Another Priest Bites the Dust

#26
#26
Gramps said:
They should strip them of their priesthood instead of relocating to another parish so they can molest more children. That is common sense.

The Church has a history of protecting the pedophiles instead of the children. That is wrong.
Click to expand...

Of course it's wrong, and most cases were handled poorly but what do you do when someone makes 30 year old allegations with no evidence?
 
#27
#27
VolsNSkinsFan said:
When you get married, you devote your life to that person. When a person becomes a priest, they are marrying the church and devoting their lives to God. A priest simply doesn't have the time to run a church and a family. You are either all in or you are not.

There are people called Deacons who do basically everything a priest does in a church and they are allowed to be married. The only difference is they can't perform Eucharist
Click to expand...

The Bible, the CC book of guidance disagrees with you.

The Church is the bride of Christ.

A bishop is to be the husband of one wife.
One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity.
For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the Church of God.

That is real simple. No where in the bible does it say a priest cannot be married, it says otherwise.
 
#28
#28
rjd970 said:
The whole idea of adding theology into the argument clouds the issue and is one of the biggest beefs I have with any organized religion.
Click to expand...

I am not sure what else you would expect from a religion than for that religion to base what they do on theology.

rjd970 said:
Society shouldn't care who this organization thinks it answers too, or what crackpot idea they have about penance. These priests broke the law and the organization they belong to tried to covered it up, swept it under the rug, etc. these priests and the church should be brought up on charges. Period.
Click to expand...

I agree that society should not care; I am stating that within the Church, I see their justifications for handling these things 'in-house' as legitimate according to their dogma. I think the manner they have handled it has not been effective.

rjd970 said:
Seriously, if this were a corporation and one of its employees were caught breaking the law and they acively covered it up, we wouldn't even be having this discussion. I see no difference, and the fact that this organization is a "church" and that somehow makes it different is absolute bull****.
Click to expand...

It certainly makes a difference from the point of view of the Church.

rjd970 said:
All the talk of what their specific religious beliefs are and how that should play into how this is handled is nauseating.
Click to expand...

You do not believe the religious beliefs of the Church ought to play into how the Church ought to handle this?
 
#30
#30
Gramps said:
The Church should not see itself as higher than the State. Christ himself said to "Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's". Christians are to adhere to the laws of the state.
Click to expand...

The Church does see itself as higher than the State, and the Church gives an interpretation of that passage that reconciles it with such a belief.

rjd970 said:
All Christians sin daily. We all can be forgiven. We all still have to suffer the consequences of our sins. If a priest, bishop, pastor or elder of any Christian church does something that disqualifies them for holding that office the church should disqualify them.
Click to expand...

If they are forgiven, they are forgiven. Again, whether or not one believes with Catholic Dogma, one will be extremely disappointed if they think that the Church is going to change anything that has been ruled dogmatic.

rjd970 said:
As far as priest not being allowed to marry. This has no biblical foundation. One of the qualification stated in the bible is that a bishop or deacon should be the husband of one wife. This is an example of one of the many errors of the CC. They have these councils, make up dogma that has zero biblical backing. The CC uses the Bible as their book of guidance yet ignore it when setting dogma.
Click to expand...

I agree that it has no biblical foundation; and, thus, it is only doctrinal and not dogmatic. Priests were allowed to marry well into the eleventh century. Some Cardinals, Bishops, and Priests in the Catholic Church continue to push for allowing Priests to marry.

Moreover, the Catholic Church does not solely rely on the bible for its guidance; it relies also on tradition and the writings of Christians that predate the compiling of the bible as a compiled text.

Finally, you are erring in your use of the term "dogma". Celibacy is not dogmatic; it is doctrinal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#31
#31
Like I said. If you want to be a priest, you can't devote your life to God and a family. If you want to raise a family and be a "priest", you enter seminary school to become a Deacon. A Deacon does everything a priest does except he goes home at night to his family. A Deacon married me and my wife, and also baptised my kids.
 
#33
#33
therealUT said:
I am not sure what else you would expect from a religion than for that religion to base what they do on theology.


I agree that society should not care; I am stating that within the Church, I see their justifications for handling these things 'in-house' as legitimate according to their dogma. I think the manner they have handled it has not been effective.



It certainly makes a difference from the point of view of the Church.



You do not believe the religious beliefs of the Church ought to play into how the Church ought to handle this?
Click to expand...

I agree that from within the Church, they can view this and handled anyway they want. Like you say, that will be driven by their particular recipe of dogma.

However, how it is handled by society outside the Church and their dogma.....if that is at odds with how the Church thinks it should be handled, tough ****, the Church will have to get over it and God will have to comply. The bottomline here is if there is any criminal culpibility by the priest and/or the Church as an organization, all parties should be brought up on charges...it doesn't matter what they might think God says about it.
 
#34
#34
rjd970 said:
I agree that from within the Church, they can view this and handled anyway they want. Like you say, that will be driven by their particular recipe of dogma.

However, how it is handled by society outside the Church and their dogma.....if that is at odds with how the Church thinks it should be handled, tough ****, the Church will have to get over it and God will have to comply. The bottomline here is if there is any criminal culpibility by the priest and/or the Church as an organization, all parties should be brought up on charges...it doesn't matter what they might think God says about it.
Click to expand...

Well said. A member or leader of any church/religion is not above the law.
 
#36
#36
rjd970 said:
I agree that from within the Church, they can view this and handled anyway they want. Like you say, that will be driven by their particular recipe of dogma.

However, how it is handled by society outside the Church and their dogma.....if that is at odds with how the Church thinks it should be handled, tough ****, the Church will have to get over it and God will have to comply. The bottomline here is if there is any criminal culpibility by the priest and/or the Church as an organization, all parties should be brought up on charges...it doesn't matter what they might think God says about it.
Click to expand...

While I tend to agree, such a move will result in the abandonment of confessor confidentiality. I'm fine with that; I am also okay with the loss of attorney-client privilege and doctor-patient confidentiality. I have my doubts that most in society would be willing to give these up, though. And, I feel that dropping the former and retaining the latter two can be based only on arbitrary whim.

Can also add spousal confidentiality to the mix.
 
#38
#38
therealUT said:
The Bible is not the only guiding source of the Catholic Church. Never has been the only guiding source; never will be the only guiding source.
Click to expand...

Your correct, the next most important guiding source is $$$$$.

:)
 
#39
#39
therealUT said:
The Church does see itself as higher than the State, and the Church gives an interpretation of that passage that reconciles it with such a belief.
Click to expand...

What is the passage?



If they are forgiven, they are forgiven. Again, whether or not one believes with Catholic Dogma, one will be extremely disappointed if they think that the Church is going to change anything that has been ruled dogmatic.
Click to expand...

One can be forgiven but one can also lose certain privileges.



I agree that it has no biblical foundation; and, thus, it is only doctrinal and not dogmatic. Priests were allowed to marry well into the eleventh century. Some Cardinals, Bishops, and Priests in the Catholic Church continue to push for allowing Priests to marry.
Click to expand...

Priest not being allowed to marry is an example of the CC simply making up doctrine/dogma.


Moreover, the Catholic Church does not solely rely on the bible for its guidance; it relies also on tradition and the writings of Christians that predate the compiling of the bible as a compiled text.
Click to expand...

Finally, you are erring in your use of the term "dogma". Celibacy is not dogmatic; it is doctrinal.
Click to expand...

Sorry for the misuse of dogma /doctrine.
 
#41
#41
TRUT, let me know when that codeine kicks in and I 'll back off and play nice. :)


I enjoy picking your brain concerning the CC. You are as well versed on it as anyone I have talked to about it. :hi:
 
#43
#43
Gramps said:
What is the passage?

One can be forgiven but one can also lose certain privileges.

Priest not being allowed to marry is an example of the CC simply making up doctrine/dogma.

Sorry for the misuse of dogma /doctrine.
Click to expand...

1. The render to Caesar passage. The Church does not interpret this passage as suggesting that the State is more authoritative than the Church. They make a distinction between material things of this world and the spiritual. The Church has authority in all spiritual matters, and this includes matters of righteousness and wrongdoing and the state of the soul.

2. Not according to the Church's understanding of forgiveness.

3. There were reasons for making Priests commit to celibacy in the eleventh and twelfth centuries. The Church has always claimed the power to administer dogma in whatever fashion it pleases so long as those doctrines do not conflict with or contradict dogma. This is akin to the US government being able to legislate in ways that do not conflict with the Constitution.
 
#45
#45
MG1968 said:
Allow priests to get married.

problem solved (for the most part)
Click to expand...

Priest should be allowed to marry.

I do not think that will solve the problem of Gay pedophile priest. Not being allowed to marry is not going to cause a man to molest a boy.

Every pedophile priest should be stripped of their priesthood, turned over to the proper authorities to be charged. That will solve the problem.
 
#46
#46
Gramps said:
TRUT, let me know when that codeine kicks in and I 'll back off and play nice. :)


I enjoy picking your brain concerning the CC. You are as well versed on it as anyone I have talked to about it. :hi:
Click to expand...

Not a problem; it is a good discussion. However, I do have to head in and tell some young kids about Nietzsche in just a second. So, I might be done with VN for the rest of the day.
 
#48
#48
therealUT said:
Not a problem; it is a good discussion. However, I do have to head in and tell some young kids about Nietzsche in just a second. So, I might be done with VN for the rest of the day.
Click to expand...


take care. enjoyed the discussion.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top