PRESS TITLE FOR DR. MASSIMO’S VERY FINE COMMENTARY:
Vatican's handling of Jesuit priest shows new dimensions of never-ending abuse crisis
I wish Dr. Faggioli would have commented, too, on the Zanchetta affair and how mercy run amuck enabled this man to escape Church justice, precisely because of his personal relationship to Pope Francis.
Or Bishop Juan Barros Madrid is a particularly painful story about Pope Francis’ and his stubborn intransigence in appointing this man a bishop in the first place and mocking those who derided this abusive bishop. It had to take the breathtaking failure of Pope Francis’ pilgrimage to Chile and the violence his presence provoked as well as very small crowds for the pope to finally act.
There is a pattern from this pope to denigrate and marginalize those who question his leadership and the direction in which in he leading the Church especially with the synodal process which seems to be open to changing doctrine, morals, sacramental principles and even dogma. Think of the first “dubia” cardinals and how they have been treated. Think of those who are now alarmed at Pope Francis canceling his last two predecessors and their hermeneutic in continuity leadership. Think too how Pope Francis uses name calling and accusations of mental illness for those who followed Pope Benedict’s generous allowance of the older form of the Mass. This is nothing short of spiritual abuse.
Here is one point that Dr. Massimo Faggioli makes:
This case (Rupnik) emerged during the second phase, or a declining moment, in Francis' pontificate, close to the 10th anniversary of the pope's election in March 2013. While I believe that these revelations also hurt Francis, I do not believe for a moment that they can be reduced to a conspiracy against the pope. This kind of whataboutism does not help the church and the pope.
From an historical point of view, the ecclesial context is one of mounting tensions and frustrations of women against a much-beloved pope because of the clear inadequacy and inconsistency of what he says on women, the language he uses about women, women's theology and women's role in the church. It is striking to see how the fact that adult women were Rupnik's alleged victims apparently made this case a less scandalous one to the Vatican or the Jesuits, after a number of female victims were not listened to or were reluctant to come forward after they saw the way other women were treated.
My comment:
I would like to remind Dr. Faggioli that the best and most humble statement coming from any pope came from Pope St. John Paul II. He said he could not ordain women priests because he has absolutely NO authority to do so as the sacramental principle of what gender the priesthood should be is a part of the ordinary magisterium of the Church. Not even an ecumenical council in union with the pope can change this dogma.
For a pope to say that HE HAS NO AUTHORITY TO CHANGE THIS, THAT OR THE OTHER AND NO ONE ELSE IN THE CHURCH DOES EITHER, IS A SAFEGUARD AGAINST SPIRITUAL ABUSE AND A POPE OR ANYONE ELSE IN THE CHURCH ABUSING THE DEPOSIT OF FAITH AND THE PERENNIAL MAGISTERIUM OF THE CHURCH!
And Dr. Faggioli, the reason that women can’t be ordained has nothing to do with secular qualifications for a job. Certainly women could make better priests than men from a variety of secular and sociological arguments. But the priesthood isn’t based solely on how well a priest performs his tasks, it is supernatural and anthropologically based upon gender differences and complimentarity. Just as a man can dress up as a women, act as a women and look like a woman, a man at the basic scientific truth of DNA is a man. He cannot conceive a child in his womb as he has no womb and cannot naturally conceived a child in his womb since he has no womb. A woman can’t be a priest because she’s not a man, she can’t be a natural father or spiritual father. She cannot be a sacramental sing of Jesus as the Son of Man or the Son of God. She is not a Son of God or a Son of Man!
16 comments:
Re “The Vatican’s handling of Jesuit priests” :
Father Jimbo SJ, who can’t take a cup of tea without relating it to LGBT issues, and whose Biblical teaching can only be described as “imaginative “, is welcomed into the Vatican and asked for his advice!
Compare and contrast this with Father Pavone's treatment:
We read in La Croix that Archbishop Lafont of Pachamma fame was convicted of sexual abuse. HERE He was consequently banned from public ministry and required to live in a monastery in France to conduct a life of prayer and penance.
He was NOT dismissed from the clerical state, it seems.
Regarding “the Vatican’s handling of Jesuit priests” (2) :
Fr Rumpy, who would win first prize for the worst ecclesial art ever seen, and who has great trouble living as a chaste celibate man, and who solves his problems by absolving the people he has sinned with, only gets a brief slap on the wrist from the CDF.
Paul, Next those loons will be saying that Jesus may have identified as a woman
For many US bishops and many American Jesuits, Fr Pavone’s backing of Donald Trump was truly a terrible blasphemy.
My personal problem with the Church’s response and failure of management of the sex abuse programs they run is that they treat the victims as nameless support actors. It is also very alarming that very little attention is given to the spiritual damage to the victims. Finally, there appears to be an almost superstitious belief that the offenders will will somehow out grow or get over their preoccupations. The unfortunate conclusion is that the hierarchy is so patient and understanding of the perpetrator and so oblivious to the victims is because they are doing the same things.
Paul,
Those bishops and priests are spiritually and mentally ill with no moral compass. And they wonder why people don’t give a damn about the Church anymore
Father McDonald said..."I would like to remind Dr. Faggioli that the best and most humble statement coming from any pope came from Pope St. John Paul II. He said he could not ordain women priests because he has absolutely NO authority to do so...For a pope to say that HE HAS NO AUTHORITY TO CHANGE THIS, THAT OR THE OTHER AND NO ONE ELSE IN THE CHURCH DOES EITHER, IS A SAFEGUARD AGAINST SPIRITUAL ABUSE AND A POPE OR ANYONE ELSE IN THE CHURCH ABUSING THE DEPOSIT OF FAITH AND THE PERENNIAL MAGISTERIUM OF THE CHURCH!"
Pope Saint John Paul II, in his 1994 A.D. Apostolic Letter on Reserving Priestly Ordination to Men Alone, said:
"But since the question had also become the subject of debate among theologians and in certain Catholic circles, Paul VI directed the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith to set forth and expound the teaching of the Church on this matter.
"This was done through the Declaration Inter Insigniores, which the Supreme Pontiff approved and ordered to be published."
"The Declaration recalls and explains the fundamental reasons for this teaching, reasons expounded by Paul VI, and concludes that the Church "does not consider herself authorized to admit women to priestly ordination."
In 2016 A.D., Pope Francis declared that "on the ordination of women in the Catholic Church, the final word is clear, it was said by St. John Paul II and this remains."
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Women-hatig clerics rend to exploit women one way or another. The next Pope should call a Council to condemn the ordination to the prfesthood of same sex attracted men. In the middle-ages clerical concubanage was the major problem. Time has come to adopt the Orthodox system and ordaine only married man. It will not totally eliminate the current problem but it woul keep out of the Church a certain class of women-hating venal individuals.
John,
Your approach, while seemingly sensible, has its own set of issues: potential divorces, bratty kids, etc. I have seen this with ministers’ families. Although, those issues do pale in comparison to clerical sexual abuse of young boys and men. The Church has a hard time admitting to Her policy mistakes, e.g.,mandatory celibacy and the failed Novus Ordo. So I would not bet on change.
TJM & John, as TJM writes, there are a whole host of problems that arise with married clergy, divorce, adultery, spousal and child abuse of one’s own children and even sexual abuse in the family.
The Anglican Clergy as well as the Orthodox have issues of sex abuse of minors and taking advantage of adults. Theirs is more heterosexual than homosexual. But at the root of disordered affections is a power differential.
Catholic priests are held to a higher standard than married clergy and thus their foibles are more reported and examined.
And of course there is the actual wedding of the priest to the Church and Jesus Christ. Sill that be the first divorce, is it simply forgotten?
Father McDonald,
Everything you say is true. It is the reaction by the hierarachy which is unfathomable. As a father, I would have thrown an extra $1,000 in the collection if an abusive priest had been denounced by his bishop and kicked out, instead of being moved to another parish to continue his crimes. The people would have CHEERED the bishops if they had done that. But no, they had no protect their caste in the hopes of avoiding "scandal" when the true scandal, and one that harmed the Church, was covering for these monsters.
I admit that married priests are not the Ultimate solution to the present problems. However, Church history tells us that the protestant reformlation occured chiefly because then as now the popes managed to sabotage internal reform initiatives. Our orthodox Cardinals are silent, or to few, or to afraid to speak. Perhaps the current orthodox bishops could act as if Benedict XVI were still the modell to follow. Lets face it, another pope like the current Holy Father and we are toast as a true Christian proposition for a long time to come.
John,
I always felt religious order priests, because of that structure, requires celibacy, but not for non religious order priests. I suspect married priests, particularly if their wives were gainfully employed, might be harder to control - hence a non starter for the hierarchy
Pride and a lack of wisdom by the Church Hierarchy has let the priestly sex abuse run amok and thus negatively painted a bad picture of the church.
During His earthly life the Son of God said and did very little to condemn how man served justice on his fellow man who broke the law.
Yet the church hierarchy seemed to have done all in its power to shield allegedly sexually predatory priests from the laws governing man.
No man...not even a Saint, a Pope or a priest is saved until he is in Heaven. The decision to enjoy eternal life is a decision between a soul and God. The Church only helps the soul to come to the Truth. And the person using his or her God given free will ultimately decides for him or herself.
For sure the church hierarchy may have tried to protect the sacraments of the church from being ridiculed and derided but this stand shows a total lack of faith in Our Lord Jesus Christ to protect the church and sacraments He established.
Judas Iscariot an apostle ended up in Hell and the thief dying next to Christ was guaranteed eternal life. One was a companion of God but freely chose the worldly life. The other was a sinner living almost his entire life away from God but in his last few minutes of this life recognized the Infinite Mercy freely available to him and chose it.
Post a Comment