Skip to comments.LA Cardinal Mahony 'stripped of duties' over sex abuse
Posted on 02/01/2013 6:35:24 AM PST by TSgt
A retired Los Angeles cardinal accused of mismanaging a child sex abuse crisis has been stripped of all administrative and public duties by his successor.
Retired Cardinal Roger Mahony, 76, has apologised for his "failure", Archbishop Jose Gomez said on Thursday.
The Los Angeles archdiocese, the largest in the US, has released thousands of pages of files on priests accused of child molestation.
Cardinal Mahony retired in 2011, having run the archdiocese for 25 years.
In 2007 Los Angeles paid $660m (£415m) to alleged victims of abuse, the largest sex abuse payout on record.
Cardinal Mahony has publicly apologised for mistakes he made handling the clerical sex abuse issue. 'They failed'
"I find these files to be brutal and painful reading," Archbishop Gomez said in a statement. "The behaviour described in these files is terribly sad and evil.
"There is no excuse, no explaining away what happened to these children. The priests involved had the duty to be their spiritual fathers and they failed."
He added that Bishop Thomas Curry, former vicar of the clergy who handled the cases of accused priests, had stepped down from his post as bishop of Santa Barbara.
The 12,000 pages of documents were released after Church records on 14 priests were unsealed as part of a civil case. They showed both Bishop Curry and Cardinal Mahony had helped to shield accused priests from investigation in the 1980s.
(Excerpt) Read more at bbc.co.uk ...
Mahoney was so “tolerant,” doncha know. The Leftist media loved him.
At least the present Cardinal did what had to be done.
Archbishop Gomez, our new Archbishop here in Los Angeles, is cleaning house. He is a very good man, very orthodox, quite fierce. He’s doing a great job, but there is a lot to clean up. We are SO glad to have Mahoney GONE. Even after he retired, he just could not stand to be out of the news. May he crawl off to a rock pile in shame.
And yes, I agree, he should be in jail. Terrible terrible man. We thank this good Pope for putting his eye on the problems here in the US and making huge changes. It will all take time, but the Lord is on His throne.
The Priest who was over the Sandy Hook area admitted that he saw nothing wrong in allowing child molesting Priests near children and not warning the parents.
His personal confidant and secretary was just busted for being a Drug Dealing Transvestite Porn Video Store Owner.
The Bridgeport Diocese was disgusting.
The present Cardinal meaning Gomez, NOT Mahoney.
Yes that and the fact that the church leadership in the usa with the exception of sex issues is about as liberal as you can get.
As a child of VC II, the present NO is all I know.
Ratzinger committed no crime so why would he be in prison?
That is the present Cardinal that I am talking about, Gomez.
If the church wants to restore its credibility it will really clean house. As in terminating the financial and organizational relationship with those like Mahoney.
Instead, Mahoney, like other pedophile priests and pedophile protectors, will live out their days under the wing and protection of the church.
That’s NOT cleaning house and it astounds me that you and others don’t understand the difference.
The present Pope did no wrong.
birth control is some sort of sin and not permitted yet sexual abuse by a priest just needs to be “hushed up”. It’s really bizarre and a shame that this great church has been so lax on these matters.
It is cleaning house already, just a gentle correcting.
And the church wonders why it is seen as a joke with zero credibility.
I have many Catholic friends who concur with my sentiments.
Question: Both are Cardinals,(though one is retired) How can one then discipline the other? Was the Pope involved in signing off on this? Or does the ban apply only inside the LA diocese? Could Mahoney go elsewhere?
In forming a new religion resulting from the assemblage referred to as Vatican II, all good that was done over the ages in Christ’s Church fell by the wayside.
The new religion dictated that all dogma, rubrics, tenets and liturgy be thrown into the trash heap of history. Additionally tossed, along with the sacred statues, pictures, vestments and any trappings that had to do with the religion Christ left behind in the keeping of Saint Peter, was the sacred nature of the priesthood.
As a result many misfits and new disturbed youth entered the priesthood and began their mission in life: destroy the religion that was a bellweather and beacon to other Christian faith. Even the Baptists watched and listened to what was said by the Roman Catholic Church.
This Vatican II, and what had occurred prior to that assembly, was Stalin’s dream come true.
His two major enemies, after all, was the Roman Catholic Church and the United States of America. He realized, all too well, that an influx of homosexually inclined priests would worm their way through the seminaries (only a few left today) and into the hierarchy of the Church. That would indeed bring the Church crumbling down. And it practically has.
Anyone who doesn’t believe that was what was wrought by modernism and subsequently Vatican II is absolutely NOT pleasing to God is completely deluded.
Look about you and see that many new ‘churches’ were built in the past 40 years, but they resemble anything but a place of worship. Go inside today and try to be inspired. Twenty minutes before the new mass is to be celebrated by the ‘president of the assembly’ (he’s not called a priest today during the ‘ceremony’) you find thinking and praying difficult due to the loud visiting going on. It would appear that those congregating realize that nothing important is going to happen here.
I recall some years ago, before I found a tradition chapel in which to worship God, shortly before Christmas Day I attended a new worship service. A young, permanent deacon delivered the homily which was his idea of a joke.
He said,”Many of us believe that the Angel appeared to Mary to tell her of God’s wish that she be the mother of His Son. He stated that the name given would be Jesus. That version is incorrect. Jesus Christ wasn’t named until one of the visiting wisemen upon entering the stable stubbed his toe and uttered an oath. Joseph said, ‘Mary. That sounds like a winner and that shall be his name.”
I walked out. On the way, I noticed a ‘brother’ standing in the back with a big grin on his face and earrings in his ears.
I have not attended a single new mass since.
Now. Since Vatican II there have been occupants of the Chair of Peter and not one has repudiated the Vatican II that has given the Church this degrading descent. Therefore, I believe that those men will owe their maker an explanation as to why they allowed this radical transformation to continue.
I bet the children who were raped would have preferred a gentle correction to the hell they endured.
After resisting to the last possible moment disclosure of what every informed person already knew.
The most difficult thing to understand about this whole mess is why there was not one bishop - not one, not here, not in Ireland, not in Belgium, not in Austria - who reacted to this like any normal man would do.
If Gomez had taken this action on day one (OK, or after two weeks) it would have been praiseworthy.
Now, it's just more concessions after being forced by the law to disclose.
Mahoney should be laicized.
The Present Pope had been in charge of dealing with sex abuse cases when he was a Cardinal for more than 20 years.
Yeah, I say he did wrong.
For example , he stopped a trial of a Priest accused of molesting about 200 deaf boys over the protests of at least two Archbishops.
Here is more info
” retired Los Angeles cardinal ... has been stripped of all administrative and public duties”
Doesn’t “retired” me you have no duties?
Evidence that Ratzinger knew about child abuse and did nothing
Ratzinger altered canon law to soften Maciel punishment, book argues
I hate to see tha Church’s dirty laundry aired in public, but it is necessary because they did nothing to clan it up in private.
I will probably go to hello for blasphemy but I look at where the Cardinals and Bishops come from. Do they not come from the ranks of the Priesthood? If there are pedophiles in the Priesthood, does it not stand to reason that there are pedophiles in the higher ranks?
Why else would they hide these Priests?
When the Church starts cleaning up their mess they have to clean it right to the top.
I believe in the Catholic Church as the religion Christ began, it is it’s human hierarchy that moved away from the teachings of Christ and allowed this abomination that I am suspiscious of. This mess did not start yesterday, it has been in the Church for a long time, and it has not been solved either.
A point of clarification: Gomez is an archbishop, not a cardinal.
Yes, a cardinal is higher than an archbishop, so it is a bit odd that a lower ranking person would relieve the cardinal of his duties, but bishops have a lot of authority over what happens in their own territory, so it does not surprise me that Gomez can do this.
BTW, when Mahoney retired, a nice little house was provided for him, at a parish up in the valley, and he was living in comfort, and able to make appearances, etc., and do whatever he wanted to do.
I hope this is just the beginning of Gomez’ cleansing of our diocese.
It’s about time the Church cracked down on the leaders who knowingly covered up sex abuse for decades. I agree they should also be serving jail time, but the Pope could send them to remote outposts where they have no authority and live harsh lives in penance.
While those who DID the horrible wrongs against children/young people must and I mean MUST be punished, I DO warn against the Catholic or any Christian church BASHING for that matter.
Also let’s NOT FORGET that there has been abuse done by non Catholic Christian ministers, teachers, even among non Christians as well, etc., so this is ACROSS the board.
Do you believe all Christian churches where abuse of minors has been covered up are a joke? Are Baptists a joke?
"The problem of clergy sexual abuse is not just a Catholic issue...Studies have shown no difference in its frequency by denomination, region, theology, or institutional structure."-Source: Baptist Hide & Seek
The fact is that sexual abuse of minors is a worldwide problem that occurs in nearly all institutions. It's even more heinous when it takes place in a Christian or other religious setting where children should be entitled to feel safe. Unfortunately for our children, it's more fashionable to bash Catholics than it is to hold accountable ALL organizations and institutions with a history of mistreating kids.
I essentially agree.
I studied Catholicism at age 12-13 with my Lutheran mom who wanted to sing in their choir.The mass then was still in Latin. A lot of it appealed to me, but I always felt a bit uncomfortable with the instructing priest and even then took pains to make sure I was never alone with him.
I also knew a monsignor who was a friend of friends of our family and was very kind, funny and friendly, and seemed to take his vows very seriously. I never had to feel uneasy around him.
There always seemed a deep sense of mystery in the Church then that in itself was very reassuring. Though I never seemed to have found that in the few times I’ve been back to church over the years.
I’d describe myself these days as an American Judeo-Christian who worships and prays from the perspective of the Old Testament, but who recognizes the humanly moshiach qualities of Jesus in that the United States could never have been founded without his influence.
It takes almost full-time work to refute the vile slanders against Pope Benedict --- and even to re-refute them, since so many of them were exposed as false years ago. But dont expect retractions from the New York Times and the British tabloid press.
Anybody with an interest in the truth about the Milwaukee case (Lawrence Murphy)is invited to read Raymond J. de Souza's article at National Review: A Response to the New York Times [Pope falsely accused].
The principal responsibility for the Lawrence Murphy sexual-abuse case lay with local Ordinary, Archbishop Rembert Weakland. Leaving the accused abuser priest "without assignment," and likewise without supervision from 1977 until 1996, and neglecting any effort to discover the scope of his abuses or to minister to his victims, Weakland essentially did nothing.
It was not until 1996 (19 years after Fr. Murphy was put out of circulation and out of the diocese on "sick leave") that Weakland first notified Cardinal Ratzingers Vatican office, which promptly moved forward on having a canonical trial. Neither Ratzinger nor anyone in his office in any way impeded the local process. In fact, Card. Ratzingers Deputy, Cardinal Narciso Bertone, tried in every way to expedite the process, despite the huge gap created by Abp Weakland's negligence and the statute of limitations.
Fr. Murphy died in 1998, before a canonical trial could take place.
The real fault in these cases is with the local bishops in the 1970's and 10 - 20 years following (like Weakland and Mahony), who were derelict in their duties.
But because the NYT and the MSM are in general reluctant to lodge fault with Weakland and Mahony ---who, as progressives, longtime enablers/protectors of anti-papal dissenters, were immune from all criticism --- there was a concerted, international effort to find some way to drag in Pope Benedict.
What the New York Times was churning out against the Pope 3+years ago --- and repeated here --- was vicious, prejudicial, and (it seems to me) probably legally libelous. The Queen of Slander herself in this game was Maureen Dowd, whose comments were echoed by well-known individuals disgracing our opinion-forum.
Let the blame fall squarely on the shoulders of those who protected and enabled abusers --- like Weakland and Mahony. But don't splatter slime on the innocent --- like Benedict XVI. The New York Times and the British tabloids will scarcely be expected to acknowledge their factual errors. However, there may be lurkers still reading: it is for your sake, lurkers, that I offer the true account of the Murphy/Weakland case.
Catholics: Can’t hurt the Church even if it hurts a child.
Ratzinger is not innocent. He was The Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.
Sex abuse was his area.
Every Catholic Bishop got a confidential letter from Ratzinger.
All preliminary investigations were to be sent to Ratzinger.
“Father John Beal, professor of canon law at the Catholic University of America, gave an oral deposition under oath on 8 April last year in which he admitted to Shea that the letter extended the church’s jurisdiction and control over sexual assault crimes. “
How long did Ratzinger hold that office and how long and how many Priests were sexually molesting children during that time.
“When Cardinal Ratzinger was asked about the accusations he brushed the questions aside. On one occasion he literally slapped the wrist of an American television reporter, Brian Ross, who had the temerity to raise the issue. On another occasion Cardinal Ratzinger said: One cant put on trial such a close friend of the Popes as Marcial Maciel.”
So Ratzinger says that a close friend of John Paul cannot be put on trial.
Ooops.... the Popes friend was a sexual deviant.
I hope you will join other Catholics and me in praying for the good men in our church as they undertake these reforms.
Ratzinger was appointed Prefect in 1981 for the office that was in charge of Sex Abuse claims.
how long did Priests abuse children during that time because Ratzinger didn’t do anything about it.
For years and years his office ignored the complaints about
Better to pray than to bash a whole Church just because of the horrible wrongs done by those who should never had been priests to begin with.
How can you possibly think Ratzinger is innocent when he was in charge of the secret tribunals and everything had to come to his office????
tell me , how long did the Vatican ignore that fact that Maciel, who was good friends with John Paul II, was a sexual deviant.
Ratzinger said that you can’t put the Pope’s good friend on trial.
The Vatican ignored a letter sent by victims
” Several said Maciel told them he had permission from Pope Pius XII to seek them out sexually for relief of physical pain.”
George Weigel, a Vatican expert and biographer of Pope John Paul, called the Legionaries statement very significant because it spelled out that Father Maciel could no longer be a model for the organization, and because this is being done because Joseph Ratzinger insisted on getting to the bottom of the controversy. Mr. Weigel said he hoped it paved the way for the refoundation of the order.
You do know Maciel is deceased?
BTW, my children attend, and my wife is employed by, a school founded by the Legionaries of Christ.
Then you should read this
Btw, Ratzingers officer ignored this for years and years. He did finally order an investigation.
But what about the people that were abused in the meantime????????????????????????????????????????????????????
You do not get a pass because you eventually do the right thing.
Ratzinger’s office was in charge of sex abuse for more than 20 years.
So he is the head of the snake on this one.
in charge at a church organization is not the same as a corporation.
His higher ups could easily have prevented any constructive actions. (think how organized religions easily replace and disregard parish councils)
Without explanation, the Vatican has halted a canon law investigation of one of the most powerful priests in Rome, accused by nine men of sexually abusing them years ago as young seminarians.
I am also not naive to the nature of huge, ancient bureaucracies.
“in charge at a church organization is not the same as a corporation.
His higher ups could easily have prevented any constructive actions. (think how organized religions easily replace and disregard parish councils)”
Oh, I agree with that.
Pope John Paul II could have easily told Ratzinger to look the other way when it came to his friend who was a sexual deviant.
It doesn’t absolve Ratzinger for more than 20 years of sexual abuse issues . Was he told to ignore them all??
Maybe his help with the abuse scandal is why he was made Pope.
Believe me, I am well acquainted with the story of Maciel.
But thanks for the head's up.
“Father Owen Kearns, a member of the Legionaries of Christ and the editor-in-chief and publisher of the National Catholic Register, apologizes in the April 25 edition of the paper for defending his orders founder, Father Marcial Maciel, when sexual abuse allegations against him first surfaced.
Father Kearns said he regrets that in his defense of Father Maciel he took to task Hartford Courant writers Renner and Jason Berry, along with the papers editors. They didnt get everything about the Legion right but they were fundamentally correct about Father Maciels sexual abuse and I ask forgiveness too late for Gerald Renner, who is deceased.
Well here is the crux of the issue to me
Did that Priest make this up:
Several said Maciel told them he had permission from Pope Pius XII to seek them out sexually for relief of physical pain.
Or did the Pope really give him permission.
Given the wide spread abuse within the Catholic church you have to wonder if they weren’t given permission.