Posted on 10/14/2011 7:01:15 PM PDT by Lazamataz
KANSAS CITY, Mo. (AP) — Kansas City's Catholic bishop has become the highest-ranking U.S. Catholic official indicted on a charge of failing to protect children after he and his diocese waited five months to tell police about hundreds of images of child pornography discovered on a priest's computer, officials said Friday.
Bishop Robert Finn, the first U.S. bishop criminally charged with sheltering an abusive clergyman, and the Kansas City-St. Joseph Catholic Diocese have pleaded not guilty on one count each of failing to report suspected child abuse.
Jackson County Prosecutor Jean Peters Baker said Finn and the diocese were required under state law to report the discovery to police because the images gave them reason to believe a child had been abused.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
Wow, thanks for setting me straight. Who in their right mind could possibly argue against John Allen of the National Catholic Reporter? Not me!
That would be a BIG “BINGO” for me !!
St John’s Seminary... Brighton MA and Richard Cardinal Cushing.The biggest crook in beantown after joseph p. kennedy.
Sleazeballs like we can only imagine!
uggggghhhh.
What fomented these, for starters, since you can't use the "blame it on celibacy" crutch that the ignorant usually try to employ?
I see you are saying it’s not a strictly Catholic issue; I agree.
Your link does’t give a Roman Catholic total.
What’s your point-”everybody does it?”
Face the music.
My point, which sailed right over your grape, is that you're ignorant.
So once again, since you can't use the "blame it on celibacy" crutch, what fomented these or these or these?
Doctors are supposed to report a crime, unless it is about who impregnated the 12 year old they’re about to “perform an abortion” on.
No reason to hide child porn; no reason to hide statutory rape either.
I wonder how many more children this particular “adult male” (priest) had contact with in the five months between the time his child pornography stash was discovered and the time the bishop finally saw fit to report it?
ArchAngel1983: Who in their right mind could possibly argue against John Allen of the National Catholic Reporter? Not me!
Do you dispute his numbers? If so, let us see yours. If you knew the size of the staffs at the various Vatican departments you would know that his numbers are quite believable. Don't let the big church fool you. Compared to the size of your average state government the Vatican staff is non-existant.
BTW, do not be put off by the name "National Catholic Reporter". For many Catholics it is a very liberal rag that is "Catholic" in name only and routinely attacks the Vatican and Catholic teachings.
My point- which sailed right over your enlightned ass is that-
There is one Church; Christ is not divided.
Sin in the Church must be excoriated. Shed your parochial bias, or perish with your sect, defending it as less sinful than others.
Perhaps my ignorance escapes your enlightened holiness.
Celibacy is unfounded in Scripture as a requirement for leading Believers. Cling to whatever you wish, erudite apostle.
You two no doubt have noticed that one of our newbies has volunteered to be the theology teacher. I’m skipping class permanently.
No, that's like saying there's a pre-marital sex problem in middle schools because we don't let kids get married at the age of 13.
Celibacy is a discipline, sure, but there's a theological and a practical importance for priests to take the vow. Since the priest is acting 'in the person" of Christ, the only bride he should take is the Church. In the same way, a nun commits herself as a Bride of Christ and takes no man for a husband. Practically speaking, the priest cannot fulfill his duties to the Church (and not just saying daily Mass, but going to hospitals to give last rites, going to wakes, conducting funerals and baptisms, visiting shut-ins, teaching in classrooms, going on required retreats, etc.) while at the same time being a parent/husband. I know it was done a long time ago, and that the orthodox still allow it, but this is just something Catholics need to accept as a fact. The real issue is that sexual impurity is epidemic - across all groups and boundaries. So Satan has a very ripe target in this day and age, and if he can "bag" a priest, a bishop, a diocese -- and drive people away from the Church, he'll come out guns blazing. On the other hand, if priests are allowed to marry, I guarantee the issue would become rampant adultery and divorce and men voluntarily leaving the priesthood because they can't even be chaste in their marital relations. Humanity, in general is growing more and more sinful, and it would be foolish to think it doesn't have ramifications inside the Church.
So, ending priestly celibacy doesn't seem to be the core issue. The core issue is that the Church spent about thirty years ordaining weak, homosexually- inclined individuals instead of real men to the priesthood. As the priesthood became more and more "feminized", less and less masculine, God-fearing men wanted to join the crowd of perverts that were let into the seminaries. Anecdotally, I understand that this has changed drastically in the last five or six years. The young priests (and those in formation) that I have met in this time span are of a different fabric, and it's tangibly apparent. These guys mean business. They're not "hiding out". They're straight, they're very masculine, and they are extremely humbled by their calling.
All that said. The matter at hand. I can't wrap my mind around what Bishop Finn was waiting for. And the reason I can't wrap my mind around it, is that he's one of the no-nonsense new breed of bishops. What he did, I don't think he did out of malice. I don't think he was trying to be conniving. I think he made a terrible, inexplicable error in judgment, and he's publicly admitted as much. In the environment of distrust that has been created over these terrible crimes, it baffles me that, from even a strictly cold, legal, cover-your-butt standpoint, the police weren't called immediately. Absolutely baffling. I am frustrated and horrified that such a mistake was made. But I believe it's way over the top to take this to a criminal level against Bishop Finn. He doesn't have a "pattern" of doing things like this. And to the point that others have made - let's see them take up the torches against Planned Parenthood's shielding of statutory rapists if the state wants to present itself as a purveyor of impartial justice.
Two points—
There are many seminaries where one can survive without being homosexual. I made it to the end but bailed before the diaconate and now have four children and counting, and of my various classmates only one has fallen under suspicion, and that is doubtful.
Secondly—Fransicans outnumber the Jesuits
If he has been purposely advancing up the ladder with a view to doing all right for himself, he needs to be smacked. AMDG and only AMDG
Sounds like the church hoped it could get Ratigan out of the path of sin. Which is fine as far as it goes. But it seems the measures they took were rather lame.
I largely agree with you, though must point out that given original sin, my gut and yours are living in a fantasy world. The Apostles only went 11 for 12, so aiming for perfect purity is probably unrealistic, but it is worth striving for.
Nice post—or rather, nice catch of a good Allen piece. I saw something the other day giving the total number of Vatican employees as 2170. Given that a good number are busy with Vatican City housekeeping details, that leaves practically no one to keep an eye on 1.2 Billion Catholics.
This theological debate surely won’t be resolved overnight.
On occasion the Roman Catholic church does bring in already-married priests, as those who leave the Episcopal church and embrace Roman Catholicism.
I go to an independent evangelical church, in which many years ago the pastor found himself unexpectedly celibate after his wife passed away untimely of a fatal disease. It was a sad burden for the pastor and the church, who all loved the woman dearly and were grieved when she departed; however I believe from observation it had the unplanned (by man) effect of concentrating this pastor’s focus on the Lord. There is something to be said, I think, for pastoral singlehood if imposed by the Lord.
If someone fails to report knowledge of a murder in Missouri is it a crime?
If it is, then it is a bad law. Why would anyone report a murder if there is a chance that he could be charged with a crime? I’ve seen many tv shows where witnesses came forward YEARS later and reported what they saw. And none of them usually faced charges-—the cops were grateful that they could then solve the crime.
Now if it is NOT the law then one could argue that they are cherrypicking crimes to prosecute. Murder is worse than abuse and the laws should reflect that.
And one more thing: I thought it was the job of law enforcement to catch criminals, not ordinary citizens.
Why do you kick so hard against the goads?
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.