Pope Lauches New Priest Recruiting Initiative.

[citizenal]

Catholic Church Tells Bishops They Are Not Obliged to Disclose Child Sex Abuse: Report

The Catholic Church is allegedly telling newly ordained bishops that they have no obligation to report child-sexual-abuse allegations to law-enforcement officials, saying instead that the decision to take such claims to the authorities should be left to victims and their families.

The policy was first reported by a veteran Vatican journalist at Catholic news website Crux, who cited a presentation given by French Monsignor Tony Anatrella.

Anatrella, a consultant to the Pontifical Council for the Family and the Pontifical Council for Health Care Workers, also authored a training document for new bishops released by Church authorities last week, in which similar guidelines are laid out.

"According to the state of civil laws of each country where reporting is obligatory, it is not necessarily the duty of the bishop to report suspects to authorities, the police or state prosecutors in the moment when they are made aware of crimes or sinful deeds," his document states, according to a citation in the Guardian.

Victim-support groups have reacted with fury to the revelation, according to news agency UPI.

Crux adds that the Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors — a major body created by Pope Francis last year to establish "best practices" for the church in its battle against child abuse — was not involved in the training process.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/catholic-church-tells-bishops-they-are-not-obliged-to-disclose-child-sex-abuse-report/ar-BBpnzm4?li=BBnbfcL&ocid=iehp

 

[aris2chat]

More multi dollar swindlers of the elderly

 

[citizenal]

More multi dollar swindlers of the elderly

Swindlers of the elderly? How about the poor and needy?

Any Pope worth his salt would establish a zero tolerance for child abuse, not create an environment where it can flourish. Apparently, the thinking is that Priests sacrifice much by forgoing marriage. Surely, having your way with an altar boy is small compensation for this.

Should we expect any less from a Pope that sanctions the New World Order and our wars of aggression in the Middle East?

Money talk and bullshit walks. When it comes to Rome, money and bullshit go hand in hand.

 

[HaShev]

Isn't that what got coach Paterno in trouble, knowing, but not going to the authority?
We learn from similarities, the Church should take a good look at how that policy ruined a great beloved man and how the public views that hush up to save your program behavior.

 

[Blackrook]

You forgot this part:

"the decision to take such claims to the authorities should be left to victims and their families."

Stop being a wanker and pay attention to what the article says.

 

[citizenal]

,

You forgot this part:

"the decision to take such claims to the authorities should be left to victims and their families."

Stop being a wanker and pay attention to what the article says.

You truly have to be joking!

An altar boy is being assaulted by a priest in the rectory. Another priest walks in, catches them in the act, and turns and leaves. In the altar boy's mind, the second priest leaving without taking action sanctions the act. Now he has two priests to "rat" on if he goes to the authorities. It takes a tremendous amount of courage to stand up to abuse like this especially when a young boy has to bear his shame in public. Most young boys just hide their shame and tolerate the abuse.

If the above scenario does not convince you; how about the situation where a ten year old altar boy is penetrated by a priest and likes it. Who is going to tell the authorities now if fellow priests keep their mouth's shut? The abuse can go on for years, with the willing underage boy being passed from priest to priest like a sex slave. Because the sex is consensual, does this make it okay? Apparently, you and the Pope think so.

From your reaction to this situation, three things seem abundantly clear. The first is that you do not know how to think. The second is that you are a Catholic. And the last thing is that you are gay. If I am wrong about any of these three things, it will come as a great surprise to me. We all know that the Pope is Catholic. As far as the other two attributes are concerned, I will leave it to the reader decide whether they apply to the Pope or not.

 

[Blackrook]

,

You forgot this part:

"the decision to take such claims to the authorities should be left to victims and their families."

Stop being a wanker and pay attention to what the article says.

You truly have to be joking!

An altar boy is being assaulted by a priest in the rectory. Another priest walks in, catches them in the act, and turns and leaves. In the altar boy's mind, the second priest leaving without taking action sanctions the act. Now he has two priests to "rat" on if he goes to the authorities. It takes a tremendous amount of courage to stand up to abuse like this especially when a young boy has to bear his shame in public. Most young boys just hide their shame and tolerate the abuse.

If the above scenario does not convince you; how about the situation where a ten year old altar boy is penetrated by a priest and likes it. Who is going to tell the authorities now if fellow priests keep their mouth's shut? The abuse can go on for years, with the willing underage boy being passed from priest to priest like a sex slave. Because the sex is consensual, does this make it okay? Apparently, you and the Pope think so.

From your reaction to this situation, three things seem abundantly clear. The first is that you do not know how to think. The second is that you are a Catholic. And the last thing is that you are gay. If I am wrong about any of these three things, it will come as a great surprise to me. We all know that the Pope is Catholic. As far as the other two attributes are concerned, I will leave it to the reader decide whether they apply to the Pope or not.

Reported.

 

[citizenal]

Blackrook: That's what should happen to the offending priest: "Reported"!

There is another angle on this thing which should be considered. In order to be a priest, it is essential to have a calling from God. Beyond all doubt, any priest that would molest a minor child could not have had a legitimate calling from God. A just and caring God would not invite a child molester into a position of leadership in His church. This being the case, any priest who molests a child should not only be defrocked, the offending priest should also be immediately reported to the authorities (Police) to ensure that no additional abuse occurs.

 

[Mudda]

Blackrook: That's what should happen to the offending priest: "Reported"!

There is another angle on this thing which should be considered. In order to be a priest, it is essential to have a calling from God. Beyond all doubt, any priest that would molest a minor child could not have had a legitimate calling from God. A just and caring God would not invite a child molester into a position of leadership in His church. This being the case, any priest who molests a child should not only be defrocked, the offending priest should also be immediately reported to the authorities (Police) to ensure that no additional abuse occurs.

A just and caring god wouldn't make pedophiles in the first place.

 

[aris2chat]

Blackrook: That's what should happen to the offending priest: "Reported"!

There is another angle on this thing which should be considered. In order to be a priest, it is essential to have a calling from God. Beyond all doubt, any priest that would molest a minor child could not have had a legitimate calling from God. A just and caring God would not invite a child molester into a position of leadership in His church. This being the case, any priest who molests a child should not only be defrocked, the offending priest should also be immediately reported to the authorities (Police) to ensure that no additional abuse occurs.

A just and caring god wouldn't make pedophiles in the first place.

So much for celibacy in the priesthood.

Defrock and turn them over to the police or castrate priests.

Maybe all men should be married before entering the priesthood so they won't be tempted or driven to abuse others.

 

[citizenal]

[/QUOTE] A just and caring god wouldn't make pedophiles in the first place. [/QUOTE]

Ah yes! The old argument comes back to haunt us. How can a just and caring God allow evil to exist. The answer; good is the province of God and Evil is the province of Satan. Not a great answer, but it is one that works. Frankly, I think of life as a crucible where the mettle of man is continually being tested for some higher purpose. Please don't ask me what that purpose is. As for me, I try to live on the side of good, not so much because I am such a nice guy, but because I don't want to take any chances.

 

[citizenal]

[/QUOTE] So much for celibacy in the priesthood. Defrock and turn them over to the police or castrate priests. Maybe all men should be married before entering the priesthood so they won't be tempted or driven to abuse others.[/QUOTE]

I think allowing priests to marry would go a long way toward helping reform the Catholic Church. A priest is supposed to be a counselor and advisor to the members of his congregation. To think that a celebrate person is a wise counselor for married couples stretches creditability and common sense.

Let's face it! If you have a profession where only unmarried males are allowed, where its members are viewed as pillars of the community, where its members wear gaudy dresses in public, and where its members have access to young adolescent boys on a routine basis, what can we reasonably expect as to the kind of people who would gravitate to a profession like this? The Bible says we reap as we sow. Well............?

 

[aris2chat]

So much for celibacy in the priesthood. Defrock and turn them over to the police or castrate priests. Maybe all men should be married before entering the priesthood so they won't be tempted or driven to abuse others.[/QUOTE]

I think allowing priests to marry would go a long way toward helping reform the Catholic Church. A priest is supposed to be a counselor and advisor to the members of his congregation. To think that a celebrate person is a wise counselor for married couples stretches creditability and common sense.

Let's face it! If you have a profession where only unmarried males are allowed, where its members are viewed as pillars of the community, where its members wear gaudy dresses in public, and where its members have access to young adolescent boys on a routine basis, what can we reasonably expect as to the kind of people who would gravitate to a profession like this? The Bible says we reap as we sow. Well............?[/QUOTE]


Apart from orthodox, the only married priests are those who were married before entering the catholic priesthood.

till the 16th C. Priest were allowed to marry and have mistresses.

 

[Compost]

The Vatican response.
Vatican: No, bishops are not being told to cover up abuse


Vatican City, Feb 11, 2016 / 12:42 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- Media reports are wrong to claim that the Vatican is telling new bishops that they don’t have to report sexual abuse, Holy See spokesman Father Federico Lombardi said.

A reported comment from a Vatican consultant is “not in any way – as someone has mistakenly interpreted – a new Vatican document or a new instruction or new 'guidelines' for bishops,” Fr. Lombardi said Feb. 11.
The news reports concerned a statement from French Monsignor Tony Anatrella, who contributed to a 2015 formation course for new bishops organized by the Congregation for Bishops.

Msgr. Anatrella, a consultant to the Pontifical Council for the Family and the Pontifical Council for Health Care Workers, wrote a document with a section reflecting on countries’ civil laws that mandate abuse reporting.

The document said “it is not necessarily the duty of the bishop to report suspects to authorities, the police or state prosecutors in the moment when they are made aware of crimes or sinful deeds.” Msgr. Anatrella said that decision is up to victims and their families.

Some media reports depicted the monsignor’s statements as an encouragement to cover up sexual abuse or as a claim that it is “not necessarily” a bishop’s duty to report sexual abuse in cases where laws require it.
However, Fr. Lombardi rejected this idea, saying that “Anatrella does not say anything new or different than what has been said by the competent ecclesiastical institutions.”

He directed reporters to a May 3, 2011 letter from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

There, the congregation told episcopal conferences that it is important to cooperate with civil authorities in responding to sexual abuse crimes. Without compromising the sacraments, it said, “the prescriptions of civil law regarding the reporting of such crimes to the designated authority should always be followed.”

Fr. Lombardi also noted that the comment is part of a single report of a collected volume from an expert conference on the formation of new bishops. That report was “published together with several others on different topics.”

 

[citizenal]

Dear Compost:

Let's see now; the Vatican tells us that no bishops are being told to cover up abuse. However in the document it says,“it is not necessarily the duty of the bishop to report suspects to authorities, the police or state prosecutors in the moment when they are made aware of crimes or sinful deeds.”

Clearly the Vatican is correct. The above quoted line in the document in question, does not tell bishops to cover up abuse. However, it does tell bishops that it is "not necessarily the duty of bishops......". Doesn't "not necessarily the duty.....", translate to "it is not the duty"? From my perspective, when the Vatican tells a bishop that something is "not their duty". or even "not necessarily their duty", the implication is that the bishop shouldn't do it.

Finally, the words, "in the moment when they are made aware of crimes or sinful deeds", is confusing also. I tend to agree with this instruction because it is not reasonable to expect anyone to do anything about anything the moment they hear it. But "in the moment when" is an ambiguity which begs to be defined and clarified.

Despite their denial, I think the Vatican still has a credibility problem on this issue and in consideration of its importance, they are remiss in this regard. There should be a zero tolerance policy from the Vatican on priestly child abuse. From everything the Vatican is telling us, at this point, it is clear that no such Zero tolerance policy exists and if none exits, the abuses will continue.

Personally, I was born and raised a Catholic and fell away from the Church in college. Far be it for me to tell anyone how they should worship God. However, as things stand now, I cannot imagine any parent allowing their child to be an altar boy in the Catholic Church and from my perspective, the fact that this state of affairs continues is disgraceful.

Somebody should tell the Pope that if he wants to stop a severed artery from bleeding, a Band-Aid will not do the job.

 

[Compost]

Dear Compost:

Let's see now; the Vatican tells us that no bishops are being told to cover up abuse. However in the document it says,“it is not necessarily the duty of the bishop to report suspects to authorities, the police or state prosecutors in the moment when they are made aware of crimes or sinful deeds.”

Clearly the Vatican is correct. The above quoted line in the document in question, does not tell bishops to cover up abuse. However, it does tell bishops that it is "not necessarily the duty of bishops......". Doesn't "not necessarily the duty.....", translate to "it is not the duty"? From my perspective, when the Vatican tells a bishop that something is "not their duty". or even "not necessarily their duty", the implication is that the bishop shouldn't do it.

Finally, the words, "in the moment when they are made aware of crimes or sinful deeds", is confusing also. I tend to agree with this instruction because it is not reasonable to expect anyone to do anything about anything the moment they hear it. But "in the moment when" is an ambiguity which begs to be defined and clarified.

Despite their denial, I think the Vatican still has a credibility problem on this issue and in consideration of its importance, they are remiss in this regard. There should be a zero tolerance policy from the Vatican on priestly child abuse. From everything the Vatican is telling us, at this point, it is clear that no such Zero tolerance policy exists and if none exits, the abuses will continue.

Personally, I was born and raised a Catholic and fell away from the Church in college. Far be it for me to tell anyone how they should worship God. However, as things stand now, I cannot imagine any parent allowing their child to be an altar boy in the Catholic Church and from my perspective, the fact that this state of affairs continues is disgraceful.

Somebody should tell the Pope that if he wants to stop a severed artery from bleeding, a Band-Aid will not do the job.

Dear citinzenal,

The Church has already put zero tolerance. Here's a link to that. Pope Francis pledges zero tolerance of child abuse by priests

As someone who has fallen away from the Church, you obviously have not kept up with what's been going on there. It sounds very much like you are simply parroting the 'Catholics are bad' line.

I don't know what your experience with the Church has been on a personal level. I'm sorry to hear that you no longer embrace the richness the Catholic faith offers. Maybe being away is why you are adverse to letting your child be an altar boy or girl. In my parish the matter of priest abuse is an open discussion including requests to report any abuse to the Church as well as to the civil authorities. It seems that the Church herself has adopted that policy some time ago in acknowledgement of the grave error in their handling of the abuses of a few decades ago.

In the present culture, I'm more concerned about children being abused by public school teachers than by priests.

 

[citizenal]

Dear Compost:

Thank you for bringing me up date on what has been going on lately in the Catholic Church.

The reason I am no longer a Catholic is because from my perspective, the Church and too much dogma, too much ritual, and not enough God in it. It is the "richness" you speak of which drove me away. I guess me and Martin Luther have a lot in common. For example, how can the Catholic church embrace the concept of purgatory when purgatory is never mentioned in the Bible. or spoken of by Jesus? Furthermore, just as I do not believe that Jews are a chosen people, I do not believe that any human being including the Pope is infallible. In the dark ages, once the Catholic Church became aligned with the governments of the day, I believe it became more of a state religion and had more in common with Judaism than Christianity. The church even sent armies of idiots out to fight the Crusades, a repeat of which we are seeing today, except instead of trying to steal the holy land for ourselves, we are now fighting to steal it for the Jews.

No thank you Compost you can keep the "filthy richness" of the Catholic faith for yourself and I will continue to love and follow Jesus.

 

[Compost]

Dear Compost:

Thank you for bringing me up date on what has been going on lately in the Catholic Church.

The reason I am no longer a Catholic is because from my perspective, the Church and too much dogma, too much ritual, and not enough God in it. It is the "richness" you speak of which drove me away. I guess me and Martin Luther have a lot in common. For example, how can the Catholic church embrace the concept of purgatory when purgatory is never mentioned in the Bible. or spoken of by Jesus? Furthermore, just as I do not believe that Jews are a chosen people, I do not believe that any human being including the Pope is infallible. In the dark ages, once the Catholic Church became aligned with the governments of the day, I believe it became more of a state religion and had more in common with Judaism than Christianity. The church even sent armies of idiots out to fight the Crusades, a repeat of which we are seeing today, except instead of trying to steal the holy land for ourselves, we are now fighting to steal it for the Jews.

No thank you Compost you can keep the "filthy richness" of the Catholic faith for yourself and I will continue to love and follow Jesus.

Thank you for your response, citizenal. I hope you find peace in Christ on your chosen path.

 

[citizenal]

Compost:

Thank you for your good wishes.

May God bless and keep you and yours.

Alan Adaschik