Posted on 11/14/2014 3:02:05 PM PST by marshmallow
Boston’s Cardinal Sean O’Malley has told the CBS television program “60 Minutes” that the status of Kansas City’s Bishop Robert Finn-- who has been convicted of endangering children because of his failure to report abuse charges—is “a question that the Holy See needs to address urgently.”
Cardinal O’Malley, who heads a new Vatican commission on abuse, nodded silently when “60 Minutes” correspondent Norah O’Donnell remarked that Bishop Finn would not be allowed to teach religious-education classes under the rules of the Boston archdiocese. The cardinal said that Pope Francis is keenly aware of the problem.
Speaking about the work of his commission, the cardinal said:
One of the first things that came up was the importance of accountability, and we’re looking at how the Church can have protocols on how to respond when a bishop has not been responsible for protection of children in his diocese.
In September the National Catholic Reporter disclosed that the Vatican has conducted an apostolic visitation of Bishop Finn’s diocese, led by Archbishop Terrence Prendergast of Ottawa. The results of that inquiry have not been disclosed.
The “60 Minutes” interview with Cardinal O’Malley is scheduled to air on November 16. The network has made an excerpt from that program available online.
In the interview, Cardinal O’Malley also comments on the Vatican’s inquiry into the work of American women’s religious orders, saying that it was “a disaster.”
This is +Francis talking and it's music to the ears of CBS; the evil Roman Inquisition of Benedict was persecuting fearless activist nuns fighting for social justice.
This is the way it is in the new "merciful" Church; one bishop publicly trashing a fellow bishop in the media. The FFI has been beaten senseless for reasons which have never been made clear but a group of heretical, New Age apostates are hailed as persecuted heroes.
As for Finn, he will be eviscerated in the same way as his fellow Opus Dei prelate, Livieres in Paraguay. If the standards being applied to them were enforced universally, the Church would lose half its bishops. The discredited, lavender-friendly, molester-protecting Card. Daneels from Belgium whose track record in this area is utterly atrocious, was given a complimentary invitation to the recent Synod on the Family for his heroics. Of course, he's a liberal modernist who's done his best to dismantle the Belgian Church and has no time for tradition so he gets a pass.
Amen, Marsh. And don’t forget the funeral Mass for Menino the hater of the unborn and the lover of making perversion Sacramental union. And the blacked-out Communion line at that scandalous use of Holy Mass for the Dead, a fitting title to describe those legion politicians bringing their own judgements upon their souls as they receive the Corpus Christi.
I forgot to add that O’Malley was the main celebrant.
They have learned their lesson from demoting Cardinal Burke.
Now the demotions and defrockings will all be tied to “protecting children”. The fact that they will all be conservatives will be coincidental.
Funny - wasn't it yesterday that we learned about the dismissal of Bishop Livieres, head of the Paraguayan diocese of Ciudad del Este.? Livieres is only suspected of protecting a priest!
Maybe it's different in the United States. After all, concerning two lawsuits alleging papal oversight of the abuse scandal, the Holy See's legal team argued that
....there has been no factual determination that the priest who committed the abuse is an employee of the Holy See. Without a showing of the priest's employment by the Holy See, there is no jurisdiction. In fact, Father [Andrew] Ronan was a priest of a religious order, the Friar Servants of Mary. In our view, the indicators of employment simply are not present. The Holy See did not pay the salary of the priest or provide his benefits or exercise day-to-day control over him or have any other connection with him indicating the presence of an employment relationship. This priest was a member of the Friar Servants of Mary. His very existence was unknown to the Holy See until after all the events in question. I do not believe that the plaintiff has any information to contradict that view....So how can the pope dismiss a bishop for failure to act, unless the bishop is in the pope's employ? And if the bishop is in the pope's employ, and the priest is admitted to be in the bishop's employ, doesn't the legal team's argument evaporate?....The Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act is built upon the existence of certain precise exceptions. Here, the required exception is that the priest be an "employee" of the Holy See. This is simply factually inaccurate. Prior to this time, the case has been about whether the plaintiff's complaint was "adequate." Now the question is whether there are any facts to support the plaintiff's complaint....
.... One of the most important parts of that defense is to help people understand that the Church is not a monolith. It is composed of different entities that operate with relative autonomy and make their own decisions about the hiring and firing of personnel. Thus, just because a priest is a member of a religious order, it does not make him an employee of the Holy See.
-- from the thread Defending the Holy See [Vatican Lawyer Discusses the Supreme Court’s Decline of Abuse Appeal]
On the other hand, the Holy See can fire him.
The bishop isn't a partner, a franchisee, a subsidiary, I can't even think of an analogy. Can you?
“They have learned their lesson from demoting Cardinal Burke.”
None of them demoted Burke. Only Pope Francis did.
“Now the demotions and defrockings will all be tied to “protecting children”. The fact that they will all be conservatives will be coincidental.”
In Finn’s case - if he is ousted (which looks likely at this point) - it will be because Finn has shown he is not a very good bishop. He is orthodox. He has done wonders for his diocese in regard to vocations. He, however, especially over the last few years, has been a lousy leader in other respects: his failing and predictably ill-fated capital campaign, the new (and probably unneeded) high school, bad hiring (for years many chancery offices have been held by people without the requisite skills), dangerous loyalty (he stays loyal to people who harm the Church and diocese with their stupidity), spending issues, having no plan for the diocese whatsoever, hiding in his office rather than facing the music after the Ratigan debacle in 2011, his criminal case, etc. After the Ratigan case broke many of his most loyal priests, many of whom were the reliably orthodox priests in the diocese, turned on him because of his poor decisions. Few people in the chancery have much respect for him as an administrator. It has nothing to do with his “conservatism”. Many of them are more conservative than he is!
I went to a Vocations dinner during the 90s for the Archdiocese of Louisville. I was seated at a table full of nuns. None of them had habits on and they kept going on and on about environmentalism and how wonderful Vice President Gore is. I started to say to them: “Do you know Al Gore is Pro-Abortion?” But I didn’t. They had definitely lost their way. The visitation was long overdue.
I started out with such hope for O’Malley but am steadily growing more disappointed as I am also for the Cardinal-Archbishop of New York.
I can. He's a subordinate.
My mom was approached by a dipstick woman wearing makeup and nail polish, jewelry and a floppy hat who identified herself as a nun. Sure was nothing like the sisters of St. Joseph I was taught by as a kid in Catholic school.
The floppy hat identified itself as a nun?!?
That's very plain in the case of a bishop in relation to the Vatican: by most of the criteria you could look at in law, the Vatican's relationship with any particular bsihop is rather tenuous. For better or for worse, most bishops have no strictly "supervisory" superior. A bishop can ignore the USCCB (often should!!)_ and most of the departments of the Vatican unless the is something Gawd-awfully, publicly scandalous going on.
To a much lesser extent, that is also true of diocesan priests. They are not employees of their bishops, even if the bishop is their ecclesiastical superior. The pastors under a Bishop are not paid by the Bishop, nor do they have their day-to-day activities spelled out or determined by the bishop. This bishop, however, can hire and fire in the sense of granting or rescinding faculties, and giving or not giving a parish assignment.
In a sense, priests are like independent contractors. Strange though it seems. I am speaking, of course, about civil law, not ecclesiastical law.
hhahahaha
As with the Kennedy canonization, O’Malley presided at the Menino abortion-fest, but was not a concelebrant of the Mass.
Commas are our friends.
The same way the Church at Antioch sent forth Paul and Barnabas while Paul himself sent Timothy to Ephesus. Neither Paul nor Barnabas were in the employ of the Church at Antioch, neither was Timothy Paul's employee, yet authority was exercised.
This concept causes consternation to American lawyers who file lawsuits against the Vatican and quite a few Freepers too, apparently, since they unthinkingly accept the assumption that the American business model can be extrapolated universally to all organizations, including religious ones, as well as throughout the past and into the future. The Church is not AT&T or General Motors.
There are situations in which authority can be exercised which do not involve the employer/employee relationship, the most obvious being the parent/child relationship but the ecclesiastical superior/subordinate is another. The Church does indeed employ people....organists, janitors, office workers etc. However, bishops are no more employees of the Pope than Timothy was Paul's employee.
This is just O’Malley kicking a man when he’s down. He hates Finn because Finn is a Catholic.
Of course, O’Malley, Dolan, Wuerl, Chaput, etc., etc., continue to commit the mortal sin of giving Communion to pro-abortion apostates.
Thought I heard otherwise, but I accept what you say. Deniability.
O’Malley is just doing what Francis the Merciful wants him to do.
I am going by photographs I saw of O’Malley slobbering on Joe Biden in the church. O’Malley wasn’t vested for Mass. A bishop often “presides” at a Mass (funerals in particular) while a priest or priests celebrate it.
O’Malley gushed on his blog about the abortion and sodomy supporter for putting his Catholic faith first in his life.
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.