Pope Francis accepts resignation of Bishop Robert W. Finn [CNA]

[Arandur]

This case was NEVER about protecting children. The diocese is NOT ‘safer’ now that he’s gone.

When Bishop Finn came to KC, the liberals had strong hold on the diocese for years and the ‘National Catholic Distorter’ was pleased. After a period of time observing as a coadjudtor Bishop, he made changes and in a well entrenched liberal establishment.

He never had a chance in this diocese being Opus Dei, conservative, he had The Distorter, the local paper The KC Star and big money liberals against him. He came out as being VERY pro life when it was being soft peddled for feeding the poor by the previous regimes. The Stowers institute, who preformed embryonic stem cell and contributed to local parishes in KC were among his enemies.

That said, he didn’t consult the people who were used to being consulted. He was authoritarian compared to the two Bishops who preceded him in dealing with others and he never had experience being a pastor himself. He made enemies, he had his faults, he was ‘too Catholic’ for progressives who had gotten by with having a Bishop who would more or less let them alone.

Kansas City lost a good and Holy man due to politics. Make no mistake about it. Please pray for our diocese, we’re VERY divided right now, and the next guy will really have his hands full.

It encourages me to hear other Catholics in this diocese that care about orthodoxy. Why is it so hard to find and band together?

I have been starved for years for lack of finding brothers and sisters (particularly around my age) on fire for the faith, active, orthodox, and ambitious. Catholic radio has been my lifeline, a community that reassures me and inspires me that there are a great many Catholics out there that are just that. But finding them locally has been a challenge. If we could gather and support each other, perhaps we could move forward and revitalize the Church more effectively on a local level.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Again, I am completely not interested in the supposed political context of the case. Nor do I have any feelings towards Bp Finn, one way or another. He’s just a name on documents to me.

Finn’s case is landmark, because it marks the end of an era where the state would bend over backwards to avoid prosecuting a bishop (see Boston). In Kansas, the DA decided prosecute, although the prosecution was still greatly restrained (again, Finn could have been easily charged with 3 felonies). Oh, and by the way, this case (like Cloyne) also demonstrates that the supposed “zero tolerance” policy is window dressing, and protection of pedophiles continues. So it appears to me that we will see another case in a few years, but the next time, the DA will not show restraint, and will go after the bishop to the fullest extent of the law.

And rightly so, may I add. Clerical pedophilia is a cancer; this cancer must be excised. Since the Church is apparently unable to do it by itself, the lay Catholics in law enforcement will – and they will have no mercy. You’ll see SWAT rides, RICO charges, and very long prison sentences.

You may be right in your last paragraph. If, as seems to be the case if one looks at, e.g., public schools and other religions, it is virtually impossible to identify every potential pedophile or other pervert before he/she acts, I am sure your wish will someday be granted, given the hostility to the Catholic Church among the progressive elites.

 

[Ridgerunner]

This case was NEVER about protecting children. The diocese is NOT ‘safer’ now that he’s gone.

When Bishop Finn came to KC, the liberals had strong hold on the diocese for years and the ‘National Catholic Distorter’ was pleased. After a period of time observing as a coadjudtor Bishop, he made changes and in a well entrenched liberal establishment.

He never had a chance in this diocese being Opus Dei, conservative, he had The Distorter, the local paper The KC Star and big money liberals against him. He came out as being VERY pro life when it was being soft peddled for feeding the poor by the previous regimes. The Stowers institute, who preformed embryonic stem cell and contributed to local parishes in KC were among his enemies.

That said, he didn’t consult the people who were used to being consulted. He was authoritarian compared to the two Bishops who preceded him in dealing with others and he never had experience being a pastor himself. He made enemies, he had his faults, he was ‘too Catholic’ for progressives who had gotten by with having a Bishop who would more or less let them alone.

Kansas City lost a good and Holy man due to politics. Make no mistake about it. Please pray for our diocese, we’re VERY divided right now, and the next guy will really have his hands full.

I have some “liberal” Catholic friends in KC, and I remember well their horror and indignation when Finn was appointed. He had a ready-made set of serious enemies before he even got there.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Wasn’t it the late Cdl George who said he expected to die in bed, his successor would die in prison and the latter’s successor would die a martyr.

The way things are going, I can believe that.

 

[Elizium23]

Wasn’t it the late Cdl George who said he expected to die in bed, his successor would die in prison and the latter’s successor would die a martyr.

The way things are going, I can believe that.

Cardinal George: The Myth and Reality of ‘I’ll Die in My Bed’
Francis Cardinal George:

What is omitted from the reports is a final phrase I added about the bishop who follows a possibly martyred bishop: ‘His successor will pick up the shards of a ruined society and slowly help rebuild civilization, as the church has done so often in human history.’ What I said is not ‘prophetic’ but a way to force people to think outside of the usual categories that limit and sometimes poison both private and public discourse.

 

[JimG]

Cardinal George: The Myth and Reality of ‘I’ll Die in My Bed’

Quote:
Originally Posted by Francis Cardinal George
What is omitted from the reports is a final phrase I added about the bishop who follows a possibly martyred bishop: ‘His successor will pick up the shards of a ruined society and slowly help rebuild civilization, as the church has done so often in human history.’ What I said is not ‘prophetic’ but a way to force people to think outside of the usual categories that limit and sometimes poison both private and public discourse.

I think that Cardinal George was being somewhat optimistic in that statement. It will take more than one generation to rebuild from the ruins of a society descended into chaos.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Francis Cardinal George
What is omitted from the reports is a final phrase I added about the bishop who follows a possibly martyred bishop: ‘His successor will pick up the shards of a ruined society and slowly help rebuild civilization, as the church has done so often in human history.’ What I said is not ‘prophetic’ but a way to force people to think outside of the usual categories that limit and sometimes poison both private and public discourse.

I think that Cardinal George was being somewhat optimistic in that statement. It will take more than one generation to rebuild from the ruins of a society descended into chaos.

There is some basis for at least tentative optimism in the quality and attitudes of the newly ordained priests and seminarians coming up. My understanding is that they are much more faithful to the teachings of the Church than are a lot of the older priests who were and are awfully infected with certain weaknesses in that regard.

And while the nuns joining the new orders (and some of the old ones) who seem to actually embrace the religious life are few, it’s a start in the direction of reform.

 

[JimG]

There is some basis for at least tentative optimism in the quality and attitudes of the newly ordained priests and seminarians coming up. My understanding is that they are much more faithful to the teachings of the Church than are a lot of the older priests who were and are awfully infected with certain weaknesses in that regard.

And while the nuns joining the new orders (and some of the old ones) who seem to actually embrace the religious life are few, it’s a start in the direction of reform.

Well yes, I do have to agree with that, just judging by the seminarians and new priests of my own diocese. They are a beacon of hope as are the newer orders of sisters. It is they who will do the rebuilding, and they will do it joyfully.

 

[weller2]

This case was NEVER about protecting children.

Technically you are right. The case was about Bp Finn breaking is promise:

Assured that we have met that standard, we have agreed to fund $10 million in payments to the victims and to adhere to a number of nonmonetary stipulations that should assure our community, our congregation and these families that the diocese will continue in its exercise of vigilance and in its devotion to training and education so that we may be confident there will never, ever be a repeat of the behaviors, the offenses, or the claims that have been associated with this matter.

– Bp Finn in 2008.

In 2008, Bp Finn signed a $10M settlement with abuse victims, in which he has made himself a mandated reporter. Then he handled Ratigan in direct contradiction of the terms of the settlement. Which, let me repeat, he has signed himself! This has been independently confirmed by a civil court which found that the diocese has been guilty of a breach of contract and had to pay damages.

Now, please kindly explain to me, how the supposed liberal conspiracy is responsible for Bp Finn’s signature on the 2008 settlement, and his subsequent failure to implement its terms.

 

[weller2]

Wasn’t it the late Cdl George who said he expected to die in bed, his successor would die in prison and the latter’s successor would die a martyr.

That’s pretty much what will happen unless clerical pedophilia is eradicated once and for all.

The previous generation of bishops has managed to escape responsibility by paying up; the current generation faces criminal charges; the next generation will not even see a trial, because the angry mob will lynch them when it hears about yet another pedophile cover-up.

 

[weller2]

You may be right in your last paragraph. If, as seems to be the case if one looks at, e.g., public schools and other religions, it is virtually impossible to identify every potential pedophile or other pervert before he/she acts, I am sure your wish will someday be granted, given the hostility to the Catholic Church among the progressive elites.

It’s not my wish, it’s my cold assessment of the situation.

While hostile elites are part of the problem, the main threat for the Church comes from within, in the form of homosexual subculture permeating all levels of priesthood from the seminary up to the Cardinals. Homosexual subculture has been the main reason for the abuse crisis, but this fact has been hushed up as politically incorrect by both liberal and Catholic media. The former are very careful not to disuss the homosexual nature of the abuse, since they are pushing the line that homosexuals are modern day persecuted saints. The latter, on the other hand, are refusing to acknowledge the presence of homosexuals in the priesthood, and the role of homosexual mafia in personal decisions.
The data, of course, tells a different story:

 

[Ridgerunner]

It’s not my wish, it’s my cold assessment of the situation.

While hostile elites are part of the problem, the main threat for the Church comes from within, in the form of homosexual subculture permeating all levels of priesthood from the seminary up to the Cardinals. Homosexual subculture has been the main reason for the abuse crisis, but this fact has been hushed up as politically incorrect by both liberal and Catholic media. The former are very careful not to disuss the homosexual nature of the abuse, since they are pushing the line that homosexuals are modern day persecuted saints. The latter, on the other hand, are refusing to acknowledge the presence of homosexuals in the priesthood, and the role of homosexual mafia in personal decisions.
The data, of course, tells a different story:

https://imgur.com/SHVc3iO

The “Lavender Mafia” has been repeatedly the concern of many traditional minded Catholic writers and publications, and rightly so. It is my impression that Pope Benedict did take steps to cleanse the seminaries of it. Hard to know where Pope Francis will be with it.

One of the problems, it seems to me, is the refusal to acknowledge that it largely a homosexuality issue rather than a pedophilia issue. In Ratigan’s case, it seems to have truly been pedophilia, but you are correct in saying the overwhelming majority of abuse cases have victimized post-pubescent teenage boys.

I also agree with you (mirabile dictu) that there is a cultural “denial” going on. Homosexuality is enshrined by society nowadays notwithstanding that its practitioners have been responsible for most of the abuse cases in the Church.

 

[Ridgerunner]

That’s pretty much what will happen unless clerical pedophilia is eradicated once and for all.

The previous generation of bishops has managed to escape responsibility by paying up; the current generation faces criminal charges; the next generation will not even see a trial, because the angry mob will lynch them when it hears about yet another pedophile cover-up.

As you, yourself, pointed out above, actual clerical pedophilia is extremely uncommon. What has not been uncommon has been homosexual abuse of teenage and older young men; a different thing.

I doubt there will be lynch mobs in the future because most diocese will probably turn into substations of law enforcement. Ironically, in many of them, the various programs really are about abuse of children, with no attention whatever paid to “consensual” homosexual seductions of young men; a far bigger problem at least in the past, as the John Jay study amply demonstrates while disclaiming the obvious conclusion.

 

[weller2]

The “Lavender Mafia” has been repeatedly the concern of many traditional minded Catholic writers and publications, and rightly so.

One beef I have with the conservatives is that they put obedience to authority ahead of common sense. So when a bishop happened to be an active homosexual molesting seminarians the knee-jerk reaction of the conservatives was silencing the molested and shouting down the accusations as an attack of the liberal media on an orthodox bishop. The whole thing was really painful to watch. The pattern I’m seeing is that the ones who dare to speak out are usually either liberals (who don’t recognize any authority), or FSSPX-style traditionalists (who believe that the authority of post-VatII bishops is, to put it mildly, impaired). To make matters worse, both liberals and tradcons use the abuse crisis to champion their pet causes, i.e. “if we had X, there would be no abuse scandal”, and X stands for either women priests or Latin mass, depending on which side you listen to.

This is not a healthy situation by any means.

It is my impression that Pope Benedict did take steps to cleanse the seminaries of it. Hard to know where Pope Francis will be with it.

While I applaud Pope Benedict’s resolve to do something about the problem, I think that his efforts will fall short. His way of dealing with the problem relies on seminaries being able to weed out homosexuals with 100% accuracy, and I simply don’t think it is possible.

Regarding actual clerical pedophilia (i.e. Ratigan) it is, and has always been, a marginal problem. But it appears that the pedophiles have been benefiting either from protection offered by homosexual rings (probably by being members thereof), or from a general hush-hush mentality which arose from covering up homosexual exploits. This must finally end.

 

[johnnykins]

As you, yourself, pointed out above, actual clerical pedophilia is extremely uncommon. What has not been uncommon has been homosexual abuse of teenage and older young men; a different thing.

Certainly the sexual abuse of pre-pubescent children is rarer than sexual abuse of older children…but, abuse is abuse. As for teenagers they too are children - the phrase “16 will get you 20” was well known in pre-history when I was a teen… As a father of 3 adults I also remember clearly their adolescent years as well as my own – and teenagers are in no way adults, which the law appropriately recognizes.

I doubt there will be lynch mobs in the future because most diocese will probably turn into substations of law enforcement.

There haven’t been lynch mobs today either, though histrionics by the Church that it is called to account for the actions of its agents is appalling. The Church has no one but its priests, Bishops, other clerics, brothers and sisters to blame for what has taken place.

Ironically, in many of them, the various programs really are about abuse of children, with no attention whatever paid to “consensual” homosexual seductions of young men; a far bigger problem at least in the past, as the John Jay study amply demonstrates while disclaiming the obvious conclusion.

See above re: “16 will get you 20”…and look at the chart…a great number of those abused were 16 or younger - post-pubescent. That’s statutory rape in most, if not all, jurisdictions - at least if the older person is more than 2 years older than the younger…so NO - it’s time to stop trying to shift blame. It’s time to accept that the Church through way too many of her priests and Bishops (and brothers and sisters and laity) is at fault and was, and needs to be, held accountable.

As for Bishop Finn…he plead guilty…that’s what counts. You may not like it, but he plead. All this junk being posted on this thread about his innocence is totally irrelevant. Once he plead, he had to be held accountable. If he felt the need to plead and was not in fact guilty is simply a testament to the evil wrought by way too many priests, and bishops - not the kids, not the lawyers, not SNAP, not the Fishwrap, not liberals, not gays…our own Priests, Bishops et al.

 

[Ridgerunner]

One beef I have with the conservatives is that they put obedience to authority ahead of common sense. So when a bishop happened to be an active homosexual molesting seminarians the knee-jerk reaction of the conservatives was silencing the molested and shouting down the accusations as an attack of the liberal media on an orthodox bishop. While I applaud Pope Benedict’s resolve to do something about the problem, I think that his efforts will fall short. His way of dealing with the problem relies on seminaries being able to weed out homosexuals with 100% accuracy, and I simply don’t think it is possible.

Regarding actual clerical pedophilia (i.e. Ratigan) it is, and has always been, a marginal problem. But it appears that the pedophiles have been benefiting either from protection offered by homosexual rings (probably by being members thereof), or from a general hush-hush mentality which arose from covering up homosexual exploits. This must finally end.

I have understood Pope Benedict had real difficulties dealing with the Vatican bureaucracy.

One wonders whether his age and increasing frailty combined with a resistant bureaucracy were the causes of his resignation. Perhaps he thought a younger man could deal with it better. I guess we’ll see what happens.

In no way do I defend the bishop of Poznan. If what is said about him is credible, there is no excuse for it whatever. One wonders, though, whether praises supposedly issued by the Pope were really issued by him or by someone acting in his stead. After all, he did oust and rusticate Marcel Maciel once it became clear what he was doing. And Maciel arguably should have had more “clout” within the Church than did the bishop of Poznan.

I am not a person to defend some of the rot that has infected Church institutions. Not at all. Look at some of the orders of sisters that have become virtually pagan. Very clearly some of the seminaries had become corrupt. There have been bishops like Weakland and others. Some blame Vatican II for those things. I don’t. I do think there were very bad interpretations of what it meant, but I think some of the rot was there even before.

As I mentioned before, I am optimistic about the future of the Church in the U.S. I really am. It might be a smaller Church, but I think the purgation has begun. It may take a generation, and harm will be done in the meantime. But I’m still optimistic.

I will say, however, that I don’t think anything anyone does will ever totally purge all churchmen and convents of sinfulness. Human nature is such that it just can’t happen. After all, Judas Iscariot knew Jesus personally, saw His miracles, and still went bad. All the SWAT teams in the world won’t stop it. I think a new generation will, however, make a great deal of difference.

But having said all of that, I still think Bp Finn did more good than harm. I think he was more sinned against than sinning. We’ll never know all the roles people played. We’ll never even know whether Finn was deceived by Msgr Murphy. We don’t even know if Murphy was a card-carrying member of the Lavender Mafia who knew all along he was setting Finn up for a fall.

Say what anybody will, I am not so naive that I don’t realize how skilled people, particularly lawyers, can make up seem like down and down up. What I do know is that Finn got McBrien out of the diocesan newspaper, changed from a suspect seminary to a faithful one for the seminarians in KC, greatly increased vocations, encouraged vocations in lieu of a prior emphasis on “lay ministries” and gave substantial aid to orders of sisters who are faithful to the Church. I know he made implacable enemies right from the start, and even then I knew someday they would get him. Right from the start I knew it, because I knew some of the people who hated him.

Am I guilty of a prejudice? I’ll confess that I am. Cdl Bernard Law was once the bishop of my diocese. Never did I see the slightest inkling that he was anything but a faithful servant of the Church. Never. He was one of the few bishops who, with Cdl O’Connor, dared to confront the “new church” people in the east and come out forthrightly as prolife. But my diocese is large in territory but small in Catholic population. From there he went to the gigantic structure that is the Boston Archdiocese. A lot of people there opposed him, and the next thing you knew he was under the bus because of actions that were largely those of subordinates in the bureaucracy.

I’m not inviting an attack on Cdl Law here. I’m just saying he went from a place where he was loved and above reproach to one that was in some levels hostile, and the next thing you know, he was the subject of a gleeful and prosecutorial media. Yes, yes, I know there are all kinds of “sources” that say he did this or didn’t do that, just as there are “sources” that claim celibacy is the cause of the “priest scandal”. We know all about it.

Are those in the church who are capable of one kind of intentional evil capable of “setting up” someone who is not the sort they want running things? Impossible to imagine that there are not.

We haven’t seen the end of this, I’m convinced. Any churchman of prominence who is faithful to the mission of the Church is going to be disfavored by the church “progressives” who have become so pervasive in church organizations.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Certainly the sexual abuse of pre-pubescent children is rarer than sexual abuse of older children…but, abuse is abuse. As for teenagers they too are children - the phrase “16 will get you 20” was well known in pre-history when I was a teen… As a father of 3 adults I also remember clearly their adolescent years as well as my own – and teenagers are in no way adults, which the law appropriately recognizes.

There haven’t been lynch mobs today either, though histrionics by the Church that it is called to account for the actions of its agents is appalling. The Church has no one but its priests, Bishops, other clerics, brothers and sisters to blame for what has taken place. See above re: “16 will get you 20”…and look at the chart…a great number of those abused were 16 or younger - post-pubescent. That’s statutory rape in most, if not all, jurisdictions - at least if the older person is more than 2 years older than the younger…so NO - it’s time to stop trying to shift blame. It’s time to accept that the Church through way too many of her priests and Bishops (and brothers and sisters and laity) is at fault and was, and needs to be, held accountable.

As for Bishop Finn…he plead guilty…that’s what counts. You may not like it, but he plead. All this junk being posted on this thread about his innocence is totally irrelevant. Once he plead, he had to be held accountable. If he felt the need to plead and was not in fact guilty is simply a testament to the evil wrought by way too many priests, and bishops - not the kids, not the lawyers, not SNAP, not the Fishwrap, not liberals, not gays…our own Priests, Bishops et al.

Possibly you are not sufficiently familiar with the plea bargaining process to realize that sometimes it is driven by sheer exhaustion of mind, body and resources. I don’t think most people realize what a huge imbalance there is between any sizeable prosecutorial team with huge resources, and an individual, even a bishop. On the one hand, there was Finn with what seems an extremely amateurish crew and 133,000 Catholics in the diocese, many of whom hated him, and a large prosecutorial team with the resources of 2.3 million taxpayers, a police force with special investigative units and a devoted media.

Should we, as citizens, worry about the ever-growing imbalance? We sure should, but that’s another story entirely.

 

[SonOfMan]

Its hard to believe that people like this are who the leaders are in the Catholic Church. Normal people dont lack such common sense, and these are educated men. Unless its true what is alleged of the Catholic Church; that there exists a dark, hidden subculture within the clergy. Usually when there is a straight forward choice and an educated person doesnt take it, theres something shady going on. Kind of creepy.

 

[Divine3]

There is truth to this. SNAP is a pack of treasure-hunting charlatans, and the presence of the National Catholic Distorter is also a liability. But the fact that Ratigan had lewd pictures of children on his computer, and Finn knew about it and shunted him off to therapy instead of calling the cops is still enough of a scandal.

Whether Ratigan was technically a pedophile is splitting hairs. The point is that he was committing heinous crimes against God, His children, and the law of the land, and Finn didn’t do what he should have done. We can’t always be shifting the blame to SNAP, the media, or the liberals who lick their chops at such disasters. We as Catholic laypeople need to hold our clergy accountable.

Bishop Finn is a great bishop and the lies that have been promoted are evil. "Yes, he might have made an error in prudential judgment, but this error ought not to be conflated into willful, malicious concealment, or callous disregard for the safety of children, The statute under which he was charged and convicted (of a misdemeanor) did not even properly apply to his situation, and the likelihood that the judgment would have been reversed, should he have chosen to appeal, was very high. " post by Blai—
I quoted an excellent post (not here in CF) by this man who has been in this diocese – If people are out for the head of a bishop why not really have the wisdom to ask Rome to remove the one in Jersey who betrayed a catholic school teacher who spoke out regarding the churches teaching on secular viewed same sex marriage.

 

[Divine3]

Bishop Finn is a great bishop and the lies that have been promoted are evil. "Yes, he might have made an error in prudential judgment, but this error ought not to be conflated into willful, malicious concealment, or callous disregard for the safety of children, The statute under which he was charged and convicted (of a misdemeanor) did not even properly apply to his situation, and the likelihood that the judgment would have been reversed, should he have chosen to appeal, was very high. " post by Blai—
I quoted an excellent post (not here in CF) by this man who has been in this diocese – If people are out for the head of a bishop why not really have the wisdom to ask Rome to remove the one in Jersey who betrayed a catholic school teacher who spoke out regarding the churches teaching on secular viewed same sex marriage.