Posted on 01/18/2018 5:58:35 PM PST by BackRoads775
SANTIAGO, Chile (AP) — Pope Francis accused victims of Chile’s most notorious pedophile of slander Thursday, an astonishing end to a visit meant to help heal the wounds of a sex abuse scandal that has cost the Catholic Church its credibility in the country.
Francis said that until he sees proof that Bishop Juan Barros was complicit in covering up the sex crimes of the Rev. Fernando Karadimas, such accusations against Barros are “all calumny.”
(Excerpt) Read more at apnews.com ...
Maybe the next time they throw a newspaper at him, they’ll use the Sunday New York Slimes.
So, if you are abused by a church official as a child, you should just later shut up so as not to be accused of slander?
So what does Barro have on Francis?
Jorge Bergoglio is not the Pope. That position still remains with Benedict XVI.
Hence why Bergoglio continues to spout utter heresies without relent.
Satan has entered the Pope’s Vatican and made himself at home.....
“In the typical Chilean family, parents (now) think twice before sending their kids to Catholic school because you never know what is going to happen,” Navia said.
All driven by anti-Catholic media. As a group priests are less likely to be child molesters.
But the media use every opportunity to go after the Catholic Church, which, of course, has its share of sinners.
Most of those claiming victimhood were boys in the teens.
Related. Other instances where Francis’ actions favored an accused abuser.
https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/six-cases-where-the-sexual-abuse-scandal-touches-pope-francis
I cannot wait for this excuse to be given on 'Judgment Day? These perverts groomed the boys, so that magical day of puberty past, this excuse would be made. Whom ever came up with the notion they could 'write' out excuses for gravity of the sins, based upon the age of the victim is only fooling themselves. You all are messing with the One who keeps the perfect record.
These perverts groomed the boys, so that magical day of puberty past, this excuse would be made.
It was sinful. But not as bad as pedophilia. They were not small children. I think Paul puts them on the same level as adulterers and thieves.
Very sad. Have you heard about what some English people have been calling Irish Catholics? Priest f*ers. Disgusting.
God destroyed Sodom, and called the acts an abomination ... He put no age on the act... A priest that grooms a boy for him self until puberty is as bad as it gets... And those that make excuses for this are not going to like the end. It is twisted beyond words to then make the post puberty teen as culpable as the pervert that grooms the boy.
What a piece of work this guy is!
Aside from that, Due Process is a good thing, ñ'est-ça pas?
Accusation-based trial and conviction in the press has gone far too far (a la #MeToo and previous accusations elsewhere in the Church), especially with respect to ex post facto elimination of statutes of limitation.
These changes promote & enable accusations of decades-old actions, to the point that the perp in question is senile or has died, and therefore unable to present a defense.
Unfortunately for the accusers, a below-average 1st-year law student could make a strong case that all the ratings-driven pretrial publicity severely compromises the defendant's ability to obtain a impartial jury in any venue. There are good reasons for Statutes of Limitations. They support the 6th Amendment right to a speedy trial, and the ability to face one's accuser.
To paraphrase others, "better that one guilty man go free than 10 innocent men go to jail" (Blackstone, Maimonides (at second quote on page referenced)).
I suspect that FReepers as a group would prefer an actual trial-by-jury (rather than trial-by-media), should anything like this happen to them.
That pesky Rule of Law thing, again.
Pope Pizza dropped the mask for an instant.
He’s the Obama of the RCC
28 - Even a blind pig can find an acorn, on occasion.
However, “One swallow does not a Summer make”.
I myself have severe problems with and concerns about the current resident of St. Peter’s Chair. But then I spent 8 years in the Jesuit education system, so the to-date performance of a South-American, Marxist-Liberation-Theology Jesuit comes as no surprise.
Not unlike the performance of a certain clean-and articulate community organizer we predicted during the latter’s election campaign.
Interregnums have happened before in history. Several lasted 2 years or more. And then there was the Western Schism (1378 - 1417) a period of 40 years in which there were two, sometimes three different simultaneous claimants to the papacy.
Fr. Pete, though in the past rather a Francis fan, evidently didn't think that was outside the range of possibility.
The ImPopester hits a new low.
The feminists will be outraged. Or maybe not.
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.