Posted on 12/29/2010 10:28:03 AM PST by marshmallow
You haven't been paying attention either.
I didn't say that having a married priesthood would solve that problem. I never said that other denominations don't have problems with sexual sin in their clergy because they are married. I know of pastors who have been removed from the ministry because of adultery.
What I said was that the advantage of a married priesthood is that it would increase the pool of men available to be priests so that they could fill the ranks of those homosexual/pedophile ones who need to be removed.
Just what do you think would happen to the Catholic church if it decided to do a wholesale clean out of the homosexual element within its ranks?
Could the church bear that without collapsing?
Could that be a factor in WHY the Catholic church has not yet dealt with the problem as it should? That it knows that it can't afford to in the loss of active priests?
There is no Scriptural reason for having an unmarried priesthood. Paul references other apostles, Peter included, who were married. Being married and being a minister of the gospel is not mutually exclusive.
No, actually, they do not. There have been very few new cases of abuse in the last few years.
However, because there are still multiple homosexuals in positions of leadership, the Lavender mafia does continue to protect its own from criminal prosecution for old allegations, a situation that cries out to God for vengeance.
IMHO:
1) I certainly would like to find out, ASAP.
2) I'm not worried. The Lord will Provide, and the gates of Hell will not prevail. (And I already drive past a dozen parishes to get to an orthodox one with a real man on the altar.)
3) The real problem is open schism. Too many western bishops are homosexual. The issue isn't the loss of priests, which the Church can weather. The problem is the fear of open schism, which the Vatican fears more than anything else. Bad bishops only last a few decades, schism is measured in centuries and millenia.
There's no scriptural reason for believing sola scriptura either, but that doesn't stop you and yours from following that false gospel.
Jesus was single. That's good enough Scriptural reason for me ;-)
FReepmail me if you don’t mind & let me know what parish you attend. When I’m in town visiting, I’d like to attend an orthodox church :-)
Wow!!! Thanks for this. My mother is a member of St Benedict’s & I always go with her when I’m in from Pittsburgh. I’ll make it to this church next time, though, for sure!
Also, the 260 cases per year are not limited to Protestant clergy it includes claims against clergy, school staff, camp counselors, and volunteers, ect.
The numbers from the Catholic church include clerics only according to the Catholic church.
Scripture is all that is needed to make one wise for salvation and thoroughly equipped for every good work.
Jesus regularly stated *It is written....*
If *It is written* is good enough for Jesus, it's good enough for me.
Hey, if a man wants to remain single and be in the ministry, I don't have a problem with that. There is Scriptural support for one who chooses that lifestyle. That's his choice and his business.
It's the making singleness mandatory that has no Scriptural support.
He was fiddling with his cousin’s son. Dear God. He’s not just a perv, he’s weapons-grade stupid.
Why are you asking me? I don't know what OPC's policies and procedures are. If you want to know, look them up yourself.
FWIW, we had a pastor in one church we attended who had some issues that the church was dealing with. Not sex abuse ones like pedophilia, but other moral issues.
I found out through a friend that he was seeking a position as pastor in their church, he had gone down for an interview with them, unbeknownst to our church leadership, and obviously had no idea that there was any connection to anyone in our church.
They called me and asked what I knew about him since he was from our home town. We were mortified to hear what he was doing and warned our friends about him and went to our pastor and told him. The pastor got on the case immediately and that put an end to that in pretty short order. He was not permitted to hold the position of pastor in our denomination again.
Sadly, another church (denomination) took him on as pastor, even with his past. They knew it but it was outside our auspices. You can warn but not force.
I know of another pastor who was removed for adultery. The denomination dealt with it when it came up and his credentials were revoked. He's no longer a pastor in that denomination either.
Neither of those cases, however, demanded or required legal action as a child abuse charge would.
Knowing what I know about the Protestant/Evangelical churches I've seen those experiences in, I don't doubt that if contacting law enforcement for criminal charges was warranted, that they would do it.
Any church which doesn't carefully investigate the pastoral candidate and do a thorough background check is irresponsible in my book. That's a lot more safeguard than shuffling priests around so that nobody knows his past and ends up protecting him while more children got molested.
All those questions could be asked of the Catholic church as well.
Celibacy among priests is a Church discipline, not doctrine or dogma. Nevertheless, the scriptural support for the practice, as with all things Catholic, is rock solid:
The "To make sure that congregants can safely report sex abuse to authorities?" is the most hysterical to think of in regard to a Catholic church. Are congregants ever consulted or advised on who the new appointees are or what their background is? Could a Catholic feel safe from threat of ex-communication for turning in a priest they knew that about? How many congregants were ever told of why priests were reassigned, either in the church they left or the church they were going to.
I dare say that Protestant congregations are much more in touch with the pastoral selection process and what they're getting in a prospective pastor than ANY Catholic is concerning a new priest who has been assigned to their parish. The congregations are very active in the selection of a new pastor. He's interviewed by the board a couple times. He's often interviewed in a special meeting with the congregation where they get to ask him questions of their own. They get to hear him preach. The board typically provides a portfolio and qualifications and personal history of the man to the congregation for them to examine. The selection of a pastor is not done in a vacuum with the congregation having to take what's given to them.
Not much. That’s because the ecclesiastical structure of Presbyterian Churches Roman Catholic church is structured to allow those bodies to wash their hands of any responsibility. So, given that their flocks are being preyed upon, what have they done to assume responsibility? Nothing. They can’t be sued for what they don’t know, and therefore, they’d rather remain ignorant and officially irresponsible.
The Church has authority, given by Christ, to lose and to bind:
I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven."
Based on the scriptural foundations linked in my post above, the Church has made this discipline, and it has the authority, given by Christ in scripture, to do so.
Its all a matter of interpretation. You with your sola scriptura false gospel interpret it one way, and the Church, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit and by the authority granted by Jesus Christ, interprets it another way.
Bear in mind that our Lord’s patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him. 16 He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction. Therefore, dear friends, since you already know this, be on your guard so that you may not be carried away by the error of lawless men and fall from your secure position.
I'll go with the Church on this, as scripture instructs me.
I always find it incongruous when a Catholic rejects sola scriptura as inadequate or a false doctrine, and then turns around and appeals to Scripture as a point of authority to justify Catholic church doctrine.
Someday you’ll understand. Pray for the enlightenment of the Holy spirit.
“The congregations are very active in the selection of a new pastor.”
“He’s often interviewed in a special meeting with the congregation where they get to ask him questions of their own”
I see.
So where does the buck stop if something goes awry? With the pastor-—or with the congregation that vetted him?
I can’t help but perceive this process as the sheep selecting the shepherd(pastor)-—the sheep sizing up the shepherd-—the sheep testing the shepherd against the “proofs” of Scripture.
How then—in such a process—can he be pastor (shepherd) if he is at the will of the sheep (congregation). Who—in the final analysis is accountable? There has to be one held accountable.
I believe that the way the Catholic Church does it is more biblical. The flock is given a shepherd and the shepherd must account for his flock. The pastor is vetted and sent forth by his bishop, whose role it is to send the right pastor and to hold that pastor responsible—as the bishop himself also is.
ping
I can honestly say from first hand experience that there is no threat of excommunication involved in turning in a priest for abuse.
That said, Catholics are not congregationalists. We have no more say over whether or where an abuser is reassigned than any parent of a government school child has over whether their child's teacher has a similar history, which is an order of magnitude higher probability.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.