Posted on 04/25/2002 9:18:29 AM PDT by Notwithstanding
I would imagine that this would be an incredibly tightly-guarded secret. If one were a highly-placed, much-respected individual, one would NOT wish his name to be made public by any means. I would suspect that they do not even keep a mailing list, but simply repsond to their members on a piece-by-piece mail system: "You mail me this, I'll mail you that, and neither of us will know more than the mailing address of the other..."
Great minds... Isn't this almost word for word what I said last week? This (in my estimation) is the only sure and speedy way to deal with the evil in the seminaries. Shut them down if there is any proof that even one of their graduates is an abuser or an enabler. Keep them closed for a year.
This is a relatively brief time, and will also give sufficient time for the seminarians to either run for cover if they are flits or to apply at a more obedient seminary if they have a genuine call.
After one year, reopen them one at a time, and staff them ONLY with graduates from reliable seminaries. NO WOMEN. NO SEXUAL INDETERMINATES. If a candidate cannot certify that he is not only heterosexual but CHASTE, he should not be accepted.
At the rate of one opening a year, the staffing of these revised seminaries will be a little more easily accomplished. If a shortage of parish priests is a result of this closure, request interim priests from third-world countries. Catholics have been limping along without genuine episcopal leadership in most dioceses for the last 20 or 30 years, anyway, so losing a bishop here and there will not cause any real problems in the pews. (I know... I understand these ideas are generalizations.)
End of transmission. You may now proceed to kill the messenger.
I'm not gonna kill you, but last time I looked Cardinal Law is still in Boston, despite the screaming over the airwaves that he was going to try to skip town to avoid being deposed. Everyone assumes they KNOW what he's going to do; why don't they just wait and see what he does? If he were planning to skip town, would he have even COME BACK from Rome? I'm sure he would have loved to have stayed in Boston to continue the changes he had begun, but probably realized that doing so would only keep the Church in a negative spotlight. I'm sure the liberal Catholics are dancing in the streets; they've been trying to get rid of him for YEARS!
My brother in law told me a couple of weeks ago that this would probably happen, that Law would end up in Rome. But those who are thrilled that he's out of the way here may not be so happy later because he may be more trouble for them from there.
|
CRISIS IN THE CHURCH (60:00) Monday April 29- 8:00 pm ET LIVE
|
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.