Francis Has Been Accused Of Protecting An Evil Priest From Facing Justice

2 thoughts on “Francis Has Been Accused Of Protecting An Evil Priest From Facing Justice”

1. Most Loved Anthony ,

   Your presentation today asks a profound question , “How does His Justice manifest in His Church Militant ? “

   From experience, our present day successors of Peter , they have chosen only mercy , BUT it is not His Mercy , it is a false mercy , a mercy which “aquits”(not guilty), by means of His Forgiveness. I believe that there is the presumption that wayward priests offer their confession, have been given absolution , and that forgiveness for sin equates with a get out of jail free card .
   In other words, there is no canonical mechanism which readily allows for civil action in the event conduct might be criminal ( rape and abuse ) “Protection” is then the default policy because allegations are only “gossip”,
   only the individuals involved know the truth , and , if confessed and forgiven,
   what else is there to do ?

   Forgiveness then arrives with no earthly consequences ; the “crime” is relegated to the spiritual dimension and any final disposition is left to His Final Judgement.

   So , the issue is “self governance” , a separation of the wheat from the tears in this life . How accomplished ? Very often with great difficulty as judgement in our material world presumes innocence , “Who is anyone to know the heart and mind ?” AND , by extension , as sexual perversions are “adult failings “ ( usually not criminal ) , “How does an organization impose discipline? “

   “Moving them around “ is not the answer. Fingerprinting the laity and placing volunteers under diocesan scrutiny is not the answer.

   Priests accused of deviant conduct , spiritual abuse as manifests by hypocritical behaviors as can be characterized to be adult sexual conduct
   that scandalizes, deserve a public “outing”. Canonical law should create a forum by which a public hearing can adjudicate “facts”; is an ex-communication warranted , or not ?

   In the vocation of medicine there are medical Boards . Usually a panel of 12 Governor appointed members in each state , empowered by a staff of investigators to determine recommendations after a public proceeding by which a finding of facts are determined . The decision , “what to do “ , is not the Governor’s ( although the ELECTED official does retain “pardon” power, in theory ).
   The hearing, by vote, following statute ( as could be canonical law ) determines “guilt” or “innocence”. The vote then extends to sanctions ( what to do ) . Being public, if “guilty”, the conduct in question, if possibly criminal , can also be acted upon by civil authorities.

   Such a system would FAIRLY get the Bishops and the Magisterium “off the hook” ?

   Those are one man’s thoughts who brought the failings of three priests to the attention of Bishop Kicanas ( two were deceased and one still lives ). AND the course of action chosen ?Bankruptcy.

   Bishop Kicanas chose not to provide any knowable public accountability in relation to alleged egregious conduct by an individual priest; no obvious accountability was demanded. The principal priest with credible allegations was given the instruction “keep on being a pastor”, “the veracity of allegations against you can’t possibly be know “.

   I share my thoughts as may reflect “worthless” opinion. His Will will be done.

   Blessings, Raphael ( aka Dr.Scott )

   Reply

2. Francis will never excommunicate anyone; it’s
   neither his “language” nor his approach to bad
   guys. The “bad guys” are those who maintain fidelity
   to the Church’s Tradition, especially to the Apostolic
   Mass.

   Now, maybe Francis has a far deeper insight into
   the nature of evil and sin. But AN INDIVIDUAL’S
   “deeper insight” [ arcane, ambiguous, obscure
   knowledge? Gnostic? ] can never trump the
   Church’s teaching on Faith AND Morals as
   [ “rigidly” ] set down in her Sacred Deposit of
   Faith.

   So, by their silence and reluctance to call
   Rupnik’s behaviour by its honest name —
   “Nun rapist” —are not those at that Art Centre,
   or associated with Rupnik, complicit in his
   condemnable behaviour ??

   Anthony, given your “play-by-play” description
   of Vatican inhabitants in the FIRST MINUTE of
   this podcast, how does a Faithful layman,
   laywoman, and Priest mirror love for Christ in
   His Passion and Cross, as testified to us for
   decades by Padre St. Pio? His life too was
   darkened by Vatican [ NOT the reigning Popes ]
   intrigues.

   But St. Pio obeyed through it all . . still loved his
   beer and oranges, and exuded the scent of
   violets. Above all, the Holy Friar loved Our Lord’s
   Passion and SHOWED us His wounds and Agony
   with each Mass offered . . followed by confessing
   endless numbers of penitents from every
   continent.

   THAT kind of love is what made BOTH St. Francis
   of Assisi and St. Pio favourites of the Jesus’ Heart,
   i.e. love of His Passion. [ see: Timothy T. O’Donnell,
   S.T.D., Heart Of The Redeemer, Ignatius Press, 1992,
   page 128 ]. Birds, bunnies, and bears come a
   distant —BUT related — second-place.

   Se, dear Pope Francis, we pray that you get
   to know —and love! —your TRUE forebears:
   St. Francis of Assisi and Padre St. Pio. It’s not
   ONLY about the poor —”The poor you always
   have with you; but Me ( not always )” —the
   Gospels.

   Reply