I'm Starting to Like This Pope

[Del]

The Roman Catholic Church wouldn't have to deal with any of this if they'd have taken action against sexual abuse rather than taken actions that facilitated it. I get that the Church is slower than politics, but these abuses have been going on for decades and decades. How many more decades are needed for the Church to take some real action?

We have taken real action against abuse. Firm, direct, positive, effective action.

There is one regard in which politics is much slower than the Church: Politics is very slow to give credit for positive success, especially to political opponents. (Notice how the Democrat/media give no credit for our booming economy, increasing jobs, record-low unemployment for Blacks and Hispanics, etc)

The secular media love to insist that the Catholic Church is decadent and hypocritical.

The current issue is not about abuse of children within the last two decades. The current issue is about cabals of active homosexuals thriving in the midst of our priests and bishops.

The connection is that the culture of recruiting and grooming spiritual young men into deeply closeted homosexuals led to the abuse of many adolescent boys.

Some would like to have a purge of homosexuals from our clergy. But traditionally, the Church would rather purge just a few extreme offenders (like former-Cardinal McCarrick).... and encourage the quiet offenders to leave quietly. A great many already have.

Proactively, the Church is putting good men in charge of forming more good men in our seminaries. There was a huge review of America's seminaries, about 15 years ago. Most saw purges of gay faculty members and students. Some seminaries were shut down and re-opened with mostly new faculty. (Pipeson's experience in Catholic seminary was entirely without any gay scandals, but there were many stories of shenanigans floating about from just a few years before.)

In the glacial movement of the Catholic Church, this is pretty fast. In just one generation, all of the gay priests will be gone.

(Note that this is primarily a problem of the Western nations. Catholics in Africa, Communist nations and formerly Communist nations are baffled at how we could be so decadent that this was possible in the first place. Catholic Christianity survived 1200 years of monastic culture without turning gay.)

[Thunktank]

The secular media love to insist that the Catholic Church is decadent and hypocritical.

The current issue is not about abuse of children within the last two decades. The current issue is about cabals of active homosexuals thriving in the midst of our priests and bishops.

The connection is that the culture of recruiting and grooming spiritual young men into deeply closeted homosexuals led to the abuse of many adolescent boys.

Some would like to have a purge of homosexuals from our clergy. But traditionally, the Church would rather purge just a few extreme offenders (like former-Cardinal McCarrick).... and encourage the quiet offenders to leave quietly. A great many already have.

There are decadent and hypocritical clergy in the Catholic Church which is why there is child abuse and “cabals of active homosexuals” who also delve into pedophilia with underage youth males. Why try to categorically reduce the problems the abused face from the abusers like you have done above, Del?

The church may need to purge more loudly now. The quiet way isn’t working out too well. It seems that I’m not alone in believing this.

This Pope is doing quite a lot in strengthening the more local governance of churches through the synods and conferences. I think this will, in the long term, enable the faithful to have more influence in keeping and maintaining worthy clergy.

[durangopipe]

Del,

You have repeatedly asserted that a chaste and pure Christian practice has characterized the Catholic Church throughout its history, and that the problems the church now face are uniquely recent; further, you argue that they are due to a recent rise of both the practice and acceptance of homosexuality in the church tacitly accepted by Francis.

While chaste lives (not historically always celibate) may be the predominant reality among Catholic clergy in the past and today, the problem of sexual perversity among clergy has existed throughout the history of the church, many times rising to the level of crisis and not always associated with homosexuality.

I am most emphatically not asserting that this problem is unique among Catholic clergy or in Catholic history - but it is the charge that the Pope bears significant responsibility for allowing this problem to continue that we’re discussing in this thread at this time.

I posted source material earlier.
I’ll post another source here.

Far more research is readily available, and this scholarly material is not corrupted by the political squabbles that exist within and outside of the church at this time.

The problem will never be solved if the church laity persist in believing and perpetuating a false understanding of history created by a few and disseminated among the faithful in order to either deny shameful truths or to pursue personal agendas.

In brief: Saying this problem is something new or the exclusive consequence of homosexuality is simply not true.



The Roman Catholic Church: A Centuries Old History of Awareness of Clerical Child Sexual Abuse (from the First to the 19th Century).

Rashid F1, Barron I1.

Abstract
Debates in international forums and in mainstream media on the role, responsibility, liability, and response of ecclesiastical authorities of the Roman Catholic Church (RCC) toward clerical child sexual abuse (cCSA) fail to take into account the historical roots and awareness of the problem. Reports also fail to mention the historic organizational laws RCC developed over centuries. In contrast, RCC documents evidence that the Catholic Church not only carried century's old history of cCSA, but also repeatedly condemned cCSA by successive papal authorities, organizational laws, and institutional management mechanisms. During the first millennium, however, church laws remained confined to the bookshelves and were not converted into appropriate management policies and infrastructural models. This was largely due to the absence of a central administrative organizational structure, which developed later in the 12th century, following the Second Council of Lateran (1139) when the Papacy asserted its authority to establish administrative control over the organizational church. It was only then that management policies started to be framed and institutional structures enacted to deal more appropriately with cCSA from the 14th to 20th centuries. Despite this, RCC developed a culture of secrecy using clandestine organizational management models and institutional laws prescribed in 1568, 1622, 1741, 1866, 1922, and 1962 which aimed to manage cCSA. The current study traces reported cCSA as far back as the first century and critically examines the organizational laws, and institutional policies developed by RCC to address clerical sexual miscondcut.

[UncleBob]

Del,

You have repeatedly asserted that a chaste and pure Christian practice has characterized the Catholic Church throughout its history, and that the problems the church now face are uniquely recent; further, you argue that they are due to a recent rise of both the practice and acceptance of homosexuality in the church tacitly accepted by Francis.

While chaste lives (not historically always celibate) may be the predominant reality among Catholic clergy in the past and today, the problem of sexual perversity among clergy has existed throughout the history of the church, many times rising to the level of crisis and not always associated with homosexuality.

I am most emphatically not asserting that this problem is unique among Catholic clergy or in Catholic history - but it is the charge that the Pope bears significant responsibility for allowing this problem to continue that we’re discussing in this thread at this time.

I posted source material earlier.
I’ll post another source here.

Far more research is readily available, and this scholarly material is not corrupted by the political squabbles that exist within and outside of the church at this time.

The problem will never be solved if the church laity persist in believing and perpetuating a false understanding of history created by a few and disseminated among the faithful in order to either deny shameful truths or to pursue personal agendas.

In brief: Saying this problem is something new or the exclusive consequence of homosexuality is simply not true.



The Roman Catholic Church: A Centuries Old History of Awareness of Clerical Child Sexual Abuse (from the First to the 19th Century).

Rashid F1, Barron I1.

Abstract
Debates in international forums and in mainstream media on the role, responsibility, liability, and response of ecclesiastical authorities of the Roman Catholic Church (RCC) toward clerical child sexual abuse (cCSA) fail to take into account the historical roots and awareness of the problem. Reports also fail to mention the historic organizational laws RCC developed over centuries. In contrast, RCC documents evidence that the Catholic Church not only carried century's old history of cCSA, but also repeatedly condemned cCSA by successive papal authorities, organizational laws, and institutional management mechanisms. During the first millennium, however, church laws remained confined to the bookshelves and were not converted into appropriate management policies and infrastructural models. This was largely due to the absence of a central administrative organizational structure, which developed later in the 12th century, following the Second Council of Lateran (1139) when the Papacy asserted its authority to establish administrative control over the organizational church. It was only then that management policies started to be framed and institutional structures enacted to deal more appropriately with cCSA from the 14th to 20th centuries. Despite this, RCC developed a culture of secrecy using clandestine organizational management models and institutional laws prescribed in 1568, 1622, 1741, 1866, 1922, and 1962 which aimed to manage cCSA. The current study traces reported cCSA as far back as the first century and critically examines the organizational laws, and institutional policies developed by RCC to address clerical sexual miscondcut.

Good luck.

[wosbald]

+JMJ+

At 'Authentic Reform,' conservative Catholics rally to 'fix' church failures [In-Depth]

Over 250 attendees gather at the "Authentic Reform" conference, Oct. 2 in Washington (Heidi Schlumpf)

Washington, D.C. — A gathering of conservative Catholics who want "Authentic Reform" in response to the church's latest sex abuse scandals ended with plans for a statement and a call for like-minded organizations to band together to force church leaders to act against sexually active priests and bishops, as well as those who abuse minors.

While some called for changes in canon law to allow more lay oversight in church governance, others admitted that was unlikely and instead urged attendees — many of them wealthy donors — to use their moral authority as baptized Catholics to effect change by withholding donations and pressuring bishops to demand an independent Vatican investigation of the U.S. church.

"We can't wait around for the leadership of our church to kick this can down the road, hoping we'll forget about it," said Timothy Busch, the millionaire businessman who co-founded the Napa Institute, sponsor of the "Authentic Reform" event in Washington, D.C.

"We're not going to forget about it," he said. "We're going to bring them to justice, move them out and restore our church to holiness."

[…]

"It [i.e. the current church scandal, vis-à-vis former Card. McCarrick] needs to stop. And, we, the laity, are going to stop it. And we're going to do it regardless of what the civil and canon law says," Busch said.

[…]

A bishops' panel featured Bishop Robert Morlino of Madison, Wisconsin; Archbishop Samuel Aquila of Denver, and Cardinal Gerhard Müller of Germany, the controversial former prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. The three were introduced as "the new papal posse."

During that panel, Morlino expressed concern about the newly formed Better Church Governance Group, which plans a "Red Hat Report" after investigating and auditing each of the cardinal electors before the next conclave. Morlino later told NCR he had spoken "off the cuff" and had only general concerns about "non-canonical" groups.


Presenters display a list of 10 lay apostolates at the "Authentic Reform" conference, held Oct. 1-2 in Washington, D.C. (Heidi Schlumpf)

Several speakers acknowledged that church leaders had done a good job of addressing sexual abuse of minors with the 2002 Dallas charter and norms, and thought reform was now needed to address sexual misconduct with adults. Concern about homosexual activity was key, with an entire session devoted to "The Problem of Homosexuality."

In that presentation, Janet Smith, who has taken a leave of absence as a professor at Sacred Heart Major Seminary in Detroit to address the scandal, estimated, using various sources of varying credibility, that 5 to 60 percent of priests break their vows of celibacy and that approximately 30 percent of bishops are "active homosexuals." She also referred to "gay priest Harvey Weinsteins" who prey on other men.

"Almost every bishop has been complacent in some way. They've looked the other way," she said of what she calls "the elephant in the diocese": a network of active homosexual priests who protect each other, advance each other and control what happens in a diocese.

[…]

Yet, despite promises of "return on investment" and an emphasis on solutions, much of the daylong event focused on personal holiness and the need for universal penance on the part of Catholics, with nearly every speaker noting that "we are all sinners."

But some attendees responded negatively to calls for universal atonement. "I don't want bishops apologizing for me, I want them apologizing to me," said one participant.

While [Augustine Institute's Tim] Gray called for an emphasis on reparation, perhaps during Lent, [Amazing Parish's co-founder, Patrick] Lencioni noted that public acts of atonement by bishops "felt like a smokescreen" to him.

In a provocative homily at the conference's opening Mass, Morlino called for a "zealous hatred of evil" to take hold in the church.

[…]

Although there were no direct or personal attacks on Pope Francis, a question from a representative of LifeSiteNews, a right-wing advocacy website, raised the issue of cover-up "from the top down" during a Q-and-A session with Gray and Lencioni.

Lencioni noted that "the moral authority of Pope Francis has been greatly tarnished and damaged, no doubt."

[…]

Busch also defended Viganò, who called for the resignation of Francis for allegedly covering up for McCarrick. Busch had initially told The New York Times that Viganò shared his now-famous letter or "testimony" with him before it was published by a newspaper owned by EWTN. Busch, who is on EWTN's board, later denied having previewed that letter.

"We can't allow the Vatican to get away with this anymore," Busch said at the conference, adding that it didn't matter if Pope Francis "originated" or merely allowed "corrupt prelates" to operate in the Vatican.

"Viganò has given us an agenda. We need to follow those leads and push that forward," he said.

[…]

[wosbald]

+JMJ+

Pope orders 'thorough study' of Vatican archives on McCarrick

Cardinal Theodore E. McCarrick of Washington gestures during a news conference at the Vatican April 24, 2002. (Credit: Vincenzo Pinto/Reuters via CNS)

ROME — Pope Francis has ordered that an investigation by the Archdiocese of New York into sex abuse allegations against ex-Cardinal Theodore McCarrick be combined with a “thorough study of the entire documentation present in the archives of the dicasteries and offices of the Holy See” in order to ascertain “all the relevant facts, to place them in their historical context and to evaluate them objectively.”

How or when the results of that review might be communicated wasn’t made clear, although a Vatican statement on Saturday said that conclusions will be revealed “in due course.”

The Holy See is conscious that, “from the examination of the facts and of the circumstances, it may emerge that choices were taken that would not be consonant with a contemporary approach to such issues,” that statement said.

“Both abuse and its cover-up can no longer be tolerated and a different treatment for Bishops who have committed or covered up abuse, in fact represents a form of clericalism that is no longer acceptable,” it said.

According to the statement, Francis has been monitoring the McCarrick situation for more than a year.

“In September 2017, the Archdiocese of New York notified the Holy See that a man had accused former Cardinal McCarrick of having abused him in the 1970s,” it said. “The Holy Father ordered a thorough preliminary investigation into this, which was carried out by the Archdiocese of New York, at the conclusion of which the relative documentation was forwarded to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.”

“In the meantime, because grave indications emerged during the course of the investigation, the Holy Father accepted the resignation of Archbishop McCarrick from the College of Cardinals, prohibiting him by order from exercising public ministry, and obliging him to lead a life of prayer and penance,” it said.

[…]

“The Holy Father Pope Francis renews his pressing invitation to unite forces to fight against the grave scourge of abuse within and beyond the Church, and to prevent such crimes from being committed in the future to the harm of the most innocent and most vulnerable in society,” Saturday’s statement said.

“As previously made known, the Holy Father has convened a meeting of the presidents of the bishops’ conferences from around the world for next February,” it said.

[…]

[wosbald]

+JMJ+

Vatican's bishops czar says papal accuser guilty of 'political frame-job'

Cardinal Marc Ouellet, prefect of the Congregation for Bishops, acknowledges the congregation after concelebrating Mass July 26 at the Basilica of Ste.-Anne-de-Beaupre in Ste.-Anne-de-Beaupre, Quebec, on the feast of St. Anne. Also pictured are Archbishop Valery Vienneau of Moncton, and Cardinal Gerald Lacroix of Quebec City. (Credit: CNS photo/Philippe Vaillancourt, Presence)

ROME — In a stinging three-page letter, the Vatican’s top official for supervising bishops has accused a former papal envoy who linked Pope Francis to the scandals surrounding ex-Cardinal Theodore McCarrick of a “deplorable and incomprehensible” attack, which is both at odds with the truth and a betrayal of his priestly calling.

In what he said was his own “testimony” on the McCarrick case, Canadian Cardinal Marc Ouellet, prefect of the Vatican’s Congregation for Bishops, said not only that Pope Francis did not conceal sexual abuse by McCarrick, calling Italian Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò’s accusations a political “frame job,” but said that while private restrictions had been in place against McCarrick, there were no formal “sanctions” imposed by Pope emeritus Benedict XVI that Francis ignored.

Viganò, who served as the papal ambassador in US from 2011 to 2016 under both Popes benedict and Francis, made his charges in an explosive letter released Aug. 25. This marks the first time a senior Vatican official has directly responded to the substance of those charges.

[…]

Ouellet confirmed that McCarrick had been asked by his predecessor, Italian Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re, to avoid public appearances and stay out of the spotlight, but he said those were not formal “sanctions” and neither Benedict not Francis had ever signed a letter to that effect. The reason, he said, is because at the time, they did not have enough evidence to prove his guilt.

McCarrick was “strongly encouraged not to travel and not to appear in public,” in order to prevent rumors, he said, and urged to live a “private life” of silence “with the rigor of canonical penalties.”

[…]

The prelate accused Viganò of making unfounded accusations for political reasons, saying that “in response to your unjust and unjustified attack, I conclude that the accusation is a political frame job without a real foundation intended to incriminate the pope and I repeat, that it has profoundly wounded the communion of the Church.”

To this end, he noted how Viganò took issue with his stance on Francis’ 2016 exhortation on the family, Amoris Laetita, as well as the pope’s decision to adjust the Catechism of the Catholic Church to read that the death penalty, declaring it inadmissible in every circumstance.

Referring to the most recent letter published by Viganò, published Sept. 29, in which the prelate makes a direct appeal to Ouellet to publish documents contained in the Vatican’s Congregation for Bishops related to McCarrick and accuses Francis of forgetting about Christ, Ouellet said that the message, though apparently spiritual, “seemed really too sarcastic, even blasphemous! This cannot come from the spirit of God.”

In a more personal tone, Ouellet said he is aware that “bitterness and delusion” have marked Viganò’s service to the Holy See, but urged the former ambassador not to end his priestly life “in open and scandalous rebellion, which inflicts a very painful wound on the spouse of Christ, which you pretend to serve better, aggravating the division and confusion of the People of God!”

Ouellet spoke of faithfulness to the Successor of Peter as a sign of priestly obedience to Christ, and closed his letter with an appeal for Viganò to remember his priestly call, asking him directly: “How can you celebrate the holy Eucharist and pronounce his name in the canon of the Mass? How can you pray the holy rosary, St. Michael the Archangel and the Mother of God, condemning the one who protects and accompanies you everyday in his heavy and courageous ministry?”

The prelate’s letter comes the day after the Vatican announced that they are carrying out a “thorough investigation” of the McCarrick case by examining documentation on him in the archives of the Roman Curia, and that they will reveal the conclusions “in due course.”

[sweetandsour]

+JMJ+

Vatican's bishops czar says papal accuser guilty of 'political frame-job'

Cardinal Marc Ouellet, prefect of the Congregation for Bishops, acknowledges the congregation after concelebrating Mass July 26 at the Basilica of Ste.-Anne-de-Beaupre in Ste.-Anne-de-Beaupre, Quebec, on the feast of St. Anne. Also pictured are Archbishop Valery Vienneau of Moncton, and Cardinal Gerald Lacroix of Quebec City. (Credit: CNS photo/Philippe Vaillancourt, Presence)

ROME — In a stinging three-page letter, the Vatican’s top official for supervising bishops has accused a former papal envoy who linked Pope Francis to the scandals surrounding ex-Cardinal Theodore McCarrick of a “deplorable and incomprehensible” attack, which is both at odds with the truth and a betrayal of his priestly calling.

In what he said was his own “testimony” on the McCarrick case, Canadian Cardinal Marc Ouellet, prefect of the Vatican’s Congregation for Bishops, said not only that Pope Francis did not conceal sexual abuse by McCarrick, calling Italian Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò’s accusations a political “frame job,” but said that while private restrictions had been in place against McCarrick, there were no formal “sanctions” imposed by Pope emeritus Benedict XVI that Francis ignored.

Viganò, who served as the papal ambassador in US from 2011 to 2016 under both Popes benedict and Francis, made his charges in an explosive letter released Aug. 25. This marks the first time a senior Vatican official has directly responded to the substance of those charges.

[…]

Ouellet confirmed that McCarrick had been asked by his predecessor, Italian Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re, to avoid public appearances and stay out of the spotlight, but he said those were not formal “sanctions” and neither Benedict not Francis had ever signed a letter to that effect. The reason, he said, is because at the time, they did not have enough evidence to prove his guilt.

McCarrick was “strongly encouraged not to travel and not to appear in public,” in order to prevent rumors, he said, and urged to live a “private life” of silence “with the rigor of canonical penalties.”

[…]

The prelate accused Viganò of making unfounded accusations for political reasons, saying that “in response to your unjust and unjustified attack, I conclude that the accusation is a political frame job without a real foundation intended to incriminate the pope and I repeat, that it has profoundly wounded the communion of the Church.”

To this end, he noted how Viganò took issue with his stance on Francis’ 2016 exhortation on the family, Amoris Laetita, as well as the pope’s decision to adjust the Catechism of the Catholic Church to read that the death penalty, declaring it inadmissible in every circumstance.

Referring to the most recent letter published by Viganò, published Sept. 29, in which the prelate makes a direct appeal to Ouellet to publish documents contained in the Vatican’s Congregation for Bishops related to McCarrick and accuses Francis of forgetting about Christ, Ouellet said that the message, though apparently spiritual, “seemed really too sarcastic, even blasphemous! This cannot come from the spirit of God.”

In a more personal tone, Ouellet said he is aware that “bitterness and delusion” have marked Viganò’s service to the Holy See, but urged the former ambassador not to end his priestly life “in open and scandalous rebellion, which inflicts a very painful wound on the spouse of Christ, which you pretend to serve better, aggravating the division and confusion of the People of God!”

Ouellet spoke of faithfulness to the Successor of Peter as a sign of priestly obedience to Christ, and closed his letter with an appeal for Viganò to remember his priestly call, asking him directly: “How can you celebrate the holy Eucharist and pronounce his name in the canon of the Mass? How can you pray the holy rosary, St. Michael the Archangel and the Mother of God, condemning the one who protects and accompanies you everyday in his heavy and courageous ministry?”

The prelate’s letter comes the day after the Vatican announced that they are carrying out a “thorough investigation” of the McCarrick case by examining documentation on him in the archives of the Roman Curia, and that they will reveal the conclusions “in due course.”

Wow, that's a lot of dirty laundry being hung out right there.

[Thunktank]

+JMJ+

Vatican's bishops czar says papal accuser guilty of 'political frame-job'

Cardinal Marc Ouellet, prefect of the Congregation for Bishops, acknowledges the congregation after concelebrating Mass July 26 at the Basilica of Ste.-Anne-de-Beaupre in Ste.-Anne-de-Beaupre, Quebec, on the feast of St. Anne. Also pictured are Archbishop Valery Vienneau of Moncton, and Cardinal Gerald Lacroix of Quebec City. (Credit: CNS photo/Philippe Vaillancourt, Presence)

ROME — In a stinging three-page letter, the Vatican’s top official for supervising bishops has accused a former papal envoy who linked Pope Francis to the scandals surrounding ex-Cardinal Theodore McCarrick of a “deplorable and incomprehensible” attack, which is both at odds with the truth and a betrayal of his priestly calling.

In what he said was his own “testimony” on the McCarrick case, Canadian Cardinal Marc Ouellet, prefect of the Vatican’s Congregation for Bishops, said not only that Pope Francis did not conceal sexual abuse by McCarrick, calling Italian Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò’s accusations a political “frame job,” but said that while private restrictions had been in place against McCarrick, there were no formal “sanctions” imposed by Pope emeritus Benedict XVI that Francis ignored.

Viganò, who served as the papal ambassador in US from 2011 to 2016 under both Popes benedict and Francis, made his charges in an explosive letter released Aug. 25. This marks the first time a senior Vatican official has directly responded to the substance of those charges.

[…]

Ouellet confirmed that McCarrick had been asked by his predecessor, Italian Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re, to avoid public appearances and stay out of the spotlight, but he said those were not formal “sanctions” and neither Benedict not Francis had ever signed a letter to that effect. The reason, he said, is because at the time, they did not have enough evidence to prove his guilt.

McCarrick was “strongly encouraged not to travel and not to appear in public,” in order to prevent rumors, he said, and urged to live a “private life” of silence “with the rigor of canonical penalties.”

[…]

The prelate accused Viganò of making unfounded accusations for political reasons, saying that “in response to your unjust and unjustified attack, I conclude that the accusation is a political frame job without a real foundation intended to incriminate the pope and I repeat, that it has profoundly wounded the communion of the Church.”

To this end, he noted how Viganò took issue with his stance on Francis’ 2016 exhortation on the family, Amoris Laetita, as well as the pope’s decision to adjust the Catechism of the Catholic Church to read that the death penalty, declaring it inadmissible in every circumstance.

Referring to the most recent letter published by Viganò, published Sept. 29, in which the prelate makes a direct appeal to Ouellet to publish documents contained in the Vatican’s Congregation for Bishops related to McCarrick and accuses Francis of forgetting about Christ, Ouellet said that the message, though apparently spiritual, “seemed really too sarcastic, even blasphemous! This cannot come from the spirit of God.”

In a more personal tone, Ouellet said he is aware that “bitterness and delusion” have marked Viganò’s service to the Holy See, but urged the former ambassador not to end his priestly life “in open and scandalous rebellion, which inflicts a very painful wound on the spouse of Christ, which you pretend to serve better, aggravating the division and confusion of the People of God!”

Ouellet spoke of faithfulness to the Successor of Peter as a sign of priestly obedience to Christ, and closed his letter with an appeal for Viganò to remember his priestly call, asking him directly: “How can you celebrate the holy Eucharist and pronounce his name in the canon of the Mass? How can you pray the holy rosary, St. Michael the Archangel and the Mother of God, condemning the one who protects and accompanies you everyday in his heavy and courageous ministry?”

The prelate’s letter comes the day after the Vatican announced that they are carrying out a “thorough investigation” of the McCarrick case by examining documentation on him in the archives of the Roman Curia, and that they will reveal the conclusions “in due course.”

Wow, that's a lot of dirty laundry being hung out right there.

I've begun to wonder if CPS' Catholic related threads have become laundromats, that's for sure. It's as though wosbald takes the dirty garments of Christ's beautiful bride to wash them in a mud puddle for her enemies to see. Stop this!

[UncleBob]

+JMJ+

Vatican's bishops czar says papal accuser guilty of 'political frame-job'

Cardinal Marc Ouellet, prefect of the Congregation for Bishops, acknowledges the congregation after concelebrating Mass July 26 at the Basilica of Ste.-Anne-de-Beaupre in Ste.-Anne-de-Beaupre, Quebec, on the feast of St. Anne. Also pictured are Archbishop Valery Vienneau of Moncton, and Cardinal Gerald Lacroix of Quebec City. (Credit: CNS photo/Philippe Vaillancourt, Presence)

ROME — In a stinging three-page letter, the Vatican’s top official for supervising bishops has accused a former papal envoy who linked Pope Francis to the scandals surrounding ex-Cardinal Theodore McCarrick of a “deplorable and incomprehensible” attack, which is both at odds with the truth and a betrayal of his priestly calling.

In what he said was his own “testimony” on the McCarrick case, Canadian Cardinal Marc Ouellet, prefect of the Vatican’s Congregation for Bishops, said not only that Pope Francis did not conceal sexual abuse by McCarrick, calling Italian Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò’s accusations a political “frame job,” but said that while private restrictions had been in place against McCarrick, there were no formal “sanctions” imposed by Pope emeritus Benedict XVI that Francis ignored.

Viganò, who served as the papal ambassador in US from 2011 to 2016 under both Popes benedict and Francis, made his charges in an explosive letter released Aug. 25. This marks the first time a senior Vatican official has directly responded to the substance of those charges.

[…]

Ouellet confirmed that McCarrick had been asked by his predecessor, Italian Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re, to avoid public appearances and stay out of the spotlight, but he said those were not formal “sanctions” and neither Benedict not Francis had ever signed a letter to that effect. The reason, he said, is because at the time, they did not have enough evidence to prove his guilt.

McCarrick was “strongly encouraged not to travel and not to appear in public,” in order to prevent rumors, he said, and urged to live a “private life” of silence “with the rigor of canonical penalties.”

[…]

The prelate accused Viganò of making unfounded accusations for political reasons, saying that “in response to your unjust and unjustified attack, I conclude that the accusation is a political frame job without a real foundation intended to incriminate the pope and I repeat, that it has profoundly wounded the communion of the Church.”

To this end, he noted how Viganò took issue with his stance on Francis’ 2016 exhortation on the family, Amoris Laetita, as well as the pope’s decision to adjust the Catechism of the Catholic Church to read that the death penalty, declaring it inadmissible in every circumstance.

Referring to the most recent letter published by Viganò, published Sept. 29, in which the prelate makes a direct appeal to Ouellet to publish documents contained in the Vatican’s Congregation for Bishops related to McCarrick and accuses Francis of forgetting about Christ, Ouellet said that the message, though apparently spiritual, “seemed really too sarcastic, even blasphemous! This cannot come from the spirit of God.”

In a more personal tone, Ouellet said he is aware that “bitterness and delusion” have marked Viganò’s service to the Holy See, but urged the former ambassador not to end his priestly life “in open and scandalous rebellion, which inflicts a very painful wound on the spouse of Christ, which you pretend to serve better, aggravating the division and confusion of the People of God!”

Ouellet spoke of faithfulness to the Successor of Peter as a sign of priestly obedience to Christ, and closed his letter with an appeal for Viganò to remember his priestly call, asking him directly: “How can you celebrate the holy Eucharist and pronounce his name in the canon of the Mass? How can you pray the holy rosary, St. Michael the Archangel and the Mother of God, condemning the one who protects and accompanies you everyday in his heavy and courageous ministry?”

The prelate’s letter comes the day after the Vatican announced that they are carrying out a “thorough investigation” of the McCarrick case by examining documentation on him in the archives of the Roman Curia, and that they will reveal the conclusions “in due course.”

Wow, that's a lot of dirty laundry being hung out right there.

I've begun to wonder if CPS' Catholic related threads have become laundromats, that's for sure. It's as though wosbald takes the dirty garments of Christ's beautiful bride to wash them in a mud puddle for her enemies to see. Stop this!

Yeah. Secrecy is the way to go.

[Thunktank]

+JMJ+

Vatican's bishops czar says papal accuser guilty of 'political frame-job'

Cardinal Marc Ouellet, prefect of the Congregation for Bishops, acknowledges the congregation after concelebrating Mass July 26 at the Basilica of Ste.-Anne-de-Beaupre in Ste.-Anne-de-Beaupre, Quebec, on the feast of St. Anne. Also pictured are Archbishop Valery Vienneau of Moncton, and Cardinal Gerald Lacroix of Quebec City. (Credit: CNS photo/Philippe Vaillancourt, Presence)

ROME — In a stinging three-page letter, the Vatican’s top official for supervising bishops has accused a former papal envoy who linked Pope Francis to the scandals surrounding ex-Cardinal Theodore McCarrick of a “deplorable and incomprehensible” attack, which is both at odds with the truth and a betrayal of his priestly calling.

In what he said was his own “testimony” on the McCarrick case, Canadian Cardinal Marc Ouellet, prefect of the Vatican’s Congregation for Bishops, said not only that Pope Francis did not conceal sexual abuse by McCarrick, calling Italian Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò’s accusations a political “frame job,” but said that while private restrictions had been in place against McCarrick, there were no formal “sanctions” imposed by Pope emeritus Benedict XVI that Francis ignored.

Viganò, who served as the papal ambassador in US from 2011 to 2016 under both Popes benedict and Francis, made his charges in an explosive letter released Aug. 25. This marks the first time a senior Vatican official has directly responded to the substance of those charges.

[…]

Ouellet confirmed that McCarrick had been asked by his predecessor, Italian Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re, to avoid public appearances and stay out of the spotlight, but he said those were not formal “sanctions” and neither Benedict not Francis had ever signed a letter to that effect. The reason, he said, is because at the time, they did not have enough evidence to prove his guilt.

McCarrick was “strongly encouraged not to travel and not to appear in public,” in order to prevent rumors, he said, and urged to live a “private life” of silence “with the rigor of canonical penalties.”

[…]

The prelate accused Viganò of making unfounded accusations for political reasons, saying that “in response to your unjust and unjustified attack, I conclude that the accusation is a political frame job without a real foundation intended to incriminate the pope and I repeat, that it has profoundly wounded the communion of the Church.”

To this end, he noted how Viganò took issue with his stance on Francis’ 2016 exhortation on the family, Amoris Laetita, as well as the pope’s decision to adjust the Catechism of the Catholic Church to read that the death penalty, declaring it inadmissible in every circumstance.

Referring to the most recent letter published by Viganò, published Sept. 29, in which the prelate makes a direct appeal to Ouellet to publish documents contained in the Vatican’s Congregation for Bishops related to McCarrick and accuses Francis of forgetting about Christ, Ouellet said that the message, though apparently spiritual, “seemed really too sarcastic, even blasphemous! This cannot come from the spirit of God.”

In a more personal tone, Ouellet said he is aware that “bitterness and delusion” have marked Viganò’s service to the Holy See, but urged the former ambassador not to end his priestly life “in open and scandalous rebellion, which inflicts a very painful wound on the spouse of Christ, which you pretend to serve better, aggravating the division and confusion of the People of God!”

Ouellet spoke of faithfulness to the Successor of Peter as a sign of priestly obedience to Christ, and closed his letter with an appeal for Viganò to remember his priestly call, asking him directly: “How can you celebrate the holy Eucharist and pronounce his name in the canon of the Mass? How can you pray the holy rosary, St. Michael the Archangel and the Mother of God, condemning the one who protects and accompanies you everyday in his heavy and courageous ministry?”

The prelate’s letter comes the day after the Vatican announced that they are carrying out a “thorough investigation” of the McCarrick case by examining documentation on him in the archives of the Roman Curia, and that they will reveal the conclusions “in due course.”

Wow, that's a lot of dirty laundry being hung out right there.

I've begun to wonder if CPS' Catholic related threads have become laundromats, that's for sure. It's as though wosbald takes the dirty garments of Christ's beautiful bride to wash them in a mud puddle for her enemies to see. Stop this!

Yeah. Secrecy is the way to go.

No, it isn't. What doesn't help anything is the constant posting on CPS to a bunch of anti Catholic guys who should also be exposed to the beauty found in the Catholic Church instead of all negativity from Catholics. In other words, my post above is more about CPS, not the dirty laundry itself. Yes, the dirty laundry needs cleaning. But why does wosbald have to post on a constant basis all the dirty intrigue of our church here of all places? For what purpose other than harm it further?

[UncleBob]

+JMJ+

Vatican's bishops czar says papal accuser guilty of 'political frame-job'

Cardinal Marc Ouellet, prefect of the Congregation for Bishops, acknowledges the congregation after concelebrating Mass July 26 at the Basilica of Ste.-Anne-de-Beaupre in Ste.-Anne-de-Beaupre, Quebec, on the feast of St. Anne. Also pictured are Archbishop Valery Vienneau of Moncton, and Cardinal Gerald Lacroix of Quebec City. (Credit: CNS photo/Philippe Vaillancourt, Presence)

ROME — In a stinging three-page letter, the Vatican’s top official for supervising bishops has accused a former papal envoy who linked Pope Francis to the scandals surrounding ex-Cardinal Theodore McCarrick of a “deplorable and incomprehensible” attack, which is both at odds with the truth and a betrayal of his priestly calling.

In what he said was his own “testimony” on the McCarrick case, Canadian Cardinal Marc Ouellet, prefect of the Vatican’s Congregation for Bishops, said not only that Pope Francis did not conceal sexual abuse by McCarrick, calling Italian Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò’s accusations a political “frame job,” but said that while private restrictions had been in place against McCarrick, there were no formal “sanctions” imposed by Pope emeritus Benedict XVI that Francis ignored.

Viganò, who served as the papal ambassador in US from 2011 to 2016 under both Popes benedict and Francis, made his charges in an explosive letter released Aug. 25. This marks the first time a senior Vatican official has directly responded to the substance of those charges.

[…]

Ouellet confirmed that McCarrick had been asked by his predecessor, Italian Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re, to avoid public appearances and stay out of the spotlight, but he said those were not formal “sanctions” and neither Benedict not Francis had ever signed a letter to that effect. The reason, he said, is because at the time, they did not have enough evidence to prove his guilt.

McCarrick was “strongly encouraged not to travel and not to appear in public,” in order to prevent rumors, he said, and urged to live a “private life” of silence “with the rigor of canonical penalties.”

[…]

The prelate accused Viganò of making unfounded accusations for political reasons, saying that “in response to your unjust and unjustified attack, I conclude that the accusation is a political frame job without a real foundation intended to incriminate the pope and I repeat, that it has profoundly wounded the communion of the Church.”

To this end, he noted how Viganò took issue with his stance on Francis’ 2016 exhortation on the family, Amoris Laetita, as well as the pope’s decision to adjust the Catechism of the Catholic Church to read that the death penalty, declaring it inadmissible in every circumstance.

Referring to the most recent letter published by Viganò, published Sept. 29, in which the prelate makes a direct appeal to Ouellet to publish documents contained in the Vatican’s Congregation for Bishops related to McCarrick and accuses Francis of forgetting about Christ, Ouellet said that the message, though apparently spiritual, “seemed really too sarcastic, even blasphemous! This cannot come from the spirit of God.”

In a more personal tone, Ouellet said he is aware that “bitterness and delusion” have marked Viganò’s service to the Holy See, but urged the former ambassador not to end his priestly life “in open and scandalous rebellion, which inflicts a very painful wound on the spouse of Christ, which you pretend to serve better, aggravating the division and confusion of the People of God!”

Ouellet spoke of faithfulness to the Successor of Peter as a sign of priestly obedience to Christ, and closed his letter with an appeal for Viganò to remember his priestly call, asking him directly: “How can you celebrate the holy Eucharist and pronounce his name in the canon of the Mass? How can you pray the holy rosary, St. Michael the Archangel and the Mother of God, condemning the one who protects and accompanies you everyday in his heavy and courageous ministry?”

The prelate’s letter comes the day after the Vatican announced that they are carrying out a “thorough investigation” of the McCarrick case by examining documentation on him in the archives of the Roman Curia, and that they will reveal the conclusions “in due course.”

Wow, that's a lot of dirty laundry being hung out right there.

I've begun to wonder if CPS' Catholic related threads have become laundromats, that's for sure. It's as though wosbald takes the dirty garments of Christ's beautiful bride to wash them in a mud puddle for her enemies to see. Stop this!

Yeah. Secrecy is the way to go.

No, it isn't. What doesn't help anything is the constant posting on CPS to a bunch of anti Catholic guys who should also be exposed to the beauty found in the Catholic Church instead of all negativity from Catholics. In other words, my post above is more about CPS, not the dirty laundry itself. Yes, the dirty laundry needs cleaning. But why does wosbald have to post on a constant basis all the dirty intrigue of our church here of all places? For what purpose other than harm it further?

I dunno... transparency, maybe?

[wosbald]

+JMJ+

Intra-Thread Trackback: pg 80


Vatican cardinal rebukes Vigano: accusations against Francis 'political frame job' [In-Depth]

Cardinal Marc Ouellet is seen at a 2016 news conference. (CNS photo/Paul Haring)

Rome — The head of the Vatican office for supervising Catholic bishops globally has issued a scathing response to a former ambassador who alleged a widespread cover-up of allegations against ex-cardinal Theodore McCarrick, calling the accusations nothing more than a "political frame job."

In an unprecedented three-page missive filled with a kind of forceful language rarely shared publicly between two Catholic prelates, Cardinal Marc Ouellet tells Archbishop Carlo Vigano his actions have been "extremely immoral" and that he has made an "unheard of and undeserved blow" on Pope Francis' moral authority.

But the prefect of the Congregation for Bishops also reveals for the first time that McCarrick, who resigned from the College of Cardinals in July following revelations of abuse of seminarians, had been under Vatican instruction to refrain from public activity as early as 2011.

Although Ouellet says those instructions did not amount to formal "sanctions," as Vigano alleged in an 11-page "testimony" released on Aug. 26, the cardinal says McCarrick had been encouraged to lead "a life of discretion, prayer and penitence" because of "rumors about his behavior in the past."

"It is false to present these measures taken against him as 'sanctions' decreed by Pope Benedict XVI and cancelled by Pope Francis," Ouellet tells Vigano, adding that an examination of the archives of his office made clear "that there are not documents regarding this matter signed by either pope."

[…]

In his open letter responding to Vigano, Ouellet is forceful and intense, telling the former ambassador at different times that his claims are "incredible and absurd," "aberrant," "a very painful wound" on the church, and "unjust and unjustified."

Ouellet opens his missive — which was released unusually by the Vatican mid-morning Oct. 7, a Sunday — by saying that he is writing with "pontifical permission" to offer his "personal testimony … on the sequence of events regarding the archbishop emeritus of Washington, Theodore McCarrick, and on his presumed ties with Pope Francis."

The cardinal says his testimony — released in French with a working Italian translation — is based both on his "personal contacts" and "the documents within the archive of the Congregation, which are currently the subject of a study to bring light on this sad case."

[…]

"It must be understood that the decisions taken by the Supreme Pontiff rest on the information available at that precise moment and which constitute the object of a prudential judgment that is not infallible," says the cardinal.

"It seems unfair to me to conclude that the persons responsible for the discernment are corrupt," he states.

Ouellet tells Vigano that accusing Francis for covering up for McCarrick "seems incredible and absurd from all points of view."

"I cannot understand how you could convince yourself of this monstrous accusation," says the cardinal.

[…]

Ouellet continues: "I find it aberrant that you take advantage of the difficult scandal of sexual abuse in the United States to inflict an unheard of and undeserved blow on the moral authority of your Superior, the Supreme Pontiff."

The cardinal concludes his letter by exhorting Vigano to reconcile with the church.

"I understand how bitterness and disappointments have marked your way in service to the Holy See, but you can not conclude your priestly life in an open and scandalous rebellion that inflicts a very painful wound," Ouellet tells the archbishop.

"Come out of hiding, repent of your revolt and return to better feelings towards the Holy Father," the cardinal urges.

[…]

"I reiterate that this profoundly wounds the communion of the church," he states. "May God wish that this injustice be quickly repaired and that Pope Francis may continue to known for that which he is: a distinguished pastor, a compassionate and steadfast father, a charismatic prophet for the church and the world."

[Thunktank]

+JMJ+

Vatican's bishops czar says papal accuser guilty of 'political frame-job'

Cardinal Marc Ouellet, prefect of the Congregation for Bishops, acknowledges the congregation after concelebrating Mass July 26 at the Basilica of Ste.-Anne-de-Beaupre in Ste.-Anne-de-Beaupre, Quebec, on the feast of St. Anne. Also pictured are Archbishop Valery Vienneau of Moncton, and Cardinal Gerald Lacroix of Quebec City. (Credit: CNS photo/Philippe Vaillancourt, Presence)

ROME — In a stinging three-page letter, the Vatican’s top official for supervising bishops has accused a former papal envoy who linked Pope Francis to the scandals surrounding ex-Cardinal Theodore McCarrick of a “deplorable and incomprehensible” attack, which is both at odds with the truth and a betrayal of his priestly calling.

In what he said was his own “testimony” on the McCarrick case, Canadian Cardinal Marc Ouellet, prefect of the Vatican’s Congregation for Bishops, said not only that Pope Francis did not conceal sexual abuse by McCarrick, calling Italian Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò’s accusations a political “frame job,” but said that while private restrictions had been in place against McCarrick, there were no formal “sanctions” imposed by Pope emeritus Benedict XVI that Francis ignored.

Viganò, who served as the papal ambassador in US from 2011 to 2016 under both Popes benedict and Francis, made his charges in an explosive letter released Aug. 25. This marks the first time a senior Vatican official has directly responded to the substance of those charges.

[…]

Ouellet confirmed that McCarrick had been asked by his predecessor, Italian Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re, to avoid public appearances and stay out of the spotlight, but he said those were not formal “sanctions” and neither Benedict not Francis had ever signed a letter to that effect. The reason, he said, is because at the time, they did not have enough evidence to prove his guilt.

McCarrick was “strongly encouraged not to travel and not to appear in public,” in order to prevent rumors, he said, and urged to live a “private life” of silence “with the rigor of canonical penalties.”

[…]

The prelate accused Viganò of making unfounded accusations for political reasons, saying that “in response to your unjust and unjustified attack, I conclude that the accusation is a political frame job without a real foundation intended to incriminate the pope and I repeat, that it has profoundly wounded the communion of the Church.”

To this end, he noted how Viganò took issue with his stance on Francis’ 2016 exhortation on the family, Amoris Laetita, as well as the pope’s decision to adjust the Catechism of the Catholic Church to read that the death penalty, declaring it inadmissible in every circumstance.

Referring to the most recent letter published by Viganò, published Sept. 29, in which the prelate makes a direct appeal to Ouellet to publish documents contained in the Vatican’s Congregation for Bishops related to McCarrick and accuses Francis of forgetting about Christ, Ouellet said that the message, though apparently spiritual, “seemed really too sarcastic, even blasphemous! This cannot come from the spirit of God.”

In a more personal tone, Ouellet said he is aware that “bitterness and delusion” have marked Viganò’s service to the Holy See, but urged the former ambassador not to end his priestly life “in open and scandalous rebellion, which inflicts a very painful wound on the spouse of Christ, which you pretend to serve better, aggravating the division and confusion of the People of God!”

Ouellet spoke of faithfulness to the Successor of Peter as a sign of priestly obedience to Christ, and closed his letter with an appeal for Viganò to remember his priestly call, asking him directly: “How can you celebrate the holy Eucharist and pronounce his name in the canon of the Mass? How can you pray the holy rosary, St. Michael the Archangel and the Mother of God, condemning the one who protects and accompanies you everyday in his heavy and courageous ministry?”

The prelate’s letter comes the day after the Vatican announced that they are carrying out a “thorough investigation” of the McCarrick case by examining documentation on him in the archives of the Roman Curia, and that they will reveal the conclusions “in due course.”

Wow, that's a lot of dirty laundry being hung out right there.

I've begun to wonder if CPS' Catholic related threads have become laundromats, that's for sure. It's as though wosbald takes the dirty garments of Christ's beautiful bride to wash them in a mud puddle for her enemies to see. Stop this!

Yeah. Secrecy is the way to go.

No, it isn't. What doesn't help anything is the constant posting on CPS to a bunch of anti Catholic guys who should also be exposed to the beauty found in the Catholic Church instead of all negativity from Catholics. In other words, my post above is more about CPS, not the dirty laundry itself. Yes, the dirty laundry needs cleaning. But why does wosbald have to post on a constant basis all the dirty intrigue of our church here of all places? For what purpose other than harm it further?

I dunno... transparency, maybe?

Oh yes, it's so very important that you know every little detail of trouble in the Catholic Church. I'm sure you keep track of every little detail about the Kingdom Hall too. Don't turn this around to some ridiculous crusade of transparency. It isn't. I just want to know why wosbald is always the bearer of bad news. He can post what he likes. I would prefer he become more balanced with it, that's all.

[sweetandsour]

FTR, my comment was not wrt Wos posting something that's already been made public, but the apparent internal remarks and personal attacks by the priests being made public by whoever this source is. And I'm certainly not anti-catholic, btw. What really raised my eyebrows were the barbs being thrown. One priest even stated that the other was "pretending" to serve the church, if I read it right.
Anyway, carry on.

[UncleBob]

+JMJ+

Vatican's bishops czar says papal accuser guilty of 'political frame-job'

Cardinal Marc Ouellet, prefect of the Congregation for Bishops, acknowledges the congregation after concelebrating Mass July 26 at the Basilica of Ste.-Anne-de-Beaupre in Ste.-Anne-de-Beaupre, Quebec, on the feast of St. Anne. Also pictured are Archbishop Valery Vienneau of Moncton, and Cardinal Gerald Lacroix of Quebec City. (Credit: CNS photo/Philippe Vaillancourt, Presence)

ROME — In a stinging three-page letter, the Vatican’s top official for supervising bishops has accused a former papal envoy who linked Pope Francis to the scandals surrounding ex-Cardinal Theodore McCarrick of a “deplorable and incomprehensible” attack, which is both at odds with the truth and a betrayal of his priestly calling.

In what he said was his own “testimony” on the McCarrick case, Canadian Cardinal Marc Ouellet, prefect of the Vatican’s Congregation for Bishops, said not only that Pope Francis did not conceal sexual abuse by McCarrick, calling Italian Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò’s accusations a political “frame job,” but said that while private restrictions had been in place against McCarrick, there were no formal “sanctions” imposed by Pope emeritus Benedict XVI that Francis ignored.

Viganò, who served as the papal ambassador in US from 2011 to 2016 under both Popes benedict and Francis, made his charges in an explosive letter released Aug. 25. This marks the first time a senior Vatican official has directly responded to the substance of those charges.

[…]

Ouellet confirmed that McCarrick had been asked by his predecessor, Italian Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re, to avoid public appearances and stay out of the spotlight, but he said those were not formal “sanctions” and neither Benedict not Francis had ever signed a letter to that effect. The reason, he said, is because at the time, they did not have enough evidence to prove his guilt.

McCarrick was “strongly encouraged not to travel and not to appear in public,” in order to prevent rumors, he said, and urged to live a “private life” of silence “with the rigor of canonical penalties.”

[…]

The prelate accused Viganò of making unfounded accusations for political reasons, saying that “in response to your unjust and unjustified attack, I conclude that the accusation is a political frame job without a real foundation intended to incriminate the pope and I repeat, that it has profoundly wounded the communion of the Church.”

To this end, he noted how Viganò took issue with his stance on Francis’ 2016 exhortation on the family, Amoris Laetita, as well as the pope’s decision to adjust the Catechism of the Catholic Church to read that the death penalty, declaring it inadmissible in every circumstance.

Referring to the most recent letter published by Viganò, published Sept. 29, in which the prelate makes a direct appeal to Ouellet to publish documents contained in the Vatican’s Congregation for Bishops related to McCarrick and accuses Francis of forgetting about Christ, Ouellet said that the message, though apparently spiritual, “seemed really too sarcastic, even blasphemous! This cannot come from the spirit of God.”

In a more personal tone, Ouellet said he is aware that “bitterness and delusion” have marked Viganò’s service to the Holy See, but urged the former ambassador not to end his priestly life “in open and scandalous rebellion, which inflicts a very painful wound on the spouse of Christ, which you pretend to serve better, aggravating the division and confusion of the People of God!”

Ouellet spoke of faithfulness to the Successor of Peter as a sign of priestly obedience to Christ, and closed his letter with an appeal for Viganò to remember his priestly call, asking him directly: “How can you celebrate the holy Eucharist and pronounce his name in the canon of the Mass? How can you pray the holy rosary, St. Michael the Archangel and the Mother of God, condemning the one who protects and accompanies you everyday in his heavy and courageous ministry?”

The prelate’s letter comes the day after the Vatican announced that they are carrying out a “thorough investigation” of the McCarrick case by examining documentation on him in the archives of the Roman Curia, and that they will reveal the conclusions “in due course.”

Wow, that's a lot of dirty laundry being hung out right there.

I've begun to wonder if CPS' Catholic related threads have become laundromats, that's for sure. It's as though wosbald takes the dirty garments of Christ's beautiful bride to wash them in a mud puddle for her enemies to see. Stop this!

Yeah. Secrecy is the way to go.

No, it isn't. What doesn't help anything is the constant posting on CPS to a bunch of anti Catholic guys who should also be exposed to the beauty found in the Catholic Church instead of all negativity from Catholics. In other words, my post above is more about CPS, not the dirty laundry itself. Yes, the dirty laundry needs cleaning. But why does wosbald have to post on a constant basis all the dirty intrigue of our church here of all places? For what purpose other than harm it further?

I dunno... transparency, maybe?

Oh yes, it's so very important that you know every little detail of trouble in the Catholic Church. I'm sure you keep track of every little detail about the Kingdom Hall too. Don't turn this around to some ridiculous crusade of transparency. It isn't. I just want to know why wosbald is always the bearer of bad news. He can post what he likes. I would prefer he become more balanced with it, that's all.

Actually I do read up on most religions--including "Kingdom Hall". I have since grad school as my Master's is in Religious Studies. It is about transparency. If the RCC had been transparent about its problems when it happened, much misery would have been avoided.

[wosbald]

+JMJ+

Intra-Thread Trackbacks: pg 80 / pg 80


Cardinal Ouellet Writes Open Letter to Archbishop Viganò

Cardinal Marc Ouellet, P.S.S. prefect of the Congregation for Bishops, in the Vatican Press Office on June 14, 2016. (Daniel Ibáñez/CNA)

The prefect for the Congregation for Bishops expresses his firm disagreement with the former nuncio’s testimonies, calling his position “incomprehensible and extremely troubling” and offers to help him “return to communion” with the Holy Father.

Here below is the full text of the letter (Vatican working translation), released this morning, the Feast of Our Lady of the Rosary. The letter was only sent to journalists accredited to the Holy See and did not appear in the bolletino. This text replaces an earlier Register translation:

OPEN LETTER FROM THE PREFECT OF THE CONGREGATION FOR BISHOPS, CARDINAL MARC OUELLET, ON THE RECENT ACCUSATIONS AGAINST THE HOLY SEE

Dear brother Carlo Maria Viganò,

In your last message to the press, in which you make accusations against Pope Francis and …

[…]

[Thunktank]

+JMJ+

Vatican's bishops czar says papal accuser guilty of 'political frame-job'

Cardinal Marc Ouellet, prefect of the Congregation for Bishops, acknowledges the congregation after concelebrating Mass July 26 at the Basilica of Ste.-Anne-de-Beaupre in Ste.-Anne-de-Beaupre, Quebec, on the feast of St. Anne. Also pictured are Archbishop Valery Vienneau of Moncton, and Cardinal Gerald Lacroix of Quebec City. (Credit: CNS photo/Philippe Vaillancourt, Presence)

ROME — In a stinging three-page letter, the Vatican’s top official for supervising bishops has accused a former papal envoy who linked Pope Francis to the scandals surrounding ex-Cardinal Theodore McCarrick of a “deplorable and incomprehensible” attack, which is both at odds with the truth and a betrayal of his priestly calling.

In what he said was his own “testimony” on the McCarrick case, Canadian Cardinal Marc Ouellet, prefect of the Vatican’s Congregation for Bishops, said not only that Pope Francis did not conceal sexual abuse by McCarrick, calling Italian Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò’s accusations a political “frame job,” but said that while private restrictions had been in place against McCarrick, there were no formal “sanctions” imposed by Pope emeritus Benedict XVI that Francis ignored.

Viganò, who served as the papal ambassador in US from 2011 to 2016 under both Popes benedict and Francis, made his charges in an explosive letter released Aug. 25. This marks the first time a senior Vatican official has directly responded to the substance of those charges.

[…]

Ouellet confirmed that McCarrick had been asked by his predecessor, Italian Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re, to avoid public appearances and stay out of the spotlight, but he said those were not formal “sanctions” and neither Benedict not Francis had ever signed a letter to that effect. The reason, he said, is because at the time, they did not have enough evidence to prove his guilt.

McCarrick was “strongly encouraged not to travel and not to appear in public,” in order to prevent rumors, he said, and urged to live a “private life” of silence “with the rigor of canonical penalties.”

[…]

The prelate accused Viganò of making unfounded accusations for political reasons, saying that “in response to your unjust and unjustified attack, I conclude that the accusation is a political frame job without a real foundation intended to incriminate the pope and I repeat, that it has profoundly wounded the communion of the Church.”

To this end, he noted how Viganò took issue with his stance on Francis’ 2016 exhortation on the family, Amoris Laetita, as well as the pope’s decision to adjust the Catechism of the Catholic Church to read that the death penalty, declaring it inadmissible in every circumstance.

Referring to the most recent letter published by Viganò, published Sept. 29, in which the prelate makes a direct appeal to Ouellet to publish documents contained in the Vatican’s Congregation for Bishops related to McCarrick and accuses Francis of forgetting about Christ, Ouellet said that the message, though apparently spiritual, “seemed really too sarcastic, even blasphemous! This cannot come from the spirit of God.”

In a more personal tone, Ouellet said he is aware that “bitterness and delusion” have marked Viganò’s service to the Holy See, but urged the former ambassador not to end his priestly life “in open and scandalous rebellion, which inflicts a very painful wound on the spouse of Christ, which you pretend to serve better, aggravating the division and confusion of the People of God!”

Ouellet spoke of faithfulness to the Successor of Peter as a sign of priestly obedience to Christ, and closed his letter with an appeal for Viganò to remember his priestly call, asking him directly: “How can you celebrate the holy Eucharist and pronounce his name in the canon of the Mass? How can you pray the holy rosary, St. Michael the Archangel and the Mother of God, condemning the one who protects and accompanies you everyday in his heavy and courageous ministry?”

The prelate’s letter comes the day after the Vatican announced that they are carrying out a “thorough investigation” of the McCarrick case by examining documentation on him in the archives of the Roman Curia, and that they will reveal the conclusions “in due course.”

Wow, that's a lot of dirty laundry being hung out right there.

I've begun to wonder if CPS' Catholic related threads have become laundromats, that's for sure. It's as though wosbald takes the dirty garments of Christ's beautiful bride to wash them in a mud puddle for her enemies to see. Stop this!

Yeah. Secrecy is the way to go.

No, it isn't. What doesn't help anything is the constant posting on CPS to a bunch of anti Catholic guys who should also be exposed to the beauty found in the Catholic Church instead of all negativity from Catholics. In other words, my post above is more about CPS, not the dirty laundry itself. Yes, the dirty laundry needs cleaning. But why does wosbald have to post on a constant basis all the dirty intrigue of our church here of all places? For what purpose other than harm it further?

I dunno... transparency, maybe?

Oh yes, it's so very important that you know every little detail of trouble in the Catholic Church. I'm sure you keep track of every little detail about the Kingdom Hall too. Don't turn this around to some ridiculous crusade of transparency. It isn't. I just want to know why wosbald is always the bearer of bad news. He can post what he likes. I would prefer he become more balanced with it, that's all.

Actually I do read up on most religions--including "Kingdom Hall". I have since grad school as my Master's is in Religious Studies. It is about transparency. If the RCC had been transparent about its problems when it happened, much misery would have been avoided.

Oh I “read up on” lots of religions too. Once in a while something hits the news in a big way about one or another of them too. Of course the reporting is all about one or two things about the religion and that’s what the average Joe and Jill judge the religion by unless they have other experience with it. It takes a special disposition to go looking for all the bad stuff in anthing.

What I mean here has nothing to do with transparency. In fact, having some posts on the bad stuff is just fine. We really should be aware of bad stuff. The trouble I personally have with what we have been seeing for the last couple of years since wosbald in particular has decided to post news on CPS about the Church for whatever reason, is how I subjectively perceive it all. Thought he might be interested in knowing how others might perceive his rapid and regular posting. Apparently you approve of it. That’s fine, I just wish he would share more variety. There’s so much more to the Catholic Church than bad news about sinners.

Quite simply, I open up this thread or the Catholic thread thinking to myself, “What bad, horrible, and traumatic news has wosbald found for me today?” It’s not an objective complaint of mine, it’s subjective. I hang out around here sometimes and by golly I just wanted to say that I think all wosbald’s bad news is a real drag after a while. I wish he would share the nice stuff about church life more often. I tried to do that a few times, but for some reason it seems that the only thing people want to talk about concerning the Catholic faith is just the bad stuff. Makes me sad is all.

But who knows, maybe I’m the only one!

[wosbald]

+JMJ+

"Red Hat Report" Intra-Thread Trackbacks: pg 79 / pg 79 / pg 79


Lay-led reform raises question: Can Catholic Church be bought? [Opinion]

(Unsplash/Pepi Stojanovski)

Two news stories last week gave ample justification for my repeated warnings this summer to be careful about viewing an increased role for the laity as some kind of panacea for what ails the church. Both stories indicated that there is a kind of clericalism unique to the laity that has emerged and which bodes ill and heretical. And, most worryingly, both stories demonstrated the ugly power of money that lay leadership entails, raising the question, unique to the American Church: Can the Catholic Church be bought?

The first story was Tom Roberts' account of a meeting at the Catholic University of America to launch the "Better Church Governance Group." The means for accomplishing improved ecclesial governance was to form a kind of posse of ex-FBI agents, academics and conservative activists to probe into the lives of all cardinal electors, compiling dossiers "in the manner of political opposition research." That characterization was frightening enough, but as you read the rest of their literature, (some of their protestations and walk backs notwithstanding,) it seemed that Roy Cohn was their model: This is reform with an ideological agenda. How else to explain the warm citation to Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò's "testimony," which has been demonstrated to be filled with mistakes and unsubstantiated rumors, or the derogatory references to Vatican Secretary of State Cardinal Pietro Parolin, to whom no whiff of scandal has attached itself.

[…]

We will see what comes of this effort. The organizers said they had already recruited some 40 researchers, and I know of one former FBI official who was contacted about working on the project. Conversely, surely someone knows, or should know, about the sad history of the jus exclusivae, the right of Catholic monarchs in France, Spain and Austria, to veto papal candidates. It was last exercised in 1903 against the candidacy of Cardinal Mariano Rampolla, after which outside attempts to influence a conclave were prohibited by canon law.

The other, related article was Heidi Schlumpf's report on the "Authentic Reform" conference sponsored by Tim Busch's Napa Institute with, as she indicates, a large role by the Denver-based and horribly misnamed Augustine Institute. Just like the poorly named Cardinal Newman Society, the Denver shop exhibits none of the intellectual reach of its namesake. They may be geniuses when compared to Busch, but that is a pretty low bar.

How low? Just read the opening comments he made:

"We're not going to forget about it [sexual misconduct by the clergy]," he said. "We're going to bring them to justice, move them out and restore our church to holiness."

"It needs to stop. And, we, the laity, are going to stop it. And we're going to do it regardless of what the civil and canon law says," Busch said

"If we don't tolerate this in our own businesses, we can't tolerate it in our church," Busch said, adding that he will have respect for priests and bishops "to the extent they are compliant with normal business acumen and behavior."

Busch is so full of himself, the successful businessman, lecturing churchmen that they need to be more like him, and that somehow the church should be run like a business, even though, obviously, it is not a business. He sounds like a 60-something male version of Veruca Salt, the snotty girl in "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory" who demands everything "now" and badgers her poor father endlessly until she gets it. Perhaps Busch will come to a similar end.

The rest of the event sounds like it was mostly gay-bashing. Just like the Jansenists before them, today's Puritans in the U.S. are not only obsessed with sex, but they seem to view sexual diversity as a kind of disease, something they could catch in an epidemic. And, like the Jansenists, they demand purity at all costs, which leads them to this perverse clericalism. If a priest falls from his vows, it is a serious thing, just as when a husband or wife violates their vows. But, this crowd is insisting that a priest who sins against his vows must leave the priesthood. This is the clericalism of the laity, the expectation that the clergy be super-holy on the people's behalf. This is an ancient view of priesthood but it is not exactly the Catholic view. Closer to the Donatists, the fourth-century schismatics against whom the doctrine of ex opera operato was devised: It is God who is active in the sacramental life of the church.

That is worrisome enough because Jansenism and Donatism were and are heresies. They try to trap God in their narrow theological constructs, but God is omnipotent and free.

Just as worrisome is the fact that today's conservative groups can throw money whenever and wherever they wish. More progressive Catholics can't match them. And, even if there were wealthy progressive Catholics who adopted the imperious tone of Mr. Busch, I would resist it. Money exercises too much influence on our politics, and it already influences our ecclesial life more than it should. But, while no one disputes the need for the expertise of laypeople to conduct oversight, I think it is beyond doubt that if the church in the United States succumbs to these naive appeals for lay-led reforms, the Veruca Salts of the Catholic Right — Busch, Carl Anderson, Sean Fieler, and other plutocrats — will be in charge. They will lead us into schism and heresy.

I will take my chances with Pope Francis and the bishops, thank you very much.

[Del]

+JMJ+

"Red Hat Report" Intra-Thread Trackbacks: pg 79 / pg 79 / pg 79


Lay-led reform raises question: Can Catholic Church be bought? [Opinion]

(Unsplash/Pepi Stojanovski)

Two news stories last week gave ample justification for my repeated warnings this summer ....

National Catholic Reporter cites two articles in National Catholic Reporter concerning hypothetical changes that National Catholic Reporter is considering to the Catholic Church's governance.

This is an echo chamber.

National Catholic Reporter does not represent Catholic faith, thought, or authority. They are a bunch of secular liberals. They exist to complain to themselves about "conservative Catholics."