Sins of Our Fathers: The Missing Link…

Sins of Our Fathers: The Missing Link…

collarpriestI’ve just watched the Newsnight Scotland discussion on the BBC documentary Sins of Our Fathers – exposing physical and sexual abuse at Fort Augustus Abbey, the prestigious Catholic school in the Highlands – broadcast last night, and available to watch for the next six days.

Throughout the entire documentary (and again on Newsnight Scotland) there wasn’t a single acknowledgment, not a mention of the fact that these were manifestly homosexual attacks by homosexual priests on boys.

And yet, we have Pope Francis widely reported as taking a lax approach to the homosexuals becoming priests. Gimme strength.

Throughout all the handwringing of the TV journalists and their bewildered Catholic interviewees (who, to date have said nothing to inform the discussion that a member of the Orange Order couldn’t have said even better!)  nobody thought to suggest that the Church in Scotland might make a start in clearing out the filth in the Church (to quote Pope Benedict) by instructing all Bishops and seminary rectors  to screen out men who might be tempted to sexual liaisons with other men and boys in much the same way that a supermarket manager would screen out kleptomaniacs.

It’s not exactly the stuff of a first class Degree, is it?  It’s really only common sense.

So, why the avoidance of the terribly obvious? Why has this issue not been hinted at, let alone raised by the BBC and their various commentators? Is it the case that we are not, for a single second, to think that homosexuals abuse children? Or that, perhaps, given the scale of the problem within the Church, homosexuals should not be ordained to the Catholic priesthood? Surely, if the BBC is serious about exposing the extent of this rot, the journalists would wish to exhaust every possible avenue, if not to assist the Church to put its own house in order, then, at least, to protect children?

I am, therefore, particularly disappointed that Mark Daly (an excellent investigative journalist) ducked this issue. I’ll send him the link to this thread in the hope that this little bit of less than subtle flattery just might prompt him to think afresh about the whole sordid business.

Well, you can’t blame a girl for trying, can you?

Comments (261)

  • Leo

    Arkenaten

    You posted a link about Saint Thomas More and heretics previously. The fact that it referred to “Saint” Martin Luther and “Saint” William Tynedale says all that needs to said about its objectivity and reliability.

    More defended the principle of punishment of heresy by secular power on the ground that it threatened the peace and safety of the commonwealth. In that, he was firmly in line with the King’s policy at that time. As Chancellor, it was More’s duty to administer the civil laws of England, which prescribed the death penalty for obstinate heretics. Nevertheless, during his term of office only four, it seems, were burned, and these were relapsed persons, whom he had no power to reprieve.

    Following a conference held by Henry VIII in May 1530 issued a proclamation against heretical books.For the future, no new Scriptural books or translations of the Bible were to be printed in England unless ‘examined and approved’ by a bishop, and books approved and printed were to include the names of both examiner and printer. At this point More became convinced that it was impossible to issue even an approved Bible translation because the mere fact of such an issue would appear ‘to give succour to heretics’. The point is that the Lollard heresy had been disseminated through vernacular translations of the Scriptures. The view of Henry’s conference, which More had attended, that the Bible in English was ‘not necessary’ was thus repeated in the proclamation. Nevertheless, More announced that if the people abandoned all heresies, the King would go ahead, after all, with an official English Bible, a concession that was Henry’s personal contribution to this proclamation.

    Your effort to imply that people were persecuted for trying to read the Bible, is really just another shoddy effort at muddying the waters here.

    August 11, 2013 at 5:26 pm
    • Arkenaten

      You are, of course, entitled to your opinion.
      The Catholic Church is famous for rooting out what it considers heresies and if the culprits would not bend then they broke them. The Cathars come readily to mind.
      have you ever visited Carcasonne? I have . Nice town.

      More’s attack against Tynedale and his eventual execution were a result of a single mindlessness to ensure the Catholic interpretation ruled.

      That we now have the bible in English, with many different versions and interpretations and pretty much every language vindicates Tyndale and once again demonstrates that no matter what the church has done to force its dogma it has always genuflected in the end.

      Normal people are merely biding their time….. 😉

      August 11, 2013 at 7:46 pm
  • gabriel syme

    @ Akenaten

    Hi:

    Catholicism accepts evolution.

    This is not correct. The Church has said that the theory of evolution is not necessarily in conflict with Christian doctrine. That is not the same as saying “this is a fact”. You could say its stance is “open minded”.

    Certainly there is enough to urge caution on glibly accepting evolution, as Darwin himself advised:

    Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely-graduated organic chain; and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and serious objection which can be urged against the theory. (The Origin of Species)

    Caution which was repeated in the 1999 reassessment of his work “Almost like a Whale”, by Professor Steve Jones (UCL):

    The fossil record – in defiance of Darwin’s whole idea of gradual change – often makes great leaps from one form to the next. Far from the display of intermediates to be expected from slow advance through natural selection many species appear without warning, persist in fixed form and disappear, leaving no descendants. Geology assuredly does not reveal any finely graduated organic chain, and this is the most obvious and gravest objection which can be urged against the theory of evolution.” (Almost Like a Whale, p. 252)

    Humans and apes have a common ancestor. There is no need for a ‘transitional fossil’
    The DNA record clearly demonstrates this

    Never mind the DNA record, if you claim that this common ancestor existed, then you must surely be able to show me its bones. Otherwise, you are asking me to have faith in you. How ironic is that! 😉

    August 11, 2013 at 5:59 pm
    • Arkenaten

      Lol…”Show me its bones” The response of the frustrated.

      I Promise to show the bones on one condition…you show me the bones of Yeshua?
      Fair deal?

      ‘…its stance is “open minded”.”
      Yep, this is church speak for fact.. If they were that confident in their man-god they would have unreservedly refuted the statement as they have always done in the past

      It’s politics, my friend. They are biding their time whole they devise a plausible answer so as to maintain the preposterous dogma of Original Sin.

      Pay it no mind….it is just another piece of nonsense that will eventually be flushed away.

      August 11, 2013 at 10:20 pm
  • spiritustempore

    Why don’t you say what YOU think, Holly? Wikipedia isn’t the most reliable of sources.

    So, which hypothesis do you support in claiming that the creation of life can come from inanimate sources….and why?

    August 11, 2013 at 6:26 pm
  • spiritustempore

    As much as it might make you lot feel special, I can’t live here and answer every question from Catholic Corner.

    My ‘position’ is merely the position of millions of normal people. It is an open club and even people like you can join. All you need is an inquiring mind.

    You mean you can’t support your arguments.

    it’s a pity that you have to resort to sneering in an attempt to cover the fact.

    The points you raised have been well answered. It appears that you have no answers for questions asked about your own position and you again default to the arguments of the playground.

    There may well come a day when you realise what you’re really fighting against.

    When you do, perhaps you’ll be blessed to find the peace of mind that billions of Catholics do, every day.

    Let’s hope so.

    August 11, 2013 at 6:33 pm
    • Arkenaten

      ”You mean you can’t support your arguments.”

      The arguments have been supported. Maybe you just choose not to pay attention? I cannot be faulted for that, surely?

      ”There may well come a day when you realise what you’re really fighting against.”

      Fighting against? Who’s fighting? You have to justify your existence to an imaginary deity, not me, my friend.
      And the billions of Catholics will one day be nothing but an oddity in a history book.
      It is already happening and you aren’t even aware.

      August 11, 2013 at 10:27 pm
  • Athanasius

    Arkenaten,

    Since there was no reply button under your comments of 1.42pm (it is so irritating!), I have copied your post below with my answer below that.

    You wrote: “The simple answer is you are using god to fill in the gaps. Humans and apes have a common ancestor. There is no need for a ‘transitional fossil’
    The DNA record clearly demonstrates this.

    Catholicism accepts evolution. Catholicism accepts that the Garden of Eden is analogy. (Though they are still managing to hold on to Original SIn, which is a wonderful demonstration of their hypocrisy) Catholicism rejects Noah’s Flood as portrayed in the bible. Perhaps the news has been slow to filter down from thew Pope to the plebs in the pews. That’s not my problem, or anyone else’s for that matter. Go and ask your local up to date priest. As our host is wont to write…Gerragrip!

    So…back to the question. Are you going to attempt to explain how Yeshua is a god, or are you going to continue on your petulant rant?

    I could produce as many proofs to you that Our Lord Jesus Christ is God, but I know beforehand that you would reject them all on some trumped up excuse or other, so I won’t waste the time. What I will say, though, is that someone who truly did not believe in God, as you claim, would not be so zealous in denying Him. God clearly troubles your conscience, which brings me back to what I said at the beginning about there being no such thing as an atheist. You need to be honest with yourself!

    August 11, 2013 at 6:58 pm
    • Arkenaten

      Actually I never lose a moments sleep over it. I merely find it fascinating that’s all.
      If I was not being honest I would be religious. But then the question would arise, which religion? Okay, Christianity? But which type of Christianity?
      You begin to see the dilemma?

      But please, feel free to demonstrate you evidence. I have seen much but am always willing to examine some more. The floor is yours….

      August 11, 2013 at 10:34 pm
      • Athanasius

        Arkenaten,

        Not losing a moment’s sleep over your opposition to God is actually very worrying; it suggests a dead conscience.

        “If I was not being honest I would be religious.” A line worthy of any number of God haters. Stalin and Hitler came immediately to mind!

        August 12, 2013 at 5:52 pm
      • Arkenaten

        I do not hate ANYTHING. Hate is a wasted emotion reserved for those who believe in the Devil and other such stuff.

        One can have a conscience without religion, you know?
        Morality isn’t the sole preserve of the religious.
        You need to get a grip.
        Hitler did not hate god. He had a warped idea of what he considered good religion but he was a catholic as it turns out. Surely you knew this? No? Oh dear…than I bet that hurt. Wince…
        I am beginning to seriously wonder what dark little secrets you have shored up in your closet that makes you chronically spiteful with you ignorant comments?
        Is the topic of this post a little too close for comfort?
        You need to chill a little.

        August 12, 2013 at 6:04 pm
      • Arkenaten

        Oh, and I notice you are still not willing to take up the challenge re: demonstrating the divinity of Yeshua. What’s the matter, can’t find anything on Wiki?

        August 12, 2013 at 6:13 pm
  • Athanasius

    I found this quote from the Preface of a book entitled ‘The Way of Divine Love,’ on the revelations of the Sacred Heart of Jesus to Sister Josefa Menendez. The words were written by a Jesuit, Fr. H. Monier Vinard in the early 1940s. They have only gained in strength since then!

    “Everywhere sin is increasing to an appalling degree. The pride of man leads him to discard his God and attempt to make a paradise on earth. He has so far succeeded only in making it a vestibule of hell, where impiety, immorality, and the worst passions have free scope; wars rage that are more terrible than any yet heard of, the majority of mankind suffers poverty and slavery, and all without the comfort which faith alone can impart. The Heart of God inclines in pity towards His forlorn children, and He points out to them the way of happiness, peace, and salvation.”

    How very true!

    August 11, 2013 at 8:00 pm
  • Athanasius

    I found this quote from the Preface of a book entitled ‘The Way of Divine Love,’ on the revelations of the Sacred Heart of Jesus to Sister Josefa Menendez. The words were written by a Jesuit, Fr. H. Monier Vinard in the early 1940s. They have only gained in strength since then!

    “Everywhere sin is increasing to an appalling degree. The pride of man leads him to discard his God and attempt to make a paradise on earth. He has so far succeeded only in making it a vestibule of hell, where impiety, immorality, and the worst passions have free scope; wars rage that are more terrible than any yet heard of, the majority of mankind suffers poverty and slavery, and all without the comfort which faith alone can impart. The Heart of God inclines in pity towards His forlorn children, and He points out to them the way of happiness, peace, and salvation.”

    How very true!

    August 11, 2013 at 8:01 pm
  • Arkenaten

    ”SHOULD the BBC documentary have highlighted the fact that in each and every case they presented for scrutiny, the child abused was a boy and the abuser was a man. THAT is the question.”

    Er…correct me if I am wrong. The boarding school was for boys and the Priests/Monks were men.

    August 11, 2013 at 10:46 pm
  • Prionsais

    Arkenaten

    Where did the common ancestor come from; a screwmouse?

    August 12, 2013 at 4:29 pm

Comments are closed.


%d bloggers like this: