Have I Been In My Job Too Long?
Family & Relationships1 min ago
Another Catholic church cover-up?
57 Answers
If the priest in question claims not to know about the contents of a memory stick he is using to present material to children, then that is a poor defencce because it is his business to know.
I would not use a memory stick for a presnetation without checking its contents first, and needless to say, there is no danger of any inappropriate images being on any stick in my posession.
The priest asking for - and being granted - leave from his duties tends to incline towards the traditional church approach towards the devient behaviour of its clergy - let's pretend it's not hapening, and with luck, it will all go away.
Any bets on this priest being moved to another parish once the initial furore has died down? Media URL: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-17885912
Description:
I would not use a memory stick for a presnetation without checking its contents first, and needless to say, there is no danger of any inappropriate images being on any stick in my posession.
The priest asking for - and being granted - leave from his duties tends to incline towards the traditional church approach towards the devient behaviour of its clergy - let's pretend it's not hapening, and with luck, it will all go away.
Any bets on this priest being moved to another parish once the initial furore has died down? Media URL: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-17885912
Description:
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by andy-hughes. 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.
andy, I'd agree with what you're saying if I thought this was deliberate; but it was surely, as sandyRoe says, accidental. Don't you think that is a genuine argument in mitigation?
(Personally, if I had a memory stick full of gay porn, I'd be quite careful not to show it to confirmation classes, which is why I'm not entirely convinced of his guilt anyway.)
(Personally, if I had a memory stick full of gay porn, I'd be quite careful not to show it to confirmation classes, which is why I'm not entirely convinced of his guilt anyway.)
jno - As I pointed out, my issue is not with this man's apparent homosexuality, it is his continuance in living a life as a Catholic priest, under whose rulings and teachings, which are known to even the most casula observer, he is required th demounce homosexuality as a sin in the eyes of God.
A religious man wrestling with his own concience in terms of his sexuality and its effects on his beliefs is one thing - that man working and living in a position that requires him to denounce in others what he is himself makes him a twenty-four carrat hypocrite - and that is what I object to.
I find it difficult in the extreme to believe that anyone who has access to a memory stick used by a priest would be malicious enough to plant such images upon it, even less that they would be unknown to that priest, and therefore named in mitigation.
And finally, the fact that another laptop was stolken from the sacristy immediately after this event does rather poine tht finger of suspcicion in his direction.
Innocent until proven guilty of course, but some evidence of the priest's intention so to do, and the church's vigourous action in assisting him would go a long way towards assisting that concept.
Sending him on requested leave sends out the wrong message to all involved.
A religious man wrestling with his own concience in terms of his sexuality and its effects on his beliefs is one thing - that man working and living in a position that requires him to denounce in others what he is himself makes him a twenty-four carrat hypocrite - and that is what I object to.
I find it difficult in the extreme to believe that anyone who has access to a memory stick used by a priest would be malicious enough to plant such images upon it, even less that they would be unknown to that priest, and therefore named in mitigation.
And finally, the fact that another laptop was stolken from the sacristy immediately after this event does rather poine tht finger of suspcicion in his direction.
Innocent until proven guilty of course, but some evidence of the priest's intention so to do, and the church's vigourous action in assisting him would go a long way towards assisting that concept.
Sending him on requested leave sends out the wrong message to all involved.
mamyalynne - you posted - "I am not going to debate whatever may have happened here, but can we just read the article again, the meeting was for parents and ONE child was present, not a class full."
and i replied that that was one child too many, with which you agreed.
So what was the point you wer making in the first place?
and i replied that that was one child too many, with which you agreed.
So what was the point you wer making in the first place?
mamyalynne - that is such a fine point of grammar as to be irrelavent in my view - a classfulll of children? One child? A room full of adults? One adult?
The numbers are not a reflection of the seriousness of the situation - it is not mitigated by the presence of the number of individuals - as I said, one child is one child too many.
The numbers are not a reflection of the seriousness of the situation - it is not mitigated by the presence of the number of individuals - as I said, one child is one child too many.
Andy calm down for heaven's sakes- this man has been unfortunate, he has not done anything illegal or even immoral, he either isn't guilty of anything (if someone else put the images on there), or he's guilty of having consenting adult gay porn and accidentally showing it to the wrong people. Either way there's no need for a witch hunt and for ousting what may be a very good priest. Now if your after ousting all the paedophile priests that's another matter, the more the merrier- but this man has done nothing wrong except make a mistake.
NOX, I am perfectly calm I assure you.
I am not interested in 'outing' anyone, a singularly odious practice in my view, but I am concerned that anyone should live and work as a Catholic priest while at the same time being a homosexual. The two are simply incompatable, and i repeat my earlier assertion - to do so is to be a hypocryte and that is where my issue lies.
Added to that is the apparent complicty of the church which is willing to allow this man to absolve himself of the responsibility of finding out how this incident occured.
Showing pornography to strangers, including a child, is a mistake.
Living and working as a Catholic priest while being a homosexual is a lifestyle and career choice and it is not acceptable.
Catholics look to their priests to follow the church's teachings, and to be an example to look up to, someone to offer advice and solce on matters of Chatholic teaching and ethos.
Preaching against homosexuality while living as one, is hardly the honest and holy approach any of this priest's parrishioners should be able to expect.
I am not interested in 'outing' anyone, a singularly odious practice in my view, but I am concerned that anyone should live and work as a Catholic priest while at the same time being a homosexual. The two are simply incompatable, and i repeat my earlier assertion - to do so is to be a hypocryte and that is where my issue lies.
Added to that is the apparent complicty of the church which is willing to allow this man to absolve himself of the responsibility of finding out how this incident occured.
Showing pornography to strangers, including a child, is a mistake.
Living and working as a Catholic priest while being a homosexual is a lifestyle and career choice and it is not acceptable.
Catholics look to their priests to follow the church's teachings, and to be an example to look up to, someone to offer advice and solce on matters of Chatholic teaching and ethos.
Preaching against homosexuality while living as one, is hardly the honest and holy approach any of this priest's parrishioners should be able to expect.
Sorry Andy but all that is pompous nonsense. People are either gay or straight, they can then choose to be celibate but there ARE either gay or straight. It seems this man is gay, and may be suffering because of the celibacy required by the Catholic church, but I do not see ( I was born a Catholic) that his position as priest is incompatible with him being gay and struggling with his sexuality. The attitude that he ought not to be a priest is to my thinking unkind, unnecessary and indeed verging on cruel. Are you perfect? Have you never erred or made a mistake? Have you NEVER been a hypocrite, becaise I have and most everyone I know has also, so why can this man not be forgiven his struggles since it hurts no-one?
Parishoners do indeed look to their priests for guidance but the church will never evolve from the dinosaur it is until people stop trying to remove anyone who deviates slightly from it's 'perfect' principles.
Show a little compassion, this man is human.
Parishoners do indeed look to their priests for guidance but the church will never evolve from the dinosaur it is until people stop trying to remove anyone who deviates slightly from it's 'perfect' principles.
Show a little compassion, this man is human.
NOX - I am not perfect - but I do not live and work as someone who teaches a religion which is clearly not compatable with his apparent lifestyle.
Have I never been a hypocrite? Absolutely I have - but not a professional one.
I am an atheist, so I have no problem with the Catholic church's stance on homosexuality.
It's medaeval attitude to human behaviour and failings, its lofty edicts on giving to the poor when sale of any of the Vatican's paintings kept in cellars - never mind those on show - would feed an African village for a year, its wilful lack of willingness to tackle the perversion of its paedophile priests, its stance on contraception in Africa, where its misionairies continue to be part to the spread of HIV and AIDS and so on and so on ad nauseum ...
none of these things affect me personally in the slightest.
But if I were a priest and I was a gay man (leaving aside the fact that I would be aware of this well before my training started, much less before being given a parish in which to live and work, supported by people who believe in the church's teachings) I would see my profession as utterly at odds with my sexuality, and I would leave and do something else.
To do any other would be to teach one thing, and live another, which is not, by any standards, the honest behaviour of a Catholic priest.
Living and working as a priest while being a homosexual is not 'deviating slightly' from the church's teachings, it is riding a coach and horses through one of its primary edicts.
Have I never been a hypocrite? Absolutely I have - but not a professional one.
I am an atheist, so I have no problem with the Catholic church's stance on homosexuality.
It's medaeval attitude to human behaviour and failings, its lofty edicts on giving to the poor when sale of any of the Vatican's paintings kept in cellars - never mind those on show - would feed an African village for a year, its wilful lack of willingness to tackle the perversion of its paedophile priests, its stance on contraception in Africa, where its misionairies continue to be part to the spread of HIV and AIDS and so on and so on ad nauseum ...
none of these things affect me personally in the slightest.
But if I were a priest and I was a gay man (leaving aside the fact that I would be aware of this well before my training started, much less before being given a parish in which to live and work, supported by people who believe in the church's teachings) I would see my profession as utterly at odds with my sexuality, and I would leave and do something else.
To do any other would be to teach one thing, and live another, which is not, by any standards, the honest behaviour of a Catholic priest.
Living and working as a priest while being a homosexual is not 'deviating slightly' from the church's teachings, it is riding a coach and horses through one of its primary edicts.
