Bishops not employees of the Vatican

[lakotak]

Any opinions on this article. Is the Vatican trying to side step responsibility in any way or just poor media reporting? This article bothers me, but it may not be the truth. Maybe some of you out there have a lot more valid information on this than is being reported by msnbc.

msnbc.msn.com/id/37182162/ns/world_news-europe/

 

[Jermosh]

In a economic stance, the Church is set akin to franchises. Each diocese is under the control of a corporate issued CEO, with a fairly strict guidelines, but are allowed some individuality based on culture. They all have their own income, success, and failures. They also pay in franchise fees to the license holder.

I think if you look at it deconstructed, the Vatican has a point.

 

[Just_Lurking]

In a economic stance, the Church is set akin to franchises. Each diocese is under the control of a corporate issued CEO, with a fairly strict guidelines, but are allowed some individuality based on culture. They all have their own income, success, and failures. They also pay in franchise fees to the license holder.

I think if you look at it deconstructed, the Vatican has a point.

I think the franchise analogy is a good model of the structure of the Catholic Church, but I don’t see how it helps the Vatican much.

If the license holder had a secret written policy that each franchise must cover up any food mishandling in order to protect the image of the franchise, and that policy resulted in a franchise poisoning its customers because appropriate action against irresponsible food-handling employees was not taken sooner, then I could definitely see the license holder being criminally responsible.

 

[manualman]

I’m pretty sick and tired of our Church being looted by these lawsuit lawyers. What’s next? Selling the religious art masterpieces of the ages to Warren Buffet and Bill Gate’s private collections? A Best Buy outlet at St. Peter’s Basillica?

It’s really disgusting. Across America, programs are cut, educational support is eliminated, mission programs are eliminated. What Americans need to realize is that awarding money to victims does not heal them, nor does it undo the wrong committed. Abuser priests are the villians, but innocent parishioners and the needy of future generations are the ones paying the price.

It must stop.

 

[EmperorNapoleon]

I’m pretty sick and tired of our Church being looted by these lawsuit lawyers. What’s next? Selling the religious art masterpieces of the ages to Warren Buffet and Bill Gate’s private collections? A Best Buy outlet at St. Peter’s Basillica?

It’s really disgusting. Across America, programs are cut, educational support is eliminated, mission programs are eliminated. What Americans need to realize is that awarding money to victims does not heal them, nor does it undo the wrong committed. Abuser priests are the villians, but innocent parishioners and the needy of future generations are the ones paying the price.

It must stop.

The Church brought this upon itself and the victims deserve justice. Maybe it wont heal them but it will provide closure.

 

[EmperorNapoleon]

I think if you look at it deconstructed, the Vatican has a point.

If the Holy See has no authority or control over the Bishops or any say as to what Bishops are to do in matters of Church policy then what is it’s function? Thats not describing One holy, Catholic, and apostolic Church; it’s describing a diocean free-for-all and some random guy presiding over what amounts to little more than a toothless committee in Rome.

 

[manualman]

The Church brought this upon itself and the victims deserve justice. Maybe it wont heal them but it will provide closure.

Baloney. A wad of cash is not closure. That’s a sick American fantasy. It certainly is NOT closure when it is money that otherwise would have educated a child, sheltered a homeless family, paid for a program to take doctors to third world countries to staff clinics, or trained future priests in a seminary close to home.

These are all REAL world examples of things that used to happen that got cut when dioceses had to liquidate assets to pay off judgements.

I agree that poor shepherding is what brought this on. I do not agree that depriving children and the poor of the services of the Church is anything remotely close to justice. Justice and closure is when an abuser priest is exposed for what he is and removed from any opportunity of using position to exploit children - preferably behind iron bars. Justice is when a bishop that valued PR over the welfare of children is publicly disgraced and resigns from his position. If he witheld actionable information from police, I’m not opposed to iron bars for him either. But let’s stop pretending that seizing money from the world’s largest charitable organization is any sort of justice. It’s just seizing money.

Exhibit A: 15 years ago, I did volunteer work in Chicago demolishing obsolete interior structures and renovating a closed catholic school into a nearly unique homeless shelter that was geared for families instead of individuals. Former classrooms were divided into four semi-private spaces for families to sleep together instead of shipping the kids off to DCFS which was the only alternative at the time. It was a TON of work and was a great experience doing that for Jesus in the poor.

Fast forward to today and anytime a parish or school closes, the property has to be sold off as surplus real estate to generate cash to pay the lawyers and abuse victims. What a world.

 

[EmperorNapoleon]

Baloney. A wad of cash is not closure. That’s a sick American fantasy. It certainly is NOT closure when it is money that otherwise would have educated a child, sheltered a homeless family, paid for a program to take doctors to third world countries to staff clinics, or trained future priests in a seminary close to home…

Well maybe the Church should have thought of that before exposing kids to child rapists and thumbing it’s nose at the victims for decades. There was a time when a simple admission of wrongdoing, profuse apology, and a defrocking would have sufficed but most of the Bishops involved still won’t even do that much. If bankruptcy is the only way to convince the Church to do the right thing then so be it. Do you honestly believe that things would have changed and justice served if the Church hadn’t been dragged kicking and screaming and forced to address the scandal?

 

[Corki]

If the Holy See has no authority or control over the Bishops or any say as to what Bishops are to do in matters of Church policy then what is it’s function? Thats not describing One holy, Catholic, and apostolic Church; it’s describing a diocean free-for-all and some random guy presiding over what amounts to little more than a toothless committee in Rome.

The Vatican has authority and control over all Catholics in terms of faith, morals and canon law. This includes the Bishops. That is its function. That’s far from “toothless”.

 

[ncjohn]

Baloney. A wad of cash is not closure.​

I agree that poor shepherding is what brought this on.

And in the end, what made the “dash for cash” so prevalent is that the Church continued to deny any culpability and to deny that there was any “policy” in place to keep things from being resolved. Because of this the victims were revictimized and made angry enough at that re-abuse to be easy prey for those in the legal profession.

Most victims would have been satisfied with an admission to the wrongdoing coupled with seeing things put in place to prevent future occurrences and counseling to help them deal with their pain. Many were most assuredly entitled to compensatory damages to restore them to some semblance of a normal life. Instead they were mostly made out be money-grubbing opportunists at best, or liars at worst for daring to point out the Church’s sins.

The whole question of whether bishops are or aren’t “employees” or “agents” in the end is irrelevant to the victims. The fact that they knew that they were to do the whole “band of brothers” thing and keep things hushed, whether that was in writing or not, is abundantly clear from both testimony and the depth and breadth of the occurrences.

The Church has indeed brought this on herself, as even the Pope has openly acknowledged in the last week. They can continue to play the legal games to try to stem the cash outlays–and almost certainly fail miserably to do so and make things worse–or they can come clean and admit what everyone already knows. If they continue to shepherd God’s sheep badly He may well allow them to be treated as God allowed His chosen people to be treated when they decided to go off on their own before. This time it may be the media and the lawyers who play the part of the Assyrians and the Babylonians but God finds creative ways to get the word out sometimes. Last time God let His temple be destroyed. Do you really think He “needs” St. Peters if it comes to that?

Peace,

 

[manualman]

Of course things would still have changed! Why do you think the bishops covered the thing up in the first place? You completely misunderstand these guys if you think it is about moeny. That kind of bishop isn’t simply covering the financial bases. The thing he fears more than anything else is public scandal and disgrace. All you need is reporters for that.

Note that I’m not complaining about reporting on the abuse. I’m not even opposed to the paying of counseling services for life for victims. Just the legalized stealing of money that was set aside for doing good in the world. A truck full of $20 bills simply doesn’t right the wrong or heal what was broken. You know that. Why are you falling for the lawyer sales job?

Is the gospel dependant on money? Of course not. But there are whole hoards of people out there who ARE dependent on the charity of believers. Who in the inner city has access to the kinds of beauty available in the stain glass windows viewable FREE because of the generosity of previous generations of believers. Good luck getting into a public art museum for free. The fact is that this money and these treasures and assets do not belong to the bishops or to the Vatican. It is wealth set aside in trust for the people of God. Taking it is stealing, however you justify it.

 

[EmperorNapoleon]

The Vatican has authority and control over all Catholics in terms of faith, morals and canon law. This includes the Bishops. That is its function. That’s far from “toothless”.

The point is that the Church cant have it both ways.

 

[EmperorNapoleon]

Who in the inner city has access to the kinds of beauty available in the stain glass windows viewable FREE because of the generosity of previous generations of believers…

I’m sure the victims will take solace in the fact that they were robbed of their innocence then snubbed by the Church and will get no justice. After all, the Church gets to keep it’s material possessions and some hobo gets to look at a stained glass window.

 

[manualman]

Oh, so now we are being ‘fair’ and ‘not having it both ways’ are we? I take it you have written letters demanding that the laws that exempt the public school system from being sued by vicitms of sexual abuse be overturned so that the vastly more victims there can have access to taxpayer coffers?

NOW who’s having it both ways. It is the EXACT same principle at work. We don’t allow victims to sue for taxpayer funds when teachers are abusers. Somebody had some sense about them and realized that this would just invite the lawyers to suck the taxpayer dry.

Too bad their vision was so narrow. They’re having it both ways.

 

[Corki]

The point is that the Church cant have it both ways.

That statement doesn’t even make sense in the context of this discussion.

 

[canadianguy1143]

Of course things would still have changed! Why do you think the bishops covered the thing up in the first place? You completely misunderstand these guys if you think it is about moeny. That kind of bishop isn’t simply covering the financial bases. The thing he fears more than anything else is public scandal and disgrace. All you need is reporters for that.

Note that I’m not complaining about reporting on the abuse. I’m not even opposed to the paying of counseling services for life for victims. Just the legalized stealing of money that was set aside for doing good in the world. A truck full of $20 bills simply doesn’t right the wrong or heal what was broken. You know that. Why are you falling for the lawyer sales job?

Is the gospel dependant on money? Of course not. But there are whole hoards of people out there who ARE dependent on the charity of believers. Who in the inner city has access to the kinds of beauty available in the stain glass windows viewable FREE because of the generosity of previous generations of believers. Good luck getting into a public art museum for free. The fact is that this money and these treasures and assets do not belong to the bishops or to the Vatican. It is wealth set aside in trust for the people of God. Taking it is stealing, however you justify it.

Stealing is not how I would describe it. As Bishops were negligent in their duties, there are consequences to those actions or inactions. I totally agree that money is not going to give peace but without large lawsuits the press would never report on it and then force the Bishops to deal with in an open manner.

Its like when the Goldman family sued O.J. Simpson for millions of dollars. They didn’t want the money, and they knew it had to be an amount that O.J. couldn’t just slough off. Their objective was to get O.J. to admit to it and the truth would be known for all.

 

[Corki]

Oh, so now we are being ‘fair’ and ‘not having it both ways’ are we? I take it you have written letters demanding that the laws that exempt the public school system from being sued by vicitms of sexual abuse be overturned so that the vastly more victims there can have access to taxpayer coffers?

NOW who’s having it both ways. It is the EXACT same principle at work. We don’t allow victims to sue for taxpayer funds when teachers are abusers. Somebody had some sense about them and realized that this would just invite the lawyers to suck the taxpayer dry.

Too bad their vision was so narrow. They’re having it both ways.

The education analogy is good. EN’s premise would be like saying that all elementary school principals are employees of the US Department of Education.

 

[canadianguy1143]

Oh, so now we are being ‘fair’ and ‘not having it both ways’ are we? I take it you have written letters demanding that the laws that exempt the public school system from being sued by vicitms of sexual abuse be overturned so that the vastly more victims there can have access to taxpayer coffers?

NOW who’s having it both ways. It is the EXACT same principle at work. We don’t allow victims to sue for taxpayer funds when teachers are abusers. Somebody had some sense about them and realized that this would just invite the lawyers to suck the taxpayer dry.

Too bad their vision was so narrow. They’re having it both ways.

I had no idea that this was so. WOW! Do you have a source for this as I would sure love to show it to others?

 

[manualman]

I’m sure the victims will take solace in the fact that they were robbed of their innocence then snubbed by the Church and will get no justice. After all, the Church gets to keep it’s material possessions and some hobo gets to look at a stained glass window.

Again, you equate justice with a pile of cash. If the priest is exposed and charged and the bishop who tried to cover it up disgraced how is justice not served? That only takes reporters, not lawyers. Why would the victims take greater solace in the reality that their windfall eliminated a homeless shelter or caused one of the only decent schools in an inner city neighborhood to close?

And how gracious of you to refer to all people in impoverished circumstances as ‘hobos.’

I suggest you read some history on the English Reformation. You make the same mistake 16th century English made in presuming that the Church amasses property for the same reasons businessmen do. Then monasteries and convents were seized by the government (King) “for the good of the kingdom.” A funny thing happened. Class divides got larger, not smaller. The lowest classes got more burdens, not less. The divide between the haves and have-nots got larger. Hillaire Belloc wrote about this effect if you’d like a reference. The same mistake appears in your thinking. “The Church” is not some entity like Bill Gates. The Church is a sacred trust that exists to serve believers. You cannot “hurt” the Church without hurting the people she exists to serve. If those who deserve punishment are priests or bishops, how about we punish THEM? Novel idea!

 

[Usbek_de_Perse]

Uh…what? Granted, the Pope neither funds nor signs the bishops’ paychecks, but he does have the power to hire and fire. I think the franchise analogy is a real stretch.

The term “employee” is a red herring. The Vatican controls most aspects of how the local church functions. It appoints bishops. It can dismiss bishops, or replace retired bishops on its own schedule. The Vatican is in charge. No other Christian body, as far as I know, has as routinized an administration.

Reading this makes me really wonder if the Vatican “gets it”.

I am so attraced to the Catholic Church, yet things like this make the CC look repugnant, amoral, even. Machiavellian.

If the CC wants to be taken seriously as an institution with a divine charter, it has to stop engaging in this sophistry.

In a economic stance, the Church is set akin to franchises. Each diocese is under the control of a corporate issued CEO, with a fairly strict guidelines, but are allowed some individuality based on culture. They all have their own income, success, and failures. They also pay in franchise fees to the license holder.

I think if you look at it deconstructed, the Vatican has a point.