It's wrong to point finger at Pope in sex abuse scandals [it was Weakland]

The Calgary Herald ^ | 3/30/2010 | Bishop Fred Henry

[Servant of the Cross]

(This is a pastoral letter that was sent to all of Calgary's Catholic parishes). (excerpted)

These are not easy times. Priests and people feel battered and scattered by the seemingly relentless media campaign about child sexual abuse in the Church. We, too, have entered into the dark regions of our fallen world. This is a painful, emptying and humbling experience.

Pope Benedict XVI, in his Pastoral Letter to Catholics in Ireland, ... addressing the victims of abuse first of all, he acknowledges the grievous betrayal they have suffered and he tells them how sorry he is over what they have endured. He recognizes that, in many cases, no one would listen when they found the courage to speak of what happened. The Pope urges victims to seek in the Church the opportunity to encounter Jesus Christ and to find healing and reconciliation by rediscovering the infinite love that Christ has for each one of them. (snip)

The New York Times on March 25, and parroted by other newspapers, accused Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger of intervening to prevent a Wisconsin priest, Father Lawrence Murphy, from facing penalties for cases of sexual abuse of minors. The story is not even supported by the evidence of the Times.

Cardinal Ratzinger does not appear in the record as taking any decision. His office, in the person of his deputy, Archbishop (Tarcisio) Bertone, agreed that there should be a full canonical trial. When it became apparent that Father Murphy was in failing health, Archbishop Bertone suggested more expeditious means of removing him from any ministry.

Furthermore, under canon law at the time, the principal responsibility for sexual abuse cases lay with the local bishop. Archbishop (Rembert) Weakland had from 1977 onward the responsibility of administering penalties to Father Murphy. He did nothing until 1996. (snip)

[Servant of the Cross]

Darling of the liberal anti-Catholic media, disgraced former archbishop Rembert Weakland, known as the "most liberal bishop in America" (during his tenure) is an admitted homosexual who "paid $450,000 in hush money to buy the silence of an apparent former male lover."

This disgraced excuse of man is the NYT's poster boy and star witness to impugn Pope Benedict XVI over this sordid affair. The very person who had the responsibility to deal with this at the time but who did nothing for 19 years (because he approved and condoned 'fr' murphy's homosexuality). Nice journalism NYT. With this pathetic attack, you are as disgraced and exposed as your darling star witness. Not that any further evidence of that is necessary.

[Scotswife]

The more this goes on, the more it looks like there IS a coverup.
The MSM doesn’t want us all to understand that homosexual men were the main problem to begin with.

So they keep putting “pedophile” in the headlines next to images of the Pope.

[massgopguy]

I saw a PBS Frontline show about the NYT. 75% of the Editorial Staff is Gay. Pope Benedict rooted out the HOMOSEXUAL PEDERISTS and they want him revenge.