Seems to be 14 (female) and 16 (male), not 13. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_Europe#Vatican_State

I stand corrected. But I still can’t see why there needs to be an age of consent in the ” holy city”

The Vatican is occupied by more than just priests and nuns. Lay people have sex.
What would cause more controversy would be if there was no age of consent at all!

The Vatican takes most of it’s laws from the Italian Penal Code so that’s the reason for the age of consent. You have to remember that there are lay people living there also as well.

As far as allegations of sexual abuse of children and their investigation under canon law is concerned it should be noted that Benedict raised the age of consent to 18. Which is not something you would not do if you wanted to hush things up. Actual Vatican state laws seem to be similar to most European states(I think our age of consent of 17 is the best cut off limit.)

Double negative there, *learn to proof read*

But in still don’t see why lay people within the Vatican need to have sex with 14/15/16 year old boys/girls. Even if its legal in Italy. Unless the whole point of Vatican City is to give high ranking officials of the church somewhere private to get pissed and have sex with young boys/girls

What makes you think those sick bastards care about an age of consent! The Catholic Church is the largest group of Hippocrates on the planet!!

They dont plan to get caught. Why would the age of consent make a difference to them?

The Swiss Guard are all male and as I understand it they’re supposed to remain single while in the employ of the Vatican. There are lay people working there but not many living there, probably just a handful but any country needs an age of consent and I’d be very alarmed if their wasn’t one there

14 is still young. Basically a child.

Doctors ! Sorry…couldn’t resist the jibe !!

I would urge everyone to see this documentary, by HBO, and also, Deliver Us From Evil, 2006 Oscar-nominated documentary on child abuse in the church in Boston and how it was covered up to ensure bishops were promoted to archbishops and then cardinals for the sake of justice, the 2006 film focused on Fr. Oliver O’Grady who was deported from the US and ended up living on the Ranelagh Road in Dublin near the canal, he is currently in Mountjoy after he left a laptop full of child pornography on an airplane, (excuse the reputable news source) http://www.sundayworld.com/columnists/index.php?aid=9211

Great post GG

Sure it’s all the fault of secularism, and wild people doing wild things like having sex

Thanks Adebayo, people need to see the truth, and William, you are dead right, one of the most potent quotes from MMM, was from Fr.Gerald Fitzgerald, in 1957, who was a church-appointed sex-therapist treating paedophile priests, he said; “We are amazed to find how often a man, who would be behind bars if he were not a priest, is entrusted with the care of souls”.

I saw it and yes it is an important revealing to us how corrupt the papacy have been in concealing these crimes. Which was a hideous crime in itself. People who chose to ignore this and continue to support the papacy are no better than accomplices.

This is the same priest who receives a pension of about $800 per month worth about $100k from the church. And the same priest who also continues to decline to give evidence against his superiors. In other words, payoff money.

I guess this behaviour is to be expected from a group of people who believe that an all powerful sky leader chose a 13 year old virgin girl (Mary) as the most appropriate female to impregnate with his son (Jesus).

Would you be referring to this John? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OsGyv1CqRuQ

Standard & Poors?

Fingers and Seanie.

It is a privately held financial institution. Hmmmm will have to look into that a bit more, the amount of corruption. Only looked for 5 mins and it appears the Vatican is a dirty bank.

Read “In God’s Name” by David Yallop and that will really open your eyes! Mafia, P2, murder etc, brilliant reading.

Thanks Brian. Corruption is taking over it is rampant everywhere when will it stop

I too recommend “In God’s Name” by David Yallop.
A total education into the crimes of the Vatican, the inner corruption and the evil level which the their official Vatican bank operates.

Brian, yep, read that years ago, probably still going on.
The church makes its own rules.
Bunch of sheep following the church.

I would advise ,nothing to do with church has to do with banks and Vatican is a massive privately owned bank, Fall Of The Republic, we don’t want to be 20 years from now only finding out what banks and the people who control them were up to.

Yup, Paul Marcincus was head of Vatican Bank. A polish priest from Chicago who was laundering mafia money through Vatican Bank and reinvesting it for American mafia. In Gods Name explains why John Paul 1 had to be murdered, Bishop John McGee was Private Secretary to three popes (only person ever to achieve this) and must be well connected. Vatican more corrupt than the mafia!

In reply to Mary Lynch’s ridiculous comment below

Thanks Bob I’ve posted links to that website a number of times in past hoping that people in Ireland could see how these corrupt clerics were being exposed in the states . Unlike here in Ireland where few were prosecuted and many more remain anonymous.

Yep “Saints and Sinners the Holy Rimmers” has a ring to it get it

Yep “Saints and Sinners the Holy Rimmers” has a ring to it get it

Yep “Saints and Sinners the Holy Rimmers” has a ring to it get it

Yep “Saints and Sinners the Holy Rimmers” has a ring to it get it

“Pope flees over crime and cottaging controversy!!”

Don’t know how that happened sorry folks

Not the first three times but it ‘dawned’ on me the fourth read ;)

Idiot.

Which one of us?

Single man, married woman = adultery.

So what about married man with single or married man or married woman with single or married woman ? Adultery could be with same sex too .

If I remember rightly from what one teacher told us was what they mean by ‘adultery’ is anyone having sexual relations without being married to them.

The inner Vatican sex club has been known about for years.
Do an internet search and you will find many reports on it.
Why he is resigning now is a total PR farce!
See: http://alturl.com/kg8pd

Interesting indeed, more interesting its from an anti catholic website so a little biased i presume.

Maybe watch this Tom, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AjzuVy_KmIg, remember, an open mind is like a parachute

Some of us have actually visited Rome’s gay bars and met with hordes of catholic priests cruising there. If the Vatican got up and left Rome many of the city’s gay clubs would be forced to close and hundreds of the city’s prostitutes would be left destitute. That’s not anti-catholicism that’s fact. Plenty of priest/religious leaders in other faiths are gay too but the difference is they don’t enforce celibacy on their employees, they aren’t anti-gay and they’re not misogynists either

if you met with hoards of priests etc, this would be out years ago, what did they do go to the gay bars in their collars, how did you know they were priests

Regano i think if take testimony from someone who is an authority on the church instead of listening to you. readers might be interested in this site created by ex priests for ex priest and those wishing to leave the church , many of them are gay .
http://www.leavingthepriesthood.com/

The bit about single homosexual men commiting adultery did have me wondering.

Pretty much the only one so far to comment on the actual story.

Damocles

I take it you believe exposing paedophile priests is also being anti-Catholic!

What about the journalists who exposed former Irish Bishop using church funds to support his illegitimate son were they also being anti-Catholic?

Allegations about Gay sex parties involving Vatican priests and staff have been around for years, nothing new. I even have a memory of a former head of the Vatican bank committing suicide (is that not a sin) / being murdered (that is a sin) following the release of information about the shady dealings of the bank.

“I take it you believe exposing paedophile priests is also being anti-Catholic!” Do you? Oh.

La Republicca is known to be massively anti-Catholic. It’s made a series of unsubstantiated claims and speculated on them.

Incidentally you seem to be given to anti-Catholicism and wild speculation yourself. Have you considered asking them for a job?

Damocles

I noticed you did not answer any of my points.

Funny how when people keep asking the simple question why, that they win the argument.

So even the great Catholic Church cannot stand up to it’s own questioning style, Jesuit that would be.

“I noticed you did not answer any of my points.”

Well spotted. A budding journalist in the offing.

I’m not a representative of the Roman Catholic Church, incidentally.

Poor aul Damocles. More brainwashed than the followers of Jim Jones and his cult.

So because I look at the agenda of the media organisation “reporting” this story and don’t like many just accept it as “truth” because it suits any pre-existing bias I might have, I’m brainwashed?

That make zero sense.

Learn to question things.

Just to reiterate … I’m NOT a representative of the Roman Catholic Church. I disagree with them on a number of theological points.

Damocles

I am not anti-Catholic, just like I am not anti-Jewish, anti-Protestant, anti-Muslim or anti any other of the religions of the world. In fact I am on record as telling an Aunt who is a Nun, and an Uncle who is a Eucharistic minister that I can forgive the individual paedophile priest, for they are unwell and need proper treatment, to ensure they are not a threat to themselves or others. However I cannot forgive the Catholic Churches hierarchy for placing the needs of institution above those of their followers especially the innocent children.

So go and follow your church and its teachings, blindly if you like, for faith is a strong and uplifting item to have. However do not expect me to hold your “Men of God” above their own teachings.

Carcu Sidub: “go and follow your church and its teachings”

Me: “I’m NOT a representative of the Roman Catholic Church. I disagree with them on a number of theological points.”

Have you considered a reading comprehension course?

Damocles

Funny how you started out questioning speculations “from a paper known to be anti-Catholic”, but end up claiming not to be not be a representative of the Roman Catholic Church, but you also refuse to engage in questions about your questions. Would you be Minister Brian Hayes by any chance another who refuses to answer questions asked of him?

As for your comment that I partake in a “reading comprehension course”, I log into and out of thejournal.ie and between your reply to Patrick and me uploading my response, I had started my response. I would have needed to do a refresh to the web page before posting my comment. I therefore apologise for not engaging in continuous refreshing of my open web pages.

So Brian why don’t you do us all a favour and answer the £ucking questions? IS that comprehension enough for you?

“Would you be Minister Brian Hayes by any chance another who refuses to answer questions asked of him?”
No.

You’ve only asked one other question.

“What about the journalists who exposed former Irish Bishop using church funds to support his illegitimate son were they also being anti-Catholic?”

That has nothing to do with this. I made no suggestion that every article that is about scandal in the Church is “anti-Catholic” per se, indeed attempts to clean out miscreants from any church might be seen as being pro that church. All I said was that this particular media outlet is known for being anti-Catholic, because it is.

Just because a media outlet take one view on a subject should not exclude it from reporting on that subject or should it as you appear to imply?

I made no such implication.

Perhaps this would enlighten you Damocles, when I read it I thought of you! http://theoatmeal.com/comics/religion

Conor I simply pointed out the known bias in a news source.

Do you not question bias simply because you agree with the message? Or do you question bias always?

That was a very funny link Conor thanks

How? There was an investigation, then he decided to resign. Timeline seems pretty accurate to me!

@ Gareth Walker-Ayers
On first reading of the headline, I assumed the Pope was been accused of the breaches of the 6th and 7th.
In a way it’s unfortunate that a radical socialist newspaper should be trusted for anything reliable about the pope.
That been said those in the Vatican, like all of us, make mistakes. But they propose, and generally live out, a higher moral standard for the world.
As you well know Gareth, you shouldn’t believe everything you read.

They live to a higher moral standard, do they? Using vulnerable women as slave labour, engaging in physical abuse (of children in catholic schools and in reformatories), psychological abuse through their bizarre teachings on sexuality, ect, and, finally, engaging in sexual abuse and its cover up on an industrial scale. Very high moral standards indeed. Oh, they lived up to those standards alright.

I presume your practicing sarcasm Mary!

“You shouldn’t believe everything you read” …..ahem the bible read any bells? Because that hole thing was a fiction that went to far

Last sentence was sarcasm. First one was from the heart. Anyone who has any sort of informed conscience would realise just how far short of the teachings of the Catholic church some of its clergy have fallen. I can (almost) excuse priests and nuns for sometimes failing to live up to the high standards set for them, but the hypocrisy of the instituional cover up which took place while we were being told how we ordinary people should conduct ourselves is a disgusting betrayal of our trust.

Lets look at ex priests accounts and views of the Vatican that seem to corroborate some of the claims concerning homosexual rings in the church http://www.leavingthepriesthood.com

Yes Paul maybe the bit about Jesus is a farce here’s an interesting site with some interesting facts http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/

While I wouldn’t pigeon-hole myself as strictly liberal, we are educated, we look at the facts and evidence and strive for a society where everyone is equal, rather than just one book from a long time ago

Terry,

People the world over, regardless of their political bias, do not want to read things that challenge their preconceptions. Successful news media reports things in a way that affirms the preconceptions of their core readership. By maintaining this core readership they can sell advertising space and make money. Look at the Daily Mail.

Giaus listening to people here you would think it to be impossible to be more conservative without being religious. There are plenty of idiots in the liberal camp as well. you only have to read a couple of stories to see that.

The only fruit I’ve seen born from old catholic Ireland Terry, is that, those who no longer follow the church, have the benefit of experiencing both sides of the story. Brainwashed from infancy, and if you come out the other side and see it for the sham it is, well fair dues to you, but for those who continue to support the church and have never questioned it, I feel sorry for these people.

The ‘faithful’ spend more time defending their church than contemplating the suffering of it’s victims

Damage the church? Get real, they do a fine job doing that themselves.
Nest of Devils.

When it comes to damaging the church, the church doesn’t need any help from journalists or anyone else.

I think the church has damaged itself Mary. evil b@$+@/&$

“Damage the church” ?

So far, they have done a brilliant job of that on their own.

It seems that the devil has infiltrated the church. The fact that there is a homosexual element hidden with the church proves this. And people wonder why the church is so outspoken on homosexuality.

Mary, there is nothing wrong or evil about homosexuality, no more than it is wrong or evil to be left-handed, you might remember when that was beaten out of people

Yes Mary the gay agenda is everywhere! The gays have infiltrated all organisations and control the Freemasons, the Vatican, the CIA and Bord Gais. Sure gay people just want to turn everyone else gay so that the human population dies out and there’ll be no one to worship God anymore thus fulfilling the Devils plans in weakening Heaven so he can take it over again.

And sure only evil people would try and make someone else change their sexual orientation to suit their agenda………oh wait catholic promoted conversion therapy?! Oh I forgot about that.

Disclaimer – this post is entirely dripping with my most disdainful sarcasm ever!

ah the devil, good one Mary,

how about that these are corrupt human beings from the top down and always have been,

How women like yourself can even consider supporting the church is beyond me,

Remember Mary that the Church council of Macon in 584 actually seriously debated the question of whether women could be considered fully human.

After much argument for and against, the question was decided in favor of women’s humanity by a vote of 32 for, 31 against! So only by the narrowest of margins…one single vote, they decided that women like yourself could be considered part of humanity.

Count yourself lucky Mary that they even consider you human,

Lol Barry is that true? What species did they think we were? Nothing surprises me with the Catholic Church. What a weird religion.

Karolyn, yep sadly its true.

The argument stems from the churches view of women and how they effectively created original sin but more so from the basis that they believe women had no souls…..the same as they believe animals don’t.

If anyone doubts my claim that Bord Gias has been taken over by the Gay Mafia and their agenda, all I need to say is Bord Gais Energy Theatre and musicals!

Connect the dots people!

Thanks Mary for teaching us all that Satan is gay. It’s certainly a new one. I hope for your sake (mentally) that you’re just trolling.

Barry, I remember it well. And as a woman I wuz mighty worried! The question at issue wad in fact whether or not women had souls. If they had souls, they could be considered human (however inferior). If they had no souls they were just animals. A bit of a problem arose when it was realized that the same female animal could give birth to an ensouled creature, I.e. A son, and a soul-less animal, I.e. A daughter. I reckon this conundrum swung the vote!

Are you familiar with Shakespeare Mary” the lady doth protest to much!, methinks “