Posted on 02/02/2013 7:40:34 PM PST by Alex Murphy
The horror, the sordidness of the awful abuse of children by figures of spiritual authority is not much assuaged by current Archbishop Jose Gomez relieving Cardinal Mahony of "all public duties" after mounting evidence showed he shielded pedophile priests from law enforcement.
So Mahony won't be overseeing the Sacrament of Confirmation at Our Lady of the Angels anytime soon. But he is not only still a priest who can perform Mass - he is still one of the 120 cardinals who form the leadership of a church with more than 1.1 billion adherents worldwide, in a line going back to St. Peter.
Given what we now know about Mahony's active efforts to protect known and suspected sexual abusers in clerical collars, this removal of him from public life is not only not enough - it's no punishment at all.
And this crime deserves punishment. That was made clear by the heartbreaking letters that were made public last week.
Go to any one of over 100 of them posted last week at la-archdiocese.org. The very first one in this alphabetical order was written by a anonymous parishioner molested as a child at a Colorado Roman Catholic Church summer camp by the Rev. Leonard Abercrombie, who later worked in Los Angeles.
Dated July 18, 2003, it begins quite simply:
"Pope John Paul II, The Holy See, Vatican City, Rome, Italy.
"Dear Pope: In July 1993 I wrote a letter to you ..."
That long letter detailing the writer's sexual abuse as a child of 7 by Abercrombie was never answered over the decade, though it was copied to other bishops and to princes of the church, including Los Angeles' own Cardinal Roger Mahony, who oversaw Abercrombie's later pastoral career.
"I informed each of you that the Denver diocese of the Roman Catholic Church had covered up Abercrombie's predation of children making it possible for him to molest me and others that I knew of when I wrote to you. ..."
"I informed each of you that this horror was systemic in your church, and to you, dear pope, I wrote, `Your bishops have known about it and they have been covering it up as a matter of course. Apparently, they haven't informed you of their criminal complicity.' So I did.
"In the ten years that have passed I have never heard a word of apology from any of you" with the exception of a bishop who happened to be a family friend, who said: "I am sure the Holy Father will respond to your letter." He never did.
Joelle Casteix, western regional director of Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests, said the action to remove Mahony from some duties is simply "too little too late."
Most cardinals leave the college in just two ways: by death or by election to the papacy.
Though highly unusual, it is possible to resign. The last to do so was French Cardinal S.J. Louis Billot in 1927. The rub is that the pope has to accept such a resignation, so it's not known if any cardinal has tried to step down during these decades of the church's sexual-abuse scandals or at any other time during the last 85 years.
But, as a small gesture toward acknowledging these enormous crimes against over 500 Angeleno parishioners, Mahony ought to offer his resignation.
And Pope Benedict XVI ought to accept it.
But what about Pope Benedict’s emmissaries to inspect the monasteries/seminaries and clean them out.
Isn’t that why we have huge numbers of straight men applying for priesthood now and willing to undergo strenous psychological exams (2 days) and then days and days of interviews from the seminary/monastery?
But it is Rome's fault. First, Rome either knew or should have known what was going on with guys like Bernadine in Chicago before he was elevated to the office of Bishop. If they knew they were directly complicit, if they didn't know but should have known then they're indirectly liable due to negligence. Choose your poison. Second, once the mismanagement became known, all the Pope had to do was issue a decree moving, say, Weakland to one of the defunct diocese of North Africa. The Pope can do that under canon law. He can't just demote a bishop, but he can assign a bishop as he pleases. As Bishop of Ben Ghazi, Weakland would have not been in a position to scandalize the faithful.
The Popes, especially JPII, are directly at fault.
You wrote:
“Specifically what would you do with those responsible with passing priests around to new parishes and new victims rather than turn them over to the police?”
If you want a specific answer you’ll have to give me a specific case.
Too often, problem teachers are allowed to leave quietly. That can mean future abuse for another student and another school district.Its a dynamic so common it has its own nicknamespassing the trash or the mobile molester.
Ah, how about the thread that we’re on???
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
The horror, the sordidness of the awful abuse of children by figures of spiritual authority is not much assuaged by current Archbishop Jose Gomez relieving Cardinal Mahony of “all public duties” after mounting evidence showed he shielded pedophile priests from law enforcement.
So Mahony won’t be overseeing the Sacrament of Confirmation at Our Lady of the Angels anytime soon. But he is not only still a priest who can perform Mass - he is still one of the 120 cardinals who form the leadership of a church with more than 1.1 billion adherents worldwide, in a line going back to St. Peter.
Given what we now know about Mahony’s active efforts to protect known and suspected sexual abusers in clerical collars, this removal of him from public life is not only not enough - it’s no punishment at all.
And this crime deserves punishment. That was made clear by the heartbreaking letters that were made public last week.
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
So what would you do with STILL CARDINAL Mahoney? A fiend who passed pedophiles around to prey on innocent children and a man your church still considers a Cardinal. And what will you do to back up your words? Honestly, I feel like I’m talking to aliens when I have these conversations.
You wrote:
“So what would you do with STILL CARDINAL Mahoney?”
First, I would have to know exactly what he did in detail. That would require an investigation. That’s why I believe there should be an inquisition.
Second, I do not know if he can formally be removed from the college of cardinals, but he could be removed from the clerical state.
We can’t burn anyone at the stake. I’m not saying that’s a plus either.
“A fiend who passed pedophiles around to prey on innocent children and a man your church still considers a Cardinal.”
Again, the problem is that I don’t even know if a cardinal can be removed from the college. There might be no mechanism for it - much like Jimmy Savile can’t have his knighthood (or whatever his rank was) removed because there is no mechanism for it.
“And what will you do to back up your words?”
Well, as a ‘civilian’, I can’t do anything to back up my words just like everyone else in this thread. That’s the reality of the situation. I can only leave it in the hands of God, pray, fast, and work for justice. My power and influence is limited.
“Honestly, I feel like Im talking to aliens when I have these conversations.”
That’s probably because you have no idea of what you’re talking about and you’re trying to force a worldly answer onto a spiritual problem. I don’t think you’re having a conversation. I think you’re just babbling without any understanding.
If your child or grandchildren was raped by a priest sent to your church by a cardinal who knew about him raping children in the past, who you consider that a ‘spiritual’ problem and pray about it as opposed to calling the police? This is actually happening to children! Babbling my a$$!
You’re proving my point.
You wrote:
“If your child or grandchildren was raped by a priest sent to your church by a cardinal who knew about him raping children in the past, who you consider that a spiritual problem and pray about it as opposed to calling the police?”
You’re proving my point when I said you don’t understand this. Yes, it’s a spriritual problem. That doesn’t mean it isn’t criminal as well. Do you even understand what is meant by “spiritual problem”? Apparently not.
“This is actually happening to children! Babbling my a$$!”
That’s what you’re doing - babbling. You proved my point.
Believe me, if we had an inquisition, none of this would have happened as it did. We should still have one today.
You accuse and insult, but have a hard time answering simple questions.
And exactly what do you mean that we should have an inquisition today?
You wrote:
“You accuse and insult, but have a hard time answering simple questions.”
A question that requires specifics to be answered but includes none is not a simple question. Also, I do not accuse. I simply state the truth.
You wrote:
“And exactly what do you mean that we should have an inquisition today?”
I can’t see how my comment would need clarification.
The Inquisition was a judicial system within the Catholic Church made up of priests who were charged with ensuring doctrinal integrity and discipline within the Church. The Inquisition was charged with investigating and exposing serious ecclesiastical crimes to ensure moral uprightness amongst the clergy and to root out any false doctrines that were being taught. These inquisitions were usually established locally and overseen by the Holy Office in Rome.
Historically, ecclesiastics found guilty of serious sins such as sodomy or heresy by an inquisition after a thorough investigation and trial would have been sacked and handed over to the secular authorities for punishment.
Thank you
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.