Bishop Juan Barros (center) attends his first religious service as people protest against him at the Osorno cathedral in Chile
Posted on 02/07/2018 9:13:23 AM PST by SeekAndFind
Well, it’s now happened. The great scandal of the modern Catholic Church — its tolerance for clergy who abuse children, and its laxity when dealing with bishops who themselves tolerated or enabled priest-abusers — now touches directly on the pope himself.
It’s worth laying out the timeline clearly. In 2015, Pope Francis appointed Juan Barros Madrid to the bishopric of Osorno, Chile. The appointment was met with local protests, among Catholics and non-Catholics who believed that Barros was implicated in the crimes of child sexual abuse committed by his friend Father Fernando Karadima, a prominent Chilean churchman who habitually kissed and fondled boys. In the days after the installation of Barros at Osono, Pope Francis told an archbishop that there was “no objective reason at all” to oppose the appointment. The Vatican’s own department governing these matters, the Congregation for Bishops, released a statement saying they had “carefully examined the prelate’s candidature and did not find objective reasons to preclude the appointment.”
In the months following the appointment, Pope Francis became extremely dismissive of complaints. “Osorno suffers, yes, for silliness,” the pope said of the outrage in the media. “Think with your head, and do not be carried away by the noses of the leftists, who are the ones who put this thing together,” he added.
A few weeks ago, Pope Francis’s visit to Chile was marked by protests, and the pope continued his extremely brusque dismissal. “The day I see proof against Bishop Barros, then I will talk,” the pontiff said. “There is not a single piece of evidence against him. It is all slander. Is that clear?” Francis said that no victims had come forward to him. It was apparently this statement that caused Cardinal Sean O’Malley of Boston to scramble down to Chile and meet with the pope. After O’Malley’s intervention, presumably, the pope issued a half-apology, but repeated that the accusations against Barros were “slander” before adding, “I’m convinced he’s innocent.”
And now the news drops. In the time between the pope’s appointment of Barros and his commentary about protesters being carried away by leftists, members of the Vatican’s own Commission for the Protection of Minors gathered to discuss the appointment. They had a representative hand-deliver a letter to Pope Francis, from Carlos Cruz. The letter alleged, in lurid detail, that Barros had personally witnessed the abuse of Cruz at Karadima’s hands. Members of the commission photographed the hand-off of the letter to the pope, to reassure Cruz that they were doing everything possible to make his cry for justice heard.
The facts as we know them leave us with a few interpretations. 1) Pope Francis simply never read the letter, ignoring this extraordinary intervention by the Vatican’s own commission on a matter of public controversy for his pontificate. 2) Francis read the letter but forgot about it, reverting to his original understanding of the case. 3) Francis read the letter, but stuck to his decision for Barros, committing unintentional or intentional deceptions about the state of his knowledge of the accusations. 4) He read the letter, but either doubted the accusations in it, or at least found them so unimpressive that he did not decide to follow up on them.
The first explanation would mean that Francis was culpably ignorant. The second that he may lack the mental or moral faculties to competently govern the Catholic Church. The third that he is too stubborn or vain to change course in the face of evidence. And the last that he has little trust or faith in the Commission on the Protection of Minors to pass on credible counsel to him. Perhaps more reporting or disclosure will change our understanding, but none of these are satisfactory.
It’s worth noting here that the extraordinary resignation of Pope Benedict that led to Francis becoming pontiff is often credited to the Vatileaks scandal. While Benedict said his decision was made without coercion, it is widely believed that the unfolding scandal caused him to doubt the strength of his mental faculties to deal with it going forward.
The leaks about the hand-delivery of this letter to the pontiff may be evidence itself that senior churchmen are losing confidence in his pontificate. The barque of Peter sails into choppy waters.
I don’t trust this Pope as far as I could throw him.
I’ve never believed for a second that Benedict left on his own volition.
The False Pope doth protest too much.
Am I missing something, or does the author of this article not offer this possibility: “Pope Francis is a liar”?
I am not being sarcastic here. Isn’t it possible Pope Francis is liar? Did the author of this article offer that as a possibility?
Question?
If the USA, now able to access the wealth of those involved in human trafficking (sex slaves), might it be possible the USA can seize the wealth of the Vatican? This Pope has NOT shown the Church in the best of light. WHY IS HE THERE? Is Benedict’s health is such dire straits that an Alinsky student imposter had to take the realm?
Just as the Democrat party is not the party of old. The Church is not the Church of old. In the past, it was the Nuns who were seen as the instigators...not the Pope and his inner circle.
I believe we should tax the Church, as a political organization.
Benedict wasn’t any better on this issue. The Church has turned a blind eye for decades to this problem. At the beginning, they blamed the victims while shuffling pedophile priests from parish to parish. Hopefully, it all comes crumbling down.
The pope says the protesters were carried away by leftists?
I thought it was the “vast right wing conspiracy”.
Could this be because the Pope himself is a ______?
Ditto that.
there is a “control file” on him somewhere..
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.