Pope Francis, Innocent until proven guilty?

  • Thread starter Thread starter johnjacob2004
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I believe Francis is guilty and he knows it. The only people defending him are: non-traditionalists, those that disagree with Humanae Vitae, are for women priests, etc., and people who really hate the Church.

My God, think about the children and the abused impressionable men who were raped and groomed by these wicked priests and bishops?! Francis’ silence on this is not charity.
 
All this makes me wonder if Dan Brown isn’t outlining his next Catholic fiction novel. But I daresay the subject matter would be too sordid. Perhaps a horror movie or crime drama…
I don’t know. I’m still reeling from all this.
 
RosalieM said:
All this makes me wonder if Dan Brown isn’t outlining his next Catholic fiction novel. But I daresay the subject matter would be too sordid. Perhaps a horror movie or crime drama…
I don’t know. I’m still reeling from all this.
Click to expand...
nahhh… Dan Brown writes fiction, not non-fiction! :cry:
 
Last edited:
twf said:
Right. Bishops are called to be bishops for life. And traditionally, bishops reign for life. It was only in recent decades, I believe under Pope St John Paul II (or maybe Blessed Paul VI?) that bishops have been asked to submit their resignation at 75. The Pope is a bishop. A special bishop, but not something more or different than a bishop.
Click to expand...
It was Paul VI who asked the bishops to submit resignations
 
Usagi said:
It can’t possibly be just the current pope, though. These are cases going back decades, and the prelates involved in the cover-up have been in office since then. If Pope Francis knew, he should go down. But this isn’t some unique problem with Francis’ papacy. Pope Benedict, Pope St. John Paul II, and their predecessors are just as likely to have known and done nothing. Pope Francis has the advantage of presiding over a Church in which there are tighter controls on this sort of thing happening from now on; the main issue now seems to be that most of the bishops and cardinals (and yes, possibly even popes) who knew and didn’t act have not been exposed and punished.
Click to expand...
I don’t know. There are allegations coming out now (so far not loudly in the mainstream news) that Pope Francis knew of sexual abuse in Buenos Aries and did nothing about and moved people around. And then told people that it never happened in his archdiocese.

The Bishop Accountability website (which often links to the left wing National Catholic Reporter) has a bit to say about our Holy Father - which I hope is not true.
http://www.bishop-accountability.org/Argentina/

And apparently German newspapers are starting to run articles that go against Pope Francis now too: Prominent German newspaper on papal silence: ‘What a mockery of the victims!’ | News | LifeSite

Apparently, even Fr. Thomas Reese, S.J. said “I love you, Francis, but that won’t work,” in regards to the silence.

And there is apparently a French documentary going over the Sex Abuse scandal in Argentina (from before Pope Francis was pope) which is painting the Pope is a bad light: Francis ignored, covered-up abuse in Argentina before becoming pope, documentary alleges | News | LifeSite

The more His Holiness remains silent, the worse this is going to get. Guilty or innocent, I wish the Pope would address these allegations honestly.
In regards to St. Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict, I doubt either were involved with such a thing when they were bishops, because there hasn’t been any substantial from their time as diocesan ordinaries, that I’m aware of. And honestly, some thing tells me that the diocesan and Vatican officials who were covering up the sex abuse would most likely keep it away from those two Popes (either to protect Their Holinesses , or out of fear of sanction). And I pray this is true.

God Bless.
 
Last edited:
@gracepoole
@Roseeurekacross
@Tis_Bearself
@SeriousQuestion
@Darklight
@(name removed by moderator)

Someone flag JoshFaith’s posts for moderation. Please and thank you.
 
Last edited:
I’d like to ask a basic question about these accusations by Vigano that I just don’t understand…

So let’s say Pope Francis knew there were some accusations by seminarians years ago against McCarrick that were settled out of court.

How can you possibly ask Pope Francis to resign because of this? These weren’t minors. They were seminarians. If the cases were settled out of court, the details will invariably not be clear and there will be no admission of guilt by anybody. Nobody will know what happened…including Pope Francis and Pope Benedict.

What am I missing?
 
Last edited:
Realistically, that letter asks “What happened?” That’s not proof.

Again, so what if Pope Francis knew about accusations that were settled out of court? This doesn’t really answer my quesiton.
 
Last edited:
You’re not missing anything, jack63.

It seems likely that the reason McCarrick was not sanctioned more severely in the past is that until recently, none of his activities with minors had come to light and been substantiated. His bad acts seem to have been generally with adults, which is still wrong, but not a basis for criminal action if the adult consented or, in the pre-MeToo era, gave the appearance of going along with it.
 
“How can you possibly ask Pope Francis to resign because of this? These weren’t minors. They were seminarians.”
End prior post excerpt
Has anyone confirmed the seminarians were minors? A few decades ago it was common for boys to enter a high school or combined seminary as young as 14.

Even if there were no minors enrolled at the seminary, at that time, it was common for teens
to visit the seminary perhaps for the weekend. Even if none of the known seminarian victims were minors, still minors were likely placed at risk, both at that seminary and later at Washington, where he was allowed to stay at the seminary.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top