News Story Today about the Pope

[mark_a]

I’m not catholic so it doesn’t effect (or is that affect) me at all. However, it does prove the point some of us here try to make: NO one is above sin and NO one deserves to be place is such high authority. Therefore, the ONLY thing we can trust is the Bible and we can pray that we are in right relationship with the Holy Spirit so we can understand and obey what we need to obey and follow our Lord Jesus Christ (hand in hand with other true believers no matter what church or denomination they belong to).

Pope Benedict: sinner
Dokimas: sinner

Both have an interpretation of the bible.

Now I have a Dilemma, don’t I.

 

[humble_maid]

I am not CC either, but I recognise that institutions are perfect places for Pedophiles to hide themselves. So often it is educated people who conceal themselves in positions of power and trust, they don’t care about Jesus or the church. Neither children or parents have the tools to fight because they come up against disbelief. When there is no disbelief there is often the issue of what the authority does about it and how they act upon it. **By its very nature a position of power will attract accusations too, sometimes prolifically. **

For example, St John of the Cross was accused of fathering a child that he couldn’t possibly have because he was elsewhere. If those in charge were to believe every accusation slung at priests, there simply wouldn’t be any priests. So church leaders are led to make wrong judgments all the time, but have to live with it and learn from it. They are effectively judging men who have wheedled their way into the church in the first place on lies and a desire to fulfill their lust. Others will have learned to lie because they have given into temptation and realise that their veil can be lifted.

Common sense is telling me, that while there were obviously some cases of abuse, there are many who have jumped on the financial band wagon. It’s illogical to suppose that the church didn’t have women around who would have seen and spoken out against any suspected abuse, or even men who had witnessed it too and brought an end to it. Even teachers, other members of society or other children. **The very nature of Christ’s Word causes people to speak out against injustice and oppression, even within churches. People hear it and they act, because they are compelled to. **

A refocusing on Christ’s Word and less on the laws of men governing the church is a good starting point. Because it would be the sickest of all churches if there wasn’t a soul who had no voice for these children and any children to come. (this is what evil doers would have people believe) The church has to be seen to do something great that will safe guard all future generations if it is to be healed. That does not come in the form of money either, it comes through change.

God bless

Thank you! Very few can see through their hate and reason as you have done. It is a matter of understanding human nature. There is no institution that has no blemish. Every man/woman is a sinner whatever his title may be; with an institution as large as the CC it is rather an alarming feat to know every member’s actions. The community has to be more vigilant and involved in church matters; to not be afraid to report any inappropriate conduct.

May Saint Michael be ever vigilant and rid the CC of these offensive abusers and protect those who are true. God Bless Everyone

 

[Dokimas]

Pope Benedict: sinner
Dokimas: sinner

Both have an interpretation of the bible.

Now I have a Dilemma, don’t I.

Read the Bible for yourself. Study what It says. Study what others say. Pray for help from the Holy Spirit. Make a decision. Obey the Bible. Find a church that you can have fellowship and that will encourage you to follow Jesus and help others find Jesus as Savior.​

I’ll give you my opinion if I have one but don’t take my word for it. Study the Bible and if I’m correct praise God; if I’m not, disreguard it and still praise God.​

BTW, I try to leave the interpretation of the Bible to the Holy Spirit. I have an understanding.​

Oh yes; I almost forgot: I will tell you up front to be careful what I say because it could be incorrect. The CC tells you they are correct and to disbelieve this is to go against God.

 

[josie_L]

VATICAN CITY – Germany’s sex abuse scandal has now reached Pope Benedict XVI: His former archdiocese disclosed that while he was archbishop a suspected pedophile priest was transferred to a job where he later abused children.

The pontiff is also under increasing fire for a 2001 Vatican document he later penned instructing bishops to keep such cases secret.

I think this is an attack on the pontiff precisely because he is conservative and orthodox, i.e., there are those who use such scandals to besmirch him so that he may be forced to abdicate (this is my opinion). More to the point, Pope Benedict did not instruct “bishops to keep such cases secret”. Here’s a website delineating the truth about the matter:

Lie no. #1. Before he became Pope Benedict XVI, Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, in 2001, issued a “confidential order to every bishop” and “ordered the cover-up” of sex abuse.

As canon lawyer Ed Peters wrote years ago, the Vatican published Ratzinger’s document in its official journal when it was first issued. Catholic press reported on the document in early 2002. The Vatican also posted the document on its web site.

**In other words, nothing was ever “confidential.” Not … even … close. As far as Jillette’s wild charges of a “cover-up,” keep reading.
**

Lie no. #2. "[Cardinal Ratzinger’s 2001 document ordered] that sex abuse investigations were to be kept secret for up to 10 years after the victim reached adulthood, upon penalty of ex-communication. You heard right."

Jillette’s claim is wild, to say the least. The document simply gave new authority to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) in handling accusations against priests, including those allegations involving child sex abuse.

Again, this document was already discussed years ago. Ed Peters’ 2005 post (scroll down to April 27) is very helpful on this topic (bold mine):

*n extending jurisdiction over these cases to 10 years past the alleged victim’s 18th birthday, CDF actually increased the amount of time that Church officials (whether diocesan or Roman) had to prosecute these offenses. Before CDF’s letter, canonical prosecutions were complicated by unduly short statutes of limitations—the very same problem, by the way, that state prosecutions encountered in many pedophilia cases. CDF was hardly obstructing justice; it was trying to make justice more available.

[K]eep in mind that most ecclesiastical crimes are not crimes under civil law, and that the Church obviously legislates for the majority of cases she encounters. For most canonical offenses, then, secrecy in criminal matters (1983 CIC 1455, 1717) accomplishes several goods: 1) protecting the integrity of the investigation; 2) shielding victims from untimely or unwanted exposure; 3) protecting accused, especially the wrongly accused, from devastating publicity; and so on. Need I say that numerous civil authorities conduct secret investigations for exactly the same kinds of reasons? More importantly, though, nothing whatsoever in CDF’s letter prevents or discourages victims (or their parents) from going to the police, private attorneys, or even the press with their stories. CDF, it seems, has a lot to learn about how to obstruct justice.*

Again, a little bit of research by Jillette would have uncovered the truth about Ratzinger’s 2001 document."

themediareport.com/sep200…eller-lies.htm

 

[josie_L]

I’m interested to know, how old are these cases?

 

[Brian_Culliton]

Some Catholics need to stop pointing the finger of blame away from their own church and follow the example of this guy…

"*To the Editor:

As a Roman Catholic priest in good standing, I find myself in the midst of a great dilemma. Of which should I be more ashamed? The fact that less than three percent of my priest brothers have been credibly accused of the sexual abuse of minors? Or the fact that 97 percent of the nation’s Roman Catholic bishops seem to be in a state of invincible denial?

The assertion that “homosexuality is no factor in abusive priests” (Post- Standard, Associated Press, Nov. 18) is so utterly absurd as to defy rational credibility. Fact: 95 percent of all reported cases of sexual abuse by priests involved the homosexual predation of teenage boys! What was the bishops’ response as this crisis was festering for more than 50 years? Instead of reaching out in a pastorally responsible and sensitive manner to the victims and their parents, they called in their attorneys to protect their assets.

This adversarial relationship that the bishops themselves created exacerbated the problem to the point where it became completely unmanageable. They have destroyed the morale of many good and holy priests and have alienated the faithful to the point where no one now living will ever see the healing of the injuries caused by this unspeakable abuse of power.

Memo to the bishops: “Denial” is not the name of a river in Egypt!
Rev. Eric K. Harer
Constantia, NY*"

Printed in the Syracuse Post Standard, November 19th, 2009

 

[tweetymom]

What is truly sad is that the RCC is ALWAYS blamed as the “institution” that has this problem. EVERY church, no matter the denomination, has experienced this pain. Some have an organized hierarchy, some don’t. But only the RCC has come forward in the press to address it. I have heard of the same issues in Protestant sects, Anglican, Mormon or any other church. Most are hidden, privately addressed and never spoken of. I praise the RCC for dealing with these cases OPENLY and investegating each accusation, even the false ones. May any sinner be brought into the light, no matter what their religious tradition is.

I really do not think anyone has come forward until they are caught.

 

[tweetymom]

I’m interested to know, how old are these cases?

Does it really matter how old this is? It has been 68 years since I was molested and the stigma lives with you for ever. And the cover up is as bad if not worse!!

 

[josie_L]

Does it really matter how old this is? It has been 68 years since I was molested and the stigma lives with you for ever. And the cover up is as bad if not worse!!

I am asking how old the cases are because I’m asking how old the cases are? You didn’t need to answer the question.

 

[twopekinguys]

Let me get this straight…you work in law enforcement and do not seem to understand the criteria for reporting sexual abuse? You seem to equate coming in contact with a child that later it has been proven to have been sexually abused as failure to report?:

This is the only pertinent part to your whole post, and proves what I was saying about the Pope, when he was the Cardinal.

Just because he came in contact with a person that later ended up commiting an act, he has failed? No, he didn’t, because he had no way to prove that it would happen.

 

[twopekinguys]

Twopekinguys in black; Doki in color

I work in Law enforcement, and I frequently work with children.

Your comment abot being “shocked if it was with kids”, is extremely rude, and uncalled for. Why? It doesn’t shock you when adults abuse children? Of course I am shocked that abuse happens to children. That is not the issue. It was the as if the poster was thinking he was in a better position to “judge”, because he works with children on some level whereas he would be “shocked” if I did, because I (and many others) don’t automatically believe an accusation.

Considering the line of work that I am in, I would say I have probably seen a little more of this first hand than most of the posters on here. I’m sure you’re sad to have to say this. Sounds sad to me.
It is very sad when you see some of the things people go through. Especially children. It is also very sad to see peoples entire lives ruined simply because an allegation was made.

I see teachers who have failed to report, I have seen parents fail to report, and I have seen medical professionals fail to report, all of which are mandated to report suspected abuse.so I suggest you get off your high horse. It’s being on a ‘high horse’ to think it wrong not to report abuse?

I agree, and more should report suspected abuse. Unfortunately, that isn’t the case. Too many people “don’t want to get invovled.” But the other side of that coin is to also be relatively sure of what you are reporting, and not make blatantly false accusations. It is a very narrow line, and a hard one to follow, but unfortunately, alot of mandated reporters don’t even try.

What I have been saying all along is that you can’t rely on, and make all of your decisions based on an accusation. It needs to be investigated, and if necessary brought to trial. Too many people are quick to jump on the bandwagon and automatically assume the individual(s) are guilty.

 

[twopekinguys]

Twopekinguy in black; Doki in color.

But you can’t fire someone just because of an accusation. If everyone who got accused of something was fired, no one would be working.

I have seen cases (locally) where a man has been accused of rape, assault, or some other crime of violence. He has lost his job, family, standing in the community, all based upon an accusation, and before an investigation or trial. Doesn’t sound like due process.
You are absolutely right. It is people making a judgement based soley on an accusation.

His reputation is ruined. Slander should be punished. The man should never want the rest of his life. I agree, but it is hard to catch everyone who does it to an individual. Word of mouth and gossip is a powerful weapon. Especially when the press is involved, and they say “We were just reporting the news.”

Then, once the investigation and/or trial is complete, he is found innocent. His reputation is still ruined, he is still unemployed, he has to reconcile with friends and family, all because of an unfounded accusation. His accusers should be made to pay his way the rest of his life (or until his reputation is fully ‘given back’ to him.) That is not such a bad idea.

I firmly believe that if it is proven that someone has committed the act, then yes, by all means punish them, and fire them. I also believe that if someone is “accused” of this act, then he should be removed from any ministry that involves children, until the investigation or trial is complete. But not remove him from the priesthood based on an accusation. Agreed

I also have to agree with an earlier poster “Pilgrimage”, when they say: “Common sense is telling me, that while there were obviously some cases of abuse, there are many who have jumped on the financial band wagon”

In this day and age, an accusation can do more harm than a conviction. Why not keep the accused safe from the media while the investigation goes on; especial in the church? How many times have you heard of someone apologizing for making an unfounded accusation? Should be a law, apologize with restitution. How many times have you heard of someone apologizing for beliving the unfounded accusation?

Arrests are a matter of public record. Right now, there are laws protecting the identities of many of the people who report crimes like this, along with the victims. That is why in many cases their names are reported in the media. In cases like these, the media can either help an investigation, or they can make it extremely difficult. They can help by giving details in order to catch a criminal, or they could give information that totally derails an investigation. It’s a difficult situation.

 

[Jean_1958]

Hi,

Child abuse, whether sexual or physical, is wrong no matter who does it. The Catholic Church is very visible and it it easy to spot the abuse (although it is a small percentage, it is what makes the headlines). But sexual abuse happens in all christian religions and should not be thought of as being just a “Catholic problem”.

xpastor.org/articles/love_norris_sexual_abuse.html

Peace,

Jean

 

[Dee123]

I’m not catholic so it doesn’t effect (or is that affect) me at all. However, it does prove the point some of us here try to make: NO one is above sin and NO one deserves to be place is such high authority. Therefore, the ONLY thing we can trust is the Bible and we can pray that we are in right relationship with the Holy Spirit so we can understand and obey what we need to obey and follow our Lord Jesus Christ (hand in hand with other true believers no matter what church or denomination they belong to).

I read some of your other posts and I think the definition of infallibility needs to be stated here…First of all, it has nothing to do with sin. What infallible means, in regards to the pope is this: he is unable, by the grace of God, to teach error in regards to faith and morals. It doesn’t mean he doesn’t sin. It doesn’t mean he doesn’t make mistakes. It doesn’t mean he’s perfect. No human being on this earth is perfect right now. So, does the pope sin? YES! Just like me and you. Does the pope make blunders in speech or in everyday life? YES! Just like me and you! Can the pope make wrong decisions? YES! Just like you and I. Can the pope teach something incorrect if it’s in regards to faith and morals? NO!!! Can he teach in error with regards to science or the law? Sure! Those aren’t the areas of a pope’s infallibility.

There you have it. Now time to think and investigate that and why we Catholics believe this.

 

[Greenbrier]

Regarding sin and infallibility: Our Lord said, “You shall know them by their fruit”.

Distinctions between sin and official charism are ludicrous. Sin goes to and comes from the heart, the same heart from which infallible pronouncements are supposed to come, can a house be divided?

 

[Greenbrier]

Some Catholics need to stop pointing the finger of blame away from their own church and follow the example of this guy…

"*To the Editor:

As a Roman Catholic priest in good standing, I find myself in the midst of a great dilemma. Of which should I be more ashamed? The fact that less than three percent of my priest brothers have been credibly accused of the sexual abuse of minors? Or the fact that 97 percent of the nation’s Roman Catholic bishops seem to be in a state of invincible denial?

The assertion that “homosexuality is no factor in abusive priests” (Post- Standard, Associated Press, Nov. 18) is so utterly absurd as to defy rational credibility. Fact: 95 percent of all reported cases of sexual abuse by priests involved the homosexual predation of teenage boys! What was the bishops’ response as this crisis was festering for more than 50 years? Instead of reaching out in a pastorally responsible and sensitive manner to the victims and their parents, they called in their attorneys to protect their assets.

This adversarial relationship that the bishops themselves created exacerbated the problem to the point where it became completely unmanageable. They have destroyed the morale of many good and holy priests and have alienated the faithful to the point where no one now living will ever see the healing of the injuries caused by this unspeakable abuse of power.

Memo to the bishops: “Denial” is not the name of a river in Egypt!
Rev. Eric K. Harer
Constantia, NY*"

Printed in the Syracuse Post Standard, November 19th, 2009

The cause and nature of the problem is obvious to everyone but the media which has, by and large, bought into the pro-gay agenda and the hierarchy, most likely for their own reasons…

Michael S. Rose’s book “Goodbye, Good Men” is instructive. As a young Catholic discerning a vocation I can corroborate much of what he has to say.

 

[mark_a]

Read the Bible for yourself. Study what It says. Study what others say. Pray for help from the Holy Spirit. Make a decision. Obey the Bible. Find a church that you can have fellowship and that will encourage you to follow Jesus and help others find Jesus as Savior.

Excellent advice.

I’ll give you my opinion if I have one but don’t take my word for it. Study the Bible and if I’m correct praise God; if I’m not, disreguard it and still praise God.

Are there any non-negotiables?

BTW, I try to leave the interpretation of the Bible to the Holy Spirit. I have an understanding.

I don’t understand this. Could you clarify?

Oh yes; I almost forgot: I will tell you up front to be careful what I say because it could be incorrect.

On a non-negotiable teaching, what good are you to the body of Christ?

The CC tells you they are correct and to disbelieve this is to go against God.

True. To say that a Catholic Church (the body of Christ) doctrine is a lie “is to go against God”. It can’t be anything but a lie.

 

[mark_a]

Regarding sin and infallibility: Our Lord said, “You shall know them by their fruit”.

Distinctions between sin and official charism are ludicrous. Sin goes to and comes from the heart, the same heart from which infallible pronouncements are supposed to come, can a house be divided?

Lord have mercy.

 

[Greenbrier]

Lord have mercy.

Amen

 

[Dokimas]

I read some of your other posts and I think the definition of infallibility needs to be stated here…First of all, it has nothing to do with sin. What infallible means, in regards to the pope is this: he is unable, by the grace of God, to teach error in regards to faith and morals. It doesn’t mean he doesn’t sin. It doesn’t mean he doesn’t make mistakes. It doesn’t mean he’s perfect. No human being on this earth is perfect right now. So, does the pope sin? YES! Just like me and you. Does the pope make blunders in speech or in everyday life? YES! Just like me and you! Can the pope make wrong decisions? YES! Just like you and I. Can the pope teach something incorrect if it’s in regards to faith and morals? NO!!! Can he teach in error with regards to science or the law? Sure! Those aren’t the areas of a pope’s infallibility.

There you have it. Now time to think and investigate that and why we Catholics believe this.

You mean sort of like what Jesus said about the pharasees? Do as they say not as they do when it comes to faith and morals.?.?​

Here’s my problem: if, and let me say again - IF, the present pope is ‘guilty’ of what he is being ‘accused’ of for his part in the pedaphile story of Germany, why is he in the position he’s in now - speaking infallibly on morals while having participated in immoral practices?​

You could say he’s been forgiven. I would accept that if in fact he has truly repented.​

I guess I should mention that I generally have a problem with the idea that one spokesman and one group can claim infallibility at all. The gates of hell not prevailing has nothing to do with infallibility, IMO. It’s only about the Holy Spirit’s work, not about us.