^ K.Ram and Acharya's posts
<!--QuoteBegin-Husky+Oct 19 2008, 01:01 PM-->QUOTE(Husky @ Oct 19 2008, 01:01 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->http://haindavakeralam.com/HKPage.aspx?P...297&SKIN=C
<!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Storm in Church over adoption of woman by bishop</b>
15/10/2008 14:56:38Â Pioneer News Service | Kochi
[...]
The Vatican has received complaints from a host of priests under Kochi diocese about their own bishop who enraged them by adopting a young woman.
While <b>Catholic Bishop Dr John Thattunkal tries to defend his act saying he had adopted the 26-year-old woman from Pathanamthitta for spiritual reformation</b> as per the Vaticanâs Canon laws, the parish priests in his diocese or even prelates in the Kerala Catholic Bishopsâ Council (KCBC), the apex body of all the bishops of the 29 dioceses in the State, do not think so.
[...]
<b>the bishopâs justification for adopting a woman in her prime youth âthat the adoption was one of the ways he had adopted for spiritual reformation</b> <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->[right][snapback]89266[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->It gets better:
http://haindavakeralam.com/HKPage.aspx?P...332&SKIN=C
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Canon law permits 'Secret Marriages' for Bishops</b>
20/10/2008 13:13:02Â
<b>Bishop apologises to believers, priests; Ready to withdraw adoption
Pioneer News Service | Kochi</b>
The controversy that erupted recently in the Catholic Church of Kerala over the 'spiritual adoption' of a mature woman by the Kochi Bishop seemed to be moving into an anticlimax on Monday with the Bishop airing his preparedness to withdraw from the adoption if the Papal office so desired. However, Church leaders thought that the damage had already been done as the incident had sparked off raging discussions regarding the need for reforms in the Catholic Church.
Bishop John Thattunkal of the Kochi diocese of the Latin Catholic Church on Monday told a meeting of the vicars of the parish churches and the priests of the diocese through a written letter that he was responsible for the <b>controversy, which had caused a crisis of credibility and faith among the laity.</b> He apologised to the priests and believers of the diocese for creating such a situation.
"I know my deeds have caused confusion and concern among the laity and also among the priests. If the Church authorities ask me to withdraw from the adoption, I am prepared to do so," he said in the letter. The issue of adoption by Bishop Thattunkal is now before Pope Benedict XVI pending his decision.
Archbishop Daniel Acharuparampil of the Latin Catholic Church's Varappuzha Archbishop, under which Bishop Thattunkal's Kochi diocese came, had forwarded the complaints filed against the Bishop by several parish vicars to Apostelic Nuncio (the Vatican's envoy) to India Pedro Lopez Quintana, who submitted it to the Pope.
Both Archbishop Acharuparampil and Pedro Quintana have reportedly recommended action against Bishop Thattunkal as they are convinced that he had broken the laws of the Church as well as those of the land. Church sources said the decision of the Papal office on the issue could come 'any moment'.
Fifty-eight-year-old Bishop John Thattunkal had last month adopted Sony, a mature woman from Pathanamthitta district, who was then said to be of 27 years of age (but later reports said that she was well into her late 30s), raising a storm in the Kochi diocese of the Latin Catholic Church. The Bishop also tried to legally register the adoption of the woman, who was the adopted daughter of CK Joseph, a priest in the Malankara Orthodox Church. The Bishop had reportedly met the woman during a pilgrimage through Europe.
Making matters worse for himself, the Bishop also had held a holy mass in his palace on October 10 jointly with Priest Joseph, who had undergone disciplinary action from his own church over complaints about his relationship with Sony. Rumours had arisen to the effect that the woman was staying at a separate house near the Bishop's palace though the Orthodox priest claimed that she was still living at his residence in Pathanamthitta district.
At the Monday meeting at the Bishop's House in Kochi, in which about 200 vicars and priests took part, Bishop Thattunkal tried to explain that he had adopted the mature woman only spiritually after he had found certain stately spiritual qualities in her. He said he tried to register the adoption in order to get legal protection.
Influential Church leaders in Kochi said that the confessions and readiness for atonement by the Bishop did not look sincere as he could have chosen this path convinced that there was no other option left for him since action from Rome was almost certain.
"In the first place, priests are not permitted to adopt. Secondly, the laws of the land do not allow adoption of mature women. Third, there is nothing called spiritual adoption. When a priest adopts someone as his own, his ability to love all alike ends there. Also, Bishop Thattunkal had deposed before the Archbishop and he had no justification to offer for the adoption," said a priest in the Archdiocesan office.
<b>At least one laymen's association pointed out that the Bishop had actually not adopted the woman but could have entered into a secret marriage, which it said was permitted by the Canon laws of the Vatican. It said this was one of the several examples of how the high priests were betraying the faithful.</b>
"A believer has to announce his or her decision to marry in the parish church on three consecutive Sundays while the bishops could marry in secret. <b>Everybody knows that such secret marriages are taking place in the Church. Then why not be transparent about it," asked ML George, secretary, Catholic Layman's Association.</b><!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Now what does that remind me of. Laisse-moi penser... (Deep thought.)
That's right. It's this:
http://freetruth.50webs.org/C2b.htm
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>GREGORY VII 1073-1085 Pope who made it compulsory for priests to be celibate. In 1074, Gregory with his mistress Countess Matilda by his side, issued an edict ordering his priests to abandon their wives.</b> The alternative, Gregory said, was to be <b>cursed forever</b>. "The whole body of the married clergy offered the most resolute resistance," according to the <i>Catholic Encyclopedia</i>. In his <i>Sex Lives of the Popes</i> Nigel Cawthorne said the effect of Gregory's legislation was to make "virtual prostitutes of the thousands of innocent wives of bewildered and angry little clergymen" and that "Husbands and wives were separated in large numbers ... (and) <b>many abandoned women committed suicide</b>".<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd--><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>URBAN II 1088-1099 Introduced sex taxes</b> and the Crusades. At the Council of Piacenza in 1095, some 400 clerics and 30,000 laymen passed a resolution finally outlawing the marriage of priests. The result was that <b>many wives were sold into slavery</b>. Seeing an opportunity, Urban II (1088-99) introduced the infamous <b>cullagium - or sex tax - which allowed a priest to keep a mistress</b> so long as he paid an annual fee.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->So it's mostly okay for Bishop what's-its-face in India. Although he can't have a wife (in public - else he'll be 'cursed forevaaaahhhh'; but not to worry IF: he's 'prepared to withdraw from the adoption, if the church authorities tell him to'), he <i>can</i> keep a mistress - as long as he pays the cullagium, that is.
On the other hand - going by catholic history - the future for his 26-year old wife appears very bleak now that this 'secret marriage' is out: abandonment-and-suicide or being sold-into-slavery don't look good, no matter which angle a heathen looks at it from... <!--emo&:o--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/ohmy.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='ohmy.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Maybe things aren't as bad as all that: there may be some tiny chance that they're not married after all (:grasps at straws). In such a case, the following old christian tradition appears to provide the appropriate terminology:
http://freetruth.50webs.org/B3c.htm
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->From the first century, "the Agapeta, were virgins who consecrated themselves to God with a vow of chastity and associated with laymen, who like themselves had taken a vow of chastity. ... It resulted in abuses and scandals. ... St. Jerome [about 400] asked indignantly, 'Why was this pest of Agapette introduced into the Church?' St. Cyprian shows that abuses of this kind developed in Africa and the East. The Council of Ancyra, in 314, forbade virgins consecrated to God to thus live with men as sisters. This did not correct the practice entirely, for St. Jerome arraigns Syrian monks for living in cities with Christian virgins. These Agapetae are sometimes confounded with the <b>Subintroductae, or women who lived with clerics without marriage."</b> (202.)
<b>-- Forgery in Christianity. A Documented Record of the Foundations of the Christian Religion</b>, by Joseph Wheless, citing the Catholic Encyclopaedia unless otherwise specified<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Most things the church gets hysterically worked up about today look to have a glorious precedent in the church's history.
So there's no need for the lay Indian sheep to suffer from a crisis in faith and get their wool all tangled up. Turns out their bishop is a 'man of gawd' alright. Same as all the many other priesties - both before and beside him.
<!--QuoteBegin-Husky+Oct 19 2008, 01:01 PM-->QUOTE(Husky @ Oct 19 2008, 01:01 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->http://haindavakeralam.com/HKPage.aspx?P...297&SKIN=C
<!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Storm in Church over adoption of woman by bishop</b>
15/10/2008 14:56:38Â Pioneer News Service | Kochi
[...]
The Vatican has received complaints from a host of priests under Kochi diocese about their own bishop who enraged them by adopting a young woman.
While <b>Catholic Bishop Dr John Thattunkal tries to defend his act saying he had adopted the 26-year-old woman from Pathanamthitta for spiritual reformation</b> as per the Vaticanâs Canon laws, the parish priests in his diocese or even prelates in the Kerala Catholic Bishopsâ Council (KCBC), the apex body of all the bishops of the 29 dioceses in the State, do not think so.
[...]
<b>the bishopâs justification for adopting a woman in her prime youth âthat the adoption was one of the ways he had adopted for spiritual reformation</b> <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->[right][snapback]89266[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->It gets better:
http://haindavakeralam.com/HKPage.aspx?P...332&SKIN=C
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Canon law permits 'Secret Marriages' for Bishops</b>
20/10/2008 13:13:02Â
<b>Bishop apologises to believers, priests; Ready to withdraw adoption
Pioneer News Service | Kochi</b>
The controversy that erupted recently in the Catholic Church of Kerala over the 'spiritual adoption' of a mature woman by the Kochi Bishop seemed to be moving into an anticlimax on Monday with the Bishop airing his preparedness to withdraw from the adoption if the Papal office so desired. However, Church leaders thought that the damage had already been done as the incident had sparked off raging discussions regarding the need for reforms in the Catholic Church.
Bishop John Thattunkal of the Kochi diocese of the Latin Catholic Church on Monday told a meeting of the vicars of the parish churches and the priests of the diocese through a written letter that he was responsible for the <b>controversy, which had caused a crisis of credibility and faith among the laity.</b> He apologised to the priests and believers of the diocese for creating such a situation.
"I know my deeds have caused confusion and concern among the laity and also among the priests. If the Church authorities ask me to withdraw from the adoption, I am prepared to do so," he said in the letter. The issue of adoption by Bishop Thattunkal is now before Pope Benedict XVI pending his decision.
Archbishop Daniel Acharuparampil of the Latin Catholic Church's Varappuzha Archbishop, under which Bishop Thattunkal's Kochi diocese came, had forwarded the complaints filed against the Bishop by several parish vicars to Apostelic Nuncio (the Vatican's envoy) to India Pedro Lopez Quintana, who submitted it to the Pope.
Both Archbishop Acharuparampil and Pedro Quintana have reportedly recommended action against Bishop Thattunkal as they are convinced that he had broken the laws of the Church as well as those of the land. Church sources said the decision of the Papal office on the issue could come 'any moment'.
Fifty-eight-year-old Bishop John Thattunkal had last month adopted Sony, a mature woman from Pathanamthitta district, who was then said to be of 27 years of age (but later reports said that she was well into her late 30s), raising a storm in the Kochi diocese of the Latin Catholic Church. The Bishop also tried to legally register the adoption of the woman, who was the adopted daughter of CK Joseph, a priest in the Malankara Orthodox Church. The Bishop had reportedly met the woman during a pilgrimage through Europe.
Making matters worse for himself, the Bishop also had held a holy mass in his palace on October 10 jointly with Priest Joseph, who had undergone disciplinary action from his own church over complaints about his relationship with Sony. Rumours had arisen to the effect that the woman was staying at a separate house near the Bishop's palace though the Orthodox priest claimed that she was still living at his residence in Pathanamthitta district.
At the Monday meeting at the Bishop's House in Kochi, in which about 200 vicars and priests took part, Bishop Thattunkal tried to explain that he had adopted the mature woman only spiritually after he had found certain stately spiritual qualities in her. He said he tried to register the adoption in order to get legal protection.
Influential Church leaders in Kochi said that the confessions and readiness for atonement by the Bishop did not look sincere as he could have chosen this path convinced that there was no other option left for him since action from Rome was almost certain.
"In the first place, priests are not permitted to adopt. Secondly, the laws of the land do not allow adoption of mature women. Third, there is nothing called spiritual adoption. When a priest adopts someone as his own, his ability to love all alike ends there. Also, Bishop Thattunkal had deposed before the Archbishop and he had no justification to offer for the adoption," said a priest in the Archdiocesan office.
<b>At least one laymen's association pointed out that the Bishop had actually not adopted the woman but could have entered into a secret marriage, which it said was permitted by the Canon laws of the Vatican. It said this was one of the several examples of how the high priests were betraying the faithful.</b>
"A believer has to announce his or her decision to marry in the parish church on three consecutive Sundays while the bishops could marry in secret. <b>Everybody knows that such secret marriages are taking place in the Church. Then why not be transparent about it," asked ML George, secretary, Catholic Layman's Association.</b><!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Now what does that remind me of. Laisse-moi penser... (Deep thought.)
That's right. It's this:
http://freetruth.50webs.org/C2b.htm
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>GREGORY VII 1073-1085 Pope who made it compulsory for priests to be celibate. In 1074, Gregory with his mistress Countess Matilda by his side, issued an edict ordering his priests to abandon their wives.</b> The alternative, Gregory said, was to be <b>cursed forever</b>. "The whole body of the married clergy offered the most resolute resistance," according to the <i>Catholic Encyclopedia</i>. In his <i>Sex Lives of the Popes</i> Nigel Cawthorne said the effect of Gregory's legislation was to make "virtual prostitutes of the thousands of innocent wives of bewildered and angry little clergymen" and that "Husbands and wives were separated in large numbers ... (and) <b>many abandoned women committed suicide</b>".<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd--><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>URBAN II 1088-1099 Introduced sex taxes</b> and the Crusades. At the Council of Piacenza in 1095, some 400 clerics and 30,000 laymen passed a resolution finally outlawing the marriage of priests. The result was that <b>many wives were sold into slavery</b>. Seeing an opportunity, Urban II (1088-99) introduced the infamous <b>cullagium - or sex tax - which allowed a priest to keep a mistress</b> so long as he paid an annual fee.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->So it's mostly okay for Bishop what's-its-face in India. Although he can't have a wife (in public - else he'll be 'cursed forevaaaahhhh'; but not to worry IF: he's 'prepared to withdraw from the adoption, if the church authorities tell him to'), he <i>can</i> keep a mistress - as long as he pays the cullagium, that is.
On the other hand - going by catholic history - the future for his 26-year old wife appears very bleak now that this 'secret marriage' is out: abandonment-and-suicide or being sold-into-slavery don't look good, no matter which angle a heathen looks at it from... <!--emo&:o--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/ohmy.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='ohmy.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Maybe things aren't as bad as all that: there may be some tiny chance that they're not married after all (:grasps at straws). In such a case, the following old christian tradition appears to provide the appropriate terminology:
http://freetruth.50webs.org/B3c.htm
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->From the first century, "the Agapeta, were virgins who consecrated themselves to God with a vow of chastity and associated with laymen, who like themselves had taken a vow of chastity. ... It resulted in abuses and scandals. ... St. Jerome [about 400] asked indignantly, 'Why was this pest of Agapette introduced into the Church?' St. Cyprian shows that abuses of this kind developed in Africa and the East. The Council of Ancyra, in 314, forbade virgins consecrated to God to thus live with men as sisters. This did not correct the practice entirely, for St. Jerome arraigns Syrian monks for living in cities with Christian virgins. These Agapetae are sometimes confounded with the <b>Subintroductae, or women who lived with clerics without marriage."</b> (202.)
<b>-- Forgery in Christianity. A Documented Record of the Foundations of the Christian Religion</b>, by Joseph Wheless, citing the Catholic Encyclopaedia unless otherwise specified<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Most things the church gets hysterically worked up about today look to have a glorious precedent in the church's history.
So there's no need for the lay Indian sheep to suffer from a crisis in faith and get their wool all tangled up. Turns out their bishop is a 'man of gawd' alright. Same as all the many other priesties - both before and beside him.