Catholic Stories

[Petronella]

3 minutes ago, 47of74 said:

LOL thanks for the heads up, I fixed that.

A culter is probably what one would call a rabid branch trumpvidian.

Ha! Yes, see, when I clicked I thought it was going to be about a scary cult leader taking over a service, but then it seemed to be a moderate layperson. So then I wondered if culter had another meaning—or was a typo. Thanks!

[SuperSluth]

I think in 50 or 100 years the Catholic Church will have to ordain women.  They have been slowly giving large chunks of work to lay women for decades. 

[Hane]

The “no ordination for women” thing (along with reproductive rights and marriage equality) was what drove me out of the Catholic Church into heathen UU-ism.

[Blahblah]

Got the bastard.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/a-top-cardinals-sex-abuse-conviction-is-huge-news-in-australia-but-the-media-cant-report-it-there/2018/12/12/49c0eb68-fe27-11e8-83c0-b06139e540e5_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.ee0ab6bd6e22

Due to ridiculous suppression orders Australian media is unable to report on this verdict because there is a further case due in March 2019. Bit stupid with the internet giving access to everything. We were told that he has been removed from the Pope’s inner circle but not why.

[Palimpsest]

11 hours ago, Blahblah said:

Due to ridiculous suppression orders Australian media is unable to report on this verdict because there is a further case due in March 2019.

Got the bastard, indeed.  I rather like the way the Herald Sun got around the gag order.

So, Cardinal Pell.  Do you still think that abortion is a worse "moral scandal" than the sexual abuse of minors?  Somehow I think the court will disagree and sentence you to many years in prison,  I expect you will find it "anti-Christian" to be condemned  for your crimes. 

Not.

Quote

Dr Pell has come under increasing criticism since his assertion at a World Youth Day event that abortion was a "worse moral scandal" than sex abuse perpetrated against young people by Catholic clergy.

Attributing his jovial mood to a successful pilgrimage where he received a standing ovation, Dr Pell said his original statement had been quoted out of context because The Globe and Mailnewspaper had not included an earlier condemnation of sex abuse in the church.

"I ... mentioned that the church is being attacked for [sex abuse] sometimes by elements that are a bit anti-Christian ... I said there are other scandals, such as abortion which are under-reported and because abortion destroys innocent life you could say it's a worse scandal."

https://www.smh.com.au/national/ill-say-it-again-abortion-is-a-worse-evil-pell-20020803-gdfidn.html

[samurai_sarah]

15 hours ago, Blahblah said:

Got the bastard. (snip)

Finally! Finally! Finally!

The likes of him have got away with too much for too long. There have been too many cover-ups, too many excuses, too much dissembling, and I'm grateful that someone finally put a foot down! Thank you, Australia!

 

[Someone Out There]

On 12/13/2018 at 1:29 PM, Blahblah said:

Due to ridiculous suppression orders Australian media is unable to report on this verdict because there is a further case due in March 2019. Bit stupid with the internet giving access to everything. We were told that he has been removed from the Pope’s inner circle but not why.

The suppression order has been lifted and it can now be reported.  The suppression order was due to another case that was being heard soon after that has now been dropped. An article on the reasons why the suppression order was in place: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-02-26/george-pell-trial-why-cardinal-court-case-held-in-secret/10233118

An article on the abuse and verdict: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-02-26/george-pell-guilty-child-sexual-abuse-court-trial/10837564

 

[47of74]

Francis wants to liberate Mary from the Mafia

Quote

Pope Francis is giving his blessing to a new Vatican think tank that is seeking to prevent the Mafia and organized crime groups from exploiting the image of the Virgin Mary for their own illicit ends.

The Vatican’s Pontifical Marian Academy launched the think tank Friday at a conference titled “Liberating Mary from the Mafia.” It was a reference to the historic relationship between the Italian mob and the Catholic Church, and the popular displays of Marian devotion by mobsters in Italy and beyond.

In a message from the pope read out at the start of the conference, held at Rome’s Museum of Civilizations, Francis said the religious and cultural image and patrimony of the Madonna “must be preserved in its original purity.”

He said any popular displays of devotion to Mary must “conform to the message of the Gospel and the teachings of the church,” and that people participating in them must be true Christians who look out for others, and especially the poor.

 

[Hane]

The late comedian and writer Steve Allen was raised Catholic, but left the church in part because, back in the ‘50s, a divorced and remarried Catholic could be denied a church funeral, but mafiosi known to have been murderers were not.

[PennySycamore]

Yeah, that divorce and re-marriage is worse that murder is all sort of fucked-up.

[47of74]

Vatican report on JP II shows how much he enabled McCarrick. 

Quote

ROME — At the funeral of Pope John Paul II at St. Peter’s Square, banners rose from the sea of mourners reading “Santo Subito,” or “Saint at Once.” He was a giant of the church in the 20th century, spanning the globe, inspiring generations of believers with his youthful magnetism, then aged infirmity, and, as the Polish pope, he helped bring down Communism over his more than 26-year reign.

Days after his death in 2005, cardinals eager to uphold his conservative policies had already begun discussing putting him on a fast track to sainthood while devotees in Rome and beyond clamored for his immediate canonization, drowning out notes of caution from survivors of sexual abuse and historians that John Paul had persistently turned a blind eye to the crimes in his church.

“He was canonized too fast,” said Kathleen Cummings, author of “A Saint of Our Own” and the head of a center on U.S. Catholicism at the University of Notre Dame. She said that given the “really damning evidence,” in the report, had the church waited at least five years, and not mere days, to begin the canonization process “it would probably not begin for John Paul II because of his complicity in the clergy sex abuse scandal.”

A reversal of the canonization, which historians struggle to recall ever happening, is implausible. Some historians say the McCarrick report is more likely to put back some brakes on a process that John Paul II himself sped up. But the report may complicate the canonization chances of others at the top of the church hierarchy during the late 20th century and early 21st century, when the scourge of sex abuse exploded in the church.

I had my way it would go to 20 years for non clergy and those clergy actually martyred for their faith and 100 years for clergy who weren’t martyred.  Requiring that for clergy would take the heat out and allow for a new generation to dispassionately evaluate the candidate. 

[wendy-sparkles]

not even bothering with the five year wait ?. my understanding is that it was JPII who instituted that 5 year wait when he streamlined the process, down from 50 years. I think going back to that would be a start.

Edited November 15, 2020 by wendy-sparkles

[smittykins]

Isn’t Mother Teresa on the fast track to canonization(if she hasn’t been already)?

[wendy-sparkles]

30 minutes ago, smittykins said:

Isn’t Mother Teresa on the fast track to canonization(if she hasn’t been already)?

yeah, Mother Teresa is another one they waived the five year wait for. I don't think you should be able to do that, especially as five years is basically nothing. I really hope they make it longer. 

I think JPII died in 2005, so it took fifteen years for this investigation to be initiated and completed - maybe it would have been longer if Benedict hadn't retired *. Maybe we still don't know about every shady or horrible thing that happened in his papacy. 

(*disclaimer: I don't pay enough attention to internal Vatican politics to be certain on that one. this is a guess based on Benedict immediately initiating JPII's cause for canonisation, and Francis being in charge when the investigation happened)

[47of74]

4 hours ago, wendy-sparkles said:

not even bothering with the five year wait ?. my understanding is that it was JPII who instituted that 5 year wait when he streamlined the process, down from 50 years. I think going back to that would be a start.

Mostly I agree. However I think it should be just a little bit faster than 50 years for some martyrs like Otto Neururer (the first priest to die in a Nazi death camp).  I hope it wouldn’t be necessary but hell even in the US we had the likes of fornicate face who would gave emulated his hero if he could  

 

[Bluebirdbluebell]

2 hours ago, 47of74 said:

  I hope it wouldn’t be necessary but hell even in the US we had the likes of fornicate face who would gave emulated his hero if he could  

who are you refering to?

[47of74]

Adolf. The original fascist. 

[Aine]

I definitely think that with all that has been publicly exposed about the rampant abuses committed by clergy and the cover ups that the Church engaged in over even the past 10 years (and it seems to be coming out at a faster rate as time goes on), there needs to be a halt on canonizing clergy for a quick minute.

Even those like Otto Neururer can wait, in my opinion. I say this with upmost respect to the faith and no sarcasm, but if those who have passed are granting miracles to those praying to them, then they will continue to do so whether they are formally canonized or not. It just adds more evidence to their file when the time comes. It doesn't mean that Catholics won't honor these people as people pray to these venerated departed people even prior to beatification, and I don't think it should prevent their beatification, but canonization can and should wait.

I'll admit that I have complicated feelings about JPII, some of which are somewhat controversial (e.g. what I see as his negligence in sub-Saharan Africa regarding condom usage for Catholics and the encouragement of condom usage by Catholic charities/missionaries when the HIV/AIDS pandemic hit that part of the world) and non-controversial (in my opinion; e.g. he was complicit in covering up child sexual abuse within the Catholic Church). I also think he did good things too. I don't think those good things obfuscate his sins, especially to the point that he is worthy of canonization. He acted in ways that are contradictory to the cardinal virtues of justice and prudence, therefore he can never be considered suitably venerable for sainthood in my view.

My opinions on Mother Teresa are maybe considered more harsh by a lot of people, especially considering how she is held up on some pedestal by so many, including non-Catholics. I do not think she is worthy of sainthood, no matter how many miracles people believe she has interceded on. She sure was picky on where she would intercede here on earth to save lives when she had the means and mechanisms in place to do so.

Even if I no longer consider myself religious, I love the Catholic Church and my cultural background and who I am is completely entwined with Catholicism. I don't say that blindly. I hate so many things the Church has done and continues to do but at the end of the day, it's one of those things where I look at it as hating what it has done sometimes without hating the whole. Like hating how an individual I love has acted but still loving the person.

The Catholic Church is in a fight for its survival and I think putting a pause on many canonizations, doing due diligence around its decisions, and publicly confessing, seeking forgiveness, and doing its penance for the sins of the Church is needed for there to be trust in the Church and the clergy ever again. Faith in papacy and leadership is at an all time low and it isn't going to get better until those who ask their congregants and lay people of the church to engage in confession and seek repentance can do the same.

 

ETA: Also, God bless the many investigative journalists, victims, families of victims, and whistleblowers within the clergy and lay-staff who have brought this reckoning of the Church to fruition.

 

[Bluebirdbluebell]

I agree a lot  with @Aine, but they would need to do a lot more to win me back to their side. 

I think we need to get rid of this infallibility nonsense. Obviously the Popes can fallible. 

(See the beginning of this thread.)

Edited November 16, 2020 by Bluebirdbluebell

[wendy-sparkles]

@Aine I'm very catholic, and I think I probably agree on both JPII and Mother Teresa. It never hurts to wait a bit for the popularity of who they were on earth to subside a bit, and also for those who might be implicated by unbiased investigations or even just conversations about them to pass or not be in power any more. You're right that people can still be saints even if we haven't formally recognised them as such, and that this should encourage us to err on the side of caution.

@Bluebirdbluebell Papal infallibility is a bit more complicated than it sounds. It does not mean that that Pope is not fallible, it means that when they speak on doctrine 'ex cathedra' ('from the chair' [of St. Peter])  it cannot be in error. This has literally happened .... once.

from wiki

Quote

The solemn declaration of papal infallibility by Vatican I took place on 18 July 1870. Since that time, the only example of an ex cathedra decree took place in 1950, when Pope Pius XII defined the Assumption of Mary as an article of faith.

 

[Aine]

22 minutes ago, Bluebirdbluebell said:

I agree with @Aine, but they would need to do a lot more to win me back to their side. 

I think we need to get rid of this infallibility nonsense. Obviously the Popes can fallible. 

(See the beginning of this thread.)

I wouldn't say I'm on their side. I don't have faith in the basic tenets of Christianity in general, so I doubt I'll ever go back. They have a lot of work to do and I'm not sure that the work can be sufficiently done in my lifetime (and I'm 31) to win back any kind of trust from me. I tried hard to hate the Catholic Church in its entirety but I can't. I hate a lot about how it is structured and run, I hate many actions by leaders within the church, I hate how many men have used the church as a shield while they committed atrocities against the very people who were vulnerable due to their trust in them...I have a lot of anger. But all of that doesn't completely undo the good I've seen and the comfort and connection I feel to those around me and my family and my past as I walk the ritualistic steps of a Mass or reconciliation/confession etc.

One of the things that seethes inside of me, and I can't see myself ever letting go of for all my life, is the way one of my personal heroes was treated by the Church. I have posted about him before on FJ but the short version is that he was my parish priest and he guided me and loved me (in the most genuine and Christ-like way) through a time in my life where I was on the brink of going down a very dark path. He was the most truly good human I have maybe ever known. He also broke his vows as a priest by being an informant to law enforcement over a number of years, passing on the confessions of other priests who had sexually abused children in Australia. He was kicked out of the priesthood. He died tragically in a natural disaster after finding love, marrying, and when his first child wasn't quite a year old. The Church did many terrible things to him and he gave his life to the Church as a true and faithful servant. I know he wouldn't want me to hold onto my anger the way I do because of how he was treated (he never spoke negatively about the Church to me). I also know that he came to a moment in his life, privately, between him and God, where he decided that 'The Church' (as in the men in leadership in the Roman Catholic Church) were not true messengers or representatives of what Jesus wanted His Church to be or what God would want his Church to be. I feel angry that he ever had to face that moment.

I also feel angry that a man that good will never be honored by the Catholic Church for his truly sacrificial life.

Edited November 16, 2020 by Aine

[Four is Enough]

12 hours ago, Aine said:

Even if I no longer consider myself religious, I love the Catholic Church and my cultural background and who I am is completely entwined with Catholicism. I don't say that blindly. I hate so many things the Church has done and continues to do but at the end of the day, it's one of those things where I look at it as hating what it has done sometimes without hating the whole. Like hating how an individual I love has acted but still loving the person.

The Catholic Church is in a fight for its survival and I think putting a pause on many canonizations, doing due diligence around its decisions, and publicly confessing, seeking forgiveness, and doing its penance for the sins of the Church is needed for there to be trust in the Church and the clergy ever again.

This is me too. It comes down to the church versus the clergy for me. Having been thoroughly screwed by the Catholic Church, I find my spiritual life to concentrate more on the Gospels and not so much on who's saying or trying to interpret it for me.

12 hours ago, Bluebirdbluebell said:

I think we need to get rid of this infallibility nonsense. Obviously the Popes can fallible. 

Popes are only infallible when they are speaking on matters of dogma. I'm sure that the times of studying and praying on the subject are vigorous..

[NachosFlandersStyle]

14 hours ago, Aine said:

Even those like Otto Neururer can wait, in my opinion. I say this with upmost respect to the faith and no sarcasm, but if those who have passed are granting miracles to those praying to them, then they will continue to do so whether they are formally canonized or not

Official doctrine is that there are lots and lots of uncanonized saints, because a saint is just any soul that is in heaven. I don't see why it’s urgent to canonize; it's not like there's a shortage of people to name churches after.

[47of74]

Could non-ordained and/or female Cardinals be next?

Quote

Pope Francis is reorganizing the Vatican Curia — the church’s administrators and his senior staff — and may name new cardinals in June. 

Francis’ new apostolic constitution, “Praedicate Evangelium” (“Preach the Gospel”), issued last month, noted that the heads of dicasteries and other offices that manage the church need not be ordained. This highlighted Francis’ stated aim to give “more space” to women in the church.  

Most of the important dicasteries are as a matter of fact headed by cardinals. But if any Catholic can head a curial office, the question becomes, does the title come with the job? More importantly, is the title needed to do the job? 

If the main duty of a cardinal is to be an adviser to the pope, and there is no ordination required, it could make sense to restart the tradition of lay cardinals and to include women in the mix.  

Even with Francis being in charge I'd be surprised if he did that.  Right now canon law states that someone has to be a priest to be named a Cardinal and they would then need to be made a Bishop.  So that would have to be changed.  I don't know that Francis would go that far either.  We'd have to see.  He's surprised me before.  I think it would be a good thing to have lay Cardinals - make it more like other church bodies where the governing bodies have ordained and non-ordained sections.  (Like the Episcopal Church with their House of Bishops and House of Deputies). 

[Howl]

Ok, it took me a minute of looking at this thread title to make sense of it. 

3, 2, 1 and I bed trad Catholics are already fulminating at THE VERY THOUGHT of women having more of a important role in the church.