[Catholic Caucus] On sex abuse, the Vatican still sends badly mixed signals

Catholic Cullture ^ | January 17, 2018 | Phil Lawler

[ebb tide]

• The New York Times notes that on the very day when he apologized to Chileans for the Church’s handling of the sex-abuse scandal, Pope Francis concelebrated Mass with Bishop Juan Barros Madrid, who was named by the Pope to head the Osorno diocese despite complaints about his long friendship with a notorious abuser. In fact, last week the Associated Press revealed that Bishop Barros had actually offered his resignation because of the scandal. But the Pope did not accept that resignation. Instead he promoted the embattled bishop, and announced that his critics in Chile were “carried away by the garbage everybody says.”
• On the day that the Pope boarded his flight to Chile, the Vatican announced that Cardinal Roger Mahony would act as the Pope’s personal envoy at the celebration of the 150th anniversary of the Diocese of Scranton, Pennsylvania. This is the same Cardinal Mahony who, in early 2013, was relieved of all public duties in the Los Angeles archdiocese by his successor, Archbishop José Gomez, because of his gross mishandling of the sex-abuse scandal. It is extremely unlikely that Archbishop Gomez would have made that announcement without consulting the Vatican. But a few days after Archbishop Gomez took that dramatic action, things changed in Rome; Pope Benedict XVI announced his retirement. In just a few more weeks Cardinal Mahony was back in action, participating in the conclave, explaining that “the highest folks at the Vatican” wanted him to attend. Since that time he has been accorded all the dignity that is normally enjoyed by a Prince of the Church—and in case you hadn’t noticed, Archbishop Gomez still does not have a red hat.
• One month ago today, on December 17, the special Vatican commission charged with responding to the sex-abuse crisis formally ceased to exist. Everyone assumes that Pope Francis will renew the commission’s mandate—some day, when he gets around to it.

[dsc]

“The New York Times notes...”

No, they lie and distort.

[ebb tide]

No, they lie and distort.

Then what's the truth?

Numerous other news sites reported that Barros took part in the papal mass. Do you claim he didn't?

[dsc]

We’ve had bad popes before. They’re dead; the Church lives.

The media report every transgression by a cleric as the core of the Church’s teaching.

Yes, the current pope is favoring everything that damages the Church and scandalizes the faithful, but the media report it as the very nature of Christianity and the Catholic Church.

It ain’t. It is heresy and blasphemy, not the teachings of the Church.

[ebb tide]

Yes, the current pope is favoring everything that damages the Church and scandalizes the faithful, but the media report it as the very nature of Christianity and the Catholic Church.

And how did the NYT article in question do that?

[dsc]

“but the media report it as the very nature of Christianity and the Catholic Church.”
‘And how did the NYT article in question do that?’

I’ve taken some time to go over both articles, because your question deserves an answer.

In this article, the slimes reports that the pope did this or that, and leaves it for their audience to infer that this is the nature of Catholicism. Not everyone will draw that inference, but some will.

What really offended me was the way they handled the sodomite cleric problem, and I include the pope in that.

They presented statements by one victim of homosexual abuse and two anti-Catholic activists who are in business to flog the Church with any stick that comes to hand. No one who might have had something reasonable and intelligent to say on the matter was given a voice.

The impression they are trying to create here is that sodomy among the clergy is an institutional fact of life within the Catholic Church, and that the hierarchy supports and protects sodomite clergy without in any way coming into conflict with Christian doctrine.

It’s a hot mess that will, they hope, cause the reader to shake his head and think uncomplimentary thoughts about the Catholic Church—not just about this pope, Bishop Barros, or the other sodomite clerics, but about the Church as a whole.

In my view, then, they are saying, in effect if not in so many words, “This is what the Catholic Church is.”