Is sectarianism a factor in the McCann case?

[Brietta]

The British newspaper quotes a “close friend to the priest” as saying that the latter “can’t even hear the Madeleine case mentioned without becoming irate.”

A statement that father José Manuel Pacheco describes as “barbarity” and a “lie”. “I do not know who that ‘friend’ might be, but I doubt such person is my friend”, he told The Resident.
http://portugalresident.com/praia-da-luz-priest-denies-reports-in-uk-newspaper

[Erngath]

Only if you link to them, which you seem unwilling to do.

Claiming something without providing evidence to support it is against the rules, I  believe.

Why don't you pop over to CMOMM and read the thread dedicated to "The Priests"

I don't believe forum rules would allow a link.

[Brietta]

Under headings such as ''I was deceived' says the Portuguese priest who comforted Gerry and Kate McCann" no stone was left unturned in the efforts used to turn Kate and Gerry's religion against them.

Snip
However, his friendship with the couple appeared to spectacularly backfire after police became convinced Kate had told him she had killed her daughter during confession.

But he has vowed to take whatever she had said to the grave, despite being quizzed by detectives.

Father Pacheco appeared to virtually vanish from the public eye in the weeks after Gerry and Kate were made arguidos - or official suspects.

The pair left Portugal without saying goodbye and handed the church keys to another clergyman.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-488262/I-deceived-says-Portuguese-priest-comforted-Gerry-Kate-McCann.html



Nothing more or less than sheer balderdash.  An issue has been made out of an event which just did not take place.
Father Pacheco did not hear Kate's confession ... but it made a good story.


Snip
When questioned, he said he never heard their confessions, perhaps because they only spoke English.

He never talked to them alone.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/FATHER_PACHECO.htm

[Brietta]

Why don't you pop over to CMOMM and read the thread dedicated to "The Priests"

I don't believe forum rules would allow a link.

Really ????  I had no idea such a board existed over there but I'm not curious enough to visit as I've probably seen quite a lot of it regurgitated elsewhere, so no particular need to.

Religion most certainly does appear to have quite a place in Madeleine's case.  Sectarianism in my opinion walks hand in hand with misunderstanding sometimes deliberate, sometimes not ~ prejudice and malice.
From what I have looked at in that place if all three weren't evident on the Priest thread there I think it would run the risk of being unique.

[G-Unit]

Under headings such as ''I was deceived' says the Portuguese priest who comforted Gerry and Kate McCann" no stone was left unturned in the efforts used to turn Kate and Gerry's religion against them.

Snip
However, his friendship with the couple appeared to spectacularly backfire after police became convinced Kate had told him she had killed her daughter during confession.

But he has vowed to take whatever she had said to the grave, despite being quizzed by detectives.

Father Pacheco appeared to virtually vanish from the public eye in the weeks after Gerry and Kate were made arguidos - or official suspects.

The pair left Portugal without saying goodbye and handed the church keys to another clergyman.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-488262/I-deceived-says-Portuguese-priest-comforted-Gerry-Kate-McCann.html



Nothing more or less than sheer balderdash.  An issue has been made out of an event which just did not take place.
Father Pacheco did not hear Kate's confession ... but it made a good story.


Snip
When questioned, he said he never heard their confessions, perhaps because they only spoke English.

He never talked to them alone.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/FATHER_PACHECO.htm

I think that was a Daily Express story. I also think it has been deleted, probably it was one of the over 100 stories which cost them £550,000 in damages.

It wasn't sectarian, it wasn't said by sceptics, so what is it's relevance to this thread?

[jassi]

]Really ????  I had no idea such a board existed over there but I'm not curious enough to visit as I've probably seen quite a lot of it regurgitated elsewhere, so no particular need to.

Religion most certainly does appear to have quite a place in Madeleine's case.  Sectarianism in my opinion walks hand in hand with misunderstanding sometimes deliberate, sometimes not ~ prejudice and malice.
From what I have looked at in that place if all three weren't evident on the Priest thread there I think it would run the risk of being unique.

You took the words right out of my mouth

[G-Unit]

Theories which include accusations and libellous speculation are surely cites for accusations and libellous speculation.

Not sectarian attacks then? Just sceptics daring to discuss priests and other clergy?

[Erngath]

Not sectarian attacks then? Just sceptics daring to discuss priests and other clergy?

Some sectarianism, some rather dubious accusations but mostly utterly ignorant assumptions about Catholicism.

[Brietta]

Not sectarian attacks then? Just sceptics daring to discuss priests and other clergy?

Insidious is a word that springs to mind as far as the way in which their religion has been twisted against them and I don't think much of what I have posted is not in line with the thread title.

I think much of your objection to my posts lies less with what I am highlighting and more with your opinions.

[Mr Gray]

Why do you think the case of a missing child should invoke such hatred?

I think the hatred is already within those who hate... The case just provides them with a focus

[Brietta]

I think the hatred is already within those who hate... The case just provides them with a focus

Summed up in a short sentence.

[G-Unit]

Some sectarianism, some rather dubious accusations but mostly utterly ignorant assumptions about Catholicism.

What was said which was sectarian in your opinion?

[G-Unit]

Insidious is a word that springs to mind as far as the way in which their religion has been twisted against them and I don't think much of what I have posted is not in line with the thread title.

I think much of your objection to my posts lies less with what I am highlighting and more with your opinions.

I disagree, obviously. An article in the media about Father Pacheco isn't relevant on a thread about sectarianism. I have started a new thread where opinions about the McCann's religion can be discussed.

[Robittybob1]

Marking my place.

[Vertigo Swirl]

I wonder how many fallacies we can get from that...

Straw Man
Genetic
Ad Hom

To have doubts about one story in no way implies you have doubts about established facts.

It was your use of the term “acceped” narrative that bands all the cases I mentioned togther.  What is the difference between “established facts” and “accepted narrative” then, in your view?