In abuse cases, church rules aren’t enough

Ahhhh yes . . .

Vatican Hubris . . . another STATION OF THE WHITE HANKY.

Let's not make this thread about me. That's against the rules.

There's been no "recent" influx of homosexuals into the RC priesthood. The RC priesthood has always attracted men who preferred the company of other men, who shunned a wife and children, who sought out a safe haven for their unnatural leanings.

When one actually reads the history of Rome one finds thousands of examples of abherrant behavior among its clergy.

That's because the idea of an "infallible magisterium" and an "infallible pope" are contrary to the word of God. And there most certainly is not "another Christ" among them. These errors lead to a perversion of both the church and the man.

Repent, and RCs won't feel like such victims.

I'm not trying to trap you here, but you seem to be confused. In 2002 Cardinal Ratzinger was the only person in Rome who did care about what everyone else saw as an American problem.

And I will repeat, I do not believe that for one second. Ratzinger was tasked with covering up the crimes, keeping a lid on them, preventing further light to be shed on the dark sins of Rome's priestcraft.

The only "confusion" is evidenced by those who seem to deny the facts and instead depend of a few lines written, no doubt, by some PR flak.

In his letter to the bishops when he was head of the office of the Inquisition, Ratzinger affirmed church policy that absolute secrecy must be maintained until the child-victim turns 28! No police reports. No family members. No school counselors. No doctors. Just a carefully guarded secret of the sexual assault of a child, a secret between a church official and that child, who is under thread of excommunication if he tells anyone other than that church official, "another Christ."

And guess what? Pope Ratzinger just reiterated that restriction.

Do RC apologists even know what real scrutiny looks like? Are they without light totally?

I’m weary to the bone of the hyperbole on both sides of this issue.

It’s a mess. It’s a dreadful sinful mess.

It’s full of sin and duplicity at every level.

God alone can clean individuals up and God alone can clean “Christian” organizations up.

He does tend to require our cooperation in both.

The rationalizations and organizational self-justifications, hedging, white-washing, shucking and jiving are at least as bad as the buggering.

However, Proddys need to be extremely careful in pointing fingers. Even judging rightly out of a bad-faith heart has dreadful consequences.

God will deal with it already yet.

What new can be said?

Sheesh.

I agree that the organizational tyrannical exclusivist lording it over stuff is dreadfully awful.

What else would we expect from the Vatican.

They and their !!!!TRADITIONS!!!! and their trumped up Marian blasphemies and idolatries are outrageous presumptions to begin with. What else is new.

Such INSTITUTIONS ALWAYS protect themselves first, last and always.

Nevertheless, God’s reach is unhindered by ermine, encyclicals, magicstericals, !!!!TRADITIONS!!!! Marian blasphemies, dogmatic hogwash, STATIONS OF THE WHITE HANKY, etc. etc. etc.

HE WILL LOWER THE BOOM ON WHOMEVER INDIVIDUALLY &/OR COLLECTIVELY WHEN HE GETS READY TO.

Are you not understanding why abuse of children by priests in the Catholic Church is far graver than any other place that it is done? Seriously, there is a reason.

That is a really excellent question.

"But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea." -- Matthew 18:6

STATIONS OF THE WHITE HANKY

Earlier I wrote: you should understand that when you make mocking statements about the Catholic Church WE read it as mockery of Christ.

To which metmom replied: So, no one can criticize the church for anything, even when it’s clearly in the wrong without it being an insult to Christ Himself?

STATIONS OF THE WHITE HANKY

Does anyone understand now?

I sat in a theater filled with Southern Baptists watching The Passion of the Christ. Grown men, myself included, sobbing and not one of them jumped up and shouted "STATIONS OF THE WHITE HANKY!" And yet, The Passion of the Christ was a cinematic meditation on the Stations of the Cross.

Last year, my very Protestant mother called me to tell me about something my parents had seen in Texas. She talked about this wonderful outdoor display that had moved them a great deal. I finally realized that they had gone to http://www.crossministries.net/index.htm after I figured out that what she was talking about were the Stations of the Cross. As I explained what she had seen to her she didn't shout "STATIONS OF THE WHITE HANKY!"

When you shout "STATIONS OF THE WHITE HANKY!" Catholics hear you mocking "He himself bore our sins in his body upon the cross, so that, free from sin, we might live for righteousness. By his wounds we have been healed."

As soon as a Catholic even so much as sees the word "Stations of the" he is reminded of the whip and the cross and the nails and the garden, the suffering and the pain, the agony of those hours. And then you throw in "WHITE HANKY" and it's a screeching halt, I mean it's the kind of thing Richard Dawkins or PZ Meyers would say. Who mocks Calvary for goodness sake?!

Any point you were trying to make fails, any credibility you had is lost, any ears that were open shut.

Ok, I may strongly disagree with you about the Catholic Church, but I’m sorry, but that’s just funny! I’m glad you haven’t completely lost your sense of humor. There’s hope for you yet. ;-)

WHAT A GRAND RELENTLESS EFFORT TO !!!!!DEMAND!!!!! THAT THE FR REL FORUM KOWTOW TO VATICAN SENSIBILITIES, DAFFYNITIONS, CONSTRUCTIONS ON REALITY! Admirable persistence in a horribly destructive direction.

TIME WILL TELL.

Most perceptive folks with a hint of discernment and a microgram of IQ know what I mean . . .

Most folks understand that

STATIONS OF THE WHITE HANKY

EQUAL

A PARODY OF ALL THE UNBIBLICAL, HERETICAL, BLASPHEMOUS, IDOLATROUS HOGWASH satan has succeeded in getting the bureaucratic political magicsterical power-mongers to layer on the backs of the sheeple and serfs in the Vatican Institution.

I realize a lot of people have a vested interest in DENYING my meaning and wailing about yet another of their SACRED COWS being pierced.

Perhaps I should say the . . .

STATIONS OF THE WHITE HANKYS OF THE WHITE-WASHED TOMBS or

THE STATIONS OF THE WHITE HANKYS OF THE SONS OF SATAN or

THE STATIONS OF THE WHITE HANKYS OF SERPENTS AND VIPERS . . .

However, Proddys need to be extremely careful in pointing fingers. Even judging rightly out of a bad-faith heart has dreadful consequences.

Well said, Quix. Hopefully your confreres will take this to heart.

22 July 2010

NY Times, Boston Globe and THEIR “Zero Tolerance” rule

CATEGORY: Biased Media Coverage — Fr. John Zuhlsdorf @ 12:32 pm

From The Catholic League with my emphases and comments:

BOSTON GLOBE & NYT LACK "ZERO TOLERANCE" RULE

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments as follows:

Yesterday, a Boston Globe editorial unfavorably compared the Vatican to the American bishops, saying that "Until the church adopts a zero-tolerance policy, justice cannot be served…."

On July 9 and July 17, the New York Times, which owns the Globe, ran editorials voicing the same criticism. The Times editorial of July 17 correctly notes that such a policy means "requiring secular authorities to be alerted from the beginning." Interestingly, neither newspaper has such a policy of its own.

Section IV of the New York Times Business Ethics Policy (which also governs the Globe), says, "Any employee who becomes aware of any conduct that he or she believes to be prohibited by this Policy or a violation of the law," is expected to "promptly report the facts" to "any supervisor or the legal department." (My italics.) It says nothing about contacting the authorities. [Say it ain’t so!] Moreover, their policy says that if an employee has been found guilty, "appropriate and corrective action up to and including termination" will take place. Even then it says nothing about contacting the authorities! [ShaZAM!]

Yesterday, we contacted three persons on four different occasions who work in the Boston Globe’s Human Resources Department about this issue. No one responded.

This settles the issue.

The New York Times and the Boston Globe find it unwise to adopt the same policy regarding employee misconduct—including instances where the law is broken—that it condemns the Catholic Church for not adopting worldwide.

So if a priest is alleged to have groped a parishioner, the cops must be called. But even after an internal probe reveals that an employee at the Times or Globe is guilty of the same offense, the cops should not be summoned. The hypocrisy is vile.

Contact the editorial page editors, Andrew Rosenthal at the Times and Peter Canellos at the Globe: andyr@nytimes.com and canellos@globe.com

COMMENTS (0)

• • • • • •

Perhaps Fr. John Zuhlsdorf could use some context.

I’ve not read any stories about a major child rape problem at the Boston Globe or New York Times.

The Boston Globe or New York Times does not portend to the the “Universal Church” or a moral authority.

The Boston Globe or New York Times hasn’t settled billions in lawsuits for said child rape.

Since you've included me in your appeal, I'll respond personally.

I don't judge anyone's heart. We're all fallen sinners. I'm not tasked with determining anyone's salvation. God may well intend what looks to be a wolf today is actually a sheep tomorrow. All I can do is look to their fruits in the moment, whether they're feeding the flock or eating the flock.

All the while remaining confident that God can turn whomever He wants from darkness to light.

Scripture does tell us, however, that we are supposed to preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ in truth, and to speak out against errors leveled at that Gospel.

A corrupted church is not a good thing. And since men make up the church of Christ on earth, it behooves all of us not to succumb to corruption, but to adhere to the Scriptures as our only rule of faith and practice.

What better pattern for Christians is there than the one set by Paul?

"Finally, my brethren, be strong in the Lord, and in the power of his might.
Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil.
For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.
Wherefore take unto you the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand.
Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with truth, and having on the breastplate of righteousness;
And your feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace;
Above all, taking the shield of faith, wherewith ye shall be able to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked.
And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God:
Praying always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit, and watching thereunto with all perseverance and supplication for all saints;
And for me, that utterance may be given unto me, that I may open my mouth boldly, to make known the mystery of the gospel,
For which I am an ambassador in bonds: that therein I may speak boldly, as I ought to speak." -- Ephesians 6:10-20

"Boldly, as I ought to speak."

AMEN! AGREED. WELL SAID.

THX.

Earlier I wrote: you should understand that when you make mocking statements about the Catholic Church WE read it as mockery of Christ.

Sorry, but idolatry is a worse offense to God than mocking that idolatry.

In fact, mocking idolatry is not a bad thing. God Himself did so.

"Their land also is full of idols; they worship the work of their own hands, that which their own fingers have made" -- Isaiah 2:8

"They shall be ashamed, and also confounded, all of them: they shall go to confusion together that are makers of idols." -- Isaiah 45:16

Sorry, but idolatry is a worse offense to God than mocking that idolatry.

INDEED. As Christ Himself demonstrated.

ABSOLUTELY TO THE MAX.

However, given that it wasn’t the

bureaucratic magicsterical power-mongers in the Vatican doing it

it can’t be considered valid by the RC’s

though perhaps Mary could get God a 2nd opinion on that score.

/s

Thanks for your kind reply.

Good points.