About the Priest scandals

  • Thread starter Thread starter Zynxensar
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
13pollitos said:
Of course they aren’t in the US and it was during the 1980’s, but I’m struggling with understanding why he was excommunicated yet homosexual priests that break their vows (often repeatedly) don’t face the same punishment.
Click to expand...
I think active homosexual priests are subject to being defrocked. Depends on the bishop of the diocese. I’ve known a couple of priests that from all visible “evidence” were homosexual. One was a disaster, the other a beloved pastor who kept his sexuality to himself, although he was constantly seen with his “friend”. Public homosexuality on the part of priests should be a scandal that warrants defrocking. But that is up to the bishop. One cannot condemn on the basis of hearsay or opinion. This was back in the 80’s and early 90s so it was much more lax back then. I think in todays climate, there is little or no tolerance for such public activity. At least in my diocese.
 
I’m sure it’s easy to trivialize when nothing happened to you at all. I’m not terribly impressed with blatant prejudice but I know it’s easy to fall back on hate instead of love. After all… man is by nature a political animal.
 
Take care of business in your own diocese. Hold your Bishop’s feet to the fire and don’t take any excuses.

If you wait for Rome to ‘fix it’ you had better believe the ‘fix is’ already in and nothing Christ honoring will be done.

I am not RC (Calvinist actually) but I have experience with the priest/predator syndrome. If you don’t nip it at bud or shortly after there will be enormous consequences. No matter how bad, take care of it now! get it done! for the glory of Christ don’t let child molestors continue on your payroll.

I am not saying you need to publicly confess the sins within your parish but you do need to stop these egregious sins or your communion will be of no consequence.
 
Defrocked is not the same as excommunicated. Why would a heterosexual priest who petitioned Rome in the early 1980’s to voluntarily leave, was denied due to priest shortages in his country —not US — be excommunicated for a heterosexual relationship, yet a known homosexual be allowed to just carry on as long as they “avoid scandal?” Or at most be defrocked.

I know that several priests in the 70’s and 80’s in the US voluntarily left to marry, but not all countries was it as easy process. Since he was excommunicated and so was his wife once they married, their children were not able to be baptized or anything. I just don’t understand why they had that penalty but something considered “disordered” is treated so much less harshly.
 
phil19034 said:
So after all these years, after hearing so many people as “why did Jesus pick Judas?”, I think we finally have our answer. He picked Judas so we don’t leave the Catholic Church during scandals like the ones we have today.

God bless.
Click to expand...
This has been expressed by a few, but what of those who left because they were the ones abused?

No one has a right to put themselves in the line of abuse, not if you believe you were made in the Image and Likeness of God, you have no right to subject yourself or your children to abuse, horrific abuses at that.

I commend these persons to God for restoration for which nothing is impossible, but I won’t dissuade persons from uncertainties they have every right to have, nor will I speak ill of those that have left. I am in no way superior to someone who felt they could not affirm their faith, that is between a soul and God.
 
I know what happened. He is my family member. And he was excommunicated for a heterosexual relationship. He asked to leave the priesthood and denied due to shortage of priests. After 3 years of attempting to leave the priesthood, he was excommunicated. At that point, he returned to my grandparents home, found employment, moved to the city and married. I have no problem (and never have had a problem) with his excommunication. He accepted it as well and never voiced an ill word about it or the Church. He knew what the consequences were from. The problem I have is that homosexual priests are not treated as harshly. Cardinal McCarrick and several others were beasts that did FAR worse for much longer, and no one has even thought of excommunication.
 
I didn’t say he wasn’t. I said that it makes no sense that a priest is denied permission to leave for marriage in a heterosexual relationship yet homosexual priests have not been treated as harshly. My uncle never thought the Church was wrong do excommunicating him. I don’t either. My problem is the double standard
 
No I don’t think I did. He was at peace. His wife dies about 6 years before him as well. Their four children are grown. One is now Catholic, and my uncle encouraged his conversion.
 
Did you read the article?

It explains why excommunication is done in some cases and not in others.
The fact that you are responding back with the same old complaint about “homosexual priests” suggests to me that you have not read the article nor thought about the issue, you just have this idea in your head that things should be the way you say.

Based on the article, there are many reasons why priests engaged in homosexual or even heterosexual relations might not be excommunicated. One reason being that excommunication is not a penalty for a past bad act, as explained in the article. You seem to be ignoring that point entirely.

Sorry, but it’s hard to have a discussion with somebody who just wants to keep saying, “Well I think they should do it my way” and won’t consider reasons why they might not do it “their way”.
 
I don’t know so much that I’m angry now that i have reflected upon this more. It’s more of a deep frustration and confusion. I don’t understand why homosexuality is called disordered yet seems to be a less likely to be called out than other sexual sins. Is it a shame thing that fuels the desire to keep it hidden? Is the desire to keep it hidden stronger than the need to do something about it? I really don’t know.

As for my uncle, yes he disobeyed his bishop. The bishop told him to keep his relationship “quiet” and that many “priests have children” but my uncle didn’t feel that was right. He did believe the Church was correct about sexual morality and that it would cause scandal. I don’t feel like more information would do anyone any good here. He was at peace when he died and always spoke highly of the Church. They raised their children with Catholic morals even though they were not able to baptize them. I can’t understand how what he did warranted excommunication while serial abusers don’t, or consensual homosexual relationships that are ongoing (or multiple over decades) are just kept secret. If found out the worse that happens is they are defrocked.
 
I’m actually seeing the opposite about “homosexuality being called out”. I cannot look at anything Catholic on the Internet without seeing somebody calling out gay people, the “gay lifestyle”, gay clergy, gay weddings. There are days when I think the only two sins left on the Church’s radar are being gay and having an abortion.

I have made this statement before on here and been told that different people process things in different ways and some people need to talk a lot about gays, homosexuality, etc in order to get a grip on the moral issue. Okay. But to say it’s just being ignored or hidden is incorrect.

With respect to clergy, I am seeing a whole lot of different sexual behavior by them being ignored, brushed off (priests having consensual love affairs with women and leaving to get married seems treated as normal behavior now) or hidden. It’s a general issue with sweeping clergy behavior under the rug. It doesn’t seem like it’s a special case of sweeping gay behavior under the rug, except that priests obviously can’t leave the priesthood and marry a man and still be a Catholic in good standing like they can with women.
 
I am not arguing about this. You obviously want to for some reason even after you said,

“OK, well I guess we have nothing more to discuss then, since what we have here is a failure to communicate. Good day.”

Obviously we do.
 
13politos, This is a discussion thread. I posted in it specifically without hitting the “reply” button to you because I wished to make a general comment, not engage with you personally any further as that would be unproductive based on your responses. Bye.
I’m muting this now as I get the impression anything further I say here, you’re going to take personally.
 
Last edited:
joeybaggz said:
While I share your animus with priests who transgress their vow of chastity, I might suggest that priests who commit sexual crimes (with consenting adults) be chastised by their superior, defrocked if the offense is serious enough, and allowed confession to confess and repent of their sins. And not be put in a position to commit them again while wearing a Roman collar.
Abuse of minors is a different story. I think they need to be immediately defrocked and turned over to the proper civil authorities for punishment under the law of the land.
As to burning in hell, let’s leave that up to the mercy, or justice, of God.
Click to expand...
  1. You cannot comment a sex crime between two consenting adults, but it can still be sexual abuse or improper sexual relationship due to position of power / hierarchy / chain of command / violation of chastity, etc.
  • However, yes, I agree that any clergy found in such situation should be removed from public ministry due to breaking chastity and defrocked if it was abuse.
  1. Yes, abuse of minors deserves the police & defrocking right away, as does sexual assault on an adult.
  2. In regards to my comments regarding them “deserving to burn in Hell,” I was refering to all abusers. I never said “they will burn in Hell,” I said they deserve to (as do many, if not all, of us). Only though the Mercy of God are some of us saved from the fires of hell.
God Bless
 
DENNYINMI said:
40.png
phil19034:
So after all these years, after hearing so many people as “why did Jesus pick Judas?”, I think we finally have our answer. He picked Judas so we don’t leave the Catholic Church during scandals like the ones we have today.

God bless.
Click to expand...
This has been expressed by a few, but what of those who left because they were the ones abused?

No one has a right to put themselves in the line of abuse, not if you believe you were made in the Image and Likeness of God, you have no right to subject yourself or your children to abuse, horrific abuses at that.

I commend these persons to God for restoration for which nothing is impossible, but I won’t dissuade persons from uncertainties they have every right to have, nor will I speak ill of those that have left. I am in no way superior to someone who felt they could not affirm their faith, that is between a soul and God.
Click to expand...
Well, all I can say to someone who has been abused is this:
  1. “I’m very sorry this has happened to you. Such a thing is evil and should have never happened, esp by someone in the Church. These wolves and sheep’s clothing will get what they deserve when they see God face to face.”
  2. I would also offer them has much mental support as I could give them and make sure the receive(d) professional help.
  3. Finally, when appropriate, I would gauge their belief in the Catholic Church. If they believe that the Catholic Church is the one, True Church founded by Christ, then I would genitally talk to them about “where would they go”? I would also genitally tell them not to let evil/sinful men chase them out of the Church. But rather, we need to kick these sinners out.
Regardless, it’s not an easy thing to do. It can take a lot of time, listening, and charity. But if they believe the Catholic Church is the one, true Church, then were can they go?

God Bless
Phil
 
It ain’t just the priests and their 1000’s of vics, which is horrendous enough.

It’s that the hierarchy actively and systematically covered it up, and enabled countless thousands of others to be victimized.

New York and several other states have issued subpoenas to multiple dioceses.

This news broke just today.

If you think it’s bad now, brace yourself–because what’s coming down the pike when they pull back the cover of so many decades of abuse, shuffling priests, and running cover for these abusers, and how many vics the Church failed to protect and even enabled to their abuse, through so many states…

…it’s going to make 2002 seem like a pebble in a puddle.

So yeah, it’s a huge, horrendous deal.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top