Talk:Bishop

The life of a bishop can be quite exciting

• http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gDnE-5lD7w8 Sophie^{because liberals} 09:19, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
• http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rBhTIoIXoTI ^bomination 09:32, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Bias

It's hard to know what to do about Bishops behaving badly. If I report only the numerous cases of cover-up scandals in the RC Church and leave out Protestant scandals that is biased. Similarly if I report what may be atypical cases of malpractise by protestant bishops that looks like bias against large numbers of better Prostestant bishops. These better bishops may misbehave in other ways but keep to any marriage vows they have taken and don't cover up abuse. It's much easier to report objectively about chess. Kirk Johnson (talk) 08:55, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Trivia

I feel the Trivia section should stay as it's funny and means readers can have a little entertainment while we're learning. Proxima Centauri (talk) 10:44, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

"The Roman Catholic Church aspires to advise the whole world about morality, but may need moral counseling themselves."

I really feel like this conclusion detracts from the impact of the argument. It's damn clear from the stuff described in the article that there are serious moral failings within the Church. The sentence just sort of states the obvious without really adding anything. Just like New York City; Just like Jericho. 15:29, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Injustice

Is O'Brien guilty?

How likely is it that four men colluded to fabricate stories against the Cardinal? We can't tell though one suggestion is as worrying as the accusations.

A source within the Catholic Church also said the cardinal "doesn't know who his accusers are and doesn't know what they're accusing him of".

What's happened to Natural justice? In UK law

(1) Audi alteram partem (Latin for, hear the other side): no accused, or a person directly affected by a decision, shall be condemned unless given full chance to prepare and submit his or her case and rebuttal to the opposing party's arguments;

And high ranking Roman Catholic dignitaries worldwide can understand that because it's also written in Latin. The Vatican is considering what to do and and the man subject to these proceedings doesn't know enough to mount an effective defence. ==Is O'Brien guilty?== How likely is it that four men colluded to fabricate stories against the Cardinal? We can't tell though one suggestion is as worrying as the accusations.

A source within the Catholic Church also said the cardinal "doesn't know who his accusers are and doesn't know what they're accusing him of".

What's happened to Natural justice? In UK law

(1) Audi alteram partem (Latin for, hear the other side): no accused, or a person directly affected by a decision, shall be condemned unless given full chance to prepare and submit his or her case and rebuttal to the opposing party's arguments;

And high ranking Roman Catholic dignitaries worldwide can understand that because it's also written in Latin. The Vatican is considering what to do and and the man subject to these proceedings aparently doesn't know enough to mount an effective defence. The accused has a right to be heard and needs enough information to prepare an effective defence. We must take O'Brien's word for things that he really doesn't know the charges against him but the cardinal is an experienced member of the Roman Catholic Church, his claim that he is denied natural justice is clearly credible and consistent with the way the church does things.

Papal powers and powers of superiors generally include ordering accused priests to retire to monasteries. For a man who doesn’t want to become a monk or who can’t adjust to monastic life that amounts to an indefinite prison sentence. It’s unlikely O'Brien will be forced into a monastery but other priests have been ordered in this way. The arbitrary power the church can exercise over priests up to the rank of cardinal is at least as ominous as the unspecified allegations made against O'Brien.

Papal powers and powers of superiors generally include ordering accused priests to retire to monasteries. For a man who doesn’t want to become a monk or who can’t adjust to monastic life that amounts to an indefinite prison sentence. It’s unlikely O'Brien will be forced into a monastery but other priests have been ordered in this way. The arbitrary power the church can exercise over priests up to the rank of cardinal is at least as ominous as the unspecified allegations made against O'Brien.

The above is adapted from what I wrote at Liberapedia. I will return but have a great deal of work to do at Liberapedia first. Proxima Centauri (talk) 08:21, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Why hasn't O'Brien issued a clear rebuttal? He can't easily rebut charges that he doesn't know. No human being can lead a totally blameless life. Which of us have never even impulsively done something sexual which we feel was wrong and afterwards regretted? When people are trying to maintain celibacy pent up sexual feelings can explode disastrously. Below is speculation.

1. O'Brien may be the sexual hypocrite he seems to be.
2. O'Brien may have done what he's accused of but be sincerely repentant. Perhaps he recognised the sex he engaged in had been destructive but thought the destructive effect was due to homosexuality rather than coercive sex. This would be consistent with his strong anti-homosexual position later in life.
3. Alternatively O'Brien may have kept to the standards he believes he should most of the time with occasional weaknesses. These weaknesses may be less extreme that the complaints suggest but since he doesn't know the accusations in detail he can't easily deny them.
4. O'Brien may believe/hope he never broke his vow of celibacy but isn't sure because he just might have done something after drinking and later forgotten. Proxima Centauri (talk) 08:23, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Princetown University and Wikipedia

A Wikipedia page has been copied onto the Princetown University website, see Apostolic Succession. It looks like at least one academic from Princetown has reviewed that Wikipedia article and thinks it's accurate. Proxima Centauri (talk) 11:50, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Bullshit. It's just a copy-paste of the lede section & TOC at some unspecified point in time, which then links on to the original WP article. There is no indication of review by an academic, and even if there was, it would be meaningless. Wèàšèìòìď^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 11:55, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

And it's Princeton, not Princetown. ωεαşεζøίɗ^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 11:58, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

It's a second year graduate student's site for some kind of data visualization project. Not only is it not from an academic passing on the content, but the content isn't relevant to the student's purpose in putting the site up. Please please please be careful. You seem to be going out and looking for cites to support claims and falling prey to confirmation bias instead of deriving your claims from sources. Nate Keaton (talk) 15:43, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Papal conclave

• Groups name "dirty" cardinals ahead of papal conclave
• Vatican dysfunction looms ahead of papal conclave
• Vatican Papal Conclave 2013: Pope Vote Preparations Begin In EarnestProxima Centauri (talk) 04:55, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Bishops son't participate in the Conclave. Just like New York City; Just like Jericho. 11:59, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

random bishops doing bad things

I understand that the Catholic church has a specific and documented history of widespread incidents of bishops AUTHORIZING the coverup of abuse. But i cut the other crap. This idea that you find one single instance where something bad happens, mostly unique to that situation does not seem to give credence to either "therefore this is how the Church sees it", or to "this is systemic in the church". It's a crappy tactic, unworthy of us. Godot The ablity to breath is such an overrated ability 21:13, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

I don't think we even need this article at all. Any comments about the role of bishops could easily be covered within the priest article, and the rest of it is about stuff that individual bishops have done. Wěǎšěǐǒǐď^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 21:31, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Agreed. and why did it log me out. oh well, this is Godot. 174.51.249.185 (talk) 21:51, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

We've been waiting for you. My friend suggested we hang ourselves. When Roosevelt came to the land of the hummingbird, shouts of welcome were heard!. 21:56, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

The article on Religious leaders is already long and unwieldy. Putting bishops there would add to the problem. Proxima Centauri (talk) 10:00, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Cardinal

Why does Cardinal redirect here? Sophie^Wilder 22:02, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Probably because cardinals are (virtually all) bishops. cept the birdsGodot The ablity to breath is such an overrated ability 22:11, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

All catholic cardinals are bishops - cardinal is just an office. 22:12, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Removal of article

Was this change agreed by the community? Proxima Centauri (talk) 14:36, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

You don't need a community decision to Redirect stuff. This was a pointless article about a particular level of church bureaucracy, some members of which did bad things. Sophie^Wilder 14:48, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Which is very important in PC's quest to end Catholicism on the Internet. Crawl back into your intellectual bunnyhole, Sophie. You obviously lack machismo. Operation Stinky Bishops will soon be unleashed. Ole!! Ole!! Ole!!! Did he doubt/Or did he try? 14:56, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Stinky Bishop, you say? Sophie^Wilder 15:06, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

THAT CHEESE IS CATHOLIC! 15:20, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Oh sorry, I'll just go and burn it. Sophie^Wilder 15:23, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Burn it in your belly with some figs and baguette ends paired with a nice bordeaux. 15:31, 7 April 2013 (UTC)