Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Wisconsin's Catholic child abuse anguish
BBC ^ | 26 March 2010 | Matthew Price

Posted on 03/27/2010 3:29:23 AM PDT by Gamecock

What must it feel like to have lost 50 years of your life? For that is what 61-year old Arthur Budzinski has endured.

Five long decades of personal pain.

And he has to rely on others to speak of his anguish.

It is made worse by the fact that no-one has been held to account for the sexual abuse he says he suffered as a child while at the Roman Catholic St John's School for the Deaf in St Francis, Wisconsin.

Arthur and around 200 other boys are said to have been sexually abused at the school by Father Lawrence Murphy, a Catholic priest.

He says he and others told members of the clergy back then that they were being watched, touched and exploited by Fr Murphy.

No-one listened.

(Excerpt) Read more at news.bbc.co.uk ...


TOPICS: Current Events
KEYWORDS: agendadrivenfreeper; arthurbudzinski; catholic; childabuse; clergy; freformed; lawrencemurphy; priest; sexualabuse; wisconsin
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-175 next last

1 posted on 03/27/2010 3:29:23 AM PDT by Gamecock
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Gamecock

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2480274/posts


2 posted on 03/27/2010 3:33:46 AM PDT by JoeProBono (A closed mouth gathers no feet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg; wmfights; Forest Keeper; the_conscience; Dutchboy88; RnMomof7; HarleyD; Quix

The Vatican insists there was no cover-up. It has accused the media and others of an "ignoble attack" on the Pope.

Seems that FRoman Catholics got their talking points straight from the top.

3 posted on 03/27/2010 3:34:32 AM PDT by Gamecock (If you want Your Best Life Now, follow Osteen. If you want your best life forever, don't. JM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JoeProBono

Thanks. My post and that link bring the pain of the victims to the forefront of this discussion.


4 posted on 03/27/2010 3:36:57 AM PDT by Gamecock (If you want Your Best Life Now, follow Osteen. If you want your best life forever, don't. JM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock

5 posted on 03/27/2010 3:37:04 AM PDT by JoeProBono (A closed mouth gathers no feet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: All

The Pope and the Murphy case: what the New York Times story didn’t tell you
By Phil Lawler | March 25, 2010 2:55 PM

Today’s front-page story in the New York Times suggests that the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF), under the direction of then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, failed to act against a Wisconsin priest who was accused of molesting scores of boys at a school for the deaf.

Is the story damaging? Yes. Should the Vatican have acted faster? Yes. Should the accused priest have been laicized? In all probability, Yes again.

Nevertheless, before assigning all blame to the Vatican, consider these factors:

1. The allegations of abuse by Father Lawrence Murphy began in 1955 and continued in 1974, according to the Times account. The Vatican was first notified in 1996: 40 years after Church officials in Wisconsin were first made aware of the problem. Local Church leaders could have taken action in the 1950s. They didn’t.

2. The Vatican, following the standard procedures required by canon law, kept its own inquiries confidential. But the CDF never barred other investigations. Local Church officials could have given police all the information they had about the allegations against Murphy. Indeed they could have informed police 40 years earlier. They didn’t.

3. Milwaukee’s Archbishop Cousins could have suspended Father Murphy from priestly ministry in 1974, when he was evidently convinced that the priest was guilty of gross misconduct. He didn’t. Instead he transferred the predator priest to a new diocese, allowing him to continue pastoral work giving him access to other innocent young people. And as if that weren’t enough, later Archbishop Weakland made sure that there was no “paper trail.” There was certainly a cover-up in this case. It was in Milwaukee, not in Rome.

4. Having called the Vatican’s attention to Murphy’s case, Archbishop Weakland apparently wanted an immediate response, and was unhappy that the CDF took 8 months to respond. But again, the Milwaukee archdiocese had waited decades to take this action. Because the Milwaukee archdiocese had waited so long to take action, the canonical statute of limitations had become an important factor in the Vatican’s decision to advise against an ecclesiastical trial.

5. In a plea for mercy addressed to Cardinal Ratzinger, Father Murphy said that he had repented his misdeeds, was guilty of no recent misconduct, and was in failing health. Earlier this month Msgr. Charles Scicluna, the chief Vatican prosecutor in sex-abuse cases, explained that in many cases involving elderly or ailing priests, the CDF chooses to forego a full canonical trial, instead ordering the priest to remove himself from public ministry and devote his remaining days to penance and prayer. This was, in effect, the final result of the Vatican’s inquiry in this case; Father Murphy died just months later.

6. The correspondence makes it clear that Archbishop Weakland took action not because he wanted to protect the public from an abusive priest, but because he wanted to avoid the huge public outcry that he predicted would emerge if Murphy was not disciplined. In 1996, when the archbishop made that prediction, the public outcry would—and should—have been focused on the Milwaukee archdiocese, if it had materialized. Now, 14 years later, a much more intense public outcry is focused on the Vatican. The anger is justifiable, but it is misdirected.

This is a story about the abject failure of the Milwaukee archdiocese to discipline a dangerous priest, and the tardy effort by Archbishop Weakland—who would soon become the subject of a major scandal himself—to shift responsibility to Rome.


6 posted on 03/27/2010 3:43:20 AM PDT by JoeProBono (A closed mouth gathers no feet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: JoeProBono

whatever


7 posted on 03/27/2010 3:44:02 AM PDT by happinesswithoutpeace (1.416785(71) x 10^32)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: happinesswithoutpeace

8 posted on 03/27/2010 3:47:41 AM PDT by JoeProBono (A closed mouth gathers no feet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock

St. John's basketball team, in the 1960's. Of 11 boys on the team, at least five say they were victims of Father Murphy (at left).


9 posted on 03/27/2010 3:51:07 AM PDT by JoeProBono (A closed mouth gathers no feet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock

Gamecock, I do not direct this toward you, as the issue is newsworthy and relevant - and merits discussion.

However, it’s just that (man alive), we get it already. This story, or variations thereof, have been posted in multiplicity on FR. But for what does it accomplish?

The Catholic Church and its leadership, like mankind, is no doubt flawed - and segments of its history are insidious shameful, and unsavory.

I would love to see any media coverage of positive aspects on the Catholic Church; moreover, the Catholic Church has been at the forefront of fight and cause for the sanctity of human life - while other denominations have been relatively silent or otherwise embrace abortion (i.e. the Methodist Church / National Council of Churches hierarchy).


10 posted on 03/27/2010 3:54:52 AM PDT by Mengerian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

A Budzinski family photograph shows the young Arthur (circled left) attending a funeral with Fr Murphy (right)


11 posted on 03/27/2010 3:56:11 AM PDT by JoeProBono (A closed mouth gathers no feet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: JoeProBono

1-9-9-89


12 posted on 03/27/2010 3:56:40 AM PDT by happinesswithoutpeace (1.416785(71) x 10^32)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: happinesswithoutpeace

13 posted on 03/27/2010 4:01:33 AM PDT by JoeProBono (A closed mouth gathers no feet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: JoeProBono; Gamecock
Oh please.....

The Pope was following the confidential orders of the Crimen Sollicitationis to hide the facts, support the priest and deny. The Vatican is still doing that.

14 posted on 03/27/2010 4:37:20 AM PDT by HarleyD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock

So even the BBC is now looking for 50 year old stories to dig up in WISCONSIN?! What a sign of desperation on the part of the left. The anti-Catholics here will cheer their efforts of course.


15 posted on 03/27/2010 5:35:50 AM PDT by vladimir998 (Part of the Vast Catholic Conspiracy (hat tip to Kells))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HarleyD

In reality what Crimen Sollicitationis did was institute a system by which ordinaries were to follow canon law. These were the canon laws that applied at the time:

Canon 904. In accordance with the apostolic constitutions, in particular the constitution Sacramentum Poenitentiae of Benedict XIV of 1 June 1741, a penitent must within one month denounce to the local Ordinary or the Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office a priest guilty of the crime of solicitation in confession; and a confessor must, under a grave obligation of conscience, inform a penitent of this duty.

Canon 2368 §1. Anyone who has committed the crime of solicitation dealt with in canon 904 is to be suspended from celebrating Mass and hearing sacramental confessions and, if the gravity of the crime calls for it, he is to be declared unfit for hearing them; he is to be deprived of all benefices and ranks, of the right to vote or be voted for, and is to be declared unfit for all of them, and in more serious cases he is to be reduced to the lay state.

Everyone involved in the case was expected to keep the strictest confidence about the case and its facts, “excepting only what may happen to be lawfully published when this process is concluded and put into effect”. Even the flamming liberal John Allen understands this better than the average (and not too bright) anti-Catholic here at FR.


16 posted on 03/27/2010 6:05:16 AM PDT by vladimir998 (Part of the Vast Catholic Conspiracy (hat tip to Kells))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: JoeProBono

It’s a Gamecock post, dude. Some people wallow in hatred and ignorance; there is nothing to do put pray for them.


17 posted on 03/27/2010 6:10:55 AM PDT by Malacoda (CO(NH2)2 on OBAMA.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: JoeProBono
This is a story about the abject failure of the Milwaukee archdiocese to discipline a dangerous priest, and the tardy effort by Archbishop Weakland—who would soon become the subject of a major scandal himself—to shift responsibility to Rome.

The blame works its way back to Rome because the RCC is a hierarchy. Ultimate responsibility rests at the top. The key issue is why didn't the leaders of this hierarchy demand that any incident, or allegation must be immediately reported to the authorities.

Instead, a pattern of keeping the issue internal and minimizing the damage to the church's reputation is what was attempted.

18 posted on 03/27/2010 8:29:32 AM PDT by wmfights (If you want change support SenateConservatives.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock; Dr. Eckleburg; wmfights; Forest Keeper; the_conscience; Dutchboy88; RnMomof7; HarleyD; ...
Consider this: Remember when the Clinton thugs blew up a small compound because it's leader was a pedophile? Now we have even more hardened Secularists in charge who would no doubt love to destroy any Christian denomination that does not ascribe to a watered down liberal pantheistic version of Christianity.

If the government used the justification that children were being harmed to attack the Branch Davidians, and I believe the same justification was used against the Mormons in Texas, then what's stopping the government from shutting down Romanist pedophile camps?

Now I'm not suggesting that the government has the right to do this, in fact, I believe it was wrong in the earlier cases. But the precedence is in place that will allow the Secularists to attempt to dismantle private Christian societies under the pretense that these Christian societies harm children and will point to the widespread abuse of children by Romanist clergy. The Romanists leaderships complicity in allowing this abuse to occur is giving the Secularists a foot in the door to tyrannize Christians of all denominations.

It's unbelievable enough that Romanists would send their children to these pedophile camps but now their deluded actions are cause for concern for all Christians.

19 posted on 03/27/2010 8:31:12 AM PDT by the_conscience (We ought to obey God, rather than men. (Acts 5:29b))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: the_conscience
It's unbelievable enough that Romanists would send their children to these pedophile camps but now their deluded actions are cause for concern for all Christians.

That's pure hatred talking.

20 posted on 03/27/2010 8:37:09 AM PDT by Lorica
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: HarleyD
Oh please.....

The Pope was following the confidential orders of the Crimen Sollicitationis to hide the facts, support the priest and deny. The Vatican is still doing that.

You must have missed this explanation of what Crimen Sollicitationis really was meant for in this thread: A Response to Christopher Hitchens' The Great Catholic Coverup (full version with references)

21 posted on 03/27/2010 8:37:38 AM PDT by BlessedBeGod (New Wizard of Oz: Pelosi as the Wicked Witch of the West & Michelle as the Wicked Witch of the East.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: the_conscience; Gamecock; Dr. Eckleburg; wmfights; Forest Keeper; Dutchboy88; RnMomof7; HarleyD
...then what's stopping the government from shutting down Romanist pedophile camps?

It's a liberal church that loves big govt. 94% of RC's in the legislature voted for nationalized HC. The left will save them for last.

22 posted on 03/27/2010 8:38:47 AM PDT by wmfights (If you want change support SenateConservatives.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: BlessedBeGod
You must have missed this explanation of what Crimen Sollicitationis really was meant for in this thread:

It gets missed on purpose. Some people just don't want facts to get in the way of their Know-Nothing mission of hate.

23 posted on 03/27/2010 8:39:37 AM PDT by Lorica
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: wmfights; Gamecock; Dr. Eckleburg; Forest Keeper; Dutchboy88; RnMomof7; HarleyD; Quix; ...
The left will save them for last.

Maybe so, wmfights. But all the justification the Secularists need is coming out of the Romanist camp. What seems more plausible to me is that the Romanist legislators will comply with the Secularists demands that their institutions be monitored by governmental authorities and in doing so will demand that all other Christian societies be subject to the same tyranny.

24 posted on 03/27/2010 8:54:52 AM PDT by the_conscience (We ought to obey God, rather than men. (Acts 5:29b))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock
The Pope and the Murphy case: what the New York Times story didn't tell you
25 posted on 03/27/2010 9:07:33 AM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: the_conscience; Gamecock; Dr. Eckleburg; Forest Keeper; Dutchboy88; RnMomof7; HarleyD; Quix
What seems more plausible to me is that the Romanist legislators will comply with the Secularists demands that their institutions be monitored by governmental authorities...

Do they have a right to not report crimes to the authorities?

26 posted on 03/27/2010 9:16:38 AM PDT by wmfights (If you want change support SenateConservatives.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: wmfights; Gamecock; Dr. Eckleburg; Forest Keeper; Dutchboy88; RnMomof7; HarleyD; Quix; ...
Do they have a right to not report crimes to the authorities?

I'm not so sure it's a question of rights as it is the mindset of the particular society. If you or I found out children were being tyrannized in our particular Christian society we would not just simply allow the leadership of that society to quietly sweep it under the rug and allow the abuse to continue. We would fight to dismantle the leadership that allowed the abuse to occur and would fight to make sure the abusers were prosecuted. Romanist eccelesiology hinders individual members from doing that and that general mindset is built into the system.

Free societies are messy and it's an awful slippery slope to try to compel a particular society to change it's mindset.

27 posted on 03/27/2010 9:39:27 AM PDT by the_conscience (We ought to obey God, rather than men. (Acts 5:29b))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: the_conscience

This sounds great and once the secularists get the power to operate the Romanistic slave labor camps they will begin to detain the progeny of true christian believers like yourself and sacrifice them to the pagan god Moolich whose taste for blood hasn’t been satiated since those nasty Spanish imperialists stopped this trafficing in the 1500’s.
You and your buddies should picket the nearest Romanist camp this weekend. Make sure it is a camp which has fully incorporated Vatican II practices.Ain’t these blogs are great entertainment.


28 posted on 03/27/2010 9:57:25 AM PDT by bronx2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: the_conscience; wmfights; Gamecock; Dutchboy88; 1000 silverlings; RnMomof7; Quix; ...
Romanist eccelesiology hinders individual members from doing that and that general mindset is built into the system.

The more that is said and understood, the better.

One has to wonder why homosexuality and pederasty are so pervasive in the RCC and why it is permitted (and thus encouraged) to continue.

"Behold, the fear of the LORD, that is wisdom; and to depart from evil is understanding." -- Job 28:22

They have no fear of God and no understanding. It's that simple.

29 posted on 03/27/2010 10:25:55 AM PDT by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: bronx2; wmfights; Gamecock; Dr. Eckleburg; Forest Keeper; Dutchboy88; RnMomof7; HarleyD; Quix
You and your buddies should picket the nearest Romanist camp this weekend.

You missed my point. If Romanists are agreed together to sacrifice their children to Moloch then I don't believe the government has much authority to interfere unless someone within the Romanist camp brings charges. What I'm afraid of is that since Romanists are unable to control their own they will allow the government to control it for them and this will lead to the government controlling all private societies.

While the example is extreme it doesn't take too much effort to realize that in less extreme examples the government could claim the right to exercise control under the same principle. For example, does the government have the right to take the children from Klu Klux Klan members because they are teaching their children to hate other races?

30 posted on 03/27/2010 10:27:56 AM PDT by the_conscience (We ought to obey God, rather than men. (Acts 5:29b))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: JoeProBono; HarleyD; the_conscience; Dutchboy88; Poe White Trash; Gamecock
Father Lawrence Murphy began in 1955 and continued in 1974, according to the Times account. The Vatican was first notified in 1996

Two points:

1) 1996 is when the Vatican tells us it was notified. And we all know how up-front the Vatican is with pesky details and how forthcoming it's been with facts.

2) One of the main reasons for this supposed time lapse is that under threat of excommunication, the victim must wait 10 years after he reaches the age of 18 to even speak about the crime with anyone other than a priest.

That rule in itself is a massively illegal maneuver.

Ratzinger was accused of covering up these crimes, and if he hadn't appealed to President Bush for diplomatic immunity, he'd be behind bars now.

Which is where any of us would be if we threatened someone into silence concerning a crime.

Is it any coincidence the Vatican and La Cosa Nostra are both Italian?

31 posted on 03/27/2010 10:38:16 AM PDT by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg

At the very least, the Pope needs to resign and take full responsibility for all the scandals. Then priests need to be allowed to marry. It’ll be easy to get rid of all child molesters hiding behind the robe.


32 posted on 03/27/2010 10:48:45 AM PDT by MinorityRepublican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998; HarleyD; Gamecock; the_conscience; Dutchboy88; Poe White Trash; RnMomof7; Quix; ...
flamming liberal John Allen

ROTFLOL!!!

John Allan may be flaming, but he sure isn't liberal! He's the CNN correspondent to the Vatican and he wrote a slavishly fawning biography of Ratzinger and another one on Opus Dei.

Your misdirection is a great example of the RCC again re-defining words and ideas and hoping no one will notice.


33 posted on 03/27/2010 10:52:31 AM PDT by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: the_conscience
The precedent has already been established . The govt did it to the sect of Mormons who practice plural marriage and before that to the Branch Davidians. They will do it again. The attempt is to exert the same influence on Catholic schools and they have done with public schools.
34 posted on 03/27/2010 10:55:50 AM PDT by bronx2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican
At the very least, the Pope needs to resign and take full responsibility for all the scandals. Then priests need to be allowed to marry. It’ll be easy to get rid of all child molesters hiding behind the robe.

Certainly sounds like the right and moral course of action.

And you're right. It would be much easier to get rid of child molesters in the RCC if the priestcraft were made up of hetersexual men who did not sanction homosexuality and turn a blind eye toward its corruption, but who instead, like real men, loathed homosexuality and all the heartbreak and destruction it creates.

35 posted on 03/27/2010 10:56:33 AM PDT by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican
It never fails, every Holy Week Satan tried to defeat Christ. He thought he succeeded on Hoy Thursday, only to be defeated on Good Friday and Easter Sunday.

As the Holy Father said right after becoming the Pope. Pray for me, especially so that I do not run when the wolf is after me.

The Holy Father battles Satan every day. Too bad the media and some in here are playing right into Satan's hands.

Stand strong B16.

36 posted on 03/27/2010 10:59:59 AM PDT by mware (F-R-E-E, that spells free. Free Republic.com baby.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: the_conscience; Gamecock; Alex Murphy; HarleyD; Forest Keeper; wmfights; Dutchboy88; ...
If Romanists are agreed together to sacrifice their children to Moloch then I don't believe the government has much authority to interfere unless someone within the Romanist camp brings charges. What I'm afraid of is that since Romanists are unable to control their own they will allow the government to control it for them and this will lead to the government controlling all private societies.

Exactly!

And this is why "school vouchers" is such a bad bad bad idea. Under cover of some skewed conservatism, the concept of school vouchers simply means more federal government intrusion into state and community school systems. The RCC is the biggest winner if school vouchers passes. Resist it like the plague.

37 posted on 03/27/2010 11:01:43 AM PDT by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg

You wrote:

“John Allan may be flaming, but he sure isn’t liberal! He’s the CNN correspondent to the Vatican and he wrote a slavishly fawning biography of Ratzinger and another one on Opus Dei.”

You’re out of touch to say the least. John Allen’s liberal views are well known. He ONLY routinely works for liberal outlets for instance. Also, about his supposedly “fawning” biography of Ratzinger:

“In 2000, Allen published a biography titled Cardinal Ratzinger: The Vatican’s Enforcer of the Faith. Several reviewers criticized this book for being biased as it often took an anti-Ratzinger stance. Joseph Komonchak, for example, called his writing “Manichaean journalism.”[3] After some examination, Allen concluded that these criticisms were valid.[4] As a result, in his next biography of the same man, The Rise of Benedict XVI: The Inside Story of How the Pope Was Elected and Where He Will Take the Catholic Church (2005), Allen tried to be fair to all sides and viewpoints. Allen acknowledged that his first book was “unbalanced” because it was his first book, and was written, he says, “before I arrived in Rome and before I really knew a lot about the universal church.” The book “gives prominent voice to criticisms of Ratzinger; it does not give equally prominent voice to how he himself would see some of these issues.”[5]” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_L._Allen,_Jr.

Thus, he himself admitts his first book on Ratzinger was biased while he got things balanced for the second time around. I don’t think you have a clue as to what you’re talking about.

And about his book on Opus Dei:

“Allen stated that one of his reasons for writing Opus Dei: An Objective Look Behind the Myths and Reality of the Most Controversial Force in the Catholic Church (2005) was that he felt that liberal and conservative Catholics were too often shouting at each other, and he hoped that a book that tried to be fair to all sides would lead to civilized discussion rather than rancor. Allen has been called by John Romanowsky of Godspy as having an objectivity that is “maddening.””

So, the very intent of the book was to dispell myths and to be OBJECTIVE - which means he had to seriously restrain himself from his own tendencies!

“Your misdirection is a great example of the RCC again re-defining words and ideas and hoping no one will notice.”

I did nothing that could even be remotely called misdirection. I was right on the facts - you weren’t. And I frankly don’t care what you “notice” but it would be great if you attempted, ATTEMPTED, to be objective on ANYTHING but your prejudices apparently won’t allow that.


38 posted on 03/27/2010 11:05:28 AM PDT by vladimir998 (Part of the Vast Catholic Conspiracy (hat tip to Kells))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: the_conscience; Gamecock; Alex Murphy; HarleyD; wmfights; Forest Keeper; xzins; blue-duncan; ...
But all the justification the Secularists need is coming out of the Romanist camp. What seems more plausible to me is that the Romanist legislators will comply with the Secularists demands that their institutions be monitored by governmental authorities and in doing so will demand that all other Christian societies be subject to the same tyranny.

This cannot be said too often. It is 100% correct.

With Ratzinger's "global authority" encyclical, there is now a blueprint for world communism. And as we all know, communism isn't really rule by the people; it is rule by a singular, monolithic bureaucracy who enforces its demands by wielding power "with teeth."

39 posted on 03/27/2010 11:09:07 AM PDT by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: the_conscience; Gamecock; Alex Murphy; HarleyD; wmfights; Forest Keeper; xzins; blue-duncan; ...
But all the justification the Secularists need is coming out of the Romanist camp. What seems more plausible to me is that the Romanist legislators will comply with the Secularists demands that their institutions be monitored by governmental authorities and in doing so will demand that all other Christian societies be subject to the same tyranny.

This cannot be said too often. It is 100% correct.

With Ratzinger's "global authority" encyclical, there is now a blueprint for world communism. And as we all know, communism isn't really rule by the people; it is rule by a singular, monolithic bureaucracy who enforces its demands by wielding power "with teeth."

40 posted on 03/27/2010 11:09:08 AM PDT by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998
I've read both books. Have you? They are BOTH slavish compliments to the Vatican.

As I said, Roman Catholic apologists habitually misdirect.

41 posted on 03/27/2010 11:12:38 AM PDT by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: wmfights
It's a liberal church that loves big govt. 94% of RC's in the legislature voted for nationalized HC. The left will save them for last.

They ARE the left.

Read Razinger's global authority encyclical in full. It is astounding. Under cover of platitudes, it calls for a world enslaved to the state. It is an amazing work. If anyone wants to know who the enemy is they need to read that book. It's on Amazon for a few dollars.

42 posted on 03/27/2010 11:15:43 AM PDT by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg
One of the main reasons for this supposed time lapse is that under threat of excommunication, the victim must wait 10 years after he reaches the age of 18 to even speak about the crime with anyone other than a priest.

Not true.

(Lots of untrue garbage on this thread, but this one stands out in particular.)

43 posted on 03/27/2010 11:17:28 AM PDT by Campion ("President Barack Obama" is an anagram for "An Arab-backed imposter")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: bronx2
The precedent has already been established

Exactly. So you understand my fear that these scandals will lead us further down that slope. What's troubling is that you would think that this would energize Romanists to reform their Church but instead we read all kinds of deluded platitudes on how these priest scandals are somehow an attack on the Roman Church by those outside the Church, written with an ignoble ignorance to the actual problem.

44 posted on 03/27/2010 11:18:32 AM PDT by the_conscience (We ought to obey God, rather than men. (Acts 5:29b))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg

You wrote:

“I’ve read both books. Have you?”

No, but I see no reason to doubt the author on his own admission of his own mistake. I also have no reason to believe you’ve read either book. Are you also going to claim you read the original Ratzinger biography? Strange how you apparently didn’t know the story of how the second one came about.

“They are BOTH slavish compliments to the Vatican.”

He said he wanted to be OBJECTIVE. If you find objectivity slavishly complimentary to the Vatican, then that’s your problem.

“As I said, Roman Catholic apologists habitually misdirect.”

And you’re STILL wrong and the facts stand opposed to you. You’re probably used to that by now.


45 posted on 03/27/2010 11:22:38 AM PDT by vladimir998 (Part of the Vast Catholic Conspiracy (hat tip to Kells))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg
They ARE the left.

Okay [sigh], gotta do it again.

John Boehner, R-Ohio, House Minority Leader, is a Roman Catholic.

Conservative SCOTUS justices John Roberts, Samuel Alito, John Scalia, and Clarence Thomas are all Roman Catholics.

Conservative ethicist Robert George of Princeton is a Roman Catholic

Conservative natural-law scholar J Budszizewski of Texas is a Roman Catholic

Do you want me to keep going?

46 posted on 03/27/2010 11:23:19 AM PDT by Campion ("President Barack Obama" is an anagram for "An Arab-backed imposter")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg

One more thing. Are you aware that the victims went to the police (AFAIK, they did so at the time, not when they turned 28), and the police and the DA refused to prosecute?


47 posted on 03/27/2010 11:27:48 AM PDT by Campion ("President Barack Obama" is an anagram for "An Arab-backed imposter")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Campion

Is she “aware”? BWA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA


48 posted on 03/27/2010 11:29:34 AM PDT by vladimir998 (Part of the Vast Catholic Conspiracy (hat tip to Kells))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Malacoda

Ping to post 3


49 posted on 03/27/2010 11:31:54 AM PDT by Gamecock (If you want Your Best Life Now, follow Osteen. If you want your best life forever, don't. JM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Campion

Campion:

And if the Supreme Court overturns Obamacare for usurping State power, etc, it will be the 4 Catholics you mentioned along with another Catholic, A. Kennedy, who will overturn it. So what many FR Protestants hate or perhaps dislike {i.e. Catholics and the Catholic Church} will be the ones protecting states from an over-reaching Federal Government.


50 posted on 03/27/2010 11:32:04 AM PDT by CTrent1564
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-175 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson