60 minutes with Cardinal O'Malley, anyone watch?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Estevao
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
E

Estevao

Guest
It was on Sunday. I was not impressed. Particularly with this:

catholicherald.co.uk/news/2014/11/17/omalley-if-i-were-founding-a-church-id-love-to-have-women-priests/
Cardinal Sean O’Malley of Boston has said that were he to start a church he would “love to have women priests”.
The outspoken remarks came during an interview with 60 Minutes on American television network CBS.
Plus it annoys me he never went on the counter-attack. Why not question the media on their utter silence concerning the Muslim war on Christians? Then again I wager that’s why he got an interview, because they knew he would be an easy interview for another smear job. Only 1/3 of American Christians are Catholic, but you’d never know that from the media who seem obsessed with the Catholic Church.
 
It was on Sunday. I was not impressed. Particularly with this:

catholicherald.co.uk/news/2014/11/17/omalley-if-i-were-founding-a-church-id-love-to-have-women-priests/

Plus it annoys me he never went on the counter-attack. Why not question the media on their utter silence concerning the Muslim war on Christians? Then again I wager that’s why he got an interview, because they knew he would be an easy interview for another smear job. Only 1/3 of American Christians are Catholic, but you’d never know that from the media who seem obsessed with the Catholic Church.
What about it was a “smear job”? The full quote about loving to have women priests is taken out of context – in the rest of the sentence, he explains that Christ did not set things up that way. It’s akin to saying, “If I had my way, the sky would be red and the grass would be blue … but I’m not the Creator.”

And Catholics make up the largest single denomination of Christianity in the U.S. (as well as in the world) – and Christianity is the dominant religious affiliation in the U.S. If the media weren’t focused on Catholicism when they discussed American religion, we’d accuse them of ignoring the predominant religion in the country.
 
What about it was a “smear job”? The full quote about loving to have women priests is taken out of context – in the rest of the sentence, he explains that Christ did not set things up that way. It’s akin to saying, “If I had my way, the sky would be red and the grass would be blue … but I’m not the Creator.”
I was watching, O’Malley doesn’t agree with Jesus I guess, that’s why I wasn’t impressed. It’s the insinuation that Jesus should have done better.

What about it was a smear job? The entire interview was a smear job from start to finish: the creation of expectation of “change” in the Church under Pope Francis to become more Episcopalian, the insinuation that the Church is hording money with all its fancy churches until leaders like O’Malley come along and get rid of it, the child abuse scandal being talked about like clockwork (let’s be honest, it’s only brought up to attack the church nowadays, they don’t care one bit about the children, otherwise they’d be talking about it in the public schools, other religions etc.), pretending that not having priestesses in the church is “immoral”, the positive light shone on O’Malley’s submitting to a blessing from a protestant clergywoman and some American bishops going to the border and making a political statement of the mass.

America has a long history of anti-catholicism and people need to come to grips with this and realize that the media is just perpetuating this long-standing bigotry via this “reporting” they do with interviews like these.
And Catholics make up the largest single denomination of Christianity in the U.S. (as well as in the world) – and Christianity is the dominant religious affiliation in the U.S. If the media weren’t focused on Catholicism when they discussed American religion, we’d accuse them of ignoring the predominant religion in the country.
No I’d be perfectly fine with the media giving the Catholic Church 1/3 of the time and spending 2/3rds of their time talking about the Southern Baptists, Methodists, Presbyterians etc. Funny why that doesn’t happen.
 
My husband and I watched the interview on Sunday and I was very impressed with the Cardinal. His quiet voice and gentle answers to questions that I thought were not appropriate made me see the exchange you mention with a different set of eyes. He seemed to be just trying to say I might do it different if I started a church but I didn’t and this is the way it is. He also didn’t get angry being asked if he didn’t think it was immoral not to ordain woman. He actually spent a great deal of time explaining why woman are not ordained but how important they are to the Church. He completely impressed me and I hope that others saw it the same way. Not one time did I hear him say anything that wasn’t in support of the Church. I guess we saw it in different ways, I respect your opinion but I will admit that it just didn’t come across to me the way you saw it.
 
It was on Sunday. I was not impressed. Particularly with this:

catholicherald.co.uk/news/2014/11/17/omalley-if-i-were-founding-a-church-id-love-to-have-women-priests/

Plus it annoys me he never went on the counter-attack. Why not question the media on their utter silence concerning the Muslim war on Christians? Then again I wager that’s why he got an interview, because they knew he would be an easy interview for another smear job. Only 1/3 of American Christians are Catholic, but you’d never know that from the media who seem obsessed with the Catholic Church.
O’Malley did a very good job, with the exception of the last part of the interview. (his response to her question on women’s role in the Church was little weak, but wasn’t in anyway wrong.)

One thing yeah ok it was a strange comment to say that if he founded a church he would have women priests. But why is that such a big deal? That was a humble statement by O’Malley, he is showing that even though he may not agree fully with something the Church teaches, he still believes it and follows it not because of his own intellect, but that he has submitted his will to Christ and what he taught. But I don’t think he was saying this because he actually believe in women ordination, rather he is trying to make a point. It doesn’t matter what I believe, Christ is the one who instituted priesthood not me.

O’Malley is speaking completely orthodox, he doesn’t go against any Church teaching. He was confident in his answers, answered them short and to the point.

But don’t go on the counter attack that is not the way to approach it. You come off as argumentative, trying to attack the person. Address the questions being answered in a pastoral way, that is what O’Malley did.
 
I was watching, O’Malley doesn’t agree with Jesus I guess, that’s why I wasn’t impressed. It’s the insinuation that Jesus should have done better.

What about it was a smear job? The entire interview was a smear job from start to finish:
No not at all
the creation of expectation of “change” in the Church under Pope Francis to become more Episcopalian, the insinuation that the Church is hording money with all its fancy churches until leaders like O’Malley come along and get rid of it, the child abuse scandal being talked about like clockwork
O’Malley answered that question is a very pastoral way. I have to go back and watch it to show you how.
pretending that not having priestesses in the church is “immoral”, the positive light shone on O’Malley’s submitting to a blessing from a protestant clergywoman and some American bishops going to the border and making a political statement of the mass.
The point she was trying to make is that it is immoral that Women can’t also become priest. His correct response is that it isn’t immoral. Is it Immoral that men can’t be women? No. So in the same way it can’t be immoral that women can’t be priests.
America has a long history of anti-catholicism and people need to come to grips with this and realize that the media is just perpetuating this long-standing bigotry via this “reporting” they do with interviews like these.
O’Malley courageously spoke the truth in this interview. He just choose a strange way to address the question of women priests.
 
I just rewetted the interview

Let me say this NOTHING he said was heretical. Maybe it wasn’t the best way to address certain issues, but he spoke the truth.

Also CBS was guilty of cutting up the interview, which can mislead people.

the last thing he said was the future of the Church will change. Well yeah it will it always has, but it was followed by a statement of God isn’t afraid of Change. Making it sound like to the uninformed viewer that somehow O’Malley things God will change things in the Church. Again nothing wrong with his statements.
 
I think Cardinal O’Malley is a good face for the Church. I like his smile. I think Jesus smiled like Cardinal O’Malley.
 
I can understand how the OP received this interview. Many of us are used to the apologetic approach to defending our faith. The reasons for women not be ordained are many. There are many arguments for not ordaining women by many well spoken apologists; anyone just needs to do a Google search or a Catholic Answers search to find these reasons.

I’d venture a guess Cardinal O’Malley knows well of these reasons and if in an academic setting could instruct on them. What he did (my opinion) was not draw a blank, or cower away from a litany of reasons why; as to instruct, but instead what he did was impressed me. He showed no sign, what-so-ever with frustration regarding the question. I, however felt a good deal of frustration. I’d have wanted to engage the woman on the issue immediately. Most of our natural responses ( I suspect) would be to ‘straighten her out’. But O’Malley didn’t even seem to come close to a response such as that. He simply stated that the ordained in the Church (Deacons Priests, Bishops, Cardinals, Pope) do not consider their roles, roles of power, but the roles of a servant. And I’d suggest he did this with true humility, almost hoping he didn’t offend her by saying it.

The Cardinal expresses what I view as true humility. He taught me a lesson in this interview. The lesson I learned was to say less, say it with humility and say it with love. I’ll never be able to do it as well as the Cardinal. My first reaction to questions that emerge from much ignorance (such as this woman’s question) will be to react firmly and quickly. O’Malley reacted calmly and slowly.
 
Um, has Bill Donohue of the Catholic League ever appeared on 60 Minutes?
 
I wonder why anyone would believe in “the utter silence concerning the Muslim war on Christians?”

How much is silence?
 
I saw the interview, and I was upset with the person who interviewed him. I thought we were going to learn something about what it’s like to be so close to Pope Francis. She may have spent a minute on that subject. The rest of the time was spent going on and on about the abusers in the Church and pouting about why on earth there are no women priests.

I felt that she was trying to make the Church look stupid.

If she was interviewing an Orthodox Jewish Rabbi, would she have gone on and on about the wonders of eating ham?

I doubt it.

The cardinal was loving and patient, but I thought the interview was a total waste of my time.
 
Cardinal Seán, who is he? Oh, “a shy Franciscan friar, the pope’s closest American advisor, Cardinal Seán O’Malley. The pope has appointed him president of the Church’s crucial new commission to combat child abuse.”

I live in an Irish Italian Catholic family, which as near as I can tell is embarrassed and outraged by the Church’s inability to deal properly with the monsters that become priests. So I say, God´s speed and good luck, Cardinal Seán.
 
I just watched this episode via the cbs app. I cringed from beginning to end. This was a set up plain and simple. The questioning was designed to railroad the Cardinal into giving answers that would lead one to believe that the church is a democracy, run at the pleasure of the pope, run on the basis of traditions “t” that are flexible. When Cardinal tried to illuminate the interviewer on the issue of Doctrine and “T” tradition he was run over and cut off. The interviewer was hell bent on framing the church as just another modern social entity devised on the whims of man and not an ancient body founded by Christ. She might as well have been talking to a ceo of a company about how they are planning to reinvent their business model. The whining about women’s ordination really took the cake and boiling it down to the immature lament of "but its not fair!"was revolting. The whole thing was a massive insult to all people of faith who believe in doing god’s will and not caving into the demands of this corrupt atheistic society. I don’t know why 60 minutes bothered doing this segment. It had nothing to offer people of faith and none of its content should really even matter to those people outside of the Catholic Church, who wouldn’t be able to understand it anyway. The only high point was the discussion of what the church is doing to combat sex abuses, other than that, this segment was pure vitriol directed squarely at an institution that doesn’t need person’s outside of it to judge it without knowledge of what it is and is not.
Elsker, Mary
 
Cardinal Seán says that “survivors and the (Catholic) community at large understandably are demanding transparency and accountability.”

Read more: patheos.com/blogs/deaconsbench/2014/11/cardinal-omalley-writes-about-his-60-minutes-interview/#ixzz3JglfaqFP

Let’s hope that Cardinal Seán will explain to Roger Mahoney, the former Cardinal and protector of perverts from Los Angeles that “survivors and the (Catholic) community at large understandably are demanding transparency and accountability.”

On this Memorial of the Presentation of Mary, I pray the Cardinal means what he says.
 
Cardinal Seán says, “Not surprisingly, Norah asked a question about Bishop Robert Finn of the Diocese of St. Joseph-Kansas City and accountability.”

thebostonpilot.com/opinion/article.asp?ID=172548#.VG1joSWqDfg.facebook

Who is Robert Finn?

Bishop Robert “Finn, who has led the Kansas City diocese since 2005, has come under sustained criticism in the diocese, especially following his conviction in September 2012 of a misdemeanor count of failing to report suspected child abuse in the case of a now-former diocesan priest who was producing child pornography.

“Finn and his diocese have been under scrutiny for several years, particularly surrounding the handling of sexual misconduct by Shawn Ratigan, a former priest who was found guilty in federal court in September 2013 of producing child pornography and sentenced to 50 years in jail. Ratigan was laicized in January.

“In September 2012, Finn was found guilty in one Missouri county court of the misdemeanor count. Earlier, in November 2011, he made an agreement with prosecutors in another county to suspend misdemeanor charges as long as he agreed to give prosecutors there immediate oversight of the diocese’s sexual abuse reporting procedures.

“The Kansas City diocese has also been facing a number of lawsuits for sexual abuse claims and has made a number of large financial settlements in recent years. In 2012, the diocesan paper estimated the diocese had spent $1.39 million for the bishops’ legal defense and almost $4 million for other claims.”

But who is Roger Mahoney?

ncronline.org/news/accountability/kansas-city-bishop-robert-finn-under-vatican-investigation

On this day of the Memorial of St. Cecilia, virgin and martyr, I pray that the Church will stop training monsters to become priests…
 
**Who is Shawn Ratigan? **

According to The Huffington post, Shawn Ratigan is a pedophile, and he was a priest. His case follows the pattern of other cases. The community complains; the Church does nothing.

“Complaints against Ratigan, who was ordained in 2004 at the age of 38, began piling up in 2009 as parents became concerned he was spending too much time with children and taking too many photos of the youths while they played and participated in church events.

“A May 19, 2010, letter from St. Patrick School Principal Julie Hess mentioned how several people had complained that Ratigan was taking compromising photos of children and allowed them to sit on his lap and reach into his pocket for candy.

"Vicar General Robert Murphy, who received the letter, spoke with Ratigan about setting boundaries with children, then gave a summary to the bishop. Finn later acknowledged that Murphy had briefed him on the memo, but he didn’t read it until a year later.

“A computer technician working on Ratigan’s laptop in December 2010 found hundreds of troubling images of young girls and reported it to officials with the Catholic Diocese of Kansas City-St. Joseph. Instead of turning the photos over to police or reporting suspicions about Ratigan, Bishop Robert Finn sent him away for psychiatric evaluation and later ordered him to stay at a convent where he could say Mass for the sisters and stay away from children."

**Bishop Finn’s actions are despicable, but compared to other Bishops who protected pedophile monsters Bishop Finn is a hero because the “photos were given to police in May 2011 after Ratigan violated Finn’s orders.” **

Cowabunga Hallalujah bothers and sisters, Bishop Finn did the right thing.

“The Rev. Shawn Ratigan pleaded guilty in August of last year to five counts (of trying to produce child pornography)– one for each of his five young victims.

More about Bishop Finn —

“Finn was convicted of one count last September and sentenced to two years of supervised probation. The charge against the diocese was dropped.

“If Finn abides by a set of stipulations from the judge, his conviction will be wiped from his record next year.”

Sounds to me totally like the State of Missouri did the right thing.

huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/12/shawn-ratigan-child-porn-priest-sentenced_n_3916434.html

On this day of the Solemnity of Our Lord Jesus Christ, King of the Universe, I pray that the Church will stop training monsters to become priests.

But who is Roger Mahony?
 
For members of the community, who think that speaking about monster priests is an attack on the church, they should know about Roger Mahony.

Cardinal Roger Mahony became a bishop of Los Angeles, with its three million parishioners, at the beginning of the monster priest scandal. Before 1985 he had been bishop of the Stockton diocese where the faithful numbered just 135,000. Maybe he had never met a monster priest, but the monsters prevailed, and they increased greatly upon the diocese.

At 49 years of age, Mahony became the leader of America’s largest archdiocese at the moment that law enforcement and the Catholic community began to force the Church to confront clergy molestation. He served as Bishop for the entire arc of the abuse crisis.

“Long after peers had retired or died, Mahony faced the public’s wrath. Because of the unique way abuse lawsuits played out in California, his files on molesters became public while in most other corners of the church, they remain under lock and key.”

The archdiocese’s confidential personnel files, which were released as part of a massive settlement of civil lawsuits, provide the most detailed accounting yet of how … “ the Chruch handed clergy abuse”… in a U.S. diocese.

In 1985 the Church appointed Roger Mahony to lead Los Angeles’ 3 million Catholics. He changed “the way the archdiocese” operated. He stocked the chancery with computers and laser printers, and (he) hired women and minorities for key positions.”

Mahony wanted the Church to move nimbly to deal with the big issues of the day. He marched with Caesar Chavez. He debated about nuclear arms, teen pregnancy, and Soviet aggression.

“Latino concerns had been important to him since the days when he worked on his family’s chicken ranch in North Hollywood, side by side with Mexicans in the country illegally. Within months of taking office in L.A., he had rolled out his ‘Latino plan’ — a strategy for better serving the archdiocese’s two million Latino Catholics. He quickly became a prominent proponent of an immigration bill that would grant amnesty to millions.”

Mahony told the Los Angeles Times, “My theory is that if we make the wrong decision, we can always abandon it or change it, or fine-tune it. But taking forever to ever get to the decision, to me, that is one of the faults of the church over the centuries.”

However, another issue vied for his attention. Less than a month after becoming the Bishop of Los Angeles, Mahony received the first letter about a monster priest. “For decades, such allegations had made their way to the archdiocese’s headquarters. But for the most part, the men who wore the miter before Mahony did little in response. Letters from irate parents gathered dust in file cabinets. Priests were quietly transferred.

Bishop Mahony must have had a holy-moly-red-rider, cowabunga dude, more-than-gnarly moment when Father Michael Baker came to Mahony’s office in December 1986 and confessed that for close to a decade, he had molested two boys.

On this day of the Memorial of St. Andrew Dung-Lac, priest and martyr, and Companions, martyrs. I must wonder why Cardinal Roger Mahony, who tilted with every wind mill, could not deal properly with the monster priests.

graphics.latimes.com/mahony/
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top