Is The Papacy Threatened?

[ReformedBaptist]

The thread started about the current Antichrist's cover-ups of the abominations within its organization. The topic went into debating doctrine, but the fact remains..the current Man of Sin is claiming immunity to being investigated or prosecuted.

May the Lord bring the papacy to a quick end.

 

[DHK]

Several well meaning but misinformed individuals here have made the claim that the church known today as the "Catholic Church" of Rome was invented in the 4th century. A cursory examination of the historical writings of the Early Church shows this claim to be fallacious.

Your quotes are fallacious, as are their interpretations.
The authors did not write in English, as English did not exist back then. They probably wrote in Greek. Either way, a bishop was a pastor. The Greek word for deacon simply means "servant." The word "catholic" in the first and second centuries simply meant "universal." With that in mind your interpretation of these writings is very much tainted. You read into them meanings that are not there.

 

[DHK]

The thread started about the current Antichrist's cover-ups of the abominations within its organization. The topic went into debating doctrine, but the fact remains..the current Man of Sin is claiming immunity to being investigated or prosecuted.

May the Lord bring the papacy to a quick end.

Amen!

But, despite repeated appeals by victims of clerical sexual abuse that he take responsibility for his role in the handling of pedophile priests, he stayed silent on that issue. The victims contend there were decades of systematic cover-up by bishops in many countries, including the United States, Ireland and Benedict's native Germany.They want him to demand the resignations of bishops complicit in any conspiracy to shield pedophile priests by shuffling them from parish to parish instead of kicking them out of the priesthood.
The accusations against the pope stem from his leadership as archbishop of Munich before he came to the Vatican three decades ago, as well as his long tenure in Rome of the Holy See's office dealing with a growing pile of dossiers about pedophile priests.


Vatican: Pope has immunity in sex abuse trials
Pope sees sex scandal as test; bishops urge reform
Abuse victims to Vatican: ‘Stop attacking us!’
Pope silent on abuse crisis as Holy Week begins

Victims group angry
"Victims are seeking consolation and healing and should not be insulted and told that our speaking out is petty gossip," said Barbara Blaine, a leader of the U.S.-based Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests (SNAP).

"The pope has said the truth should be exposed. They can't have it both ways," she told Reuters.
The celebrations leading up to Easter have been clouded by accusations the Church in several countries mishandled and covered up abuse of children by priests, sometimes for decades.



The Vatican has denied any cover-up over the abuse of 200 deaf boys in the United States by Reverend Lawrence Murphy from 1950 to 1974. The New York Times reported the Vatican and Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict, were warned about Murphy, but the priest was not defrocked.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36166058/ns/world_news-europe/page/2/


How long will people let such atrocities stand, that is go unpunished?
Simply to say, "I'm sorry," doesn't cut it. If one could find all the abused victims, both dead and alive and count up the total, I wonder how much cumulative jail time it would add up to?

 

[lori4dogs]

The New York Times and Pope Benedict XVI:
how it looks to an American in the Vatican

By Cardinal William J. Levada
Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith

In our melting pot of peoples, languages and backgrounds, Americans are not noted as examples of “high” culture. But we can take pride as a rule in our passion for fairness. In the Vatican where I currently work, my colleagues – whether fellow cardinals at meetings or officials in my office – come from many different countries, continents and cultures. As I write this response today (March 26, 2010) I have had to admit to them that I am not proud of America’s newspaper of record, the New York Times, as a paragon of fairness.


I say this because today’s Times presents both a lengthy article by Laurie Goodstein, a senior columnist, headlined “Warned About Abuse, Vatican Failed to Defrock Priest,” and an accompanying editorial entitled “The Pope and the Pedophilia Scandal,” in which the editors call the Goodstein article a disturbing report (emphasis in original) as a basis for their own charges against the Pope. Both the article and the editorial are deficient by any reasonable standards of fairness that Americans have every right and expectation to find in their major media reporting.

In her lead paragraph, Goodstein relies on what she describes as “newly unearthed files” to point out what the Vatican (i.e. then Cardinal Ratzinger and his Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith) did not do – “defrock Fr. Murphy.” Breaking news, apparently. Only after eight paragraphs of purple prose does Goodstein reveal that Fr. Murphy, who criminally abused as many as 200 deaf children while working at a school in the Milwaukee Archdiocese from 1950 to 1974, “not only was never tried or disciplined by the church’s own justice system, but also got a pass from the police and prosecutors who ignored reports from his victims, according to the documents and interviews with victims.”

But in paragraph 13, commenting on a statement of Fr. Lombardi (the Vatican spokesman) that Church law does not prohibit anyone from reporting cases of abuse to civil authorities, Goodstein writes, “He did not address why that had never happened in this case.” Did she forget, or did her editors not read, what she wrote in paragraph nine about Murphy getting “a pass from the police and prosecutors”? By her own account it seems clear that criminal authorities had been notified, most probably by the victims and their families.

Goodstein’s account bounces back and forth as if there were not some 20 plus years intervening between reports in the 1960 and 70’s to the Archdiocese of Milwaukee and local police, and Archbishop Weakland’s appeal for help to the Vatican in 1996. Why? Because the point of the article is not about failures on the part of church and civil authorities to act properly at the time. I, for one, looking back at this report agree that Fr. Murphy deserved to be dismissed from the clerical state for his egregious criminal behavior, which would normally have resulted from a canonical trial.

The point of Goodstein’s article, however, is to attribute the failure to accomplish this dismissal to Pope Benedict, instead of to diocesan decisions at the time. She uses the technique of repeating the many escalating charges and accusations from various sources (not least from her own newspaper), and tries to use these “newly unearthed files” as the basis for accusing the pope of leniency and inaction in this case and presumably in others.

It seems to me, on the other hand, that we owe Pope Benedict a great debt of gratitude for introducing the procedures that have helped the Church to take action in the face of the scandal of priestly sexual abuse of minors. These efforts began when the Pope served as Cardinal Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and continued after he was elected Pope. That the Times has published a series of articles in which the important contribution he has made – especially in the development and implementation of Sacramentorum Sanctitatis Tutela, the Motu proprio issued by Pope John Paul II in 2001 – is ignored, seems to me to warrant the charge of lack of fairness which should be the hallmark of any reputable newspaper.

Let me tell you what I think a fair reading of the Milwaukee case would seem to indicate. The reasons why church and civil authorities took no action in the 1960’s and 70’s is apparently not contained in these “newly emerged files.” Nor does the Times seem interested in finding out why. But what does emerge is this: after almost 20 years as Archbishop, Weakland wrote to the Congregation asking for help in dealing with this terrible case of serial abuse. The Congregation approved his decision to undertake a canonical trial, since the case involved solicitation in confession – one of the graviora delicta (most grave crimes) for which the Congregation had responsibility to investigate and take appropriate action.

 

[lori4dogs]

. . . . and then there is this from The Smoking Gun:

http://www.ncregister.com/blog/smoking_gun_memo_in_murphy_paedophilia_case/

 

[lori4dogs]

The thread started about the current Antichrist's cover-ups of the abominations within its organization. The topic went into debating doctrine, but the fact remains..the current Man of Sin is claiming immunity to being investigated or prosecuted.

May the Lord bring the papacy to a quick end.

Then you and DHK will have to find a new Antichrist.

 

[DHK]

Goodstein reveal that Fr. Murphy, who criminally abused as many as 200 deaf children while working at a school in the Milwaukee Archdiocese from 1950 to 1974, “not only was never tried or disciplined by the church’s own justice system, but also got a pass from the police and prosecutors who ignored reports from his victims, according to the documents and interviews with victims.”

And these charges are true, aren't they? BTW, where is Murphy today, and what is he doing, if he is still alive? Did he ever get jail time? Did he ever face the death penalty? Why not?

But in paragraph 13, commenting on a statement of Fr. Lombardi (the Vatican spokesman) that Church law does not prohibit anyone from reporting cases of abuse to civil authorities, Goodstein writes, “He did not address why that had never happened in this case.” Did she forget, or did her editors not read, what she wrote in paragraph nine about Murphy getting “a pass from the police and prosecutors”? By her own account it seems clear that criminal authorities had been notified, most probably by the victims and their families.

And what was done about it? Another cover-up?

Goodstein’s account bounces back and forth as if there were not some 20 plus years intervening between reports in the 1960 and 70’s to the Archdiocese of Milwaukee and local police, and Archbishop Weakland’s appeal for help to the Vatican in 1996. Why? Because the point of the article is not about failures on the part of church and civil authorities to act properly at the time. I, for one, looking back at this report agree that Fr. Murphy deserved to be dismissed from the clerical state for his egregious criminal behavior, which would normally have resulted from a canonical trial.

Then, why didn't it?

The point of Goodstein’s article, however, is to attribute the failure to accomplish this dismissal to Pope Benedict, instead of to diocesan decisions at the time.

The failure of the company to perform lies squarely on the shoulders of its CEO. You know the phrase well: "The buck stops here." It applies to the RCC. The Pope is fully responsible for Murphy as he is for all his bishops, and each and every charge underneath him, including the priests. If the system doesn't work, then it must be changed. The system failed. He needs to resign. It is the only ethical thing to do.

She uses the technique of repeating the many escalating charges and accusations from various sources (not least from her own newspaper), and tries to use these “newly unearthed files” as the basis for accusing the pope of leniency and inaction in this case and presumably in others.

Not only the current pope, but popes throughout history have been lenient, have covered-up crimes, have committed crimes themselves, and have never been brought to court for them. This is a shame. And yet you still call this a Christian institution??

It seems to me, on the other hand, that we owe Pope Benedict a great debt of gratitude for introducing the procedures that have helped the Church to take action in the face of the scandal of priestly sexual abuse of minors.

A debt of gratitude for something that he was part and parcel of. Do you know of his history, and the history of his brothers, whose sins he helped to cover. Aiding and abetting crimes is just as bad as committing the same.

These efforts began when the Pope served as Cardinal Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and continued after he was elected Pope. That the Times has published a series of articles in which the important contribution he has made – especially in the development and implementation of Sacramentorum Sanctitatis Tutela, the Motu proprio issued by Pope John Paul II in 2001 – is ignored, seems to me to warrant the charge of lack of fairness which should be the hallmark of any reputable newspaper.

If they had done a thorough investigation, he should never had been chosen pope in the first place.

Let me tell you what I think a fair reading of the Milwaukee case would seem to indicate. The reasons why church and civil authorities took no action in the 1960’s and 70’s is apparently not contained in these “newly emerged files.” Nor does the Times seem interested in finding out why. But what does emerge is this: after almost 20 years as Archbishop, Weakland wrote to the Congregation asking for help in dealing with this terrible case of serial abuse. The Congregation approved his decision to undertake a canonical trial, since the case involved solicitation in confession – one of the graviora delicta (most grave crimes) for which the Congregation had responsibility to investigate and take appropriate action.

No action was taken by the church. Astonishing! It was covered-up! Typical. No action was taken by the courts. It should have been. Those that perpetrated such crimes should still be rotting in jail today.
Would you want your children to be the victims of sodomy and rape? Really? Then why do you defend these wicked men?

 

[lori4dogs]

I don't defend wicked men, DHK. I know of 'wicked men', wicked leaders in the Baptist church. They are still preaching, the HYPOCRITES, and still playing the 'holy and sanctified' game. I saw an incredible amount hypocrisy and abuse at the hands of clergy in Baptists churches over the years. Spare me!

 

[lori4dogs]

Now, here is my opinion on the recent reporting by the New York Times. What the NYT is trying to do is to implicate Pope Benedict, specifically, him. And it is distorting time-lines by 20 years or so to do it. Which amounts to lying. And their reason for doing so has nothing to do with caring about kids and how horrific it all was. Their reason for doing so is that the Catholic Church led and encouraged by Benedict, is the only large visible institution which stands against their pro abortion, pro homosexual marriage etc etc agenda. I commend the Baptist stand (most Baptist anyway) on these issues but the Baptist church is not nearly the target the Catholic Church is.

 

[BobRyan]

Here is an example of a "list" of Popes so wicked that even the RCC condemned them.

http://listverse.com/2007/08/17/top-10-most-wicked-popes/

I don't think the RCC is going to stand or fall based on finding that over the centuries they had some wicked Popes. And I am not entirely convinced that the current Pope would even be classified in that list.

The extermination of the saints - the torture of those who dared to dissent, the doctrines that supported those ideas - the claim to infallability in regard to statements such as those found in Lateran IV calling for the "extermination" of heretics and Jews -- All things that do not change with time as long as infallability is held up as an article of her faith. Those are the kinds of history-making deeds that one might expect to come up for mention in the Bible.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Zenas]

If they had done a thorough investigation, he should never had been chosen pope in the first place.

If you think the Pope should resign, be careful what you're asking for. The next pope could be a charismatic individual with the ability to go on television, preach powerful sermons and lead millions (perhaps billions) into the Catholic Church. Have you ever heard John Corapi?

 

[lori4dogs]

If it weren’t a way to get the church, the NYT would still be publishing articles saying adult child sex isn’t really harmful, as it was back in the 70’s! Read “How pedophilia lost its cool,(or maybe, lost its chic pronounced sheek)” the article First Things published about this.

Benedict himself spoke about cleaning the “filth” out of the church. No one was more upset about all this than he. No one has been more effective in changing procedures to make it possible to clear out the filth than he. But the NYT-and some really scurrilous internet sites-want to make him the chief villain of the story.

However, as I said before, if he was involved in cover up then he is guilty. I will wait for actual proof instead of relying on liberal media lies and distortions.

 

[lori4dogs]

If you think the Pope should resign, be careful what you're asking for. The next pope could be a charismatic individual with the ability to go on television, preach powerful sermons and lead millions (perhaps billions) into the Catholic Church. Have you ever heard John Corapi?

John Corapi ROCKS!

 

[DHK]

If you think the Pope should resign, be careful what you're asking for. The next pope could be a charismatic individual with the ability to go on television, preach powerful sermons and lead millions (perhaps billions) into the Catholic Church. Have you ever heard John Corapi?

And do I care?
Whatever "power" he has won't be from God.

 

[DHK]

I don't defend wicked men, DHK. I know of 'wicked men', wicked leaders in the Baptist church. They are still preaching, the HYPOCRITES, and still playing the 'holy and sanctified' game. I saw an incredible amount hypocrisy and abuse at the hands of clergy in Baptists churches over the years. Spare me!

No you didn't. As I said before, Not In The Churches I Am Associated With!
Sin yes. But any of that sin is dealt with, not only by us, but by the courts and jail sentences are handed out if need be. You don't know what you are talking about.
Such people are not qualified for the office of pastor and never will be.
In the churches I am associated with, they don't exist.

 

[donnA]

I don't defend wicked men, DHK. I know of 'wicked men', wicked leaders in the Baptist church. They are still preaching, the HYPOCRITES, and still playing the 'holy and sanctified' game. I saw an incredible amount hypocrisy and abuse at the hands of clergy in Baptists churches over the years. Spare me!

as I have said repeatedly and you have refused to understand, baptist churches are independent, none of us are answerable for another baptist church. but the rcc are not independent, but are all under one leader, and this disgusting filth comes straight from the top. none of us supports churches like you have described, and most of us would leave a church who supported a man like this, but not you, you chose to support the church who supports men who abuse children, in this way you have supported pedophilia. the rcc(that being the entire church, evry clergymen, every member, or they would distance themselves from the abuse) protects men who abuse children from prosecution, most baptsts will not.

 

[DHK]

I don't defend wicked men, DHK. I know of 'wicked men', wicked leaders in the Baptist church. They are still preaching, the HYPOCRITES, and still playing the 'holy and sanctified' game. I saw an incredible amount hypocrisy and abuse at the hands of clergy in Baptists churches over the years. Spare me!

Again, this is a nice diversion from the OP.
We aren't talking of the misdeeds of any of the Baptist churches, which BTW, are independent and not a denomination and thus cannot be compared.

Keep focused Lori. Go and read the OP if you forget what it is.
The wicked men and leaders are the clergy, including the pope, who should be removed from office for countenancing the rape, brutality, sodomization, and general torment of small children. What greater cruelty could be done by the RCC, and yet they refuse to own up to it as they should.

 

[donnA]

which BTW, are independent and not a denomination and thus cannot be compared

she apparently does not understand this.

 

[lori4dogs]

she apparently does not understand this.

Get real. Baptist 'associations' ARE denominations. This board has put up lists of Baptists denominations in Baptist Only forums.

 

[lori4dogs]

Again, this is a nice diversion from the OP.
We aren't talking of the misdeeds of any of the Baptist churches, which BTW, are independent and not a denomination and thus cannot be compared.

Keep focused Lori. Go and read the OP if you forget what it is.
The wicked men and leaders are the clergy, including the pope, who should be removed from office for countenancing the rape, brutality, sodomization, and general torment of small children. What greater cruelty could be done by the RCC, and yet they refuse to own up to it as they should.

Oh, I'm sure you don't want any focus on the filth in you own Baptists churches. Of course you would only want to focus on the Catholic Church. No surprise.

BTW, you have no idea who John Caropi is or what his relationship with Jesus Christ is. You need to stop the hatred and judging of people based on their being Catholic.