Holding the Catholic Church accountable for its crimes

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think it would be simply wonderful for some big law firm to take on the Vatican and sue, not just for the Crusades, but for the Spanish Inquisition, Mary, Queen of Scots death, and so many other misdeeds condoned by various Popes. If that Monument to Greed law firm building, Arnold & Porter, would do this then think of all the lawyers who would be employed.

Was watching Law & Order the sum total of your JD coursework?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Catholic Church has been allowing/committing/promoting crime for many centuries and gone unprosecuted - see the Crusades, the Inquisition, etc. Can't see anything changing now either....

The Crusades were not a one-sided conflict. You've heard of the Moorish invasion, yes?


And in any event, Western Civilization really IS superior. To disbelieve this really is to disbelieve in democracy, representative government, and fundamental human rights for all citizens.

If you are at the point where you feel the need to defend the Crusades by playing tit-for-tat about the Moors, then you have out-Catholic'd the rest of us and even the pope. Even JPII has apologized for some of the things done during the Crusades. And in case you didn't notice, the Moors weren't even in the Holy Land. They were from Morocco and came over that way to Spain. Maybe you are mixing up your muslims.

But bottom line: do you really want to be the apologist for the Crusades? What's next, deny the Holocaust?

Actually, I'm not Catholic. The point was poorly made but really intended to express that it was a long two-sided conflict (which is indicative of complexity in a legal claim, not merely "right" and "wrong"). Moreover, it is ancient (middle aged, as it were) history. You'd have better luck suing Spain or England or France for settling the new world than suing the Pope for the Crusades.

I think it would be simply wonderful for some big law firm to take on the Vatican and sue, not just for the Crusades, but for the Spanish Inquisition, Mary, Queen of Scots death, and so many other misdeeds condoned by various Popes. If that Monument to Greed law firm building, Arnold & Porter, would do this then think of all the lawyers who would be employed.

OK you were on a roll with the Crusades and the Spanish Inquisition. But then you kind of lost it with Mary Queen of Scots and Arnold & Porter. WTF?

[Anonymous]

Dorrie wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it would be simply wonderful for some big law firm to take on the Vatican and sue, not just for the Crusades, but for the Spanish Inquisition, Mary, Queen of Scots death, and so many other misdeeds condoned by various Popes. If that Monument to Greed law firm building, Arnold & Porter, would do this then think of all the lawyers who would be employed.

Wait, Mary Queen of Scots was executed by Elizabeth I, a Protestant. I didn't think the Pope had anything to do with it.

Wish there was a way to mod this up like you deserve. Too funny.

[Anonymous]

Dorrie wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it would be simply wonderful for some big law firm to take on the Vatican and sue, not just for the Crusades, but for the Spanish Inquisition, Mary, Queen of Scots death, and so many other misdeeds condoned by various Popes. If that Monument to Greed law firm building, Arnold & Porter, would do this then think of all the lawyers who would be employed.

Wait, Mary Queen of Scots was executed by Elizabeth I, a Protestant. I didn't think the Pope had anything to do with it.

MQ of S was Catholic and wanted to regain the throne from the Protestant, QEI.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Catholic Church has been allowing/committing/promoting crime for many centuries and gone unprosecuted - see the Crusades, the Inquisition, etc. Can't see anything changing now either....

The Crusades were not a one-sided conflict. You've heard of the Moorish invasion, yes?


And in any event, Western Civilization really IS superior. To disbelieve this really is to disbelieve in democracy, representative government, and fundamental human rights for all citizens.

If you are at the point where you feel the need to defend the Crusades by playing tit-for-tat about the Moors, then you have out-Catholic'd the rest of us and even the pope. Even JPII has apologized for some of the things done during the Crusades. And in case you didn't notice, the Moors weren't even in the Holy Land. They were from Morocco and came over that way to Spain. Maybe you are mixing up your muslims.

But bottom line: do you really want to be the apologist for the Crusades? What's next, deny the Holocaust?

Actually, I'm not Catholic. The point was poorly made but really intended to express that it was a long two-sided conflict (which is indicative of complexity in a legal claim, not merely "right" and "wrong"). Moreover, it is ancient (middle aged, as it were) history. You'd have better luck suing Spain or England or France for settling the new world than suing the Pope for the Crusades.

I think it would be simply wonderful for some big law firm to take on the Vatican and sue, not just for the Crusades, but for the Spanish Inquisition, Mary, Queen of Scots death, and so many other misdeeds condoned by various Popes. If that Monument to Greed law firm building, Arnold & Porter, would do this then think of all the lawyers who would be employed.

OK you were on a roll with the Crusades and the Spanish Inquisition. But then you kind of lost it with Mary Queen of Scots and Arnold & Porter. WTF?

All right, let's forget Mary, Queen of Scots and just gp for the Crusades and Spanish Inquisition.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Dorrie wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it would be simply wonderful for some big law firm to take on the Vatican and sue, not just for the Crusades, but for the Spanish Inquisition, Mary, Queen of Scots death, and so many other misdeeds condoned by various Popes. If that Monument to Greed law firm building, Arnold & Porter, would do this then think of all the lawyers who would be employed.

Wait, Mary Queen of Scots was executed by Elizabeth I, a Protestant. I didn't think the Pope had anything to do with it.

Wish there was a way to mod this up like you deserve. Too funny.

Henry IV was refused by the Vatican to obtain a divorce from his first wife and that if when England broke with the Ro,am Catholic Church. A lot of spilled blood would have been averted if he had been allowed to obtain a simple divorce, marry Anne Boelyn, who was his first wife to lose her head to Henry. Though Queen Anne did have her revenge posthumusly when her daughter Elizabeth ascended the throne.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it would be simply wonderful for some big law firm to take on the Vatican and sue, not just for the Crusades, but for the Spanish Inquisition, Mary, Queen of Scots death, and so many other misdeeds condoned by various Popes. If that Monument to Greed law firm building, Arnold & Porter, would do this then think of all the lawyers who would be employed.

Was watching Law & Order the sum total of your JD coursework?

It is a tragedy to go though life without a sense of humor and sense of the absurd. My sympathy to all who know you.

[Anonymous]

Semantics I know but the Catholic Church is the people in the pews. I believe you mean to condemn the Catholic clergy - or some part of the Catholic clergy. Just sayin...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Semantics I know but the Catholic Church is the people in the pews. I believe you mean to condemn the Catholic clergy - or some part of the Catholic clergy. Just sayin...

Actually the Church is the whole enchilada. You described the Catholic Laity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Dorrie wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it would be simply wonderful for some big law firm to take on the Vatican and sue, not just for the Crusades, but for the Spanish Inquisition, Mary, Queen of Scots death, and so many other misdeeds condoned by various Popes. If that Monument to Greed law firm building, Arnold & Porter, would do this then think of all the lawyers who would be employed.

Wait, Mary Queen of Scots was executed by Elizabeth I, a Protestant. I didn't think the Pope had anything to do with it.

Wish there was a way to mod this up like you deserve. Too funny.

Henry IV was refused by the Vatican to obtain a divorce from his first wife and that if when England broke with the Ro,am Catholic Church. A lot of spilled blood would have been averted if he had been allowed to obtain a simple divorce, marry Anne Boelyn, who was his first wife to lose her head to Henry. Though Queen Anne did have her revenge posthumusly when her daughter Elizabeth ascended the throne.

I'm not sure that Henry VIII's problem was the inability to "simply" obtain a divorce. Ask Ann Boelyn.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Semantics I know but the Catholic Church is the people in the pews. I believe you mean to condemn the Catholic clergy - or some part of the Catholic clergy. Just sayin...

Actually the Church is the whole enchilada. You described the Catholic Laity.

Okay... point being that the entire Church is not to be condemned, right? The parents of the abused altar boys? Shameful for sure, and nothing to be excused. But the entire Church - The families, individuals, ordained clergy, lay ministers, etc.?

[Anonymous]

Read this in the Post this AM (yes I still read paper!)

http://www.slate.com/id/2267970/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it would be simply wonderful for some big law firm to take on the Vatican and sue, not just for the Crusades, but for the Spanish Inquisition, Mary, Queen of Scots death, and so many other misdeeds condoned by various Popes. If that Monument to Greed law firm building, Arnold & Porter, would do this then think of all the lawyers who would be employed.

Was watching Law & Order the sum total of your JD coursework?

It is a tragedy to go though life without a sense of humor and sense of the absurd. My sympathy to all who know you.

Oh, don't get huffy just because I doubled down on your humor and got the better of you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Semantics I know but the Catholic Church is the people in the pews. I believe you mean to condemn the Catholic clergy - or some part of the Catholic clergy. Just sayin...

Actually the Church is the whole enchilada. You described the Catholic Laity.

Okay... point being that the entire Church is not to be condemned, right? The parents of the abused altar boys? Shameful for sure, and nothing to be excused. But the entire Church - The families, individuals, ordained clergy, lay ministers, etc.?

I think that in context the point was clear. OP wants to hold the organization of the Catholic Church responsible.

[Anonymous]

I'm still baffled about why one poster, who apparently has no connection to the catholic church, is obsessed with suing the whole enchilada. I won't use the "b" word. But OP, are you a lonely loser, or what?

Actually, not a whole lot of blood was spilt in Henry's pursuit of a divorce. Except maybe Thomas Moore, Cromwell and a few others.