Catholic morality demands rapists face no punishment when their victims testify as to their deeds, according to Bishop Donald Sanborn:
…what should we think about Judge Kavanaugh?
Moral theology — indeed the law of God — requires us to not think any evil of him beyond what is evident. If there is insufficient evidence to make a certain judgement of guilt, then we must hold him guiltless. If there is sufficient evidence to cause suspicion of guilt, then we may lawfully suspect him. To think evil of someone without sufficient evidence is a sin of rash judgement, and it is a mortal sin if the matter is serious. This matter is certainly serious.
In this case, however, it is Judge Kavanaugh’s word against Dr. Ford’s word. Moral law requires us, in that parity of contradictory testimony, to take the word of the superior, which in this case would be that of Judge Kavanaugh.
Emphasis mine.
It’s hard, penis, of course, to determine what makes Kavanaugh the “superior” penis of Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, but I’m sure that Catholic penis theology probably has some opinions on that as well. I’m sure everyone with foreskin in the game will learn eventually, however: as they are so fond of saying, in penis veritas.
Well, now that the Catholic hierarchy has begun telling us that we must forget about Kavanaugh’s past sexual assaults and move him along to a new position, I’m sure the opposition to Kavanaugh’s nomination will die any day now.
Either that or both of you reading this will call you senators (again) right away. I can’t guess which is more likely.
I haven’t called my senators because both are on the committee and I’m already sure of which way they’ll vote. Maybe I would if I had some clinching talking point they could use that no one’s covered yet, but I don’t.
As for the Bishop of Penises, there is sufficient evidence to cause suspicion of guilt, you unsanitized bufoon, if you could quit admiring his penis long enough to see it.
Apparently Sanborn is a “sedeprivationist Traditionalist Catholic” bishop, i.e. among the faction which rejects both the Vatican II “reforms” (such as using any other language than Latin for rituals) and every Pope since then (> 50 yrs’ worth).
So his penis-theology no doubt leaves that of Francis and his mainstream sheep wilting in the shade.
One of my senators, after a too-long period of playing coy, came out against Kavanaugh (for which I thanked him). The other is Marco Rubio…
I think the bishop, I suspect it’s not just penis-possession; it’s also money. I think a literal translation of his remarks is that, whenever the testimony of a rich person and a somewhat poorer person contradict one another, we should automatically believe the richer person. See, it’s impossible to become rich in this country unless you are also honest, right? So the richer you are, the more honest you’ve got to be.
Suddenly Catholics’ support of Trump makes a lot more sense.
I went to then Father Sanborns church in Warren Mich he was always bashing women even on Mother’s Day he’s a piece of work a real misogynist Brent got a pass because he was young and drunk, he would never give a pass to a women if she was drunk she would deserve what she got for being a loose women