'Holy Father, what shall we do?'

  • Thread starter Thread starter Zatzat
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Z

Zatzat

Guest
news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/from_our_own_correspondent/8734850.stm

It has been a bad year for the priesthood.

Hardly a week has gone by in recent months without some new scandal involving a paedophile Catholic priest - or even the odd bishop - emerging somewhere in the world.

…Snap victims were yet again doomed to disappointment. Pope Benedict failed to respond to their request for him to order his former Vatican department to turn over to international law enforcement all the criminal evidence they have amassed about predator priests in recent decades.
 
Hardly a week has gone by in recent months without some new scandal involving a paedophile Catholic priest - or even the odd bishop - emerging somewhere in the world.
not really, they are ephebophiles. these situations are are with homosexual ephebophiles…hardly the model for the good priests these few individuals should be liaised and excommunicated. you’ve also got to realize that the media is blowing these cases WAAAAAAAY out of proportion. they are regrettable and disgusting, but you cannot act like its all or even most priests… its probably not even 1/4 of 1% of priests that do this stuff.
 
The answer for us in the laity: We pray. We pray for our priests, young and old. We pray that devout young men will be called to the priesthood vocation. We pray that our Lord will guide and protect His priests and bishops, and that the saints and our Lady will pray with us for them.

Mother of Good Counsel, Seat of Wisdom, Singular Vessel of Devotion, Queen of Confessors, Queen of All Saints - we ask you to pray for our priests! :crossrc:
 
Actually, it has been a very GOOD year for good and holy priests. Millions of catholics have been reminded to pray and fast for them, hundreds of Judas priests have been exposed and removed, thus purifying the priesthood and seminaries in the dioceses of faithful bishops continue to fill at rates unseen in my lifetime.

This is a good year, my friend. You just need to step back a few paces to see the long term picture.
 
Actually, it has been a very GOOD year for good and holy priests. Millions of catholics have been reminded to pray and fast for them, hundreds of Judas priests have been exposed and removed, thus purifying the priesthood and seminaries in the dioceses of faithful bishops continue to fill at rates unseen in my lifetime.

This is a good year, my friend. You just need to step back a few paces to see the long term picture.
👍:amen:
 
not really, they are ephebophiles. these situations are are with homosexual ephebophiles…hardly the model for the good priests these few individuals should be liaised and excommunicated. you’ve also got to realize that the media is blowing these cases WAAAAAAAY out of proportion. they are regrettable and disgusting, but you cannot act like its all or even most priests… its probably not even 1/4 of 1% of priests that do this stuff.
There are two words that must be understood here. I believe that the laity does not fully understand what they mean.

Laicization: the act of laicization for a priest, friar or monk does not make him a lay man again. That is impossible, even for the Church. The word is not used in the Latin translation of the code of canon law. But there is no equivalent in English, so that word was chosen. The term that is written in the code is that the individual is dismissed from the state in which he lives: clerical or religious. This means that he may not function as such, but he remains a deacon, priest, bishop, monk or friar until death. If he is a deacon, priest or bishop, he may celebrate the sacraments in any emergency. It does not have to be a lfie and death situation. It can be a case of someone being sick and there is no priest available. The laicized priest or bishop can hear that confession, absolve and do the Annointing of the Sick. The laicized deacon can baptize a non bapatized person who is in danger of death and there is no other deacon to do the baptism. In neither of these cases does death have to be immanent. It is simply danger of death.

If you’re going for sugery and there is no priest who can absolve you and annoint you, you can call your nextdoor neighbor who is a laicized priest and he can do it and the Church supplies the faculties. The sacraments are valid and legal.

To laicize means to pretend to be a layman. You live as if you were a lay person. But you are never a lay person again. When you were ordained or when you made solemn vows your soul was changed forever by an act of the Holy Spirit, just as your soul was changed at the time of Baptism. The Church does not have the power or authority to undo what the Holy Spirit has done in the soul.

Excommunication: You can only be excommunicated for breaking a law of the Church, not for sinning. Sexual abuse of any kind is a very grave sin. However, it is not found in the code of law as an excommunicable sin, as is abortion. Therefore, the Church does not have the authority to excommunicate someone for this sin. To do so that pope would have to proclaim that this has been revealed by the Holy Spirit, as he did with abortion, and then he can add it to the canons (laws) of the Church. Since this has not been revealed by the Holy Spirit as a sin that automatically places you outside of the physical Church, the Church cannot impose an excommunication. There has to be a revelation from the Holy Spirit that this is so serioius that you no only sever your ties wtih grace, but you sever your ties with the pysical Church.

To excommunicate is to say that someone is no longer a member of the Catholic Churfch. If you excommunicate these men, you are denying them the right to receive the sacraments. This is not allowed.

You can only deny this right to someone who has commmitted a crime against the sacraments, agains tthe faith, against the pope, against the unborn, against a religious or cleric and even then, you can only deny it until such time as the person asks for forgiveness.

Once the person asks for forgiveness, you must forgive and you must lift the excommunication. In reality, the excommunication only lasts as long as the sinner allows it to last. Once the sinner says “I’m sorry,” it’s over. The excommunication must be lifted by the proper authority.

Another situation is that the Church must do everything in her power to make sure that she provides an opportunity for the sinner to be absolved. Therefore, she cannot hold an excommunication over someone’s head if they want to be absolved.

Our mission, as Catholics is to save souls, not to get even with those who have sinned. These men have souls and have the same right to forgiveness and grace as anyone else. Even Paul, who was a murderer was given the gift of grace and became an Apostle. We can’t interfere in the wrorking of grace.

To close:

Laicization just means that the person lives pretending to be lay man, he is always an ordained man or a religious in solemn vows.

Excommunication can only be imposed for those reasons that the Holy Spirit has revealed to the Church. It cannot be imposed because we wish it.

The sinner has a right to be forgiven and received into the Church and a right to go to heaven if he remains in a state of sanctifying grace. We cannot deny someone this opportunity. This was established by Christ himself when he received Peter again, after his denial and when he knocked Paul off of his horse. Peter and Paul commited greater sins than the abusers in these cases. They denied Christ.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
‘Holy Father, what shall we do?’
This is a no-brainer! And actually our bishop here just solved the problem for us on Corpus Christi Sunday by instituting Perpetual Eucharistic Adoration in this diocese.

He has us right where we should be…on our knees in front of the Blessed Sacrament praying that even more men answer the call to true vocations, that the faith be purified by those orthodox seminarians coming forth, and that error be stamped out in our RCIA and religious ed programs.
 
This is a no-brainer! And actually our bishop here just solved the problem for us on Corpus Christi Sunday by instituting Perpetual Eucharistic Adoration in this diocese.

He has us right where we should be…on our knees in front of the Blessed Sacrament praying that even more men answer the call to true vocations, that the faith be purified by those orthodox seminarians coming forth, and that error be stamped out in our RCIA and religious ed programs.
That’s a smart pastor.

While you’re praying for vocations, pray for more vocations to the Franciscan Brothers of Life who give their lives for the unborn, the chronically ill, the dying, the elderly and anyone whose life in threatened by the culture of death. We need more consecrated brothers.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
JR, It almost sounds like you are saying that canon law is a divinely revealed resource. Could you clarify?

I’ve always understood canon law to be a tool devised by the hierarchy of the Church to assist in even application of truths we know of, but that the canon itself has authority, but not revealed status. But then I get a lot of stuff wrong! 😉

If I’m right, it would appear appropriate to me for the Church to add child sexual abuse as a l.s. excommunication offense on the same level as abortion. The best available information indicates that child sexual abuse is the outcome of a long decline in sexual morality and one that almost nobody ever recovers from (i.e. no such thing as a “former” child molestor).

Like abortion, child sexual abuse is not just a sin, it is an indicator of a seriously broken conscience that fails to recognize the dignity of a human person.
 
JR, It almost sounds like you are saying that canon law is a divinely revealed resource. Could you clarify?
Thank you for the question. It’s an important one. Canon law is erected upon divinely revealed truths. In itself, it is just law, not revelation. The canons began as systems that the Church used to ensure that behaviors, beliefs and other circumstances that conflicted with Revelation were dealt with appropriately. It was also the purpose of the canons to protect Revealed truth by creating systems that ensured that Revelation was never abused or ignored. Like any other legal system, it exists to uphold a shared belief system. In our case, that belief system is the faith.
If I’m right, it would appear appropriate to me for the Church to add child sexual abuse as a l.s. excommunication offense on the same level as abortion. The best available information indicates that child sexual abuse is the outcome of a long decline in sexual morality and one that almost nobody ever recovers from (i.e. no such thing as a “former” child molestor).

Like abortion, child sexual abuse is not just a sin, it is an indicator of a seriously broken conscience that fails to recognize the dignity of a human person.
This was proposed during the papacy of John Paul II and Cardinal Ratzinger and the Sacred Congregation of the Faith said that it would be an abuse to do so on several grounds.
  1. Sexual abuse of a child does not involve the murder of a defenseless life.
  2. Sexual abuse is a very grave sin, but it is not a sin against a dogma. Abortion is a sin against a revealed dogma.
  3. Sexual abuse is not a sin against the sacredness of life. It is a sin against the 6th commandment. In the moral hierarchy it does not rank as high as murder, which is the fifth commandment.
  4. The abuser does not attempt to replace God as does the abortionist.
  5. It is not an offense against a sacrament, cleric or consecrated religious. To sexually abuse a cleric or consecrated religious is punishable by excommunication.
Cardinal Ratzinger and the Sacred Congregation for the Faith found more arguments against making it an excommunicable offense than for it. Pope John Paul II considered it, but Cardinal Ratzinger and Msgr Georg (his current secretary) persuaded the Pope that it would be inappropriate. Msgr. Georg is one of the most outstanding canon and civil lawyers in the Church. If the man says that something would be inappropriate, you can take it to the bank. He’s brilliant in canon law.

This does not mean that a future pope may not find five good reasons to include it among the excommunicable offenses. It just means that currently there are no arguments to refute the premises of Cardinal Ratzinger and Msgr. Georg of 2001.

Canon law is based on logic, not on love. The word love is deliberately excluded from canon law. This was argued by the Franciscan School of Law and Theology of the 13th and 14th century. Love could not enter into canon law, because canon law is not a moral code. It is a disciplinary code. It’s purpose is to keep order, not to evangelize. The Franciscans argued that the two had to keep to their particular areas of expertise. Moral law is about love. Canon law is about discipline. The Lateran Council agreed and the agreement was revisited several times since and the point was made again. No council or pope has ever wanted to blur the lines between canon law and moral theology. What canon law does is to apply disciplinary actions to those things that moral theology rules need disciplinary actions. For example, canon law says that any priest who abuses a minor must be dismissed from the clerical state. That comes from moral theology, which says that any priest who commits such a heinous crime forfeits his rights as a priest. However, the moral law also says that you cannot take away a man’s priesthood, because that would be heresy. While he forfeits his rights to function as a priest, he does not forfeit his priesthood.

If you notice, there is no provision in canon law for a consecrated religious who commits the same crime. The reason is that moral theology says that you cannot unconsecrate a person in vows. Such a law would be impossible to enact. How can you take away someone’s right to be a consecrated religious, if you cannot unconsecrate him or her? The most that you can do is to suspend them from active ministry. To unconsecrate a religious is like trying to unbaptize a Christian. It’s not morally or sacramentally possible. Just like you can’t un-ordain a deacon, priest or bishop. You can only dismiss them, but they retain the ontological change. There are certain things that even the Church cannot undo, because they were done by God, not by man. However, if a priest or religious in involved in abortion, then he or she can be excommunicated, because the sin is against the Creator himself, not against the vows.

I hope this helps.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
So it IS a prudential judgement, and one with a formidable level of reason behind it. I appreciate the in depth explanation (as ever).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top