C
Cruciferi
Guest
Please refer to Jimmy’s altered posts on this Thread.
Jimmy posted a picture that he then deleted. Post 60
Jimmy posted a picture that he then deleted. Post 60
Last edited:
- Status
A
adgloriam
Guest
It was reported in some nations bishop’s conference media and I don’t think that it’s a single box but a pile of dossiers all with the same standard format. And I really liked the picture too 
G
graciew
Guest
Thank you!
I deleted my post but I just love the photos of both Popes.
( ps.I was looking up to find out if there is anything nice and traditional that is handed over from Pope to Pope. But that is for another thread if ever I find out!)
I deleted my post but I just love the photos of both Popes.
( ps.I was looking up to find out if there is anything nice and traditional that is handed over from Pope to Pope. But that is for another thread
if ever I find out!)
Last edited:
C
Canvas
Guest
Actually, the most serious allegations against McCarrick were of events that happened in the early 1970s.
Pope Francis was just Fr. Bergoglio SJ in Argentina back then.
McCarrick was in his 80s by the time Francis became Pope.
Pope Francis was just Fr. Bergoglio SJ in Argentina back then.
McCarrick was in his 80s by the time Francis became Pope.
T
therese1998
Guest
I CAN’T say he’s innocent any more than I can say he’s guilty. But I will not play the “Did you hear?”, “He’s SO guilty…I know so because this priest/Catholic/neighbor/postman/friend I have said so”, either. I will not call for his deposition (as if that were even an option
). I am neither in an official position to defend him, nor do I have access to the information that would lead to a conclusion of guilty or innocent.To make a definitive statement either way is to either rush to judgment or make a judgment without facts.
I will point out, however, that while we are not obligated to agree with the Pope (other than in ex cathedra statements), we ARE obligated to give him the respect due as Vicar of Christ. And speculation about his actions or motives is not respectful.
@philipl Our conversation is over. You have crossed a line. One thing I do not choose to do, for my own benefit, is to continue contact of any kind with someone who dismisses my experiences as an abuse survivor. This is the point at which I know this person is not reachable…at least not by me. Yes, you know NOTHING about me and yes, I DO perceive you as the things I have written.
J
joeybaggz
Guest
Was this the picture of the Pope holding up a child and kissing the child on the cheek. And that should be disturbing.
Anyone who believes that can just go ahead and believe all the hate you want. You are not worth the effort.
Anyone who believes that can just go ahead and believe all the hate you want. You are not worth the effort.
G
graciew
Guest
No,no. Nothing disturbing in the picture itself at all. It is always nice to see both Popes together.
Last edited:
P
pnewton
Guest
What crime did Cardinal Wuerl allegedly commit, specifically?
You also mentioned extraditing Pope Benedict, which is legally absurd. What crime do you think he might have committed?
J
joeybaggz
Guest
See Aquinas11’s post # 5 on this thread. That is the accusation against Wuerl. As to its veracity, here’s hoping we find out what and why. Cardinal Wuerl has refused to step down.
S
SeriousQuestion
Guest
What does it mean?
P
pnewton
Guest
I saw accusations of mishandling the case of Zirwas, but no crime. Looking this up, I found that the local prosecutor knew of the case and could not make a criminal case against Zirwas, much less Cardinal Wuerl. I find no crime from what I have read.
I say that, because I have seen talk of extraditing the Pope. Now I have no great confidence in the intelligence of the average American, but I thought everyone knew that a crime is needed for extradition.
I say that, because I have seen talk of extraditing the Pope. Now I have no great confidence in the intelligence of the average American, but I thought everyone knew that a crime is needed for extradition.
Last edited:
A
adgloriam
Guest
Usually centuries go by where the predecessor dies and the successor gets handed saint Peter’s keys to heaven together with a lot of earthly problems
C
Cruciferi
Guest
Agenda posting in my opinion.
S
StandUp4Truth
Guest
It seems contradictory to say that the Pope was unaware of “McCarrick’s situation” in one sentence, but then go on to praise the Pope’s actions in moving him to reduce the chances of more abuse.
Maybe I missed something?
I agree with you that no one knows all of the details at this point, but people are getting tired of the old “shell game” (Church policing itself, moving predators around) and are starting to demand justice.
S
StandUp4Truth
Guest
I could NOT disagree with this statement more, no they have not all been recognized and the way that the Church has “dealt with” those identified up to this point is to send them to rehab and then shuffle them off to another parish!
That is NOT justice, that only enables their predatory behaviors!
The latest revelations show an organized effort within the Church to do anything to sweep these predators’ crimes under the rug, including paying off victims in exchange for their silence.
The abuses themselves (by individuals) are horrible enough, but the cover-ups that followed (by the organization) have created a crisis of moral authority for the Church.
Tis_Bearself
Patron
I’m not “rushing to defend the Holy Father” because I’m not seeing that he needs any help from me in that area, and the people pushing the idea that he did something, owes us something, needs to resign etc aren’t going to be convinced by my arguments to the contrary.
I have said my piece enough times on here that I don’t think I need to repeat it every time somebody starts railing against the Pope. I’d be defending the Holy Father all day because I think a lot of people just roll out of bed in the morning and start hating on the Pope like he was Donald Trump. It gets old real fast.
P
pnewton
Guest
This simply is not true. Yes, at one time priests were sent to rehab, as were all sex offenders in society. Most of these cases of child sexual abuse were from 1950 until 2002. That was what this “latest revelation” showed. Yet the national sex offender registry did not start in the United States until 1994. Did you know they only indicted two priests, and their actual guilt remains undetermined yet?
Your statement also ignores those cases reported to the police and the priests that have been convicted. Your statement ignores the priests that have been removed from public ministry and laicized. Of course not all abusers have been recognized and dealt with. Heck, not all victims even report abuse to the police. But it is also wrong to say the way that the Church has dealt with them “up to this point” is to send them to rehab. You are at least two decades behind the times with that statement.
Settling a law suit is not paying for silence. It is agreeing that damage was done and making reparations that the victim agrees is just. It is not for me or you to question what the victim agrees is acceptable.
Here is some interesting reading on the history of sex offender registries:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_offender_registries_in_the_United_States
Last edited:
J
joeybaggz
Guest
20, 30 years ago, maybe. Today, after the Dallas Conference of 2002, no. If you want to wallow in your angst and it makes your hubris seem more “valid” go ahead. Prove to me that there are still abusive priests and bishops today covering up abuse, and I’ll buy your disagreement. If not, I’m tired of trying to shed some light on the fact that this was a problem 20 to 70 years ago and steps have been in place for the last fifteen years or so to see that it does not happen again on a wide scale. Will, there be isolated instances of abuse and poor judgment in handling them, yea, but not the ocean of crap we’ve been hearing about historically.
S
StandUp4Truth
Guest
Even the post-2002 punishments enacted by the Church in many cases have been insufficient, parishioners want to see these predators cast out of the flock and sent to jail.
Some may argue that the RCC doesn’t operate jails, well, how many abusers have been excommunicated? Why not all predators with confirmed cases of abuse? Throughout the history of the Church, many have been excommunicated for less, these abusers are doing lasting harm to their victims and to the Church.
Once this problem was identified, why didn’t the Church get proactive about identifying and removing the abusers? All they did was change the protocol once an accusation was made, not put in place programs to actively hunt them down and force them out - this is what people need to see right now for trust to be restored.
What this latest revelation showed is that there is reason to believe that the old culture of ignoring this behavior may still be present at the highest levels of the Church. If it’s true that punishments were lifted from McCarrick and he was promoted to the level of the Pope’s trusted advisor (assisting with Curia selections), it’s confirmation that the old culture of ignoring abuse is thriving at the highest levels of the Church.
I pray this is not the case, but I agree with Fr Longnecker (OP’s article) that the Pope’s track record up to this point and current silence is not very encouraging.
- Status