Is it Time for Vatican III?

[Abu]

Sanity and Reality

Anti-Catholicism, Again
The permanent scandal of the Vatican
BY Joseph Bottum [Joseph Bottum is a contributing editor to The Weekly Standard and editor of First Things].
May 3, 2010, Vol. 15, No. 31 (The Weekly Standard)
weeklystandard.com/articles/anti-catholicism-again?page=2
The general figures of child abuse in the world today are shocking. One widely reported study in the Journal of Interpersonal Violence suggested the United States has 39 million victims of childhood sexual abuse. It’s a little hard to believe. More than 12 percent of the population were abused at least once as children? But Charol Shakeshaft’s respected study insists that 6 to 10 percent of recent public-school students have been molested. Ernie Allen, president of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, claims 10 percent is a conservative estimate. John Jay College’s Margaret Leland Smith says her numbers come closer to 20 percent.
All this, while (as the papal biographer George Weigel points out) the most recent audit found six credible cases of sexual abuse by Catholic clerics in 2009, in an American church of 68 million members, with all the perpetrators reported to the police and stripped of priestly faculties by their bishops. “The only hard data that has been made public by any denomination comes from John Jay College’s study of Catholic priests,” an April 8 Newsweek story noted.
Limiting their study to plausible accusations made between 1950 and 1992, John Jay researchers reported that about 4 percent of the 110,000 priests active during those years had been accused of sexual misconduct involving children. Specifically, 4,392 complaints (ranging from “sexual talk” to rape) were made against priests by 10,667 victims.

weeklystandard.com/articles/anti-catholicism-again?page=5
For almost 10 years now, the Catholic Church has been putting in place policies on child abuse stricter than those of any other large institution in the world. “We were the model of what not to do,” as New York’s Archbishop Timothy Dolan put it, “and now we are the model of what to do.” But the newspaper accounts of a newly elected pope would be, nonetheless, a mad race to find something, anything, to link him to the bishops’ failures to act against pedophiles in the previous generation. And if they found what they sought—as they would, given how slight the perceived connection has to be—the sex-abuse scandal would become for that pope what it is now for Pope Benedict: the chief identifier, the narrative hook, for his entire pontificate.

The current frenzy does share at least a few characteristics with previous outbreaks of anti-Catholicism. You could lift great chunks of today’s commentary and drop them unchanged into newspaper accounts of that 1836 anti-Catholic classic The Awful Disclosures of Maria Monk, as Exhibited in a Narrative of Her Sufferings During her Residence of Five Years as a Novice and Two Years as a Black Nun, in the Hotel Dieu Nunnery at Montreal. For that matter, the New Atheists’ recent ravings about Catholicism could slip unnoticed into the yellowing anti-Catholic pages of Robert G. Ingersoll’s 1896 How to Reform Mankind and Paul Blanshard’s 1949 American Freedom and Catholic Power.

 

[Tigg]

during the past ten/fifteen years.
Again the crop of US priests is a scant percentage of what it was and like I noted before, the calibre of priests is basically that of those that give unbending obedience to B16 and as pointed out by a cardinal last week, part of the problem is that the clerics in many instances have more alligence to their fellow priests and clerics than they do to the flock.
So we are just getting less of the same, not more better priests.

Peace

Peace

OH MY! With all due respect, I find this logic so twisted because B16 is the one defending the true faith amidst the heterodoxy we hear on a daily basis. What is allegiance to the flock and the role of a Shepherd? Redemptionis Sacramentum says the faithful have the RIGHT to hear authentic teaching and to have a pure liturgy! It’s all about the faith of the Church…**THE FAITH ** which does not change.

I believe this descent into immorality can be traced to the weakening of true Church teaching – by dissident theologians and priests who placed little emphasis on the need for the Sacraments and de-emphasized sin. Everything from the Dutch Catechism to the laxity and irreverence displayed in the celebration of the Mass by those progressive priests who believed the liturgy was theirs to do as they pleased. Once alienated from Truth, the result has been a loss of faith which quickly turned into a denigration of that which is good and holy and true.

Many of the liberal seminaries have now closed, and although vocations are still sorely needed, these men coming forth are of a different character. A return to true spirituality and the practice of holy virtue is what is needed now. It isn’t allegiance to the pope or bishops, it is allegiance to the kingdom values of Christ! Those who are not just Catholics-in-name-only can see what is happening even amidst this horrible storm. There is a breath of fresh air that has been stifled for a very long time now as Adoration and Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament comes alive once again and past heresies are refuted. Right now, there is only a Remnant, but it is growing.

 

[portarica]

Sanity and Reality

Anti-Catholicism, Again
The permanent scandal of the Vatican
BY Joseph Bottum [Joseph Bottum is a contributing editor to The Weekly Standard and editor of First Things].
May 3, 2010, Vol. 15, No. 31 (The Weekly Standard)
weeklystandard.com/articles/anti-catholicism-again?page=2
The general figures of child abuse in the world today are shocking. One widely reported study in the Journal of Interpersonal Violence suggested the United States has 39 million victims of childhood sexual abuse. It’s a little hard to believe. More than 12 percent of the population were abused at least once as children? But Charol Shakeshaft’s respected study insists that 6 to 10 percent of recent public-school students have been molested. Ernie Allen, president of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, claims 10 percent is a conservative estimate. John Jay College’s Margaret Leland Smith says her numbers come closer to 20 percent.
All this, while (as the papal biographer George Weigel points out) the most recent audit found six credible cases of sexual abuse by Catholic clerics in 2009, in an American church of 68 million members, with all the perpetrators reported to the police and stripped of priestly faculties by their bishops. “The only hard data that has been made public by any denomination comes from John Jay College’s study of Catholic priests,” an April 8 Newsweek story noted.
Limiting their study to plausible accusations made between 1950 and 1992, John Jay researchers reported that about 4 percent of the 110,000 priests active during those years had been accused of sexual misconduct involving children. Specifically, 4,392 complaints (ranging from “sexual talk” to rape) were made against priests by 10,667 victims.

weeklystandard.com/articles/anti-catholicism-again?page=5
For almost 10 years now, the Catholic Church has been putting in place policies on child abuse stricter than those of any other large institution in the world. “We were the model of what not to do,” as New York’s Archbishop Timothy Dolan put it, “and now we are the model of what to do.” But the newspaper accounts of a newly elected pope would be, nonetheless, a mad race to find something, anything, to link him to the bishops’ failures to act against pedophiles in the previous generation. And if they found what they sought—as they would, given how slight the perceived connection has to be—the sex-abuse scandal would become for that pope what it is now for Pope Benedict: the chief identifier, the narrative hook, for his entire pontificate.

The current frenzy does share at least a few characteristics with previous outbreaks of anti-Catholicism. You could lift great chunks of today’s commentary and drop them unchanged into newspaper accounts of that 1836 anti-Catholic classic The Awful Disclosures of Maria Monk, as Exhibited in a Narrative of Her Sufferings During her Residence of Five Years as a Novice and Two Years as a Black Nun, in the Hotel Dieu Nunnery at Montreal. For that matter, the New Atheists’ recent ravings about Catholicism could slip unnoticed into the yellowing anti-Catholic pages of Robert G. Ingersoll’s 1896 How to Reform Mankind and Paul Blanshard’s 1949 American Freedom and Catholic Power.

Again you bring up facts that I support, namely that the perversion among priests was similar to that of civilian society, the only difference is that the leaders of our church have shown that they are willing and in many cases , including B16 and JP2, insisted upon condoning abuse by keeping it secret.

And that is the real danger to the congregation. We have a leadership that supports deceit and we have a curia that supports that leadership and we have a priesthood in formation that supports that leadership.

If the leadership is not only willing to support deceit and subterfuge, but has a track record of insisting upon it, what does that say about the church as the foundation of truth?

What it tells me is that not only will the church prevail if all that condoned abuse and engaged in subterfuge resigned, but that the church would thrive.

It is like we are afraid to acknowledge that not only is our leadership human, but they are not acting like good average Christians. They are poor leaders and poor examples of what Jesus taught.

So what entitles them to run our church?

They broke apostolic succession when they stopped doing what Jesus taught about caring for the flock, so there is no theological reason behind their actions or for maintaining their positions.

Peace

 

[Tigg]

And that is the real danger to the congregation. We have a leadership that supports deceit and we have a curia that supports that leadership and we have a priesthood in formation that supports that leadership.

If the leadership is not only willing to support deceit and subterfuge, but has a track record of insisting upon it, what does that say about the church as the foundation of truth?

What it tells me is that not only will the church prevail if all that condoned abuse and engaged in subterfuge resigned, but that the church would thrive.

It is like we are afraid to acknowledge that not only is our leadership human, but they are not acting like good average Christians. They are poor leaders and poor examples of what Jesus taught.

So what entitles them to run our church?

They broke apostolic succession when they stopped doing what Jesus taught about caring for the flock, so there is no theological reason behind their actions or for maintaining their positions.

Peace

You have an incorrect understanding of apostolic succession and the words you have written only support my previous post that heresy is to blame for the current state of affairs.

From our very own Catholic Answers:

catholic.com/library/Apostolic_Succession.asp

That something, somewhere has gone terribly wrong, I will admit. We know well the writings of Karl Rahner and Teilhard de Chardin (whose teaching on original sin was condemned by the Holy See,) and others, especially the Jesuits who embraced various and sundry denials of doctrine which blurred the message and the total act of faith. These individuals cannot take the Church down, and have summarily and continue to be corrected. The Truth will not fail, but we all need to study the authentic sources and use discernment with all we hear and see.

As far as the papacy supporting deceit, I really do not think the laity is in a position to judge the extraordinary interactions of the Vatican. What may seem to us as one thing, may, in reality be quite another. For example, did the hierarchy believe it would create more scandal and harm to the faithful by bringing the guilty to light? We don’t know what course was decided to attempt to minimize the damage. And human fraility and wrong judgment was at play, but you seem to think that alone is destroying the Church. I am not defending the personal sins of the priests and their heinous crimes, but again I repeat that had Truth continued to be taught after Vat II, the faithful would not have been driven away in droves, in doubt and confusion, the seminaries would not have disseminated such liberalism and the apostate clergy would have been drowned out by the voices of those still embracing One Lord, One Faith .

 

[portarica]

You have an incorrect understanding of apostolic succession and the words you have written only support my previous post that heresy is to blame for the current state of affairs.

From our very own Catholic Answers:

catholic.com/library/Apostolic_Succession.asp

That something, somewhere has gone terribly wrong, I will admit. We know well the writings of Karl Rahner and Teilhard de Chardin (whose teaching on original sin was condemned by the Holy See,) and others, especially the Jesuits who embraced various and sundry denials of doctrine which blurred the message and the total act of faith. These individuals cannot take the Church down, and have summarily and continue to be corrected. The Truth will not fail, but we all need to study the authentic sources and use discernment with all we hear and see.

As far as the papacy supporting deceit, I really do not think the laity is in a position to judge the extraordinary interactions of the Vatican. What may seem to us as one thing, may, in reality be quite another. For example, did the hierarchy believe it would create more scandal and harm to the faithful by bringing the guilty to light? We don’t know what course was decided to attempt to minimize the damage. And human fraility and wrong judgment was at play, but you seem to think that alone is destroying the Church. I am not defending the personal sins of the priests and their heinous crimes, but again I repeat that had Truth continued to be taught after Vat II, the faithful would not have been driven away in droves, in doubt and confusion, the seminaries would not have disseminated such liberalism and the apostate clergy would have been drowned out by the voices of those still embracing One Lord, One Faith .

First of all the truth after V2 was the same truth as before V2.

V2 was about language and the opening of God to the congregation. There was no change in doctrine.

The faithful that have been driven away are in many instances those that wouldn’t tolerate being lied to and subjected to the patronizing behavior of much of the curia.

Can you name one person who left the church because of one thing that was changed in doctrine?

The whole V2 thing is a smokescreen, if anything, V2 made Christ more approachable and V2 increased the enthusiastic involvement of many in the church.

But maybe , in some respects ,V2 is the cause of the abuse scandal. After V2 people understand that Jesus taught to not abuse, that Jesus taught to not be deceptive and Jesus also taught that His successors were to be as shepherds to His flock.

V2 didn’t change any doctrine, but it did pull back the curtains on some aspects of the institutional church ,many that the institution wished were still closed. And that is what the curia is doing now, they aren’t saying Jesus inspired them to act the way they did, are they?

Why not? Because we know any twelve year old knows what they did is wrong and so blatantly unChristlike.Any reasonable person with access to even just the public info knows that all the weak uncourageous excuses used to defend the actions of the curia are just that - weak uncourageous excuses.

The Sargent Schultz defense doesn’t work except in sitcoms and the abuse and cover up of abuse is no laughing matter.

Peace

 

[Abu]

portarica
First of all the truth after V2 was the same truth as before V2.
V2 was about language and the opening of God to the congregation. There was no change in doctrine.
The faithful that have been driven away are in many instances those that wouldn’t tolerate being lied to and subjected to the patronizing behavior of much of the curia.

You make your own confusion because you decry the facts given to you in post #61, and fabricate assumptions. Get real about the tidal wave of dissent producing the crisis.

Faithful Catholics don’t leave Christ’s Church. Those who leave have already become unfaithful. When they see dissent in word and action they counter it, by offering truth, prayer, fasting, and good works.

The crisis in Christ’s Church is due to the modernist errors abroad before Vatican II, whose promoters tried to take over the Council, and are referred to in *Christ Denied *TAN, 1982, by Fr Paul Wickens.

Before Vatican II, by May of 1964, the Sex Information and Education Council of the United States (SIECUS) had approved the sex education program put forward by 2 Swedish delegates, and the whole sordid conglomerate is exposed in Claire Chambers The SIECUS Circle, 1977. The power structure exerts pressure on local schools and the gullible public for its school sex education program. The network promotes population control, legalised abortion, homosexuality, pornography, sensitivity training and drugs. (p xv). We surely know how dissenters have spread these into the People of God.

The '60’s saw the rise of anarchy in the USA, flower power etc., with much that was good in society decried and destroyed with nothing worthy to replace it. The new religion of the so-called Enlightenment was welcomed by selfists.

The degradation of sacred order, at the invitation of nuns, occurred from 1967 in the USA through humanistic psychologists especially Carl Rogers, and I have heard one of his lieutenants, Dr J W Coulson in person, apologising for the grave harm caused. [See *The Emperor’s New Clothes by William Kirk Kilpatrick, 1985, p 149-150]. The destruction of whole Catholic school systems and religious orders occurred.

Then followed the disgraceful public dissent against *Humanae Vitae *by Karl Rahner and numerous dissenting theologians, Richard McBrien’s Catholicism (full of errors), the revolt of the Catholic universities and the bureaucratic/theological tail wagging the episcopal dog so to speak – coupled with lax or dissenting bishops this resulted in a grave crisis, which is worldwide with relativism, selfism and secularism. The seminaries were filled with dissenting formators. “In *Goodbye, Good Men *Michael Rose says that men who entered the priesthood before the 1970’s, and the newest priests today generally accept celibacy as crucial to their service and are devoted to the orthodox teachings, sacraments and traditions of the church. But that in-between generation, now ensconced in the church’s leadership (except for some few who courageously resisted the corruption) are determined to “change the structure and mission of the Catholic Church”; their goal is a secularized and desacralized institution led perhaps by priestesses, or perhaps by a priestless, organized laity giving the sacraments. [From a book review (Peggy Whitcomb, 2002) of *Goodbye, Good Men (How Liberals Brought Corruption Into The Catholic Church) by Michael S. Rose].

James Hitchcock, author, The Pope and the Jesuits, writes: “Liberals who blame celibacy for the Catholic Church’s pedophilia scandals are missing the real cause: seminaries that actively encourage homosexuality, moral laxity, and theological dissent all in the name of post-Vatican II ‘renewal.’ In Goodbye, Good Men, Michael S. Rose demonstrates that such seminaries are by no means rare. All over the country, gay priests and liberal nuns energetically recruit for the priesthood gay men and others of questionable moral character - while turning away heterosexual orthodox men.”

 

[portarica]

You make your own confusion because you decry the facts given to you in post #61, and fabricate assumptions. Get real about the tidal wave of dissent producing the crisis.

Faithful Catholics don’t leave Christ’s Church. Those who leave have already become unfaithful. When they see dissent in word and action they counter it, by offering truth, prayer, fasting, and good works.

The crisis in Christ’s Church is due to the modernist errors abroad before Vatican II, whose promoters tried to take over the Council, and are referred to in *Christ Denied *TAN, 1982, by Fr Paul Wickens.

Before Vatican II, by May of 1964, the Sex Information and Education Council of the United States (SIECUS) had approved the sex education program put forward by 2 Swedish delegates, and the whole sordid conglomerate is exposed in Claire Chambers The SIECUS Circle, 1977. The power structure exerts pressure on local schools and the gullible public for its school sex education program. The network promotes population control, legalised abortion, homosexuality, pornography, sensitivity training and drugs. (p xv). We surely know how dissenters have spread these into the People of God.

The '60’s saw the rise of anarchy in the USA, flower power etc., with much that was good in society decried and destroyed with nothing worthy to replace it. The new religion of the so-called Enlightenment was welcomed by selfists.

The degradation of sacred order, at the invitation of nuns, occurred from 1967 in the USA through humanistic psychologists especially Carl Rogers, and I have heard one of his lieutenants, Dr J W Coulson in person, apologising for the grave harm caused. [See *The Emperor’s New Clothes

by William Kirk Kilpatrick, 1985, p 149-150]. The destruction of whole Catholic school systems and religious orders occurred.

Then followed the disgraceful public dissent against *Humanae Vitae *by Karl Rahner and numerous dissenting theologians, Richard McBrien’s Catholicism (full of errors), the revolt of the Catholic universities and the bureaucratic/theological tail wagging the episcopal dog so to speak – coupled with lax or dissenting bishops this resulted in a grave crisis, which is worldwide with relativism, selfism and secularism. The seminaries were filled with dissenting formators. “In *Goodbye, Good Men *Michael Rose says that men who entered the priesthood before the 1970’s, and the newest priests today generally accept celibacy as crucial to their service and are devoted to the orthodox teachings, sacraments and traditions of the church. But that in-between generation, now ensconced in the church’s leadership (except for some few who courageously resisted the corruption) are determined to “change the structure and mission of the Catholic Church”; their goal is a secularized and desacralized institution led perhaps by priestesses, or perhaps by a priestless, organized laity giving the sacraments. [From a book review (Peggy Whitcomb, 2002) of *Goodbye, Good Men (How Liberals Brought Corruption Into The Catholic Church) by Michael S. Rose].

James Hitchcock, author, The Pope and the Jesuits, writes: “Liberals who blame celibacy for the Catholic Church’s pedophilia scandals are missing the real cause: seminaries that actively encourage homosexuality, moral laxity, and theological dissent all in the name of post-Vatican II ‘renewal.’ In Goodbye, Good Men, Michael S. Rose demonstrates that such seminaries are by no means rare. All over the country, gay priests and liberal nuns energetically recruit for the priesthood gay men and others of questionable moral character - while turning away heterosexual orthodox men.”

You keep bringing up two facts : there were not an extraordinarily large amount of abusing priests , as related to the population in general, and it is the fault of these small numbers of abusers who were gay and morally lax.

So these perverts convinced the popes and cardinals and bishops to let them get away with abusing kids and teens. And the ones convinced included JP2 and B16 and most American Cardinals and Bishops and apparently most of those in Europe and the UK, not to be remiss, the heterosexual priests that were raping nuns in Africa also convinced the curia to turn a blind eye toward their deeds as well.

And among the perverts were the orthodox legionaries and their good friend of popes -Maciel.

So the gay and lax moral group convinced the orthodox group to let them continue their abusing shenanigans .

So if your argument is true, the present establishment is culpable because they allowed the gays and morally lax to rape the congregation.

Like I said before, the excuses the leadership are using, as evidenced by your supporting information are just uncourageous excuses.

Thank you for your supporting information.

Peace

 

[Abu]

**Facing reality **

portarica
The faithful that have been driven away are in many instances those that wouldn’t tolerate being lied to and subjected to the patronizing behavior of much of the curia.
They broke apostolic succession when they stopped doing what Jesus taught about caring for the flock, so there is no theological reason behind their actions or for maintaining their positions. So these perverts convinced the popes and cardinals and bishops to let them get away with abusing kids and teens.

You rant about Apostolic succession, which is not “broken” by personal error. That’s Luther’s error – and see the mess the cleavage of Christendom has caused! You continue to spread error and confusion – “the present establishment” – how sloppy! What a perverted attitude you have – lumping popes, cardinals and bishops as a group as conniving at abuse. Bringing in "much of the the curia” again is your favourite red herring of confusion as the Vatican has been resolutely tackling the abuses for a long time, led by Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI. No “faithful” leave the Church – you concoct fantasies. The faithful pray, fast, do penance and work to support the Mystical Body of Christ.
Some lax bishops, products of the rampant dissent, have failed to adequately discipline offenders and weed them out, as we have known for ages, but you contribute nothing positive – only criticise, and muddle things for yourself.

weeklystandard.com/articles/anti-catholicism-again?page=3
"Liberal Catholics see the scandals as a chance to discredit conservatives, and conservatives as a chance to discredit liberals. Maureen Dowd, who regularly devotes her New York Times column to bite-sized rehashes of Mary McCarthy’s old Memories of a Catholic Girlhood, opines on ‘the Church’s Judas moment.’ The liberal theologian Hans Küng accuses the pope of directly engineering the cover-up. The left-leaning National Catholic Reporter declares it ‘the largest institutional crisis in centuries, possibly in church history,’ and another liberal Catholic magazine demands theological reform, to be achieved by arraigning “Benedict in the Dock.”

The current hysteria over the Catholic sex-abuse scandal derives at least in part from the same source that fed the panic over rape at preschools and day care centers 20 years ago. These are, in this one respect, two chapters of a single story—the story of a culture whose views of sexuality put its children at risk.
That risk is real. Our contemporary understandings of sex are a jumble of contradictions and insanities, and the young are among those paying the price. The news reports about the Catholic scandals have purchase on us precisely because they echo down the canyons of our cultural anxiety. And to account for that anxiety—to localize and personalize its causes—Catholicism is far more useful than outlandish charges of Satanism ever were.

"For some of the commentators on the current scandals, any stick is a good one if you can poke it at religion. Most people, however, are just looking for an explanation. They worked so hard to build the life the contemporary world demands, and still they are anxious. They rejected the sexual strictures of the past, just as they were taught to do, and still their children are in danger. There must be a reason for the unfulfilled promise of modern sex and modern life. There must be a mystical, magical key that will unlock the door to paradise. Why have we been thwarted? Why aren’t we there yet?
The Catholic Church, of course. That’s the answer.

“Then there’s Ireland—ground zero for the European scandals raging now, just as Boston was for the American scandals back in 2002. Brendan O’Neill, editor of the Spiked-Online website and no particular friend of the Church, points out that the Irish government’s official commission spent 10 years, from 1999 to 2009, intensively inviting, from Irish-born people around the world, reports of abuse at Irish religious institutions. Out of the hundreds of thousands of students who passed through Catholic schools in the 85 years from 1914 to 1999, the commission managed to gather 381 claims—with 35 percent of those charges made against lay staff and fellow pupils rather than priests.
‘It might be unfashionable to say the following but it is true nonetheless,’ O’Neill concludes. ‘Very, very small numbers of children in the care or teaching of the Catholic Church in Europe in recent decades were sexually abused, but very, very many of them actually received a decent standard of education.’
“And yet, precisely because priests are supposed to behave better than other people do, fulfilling their vows of celibacy, it’s not an answer to point out that higher percentages of children are abused by other segments of the population. There were never a lot of these Catholic cases, but there were enough—with every single one a horror, both in the act itself and in the failure of the bishops to react forcefully and quickly. The Catholic Church didn’t start the worldwide epidemic of child sexual abuse, and it didn’t materially advance it. But the bureaucracy of the Church sure as hell didn’t do enough to fight that epidemic when it broke out among its own clergy.”

Other readers will be glad to know that the Holy Father has appointed an apostolic delegate to supervise the Legionaries of Christ.

 

[portarica]

**Facing reality **

You rant about Apostolic succession, which is not “broken” by personal error. That’s Luther’s error – and see the mess the cleavage of Christendom has caused! You continue to spread error and confusion – “the present establishment” – how sloppy! What a perverted attitude you have – lumping popes, cardinals and bishops as a group as conniving at abuse. Bringing in "much of the the curia” again is your favourite red herring of confusion as the Vatican has been resolutely tackling the abuses for a long time, led by Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI. No “faithful” leave the Church – you concoct fantasies. The faithful pray, fast, do penance and work to support the Mystical Body of Christ.
Some lax bishops, products of the rampant dissent, have failed to adequately discipline offenders and weed them out, as we have known for ages, but you contribute nothing positive – only criticise, and muddle things for yourself.“Then there’s Ireland—ground zero for the European scandals raging now, just as Boston was for the American scandals back in 2002. Brendan O’Neill, editor of the Spiked-Online website and no particular friend of the Church, points out that the Irish government’s official commission spent 10 years, from 1999 to 2009, intensively inviting, from Irish-born people around the world, reports of abuse at Irish religious institutions. Out of the hundreds of thousands of students who passed through Catholic schools in the 85 years from 1914 to 1999, the commission managed to gather 381 claims—with 35 percent of those charges made against lay staff and fellow pupils rather than priests.
‘It might be unfashionable to say the following but it is true nonetheless,’ O’Neill concludes. ‘Very, very small numbers of children in the care or teaching of the Catholic Church in Europe in recent decades were sexually abused, but very, very many of them actually received a decent standard of education.’
“And yet, precisely because priests are supposed to behave better than other people do, fulfilling their vows of celibacy, it’s not an answer to point out that higher percentages of children are abused by other segments of the population. There were never a lot of these Catholic cases, but there were enough—with every single one a horror, both in the act itself and in the failure of the bishops to react forcefully and quickly. The Catholic Church didn’t start the worldwide epidemic of child sexual abuse, and it didn’t materially advance it. But the bureaucracy of the Church sure as hell didn’t do enough to fight that epidemic when it broke out among its own clergy.”

Other readers will be glad to know that the Holy Father has appointed an apostolic delegate to supervise the Legionaries of Christ.

Yes I do lump the popes, cardinals and bishops together with their sycophants in the curia, because they condoned abuse by their inaction.

There is no red herring about the numbers of bishops and popes who didn’t do everything in their power to stop abuse. JP2 and B16 kept Maciel in the priesthood even after knowing he abused kids and fathered children, they both kept his actions secret for years.

We are not talking about the abuse in strictly legal terms as the lawyers for the church and its spokesman like to do. Its not about whether the church responded in time to complaints moving through the legal system.

Its about the failure of every pastor, Msgr., vicar, bishop ,cardinal or pope who didn’t respond to the complaints of victims or their moms who wrote letters of complaint.

The abuse crisis is a result of the abject failure of members of the hierarchy to respond in a Christlike fashion to members of the congregation. The hierarchy’s commissions and omissions are inexcusable from either an orthodox or more enlightened viewpoint of what Jesus taught.

The reason that the issues has people attacking it from all sides is that the behavior of the hierarchy is deplorable from any viewpoint. No reasonable person can defend what the leaders of our church did. No liberal is saying that abusing kids is OK, no orthodox person is saying that abuse glorifies God. Who is saying that lying about the abuse and the subterfuge and transferring of abusers in any manner is related to the teachings of Christ?

So in essence we have a defense that is not about becoming a church leadership becoming forthright in more closely acting in accordance to what Jesus taught, but a hierarchy trying to defend its right to remain in power even as it continues to be deceitful to the congregation. It steadfastly defends its right to secrecy, even as perverted clerics remain in the priesthood.

And that makes the leadership of our church perverted as well.

per·vert·ed   
–adjective
1.Pathology. changed to or being of an unnatural or abnormal kind: a perverted interest in death.
2.turned from what is right; wicked; misguided; distorted.
3.affected with or caused by perversion.

And the saddest part is that the leadership of our church wants us to see their behavior as being somehow justified.

Peace

 

[Tigg]

Ya know, portarica, I believe that some of your points cannot be refuted. My faith is my greatest and most cherished gift. We would all be blind to say that something, somewhere has not gone terribly awry with the Catholic clergy. In a way, it defies explanation so all I can do on an individual basis is to cling tightly to the words of Jesus and believe in the indefectibility of the Church and let the storm swirl around me.

That’s no comfort until one realizes that all of what is happening has been prophecied long ago and by many saints, even our Blessed Mother.

I’ve been waiting for an opportune time to post this, and yes, we are not required to believe in private revelation, but I know that even devout Catholics, firm in their faith, have experienced a major unsettling over the past few years. So be comforted, those of you who do NOT despise prophecies, nor stifle the Spirit:

EXCERPT FROM STORY OF CHURCH APPROVED APPARITION: As Mother Mariana was praying in the upper choir loft before the Blessed Sacrament, as she often did, the Sanctuary lamp went out. Mother Mariana was left in complete darkness. The extinguishing of the Sanctuary Light signified the dire straits the Church would be in during these times.

Our Lady of Good Success was quite clear on what would be the demise of the Catholic Church—the general theme–a lax and perverse clergy. Certain members of the Catholic clergy would become as thieves stealing that Tabernacle light…thieves that would steal what is rightfully ours by virtue of our baptism in the Catholic Church—our Faith. They would rob us of Doctrine, Dogma and Tradition—ransacking the Church as it were leaving us in total darkness without even as much as the light of the Sanctuary Lamp (which signifies the presence of the Holy Eucharist—Jesus Christ, Himself). Our Lady of Good Success went into great detail to explain what the five reasons were for the extinguishing of the light.

The first reason why the lamp was snuffed out was because in the end of the 19th Century and the 20th Century, heresies would prevail not only in Ecuador but universally. “As these heresies spread and dominate, the precious light of Faith will be extinguished in souls by the almost total corruption of customs.”

The second reason was that in these times the Conceptionist Community would shrink and even be infected with bad attitudes and false charity as a result of the pervading situation of the Church at the time. "

The third reason the lamp failed was due to the fact that during this century a worldwide campaign against the virtues of chastity, and purity would succeed in ruining the youth. Our Lady of Good Success affirmed, “There will be almost no virgin souls in the world”.

The fourth reason the lamp was put out was to demonstrate how the Masonic and other secret sects would have so much influence on society and even the Church. **“During these unfortunate times,” she foretold, “evil will invade childhood innocence. In this way, vocations to the priesthood will be lost, resulting in a true calamity.” **

Continued, next post

 

[Tigg]

(Continued from previous post)

Our Lady of Good Success could foresee that there would still be some good, faithful religious that would be willing to suffer all for the salvation of souls and sustenance of the Holy Catholic Church. “The secular clergy will leave much to be desired because priests will become careless in their sacred duties. Lacking the divine compass, they will stray from the road traced by God for the priestly ministry, and they will become attached to wealth and riches, which they will unduly strive to attain. How the Church will suffer during this dark night! Lacking a prelate and a father to guide them …many priests will lose their spirit, placing their souls in great danger.”

The poor priestly souls that would be left to uphold the Church would suffer greatly.

"Against them the impious will rage a cruel war, overwhelming them with vituperations, calumnies and vexations in order to stop them from fulfilling their ministry. But they, like firm columns, will remain unswerving and will confront everything with a spirit of humility and sacrifice with which they will be vested, by virtue of the infinite merits of my most Holy Son, Who will love them in the innermost fibers of His Most Holy and Tender Heart.

Our Lady of Good Success implored that the people of this time should “clamor insistently” to the Heavenly Father for an end to ‘these ominous times’ sending to the Church a prelate and father who would restore the spirit to the priests". The fifth reason the lamp went out was due to those who have the financial means to help the Church but do nothing. Because of their uncaring attitude toward God and His Church, they would have allowed evil to seemingly triumph.

Due to the extreme wickedness that Mother Mariana saw in these visions of our era, she fainted and remained unconscious for two days. The doctor, unable to revive her, expected her death to be at hand. But Mother Mariana miraculously awoke and returned to health to live another year.

We are living in a time of the great crisis of Faith and morals as prophesied by Our Lady. The confusion is of such magnitude that it is not only subverting the temporal sphere, but also penetrates the walls of the Church itself. Indeed, as Our Lady prophesied, the corruption of customs has become general and the precious light of Faith almost extinct. Yet the message of Our Lady of Good Success ends with a note of great hope: When everything will seem lost and paralyzed, that will be “the happy beginning of the complete restoration. This will mark the arrival of my hour, when I, in a marvelous way, will dethrone the proud and cursed Satan, trampling him under my feet and fettering him in the infernal abyss.” It is the promise echoed by Our Lady again at Fatima in 1917: “In the end, My Immaculate Heart will triumph.”

Thus it seems opportune to turn to Our Lady of Good Success and invoke Her, begging for every good success - both temporal and spiritual. It is the moment to ask for her orientation and certainty amid this storm, and the courage and strength to keep aloft the standard of the Faith.

Finally, let us pray that Our Lady will intervene quickly to restore the Church and society, so that she may reassume her throne and reign again in glory as Queen of all the earth.

traditioninaction.org/tiabk003.htm

 

[portarica]

Ya know, portarica, I believe that some of your points cannot be refuted. My faith is my greatest and most cherished gift. We would all be blind to say that something, somewhere has not gone terribly awry with the Catholic clergy. In a way, it defies explanation so all I can do on an individual basis is to cling tightly to the words of Jesus and believe in the indefectibility of the Church and let the storm swirl around me.

That’s no comfort until one realizes that all of what is happening has been prophecied long ago and by many saints, even our Blessed Mother.

I’ve been waiting for an opportune time to post this, and yes, we are not required to believe in private revelation, but I know that even devout Catholics, firm in their faith, have experienced a major unsettling over the past few years. So be comforted, those of you who do NOT despise prophecies, nor stifle the Spirit:

**EXCERPT FROM STORY OF CHURCH APPROVED **APPARITION: As Mother Mariana was praying in the upper choir loft before the Blessed Sacrament, as she often did, the Sanctuary lamp went out. Mother Mariana was left in complete darkness. The extinguishing of the Sanctuary Light signified the dire straits the Church would be in during these times.

Our Lady of Good Success was quite clear on what would be the demise of the Catholic Church—the general theme–a lax and perverse clergy. Certain members of the Catholic clergy would become as thieves stealing that Tabernacle light…thieves that would steal what is rightfully ours by virtue of our baptism in the Catholic Church—our Faith. They would rob us of Doctrine, Dogma and Tradition—ransacking the Church as it were leaving us in total darkness without even as much as the light of the Sanctuary Lamp (which signifies the presence of the Holy Eucharist—Jesus Christ, Himself). Our Lady of Good Success went into great detail to explain what the five reasons were for the extinguishing of the light.

The first reason why the lamp was snuffed out was because in the end of the 19th Century and the 20th Century, heresies would prevail not only in Ecuador but universally. “As these heresies spread and dominate, the precious light of Faith will be extinguished in souls by the almost total corruption of customs.”

The second reason was that in these times the Conceptionist Community would shrink and even be infected with bad attitudes and false charity as a result of the pervading situation of the Church at the time. "

The third reason the lamp failed was due to the fact that during this century a worldwide campaign against the virtues of chastity, and purity would succeed in ruining the youth. Our Lady of Good Success affirmed, “There will be almost no virgin souls in the world”.

The fourth reason the lamp was put out was to demonstrate how the Masonic and other secret sects would have so much influence on society and even the Church. “During these unfortunate times,” she foretold, "evil will invade childhood innocence. In this way, vocations to the priesthood will be lost, resulting in a true calamity."

Continued, next post

It is sort of Ironic, that some who picture themselves as “orthodox” do not use the standards of Jesus when discussing the behavior of the leadership of our church.

I would think that being “orthodox” would mean having the highest allegiance to what Jesus taught. All the warnings about the devil and such that are trotted out by the “orthodox” are just further evidence that the leadership of our church is incompetent when it comes to acting or teaching in a manner that is in concordance with what Jesus taught.

So why are the orthodox not complaining? Is it because they see the leadership of our church being more open to masses in Latin ? Do the orthodox feel it is more important to worship God in a specific manner than to see the teachings of Jesus carried out?

Why are the orthodox OK with the subterfuge of the church’s leaders?

I don’t get it? Am I missing some doctrine or something that says it is OK to flaunt ones position as a way of justifying deceit? Is any child of God less precious than the reputation or legacy of any church leader?

Because that in a nutshell is what this is all about. The leaders of the church committed scandalous acts, but they don’t want to take responsibility for those actions because it would taint their personal legacies and maybe interfere with the beatification of some of them. I’m sure Maciel was thought to be a potential saint a few years ago, and now it appears that JP2 had much more involvement with the abuse cover up than it seemed when he was fast tracked for sainthood.

Its sort of sick that our church’s leaders put their positions and legacies ahead of the needs of Jesus’ flock and more critically put the wants of the hierarchy ahead of the safety of Jesus’ lambs.

And if the whole lot of them resigned tonight, the church would prevail , the orthodox could focus on their orthodox needs and many of those driven away from Jesus by the actions of the church’s leaders could return home confident that the church was a safe place for their children and their faith.

Peace

 

[Abu]

portarica
the leadership of our church is incompetent when it comes to acting or teaching in a manner that is in concordance with what Jesus taught.
The leaders of the church committed scandalous acts, but they don’t want to take responsibility for those actions because it would taint their personal legacies and maybe interfere with the beatification of some of them.
And if the whole lot of them resigned tonight, the church would prevail, the orthodox could focus on their orthodox needs and many of those driven away from Jesus by the actions of the church’s leaders could return home confident that the church was a safe place for their children and their faith.

Facing Reality
What a sad example of confusion. In this world now engulfed in secular humanist free-for-all sex, abortion, condom-mania, and homomania, the safest place in this world of organisations, concerning sexual abuse, is the Catholic Church. The falsehood of breaking “apostolic succession” as based on “theological reasons” mimic Alice in Wonderland scenarios.

So the “leadership” is “incompetent” is it? You know of the failures in governance and personal sin, but you will not to see the apologies and the actions of renewal. But now, you attack Jesus Himself, for you make Him a liar when He told you heed and obey His Church’s teaching, and you say She is incompetent in teaching!
You have had ample time to know the facts – the dissent (like yours) which fed sins, the laxity of some bishops, the skullduggery of some psychologists (post #86), the corrective actions of Popes and the CDF (post #76), and the fact that the there has been a dramatic decrease in the abuse because of these efforts.

“He that is without sin, let him cast the first stone.” (Jn 8:7) “Neither do I condemn you. Go and sin no more.” (Jn 8:11).
Who among us has not had to forgive? “Then Peter came to Him and said, ‘Lord, how often shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? Up to seven times?’ Jesus said to him, ‘I do not say to you, up to seven times, but up to seventy times seven.’ ”

 

[portarica]

Facing Reality
What a sad example of confusion. In this world now engulfed in secular humanist free-for-all sex, abortion, condom-mania, and homomania, the safest place in this world of organisations, concerning sexual abuse, is the Catholic Church. The falsehood of breaking “apostolic succession” as based on “theological reasons” mimic Alice in Wonderland scenarios.

So the “leadership” is “incompetent” is it? You know of the failures in governance and personal sin, but you will not to see the apologies and the actions of renewal. But now, you attack Jesus Himself, for you make Him a liar when He told you heed and obey His Church’s teaching, and you say She is incompetent in teaching!
You have had ample time to know the facts – the dissent (like yours) which fed sins, the laxity of some bishops, the skullduggery of some psychologists (post #86), the corrective actions of Popes and the CDF (post #76), and the fact that the there has been a dramatic decrease in the abuse because of these efforts.

“He that is without sin, let him cast the first stone.” (Jn 8:7) “Neither do I condemn you. Go and sin no more.” (Jn 8:11).
Who among us has not had to forgive? “Then Peter came to Him and said, ‘Lord, how often shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? Up to seven times?’ Jesus said to him, ‘I do not say to you, up to seven times, but up to seventy times seven.’ ”

The abuse situation as handled by the leadership of the church, shows they have no understanding of any of the verses you quote.

We are not talking about an instance of sin and then sinning no more. We are talking about sins covering up sins.

And as to forgiveness, that doesn’t mean we must still have them as the leaders of the church. That is where the incompetence comes in. Not only did they sin because they didn’t understand what God said regarding being as shepherds to His flock, but they pretend that we are stupid by continuing to practice subterfuge and that shows they are not qualified to lead us.

I have no problem forgiving them, but first they must stop the sins of deceit and then they can resign so people qualified can run the church.

So I ask you, which actions of the leadership of our church in regards to the abuse issue, show a deep understanding of any of Jesus’ teachings and can you provide a few examples? Specifically in the area of personal behavior and treatment of children and the least?

I await your reply.

Peace

 

[portarica]

Here is an interesting view of the situation in context with the work being done in His vineyards.

nytimes.com/2010/05/02/opinion/02kristof.html

Peace

 

[Dale_M]

Here is an interesting view of the situation in context with the work being done in His vineyards.

nytimes.com/2010/05/02/opinion/02kristof.html

I am glad Mr. Kristof is drawing attention to the good works done by priests and religious in southern Sudan, However, he is dividing the Catholic Church into two halves. One is composed of holy, meek and self-sacrificing individuals. The other is comprised of a hierarchy which is arrogant and indifferent to the needs of the weak.

Its a back-handed compliment, at best. While praising good persons motivated by Christian charity, he condemns the institution which shepherds the development of such Christian charity. Following his logic, if the structure of the Church is corrupt, then the good persons of the Catholic Church would be better off independent of it.

 

[portarica]

I am glad Mr. Kristof is drawing attention to the good works done by priests and religious in southern Sudan, However, he is dividing the Catholic Church into two halves. One is composed of holy, meek and self-sacrificing individuals. The other is comprised of a hierarchy which is arrogant and indifferent to the needs of the weak.

Its a back-handed compliment, at best. While praising good persons motivated by Christian charity, he condemns the institution which shepherds the development of such Christian charity. Following his logic, if the structure of the Church is corrupt, then the good persons of the Catholic Church would be better off independent of it.

Actually the point he was making was that “institution” in the personage of its leaders basically has not been good at shepherding. Perhaps the church would be better off without that element.

It seems that the good works of Christ continue despite the way the leaders have acted. It would seem that those motivated to do the good work of Jesus would continue to do so if the leadership changed.

I don’t think that we have to worry about catholic charity declining if the the leadership changed, in fact it would probably grow and be a brighter beacon if those seeking to share the good news of Jesus within Catholicism didn’t have to deal with all the negative actions of the curia being revealed.

Peace

 

[portarica]

Facing Reality
What a sad example of confusion. In this world now engulfed in secular humanist free-for-all sex, abortion, condom-mania, and homomania, the safest place in this world of organisations, concerning sexual abuse, is the Catholic Church. The falsehood of breaking “apostolic succession” as based on “theological reasons” mimic Alice in Wonderland scenarios.

So the “leadership” is “incompetent” is it? You know of the failures in governance and personal sin, but you will not to see the apologies and the actions of renewal. But now, you attack Jesus Himself, for you make Him a liar when He told you heed and obey His Church’s teaching, and you say She is incompetent in teaching!
You have had ample time to know the facts – the dissent (like yours) which fed sins, the laxity of some bishops, the skullduggery of some psychologists (post #86), the corrective actions of Popes and the CDF (post #76), and the fact that the there has been a dramatic decrease in the abuse because of these efforts.

“He that is without sin, let him cast the first stone.” (Jn 8:7) “Neither do I condemn you. Go and sin no more.” (Jn 8:11).
Who among us has not had to forgive? “Then Peter came to Him and said, ‘Lord, how often shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? Up to seven times?’ Jesus said to him, ‘I do not say to you, up to seven times, but up to seventy times seven.’ ”

Wow I guess I didn’t read this clearly the first time. You are saying that I make Jesus a liar for saying that the way the church leaders have acted shows incompetence.

If you are saying that the way the church leaders have acted is trying to teach us what to do, then you are right. But you are not saying that, or are you?

Luckily, I don’t subscribe to the notion that the way the leaders of our church acted has any relation to what Jesus taught in word or what He taught by example.

Also it, seems counter to what Jesus taught to not want the church’s leaders to be more faithful examples of what Jesus taught. But maybe I’m wrong on what Jesus taught and He was really all about enabling the continuation of abuse of kids and subterfuge. Is that what you feel?

Peace

 

[Sailor_Kenshin]

Facing Reality
What a sad example of confusion. In this world now engulfed in secular humanist free-for-all sex, abortion, condom-mania, and homomania, the safest place in this world of organisations, concerning sexual abuse, is the Catholic Church. The falsehood of breaking “apostolic succession” as based on “theological reasons” mimic Alice in Wonderland scenarios.

So the “leadership” is “incompetent” is it? You know of the failures in governance and personal sin, but you will not to see the apologies and the actions of renewal. But now, you attack Jesus Himself, for you make Him a liar when He told you heed and obey His Church’s teaching, and you say She is incompetent in teaching!
You have had ample time to know the facts – the dissent (like yours) which fed sins, the laxity of some bishops, the skullduggery of some psychologists (post #86), the corrective actions of Popes and the CDF (post #76), and the fact that the there has been a dramatic decrease in the abuse because of these efforts.

“He that is without sin, let him cast the first stone.” (Jn 8:7) “Neither do I condemn you. Go and sin no more.” (Jn 8:11).
Who among us has not had to forgive? “Then Peter came to Him and said, ‘Lord, how often shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? Up to seven times?’ Jesus said to him, ‘I do not say to you, up to seven times, but up to seventy times seven.’ ”

Amen.

But there are people who seem to be looking for any excuse to bash the Church and jump ship. They even seem to relish it, and feed on rumor, half-truths, innuendo, and outright media lies.

They believe the newspapers, but not the Church.

 

[Tigg]

Actually the point he was making was that “institution” in the personage of its leaders basically has not been good at shepherding. Perhaps the church would be better off without that element.

Peace

WOW again! I hope you aren’t saying what I think you may be saying. Sorry, but the patriarchal, hierarchical Church is the manner in which Christ Himself instituted. You know, the keys of the Kingdom given to Peter and all of that…