Senior Clergy covering up - "I don't remember."

  • Thread starter Thread starter Uriel1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
It’s bad enough reputable sources are writing/producing divisive content around the current issues; we definitely don’t need this anti-Church garbage.
 
On the contrary; our church is going to be excoriated by nationwide grand juries in the USA and we need to prepare to rebuild the Church of God without those who are about to be judged

Some of the guilt lies on the laity for not challenging the red frocked cardinals, and bishops in their error.

Ask yourself why did it take the Boston Globe to open this can of worms? Why were the parents of the boys who were abused, not themselves able to charge the evil portion of the clergy?
 
Not arguing any of that. Just saying your source is worse than the worst anti-Catholic, toxic Protestantism.
 
I don’t know enough about CM to judge them; they are exposing the contempt with which some very high church leaders are treating the people, and God - and you complain about them! Howso?
Sent using BlackBerry® from Orange
 
Last edited:
Uriel1 said:
I don’t know enough about CM to judge them
Click to expand...
Then should you be reposting their content? IMO, one should research the background of the pundits whose imformation they disseminate and see if they have ulterior motives.
 
I’m not saying CM has or does not have ulterior motives. I just think it’s irresponsible to disseminate information without having judged the source.
 
This devastating information is the archbishop saying he doesn’t remember knowing or not knowing that it was a sin for a priest to have sex with a child; and you criticise the source ?
Sent using BlackBerry® from Orange
 
Last edited:
It doesn’t matter if it’s Church Militant, Fox News, MSNBC or whatever. This information comes from a video-taped deposition of Archbishop Robert J. Carlson, who’s diocese is being sued for sex abuse. The answers he gives are truly unbelievable.
2014 deposition of Archbishop Robert J. Carlson

Q: Archbishop, you knew it was a crime for an adult to engage in sex with a kid?
A: Um, I’m not sure whether I knew it was a crime or not. I understand today it’s a crime.

Q: When did you first discern it was a crime for an adult to engage in sex with a kid?
A: I don’t remember.

Q: When did you first discern that it was a crime for a priest to engage in sex with a kid who he had under his control?
A: I don’t remember that either.
Click to expand...
We all need to hear this, folks. The cancer in our Church will never be rooted out if we bury our heads in the sand and attack the messenger.
 
Uriel1 said:
On the contrary; our church is going to be excoriated by nationwide grand juries in the USA and we need to prepare to rebuild the Church of God without those who are about to be judged
Click to expand...
take it from me. rebuilding will take years
 
There is nothing wrong with CM as a source.

Are you saying the supplied video is incorrect? You seem to be ignoring the video and talking more about CM. If CM did bad reporting here, please point it out.
 
I’m saying neither of those things.

It’s irresponsible to share info online and then say
Uriel1 said:
don’t know enough about CM to judge them
Click to expand...
In this era of disinformation, we need to use and patronze services we have examined and judged ourselves, not just regurgitate Google results.
 
I have no doubt about the veracity of the content of the evidence from the video; none at all.

You, on the other-hand, have attempted to cast doubt on its veracity by suggesting (judging) CM is not reliable, while saying nothing about the shepherd discussing his overseeing of those who may have done major wounds to his sheep

All Catholics need to see this video and waken up, or we too will be called to account
Sent using BlackBerry® from Orange
 
Last edited:
Had the church leaders taken care of this 37 years ago then the church would have been restored by now.
 
BoomerangToo said:
It doesn’t matter if it’s Church Militant, Fox News, MSNBC or whatever. This information comes from a video-taped deposition of Archbishop Robert J. Carlson, who’s diocese is being sued for sex abuse. The answers he gives are truly unbelievable.
2014 deposition of Archbishop Robert J. Carlson

Q: Archbishop, you knew it was a crime for an adult to engage in sex with a kid?
A: Um, I’m not sure whether I knew it was a crime or not. I understand today it’s a crime.

Q: When did you first discern it was a crime for an adult to engage in sex with a kid?
A: I don’t remember.

Q: When did you first discern that it was a crime for a priest to engage in sex with a kid who he had under his control?
A: I don’t remember that either.
Click to expand...
I wonder…

Can YOU tell us exactly when you learned the law that “it was a crime for an adult to engage in sex with a kid?”

Do YOU remember the exact day, month, and year when you first learned this? For that matter, could anyone ever really answer such a question? Imagine having to answer a question like that “under penalty of perjury.”

If someone asked me, under oath, “when did you first discern that it was a crime to rob a bank?” I wouldn’t be able to answer. I don’t remember the exact date that I leaned that fact. That doesn’t mean I’m being evasive. It doesn’t mean I’m trying to hide anything. It certainly doesn’t mean that I robbed any bank. It means that the question itself is meant to provoke more than enlighten.
Click to expand...
 
I certainly wouldn’t say that I have ever been unsure that it is a crime to have sex with a kid though - it has been criminal certainly for all of my lifetime and I.would venture for all of Carlson’s too. ‘Age of consent’ has been a thing - and an incredibly widely known one - for over a century, surely?
 
Last edited:
LilyM said:
I certainly wouldn’t say that I have ever been unsure that it is a crime to have sex with a kid though - such has been criminal certainly for all of my lifetime and I.would venture for all of Carlson’s too. 'Age of consent has been a thing for over a century, surely?
Click to expand...
Still, can you remember the exact date that you learned it? That’s what he was being asked. He wasn’t just being asked “if” he knew it, or even if he knew it before he became a bishop. He was asked to explain when he learned it.

In U.S. courtrooms, we generally do not expect people to be able to answer questions beyond their expertise. If someone asked me a legal question in a court (or deposition) I would answer “I’m not a lawyer” just the same as if someone asked me a medical question I’d say “I’m not a doctor” or a tax question “I’m not an accountant.”

If someone says “I learned it was a crime on such-and-such a date” that implies either expertise in the law (such as “I learned it in criminal law course 602”) or a specific event that would cause someone to have that specific knowledge.
 
That is ridiculous; anyone of Carsons age knew in the 70s that it was a crime to have sex with a child. End of …!
Sent using BlackBerry® from Orange
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top