Vatican Equates Making Women Priests with Pedophilia

3113

Hello Summer!
Joined
Nov 1, 2005
Posts
13,823
I gather that they were just trying to explain what will get a Priest defrocked, but it came out the wrong way. (Bolds mine)
It was meant to be the document that put a lid on the clerical sex abuse scandals that have swept the Roman Catholic world. But instead of quelling fury from within and without the church, the Vatican stoked the anger of liberal Catholics and women's groups by including a provision in its revised decree that made the "attempted ordination" of women one of the gravest crimes in ecclesiastical law.

The change put the "offence" on a par with the sex abuse of minors.

Terry Sanderson, president of the National Secular Society, called the document "one of the most insulting and misogynistic pronouncements that the Vatican has made for a very long time. Why any self-respecting woman would want to remain part of an organisation that regards their full and equal participation as a 'grave sin' is a mystery to me." Vivienne Hayes, the chief executive of the Women's Resource Centre, said the decision to raise women's ordination to the level of a serious crime was "appalling".

...Ceri Goddard, chief executive of the Fawcett Society, said: "We are sure that the vast majority of the general public will share in our abject horror at the Vatican's decision to categorise the ordination of women as an 'offence' in the same category as paedophilia – deemed to be one of the 'gravest offences a priest can commit'.

...The revision of a decree first issued nine years ago was intended to address the issue of clerical sex abuse. Last night it remained unclear why the Vatican had decided to invite further controversy by changing the status of women's ordination in canon law....
Full story here.
 
Last edited:
well, he was a german nazis youth.

True, but he was a draftee, rather than a volunteer. Holding that against him would be like holding against him the fact that he was a German soldier at the age of 16.

Whatever he used to be, he is a misogynist now. I believe that raping a child is absolutely the worst thing a priest can do. Not only is it an evil deed in itself, it is a violation of everything a clergyman should be and an extreme dereliction of duty. The equivalent would be a parent raping his or her own child.

Whether a woman should be ordained or not is open to conjecture. Personally, I see nothing wring with it, but I am not a Catholic and have no vote in the matter. :( If I had one, I would vote to do so.
 
Whatever females get involved with morphs into pink collar ghettos. Theyre like termites that see everything as meal-non meal; and they devour whats a meal.
 
You have to take your mitre off to the vatican, they are not short of brass neck!

Every priest who has abused a child is a criminal.
Every bishop, archbishop, cardinal and pope who has conspired in covering up those crimes is also a criminal.
Paedophilia is a ghastly crime and its cynical cover-up on such a massive scale strips the church of Rome of any pretension to integrity or moral authority.
Be gone! Be quiet! You have nothing of value to say.

It is ludicrous that the pope can avoid arrest by claiming diplomatic immunity. A grubby cash-for-statehood deal with that fine upstanding guy Benito Mussolini was somehow accepted by other countries as legitimate, giving a religious compound the same status as a proper country.

I believe that 2010 will be an annus horribilis for the vatican and pope Benny will regret his visit to Britain in September. It will be four days of protest, during which the old mysogynist will be exposed to ridicule, abuse and general opprobrium. Looking forward to it already!
 
This week the Anglican Synod voted, in principle, that women priests could become bishops if not immediately.

The Roman Catholic Church's announcement that making Women into Priests is a crime seems to be deliberately timed to annoy the Church of England.

Og
 
The RCC under Benedict seems to have taken on the aspects of the most paranoid extreme members of the GOP. Ideological purity trumps acceptability. I see a great contraction of the church membership if this sort of nonsense continues. The Anglicans, Lutherans and other mainstream liturgical Protestant denominations must be smiling quietly in anticipation.
 
The RCC operates just like corporate America. When it comes down to a choice between tradition and common sense, tradition wins hands down.
 
Whether a woman should be ordained or not is open to conjecture.
There are certainly Catholics that argue the point--however, if one belongs to a religion where one of the tenants is "no women priests" then you pretty much have to accept that--especially if you belong to a religion which is run as a dictatorship, not a democracy.

The problem here isn't that the Vatican is saying "Women can't be priests," however, it's HOW they said it...in the worst possible way. They essentially said, "Ordaining a woman a priest would be like raping a child." That the sin of one is as bad as the other. A woman of the Catholic faith might bow her head and say, "If the priesthood is only for guys, okay," but telling her that women in priestly positions is a sin equal to raping kids, that's likely to piss her off. "It's not allowed," is one thing. "It's like raping a child!" is quite another.

Of course, the irony is, if they'd had women there to ask, they might not have fucked up :rolleyes: All they really meant was: "If a priest does these things, he'll be defrocked..." and the list included child abuse...and ordaining women.
 
This week the Anglican Synod voted, in principle, that women priests could become bishops if not immediately....The Roman Catholic Church's announcement that making Women into Priests is a crime seems to be deliberately timed to annoy the Church of England.
It seems that way, though it likely wasn't. Again, this Vatican really has a tendency to put it's foot in it's mouth. Apparently some Priest in France ordained some women, and the Vatican immediately defrocked him for doing this. All well and good, but now they decide that while they're putting their new rules about child abuse into writing, maybe they should spell out the rules about ordaining women. In case any other upstart priests get ideas.

They decide two-in-one would be economical. They are, after all, just explaining what will get one defrocked. Right? Wrong-O! As you point out, not only do they put it in a way that really insults women, but they also announce it at a time when it's going to look like it's bitch-slapping the Anglican Church.

Maybe Pope Benny should re-think that visit to the UK? I know he was really looking forward to seeing the Queen, but being as she is a woman and head of the C-of-E...maybe he should wait till these remarks are forgotten.
 
Maybe Pope Benny should re-think that visit to the UK? I know he was really looking forward to seeing the Queen, but being as she is a woman and head of the C-of-E...maybe he should wait till these remarks are forgotten.

Maybe the Pope wants to show the Q of E why the pope hat is so tall, and why he likes to keep it on his lap indoors.
 
This week the Anglican Synod voted, in principle, that women priests could become bishops if not immediately.

The Roman Catholic Church's announcement that making Women into Priests is a crime seems to be deliberately timed to annoy the Church of England.

Og

The Brits and Yanks are in the clutches of fags and old maids, and membership is falling like a heavy rock in both countries.
 
uhuh, there's a BRITISH church?

The Church of England exists in England. The United Kingdom (now there's an oxymoron, in several ways!) of Great Britain and Nothern Ireland includes nations in which Queen Elizabeth the First (check your history) is not head of the church, though she is head of state.

The fastest-growing faith in the UK is Islam.

I'm an atheist, but I prefer to get my facts right, about religion as with other matters.

The Brits and Yanks are in the clutches of fags and old maids, and membership is falling like a heavy rock in both countries.
 
The Church of England exists in England. The United Kingdom (now there's an oxymoron, in several ways!) of Great Britain and Nothern Ireland includes nations in which Queen Elizabeth the First (check your history) is not head of the church, though she is head of state.

The fastest-growing faith in the UK is Islam.

I'm an atheist, but I prefer to get my facts right, about religion as with other matters.

Queen Liz the First hasn't been much of anything but bones for hundreds of years.

Islam is probably growing more rapidly than other faiths because of a higher birth rate and immigration, rather than converts.
 
The Church of England exists in England. The United Kingdom (now there's an oxymoron, in several ways!) of Great Britain and Nothern Ireland includes nations in which Queen Elizabeth the First (check your history) is not head of the church, though she is head of state.

The fastest-growing faith in the UK is Islam.

I'm an atheist, but I prefer to get my facts right, about religion as with other matters.

Queen Liz the First hasn't been much of anything but bones for hundreds of years.

Islam is probably growing more rapidly than other faiths because of a higher birth rate and immigration, rather than converts.
 
Queen Liz the First hasn't been much of anything but bones for hundreds of years.

Islam is probably growing more rapidly than other faiths because of a higher birth rate and immigration, rather than converts.

The alleged high rate of growth in Islam is one of those "well, of course" things that hasn't got any citations. The birthrate in the Arab nations is falling faster than anywhere else, though it's still fairly high.((Pearce, The Coming Population Crash) In Africa the Islam to Christianity conversion worries the Imans no end.( Spengler's column, Asia Times.) Iran's birthrate is so low that within a generation it will go into negative population growth, just like Japan, Italy and Spain have.
 
Liz the First is currently queen of the UK

Her predecessor by name was Liz the First of the of England. The current one is the first Elizabeth, queen of the UK.

Her ignorarnt advisors forgot that when they had 'EIIR' cast on the first postboxes in Scotland after her coronation. The postboxes were deservedly blown up for their historical innacuaracy. and 'EIIR' has never reappeared in Scotland since. That's nearly 50 years.

Learn your UK history before you comment. Many US citizens are unhapppy that UK folk don't understand your history. It's reciprocal Boxlicker.

The birthrate of prods in NI is exceeded by RCs. That's why the NI question is receding as a factor in UK politics. But the beleagured prods in NI are still fighting back against hisrtory, see this week's news.

Queen Liz the First hasn't been much of anything but bones for hundreds of years.

Islam is probably growing more rapidly than other faiths because of a higher birth rate and immigration, rather than converts.
 
I might be mistaken, but what that link leads to looks to me like something that was made up to smear the Roman Catholic Church. I am not a member of any faith, being something of an atheist who doesn't care one way or another, but I am not an anti-Catholic or an anti-anything. :(

Read history.
 
I might be mistaken, but what that link leads to looks to me like something that was made up to smear the Roman Catholic Church. I am not a member of any faith, being something of an atheist who doesn't care one way or another, but I am not an anti-Catholic or an anti-anything. :(

It's only a smear if it's not true.

If a book were to be written with the title "The Crimes of the Papacy" it would make for a very long and extremely dispiriting read.

I stopped believing in religion around the age of 10 but it seems that the world would be a safer place if the followers of the more violent and authoritarian religions were to convert to buddhism.
 
Sadly, that only goes to show how little you know about Buddhism. Any religion can be subverted to violence. Consider the Japanese cult of Bushido . . .
 
Her predecessor by name was Liz the First of the of England. The current one is the first Elizabeth, queen of the UK.

Her ignorarnt advisors forgot that when they had 'EIIR' cast on the first postboxes in Scotland after her coronation. The postboxes were deservedly blown up for their historical innacuaracy. and 'EIIR' has never reappeared in Scotland since. That's nearly 50 years.

Learn your UK history before you comment. Many US citizens are unhapppy that UK folk don't understand your history. It's reciprocal Boxlicker.

The birthrate of prods in NI is exceeded by RCs. That's why the NI question is receding as a factor in UK politics. But the beleagured prods in NI are still fighting back against hisrtory, see this week's news.

Okay. Technically, you're right. Now I'll ask one. Who was the eighth president of the Unted States?






















If you counted on your fingers and/or conulted your history books or memories and came up with Martin Van Buren, you are wrong. The eighth president was George Washington. He was preceded by seven elected men. :D

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&...=&as_occt=any&cr=&as_nlo=&as_nhi=&safe=images
 
Back
Top