K
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
C
CilladeRoma
Guest
Lawler has a point.
In fact, I have been asking myself many of the same questions.
I have also heard some say this case, while bad, isn’t “as bad”, because many of the men were adults, so they must have consented. That’s just bull balls!
These men were at McCarricks mercy- where they lived, studied, served, he controlled it all, and I am sure he was a man who didn’t like to be told no.
I pray the justice is done and that all those who have been affected by McCarrick’s behavior find some peace.
In fact, I have been asking myself many of the same questions.
I have also heard some say this case, while bad, isn’t “as bad”, because many of the men were adults, so they must have consented. That’s just bull balls!
These men were at McCarricks mercy- where they lived, studied, served, he controlled it all, and I am sure he was a man who didn’t like to be told no.
I pray the justice is done and that all those who have been affected by McCarrick’s behavior find some peace.
Last edited:
1
1Lord1Faith
Guest
McCarrick was made a bishop by Pope Paul VI. He was made a Cardinal by a Saint, St John Paul II. What did the Saint know about McCarrick in 2001? Surely Pope Benedict XVI knew something about it during his tenure.
Apparently the author only felt comfortable singling out Pope Francis by name, in an article about McCarrick. Go figure. I’m guessing “First Things” is a Traditionalist site.
Apparently the author only felt comfortable singling out Pope Francis by name, in an article about McCarrick. Go figure. I’m guessing “First Things” is a Traditionalist site.
1
1Lord1Faith
Guest
Indeed it is! Such a piquant choice of words.That’s just bull balls!
O
otjm
Guest
You might want to do a bit of research about First Things. Try the Wikipedia article; it is even-handed.
Last edited:
Tis_Bearself
Patron
In any event, I’m not sure how Pope Francis is to blame for this. Mccarrick’s promotion happened long before Pope Francis was in charge. Pope Francis has been actively cleaning house.
It would seem that the problem the author has with Pope Francis has to do with a guy who has perhaps committed financial irregularities and whose deputy committed sex abuse and has now resigned. If the deputy has been kicked out, then it doesn’t look to me like the Church is sitting around tolerating sex abuse.
The point of the article seems to be to bash Pope Francis, as opposed to the Popes who were actually reigning while McCarrick was getting promoted. An article about Pope Francis should have been about the financial scandal guy Maradiega, and not McCarrick.
It would seem that the problem the author has with Pope Francis has to do with a guy who has perhaps committed financial irregularities and whose deputy committed sex abuse and has now resigned. If the deputy has been kicked out, then it doesn’t look to me like the Church is sitting around tolerating sex abuse.
The point of the article seems to be to bash Pope Francis, as opposed to the Popes who were actually reigning while McCarrick was getting promoted. An article about Pope Francis should have been about the financial scandal guy Maradiega, and not McCarrick.
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.