Vatican demonstrates its compassion once again

[kylaBC]

No, the mom is being excommunicated because she failed to keep her new husbands schlong in his pants around her daughter.

The doctor....well, the Vatican just hates science, and medicine is pretty close to science, so why not?

But of course they can't excommunicate the 9-yr-old girl, because then people would think they're monsters!

 

[The Nimble Pianist]

.
YGBSM!
All those people murdered in the most hideous manners the psychopaths in charge of both sides could dream up... What happens to their souls?
And when?
When St. Pete greeted them at the Pearly Gates while they were still cooling down, seeing the future is already cast in concrete, did he say.. "Oops, sorry folks, it was all a big foofarah. No hard feelings? Can't you take a joke?"
I'm gonna love seeing the "philosophers" and "theologians" gnarble and flabbersnit their way around this one
Heresy becomes merely a matter of dates, like treason?
BSD's representatives here on earth are just as f****d up as they have appeared over the centuries!

Like I said, it's just a rumor I've read on a number of Catholic sites. I'm highly skeptical of it due to Benedict's very conservative nature. Does it seem likely that the same man who has brought back the Tridentine Mass, communion by kneeling and on the tongue, and Easter prayers for the conversion of the Jews is really the type to say "Oh, well the Protestant Reformation wasn't that bad?

No. Benedict doesn't seem like much of a fan of ecumenicism. If any recent Pope were to lift the excommunication of Luther, I'd say it would've been John Paul II.

So, when the Pope posthumously lifted this excommunication, did Galileo's soul immediately leave Hell and enter Heaven?

I don't know. I can't purport to be an expert on this as I learned this in a "conversion class". I assume that omniscience would play a role in the Catholic cop out explanation. "God foresaw the lifted excommunication at the moment of Galileo's death and so allowed him to go to Purgatory rather than Hell. Also, I don't know if dying in the state of excommunication is an immediate ticket to hell. I've never known any Catholic (even the Pope) to speculate on the eternal damnation of an individual, only the eternal life of an individual (see: Saint canonization).

 

[Madouc]

No, the mom is being excommunicated because she failed to keep her new husbands schlong in his pants around her daughter.

But it's OK when people fail to stop priests doing that kind of thing, right?

 

[kylaBC]

But it's OK when people fail to stop priests doing that kind of thing, right?

Exactly. But, seeing as priests can't get married, it's okay for them to touch little boys. See, the system DOES make sense!

Because the guy was married, it's automatically the woman's fault, but because priests aren't, there's no one to blame!

 

[Hittman]

Sorry, I know this post is off topic, but the catholic church deserves ridicule.

They deserve more than ridicule. They deserve contempt. Their leaders deserve to be spit on whenever they show their face in public. They are sick, sick, sick, evil {string of expletives.}

She is nine. Nine, you sick evil perverts. She has been repeatedly raped for half of her life. Are you so enamored with pedophilia that you can justify such torture of a child?

http://www.davehitt.com/blog2/the-catholic-church-still-loves-pedophiles/, because I can't use the appropriate language in this forum.

 

[The Nimble Pianist]

No, the mom is being excommunicated because she failed to keep her new husbands schlong in his pants around her daughter.

No. The stated reason for the excommunication is for aiding in an abortion. In Catholicism, one can be charged guilty for another's sin if they facilitated the sin. Considering the Catholic Church's very consistent (though very irrational) teachings on abortion, I see no reason to doubt the stated reason for the excommunication.

The doctor....well, the Vatican just hates science, and medicine is pretty close to science, so why not?

Do you have any evidence for this assertion? You'd be hard-pressed to demonstrate that the organization the gave the world its first scientific organizations "hates science". They might not consistently, or even critically embrace science, but it's a might large leap to say they hate it.

But of course they can't excommunicate the 9-yr-old girl, because then people would think they're monsters!

They're already taking heat in Brazil for excommunicating the mother and the doctor. If they were at all worried about their reputation, they would not have excommunicated anyone. It's much more likely that the 9 year old was excommuncated because she can't be excommunicated by Catholic Canon Law.

But it's OK when people fail to stop priests doing that kind of thing, right?

Again, it would be very hypocritical if the RCC were excommunicating the woman for failing to stop child, sexual abuse. Since that's not the case, I can't seem to find any utility in your post except for maybe serving as a fine example of a red herring.

Exactly. But, seeing as priests can't get married, it's okay for them to touch little boys. See, the system DOES make sense!

Because the guy was married, it's automatically the woman's fault, but because priests aren't, there's no one to blame!

You see. This is what happens when someone makes a claim that is not founded in evidence. The conversation becomes hysterical. You stated, incorrectly, that the mother was excommunicated for failing to stop her husband from abusing her child, which welcomed the irrelevance of rapist priests.

 

[kylaBC]

I'm sorry that sarcasm doesn't translate well to some people.
Just in case you were wondering, the joys of sarcasm can be found in many of my posts.

 

[The Nimble Pianist]

I'm sorry that sarcasm doesn't translate well to some people.
Just in case you were wondering, the joys of sarcasm can be found in many of my posts.

Pardon me. My fault. I've noticed the frequency of trolls increase recently, so I guess my sarcasm intuition is off a bit.

Smilies help those of us who are thick

 

[Gord_in_Toronto]

Pardon me. My fault. I've noticed the frequency of trolls increase recently, so I guess my sarcasm intuition is off a bit.

Smilies help those of us who are thick

[not sarcasm]And yet the child-raping father is permitted to attend church next Sunday.[/not sarcasm]

 

[I Ratant]

[not sarcasm]And yet the child-raping father is permitted to attend church next Sunday.[/not sarcasm]

.
Buy a few novenas, light a few candles, all is forgiven.
The sin, that is.
The crime, well, ignore that, as is done all the time in the LA archdiocese.

 

[The Nimble Pianist]

[not sarcasm]And yet the child-raping father is permitted to attend church next Sunday.[/not sarcasm]

Yup. Pretty sick huh. I asked a priest. Apparently rape is not an excommunicable offense whereas saving a 9 year old's life is.

Very backward priorities.

 

[I Ratant]

I encountered that priority problem 60 years ago, when Sister Caligula told us that when there was a problem with childbirth, letting the mother die to save the child was the process.
I kinda wondered in my 10 year old mind,... isn't the years invested in the life of the mother more important than the life of something that has never been born?
I would chose to lose the potential child, over the life of my wife!

 

[fuelair]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7930380.stm

Riiiiiiigghhhttt.... so, the Vatican says it's OK to pronounce excommunication on the child's mother and the doctors who were saving the child's life and health. But not a word about the rapist scum who abused her.

But, but, my understanding is that the persons excommunicate themselves not that the church excommunicates them. Oh well, rectums will be rectums and feces shall spring forth therefrom.

 

[Gord_in_Toronto]

Yup. Pretty sick huh. I asked a priest. Apparently rape is not an excommunicable offense whereas saving a 9 year old's life is.

Very backward priorities.

How about the child molestation aspect? I presume that this "is OK" too?

 

[Wauthan]

I read about this earlier and my knee-jerk reaction was not much in favor of the senior cleric. There's something odd about this story, and I'm sure a lot of important parts are missing.

Why would the church even bother with the excommunication? Surely they knew that this decision would cast a very dark shadow indeed. Is abortion such an important topic that they couldn't simply have ignored this particular case? Or are there local political aspects to this, that forced the church to get involved?

 

[Flo]

I read about this earlier and my knee-jerk reaction was not much in favor of the senior cleric. There's something odd about this story, and I'm sure a lot of important parts are missing.

Why would the church even bother with the excommunication? Surely they knew that this decision would cast a very dark shadow indeed. Is abortion such an important topic that they couldn't simply have ignored this particular case? Or are there local political aspects to this, that forced the church to get involved?

It is unfortunately very consistent with general policy in vatican, as was apparent during the former Yugoslavia war when many Croatian women were raped, and the then pope decreed that aborting the resulting pregnancies was unacceptable from a catholic (and orthodox) standpoint. He meekly added that, of course, rape was bad, but ... and women should show christian spirit and gladly carry their burden in life, yadda, yadda, ... , etc.

 

[Gord_in_Toronto]

I read about this earlier and my knee-jerk reaction was not much in favor of the senior cleric. There's something odd about this story, and I'm sure a lot of important parts are missing.

Why would the church even bother with the excommunication? Surely they knew that this decision would cast a very dark shadow indeed. Is abortion such an important topic that they couldn't simply have ignored this particular case? Or are there local political aspects to this, that forced the church to get involved?

Nothing terribly odd that I can see. It's new Pope's intent to turn back the clock and turn the Church back a couple of centuries or two. The Church does not care what we heretics think. God's law is above all that.

Presumably their worry is that, if they don't respond and such actions become common, the sheeple will start to think for themselves and stop buying candles to keep the priests warm and spend the money on food for themselves instead.

 

[Wauthan]

But that's sort my point. This is a high profile case, and a horrible tragedy. Even if the catholic church is somehow bound to issue the excommunications it makes no sense why they didn't go out of their way to lessen the impact. The public opinion of the vatican is already tarnished by several recent events. To come across as heartless biblethumping thugs would not exactly improve the situation.

That's what I meant when I said the story was odd. I can understand if the vatican needs to make broad sweeping statements to enforce what they consider sacred laws. But there must be thousands of invidual cases every year, just as tragic as this one, where the church simply didn't get involved. Dodging the bullet, so to speak.

 

[fuelair]

How about the child molestation aspect? I presume that this "is OK" too?

As long as the stepfather is a priest.

 

[oggiesnr]

In Canon Law only the confirmed can be excommunicated so the child could not be eccommunicated as she had not been confirmed.

Steve