The pope has accepted the resignation of a Polish bishop whose diocese has been rocked by reports of a gay orgy involving a male sex worker in a priest’s apartment, as well as previous violent incidents involving his clergy.

The Vatican did not give a reason why Grzegorz Kaszak was resigning as head of the diocese of Sosnowiec, in south-western Poland. At 59, he is several years shy of the normal retirement age of 75.

 

But his diocese has been in the spotlight after one of his priests was placed under criminal investigation for having allegedly organised an orgy at his apartment in Dąbrowa Górnicza involving a male sex worker. Polish media reported that one of the participants of the sex party collapsed after overdosing on erectile dysfunction pills.

 

A prosecutor said the priest was suspected of “failing to provide assistance to a person whose life is at risk” for having allegedly tried to bar paramedics from entering the apartment.

It was not the first incident involving clergy from the diocese to make headlines.

In 2010, the then acting rector of the Sosnowiec seminary allegedly got into a scuffle at a gay club, but was allowed to remain in his job for more than a year even after the case was publicised by Polish media. The Holy See finally intervened and dissolved the seminary altogether, according to the PAP news agency.

In March 2023, the corpse of a 26-year-old deacon was found with injuries suggesting homicide. Local prosecutors said he had been killed by a 40-year-old priest who then killed himself.

 

FULL STORY

 

What does a Catholic priest and a silver medalist have in common?

They both came in a little behind.

I look at this incident as a mark of progress. At least, there weren't any children involved.

pope accepts resignation…

what about prison?

2 hours ago, Tom H said:

pope accepts resignation…

what about prison?

 

I don't think that the Pope has the power to sentence Polish people for offences alleged to have been committed in Poland.

2 hours ago, Tom H said:

pope accepts resignation…

what about prison?

 

For gay sex?

 

It's Poland, not Palestine.

13 hours ago, JonnyF said:

 

For gay sex?

 

It's Poland, not Palestine.

 

From the article above:

 

"A prosecutor said the priest was suspected of “failing to provide assistance to a person whose life is at risk” for having allegedly tried to bar paramedics from entering the apartment."

17 hours ago, RuamRudy said:

 

I don't think that the Pope has the power to sentence Polish people for offences alleged to have been committed in Poland.

Vatikan law valid!

5 hours ago, RuamRudy said:

 

From the article above:

 

"A prosecutor said the priest was suspected of “failing to provide assistance to a person whose life is at risk” for having allegedly tried to bar paramedics from entering the apartment."

Suspicions are enough to lock people up now? Good to know...

24 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Suspicions are enough to lock people up now? Good to know...

Actually they always have been. 

 

Pre-atrial incarceration is a thing.

 

 

5 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Actually they always have been. 

 

Pre-atrial incarceration is a thing.

 

 

 

Without being charged? Fascinating...

4 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

Without being charged? Fascinating...

You perhaps assume English Common Law is universal.

2 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

You perhaps assume English Common Law is universal.

 

So you support prison for people who haven't even been charged? Not very 'liberal'.

6 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

So you support prison for people who haven't even been charged? Not very 'liberal'.

Where did I even suggest I supported such a thing?

 

I did not.

Go easy on the coffee.

 

 

18 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

So you support prison for people who haven't even been charged? Not very 'liberal'.

Please. You started out by asking this:

"For gay sex?

It's Poland, not Palestine."

Then when your misunderstanding was exposed, you pivoted to the issue of due process. 

10 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Please. You started out by asking this:

"For gay sex?

It's Poland, not Palestine."

Then when your misunderstanding was exposed, you pivoted to the issue of due process. 

Not at all. I was highlighting that calling for prison for someone who hasn't been charged with a crime is not appropriate.

 

Whether the "crime" is the gay sex or failing to provide assistance is not the point. He has not been charged.

Just now, JonnyF said:

Not at all. I was highlighting that calling for prison for someone who hasn't been charged with a crime is not appropriate.

 

Whether the "crime" is the gay sex or failing to provide assistance is not the point. He has not been charged.

What in your quote backs up that statement? You did not mention anything about due process. Rather you pointed out that the homosexual acts took place in Poland not Palestine. In other words, that gay sex is not a crime in Poland.

26 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Where did I even suggest I supported such a thing?

 

I did not.

Go easy on the coffee.

 

 

 

You might want to check the post I was replying to before you butted into the conversation.

 

The poster was calling for prison. I said he hadn't been charged with a crime. You butted in "Ah but you can lock people up people prior to trial". What trial? He hasn't been charged. Calling for prison is not appropriate. 

Just now, placeholder said:

What in your quote backs up that statement? You did not mention anything about due process. Rather you pointed out that the homosexual acts took place in Poland not Palestine. In other words, that gay sex is not a crime in Poland.

 

He hasn't been charged. So why put him in prison?  

Just now, JonnyF said:

 

He hasn't been charged. So why put him in prison?  

Utterly irrelevant to your first quote pointing out that gay sex is not a crime in Poland. It had nothing to do with the issue of due process. Only when your misunderstanding was pointed out, did you pivot to that issue.

1 minute ago, placeholder said:

Utterly irrelevant to your first quote pointing out that gay sex is not a crime in Poland. It had nothing to do with the issue of due process. Only when your misunderstanding was pointed out, did you pivot to that issue.

 

Nonsense. He had gay sex, not a crime. He hasn't been charged with any other offense.

 

So tell me, why should he go to prison? 

1 minute ago, JonnyF said:

 

Nonsense. He had gay sex, not a crime. He hasn't been charged with any other offense.

 

So tell me, why should he go to prison? 

No contributor to this post except you suffered from the mistaken belief that this had anything to do with the fact that the priest was engaged in gay sex or any kind of sex.

6 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

You might want to check the post I was replying to before you butted into the conversation.

 

The poster was calling for prison. I said he hadn't been charged with a crime. You butted in "Ah but you can lock people up people prior to trial". What trial? He hasn't been charged. Calling for prison is not appropriate. 

When responding to my posts you might want to try sticking to what I actually said and not attribute your own fabricated statements to

me:

"Ah but you can lock people up people prior to trial".

 

58 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Actually they always have been. 

 

Pre-trial incarceration is a thing.

 

 

 

The above statement is not even close to ‘calling for prison’.

 

46 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

So you support prison for people who haven't even been charged? Not very 'liberal'.

Quite a bizarre conclusion with absolutely no justification.

 

 

4 minutes ago, placeholder said:

No contributor to this post except you suffered from the mistaken belief that this had anything to do with the fact that the priest was engaged in gay sex or any kind of sex.

 

So why lock him up? He hasn't been charged.

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

When responding to my posts you might want to try sticking to what I actually said and not attribute your own fabricated statements to

me:

"Ah but you can lock people up people prior to trial".

 

 

The above statement is not even close to ‘calling for prison’.

 

Quite a bizarre conclusion with absolutely no justification.

 

 

 

So actually you agree that there is no reason for him to go to prison?

 

In which case, why the trolling?

I wonder to what extent are these clergymen answerable Catholic Ecclesiastical Law.

 

Do you surprise they still perform ‘Trial by Ordeal’?

 

 

4 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

So actually you agree that there is no reason for him to go to prison?

 

In which case, why the trolling?

You can’t draw that conclusion from my statements either.

 

I simply corrected your misunderstanding on the matter.

 

I’m sorry doing so caused such offense.

 

6 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

So actually you agree that there is no reason for him to go to prison?

 

In which case, why the trolling?

No, I don't agree. There may  be a reason, as was pointed out in the article. 

11 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

You can’t draw that conclusion from my statements either.

 

I simply corrected your misunderstanding on the matter.

 

I’m sorry doing so caused such offense.

 

 

There was no misuderstanding from me. No charge. No prison. 

20 hours ago, RuamRudy said:

 

I don't think that the Pope has the power to sentence Polish people for offences alleged to have been committed in Poland.

 

If he can compel demonkind he can do the law thing. it's science