The Case of Theodore McCarrick | Commonweal Magazine

[curious_cath]

The Church had laws and procedures for handling these types of crimes.

That is why the sheep should be separated from the goat very firmly. Those who are innocent in the eye of God from those who are guilty. Would you like to persecute those who did not commit any crime? In cases of 40-50 years old allegations you should be one heck of a Sherlock Holmes to tell if crime was truly committed! Some repentant clergy are very contrite and admit wrong. Then are you going to punish him for confessing? How about those who are guilty as hell, still deny any wrongdoing? How would you convict them without clear evidence?

 

[kyrie03]

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.

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.

What gives you the impression that McCarrick might be repentant? When questioned about allegations, McCarrick publically DENIED any wrongdoing.

Sympathy with sinners in their final years is preferable to a canonical trial investigating McCarrick’s serious and blasphemous abuse of office to guard and protect those in his charge? Wise judgment for even the “most competent person on earth” isn’t possible unless the facts are brought to light.

Archbishop Vigano testified, and backed up with an oath, that he personally told Pope Francis about McCarrick in 2013 – that there had been compiled for some years, a thick dossier of alleged sexual acts perpetrated by McCarrick on various priests and seminarians.

• We know that 2 diocese in New Jersey paid out $180,000 to 2 individuals (not minors at time of abuse) in 2004 and 2007.
• Vigano claims that Pope Benedict ordered restrictions on McCarrick that were disobeyed. Soon after Pope Francis was elected, McCarrick was ‘rehabilitated” and sent to China to help negotiate the deal we now have allowing the Communist Chinese to nominate who the Vatican appoints as bishops.
• In June of 2018, the New York diocese found “credible” an additional 2 cases of homosexual abuse.
• The pedophilia allegation of an 11 year old boy were not made known until after McCarrick’s resignation was accepted and he was sent off to be quiet in a monastery.

Pope Francis hasn’t authorized any canonical trial of McCarrick, nor the release of any documents relating to the allegations. He hasn’t shown any interest in determining the truth to clear up confusion or stop the loss of faith and trust. He told us that he will remain silent!

 

[Weserthy]

I agree - despite the promise from the Vatican that they will perform a full review of the McCarrick files, I am not filled with optimism that this will really go anywhere. There is probably a good chance that they never even make the results of this “review” public, and there is absolutely zero chance that they disclose all of the facts about the review if they do decide to announce something. The Vatican isn’t going to release any results that would make the Pope look bad, and given that it seems likely that Pope Francis was at some point negligent in his attention to the McCarrick’s situation, they will surely suppress some, if not all of the results of their investigation. Pope Francis already has a checkered history when dealing with sex abuse issues going back to his days as a Cardinal and bishop, then with the recent bungled Chile situation, so I doubt there is any appetite at all to cast doubt on his handling of things in this realm.

I also would bet heavily against McCarrick ever going on trial by the Vatican. He will probably be allowed to die of old age/natural causes rather than be subjected to a trial, even if he lives for another ten years. The Vatican clearly just wants this whole McCarrick affair to disappear (even though it hasn’t yet left the headlines of Catholic publications) and announcing that he is going on trial will just cause them a headache that they can easily avoid by using the convenient excuse of his advanced age.

 

[curious_cath]

When questioned about allegations, McCarrick publically DENIED any wrongdoing.

If Andrea Tornielli is right, whom I referred to above, then there could have very well been an abuse of clerical power, but no sexual relation! Just think of it. I know it is hard to believe after the sexual revolution of the 60ties. We all tend to place sex in the center of our thinking. But is this proper? I don’t think so! Sex is only one biological drive we humans are destined to follow, but there are other indulgencies sinners may find even more attractive. This is power!

Vigano claims that Pope Benedict ordered restrictions on McCarrick that were disobeyed.

This is something that has been heavily contested already.

Pope Francis hasn’t shown any interest in determining the truth

Wow, wow and wow! Is this right? What is truth according to kyrie03?! Is not the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ the truth that pours out mercy into our frail world? If truth is something you dislike then is it still truth? I surely hope that you don;t want to convince me to disregard what Pope Francis says. He was elected to Pope under the auspices that he is the most reliable among the faithful. Was not he selected by the Spirit of truth?

The Vatican isn’t going to release any results that would make the Pope look bad.

Why should Vatican do that? I mean what would be the benefit? Is it not the Big Liar who wants to discredit church leadership so that the flock runs? Who will pick up the wayward Catholics once they lose faith in the Vicar of Christ? Should we give them up to Protestant denominations?

I also would bet heavily against McCarrick ever going on trial by the Vatican.

Persecution of an old man would turn into a game of blame. Do you need a scapegoat? Then you only want to distract. If you turn a sheep black at your pleasure, then it is only a matter of time until many more sheep turn black. Would you prefer a church of the black sheep over the white ones?

 

[Annie]

If Andrea Tornielli is right, whom I referred to above, then there could have very well been an abuse of clerical power, but no sexual relation!

I am sorry, but the idea that MacCarrick had no sexual contact is belied by the fact that he has been accused over the years of committing similar acts, has been very credibly accused of abusing two minors, and by the fact that payouts have been made.

St Matthew (10:18) quotes Christ “Behold I send you as sheep in the midst of wolves. Be ye therefore wise as serpents and simple as doves.”

 

[Annie]

Those who are innocent in the eye of God from those who are guilty. Would you like to persecute those who did not commit any crime? In cases of 40-50 years old allegations you should be one heck of a Sherlock Holmes to tell if crime was truly committed!

Sort of continued from above, as I posted that by mistake before I was finished.

I completely understand about false accusations, and have no desire to see anyone who is innocent be punished.

However, K do want our bishops to show at least as much compassion for victims and potential victims as they did for the priests whose terrible crimes they covered up. That is what I am talking about: something being done to those who rip the innocence of young people away through their own selfish desire for sexual satiety, because that is justice, and justice is not only important for the victim and the perpetrator, but also to show the world that the Church is as just as it should be, not allowing “its own” to avoid justice, which is what all too many bishops have done over the last several decades.

 

[curious_cath]

K do want our bishops to show at least as much compassion for victims and potential victims as they did for the priests whose terrible crimes they covered up.

I absolutely agree with you (or with K) on this one! I believe, showing compassion to victims is the alpha and omega of what the faithful, all the priests, bishops, Cardinals and the Pope should demonstrate immediately and without hesitation.

 

[13pollitos]

How is it that McCarrick sexually abuse two boys (his godson and an altar boy) if he was not engaging in homosexual relations? Are all those seminarians mistaken as well?

 

[13pollitos]

If Andrea Tornielli is right, whom I referred to above, then there could have very well been an abuse of clerical power, but no sexual relation! Just think of it. I know it is hard to believe after the sexual revolution of the 60ties. We all tend to place sex in the center of our thinking. But is this proper? I don’t think so! Sex is only one biological drive we humans are destined to follow, but there are other indulgencies sinners may find even more attractive. This is power!

It is a power trip, yes, but it is also sexual in nature. He abused at least two young boys as well as the seminarians or young priests. What Andrea Tornielle stated is not correct and convieniently forgets to mention the younger victims of his crimes.

 

[Annie]

In that case, we cannot allow ourselves to be blinded by compassion for the priests who have committed these acts.

 

[kyrie03]

Wow, wow and wow! Is this right? What is truth according to kyrie03?! Is not the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ the truth that pours out mercy into our frail world? If truth is something you dislike then is it still truth? I surely hope that you don;t want to convince me to disregard what Pope Francis says. He was elected to Pope under the auspices that he is the most reliable among the faithful. Was not he selected by the Spirit of truth?

Quid est veritas?

• Either McCarrick engaged in homosexual behavior (not "clericalism) with priests and seminarians resulting in payouts and forcing his resignation, or he didn’t. Either he groomed his godson from an early age and abused him starting at the age of 11, or he didn’t.
• Determining who is telling the truth and what that truth is matters, because the present intolerable confusion is destroying the Church.
• Either the Giver of Life commanded us to “increase and multiply” or “not to breed like rabbits.” God cannot contradict Himself; His teachings cannot evolve to suit the times.
• The Spirit of Truth doesn’t select the most reliable among the faithful to be the Vicar of Christ on earth!

According to Catholic teaching, the pope is infallible (protected from proclaiming error) when he speaks ex cathedra (from the chair); deciding to rehabilitate McCarrick or judging that he is repentant doesn’t qualify.

“when in discharge of the office of Peter and the Doctor of all Christians, by virtue of his supreme apostolic authority, he defines a doctrine regarding Faith or Morals to be held by the Universal Church.” Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma by Ludwig Ott

You seem to misunderstand God’s mercy. There is a hell where numerous souls suffer for all eternity because they did not seek to observe God’s laws but instead, pursued the lusts of their own hearts. God, Who is infinitely just, mercifully forgives repentant sinners; the unrepentant He cannot forgive.

“The rewarding of the good and the punishing of the wicked is not merely a work of the Divine Justice, but also an operation of Divine Mercy, as He rewards beyond merits, and punishes less than is merited. On the other hand, **the remission of sin is not merely a work of mercy, but at the same time, a work of justice, as God demands from the simmer repentance and atonement.” Moral Attributes of the Divine Will in Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma by Ludwig Ott

 

[kyrie03]

continued…

Scripture tells us that mercy and truth are applied to those who seek to keep God’s laws. Habitually hosting 5 seminarians to spend night at beach house with only 5 beds, leaving 1 to sleep in same bed with the naked bishop, is seeking something diametrically opposed to God’s laws.

“The Lord is sweet and righteous; therefore he will give a law to sinners in the way.
He will guide the mild in judgment: He will teach the meek his ways.
All the ways of the Lord are mercy and truth to them that seek after his covenant and his testimonies.”
Psalm 24:8-10.

St Augustine explains these verses: "Though He is always ready to receive the penitent, He will punish the obstinate with severity. Jesus Christ showed mercy at his first coming and He will display truth at his second coming, judging all with equity. When God gave his law to manifest his will, he attested heaven and earth, that all might observe it carefully. The law is God’s covenant, and the testimony is his will. He mercifully preserveth us with his graces, and will reward with truth and justice". Haydock Catholic Bible

 

[kyrie03]

Why should Vatican do that? I mean what would be the benefit? Is it not the Big Liar who wants to discredit church leadership so that the flock runs? Who will pick up the wayward Catholics once they lose faith in the Vicar of Christ? Should we give them up to Protestant denominations?

The “Big Liar” is the one who doesn’t tell the truth. The Church leadership prefers confusion to clarity; cover-up to transparency. Once the shepherd has been struck, the sheep scatter. It’s not too late to stop the silence and speak -“to confirm the brethern in the truth.” The sheep will recognize the voice of the Shepherd. Voices that are not truthful will be rejected.

Persecution of an old man would turn into a game of blame. Do you need a scapegoat?

Let McCarrick speak. Let him address and explain the numerous allegations. A canonical trial is just and merciful - it provides the means for McCarrick to repent. There is no persecution of an old man. He is not the scapegoat. Christ took on the punishment due to sin and offered Himself as fitting sacrifice to God.

 

[curious_cath]

Thanks for your comments. I agree with most of what you wrote. I just mention that you haven’t addressed or responded to any of my questions.

Quid est veritas?

I have never said Pope Francis can be trusted because he is canonically infallible in these matters. But the Vicar of Christ can still be trusted even beyond ex cathedra matters, anyway. You exaggerated legalism really turns me off.

the present intolerable confusion is destroying the Church.

I don’t know what do you think is intolerable. I do think our sisters and brothers in Christ, including church leaders, should be tolerated. The persecution of the church by state attorney generals is also something that might become intolerably painful once the green light to proceed is given by the government.

Habitually hosting 5 seminarians to spend night at beach house with only 5 beds, leaving 1 to sleep in same bed with the naked bishop, is seeking something diametrically opposed to God’s laws.

There is no evidence of sexual relation. The Pope cannot say there is. I mean abuse could occur even without a sexual relation. Remember Bill Clinton who famously said about Monica Lewinsky: “I did not have sexual relation with that woman.” But why don’t the victims flock out to the limelight with their victimhood? This raises doubts of the validity of the prevailing prejudices against McCarrick. Do not mistake my words, Cardinal McCarrick IS guilty of abuse of clerical power, including sexual connotations. But there is no witness of a sexual relation, per se.

The “Big Liar” is the one who doesn’t tell the truth.

Or omits some important aspect of the truth. The states’ blackmailing of the church is a classic case of intrusion into church matters by the government. Those who aid this intrusion are preparing the internal climate of the church to resign into an era of renewed political persecution. We should not resign, we should fight back! We should admit a lot of clerical abuses that the church is able to handle. But we should not accept all accusations of sexual nature on face value. With utter compassion for real victims, the church should pay retribution according to secular law. But those who jump the band wagon of sexual accusations against the Catholic faith for direct monetary gain should be identified, separated from real victims and rejected.

 

[curious_cath]

A canonical trial is just and merciful - it provides the means for McCarrick to repent.

This is an altogether different idea. I have referred to a post about the case of Archbishop Apuron above. In relation of sexual abuse accusations stemming from 30-40 years ago, he went through a canonical trial recently by his own request. The verdict was announced this Spring and he appealed the penalties imposed on him by the tribunal. What makes this case delicate is that

• the exact charges have never been announced,
• the reason of conviction also remains unknown,
• the imposed penalties are relatively light.

There is speculation that the charge of sexual abuse against minors was converted into an abuse of clerical power. This could be a projected blueprint for the future handling of accusations of this nature. Clerical power abuse is something internal for the Catholic Church that cannot be prosecuted by the states.

Pope Francis is handling the appeal as he announced it the same day the Vigano letter came out. The Pope has information of an explosive strategy of the accusers and their handlers involving potential conspiracies, bribing and racketeering, using projected monetary gains alleged victims will reap from the church. This information has to be counterbalanced by true instances of power abuse and cases of many decades old pedophile predating by parish priests in the diocese.

Pope Francis has one heck of a challenge to make justice. On August 28th he announced that a verdict is expected after a one month long examination of the case by canonical lawyers. After 10 weeks of this announcement the verdict is to be expected to come out very soon.

 

[Annie]

The persecution of the church by state attorney generals is also something that might become intolerably painful once the green light to proceed is given by the government.

This is absurd. had the Church réacted vigorously against those who committed these terrible crimes you might have a point, but the bishops chose to cover up and throw the victims under the bus. They allowed predators to continue to victimize, often through several cycles.

So when an institution behaves like that, it’s nnot being persecuted when outside authorities step in.

 

[kyrie03]

Thanks for your comments. I agree with most of what you wrote. I just mention that you haven’t addressed or responded to any of my questions.

Not sure which specific questions you’re referring to? Some of your questions pre-suppose agreeing with your point of view….and I’ve attempted to point out problems in your point of view

McCarrick engaged primarily in “clericalism”? https://cruxnow.com/church-in-the-u...-settlements-after-alleged-abuse-by-cardinal/

I have never said Pope Francis can be trusted because he is canonically infallible in these matters. But the Vicar of Christ can still be trusted even beyond ex cathedra matters, anyway. You exaggerated legalism really turns me off.

How can I trust the Vicar if he refuses to even clarify what it is he is attempting to teach us? (example: Dubia)

Remember Bill Clinton who famously said about Monica Lewinsky: “I did not have sexual relation with that woman.” But why don’t the victims flock out to the limelight with their victimhood? This raises doubts of the validity of the prevailing prejudices against McCarrick. Do not mistake my words, Cardinal McCarrick IS guilty of abuse of clerical power, including sexual connotations. But there is no witness of a sexual relation, per se .

Bill Clinton didn’t control his sexual appetite and that led to abuse of power with an intern….not other way around. And it’s not the only sexual allegation against Clinton (Paula Jones, Kathleen Willey, Juanita Broderick).

Why would Church pay out for 2 cases and deem another 2 cases “credible” if there was no witness of sexual relations?

 

[kyrie03]

There is speculation that the charge of sexual abuse against minors was converted into an abuse of clerical power. This could be a projected blueprint for the future handling of accusations of this nature. Clerical power abuse is something internal for the Catholic Church that cannot be prosecuted by the states.

The Church was instituted by Christ to provide the means to eternal salvation. When its mission shifts to protecting assets and guarding its reputation, it not only loses credibility but leads souls away from God and delivers them to the world. Love of money and desire for worldly prestige led Judas to betray Christ. The Bride of Christ, the Church, is likewise betrayed.

The Pope has information of an explosive strategy of the accusers and their handlers involving potential conspiracies, bribing and racketeering, using projected monetary gains alleged victims will reap from the church.

Lord, have mercy! Let us, the members of the Church, follow in the footsteps of the Bridegroom and lovingly unite our sufferings to those of the Crucified. This is the means of the Church’s purification. May God’s Will be done!

 

[curious_cath]

How can I trust the Vicar if he refuses to even clarify what it is he is attempting to teach us? (example: Dubia)

By faith. Every good thing is possible by faith. Have faith in Pope Francis because he is the legitimate leader of your church with a “nihil obstat” stamp on him by the Holy Spirit.

Why would Church pay out for 2 cases

They did not say they had sexual relation. They definitely had to endure sexual connotation that is abuse enough to pay off settlement. But the nature of the abuse they suffered is rather related to power than to sex. About the church you say:

When its mission shifts to protecting assets and guarding its reputation, it not only loses credibility but leads souls away from God

Of the two, I would be more careful with reputation. In fact, losing reputation drives people away from the church. Once the moral standing of the church, really its backbone, would be crushed, there is no way to stop it from collapsing. This is the aim of all the dark business of the states, to make the Catholic Church to collapse in whole America! Just think of the “anti-Romanism” campaign waged against the Catholics over a century ago. That is what they want again, this is why they intrude into church jurisdiction where they have no business at all.

If you would need to choose between keeping reputation in peace or losing it in persecution, which one would you choose? As far as me and my household, we’ll follow the Lord.

This is the means of the Church’s purification. May God’s Will be done!

Purify from what?

24 “When an impure spirit comes out of a person, it goes through arid places seeking rest and does not find it. Then it says, ‘I will return to the house I left.’ 25 When it arrives, it finds the house swept clean and put in order. 26 Then it goes and takes seven other spirits more wicked than itself, and they go in and live there. And the final condition of that person is worse than the first.” (Luke 11)

 

[Annie]

By faith. Every good thing is possible by faith.

You are talking about “blind faith,” just believing the Pope because he is the Pope. This type of clericalism is a large part of what has led us to this point: people “having faith” in the priest who molested them, in the bishop who ignores them.

Having true faith does not mean checking your mind at the door.

First, we have faith in God, in Christ, in the Holy Spirit, not in mere men.

Do you understand that Pope Francis had to backtrack on the wicked and hurtful way he reacted to the Chilean crisis? (Pope Francis accuses Chilean church sexual abuse victims of slander | Pope Francis | The Guardian). He said the accusers were committing calumny! And we hear echoes of that sentiment when he says the “Great Accuser” is attacking bishops through these revelations (Pope Francis: Bishops are under attack from 'Great Accuser.' Internet: Wait, what? - nj.com).

Consider what crimes we are talking about.