The Bishop of the Cols Diocese called homosexuality "depraved behavior"...I guess priests raping alter boys is acceptable to this uber-hypocrite.

Tiernan;1437292 wrote:The Bishop of the Cols Diocese called homosexuality "depraved behavior"...I guess priests raping alter boys is acceptable to this uber-hypocrite.

Kind of realted here, but kind of not...

Does anyone know if this particular diocese had cases in which priests malested young boys? I would venture probably that it occured, but I have no knowledge of it being the case. IMO, that would be more damning.

If this particular diocese had cases of it, and swept it under the rug, (or even accepted preists who were being relocated) then that is one thing. But if this dicese was adamant about the prosecution of priests who molested boys, then that is another.

cruiser_96;1437314 wrote:Kind of realted here, but kind of not...

Does anyone know if this particular diocese had cases in which priests malested young boys? I would venture probably that it occured, but I have no knowledge of it being the case. IMO, that would be more damning.

If this particular diocese had cases of it, and swept it under the rug, (or even accepted preists who were being relocated) then that is one thing. But if this dicese was adamant about the prosecution of priests who molested boys, then that is another.

http://www.columbustruth.org/Loyd_Frederick_pg1.html

cruiser_96;1437314 wrote:Kind of realted here, but kind of not...

Does anyone know if this particular diocese had cases in which priests malested young boys? I would venture probably that it occured, but I have no knowledge of it being the case. IMO, that would be more damning.

If this particular diocese had cases of it, and swept it under the rug, (or even accepted preists who were being relocated) then that is one thing. But if this dicese was adamant about the prosecution of priests who molested boys, then that is another.

http://bishop-accountability.org/member/psearch.jsp

That link does not mention the acceptance of any accused priests. So I don't know if Columbus did or did not accept any accused priests.

Fred Flintstone;1437336 wrote:http://www.columbustruth.org/Loyd_Frederick_pg1.html

That's what I'm saying.

Am I wrong to expect a church to personal detain the guy while the cops are called that instance!? Probably. I'm sure any church that tried that would be charged with kidnapping or unlawful detainment of an adult or something.

Back about 2005 or 6 there was a priest who had been in several Cols parishes and was relocated to Fk'n British Columbia and then finally Canadian authorities found he had molested dozens of boys and arrested him. Good Ol' Fr. Phillips probably molested hundreds of boys during his 40 some yrs in the Catoleigh Church. And the Cols Diocese knew full well of his "depraved behavior" but sent him to Canada to rape Canucks instaed of frying this guy. But let's fire a woman for having a committed relationship with another woman and call her "depraved"? Any of you supporting the Catoleigh Church and its "morality clause" in the firing of Carla Hale should be ashamed of yourselves because you are essentially supporting one of the most dangerous and perverted organizations on the planet.