Warned about abuse, Vatican failed to defrock priest [NYT]

[mlund]

We* don’t know *that the priest was unable to stand trial. He did die soon after–doesn’t say what–sudden heart attack?

According to the letter he’d suffered more than one stroke prior to writing it.

Did Ratzinger try to find out how ‘sick’ the priest really was? I doubt it. He could have instituted proceedings anyway, and the priest then died before they could have been completed. Ratzinger and the church would have looked a lot better.

They did implement proceedings. Let me re-post the pertinent part for you to examine:

"the second in command at the doctrinal office, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, now the Vatican’s secretary of state, instructed the Wisconsin bishops to begin a secret canonical trial that could lead to Father Murphy’s dismissal.

But Cardinal Bertone halted the process after Father Murphy personally wrote to Cardinal Ratzinger protesting that he should not be put on trial because he had already repented and was in poor health and that the case was beyond the church’s own statute of limitations."

His office did start the proceedings. They stopped them because at least part of the claim Fr. Murphy made of being unfit to stand trial and the case being beyond the statute of limitations under Canon Law made it difficult or outright illegal under Canon Law to bring him to trial. The Office had a meeting on the 30th of May, 1998 to discuss the problems presented by the statute of limitations and the other requirements for trial. Copies of the meeting notes were sent in July. The trial proceedings were abated August 19th and Fr. Murphy met his Maker on September 2nd, dead from the same chronic heart disease that had given him the strokes he mentioned in his letter.

Even if the trial had proceeded up until the moment of Fr. Murphy’s death I seriously doubt they’d have been able to convict and Laicize him in those 16 days - especially if he was hospitalized or in hospice care.

Cardinal Ratzinger’s response over the next 4 years was a campaign that lead to rewriting the Canon Law to extend the statute of limitations - among many other serious reforms to protect children from predators and ensure offenders were reported to civil authorities.

• Marty Lund

 

[Outraged]

I am so ashamed to be a Catholic right now!!

I am sickened by anyone who has the audacity to post any kind of defense of these priests or the Church on these issues. Our goal should be figuring out how to protect our children and not wasted on defending the perpetrators of these offenses (of the actual crime and the covering up) or some archaic Canon law process.

If there is even a shred of evidence, which I believe there to be, that proves the pope knew about even one abuse and he covered it up he should be defrocked himself.

I pray for the children of those who would rather write some pompous defensive rhetoric then to admit that the Church has messed up so bad it deserves any and everything the media can find and report!

 

[anode]

According to the letter he’d suffered more than one stroke prior to writing it.

They did implement proceedings. Let me re-post the pertinent part for you to examine:

"the second in command at the doctrinal office, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, now the Vatican’s secretary of state, instructed the Wisconsin bishops to begin a secret canonical trial that could lead to Father Murphy’s dismissal.

But Cardinal Bertone halted the process after Father Murphy personally wrote to Cardinal Ratzinger protesting that he should not be put on trial because he had already repented and was in poor health and that the case was beyond the church’s own statute of limitations."

His office did start the proceedings. They stopped them because at least part of the claim Fr. Murphy made of being unfit to stand trial and the case being beyond the statute of limitations under Canon Law made it difficult or outright illegal under Canon Law to bring him to trial. The Office had a meeting on the 30th of May, 1998 to discuss the problems presented by the statute of limitations and the other requirements for trial. Copies of the meeting notes were sent in July. The trial proceedings were abated August 19th and Fr. Murphy met his Maker on September 2nd, dead from the same chronic heart disease that had given him the strokes he mentioned in his letter.

Even if the trial had proceeded up until the moment of Fr. Murphy’s death I seriously doubt they’d have been able to convict and Laicize him in those 16 days - especially if he was hospitalized or in hospice care.

Cardinal Ratzinger’s response over the next 4 years was a campaign that lead to rewriting the Canon Law to extend the statute of limitations - among many other serious reforms to protect children from predators and ensure offenders were reported to civil authorities.

• Marty Lund

Nice try.

Too little too late

 

[pnewton]

I am so ashamed to be a Catholic right now!!

I am sickened by anyone who has the audacity to post any kind of defense of these priests or the Church on these issues.

In order to move beyond rhetoric and into an area of substance, it would help to know what specifically you disagree with, if you can do so without the hype and without insult.

 

[anode]

In order to move beyond rhetoric and into an area of substance, it would help to know what specifically you disagree with, if you can do so without the hype and without insult.

The second article regarding the Milwaukee abuse scandal was published today in the New York Times:

nytimes.com/2010/03/27/us/27wisconsin.html

Warning: This article is full of* facts,* and is very upsetting.

Many of the deaf boys, later on, tried to report abuse to at least* three* archbishops to no avail, until Weakland finally appealed to Card. Ratzinger, whose Cong of the Doctrine of the Faith handled these cases -in 1996. Not until TWO YEARS LATER, in 1998, did Ratzinger look into it. By that time Murphy pled age, ill health, and penitence and died before a case could be begun against him.

 

[whatevergirl]

The second article regarding the Milwaukee abuse scandal was published today in the New York Times:

nytimes.com/2010/03/27/us/27wisconsin.html

Warning: This article is full of* facts,* and is very upsetting.

Many of the deaf boys, later on, tried to report abuse to at least* three* archbishops to no avail, until Weakland finally appealed to Card. Ratzinger, whose Cong of the Doctrine of the Faith handled these cases -in 1996. Not until TWO YEARS LATER, in 1998, did Ratzinger look into it. By that time Murphy pled age, ill health, and penitence and died before a case could be begun against him.

I have to stop crying…all of this is so heartbreaking to read.

 

[Zatzat]

The second article regarding the Milwaukee abuse scandal was published today in the New York Times:

nytimes.com/2010/03/27/us/27wisconsin.html

Warning: This article is full of* facts,* and is very upsetting.

Many of the deaf boys, later on, tried to report abuse to at least* three* archbishops to no avail, until Weakland finally appealed to Card. Ratzinger, whose Cong of the Doctrine of the Faith handled these cases -in 1996. Not until TWO YEARS LATER, in 1998, did Ratzinger look into it. By that time Murphy pled age, ill health, and penitence and died before a case could be begun against him.

The facts in this case are of great concern. Many questions need to be answered. A full public inquiry is called for.

 

[pnewton]

The second article regarding the Milwaukee abuse scandal was published today in the New York Times:

nytimes.com/2010/03/27/us/27wisconsin.html

From your article:

. They told two police departments and the district attorney.

Yes, a full public inquiry is needed into how the public officials failed the public. Enforcement of law is the job of law enforcement. When this is placed as the priority of any investigative report, I will lend credence to the journalist.

 

[Zatzat]

From your article:

Yes, a full public inquiry is needed into how the public officials failed the public. Enforcement of law is the job of law enforcement. When this is placed as the priority of any investigative report, I will lend credence to the journalist.

Of course, the Police, prosecutors, the local Church and the Vatican all need to be put under the mircroscope to determine what went wrong and how this pedophile was able to use his position in the Church to find his victims.

 

[ConfusedTim]

This was a response from Father Raymond De Souza. Soem really intersting facts here and the timeline shows that the Pope was NOT responsible:

The New York Times on March 25 accused Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI, of intervening to prevent a priest, Father Lawrence Murphy, from facing penalties for cases of sexual abuse of minors.

The story is false. It is unsupported by its own documentation. Indeed, it gives every indication of being part of a coordinated campaign against Pope Benedict, rather than responsible journalism.

Before addressing the false substance of the story, the following circumstances are worthy of note:

• The New York Times story had two sources. First, lawyers who currently have a civil suit pending against the Archdiocese of Milwaukee. One of the lawyers, Jeffrey Anderson, also has cases in the United States Supreme Court pending against the Holy See. He has a direct financial interest in the matter being reported.

• The second source was Archbishop Rembert Weakland, retired archbishop of Milwaukee. He is the most discredited and disgraced bishop in the United States, widely known for mishandling sexual-abuse cases during his tenure, and guilty of using $450,000 of archdiocesan funds to pay hush money to a former homosexual lover who was blackmailing him. Archbishop Weakland had responsibility for the Father Murphy case between 1977 and 1998, when Father Murphy died. He has long been embittered that his maladministration of the Archdiocese of Milwaukee earned him the disfavor of Pope John Paul II and Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, long before it was revealed that he had used parishioners’ money to pay off his clandestine lover. He is prima facie not a reliable source.

• Laurie Goodstein, the author of the New York Times story, has a recent history with Archbishop Weakland. Last year, upon the release of the disgraced archbishop’s autobiography, she wrote an unusually sympathetic story that buried all the most serious allegations against him (New York Times, May 14, 2009).

• A demonstration took place in Rome on Friday, coinciding with the publication of the New York Times story. One might ask how American activists would happen to be in Rome distributing the very documents referred to that day in the New York Times. The appearance here is one of a coordinated campaign, rather than disinterested reporting.

It’s possible that bad sources could still provide the truth. But compromised sources scream out for greater scrutiny. Instead of greater scrutiny of the original story, however, news editors the world over simply parroted the New York Times piece. Which leads us the more fundamental problem: The story is not true, according to its own documentation.

The New York Times made available on its own website the supporting documentation for the story. In those documents, Cardinal Ratzinger himself does not take any of the decisions that allegedly frustrated the trial. Letters are addressed to him; responses come from his deputy. Even leaving that aside, though, the gravamen of the charge — that Cardinal Ratzinger’s office impeded some investigation — is proven utterly false.

The documents show that the canonical trial or penal process against Father Murphy was never stopped by anyone. In fact, it was only abandoned days before Father Murphy died. Cardinal Ratzinger never took a decision in the case, according to the documents. His deputy, Archbishop Tarcisio Bertone, suggested, given that Father Murphy was in failing health and a canonical trial is a complicated matter, that more expeditious means be used to remove him from all ministry.

To repeat: The charge that Cardinal Ratzinger did anything wrong is unsupported by the documentation on which the story was based. He does not appear in the record as taking any decision. His office, in the person of his deputy, Archbishop Bertone, agreed that there should be full canonical trial. When it became apparent that Father Murphy was in failing health, Archbishop Bertone suggested more expeditious means of removing him from any ministry.

Furthermore, under canon law at the time, the principal responsibility for sexual-abuse cases lay with the local bishop. Archbishop Weakland had from 1977 onwards the responsibility of administering penalties to Father Murphy. He did nothing until 1996. It was at that point that Cardinal Ratzinger’s office became involved, and it subsequently did nothing to impede the local process.

The New York Times flatly got the story wrong, according to its own evidence. Readers may want to speculate on why -cont…

 

[ConfusedTim]

Here is the relevant timeline, drawn from the documents the New York Times posted on its own website.

15 May 1974

Abuse by Father Lawrence Murphy is alleged by a former student at St. John’s School for the Deaf in Milwaukee. In fact, accusations against Father Murphy go back more than a decade.

12 September 1974

Father Murphy is granted an official “temporary sick leave” from St. John’s School for the Deaf. He leaves Milwaukee and moves to northern Wisconsin, in the Diocese of Superior, where he lives in a family home with his mother. He has no official assignment from this point until his death in 1998. He does not return to live in Milwaukee. No canonical penalties are pursued against him.

9 July 1980

Officials in the Diocese of Superior write to officials in the Archdiocese of Milwaukee about what ministry Father Murphy might undertake in Superior. Archbishop Rembert Weakland, archbishop of Milwaukee since 1977, has been consulted and says it would be unwise to have Father Murphy return to ministry with the deaf community. There is no indication that Archbishop Weakland foresees any other measures to be taken in the case.

17 July 1996

More than 20 years after the original abuse allegations, Archbishop Weakland writes to Cardinal Ratzinger, claiming that he has only just discovered that Father Murphy’s sexual abuse involved the sacrament of confession — a still more serious canonical crime. The allegations about the abuse of the sacrament of confession were in the original 1974 allegations. Weakland has been archbishop of Milwaukee by this point for 19 years.

It should be noted that for sexual-abuse charges, Archbishop Weakland could have proceeded against Father Murphy at any time. The matter of solicitation in the sacrament of confession required notifying Rome, but that too could have been done as early as the 1970s.

10 September 1996

Father Murphy is notified that a canonical trial will proceed against him. Until 2001, the local bishop had authority to proceed in such trials. The Archdiocese of Milwaukee is now beginning the trial. It is noteworthy that at this point, no reply has been received from Rome indicating that Archbishop Weakland knew he had that authority to proceed.

24 March 1997

Archbishop Tarcisio Bertone, Cardinal Ratzinger’s deputy at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, advises a canonical trial against Father Murphy.

14 May 1997

Archbishop Weakland writes to Archbishop Bertone to say that the penal process against Father Murphy has been launched, and notes that the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has advised him to proceed even though the statute of limitations has expired. In fact, there is no statute of limitations for solicitation in the sacrament of confession.

Throughout the rest of 1997 the preparatory phases of penal process or canonical trial is underway. On 5 January 1998 the Tribunal of the Archdiocese of Milwaukee says that an expedited trial should be concluded within a few months.

12 January 1998

Father Murphy, now less than eight months away from his death, appeals to Cardinal Ratzinger that, given his frail health, he be allowed to live out his days in peace.

6 April 1998

Archbishop Bertone, noting the frail health of Father Murphy and that there have been no new charges in almost 25 years, recommends using pastoral measures to ensure Father Murphy has no ministry, but without the full burden of a penal process. It is only a suggestion, as the local bishop retains control.

13 May 1998

The Bishop of Superior, where the process has been transferred to and where Father Murphy has lived since 1974, rejects the suggestion for pastoral measures. Formal pre-trial proceedings begin on 15 May 1998, continuing the process already begun with the notification that had been issued in September 1996.

30 May 1998

Archbishop Weakland, who is in Rome, meets with officials at the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith, including Archbishop Bertone but not including Cardinal Ratzinger, to discuss the case. The penal process is ongoing. No decision taken to stop it, but given the difficulties of a trial after 25 years, other options are explored that would more quickly remove Father Murphy from ministry.

19 August 1998

Archbishop Weakland writes that he has halted the canonical trial and penal process against Father Murphy and has immediately begun the process to remove him from ministry — a quicker option.

21 August 1998

Father Murphy dies. His family defies the orders of Archbishop Weakland for a discreet funeral

 

[RobbyS]

The second article regarding the Milwaukee abuse scandal was published today in the New York Times:

nytimes.com/2010/03/27/us/27wisconsin.html

Warning: This article is full of* facts,* and is very upsetting.

Many of the deaf boys, later on, tried to report abuse to at least* three* archbishops to no avail, until Weakland finally appealed to Card. Ratzinger, whose Cong of the Doctrine of the Faith handled these cases -in 1996. Not until TWO YEARS LATER, in 1998, did Ratzinger look into it. By that time Murphy pled age, ill health, and penitence and died before a case could be begun against him.

Are you accepting Weakland as a reliable source? With his history?

 

[Outraged]

Please Confused Tim. Even if the pope had not be involved in the initial investigations, he was most certainly responsible for halting the trial in 1996 and allowing this priest to be buried in full vestments with the honors of a priest. And even if the priest professed that he was “truly” sorry and had repented he still deserved to be defrocked. Repenting may have saved his soul, but it should not have allowed him to continue to be a priest. Even if a criminal confesses his sins and professes to be sorry, he still has to stand trial and pay his debt to society by servicing his sentence. And so too should any priest.

I totally agree that the public authorities are also to blame in this incident. But that does not excuse the Church or its authorities. It does not lessen the harm they did to our children or shield them from any responsibility.

Here is a list I have composed of individuals who should be defrocked and/or stand civil trial for the abuses against the boys Murphy perpetrated.

Unnamed priest #1 in Madison, WI
Unnamed priest #2
Rev. Tom Schroeder
The two nuns of St. John’s school who knew about the abuses and did little or nothing to help these boys
Father Walsh
Archbishop Albert Gregory Meyer of Milwaukee,
Archbishop William E. Cousins
Archbishop Rembert G. Weakland
Pope Benedict XVI

Criminal/Civil lawsuits:
Members of the Milwaukee police department who turned a deaf ear
E. Michael McCann, the district attorney of Milwaukee County
DA Assistant, William Gardner

Justice for our children!!

 

[lemonbeam]

Please Confused Tim. Even if the pope had not be involved in the initial investigations, he was most certainly responsible for halting the trial in 1996 and allowing this priest to be buried in full vestments with the honors of a priest. And even if the priest professed that he was “truly” sorry and had repented he still deserved to be defrocked. Repenting may have saved his soul, but it should not have allowed him to continue to be a priest. Even if a criminal confesses his sins and professes to be sorry, he still has to stand trial and pay his debt to society by servicing his sentence. And so too should any priest.

I totally agree that the public authorities are also to blame in this incident. But that does not excuse the Church or its authorities. It does not lessen the harm they did to our children or shield them from any responsibility.

Here is a list I have composed of individuals who should be defrocked and/or stand civil trial for the abuses against the boys Murphy perpetrated.

Unnamed priest #1 in Madison, WI
Unnamed priest #2
Rev. Tom Schroeder
The two nuns of St. John’s school who knew about the abuses and did little or nothing to help these boys
Father Walsh
Archbishop Albert Gregory Meyer of Milwaukee,
Archbishop William E. Cousins
Archbishop Rembert G. Weakland
Pope Benedict XVI

Criminal/Civil lawsuits:
Members of the Milwaukee police department who turned a deaf ear
E. Michael McCann, the district attorney of Milwaukee County
DA Assistant, William Gardner

Justice for our children!!

Where do you get the assumption that Pope Benedict halted the trial? This is false!

The documents show that the canonical trial or penal process against Father Murphy was never stopped by anyone. In fact, it was only abandoned days before Father Murphy died. Cardinal Ratzinger never took a decision in the case, according to the documents. His deputy, Archbishop Tarcisio Bertone, suggested, given that Father Murphy was in failing health and a canonical trial is a complicated matter, that more expeditious means be used to remove him from all ministry.

To repeat: The charge that Cardinal Ratzinger did anything wrong is unsupported by the documentation on which the story was based. He does not appear in the record as taking any decision. His office, in the person of his deputy, Archbishop Bertone, agreed that there should be full canonical trial. When it became apparent that Father Murphy was in failing health, Archbishop Bertone suggested more expeditious means of removing him from any ministry.

Furthermore, under canon law at the time, the principal responsibility for sexual-abuse cases lay with the local bishop. Archbishop Weakland had from 1977 onwards the responsibility of administering penalties to Father Murphy. He did nothing until 1996. It was at that point that Cardinal Ratzinger’s office became involved, and it subsequently did nothing to impede the local process.

The New York Times flatly got the story wrong, according to its own evidence. Readers may want to speculate on why.

 

[lemonbeam]

Please Confused Tim. Even if the pope had not be involved in the initial investigations, he was most certainly responsible for halting the trial in 1996 and allowing this priest to be buried in full vestments with the honors of a priest. And even if the priest professed that he was “truly” sorry and had repented he still deserved to be defrocked. Repenting may have saved his soul, but it should not have allowed him to continue to be a priest. Even if a criminal confesses his sins and professes to be sorry, he still has to stand trial and pay his debt to society by servicing his sentence. And so too should any priest.

I totally agree that the public authorities are also to blame in this incident. But that does not excuse the Church or its authorities. It does not lessen the harm they did to our children or shield them from any responsibility.

Here is a list I have composed of individuals who should be defrocked and/or stand civil trial for the abuses against the boys Murphy perpetrated.

Unnamed priest #1 in Madison, WI
Unnamed priest #2
Rev. Tom Schroeder
The two nuns of St. John’s school who knew about the abuses and did little or nothing to help these boys
Father Walsh
Archbishop Albert Gregory Meyer of Milwaukee,
Archbishop William E. Cousins
Archbishop Rembert G. Weakland
Pope Benedict XVI

Criminal/Civil lawsuits:
Members of the Milwaukee police department who turned a deaf ear
E. Michael McCann, the district attorney of Milwaukee County
DA Assistant, William Gardner

Justice for our children!!

Continued:

Here is the relevant timeline, drawn from the documents the New York Times posted on its own website.

15 May 1974

Abuse by Father Lawrence Murphy is alleged by a former student at St. John’s School for the Deaf in Milwaukee. In fact, accusations against Father Murphy go back more than a decade.

12 September 1974

Father Murphy is granted an official “temporary sick leave” from St. John’s School for the Deaf. He leaves Milwaukee and moves to northern Wisconsin, in the Diocese of Superior, where he lives in a family home with his mother. He has no official assignment from this point until his death in 1998. He does not return to live in Milwaukee. No canonical penalties are pursued against him.

9 July 1980

Officials in the Diocese of Superior write to officials in the Archdiocese of Milwaukee about what ministry Father Murphy might undertake in Superior. Archbishop Rembert Weakland, archbishop of Milwaukee since 1977, has been consulted and says it would be unwise to have Father Murphy return to ministry with the deaf community. There is no indication that Archbishop Weakland foresees any other measures to be taken in the case.

17 July 1996

More than 20 years after the original abuse allegations, Archbishop Weakland writes to Cardinal Ratzinger, claiming that he has only just discovered that Father Murphy’s sexual abuse involved the sacrament of confession — a still more serious canonical crime. The allegations about the abuse of the sacrament of confession were in the original 1974 allegations. Weakland has been archbishop of Milwaukee by this point for 19 years.

It should be noted that for sexual-abuse charges, Archbishop Weakland could have proceeded against Father Murphy at any time. The matter of solicitation in the sacrament of confession required notifying Rome, but that too could have been done as early as the 1970s.

10 September 1996

Father Murphy is notified that a canonical trial will proceed against him. Until 2001, the local bishop had authority to proceed in such trials. The Archdiocese of Milwaukee is now beginning the trial. It is noteworthy that at this point, no reply has been received from Rome indicating that Archbishop Weakland knew he had that authority to proceed.

24 March 1997

Archbishop Tarcisio Bertone, Cardinal Ratzinger’s deputy at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, advises a canonical trial against Father Murphy.

14 May 1997

Archbishop Weakland writes to Archbishop Bertone to say that the penal process against Father Murphy has been launched, and notes that the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has advised him to proceed even though the statute of limitations has expired. In fact, there is no statute of limitations for solicitation in the sacrament of confession.

Throughout the rest of 1997 the preparatory phases of penal process or canonical trial is underway. On 5 January 1998 the Tribunal of the Archdiocese of Milwaukee says that an expedited trial should be concluded within a few months.

12 January 1998

Father Murphy, now less than eight months away from his death, appeals to Cardinal Ratzinger that, given his frail health, he be allowed to live out his days in peace.

6 April 1998

Archbishop Bertone, noting the frail health of Father Murphy and that there have been no new charges in almost 25 years, recommends using pastoral measures to ensure Father Murphy has no ministry, but without the full burden of a penal process. It is only a suggestion, as the local bishop retains control.

13 May 1998

The Bishop of Superior, where the process has been transferred to and where Father Murphy has lived since 1974, rejects the suggestion for pastoral measures. Formal pre-trial proceedings begin on 15 May 1998, continuing the process already begun with the notification that had been issued in September 1996.

corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZDkxYmUzMTQ1YWUyMzRkMzg4Y2RiN2UyOWIzNDVkNDM=

 

[lemonbeam]

Please Confused Tim. Even if the pope had not be involved in the initial investigations, he was most certainly responsible for halting the trial in 1996 and allowing this priest to be buried in full vestments with the honors of a priest. And even if the priest professed that he was “truly” sorry and had repented he still deserved to be defrocked. Repenting may have saved his soul, but it should not have allowed him to continue to be a priest. Even if a criminal confesses his sins and professes to be sorry, he still has to stand trial and pay his debt to society by servicing his sentence. And so too should any priest.

I totally agree that the public authorities are also to blame in this incident. But that does not excuse the Church or its authorities. It does not lessen the harm they did to our children or shield them from any responsibility.

Here is a list I have composed of individuals who should be defrocked and/or stand civil trial for the abuses against the boys Murphy perpetrated.

Unnamed priest #1 in Madison, WI
Unnamed priest #2
Rev. Tom Schroeder
The two nuns of St. John’s school who knew about the abuses and did little or nothing to help these boys
Father Walsh
Archbishop Albert Gregory Meyer of Milwaukee,
Archbishop William E. Cousins
Archbishop Rembert G. Weakland
Pope Benedict XVI

Criminal/Civil lawsuits:
Members of the Milwaukee police department who turned a deaf ear
E. Michael McCann, the district attorney of Milwaukee County
DA Assistant, William Gardner

Justice for our children!!

Continued:

30 May 1998

Archbishop Weakland, who is in Rome, meets with officials at the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith, including Archbishop Bertone but not including Cardinal Ratzinger, to discuss the case. The penal process is ongoing. No decision taken to stop it, but given the difficulties of a trial after 25 years, other options are explored that would more quickly remove Father Murphy from ministry.

19 August 1998

Archbishop Weakland writes that he has halted the canonical trial and penal process against Father Murphy and has immediately begun the process to remove him from ministry — a quicker option.

21 August 1998

Father Murphy dies. His family defies the orders of Archbishop Weakland for a discreet funeral

corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZDkxYmUzMTQ1YWUyMzRkMzg4Y2RiN2UyOWIzNDVkNDM=

 

[lelhajj]

I am so ashamed to be a Catholic right now!!

I am sickened by anyone who has the audacity to post any kind of defense of these priests or the Church on these issues. Our goal should be figuring out how to protect our children and not wasted on defending the perpetrators of these offenses (of the actual crime and the covering up) or some archaic Canon law process.

If there is even a shred of evidence, which I believe there to be, that proves the pope knew about even one abuse and he covered it up he should be defrocked himself.

I pray for the children of those who would rather write some pompous defensive rhetoric then to admit that the Church has messed up so bad it deserves any and everything the media can find and report!

Dear fellow of Christ,
do not be discourage or regret in your belief in God. What humans do, it is not God’s mistake. Do not get confused and ashamed of what you believe. Everytime that our beliefs are shaken, the most we should cling to our faith and to our God. Remember, the devil exists and he is more than happy to have you or have others rejecting Jesus and leaving our catholic faith. Trust in God’s jugment, isn’t He, the first one that must be crying for those inocent children that were abused? Didn’t he see all the humanity mistakes and misery that we were going to live before he died? Do not get confused, i tell you. We, humans are prone to make mistakes and sin again and again, but, God is the answer and our savior if we just Trust in Him. Let’s pray for those inocent victims and let God decide and jugde the people that are at fault in this case.Put your faith and trust first, above everything and everybody as God has commanded. We feel the pain, because our trust in our priests have been shaken, but, we must trust God and that faith and love should not be shaken.

 

[Thekla]

… the media tend to reserve a special type of coverage for the Catholic Church.

The Catholic Church has brought all of this upon itself. And we deserve all of the scorn and loathing that we get. What Church officials from LA to Boston to Dublin to Munich to Vatican City have done is sickening and almost unforgiveable.

It isn’t random that pedophile priests were hidden across the globe shows; it’s a conspiracy.

Trust in God is not at issue. Trust in the officials of the Church is a big issue. They don’t deserve it, they don’t have it, and I don’t know how they are going to get it back.

 

[Outraged]

Dear Lelhajj ,

Please let me clarify. I have not lost faith in God. It is the Catholic church, the man-made institution, for which I am finding it difficult to remain faithful to. When our priests can hide these atrocities and let their fellow priests continue to commit them over and over again. When our fellow parishioners (at least some of those on this site anyway) would rather defend the pope and the monsters who have perpetrated our children and who can demonize the media for reporting the offenses rather then own up to the fact that the church officials have brought this on themselves. When the pope himself can get up in front of thousand of people and spew such rhetoric as “petty gossip of dominant opinion.” Seriously, petty gossip??!!?? I ask you what is there to remain faithful to??

Defending our children is NOT petty!!! And these reports are NOT gossip!

Telling everyone to pray for the abused and those entrusted with their education IS NOT ENOUGH! And to say the media and us parents, who have children in the Catholic school and entrust their lives to this institution on a daily basis, are petty for wanting justice for those abuses is WRONG!

How are we ever suppose to believe that the vatican or anyone within the church hierarchy has the protection of our children as one of their top priorities when we are told that we are being petty because we want answers and action?!? Is this really the institution I want to claim to be a part of?? I have some serious soul searching to figure that out. Luckily I do have a great local parish with some really great people. But I don’t really know who I can trust anymore…

 

[Outraged]

Here is a list I have composed of individuals who should be defrocked and/or stand civil trial for the abuses against the boys Murphy perpetrated.

Unnamed priest #1 in Madison, WI
Unnamed priest #2
Rev. Tom Schroeder
The two nuns of St. John’s school who knew about the abuses and did little or nothing to help these boys
Father Walsh
Archbishop Albert Gregory Meyer of Milwaukee,
Archbishop William E. Cousins
Archbishop Rembert G. Weakland
Pope Benedict XVI

Criminal/Civil lawsuits:
Members of the Milwaukee police department who turned a deaf ear
E. Michael McCann, the district attorney of Milwaukee County
DA Assistant, William Gardner

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////

I left off Cardinal Bertone!