How do we respond to the "sex abuse scandal"?

[twb1621]

First I can surmise from your posts that you do not have first hand experience with the operations of the church regarding abuse.

You say that I only have knowledge of the issue from commercial sources. You are mistaken on a number of points there. First, myriad church documents are available online that show a side of the issue that do not appear in the public relations releases of either Rome or the Dioceses in the US. Many of these have been obtained through court ordered
disclosures in abuse cases.

Other church documents regarding the issue can be found in the official church publications coming from Rome. The recent protestations of a lack of knowledge about the issue coming out of the church are directly contrary to information that is available and in some cases has been available for decades in regard to the cases of abuse coming to light now. The church has been also dealing with clerical abuse since the time of some of the early councils.

Secondly, I have first hand experience of dealing within the church system regarding the issue. I have witnessed the toll the church’s subterfuge took on my mother. She did not die in peace with the church she so devoutly trusted with her faith and her children.

I have not made any idle claims or tried to paint any person or the church in terms of being beyond redemption. Point out any post where my argument contains any info that can’t be substantiated.

I just don’t think our church leadership has any business acting in a fashion that is so blatantly unChristlike in word or example.

The whole clerical abuse issue could have been avoided if it was acted upon in an honest and forthright manner. We are not talking rocket science here. Don’t hurt kids and don’t do anything that leads to more kids being hurt. That covers the actions of the abusers and the actions of the church’s leaders. Any Pope could have made that the policy of the church, but none have, go figure.

A twelve year old kid could figure that out, and did at one time, perhaps we should listen to Him more closely.

Imagine how much better our church would be right now if people across the world could look at our church as a beacon of the goodness of Jesus , instead of the perception it is giving the world right now. It is sad. But alas it will prevail, so who cares if it is better , that’s not important.

Peace

I see your reasons for your feelings and feel shame that your mother was a victim to such a violation and I do agree with SOME of your points but you keep referring to “the Church” as though everyone is guilty from the pope down of everything accused and the pope had full knowledge of events as they occurred. That is the issue I have with your posts. And I will explain why below. You are correct, I do not have first hand experience with the operations of the church regarding abuse and I never implied I did. Very few people outside the church other than those directly involved in such cases would have. But I do have years experience in criminal and civil investigations… with attorney tactics, media tactics and criminal procedure. I am somewhat familiar with the documents available on line and yes it was handled poorly. However, some of these allegations and interpretations regarding the documents supplied by the attorneys filing the suit are now in question. The majority of the communications on line express recognition of the severity of the events and the Church’s desire to prosecute following proper procedure and impose justice for all involved. If proper procedure is not followed, it could cause case dismissal. The sentiment for prosecution is verified to the point the Vatican offices agreed to wave the statute of limitations for the violations of Church law so Murphy could be prosecuted. But in reviewing all the documents and the circumstances involved, it is obvious Murphy was not going to live much longer for the prosecution to pursue the cases.
Also, part of the issue was due to United States civil law and lack of evidentiary documentation, not just Church law. What I do not see is any Church documentation with Ratzinger’s signature or name that offers or suggests protecting Murphy from prosecution as would usually be the case in a cover up. I see nothing even remotely suggesting for instance that Murphy be sent away to a psychiatric institution for treatment and rehabilitation to avoid further responsibility. In fact, according to the documentation, it was determined he should be prosecuted because there would be no other suitable remedy while providing justice. I do see based on the decision from the meeting of July 13th, 1998 from the officials of the CDF it was obvious Murphy was not going to be around long enough for him to be adjudicated considering he was near death when the prosecution was initiated. In fact he died only five weeks after the letter of the CDF was written, August 21st, 1998.

So we know some of the information but not necessarily which pieces of the information are true and we know that some things may have been tainted by the attorneys for the sake of sensationalism and bloating the possible settlement. But what is true…

 

[flyfisher]

Has anyone read the the apparition of Our Lady Of La Salette Sept. 19,1846. There the Queen of Heaven addresses herself on a mountain top to two very ignorant little peasants, a nine year-old boy, Maximin, and a fourteen year- old girl, Melanie. the following is just a small part of Her message.
The priest, ministers of my Son, the priests by there evil life, by there irreverence and the impiety with which they celebrate the holy mysteries, by there love of money, love of honor and pleasures, the priests have become cesspools of impurity, Yes, the priests ask for vengeance and vengeance is suspended above their heads. Woe to the priests and persons consecrated to God who by their infidelities and their evil life crucify again my Son; The sins of the persons consecrated to God scream to Heaven and call down vengeance, and so vengeance is at their door, for there is no one anymore to implore mercy and pardon for the people: There are no more generous souls, no one worthy anymore to offer the flawless Victim to the Eternal.

Again this is just a very small part of Her message. and copied from a Remnant Supplement. published at 2539 Morrison Ave. St. Paul. Minn. 55117:thumbsup:

 

[flyfisher]

Has anyone read the the apparition of Our Lady Of La Salette Sept. 19,1846. There the Queen of Heaven addresses herself on a mountain top to two very ignorant little peasants, a nine year-old boy, Maximin, and a fourteen year- old girl, Melanie. the following is just a small part of Her message.
The priest, ministers of my Son, the priests by there evil life, by there irreverence and the impiety with which they celebrate the holy mysteries, by there love of money, love of honor and pleasures, the priests have become cesspools of impurity, Yes, the priests ask for vengeance and vengeance is suspended above their heads. Woe to the priests and persons consecrated to God who by their infidelities and their evil life crucify again my Son; The sins of the persons consecrated to God scream to Heaven and call down vengeance, and so vengeance is at their door, for there is no one anymore to implore mercy and pardon for the people: There are no more generous souls, no one worthy anymore to offer the flawless Victim to the Eternal.

Again this is just a very small part of Her message. and copied from a Remnant Supplement. published at 2539 Morrison Ave. St. Paul. Minn. 55117:thumbsup:

 

[Tybourne]

Portarica, I am very sorry to hear of your pain, especially about your mother dying out of peace with God’s Church. Only He can resolve such situations in His goodness and love. Still, we must all do our part. I will pray for you and for her.

I will share an example that I was party to on the ‘other side’, if you will. It is one that supports some of your points and contradicts others.

Many years ago, I was novice in a religious community. During my novitiate year, it was discovered that one of the solemnly professed brethren, a priest, had sexually molested a pre-pubescent child while he slept in the dormitory at the school run by the order. The priest was supposed to be on ‘night duty’. The parents agreed not to prosecute on condition that the priest was sent away for ‘treatment’ and did not return until he was ‘cured’. I don’t know whether any pressure was brought to bear on the parents to hush things up. To my knowledge, the priest involved still lives away from his community and the school they run.

Now to the points you raised:

The recent protestations of a lack of knowledge about the issue coming out of the church are directly contrary to information that is available and in some cases has been available for decades in regard to the cases of abuse coming to light now.

I partly agree. In the case I described, this was not the first time the community in question had been troubled with sexual abuse. A few years earlier, a different priest had solicited a sexual relationship with a novice who was 18 years old, to whom he acted at confessor. Was this the same as molesting a pre-pubescent child while he slept? No connection seemed to be made in the minds of the community’s superiors between the two incidents. Most importantly, no one in the order seemed to appreciate how damaging the abuse probably was for the child.

Secondly, I have first hand experience of dealing within the church system regarding the issue. I have witnessed the toll the church’s subterfuge took on my mother. She did not die in peace with the church she so devoutly trusted with her faith and her children.

I have not made any idle claims or tried to paint any person or the church in terms of being beyond redemption. Point out any post where my argument contains any info that can’t be substantiated.

I just don’t think our church leadership has any business acting in a fashion that is so blatantly unChristlike in word or example.

Without making any judgement in your mother’s case, I disagree with your generalizations. The problem with blaming the ‘church system’ is that there *was *no system. In the case I described, the community’s response was ad hoc. Clearly, they did not anticipate and had not planned for how to deal with an incident of abuse, in spite of the earlier case. The community was run more like a family than a corporation. Families do not generally have written policies or procedures but tend to put their heads together and muddle through in a crisis. Decisions are based on personalities and informal consensus. Perhaps it should be otherwise in the Church, but in my experience, it has not been so, maybe until recently. I do share your desire for other forum readers to come forward with examples of bishops and religious superiors who have acted courageously and swiftly in cases of abuse. Still, we cannot generalize from one or more bishops or religious superiors to the Church leadership as a whole.

The whole clerical abuse issue **could have been avoided **if it was acted upon in an honest and forthright manner. We are not talking rocket science here. Don’t hurt kids and don’t do anything that leads to more kids being hurt. That covers the actions of the abusers and the actions of the church’s leaders. Any Pope could have made that the policy of the church, but none have, go figure.

Again, the Church is not a corporation and the Pope does not merely change ‘policy’ and then the whole hierarchy responds. As First Among Equals, the Pope’s role is usually one of remonstrating, leading by example and encouraging. He would only use the discipline of ‘binding and loosing’ if the bishops did not respond to other measures. It could be argued that the Pope did that in the 2001 decree placing all cases of sexual solicitation in Confession in the hands of the then Cardinal Ratzinger’s Congregation. As others have pointed out, the current Pope went after Maciel in spite of his close allegiance with the ailing Pope John Paul II. The latter also sent a salvo to the U.S. bishops, stating in 2004 that “There is no place in the priesthood for those that would harm the young”. It seems that you would be satisfied with nothing less than a ‘zero tolerance’ policy, which, it seems to me, has no place in a body that confesses faith in “the forgiveness of sins”.

Imagine how much better our church would be right now if people across the world could look at our church as a beacon of the goodness of Jesus , instead of the perception it is giving the world right now. It is sad. But alas it will prevail, so who cares if it is better , that’s not important.

Agreed. We seem to be moving into a neo-pagan age, in Europe at least. We need those living in darkness to say “See how they love each other!” as happened in the second century. However, before that perhaps we need a purging, a time of winnowing. The persecution, just and unjust, that the world is giving the Church right now may be part of this process. Remember Pope Benedict’s motto: “Succisa virescit — pruned, it grows again”.

The little ones will never be forgotten. God will see to that.

 

[benedictus2]

Imagine how much better our church would be right now if people across the world could look at our church as a beacon of the goodness of Jesus ,

While that may be ideal, even Jesus Himself did not promise that. The Church is the a beacon not of the the goodness of Jesus but of the Truth of Jesus.

Before He died, He promised to send the Holy Spirit not to guide the Church into all goodness but to guide the Church INTO ALL TRUTH.

To this day that is still what matters. Along with this He also left us the Eucharist where His blood is shed for the forgiveness of sins.

It is good to be concerned for how this will impact on the public perception of the Church but an inordinate amount of anxiety over this means a failure to trust in Jesus whose Church this is.
It is good that this is now all being brought out in the open and mea culpa’s can finally be said. There is no pain that God cannot heal, no sin that God cannot forgive. Except the sin agains the Holy Spirit.

I have often wondered what that meant. At this stage I think that has to do with a persistent denial of truth because the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of truth. Once we have bought into the lie of the devil then how can one repent. One would feel no need for repentance in this case.

instead of the perception it is giving the world right now. It is sad. But alas it will prevail, so who cares if it is better , that’s not important.

You completely miss the point here. All this will pass. Everythig passes. Only God remains constant. Being too troubled about this is actually allowing the devil to hold sway. Christ chose fallen man. We have to remember that inspite of everything, these are still the men that Christ has called to His Church.

Christ could have chosen the most loving, holy, good men as disciples but He did not. And down the years it has been the same. There will be those who will be faithful to Him and those who will fail miserably to live the Gospel.

I think what we as laity have forgotten is that the clergy need our prayers too. Instead of being sanctimonious, we all need to do a mea culpa.

The call to metanoia is a continuing invitation to all of us - not just the priests and bishops at the centre of this scandal.

 

[benedictus2]

I’ve often wondered, those who are so angry about this abuses, are they just angry about the abuses or are they ashamed about being Catholic - you know guilt by association?

If this is the case, are we more worried about our own skin and esteem than about the Church?

I think we really need to look at ourselves and look at what is in operation underneath all that righteous indignation.

 

[twb1621]

I’ve often wondered, those who are so angry about this abuses, are they just angry about the abuses or are they ashamed about being Catholic - you know guilt by association?

If this is the case, are we more worried about our own skin and esteem than about the Church?

I think we really need to look at ourselves and look at what is in operation underneath all that righteous indignation.

This is exactly one of the questions I was raising in my earlier posts. There is a big difference in why we are upset in regard to this crisis. I would also like to point out that in the Murphy case the bishop who first became away of the sins of Murphy in 1975 was IMO, the one who handled the matter most inappropriately and even negligently. But the succeeding bishop when he learned of the matter did exactly what should have done in the beginning. Now according to some of the generalizations of those here, both bishops would be stoned to death and are in fact falling to the same accusations. This is what I find sad from some Catholics.

For portarica, I do understand your anger due to your mother’s case and I have fought for years for the justice of the victimized, but every case is different and evidence is crucial. If charges are brought inappropriately the accused can walk never being tried again and if the evidence is weak or lacking the case can be thrown out. The problem is even if the case were thrown out, the damage is done to the victims who had to tell the world their private matters and the church, even if attempting to do right would be judged and condemned regardless. No one would win except Murphy. The cases in the media today are from 30 years ago and were not presented until 20 years after the fact so who are we to determine what could have been done properly. Yes it is aggravating and sad to know someone may have gotten away with something when others were victims of his crimes, but it is an every day thing in criminal and civil investigations and life is not as TV shows it to be. Neither is the media news often. Again, the cases were handled poorly but it seems (IMO) the cause lays on the handling by the initial bishop, not the pope and not the entire church.

 

[Godscre]

I admire the victims who have posted here and expressed the importance of forgiveness. If someone abused one of my daughters, I pray I could be as charitable.

To those who seem to blame the “sex abuse scandal” on liberal theologians, misguided bishops, the mainstream media or suggest that the Catholic Church is being singled out because abuse occurs in other churches or in schools, please keep in mind crimes were committed. Crimes for which people are sent to prison every single day. The priests who abused these children committed crimes against vulnerable children and should have been brought to justice.

If any bishop became aware of a priest abusing a child and sent the priest to therapy or transferred the priest to an assignment where there would be minimal contact with children, that bishop failed to report a crime. I don’t care if a psychologist told the bishop the priest could be cured through treatment or thereapy. The abouse constituted a crime and it is very clear that there was an institutional policy within the Church to cover-up these crimes.

The sooner the bishops and the pope take responsiblity for the Church’s complicity in these crimes and stop blaming the media, the sooner the scandal will be over. They were the ones who could have done something to protect these children and chose to protect themselves instead.

TOTALLY AGREE!!!
I keep reading in the local paper (in NJ) about more cases that were ‘mistakes’ - a local Bishop who didn’t know about a police report (Archdiocese of Newark where VOTF is not welcomed), transferred a Priest to Florida (for the warmer weather).
The millions of money keeps going to pay for these crimes, yet they blame everyone else. Our teachers will be judged more strickly as James 3:1 states and Romans 3:1-7 states that to resist the authorities is to resist God.
The little done to protect children only came out AFTER the laity, and the victims were finally were heard because of the media. I wonder if our leaders know about what the Bible says about disciplining and dealing with immoral people in the Church especially those who commit crimes. Those who cover-up as guilty as well. They should cooperate with all of the authorities and admit their wrongdoing and take responsibility.
Hush money to victims has been given out which seems to be a a crime in itself.
This is a conspiracy yet they blame others as anti-Catholics smearing the Church.
I’m a Catholic convert after attending a fundamental seminary and I’m conservative. I’m pro-life and don’t believe in gay marriage (whom have been accused of smearing the Catholic Church). These Church officials are our moral teachers. I’ve lost faith in the Catholic Church, but not Jesus. Our leaders need to stop the secrecy and promoting those who cover-up to higher places in the Vatican.
Jan Fredericks
Licensed Counselor
Chairman, Catholic Concern for Animals-USA

 

[portarica]

I see your reasons for your feelings and feel shame that your mother was a victim to such a violation and I do agree with SOME of your points but you keep referring to “the Church” as though everyone is guilty from the pope down of everything accused and the pope had full knowledge of events as they occurred. That is the issue I have with your posts. And I will explain why below. You are correct, I do not have first hand experience with the operations of the church regarding abuse and I never implied I did. Very few people outside the church other than those directly involved in such cases would have. But I do have years experience in criminal and civil investigations… with attorney tactics, media tactics and criminal procedure. I am somewhat familiar with the documents available on line and yes it was handled poorly. However, some of these allegations and interpretations regarding the documents supplied by the attorneys filing the suit are now in question. The majority of the communications on line express recognition of the severity of the events and the Church’s desire to prosecute following proper procedure and impose justice for all involved. If proper procedure is not followed, it could cause case dismissal. The sentiment for prosecution is verified to the point the Vatican offices agreed to wave the statute of limitations for the violations of Church law so Murphy could be prosecuted. But in reviewing all the documents and the circumstances involved, it is obvious Murphy was not going to live much longer for the prosecution to pursue the cases.
Also, part of the issue was due to United States civil law and lack of evidentiary documentation, not just Church law. What I do not see is any Church documentation with Ratzinger’s signature or name that offers or suggests protecting Murphy from prosecution as would usually be the case in a cover up. I see nothing even remotely suggesting for instance that Murphy be sent away to a psychiatric institution for treatment and rehabilitation to avoid further responsibility. In fact, according to the documentation, it was determined he should be prosecuted because there would be no other suitable remedy while providing justice. I do see based on the decision from the meeting of July 13th, 1998 from the officials of the CDF it was obvious Murphy was not going to be around long enough for him to be adjudicated considering he was near death when the prosecution was initiated. In fact he died only five weeks after the letter of the CDF was written, August 21st, 1998.

So we know some of the information but not necessarily which pieces of the information are true and we know that some things may have been tainted by the attorneys for the sake of sensationalism and bloating the possible settlement. But what is true…

You miss the biggest point. The church had more than enough information to head the problem off at the pass.

Any Pope could have taken any letter from any mother complaining about abuse and checked it out.----- Even checked it out behind the scenes as they did in the US where they were paying off victims well before the crisis became public in Boston.

All any of the Pius’s or J23 or P6 or JP2 or B16 had to do was make it clear that abuse would not be tolerated and subterfuge would not be tolerated.

But none had the courage to do what Jesus or His mother would do.

Its not about meeting the requirements of the laws of men, after all, the church is trying to use that ploy now to stifle discovery of what they knew and when they knew it.

Its about doing what Jesus told the apostles to do: be as shepherds to His sheep, but they unfortunately do not want to protect the flock from the wolves that have infiltrated the profession of the shepherds, instead they are willing to sacrifice a number of lambs and ewes to not bring shame upon the most gaudily dressed of the shepherds.

You keep saying I think everybody is guilty . I think the only guilty ones are those that abused and those that enabled abuse by either condoning abuse or using subterfuge to enable it.

You are the one who assumes that means everybody. I know some great priests and nuns who have had no party to the problem, so universal blame is not my contention.

Peace

 

[tweetymom]

You miss the biggest point. The church had more than enough information to head the problem off at the pass.

Any Pope could have taken any letter from any mother complaining about abuse and checked it out.----- Even checked it out behind the scenes as they did in the US where they were paying off victims well before the crisis became public in Boston.

All any of the Pius’s or J23 or P6 or JP2 or B16 had to do was make it clear that abuse would not be tolerated and subterfuge would not be tolerated.

But none had the courage to do what Jesus or His mother would do.

Its not about meeting the requirements of the laws of men, after all, the church is trying to use that ploy now to stifle discovery of what they knew and when they knew it.

Its about doing what Jesus told the apostles to do: be as shepherds to His sheep, but they unfortunately do not want to protect the flock from the wolves that have infiltrated the profession of the shepherds, instead they are willing to sacrifice a number of lambs and ewes to not bring shame upon the most gaudily dressed of the shepherds.

You keep saying I think everybody is guilty . I think the only guilty ones are those that abused and those that enabled abuse by either condoning abuse or using subterfuge to enable it.

You are the one who assumes that means everybody. I know some great priests and nuns who have had no party to the problem, so universal blame is not my contention.

Peace

Very good post and very truthful. I do not understand all the coverup. Call a spade a spade and face up to whatever must be done.

 

[portarica]

Portarica, I am very sorry to hear of your pain, especially about your mother dying out of peace with God’s Church. Only He can resolve such situations in His goodness and love. Still, we must all do our part. I will pray for you and for her.

I will share an example that I was party to on the ‘other side’, if you will. It is one that supports some of your points and contradicts others.

Many years ago, I was novice in a religious community. During my novitiate year, it was discovered that one of the solemnly professed brethren, a priest, had sexually molested a pre-pubescent child while he slept in the dormitory at the school run by the order. The priest was supposed to be on ‘night duty’. The parents agreed not to prosecute on condition that the priest was sent away for ‘treatment’ and did not return until he was ‘cured’. I don’t know whether any pressure was brought to bear on the parents to hush things up. To my knowledge, the priest involved still lives away from his community and the school they run.

Now to the points you raised:

I partly agree. In the case I described, this was not the first time the community in question had been troubled with sexual abuse. A few years earlier, a different priest had solicited a sexual relationship with a novice who was 18 years old, to whom he acted at confessor. Was this the same as molesting a pre-pubescent child while he slept? No connection seemed to be made in the minds of the community’s superiors between the two incidents. Most importantly, no one in the order seemed to appreciate how damaging the abuse probably was for the child.

Without making any judgement in your mother’s case, I disagree with your generalizations. The problem with blaming the ‘church system’ is that there *was *no system. In the case I described, the community’s response was ad hoc. Clearly, they did not anticipate and had not planned for how to deal with an incident of abuse, in spite of the earlier case. The community was run more like a family than a corporation. Families do not generally have written policies or procedures but tend to put their heads together and muddle through in a crisis. Decisions are based on personalities and informal consensus. Perhaps it should be otherwise in the Church, but in my experience, it has not been so, maybe until recently. I do share your desire for other forum readers to come forward with examples of bishops and religious superiors who have acted courageously and swiftly in cases of abuse. Still, we cannot generalize from one or more bishops or religious superiors to the Church leadership as a whole.

Again, the Church is not a corporation and the Pope does not merely change ‘policy’ and then the whole hierarchy responds. As First Among Equals, the Pope’s role is usually one of remonstrating, leading by example and encouraging. He would only use the discipline of ‘binding and loosing’ if the bishops did not respond to other measures. It could be argued that the Pope did that in the 2001 decree placing all cases of sexual solicitation in Confession in the hands of the then Cardinal Ratzinger’s Congregation. As others have pointed out, the current Pope went after Maciel in spite of his close allegiance with the ailing Pope John Paul II. The latter also sent a salvo to the U.S. bishops, stating in 2004 that “There is no place in the priesthood for those that would harm the young”. It seems that you would be satisfied with nothing less than a ‘zero tolerance’ policy, which, it seems to me, has no place in a body that confesses faith in “the forgiveness of sins”.

Agreed. We seem to be moving into a neo-pagan age, in Europe at least. We need those living in darkness to say “See how they love each other!” as happened in the second century. However, before that perhaps we need a purging, a time of winnowing. The persecution, just and unjust, that the world is giving the Church right now may be part of this process. Remember Pope Benedict’s motto: “Succisa virescit — pruned, it grows again”.

The little ones will never be forgotten. God will see to that.

A couple of corrections, there is " a church system" for investigating abuse at the diocesan level in the US and it involves subterfuge.

As for the pruning needed, why does the church think it needs to prune those that want the church to act in a more Christlike fashion, while it demands that the rotten stems be preserved?

As for the Pope as corporation or whatever you want to use as a legal description, that is a strawman , if you think the popes couldn’t effect change then the only reasonable explanation is that the popes have no credible authority over the bishops. But wait , they make bishops, they transfer bishops, they remove bishops and they protect bishops, but they have no “legal corporate” authority over them?

The current pope went after maciel years after the knowledge of abuse and allowed Maciel to remain a priest.

And if you think there is no place in the priesthood for those that did no harm to the young, you must agree that Cardinal Law did no harm to the young.

And that may be the most critical point of all. The Popes may have actually believed that enabling and condoning abuse and engaging in subterfuge does no harm to kids. That can be the only explanation for their lack of action and urgency.

That begs a lot of questions.

Peace

 

[Godscre]

I agree that one of the big problems is that we don’t hold ourselves as members of the laity accountable. We have been basically silent about the rampant disregard for what Jesus taught.
As for the failure of church orientated institutions to successfully treat the abusers, look at the link a few posts back about the Paraclete. As to taking some psych courses and not hearting about the issue is quite different from taking some courses in abnormal sexuality or criminal psychology, were they the subjects you took?

I don’t hold the entire church responsible, just the 1-4% of priests who abused and all the bishops and cardinals and popes, except those that did all they could to not condone abuse with inaction.

So that puts about 96-98% of the priests in the clear, but how many bishops ignored letters from the mothers of victims, how many letters were forwarded directly to Rome and how many letters from Moms were mailed directly to the Vatican?

If one kid was molested after a mom’s letter made it to a bishop or a cardinal or a pope, then it is just like they molested the kid themselves. There is no excuse for not protecting Jesus’ lambs, it would be akin to not stopping an abortion if one could stop it from happening.

Peace

I’m not blaming the laity, I’m blaming our leaders. Cardinal Ratziner sent a letter to all of the Bishops in 2001 telling them to report cases to the Vatican for secrecy.
What a mess they made. Now the truth needs to come out.

 

[portarica]

A couple of corrections, there is " a church system" for investigating abuse at the diocesan level in the US and it involves subterfuge.

As for the pruning needed, why does the church think it needs to prune those that want the church to act in a more Christlike fashion, while it demands that the rotten stems be preserved?

As for the Pope as corporation or whatever you want to use as a legal description, that is a strawman , if you think the popes couldn’t effect change then the only reasonable explanation is that the popes have no credible authority over the bishops. But wait , they make bishops, they transfer bishops, they remove bishops and they protect bishops, but they have no “legal corporate” authority over them?

The current pope went after maciel years after the knowledge of abuse and allowed Maciel to remain a priest.

And if you think there is no place in the priesthood for those that did no harm to the young, you must agree that Cardinal Law did no harm to the young.

And that may be the most critical point of all. The Popes may have actually believed that enabling and condoning abuse and engaging in subterfuge does no harm to kids. That can be the only explanation for their lack of action and urgency.

That begs a lot of questions.

Peace

And if you think there is no place in the priesthood for those that did "no harm "to the young, you must agree that Cardinal Law did no harm to the young.

Should be :And if you think there is no place in the priesthood for those that did harm to the young, you must agree that Cardinal Law did no harm to the young. /COLOR]

Peace

 

[Tybourne]

Okay, here’s a suggestion. Would it help if the Church set up an international truth and reconciliation commission? I’m thinking of something similar to the one established in South Africa after the end of apartheid and to the one now under way in Canada to deal with the residential schools that damaged aboriginal children and families so much?

 

[portarica]

Okay, here’s a suggestion. Would it help if the Church set up an international truth and reconciliation commission? I’m thinking of something similar to the one established in South Africa after the end of apartheid and to the one now under way in Canada to deal with the residential schools that damaged aboriginal children and families so much?

That’s an idea.
Here’s another: How about if the curia just tells what it knows and when it knew it?

Peace

 

[portarica]

That’s an idea.
Here’s another: How about if the curia just tells what it knows and when it knew it?

Peace

Doesn’t it seem a little weird to be suggesting that asking a church to tell the truth, without trying to engage in any type of deception, would represent a change in course?

Peace

 

[Godscre]

Here’s a little question for everyone.

Let’s suppose that you have a big family. Let’s suppose that you found out that one of your sons is a paedophile. What would you do? Would you go to the police straight away and report him. Would you denounce him to all your friends. This is your own beloved son remember.

It is very easy to pass judgement on the decisions made by some bishops because we are not in their shoes. This great dilemna of what to do is not ours to make.

The Church is not just an institution. It is a family - God’s family. If we truly believe that God has placed the Pope and bishops to be our shepherds, then you can imagine the dilemna. They are not just here to be caretakers of our bodies but caretakaers of the Church - His Body.

If I knew that a family member brutally raped a child I would tell the Police.
These children were/are in God’s family also. Our leaders will be judged (James 3:1).
We need to stop making excuses for abusers!!!

We all hold this Great Treasure but in earthen vessels - and as such can make the wrong call.

Once we become aware of how great our own sinfulness is, it becomes less easy to pass judgment on others who have sinned no matter how heinous their crimes may be.

Perhaps, those who tried to hide this thought: There but for the grace of God go I. And that is true for all of us. There but for the grace of God we go.

 

[portarica]

Godscre:
Or maybe we shouldn’t turn in terrorists, or maybe if my daughter was going to get an abortion I should be quiet.

Same thing, just weak excuses for those that should know better than anybody.

Peace

 

[tweetymom]

Or maybe we shouldn’t turn in terrorists, or maybe if my daughter was going to get an abortion I should be quiet.

Same thing, just weak excuses for those that should know better than anybody.

Peace

Tell the truth? Hmm what a novel idea for a church to do.

 

[Boxie]

I’ve often wondered, those who are so angry about this abuses, are they just angry about the abuses or are they ashamed about being Catholic - you know guilt by association?

If this is the case, are we more worried about our own skin and esteem than about the Church?

I think we really need to look at ourselves and look at what is in operation underneath all that righteous indignation.

Hello,I did a post but lost it, I am not ashamed of the church but i am ashamed that what is going on is not resolved. These are Blind children and i am a woamn and children advocate and i am on face book doing the work of an advocate and i like doing this for woman and childen all over the world. I feel people are afraid to speak up but they have the right to because we are responsible for all children in this world. I could not sleep at night if i knew i could help a woman or child against sex abuxe and sex slavery. I pray people do not loose their faith because of this, for that would be what the devil would want us to do. But we do need to pray about all this, and hope the papacy does the right thing and rids the church of this filth. my opinion.