…and this is a 
Lose all faith in Catholicism, please. If you haven't already, this story should help you on your way. If that's not enough, perhaps Cuttlefish's poem will persuade you.
To summarize: A Franciscan priest uses his office to seduce multiple women. He lives with at least one of them as husband in all but official name, and gets her pregnant (which he suggests ending with an abortion; she refuses), and has a son. He then scampers off and leaves both. The woman rattles the cage of the Catholic church and gets child support…as long as she signs a confidentiality agreement and promises to never mention the matter publicly. Now in her later years, she has cancer, and even worse, her son has cancer, and where's good ol' Father Willenborg? In a new diocese, acting as if it had never happened.
A few amoral, irresponsible individuals don't ruin the reputation of an organization — they're everywhere, even among atheists — but what does indict the church is their response to bad behavior. It's the cover-up, stupid. It's not just the demand for confidentiality, but that they continue to enable their sleazy playboy priest to go about his seductions with only an occasional finger-wag.
Clergy members of many faiths have crossed the line with women and had children out of wedlock. But the problem is particularly fraught for the Catholic Church, as Catholics in many countries are increasingly questioning the celibacy requirement for priests. Ms. Bond's case offers a rare look at how the church goes to great lengths to silence these women, to avoid large settlements and to keep the priests in active ministry. She has 23 years of documents, depositions, correspondence, receipts and photographs relating to her case, which she has kept in meticulous files.
Those files reveal that the church was tightfisted with her as she tried to care for her son, particularly as his cancer treatments grew more costly. But they also show that Father Willenborg suffered virtually no punishment, continuing to serve in a variety of church posts.
And then there are the statistics.
A landmark study in 1990 by the scholar A. W. Richard Sipe, a former Benedictine, found that 20 percent of Catholic priests were involved in continuing sexual relationships with women, and an additional 8 percent to 10 percent had occasional heterosexual relationships.
I actually have some sympathy for the priests here: celibacy is an aberration for most people, and for the church to demand it is bound to induce or attract pathological individuals. But if they're going to insist on it as a matter of dogma, at least be consistent and boot out priests that violate their doctrine; they're obviously not suited for the job.
But I have no sympathy at all for Willenborg. He is a father — a literal father, more than the fake title he's given as a priest — and that means he has certain moral responsibilities. Yet he ignores them, and thinks that having his religious order grudgingly sending an allowance fulfills his obligations to a very sick son.
Why would anyone expect him to tend to his duties to his religious flock if he is so aloof to his own true child?
Politics
Comments
Posted by: Alverant
|
October 18, 2009 11:49 AM
Revolting. One quarter of catholic "fathers" break their vows and the church continues to look down its nose at us "heathens".
Posted by: mothwentbad
|
October 18, 2009 11:55 AM
Yet he ignores them, and thinks that having his religious order grudgingly sending an allowance fulfills his obligations to a very sick son.
This could've been improved by using the word pittance.
Posted by: nixscripter | October 18, 2009 11:56 AM
If you believe that God is capable of granting forgiveness and changing a person's soul then OF COURSE all it takes is five Our Fathers and four Hail Mary's to turn a child molester celebrate or a drinker dry. They just don't want everyone in the world to see them disciplining a priest, lest they loose faith in God's ability to turn child molester celebrate or a drinker dry.
Posted by: nixscripter | October 18, 2009 12:00 PM
@3: Uh, I meant celibate.
Posted by: Paul Lundgren | October 18, 2009 12:01 PM
I breathlessly await the response of Bill "The Ultimate Hypocrite" Donohue.
[crickets]
Posted by: Didac
|
October 18, 2009 12:11 PM
All that talk about Church depravity reminds me one of the Boccaccio's stories (http://it.wikisource.org/wiki/Decameron/1a_giornata/Novella_Seconda). As for the effects of clerical celibacy I don't think married priests will be less prone to sexually abuse. Or maybe, but then they would sexually abuse their own wives. Sexual abuse is as much a questions of sex than a question of power and humiliation.
Posted by: Steve L | October 18, 2009 12:13 PM
And then there is this:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/18/african-children-denounce_n_324943.html
Maybe I should have posted this link in the holy vs regular ghosts thread?
Posted by: JohnM | October 18, 2009 12:27 PM
This post reminded me. If anyone here hasn't read Aldous Huxley's "The Witches of Loudon", then you should.
Posted by: Romeo Vitelli
|
October 18, 2009 12:32 PM
Old news really. The Catholic Church does this on a regular basis. It's interesting that the Church turns a blind eye to "straying" priests while publicly announcing that they will be weeding out homosexuals.
http://drvitelli.typepad.com/providentia/2009/08/dealing-with-betrayal.html
Posted by: bill | October 18, 2009 12:41 PM
PZ Myers upholding good standards of ethics and morality!
Congratulations!
Posted by: Candace | October 18, 2009 12:45 PM
It kills me every time the church says homosexuality is an aberration or "against nature!" What could possibly be more of an aberration or against nature than celibacy? Hypocrisy, lies, and coverup, the trinity of "holy mother church."
Posted by: Fred The Hun | October 18, 2009 12:45 PM
As a divorced father, who pays child support, I can assure you that it is much more than a moral obligation...
However in my case, I actually devote a lot of time and effort to being personally involved in my kid's life.
BTW I'm an ex Catholic and have a deep disdain for their particular brand of hypocrisy. Too bad there is no hell!
Posted by: Alex
|
October 18, 2009 12:47 PM
The Church helped pay for a lot, even though they weren't obligated to. The Church wasn't really in the wrong that much in this case.
This has more to do with why I dislike the Church: http://asolis.net/2009/10/the-catholic-church-and-wwii/
Posted by: Candace | October 18, 2009 12:48 PM
It kills me every time the church says homosexuality is an aberration or "against nature!" What could possibly be more of an aberration or against nature than celibacy? Hypocrisy, lies, and coverup, the trinity of "holy mother church."
Posted by: Veritas | October 18, 2009 12:50 PM
Let's be honest, this is standard operating procedure for the Catholic Church. Someone breaks a vow? Cover it up, pay it off, move the priest. They do it in this case (which is just stupid) and in the rather more harmful cases of child abuse, and as my diocese is currently finding out, child porn too.
Posted by: Flea
|
October 18, 2009 12:50 PM
Listen to the son here:
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2009/10/15/us/priest/index.html
And what has his "father" done for him after knowing he is dying of cancer: "He hasn't seen him for years but he sent him a get-well card and says he prays for him".
Disgusting!
Posted by: ElectricBarbarella
|
October 18, 2009 12:55 PM
I read the comments in the original link. I really "love" all the comments that stated
"it takes two to tango. And SHE's the one at fault. I mean c'mon, how does one "fall in love" with a Priest? No, she trapped him and HE's the one paying?"
First page of comments. A male said this. Firmly believes the Priest was "trapped". He also threw in this:
"She's also had how many husbands? She's obviously not a paragon of virtue" as his proof.
Sad. And my mother wonders why I denounce all religion but especially the Catholic one.
toni
Posted by: Lilith | October 18, 2009 12:58 PM
I was introduced to a Jesuit at a wedding once and he readily admitted that when he or his brethren went away on holidays, it was off with the dog collar and sex, drugs, and rock'n'roll time. No one they met knew they were priests, they were just guys on vacation, out for a good time.
Hypocritical regarding the whole celebacy thing, but much better than preying on members of their own flock, I suppose.
Posted by: Zifnab
|
October 18, 2009 1:17 PM
I guarantee, PZ, that you'll hate the priests that do manage to self-flagellate themselves into a state of celibacy more than you hate the ones that don't.
I mean, shit, what do you think drives a man to the point that he considers an 8 year old boy so attractive that the guy "can't help himself"? Imagine what that kind of enforced asexuality does to him on all sorts psychological levels?
I'd much rather have a priest cheat on his vows with a consenting woman and get on the "too error is human" bandwagon, than some fountain of hormonal lust all bottled up and ready to blow its top.
Posted by: formosus
|
October 18, 2009 1:24 PM
Every time I see these news stories, I'm happier and happier that I'm not a catholic anymore. Even though I hold no grudge against my particular parishes, they belong to an organization of thieves, liars, and rapists. It's the sort of thing like "Yeah, he's a Klansman, but he doesn't personally intimidate and murder black people. He just pays his exorbitant dues each year, and tells all his friends that the Klan has the best interest of the world at heart."
It makes those yearly pledge drives (I forgot what their name for them was) even more sinister. Each church gets a quota that they MUST give to the upper levels. Only after this quota has been raised can they actually start keeping money for their own parishes.
PS: FUCKING COMMENTING SYSTEM. STILL BROKEN.
Posted by: Susan | October 18, 2009 1:25 PM
Fatherhood (in every sense of the word) FAIL. But irony, ftw.Posted by: golemxiv | October 18, 2009 1:38 PM
You should keep in mind, that as the church guys dwell in the past, they probably go by the old definition of celibate = unmarried. ;-)
[Dictionary says - Usage Note: Historically, celibate means only "unmarried"; its use to mean "abstaining from sexual intercourse" is a 20th-century development. But the new sense of the word seems to have displaced the old, and the use of celibate to mean "unmarried" is now almost sure to invite misinterpretation in other than narrowly ecclesiastical contexts. Sixty-eight percent of the Usage Panel rejected the older use in the sentence He remained celibate [unmarried], although he engaged in sexual intercourse.]
To church it was not so important if you have sex or not, as long as you have no legitimate inheritors.
Posted by: Norm | October 18, 2009 1:41 PM
Here in Canada a catholic bishop has been found in possession of child pornography:
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/ottawa/story/2009/10/16/ns-lahey-search-warrant.html
Posted by: drjimsthinkingshop.com
|
October 18, 2009 2:02 PM
The bishop mention in #23 above is a total jerk. Check out what Michael Coren says on the National Post's blog "Holy Post"
http://tinyurl.com/yleoo3h
"Today secularism is the ideology of fashion but Catholicbashing, the last acceptable prejudice in polite society, is the toxin the runs through the contemporary bloodstream of Western liberal society."
Fer godless' sake, if the C. C. would start treating sexual abuse like a crime adn the perpetrators like criminals and not inconveniences that need to be hidden away, then maybe "Catholicbashing" wouldn't be so popular.
Posted by: Barb
|
October 18, 2009 2:04 PM
“Father Willenborg suffered virtually no punishment, continuing to serve in a variety of church posts.”
You can bet a nun would be booted out of the church immediately if she were to become pregnant, though.
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/03/21/world/documents-allege-abuse-of-nuns-by-priests.html
Posted by: Marley Fitz | October 18, 2009 2:07 PM
Similar story (I'm sure there are MANY). When I was still a practicing Catholic, I was at Sunday mass......priest comes out to begin the service but instead, he makes an "announcement". In tears, he tells the congregation he has committed a sin. I'm thinking......holy crappola, he's molesting the altar boys. (My two young sons attended the school.)
Instead, he admits to having a lover.......the secretary at the rectory, whom he had transferred from his previous church. Turns out he was nailing her...had a new rectory built just for them. She ends up having a nervous breakdown when he tries to end the relationship. She sues the church.....settlement undisclosed. They ended up "relocating" the little fucker.
Luckily for me, I wasn't much of a catholic even when I WAS a catholic. When they passed the basket around for "offerings", I took a pass. So, at least I know it wasn't MY money that was being used to build the rectory and support his lover or pay her off.
And now, I'm happy to call myself an atheist. Incidentally, so are my children. Although, their father (my ex) says he will never forgive me for turning his children against god.
Unfortunate? Yes, but I can live with that.
Posted by: black-wolf72
|
October 18, 2009 2:15 PM
Too bad humanity needs religious organisations and faith to inform its morality and to hold a civilized society together.
Oh, wait, no it doesn't.
Posted by: Strangest brew
|
October 18, 2009 2:31 PM
'I'd much rather have a priest cheat on his vows with a consenting woman and get on the "too error is human" bandwagon, than some fountain of hormonal lust all bottled up and ready to blow its top.'
I think that we would all much rather that the RC church realised its dogma was pathetic and insane then grew up and became relevant...
Although 'relevant' is a rather mobile concept when you are trying to flog a tawdry fairy story.
Reality has never been a strong point of any religious mumbo jumbo especially the Jesuit delusion.
Posted by: Janine, Vile Bitch, OM | October 18, 2009 2:32 PM
How can this be blamed on the fact that homosexuals exist and are not hiding?
Posted by: Sili
|
October 18, 2009 2:57 PM
Sorry, PeeZed, but I don't believe I had any faith in the CC to lose.
Posted by: tsig0
|
October 18, 2009 3:16 PM
If I did it it would be a crime and I would go jail when a priest does it it is just a sin and he gets moved to a fresh flock.
Posted by: tsig0
|
October 18, 2009 3:23 PM
I had a post so devastatingly clear and powerful that believers who just saw it would instantly be shorn of their faith and rendered atheists on the spot but..the...system ate it.
Curse you comment system!!!!
Posted by: Rose Colored Glasses | October 18, 2009 3:24 PM
He's probably boning the flock out of some of his current flock.
Posted by: Irene Delse | October 18, 2009 3:50 PM
Indeed, it's not the crime, it's the cover-up! A catholic priest "cheating" on his vows with another consenting adult? Well, good for him, I say. It's human. And better a little furtive adulterous sex than child molesting.
But if it becomes a long-time relationship, it's more serious. There are moral and legal obligations. Especially if there are children! The disgusting thing is that not only these priests, but the whole Church, keep trying to put things under the carpet, denying all validity to the relationship and the rights of the "spouse" and kids of the priests. Who, themselves, too often want to have their cake and eat it too, i.e. have a lover and keep their social status within the Church and among their parishioners!
Well, no. As long as celibacy is a requirement for the job, these men are being dishonest to themselves, to their lovers and to their fellow religionists. If they don't like it, maybe they should try to change the celibacy rule...
I know there are a few priests, in this situation, who decide to resign their job with the Church and keep their family. But often it's heart-wrenching for them, and for the spouse and children too, because they are shunned by "good Christians" and end up having to change towns and build a whole new life.
Posted by: Will. M | October 18, 2009 4:17 PM
I quit watching a program called "Ballykissangel" after the writers, having boxed themselves into a corner with a plot line involving a sexual interest between a very enticing female pub owner and the local priest decided that a fatal accident was the only way to resolve the issue. Guess who got electrocuted - a particularly gruesome death, no?
Posted by: Jeff Eyges | October 18, 2009 4:22 PM
I read the comments in the original link. I really "love" all the comments that stated
"it takes two to tango. And SHE's the one at fault. I mean c'mon, how does one "fall in love" with a Priest? No, she trapped him and HE's the one paying?"
First page of comments. A male said this. Firmly believes the Priest was "trapped". He also threw in this:
"She's also had how many husbands? She's obviously not a paragon of virtue" as his proof.
Of course. You can bet your bottom dollar this is how the Church hierarchy views her - as a seductress, tempting the poor man away from his vows. It's always the woman's fault in their minds - always. Misogynists, the lot of them.
Posted by: Gregory Greenwood
|
October 18, 2009 4:26 PM
I would say that I was shocked or at least surprised at the rank hypocrisy and utter inhumanity of this priest, but I long ago realised that there are no depths to which cretins who hide behind clerical status will not sink.
I cannot imagine what kind of father would abandon his own child so callously and then have the sheer gall to presume to tell others how to behave.
Posted by: Smoggy Batzrubble OM4Jesus
|
October 18, 2009 4:35 PM
Dear Atheists,
I'm saddened that many of you seem to think that God's blessed Father Willenborg has not suffered in all of this. This unfriendly public exposure of the private activity of his privates has made it much more difficult for him to continue with his unique form of ministry. Can't you see that this is the Bible in action? Didn't the great King David do his best work after he'd fucked someone else's wife?
Please also try to understand Father Willenborg's dilemma. The One True Catholic Church commands him to be celibate, with the consequence that he's always acutely aware of the sex he isn't getting, and the importunate demands of a penis he isn't using, while even the nastiest of his parishioners is "doing it" on a regular basis and coming to boast to him about their sins and conquests. For a while whacking off in the confessional kept his desires at bay, but there was that unfortunate incident of the screen-splatter when young Miss Himmel confessed that she liked to masturbate with a vibrating dildo up her back passage.
Imagine the build up of unbearable tension for poor Father Willenborg.
Imagine the fantasies invading his sleep and encrusting his sheets.
Imagine trying to give Miss Himmel communion and just about coming in his pants when she licked her plump lips and stuck out her pert pink tongue to take the wafer.
Imagine how fantastic it must have felt when he finally yielded to temptation after all those years and had fantastically disgusting sinful sex. Like the first time a boy in a shower with a bar of soap accidentally discovers masturbation.
And then the wracking guilt...the penance...the confession...the vows made...the increasing tension...and, finally . . . the chance to do it again!! Talk about a recipe for addiction.
Of course, there was the minor inconvenience of the power imbalance, the emotionally needy woman, the unfortunate issue of the child, the pain of having to move parish and break in a whole new set of sexy sinners.
Verily, the works of God and His One True Church are above human comprehension.
Smoggy
AMEN
Posted by: Fayrous Hamdan | October 18, 2009 6:55 PM
I haven't met any who are genuine in their caring, most that do
something, end up wanting in return right away or in the long run,
also others do it because they don't want to discuss their own ins and
outs so they're looking for gossip to spew about rather than have to
disclose or unveil their concealed selves to another. I've been there
and done that...to get over things...but there is a time and place for
it. It does work but learning has to be involved...you can't just be
stone cold and roll information in and out...when you spew you have to
listen to yourself and see what you missed and get feedback from
others...unbiased parties...who don't know the parties involved...
anyway, I gave up...men aren't worth it and you know; it's their loss
because I am a great girl, but so long as your looking for the quick
sex and the city fling as a male (not you but the general population)
then you deserve, the genital warts, herpes, aids, hiv, gonnorhea,
chlymidia, syphillis, puscules, crabs, scabies, etc...because that's
the life you lead...but you know that I checked out meaning when and
if this guy comes around...I'm not there anymore. It was closing time
too long ago and he missed out...oh well, for him...I'd rather be
alone than with someone who wants nothing more than to hurt me, by
hurting himself and hurt me by hurting me...because this kind of
person is the detriment to humanity on every level and on top of
it...he can swap his name out as he may have changed it to escape
scrutiny and charges...but it won;t matter...the funny thing is...i
think he may have stolen my name to make his what it is on my
paperwork as my birth certificate and social security card were stolen
out of my dorm in college...get this...it was his dormroom the spring
semester and I stayed there for the summer semester...so it was a 6
man, but they put me up in it...they had keys...I don't think they had
all of them back at that point...isn't it sad that these jerks were
looking to prey on someone and hurt someone just to exercise their
criminal justice class knowledge...all in a jesuit catholic
college...St. Peter's College...I'll tell you the details if you want
them...This college is being paid into by the entertainment industry
heavily...you know the rapper Fabolous...well he performed at a
catholic college around 8pm..when everybody knows that artists don't
perform this early unless it's for an award show...c'mon? These guys
are doing this for money and I know where it's coming from now...so I
need some advice on a platform to release their information to the
public...worldwide...so that this never happens to anyone...even in
villages...I might look into this, but if you've got i deas I'd love
to hear it...
Posted by: Madrigalia
|
October 18, 2009 7:14 PM
Relevant poll in need of Pharyngulation! The Catholic church is a force for good in the world. Can vote: for the motion, against the motion, or don't know. At the moment, "against" has only 46.4% of the vote.
Posted by: Evolving Squid | October 18, 2009 7:36 PM
At least he was having sex with an adult.
Posted by: ad | October 18, 2009 7:43 PM
Wow, I didn't realize that if you got a chick pregnant you could just get your employer to pay. Whooohoo! Sounds really good of them.
Posted by: Smoggy Batzrubble OM4Jesus | October 18, 2009 8:07 PM
Dear Sister Fayrous Hamdan @39
Your marvelous name... and disjointed perambulation in prose... convince me that we have a lot in common. If you'd like a platform... upon which to release something... meet me at Platform Nine and Three Quarters on the 22nd of October... and we'll release a whole herd of woo... together.
Yours in elliptical evangelism
Smoggy Batzrubble
Posted by: Aseem
|
October 18, 2009 9:29 PM
# 10 Bill
Donohue, is that you?
Posted by: GH | October 18, 2009 11:47 PM
I would say he wasn't even remotely a husband, you have to earn that title and shacking up doesn't get it. Nordoes knocking up either.
So not only was he never a husband he apparently isn't much of a father either.
Posted by: BoxNDox
|
October 19, 2009 12:13 AM
Of course removing the celibacy rule won't do squat in the short term.
Longer term... I'm not so sure. I've often wondered if the celibacy thing isn't actually a lure for men with abnormal sexual tastes - might they not view the oath of celibacy as a means of resisting temptation?
So men with, say, paedophilic tendencies join the church thinking the church will help them control them, which of course it doesn't. In fact in lots of cases it places them in a position of trust with easy access to the objects of their desires.
So perhaps if the restriction was removed, it might help. Of course no longer protecting the slime in their midst would be even better, but given the direction the church has gone lately neither seems especially likely.
Posted by: formosus
|
October 19, 2009 12:33 AM
@Smoggy #38-
Thank you. You made my night there.
Posted by: phantom-wolfboy
|
October 19, 2009 2:04 AM
Lose all faith in Catholicism, please.
Done and done.
Was I supposed to read the rest of the article, then?
Posted by: Cowcakes
|
October 19, 2009 2:56 AM
This reminds me of several anecdotal stories I have heard from my parents and others of their generation. My hometown in Orange NSW Australia use to have a Roman Catholic run orphanage and it was generally widely known that many of the children cared for there were the secret offspring of Roman Catholic Priests and Nuns. During this period there were also a number of families that had "Holy children", the result of Priest fucking married women.
Posted by: Walton | October 19, 2009 4:25 AM
In the end, the human sex drive is, for most people, stronger than any religious proscription. I suspect there are very, very few priests who manage to maintain complete celibacy (including refraining from masturbation) throughout their adult lives. And that's hardly surprising. When they've spent years forcing themselves to repress their natural sex drive, it's not surprising that, from time to time, they end up losing the battle. Of course, this doesn't excuse their exploitation of vulnerable parishioners - as in this instance - and this priest certainly acted in an inexcusable way in failing to care for his child. But in itself, I don't particularly blame him for having had sex.
The real problem here is that the Catholic Church places completely unrealistic and artificial expectations on its clergy. As I understand it, the requirement of clerical celibacy comes from a couple of passages in Paul's letters - Paul himself, from what I can gather, being somewhat misogynistic (remember the "women must not speak in church" bit?) and an anti-sex fanatic. The Gospels don't say anything much about celibacy, and plenty of Jesus' recorded followers were married. And most other Christian sects allow their clergy to marry and have children.
This really seems to be the pattern of Catholic teaching as a whole, though. They impose arbitrary and exacting "moral standards" which virtually no one can actually reach, and then keep their followers in a perpetual state of guilt due to failing to obey all the Church's bizarre rules. And, of course, this state of never-ending guilt is passed on to each new generation via Catholic education ("give me a child before he's seven and he's mine for life"). Even when I was a Christian, I wasn't a big fan of Catholicism.
Posted by: Feynmaniac | October 19, 2009 5:37 AM
Not just Catholicism, but this obsession with guilt seems to be a common theme in monotheism in general (e.g, "Jewish guilt"). If there is a good and powerful God looking out for his followers then how come so many bad things happen to them? Followers try to explain these semi-random unfortunate events by saying they broke one of God's many, many rules (at least I think this is one element of it).
Posted by: Bob Russell | October 19, 2009 6:20 AM
Sad...every time I hear or read a story like this it reminds me of the advice I gave my own son who was going through Catholic indoctrination as a boy..."Never trust a priest and never - ever - trust a priest with a boner." It proved excellent advice...my son is now a fine young man who has not been fucked in the head (or elsewhere) by the Catholic Church.
Posted by: 'Tis Himself, OM
|
October 19, 2009 9:37 AM
There's the further point that the Abrahamic religions teach "we're all sinners." Of course they are. With so many arbitrary, pettifogging rules that can be broken not just by deed but "wrong thinking," it's impossible for someone not in a coma to obey all of the precepts all of the time.
The sexual rules seem to be the most absolute. Under certain circumstances a Jew can eat non-kosher food and a Muslim can eat in the day during Ramadan. But let "impure thoughts" cross your mind and you've sinned.
Posted by: condignaction.wordpress.com
|
October 19, 2009 3:06 PM
Yes, people are confusing "celibacy" with chastity. When the Church was the government, a Bishop (for example) collected taxes on his diocese. To prevent legitimate children from contesting property and inheritance they instituted the "vow of celibacy." That is, an irrevocable vow to god that you will never marry. The restriction on a priest to not have sex is the same requirement of chastity that any unmarried Catholic has.
Personally, I'm not bothered if a Catholic priest has sex. Good for him in fact. If he wants a quickie in a gay bar, kinky sex with a few women, or even a long-term relationship with a married parishioner. All fine. As long as everyone involved is an adult, it's their business.
Posted by: wrpd | October 19, 2009 5:56 PM
"Personally, I'm not bothered if a Catholic priest has sex. Good for him in fact. If he wants a quickie in a gay bar, kinky sex with a few women, or even a long-term relationship with a married parishioner. All fine. As long as everyone involved is an adult, it's their business."
I agree with most of this. Getting involved with a parishioner is a very tricky proposition. There is the inequality of their power. It's like sleeping with your employee.
I had a rector who liked teenage boys--he's in jail now. As offensive as his behavior was he had one rule: Don't fuck the flock.
As a side not, all of the RC priests I've slept with were completely incompetent in bed.
Posted by: Nebula99
|
October 19, 2009 7:46 PM
Madrigalia @ 40, I spammed that poll up to 48% against, then I went to sleep and the Catholics counter-spammed it back down to 41.3%. Help counter-counter-spamming it would be appreciated if anyone is interested. If your machine is like mine, just click Refresh on the screen you get after you vote, then press Enter to confirm the "repeat action" thingy. That will repeat your vote quickly.
Posted by: avault
|
October 20, 2009 4:57 AM
There is another major issue here... namely the fact that she has to PAY for cancer treatment. That too is immoral.
/end hijack