Francis gives Vatican authority to initiate removal of bishops negligent on sexual abuse

[Exiled_Child]

ncronline.org/news/accountability/francis-gives-vatican-authority-initiate-removal-bishops-negligent-sexual-abuse

**ROME Pope Francis has signed a new universal law for the global Catholic church specifying that a bishop’s negligence in response to clergy sexual abuse can lead to his removal from office.
The law also empowers several Vatican dicasteries to investigate such bishops and initiate processes of removal, subject to final papal approval.

The move, made by the pontiff in a formal document known as a motu proprio on Saturday, appears to represent a significant moment in the worldwide church’s decades-long clergy sexual abuse crisis.**

The article continues at the link.

 

[Erikaspirit16]

If you wonder why the “former” is in my religious tag, it’s because of the child abuse thing.

Bishops are not above the law–certainly not God’s law. Whatever happened to that saying about “it would be better to put a millstone around your neck…”?

For decades bishops have enabled predators to take advantage of children. It’s about time to look for just a tiny speck of accountability.

My favorite incident was a few years ago, when a former priest named Spillane was put in charge of national children’s liturgies in Baltimore. It turns out that not only was he de-frocked, he was a convicted pedophile. But they didn’t bother to check his background when they hired him!!! I’ll bet you anything those responsible were never punished.

 

[Dorothy]

It is a good thing that our Lord Jesus Christ does not leave the Church due to the sins of its members.

 

[peter26]

This could be good news as long as it is measured and balanced and does not become a witch hunt.

 

[thephilosopher6]

If you wonder why the “former” is in my religious tag, it’s because of the child abuse thing.

Bishops are not above the law–certainly not God’s law. Whatever happened to that saying about “it would be better to put a millstone around your neck…”?

For decades bishops have enabled predators to take advantage of children. It’s about time to look for just a tiny speck of accountability.

My favorite incident was a few years ago, when a former priest named Spillane was put in charge of national children’s liturgies in Baltimore. It turns out that not only was he de-frocked, he was a convicted pedophile. But they didn’t bother to check his background when they hired him!!! I’ll bet you anything those responsible were never punished.

People in the Church sin. But the Church is still the Church. You are an apostate and have abandoned God for a pagan religion. I hope that God will have mercy on your soul.

 

[twf]

If you wonder why the “former” is in my religious tag, it’s because of the child abuse thing.

Bishops are not above the law–certainly not God’s law. Whatever happened to that saying about “it would be better to put a millstone around your neck…”?

For decades bishops have enabled predators to take advantage of children. It’s about time to look for just a tiny speck of accountability.

My favorite incident was a few years ago, when a former priest named Spillane was put in charge of national children’s liturgies in Baltimore. It turns out that not only was he de-frocked, he was a convicted pedophile. But they didn’t bother to check his background when they hired him!!! I’ll bet you anything those responsible were never punished.

There is no excuse for what happened, but the vast majority of proven cases took place decades ago. The Church has been implementing various reforms for years already- this is just the latest. A few examples:

1. Pope Benedict required that all priests accused of child abuse be investigated directly by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in Rome.
2. Seminaries the world over drastically revised their entry requirements including detailed psychological screening
3. Pope Benedict alone defrocked 400 or so priests accused of child abuse.

There’s no evidence that child abuse is more common in the Catholic Church than elsewhere and few institutions take it as seriously as the Church now does.

 

[Augustine]

Interestingly, many of Francis’ staunch supporting bishops were quite expedient covering up sexual abuse by their priests, some he even made cardinals. Methinks that it’s just yet another tool to be wielded against orthodox bishops (e.g., Bp. Plano of Ciudad del Este).
*
Κύριε, ἐλέησον!*

 

[RPRPsych]

Interestingly, many of Francis’ staunch supporting bishops were quite expedient covering up sexual abuse by their priests, some he even made cardinals. Methinks that it’s just yet another tool to be wielded against orthodox bishops (e.g., Bp. Plano of Ciudad del Este).
*
Κύριε, ἐλέησον!*

And cue the conspiracy theories!

wdtprs.com/blog/2016/06/new-procedures-to-remove-negligent-bishops-what-could-go-wrong/

Seriously, sometimes I feel being Pope is the hardest job in the world. You just can’t win.

Defeat communism, reaffirm orthodoxy and provide a clear roadmap for the future? “Waah, waah, Assisi, ecumenism.”
Promote the Traditional Mass, reaffirm orthodoxy, oppose relativism and modernism? “Waah, waah, he’s actually a closet modernist, Vatican II.”
Realize that you can’t win on the above issues and work on other equally important ones?
“Waah, waah, diabolical narcissistic fascist Peronist, sedevacantism.”

:crying:

Lord have mercy, indeed.

 

[RPRPsych]

There is no excuse for what happened, but the vast majority of proven cases took place decades ago. The Church has been implementing various reforms for years already- this is just the latest. A few examples:

1. Pope Benedict required that all priests accused of child abuse be investigated directly by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in Rome.
2. Seminaries the world over drastically revised their entry requirements including detailed psychological screening
3. Pope Benedict alone defrocked 400 or so priests accused of child abuse.

There’s no evidence that child abuse is more common in the Catholic Church than elsewhere and few institutions take it as seriously as the Church now does.

To which one might add, charitably, that Islam has a far from positive record when it comes to the sexual abuse of women and children.

 

[Barricade]

Let’s be honest, the real reason why these things go unreported is because the priests who find out about this probably find out in the confessional and are bound by the seal of confession not to say anything under pain of mortal sin and automatic excommunication. I don’t know how this aspect of the problem can be appropriately addressed.

Could a potential solution be that bishops require priests who commit these sins to first report it to their bishop outside of the confessional under pain of mortal sin (like having priests make a vow to this effect that prior to confessing they vow to first notify their Bishop of what they have done in regards to child abuse) so that their Bishop (not being bound by the seal) can report it to the authorities while the priest is then free to seek the sacrament of confession and their confessor is not put in such a dilemma since the bishop is handling the legal matter?

 

[MacBP]

Let’s be honest, the real reason why these things go unreported is because the priests who find out about this probably find out in the confessional and are bound by the seal of confession not to say anything under pain of mortal sin and automatic excommunication. I don’t know how this aspect of the problem can be appropriately addressed.

I’m not at all sure this is the case. Its my understanding that the Bishops who are widely believed to have been negligent in their duty to protect their flock have been branded as negligent for ignoring information received outsode the confessional.

Moreover, believing that changing the seal of confession would have caught all those pedophile priests seeks a little ill thought out to me. It seems to me the most probable answer is that priests were either using their position as a pretext for abuse (in which case they wouldn’t be going to confession anyways) or would simply not confess that particular sin if they know it was the outcome. I would suspect that there aren’t too many faithful priests that were abusing children making a deliberate and conscious effort to stop. I suppose its possible that confession somewhere might have stopped someone somewhere but it seems unlikely.

 

[Barricade]

I’m not at all sure this is the case. Its my understanding that the Bishops who are widely believed to have been negligent in their duty to protect their flock have been branded as negligent for ignoring information received outsode the confessional.

Moreover, believing that changing the seal of confession would have caught all those pedophile priests seeks a little ill thought out to me. It seems to me the most probable answer is that priests were either using their position as a pretext for abuse (in which case they wouldn’t be going to confession anyways) or would simply not confess that particular sin if they know it was the outcome. I would suspect that there aren’t too many faithful priests that were abusing children making a deliberate and conscious effort to stop. I suppose its possible that confession somewhere might have stopped someone somewhere but it seems unlikely.

I wasn’t suggesting that the seal of confession be changed, I was wondering whether it would be worthwhile for Bishops to force their priests to vow under pain of mortal sin that if they ever abuse a child they will inform their bishop PRIOR to going to confession so that the bishop can alert the legal authorities without being bound by the seal of confession since the offending priest did not tell them the sin in confession. It is my understanding that only in the context of the sacrament of confession is a priest bound by the seal.

I think that certainly some of the abusing priests were totally off the rails and didn’t care about the state of their souls in this regard, but I certainly think in some cases, certain repentant priests brought their crimes to the confessional, received absolution, and since the confessor was bound by the seal, he couldn’t tell the police or even his bishop for that matter. Forcing them to take a vow like the one I mentioned would certainly seem to coerce priests who still care for their souls since they would be breaking their vow by refusing to inform their Bishop of their crime prior to seeking out confession.

 

[Maximilan_Kolbe]

If you wonder why the “former” is in my religious tag, it’s because of the child abuse thing.

Bishops are not above the law–certainly not God’s law. Whatever happened to that saying about “it would be better to put a millstone around your neck…”?

For decades bishops have enabled predators to take advantage of children. It’s about time to look for just a tiny speck of accountability.

My favorite incident was a few years ago, when a former priest named Spillane was put in charge of national children’s liturgies in Baltimore. It turns out that not only was he de-frocked, he was a convicted pedophile. But they didn’t bother to check his background when they hired him!!! I’ll bet you anything those responsible were never punished.

Nonsense. What does any of that have to do with whether or not the teachings of the faith reveal truth?

And you have the gall to say this caused you to leave the faith, however now you are considering Islam? Seriously? One could argue the tenets of Islam don’t support blowing up kids any more than the tenets of a Christian faith support abusing them, but it also means that isn’t your real reason for looking at other faiths. And you look to Islam for the way they properly handle children (and women)? You are joking I assume?

If you keep looking for a faith that has people who don’t disappoint you, you will be miserable for the rest of your life. Either you agree with the precepts and teachings, or you don’t. What do people have to do with anything?

 

[fin]

Gee, I wonder if Cardinal Danneels would be first on the list to be investigated?

Pope Francis appointed him to participate in the recent Synod.

Good grief.