I
IHeartBenedict
Guest
No Catholic ignores it, so put your straw man back in its box. What we DON’T need though is the evil forces outside taking advatage of the situation to do their best to destroy the Church.
- Status
J
Jermosh
Guest
Pedophilia is not the only reason for dimissing. Yes he would not be part of the church or have any say, he would certainly still have his pedigreed powers, but I highly doupt he would start up a new congregation. But at least he would not be in a lavish postition.There is not such thing as defrocking in the Catholic Church. You can be dismissed from the clerical state, but the only way that you can be dismissed is if you actually commit the act of pedophilia. A dismissal is not defrocking. The man will always be a bishop, but he would have to live as if he were a lay man. However, they still have the same poewr as any other bishop.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
C
CMatt25
Guest
Am I understanding Benedict’s defense correctly? He didn’t see the memo in the German case, saw no evil. heard of no evil, and his deputy, not him, halted the Church trial in the Wisconson case?
Nixon resigned. Harry Truman once said the buck stopped with him. I’m wondering with whom does the buck stop at the Vatican?
Nixon resigned. Harry Truman once said the buck stopped with him. I’m wondering with whom does the buck stop at the Vatican?
J
JReducation
Guest
The charges that were brought up against Cardinal Law are not canonical cause for dismissal. You can’t break the law either. Why doesn’t it bother me? I think because I understand how the canons work and I realize that what was done is the best they could do and remain within the canons.
Secondly, you cannot strip a Cardinal of his place as a Prince of the Church. You can relieve him of duties as an Ordinary, which was done. But you cannot take away his Apostolic succession nor his right to vote as a Cardinal.
I’m comfortable that the Holy See did everything that is allowed by law. The Cardinal should have volunteered to go some place. I do believe this. But he didn’t and he can’t be forced to do so.
We have to remember that there are rules that govern Holy Orders that are inviolable.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
C
CMatt25
Guest
I understand of course the belief Christ is leading the apostolic successors and their infallible teaching in faith and morals. But obviously they have not always heeded His calling in deed. It doesn’t trouble you in the least then that those with a hand in forming and adopting the rules, are forming and adopting the rules to govern themselves?The charges that were brought up against Cardinal Law are not canonical cause for dismissal. You can’t break the law either. Why doesn’t it bother me? I think because I understand how the canons work and I realize that what was done is the best they could do and remain within the canons.
Secondly, you cannot strip a Cardinal of his place as a Prince of the Church. You can relieve him of duties as an Ordinary, which was done. But you cannot take away his Apostolic succession nor his right to vote as a Cardinal.
I’m comfortable that the Holy See did everything that is allowed by law. The Cardinal should have volunteered to go some place. I do believe this. But he didn’t and he can’t be forced to do so.
We have to remember that there are rules that govern Holy Orders that are inviolable.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
J
JReducation
Guest
It is true that the faithful, including bishops and popes, have not always heeded the Gospel as we should. We are a Church of sinners. That’s something that we know and that we keep working on.
Does it trouble me that those with a hand in forming law are forming laws to govern themselves? No. There is a good reason why not.
- Canon law governs the entire Church, not just bishops.
- Canon law is written by lawyers, not by bishops. Then they are sent to a committee of Cardinals that reviews them for theological integrity. If they pass that test, then they are sent to the Pope who must read and approve each section, one at a time. The pope is the only law-giver, not the bishops and cardinals. This is rooted in Jesus’ confrimation of Peter, “Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven. Whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. To you I give the Keys of the Kingdom.” We can’t change this. The Church does not have the authority to change this.
I’m seeing the Church through the eyes of history and law and I see the law evolving to address the problem, which is what it should do. But to say that the law should have anticipated the problem is like saying that the Constitution should have anticipated divorce. This did not happen in those days frequently enough to become a legal point. When it did become moer common, laws had to be written to address the problem.
I would see a failure in the law, if the law never addresses the problem. That would raise my eyebrow. I wouldn’t be able to say anything, but it would raise my concern and attract my attention.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
C
Canto
Guest
Pope in the clear.
Media on the other hand…
catholiceducation.org/articles/apologetics/ap0329.htm
extract: The so-called “confidential” instruction was published by the Vatican, appeared in English in 2001, and has been on the Vatican website (in Latin) since at least the middle of 2005.
It has been ‘discovered,’ ‘revealed’ or ‘exposed’ by so many reporters since then that it might give pause to those who doubt the possibility of the resurrection of the dead.
Catholic media disclosed and discussed the document in January, 2001. In July, 2003, newspapers in Massachusetts published stories about the document Mr. Hitchens quotes. CBS News tried to take credit for the news the following month.The Observer, cited by Mr. Hitchens, purported to break the story in 2005, while the BBC ‘exposed’ the instruction in 2006. A CBS feature ‘discovered’ it in late 2009.
Media on the other hand…
catholiceducation.org/articles/apologetics/ap0329.htm
extract: The so-called “confidential” instruction was published by the Vatican, appeared in English in 2001, and has been on the Vatican website (in Latin) since at least the middle of 2005.
It has been ‘discovered,’ ‘revealed’ or ‘exposed’ by so many reporters since then that it might give pause to those who doubt the possibility of the resurrection of the dead.
Catholic media disclosed and discussed the document in January, 2001. In July, 2003, newspapers in Massachusetts published stories about the document Mr. Hitchens quotes. CBS News tried to take credit for the news the following month.The Observer, cited by Mr. Hitchens, purported to break the story in 2005, while the BBC ‘exposed’ the instruction in 2006. A CBS feature ‘discovered’ it in late 2009.
J
Jermosh
Guest
I did not state that they were grounds for him to be dismissed, just highlighting that pedophilia is not the only act that can do such a thing.The charges that were brought up against Cardinal Law are not canonical cause for dismissal. You can’t break the law either. Why doesn’t it bother me? I think because I understand how the canons work and I realize that what was done is the best they could do and remain within the canons.
Secondly, you cannot strip a Cardinal of his place as a Prince of the Church. You can relieve him of duties as an Ordinary, which was done. But you cannot take away his Apostolic succession nor his right to vote as a Cardinal.
I’m comfortable that the Holy See did everything that is allowed by law. The Cardinal should have volunteered to go some place. I do believe this. But he didn’t and he can’t be forced to do so.
We have to remember that there are rules that govern Holy Orders that are inviolable.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
That said, do you think that being the archpriest of the most prestigious parish in the world and attending world class events as a punishment? How are you fine with this? I am finding this particular aspect rather interesting in how we view what we consider punishment and ethics.
Was he or was he not forced into the position of being the chaplin in the MD convent?
L
lemonbeam
Guest
Pope Benedict was not complicit in any cover up of the Wisconsin Priest.
Read the following:
The Pope and the Murphy case: what the New York Times story didn’t tell you:
catholicculture.org/commentary/otn.cfm?id=629
Pope Benedict Transferred Paedophile?:
ncregister.com/blog/pope_benedict_transferred_paedophile/
VATICAN NOTES “MERE SPECULATION” IN NEW YORK TIMES:
zenit.org/article-28761?l=english
Keeping the record straight on Benedict and the crisis:
ncronline.org/blogs/all-things-catholic/keeping-record-straight-benedict-and-crisis
The Pope and the Wisconsin sex abuse scandal: I smell a stitch-up:
blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/damianthompson/100031495/the-pope-and-the-wisconsin-sex-abuse-scandal-i-smell-a-stitch-up/
The Church is not trying to cover anything up:
timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article7076344.ece
VATICAN SPOKESMAN REFUTES MURPHY CASE ACCUSATIONS
zenit.org/article-28750?l=english
NY Archdiocese Demands Retraction from NYTimes:
archny.org/news-events/news-press-releases/index.cfm?i=15964
NEW YORK TIMES TRIES TO KEEP FLAME ALIVE
catholicleague.org/release.php?id=1811
A Response to the New York Times [Father Raymond J. de Souza]
corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZDkxYmUzMTQ1YWUyMzRkMzg4Y2RiN2UyOWIzNDVkNDM=
M
maximus
Guest
I vote NO on the Pope resigning. We live in a world drowning in an addiction to pornography, which has resulted in an outbreak of pedophilia. The Church currently has for her part is taking aggressive action to protect children. My dioceses had good working plans early on so things have not been bad here. Poor protection of children occurred in the past across the board including the church. Currently, I would say the church leads in protecting children. Look at what happens in public schools that is where pedophilia still to this day runs wild; but there is no public out cry there we just make the offenders reality tabloid stars. The majority of pedophiles are living boy friends, lets attack the practice of adultery if we really care about children rather than trying to take down the Church. Also, as parents we need to be vigilant of our children in a world of porn addicts.
I believe this situation is being exploited and once the media takes down a pope then they will control who will lead the Church and you can bet it will be in a direction of deviancy. However, I believe in our Lord and in his promise of divine protection. Maybe this crisis will help separate the wheat from the chaff; we need a downsizing to purge the Church of cancers within.
God Bless and have a happy Easter.
I believe this situation is being exploited and once the media takes down a pope then they will control who will lead the Church and you can bet it will be in a direction of deviancy. However, I believe in our Lord and in his promise of divine protection. Maybe this crisis will help separate the wheat from the chaff; we need a downsizing to purge the Church of cancers within.
God Bless and have a happy Easter.
J
JReducation
Guest
I do not know this for a fact. Therefore I can’t answer that. I do know that you cannot force any priest on a religious community. If it was a convent, the superior has the right and authority to deny the request that she accept a chaplain that she does not aprove of.
There is another issue in canon law, a bishop who goes into another diocese on a permanent assignment, such as a chaplaincy, creates an irregular situation for the bishop of that diocese. Usually bishops are auxiliary to the local bishop. This is an assignment out of the norm.
Were I a bishop, I would have a problem accepting another bishop to work in my diocese unless he came voluntarilly, which has happened. I know two bishops who got into trouble, not this kind, but one volunteered to go to another state and be a chaplain for some nuns. The other resigned as auxiliary and returned to his religious community. They lived very holy lives until they died.
I have no idea if he was offered a chaplaincy and how that went down. I can’t imagine offering a prince of the Church a chaplaincy. It would be rather awkward for everyone involved. The idea is not to cause more problems for other people.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
J
JohnnyK
Guest
Why should he resign? these are obviously attacks by Satan & other dark forces. WE should PRAY HARD for him and the church through these attacks. Remember, we know the end of the story, and we win through Jesus’ sacrifice.
C
CMatt25
Guest
Still seems at the moment after all I’ve read that it’s he didn’t see this memo or that letter or a deputy did this or that or it wasn’t under his jurisdiction so he’s not responsible and so forth.
S
St_Kevin
Guest
As a former Catholic, I believe Catholics need to become more educated about the history of their church; in detail & not from a Catholic slant. Find out what other people thought about your history.
For example, did you realize that the Catholic church got into power by marrying the Roman empire?
That Christs church was never built on Peter but rather Peter’s statement of faith. Find out what your own Church fathers taught on this issue.
That it has a long history in political affairs?
That there is a lot of lawyerism in its system.
(accuse the accusers is one of their favorites)
That some wars were started by Popes between innocent countries?
That the Irish were abused by the English because of the Popes forged papal bulls?
Did you know 1 Catholic pope had a previous pope exhumed & put on trial? (Formosus)
yes, you can put a dead man on trial; the catholic church approved of it.
Resigning is what a Godly man would do if only 1 child was abused & it was covered up; but since the Catholic church is so political, he probably won’t.
For example, did you realize that the Catholic church got into power by marrying the Roman empire?
That Christs church was never built on Peter but rather Peter’s statement of faith. Find out what your own Church fathers taught on this issue.
That it has a long history in political affairs?
That there is a lot of lawyerism in its system.
(accuse the accusers is one of their favorites)
That some wars were started by Popes between innocent countries?
That the Irish were abused by the English because of the Popes forged papal bulls?
Did you know 1 Catholic pope had a previous pope exhumed & put on trial? (Formosus)
yes, you can put a dead man on trial; the catholic church approved of it.
Resigning is what a Godly man would do if only 1 child was abused & it was covered up; but since the Catholic church is so political, he probably won’t.
P
Pons
Guest
No.
M
markomalley
Guest
Or maybe we could get our history from somebody other than Alexander Hislop or Jack Chick.
I
IHeartBenedict
Guest
I think the days of corrupt popes are far behind us. Frankly, I think everyone here needs to chill out. A few pinheads in the media run a few stories in the news, and our Apologetics forum is now all clogged up with this story. This junk doesn’t even have anything to do with Apologetics for Pete’s sake.
I trust the Pope far more than I trust the anti-Catholic, liberal, lame-stream media. I am therefore content to forget the whole matter and let the process take care of itself. God chose the Pope, not Katie Couric or Matt Lauer. As far as I am concerned they can crawl back in their holes and the Pope can get about the business of being Pope.
H
Hiskid1973
Guest
Satan is always behind any work against Christ, but the reaping from what was sown in the past/present has to be dealt with and those complicit in are due to reap church discipline as well as well as man’s law…Look how the Corinth church dealt with those who would bring infection to the whole body of Christ…Why should he resign? these are obviously attacks by Satan & other dark forces. WE should PRAY HARD for him and the church through these attacks. Remember, we know the end of the story, and we win through Jesus’ sacrifice.
H
Hiskid1973
Guest
Thing is, if all this was dealt with in the right way an exposed rather than covered and moved around there would be much less fodder for them to consume…The press looks for ways to usurp the body of Christ…We should be harmless as doves and above reproach in doing His work…Expose the issues, mete the punishment deserved and move on…
I
IHeartBenedict
Guest
Thats fine. So the press did their job. Now we all know about it and the bishops are handling it. Now can we all move on? Sheese.
.
- Status