Apparently It's True (Levada to be head of CDF?)

Bettnet.com ^ | 5/10/05 | Domenico Bettinelli

[old and tired]

It appears, based on very reliable sources, that indeed Archbishop William Levada of San Francisco is going to be appointed the new Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

This is not good news. Archbishop Levada is the prelate who compromised with the city of San Francisco over the city’s demands that Catholic Charities and other Church organizations provide “domestic partner” benefits to employees. His archdiocese is also a mess with dissenting priests, homosexual activists running all over the place, the University of San Francisco trampling the faith, and more.

I’m really very surprised by this. I would have thought that Pope Benedict would have seen this for what it was, especially considering his close association with Father Fessio, who had been in San Francisco for many years.

Maybe he sees something we don’t. I hope.

[Fred]

My pick for the next Bishop of San Francisco, Bishop Fessio SJ.

[ninenot]

Since you're short of significant facts, perhaps you'd like to check.

We have those laws in Wisconsin, and apparently they have them in Florida, where Jeb Bush's Administration has done a WUNNERFUL job of keeping up with things.

[Fred]

More on His Royal Highness Mahony

[livius]

Sterling.

Thanks - it he sounds like he's destined for bigger things. Perhaps even bigger than SF, which really (despite its own opinion), isn't much of a much.

[GipperGal]

That was just horrifying. Disgusting. The sicko said he confessed to a priest after each molestation. Why the hell didn't those priests report him?! This doesn't sound like it fits the "Lavender Mafia" motif so often toted around here. Were most of these criminals like this guy or were they in fact going after adolescent boys?

[NYer]

Barf Alert!

[Carolina]

Archbishop William Levada of Portland, Ore., answers questions during a news conference in San Francisco, in this Aug. 17, 1995 file photo after being named to replace Archbishop of the San Francisco diocese. Pope Benedict XVI is sounding out top Vatican cardinals on filling his old job as the Vatican's chief guardian of doctrinal orthodoxy, with one of the candidates San Francisco's archbishop, but hasn't made a decision yet, a Vatican official said Wednesday May 11, 2005. (AP Photo/Eric Risberg/File)

[livius]

but [the Pope] hasn't made a decision yet, a Vatican official said Wednesday May 11, 2005

Phew. I can see him politely removing Levada and sending him off to lick postage stamps in some office in Rome, or even giving him some minor position at the CDF (since it appears that Levada did work there at some time) - but I sure don't see him making Levada the HEAD of the place.

[ninenot]

You may recall the seal of confession? NO priest may "report" the contents of a confession to ANYONE.

[ninenot]

Walter Kasper, a suspect of the first water, was promoted to Prefect of Cong. for Schmoozing the Prots, where he made a bunch of silly statements, as expected.

They were either ignored or contradicted.

[maryz]

The sicko said he confessed to a priest after each molestation. Why the hell didn't those priests report him?!

Seal of confession. No way of knowing whether the confessors made absolution contingent on turning himself in, but probably unlikely.

This doesn't sound like it fits the "Lavender Mafia" motif so often toted around here. Were most of these criminals like this guy or were they in fact going after adolescent boys?

Considering the continuing friendliness of the LA Times to Mahony, I wouldn't discount the possibility that they're running this to reinforce the idea that the scandal was basically pedophilia, whereas some 90%+ of the victims were adolescent boys. Anything to get the focus off homosexuality! (Remember that woman who said she had an affair with Mahony; she was later discredited as schizophrenic, but she seems to have served a purpose.) It would be devious certainly . . . .

I wonder if something big on the LA scandals is due to break.

[GipperGal]

You may recall the seal of confession? NO priest may "report" the contents of a confession to ANYONE.

I thought the priest could deny absolution and turn someone in if they confessed to a crime like murder, etc. Am I way off on this?

Hey Sinks, what's the rule on this?

[livius]

Cong. for Schmoozing the Prots

LOL! Maybe Levada will get on Dali Lama Duty.

[sinkspur]

A priest is never permitted to mention anything he hears in confession that could lead to the identification of the penitent, absolution or not. Even if the penitent gives him permission, he simply should never do it, as the penitent could contradict him.

The seal is one commandment of the Church that almost 100 percent of priests observe (and I'm not aware of any who have broken the seal).

[GipperGal]

Considering the continuing friendliness of the LA Times to Mahony, I wouldn't discount the possibility that they're running this to reinforce the idea that the scandal was basically pedophilia, whereas some 90%+ of the victims were adolescent boys. Anything to get the focus off homosexuality!

Good point. Thanks. I've steered clear of reading these abuse stories in the past and have just taken everyone's word that the majority of them involved homosexual pederasts. Am I right in believed that that is still the case?

[GipperGal]

A priest is never permitted to mention anything he hears in confession that could lead to the identification of the penitent, absolution or not.

Thanks for clearing that up, Sinks. What would/should a good priest do if someone confessed something so horrendous to him like abusing a child? What about the need to protect the community?

[maryz]

As I understand it, the priest can make absolution contingent on something like restitution (in the case of theft) or turning oneself in (in the case of murder), but that means that there's no absolution if the condition isn't met. It has no effect on the seal of confession.

[GipperGal]

I see. That makes sense. Thanks!

[Fred]

Time for Mahony to go the way of Cardinal Law. As noted in the article the jurors thought Mahony was full of BS (Barbara Streisand) when he claimed not to know what a swine Grady is, was....

[maryz]

Am I right in believed that that is still the case?

Yes, it is. When the media keep referring to "abuse of children," you have to remember how fluid a term "child" is to them. Remember all those "children" dying of gunshots? The vast majority of whom are 16-, 17-, 18-year-old drug dealers and gang members? They're doing the same thing here. (Sort of the opposite of what they did when women's lib took exception to the word "girl" -- I actually saw a newspaper reference to "the 13-year-old woman.")

Wasn't it the Cheshire Cat who said something like "A word means what I want it to mean"? His picture should be printed on press cards!