1 members (1 invisible),
507
guests, and
130
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
Forums26
Topics35,526
Posts417,646
Members6,178
|
Most Online4,112 Mar 25th, 2025
|
|
|
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 1,208
Member
|
Member
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 1,208 |
I don't "get it", either. The alleged behavior is beyond my ability to comprehend.
But what I DO get is:
1) that at this point, these are just accusations, not proven facts;
2) that there are at least 2 sides to most stories; and sometimes more than 2;
3) that our Churches are made up of sinful, fallen, contradictory and sometimes even downright dangerous and corrupt people - summoned by Christ to get involved in the process of repentance and of making personal moral changes as necessary;
4) and that the Lord acts through highly imperfect folks. This latter truth is a potential scandal for many but it's a mystery for everyone.
Last edited by sielos ilgesys; 02/15/11 10:27 AM.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 7,352 Likes: 99
Moderator Member
|
Moderator Member
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 7,352 Likes: 99 |
Remember that these are still just accusations. There is a political agenda going on in Philadelphia that involves an aggressive DA hoping to make political capital out of these accusations against the Catholic Archdiocese. The whole idea behind it is that if you're the bishop you should know what vevery priest is doing at every hour of the day. And it looks like the old litigator's idea of "the more the merrier," meaning that you name as many people as possible in roder to force negotiated settlement.
You've also got to remember that these accusations have been made by people who are told taht this is a way to make a quick buck. There was a priest in my area accused of things that were later proven to be false. Unfortunately, he is still under the stigma of the accusation because the press related the charge but never his finding of innocence.
Bob
Last edited by theophan; 02/15/11 12:37 PM.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 7,352 Likes: 99
Moderator Member
|
Moderator Member
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 7,352 Likes: 99 |
Of course this makes sense, but the section I quoted seemed to be focused very much on exactly that. Otherwise, why the need to include it in the minority report? I don't either, but I wonder how much is real and how much is political. And so is Nancy Pelosi and lots of other people who have a love/hate relationship with the Church. Bob
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 1,953
Member
|
Member
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 1,953 |
I worked for many years with Children's Services and the Family Courts and have an extensive background on the issues of child sexual abuse and overall child maltreatment. With absolutely no apologies or excuses for the alleged conduct of officials in the Philadephia Archdiocese and the Roman Catholic Church at large, I still can not help but wonder, nor do I doubt, that similar systemic behaviors exist throughout our highly sexualized and self-centered society. This pattern consists of first 'disbelieving' the accusations, followed by 'minimalization' of the accusations, followed by 'denial' and finally by a 'hide the problem and hope it goes away' type of 'solution'. The very nature of a hierarchical or pyramidal corporate structure subtly encourages such thinking . In addition to the church, many other organizational structures behave in a similar fashion, including, but not limited to, the military, education, public safety, medicine, social service organizations - and the worst offender - the family itself. All that being said, as someone both deeply involved with the clergy and with secular CPS experience, I am more offended and upset by failings within any Church or religious organization because of the message that sends to the world and to the enemies of God. However, we can't blind ourselves to the overall societal problem of child abuse by using tunnel vision and focusing only on the misdeeds of a church and its leaders. As municipal and county budgets get squeezed in the years to come, we have to ensure that our efforts to protect the most vulnerable of our citizens are not thrown to the sidelines while we focus our attention solely on one small, but outrageous, example of organizational abuse.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 388
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 388 |
Campaign builds for rethinking zero tolerance on sex abuse Debate on the Catholic hierarchy's response to the sex abuse crisis is typically framed in terms of just one question: Has the church done enough? Some important voices in Catholicism are arguing that the church has already done too much. It's a view that's finding traction among Catholics who believe that the church's doctrine are being sacrificed upon the altar of short-term PR and legal relief. http://ncronline.org/news/accountability/campaign-builds-rethinking-zero-tolerance-sex-abuse
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 388
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 388 |
The Priesthood and Justice While everyone recognizes that bishops must pursue just canonical and civil penalties against those who have betrayed their sacred office, there remain enduring theological questions about the severity of certain of these actions. http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/2011/01/the-priesthood-and-justice
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,285
AthanasiusTheLesser Member
|
AthanasiusTheLesser Member
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,285 |
I couldn't disagree more with Fr. Thomas Guarino. I certainly agree that sins of sexual abuse are not beyond God's ability or willingness to forgive. However, a man who engages in such sins has no place in the priesthood. The risk of scandal-to the victim and the victim's family, to those who are victims when to re-offending begins (in many cases, an inevitability) to the faithful, and to those outside is too great. I fear some people within in the Church (including Fr. Thomas) have learned very little from the scandals of the last ten years. Would Fr. Thomas like to have to face a victim of a re-offending priest? I think not. He should consider that horror before advocating a retreat from the no tolerance policy.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,411
Member
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,411 |
Both articles are disturbing.
Has the church done too much?? Does apologizing "undercut the moral credibility of the church" (as opposed to what actually happened and how it's been handled maybe undercutting credibility)??
Good lord.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,125 Likes: 1
Za myr z'wysot ... Member
|
Za myr z'wysot ... Member
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,125 Likes: 1 |
I couldn't disagree more with Fr. Thomas Guarino. I certainly agree that sins of sexual abuse are not beyond God's ability or willingness to forgive. However, a man who engages in such sins has no place in the priesthood. AtL, I agree completely. Fr. Thomas seems to be rather naive, especially where he states: Unfortunately, many priests now regard bishops, subconsciously if not theologically, as their employers, their bosses, with whom they have a contractual, not a familial or fraternal relationship. This constitutes a profound paradigm-change in the Church, whereby a communio model has now ceded to a business or corporate model. But this is a pernicious volte-face for the theological imagination. St. Ignatius of Antioch, in the early second century, speaks of priests related to their bishop as strings to a harp. Vatican II says that a bishop “should regard his priests as sons and friends.” I mean, all this sounds great, but does he really think that this ideal situation set forth by V2 was the NORM in RC dioceses prior to "Zero Tolerance?" I certainly agree that Zero Tolerance is a less-than-ideal solution to this problem, but it does represent an acknowledgement that we no longer live in a world where problems like this can be officially declared not to exist--God forbid we should ever wish to return to such a state! Peace, Deacon Richard
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309 Likes: 3
Member
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309 Likes: 3 |
Zero tolerance policies are everywhere and in all circumstances an abrogation of responsibility by persons in authority. In place of their individual judgment and discretion, they rely on an abstract set of rules, applied in a procrustean manner that invariably results in idiocy and outright injustice. On the other hand, it protects them from making hard choices on the one hand, and from legal liability on the other.
Such policies are also antithetical to Christian ethics, which demand that human beings be treated as individual persons rather than as objects.
Last edited by StuartK; 02/18/11 08:14 AM.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 115
Member
|
Member
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 115 |
I hope we are all on the same page as to what zero tolerance means.If it means an "accusation" then I agree with Stuart. If it truly means "conviction", this was stated in a comment on Fr.Guarino's article, the priest or religious be sent to a monastery for the remainder of his or her days to pray for forgiveness and salvation of their souls if they are not in jail.
Last edited by Scotty; 02/18/11 09:10 AM.
|
|
|
|
|