Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Pyro7480

Enlightening. But couldn’t they still defrock, saying that while he was still a priest he was unable to perform his duties. Like when a married person is civilly divorced?


8 posted on 04/10/2010 8:37:37 AM PDT by mockingbyrd (Remember in November.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: mockingbyrd

Defrock is a secular term not found in Canon Law. Removal of a Priest is called Dismissal. A Priest can be suspended from public ministry while his offense is being adjudicated without being dismissed from the clerical state.


9 posted on 04/10/2010 9:49:31 AM PDT by A.A. Cunningham (Barry Soetoro is a Kenyan communist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

To: mockingbyrd
As Fr. Fessio states, nothing at all prevents a bishop from:

There is no need even to inform Rome about this.

The only way (until 2001 or in cases of abuse of Confession) that it would land in Rome is if the priest appeals the bishop's decision.

You will have noticed, perhaps, that this is what had been done in the awful School for the Deaf case: the abuser, Fr. Murphy, was removed from all assignments and placed on an authorized leave ("sick leave" from 1974 until his death in 1998) --- he never served as a priest in the Archdiocese again, or even lived in the Archdiocese of Milwaukee, until the day of his death. This was all on the authority of his Ordinary, Abp. William Counsins, whose policy was simply continued, as I understand it, by his successor Abp. Rembert Weakland.

Again, as I understand it, it didn't get to Rome until Fr. Murphy was dying, and people he had abused (now grown men, 35-45 years later) wanted -- rightfully --- to ensure he was not buried as a priest. His case had the very unusual feature that he had abused the sacrament of Confession, so it was sent on to the Vatican. A canonical trial was initiated despite some worrying that it would take way too long (I understand that Cardinal Bertone wanted to find some way to expedite things); and sure enough, Murphy died while the canonical trial was still in process.

For which Bertone and his boss, Cardinal Ratzinger (who probably had no involvement in the case), are now being thrown to the media dogs; when actually, the case had been on Weakland's plate for 20 years.

There's a pattern here, I think, of slack, dissenting and abuse-enabling bishops (Weakland, and in Oakland, Bp Cummings: darlings of the liberal media) being shielded, and the facts being twisted so they're off the hook and Benedict is set up for a worldwide sliming.

That's my interpretation.

This may be of limited relevance, since this chart only shows U.S. abuse cases. But just notionally, check out the "Benedict years" --- if you want to call them that--- when he was Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, under John Paul II, 1981-2005. Notice a trend?

12 posted on 04/10/2010 11:19:35 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (Sorry: Tag-line presently at the dry cleaners. Please find suitable bumper-sticker instead.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson