Pope Francis Must Resign: Archbishop Vigano

  • Thread starter Thread starter TigerLily-1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Yeah, that’s my point. No one has a perfect record, and I don’t think the church is ready for that. The liberals want to blame the conservatives and the conservatives want to blame the liberals. It’s not going to work like that.
 
tafan2 said:
.
Click to expand...
tafan2 said:
In this case it might not be imposeible. A man might tell a lie, but rarely does he do so by writing an eleven page report with lots of names and details. Yes, there might be exaggerations or even lies, but he details a lot of events. Much of it can be collaborated.

One small bit, the NCR included the following in their article:

"The Register has independently confirmed that the allegations against McCarrick were certainly known to Benedict, and the Pope Emeritus remembers instructing Cardinal Bertone to impose measures but cannot recall their exact nature. "

I expect there are already many reporters working on the details.
Click to expand...
Well, this is one report (NCR) that “probably” has some truth to it.
 
Last edited:
Aphelion said:
Yeah, that’s my point. No one has a perfect record, and I don’t think the church is ready for that. The liberals want to blame the conservatives and the conservatives want to blame the liberals. It’s not going to work like that.
Click to expand...
Yes, especially since McCarrick (a liberal) is guilty of more or less exactly the same sin (having sex with seminarians) as O’Brien, a conservative.

It’s not a conservative-vs-liberal issue. It’s a sexual predator issue, along with subsequent cover-ups.
 
I’m thinking that with these scandals, CAF members will have to stop arguing liberal/conservative and instead argue tainted/non-tainted.

How many candles are on the altar or how they’re arranged, or which direction the priest faces, are small potatoes compared to this.
 
Would you leave Jesus because of Judas? The Catholic Church has the fullness of truth. Please stay.
 
I think that’s a fair analysis at this point.

It’s sexual sins (which I have my share of) and lack of conviction.

I think it will amount to clergy being humbled off their high horse. They are just like us, yet in positions of great responsibility.

St Paul said a Bishop must be above reproach. Yet, men like Benedict and Francis are not guilty of either sexual misconduct or doing nothing. It’s a matter of not doing enough.

But they have done a lot. It’s just too much happening. Literally thousands of priests and bishops in the last 30 years with sexual abuse!

We are being attacked with great force!
 
I agree completely. Not every bishop who participated in a cover-up is a bad person. Some of them are decent or even good people who nonetheless failed (my sense is that Wuerl belongs in this category). And the people who failed–who didn’t do enough–have to go, too.
 
To a degree you are correct, however a lot of the details, the smallest of them included, when not consistent and enforced lead to further break downs later down the road. As Catholics we have a list of pertinent and important details that we need to do our best to follow like the church has followed historically.
I totally agree with your other posts and the above paragraph though. We are all Catholics and need to focus on the survival of the church rather than of our personal political party.
 
Erikaspirit16 said:
Already on this forum you can see two points of view developing:
  1. Francis should resign. He is not the answer to the problem, he is PART of the problem.
  2. Vigano is leading a palace coup and leading the conservative faction. Or a variation, he is lying.
Click to expand...
I am in neither camp, as neither is Catholic, as rushing to make an opinion without knowledge, and thereby condemning others, is not very Christian.
 
Last edited:
Personally, I believe that Francis isn’t doing enough, but I also believe that Vigano is part of a conservative effort to (at the very least) discredit Francis. Both can be true.

EDIT: The Vigano thing can be true even if what he’s saying is true, or at least partially true.
 
Last edited:
Mark121359 said:
I’m sorry. But in light of what has transpired in the RCC in recent times, I’m not so sure I can even trust their word…but that’s just me.
Click to expand...
Then what is your basis to trust a negative word? This is the very definition of confirmation bias.
 
Aphelion said:
I agree completely. Not every bishop who participated in a cover-up is a bad person. Some of them are decent or even good people who nonetheless failed (my sense is that Wuerl belongs in this category). And the people who failed–who didn’t do enough–have to go, too.
Click to expand...
So, what we are referring to as cover-ups cannot have any truly good intentions behind them, and all those people need “to go”? These “good” people failed, as you say. Maybe many of these people were simply following the normal protocol. Maybe the normal protocol was the culprit. What makes anyone think that replacing all of these high ranking people of the Church is going to get us anywhere? Poor behavior among the hierarchy has been in the Church from the very beginning, because we are all faulty human beings. We should always strive to become a holy people, because that is what God calls us to be.
 
You’re right, the problem is that the cover-ups were standard procedure. Still, the defense of “I was just following orders” only gets you so far. For example, it looks like Wuerl at least tried to do the right thing (when he was in Pittsburgh), but he still let a number of abusers go. That was a choice. I understand why a bishop would be reluctant to go public, but is that really a defense?
 
This is what I don’t care for about Pope Francis approach.

“When some time passes and you have drawn your conclusions, I may speak”

It’s not wrong to want to hear his own words about the issue. It’s the same thing with AL.

Questioning him about issues and statements doesn’t mean we think he is a devil. It just means we want to hear his words.

I don’t think he is bad, just not great at speaking to the people. And so these things go beyond what they could be reduced to.

So for me, I don’t think he has done wrong, just that he doesn’t manage the college of Bishops well, or put the faithful at ease.

A large part of a pastor is to give understanding to the faithful.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top