I feel like the author is Roseanne Roseannadanna. The pope didn't say someone should be outside the Church. He acknowledged her as a Catholic and responded to the pain she felt having been sexually abused "at the hands of a curate in the archdiocese of Dublin." In other words he was addressing, quite specifically, her physical presence in an actual physical church as not being necessary under her conditions so as to not cause her any more pain.
Sheesh. I'm not even Catholic and it's clear to me that he was giving her a dispensation for relief. And to those of you who say it's because I'm not Catholic that I agree with the Pope - do you even hear what you're saying? LOL!
That one case, taken in isolation, I would simply interpret the same as you. Under any other pontificate it wouldn’t raise an eyebrow.
The problem is that it’s not an isolated case. Taken into consideration with many other cases in this pontificate, it has become a pattern that is very troubling.
Time will tell.
Another troubling irony is that those who usually attack Catholicism and the papacy seem to want to defend this Pope, and those who usually defend the papacy in general are troubled by him.
He is popular with the world, often the wrong elements of the world, and I’m not seeing people pouring into the Church and embracing Catholicism as a result of his worldly popularity.
These cases are people who have gone public, how many others has he counseled and what message did he give them? Maybe he has said something different to those unknown others, something more in line with church teaching, and they have kept their conversations private.
The Pope is exactly correct. Either that or a host of elderly and infirm, who receive the Eucharist at home and in nursing homes because they can't travel to a church building, are condemned to hell.
Hm, who to believe...