An uphill battle

9 Comments

1. Lurker 59 says:

   9 April 2010 at 5:09 PM

   Just wrote 797 words to help out. Took several hours to compile as I have yet to find the MSM correctly putting together a timeline of how and why things happened. When the MSM reports things, the dates are always in odd orders to make things sound more recent or like no one was doing anything.
2. PostCatholic says:

   9 April 2010 at 5:37 PM

   Agreed.

   Part of the problem, however, is that “the buck stops here” and a transparent apology has not yet been made by the Vatican. Nor has the Pope held to account several prelates who, instead of demonstrating the courage and rectitude he showed (and which ought to be ordinary), behaved in criminally negligent and conspiratorial ways. I hope he’ll do those things. The Archpriest of St. Mary Major needs to go.
3. Norah says:

   9 April 2010 at 6:22 PM

   PC in my opinion an apology has been made by the Pope, over and over again. I admit to being puzzled as to why Cardinal Law was given the position he holds. I am also puzzled as to why Cardinal Mahoney is not regarded with as much opprobium as Cardinal Law.
4. LisaNicholas says:

   9 April 2010 at 9:19 PM

   And yet, the MSM continue to spew their lies, as if no refutation had been offered. They think their readers/viewers are stupid — and too often they are correct.
5. PostCatholic says:

   9 April 2010 at 9:32 PM

   Norah, Bernard Law presided over such serious pastoral and supervisory neglect, made so many egregious and even reckless decisions, and did so for so long, involving such a high percentage of his priests that it’s hard to fathom how anyone could have done worse without being a child abuser himself. What finally sealed his fate there and pushed the most respected priests of the Boston archdiocese was the publication of his deposition where he recounted the admission of by a priest of a murder and how his mind immediately turned to scandal and the necessity of keeping law enforcement uninvolved and hoping the victim’s children had grown up and forgotten about it. When that deposition became public record as a result of legal proceedings, he lost the confidence of his laity and the most respected and decent members of the Boston clergy, who demanded his resignation. All of this is public record and the thousands of pages of relevant documents are available for your disgusted perusal at BishopAccountability.com.

   That is the tale of a morally depraved coward. That’s why it’s an affront that he is still a member of several dicasteries and the archpriest of one of Catholicism’s oldest and most important churches. He’s in a league of his own. Roger Mahoney’s reprehensible behavior can’t hold a candle to that level of depravity.

   Pope Benedict XVI has not yet apologized for the Vatican’s neglect and/or complicity in the worldwide child abuse scandal. And he continues to allow racketeers and criminals like Law to be a part of his curia and to hold high office within his benefice. It’s a blemish on an otherwise good record. Any fair-minded person can see that Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger was one of the good guys with a track record of having worked very hard to clean the Augean stables; in fact I’m not sure many other cardinals showed more authentic moral leadership (maybe the late James Cardinal Hickey). But the Pope still needs to do more. I have hope that he will.
6. Suburbanbanshee says:

   9 April 2010 at 9:48 PM

   Re: Law, that would be a job, I understand, of being archpriest almost without any duties, of a huge important church that’s almost never open, and which features a huge picture of St. John Bosco that looks down accusingly at where said archpriest is assigned to sit.

   Sheesh. What more do you need, a cellar and a cask of Amontillado, or a heartbeat under the floorboards? A soundtrack? A montage pointing out every detail of the mortification and punishment?
7. Norah says:

   9 April 2010 at 10:20 PM

   Thank you for the link PC; not being an American and not having a computer at the time of the Law scandal I am not across all of the details.

   Surburban, you may be quite correct in what you say about Law’s position but the public perception is that he received a reward.
8. Thomas G. says:

   10 April 2010 at 7:40 AM

   Good point, Fr. Z, and the problem is that few are willing to wade through those 1000 words to get at the truth. I, for instance, want to understand this alleged scandal in a way that allows me to meaningfully defend the Holy Father, but I’m frequently confused by the essays that emerge – confused by timelines, actors, who is supposed to do what to whom and why they did or did not. It’s positively Byzantine.

   And I think it’s precisely that Byzantine quality that the secular press uses to its advantage: vomiting forth a confused collection of alleged facts all overlaid with innuendo and bias – creating the suggestion of wrongdoing that may or may not be supported by facts.

   An example is the narrative about then-Cardinal Ratzinger’s letter (alleged) regarding the abusive Oakland priest. The Cardinal’s letter is described as “stalling” his laicization – a very loaded and pejorative term. One man’s rightful caution in dealing with a serious situation without undue haste is the secular media’s “stalling”. This isn’t even close to objective reporting.
9. PostCatholic says:

   10 April 2010 at 8:14 AM

   suburbanbanshee, I realize it’s not a particularly onerous task to be the archpriest of St. Mary Major. What’s more disgusting his that Law is still a member of several congregations and bodies of the Vatican curia. Including and shockingly, the Congregation for the Clergy, the Congregation for Bishops, the Pontifical Council for the Family, and the Institute of Consecrated Life. That is unacceptable. You don’t have to wall him up somewhere with a barrel of sherry, but at least stop him from exerting any influence over church governance, give him his retirement pay and tell him to paint seaside pictures and grow tulips.

Comments are closed.