Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Benedict and the Scandal (Mark Shea comments on Rod Dreher remarks)
Inside Catholic ^ | April 23, 2008 | Mark Shea

Posted on 04/24/2008 7:25:40 AM PDT by NYer

Now that Benedict has come and gone we are in the thick of media analysis of the meaning of it all. Many folk (Rod Dreher is a notable example) were (as I expected) disappointed because the pope didn't "do something" about bishops who have, to say the least, not particularly distinguished themselves in the Scandal. Dreher wanted a "read them the riot act" moment. Others scattered around the secular and mainstream media talked about Benedict "firing" them and so forth.

The pope, as you might expect, addressed the bishops and (as you also might expect given his high degree of commitment to dialog with any person of good will or even not-so-good will) his talk wound up being a mixture of his thoughts and attempts to engage the often dim-witted drivel of the USCCB functionaries upon whom he depends for information about what's going on in the USCCB. But though he made clear that sometimes sexual abuse cases had been very badly handled by our bishops, there was no Riot Act Reading. Compounding this, for Dreher, was the reaction of our dim-witted functionaries, which was predictably less-than-stellar (not to say vaguely nauseating). Dreher mentioned Bishop Tod Brown, who offered the usual disingenuous smarm that he learned from his master, the even more egregious and untrustworthy Cardinal Mahony. Both Brown and Mahony are textbook examples of just about everything that is wrong with the USCCB's response to the crisis of sexual abuse in the Church.  All this bugs Dreher and he expresses his disappointment with Benedict (though, to be fair, he was also very delighted to see Benedict meet with abuse victims and gave him his due).

The thing is, I'm not sure what Dreher and many others think should have happened between Benedict and the bishops. But then I haven't thought Dreher has had a realistic grasp of the options the pope has in this matter since the beginning. Dreher began his quarrel with the papacy on this matter when, as he famously said, the pope "let us down" by not dismissing a bunch of bishops "with the stroke of a pen." Life for Dreher since then has constituted the never-ending encounter with the fact that this entire perception of what the pope could or would do was wholly unrealistic.

As I've argued repeatedly, anybody who has read and internalized Ut Unum Sint could not be surprised when the pope with the most Eastern conception of the papacy in a thousand years did not regard it as his role to micromanage the American Church. Likewise, John Paul II's successor, Benedict, for all his fury at the Scandal (and it is real fury, not feigned for the cameras) is also constrained by the fact that, at the end of the day, he is bound to his commitment to regard himself as first among equals, not as The Guy Ordained by God to Tell All the Other Bishops to Obey Him or Hit The Road. His mission is to strengthen the brethren, not lay about him with mace and cudgel. Both his office and his personality are wholly arrayed against this highly American desire to "fix" everything with a cathartic gust of rage.

Moreover, the crowning paradox of Dreher's position is that, having left the Catholic Church for Eastern Orthodoxy in large part because of the Scandal, he is now in communion with bishops who would take it very ill if the pope were to do what Dreher so much wants him to do. It's one of the most puzzling aspects of Dreher's position and I hope that one of these days he will articulate how he can simultaneously hold an Orthodox ecclesiology and still want Benedict (or any pope) to act like Innocent III. I honestly don't get it.

Meanwhile, from where I sit it seems we are left with this:
 
Failing to summarily fire bishops whom even we laypeople (who own all the guns, run all the police forces, staff all the courts, and manage all the jails) have not opted to charge with any crimes, what is it we laypeople are asking the pope to do?
 
As far as I can tell, we are demanding that the one person in the world whose job, more than any other, is to proclaim the mercy of God do our job for us by administering some sort of vague but severe punishment for something we will not, ourselves, punish (and which we in many cases celebrate: namely a laissez-faire attitude toward our sex lives, including the sex lives of our kids).

Now I'm all for jailing bishops who have committed crimes. But, see, that's our job as laypeople and we have basically decided we can't or won't do that. I'm not a lawyer and I have no idea of the legal guilt of this or that bishop. But I do know something about the Gospel and it seems to me that if we laypeople don't think we have a case against the bishops beyond their being dumb, shady, slick, and/or disingenuous in the handling of serial perverts, then I don't see how it is the pope's task to be more merciless than we are.

The American Church has made great strides in making parishes places of almost paranoid safety for kids since 2002. This is but one of the prices we pay for the wretchedness of the episcopal response to the Scandal. Some of the Zero Tolerance idiocy is a heavy cross to bear for all the normal people who have to go through endless training and scrutiny because bishops did not have the sense God gave a goose when some serial pervert was reassigned to a fresh field of victims multiple times by these numbskulls. Now the bishops overcompensate by treating everybody as a serial pervert. That's exasperating, but it does give the lie to the notion that "nothing has been done." Plenty has been done and I, as a layman, have not a worry in the world about the safety of my children in the Church.

But that's not what people now mean by the phrase "nothing has been done." What they mean is that they do not have the sense that sufficient vengeance has been wreaked on bishops. Well, if there is legal vengeance to be wreaked, that's up to us laypeople, innit? But we have not done so, apparently because we don't have a case. So we hope that Benedict will do something or other to wreak that vengeance for us and we take it out on him for not doing our job. I think that's kinda crazy. I don't want a Church that is all about vengeance. I much prefer a Church that is about mercy.


TOPICS: Catholic; Current Events
KEYWORDS: b16; benedictxvi; bishops; bxvi; catholic; dreher; pedophiles; pedophilia; pope; priests; scandal
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-68 next last

Mark P. Shea is a senior editor at www.CatholicExchange.com and a columnist for InsideCatholic.com. Visit his blog at www.markshea.blogspot.com.

1 posted on 04/24/2008 7:25:40 AM PDT by NYer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Salvation; narses; SMEDLEYBUTLER; redhead; Notwithstanding; nickcarraway; Romulus; ...
For those who are unfamiliar with how the Vatican functions, I strongly recommend the following article, written by Fr. Rob Johansen:

Why Doesn't the Pope Do Something about "Bad" Bishops?

2 posted on 04/24/2008 7:27:38 AM PDT by NYer (Jesus whom I know as my Redeemer cannot be less than God. - St. Athanasius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kolokotronis; kosta50; kawaii
Benedict, for all his fury at the Scandal (and it is real fury, not feigned for the cameras) is also constrained by the fact that, at the end of the day, he is bound to his commitment to regard himself as first among equals, not as The Guy Ordained by God to Tell All the Other Bishops to Obey Him or Hit The Road.

Your thoughts?

3 posted on 04/24/2008 7:30:12 AM PDT by NYer (Jesus whom I know as my Redeemer cannot be less than God. - St. Athanasius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Very interesting discussion. What I would have liked to see the Pope do (in a dream world ...) is stand up in front of the press and say, in a talking-to-rather-slow-preschoolers tone, “You do understand that all but a few of these cases involved homosexual men and teenage boys, don’t you? Oh, but you think there’s nothing wrong about adult men’s having sex with teenage boys? Well, you’re compost-eating hypocrites, then, aren’t you?”

Just sayin’ ... reason number #7857 why they’ll never make me Pope ...


4 posted on 04/24/2008 7:33:20 AM PDT by Tax-chick ("A man grasps his sword in hand, takes his stance, and demands the true price of his hide.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

I read Johansen’s letter about bishops. Yes, he has a point that you can’t look at the Pope as if he were the top CEO and bishops as if they were middle level executives. This is where the laity needs to step in. If solid evidence comes forth that a priest or priests were involved in sexual misconduct with minors and the bishop is lax in action-—the laity needs to force his hand. There is no better way to say F-U to a bishop than by holding back $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.


5 posted on 04/24/2008 7:41:26 AM PDT by brooklyn dave (Proud to be an Infidel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: NYer

It’s an interesting idea that JPII had an “Eastern” view of the Papacy, although if this means being simply a hands-off figurehead, I’m not sure this is a totally accurate assessment of the Eastern view. However, I think BXVI’s view of the papacy is different from that of JPII, although obviously it is tempered by it because it would be very hard for him to do anything abrupt after so many years of JPII’s style.

JPII had one of the longest papacies ever, and I think that’s something we often neglect to consider: many things that Popes will have to deal with for some time to come were shaped by him, particularly since he had this long reign right after VatII, when things were in flux anyway. The rise of the national bishops’ conferences and their power, for example, is something that earlier popes didn’t have to contend with, so there were even structural changes left behind by JPII. (The bishops’ conferences came out of a suggestion made at VatII, but they were fairly new when JPII took over, and he could have restricted their competence, but actually seems to have expanded it.) Also, JPII let so many things drift along that there are many - well, I’ll say it - evil people installed in various cathedra across the country and the world. And they’ve been there for a long time.

That said, I think he probably will do something, but it’s not going to be as dramatic as I’d like! Some bishops may get coadjutors; some bishops may be retired for “health reasons.” This Pope seems to give people plenty of warning, but he does act eventually. So we shall see...


6 posted on 04/24/2008 7:52:00 AM PDT by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: NYer

This was how I felt on why nothing outspoken had come from the Vatican on the issue. But the Pope still can use the bully pulpit. Of course the hard part of using the bully pulpit is being charitable at the same time.

Rewarding those Bishops that did do something right would be great as well. I’m still miffed that Arch. Bishop Burke was over looked for the Red Hat. Not that I would want him to receive the hat for political statement purposes, but at least it could be a statement on how a Prince of Church should look like.

Another good reason for lack of thunder is due to small list of replacements. I think it has been pointed out that there are many bishop sees empty and deciding on who to take the chair can take years at times.


7 posted on 04/24/2008 7:55:25 AM PDT by neb52
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: NYer
Article:"Moreover, the crowning paradox of Dreher's position is that, having left the Catholic Church for Eastern Orthodoxy in large part because of the Scandal, he is now in communion with bishops who would take it very ill if the pope were to do what Dreher so much wants him to do. It's one of the most puzzling aspects of Dreher's position and I hope that one of these days he will articulate how he can simultaneously hold an Orthodox ecclesiology and still want Benedict (or any pope) to act like Innocent III. I honestly don't get it."

The deeper question, for anyone who wants to ponder it, is why God does not send better bishops and priests who defend the faith and the Church. We are not able to see the correspondence that has been sent to Rome from priests and laymen complaining about this for the last 30 years. But weak bishops or popes is nothing to lose your faith over. During the Reformation people were killing each other over doctrinal disagreements. There were perverts pretending to be clergymen long before some of these American celebrity converts converted. It's disgusting but you can't spend the rest of your life stuck on this.

8 posted on 04/24/2008 7:58:06 AM PDT by HowlinglyMind-BendingAbsurdity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Scene I’d liked to have seen: Mahoney comes up to receive Holy Communion from Benedict at a televised event. Benedict slaps Mahoney’s face, administers a blessing and sends him back to the pew.


9 posted on 04/24/2008 7:59:04 AM PDT by Petronski (When there's no more room in hell, the dead will walk the earth, voting for Hillary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick

Actually, did you notice the one brief mention he made of just this issue? I think it was in one of the DC addresses, but I’m not sure which one. He said something about the pedophile crimes, and then he mentioned homosexuality and said “but this is a separate matter that we will get to later.”

The number of genuine pedophiles among the clergy was probably even lower than that in the rest of the world, because priests rarely have much opportunity to get near small children of either sex. And the crimes that would genuinely constitute pedophilia are a relatively small percentage of those in the lawsuits, etc.

It was in the vast majority, homosexual adult men preying upon teenage boys. These men were active homosexuals and were engaged with other adult men as well. And it went all the way up the line. Recently stuff has come out about Cdl McCarrick (now retired), and of course, we even have a serving bishop here in Florida, Bp Lynch of Tampa St. Pete’s, who had to settle a sexual harrassment suit brought against him by a male employee only a few years ago. And yet he was not removed from his post or even mildly scolded.

Also, I think BXVI made a major mistake in picking Levada, since Levada is notoriously gay-friendly and probably has completely misadvised BXVI about the US bishops. But I think BXVI may be aware of this, and I suspect that he will take up the issue of homosexuality in the clergy and probably even among the bishops and higher. This probably wasn’t the moment for it, but I suspect it will happen.


10 posted on 04/24/2008 8:01:54 AM PDT by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Petronski

You have an eye for the perfect moment!


11 posted on 04/24/2008 8:03:20 AM PDT by Tax-chick ("A man grasps his sword in hand, takes his stance, and demands the true price of his hide.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Petronski

Implausible:

Priests/bishops/cardinals self-communicate when they are vested.


12 posted on 04/24/2008 8:05:53 AM PDT by Notwithstanding ("You are either with America in our time of need or you are not" - W? No, 'twas Sen. Hillary 9/12/01)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Notwithstanding
Implausible

I readily concede that.

13 posted on 04/24/2008 8:07:52 AM PDT by Petronski (When there's no more room in hell, the dead will walk the earth, voting for Hillary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: livius
This probably wasn’t the moment for it, but I suspect it will happen.

If anyone knows what the right moment is, it would have to be Pope Benedict :-).

The Popes and some Bishops have produced excellent statements about homosexual attraction (a psychological disorder) and homosexual behavior (always a sin, No Matter What). Unfortunately, resistance to this message is pervasive in the Church as well as in general society.

14 posted on 04/24/2008 8:08:48 AM PDT by Tax-chick ("A man grasps his sword in hand, takes his stance, and demands the true price of his hide.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: livius
"It’s an interesting idea that JPII had an “Eastern” view of the Papacy, although if this means being simply a hands-off figurehead, I’m not sure this is a totally accurate assessment of the Eastern view. However, I think BXVI’s view of the papacy is different from that of JPII, although obviously it is tempered by it because it would be very hard for him to do anything abrupt after so many years of JPII’s style." 6 posted on Thursday, April 24, 2008 10:52:00 AM by livius

It's more likely that a naive understanding of sexuality is to blame. By the time the media were making noise about it, JP2 had Parkinson's. Not exactly in a robust state to offer stern lectures.

But whoever is advising the Vatican about the Church in America needs to replaced. And they ought to have lay heterosexuals who were born Catholic and grew up in the Church in leadership positions on some of the committees. It's astonishing some of the people that manage to rise to positions of promimence on Catholic matters. Someone who converted in the '90s or the '80s is not going to know enough about what was going on with these issues. And, really, as outsiders, they should consult with people who do.

15 posted on 04/24/2008 8:12:43 AM PDT by HowlinglyMind-BendingAbsurdity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick
Very good point. It's also worth noting that many of the clerical abuse claims we've seen in the news here in the U.S. can hardly be called "abuse" at all. This was borne out in one of the big stories a couple of years ago involving a claim of abuse that dated back 20 or more years. When I saw the age of the accuser, I calculated backward and figured that he was about 25-30 years old when the "abuse" took place -- and his "abuser" was well into his 50s.

Color me skeptical, but something about that doesn't seem quite right.

16 posted on 04/24/2008 8:13:34 AM PDT by Alberta's Child (I'm out on the outskirts of nowhere . . . with ghosts on my trail, chasing me there.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick

You do understand that all but a few of these cases involved homosexual men and teenage boys, don’t you? Oh, but you think there’s nothing wrong about adult men’s having sex with teenage boys? Well, you’re compost-eating hypocrites, then, aren’t you?”

There, that looks better :-)

17 posted on 04/24/2008 8:33:34 AM PDT by NYer (Jesus whom I know as my Redeemer cannot be less than God. - St. Athanasius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: livius
I think he probably will do something, but it’s not going to be as dramatic as I’d like!

Actually, there's some discussion that he may modify Canon law to extend the statute of limitation for filing claims. There are victims who have submitted claims against priests, dating back to the 50's; most of those priests are now deceased.

18 posted on 04/24/2008 8:38:37 AM PDT by NYer (Jesus whom I know as my Redeemer cannot be less than God. - St. Athanasius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: neb52
I’m still miffed that Arch. Bishop Burke was over looked for the Red Hat.

Last year or this?

19 posted on 04/24/2008 8:39:41 AM PDT by NYer (Jesus whom I know as my Redeemer cannot be less than God. - St. Athanasius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
Color me skeptical, but something about that doesn't seem quite right.

Yes, that's interesting. Perhaps the man was an employee of the church, which would make it a workplace sexual-harassment situation? We also don't know how many of the molestation claims are false. "Oh, I just remembered when I saw the seven-figure dollar amounts on the news that a priest groped me thirty years ago!" One case in Tulsa, involving a former pastor of our parish there, was determined by the DA to be a complete fabrication; I'm sure that wasn't a unique case.

What really bothers me, though, is that our society, our school systems, and often other government entities positively encourage homosexual behavior by teenagers. They want to force the Boy Scouts to put active homosexual men in authority over teenage (and younger) boys. One might imagine that some of these forces are actually thrilled that homosexual priests were (totally predictably) prospecting, seducing, and in some cases forceably raping teenage boys. (LIKE, DUH. That's what they do!) They don't care about "the children." They're just Satan's tools who want to destroy the Church, by any means.

20 posted on 04/24/2008 9:10:41 AM PDT by Tax-chick ("A man grasps his sword in hand, takes his stance, and demands the true price of his hide.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: NYer

LOL! I just can’t see Pope Benedict saying, “Compost-eating hypocrites”; he’s too refined.


21 posted on 04/24/2008 9:12:40 AM PDT by Tax-chick ("A man grasps his sword in hand, takes his stance, and demands the true price of his hide.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: NYer

I believe it was this year. Would more hats be handed out later this year?


22 posted on 04/24/2008 9:15:05 AM PDT by neb52
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: neb52
Dear neb52,

“Would more hats be handed out later this year?”

I believe that the Vatican tries to keep the number of voting cardinals to 120. There are currently 118 voting cardinals. Thus, until that number falls to perhaps 110 or even much less, it's unlikely that the pope will have another consistory.

There are three cardinals who are 79 years old or older, thus, without a significant number of deaths, it's unlikely that there will be a consistory in the next 12 months. There are, however, another seven cardinals who are at least 78 years old, so a consistory in the next 24 or so months is certainly possible.


sitetest

23 posted on 04/24/2008 9:27:37 AM PDT by sitetest (If Roe is not overturned, no unborn child will ever be protected in law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: sitetest

Will I know what to add to my prayers then! :P


24 posted on 04/24/2008 9:35:42 AM PDT by neb52
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: NYer
Moreover, the crowning paradox of Dreher's position is that, having left the Catholic Church for Eastern Orthodoxy in large part because of the Scandal, he is now in communion with bishops who would take it very ill if the pope were to do what Dreher so much wants him to do. It's one of the most puzzling aspects of Dreher's position and I hope that one of these days he will articulate how he can simultaneously hold an Orthodox ecclesiology and still want Benedict (or any pope) to act like Innocent III. I honestly don't get it.

Rod is like the husband who has got a divorce from a women with certain faults decides to marrry a second woman with the same faults. When one falls out of love, it usually has less to do with the other person than oneself. There is nothing more bitter than a person who expects others to grant him all he desires.

25 posted on 04/24/2008 10:08:54 AM PDT by RobbyS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: livius; Tax-chick
I think it was in one of the DC addresses, but I’m not sure which one. He said something about the pedophile crimes, and then he mentioned homosexuality and said “but this is a separate matter that we will get to later.”

I'm pretty sure it was during the press conference on the airplane coming to America.

26 posted on 04/24/2008 10:13:19 AM PDT by ELS (Vivat Benedictus XVI!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS
There is nothing more bitter than a person who expects others to grant him all he desires.

Some people, when they notice that a lot of terrible things happen in the world, take it very personally. Maybe it's a genetic trait. Continually searching for the place where no bad people do bad things must be very stressful.

27 posted on 04/24/2008 10:19:14 AM PDT by Tax-chick ("A man grasps his sword in hand, takes his stance, and demands the true price of his hide.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: ELS

You could be right; it was early in the visit and could well have been on the plane. Did you draw the same inference, which is that he was going to cut this issue (clerical homosexuality) out as a separate one and address it specifically? Or was that just my wishful thinking...


28 posted on 04/24/2008 10:26:37 AM PDT by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick
Unfortunately, resistance to this message is pervasive in the Church as well as in general society. Goes back to 1968. PV was a progressive pope, and he was shocked to discover how liberals interpreted the Council documents. A revolution was taking place and the pope was somewhat in the same position as Louis XVI was in 1789. He had lost control of events: hence the famous remark about the smoke of Satan in the Church. Jacques Maritain, until that time a darling of the liberals, wrote a bitter statements against the trend of things in his "Old Man of the Garonne," and was dismissed as a bitter old man.

I have read that John Paul was warned to stay clear of the committee that was discussing the issue of contrception. because that was a runaway train. The encyclical only managed to brake its momentum. Benedict was also surprised, and the vilolence of the your rebelliion in 1968 made him turn away from the progressives, so much so that they think of him as a traitor.

The pope has lived through the 43 years since the Council and he knows how deeply the Church is divided. As deeply divided, I think, as the Church was during the Christological contoversies of the 4th and 5th Centuries. In a sense we are engaged in a similar controversy. The pope stands with Athanasius but many of the bishops stand with Arius.

29 posted on 04/24/2008 10:30:15 AM PDT by RobbyS (Ecce homo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: livius

I think he just wanted to sidestep the entire homosexuality issue at that time. I think he agrees with the document written by John XXIII saying that homosexuals should not be admitted to the priesthood, but knows that many in the mainstream media are pro-homosexual or homosexual themselves and has observed the violent rage of the radical homosexuals in Italy, so he simply diffused that aspect of the discussion. IMHO.


30 posted on 04/24/2008 10:39:06 AM PDT by ELS (Vivat Benedictus XVI!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: ELS

That’s what I think, too. But it sounded like he was definitely preparing something on this subject and was getting ready to deal with it.

You’re right, he has been heavily under attack from the Italian gay lobby. And of course St. Pat’s is picketed by them on a regular basis, and has even been desecrated by radical homosexuals at the masses. So I think he probably wanted to avoid such an event on this trip.


31 posted on 04/24/2008 11:45:08 AM PDT by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick; RobbyS
Continually searching for the place where no bad people do bad things must be very stressful.

How coincidental that you should mention this. Earlier this morning, I watched an EWTN program "Eucharistic Principles". Father Emmerich Vogt O.P who does this series, specifically addressed this topic of perfectionism and the damage it brings to our spiritual life. He was quite amusing as he described two other members of the society - one is messy - the other is a neat nick. The messy one admonishes the perfectionist and vv. He runs missions called 12 Step Review

32 posted on 04/24/2008 11:52:59 AM PDT by NYer (Jesus whom I know as my Redeemer cannot be less than God. - St. Athanasius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: neb52
Would more hats be handed out later this year?

That is up to the pope. Given the number of aging cardinals, it's possible he may call another consistory this year.

Like you, I also believe Archbishop Burke is a sterling example. FWIW - my grandmother was upset when Archbishop Sheen did not receive the red hat. Look at him now ;-)

33 posted on 04/24/2008 11:59:08 AM PDT by NYer (Jesus whom I know as my Redeemer cannot be less than God. - St. Athanasius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: livius
going to cut this issue (clerical homosexuality) out as a separate one and address it specifically? Or was that just my wishful thinking...

That was definitely my understanding too, though I sort of inferred that he would have quite a bit to say when he did and that it's a complex issue. One possible complicating aspect, I would assume, is that there are practicing (and good) priests of homosexual inclination who manage to control themselves, and they would have to be taken into consideration too, though this is speculation on my part.

34 posted on 04/24/2008 12:11:19 PM PDT by maryz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: maryz

I don’t think the inclination has ever been a problem, legally speaking. Actually, I’d say the “inclination” may even be a modern phenomenon in our sexualized culture, because I think a lot of people who simply are not really interested in sexual relationships (with anybody) would now be considered homosexual. A lot of men who develop intense intellectual relationships with other men are not even remotely thinking of any sexual involvement with them, but Freud has transformed everything into sex. The worst thing that followed VatII, IMHO, (well, after the destruction of the liturgy) was the acceptance of Freudianism.

Freud was a renegade Jew who hated Judaism and spent most of his life trying to destroy it. He succeeded, to some extent: all my Jewish friends in NY had a therapist, and none of them had a rabbi.

By extension, Freud also hated Christianity, and his effect has been equally corrosive. And after VII, we all ran out and embraced his vision of life as entirely sexual, in a genital sense, and entirely at odds with what the Church was and has always taught. This was actually one of the things that contributed to the clerical sexual abuse of the last few decades - they all thought it was groovy and cool, and their bishops were telling them it was all okay.


35 posted on 04/24/2008 12:53:39 PM PDT by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: livius

You make excellent points, especially about the pre-Freudian/post-Freudian mindsets! And the whole therapy mystique has been implicated in the abuse scandal in a number of articles. (I do recall Cardinal Law: “We are all ‘wounded healers’” — which I guess is almost a term of art in the therapeutic world.)


36 posted on 04/24/2008 2:28:01 PM PDT by maryz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: NYer; livius; Tax-chick
” Moreover, the crowning paradox of Dreher’s position is that, having left the Catholic Church for Eastern Orthodoxy in large part because of the Scandal, he is now in communion with bishops who would take it very ill if the pope were to do what Dreher so much wants him to do. It's one of the most puzzling aspects of Dreher’s position and I hope that one of these days he will articulate how he can simultaneously hold an Orthodox ecclesiology and still want Benedict (or any pope) to act like Innocent III. I honestly don't get it.”

My thoughts?

Dreher is a jerk. Like so many Western converts, he is far, far too “holier than thou”, a legalistic martinet with no more understanding of the Orthodox phronema than my dog. The disgrace is that any Orthodox priest chrismated him. He is, as one of my favorite priests from down in the old country once told a puffed up “holy guy” convert, “nothing more than a Protestant swinging the theemeeatoe (thurifer)!”

The comment about the Pope being constrained by his primus inter pares position is an interesting, and probably delusional, observation. In Latin ecclesiology he has immediate local jurisdiction of the various bishops. Eastern ecclesiology is different. Oh, btw, I sincerely disagree that there was anything even remotely Eastern about +JPII. In fact he was not well thought of in the East though of course his office and person were respected. Its quite a different matter with +BXVI

37 posted on 04/24/2008 2:34:28 PM PDT by Kolokotronis (Christ is Risen, and you, o death, are annihilated)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Kolokotronis

It’s always very interesting to hear the foreign perspective.


38 posted on 04/24/2008 2:47:14 PM PDT by Tax-chick (Tagline closed for renovation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick

“It’s always very interesting to hear the foreign perspective.”

It is, eh?!


39 posted on 04/24/2008 2:59:43 PM PDT by Kolokotronis (Christ is Risen, and you, o death, are annihilated)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Kolokotronis

What letter makes the “ee” sound?


40 posted on 04/24/2008 3:04:00 PM PDT by Tax-chick (Tagline closed for renovation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: maryz
Cardinal Law: “We are all ‘wounded healers’”

Wounded healers...bleccchhh...

41 posted on 04/24/2008 3:34:52 PM PDT by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS
The pope stands with Athanasius but many of the bishops stand with Arius.

Very true. The thing that makes this controversy so difficult is that there is no heresiarch. Unless maybe one could say the "Zeitgeist"!

But seriously, I have always thought that one of the problems with this modern heresy is that it is very diffuse, doesn't have an identifiable leader - yet it is a reality and is destroying the Church, and will attempt to destroy anyone (like BXVI) who gets in its way.

42 posted on 04/24/2008 3:38:19 PM PDT by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Kolokotronis

I agree, and I also don’t think that JPII put that much thought into the matter in the first place. He simply was hands-off because - well, that’s the way he was. He was a media personality and I think this affected his view of his role very greatly.

Now that BXVI has suddenly gotten popular, I hope the same thing doesn’t happen to him! But I don’t think it will.


43 posted on 04/24/2008 3:41:00 PM PDT by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick
"What letter makes the “ee” sound?"

θυμιατό

44 posted on 04/24/2008 3:47:55 PM PDT by Kolokotronis (Christ is Risen, and you, o death, are annihilated)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: livius
“But seriously, I have always thought that one of the problems with this modern heresy is that it is very diffuse, doesn't have an identifiable leader - yet it is a reality and is destroying the Church, and will attempt to destroy anyone (like BXVI) who gets in its way.”

Allow me an observation from the outside. From what I can see, the Latin Church for many, many centuries, really since before 1056, has inculcated in the laity and the lower clergy a “pay, pray and obey” mindset. Your lower clergy and laity, for all the talk about “cafeteria Catholics” floating around, really are simply obedient and wouldn't't think of questioning your hierarchs out loud.

Orthodox Christians, however, are quite different. We sniff out heresy; in a way, we lay folk are all Inquisitors. And when we see heresy, we go after it with a vengeance. We don''t hesitate to topple a hierarch for heresy. As you know, we recently did it right here in America. We, not the hierarchs, are the ultimate guardians of Orthodoxy. Its simply not the same in the Latin Church and because of that, heresy persists and becomes, as you say, more “diffuse”. There are so many Latin bishops that its simply too much to think the pope can handle each one of them. Where Orthodox patriarchs can count on the people to deal with heresiarchs including heretical patriarchs, at least initially, the pope can't say the same for you guys because you've not been taught that's your role for well over 1000 years.

45 posted on 04/24/2008 3:59:43 PM PDT by Kolokotronis (Christ is Risen, and you, o death, are annihilated)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Kolokotronis
I sincerely disagree that there was anything even remotely Eastern about +JPII. ... Its quite a different matter with +BXVI

When I first read the phrase "the pope with the most Eastern conception of the papacy in a thousand years" I thought the author was referring to Benedict XVI. It wasn't until I reread the sentence that I realized the author was referring to JPII and had no idea what he was talking about. I agree that Benedict XVI much better fits the description given to JPII.

46 posted on 04/24/2008 5:00:17 PM PDT by ELS (Vivat Benedictus XVI!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Kolokotronis

It couldn’t be the same letter twice, could it? That just wouldn’t be Greek! (Or English either, I suppose.)


47 posted on 04/24/2008 5:06:06 PM PDT by Tax-chick (Tagline closed for renovation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick
"It couldn’t be the same letter twice, could it? That just wouldn’t be Greek!"

No, it wouldn't. Frankly, the same letter twice in Greek is uncommon, very uncommon. But to transliterate the syllable "θυ" we need to write "Thee" and "μι" in English becomes "mee"

48 posted on 04/24/2008 5:41:38 PM PDT by Kolokotronis (Christ is Risen, and you, o death, are annihilated)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Kolokotronis

This will upset Pat. He’s going to learn Indirect Objects (or specialized prepositional phrases) in his next lesson! Vlad’s learning the Greek alphabet and phonics, and James has learned some words and parts of speech. I almost wish they all wanted to go to the Greek charter school!


49 posted on 04/24/2008 6:15:39 PM PDT by Tax-chick (Tagline closed for renovation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick

“I almost wish they all wanted to go to the Greek charter school!”

You have a Greek Charter School???????????????

I have an idea. Take them (James & Pat; Vlad is too little) to the Great and Holy Friday devotion at the Greek Church tomorrow night. That’ll give them enough Greek to last for weeks!


50 posted on 04/24/2008 6:24:57 PM PDT by Kolokotronis (Christ is Risen, and you, o death, are annihilated)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-68 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

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