(no subject)

[dv8nation.livejournal.com]

http://articles.philly.com/2011-02-11/news/28350535_1_abuse-allegations-grand-jury-report-archdiocesan-priests

Archdiocesan leaders in Philadelphia have been raked over the coals by a new report out stating that very little has changed in the way the Church deals with priests suspected of molesting kids.

The review board designated to hear abuse allegations routinely ignored evidence substantiating those claims, the grand jurors contended. And at least 41 priests were left in active posts around the region after being accused of inappropriate behavior or abuse of minors.

"The evidence presented before us indicates that the Archdiocese continues to engage in practices that mislead victims, that violate their trust, that hinders prosecution of their abusers, and that leave large numbers of credibly accused priests in ministry," the report stated.


I'm not really surprised by this, but it's still kinda incredible that the Church just doesn't seem to be learning ANYTHING from recent years. Every time something like this happens it ruins any credibility the Church has built in a community, especially one where this has been a problem before. Moving pedo priests around is akin to trying to deal with cancer by giving it a good scolding.

The only real good coming out of all this is that people seem to be keeping a close eye on the Church and taking them to task for their failings. I'm guessing it's going to take a lot more painful lessons before the church gets that they're really going to have to start doing things a new way.

Letting priests marry would help a lot. It's one of the main things keeping men out of the priesthood. Which tends to leave the alter boy lovers filling in more of the ranks. But I'm not Catholic so I suppose that's easy for me to say.

Comments

[anosognosia.livejournal.com]

Yes, and you're mistaken, there are in fact Catholic priests who are married. The celibacy of the clergy is, etc.

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

As far as I'm aware, the only RCC priests who are married are ones who were ordained as Orthodox and then crossed over later and are allowed to remain married.

[anosognosia.livejournal.com]

While there are special dispensations for some Latin rite priests, a Catholic priest of any other rite is free to marry, as the celibacy of the clergy is an aspect of the Latin rite rather than fundamental doctrine.

[ddstory.livejournal.com]

Just out of curiosity, do you ever get worked up about anything else but religion, philosophy and the church?

[anosognosia.livejournal.com]

I never get worked up about anything, it's all the yoga and chamomile.

[green-man-2010.livejournal.com]

isn't this enough ?

[ddstory.livejournal.com]

I was trying to be nice.

[green-man-2010.livejournal.com]

Oh , you *were* nice - I should have used a smiley.

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

You do realize that doctrine =/=dogma, right? I'm sorry I used the term fundamental, maybe that's what's confusing you, but it is a primary piece of doctrine for the RCC.

[anosognosia.livejournal.com]

I'm not confused, you are just mistaken. The celibacy of the priests is an element of the Latin rite nor of Catholic doctrine, and Catholic priests of other rites can marry.

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I said that already.

[anosognosia.livejournal.com]

You said that Catholic priests can marry? I must have missed that. Oh well, I'm glad we have a consensus on the issue and agree that Catholic priests can marry.

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

http://community.livejournal.com/talk_politics/897139.html?thread=68327027#t68327027

[anosognosia.livejournal.com]

Under that link you say "[clergy being allowed to marry] will never happen for the RCC." This is surely the exact opposite of what you just finished claiming you've said. Or does RCC stand for something other than the Catholic church?

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

RCC is the Roman Catholic Church, which is the Latin Rite, which we just agreed does not allow for married priests, with the exception of those "transferring in". I believe that situation will not ever change.

[anosognosia.livejournal.com]

"RCC is the Roman Catholic Church..."

Right. So you see how we are saying different things, right?

Me: RCC ordains married priests.
You: RCC doesn't ordain married priests.

"...which is the Latin Rite..."

No, it's not. Latin Rite Christianity is neither limited to nor exhausted by Catholicism. There are both non-Latin Rite Catholics and Latin Rite non-Catholics.

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

Me: RCC ordains married priests.
You: RCC doesn't ordain married priests.

And you are wrong on this point.

http://www.ewtn.com/library/ANSWERS/MARPRIE.htm
Finally, concerning married Episcopalian clergy becoming Catholic priests, "the Holy See has specified that this exception to the rule of celibacy is granted in favor of these individual persons, and should not be understood as implying any change in the Church's conviction of the value of priestly celibacy, which will remain the rule for future candidates for the priesthood from this group."

And whether there is Latin Rite groups outside of the RCC isn't relevant to the point, as I'm only talking about the RCC.

[anosognosia.livejournal.com]

"And you are wrong on this point."

Well one of us probably us. My guess is that it's the one who hasn't bothered looking into this, doesn't know what they're talking about, and doesn't regularly work with married Catholic clergy. But hey, I'm always one for surprise endings.

"http://www.ewtn.com/library/ANSWERS/MARPRIE.htm"

Why are you linking me about Latin rite priests?

"And whether there is Latin Rite groups outside of the RCC isn't relevant to the point, as I'm only talking about the RCC."

Yes, it is relevant to the point, since you falsely declared that Latin rite and Catholicism are the same thing. This is the basis of your error: knowing that Latin rite priests cannot marry without special dispensation, and falsely believing that Catholicism and Latin rite are the same thing, you've falsely concluded that Catholic priests cannot marry without special dispensation.

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

Yes, it is relevant to the point, since you falsely declared that Latin rite and Catholicism are the same thing.

No, I didn't. Your entire comment here seems to betray a reading comprehension problem on your side.

[anosognosia.livejournal.com]

Oh, so you agree that Catholic priests can be married without special dispensation. It sure doesn't seem like it, but hey maybe I have a reading comprehension problem. In any case, I am glad we have come to a consensus and all agree that Catholic priests can marry.

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

so you agree that Catholic priests can be married without special dispensation.

Yes, however, Roman Catholic priests cannot become priests if they are married without a special dispensation. If they are already priests before they become Roman Catholic, then they don't need the dispensation. The link I gave you explained it pretty clearly.

[anosognosia.livejournal.com]

Althougn, for shits and giggles:

gunslnger: "RCC is the Roman Catholic Church, which is the Latin Rite."
anosognosia: "you falsely declared that Latin rite and Catholicism are the same thing"
gunslnger: "No, I didn't. Your entire comment here seems to betray a reading comprehension problem on your side."

Ok ok, my bad. You didn't say "Latin rite and Catholicism are the same thing." What you said is that the former "is" the latter. And of course what does "is" mean?

DURRR.

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

There's an errant "the" in there before "Latin Rite", sorry.

As for what "is" means, "A is B" does not imply "B is A".

[green-man-2010.livejournal.com]

and the C of E ones too...
Oh, wow. If I was a preist and was celibate, but then a bunch of anglican clerics came in b/coz they didn't like women being ordained, and managed to become catholic preists and keep their wives too - i guess I would be miffed to say the least. Stiill, sexixt priests and a corrupt Church , they deserve each other and I hope that the influx of anglicans will do niether side any good. A plague on both their houses, I say.