POPE GAVE HIS BLESSING (to transfer of pedophiles!)

NY Post ^ | 11 December 2002 | KATE SHEEHY

[Zviadist]

Boston's Bernard Cardinal Law was just following orders from his boss - Pope John Paul II - when he sent suspected pedophile priests back to work in parishes with kids, a damning church document reveals.

The pope, in a 1999 order defrocking a Boston priest with a history of molesting boys, acknowledged that the man "ought to live away from the place where his previous condition is known."

[Bloody Sam Roberts]

Yup...your right. I got them mixed up. That'll teach me to operate a keyboard before taking my coffee dose.

[Illbay]

Kind of a weird translation.

Furtunately, we have latter-day revelation to clarify things. In our belief it is impossible to live in the presence of God without a choice companion to whom you are sealed for eternity.

I can see how it pleases Satan, though, to put about the rumor that it's the other way around.

[Jael]

That doesn't really answer my question. If he was defrocked, why would the Pope have any control over an American citizen that supercedes American law?

[SoothingDave]

If he was defrocked, why would the Pope have any control over an American citizen that supercedes American law?

Who said anything about "superceding?"

Church law and secular law operate in different spheres. Church law can not, without suffering the usual penalty, direct a person to violate civil law.

And civil law has no business in Church law. It is not the state's business whom a Church ordains or removes, or what they teach.

As has been said already, a Catholic owes some measure of obedience to the Church. While there are no armies or police forces to make this man obey the wishes of his bishop, vis-a-vis where he lives after leaving prison, a Catholic just might obey.

Especially if the Catholic in question had committed a horrible crime and been thrown out of the priesthood. Recognizing the Church as necessary, one would want to please the Church.<> SD

[agrace]

That's kind of my question throughout all this. From a legal standpoint, should the RCC, for example Cardinal Law specifically, be held criminally liable for not reporting numerous instances of molestation etc? What would the situation be if say, a elementary school principal knew that his teachers were molesting kids and he did nothing to report it but rather shifted them to other schools instead? Wouldn't the police be knocking on his door pretty quick?

And a side question from a non-Catholic - why do they call him "Bernard Cardinal Law," or as with the late "John Cardinal O'Connor"? Why is the title stuck in the middle? And is that just for cardinals or other levels too? Thanks. :)

[Arthur McGowan]

The real scandal: How many reporters desperately need remedial reading courses.

[redhead]

"Furtunately, we have latter-day revelation to clarify things. In our belief it is impossible to live in the presence of God without a choice companion to whom you are sealed for eternity. I can see how it pleases Satan, though, to put about the rumor that it's the other way around."

This is the kind of condescending, snotty remark we have come to expect from you. Please be informed that the Book of Mormon, the Pearl of Great Price, and the Doctrine and Covenants are NOT SCRIPTURE except to you. The rest of us, as Christians, do not accept them as such. And your sanctimonious attitude in the second remark illustrates perfectly the main reason why I left the Mormon church.

Please stop trying to foist that stuff off on us as having any pertinence to this discussion. If you would like to enter the discourse with something that actually pertains to the subject at hand, please feel free to do so, but stop dragging this dead cat back into the living room.

[Illbay]

Please be informed that the Book of Mormon, the Pearl of Great Price, and the Doctrine and Covenants are NOT SCRIPTURE except to you.

Well since, in this instance, my own opinion is the only thing that matters to me, that's perfectly acceptable.

[ArrogantBustard]

we have latter-day revelation to clarify things.

Who's "we", Kemosabe? The mohammedans also have a "latter-day revelation." Yours, and theirs, are completely irrelevant to this discussion. I don't believe either of them came from God.

[SoothingDave]

And a side question from a non-Catholic - why do they call him "Bernard Cardinal Law," or as with the late "John Cardinal O'Connor"? Why is the title stuck in the middle? And is that just for cardinals or other levels too? Thanks. :)

It's a secret code. ;-)

Seriously, I have only seen the usage with the Cardinal title and not with any other. I do not know where or why it is used that way, and this is a good question. The only thing I can imagine is that it is a fairly recent thing for Catholics to refer to "Father Bob" rather than "Father Smith."

Perhaps the placing of Cardinal right before the surname is a reminder that he is not Cardinal Jimmy, but rather Cardinal Jones.

SD

[IrishRainy]

To clarify, abortion providers in many states are also required to report to authorities when a molestation has occurred. The majority of teens who terminate their pregnancies have been impregnated by an adult over the age of 18, often much older than that. If the girl is under the age of consent or the father is much over the age of 18, they are supposed to be reported to the authorities by the abortion clinics. And of course 90% of these cases are not reported.

Where is the outrage about that?

[AmericaUnited]

So much for the Infallible Church!

You're thinking of "impeccability."

No, I was thinking of "infallibility", a notion among Catholics that the Church can not err. I guess that notion gets thrown on the ash heap of history.

[agrace]

Oh I'm with you on that one! Plenty of outrage here. I've read half a dozen or so articles on FR recently attesting to the fact that PP encourages these underaged girls who are having sex with older men to come in and mum's the word. Sickening.

[agrace]

Thanks for the response. :)

[Notwithstanding]

Legally: It all depends upon whether the law requires the principal to report it, and whether a law GENERALLY APPLICABLE TO ALL PEOPLE, and not specific to clergy requires such reporting.

Morally: of course, it seems that you would report this unless there was some compelling reason not to.

As to the "Cardinal" as middle name: it is tradition - and it is fading in the media, although formally that word still is the "middle name" of a cardinal.

[agrace]

Thanks, from reading your other related responses on this thread, I got the gist of it, that being if states individually pass general laws requiring all to report sexual abuse etc, it is applicable to clergy. Makes sense.

And about the Cardinal thing - I really appreciate the feedback. Traditions are funny, I wondered about this one for a while, and I will admit that up until a few years ago, I wasn't sure that Cardinal wasn't ACTUALLY John O'Connor's middle name! :) Thanks again for the response.

[iconoclast]

Jimmy Swaggart was a prominent leader?

WAS?

Last time I looked he was hangin in there pretty strong. Preachin, cryin, singin, shoutin, beggin. Every bit the cousin of Jerry Lee Lewis (at least an honest entertainer).

So much for protestant superiority.

[AmericaUnited]

So much for protestant superiority.

The problem with your post is that he is doing all of that ON HIS OWN!

[Aquinasfan]

No, I was thinking of "infallibility", a notion among Catholics that the Church can not err. I guess that notion gets thrown on the ash heap of history.

In order to demonstrate that the Church acted fallibly, you must contradict the actual teaching of the Church regarding infallibility, not what you believe the Church teaches regarding infallibility.

Look through this Catholic Encyclopedia entry under Infallibility and cite a portion of the actual Church teaching.

[Aquinasfan]

Furtunately, we have latter-day revelation to clarify things.

How do you know that "latter-day revelation" is God-breathed, demon-inspired, or just plain made up? Any objective criteria for making this determination?