[Sarky]

It's hard to tell with so many extra words in there, but that looks like a "no".

[marienbad]

Originally Posted by ISAW

Let us say there is an offender in Venezuela.
It isnt for the Pope to go to Venezuela or to write to the police there to tell them about this pedophile.
It is a rule of the church that if the state has a law against it in Venezuela then the church must fully disclose any such people in that jurisdiction.
It isnt for the church to try the crime or to obstruct any civil authority in trying the crime.

Let us say stop acting the fcuking edjit and give a straight answer. Did the relevant church authorities in the country in which the offence occurred report the issue to the relevant secular authorities ?

A yes or no will sufffice .

[Nodin]

Originally Posted by CiaranMT

None of which answers the question.

Lads, how did ISAW end up on this thread again?

....well, some would suggest the Wrath Of An Angry God...

[ISAW]

Originally Posted by marienbad

Let us say stop acting the fcuking edjit and give a straight answer. Did the relevant church authorities in the country in which the offence occurred report the issue to the relevant secular authorities ?

A yes or no will sufffice .

I actually dont know. To my knowledge i hadnt heard of the case until you mentioned it.

I assume they did or that the case was so widely known in whatever place it happened it was not necessary.
i hafd heard of the Order he was involved with and that the head was questionable but i didnt know his name and i didnt know the questions were about child sexual abuse. i thought it was about cult like power or control.
Have you evidence they knew and didnt report it and tried to hide it?
Because if so that is against church policy.

[Dades]

marienbad - calling someone a "fcuking edjit" is against the charter.
You have been duly warned.

[Galvasean]

Originally Posted by Nodin

....well, some would suggest the Wrath Of An Angry God...

He moves in mysterious (and sneaky) ways. The 21st century God has become much more refined than the OT one that's for sure.

[ISAW]

Originally Posted by Galvasean

He moves in mysterious (and sneaky) ways. The 21st century God has become much more refined than the OT one that's for sure.

Id have to mostly agree with that. Im actually posting about just that in Christianity. Im not going to post here anymore because it draws attacks on me. Ill express my personal opinions about what i believe religions think somewhere where i dont get attacked when I am honest about them. and Ill back them up with stats and reference. Nuff said here.

[marienbad]

Originally Posted by Dades

marienbad - calling someone a "fcuking edjit" is against the charter.
You have been duly warned.

What can I say - guilty as charged - mea culpa mea culpa mea maxima culpa. Applying the cilice this instant .Lashing of apologies as Count Almasy would say .

[robindch]

Originally Posted by ISAW

Im not going to post here anymore because it draws attacks on me.

As I've explained numerous times, your posting style is not the dialectic form that most A+A regulars use and enjoy. If you followed any of the tips you've been sent about this, you probably wouldn't have navigated yourself up the creek you now find yourself in.

The best of luck over the fence.

[mikhail]

Originally Posted by marienbad

What can I say - guilty as charged - mea culpa mea culpa mea maxima culpa. Applying the cilice this instant .Lashing of apologies as Count Almasy would say .

You know what the difference between a god and a mod is? When you anger a mod, you get an automatically generated pm indicated that you have been smited.

[Sarky]

I've had no success asking God to buy me a beer. Mods are much more generous.

[marienbad]

Originally Posted by mikhail

You know what the difference between a god and a mod is? When you anger a mod, you get an automatically generated pm indicated that you have been smited.

And By the grace of Mod I am definitely smitten, smited , smote , whichever is applicable

[koth]

Abuse victim testifies in Philadelphia church trial

The jury in the Philadelphia Archdiocese pedophilia case on Wednesday got a look at the lurid lives of priests that were allegedly ignored by a top church official now on trial for child endangerment.

Testimony by a former altar boy who said he was abused and by a priest who stumbled upon his fellow clergy's misdeeds came during the trial of Monsignor William Lynn, the most senior church official to go to trial in the child sex abuse case rocking the Roman Catholic Church.

Lynn, 61, who served as secretary of the clergy under the late Cardinal Anthony Bevilacqua, is charged with child endangerment and conspiracy for covering up allegations against priests, many of whom were simply transferred to unsuspecting parishes.

Lynn, who was effectively the archdiocese's personnel director, said he tried to expose suspect priests by giving a list of their names to Bevilacqua but his boss ordered the paperwork shredded.

[koth]

Nun arrested in ‘stolen babies’ scandal

AN 80-year-old nun has become the first person to be officially named as a suspect in the stolen babies scandal.

Sister Maria Gomez has been arrested over a case involving Maria Luisa Torres and her daughter Pilar who were reunited eight months ago after 29 years.

Torres told investigators she contacted Gomez after seeing an advert offering to help single mothers who had become pregnant by another man.

She insists that Gomez, who worked with two Madrid clinics in the 1980s, promised to put the baby in an orphanage until she was able to look after the child herself.

But after the birth Gomez gave the baby to another family and threatened to denounce her and have her other daughter taken away if she complained.

[ISAW]

Originally Posted by robindch

As I've explained numerous times, your posting style is not the dialectic form that most A+A regulars use and enjoy. If you followed any of the tips you've been sent about this, you probably wouldn't have navigated yourself up the creek you now find yourself in.

The best of luck over the fence.

Im aware people dont like my style. that isn't a reason to assume i am wrong.
but when you cant win an argument attach the person making it
I call that ad hominem. Others call it "getting rid of ISAW".
Im not afraid to admit when I am wrong but I haven't been shown where.
and when you support you 6.5% claim about priests
and the claim that it is widely supported
and statistics on sex abuse convicts in Irish prisons support it
and that the Irish Bishops own stats support it

THEN Ill be prepared to accept it. but you have failed to do so.