It’s all about the money with the Church.
what
And this is why they are getting slammed here. It’s not the abuse, ok it is definitely the abuse but not exclusively, it is the coverup and culpability of leadership. It is the denial, the not seeing what is in front of ones own nose. For an organization that deigns to claim moral leadership this is beyond unacceptable, it is a dereliction of duty to their core reason.
And the Catholic Church is not alone. The evangelical and baptist communities, of which I grew up in, going all in and embracing the racism and hatred of Trump is another example of failure of an organization to live up to the moral leadership they try to claim.
And that is substantially worse than simply being culpable. Penn State and Paterno covering for Sandusky is similar, though to a slightly lower degree. They aren’t claiming moral leadership as much as their core reason is to educate and grow young adults, there is an implied responsibility to protect those entrusted to their care. They are worse than, for example, movie studios covering for Weinstein.
Not because the crimes are lesser, or the victims less important, but that I find an organization who, as it’s core reason for existing, claims moral leadership or stewardship for children should be held to a higher standard than your average corporation. Because if you fail so badly at your very reason to exist, it is right and natural to question your continued existence as such.
Just to clarify something: the Catholic League is NOT the Catholic Church, although they obviously have close ties and I’d assume would listen to strong directives from the Church if they came. The Catholic League is basically an Anti-Defamation League devoted to all things Catholic, and their completely one-sided advocacy leads to some pretty messed up stuff. But again, this isn’t an excuse; as mentioned earlier, if the Church wanted them to shut the heck up, it would likely take little effort.
Seems like the Catholic League is something like the Rudy Giuliani of the Church.
Well, this guy is the church, and he blames child abuse by priests on homosexuality.
https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2018/08/17/catholic-cardinal-homosexual-culture-blame-child-rape/
That’s really on point, lol
edit - of course, they’re not actually employed by the Church, but otherwise spot on
No one man (or woman) IS the Church, but you know that. Anyway, the whole lesson here is that cardinals and bishops can fuck up really badly, so what do Burke’s words prove?
So Burke is wrong but it is maybe worth noting that an aspect of the scandals (less abominable, if we must categorize, than the abuse of children) involves priests, teachers, and bishops who abuse their authority to pressure young men studying in seminaries into unwanted homosexual activity. This is the sort of thing Cardinal McCarrick was fairly well known for within the clergy (they used to say “hide the handsome ones” when he would visit; and he would have his favorites call him “Uncle Ted”) until the stories came out recently that he also had abused young boys.
The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops released a bolder-than-usual statement today. Big message is that they will be setting up procedures to report and investigate bishops (which were lacking inthe past) and will involve the laity as well as the Vatican (which is only sometimes the case).
The Executive Committee has established three goals: (1) an investigation into the questions surrounding Archbishop McCarrick; (2) an opening of new and confidential channels for reporting complaints against bishops; and (3) advocacy for more effective resolution of future complaints. These goals will be pursued according to three criteria: proper independence, sufficient authority, and substantial leadership by laity.
If anyone’s still following this, a big bombshell dropped last night: An Italian bishop, Archibishop Vigano, who used to be the nuncio (Vatican ambassador) to the United States wrote a sharply worded “testimony” spelling things out about what was known about Cardinal McCarrick and when, and naming names. Some of the contents:
- Reports were being sent to the Vatican’s secretary of state in 2000 and several other times after that. These reports would have come in during all of the last three papacies.
- Vigano claims that Pope Benedict eventually disciplined McCarrick, disallowing him from living in seminaries and from speaking and celebrating mass publicly. This disciplining was apparently never made public or widely known. And if it’s true, McCarrick didn’t totally abide by the punishment.
- Vigano implies that Pope Francis knew of McCarrick’s status, but upon becoming pope apparently made McCarrick a major advisor on who in the American clergy should be made bishop.
- He also tells some stories of meetings with Francis that indicate Francis was testing Vigano to see what he knew and felt about McCarrick.
- He calls out many powerful Italian and American bishops as complicit in the McCarrick failures: Secretaries of State Sodano and Parolin, Cardinal William Levada (former archbishop of San Francisco), and Cardinal Donald Wuerl (Archbishop of Washington), and many others.
- Vigano declares that all of the prelates named including Francis are obliged to step down.
Vigano is easily the most prominent voice to start calling out specific men about specific actions or failures to act. His words are very rough on Pope Francis and many of the bishops who are seen as supporters of his generally liberal, reformist agenda. But they also implicate Popes JPII and Benedict in failures as well, albeit with a lighter touch.
Here’s the thing: It’s well known that Vigano is a conservative who has opposed many of the moves Francis has made. He was removed from his position as nuncio by Francis presumably over these political disputes. Vigano definitely has several bones to pick with Francis. But there is something here that transcends those squabbles, it seems to me. The abuse issue is obviously huge and the anger is swelling among clergy and laity alike. Many will probably defend Francis by saying this is a political attack, but Vigano is doing what a lot of members of the church have wanted someone to do for months now: get specific, name names, make claims.
This could be very big, either for what it exposes, or for how it politically divides the college of cardinals.
One of those Nostradamus-like folks listed out all the Popes of the future. As I recall, the line ended right around now. If all this stuff is true, good riddance.
Priests rape 'em, nuns finish 'em off. There’s not really a more appropriate headline for this timeline, I guess.
I’m maybe one fifth of the way through that and just need to step away from it and take a break…
I’m sure this ONLY happened in that one orphanage or something. The Church isn’t pure evil at all! /s
Answering the question:
I don’t think theres something truly evil in the Catholic Church, other that they put the survival of the institution over everything else. But this evil is shared by almost all human institutions, and the ones did not had it has rule probably don’t exist now because of it.
The law should apply to the Catholic Church, like any other institution or person.
Oof, that’s gruesome stuff.
I kept wanting to hear something from the nuns or priests or staff, just to hear how they could possibly explain, excuse, or evade what happened to those kids. When she caught up with one–Sister Priscilla?–it was almost as disturbing to see that thin veneer of fiction melt away, the immediate contradictions in her statements, her sense that maybe justice had come (it hadn’t).
One of the factors in both what’s reported there in the the article and in the recent abuse cases in the Church is how insular and isolated structures like seminaries and orphanages provide fertile ground for a culture of depravity and exploitation of the weak to sprout and grow and get passed on and accepted by new members. Evil festers in stagnant waters. Even as someone who thinks the Catholic Church is divinely established and commonly a force for good in the world, I can see how some of its qualities make it more susceptible to that kind of rot. Counteracting that is one of the things the Church has to figure out.
It occurs to me that beyond what is real and in the news about problems with the catholic church, this forum is in english, and many people that post here are from anglosaxon and protestan countries. Religion and politics have cross lines many times, and theres a vested interest into painting the catholic church with darker colors because politics.
Like… in anglosaxon countries the spanish inquisition is popular, but the reality is they burned like 60 womens, while in germany the process for witches burned around 40.000. But the infamy gets on the spanish inquisition because is catholic land it was good to demonize the political enemy.
Modern times has done nothing to fix these political influenced memes. They are accepted and never questiones maybe because the interest to label the catholic church has evil for political reasons still exist?
I am only thinking out loud.