Posted on 03/31/2010 7:49:02 AM PDT by ADSUM
Milwaukee Archbishop Jerome Listecki on Tuesday defended Pope Benedict XVI's handling of the clergy sex abuse scandal. And he absolved him of any blame in decisions involving Father Lawrence Murphy.(42)
Or perhaps better, please explain why I as a lay person should not take Pope Benedict's failure to laicize these sick men as anything other than a finger in the eye to my nephew and all the multitude of other victims of perverts in Roman collars?
Because the Pope has not chosen to do so.
And the Church is neither a Papal Dictatorship nor a Democracy.
Of course he "has not chosen to do so."
The question is why his choice to allow these evil men to retain the dignity of their offices should not be taken as an in-your-face affront by the multitude of priestly sex abuse victims and their families?
I would appreciate your forthright reply.
DON'T presume to speak for anybody but yourself when you do.
I too, wonder why Mahony, Sullivan, and others are permitted to complete their terms of office.
I note that a Bishop holds his office in his own right; he is not a "subordinate" to the Pope.
I am not the Pope. Neither are you. He is not answerable to us, he is answerable to God.
That doesn't mean "sit down and shut up". It does mean recognizing that we aren't in charge. Many Americans have trouble with that concept.
Then there's that pesky Eighth Commandment. Nothing good is served by repeating the falsehoods promoted in the leftist press.
Which falsehoods do you have in mind? If I said something false above, please advise.
Take it any way you want to.
I sure will. And I do take it as an affront. As I believe any person with a shred of self respect should.
That's basically the "don't give a damn what you think" attitude that characterizes the hierarchy's relationship with us the laity, in my opinion (I understand you have a different opinion, no need to repeat your demurer. Evertything I say is my opinion only).
I say to all of my fellow laity: Let's work diligently to bring these slimeballs down. How can we do that?
1. Cut the funding. I for one never, ever give to anything Diocesan. I give to other Catholic causes, but I make sure it's only for a good cause, like feeding the hungry, where I can see basically how the money is spent (I don't want to subsidize the Catholic clergy's co-pays for AZT and their huge bill for KY Jelly). And rub it in their sick-o mugs when you get a chance. One fellow suggested (in a conservative Catholic magazine I used to subscribe to) to send a copy of the cancelled check back to the Diocese in their fund raising envelope with a little note that they can expect no more charity until appropriate actions are taken). It has to stop. I say cut off all funding now. When they pass the basket at church, drop in one penny in an envelope with an appropriately worded note.
2. Remove all priestly access to children (aside from sacraments that you can superviese). I would never have my kids attend a Catholic school, much less spend any appreciable time with a Catholic priest outside of mass. Never invite the priest to your homes. Never let your kid attend a parish function if the priest will be there. Monitor carefully what the priests are saying to your children and watch carefully for pro-homosexual propaganda (from my experience, it's a very common thing).
3. Spread the word. The danger is present among us and will be so long as we have a largely homosexual clergy that sneers at us "breeders." Work diligently to prevent the sort of horrific damage that was done in my little circle. Silence really does equal death in this case. Spiritual death and destruction. Remember that our great impediment to spreading the truth about our perverted clergy is the sort of mass Stockholm Syndrome the Catholic laity suffers from. Catholics really want to believe that it's all okay, that Pope Benedict really is a good man who has their best interests at heart, and that John Paul II would never have covered up for pedophiles. But we know that's all crap, by the simple fact that Mahoney, Law and Weakland, to name but a few, have not been laicized or otherwise punished in any meaningful way.
We need to confront, confront, confront. Victims are very powerful advocates for this cause and some are willing to spread the truth about priestly perversion zealously. Get the Stockholm Syndrome crowd to meet and talk with victims. I know because I was one of the Stockholm Syndrome crowd. I really wanted to believe that priestly perversion was a small problem, but then I talked to my friend about this at length. When you know somebody whose life was destroyed by a priest who was then coddled by the hierarchy, it tends to change your feelings fast, based on my experience.
No thanks.
Thanks for playing.
Try to keep that pesky 8th commandment in mind.
Sure will. Do you see a falsehood there someplace? Please advise. I would appreciate your pointing out to me a clear falsehood there as I wouldn't want to leave myself open to a charge of false witness.
Are you sure you're Catholic? That is some of the worst "advice" I've ever seen. Thank God my parents didn't think that way. I don't either. Your "advice" would seem to be based on an outright slanderous notion that all, or even most, Priests are perverts.
But we know that's all crap
SPEAK FOR YOURSELF. You may know (or think you know) some such thing ... I think you're dead wrong.
Seriously ... your inflammatory rhetoric borders on slander (indeed, crosses the border), and completely discredits you and your cause.
Please refer to my disclaimier - I understand that I do not speak for you. No need to repeat that incessantly.
Yet you persist in employing the first-person plural.
When you begin speaking for yourself only, in the singular, then I will no longer need to point out that you do not speak for me.
Yes, and I believe that are lots more like me.
That is some of the worst "advice" I've ever seen. Thank God my parents didn't think that way.
I'll be sure to pass your comments on to the mother of my dear old friend who recently came out about being abused by another pervert in a Roman collar. I can't imagine she'd see my strong advice to keep one's children a safe distance from anything in a Roman collar as "bad", especially in retrospect. But I'll try to ask next time I see her. Maybe she sees her son's molestation by a priest and his permanently damaged soul as a good thing. I'll tell her a guy named ArrogantBustard sent me.
I’m giving you my opinion on what “we” should do. It is entirely appropriate - indeed almost unavoidable - to use the first person plural in that instance. I made it clear that I’m only giving my opinion. I’m not saying “this is what we (including you) believe”. I am saying “this is what we (including you) ought to believe.” So I am speaking only for myself.
Please do.
Those who believe that all or most Priests are perverts are dead wrong and buying in to leftist slander.
Incorrect. You made an assertion about what "we" know.
You (singular) may know (or think you know) what you asserted to be collective "knowledge". That's your problem. Refrain from projecting it onto others.
Sure will. I'm sure she'll find your Christian compassion a soothing balm to her pierced heart.
Those who believe that all or most Priests are perverts are dead wrong and buying in to leftist slander.
I'm just going by what I see.
By the way, it was reported about ten years ago that Catholic Priests in the States died from AIDS at about four times the rate of the general population. There's the fruits of the priestly celibacy requirement for you. By their fruits you shall indeed know them.
No slander there - just facts.
Those who fail to see that the great majority of priest in American are either gay and/or suffer from some other grave personality disordered need to take off the rose coloured glasses. I suppose it's possible that your experiences were radically different from my own, but growing up in Wisconsin I gotta tell you that nearly every priest I had contact with was either gay (usually openly so, preaching gay lib from the pulpit) or was an alcoholic, or was painfully neurotic in some other way. Or a combination of these.
The parish preist I had when I was a boy was certainly mentally ill. He wasn't gay as far as I know, but he was a barely functioning personality.
One of the priests that I knew as a teenager is serving a life sentence for molesting boys. Another moved to New York and ministers to the GLBT community. Another was recently found out to have had a lengthy liason with a minor boy. Archbishop Weakland had a homosexual relationship with a young theology student and paid his little lover boy $450,000 in Diocesan money to shut him up. Lawrence Murphy destroyed the lives of (what?) 200 deaf boys, and Weakland and others covered up for him.
From my very considerable experience the American clergy is the worst collection of drunks and sexual deviants I've ever run across. Far too many of us laity are in denial about this (I understand you do not agree.)
I would also say to any normal and healthy young man who is considering the priesthood - please stop. Think again. Being a Roman Catholic priest in America is about the most disreputable thing a man can be at this point. Don't ruin your good reputation by associating with them. There are many ways to serve God and the Church. Get married, have some kids, study theology, and get involved with the renewal of the Church. Just understand that renewal must of necessity involve war with the perverted, celibate clergy.
I see. All the more reason not to speak of what "we" know.
You're hardly the only person who "goes by what he sees".
And not everybody sees what you see. I see a lot of decent, holy men offering their lives in service to God and His Church ... and getting slandered for their pains.
From my very considerable experience the American clergy is the worst collection of drunks and sexual deviants I've ever run across.
Your "very considerable experience"? Phooey! "On the internet, nobody knows you're a dog." Why should I believe a word of your claims? Should I offer my "very considerable experience" against yours? Hmmmm? It's a very different experience. Would that settle anything?
I would also say to any normal and healthy young man who is considering the priesthood - please stop. Think again. Being a Roman Catholic priest in America is about the most disreputable thing a man can be at this point. Don't ruin your good reputation by associating with them.
I'm so NOT impressed with your advice. Fortunately, America's Catholic young men are ignoring your bad advice. The faithful, orthodox seminaries are overloaded. BTW, your "advice" reminds me of the democRat political pundits in the leftist media offering their opinions on which political hacks the Republican party should promote. No, thank you.
Just understand that renewal must of necessity involve war with the perverted, celibate clergy.
Sez who? YOU? To hell with your conflation of celibacy and perversion!
Anyone who knows the specifics of this case realizes that to blame Benedict XVI for this atrocity is like blaming Simon of Cyrene for the crucifixion of Jesus. Let’s blame one of the few good guys in this whole sordid affair.
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.