Posted on 03/15/2013 2:28:15 PM PDT by Hilda
“”Cardinal Law was present in a discrete manner in the chapel along with the members of the chapter and confessors, having been until recently the Dean of St. Maria Maggiore. Then he returned to his home. Nothing to add. “ Father Federico Lombardi, director of the Vatican press office, told Adnkronos in response to journalistic speculation whereby yesterday Pope Francis during his visit to the Basilica of St. Maria Maggiore in Rome, told Cardinal Bernard Francis Law, to keep away from the Basilica.”
I forgot this part
“And here that Pope Francis, after meeting Cardinal Bernard Law of Boston, retired ordered him to be removed. The Cardinal was accused of covering up the pedophile priests in his diocese.
“I will not frequent this church,” he said Papa Francesco. The Vatican spokesman sought to play down the incident.”
For those that speak Italian
http://www.youreporternews.it/2013/papa-francesco-caccia-cardinale-law-a-boston-copriva-preti-pedofili/
Vatican City is recognized,under international law,as a sovereign nation and one would think that the Pope is the Prime Minister,Justice Minister,etc.So could the Pope actually *expel* him from Vatican City,thus opening him up to possible extradition? Hmmm....
“Bernard Law entered very discreetly, he entered through one of the side chapels,” said Vatican spokesman the Rev. Federico Lombardi.
Stop me if you've heard this
Monk has a vow of silence, broken only when he is questioned by the Abbot
So after five years, The Abbot asks, "Brother, how do you fare?"
Monk says, "Food bad."
Five more years pass, and the Abbot asks, "Brother, how do you fare?"
Monk says, "Bed hard."
Five more years pass, and the Abbot asks, "Brother, how do you fare?"
Monk says, "I quit."
"Well, I am not surprised." said the Abbot. "Since you got here, you've done nothing but complain."
“Cardinal Bernard Law resigned as Archbishop of Boston in 2002, after being accused of actively covering up for a litany of paedophile priests.’
Despite the scandal which exploded to engulf the entire church, he was given an honorary position at the Basilica Santa Maria Maggiore, in Rome. “
Tells you exactly what is wrong. I hope the new guy can fix it, being as drastic as necessary to restore the church to a position of credibility.
Pope Francis is not treading lightly (with words); we’ll see what the future brings. :)
The pertinent part:
Il pontefice non voleva condividere le prime fotografie e le prime immagini pubbliche con un principe vaticano macchiatosi di enormi peccati, e non ha trattenuto il pensiero, anzi il desiderio: “Non voglio che frequenti ancora questa basilica”. Anche se privato di qualsiasi carica, Law risiede ancora nel palazzo di Santa Maria Maggiore. Al Fatto risulta che il pontefice argentino, come primo atto di pulizia, sia intenzionato a far trasferire il prelato: in clausura sarebbe perfetto. E sarebbe una rivoluzione per il Vaticano che ha protetto Law sottraendolo al percorso giudiziario americano. Perché nel 2004, mentre negli Stati Uniti cominciavano i processi e la diocesi di Boston pagava risarcimenti milionari, il cardinale di Torreòn fu elevato ad arciprete di Santa Maria Maggiore, una delle quattro basiliche patriarcali, cioè papali, assieme a San Pietro, San Giovanni in Laterano e San Paolo fuori le mura.
Cheesy Google translate:
The pontiff did not want to share the first images and the first public images with a prince Vatican macchiatosi of enormous sins, and has held the thought, or rather the desire: "I do not want this church still frequent." Although deprived of any office, Law still resides in the palace of Santa Maria Maggiore. Fact is that the pontiff Argentina, as the first act of cleaning, is willing to transfer to the prelate in seclusion would be perfect. It would be a revolution for the Vatican who protected Law subtracting the American judicial process. Because in 2004, while in the United States began the process and the Diocese of Boston paid compensation millionaires, the Cardinal of Torreon was elevated to archpriest of Santa Maria Maggiore, one of the four patriarchal basilicas, that papal, along with St. Peter, St. John Lateran and St. Paul Outside the Walls.
Note the phrase horribly translated by Google: "I do not want this church still frequent." The Italian for frequent is "frequenti" -- which is the second person singular. In other words, perhaps it should be translated: I do not want you to still frequent this church.
Now clearly the idea of "cloister" is the imagination of the reporter...but if, if the reporting of the statement by the pontiff is correct...he is saying that he doesn't want the notorious Law to frequent the basilica any more.
Also see this article: http://www.report84.it/78-prima-pagina/33667-cominciano-le-pulizie-di-pasqua-in-vaticano-papa-francesco-potrebbe-spedire-in-clausura-il-cardinale-law.
Is the anti-Catholic herd now going to bray that Law should be cut loose? Really?
If members of the anti-Catholic herd wonder why Catholics treat their opinions with contempt, perhaps the anti-Catholic herd should look no further than its own inconsistency and its own perpetual offendedness.
Extradition to where? Massachusetts? On what grounds? The guy may be a dirtbag, but the Commonwealth's Attorney found nothing with which to charge him. Stick him in a monastery, feed him bread and water. It's more than the secular authorities could do to him.
Oh, thank you for including me on this ping. This will be very interesting to follow. I’m sure the confirming news (either way) will be out soon.
VERY good news!
At least he got the right “discreet”
I didn’t realize that Law had a cheering section on FR, perhaps this new Pope is wrong about him.
Every Cardinal has a Rome-diocese church at which he conducts services when that Cardinal is in Rome, or so I understand.
So by barring Law from one of the perks of Law's cardinalate, Francis is rather forcefully inviting Law to disappear. (I don't know whether a pope can dismiss a cardinal. I tend to doubt it, particularly where the cardinal at issue was given that office by a prior pope. Anyone know?)
I don’t see it that way. All we know from this second report is that there is a confirmation that the two men met.
That makes sense to me.
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.