Talk:Paul Shanley

Needs more info

If conviction was upheld, article should say where he is, whether in jail or not, at least. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Plutonium57 (talk • contribs) 16:35, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Paul Shanley. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110719031750/http://www1.whdh.com/news/articles/local/BO124053/ to http://www1.whdh.com/news/articles/local/BO124053/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 03:49, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Paul Shanley. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080520104110/http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn02192005.html to http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn02192005.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110727113742/http://ncrj.org/Shanley/JimShanley4.html to http://ncrj.org/Shanley/JimShanley4.html
• Added archive https://archive.is/20120905022152/http://www.necn.com/Boston/New-England/2008/11/26/Priest-in-Boston-clergy/1227746335.html to http://www.necn.com/Boston/New-England/2008/11/26/Priest-in-Boston-clergy/1227746335.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050306021539/http://www.courttv.com/trials/shanley/ to http://www.courttv.com/trials/shanley/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:40, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Laicized

The reason we use "laicized" is because it is the legal, canonical term used by the Church herself. Now, if a president were "impeached" and a Wikipedia article said he was "nailed to the wall" instead, what would be the proper course of action there? Yes, laicized is a technical term, and so people who need help understanding it are welcome to click the hyperlink and learn more at that article. That's what wikilinks are supposed to do. "Defrocked" on the other hand, is sloppy slang used by mainstream media who do not bother learning about the Catholic Church and wish to shock and awe readers with horrific and scandalous language. "Defrocking" has no meaning to Catholics, whose clergy do not wear "frocks" anyway. Protestants are free to do it differently. 2600:8800:1880:FC:5604:A6FF:FE38:4B26 (talk) 21:23, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

• "Laicized" redirects to "Defrocking", and there is general consensus to use the latter. Kirbanzo ^{(userpage - talk - contribs)} 21:25, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

No, there is consensus to use "laicization" for Catholic canonical cases. I have ensured its consistent use and you are editing against consensus. 2600:8800:1880:FC:5604:A6FF:FE38:4B26 (talk) 21:27, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

• Examples that this is the case? Kirbanzo ^{(userpage - talk - contribs)} 21:29, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Glad to show you!

1. Dale Fushek
2. Louis Évely
3. Pierino Gelmini
4. Francesco Calcagno
5. Malachi Martin
6. Gerald Ridsdale
7. William X. Kienzle
8. Murphy Report
9. Józef Wesołowski
10. Magnus Murray (Catholic priest)
11. Category:Laicized Roman Catholic priests
12. Category:Laicized LGBT Roman Catholic priests

• 2600:8800:1880:FC:5604:A6FF:FE38:4B26 (talk) 21:33, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Defrocking is more narrow, if you want to be literal about it. If I remember correctly, there were different steps to the loss of clerical state in the past, and one of them was defrocking. The penalties were staggered to try to get the priest to come around. So the concept the term represents is Catholic in a historical sense, but it is not synonymous with the loss of clerical state. It would rather be a part of the "loss of clerical state procedure". It is not absolutely incorrect to use the term defrocking as synonymous with laicization, but it is more accurate to use it in the historical sense that I think was discontinued several centuries ago, maybe even before 1917? It is a figure of speech where the part refers to the whole. Such as when I say "put the milk on the table" and I also mean "put the jug on the table with the milk inside it." Only now, the part that refers to the whole is obsolete, making the figure of speech anachronistic.

The flip side is that laicization is a POV issue. I once talked to a priest who had just gotten a laicization letter. He didn't view it that way--he thought was still a priest, I think because of that whole indelible character thing. Also, his congregation/parish left/was interdicted out of the Roman Catholic Church with him, and they still thought he was a priest. So if laicization is used it would be best to qualify it as "laicization from the perspective of Rome," just like we do on articles like David Icke, where they talk about reptilians from his perspective rather than as a universally objective fact. The Independent Catholic bodies that some of these priests end up in don't view them as being laicized and we should respect that.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 02:02, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

Laicized is the term the Catholic Church uses today so let's stick with that. --PluniaZ (talk) 03:09, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Or we could say he got laid. EEng 23:56, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Death date

https://boston.cbslocal.com/2020/11/06/paul-shanley-priest-boston-clergy-sex-abuse-scandal-dies/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/obituaries/paul-shanley-notorious-pedophile-priest-dies-at-89/2020/11/06/d75584c0-2085-11eb-ba21-f2f001f0554b_story.html

https://www.boston25news.com/news/local/former-priest-paul-shanley-key-figure-boston-clergy-sex-abuse-scandal-dies/5KBZ6RHPQ5GTBNYFOLEDT3ZQ3E/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/obituaries/paul-shanley-priest-at-center-of-sex-scandal-dead-at-89/2020/11/06/ddc01864-2082-11eb-ad53-4c1fda49907d_story.html

He died on October 28th from heart failure. MikaelaArsenault (talk) 00:34, 7 November 2020 (UTC)