Smaller
Bigger
Close Gallery
Santo Domingo.- Cardinal Nicolas de Jesus Lopez Rodriguez yesterday said if the priest charged with raping a minor is found guilty he must suffer the consequences and will be banned from exercising the priesthood.
He said if Alberto Cordero is guilty as charged, the Catholic Church will not defend him and if on the contrary is proven innocent, the suspension "will automatically fall."
"I regret this young priest’s situation very much but if he really did a wrong he has to pay the consequences of his mistake," the Cardinal said.
The prelate said although Cordero wouldn’t be expelled from the church, he would be suspended from the ministry.
Share / Recommend this article:
Facebook
Digg this
del.icio.us
Technorati
Yahoo
Facebook
Digg this
del.icio.us
Technorati
Yahoo
quote: "Typical catholic church protecting its pedophiles in robes"
I have my own predjudices about the church and priests, having friends who have been victimized by those in robes.
But, let's be objective about what the cardinal said. It is not a stance of protection, he is saying, let the chips fall where they may; he is not covering for the priest. = {edited, removed play on words.}
this has to be a play on words
I think "foresthill" did - in fact - read the article. Witness the closing notation that says, "The prelate said although Cordero wouldn’t be expelled from the church, he would be suspended from the ministry."
A.K.A.: "IF" he's convicted, this person still has a job within the very same entity which he's "ALLEGEDLY" used as his personal vehicle. I see that as an odd response from his employer. That would be tantamount to a retail clerk being convicted of groping the patrons, and after being convicted in court; his employer just takes him off the sales floor.
Hence the comment from foresthill - I suspect.
The only missing piece from this article is the context in which the prelate’s comment was issued. And that a leads to conjecture such as is being offered up in our commentary.
I think you misunderstand the meaning of ..."wouldn't be expelled from the church, he would be suspended from the ministry".
It basically means that a person even if he is a sinner, he can attend church services. There are exceptional circumstances where some are excommunicated, but that is rare. "He would be suspended from ministry" means that he no longer will be a priest, deacon, etc. Churches don't only cater to the holy ones, but to those who need spiritual healing also. If that would be the case, churches (of all denominations) would be almost empty
Amber:
Thanks for clarifying that for me. I did - in fact - think that meant he'd still be playing some role in the church other than part of the flock. As a member of the Church of England, I should have known better. And, in light of the import of "forgiveness" and "salvation" I guess it would be hypocritical to punt him out altogether.
Sadly, that's precisely what his victims would want at minimum, IF, he is in deed guilty of the charge levied upon him. And perhaps it'd be best if he'd be "barred" from the parish. That - in itself - would make life easier for the congregation as he'd be a known entity amongst them should he choose to remain, and could render the church in the same empty state you'd referred to above.
LOL..... Maybe a just and fair retribution would be something akin to a scene from "Little Nicky".
BRB, I'm just going to buy some pineapples.... LOL.
Again Amber; Thanks for putting me right on this one.