Friday, August 31, 2018

Cardinal Burke said it's licit to ask for the Pope's resignation, and Bishops call for a thorough investigation in the Vigano case and, and, and ...

Cathedral of St. Paul with it's own lightning strike.


The Pope himself asked journalists to investigate.

So that's what everyone is doing - with the approval of the Pope.  A lot of the information emerging is news to me, a lot is stuff I used to dismiss as gossip and hearsay and anti-clericalism.  I was so stupid.  For instance, I never knew this:
Archbishop Harry Flynn had conveyed concerns about Archbishop Nienstedt’s sexual behavior to Italian Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re while he was prefect for the Congregation for Bishops in Rome. - Source
Just when I was wondering why we haven't heard from Jennifer Haselberg ...

She shows up in the linked article: Questions Still Surround Papal Accuser's Role In the Nienstedt Probe.

In recent days, Archbishop Viganò has rejected claims that he tried to interfere in the investigation. Yet new interviews with some of the pivotal players – along with confirmations that two U.S. cardinals were involved to varying degrees with discussions over Archbishop Nienstedt’s potential removal – suggest that question marks about his role have not yet been resolved.
In January 2014, Archbishop Nienstedt agreed to an internal investigation into claims from two priests within the archdiocese who had accused him of “unwanted touch.”
Father Dan Griffith, who served as the archdiocese’s Safe Environment coordinator and later as the liaison between the archdiocese and the outside legal counsel tasked with leading the investigation, Greene Epsel, penned a 2014 memo saying the archdiocese was in possession of letters from a gay bar and strip club called the “Happy Tap,” in Ontario, Canada, claiming that Archbishop Nienstedt was a regular presence there.
In addition, according to affidavits signed during the investigation, Archbishop Nienstedt was also a close personal friend of Father Curtis Wehmeyer, who, in 2013, was convicted for sexually abusing two boys at his church.
Court documents reveal that Archbishop Nienstedt was responsible for advancing the career of Father Wehmeyer, going against counsel of others within the archdiocese who had warned him of a history of predatory behavior and heavy drinking.
In March 2015, Pope Francis issued a decree removing Father Wehmeyer from the priesthood, just one month prior to Archbishop Nienstedt’s resignation.
Archbishop Nienstedt’s dismissal of the warnings he received on Father Wehmeyer, along with his broader handling of the archdiocese’s sexual abuse policies, led to the resignation of his former chancellor for canonical affairs.
Jennifer Haselberger told The Tablet she decided to leave because “we needed to radically alter the Catholic Church’s approach to sexual misconduct and sexual abuse. I believed in the commitments made in the 2002 Charter and was frustrated to discover them to be empty promises.
[The reference is to a 2002 charter adopted by the U.S. bishops in Dallas pledging the Church to combat child sexual abuse aggressively.]
“I was further troubled by the lack of urgency that was exhibited, especially when presented with cases of abuse perpetrated more than a decade after the crisis that was supposed to have resulted in a zero tolerance policy,” she said. - Source

They operated like Organized Crime or the Mafia.  It creeps me out.  I guess I was naive or just in total denial, believing what I wanted to believe.  It's disgusting.  All the secrecy and corruption is sick.

"I am telling you this to make you see what great purity I demand of you and them, and especially of them (priests), in this sacrament. But they do just the opposite to me, for they come to this mystery wholly impure - and not simply with the sort of impurity and weakness to which all of you are naturally inclined because of your weak nature (although reason can calm its rebellion if free choice so wills). No, these wretches not only do not restrain their weakness; they make it worse by committing that cursed unnatural sin. As if they were blind and stupid, with the light of their understanding extinguished, they do not recognize what miserable filth they are wallowing in. The stench even reaches up to me, supreme Purity, and is so hateful to me that for this sin alone five cities were struck down by my divine judgment. For my divine justice could no longer tolerate it, so despicable to me is this abominable sin. The stench displeases not only me, as I have said, but the devils as well, those very devils these wretches have made their masters. It is not its sinfulness that displeases them, for they like nothing that is good. But because their nature is angelic, that nature still loathes the sight of that horrendous sin actually being committed. It is true that it was they (the devils) who shot the poisoned arrows of concupiscence, but when it comes to the sinful act itself they flee..." - Catherine of Siena, Dialogue

18 comments:

  1. At this point, it's come to "he said - he said" with lots of finger wagging, self-righteous indignation/hogwash, twisted facts, claims, assumptions, online distractions galore!

    The devil is sitting with his super-duper desktop pc, watching, reading, cackling with glee!

    In the meantime, what about the poor innocents who were raped, mauled, abused?

    Who's praying for them?

    I believe our Holy Father is. I think I will continue to try and join him ...

    ReplyDelete
  2. Three or four years ago, there was a bishop in Kansas who got into trouble for moving around a priest who had been found with child porn on his computer, and many pictures that he had taken of very young girls. If I remember correctly, the priest even, after the charges were known, was allowed to go with a group of elementary kids on a camping trip. When the bishop found out, he said he consulted people who told him the priest did nothing wrong! Now, Pope Francis rightly removed this bishop (Finn, was his name), but after he was removed many "conservative" or "traditional" Catholics pointed out other bishops that were allowed to continue in their Sees, and the Pope and the media were just going after a "conservative" bishop.

    I would point out to them, even if I granted that indeed it was a witch hunt to get rid of conservative bishops, did Finn commit the crime or not? It's clear that he did, he admitted it. Okay. Even if I grant that he had indeed followed extremely bad advice, does it excuse his deeds in regards to this priest?

    Christ did not tell his disciples to be gentle as doves and wise as gnats. He told them to be as wise as serpents. Bishop Finn's actions showed he was sorely lacking in the wisdom department.

    The same thing goes for both Archbishop Vigano and Pope Francis right now. Vigano made specific accusations against not just Pope Francis, but against many members of the hierarchy. If it is true that he ordered the ending of the Nienstedt probe, then he needs to take his own advice and resign his position, but as far as the accusations he makes go, are they true or not? Pope Francis has hardly been wise as a serpent as well: when some of his closest advisors are Msgr. Ricca, Cardinal Maradiaga, Cardinal Wuerhl, Cardinal McCarrick, Cardinal Coccopalmerio? No, and now he's caught up in this mess, even if he did no actual wrong. No, he doesn't need to, and shouldn't resign. He needs to accept the evils of the men under him as Vicar of Christ (even if some aren't his fault), accept the opprobrium of the world and cleanse the Church of the filth, and we Catholics also need to accept the opprobrium of the world and assist him in the work especially by doing works reparation. I wasn't kidding in an earlier post when I said that we Catholics need to be wearing sackcloth and ashes.

    And yes, I know: Me first.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I too have problems with the friends Francis has - but what can I say. Yes - sackcloth and ashes would be good. One Holy Hour is important, but I think something public like a procession in addition to a longer period - like 40 Hours would be more significant.

      Delete
  3. Abp Flynn ordained Wehmeyer after the Seminary Rector said not to. And he was dismissed from the priesthood upon conviction for his crimes. To me, linking his laicization to Abps resignation is wrong because it was about his conviction for molesting children.

    I take issue with ignoring the mishandling of the molestation, generally but also that they're pointing fingers at N for Wehmeyer, which was brought up before. There was no there there. If it was a close personal relationship would a thank you note for a dinner have ended up in his personnel file? They also had issue with N visiting W in jail. Hello, corporal works of mercy. W pled guilty, sparing the children a trial. I was happy about that.

    Also, with all the stuff disseminated, why is this the first we're hearing of people accusing Neinstedt of unwanted touch? I'd have expected that to have been trumpeted far and wide 5 yrs ago. It's incredible that was never mentioned publicly in the last 5 yrs.

    Did you notice that the strip club claimed Abp was there but there's nothing about proof, dates or affidavits? Someone saying he was there is meaningless absent proof or affidavits that he was there on particular dates. Also, there's nothing about what he was doing. Was he paying for lap dances, making arrangements for private parties? How regular could his presence have been when he had a high profile position that included a lot of dinners?

    Of course, I have the utmost respect for Fr Dan.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I was wondering what you thought. I still can't see Nienstedt in a gay bar the way he dresses and that beret thing he wears for a hat. It would be like Father Knows best cruisin' a gay bar. The warmest thing I've ever seen Nienstedt do his start his homilies off with a song. Maybe he went to the bars because they had karaokie? What?

      Delete
    2. Yeah, I still think it's about his adherence to church teaching on marriage. There simply isn't any information. Yes, in Detroit he could've gone to Ontario's gay bars, but that's marginal. Where was this information when he was in Detroit? I speculate that those who accused him of impropriety are those who commit improprieties themselves.

      Haselberger has always seemed like she had an agenda.

      Delete
  4. Viganò is in hiding. No one knows where he is. He attacks the Pope, causes division and strife in the Church and then runs away, but not before letting us know that he is at peace.

    Many, many of these people calling for the Pope’s resignation and/or supporting Viganò are connected to each other. Many of the bishops making public statements in support of Viganò are part of the Napa Institie, run by Timothy Busuch, an extremely wealthy conservative Catholic who is on the Board of Directors for EWTN. Nienstedt worked as a consultant for Busch until a couple of weeks before Viganò’s testimony was released. Busch was interviewed by The NY Times and said he knew about Vigano’s allegations a couple of weeks before they were released. It was right at that time that Neinsted left the Napa Insttiute. Viganò and Busch go back years to when they received an award together.

    If anyone thinks this was not a coordinated attack to get rid of Francis, they are living in a dream world.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think it plausible his life could be in danger, but probably not. It does seem coordinated, but it also seems more or less credible. 2 things are of major importance: 1st the pope doesn't need to resign, nor should he - that would be insane. 2nd the McCarrick thing is the most important aspect of the story since it exposes the corruption - on both sides of procession of Cardinals and bishops. Take your eyes off that, the good cappas are safe - focus on the priest abuse of minors and calling for the Pope to resign maintains the status quo and the charade goes on. Just my opinion. All in all, the facade is cracking, the roof is falling in and as Benedict said, "The Lord wins in the end."

      Delete
    2. I don't believe he's at peace otherwise, why give another interview from his secret hideout? It's like he's trying to tidy up the lamb blasted mess he created in the first place especially howling for the Holy Father's resignation.

      He's talking a different story too (imo) than he first did giving a few more details about Benedict and how he chose to handle McCarrick. I told Terry I am thinking perhaps, this same info was passed on to Francis and he chose to follow Benedict's example as to how to handle McCarrick.

      Who knows ...

      Delete
    3. I agree Terry that the McCarrick story should be the most important part of this whole thing. But if that was the case, why aren’t these people equally upset with JP II and Benedict? They claim Benedict imposed sanctions, but if that is true, he sure didn’t do anything to enforce them.

      The fact is, they are going after Francis, who is the only pope who has actually done anything about McCarrick.

      Also, these people are now saying that Francis pushed Mueller out because Francis didn’t want Mueller to follow the abuse guidelines. Yet when Mueller was replaced, these same people were saying it was because Mueller was opposed to communion for the divorced and remarried,

      The enemies of Francis will grab whatever they can to try to discredit the Holy Father. Their goal is to push Francis out, and they will use any means necessary.

      Open your eyes, Terry.

      Delete
    4. http://www.patheos.com/blogs/markshea/2018/09/conversation-with-a-reader-about-the-crisis.html

      Delete
    5. Southernchild, I know they are trying to push Francis out, but they can't - their only option is to become schismatics. BTW - I think these people are equally upset with JPII and Benedict. And who knows why Mueller was replaced? Like you said, the enemies of Francis will grab anything to discredit Francis.

      Delete
  5. Viganò: Benedict did not want public sanctions because McCarrick was retired - La Stampa
    http://www.lastampa.it/2018/09/01/vaticaninsider/vigan-benedict-did-not-want-public-sanctions-because-mccarrick-was-retired-MADPNcxY8kj7hUGzP355xJ/pagina.html

    Another interesting read that seems to be deflating Vigano's claims.

    Glad that someone has taken up our Holy Father's challenge to "read it for yourselves then come to your own conclusions."

    Me thinks someone jumped the gun by calling for Papa Francis resignation after this story and especially after Vigano's second or is a third interview from his "hidden location."

    Let the reporters continue to dig further, clarify more and continue to ask questions, honest questions, regardless of who it is. Sadly, and unexpectedly, the consequences of Vigano's accusations more and more involve Papa Benny too.

    Maybe, that was something he and his colleagues were not expecting?

    ReplyDelete
  6. To follow up on my previous post ... what if Papa Francis was indeed told about McCarrick exactly as Vigano's now claiming and he simply chose to follow Papa Benny's example?


    In my opinion, that is a whole he** of a lot different than what was first claimed.

    Any thoughts?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That sounds likely. I think the Pope deals with gay clerics in a rather forgiving way - unless it involves child abuse. I also think that he deals with corruption by allowing it's actors to expose themselves rather than conducting an inquisition. Though I'd love it if he addressed these issues head on, there must be something he sees or knows ready to come to light. He should not resign and I don't think he needs to do that. I'm disappointed in all of them, but that's fine to, because we in turn focus our faith on Christ alone.

      Delete
    2. I think and I hope, he will speak about it but until then, reporters are out doing lots of digging. Crux has several good articles this morning that make one think.

      Anyway, just got home from work so I am off to sleep. ^^

      Delete
    3. I am taking a respit from it all. Just curious though. Are there actual accusers speaking publicly against McCarrick? You know, adult men who were victimized by him? I have not read of one. Lots of rumors, lots of tintialling stories of beach parties. Not defending him, but it seems the whole trial is being conducted on social media and the guilty on all the sordid counts and a few more not mentioned verdict came first.
      PS: Do not know why but I do not trust Cardinal Burke. Maybe that city block long cape he prefers or all the lace. Turns me off.

      Delete
  7. Cleaning out e mail and came upon this article linked from Dr Moynihan's Vatican letter. I thought others might be interested.
    https://www.ucatholic.com/blog/j-r-r-tolkiens-lost-prophetic-message-on-abuse-in-the-church/

    ReplyDelete


Please comment with charity and avoid ad hominem attacks. I exercise the right to delete comments I find inappropriate. If you use your real name there is a better chance your comment will stay put.