Posted on 05/27/2004 8:50:34 AM PDT by ZULU
You and I are reading from the same Marian Missal!
Dominus vobiscum.
You should have pointed out to Zulu that Pope Paul is dead.
"HE didn't commit the crimes, he just didn't do all he could to send the men who DID do them to jail, and he admitted that he was wrong in that."
THAT sounds like accessory after the fact to me, but then - I'm no attorney.
As far as Law being compassionate, it seems to me his "comapssion" didn't extend to the victims of the predators he was playing musical chairs with. On the other hand, maybe he didn't really know what his subordinate bushops were doing. In that case, he was grossly negligent, wouldn't you say? Were any of them - the Bishops - successfully prosecuted?
I don't know all the particular details first hand of Law's situation. I only know what I read on the Internet and in the papers.
It appears the Catholic Church has had a serious problem with paedophile priests.
I KNOW the overwhelming majority of priests are NOT paedophiles, but dedicated, decent men doing a difficult and thankless job in a society which has become increasingly secular and atheistic.
Both paedophile priests and those who protect them, in addition to being guilty of crimes against society in general, have done an injustice to the Church they claim to represent and to their fellow clegymen who are not so sullied.
Don't you see he should be rewarded for that outstanding job? Maybe Cardinal Law will get to join that Vatican foreign minister in America-bashing!
"Point 1: Celibacy has little to do with vocations. If seminaries didn't discourage orthodox young men from attending, there would be plenty of aspirants to the priesthood. Too many seminaries are still in the grip of modernism."
I don't know anything about that, but "modernism" is a plague in most Christian churches today. However, I DO know that the Church's rules on priestly celebacy aren't written in stone - the Church made them and the Church can change them. In the distant past priests could marry and in certain eastern rites of the Catholic Church priests were always permitted to marry. Further, the Catholic Church allows married Episcopalian priests who want to join the Catholic Church and become Catholic priests to do so without divorcing.
For a normal, average male, falling in love with a woman, getting married and raising a family is a normal drive. Surpressing that drive, especially in modern society not only creates additional stress on an individual in an already stressful occupation, it discourages men who would otherwise seek a vocation from doing so. Finally, a married clergyman is far better able to provide advice on marital problems and issues than a celebate one - he's already been there.
The Catholic Church will not rise or fall on the issue of celebacy alone, but it will contribute to unneeded stresses at time when it is facing enough problems - as are most mainstream Christian faiths.
"Point 2: Celibacy doesn't have anything to do with child molesters. There are too many examples of MARRIED child molesters to debunk this notion. In fact, in studies that have been done in the last couple of years, it has been found that the instances of abuse in the Catholic church in America were no more prevalent than instances in other denominations, or in public schools. It also found that other organizations were no more forthcoming about this abuse than the Church was. It just so happened that the Church got tons of press, while the other organizations did not."
Ever hear that story of Caesar's wife??
I'm an old guy and I remember when you hardly heard anything at all about this happening. I don't believe this was a on-going problem with the Catholic Church at all times - although as you point out, it was always there as it was present in society in general. However, I feel that the kind of environment provided today in which homosexuality is out of the closet, and the Catholic Church provides a celebate environment, the attraction there for homosexuals is greater than in the general society at large.
If priests were allowed to marry, this would change. More heterosexuals would be drawn to the Church, which would be good for vocations, and there presence there would, by merely their BEING there, discourage homosexual activity. And the overwhelming number of paedohilic cases involve male victims.
Although not all homosexuals are paedophiles, I believe homosexuality is an abnormal perversion, as is paedohilia and they feed upon one another.
By the way, if you check my prior postings, although I am Protestant, you will find I am hardly a Catholic basher. From a theological and dogmatic perspective, there is much I find appealing about Catholicism.
Really? Then why did it take until 1998 for John Geoghan to be defrocked, when Cardinal Law knew that he was a molester for at least 14 years? Why did Joseph Birmingham get to be a priest until his death in 1989, even though he had admitted to church officials that he had molested children? Why did Law write a job recommendation for Paul Shanley in 1997, even though he knew the guy was gay, and a molestor? Why did Law assign Ronald Paquin to a chaplain position in 1998, where Paquin continued to molest boys?
Yeah, Law worked night and day on "getting rid of the abusers", alright. It only took 20 years of his leadership, and a few multimillion-dollar lawsuits and the criminal justice system's involvement, for these priests to lose their jobs.
Yeah, I know. But in a "by their fruits -- including the ones they set up at St. Mary -- you will know them" sort of way, things are looking pretty grim where all but essential doctrine is concerned.
Link me to yours on St. Jerome ... if I did see it, I can't remember it.
I too lock horns where it would seem some feel they should choose another pope or decide who is and isn't a "real" pope. That's not the problem. I just have the same old doubts about JPII, that's all. A sort of Reaganite Pope, if you will.
I'm sorry about Law's station. Indeed I'm aware of your uncle (isn't it?) and have been keeping him in my prayers already. It's good he came home, I think. I'm pleased you've had time to spend with him and pray his is a happy and peaceful death.
Yes, tell me, are you Roman Catholic or non-Catholic.
If the former, where do you attend mass? SSPX, Indult Latin, Novus Ordo, or sedevantist or other independant chapel?
If the latter, non-Catholic, please, do NOT continue on my account. I've already read Dave Hunt and Lorraine Boettner.
Yes, Church-wide things are looking grim. In this fallen world, this is normal, I think. Was it not ever thus?
Here's the Jerome quote. Shall I tell you what Burt said about him over dinner last November? We were discussing Sta. Maria Maggiore's treasure trove of relics with a Bethlehem association. I mentioned that Jerome, who translated the Vulgate in Bethlehem, saw the manger there and may have arranged to have it sent to the great Marian basilica in Rome, to add to its relics. Burt's eyes lit up. "Oh, we've got him too!" You would have adored him.
I think Cardinal Law was incompetent and not a good shepherd, but I don't think he was a bad person at heart and I thank him for the idea of the catechism. While he was not a disciplinarian, I don't think he actively preached or promoted unorthodox doctrine. I think he has suffered ignominy and if he can serve this ceremonial position with honor, more power to him.
Don't blame the Protestants for the lousy hymns in Catholic churches. As a convert, I relish the rare old Protestant hymn when I come across them in a Catholic church -- it is much better and more reverent than the usual saccharine bromides that constitute modern Catholic music, e.g., "Gifts of Finest Wheat", "On Eagles' Wings", etc., etc.
Actually, the hymns in the old Tridentine Mass - in Latin - were awesome.
One of the biggest mistakes the Catholic Church made was to eliminate Latin in their services. It was a link to the past and a realling insopring experience to hear.
Translating Latin into English results in passages devoid of the poetic and dramatic majesty of Latin.
I guess its always easier to judge other people when your not in their shoes.
Ugh! Agreed.
How about O Sanctissimo?
OK. He admitted he did all of that. But, just because he admitted his terrible sins, you think he deserves an honor and a reward? I think he deserves disgrace and shame (in this world) for what he admitted.
I doubt you can document that allegation.
I appreciate what both of you have written here, thank you.
Is there no one who believes Mar 9:42 "And whosoever shall offend one of [these] little ones that believe in me, it is better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he were cast into the sea."?
Aren't there people bold enough to pray that the God of those words will see that it is borne out in order to build the faith and enlarge the vision of those who believe? Even a sigh can b
e a prayer.
It constitutes a "heart hurt" to imagine that the name of John Paul II is being denigrated by powerful evil forces that despise the children of God and Truth as well. May God raise up righteous hearts that will cry out to God day and night for the eviction of those who do despite to the Word and His people.
He essentially "admitted" his failings while facing the barrel of a gun, metaphorically speaking -- it was only after the lawsuits, and the government involvement, did he admit that he did anything wrong.
Check out this website: http://www.boston.com/globe/spotlight/abuse/
And for those of you who are ready to say that the info there can't be trusted, because it's the Boston Globe's website, the site features actual church letters, documents, and court depositions showing Law's disgraceful lack of action in ridding the church of pedophile priests.
It was in his report that was published in the Boston Globe, at the same time he pulled some number out of thin air about how many MORE cases of abuse there probably had been.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.