In the opinion section of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, there was a piece by New York Times writer Ross Douthat. Basically, he saw John Paul II as the charismatic pope who was "a weak administrator, poor delegator, and sometimes a dreadful judge of character." His protecting of Fr. Marcial Maciel is a case in point. In general, JP's charisma and good looks covered a litany of faults in the public square.Benedict's handling of the the Vatican and dealings with pedophiles has been far superior. But he's also buried himself in a state of "retrenchment, resentment, and self-pity." And more importantly, he's still not doing enough. He has been tough on pedophiles since he became pope, he has not properly sanctioned any bishop.
To me, Douthat's article is right on. It may be cute for the Vatican to be willfully wrong on doctrinal issues, but claim no fault in the Church's handling of sexual abuse is crazy (see again Fr. Marcial). I wait in great interest to see if Benedict can be the pope I hope him to be.
A Faithful Catholic
22 comments:
And what doctrinal issues is the Vatican wrong on? Inquiring minds would really like to know.
I certainly think we are seeing Pope Benedict place a keener eye on Administration than the late John Paul the Great. That administration (with the corresponding improvement in Bishops - or at least appointments) will significantly help the Church. As for retrenchment, what retrenchment? I agree with anonymous, what doctrinal issues is the Church wrong on?
It would seem to me you think that 'covering up' for pedophiles would be a 'right granted to priest/bishop in recent years.
So I must assume the above comments(supporting child molestation)are "rights" granted to clergy.
I assume you think molesting kids is just fine since it is not spelled out as a 'doctrinal'issue.
But he's also buried himself in a state of "retrenchment, resentment, and self-pity."
Really? That's Douthat's analysis, based on......personal knowledge? Long-term acquaintanceship with B-16? Or a sudden flash of insight from the Holy Spirit?
Anonymous,
I see you are your usual self. I don't know if you've realized it, but straw-men aren't that useful when you try discussing something with someone who can easily knock them down. Nowhere did either anonymous (the first one) or myself indicate that covering up pedophiles would be a right.
What we both took issue with was FC's belief that the Vatican is "willfully wrong" on doctrinal issues. I can't speak for anonymous, but I'm pretty sure he/she doesn't think molesting kids is just fine. I find it a travesty and the priests should be de-frocked, but also the seminaries reformed so that individuals like that do not enter the priesthood.
Again, perhaps you should attempt a discussion when you can rationally discuss the issue as opposed to your standard technique of making something up and then pretending to discuss the issue.
If I am wrong, why are there many cases of molestation and the priest is just transfered?
Anon,
Your statement is non-sensical. The presence of abuse and the horrible response by the bishops doesn't imply a doctrinal position anymore than the Papacy of Alexander VI provided doctrinal support for orgies and other forms of depravity.
CS, word play again. Molesting children is not the best thing,but after all there is no 'doctrine'saying a priest cannot molest a child. Your position is absurd!!!
Mark,
Your position is the absurd one. In fact, Church Moral Teaching strongly condemns Rape and Sexual Assault.
I know you don't read the Catechism, but this is a pretty strong condemnation and it is doctrine: "2356 Rape is the forcible violation of the sexual intimacy of another person. It does injury to justice and charity. Rape deeply wounds the respect, freedom, and physical and moral integrity to which every person has a right. It causes grave damage that can mark the victim for life. It is always an intrinsically evil act. Graver still is the rape of children committed by parents (incest) or those responsible for the education of the children entrusted to them."
Again, at no point have I or anyone else who has posted here attempted to defend the acts of clerical sex abuse.
Your position is the clearly absurd one. I'll await your retraction.
CS, rape is mentioned in the catechism, but where is child molestation mentioned.
Are you saying that everything in the catechism is infallible?
Mark,
Did you even read the citation from the Catechism? Did you read the definition of rape in the Catechism?
It includes child molestation, any sane individual who isn't driven by an intense hatred of the Catholic Church can see it. I shall quote it again to help you see:
"2356 Rape is the forcible violation of the sexual intimacy of another person. It does injury to justice and charity. Rape deeply wounds the respect, freedom, and physical and moral integrity to which every person has a right. It causes grave damage that can mark the victim for life. It is always an intrinsically evil act. Graver still is the rape of children committed by parents (incest) or those responsible for the education of the children entrusted to them."
The Catechism is the authoritative teachings of the Catholic Church. The Catechism is part of the Ordinary Magisterium and is the sure norm for the teachings of the faith. The book as a whole (because it was composed by men) is not infallible as opposed to Sacred Scriptures or the divinely revealed truths of Marian, Christological, and Ecclesial doctrine. But it is nonetheless the Truth of the Catholic Faith.
The Catechism is fundamentally a summary of the Catholic Faith. It is not the Catholic Faith in its totality and as a result is incomplete, yet it is nonetheless true.
I again will await your retraction.
I can't see what you are saying! Something is---and is not.And at the same time. I await your explanation. The Church certainly makes a distinction between rape as defined by law and molestation. Are you saying there are no degrees of sexual misconduct?
Let's face it: the Church justifies sexual relationship ONLY for procreation.
Read between the lines, my friend.
Mark,
I'm beginning to think you are a graduate of MPS based on your reading comprehension.
Rape is the forcible violation of sexual intimacy per the Catechism's definition. That is the definition of Sexual Assault. Child Molestation by definition is sexual assault and is the violation of sexual intimacy. Ergo, the Church condemns child molestation. While legally there are degrees, they are all fundamentally, intrinsically evil. CCC2356 is crystal clear on that point (for a rational human being).
I cannot believe that someone who claims to be a rational human being even thinks the Church would support Child Molestation. It highlights just how sick you are.
So if the Church only justifies sexual relationships for procreation (a half and incomplete truth), wouldn't it condemn child molestation without a procreative function? Of course, that ignores the important unitative role of sexual relationships and its proper place within the marriage covenant. But then, you don't let facts get in the way of your Anti-Catholic hate.
CS, you're 'playing' again. In your wisdom do you believe not believing in the Immaculate Conception is worse than child molestation.
Mark,
I would certainly contend that child molestation is an evil. Denial of the Immaculation Conception is not an intrinsic evil. It certainly removes you from the Catholic faith and is a heresy, but it is not a moral evil. Child Molestation is clearly an unequivocally the MORAL EVIL.
That being said, you've changed the subject as this discussion is completely tangential to our earlier discussion.
It is a sure sign that you've lost on every point and are forced to change tact.
CS, we haven't changed the subject.You're just not able to respond. You continue to act as if clerical misdeeds are just par for the course. What is your position on child abuse.
A pope's position on child abuse is important.JP2 tried to protect priest's abuse of children by hiding the facts.
How about Ireland?
At what point did I condone child abuse? That is an outright lie on your part Mark, typical of someone like you, but nonetheless disgusting.
At no point did I say priests had the right to child abuse - something you lied about.
At no point did I say bishops had a right to cover it up - something you lied about.
At no point did I say Catholic doctrine denied the evil of child abuse - something you lied about.
I can debate with people with whom I disagree. But I cannot debate with liars.
CS, Are you shocked in any way by the clerical abuse of children?
I must say that your total sebservience to any thing catholic is the substanceof your arguments.
Maybe I'm too critical of the catholic priest and hierarchy.
You, on the other hand, have never raised any objection to any thing the church does and does.
I assume you think the Church has, and cannot, make a mistake on any moral or faith issue.
The only answer you give is what you read in catholic pamphlets.
Maybe I have been a little hard on the Church. On the other hand you have no mind of your own---you just repeat the catholic"line."
Of course when I say the church is way out of line--I don't mean all priest and bishop. But enough have to say the "Church" has encouraged abuse by its failure.
Try this: when you talk about the Church, are you indluding all clerics. Of course, not. So when I critisize the Church obviously there are exceptions.
Again you are playing word games because of your blind and absolute trust the whole church.
Hey, did you see a Belgian bishop resigned because of the sex scandal.
Mark,
I took a break from this, but came back to see what your response was. I can only laugh at your own blindness and willful ignorance.
You ask if I am shocked by the sexual abuse of children by priests? Let's take a look at a few of my thoughts on it.
"I find it a travesty and the priests should be de-frocked, but also the seminaries reformed so that individuals like that do not enter the priesthood."
"Child Molestation is clearly an unequivocally the MORAL EVIL."
I have shown your most recent response to be nothing but an utter LIE.
I've been to your blog and I noticed you rail against some guy called MP for lying and slander. I have no idea what is discussed there, but in reality, you are just like your characterization of him.
CS,your argument is that the church cannot make a mistake on any issue of faith and morals. When the church approved slavery was the church correct? Or is it correct today in opposing slavery.
My question is, as you MUST believe the church must always be right do you believe that its approval of slavery was a God given mandate?
Do you ever have a thought of your own about religion?
Since you argue that the church is always right and never can be wrong, why do youu even discuss religion? It seems you just don't think anything the Church say can be wrong. Is accepting the church on all moral issues defines a christian, I assume you read nothing but catholic apolegetics and then repeat them.You support torture,the inferiority of women, the inquisition,castration of boys for the papal choir,the church's role in helping Nazi escape justice and on and on.
Your position--the church can never make a mistate on any moral issue--must be accepted by you.
Of course, your excuse for the church is it can never make a mistake---that clearly forces you to support the atrocities mentioned above
I'll give you your next response. The evils I cite above are not moral or ethical issues--so it was perfectly alright to support the torture of heretics since torture is not a matter of faith and morals.
Mark,
You are really quite entertaining. In a sad sort of way. I'm still waiting to hear your overall personal beliefs in Scripture (as you've already dismissed them as authoritative).
I'm also still awaiting your apology for your lie. Then again, I'm not holding my breath.
In fact, you are probably one of the most disgusting liars I have ever met. You even go so far as to say I support the castration of boys. You are sick. You are beyond perverted. Your hatred of all things Catholic blinds you to the truth. Let me guess, I support rape and genocide too? You seemed to leave those charges out.
Have you ever looked in the mirror and seen what a twisted soul you have become. You have allowed your hatred of the Catholic Faith to twist your soul and your interactions with others. You become irrational when confronted with the Catholic Faith and fall into tired old lies and allegations.
I PITY YOU. I will pray for your poor soul. You are the perfect example of what happens when you allow hate to dominate your life. God loves you.
You might also do well Mark, to read Fr. Panzer's "The Popes and Slavery" (http://www.ewtn.com/library/ISSUES/FREECAPT.TXT).
You would also do well to read Eamon Duffy's Stripping of the Altars, since I imagine you also have a quite incorrect view of Early Modern Catholicism as well.
Post a Comment