| We hope you enjoy your visit! You're currently viewing Catholic CyberForum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our online cyberparish, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! Messages posted to this board must be polite and free of abuse, personal attacks, blasphemy, racism, threats, harrassment, and crude or sexually-explicit language. If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Glasgow Trial; Priest's role | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Saturday, 5. May 2007, 20:51 (1,360 Views) | |
| Rose of York | Tuesday, 8. May 2007, 18:42 Post #31 |
![]()
Administrator
|
Back to the problem of the court case. I think it is highly doubtful any priest could behave badly for a long period, without his bishop hearing about it. Children have suffered, so have vulnerable women. Now, there has been the scandal of all time - a young woman murdered, due to a registered sex offender worming his way in to parish life. Let us hope their Lordships will get their act together, put a stop to the nonsense of parishes dishing out responsibilities like child and vulnerable adult protection to the nearest woman available, who likes to get her finger into every pie. Diocese is the Head Office of a Registered Charity. It is high time their professional staff were authorised to check up on parish administration. A once every three years Bishops Visitation is not enough. |
|
Keep the Faith! | |
![]() |
|
| nelly k | Tuesday, 8. May 2007, 18:45 Post #32 |
|
The Scottish News has just finished... Father Nugent was given 100 hours Community Service and a years probation, the Sherriff accepted that he was suffering a mental illness at the time of the trial... As for the pathetic statement from the Catholic Powers that be... Iam really angry for all sorts of reasons, least of my anger is for Father Nugent, the Sherrif also acknowledged the many people he had helped over many years... The Thing is he was let down by his bosses... he should be doing them for Industrial injuries... he seems to have been neglected... the Scottish Press are now printing realy awfull sensationalist stuff about him... During the Trail he was driven to Court wearing his Clerical Collar with minders... today he was in a shirt and tie with only one friend or relative with him... talk about looking abandond, and the Powers that be well .... saying sorry... but appear to take no responsibilty for this whole affair, my thoughts are with Father Nugent and Angelika Kluk... nelly Iam off for a few days now , I cant express how I feel about our so called leaders... I generally tend to defend them... but this has put so much doubt in my head |
![]() |
|
| Rose of York | Tuesday, 8. May 2007, 19:18 Post #33 |
![]()
Administrator
|
Nelly, I beg you: If you lose faith in the leaders do not lose faith in The Church. It has the TRUTH. It was founded by God the Son. For any of us, there are times when our Faith is all we have to pull us out of a crisis. Don't let the whatsits get you down, Nelly. |
|
Keep the Faith! | |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Tuesday, 8. May 2007, 22:11 Post #34 |
|
Deleted User
|
Here are the facts in the public domain which concern me greatly and lead me to think Jamie is right in speculating that the view might have been taken that any priest is better than no priest. 1. The priest in the witness box volunteered that he had had a sexual relationship with the victim 2. In the witness box he said that he had had a similar relationship with another female parishioner 3. This female parishioner said in the witness box that this was a lie but that the priest was a "sex pest" who had harassed her with words and inappropriate touching 4. In the witness box the priest said that he was an alcoholic. I have seen nothing which uses the phrase "recovering alcoholic " to suggest that he suffered from this disease but was fighting it. In fairness, the judge today said that he was sparing him prison because he had an exceptional record of helping people. However, the publicly stated facts above suggest to me that this man's problems must have been obvious to his bosses. If so, they should have acted before now. If they were unaware, then they are guilty of a different type of incompetence. How many more of these cases are we going to have to suffer and how many times are we going to have a limp apology from our bishops? Not forgetting that this aspect of the case is a sordid sideshow to the heinous crime committed against the poor girl. John |
|
|
| Rose of York | Tuesday, 8. May 2007, 22:36 Post #35 |
![]()
Administrator
|
I question whether taking in the tramps, drug abusers, and other vulnerable people is proper to the role of a parish priest. His function (in addition to offering Mass and administering sacraments) is to preach the Gospel, also to give pastoral care to individual parishioners. Somewhere I read that Father Nugent had, on occasion, prostitutes living in the Chapel House. Is that right for a celibate priest, who is aware of his own weakness, to put temptation in his own way in that manner? If the Gospel is preached effectively the parishioners will be motivated to help vulnerable people, in whatever way they can. Some give money to charities, and some get actively involved in charities. A parish priest who gets directly involved in such activies cannot possibly be devoting sufficient attention to his primary functions as parish priest. |
|
Keep the Faith! | |
![]() |
|
| tomais | Wednesday, 9. May 2007, 14:36 Post #36 |
|
For further comment see " Catholic Truth" now available but from a different office. Tomais |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Wednesday, 9. May 2007, 20:55 Post #37 |
|
Deleted User
|
I realise that this idea runs contrary to our traditional view of the priesthood but in view of these dispiriting scandals could we devise an inspectorate for priests? Such a body could go into all parishes from time to time and check up on a priest's standing in the community, check that all safety processes such as CRB checks, child protection procedures etc were in place, investigate any rumours and certify to the best of their knowledge that all was above board. Not perfect but useful and many other professions have to accept this regime. Some might argue that it would put off potential recruits but surely nothing could put such people off more than the disrepute than hangs around from these cases? A robust governance process might actually encourage good people. John |
|
|
| Deacon Robert | Wednesday, 9. May 2007, 21:21 Post #38 |
|
John, What you speak of is already in place. There are revue boards and compliance teams in most Dioceses. The problem may be the Bishop's reluctance to act or incidents are down played by those who write the reports |
|
The burden of life is from ourselves, its lightness from the grace of Christ and the love of God. - William Bernard Ullanthorne | |
![]() |
|
| Rose of York | Thursday, 10. May 2007, 01:47 Post #39 |
![]()
Administrator
|
Deacon Robert, I have never heard of revue boards and compliance teams in Dioceses in this country. If they exist, they are treated as internal. They are not listed in Diocesan directories or on the websites. There are independent bodies to which we can refer complaints of incompetence or unprofessional behaviour on the part of doctors, dentists, lawyers, chartered surveyors, accountants, teachers, architects, nurses and other professionals. I would like to see an independent Council that would deal with certain complaints (eg inappropriate sexual behaviour with vulnerable persons and financial impropriety). Doctors can be struck off for sexual behaviour with patients. All professionals can be struck off for theft, abuse, or violence. I accept some problems (eg abuse of the confessional) are purely Ecclesiastical matters, but that would not apply to the sort of thing that happened in the recent Scottish case. Some matters of duty of care could be dealt with by an independent body, whatever the religion of clergy. Imams, rabbis, ministers, pastors and priests should all have high standards in their relationship to people, and honesty in financial matters. No doubt there would be claims of "government encroachment on the affairs of the church". Well, if it is sometimes necessary to call in outsiders to protect the interests of vulnerable people, so be it. If the bishops get their act together there will be no need for anybody to complain to any outside body. |
|
Keep the Faith! | |
![]() |
|
| Deacon Robert | Thursday, 10. May 2007, 12:47 Post #40 |
|
Rose, I think our bishops may have brought more of a secular business model into the church than the Bishops in the UK. Most of the Diocesan departments are run by the laity. The group dealing with the abuse problem has only one cleric on it and the Bishop has followed their recommendations. |
|
The burden of life is from ourselves, its lightness from the grace of Christ and the love of God. - William Bernard Ullanthorne | |
![]() |
|
| medjugorje vin | Thursday, 10. May 2007, 14:13 Post #41 |
|
Deacon Robert wrote:
Therein lies the problem as who is to discern from the laity that are working for God or the laity that are using the Church for their own ends.The treatment of Father Nugent the day he went in to be sentenced was nothing short of appalling,you had some geezer shoving a microphone under his nose and actually blocking him for entering the building.He really did look as if he had been abandoned and whether this was by fault or by design I don't know but it looked really awful.Only the hardest of hearts could not have felt compassion for him that day. When they were about to stone Mary Magdalene, for what was at that time appalling behaviour,Jesus stood directly in front of them to protect Mary Magdalene and said"He that is without sin cast the first stone."They all subsequently dropped there stones and left one at a time. Now before everyone starts to think that I am some kind of woolly liberal(God forbid) we really have to start looking at the causes of these things rather than the actual perpetrators,who would not have got in if there had been procedures in place.By causes I mean the openess to which some of our priests offer only to then have this openess abused. We will have to accept that the Catholic Church will always suffer more under these types of revelations than others simply because we have far more enemies as a result of our faith.Incidently,this does not come from other religions, the big enemy now is, and probably always has been, secularism and athieism. We as Catholics have to try and temper our initial human instinct to jump right in there like everybody else and we must never preach or say that we cannot forgive.The editor of the Scottish Catholic Observer wasn't being very forgiving in his response to the secular media about Father Nugent ,and this type of reaction only compounds the darkness into which this whole tragic episode has plunged our Church and Faith. The relevant authorities that released Peter Tobin early from his sentence to the previous appalling crime in which he committed without any form of supervision,are they exonerated in all this? "Eternal rest grant unto her ,O Lord, and let perpetual light shine upon her may she rest in peace.May the souls and the souls of all the faithful departed through the Mercy of God rest in peace.Amen."Angelica Kluk. Praised be Jesus and Mary ALWAYS Medjugorje Vin |
![]() |
|
| newminster | Thursday, 10. May 2007, 15:03 Post #42 |
|
Unregistered
|
Tomais, do you have a link to that? Patricia has always been a bit strident and not known for her tact and discretion but to force the closure of the web site was going a bit far. |
|
|
| Deacon Robert | Thursday, 10. May 2007, 15:26 Post #43 |
|
MV, You can't have it both ways, either lay people work where they have the skills or you have clergy working in fields where they have no training. I would say that most people employed by ANY Diocese is primarily there for the church. Their pay is on an average 1/3 to 1/2 what they would make in the real world. Their chances for advancement next to zero and their authority is limited to the department they work in. Also, from personal experience, Priests can be just as self serving as a lay person. They look for advancement and are not opposed to using church politics to get what they desire. There are Saints and sinners both Lay and Clergy. |
|
The burden of life is from ourselves, its lightness from the grace of Christ and the love of God. - William Bernard Ullanthorne | |
![]() |
|
| newminster | Thursday, 10. May 2007, 15:31 Post #44 |
|
Unregistered
|
Real world, Robert? :angry: I thought what we were in was the real world!! |
|
|
| medjugorje vin | Thursday, 10. May 2007, 17:13 Post #45 |
|
Deacon Robert wrote: MV, You can't have it both ways, either lay people work where they have the skills or you have clergy working in fields where they have no training. I would say that most people employed by ANY Diocese is primarily there for the church. Their pay is on an average 1/3 to 1/2 what they would make in the real world. Their chances for advancement next to zero and their authority is limited to the department they work in. Also, from personal experience, Priests can be just as self serving as a lay person. They look for advancement and are not opposed to using church politics to get what they desire. There are Saints and sinners both Lay and Clergy. Hi Deacon Robert, I wasn't referring to those who are employed by the Church as I believe they are better vetted,I am referring to those who offer there services to the Church free of charge but have another agenda,just as Peter Tobin did. Praised be Jesus and Mary ALWAYS Medjugorje Vin |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Archived Discussions · Next Topic » |





3:50 PM Jul 11