Retired cardinal has retracted his apology for abuse cases

[Anonymous]

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9400E2DE173DF93BA35751C0A9649D8B63&ref=romancatholicchurch

"He said that even now, the church in Connecticut had no obligation to report sexual abuse accusations to the authorities."

Moral high ground, ey? Following their conscience, are they?

It's not hard to understand why they're putting up such a fight against contraception...

[Anonymous]

No words

[Anonymous]

look ... many of these people (from the abusers up the chain) should be in prison for rape, perjury, conspiracy, etc.

And the Catholic Church (various dioceses) should have been the subject of civil and criminal actions under RICO, they fit the definition of a corrupt racketeering enterprise ...

the entire thing is disgusting from top to bottom.

[Anonymous]

I might slightly sympathize with the Cardinals if they had truly removed any molesting clergy from contact with children -- a sinecure, if it were (the word comes from Latin words meaning "without care (for souls)." Key word being slightly.

But no, they shuffled molesting clergy around -- and this isn't some case where the 29 year old priest was alone with the overgrown/hormoned 17 year old -- this was multiple accusations involving the same priest!

I often wonder how the more Catholic than the Pope regulars on here reconcile themselves with this fact.

[Anonymous]

Disgusting. I want to hear what santorum has to say about this.

[Anonymous]

They are totally unrepentant sinners, despite any assertions to the contrary.
There was also the case a few years ago of that Congressman whose name I can't remember who had to resign because he had been harrassing male pages (anyone know who I'm talking about?) It turned out that he had been abused by a priest as a kid. What stuck out in my mind was that the priest, who now lives in Europe, said upon being interviewed for the story something to the effect that "we were good friends and we had a good time together."

I hate to say this, because I imagine there are some good priests out there, but given the lack of contrition the thought that I can't shut out of my mind is that of course a pedophile would be against contraception--how else is he going to get children to prey on?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They are totally unrepentant sinners, despite any assertions to the contrary.
There was also the case a few years ago of that Congressman whose name I can't remember who had to resign because he had been harrassing male pages (anyone know who I'm talking about?) It turned out that he had been abused by a priest as a kid. What stuck out in my mind was that the priest, who now lives in Europe, said upon being interviewed for the story something to the effect that "we were good friends and we had a good time together."

I hate to say this, because I imagine there are some good priests out there, but given the lack of contrition the thought that I can't shut out of my mind is that of course a pedophile would be against contraception--how else is he going to get children to prey on?

It was mark foley and here's a link to the ABC blog by Brian Williams:
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/BrianRoss/story?id=2509586&page=1

Here's what is happening in Philadelphia where the creep ass Cardinal Anthony Bevilacqua allowed pedophiles to run rampant and Molloy kept a secret copy of the Lynn's shredded list:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/on-faith/pa-monsignor-cardinal-bevilacqua-had-my-list-of-35-active-accused-priests-destroyed-in-94/2012/02/24/gIQAUwgFYR_story.html

Now I wonder if the cardinal really had dementia or if it was a convenient out to what should have been an indictment.

[Anonymous]

The church wants to pick and choice the laws that apply to it. If you don't have to supply birth control per the law why should you report sexual abuse per the law?