´óÏó´«Ã½

William:

Thanks, for bringing up this important and valid point regarding the potential risk of arrest/detention in theory of Pope in the United Kingdom arena of land...The chances of it happening is relatively low to none since, it would bring up international affairs regarding soverignty and other international laws.

(d)

Shame. That would certainly be a fun drama.

Will, you neglected to mention that the Holy Father is not guilty of any crime.

Unless of course the concealment of child rape is considered a crime.

And a happy Easter to you RJB. Still suffering the same dillusions about the Holy Father I see.

Let’s take just one case: Peter Hullermann, who was found to have raped children in at least three families under Ratzinger’s authority in the late 1970s. The families had decided not to ‘file charges’, and Ratzinger decided not to report the priest to the criminal authorities, nor to strip him of his office, but to send him for therapy and retain him as an active priest. But, instead of being given therapy as planned, he was swiftly assigned to parish duties. He subsequently committed an offence involving a boy for which he was tried and convicted.

The German newspaper Der Spiegel this week claims that when the story was brought to light by the New York Times in March, Ratzinger’s former vicar-general in Munich, Gerhard Gruber, received a string of phone calls in which church officials begged him to take the blame and accept full responsibility for the decision that had actually been made by Ratzinger.

The whole affair is is beginning to unravel like Watergate, which of course went all the way to the White House. It is a scandal that the chief architect of the great Catholic cover-up of clerical abuse is the current pope, who blames it all on everyone and everything but himself.

mcc, it is increasingly obvious that the so-called ‘Holy Father’ is neither very holy nor very fatherly.

Very, very funny comment by Stewart Lee about Ratzinger.



(Go to youtube and search Stewart Lee Pope.)

Whether he can be arrested or not is almost irrelevant. The fact that Dawkins has managed to get people talking about it is exactly the sort of bad publicity that the Vatican would like to bury under a ton of Latin dictionaries but which is starting to follow the Pope around like a bad smell.

Wrong as usual Brian - Peter Hullerman was a priest in the Diocese of Essen when these things happened. And why do you put "file charges" in inverted commas - is that some way to exonerate parents for their part in a cover up? He was in Munich for treatment, and the Vican General subsequently allowed him to do some pastoral work. Clearly this turned out to be a mistake. But none of it attaches to the Pope despite your best efforts. And no amount of Watergating will make it so. Goebells tried exactly the same tactics with the Catholic Church.

As for bad publicity, the only person looking ridiculous is Dawkins.

Tens of thousands of abused children, hundreds who have later attempted or actually committed suicide, hundreds of abuser priests in prison, billions paid out in compensation, Bishops found guilty of cover up, Ratzinger's signature on letters asking Bishops to keep quiet and consider "the greater good of the universal church", Cardinal Law still enjoying a top position in Rome, Cardinal Castrillon Hoyos praises a French Bishop for covering up and calls him "a hero" and will say a Tridentine Mass on Saturday in Washington to celebrate five years of Ratzingers 'reign', Cardinal Bertone blames homosexuals for abuse and is roundly criticised across the globe, Cardinal Sodano blames "gossip", a German VG, Fr Gruber, is pressurized to take the blame for Ratzinger's "mistake" in allowing a paedophile to continue abusing children and....

... "the only person looking ridiculous is Dawkins."

MCC, if Latin Mass is your 'thing', just say that. If you have a penchant for lace albs, just say that. Argue your case for a return to the Pius epoch. Explain your dislike for reform and give your opinion.

But please stop insulting everyone's intelligence by pretending that there is nothing rancidly wrong, morally bankrupt and illegal with the church's involvement in the systematic abuse and cover up of our children.

It makes YOU look ridiculous.

RJB - why this fascination with the Latin Mass? As I think I told you, I've only ever been to one, about ten years ago in Canada. I've never worn a lace alb because they look ridiculous.

The "discovery" that Catholic priests abuse children at or below the same level as the general population, and that it has been covered up in the same way as most families and other institutions cover it up has obviously been a shock to most people.

The discovery that some people want to take advantage of the situation to attack the Church is less surprising.

As for reform, like the Holy Father, I prefer my reform to be in continuity with the Church, with the Church founded by Christ, with the Apostles, the the Fathers of the Church, the great mediaeval teachers, the saints of the counter reformation, the social reformers of the last two centuries. So while I like Mass in English I want it to be good English. And I recognise that there are teachings handed on for two thousand years which, while they may develop and grow, cannot be cast aside lightly.

Who would have thought it? I have been to more Latin masses than Christopher - quite a few more! I even went to one of LeFebvre's once. I quite like them - I think the total abandonment of Latin in the liturgy may have been one of the Reformers' mistakes. Meaning in terms of formal communal worship is tied up with gesture, atmosphere and drama; abandonment of rational bonds is easier when the words are just glorious sounds, pure sounds.

MCC

Given what you claim in post 11, I think that Helio's suggestion that you respond to the issues raised in Kung's letter, is a good one.

Vatican II Council was called by a Pope, attended by the Cardinals, Bishops and theologians and supported by the people of God. It decided collectively to return to a more collegial (apostolic) form of decision making.

You will find references throughout Vatican II Council to the Gospel of Jesus Christ and the New Testament, to the Apostolic Tradition, the Fathers of the Church, the Councils of Nicea, Trent and Vatican I, the teachings of the Fathers of the Church, references to Augustine and Aquinas in particular, the saints, spiritual writers who have enriched our church and social reformers of the last two centuries. All YOUR criteria is there, in black and white.

Would you please explain then how Ratzinger's unilateral decision to totally ignore Vatican II Council, to set himself against its very clear conclusions on liturgy, collegiality, other world faiths,sexual morality, etc.., is in line with the teaching of the church?

It is Kung who is faithful to the tradition of the Church and it is Ratzinger who has very arrogantly placed himself outside it.

It is Kung who has written extensively promoting the teachings of Vatican II Council - the teaching of the universal Catholic Church, it is Ratzinger who - without any consultation with the College of Cardinals - has systematically attempted to dismantle it.

Maybe you could begin by enlightening us all on how Ratzinger's ignoring the clear teachings of Vatican II Council is in any way faithful to the tradition of the church with its history of reforming councils and how you believe Kung is wrong to point to the 2000 year old Apostolic Tradition?

Parrhasios

In the Roman Catholic Church at the moment, those who wish to have Latin Mass may do so. Anglican clergy who jump the dyke (even those who are married) may say Mass in the same language (in the same words) they used in the Anglican Church. However, the vast majority of Catholics will have an archaic translation of Mass, taken from the Latin, imposed upon them later this year by this Pope in direct opposition to the expressed wishes of Vat II.

It also irks that the claim that spiritual depth and a mystical ethos suddenly disappeared from the Church when Mass was allowed to be said in the language of the people attending Mass. This is simply not true.

Those who were against this necessary and beautiful reform in our church have, for years, labelled this Mass as a circus led by tambourine-wielding, kumbaya-singing, hippie priests. It was and is a lie.

Worship has to connect with us at a spiritual level and if Latin Mass does this for some people, that's fine. But it also has to connect with us at a cognitive and intellectual level. Mass in a language which is alien to its participants and which uses signs and symbols which are unintelligable to those present, is a circus, a form of entertainment with little or no relevance to the lives of the 'onlookers.'

"The "discovery" that Catholic priests abuse children at or below the same level as the general population"

That is a boldly counter factual statement, even by mccamlyec's standards.

According to the Vatican, 1.5-4% of priests have abused children. says that per 100000 people there are 228 registered sex offenders (which includes rapists and other types of sex offenders besides pedophiles). So unless 85-95% of all sex crime goes unreported, and all registered sex offenders are pedophiles, the percentage of pedohpiles among priests is dozens of times higher than among the general population, at least for the US.

According to One in Four - 27% of people were abused as children so, yes, unreported abuse is very high. You can read more in the Scavi Report here [Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator]

RJB - I am afraid I know next to nothing about liturgical revision in the Roman Catholic Church. I am all in favour, however, of the pick and mix style which the new Prayer Book introduced into the CoI - variety is a good thing.

Sometimes words are what we need, sometimes we want to see a direction, to grasp an idea; sometimes though words are either a distraction or an impediment, sometimes ideas serve only to mire the mind and then an invitation to lose oneself in beauty and exaltation can be just what is needed; sometimes a Latin mass or a Slavonic liturgy exactly hits the spot.

What I would think very wrong is to promote a one size fits every person on every occasion approach - it doesn't. I am even finding that I quite enjoy the wholly unstructured evening services at the fairly evangelical Anglican church I now most regularly attend - so long as I can get my incense fix every now and again!

Parrhasios

I'd appreciate to talk with you off this public forum, if you wouldnt mind and if that is at all possible given that we cant put email addresses on here. (Just something you said about looking back on your life, on another thread. I would appreciate your counsel.) Any suggestions as to how to go about that?

RJB, Parrhasios,

"I'd appreciate to talk with you off this public forum, if you wouldnt mind and if that is at all possible given that we cant put email addresses on here. (Just something you said about looking back on your life, on another thread. I would appreciate your counsel.) Any suggestions as to how to go about that?"

There is still that one page where my email won't be deleted by the mods:

/blogs/ni/2008/04/will_testament_bloggers_dinner.html

Feel free to use that one to facilitate an exchange of emails if you like.

mccamleyc, post 16,

I guess I'll hold that removed url against the mods, not against you.:)

My bad as they say - it was a pdf link which they don't like for some reason - it's just the One in Four site.

Our Holy Father is immune which as it should be
just Protestants trying to arrest our Holy father because
they are bigits [protestants]. the Holy Father is doing a Great Job
and is Going to England and Scotland to visit the Queen in buckingham place which i cant wait to see on tv and read about it in the news paper. the Queen and William and Harry are the Only Protestants
i Admire because there not Bigits like the Unionist and Orangemen here in the North of Ireland.

Hayl the Sovereign Lady Elizabeth II
and our president

God Bless Our Holy Father and may he be pope forever.