrors the Catholic Church's attitude of simply moving priests around and not telling anyone.

Dave (imported) wrote: Sat Mar 27, 2010 6:10 am First, Pope Benedict (then Cardinal Ratzinger) problem is that there was no trial or internal church investigation. In this case, they let him die without any punishment.

Second, there is a similar case in Germany (From 1980) where the priest was merely transfered to other duties and a few years later convicted of molestation. So there is a pattern here that mirrors the Catholic Church's attitude of simply moving priests around and not telling anyone.

Investigation?

Don't they call those INQUISITIONS?

A-1 (imported) wrote: Sun Mar 28, 2010 10:47 am Investigation?

Don't they call those INQUISITIONS?

No, defrocking is not an inquisition. But point well taken, Torquemada would have a field day in this day and age.

Well, maybe they could have a "De-Fucking" instead of a "De-Frocking"

...a miraculous re-constituting of virginity....

See, untouched except by the hand of God.

er... hand? ...handy to have the Church around... er,,, :-\ though, hand? weeeell, nevermind...