D
danonwaveland
Guest
Perhaps you will be proven correct, but it’s not ***clear ***right now. Let’s wait for the dots to be connected; let’s not draw them ourselves.
God bless,
Dan
- Status
God bless,
Dan
A
anode
Guest
NO ONE is going to look at this with ‘gentleness and inner silence’, no one who understands the nature of authority and responsibility in the modern world.
The smoking gun in this case is the testimony of the psychiatrist, which I have only now just read, that he warned* both in speech and letter* specifically about* this priest*, that he* had to be in one-on-one therapy, be supervised, avoid youth and avoid alcohol. He did NOT say that “This can be treated, he can be cured.”, etc. All of his warnings fell on deaf ears. The subordinates took their cue from above. If *the cardinal was not interested in pastoral matters, which he apparently wasn’t, he should have instructed his staff, Frs. Fahr and Gruber, that he was giving them substantial responsibility in pastoral matters, BUT he wanted to know about anything important (if this wasn’t important, what is?). Did he do this–we’ll never know. What subsequently happened shows that his administration was negligent, incompetent or both.
J
JReducation
Guest
We study and deal in the relationship between the soul and the divine. We do a lot of spiritual direction, retreats, teaching. We specialize in such topics as : prayer, religious life, the spiritual life, the action of grace on the soul, the mystics and their experiences and writings, growth of the soul from its first step towards God to ecstacy, of course we identify what is truly mystical and what is not, or what is truly an ecstasy and what is a psychological state. We also work on cases presented for canonization. Mystical theologians are often called in to examine the writings of the individual to orthodoxy and to determine what God said to the person and how reliable the person’s report may be. For example, a large team of mystical theologians combed Sister Faustina’s writings during her process. They were looking for anything that was inconsistent with the way God speaks to the soul as found in revelation and dogma. Even a single word would have required an explanation that would have satisfied these theologians, before these writings could be introduced as evidence of her sanctity.
In a nutshell, these are some of the things that we do. There are very few mystical theologians. You must first get a four-year college degree. Then a four-year Master’s degree in theology. Then a three to five year doctoral degree in mystical theology. By the time you’re finished you’re about 32 years old. You also have to study a lot of psychology as well as theology as you go along.
Does that help?
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
N
Non_Serviam
Guest
So, if I understand your reply correctly, it doesn’t bother you that after accpting this man into the diocese for treatment for pedophelia, and then being warned repeatly by the therapist that this man would definitely reoffend if given any opportunity to do so, that he was allowed to resume priestly duties?But this is not the question. This is already known. In fact there is more. The therapist complained that the priest was an non-compliant patient.
Hoever, the question on the table is who assigned him and the Vicar General says that he did. This is very possible, because Vicars or Auxiliary Bishops are often in charge of personell matters, not the Archbishop. The Archbishops get a memo that gets filed by a secretary so that it’s available when he needs it.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
I once worked for an organization where a man was required to attend therapy because of issues at work, during which time he confessed to a plan to return to work with a gun and “fix everything” by killing a woman there that he believed was conspiring against him.
The warning from the institution went beyond the HR officer’s desk to the Director’s desk and the Director arranged for security devices to be installed and other measures to be taken to protect the individual who was at risk. Are you saying the archdiocese of Munich was less diligent to protect people than my organization was? When did his secretary think the shepherd Ratzinger would need the memo? After his sheep had been ravaged?
Either Ratzinger was guilty of releasing a pedophile on unsuspecting church member or he was guilty or running the most corrupt or incompetent diocesan heirarchy in Germany and needs to own up to one or the other. I don’t know which it is, but it is one of those three options.
Perhaps I’ve misunderstood your reply, but it seems to me to suggest that the priority of maintaining a “teflon pope” is more important than making the truth known and having people accept responsibility for their mistakes.
B
brad35
Guest
Greetings in the name of Jesus Christ!
FYI, I am not Catholic, but I am a great admirer of your church and a defender of her in my circles. I even went so far as to marry a nice, Catholic girl!
After reading some of your posts, I felt compelled to respond because I fear that many here are missing an important point. I know how hurtful this whole situation must be for you. I understand how easy the temptation is to strike back in anger at accusers railing against your mother church. I am fully aware that many of the outlets shouting the loudest do so because they would like to see your church fail, and more importantly, see Christ fail.
That being said, the issue is NOT what people outside of the faith think of the situation or how they report it in the media. Do not fear them, for Jesus Himself will give you strength during these dark hours. The community of believers will stand firm through the power of the Holy Spirit until Christ returns, and no amount of negative press can change that!
Our job as Christians is to spread the Good News, and I believe some of you are doing a great disservice to this holy call in your posts. The proper response to such terrible sin is repentance, not accusations of partiality in reporting or complaints that other churches have this problem as well. Like it or not, whenever we respond in this fashion, we only end up hardening the hearts of those that do not believe. All of us, Protestant and Catholic alike, need to pray for forgiveness, and we need to pray that by our right action and contrition some might find the Truth.
As new creatures in Christ, we should be above such sordid crimes, and when we do not respond with absolute shame and horror to these deeds done in our name, we force those outside to faith to conclude that we are no better than those that do not know Christ. We are in effect saying the love of Christ doesn’t actually change us.
I write these words in love because I believe a healthy Catholic church is one of the greatest weapons in Christ’s arsenal. You should be leaders in the world of faith. It is time you started leading.
Brad
FYI, I am not Catholic, but I am a great admirer of your church and a defender of her in my circles. I even went so far as to marry a nice, Catholic girl!
After reading some of your posts, I felt compelled to respond because I fear that many here are missing an important point. I know how hurtful this whole situation must be for you. I understand how easy the temptation is to strike back in anger at accusers railing against your mother church. I am fully aware that many of the outlets shouting the loudest do so because they would like to see your church fail, and more importantly, see Christ fail.
That being said, the issue is NOT what people outside of the faith think of the situation or how they report it in the media. Do not fear them, for Jesus Himself will give you strength during these dark hours. The community of believers will stand firm through the power of the Holy Spirit until Christ returns, and no amount of negative press can change that!
Our job as Christians is to spread the Good News, and I believe some of you are doing a great disservice to this holy call in your posts. The proper response to such terrible sin is repentance, not accusations of partiality in reporting or complaints that other churches have this problem as well. Like it or not, whenever we respond in this fashion, we only end up hardening the hearts of those that do not believe. All of us, Protestant and Catholic alike, need to pray for forgiveness, and we need to pray that by our right action and contrition some might find the Truth.
As new creatures in Christ, we should be above such sordid crimes, and when we do not respond with absolute shame and horror to these deeds done in our name, we force those outside to faith to conclude that we are no better than those that do not know Christ. We are in effect saying the love of Christ doesn’t actually change us.
I write these words in love because I believe a healthy Catholic church is one of the greatest weapons in Christ’s arsenal. You should be leaders in the world of faith. It is time you started leading.
Brad
J
JReducation
Guest
The Vicar should never have assigned him. Everyone agrees with this.
He is not guilty if he does not do the assigning, which has already been stated that he did not. Where do you see corruption or incompetence? This is the way that the system works. Vicars and Auxiliary bishops often do the assigning. The Ordinary of the diocese is responsible for assigning the pastors. They need not consult the assignments they make with the Ordinary. All they need to do is record it and have it filed where it can be found when needed. It’s like any other organization. Each person has an area for which they are responsible.
When they have their weekly meeting with the Ordinary they usually discuss more global concerns of the diocese, not individuals. It is very rare that a Vicar or Auxiliary brings an individual to the table unless something has gone wrong, which was the case in many dioceses where Vicars and Auxiliaries did bring the information to the table and the bishops botched it up by reassigning instead of suspending and reporting.
It’s not a matter of that at all. It’s that the assumptions don’t match the man that we have known for more than 25 years. There are gaps in the reports that the media has put out there. When the Vicar General tried to fill in the gaps, no one wants to listen to the man. It’s reported in a dismissive manner. That’s not fair to anyone.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
R
Rachel_1
Guest
Ok, I’m going to be quite frank here and quite open about something in my past that I normally don’t discuss, but I think what happened to me can shed some light on some of this stuff.
From age 9-12 I was sexually abused, not just me, but multiple other kids by a certain man. This man was not a priest, he was a psychologist. His job though is irrelevant though, he was in a position to abuse children just the same.
When I was 13 my dad was murdered (which btw, serrevin, I could relate my dad’s murder case to what you’ve wrote above too but for sake of time, I won’t). Because of the murders my mom put me in counseling. Instead of discussing the murders guess what came out… yep, you guessed it, the sexual abuse.
The counselor was bound by law to tell the police, I begged her not to but she basically said that either she was going to, or I had to. So after a few days of letting me decide I choose to tell them myself. She was on the phone at the time and also spoke with the police.
Let me tell you what happened when I reported what happened (btw, this was in 1981). The police refused to do anything. They didn’t want to deal with the paperwork involved and they attempted to scare me by telling me that if they did anything to him, I would have to see him in court and his attorneys would be allowed to yell at me etc.
I tell you my story to let you know that at the time all this was going on, it’s very possible someone may have told the authorities (victim or otherwise) and they may have gotten the same response my counselor and I did.
edit- took out some stuff I wasn’t comfortable sharing.
D
danonwaveland
Guest
Yes, very much. Thanks! (Also thanks for clarifying some of the procedures that are employed in some church offices. Very helpful to understand.)In a nutshell, these are some of the things that we do. There are very few mystical theologians. You must first get a four-year college degree. Then a four-year Master’s degree in theology. Then a three to five year doctoral degree in mystical theology. By the time you’re finished you’re about 32 years old. You also have to study a lot of psychology as well as theology as you go along.
Does that help?
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
God bless,
Dan
N
Non_Serviam
Guest
I understand bureaucracies, having worked in a number of them over the years. I understand about delegation and I understand that “the man in charge” doesn’t hear about most things.
That being said, we now understand clearly that the archdiocese was repeatly informed that THIS MAN WOULD MOLEST CHILDREN AGAIN if given the chance. Part of the condition of having responsibility delegated is the expectation the the person receiving it knows how to use it properly and when to ask his superior for clarification.
As I said above, either the staff were corrupt, and permitted this man to return to priestly duties for some benefit of their own that we aren’t yet aware of, or they were incompentent, not realizing that a) you don’t let a child molester work with children and b) when you are repeatedly warned about this man being a danger, that this is one of those “rare cases” that you mentioned where you consult your boss.
In either case the staff’s failings should be acknowledged by their superior who acknowledges that he should have either picked better people or supervised them more closely. Hencemy assertion that the Pope has something to take responsibility for, even if it isn’t responsibility for the entire incident.
I agree-when many questioned Benedict XVI based on his childhood associations, I expressed the opinion that it was an unjust crticism when viewed in the light of his subsequent actions. Likewise he always seemed to be an person who advocated individuals taking responsibility for their actions, especially while heading the CDF. Perhaps that’s why I have higher expectations for him now that he is in this situation.It’s not a matter of that at all. It’s that the assumptions don’t match the man that we have known for more than 25 years. There are gaps in the reports that the media has put out there. When the Vicar General tried to fill in the gaps, no one wants to listen to the man. It’s reported in a dismissive manner. That’s not fair to anyone.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
When the Vicar General first spoke and it was not clear that the archdiocese had been warned by the psychologist I was leaning toward the opinion that several on this thread had adopted, that it was an unfortunate mistake, and while there was fault on the part of the Vicar General it was minimal. Having since learned of the repeated warnings, I can only see this in terms of gross incompetence or corruption on his part. I truly hope this is where the knowledge of the man’s problems ended, but I must confess that with so many revelations I find it hard to do so.
J
JReducation
Guest
Let’s clarify two things here.
First, there were not repeated warnings. The therapist himself, in a telephone interview, said that he wrote his report and followed up with a call. He does not know to whom he spoke. That was the end of the therapist’s communication with the Archdiocese.
Second, the Vicar General has said that up to the time that he assigned him, there had not been any problems with this man. The problems seem to have resurffaced long after the Cardinal was in Rome. The Vicar General acted in good faith, albeit imprudently. There is no way that a superior can know if someone is going to mess up until they do so. I have held many positions of authority and I assumed that everyone knows what they have to do, until someone drops the ball. I am going to assume here that the Vicar General had never dropped the ball; therefore, there was not reason to keep a close eye on him. I truly believe that his act was an imprudent one, not corruption of any kind. This Vicar General has enjoyed a very good reputation in the Archdiocese of Munich as a very fair and honest man.
Given these two pieces of information, plus the time table and the fact that this priest did not even belong to the Archdiocese, but was a guest there, there is a high probability that what happened was that they needed to fill a slot and the Vicar put him in it. By the way, I’m saying that he did not belong to the Archdiocese, because what has been said is that he was sent to Munich for therapy, not that he was transferred to Munich. Secular priests cannot be transferred outside of their dioceses. That’s a complicated procedure called incardination. No one has mentioned it. It may have happened at some point, but so far it seems that he was not even the Archbishop’s responsibility during the time that the Archbishop was in Munich. The reports give the impression that he was a guest in the Munich Archdiocese. Why he remained in Munich is unknown to me.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
N
Non_Serviam
Guest
Yes, let’s clarify things.Let’s clarify two things here.
First, there were not repeated warnings. The therapist himself, in a telephone interview, said that he wrote his report and followed up with a call. He does not know to whom he spoke. That was the end of the therapist’s communication with the Archdiocese.
Second, the Vicar General has said that up to the time that he assigned him, there had not been any problems with this man. The problems seem to have resurffaced long after the Cardinal was in Rome. The Vicar General acted in good faith, albeit imprudently. There is no way that a superior can know if someone is going to mess up until they do so. I have held many positions of authority and I assumed that everyone knows what they have to do, until someone drops the ball. I am going to assume here that the Vicar General had never dropped the ball; therefore, there was not reason to keep a close eye on him. I truly believe that his act was an imprudent one, not corruption of any kind. This Vicar General has enjoyed a very good reputation in the Archdiocese of Munich as a very fair and honest man.
Given these two pieces of information, plus the time table and the fact that this priest did not even belong to the Archdiocese, but was a guest there, there is a high probability that what happened was that they needed to fill a slot and the Vicar put him in it. By the way, I’m saying that he did not belong to the Archdiocese, because what has been said is that he was sent to Munich for therapy, not that he was transferred to Munich. Secular priests cannot be transferred outside of their dioceses. That’s a complicated procedure called incardination. No one has mentioned it. It may have happened at some point, but so far it seems that he was not even the Archbishop’s responsibility during the time that the Archbishop was in Munich. The reports give the impression that he was a guest in the Munich Archdiocese. Why he remained in Munich is unknown to me.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
Quoting from the article in question:
“Frequently” suggests more than one written notification and one phone call. As to your assertion that the Vicar General wasn’t culpable because there is “no way that a superior can know if someone is going to mess up until they do so,” it must be remembered that the man was in Munich in the first place because he had already “messed up” with 3 families and admitted to it.
The Vicar General also had his therapist’s repeated warnings that the man would abuse again if given the opportunity. Regardless of whether it took 4 minutes or 4 years, the fact still stands that the man was given the opportunity to abuse again. If every priest in the archdicese had come down with bubonic plague he shouldn’t have been considered for duty.
Accepting that the Vicar General is a good man as you have said (and I have no reason to doubt that) and leaving aside corruption as a possible reason for this, he is still accountable for a tremendous and tragic error in judgment at the very least if not outright unacceptable performance of his duties. In a secular setting there would be questions of liability and possible legal action.
L
lemonbeam
Guest
The documents show that the canonical trial or penal process against Father Murphy was never stopped by anyone. In fact, it was only abandoned days before Father Murphy died. Cardinal Ratzinger never took a decision in the case, according to the documents. His deputy, Archbishop Tarcisio Bertone, suggested, given that Father Murphy was in failing health and a canonical trial is a complicated matter, that more expeditious means be used to remove him from all ministry.
To repeat: The charge that Cardinal Ratzinger did anything wrong is unsupported by the documentation on which the story was based. He does not appear in the record as taking any decision. His office, in the person of his deputy, Archbishop Bertone, agreed that there should be full canonical trial. When it became apparent that Father Murphy was in failing health, Archbishop Bertone suggested more expeditious means of removing him from any ministry.
Furthermore, under canon law at the time, the principal responsibility for sexual-abuse cases lay with the local bishop. Archbishop Weakland had from 1977 onwards the responsibility of administering penalties to Father Murphy. He did nothing until 1996. It was at that point that Cardinal Ratzinger’s office became involved, and it subsequently did nothing to impede the local process
Read more here: corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZDkxYmUzMTQ1YWUyMzRkMzg4Y2RiN2UyOWIzNDVkNDM=
Everyone should listen to this radio program, on the recent revalations about out Holy Father in the New York Times, It pretty much destroys the spurious allegations that, as Archbishop of Munich and Cardinal Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith, Joseph Ratzinger tried to prevent prosecution of child molesting priest:
go2.wordpress.com/?id=725X1342&site=lewiscrusade.wordpress.com&url=http%3A%2F%2Frelevantradio.streamguys.us%2FAsx%2520Files%2FDM%2520Archive%2FDM20100325c.asx&sref=
N
Non_Serviam
Guest
I’m a bit puzzled by this response as we were discussing the situation in Munich, not Wisconsin, and the actions of the psychologist who treated the priest in particular. I agree that everything related to the Wisconsin incident was “after the fact” and would not have protected any boys from molestation. That said, a more public censure for the priest involved, combined with a public apology might have gone a long way to addressing some of the hurt experienced by those (now) men.
The Munich situation is an altogether different matter as we have discoved in previous posts.
G
gam197
Guest
Welcome to the Forum, Brad!
I think this was also an attitude that help to keep this all a secret. Some of the young males in MA committed suicide. Tragic for these families.
From what I am reading here, the complexity of the hierarchy and breakdown in communication helped. I think in general in MA people tried to hide “the touching” in all of the community - people just didn’t talk about it and the church tried to cover it up but the they-both church heads and psychologists- should have known the" crude details".
I don’t blame the Pope as this is one case and anything could have happened.
I personally didn’t see this. I know of a few incidents where friends were touched by family members and neighbors outside - ( rumors about group of teen males in the woods but I don’t even think this was common) and as I said we were sheltered but that is very different from rape.
K
Kirk_O
Guest
J
JReducation
Guest
I believe that the abuse did happen. I believe that many people botched up the handling of the complaints. But I also believe that many of those who botched up had no desire to hurt anyone. Regrettably their methods of handling the situation did hurt children and the credibility of Church leadership. All of this is unacceptable and has to be addressed; systems have to be put into place to minimize the possibility of this happening. I say minimize, because we all know the people with deviant traits can fly under the radar and there is not fool-proof test to filter them out.
However, in the interest of helping those faithful Catholics, I’d like to point out that the above behaviors and failures are disciplinary, not dogmatic or doctrinal. The deposit of faith remains untarnished. Our faith rooted in the fullness of truth that subsists only within the Catholic Church.
We have seen heresies, Crusades, corruption, immoral leadership, wars and all kinds of less than Christian behaviors in our 2000 year history. But we have also seen great saints, holy teachers, great contributions made to society, all rooted in faith.
I don’t know if the media blitz has anything to do with the healthcare law; but there is one truth. There is a great deal of anger toward the Church on a number of moral issues. Therefore, every mishap, whether it’s large or small is going to be used to drive home a negative message about the Church’s credibility. Since most people do not see the difference between dogma and discipline, they will be swayed. Unfortunately, whatever happened 20 years ago or more happened. We can’t change that. All we can do now is to fix the system and where possible, discipline the guilty. But those people of faith can help those who are struggling by helping them understand the difference between dogma and discipline. It is discipline that has been violated, not dogma. Truth remains truth and its fullness is still within the Catholic Church.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
However, in the interest of helping those faithful Catholics, I’d like to point out that the above behaviors and failures are disciplinary, not dogmatic or doctrinal. The deposit of faith remains untarnished. Our faith rooted in the fullness of truth that subsists only within the Catholic Church.
We have seen heresies, Crusades, corruption, immoral leadership, wars and all kinds of less than Christian behaviors in our 2000 year history. But we have also seen great saints, holy teachers, great contributions made to society, all rooted in faith.
I don’t know if the media blitz has anything to do with the healthcare law; but there is one truth. There is a great deal of anger toward the Church on a number of moral issues. Therefore, every mishap, whether it’s large or small is going to be used to drive home a negative message about the Church’s credibility. Since most people do not see the difference between dogma and discipline, they will be swayed. Unfortunately, whatever happened 20 years ago or more happened. We can’t change that. All we can do now is to fix the system and where possible, discipline the guilty. But those people of faith can help those who are struggling by helping them understand the difference between dogma and discipline. It is discipline that has been violated, not dogma. Truth remains truth and its fullness is still within the Catholic Church.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
G
Guyonthestreet
Guest
JR - I’m going to call you Brother Curveball !!!It is discipline that has been violated, not dogma. Truth remains truth and its fullness is still within the Catholic Church.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
I might just start going back to the catholic church because of you
You are to be commended for your unrelenting clarity and charity.
A
anode
Guest
A lot of people don’t regard truth as residing in some sort of vacuum-proof jar. They regard truth as something which is filtered through human experience. For such people, which I suspect includes a substantial percentage of the human race, the presence of sin and crime among those purporting to possess the truth in the jar tends to argue against the *existence *of that jar, or to suggest that they broke the jar.
The belief that one group possesses the truth and will continue to possess that truth in any and all circumstances is an open invitation to corruption.
The belief that one group possesses the truth and will continue to possess that truth in any and all circumstances is an open invitation to corruption.
W
wanner47
Guest
Why do you think people who possess the truth cannot, or should not, sin? Adam and Eve possessed the truth and they still sinned.
*Having *the truth and following the truth are two entirely different things. You can have the first and not do the second.
The institution (the Church) has the truth. The **people **in the institution don’t always follow it. That’s called human nature.
J
JReducation
Guest
Corruption is not the result of truth. Truth can never lead to corruption. Corruption is the result of failure to follow the truth. Instead of following truth we follow our passions, fears and other destructive emotions. But what we do will not change truth.
This is what the faithful need to hear. The truth is absolute and non of the sins that have been committed have compromised the truth. Everything that we recite in the Creed is still intact. Nothing of what the Church believes as dogma or doctrine is affected by these sinful behaviors.
When I go to communion I still receive the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ, even if the priest is the greatest sinner in the world. His sin does not undo God’s work. To believe that man’s sinfulness can undo God’s work is heresy. It makes man more powerful than God. Man can destroy his own soul, but he cannot destroy what God has revealed.
I’m always reminded of Jesus himself. How many people were present when he said that he would destroy the temple and raise it up in three days? How many of those people believed him? Had they believed him they would have stood up with him during his time of trial. However, their lack of faith did not change the truth. Jesus did die and did rise on the third day, just as he had said. Why? Because truth is truth, independent of human weakness.
This is what has kep the Church alive for 2000 years, the truth that subsists within the Catholic Church, not the virtue of her members. Even though when it’s all told, there are many more holy people in our history then there have been corrupt. We have done much more good for the world than harm.
We should never cease to be proud of our Catholic heritage, of our saints, our contribution to society, our posession of revealed truth. We can be proud of our Catholic heritage and still be contrite and ashamed of the sins that some of our brothers and sisters have committed, because they do not represent us or our heritage. We stand for what Christ has revealed, not for the sins of our brothers and sisters.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
- Status