Posted on 05/25/2010 7:49:32 PM PDT by Laissez-faire capitalist
The Obama administration in a brief to the Supreme Court has backed the Vatican's claim of immunity from lawsuits arising from cases of sexual abuse by priests in the United States.
The Supreme Court is considering an appeal by the Vatican of an appellate court ruling that lifted its immunity in the case of an alleged pedophile priest from Oregon.
In a filing on Friday, the solicitor generla's office argued that the Ninth Circuit court of appeals erred in allowing the lawsuit brought by a man who claims he was sexually abused in the 1960's by the Oregon priest.
The unnamed plaintiff, who cited the Holy See and several other parties and defendants, argued the Vatican should be held responsible for transferring the priest to Oregon and letting him serve there despite previous accusations he had abused children in Chicago and Ireland.
The solicitor general's office, which defends the position of president Obama's administration before the Supreme Court, said the Ninth Circuit improperly found the case to be an exception to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, a 1976 federal law that sets limits on when other countries can face lawsuits in US courts.
"Although the decision does not conflict with any decision of another court of appeals, the court may wish to grant the petition, vacate the judgment of the court of appeals and remand to that court for further consideration."
... the Vatican plans to argue that Catholic Dioceses are run as seperate entities from the Holy See, and that the only authority that the Pontiff has over bishops around the world is a religious one...
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
That was then, this is now, not official “official”, out of context,
I’m waiting for more explacuses.
Great. So now if you want to molest kids, just become a priest and you won't have to worry about the legal ramifications of your actions.
And after seeing how the Vatican deals with these guys, it gives you a chance to travel, as you're transferred from parish to parish.
If someone committed a crime in this country, they shouldn’t be protected from the consequences of that crime based on religious affiliation.
Unless you’re suggesting that this kind of behavior falls under the free exercise of one’s religion in the First Amendment????
All you’re doing here is giving an open door invitation to pedophiles to become priests so they can practice their trade.
What law protects priests who molest children?
Are you Catholic?
Interesting that the Catholic church has to threaten people with hellfire for not believing their traditions of men.
“That has become the foundation of a main liberal argument;”
The Vatican has been very liberal in their approach to child molesters, IMHO. As Monty Python said “nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition,” but essentially a response of there but for the grace of God go I is a little weak.
The Pope either has control or he doesn’t. Making foreign heads of state arguments brings him down to the level of a politician, unbecoming of a Prelate.
May 26, 2010
Charles J. Chaput, O.F.M. Cap.
In the organizational structure of the Catholic Church in America, the Province of Denver includes the dioceses of Pueblo and Colorado Springs in Colorado, the Diocese of Cheyenne in Wyoming, and the province’s metropolitan (or senior) see, the Archdiocese of Denver. That makes Denver’s bishop an archbishop. As that archbishop, I rarely see a year go by without at least two or three unhappy parishioners assuming I have the authority to “straighten out” their liturgists and principals and pastors or some other problem in their local parish—within the province but outside my own diocese.
They tend to get even more annoyed when they learn that I have neither the authority nor the foolishness to meddle in the life of a sister diocese. Nor will I intrude on the ministry of a brother bishop. The title archbishop does entail some rights and duties in the life of a province, but these are strictly limited.
In reality, each diocese is a separate, autonomous community of believers. Each bishop in a province is an equal. Each is a successor of the apostles. And each is the chief teaching and governing authority in his own local church. Of course, the bishop of Rome, who is also the pope, is uniquely different: He is first among brothers, and yet he also has real authority as pastor of the whole Church. But he is not a global CEO, and Catholic bishops are not—and never have been—his agents or employees.
It’s useful to remember this today as lawyers try ingeniously to draw the Vatican into America’s ongoing sex-abuse saga. In O’Bryan v. Holy See, currently being heard in the U.S. district court in Kentucky, plaintiffs’ attorneys are seeking to depose Vatican officials—including, potentially, the pope himself—to determine what they allegedly ignored or covered up about the handling of clergy sex-abuse cases by American bishops. The plaintiffs’ legal argument hinges on the premise that bishops are, in effect, Roman-controlled employees or officials.
That argument is not merely false in practice. It is also revolutionary in consequence. In effect, it would redefine the nature of the Church in a manner favorable to plaintiffs’ attorneys but alien to her actual structure and identity. To put it another way, plaintiffs’ attorneys want a federal court to tell the Church what she really is, whether she agrees or not, and then to penalize her for being what she isn’t.
Every bishop in the United States has a filial love for the Holy Father and a fraternal respect for his brother bishops. But these family-like words—filial, fraternal, brother—are not simply window dressing. They go to the heart of how the Catholic community understands and organizes itself—and, more important, to how the Church actually conducts herself, guided by her own theology and canon law.
The Church is much closer to a confederation of families than a modern corporation. And this has real, everyday results. In practice, the influence of the Holy See on the daily life of the Archdiocese of Denver is strong in matters of faith and morals. We’re deeply grateful for the leadership and wonderful teaching of the papacy. But in the operational decisions of our local Church, the Holy See’s influence is remote. In twenty-two years as a bishop, my problems have never included a controlling or intrusive Vatican.
We live in ironic times. Critics of the Catholic Church in the nineteenth century conjured up a monolithic Catholic Church, the better to frighten America’s Protestant masses. Today, when that Roman straw man is even less believable, they have revived the notion of the Catholic Church as a Vatican-controlled monolith, no matter how far that myth is from real Church life—but this time, the better to sue her.
Charles J. Chaput, O.F.M. Cap. is the archbishop of Denver.
He's already got the ones he's going to get. And if he does what he'd need to do to get the rest, he'd lose the feminazi vote.
Contrary to your humble opinion, Pope Benedict as worked very hard and accomplished a great deal against abuse. His and the Church’s efforts have been very effective.
Your #43 and #44 (to me) seem to indicate a lack of reading of the article and the issues in it.
Did you really expect a fair and impartial assessment of the facts when an opportunity to bash the Church and its clergy presented itself. Just ask yourself what else would motivate the non-Catholics to flock to any Catholic topic thread if not to bash. Surely, it is not to gather information in order to make an honest assessment and conclusion. I have yet to see a single instance of that from those who are already convinced that the Church is the greatest source of evil. Nor have I seen an attempt to aid in the salvation of those Catholics whom the anti-Catholics fear are destined for hell.
“His and the Church’s efforts have been very effective.”
Is he or isn’t he in control?
***The Vatican says that dioceses are run as seperate entities.****
So there you have it. There are over 2,000 dioceses, 2,000 Roman Catholic denominations.
No wonder they can't get their stories straight about what Catholics believe.
What's interesting is this line of reasoning.
Are Catholic priests no longer citizens of this country? Are they required to give up their citizenship upon entering the priesthood, thereby making them exempt from prosecution for crimes violating US law against US citizens committed on US soil?
So there you have it. There are over 2,000 dioceses, 2,000 Roman Catholic denominations.
Wow - over 2000 Roman Catholic denominations, you say? Where have I heard that number before?
When this figure first surfaced among Roman Catholic apologists, it started at 20,000 Protestant denominations, grew to 23,000 Protestant denominations, then to 25,000 Protestant denominations. More recently, that figure has been inflated to 28,000, to over 32,000. These days, many Roman Catholic apologists feel content simply to calculate a daily rate of growth (based on their previous adherence to the original benchmark figure of 20,000) that they can then use as a basis for projecting just how many Protestant denominations there were, or will be, in any given year........If the Roman Catholic apologist wants instead to cite 8,196 idiosyncrasies within Protestantism, then he must be willing to compare that figure to at least 2,942 (perhaps upwards of 8,000 these days) idiosyncrasies within Roman Catholicism. In any case, he cannot compare the one ecclesial tradition of Roman Catholicism to 25,000, 8,196, or even twenty-one Protestant denominations; for Barrett places Roman Catholicism (as a single ecclesial tradition) on the same level as Protestantism (as a single ecclesial tradition)....
....In short, Roman Catholic apologists have hurriedly, carelessly—and, as a result, irresponsibly—glanced at Barrett’s work, found a large number (22,189), and arrived at all sorts of absurdities that Barrett never concluded. One can only hope that, upon reading this critique, Roman Catholic apologists will finally put this argument to bed. The more likely scenario, however, is that the death of this argument will come about only when Evangelicals consistently point out this error—and correct it—each time it is raised by a Roman Catholic apologist. Sooner or later they will grow weary of the embarrassment that accompanies citing erroneous figures in a public forum.
From the thread 30,000 Protestant Denominations?
I believe his most successful effort was as Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith under John Paul II. I think it was here that the changes in requirements for seminarians began.
I’m not sure if the strong line began at this time or after he became Pope Benedict.
Do (and should) Catholic churches on American soil be considered to be embassies of a foreign nation?
What is the legal/moral difference between:
You never know. Sometimes the actual topic can be maintained for many dozen posts.
Yes, some flock at every opportunity to hurt the Church and her members. However, they can't seek to hurt someone else without hurting themselves in the act. The same holds for each person. As it likely becomes obvious eventually that what is enflaming us is poisoning us - I think that this, at the minimum, becomes a chance for growth.
As predictably as flies to you know what.....and for the same reasons.
"It is said that if you want to look tall hang arond short people. If the people around you aren't short enough knock them down or force them to their knees. It doesn't work for Kim Il-Sung and it doesn't work for Protestants either. It just makes them look goofy and desperate.
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.