Donate SIGN UP
Gravatar

Answers

1 to 20 of 28rss feed

1 2 Next Last

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by Duncer. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Looks like it - earlier statements released just said that he apologised for his behaviour if it had offended anyone.
rather muted but yes..
If the Catholic church was to issue apologise for all its "sins" theyd not have enough time in the day to preach their usual lies and hypocrosy
LOL - I wonder what he actually did. Does anyone have the gory details?
not sure if this says anymore than the first link...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21649475
Very brave man to own up. all the rest deny everything until proven guilty, perhaps this one is really a man of godliness even though he has sinned.
Question Author
Please tell me you're not serious or, to put it another way, like the accusers, I'm not swallowing it?
I doubt if He did much wrong somehow or He would have gone into hiding or commited suicide.
the truth will out, and no one simply quits if entirely innocent...
Question Author
"I doubt if He did much wrong somehow or He would have gone into hiding or commited suicide".

Or obfuscated, lied and denied until forced into a mea culpa.

It never ceases to amaze me how people will make excuses for church people and churches, and I include ALL chruches in this.
It's deeply upsetting especially as it seems clear now that he has done something, I know not what, that he shouldn't have. The way he talks I don't think he's ready to admit to anything too serious just yet. I hope for his sake that he has nothing more to own up to.

But on another note. Seriously it's just wrong to label "the church" as if everyone involved in it is up to no good all the time. Hypocrisy there certainly is, and there are a lot of sins it has committed. But the vast majority are well-behaved, moral people. And at worst these people are guilty of the same sins that everyone else is, it's not just something that religions do "better" (well, worse) than everyone else. Just human nature striking again. At least at their hearts the message of most religions is that humans are flawed so and they have tried, albeit unsuccessfully, to do something about that and tackle the problem.

But it's equally hypocritical to tar everyone in the church with the same brush.
I certainly wont throw the first stone.
"I know not what, that he shouldn't have"

fiddling with other priests by the sound of it, not an unusual peccadillo in that particular profession or so it seems.

if they stopped with the ridiculous celibacy vows then a lot of their problems would vanish in a jiff, but underage fiddling is a different matter entirely no matter what vows they take.

/// It never ceases to amaze me how people will make excuses for church people and churches, and I include ALL chruches in this. ///

It also amazes me when some if not the majority will grab the opportunity to condemn the church and this man as doing evil things etc, etc, when it is these same people who are quick to condemn others if they criticise the actions of other homosexuals and label them as homophobic.

Isn't that also hypocritical?

After all this man regardless of his position in the church, is obviously a homosexual who has finally been forced to 'come out.

Perhaps we should also question whether or not it is safe for two homosexual men to adopt male children?

Why would it not be "safe"?
according to one report the Catholic church has long been a safe haven for homosexual men, don't ask me why, but that is what i was reading.
"Catholic church has long been a safe haven for homosexual men"

because they probably thought they were untouchable and that the secrecy of their club would protect them...oh and did i mention an easy supply of like minded and probably not so, but easily persuaded men to prey on
AOG - "After all this man regardless of his position in the church, is obviously a homosexual who has finally been forced to 'come out."

That's not q

AOG - "After all this man regardless of his position in the church, is obviously a homosexual who has finally been forced to 'come out."

That's not the point is it - and i think you know that.

It is not that this man is a homosexual who has been forced to come out at all.

It is that this man holds a senior position as a member of the Catholic church which speaks out against homosexuality as evil and against God - and he himself has spoken in such terms.

To abuse his position of seniority to allegedly sexualy abuse other priests using his faith and position as a cover is hypocricy of stratospheric proportions.

To then deny his actions until forced to resign and then to produce s mewaly-mouthed statement about 'falling short of accepted standards' shows the measure of this man.

he is a blatent hypocryte, forced to admit his dreadful abuse and resign. but still not have the common decency and humilty (both of which are tenets of his faith and position) to apologise and beg forgiveness.

That is quite a long way from a gay man coming out - isn't it AOG?
"That is quite a long way from a gay man coming out - isn't it AOG?"

but i'll bet hes not too chuffed about it though is he ?

1 to 20 of 28rss feed

1 2 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

Admission Of Guilt?

Answer Question >>