Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
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:

Username:   Password:
Locked Topic
Glasgow Trial; Priest's role
Topic Started: Saturday, 5. May 2007, 20:51 (1,359 Views)
Deacon Robert
Member Avatar

MV,

Sorry it is my mistake. I thought you were referring to Those employed by the church as opposed to volunteers. I was responding to Rose's post about checks and balances in diocese and Parish organizations.

The new regulations in my Diocese, and most in the US, call for all staff, clergy, and volunteers to have a criminal background check. They must also be re-vetted if they change parishes.


The burden of life is from ourselves, its lightness from the grace of Christ and the love of God. - William Bernard Ullanthorne

Offline Profile Goto Top
 
medjugorje vin


Deacon Robert wrote:

Quote:
 
MV,

Sorry it is my mistake. I thought you were referring to Those employed by the church as opposed to volunteers. I was responding to Rose's post about checks and balances in diocese and Parish organizations.

The new regulations in my Diocese, and most in the US, call for all staff, clergy, and volunteers to have a criminal background check. They must also be re-vetted if they change parishes.


No probs,I think it is the way that we should be going over here too and I believe that this type of progress has started.I think that no matter who it is ,from now on ANY person who is actively associated with the running and maintenance of the parish should be subject to a disclosure check as we call them over here.Only when such a check has been completed to the satisfaction of the Church should people then be allowed to participate in the day to day running of the parish.

If this had been the case in Glasgow then maybe this whole tragic case would have been avoided and it would also allow the Parish Priest the confidence to know that the people who are helping in the Parish are "clear" as glass.

Praised be Jesus and Mary ALWAYS

Medjugorje Vin
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

Being forgiving of Father Nugent 's sin does not mean we should feel sorry for him. Nor should we try to wriggle out of our responsibilities by suggesting he was especially vilified because he was a Catholic priest. He behaved despicably and the Church has questions to answer yet again. . The quote from the Church I have seen is equally despicable as it says something like " Fr Nugent is of course responsible for the quality or otherwise of the evidence he gave". True , of course, but despicable in not standing up and answering the hard questions as to why he was there in the first place.

John
Goto Top
 
medjugorje vin


john sweeney wrote:

Quote:
 
Being forgiving of Father Nugent 's sin does not mean we should feel sorry for him. Nor should we try to wriggle out of our responsibilities by suggesting he was especially vilified because he was a Catholic priest. He behaved despicably and the Church has questions to answer yet again. . The quote from the Church I have seen is equally despicable as it says something like " Fr Nugent is of course responsible for the quality or otherwise of the evidence he gave". True , of course, but despicable in not standing up and answering the hard questions as to why he was there in the first place.

John


John what on earth are you talking about :blink:

Are you so righteous that you can "cast the first stone",whenever it is the Catholic Church it is always magnified by the secular media who detest religion ,but in particular the Catholic Church.In case it is missed on you ,Fr Nugent is still a human being.The reason he was there in the first place was because he was the Parish Priest.

Do not judge a man till you have walked a mile in his shoes.

Praised be Jesus and Mary ALWAYS

Medjugorje Vin
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Rose of York
Member Avatar
Administrator
medjugorje vin
May 11 2007, 10:49 PM
Are you so righteous that you can "cast the first stone",whenever it is the Catholic Church it is always magnified by the secular media who detest religion ,but in particular the Catholic Church.In case it is missed on you ,Fr Nugent is still a human being.The reason he was there in the first place was because he was the Parish Priest.

Do not judge a man till you have walked a mile in his shoes.

What if a priest is having difficulty functioning because of a debilitating physical illness? He would be able to contact his bishop, and arrange to go on sick leave, temporarily or permanently. I presume that if a priest is physically incapable of fulfilling his role, perhaps after a major stroke or incurable disease, and he is in denial, claiming that he will be all right in a day or two, sooner or later his bishop will say "Enough is enough. Father, you are unable to be confident of offering Sunday Mass, turning up for scheduled Sacrament of Reconciliation times, going out to administer the Sacrament of the Sick, or administer the parish. I am sorry but I have no alternative but to place you on administrative leave."

Father Nugent was very very sick indeed. He had the disease of alcoholism, and it was not under control. He claims he had grave difficulty with his sexuality, and could not keep his vow of celibacy. Yes, he was ill. His Archbishop allowed him to continue as parish priest, in a situation in which there was no other resident priest to raise the alarm if the situation worsened. That is the crux of this problem. It is common for alcoholics to fail to acknowledge to themselves the severity of their condition. It would help if the Church made an effort to get the message across, that there should be no stigma attached to mental illness of any kind. "Father Smith has been taken ill. On Tuesday he was taken to the Royal Infirmary by ambulance" is non confidential. "Father Smith is very ill. He has gone to a psychiatric unit, where he will remain until further notice. Please pray for his recovery" is the announcement we never hear.

It is high time a stop was put to the silly policy of "The Church's reputation must be protected in the short term, and if the price to be paid is serious long term damage, to the Church and individual people, that is a problem for another day".

We must accept that priests and bishops have human failings, but surely we can justifiably expect certain minimum standards of behaviour and competence from clergy and "key personnel", and we should jettison the culture of not contacting the bishop if there is a difficulty with the priest?
Keep the Faith!

Offline Profile Goto Top
 
medjugorje vin


Rose,

My much loved and missed friend Karol Wojtyla said as JPII"The biggest disservice we can do the Holy See is by not questioning it"

I agree with what you say ,however,I can't just sit back and watch those who are just waiting for the next opportunity to bash the Church and the Faith.This is much more multi-factorial than we can begin to comprehend.Whether we here on earth care to believe it or not,our priests are "Son's of Mary" and God works great miracles through them.Christianity is a forgiven religion,but also a responsible one and we all know by the discernment of the Holy Spirit what we must do.

Not one ounce of bitterness or sin will enter Heaven......be on your guard.

"Judge lest you be judged"

Praised be Jesus and Mary ALWAYS

Medjugorje Vin
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Rose of York
Member Avatar
Administrator
medjugorje vin
May 12 2007, 12:18 AM
Whether we here on earth care to believe it or not,our priests are "Son's of Mary" and God works great miracles through them.Christianity is a forgiven religion,but also a responsible one and we all know by the discernment of the Holy Spirit what we must do.

What must we do?

Keep the Faith!

Offline Profile Goto Top
 
medjugorje vin


Rose,

We have been here before and "no" it is not directed at you.The point I am trying to make on this type of medium,which doesn't always convey what is being said,is that if Jesus can forgive the very people who,humiliated Him,ripped Him to pieces on that pillar,crowned Him with a nest of thorns,was made to carry "our" Cross and was then nailed to a piece of wood ,and then with His last breath said"Forgive them Father for they know not what they do."Then I am sure in what He was asking of us was not to forgive 7 times,but 7 times 77 times.

The number 7 will not be lost on you.

Praised be Jesus and Mary ALWAYS

Medjugorje Vin
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Alan
Member Avatar

From the Universe 6th May 2007.

“The issue of sexual abuse by clergy has rightly been exposed, and the resulting scandals have caused a major rethink in the way the Church handles such cases.
But while the victims – quite properly –received enormous sympathy little attention has been paid to the ordeal of priests who have been unjustly accused of child abuse.

Fr Dominic McKenna the parish priest of Our Lady of Hal church in Camden London knows all too well how easy it is to be the innocent victim of such a claim..

A respected and much loved priest, he had criminal charges hanging over him for almost two years before the case against him was dismissed for the lack of evidence last summer.

But even after being declared not guilty by the court, it was another four months before the Church’s formal Risk Assessment procedure allowed him to return to active ministry and his grateful congregation

He understands why the process was necessary, but to be disbarred from his parish for more than two years on the grounds of a wholly baseless accusation has been a long and difficult ordeal for an innocent man to bear..

It was claimed by the accuser that the abuse happened when he was between three and five years old.

In the light of this accusation Fr Dominic was sent on “administrative leave” to a secret address.”

This is the other side of the issue and clearly demonstrates that the Church now has proper procedures in place.

As has been said in other threads no use moaning about a priests shortcomings at the Church Door. The Bishop must be informed.

God Bless all who visit this forum,

Alan.

Add Catholic CyberForum to your favourites
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Rose of York
Member Avatar
Administrator
medjugorje vin
May 12 2007, 12:58 AM
Rose,

We have been here before and "no" it is not directed at you.The point I am trying to make on this type of medium,which doesn't always convey what is being said,is that if Jesus can forgive the very people who,humiliated Him,ripped Him to pieces on that pillar,crowned Him with a nest of thorns,was made to carry "our" Cross and was then nailed to a piece of wood ,and then with His last breath said"Forgive them Father for they know not what they do."Then I am sure in what He was asking of us was not to forgive 7 times,but 7 times 77 times.


Yes we must forgive all offences, comitted by any person in any position. However that does not absolve us of responsibilities to refer some matters to the appropriate authorities.


medjugorje vin
May 12 2007, 12:58 AM
The number 7 will not be lost on you.


Sorry I don't quite follow you.

Keep the Faith!

Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Em.

Judgement is G-d's domain.
I remember reading the Bible and also watch the film of "Jesus"
when a prostitute was brought to him to be stoned, Jesus agreed, and he asked for the first person that was not guilty to throw the first stone. . . no one did. Is anyone of us free to thrown the first stone?. . . I am not for sure.
Divine Mercy
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Jamie

Em.
May 12 2007, 09:30 AM
Judgement is G-d's domain.
I remember reading the Bible and also watch the film of "Jesus"
when a prostitute was brought to him to be stoned, Jesus agreed, and he asked for the first person that was not guilty to throw the first stone. . . no one did. Is anyone of us free to thrown the first stone?. . . I am not for sure.

I think you are being more than a little naive if you are suggesting that priests, or indeed anyone else, should be allowed free rein to molest as an alternative to "judging" them......
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Eve
Former Admin/Moderator

I see no signs in this discussion, of judgement of Father Nugent. All I see are questions about whether the hierarchy fulfilled their responsibilities.

Quote:
 
The reason he was there in the first place was because he was the Parish Priest.

I sense members are asking why he was allowed to continue as a parish priest.
Howdy Folks. Has anybody seen my husband lately?
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

Exactly Eve. No one wants to be unmerciful to an individual who has now been punished by the courts. However, the Church has questions to answer and no amount of pagan mumbo-jumbo about the number 7 or media hounding should be allowed to obscure this fact.

John
Goto Top
 
Rose of York
Member Avatar
Administrator
The Penny Catechism
 
329. In how many ways may we either cause or share the guilt of another's sin?

We may either cause or share the guilt of another's sin in nine ways:
1. By counsel.
2. By command.
3. By consent.
4. By provocation.
5. By praise or flattery.
6. By concealment.
7. By being a partner in the sin.
8. By silence.
9. By defending the ill done.



This discussion has moved on. It is not solely about the recent tragic events in Glasgow.

I feel that this discussion has developed into exploring the wider issue of how the hierarchy and, indeed, laity, should deal with complaints (which may prove to be well-founded, or untrue) and the appropriate action to be taken if the behaviour of any person, clerical or lay, acting on behalf of The Church, is damaging The Church, society in general, or individuals.

The way I see it, if I know a person is causing any form of damage or distress, I am in a position of authority, and I turn a blind eye, I consent. If I have no authority but do have concerns or evidence, and take the angle "Judge not, that person is human, with failings just as I have, I am in no position to cast the first stone so I will keep my mouth shut", I sin by concealment and silence.
Keep the Faith!

Offline Profile Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Archived Discussions · Next Topic »
Locked Topic