John Paul II

[ChristisRisen32]

My best friend who’s Lutheran started asking me about the Papacy and I told her I thought Pope John Paul II was one of the holiest men who ever lived. She send me this article and tld me it was very concerning that a man who could stand up against Communism, ignored the child molestation that was uncovered in the 1980s. What are good responses to this article?

thenation.com/article/160242/shame-john-paul-ii-how-sex-abuse-scandal-stained-his-papacy

 

[Huiou_Theou]

My best friend who’s Lutheran started asking me about the Papacy and I told her I thought Pope John Paul II was one of the holiest men who ever lived. She send me this article and tld me it was very concerning that a man who could stand up against Communism, ignored the child molestation that was uncovered in the 1980s. What are good responses to this article?

thenation.com/article/160242/shame-john-paul-ii-how-sex-abuse-scandal-stained-his-papacy

Pope John Paul made public apologies for it; he came to the US and met with some victims, if I remember rightly. Very few bishops have done the same.
There is a double edged issue here – for I am one of the people who had a pedophile priest in my parish with kids; and we’re not talking the 1980’s – we’re talking the 90’s. But I tell you, even with what I have experienced – I believe Pope John Paul II to be a very holy man, and I don’t believe it really possible that he could have done much better. The media coverage of him really is just hype. If she want’s to know what a victim feels, it’s not hate toward PJP-II; but it is disgust with my own archdiocese!

To prove the point, (and I can produce evidence if needed):
I had an email conversation with Cathy Shannon at the Archdiocese of Portland.
After the first email, she stopped responding to me.

This is an excerpt from OCT 8,2009. Cathy is the one placed there to supposedly be “sensitive” to us that have had pedophiles in their parish as a “solution” to the priests covering it up; and this is the gist of my letter:

** On Mrs. XXXXXXXX’s “Growing in faith” handout to parents which I was given, belatedly, it says – “Please feel free to visit our classroom anytime**.”

… snip …

** What I witnessed did cause me concern, for one of the children complained bitterly about having to go through the called to protect session – and I began to suspect I was not the only parent who was not informed of the nature of the material to be presented and especially not their right sanctioned directly by the Vatican and agreed to by Vlazny, to teach this particular material on their own.

As I work with a Psychiatrist who deals with child abuse issues as a specialty; I asked her regarding what I ought to do for my child. She informed me of documents from Rome and advised that it would be best for me to deal with my own child specifically on this issue – but unfortunately that was before I knew when the class would occur; so – hoping to avoid future conflicts – I desired to open a discussion with the religious coordinator Elizabeth Millager.
**
** My first concern is that I am being told conflicting statements regarding the Archdioce’s policy. Is it in fact Archdiocese policy that a parent may not observe a class at all because of the statement aforementioned that a background check is required? If this is so, could you explain to me how I could have been in error in informing Mrs. XXXXX that her invitation to parents to visit was “misleading”?

… snip …**

Etc.
I’ve removed the teacher’s name as she really was innocent and Elizabeth Millager’s chumyness with my wife and panic at the situation was the sole driver of the teachers reactions to me.

It makes me sad that I made that volunteer teacher uncomfortable, but at the same time – this isn’t PJP-II’s fault, nor is it Pope Benedict’s; This is just plain old neighbor bullying neighbor to protect an “idealized” church that doesn’t exist.
Tell you friend that the same happened during the scandal, and a great deal of this happened at the hands of parishoners – not just clergy.

Presently my wife is now divorcing me, and on that score – the Archdiocese (so far) is repeating the action of Cathy Shannon, and I am not getting a response.
I can’t help but wonder if they looked up the baptismal certificate of my son, and realizing they have a bomb – just are refusing to answer out of fear.

So let your friend know this – I STILL love the Catholic Church in spite of what happened; but it is true that there was AND STILL IS a very grave problem. It also goes beyond the Catholic church, and is found in public and private schools, and many other institutions which are only now beginning to be examined.

Our society as a whole, here in the USA, is as guilty for what happened as the priests and bishops are who failed to do anything more than political bold facing.

Hi Cathy,

I have received no reply regarding my questions about the CCD program at st. Wenceslaus. I have since gotten fr. Jim Stange’s e-mail, and have received no replay from him either.
I would like at least a reply indicating you received the earlier e-mail regarding “actual” diocesan policy about parents visiting their children’s CCD classes;
My concern is that I am either being forgotten, or this e-mail is somehow out of service – so even if you can’t answer the question at this time, at least let me know you have it.
That would save on registered mail.

Thanks.
–Andrew Robinson

P.S. There was no response after the first e-mail…
Since Pope John Paul, II, did respond. That alone makes him a hero in my eyes.

 

[jesus4ever]

if i ever have a son i already have a name for him JOHNPAUL

 

[inkaneer]

My best friend who’s Lutheran started asking me about the Papacy and I told her I thought Pope John Paul II was one of the holiest men who ever lived. She send me this article and tld me it was very concerning that a man who could stand up against Communism, ignored the child molestation that was uncovered in the 1980s. What are good responses to this article?

thenation.com/article/160242/shame-john-paul-ii-how-sex-abuse-scandal-stained-his-papacy

I am not sure JPII was as culpable as your friend may think. Lost in all of this pedophilia reporting is that bishops are administrators of their own diocese. I am not sure how much information gets reported to Rome. In the beginning the bishops sought advice from psychologists on the matter and received assurrance that this was indeed a treatable condition. So priests were sent to treatment centers and once treatment was completed they returned to ministry. Well we all know now that pedophilia is not treatable and the only recourse is removal from ministry. Psychology and its ‘experts’ failed us. The bishops and we all learned this the hard way. My question is whether this would have been reported to Rome other than the laicization requests from the individual bishops. Laicization could be from any number of reasons and is not limited to just pedophilia. Also, let us not forget that bishops are focused on forgiving sin and not civil law. So how much of this was reported to Rome by the bishops? I don’t think much of it was. Also, remember that much of the alleged abuse supposedly occurred before JPII was pope. Many allegations were 40 and 50 years old and against priests who had meanwhile died. How much of this do we hang on the neck of one man whose knowledge of what was occurring was probably no better than our own?

 

[Huiou_Theou]

I am not sure JPII was as culpable as your friend may think. Lost in all of this pedophilia reporting is that bishops are administrators of their own diocese. I am not sure how much information gets reported to Rome. In the beginning the bishops sought advice from psychologists on the matter and received assurrance that this was indeed a treatable condition. So priests were sent to treatment centers and once treatment was completed they returned to ministry. Well we all know now that pedophilia is not treatable and the only recourse is removal from ministry. Psychology and its ‘experts’ failed us. The bishops and we all learned this the hard way. My question is whether this would have been reported to Rome other than the laicization requests from the individual bishops. Laicization could be from any number of reasons and is not limited to just pedophilia. Also, let us not forget that bishops are focused on forgiving sin and not civil law. So how much of this was reported to Rome by the bishops? I don’t think much of it was. Also, remember that much of the alleged abuse supposedly occurred before JPII was pope. Many allegations were 40 and 50 years old and against priests who had meanwhile died. How much of this do we hang on the neck of one man whose knowledge of what was occurring was probably no better than our own?

My own comment on this appears to have failed to post – SO I won’t repeat it, but I will concur with your statement. PJP II didn’t get told much at all.
It isn’t true that all Psychologists failed us, though. There was selective listening.
My family’s case was not 40 to 50 years ago; and even now, the Psychiatrist (Md. Phd BOTH) I have worked with concerning these issues is being ignored by the local Archbishop. But it is a deeper problem than that, for Archbishop Leveda left a crew in place for the new archbishop which themselves had refused to listen in the past. Archbishop Vlazny has documents in place that are guidelines for the men and women professionals of his archdiocese to act by – and they refuse to do so, quite possibly out of fear. The climate which allowed the problem to exist in the first place STILL exists. It has nothing to do with men covering up for men, for women in power in the archdiocese are also choosing badly.

The previous Archbishop of Bend, OR, did not act the same as the archbishop of Portland (Leveda) in the 90’s and although they both had problems, the way they fared shows the difference wisdom makes when it comes to choosing the professionals one sits on the same side of the table with.

The past and present is documented; if anyone dares to take a good look.
PJP II was truly a hero. I find no fault with Benedict at this time either.

 

[Bruised_Reed]

My best friend who’s Lutheran started asking me about the Papacy and I told her I thought Pope John Paul II was one of the holiest men who ever lived. She send me this article and tld me it was very concerning that a man who could stand up against Communism, ignored the child molestation that was uncovered in the 1980s. What are good responses to this article?

thenation.com/article/160242/shame-john-paul-ii-how-sex-abuse-scandal-stained-his-papacy

This may not be helpful but JPII was directly affected by communism; his country was taken over by communists. And one of the things the communists did was falsely accuse priests of crimes such as these. He was devastated by hearing about all the cases that came to light; I heard this on a CAL show - one that probably isn’t accessible at this time.

The article doesn’t mention anything that has been done to make things safer for children. Nor does it compare the number of cases involving schools or others places children are vulnerable and no one is implementing any protocols or practices on the scale the the Church has. And it quotes Fr. McBrien. 'Nuff said.

 

[Tenofovir]

Note that left wing parties were against banning child pornography in Holland and Denmark. Holland:

There was no mention of child pornography. Also the proposals of the Ministers De Ruiter and Korthals Altes included no child pornography clause, despite repeated pressure from the Christian Democrat fraction. These ministers took the existing prohibition on sex with children as sufficient to combat the production and distribution of child pornography. That argument is, however, questionable, since the origin of much pornography is not known, so that tracking down and prosecuting the producers is often impossible. It should be remembered that the main thrust of the proposed reforms was the repeal of old and useless legislation.

ipt-forensics.com/journal/volume4/j4_2_1.htm

Child pornography trade was legal in much of Western Europe until the 1980s. In fact the people who moan most about Catholic Church abuse scandals were some of the ones most opposed to criminalisation of actual, real, child pornography. Why? Because it was probably made outside their countries, and so it didn’t matter if children elsewhere were abused to produce material. Local production was outlawed by other laws. **It was not an important issue. **

This is both an indictment on modern values and a point that child abuse was not taken very seriously anywhere, probably because most people thought it was very rare because it’s such an abnormal thing to do. Actual sales of child pornography in shops in Europe did not offend people enough to force through legislation. Who was thinking of the children then?

Do we see modern media crying about this now? No. I bet you didn’t even know about this. There are still countries in Europe which do not possess specific anti-child porn laws.

 

[Sacred_Heart_1]

My best friend who’s Lutheran started asking me about the Papacy and I told her I thought Pope John Paul II was one of the holiest men who ever lived. She send me this article and tld me it was very concerning that a man who could stand up against Communism, ignored the child molestation that was uncovered in the 1980s. What are good responses to this article?

thenation.com/article/160242/shame-john-paul-ii-how-sex-abuse-scandal-stained-his-papacy

I don’t think that the Pope should be held accountable for the child molestation scandal. It kind of took everyone by surprise, even the Pope; so how could he react. Anyways the child molestation was committed by a few priests. It has been the medias overexaggeration that has brought this into a bigger deal than it is. Many innocent priests have been falsely accused since. The Church, including the Pope, was just trying to get a handle on this. Like getting all the facts straight before it acted. The Church has done nothing wrong.

People accuse the Church of many things because the Church is the light of the world and they do not want to face their sins.