Posted on 03/26/2010 5:32:30 PM PDT by Biggirl
Wow.. won’t they be surprised when they find out the Pope isn’t working for a legacy... rather, something greater than they will ever understand.
LOL
Look at all the denials and distortions being posted in the posts above.
It is truly pathetic.
The truth will prevail. We are not lying.
So happy that you really believe the NYSlimes.
Keep acting like nothing happened.
Your tithes are supporting this behavior.
Pathetic. "My church, right or wrong."
Did you read the article?
I don’t live in Minnesota — the former Archbishop has been removed from office. Money going to that Archdiocese does not support Weakland in any ministry at all. He has been removed from ministry.
If Weakland thought it was so important to come out of retirement and speak about it right now, why or WHY didn’t he do something about Murphy when he was the ARCHBISHOP.
And it would seem that you did not read the part about the benevolence toward a dying priest either. What good would have been served if he had been imprisoned — since Father Murphy was ill and actually in failing health and if I remember died shortly after the judgments about this whole matter.
Why do you think this is being dredged up again?
In my way of thinking, it is being dredged up to discredit the Catholic Church — reason one and only one. Of course, that means also discrediting Pope Benedict.
One has to wonder then, why didn’t this whole matter get pursued while Pope John Paul II was the Pope? Why now?
Is it because Pope Benedict is German? Some people seem to think so.
There is more than meets the eye — like I said, if I didn’t know better, I would think you were a leftist in believing what the NYTimes says versus what the Catholic Church says.
But I know you are not a leftist at all. So do you just hate all Catholics?
If one Catholic priest sins does that make all Catholics bad?
Or conversely, if one Protestant sins, does that make all Protestants bad?
Elsewhere,
Some 400 new allegations of clergy sex abuse were reported in the United States in 2009.
Regardless of how anyone tries to smooth this over, it is reprehensible for the Pope to have been indifferent to the molestation of 200 deaf boys and supportive of a pedophile priest. I wonder how our Catholic friends would react if it were their son and the Pope excused the priest? The priest should have been defrocked and then told to spend his last days repenting. Those 200 family probably left the Church. But that doesn't matter as long as the Church is protected.
We all sin, but when we sin we are to acknowledge our sin-not hide it under a blanket of denials or defend our sin. If we confess our sins, He is faithful to forgive us and cleanse us. If we say we have no sin the truth is not in us. (recommended reading: 1 John)
Strangely, few Catholics seems to be asking the Pope to repent of his wrongful actions. Nor does the Pope say that he made a grievous error. People who defend the Pope's action are simply partakers of the Pope's decision.
Heb 10:26-27 For if we go on sinning deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a fearful expectation of judgment, and a fury of fire that will consume the adversaries.
Something people should give careful attention to.
I suspect they wouldn't be as cavalier as they are.
Wrong question...No one is suggesting all Catholics are bad...
If numerous priests molest children and the 'organization' hides the fact, covers it up and shuffles the priests around without outing them, is the organization bad??? Emphatically, YES...
How many of these protected, perverted priests become bishops, cardinals and popes???
Interesting. I wonder why he thinks Fr. Z is worthwhile then because he does NOT reject Vatican II?
You wrote:
“If numerous priests molest children and the ‘organization’ hides the fact, covers it up and shuffles the priests around without outing them, is the organization bad??? Emphatically, YES...”
No. After all the “organization” never did that. Some bishops - only some bishops in the world - did it. The Church never did.
You wrote:
“Look at all the denials and distortions being posted in the posts above.”
Okay, name one. Can you? Where in this thread did any Catholic post a denial or distortion?
You wrote:
“Strangely, few Catholics seems to be asking the Pope to repent of his wrongful actions. Nor does the Pope say that he made a grievous error. People who defend the Pope’s action are simply partakers of the Pope’s decision.”
1) What “wrongful actions” did the pope commit that he would know to be a wrongful action?
2) What grievous error did he make that he knew was a grievous error?
Can you answer those questions for me?
We have a plant in Germany, and the news there is much worse than we see here. I suspect it was the same for them when the scandals hit the US. This is coming as quite a shock to many of the southern Germans.
There is something to these reports, and saying it is all the media gunning for the Pope is putting on blinders. Yes they are, but that doesn't mean the reports are all made up.
No, it doesn't. We're all sinners, all fallen, but for the grace of God.
The problem is in the secrecy and the sheltering. That gives the appearance of impropriety, at a minimum. At the extreme, it implies complicity for the entire hierarchy.
You're making a huge mistake, with all these "see, other people do it too" efforts at deflection. It's not coming across the way you want, at all.
Or conversely, if one Protestant sins, does that make all Protestants bad?
All Protestants are sinners, too, all fallen and in need of redemption, which comes through repentance and acceptance in faith, of the gift of salvation. Those who fail to show remorse, to turn to God and to repent, and instead continue on in their sin, deflecting blame and denying any need to repent, are invited to leave any Bible-believing Christian church with which I've had the good fortune to associate. It's just common sense. You just don't accept ongoing, unrepentant sin in the congregation. Will people fail on occasion? Of course. I'll take a blubbering Jimmy Swaggart, on his knees and in tears, admitting his failure and sin any day, over arrogant denials and attempts to paint everyone else as being just as sinful in order to protect a particular church.
To make excuses, to revert to a childish "you do it, too, you started it" is not indicative of repentance. To continue to conceal, to have secrets ... well, I assume you know what is written about your secrets finding you out, in all your dark places.
Your church put itself in this position. You can choose to acknowledge the problem and rid yourselves of it, or you can continue to deflect. Both have consequences. It's not as if the problem of widespread homosexuality in your priesthood is a newly discovered phenomenon. It's not as if sexual abuse of pubescent males by these homosexual priests is a newly discovered phenomenon, either.
Deal with it. Cast these priests out of any position of authority, if not from your church as a whole. No good can come of continuing down this path. I realize this advice is coming from outside your church, and therefore you place very little value upon it. But, there it is, the answer that is obvious to those who have no vested interest in the matter.
Yawn. Accusing Benedict of “global authority” when you never bother to read the encyclical! Who made you the official interpreter of Catholic teaching? Answer? No one. Now go back and actually learn something about Cathoicism.
Christianity is under attack, not just the Catholic Church. They hate Christ, therefore they hate His Body, the believers. We are in the final days, so, yes, this will increase, but guess who is victorious in the end????
Cardinal Ratzinger was not implicit in in a deliberate cover up. I agree that those pedophilic priests should have been turned to the police yes. It was common back then to believe that pedophilia could be cured by therapy. Not just in the Catholic Church. Other denominations and I’m sure other religions as well.
It’s hard to make sense of this now, because things are so different and there are rigorous child protection systems in place in churches now. Have you ever wondered why the victims never went to the Police at the time, I’m speculating here but maybe they did go to the police but they didn’t take it seriously and probably said the same thing that the Priest would be cured by therapy and they sent the Priest away.
It was common thought back then. No one knew much about pedophilia. Serious mistakes have been made, but we have no evidence the heirarchy did this with any malice of forethought. They actually thought that therapy helped.
The Vatican is not to blame and neither is the Pope, the archdiocese of the time when this abuse took place is to blame. But the true story, what I’ve just noted, wouldn’t be such an intriguing story for the mainstream media, would it?
I’m fed up with the Catholic Church being targeted while of the rest of Christian denominations, many who have higher rates of abuse than in the Catholic Church, are let of scot free in the media. Regarding abuse in the present, and the past.
I do not reject Vatican II. Just to be clear with everyone.
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.