The Case of Theodore McCarrick | Commonweal Magazine

[twf]

but nobody is above the law,

For the record, I have no issue with the proper authorities investigating the dioceses of the USA (or any other country)…I think everything needs to be exposed to the light of day before true healing can happen.

That being said, the Church DID traditionally teach that she is above man’s laws. In medieval Europe, clergy could only be judged by Church tribunals, not secular courts. To this day, the Bishop of Rome remains sovereign of his own micro nation state to ensure that no secular government has authority over him or the Church as a whole…

 

[Ardent_Fire]

For the record, I have no issue with the proper authorities investigating the dioceses of the USA (or any other country)…I think everything needs to be exposed to the light of day before true healing can happen.

This is the bottom line. The church also teaches that we are to obey certain laws and law enforcement is justified in enforcing these laws.

 

[kyrie03]

Please read what the victims had to go through at the hands of Bishop McCarrick. Here’s an interview with “James”, who was first child baptized by Fr. McCarrick. Uncle Ted's 'Special Boy' | The American Conservative “James” tells not only of the grooming and the sexual assault, but also of the blasphemous abuse of the priesthood that warped his developing conscience leading him to destructive behaviors. There is a demonic aspect associated with this grave sin. McCarrick has never admitted any wrong!

(McCarrick) looks contrite and remorseful. If his sins are forgiven by God then who are we to judge him?

Mercy is for God to dispense and the priest absolves sins in the confession. You and I show mercy when we pray for others to repent. However, contrition (sincere sorrow for having offended God and hatred for the sins with firm purpose of sinning no more) is necessary for sins to be forgiven. I don’t know how McCarrrick’s actions, including his disobedience to the restrictions Cardinal Ouellet admits were placed upon him, leads you to believe he was repentant?

Why is mercy not an acceptable option for you

The Church’s “merciful” approach to sins of sodomy has, unfortunately, led to minimizing this grave sin that cries to heaven for vengeance and has allowed it to pollute and permeate the hierarchy. According to numerous saints, homosexuality begets multiple other disorders.

• St John Chrysostom: “All of these affections [in Rom. 1:26-27] . . . were vile, but chiefly the mad lust after males; for the soul is more the sufferer in sins, and more dishonored than the body in diseases. The sins against nature are more difficult and less rewarding, since true pleasure is only according to nature. But when God abandons a man, everything is turned upside down! . . . A murderer only separates the soul from the body, whereas these destroy the soul inside the body . . . There is nothing, absolutely nothing more mad or damaging than this perversity.”— St. John Chrysostom, “Homilies on Romans”.
• St Peter Damien, 11th century Doctor of the Church in ( Liber Gomorrhianus ), says: “Without fail, it brings death to the body and destruction to the soul. It pollutes the flesh, extinguishes the light of the mind, expels the Holy Spirit from the temple of the human heart, and gives entrance to the devil, the stimulator of lust. It leads to error, totally removes truth from the deluded mind … It opens up hell and closes the gates of paradise … It is this vice that violates temperance, slays modesty, strangles chastity, and slaughters virginity … It defiles all things, sullies all things, pollutes all things …

 

[curious_cath]

nobody is above the law, especially when it comes to violating the young and vulnerable and any institutional failure to protect them.

I agree with you that sin must be uprooted. I don’t defend what Cardinal McCarrick did. The church has a duty to prevent this kind of things happening in the future. I only say we are all sinners. This is what I learned as the new consciousness of New Evangelization. We are not that much different from the worse sinners ever, as we all need mercy from God. Without mercy we are doomed and dead. Death is the wage of sin. So we need mercy every moment of our lives. We need mercy to be able to lay down our own lives for our enemies without murmur and grumbling as Christ did. How could we be called Christians otherwise?

Our communities in the Neocatechumenal Way have this kind of sensitivity towards each other seeing ourselves as sinners. It also paves our way for us to be able to lay down our lives for our enemy. This is the spirit of New Evangelization that is stemming from Vatican 2. More than half a century after the Council the fruits are being seen as our view of ourselves, faithful Catholics, as irredeemable sinners. What else could be the point of New Evangelization, if not this?! In the incoming war against our Mother Church by the states we’ll be able to weather the storm because of this spiritual understanding that sets us apart from state attorneys. We are on the side of the church even if this includes Cardinal McCarrick at al.

 

[kyrie03]

We have a high priest, in this case Pope Francis, who has sympathy for us as he knows all kinds of temptation himself. He intercedes for us with loud voice, a way of chasing devil away. He cannot hold back mercy, because it is not his authority to manage something that comes from heaven through the precious purchase price paid by our Savior.

Pope Francis is a high priest? No, he is the vicar of Christ on earth who has been tasked to teach, to sanctify and to rule the faithful by handing down, unadulterated, the truths necessary for salvation. God dispenses mercy through all of His representatives, including Pope Francis; they cannot be more “merciful” than God.

Are we with the Great Accuser who has no mercy in devouring the Precious Body?

The Great Accuser is the devil. Those who have accused McCarrick are victims, not the devil. Those who have accused various bishops, including Pope Francis, of covering up for McCarrick are either telling the truth or not. The attorney generals are attempted to investigate what the Church is refusing to investigate. If the hierarchy is unwilling to purify the Church of this rot, God can use other means to bring it about.

 

[bullish1]

Why is mercy not an acceptable option for you, dear remartensjr? The cardinal looks contrite and remorseful. If his sins are forgiven by God then who are we to judge him?

Who cares what he looks like? Contrition and remorse should be shown by penitent actions! Is he fearful of God’s judgement of his actions? How about a public apology so that his soul and other’s may be saved by his example!

 

[curious_cath]

If the hierarchy is unwilling to purify the Church of this rot, God can use other means to bring it about.

Yes, but the church should not persecute itself. There are political entities outside in the world, like the states and the attorney generals, who persecute the Christian, persecute the church. We should not join the persecutors.

 

[13pollitos]

Cleansing is not persecuting. Even Jesus cleansed the temple.

 

[curious_cath]

You’ve mentioned the Neocatechumenal way which seems to be of great influence. Yet as I read your posts you seem 100% confident that this sinner is repentant, and here you’re doubting the word of the victims and it seems you’re getting your information from TV and the internet like the rest of us, so how do you know? That’s an honest question.

Dear Monicad, I sincerely appreciate your question. If you have read my comments or topics, you could have an impression of why I am full of doubts. I personally know an Archbishop who is right now at the cross hairs of some interest because of the charges against him. I wrote about this here:

Guam Archbishop appeals verdict Catholic News

If you follow the news, you may recall that here was a canonical trial against Archbishop Anthony Sablan Apuron that had been appealed. Pope Francis told the media recently that he will make a decision in the case: “I took it upon myself and I made a commission of canonists to help me,” Francis explained, adding: “It is a complicated case on one hand, but also not difficult because the evidence is very clear.” “But I cannot prejudge,” he said. “I’ll wait for the information, and then I will…

Archbishop Apuron walks in the Neocatechumenal Way. He personally blessed my Bible that I use for the Celebration of Word. A couple years ago a well detectable belligerence started to develop against the Archbishop by a group of very arrogant people. I gave the link to their blog at the post above. It is detectable, almost inch by inch, as these group of disgruntled Catholics marched toward the end we see now: over 200 litigation against the local church, 6 of them personally against the Archbishop.

Without repeating here much detail, I just let you know that many people, not only in the Neocatechumenal Way, suspect malfeasance because of the history of what had been written, including direct threats, on this blog for a duration of several years from 2013-16, before the actual sexual abuse charges were launched in 2016. Some of the charges, I emphasize SOME of the charges appear to be fabricated.

Unfortunately, the same process brought into light the case of Fr. Bruillard, as well, whom I also referred to above. He was a genuine serial sexual abuser and dangerous pedophile predator here back in the 70s and early 80s. He was relocated to Minnesota in the mid-80s where he continued the abuses of minors. Eventually he was exiled to decades of prayer and penance where he died a few weeks ago at the ripe age of 97.

 

[curious_cath]

Jesus commands forgiveness, but not to the exclusion of compassion and justice for the victims of a crime. I commend you for your zeal to encourage forgiveness, but it seems a little restrain might be in order. Thank you for letting me share my thoughts. God bless.

My point is that we all feel for the victims and we stand for them. This is the precise reason we should reject exaggerated or outright fabricated charges. There are always some who try to jump the bandwagon while million of dollars are at the stake. We would be blind if we don’t acknowledge this.

Now, the case of Archbishop Apuron is complicated as Pope Francis said in his interview at the end of August. Again, I am mentioning him because I personally know him as a brother in the Neocatechumenal communities. Some people may say communities are like extended families, so community members are our family members in the spiritual sense. Would you like to see your family member cited by the court for accusations that are unbelievable?

To make a long story short, we truly appreciate Pope Francis’ gesture to personally judge the case. Everybody will accept his judgment because he is the most competent person of earth, the Vicar of Christ , who sympathizes with us sinners. I mean we are all sinners. The New Evangelization was built around this central message after Vatican 2. But talking about sin without mercy is not Christian. We learn that we should love our abusers, even lay down our lives for them, because by this we give a chance to them to be redeemed.

So no, I don’t know for sure if Cardinal McCarrick is truly repentant or not. But I trust Pope Francis who, in turn, trusted him with honor and leadership during the years that very well might be the final years of the Cardinal to be spent here, among the mortal.

 

[curious_cath]

I personally know people whose innocence had been ripped away by the hands of clergy.

I also know stories of people who were victimized long time ago. I don’t see any point why these people should not come forward. People who come forward receive professional help from the diocese. There is counseling available free of charge. I sympathize with the victims and I believe they are entitled for retribution. But how can you sort out the sheep from the goat after a period of 40-50 years that have passed?

I emphasized that it is only SOME of the accusers who raise eyebrow. You may say we don’t need to talk about them, but their reality contaminates the climate and makes the church more vulnerable that it should be. There is a reason Pope Francis is delaying his verdict in the case of Archbishop Apuron. His reason is related to his own doubts of accepting all charges against the Archbishop on face value.

I might be wrong, but I detect some anger or desperation with Catholic leaders after the case of Cardinal McCarrick and the letters of Archbishop Vigano. This is the reality we live in now as Catholics in the year of 2018. Please, do not project your anger on me, what I have written is true.

 

[bullish1]

Unfortunately, the same process brought into light the case of Fr. Bruillard, as well, whom I also referred to above. He was a genuine serial sexual abuser and dangerous pedophile predator here back in the 70s and early 80s. He was relocated to Minnesota in the mid-80s where he continued the abuses of minors. Eventually he was exiled to decades of prayer and penance where he died a few weeks ago at the ripe age of 97.

You did not also mention that his actions were known and reported to the Bishop in Guam, not the current Bishop you defend, and nothing substantial was done to curb the abuse. I hope you are right in your support of this Bishop, but there sure seems like a lot of credible accusations made against him.

@Dacinom did not express anger at you. I agree that you seem more bent on mercy for the potentially falsely accused than you do for the actual victims. I think both are justified in the correct balance. Not all the civil authorities are out to get the church but I am sure that some are. If the church had conducted herself appropriately since 2002, she would not be in this mess to begin with however. Any backlash is to be expected, right or wrong!

 

[JimG]

The Commonweal article was interesting and sheds perhaps a little more light on the matter. I have no idea of the state of the former cardinal’s conscience or the depth of his repentance. What has puzzled me somewhat since first hearing of this matter is the question of his adult seminarian victims. They were not children. Yet seemingly none spoke up or took action. What were they thinking. It is a question asked in this article:

McCarrick’s Seminarians.

Loading…

studiomatters.com

 

[13pollitos]

They must have told someone since there were settlements made to them. There are also very old articles on the internet that listed their allegations. If they didn’t speak up, there would be no settlements or old statements.

 

[JimG]

Yes, apparently it was an open secret.
From the article I linked:

“Whatever were they thinking, those young men who accepted invitations to the beach house of a priest whose proclivities were an open secret? What were these “nephews” expecting when they climbed into Uncle Ted’s bed? Did none of them have functioning reflexives? Most of us could imagine our own sons giving the goat a knee in the groin: “Oh, sorry! I didn’t mean to do that. But there’s not much room here.” Did no one think to say, “Thanks anyway, Your Eminence, but I can sleep on the floor.” Or, “A chair will do me fine, Ted.””

 

[13pollitos]

These were seminarians specifically recruited by their Archbishop. He had the power to keep them or be rid of them. They weren’t given much of a choice. It is unfair to expect more of them than if these were young ladies. I guarantee it is much more humiliating to these young men than their female counterparts. That is one reason far fewer males report sexual assaults than females do.

Priests have admitted that there were complaints about McCarrick and that seminarians had confided they were not comfortable. But asking for a young seminary student to publically speak out about a bishop or Cardinal is truly asking too much. Even now after all we know people are chided for speaking “disrespectfully” about the clergy, or “spreading gossip”

 

[Annie]

I don’t see any point why these people should not come forward.

Clearly you have not thought this through. Consider what these victims went through, at a young age. Imagine yourself as a young vulnerable teen, because the vulnerable are those whom these filthy predators choose, perhaps suffering from a bad family life or bullying at school, etc, only to find themselves having been led down a path to degradation.

That is past for them. Why should they come forward? They have lives which they have built apart from that wreckage. It was a long time ago. It is something they have moved away from.

And they might encounter people who suggest they are lying. They bare their souls and someone else can trash it. It might get in the newspapers and then everyone they run into will think of them in that context.

No, for many there is no reason for them to come forward at this point.

 

[Annie]

First of all, a predator chooses a vulnerable, compliant type of person to be his victim. Then he charms them into a position in which they find it difficult to suddenly refuse. It happens little by little.

Victims also often feel like they are somehow culpable. The predator seems like such a nice, loving person, perhaps, the victim thinks to himself, he gave off some unnoticed message?

And then too, all of us are trained o be respectful of authority, to be nice, to not rock the boat.

And if victims do rock the boat, the response may well fall on them rather than on the perpetrator. It hit the newspapers where I lived that a girl being abused by a popular teacher was being bullied because of her accusations against him. Everyone was upset that she had reported the teacher rather than being upset with the teacher for committing these terrible acts.

@curious_cath It’s in the Church and outside the Church, the lack of a sense of sin mentioned in the article. We have all been imbued with this idea of over-forgiveness, who am I to judge.

How can we have justice if we say only, “Well, I’ve done bad things too.” I have done bad things in my life, but I still want murderers to be put in prison.

The Church had laws and procedures for handling these types of crimes. The bishops should have followed their own laws and stopped this scourge at its commencement. The bishops were trying to be merciful, but ended by allowing thousands to be victimized.

The Church should not laïcize these twisted quisling priests to let them loose in the world; the Church should publicly strip them of any rank or title, as previously called for, then send them to an enclosed monastery to live apart from those whom they might harm.

 

[13pollitos]

The Church should not laïcize these twisted quisling priests to let them loose in the world; the Church should publicly strip them of any rank or title, as previously called for, then send them to an enclosed monastery to live apart from those whom they might harm.

I had not considered that, but it is not a bad idea. I don’t like the fact these the “punishment” is to knock them down to the level that all of us lay faithful are. It’s as if we are being told we are worthless and no better than abusers. Excommunicated publically seemed fitting. But confining then away after publically stripping them of all titles is much better.

 

[curious_cath]

No, for many there is no reason for them to come forward at this point.

Are we talking about hypothetical victims? Or real ones who are entitled for monetary recompense? See another explanation of why those victims do not come forward:

Is Catholic Clergy Sex Abuse Related to Homosexual Priests? Catholic News

A journalist considered one of Pope Francis’ “unofficial spokespeople” claimed in stunning remarks about Archbishop Theodore McCarrick’s alleged sexual abuse of seminarians that the root problem is not homosexuality but clericalism, and also asserted that “No, McCarrick did not have homosexual relations.” He also "insisted that the problem in the Church is not child abuse but homosexuality. “Is the root, the origin of the problem of abuse really to be found in the homosexuality of priests?” th…