Papal resignation linked to inquiry into 'Vatican gay officials'?

[G8trGr8t]

A potentially explosive report has linked the resignation of Pope Benedict XVI to the discovery of a network of gay prelates in the Vatican, some of whom – the report said – were being blackmailed by outsiders.

The pope's spokesman declined to confirm or deny the report, which was carried by the Italian daily newspaper La Repubblica.

The paper said the pope had taken the decision on 17 December that he was going to resign – the day he received a dossier compiled by three cardinals delegated to look into the so-called "Vatileaks" affair.

Last May Pope Benedict's butler, Paolo Gabriele, was arrested and charged with having stolen and leaked papal correspondence that depicted the Vatican as a seething hotbed of intrigue and infighting.

According to La Repubblica, the dossier comprising "two volumes of almost 300 pages – bound in red" had been consigned to a safe in the papal apartments and would be delivered to the pope's successor upon his election.

The newspaper said the cardinals described a number of factions, including one whose members were "united by sexual orientation".

In an apparent quotation from the report, La Repubblica said some Vatican officials had been subject to "external influence" from laymen with whom they had links of a "worldly nature". The paper said this was a clear reference to blackmail

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013...ckmail-inquiry

as if there was any question as to why so many crimes against kids were covered up by the catholic church. it is probably going on at the highest levels of the church and has been since the church was formed. it seems to be ingrained in the system

[corpgator]

Originally Posted by G8trGr8t

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013...ckmail-inquiry

as if there was any question as to why so many crimes against kids were covered up by the catholic church. it is probably going on at the highest levels of the church and has been since the church was formed. it seems to be ingrained in the system

The pope himself was the man in charge of covering them up before he became the pope.

[g8rjd]

I saw this article. It's going to be interesting to watch.

[DeanMeadGator]

Originally Posted by corpgator

The pope himself was the man in charge of covering them up before he became the pope.

99% of priests are good men who have devoted their lives to serving others. An entire religion cannot be painted with the brush of some priests who have done some very bad and evil things. They should be in prison.

99% of the soldiers who fought in Vietnam fought for and served their country with valor and distinction. All returning Vietnam vets cannot be painted with the brush of being baby killers and the murderers of their commanders because a few did kill children, and a few fragged their commanders. Some of you will remember the cover up of the deaths of children and others in a small village. Does this condemn all soldiers?

It is easy to condemn based on the terrible acts of some. It is not right to condemn an entire group based on the terrible and evil acts of a small number in a huge group.

One of the priests who lives two doors down from us is called virtually every night (sometimes multiple times in a night) to go to the hospital to visit the sick and dying. Some of those are children. Who among us would try to comfort the parents of a dying child?

He visits the numerous homes for the elderly and the 33rd Street jail. He is the same age that I am (68) and works harder than any man I know.

Some policemen have done some bad things. Ergo, the cover up by the thin blue line paints all the police as bad??

It is a sad fact of life that some will always do horrible and evil things. There will also be some who try to cover it up. The condemnation should be reserved for those - not 99% of people who try very hard to do the right thing and generally do.

We have 3 children and 6 grandchildren. In my opinion, anyone who molests a child should serve a mandatory prison term. I refuse, however, to condemn a group based on the acts of a very small minority.

[g8rjd]

Originally Posted by DeanMeadGator

Some policemen have done some bad things. Ergo, the cover up by the thin blue line paints all the police as bad??

You obviously haven't read the Purifoy threads.

I keed. Good post.

[MastaG8r]

If it's true that the Pope received a dossier containing allegations against cardinals or other high-ranking clergy, I really doubt he would think that by resigning he could make the whole thing go away, if that's the implication here. If he did get such info it was probably at most just another straw on the camel's back in terms of his determination that his weak health made him unfit to fulfill the stressful demands of the job.

The Church really, really needs to do away with the celibacy requirement for priests. Not to say it never happens but personally I never hear about any sexual scandals involving priests in the Episcopalian Church, which is very similar to the Catholic Church except that the priests are allowed to marry. In fact that's where Padre Alberto ended up, the popular TV priest here in Miami who was caught having an affair with a woman. He quit the Catholic Church, married the woman, became an Episcopalian priest and as far as I know is living happily ever after.

As you might expect being a churchgoing Catholic in Florida's Catholicist city, I know a good amount of other Catholics. I don't know a single one who doesn't support abolishing the celibacy requirement. Not one.

[MichiGator2002]

But... as gently as I may... I don't know how "Catholicest" a community can be that treats matters of Church doctrine as though they were a zoning ordinance, i.e. subject of human law. It is like watching all this politicking over the papacy itself like its primary season.

I can't say with 100% confidence that I understand the celibacy requirement, but I accept that, like much of Catholic life, it is a mystery. I can even say that I myself am one who has steered thoughts of the priesthood out of my mind, because I want too much to be a husband and father, and that the Church does need priests. If the time comes for it to change, that will be shown to the Church. There is no ballot initiative process to change the Catechism or the CIC.

[reformedgator]

What's always been baffling to me is the victim always seems to be young boys. What could possibly be the pleasure in molesting adolescent males if you're a male yourself? And how could you minister to people with any kind of conscience knowing what you've done?

[MastaG8r]

Originally Posted by MichiGator2002

But... as gently as I may... I don't know how "Catholicest" a community can be that treats matters of Church doctrine as though they were a zoning ordinance, i.e. subject of human law. It is like watching all this politicking over the papacy itself like its primary season.

I can't say with 100% confidence that I understand the celibacy requirement, but I accept that, like much of Catholic life, it is a mystery. I can even say that I myself am one who has steered thoughts of the priesthood out of my mind, because I want too much to be a husband and father, and that the Church does need priests. If the time comes for it to change, that will be shown to the Church. There is no ballot initiative process to change the Catechism or the CIC.

LOL, yes you're right, if such a word existed it would end in est, not ist.

It may be a mystery why the celibacy requirement was ordained but it's no mystery how much damage is being done to the Church by these endless allegations of abuse. It's no mystery, if you ask me, why the Episcopalian Church has so fewer sex scandals, although since writing my previous post I looked it up and they have had some. Nothing remotely like the scale of what the Catholic Church has suffered, though.

With its similar rites, traditions, terminology and even church architecture, the Episcopalian aka American Anglican Church is becoming an increasingly attractive option for many Catholics. Of course a worse problem than people leaving for a different denomination is people losing faith altogether, and if these scandals aren't a major cause of that, at a minimum they certainly aren't helping matters any.

I do understand that such a major change in Church doctrine is something that has to be revealed and can't just arbitrarily be put up for vote or whatever. I just hope the new Pope has an open heart & mind and on day one starts looking really, really hard for revelations.

[gatorev12]

Originally Posted by MichiGator2002

I can't say with 100% confidence that I understand the celibacy requirement, but I accept that, like much of Catholic life, it is a mystery. I can even say that I myself am one who has steered thoughts of the priesthood out of my mind, because I want too much to be a husband and father, and that the Church does need priests. If the time comes for it to change, that will be shown to the Church. There is no ballot initiative process to change the Catechism or the CIC.

The celibacy requirement is more tradition, it isn't a fundamental doctrine of the Catholic Church--ie: in theory, it can be changed at any time.

Certainly, in the early Church, priests were allowed to marry and there are exceptions made to this day.

The primary reason for celibacy is found in the fact Jesus and His Apostles were celibate and thus, why the Church teaches it for priests. In a nutshell, the reasoning goes: a marriage is a worldly concern and often gets in the way of spiritual/heavenly concerns.

In saying that though, I'm in agreement that the Church should allow priests to marry and I'm fairly confident most Catholics feel the same way too. The most common-sense approach is to adopt what the Orthodox Church has done for centuries and require celibacy for bishops and above..but ordinary priests can marry.

[Gatorrick22]

Originally Posted by G8trGr8t

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013...ckmail-inquiry

as if there was any question as to why so many crimes against kids were covered up by the catholic church. it is probably going on at the highest levels of the church and has been since the church was formed. it seems to be ingrained in the system

No offense to the OP, a person whose views and opinions I do respect, but I call horse $hit on this whole BS article. The English have had a steady hatred of the Catholic Church since Henry the VIII's time as the butcher of innocent women.

[corpgator]

Originally Posted by DeanMeadGator

99% of priests are good men who have devoted their lives to serving others. An entire religion cannot be painted with the brush of some priests who have done some very bad and evil things. They should be in prison.

99% of the soldiers who fought in Vietnam fought for and served their country with valor and distinction. All returning Vietnam vets cannot be painted with the brush of being baby killers and the murderers of their commanders because a few did kill children, and a few fragged their commanders. Some of you will remember the cover up of the deaths of children and others in a small village. Does this condemn all soldiers?

It is easy to condemn based on the terrible acts of some. It is not right to condemn an entire group based on the terrible and evil acts of a small number in a huge group.

One of the priests who lives two doors down from us is called virtually every night (sometimes multiple times in a night) to go to the hospital to visit the sick and dying. Some of those are children. Who among us would try to comfort the parents of a dying child?

He visits the numerous homes for the elderly and the 33rd Street jail. He is the same age that I am (68) and works harder than any man I know.

Some policemen have done some bad things. Ergo, the cover up by the thin blue line paints all the police as bad??

It is a sad fact of life that some will always do horrible and evil things. There will also be some who try to cover it up. The condemnation should be reserved for those - not 99% of people who try very hard to do the right thing and generally do.

We have 3 children and 6 grandchildren. In my opinion, anyone who molests a child should serve a mandatory prison term. I refuse, however, to condemn a group based on the acts of a very small minority.

I didn't paint with any broad brush. I spoke specifically of one man who is known to have covered up for that 1% that were raping children and in doing so allowed them to continue raping more.

[MastaG8r]

Originally Posted by gatorev12

The celibacy requirement is more tradition, it isn't a fundamental doctrine of the Catholic Church--ie: in theory, it can be changed at any time.

Certainly, in the early Church, priests were allowed to marry and there are exceptions made to this day.

The primary reason for celibacy is found in the fact Jesus and His Apostles were celibate and thus, why the Church teaches it for priests. In a nutshell, the reasoning goes: a marriage is a worldly concern and often gets in the way of spiritual/heavenly concerns.

In saying that though, I'm in agreement that the Church should allow priests to marry and I'm fairly confident most Catholics feel the same way too. The most common-sense approach is to adopt what the Orthodox Church has done for centuries and require celibacy for bishops and above..but ordinary priests can marry.

Yeah that reasoning in bold was easier to sell back in the pre-porn days when guys didn't really know what they were missing.

I don't get the "priests OK to marry but not bishops" deal. So if you choose to marry you're off the the bishop track? No offense but how do you figure that's "sensible"? I say just let 'em all get married if they want to, like in every other church.

If you're like me the most "normal" people in the clergy at Church who you find easiest to talk and relate to are the lay deacons. They have wives and kids and family lifestyles and can better relate to other people with the same.

[Spurffelbow833]

Originally Posted by gatorev12

Certainly, in the early Church, priests were allowed to marry and there are exceptions made to this day.

How would one qualify for an exception? I'm thinking of a situation like a war or a natural disaster where a man's wife disappears and is eventually declared legally dead, he becomes a priest while he believes she's dead, then she is found alive.

[gatorev12]

Originally Posted by MastaG8r

I don't get the "priests OK to marry but not bishops" deal. So if you choose to marry you're off the the bishop track? No offense but how do you figure that's "sensible"? I say just let 'em all get married if they want to, like in every other church.

If you're like me the most "normal" people in the clergy at Church who you find easiest to talk and relate to are the lay deacons. They have wives and kids and family lifestyles and can better relate to other people with the same.

Bishops have a bigger role than parish priests--the same way a general has a bigger role than the sergeant or the Publix CEO from the store manager. The positions are different and a valid argument can be made that the qualifications for both are different too.

But yes...married deacons are often far easier to relate to than most parish priests for the reasons you mentioned.

[G8trGr8t]

Originally Posted by Gatorrick22

No offense to the OP, a person whose views and opinions I do respect, but I call horse $hit on this whole BS article. The English have had a steady hatred of the Catholic Church since Henry the VIII's time as the butcher of innocent women.

the original report is from an italian newspaper

http://www.businessinsider.com/secre...gay-sex-2013-2

But according to the major Italian newspaper La Repubblica, the real reason he resigned is because he did not want to deal with the repercussions of a secret 300-page Vatican dossier that allegedly found, among other things, an underground network of high-ranking gay clergy, complete with sex parties and shady dealings with the already scandal-ridden Vatican bank.

Here's what we know:

The report sounds menacing. According to La Repubblica, the dossier comes in two volumes, "two folders hard-bound in red" with the header "pontifical secret."

Pope Benedict asked for the investigation. "The paper said the pope had taken the decision on 17 December that he was going to resign — the day he received a dossier compiled by three cardinals delegated to look into the so-called 'Vatileaks' affair," according to the The Guardian's translation of the report.

The Vatican has a Velvet Mafia — and the Velvet Mafia is being blackmailed. The dossier alleges that a gay lobby exists within the Church, and has some sort of control on the careers of those in the Vatican. The dossier also alleges that this group isn't as covert as it thinks — and got blackmailed by people on the outside.

"The cardinals were said to have uncovered an underground gay network, whose members organise sexual meetings in several venues in Rome and Vatican City, leaving them prone to blackmail," reads The Sydney Morning Herald's translation of the report, and The Guardian adds: "They included a villa outside the Italian capital, a sauna in a Rome suburb, a beauty parlour in the centre, and a former university residence that was in use by a provincial Italian archbishop." Some important context on this still powerful group:

This isn't the first time there's been talk of a gay faction inside the highest ranks of the Church. Indeed, it isn't even the first time that La Repubblica has written about it. Back in 2010, Ghinedu Ehiem, a Nigerian clergyman who was part of one of the Vatican's prestigious choirs, was dismissed after police wiretaps found him negotiating for male prostitutes. La Repubblica had those wiretaps

La Repubblica's sourcing seems to have been corroborated. So how much of this new scandal should you believe? Well, La Repubblica is not the only publication with an outline of this scandalous dossier.

Panorama, an Italian weekly, has a similar report out late this week and according to the AFP, both publications have sources (perhaps the same source) who said the same thing: that the investigation shows transgressions that "revolve around the sixth and seventh commandments" — "Thou shall not commit adultery" and "Thou shall not steal." It's assumed in multiple reports that homosexual sex acts fall under the "adultery" umbrella.

and to address another point, if a policeman covers for a bad cop, he is just as guilty as the one that committed the crime.

[g8tr80]

Like the Borges all over again. OK, an institution 2000 years old will have their fair share of skeletons accumulated. And to some of you who want "change", the catholic church is a religion, not a political party. They will not change like muzzies will not change. The day I can flush a koran down the toilet without causing WWIII is the day priests will get married. Get it?

Yes, the catholic church has a huge homosexual problem. Started in the 70's and has ingrained itself in the hierarchy as gay priests got promoted. The explosion of the gay culture, they greying of all things niether right or wrong, the desire to diddle little boys and the concept of "forgiveness" have proven troublesome for the church. Unfortunately a byproduct of our change in culture. Once again, did you not think that profound changes in our moral psyche will result in certain consequences both good and bad?

And then we insist on gay scout masters in the BSA. We deserve everything we get.

[cocodrilo]

It sounds like wild living ("The Vatican After Hours") may have contributed to the Pope's declining health, though age is certainly a factor. "I just can't keep up with the younger prelates anymore."

[Lawdog88]

Originally Posted by MastaG8r

Yeah that reasoning in bold was easier to sell back in the pre-porn days when guys didn't really know what they were missing.

I don't get the "priests OK to marry but not bishops" deal. So if you choose to marry you're off the the bishop track? No offense but how do you figure that's "sensible"? I say just let 'em all get married if they want to, like in every other church.

If you're like me the most "normal" people in the clergy at Church who you find easiest to talk and relate to are the lay deacons. They have wives and kids and family lifestyles and can better relate to other people with the same.

Anglican here (disaffected Episcopalian), and often wondered how celibate priests could ever give decent marriage counseling.

That is one area of counseling, IMO, where to talk the talk, you have to have walked the walk.

[gatorev12]

Originally Posted by Spurffelbow833

How would one qualify for an exception? I'm thinking of a situation like a war or a natural disaster where a man's wife disappears and is eventually declared legally dead, he becomes a priest while he believes she's dead, then she is found alive.

The most common exception is if the priest was a married Protestant priest and converted to Catholicism.

Additionally, African converts who'd been priests or shamans in whatever native religion they practiced have been allowed to keep their wives as well.

The scenario you presented would also be a likely exception.