Phony Mahony & the Homosexual Priest Cover-Up

American Vision ^ | 7/17/2007 | Gary DeMar

[fortheDeclaration]

Actually, I can't find the ping on it, so I am wondering if I did post #43 at all.

My Mafia comment was on another thread.

[Straight Vermonter]

I hate to dredge it all up again but your contention was that the practice of abusing children had been going on for 1000 years and that it was part of the religion.

I don’t see how it could have been anyone else’s post since I simply hit “post reply”.

[spotbust1]

..

[fortheDeclaration]

I hate to dredge it all up again but your contention was that the practice of abusing children had been going on for 1000 years and that it was part of the religion.

Thank you, I had forgotten what I had posted.

Yes, I and cited Rev.2:20.

[spotbust1]

Well said.

[Uncle Chip]

The priesthood is no longer dominated by the homosecuals. There is testing of seminarians, and if the get through that and other conclusions are drawn by supervisors, then they are kicked out of the seminary.

That is wishful thinking. The RCC draws a distinction between homosexuality and homosexual acts --- only the latter being sinful. So your magisterium regularly ordains non-practicing homosexuals as priests and sees no problem with it.

[BlessedBeGod]

Actually, no, it is not. When a Bishop reaches 75, he has to tender his retirement to the Pope, but the Pope can choose to leave him in office past his 75th birthday.

But his retirement is mandatory on his 80th birthday, whether the Pope likes it or not.

[fortheDeclaration]

I don’t see how it could have been anyone else’s post since I simply hit “post reply”.

No, it was my post.

when a post gets deleted it must get erased from one's ping list and I had forgotten what I had posted.

[xzins]

Revelation 18 "To the angel of the church in Thyatira write: 19 I know your deeds, your love and faith, your service and perseverance, and that you are now doing more than you did at first. 20 Nevertheless, I have this against you: You tolerate that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess. By her teaching she misleads my servants into sexual immorality and the eating of food sacrificed to idols. 21 I have given her time to repent of her immorality, but she is unwilling. 22 So I will cast her on a bed of suffering, and I will make those who commit adultery with her suffer intensely, unless they repent of her ways. 23 I will strike her children dead. Then all the churches will know that I am he who searches hearts and minds, and I will repay each of you according to your deeds. 24 Now I say to the rest of you in Thyatira, to you who do not hold to her teaching and have not learned Satan's so-called deep secrets (I will not impose any other burden on you): 25 Only hold on to what you have until I come. 26 To him who overcomes and does my will to the end, I will give authority over the nations-- 27 'He will rule them with an iron scepter; he will dash them to pieces like pottery'-- 27 just as I have received authority from my Father. 28 I will also give him the morning star. 29 He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches.

[maryz]

The former is an “impediment” to the priesthood (i.e., a disqualifier). Yes, too many have been admitted, but it was in direct disobedience to explicit directives of the Church.

[Machavelli]

You really should study scripture and stop using it to further your prejudice against the church. Jer. 16:1-4 Jeremiah is told not to take a wife and have children. 1 Cor 7:8 St. Paul was celebate for the sake of the kingdom Mt 19:12 Celebacy is praised by Jesus. Therefore, celebacy is not for everyone but for those who forsake marriage for the sake of the kingdom of God.

[fortheDeclaration]

Exactly-so I don't know why the post was pulled-it was scriptural!

Oh, maybe that's why-because it was scriptural!

What version is that, the NKJV?

[xzins]

it was on the bible that came up on crosswalk.com

I think it was NIV

[fortheDeclaration]

it was on the bible that came up on crosswalk.com I think it was NIV

Owww, my eyes!

[xzins]

LOL!

Gimmeabreak. :>)

[P-Marlowe]

It’s a dirty job that no one wanted. Some one had to step up and do it. Would any one begrudge these high minded lawyers their measly $650 an hour for for bringing so sordid an era to light?

Um, I do believe that the $650 per hour lawyer fee was what the church was paying to keep this sordid affair in the dark. The lawyers who were bringing this to light were on contingencies.

[xzins]

Looks like their lawyer lost.

At $650 an hour, you’ve gotta wonder what the church’s legal fees were over the course of this to add on top of their 100+ million separate payouts + this $666 million payout.

I’ll bet they’ve got a BILLION DOLLARS of offering plate money, property, savings, and investments from their members absolutely wasted. Might as well just flushed it down the commode.

And did their members even get any change for all this money. Nope. Not a bit. They left the same crew in charge.

It’s mind boggling. The pope’s have had their heads up their posterior anteriors.

[P-Marlowe]

I think the biggest difference between a $650 per hour lawyer and a $200 per hour lawyer is that the $650 per hour lawyer will convince you that he can, (by virtue of his prestige and high fee) win a case that you are certain to lose, and a $200 per hour lawyer will tell you your case sucks and you need to settle out early.

It's nice to see that the LA RCC is getting screwed at both ends since they seem to have been doing that to their parishioners for so many years

[blue-duncan]

“I think the biggest difference between a $650 per hour lawyer and a $200 per hour lawyer...”

$450 per hour. If they are insurance defense lawyers then the rate is probably closer to $200.00. I did some defense work on products liability cases and finally told the insurance company to look elsewhere. It was costing me money to defend them.

By the way, I understand there is a confidentiality agreement attached to the settlement. The plaintiffs can’t talk about the cases or their experiences and the Diocese does not have to produce any information. That is probably worth more than the money settlement to the Diocese.

[xzins]

By the way, I understand there is a confidentiality agreement attached to the settlement. The plaintiffs can’t talk about the cases or their experiences and the Diocese does not have to produce any information. That is probably worth more than the money settlement to the Diocese.

"The things said in secret should be proclaimed openly...."

--Jesus of Nazareth, ca 30 AD.