W
WanderAimlessly
Guest
Two things:
*]It was bound to happen and I am not surprised it happen
*]It was wrong for the man to attack the Cardinal no matter what you think of him.
- Status
R
roymckenzie
Guest
Please help me why do they say “Leading U.S. Roman Catholic Cardinal Roger Mahony” other than his diocese what does he lead?
W
WanderAimlessly
Guest
Not an issue here. The only issue is the assault.
R
roymckenzie
Guest
Why is that not an issue? The article said he was a “Leading U.S. Roman Catholic Cardinal” and I am wondering what makes him a leading Catholic Cardinal.
Any time someone assaults a person it is wrong. It is at least doubly wrong to assault a 71 year old.
T
TMC
Guest
Its poorly constructed but I think they mean that he is a “leading U.S. Roman Catholic.” His title/name is Cardinal Roger Mahony. Either way I don’ think anyone can dispute that its a fair characterization. There are 69 million Catholics in the U.S. Only 13 are Cardinals. Being one makes you ‘leading’ no matter how you slice it.
M
mdzialo
Guest
The paper says:
"a former Catholic priest was sentenced to 10 years in prison after pleading guilty to molesting two teenage boys in the mid-1990s in the Los Angeles area.
Michael Stephen Baker, 59, is believed to have molested more than 20 young boys in his 26 years as a priest and had confessed his problem to Mahony in 1986.
Mahony, who was then a bishop, sent Baker away for treatment and later reassigned him to other parishes."
In addition to paying out the 660 million dollars in church money to the victims, maybe the LA Cardinal should show some personal accountability and retire to a distant, far away, island - where he’d be safe.
"a former Catholic priest was sentenced to 10 years in prison after pleading guilty to molesting two teenage boys in the mid-1990s in the Los Angeles area.
Michael Stephen Baker, 59, is believed to have molested more than 20 young boys in his 26 years as a priest and had confessed his problem to Mahony in 1986.
Mahony, who was then a bishop, sent Baker away for treatment and later reassigned him to other parishes."
In addition to paying out the 660 million dollars in church money to the victims, maybe the LA Cardinal should show some personal accountability and retire to a distant, far away, island - where he’d be safe.
W
WanderAimlessly
Guest
I find it disconcerting that the only things people here want to comment about is the grammar in the article and that the Cardinal should be sent away. 
THE ARTICLE IS ABOUT THE ASSAULT ON A CARDINAL.
Walt, please close or delete this this thread. It is not worth keeping open or even here with these types of comments.
THE ARTICLE IS ABOUT THE ASSAULT ON A CARDINAL.
Walt, please close or delete this this thread. It is not worth keeping open or even here with these types of comments.
W
whatevergirl
Guest
He shouldn’t have been assaulted. There’s no benefit to assaulting someone, and it’s wrong in God’s eyes. I have to wonder though, why aren’t these Cardinals and Bishops being held accountable? It’s an awfully odd message that the media/public gets of the Catholic Church. We need to think about this for a moment. The RCC preaches against the atrocity of abortion, and rightfully so, but several Bishops, etc. pass(ed) on abusive priests to potentially molest other unsuspecting children. 
You either are for protecting the innocent or you’re not. And with this type of ‘scandal’ it is no wonder many people have mixed messages of what the RCC stands for. I will always stand by the RCC…people make mistakes. We are all human. But, someone should have been protecting the children! Why weren’t they?? I mean, what could be more important than protecting the lives of children, when you sense they may be in danger?
You either are for protecting the innocent or you’re not. And with this type of ‘scandal’ it is no wonder many people have mixed messages of what the RCC stands for. I will always stand by the RCC…people make mistakes. We are all human. But, someone should have been protecting the children! Why weren’t they?? I mean, what could be more important than protecting the lives of children, when you sense they may be in danger?
B
bones_IV
Guest
Far as I’m concerned this is hopefully a wake up call to the Cardinal!
W
Walt_Oliver
Guest
This thread is about the assault on the Cardinal. If it turns into a “Bash Mahony” thread, it will be closed. Please stay on topic.
R
retrovert
Guest
My wife and I talked about this very thing months ago and surprized it has not happened sooner. I am not bashing the Cardinal, but he is certainly not very popular in our diocese. I pray that nothing more serious happens to him. He really needs security whenever he goes out.
M
mark_a
Guest
Was the attacker ditraught over abuse or the payout?
W
WanderAimlessly
Guest
Who know his state of mind and it does not do any good to speculate.
S
SemperFidelis
Guest
I am not advocating this position, but I thought I should post it nonetheless as it is a possibility and it is pertinent to the topic, not to mention it is somewhat funny or ironic, or both:
from: closedcafeteria.blogspot.com/2007/12/quote-of-day_07.html
Quote of the Day
There were no witnesses. He didn’t file a police report. In fact Cardinal Mahony didn’t tell anyone that he had been physically assaulted until months after the fact. Now the trail is cold, and unless they somehow gain more evidence, police are unlikely to find the perp. Does that seem implausible to you? A potentially dangerous, violent man is on the loose in LA. He could be a threat to others. And yet the cardinal-archbishop didn’t bother to tell police?
Oh wait. Never mind.
If this somehow breaks the forum rules, mods please remove it, and I sincerely apologize.
from: closedcafeteria.blogspot.com/2007/12/quote-of-day_07.html
Quote of the Day
There were no witnesses. He didn’t file a police report. In fact Cardinal Mahony didn’t tell anyone that he had been physically assaulted until months after the fact. Now the trail is cold, and unless they somehow gain more evidence, police are unlikely to find the perp. Does that seem implausible to you? A potentially dangerous, violent man is on the loose in LA. He could be a threat to others. And yet the cardinal-archbishop didn’t bother to tell police?
Oh wait. Never mind.
If this somehow breaks the forum rules, mods please remove it, and I sincerely apologize.
M
mark_a
Guest
If something like this happens and its not reported immediately, its best to never ever bring it up.
J
johnstown_johnn
Guest
When you get down to the nitty-gritty, Cardinal Mahony allegedly covered up for deviate priests and moved them around…allegedly. So, in the public view he is the “face” of the child molesters…rightly or wrongly.
Assault begets assault…there could not be a worse malfeasance of Holy Orders than to sexually assault kids and have it covered up. It’s not surprising that emotions are stirred in the most forceful way.
The solution is to keep deviates OUT of the seminaries and to defrock any priests that are guilty of this heinous crime…INSTANTLY.
Those that have that disorientation must be shown that it is intolerable and severe punishment is forthcoming so to help PREVENT one from doing these deeds.
IMO. jail is mandatory.
A
Angels_Watchin
Guest
If it was in fact an assault on C. Mahony by someone unknown to him, - and it was not reported - then the Cardinal is allowing a person to run loose who is so furious and out of control that he would beat a 71 year old cardinal who is known worldwide.
Sorry, it just doesn’t seem plausible. I believe, based on the story, that the cardinal knew this person and is covering something up.
Sorry, it just doesn’t seem plausible. I believe, based on the story, that the cardinal knew this person and is covering something up.
A
Angels_Watchin
Guest
Or - (another thought)
it never happened.
it never happened.
W
wifeandmomoftwo
Guest
DIng, Ding, Ding we have a winner!
So which scenario is it #1 or #2? The consensus among Catholic Bloggers our in blogger-land is that #2 is the correct answer!
- Status