J
jay29
Guest
People shouldn’t attack the CC because EVERY single denom has molesters: Unfortunately, where there are children there will always be molesters.
- Status
J
jay29
Guest
I have been preaching this forever. My decisions are not based on other people’s sins. Foolish is a weak term for those who leave the Church.
E
estesbob
Guest
I am sorry you left the Church but I understand why you did, It was a HORRIBLE thing some of our clergy did and even more horrible how it was covered up. And NOTHING can excuse it -not even pointing out other denominations are worst.
I was so upset about this I not only spoke to my Pastor I also cornered my Bishop at an ordination party and let him have it to.
But I aint going anywhere. No man I MEAN NO MAN is going to separate me from God’s Church.
One of the reasons I am sorry you left the Church is because we need people like you, those who recognize this betrayal of trust for what it is, to help sort this out and help keep it from happening again.
J
jay29
Guest
Like this wake up call? stopbaptistpredators.org/index.htm
I
inJESUS
Guest
Neither is a priest necessarily a saint, nor is a lay man necessarily a demon. We are all striving. Forgiveness and prayer are needed to all because satan is always at work, specifically against priests/nuns. We must take each others’ hands and teach and show and pray, not judge.
E
Eden
Guest
It’s my opinion. And your response is intriguing. Weak? Hmm… Considering the number of times the words “fool” and “foolish” appear in the Bible, I’d have to disagree with your comment.
For instance:
**Then he said to them: O foolish, and slow of heart to believe in all things which the prophets have spoken. - Jesus (Luke 24:25)
**So, I reiterate that you are foolish for leaving the Church founded by Christ.
C
Cathdefender
Guest
I wish people or non-Catholic Christians understand that this was all predicted by our Lady. That a crisis would erupt within the Catholic church and it would start at the top. Satan had entered the priesthood, the church Jesus founded.
C
Cathdefender
Guest
Priests are servants of God. They give their whole lives up for him.
Some ordained have unique histories: Hai Duc Din, 46, of the Diocese of Davenport, Iowa spent a year in a Vietnamese labor camp.
Doctor Marvin Laird of Virginia comes to the priesthood after a medical career. Kevin Bauman 47, of Indiana is a former Vice Chairman of Romance language dept at the UND.
David Link is a former dean of a college, he heard the priestcall through prison ministry.
There are priests who come from other denominations. Mark Barr 29, grew up Episcopalian and converted to Catholicism in college. Jeffrey Wharton 38, a former Episcopalian minister.
Brandon Jones who grew up Baptist will be ordained this week.
The largest numbers coming from Mexico, Vietnam, Poland, and the Phillipines. The percentage of foreign born is nearly the same in 2008 as in 2007 but has INCREASED from the 22% reported in 1999.
Some ordained have unique histories: Hai Duc Din, 46, of the Diocese of Davenport, Iowa spent a year in a Vietnamese labor camp.
Doctor Marvin Laird of Virginia comes to the priesthood after a medical career. Kevin Bauman 47, of Indiana is a former Vice Chairman of Romance language dept at the UND.
David Link is a former dean of a college, he heard the priestcall through prison ministry.
There are priests who come from other denominations. Mark Barr 29, grew up Episcopalian and converted to Catholicism in college. Jeffrey Wharton 38, a former Episcopalian minister.
Brandon Jones who grew up Baptist will be ordained this week.
The largest numbers coming from Mexico, Vietnam, Poland, and the Phillipines. The percentage of foreign born is nearly the same in 2008 as in 2007 but has INCREASED from the 22% reported in 1999.
S
Steven_John
Guest
tanks i kant speell hey.
dont follow the bold bit, i reckon no religion is immune.
Peace be with you and yours
S
Steven_John
Guest
Islam is around 500 years behind on the calender.
I am not a historian but dont think Christians were doing as good as they are now 500 years ago.
S
Steven_John
Guest
God blessed the world through your Grandmother.
S
SIA
Guest
What kind of garbage is that? What are you trying to prove here?
S
SIA
Guest
Why the childlike behavior? It seems very disingenuous that you treat such a deplorable scandal with such careless disregard. I don’t recall anyone teaching filth and immoral behavior in their church and you know very well that this is not the point here. Stay on subject please.At least the CC’s teachings are clean and not soiled.
G
Gottle_of_Geer
Guest
Seventy-two thousand ? That is not untrue - that is a whopper of an exaggeration of an untruth. I’m impressed.
If it were true, why is the total number of Catholic martyrs from his reign to be accounted Venerable, Blessed or Saint no more than**…fifty** ? Even including all those whose names have been considered as possibly to be reckoned as martyrs, the number of English & Welsh martyrs & putative martyrs is no more than 600. In actuality, only 361 at most - the figure should probably be 357 - have been judged to be martyrs: & that is for the entire period 1535 to 1680. Add the Irish martyrs, & the figure of 600 rises to 857; for the entire period 1535 to 1702 (one of the Irish martyrs died in prison in that year). This is for England, & Wales, & Scotland, & Ireland.Even if one assumes - on no evidence - that ten times as many died in prison for the Faith as are* known* to be martyrs, the figure is no more than ten thousand for those 167 years & those four areas. (I have bumped up 857 to 1000 in order to nudge the stats as high as possible - there is no reason to think the figures come anywhere close to 5,000, let alone to 10,000 - let alone 72,000 in the reign of Henry VIII alone.
The Revd. Fr. has made a very simple error: he (or his source ?) has AFAIK mistaken** the number of criminals put to death during the entire reign** of Henry VIII - from 1509 to Jan. 28 1547 - for the number of Catholics who suffered as martyrs following the break with Rome in 1534. My source ? The “Guinness Book of Records”, of all things. That figure must itself have a source, so they seem to be the folk to consult.
BTW - 72,000 for the entire reign would include Protestants; they too suffered. I doubt that even the severest critic of Henry VIII would think them to be Catholic martyrs
From that page:
**King Henry VIII **of England, who took upon himself the role of grand royal inquisitor, took the lives of some 72,000 Catholics, many who were cruelly tortured.
Queen Elizabeth, proved herself the former’s daughter by putting to death more people in one year than the Inquisition had done in 331
Which year ? “People” =//= Catholics; let alone Catholics put to death for the Faith. Catholics guilty of plotting against the monarch are traitors, not in name alone, but in fact. So monstrous & wicked a crime is no ground to be reckoned a martyr, so those wicked & abandoned wretches have never been accounted martyrs by Catholics.
D
dosdog
Guest
Political Executions ordered by King Henry VIII to secure the throne of England
According to Raphael Holinshed (died c. 1580) the English chronicler, who compiled the work commonly known as Holinshed’s Chronicles, the number of executions in his reign amounted to 72,000. Anyone who disobeyed the orders of King Henry VIII were executed for treason. These executions also included every living descendent from the Plantagenet line of English Kings. His ruthlessness even extended to Margaret Pole, Countess of Salisbury (1473-1541) who was the last direct descendant of the Plantagenet line - she was as descendent of King Edward III and 68 years old when she was cruelly executed on the block.
the-tudors.org.uk/king-henry-viii.htm
According to Raphael Holinshed (died c. 1580) the English chronicler, who compiled the work commonly known as Holinshed’s Chronicles, the number of executions in his reign amounted to 72,000. Anyone who disobeyed the orders of King Henry VIII were executed for treason. These executions also included every living descendent from the Plantagenet line of English Kings. His ruthlessness even extended to Margaret Pole, Countess of Salisbury (1473-1541) who was the last direct descendant of the Plantagenet line - she was as descendent of King Edward III and 68 years old when she was cruelly executed on the block.
the-tudors.org.uk/king-henry-viii.htm
V
vocatio
Guest
I see your point. It shouldn’t be burried. It should be dealt with properly. But as an Orthodox priest explained to me. This is not a reason to “run” away from a faith. All you are doing is running away. Scandals have been around forever. The Church is made up of sinners, not perfect people. We are broken. It sounds like you ran like I did.
But where the H.E. double tootpicks were you when I was suffering from abuse? You lack of opening a dialogue hurt people like me. What about those that stopped believing in God altogether because of the many people that reacted like you? [making a point here so don’t go off the deep end like I just did] I held on for 10 years with no support and finally caved into pride. I was severely anti-Catholic for 17 years. I hated the idea of returning to the Roman Catholic Church. But the more I learned the more I realized that the Church was not the Roman Catholic Church but rather the Church of Christ…as defined in Catholicism, not my former Protestant faith.
I feel even more scandalized when I find someone that abandoned me before this stuff came to the media. Where wer you when all of us were struggling behind the scenes being told to SHUT UP?
E
emeraldcoast
Guest
In the news today…
Victims advocates protest priest’s bid for new trial
By Denise Lavoie, AP Legal Affairs Writer | May 29, 2008
BOSTON --Advocates for clergy sex abuse victims said Thursday that they were outraged that a priest at the center of the Boston clergy sex abuse scandal is seeking a new trial, based on a challenge to the theory of repressed memories.
Defrocked priest Paul Shanley, 77, is serving a 12- to 15-year sentence for repeatedly raping and fondling a boy at a Newton parish in the 1980s. The victim testified that his repressed memories of the event surfaced in 2002.
Shanley was in Suffolk Superior Court on Thursday for a hearing on his motion for a new trial, during which his new lawyer, Robert Shaw Jr., argued that the theory of repressed memories was “junk science.”
Shaw said Shanley’s trial lawyer failed to vigorously challenge the theory during his trial.
“Paul Shanley, just like any other citizen, is entitled to a fair trial,” he said.
Boston attorney Mitchell Garabedian, who represented more than 100 clergy abuse victims who reached civil settlements with the Boston Archdiocese, said he has been flooded with calls about Shanley’s motion for a new trial.
“The victims outraged that Father Shanley might have any possibility of having a new trial,” Garabedian said. “The victims desperately want closure.”
Robert Costello, a Norwood man who said he was sexually abused by another priest during the late 1960s and early 1970s, said he attended the hearing to remind Shanley about the victims of clergy sex abuse.
“He should not get a new trial,” Costello said. “There was more evidence than just the doctors talking about repressed memories. There was (the victim’s) testimony.”
Shanley’s accuser testified that Shanley repeatedly pulled him out of catechism class and raped and fondled him, beginning when he was 6 years old. He said he recovered memories of the abuse in 2002, when the news media began reporting on the clergy abuse scandal in the Boston Archdiocese.
Assistant District Attorney Loretta Lillios said Shanley’s defense did call an expert witness during the trial who questioned the reliability of repressed memories and also cross-examined the state’s expert on the phenomenon.
Judge Stephen Neel did not immediately rule on the motion.
Shanley was known in the 1960s and 1970s as a “street priest” who reached out to troubled children and gays. He became a central figure in the abuse scandal after at least two dozen men claimed he molested them.
boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2008/05/29/victims_advocates_protest_priests_bid_for_new_trial/
Victims advocates protest priest’s bid for new trial
By Denise Lavoie, AP Legal Affairs Writer | May 29, 2008
BOSTON --Advocates for clergy sex abuse victims said Thursday that they were outraged that a priest at the center of the Boston clergy sex abuse scandal is seeking a new trial, based on a challenge to the theory of repressed memories.
Defrocked priest Paul Shanley, 77, is serving a 12- to 15-year sentence for repeatedly raping and fondling a boy at a Newton parish in the 1980s. The victim testified that his repressed memories of the event surfaced in 2002.
Shanley was in Suffolk Superior Court on Thursday for a hearing on his motion for a new trial, during which his new lawyer, Robert Shaw Jr., argued that the theory of repressed memories was “junk science.”
Shaw said Shanley’s trial lawyer failed to vigorously challenge the theory during his trial.
“Paul Shanley, just like any other citizen, is entitled to a fair trial,” he said.
Boston attorney Mitchell Garabedian, who represented more than 100 clergy abuse victims who reached civil settlements with the Boston Archdiocese, said he has been flooded with calls about Shanley’s motion for a new trial.
“The victims outraged that Father Shanley might have any possibility of having a new trial,” Garabedian said. “The victims desperately want closure.”
Robert Costello, a Norwood man who said he was sexually abused by another priest during the late 1960s and early 1970s, said he attended the hearing to remind Shanley about the victims of clergy sex abuse.
“He should not get a new trial,” Costello said. “There was more evidence than just the doctors talking about repressed memories. There was (the victim’s) testimony.”
Shanley’s accuser testified that Shanley repeatedly pulled him out of catechism class and raped and fondled him, beginning when he was 6 years old. He said he recovered memories of the abuse in 2002, when the news media began reporting on the clergy abuse scandal in the Boston Archdiocese.
Assistant District Attorney Loretta Lillios said Shanley’s defense did call an expert witness during the trial who questioned the reliability of repressed memories and also cross-examined the state’s expert on the phenomenon.
Judge Stephen Neel did not immediately rule on the motion.
Shanley was known in the 1960s and 1970s as a “street priest” who reached out to troubled children and gays. He became a central figure in the abuse scandal after at least two dozen men claimed he molested them.
boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2008/05/29/victims_advocates_protest_priests_bid_for_new_trial/
E
estesbob
Guest
Priest’s are not above the law BUT they are not below the law either.
D
DJgang
Guest
I do not see the name of one of my former ministers on that website…I think I need to email them…
Nope, just found him!
What is so bad is that most of these denominations do not communicate with each other. My former minister was a baptist when his ordeal happened and he just walked over to the United Church of Christ.
Nope, just found him!
What is so bad is that most of these denominations do not communicate with each other. My former minister was a baptist when his ordeal happened and he just walked over to the United Church of Christ.
- Status