Catholics in Boston Arrested For Praying

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

EddieArent

Guest
So, after many years of coverups on bahalf of the old Bishop, this is what the people of Boston get? They pay for the sins of their former priests by being arrested?

cnn.com/2004/US/12/26/churchclosings.ap/index.html

(exerpt, go to site above for full story)
NATICK, Massachusetts (AP) – Police arrested two parishioners who attempted a vigil to keep the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Boston from closing their 114-year-old parish, one of 83 churches slated to be shut down or consolidated by year’s end.
Anne Green said she and Leo Ryan were handcuffed Christmas Eve at Sacred Heart Church, placed in the back of a cruiser and driven to Natick police headquarters, where they were booked on trespassing charges and briefly jailed.
 
It’s not a Boston “cover-up” problem. Parishes are closing all over the country due to falling attendance. IF Catholics actually went to church on a regular basis (weekly) and actually tithed (10% of their income), no Church would have to close.At least these two had the courage to stand in defense of the Church.
 
That’s a misleading topic. They were arrested for trespassing, which is even mentioned in the quote.

I wasn’t aware of this “widespread” issue of church closings. It makes sense to me if there is no or little attendance.
 
Archbishop Sean has been reasonable on this. Not perfect, but reasonable. A number of parishes were announced for closing. Some of the parishes objected. The Archbishop showed a willingness to rverse himself in a couple of cases, invited lay representatives including a VOTF leader to serve on the commission handling this matter and not take any legal action where parishes were resisting closure. I understand the Natick parish was one were the consensus of the parish understood the need for closure and the arrestees were a small, dissenting element of the parish (maybe no more than just themselves).
 
Just wondering if the archbishop sends in the police to make arrests for disorderly conduct when liturgical abuse occurs at a Sunday Mass.

I’ve never seen it happen around here. Is the archbishop being consistent or is he just jerking people around.?

It seems that the Archdiocese of Boston would rather pay the sexual entertainment bills of its priests, rather than pay the bills to operate churches.
 
Everyone is now confronting the problem of muli-million dollar settlements. The money has to come from somewhere. The lawyers see the Church as a bonanza. They could care less about where the money comes from. They just want it. Even the victims don’t seem to realize they are not hurting the “Church” in the sense that most think. They are hurting everyone by demanding money that the Church simply cannot afford to pay without shutting down institutions. I really regret all of this. I feel for the victims. But creating more victims is not the healing solution. It may feel good at first, but in the end it hurts innocent people. There is no easy way out of this mess. We should have heeded John Paul’s insistant calls for reform. Now we need tort reform across the board. You can’t find a doctor who will deliever a baby in some areas due to legal fears. I wish the victims could find peace without resorting to bankrupting the Church and ending our ability to do any of the good works we are called to do.
 
Chris Jacobsen:
Just wondering if the archbishop sends in the police to make arrests for disorderly conduct when liturgical abuse occurs at a Sunday Mass.

I’ve never seen it happen around here. Is the archbishop being consistent or is he just jerking people around.?

It seems that the Archdiocese of Boston would rather pay the sexual entertainment bills of its priests, rather than pay the bills to operate churches.
Click to expand...
Sean O’Malley has no choice - the church agreed to the settlement, now it must be paid. It isn’t a matter of want to, choose to - it is a matter of “have to”. These are legal and binding agreements.
 
I’m not sure it’s correct to link the closings to the scandal. To my knowledge, nearly all of the settlement funds are coming not from the closing of parishes, but rather the sale of the archbishop’s mansion to Boston College.

-Illini
 
Oh really? His official residence is being sold? That’s interesting. In some ways, while I believe that bishops are worthy of great respec, honour, and veneration, it seems out of place for a successor of the Apostles to reside in a palace, when the Apostles went out with nothing but the clothes on their backs.
 
40.png
twf:
Oh really? His official residence is being sold? That’s interesting. In some ways, while I believe that bishops are worthy of great respec, honour, and veneration, it seems out of place for a successor of the Apostles to reside in a palace, when the Apostles went out with nothing but the clothes on their backs.
Click to expand...
Just a FYI, bishop O’malley, never lived in the estate. As soon as he took over the keys, he moved in with his order in a local abby.

With that said, the former bishop who made a large part of this mess is sitting pretty over in the Vatican in charge of a world premier parish.
 
The truth is there are parishes that do not have enough attendance to support the parish, when that happens that tells the Bishop it is time to merge two or more to make it economical. It is not the job of the Bishop to support parishs that cannot support them selves-it is the job of the people in the pews-period.

The immigrants to this country built and supported large parish buildings and schools, all with their meager funds, but Catholics today think a $1.00 bill is a donation, lets get real.

Lets stop bashing the Church and start bashing the people in the pews, it up to us, and always has been.
 
40.png
twf:
Oh really? His official residence is being sold? That’s interesting. In some ways, while I believe that bishops are worthy of great respec, honour, and veneration, it seems out of place for a successor of the Apostles to reside in a palace, when the Apostles went out with nothing but the clothes on their backs.
Click to expand...
O’Malley would agree. I don’t think he has even ever lived there. He found it not acceptable before the need to sell even came up, as he believes in simplicity for religious leaders.

You won’t find O’Malley sad to sell it. The church’s do cause him sorrow. But he has no choice. 😦
 
40.png
Marie:
You won’t find O’Malley sad to sell it.
Click to expand...
This is very true, I would also not be to sad to be able to buy it though. Its actually a wonderfull property, as is most of the property being sold off in Boston. We are talking about some prime waterfront property here. While I do feel they need and deserve some serene and nice property for priests needing a much needed vacation or retreat, they do not need some of the properties they are selling off.
 
The sale of the land in Brighton only converd the biggest settlement. The Church owes the KoC over 40 mill and Fleet around 30-65 mil plus they have to repay the cemetary funds that were raided as well as the priest’s retirement fund. Law was not ablwe to raid the ADoB pension as it entiles the Hospital network, schools etc. and the IRS doesn’t like that.
O’Mally inherted a nighmare. He parys to die becuase this mess is so bad. And please don’t act like Voices of the Unfaitful have done anything positive they have jumped on this and bled the Church till it was forced to close churches. Don’t even start with the speel. I know I have been living with it for over 2 years and my sister is a member of this most unfaithful renegade group.
My Church is closing and I have to say O’Mally and Lennon have been very unresponsive to us. We have signed letter’s from Lennon that he doesn’t even know what we were talking about at a meeting. I want to know who is running this ship. I don’t think O’Mally is. The rough Boston crowd have already beaten him down.
I agree with the poster if we ponied up %10 or even %5 we wouldn’t be talking closings. In cheap Brahmin Boston fat chance.
Kathy
 
I know of a small town which had 2 Catholic churches. The parishes became linked. The bishop warned the people for years that if they didn’t contribute more money, one of the churches would be closed. The people claimed they wanted both churches, but were too cheap to contribute anymore money. They started letting the churches fall into disrepair. Finally, the bishop publicly declared worst of the 2 churches desecrated.
 
Chris Jacobsen:
I know of a small town which had 2 Catholic churches. The parishes became linked. The bishop warned the people for years that if they didn’t contribute more money, one of the churches would be closed. The people claimed they wanted both churches, but were too cheap to contribute anymore money. They started letting the churches fall into disrepair. Finally, the bishop publicly declared worst of the 2 churches desecrated.
Click to expand...
It is sad when Church’s close, as a consequence, the light of Christ becomes less visible in a world that needs the TRUTH. If money is the issue, it is even sadder for parishes who collectively have adequate means but do not adequately contribute. In essence they break the Fifth Precept of The Church, which is serious sin.

The wages of sin is death. In this instance death of a parish. Give to your Church and pastors, as much as you can afford. Forget about percentages (That is OT, Christ wants everthing we do to be for the greater honour and Glory of the Father), give as much as you can afford. As a rule of thumb, if you and/or your family can afford to eat out more than once a week, you are not giving enough to your Church. Make sacrifices, you will get your reward in heaven.
 
Maybe if parishioners started putting in 5 or 10 dollars in the collection plate instead of a buck we wouldn’t be here. Stop blaming the bishop or the abuse scandal. If Catholic don’t take care of their own local indepednantly run parishes, they have no right to blame anyone. Sorry for being irritated but when we are given financial control of the parish and it fails, we blame the Church. But when the achdiocese level fails, we claim we want more laity control. Here is a situation where laity had complete control over attendance and finance and it failed, but we see thread popping up like this.
 
40.png
Leo44:
The truth is there are parishes that do not have enough attendance to support the parish, when that happens that tells the Bishop it is time to merge two or more to make it economical. It is not the job of the Bishop to support parishs that cannot support them selves-it is the job of the people in the pews-period.

The immigrants to this country built and supported large parish buildings and schools, all with their meager funds, but Catholics today think a $1.00 bill is a donation, lets get real.

Lets stop bashing the Church and start bashing the people in the pews, it up to us, and always has been.
Click to expand...
Exactly! Here in nw Ohio, there will be parishes closing, and being twinned, just for the simple fact that there are not enough priests here. We had one ordained in 2004. Something has to give somewhere. Yes, here too, the old give a dollar to the church syndrome still exists. The parishes are always in need of money, but there will still be some closed that are financially sound. We can’t afford to keep parishes open that are only a few miles apart anymore. Attendence is also a problem. The churches are only full when the easter bunnies and the santa clauses show up. If they were full all year around, maybe things would be better. God bless
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top