Replies

"Although certain Roman curial officials occasionally stick their feet where they don't belong, there's NEVER been a dogmatic/doctrinal error."

I never said they did. What my original intent in all this discussion was that because Rome SEEMINGLY does not act to correct abuse other than issue a paper behind the scenes does that put more souls in jeopardy than if they made more bold moves like excommunication and drew a line in the sand?

It seems like a fair question and an easy to understand question. Now, perhaps I have been clumsy in the way I have phrased it, but now you can see it. I do not claim the Church has erred in any issue of faith or morals. I am simply asking for the sake of argument if the prudential judgments made save more souls or place more souls in jeopardy. This is a question that we do not know the answer to obviously, but I put it out there because so many blame the heretical bishops without looking to their bosses. As Maximilian said it is the forbidden question.

My faith is as strong as it ever has been. The homosexual abuse thing is not why I ask. I ask because several decades have passed and the Church has many crises.

The explanations given about termites and masons, etc are fine but those arguments always hinge on the assumption that by taking bold action more souls would be lost due to schism or scandal. I ask if you are sure that is true? Why is it not plausible that by taking a low key approach more souls have been lost? After all teaching error and leading others into error does not totally leave the one taught totally without moral culpability. This is my point.