Is The Papacy Threatened?

[DHK]

Right! I gave you proof of Baptists cover-ups, but you won't even acknowledge that.

As far as the 'Pope Joan Myth'. When I was at Calif. Baptist College a favorite 'fact' of the students was that the pope wore a mitre that had 666 in roman numerals on it (proving he was the anti-Christ). I suppose you believe that one as well.

I have acknowledged this occasionally happened, and that it is properly dealt with as a criminal offense, and that the person involved can NEVER be a pastor again. That is not what happens in the RCC.

It is a festering plague that cannot be stopped.
It has been going on (and still is) in German, (and the rest of Europe), in Great Britain, and Ireland), in Brazil, and the rest of South American, expanding at an exponential rate in North America. It is world-wide and has been going on for centuries, well before the Reformation. Lori, you have nothing to compare to.

 

[DHK]

While Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, now the pontiff, was involved in a 1980 decision to transfer Hullermann to Munich for therapy, Ratzinger's then-deputy took responsibility for a subsequent decision to let the priest return to pastoral duties. Hullermann was convicted of sexual abuse in 1986.



However, The New York Times reported Friday that Ratzinger was copied in on a memo stating Hullermann would be returned to pastoral work within days of beginning psychiatric treatment. The archdiocese insisted Ratzinger was unaware of the decision and that any other version was "mere speculation."



Kasper said in the interview that "especially in big dioceses, I have the impression that bishops were often not informed, unfortunately." He said this needed to change, along with the process of selection at seminars.
In another case, documents show the Vatican office responsible for disciplining priests, while headed by Ratzinger, halted a church trial of a Milwaukee priest accused of molesting some 200 deaf boys from 1950-1975.



Despite the grave allegations against the Rev. Lawrence Murphy, Ratzinger's deputy, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, shut the process down after Murphy wrote Ratzinger a letter saying he had repented, was old and ailing, and that the case's statute of limitations had run out.
Bertone now serves as the Vatican's secretary of state.



The Vatican said the case only reached the Vatican in 1996, that Murphy died two years later, and that there was nothing in the church's handling of the matter that precluded any civil action from being taken against him.



The abuse scandal in dioceses, monasteries and other Catholic institutions has spread to countries including Austria, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands and Switzerland.

http://start.shaw.ca/start/enCA/News/WorldNewsArticle.htm?src=w032773A.xml


There is no other denomination in the world so steeped in sex scandals as the RCC. The present pope is one of the greatest offenders himself, if not directly but indirectly by hiding offenders, turning a blind eye, etc. Only the hue and cry of the public and the victims themselves have forced his hand to take action.



But remember this: A thousand apologies coming from the pope are worthless. One cannot apologize on behalf of the offender. If the offender himself does not apologize the apology is worthless.

Secondly, an apology is meaningless without repentance from the one who has committed the crime.

Thus the Pope or even the Vatican as a whole cannot apologize on the behalf of any of its criminals. And that is exactly what they are!

 

[lori4dogs]

There is also no denomination in the world anywhere near the size of the Roman Church. That being said, I believe these offenders must be purged from the roles of the clergy and face whatever legal consequences are due them.

Some of the bishops were guilty of playing shell games with a dozen or more of these creeps in collars. It remains a source of amazement to me that not one bishop in the United States has been indicted (much less sent to prison) for aiding and facilitating child rape.

That being said, as far as the New York Times reporting that "Ratzinger was copied in on a memo stating Hullermann would be returned to pastoral work within days of beginning psychiatric treatment", I think the following article shed some doubt on that:

http://www.zenit.org/article-28769?l=english

 

[donnA]

Right! I gave you proof of Baptists cover-ups, but you won't even acknowledge that.

As far as the 'Pope Joan Myth'. When I was at Calif. Baptist College a favorite 'fact' of the students was that the pope wore a mitre that had 666 in roman numerals on it (proving he was the anti-Christ). I suppose you believe that one as well.

what you never understand is that baptist churches are independant of each other, anything is within one single baptist church and is not all baptist churches, as withe rcc, it is all under one roof no matter where in the world the church is located, makes the whole church responsible, in baptist churches only one church is responsible, and none of us is answerable for another church, since rcc is all one then each is answerable for anyother in the world. if you could understand this you'd understand the difference.

and that it is properly dealt with as a criminal offense, and that the person involved can NEVER be a pastor again.

in the catholic church this never happens, no one is ever answerable for these crimes against children. they allow them to continue knowing what they are doing to children.

Some of the bishops were guilty of playing shell games with a dozen or more of these creeps in collars. It remains a source of amazement to me that not one bishop in the United States has been indicted (much less sent to prison) for aiding and facilitating child rape.

as the pope himself has done

 

[DHK]

That being said, as far as the New York Times reporting that "Ratzinger was copied in on a memo stating Hullermann would be returned to pastoral work within days of beginning psychiatric treatment", I think the following article shed some doubt on that:

http://www.zenit.org/article-28769?l=english

The bishop of Milwaukee wrote again on Aug. 19 to Archbishop Bertone to update him on the measures taken to activate the lines indicated by the congregation, and to inform him of the fact that his diocese would continue to be responsible for the expenses to maintain the therapies for the victims of sexual abuses. In the end, Father Murphy died on Aug. 21, closing the case definitively.

This is Rome's cover-up of Rome's cover-up. Hilarious! :laugh:

 

[BobRyan]

Right! I gave you proof of Baptists cover-ups, but you won't even acknowledge that.

As far as the 'Pope Joan Myth'. When I was at Calif. Baptist College a favorite 'fact' of the students was that the pope wore a mitre that had 666 in roman numerals on it (proving he was the anti-Christ). I suppose you believe that one as well.

That is a bit of a bend-and-stretch on historic facts:

The actual fact is that there is an issue of the Catholic publication "Our Sunday Visitor" that claims that there exists a Papal mitre that has the words "Vicarius Filii Dei" written on it - which when using the Latin form of numbering a name -- adds up to 666.

Facinating that the Catholic document "The Donation of Constantine" also claimed that same title for the Pope many centuries before the "Sunday Visitor" said word one about it.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[DHK]

This is Rome's cover-up of Rome's cover-up. Hilarious! :laugh:

Truthfully, this is no laughing matter.
It is horrid, despicable, one of the most unspeakable crimes of history--the sexual abuse of children. It is unthinkable.
Today, the Pontiff's response was: "petty gossip." He said we shouldn't listen to it.

No apology, no repentance, not even an acknowledgment. It is just "petty gossip."
I am so glad that God delivered me from the evil clutches of the RCC.

 

[Matt Black]

Certainly the future looks bleak for Ratspoison, which is ironic given the fact that he's toughened up the procedures to prevent this kind of thing.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

http://start.shaw.ca/start/enCA/News/WorldNewsArticle.htm?src=w032773A.xml


There is no other denomination in the world so steeped in sex scandals as the RCC. The present pope is one of the greatest offenders himself, if not directly but indirectly by hiding offenders, turning a blind eye, etc. Only the hue and cry of the public and the victims themselves have forced his hand to take action.



But remember this: A thousand apologies coming from the pope are worthless. One cannot apologize on behalf of the offender. If the offender himself does not apologize the apology is worthless.

Secondly, an apology is meaningless without repentance from the one who has committed the crime.

Thus the Pope or even the Vatican as a whole cannot apologize on the behalf of any of its criminals. And that is exactly what they are!

Not true. What is true is that the sex scandals of the Catholic Church are most publicised. However, protestant denominations have quite a few themselves. Mormons are probably the top of the list as far as "Christianity" goes. I would say Islam is the largest perpatrator of sexual crimes but the majority of those happen in Islamic countries that find that behavior acceptable. The difference between the Protestant offenders is the "cover up". Usually, protestant ministers are tried in a civil court. Where as Catholics have such a large institution that they are able to move preist around and internationally to prevent scandal.

 

[DHK]

Not true.

Thinkingstuff, you are not thinking straight.

What is true is that the sex scandals of the Catholic Church are most publicised. However, protestant denominations have quite a few themselves.

If they are Baptists, especially the Baptists that I am associated with, they are immediately dealt with, not only by us but with the justice system. If jail time is required they serve it. They are never allowed in their lifetime to hold the office of a pastor again. They have disqualified themselves. This is not the case in the RCC. In the RCC it is one cover-up after another.

Mormons are probably the top of the list as far as "Christianity" goes.

Mormonism is not Christianity. It is a moot point.

I would say Islam is the largest perpatrator of sexual crimes but the majority of those happen in Islamic countries that find that behavior acceptable.

Since when have you considered Islam a Christian religion? Keep on topic!!

The difference between the Protestant offenders is the "cover up". Usually, protestant ministers are tried in a civil court. Where as Catholics have such a large institution that they are able to move preist around and internationally to prevent scandal.

That is exactly the point that we have been making all along. Baptists do not cover-up their crimes. They deal with them, admit them, acknowledge them as sin, and they are dealt with accordingly. The RCC does not do this, even when they are the most heinous crimes against society/ the law, and God. It is despicable.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

Thinkingstuff, you are not thinking straight.

If they are Baptists, especially the Baptists that I am associated with, they are immediately dealt with, not only by us but with the justice system. If jail time is required they serve it. They are never allowed in their lifetime to hold the office of a pastor again. They have disqualified themselves. This is not the case in the RCC. In the RCC it is one cover-up after another.

Mormonism is not Christianity. It is a moot point.

Since when have you considered Islam a Christian religion? Keep on topic!!

That is exactly the point that we have been making all along. Baptists do not cover-up their crimes. They deal with them, admit them, acknowledge them as sin, and they are dealt with accordingly. The RCC does not do this, even when they are the most heinous crimes against society/ the law, and God. It is despicable.

I am on topic. Always have been. The statement to which I replied was that RCC is the greatest offender in this regard. Not true, it is the most publisized. The difference between Catholic Church and the baptist churches is one of organization. Believe me if the Baptist were as large and institutionalized as the RCC it would have its own coverups. Fortunately, each baptist church is independent and therefore unable to hide guilty pastors in Red tape or just move them around. There are baptist pastors who avoiding legal entaglements have moved to another state and perpurtrate more crimes. But this occurence is less often because there is no higher authority (in civil cases) than the pastor save the civil authorities. Because of Baptist independence and democratic structure, when its highest officer has committed an offence the issue is taken up by the local authorities which judge based on the laws of the Land. So the baptist pastor is more likely to serve jail time than the catholic priest.
Note the three top insurers of Protestant churches report that an average of 260 reports a year are filed against protestant pedophiles in the clergy.

(Associated Press, June 16, 2007, New York Times) [see also a related URL]The three companies that insure a majority of Protestant churches say they typically receive upward of 260 reports a year of children younger than 18 being sexually abused by members of the clergy, church staff members, volunteers or congregants.

the Freedom From Religion Foundation. http://www.ffrf.org/

did a study that found

. . Of the accused clergy, 75 were Catholic priests (39.5%) and 111 were Protestant ministers (58%).

This isn't saying that one is better than the other but I think because of media coverage the truth has been compromised. Yet I think that baptist churches are the best equiped to deal with this problem primarily due to its organization and structure.

 

[DHK]

Thinkingstuff,
I still don't think you are really on topic.
Sometime ago I mentioned to Lori that in the Baptist churches that I am associated with those things are not true. Then she got the message.
Yes there are a lot of ugly problems in liberal Protestant churches. Many, if not most of them, are full of unsaved individuals. Protestant does not equal Christian. It only means that it falls under a general umbrella of Christendom.

In many of the churches I am associated with, for insurance purposes every salaried person was required to get a police check or clearance, and that includes the pastor.

1 Timothy 3:2 A bishop (pastor) then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;

We don't have any pastors that have been in sex scandals because they have automatically disqualified themselves. They can never pastor. Thus your statistics are wrong. They may be right for the churches that you may be referring to: liberal protestant churches, but not IFB churches. Your statistics are moot.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

Thinkingstuff,
I still don't think you are really on topic.
Sometime ago I mentioned to Lori that in the Baptist churches that I am associated with those things are not true. Then she got the message.
Yes there are a lot of ugly problems in liberal Protestant churches. Many, if not most of them, are full of unsaved individuals. Protestant does not equal Christian. It only means that it falls under a general umbrella of Christendom.

In many of the churches I am associated with, for insurance purposes every salaried person was required to get a police check or clearance, and that includes the pastor.

1 Timothy 3:2 A bishop (pastor) then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;

We don't have any pastors that have been in sex scandals because they have automatically disqualified themselves. They can never pastor. Thus your statistics are wrong. They may be right for the churches that you may be referring to: liberal protestant churches, but not IFB churches. Your statistics are moot.

I am glad your affiliated churches follow a procedure that eliminates this type of thing. Not all baptist churches do this though. Some churches I've attended I wondered if they followed up on referrence calls much less do an criminal background check. And note those checks only reveal charges that have been made not actual events. However, my point is that the structure of baptist churches is responsible for eliminating a lot of the problems associated with this type of thing. Even in your affiliated churches I am sure there are members and others who you might question their salvation. So its not reasonable to suppose that only people in attendence are those who are saved. Unfortunately, there are tares among the wheat.
And its not only liberal Churches that have sexual scandal issues. Fundamental churches have their share. Note this article about an IFB church

PLANO — A Prestonwood Baptist Church minister arrested for soliciting a minor online has resigned from the church, Pastor Jack Graham told his congregation Saturday evening.

Dr. Graham addressed the crowd at the start of the church’s regular worship service. He said the church had accepted Joe Barron’s resignation, which took effect immediately. …

Police arrested Mr. Barron, 52, Thursday morning after he drove from Plano to Bryan to meet with what he thought was a 13-year-old girl he had met online, authorities say. The girl turned out to be a Bryan police officer working in an ongoing Internet sex sting.

I know my church affiliation is problematic (SBC) for some of IFB but I don't consider us to be liberal nor is baptist problems secluded to just SBC. I went to an American Baptist university an they also have their share of problems. So you can find any denomination any church and find issues.
Note there is a website that deals with Just IFB problems of abuse http://freedomfromabuse.net/
the fact is that sin is sin and it permiates all christiandom because among our ranks there are people who are sinners. And some still need to be born again. No group is free from it.

 

[DHK]

Here is your quote: Let's examine it in the light of the RCC policies.

PLANO — A Prestonwood Baptist Church minister arrested for soliciting a minor online has resigned from the church, Pastor Jack Graham told his congregation Saturday evening.

The man was arrested (not transferred or a crime covered-up), and his resignation was immediate (the RCC keeps him as a priest just shifts him to another parish) [/quote]

Dr. Graham addressed the crowd at the start of the church’s regular worship service. He said the church had accepted Joe Barron’s resignation, which took effect immediately. …

The resignation took effect immediately. There is no resignation in the RCC.

Police arrested Mr. Barron, 52, Thursday morning after he drove from Plano to Bryan to meet with what he thought was a 13-year-old girl he had met online, authorities say.

Rarely do the priests get caught in the RCC, and when they do the pope has been covering it up for them. They rarely face criminal charges. The Church takes care of it for them. It is within the Church's jurisdiction. He is just shipped off to another jurisdiction only to commit the same crimes all over again.

The girl turned out to be a Bryan police officer working in an ongoing Internet sex sting.

I am glad the guy was caught and got what was coming to him. I wish it was so in the RCC.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

DHK why do you keep ignoring what I say? Note I said this in the same post you quoted

However, my point is that the structure of baptist churches is responsible for eliminating a lot of the problems associated with this type of thing.

Also note that my point was that the RCC was not the largest purpertrator of this type of proplem but it certainly is the most publicized.
Also note that the whole point of the article I posted was to show that despite the baptist structure we still have problems and this pastor was an IFB to which you've commented that Our pastors do not have that problem. The problem of pedophilia or being moved. If being moved I've already commented that our baptist structure helps avoid this issue. However if baptist were structured like the RCC then we would have similiar issues. Why? Because we have sinners in our churches too. Though I'm not IFB but SBC we still have the very same issues.

 

[DHK]

DHK why do you keep ignoring what I say? Note I said this in the same post you quoted
Also note that my point was that the RCC was not the largest purpertrator of this type of proplem but it certainly is the most publicized.
Also note that the whole point of the article I posted was to show that despite the baptist structure we still have problems and this pastor was an IFB to which you've commented that Our pastors do not have that problem. The problem of pedophilia or being moved. If being moved I've already commented that our baptist structure helps avoid this issue. However if baptist were structured like the RCC then we would have similiar issues. Why? Because we have sinners in our churches too. Though I'm not IFB but SBC we still have the very same issues.

Baptist churches in general, especially the IFB and many of the SBC do not have this problem because generally their membership (especially their leadership) are composed of born again members. That is not so in the RCC. They hardly know what the term means.

Secondly they ARE the largest perpetrator of this crime.
Not only are they the largest, they have been doing it for the longest period of time--over centuries.
And now, finally, it is being publicized. It is about time that their cover-ups, all of these atrocities are being brought to the light. They have been hidden for far too long. They are not the most publicized because they are the largest, but rather because in the past they were the most secretive, and now finally they are being exposed.

 

[Peggy]

The man was arrested (not transferred or a crime covered-up), and his resignation was immediate (the RCC keeps him as a priest just shifts him to another parish)

The resignation took effect immediately. There is no resignation in the RCC.

Rarely do the priests get caught in the RCC, and when they do the pope has been covering it up for them. They rarely face criminal charges. The Church takes care of it for them. It is within the Church's jurisdiction. He is just shipped off to another jurisdiction only to commit the same crimes all over again.

DHK, you are a few years behind the times. The reforms in the RCC over the past 10-15 years have eliminated the problem of accused priests being transferred, etc. You can't entirely eliminate abuse, (abusers are notoriously good at covering their crimes) but the RCC has taken as many steps as humanly possible to root out abusive priests and punich them. There is always throughout society a minority of men across all professions (coach, teacher, minister, Boy Scout leader, etc) who will commit terrible crimes against children.

There is a process in the RCC whereby a priest is forbidden from excercising priestly functions if he has been convicted of abuse.

My friend's priest was removed from his parish with a mere accusation of acting inappropriately. He is now retired and does not have a parish anymore. There was never any proof of any wrongdoing, but the mere accusation was enough to remove him from parish life.

I'm not RCC, but I gotta ask how many times must the Bishops and Pope say they are sorry before the apology is accepted? How many millions/billions of dollars must be spent before the victims/accusers are satisfied?

Most of the crimes were commited 30-50 years ago, and many of the accused priests are dead and no longer able to defend themselves. Yet the RCC still made payments to the accusers and their lawyers. In what civil jurisdiction do we pronounce the word "guilty!" when the accused is not able to defend himself?

 

[DHK]

I'm not RCC, but I gotta ask how many times must the Bishops and Pope say they are sorry before the apology is accepted? How many millions/billions of dollars must be spent before the victims/accusers are satisfied?

They will never be satisfied, and for good reason.

Most of the crimes were commited 30-50 years ago, and many of the accused priests are dead and no longer able to defend themselves. Yet the RCC still made payments to the accusers and their lawyers. In what civil jurisdiction do we pronounce the word "guilty!" when the accused is not able to defend himself?

Suppose your daughter was the victim of a horrible rape by your next door neighbor's teen-age son. It was very brutal. It leaves ugly scars (emotional and otherwise) on your daughter. The teen is not caught. He goes free. Your daughter dies eventually of AIDS. Years later the teen's Grandfather comes forward and apologizes to you for his grandson's terrible action toward your now deceased daughter. Do you accept his apology (what is termed a "proxy apology" --an apology on behalf of another).
I hope you are wiser than that. Apologies can only come from the perpetrators of the crime and from no one else. They must come accompanied with repentance or the apology is not sincere. No matter how many times the pope apologizes it is meaningless. He cannot apologize for the crimes of another. It is impossible, meaningless, and does no good. It is only a symbolic meaningless gesture. You can't pay off repentance. Neither can you buy your way into heaven.

 

[DHK]

DHK, you are a few years behind the times. The reforms in the RCC over the past 10-15 years have eliminated the problem of accused priests being transferred, etc. You can't entirely eliminate abuse, (abusers are notoriously good at covering their crimes) but the RCC has taken as many steps as humanly possible to root out abusive priests and punich them. There is always throughout society a minority of men across all professions (coach, teacher, minister, Boy Scout leader, etc) who will commit terrible crimes against children.

There is a process in the RCC whereby a priest is forbidden from excercising priestly functions if he has been convicted of abuse.

Go back and read the quotes posted from various news articles.
If those "reforms" were implemented then the pope himself would step down and resign. He is part of the problem. He is involved in the cover-up.

 

[lori4dogs]

DHK said: "Secondly they ARE the largest perpetrator of this crime."

Thinkingstuff provided evidence to the contrary. Where is yours?