Pope Francis, Catholics, and Christians in the news worldwide
A challenge that the Pope addresses: climate change. He notes that some are short-sighted and selfish:
Great expectations were placed on the [United Nations Climate Change] meeting in Paris in December 2015. A big effort was made there to facilitate the meeting of world leaders in order to seek new ways to address climate change and safeguard the well-being of the Earth, our common home. This meeting in Paris was really a step forward.
But then the conflicts began, the compromises between what was hoped for and the “wallet,” the economic interests of certain countries. And so some countries withdrew. But today people have become much more aware than before of the need for the care of the common home and its importance.
Many movements were born, especially those animated by young people. This is the road to walk on. Today, it is young people who understand with their hearts that the survival of the planet is a fundamental theme. They understand Laudato Si’ well, with their hearts. It is a promise for the future. “The future is ours!” they say. We must continue to work to ensure that the fundamental message of Laudato Si’ [the Pope's encyclical "On Care for Our Common Home"] is shared worldwide. The encyclical is made to be widely shared. What you say has been accepted by many. And there is no copyright on the care of the common home! It’s a message that belongs to everyone.
nohero said:
"The pope also gave his approval for children and adults who love to add to the nativity scene other figures that have no apparent connection with the Gospel accounts, as is a common practice in Italy and parts of Latin America."
Learn something every day! 
I’ll stick with camels, donkeys and sheep — oh, and reindeer.
There is also the Catalan Caga Tio, a log that poops out presents when children beat it on the butt with a stick.
Its nice to see people getting back to these more traditional Christmas rituals.
Catholic Herald: Beatification of Fulton Sheen Delayed Pending Revelations Regarding Sexual Abuse
If only someone could have seen that coming.
To be clear, this does not appear to be connected to the claims that came out a year or two ago that Sheen molested a number of children. In this case, the concern that has been raised by Bishops familiar with the Church records scheduled for release is that those records show that Sheen facilitated the rape and abuse of children by members of the clergy.
Viewed thru a lens not distorted by hate, we have this...
https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/diocese-of-rochester-confirms-it-requested-fulton-sheen-beatification-delay-95690
“Kruse told CNA Dec. 4 that the issue in question is the case of Gerard Guli, a former Rochester priest.
“Guli is the issue,” he told CNA.
The priest was ordained in 1956, and from 1963 to 1967 served in parishes in West Virginia. According to a document issued by the Diocese of Wheeling-Charleston, in 1963 the Diocese of Rochester received an allegation that in 1960 Guli committed abuse or misconduct against adults, not minors.
Kruse told CNA that the priest “returned from Wheeling to help his sick parents” in 1967.
Sheen became Rochester’s bishop in October 1966.
Some have claimed that Sheen gave Guli an assignment in the Diocese of Rochester, despite the 1963 allegation against him, Kruse said, and that Bishop Matano was concerned the NY attorney general would identify this issue in any report or announcement.
But Kruse said that Sheen never assigned Guli to ministry.
“We have studied extensively Sheen’s administrative decisions regarding Guli, and he never put children in harm’s way,” Kruse said.
“And in talking with Guli, assignments that some say Sheen gave him, Guli says ‘I never served there.’”
“And so this whole concept that Sheen appointed a pedophilic priest, that’s just not true,” Kruse added.
“The documents clearly show that Sheen’s successor, Bishop Hogan, appointed Guli, and it’s at that assignment that Guli offended again.”
“It’s [Bishop] Hogan who appointed Guli to the parishes in the towns of Campbell and Bradford where Guli offended, and it’s part of the reason that led to his ultimate removal and laicization, as well as other issues.”
mtierney said:
Viewed thru a lens not distorted by hate, we have this....
So, you are saying that the Catholic Herald is "distorted by hate"?
The truth seeking around Sheen is a microcosm for the larger conflict in the global Church between those who would address the Church's shameful past in order to protect the Catholic children of today and tomorrow and those who would throw those children under the bus to protect the reputation of a man who has been moldering in the ground for decades.
The fact is that his beatification has been postponed indefinitely. It doesn't sound like the Church has much faith in its ability to bury the truth this time around.
And he would have gotten away with it too, if it weren't for those pesky kids.....
Unfortunately, the article is behind a paywall but the Rochester Democrat and Chronicle is confirming this morning that the indefinite delay in Fulton Sheen's beatification is "about his administration of multiple priests who had been accused of misconduct".
Klinker said:
Unfortunately, the article is behind a paywall but the Rochester Democrat and Chronicle is confirming this morning that the indefinite delay in Fulton Sheen's beatification is "about his administration of multiple priests who had been accused of misconduct".
Instead of continuing to try to hunt down news about this, you could wait and see what develops. If something does come up to further delay, it'll be in lots of news outlets.
Just be patient. Here's an inspirational quote for you on that:
From my earlier link — apparently only scanned by some..
“But Kruse said that Sheen never assigned Guli to ministry.
“We have studied extensively Sheen’s administrative decisions regarding Guli, and he never put children in harm’s way,” Kruse said.
“And in talking with Guli, assignments that some say Sheen gave him, Guli says ‘I never served there.’”
“And so this whole concept that Sheen appointed a pedophilic priest, that’s just not true,” Kruse added.
“The documents clearly show that Sheen’s successor, Bishop Hogan, appointed Guli, and it’s at that assignment that Guli offended again.”
“It’s [Bishop] Hogan who appointed Guli to the parishes in the towns of Campbell and Bradford where Guli offended, and it’s part of the reason that led to his ultimate removal and laicization, as well as other issues.”
nohero said:
Klinker said:
Unfortunately, the article is behind a paywall but the Rochester Democrat and Chronicle is confirming this morning that the indefinite delay in Fulton Sheen's beatification is "about his administration of multiple priests who had been accused of misconduct".
Instead of continuing to try to hunt down news about this, you could wait and see what develops. If something does come up to further delay, it'll be in lots of news outlets.
Just be patient. Here's an inspirational quote for you on that:
Just trying to balance the scale. The guy was a nasty piece of work, entirely aside from his involvement in the clerical rape apocalypse. He supported brutal right wing dictators throughout his career and contributed to a general culture of conservativism that damaged the lives of countless working people.
The fascist rearguard can put whatever label they like on the man but Fulton Sheen will never be a real saint.
mtierney said:
From my earlier link — apparently only scanned by some..
That certainly is the line being pushed by the Peoria diocese which is trying to turn their relationship with Sheen into a cash cow. They need to do that because the diocese is facing massive liability due to their own involvement in the rape of (at least) dozens of children.
The news coming out this morning, however, addresses your point directly in that it wasn't just this one priest but, rather, Sheens involvement in multiple cases that has prompted the indefinite delay.
This is an interesting article, particularly as it relates to the canonization of John Paul II who certainly had at least as much of a role in facilitating the rape of children as Fulton Sheen.
Crux: Church now faces ‘Sheen dilemma’ in evaluating saints and their halos
mtierney said:
Politics at work —
We're shocked, shocked to find politics among members of the hierarchy. 
Klinker said:
This is an interesting article, particularly as it relates to the canonization of John Paul II who certainly had at least as much of a role in facilitating the rape of children as Fulton Sheen.
Crux: Church now faces ‘Sheen dilemma’ in evaluating saints and their halos
Mr. Klinker appears to be a regular reader of the Crux Catholic news site, so Ms. Mtierney's efforts haven't been completely in vain.
I am surprised this Crux article hasn’t been posted already — doesn’t fit the narrative I suppose...
I think that's rather because you'll find few here arguing celibacy is driving priests to commit acts of sexual abuse.
Poor moral judgement, a system that supports lack of transparency while 'handling' such incidents, a system that traditionally finds itself unable to adequately address compensation and medical/legal solutions ensuring no party (perpetrator, victim and the community at large) needs be at risk again are more usually the discussion points here. Abuse of power as well as historical refusal to acknowledge past inadequacies continue the insult.
The article totally misses the point.
Compensation, both financially and spiritually comes awareness of the impetus for such wicked behavior happened in the first place. To fix what is broken in the Church, of course, you must understand the why.
From the link:
“When it comes to celibacy, Bertomeu wrote that there is “no evidence” that it causes any “deviant sexual addiction,” nor has it ever been considered a relevant parameter to identify abuse: “Rather, most abusers are married men,” he said.
“According to some, in a sexually uninhibited society, eroticized to convulsion, with numerous cases of addiction to all kinds of pornography and sexual deviations or perversions, priestly celibacy would be a pernicious life option,” Bertomeu wrote. “According to this theory, with a perpetual self-censorship of sexual desire, the priest would end up developing psychological problems related to immaturity that, in some limiting cases, would result in pedophile behaviors.”
He debunks this theory with the data offered by other Christian and non-Christian churches. Bertomeu quotes the Unity Church of Australia, that has 240,000 members, no hierarchy and a “democratically married male and female clergy.” In recent months it made headlines due to its 2,500 cases of child abuse.
“Such data contrast with those of the Catholic Church, with 466,000 priests and 6,000 cases reported to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith,” he argued.
He also argued that celibacy is rooted in the Gospel, as proven by historic studies, and not something that appeared in the twelfth century to “better control the economy of the dioceses” that could end up in “clerical families.”
And, this reality..
“He also says that if 73 percent of sexual abuses against children are perpetrated within the household, it cannot be said that “being father or mother predisposes to abuse.”
joanne said:
I think that's rather because you'll find few here arguing celibacy is driving priests to commit acts of sexual abuse.
Poor moral judgement, a system that supports lack of transparency while 'handling' such incidents, a system that traditionally finds itself unable to adequately address compensation and medical/legal solutions ensuring no party (perpetrator, victim and the community at large) needs be at risk again are more usually the discussion points here. Abuse of power as well as historical refusal to acknowledge past inadequacies continue the insult.
The article totally misses the point.
I don't think the article misses the point. It's just that there's more than one point to consider.
There certainly are people who will claim both that:
1) celibacy leads to deviant sexual behavior because it is unnatural (I had Protestant professors in seminary who said in class that celibacy was unnatural...)
2) that homosexuality in the priesthood is the reason for the sexual abuse problem (this is the line of many Catholic conservatives, and is completely unfounded by any data)
But the discussion here, and in many places, has less to do with the "causes" of the epidemic of sexual abuse and more to do with the church response to it. The inability of the institutional church to value children enough to swiftly condemn and stop their sexual abuse is what makes posters here line @Klinker absolutely outraged - and with good reason.
Academics and others (like the author of the cited piece) can continue to debate the causes of the epidemic of sexual abuse of vulnerable children in the Catholic church and other institutions. The institutions still need to be judged by their response. And by and large, the response of the Catholic church in the US was deplorable.
Plus by ‘Church of Australia’, does he mean the Anglican Church of Australia, or one of the weirdo sects started in the 70s/80s and known for group sex and child abuse???
There is no ‘Church of Australia’ per se. It’s a partial name. If your expert can’t get details right, there’s a problem.
Joanne: Does this clarify your concern?
Bertomeu quotes the Unity Church of Australia, that has 240,000 members, no hierarchy and a “democratically married male and female clergy.” In recent months it made headlines due to its 2,500 cases of child abuse.
That sounds like the bizarre sect that I mentioned above, was originally run I think by a woman? Thought she was sent as a new prophet or incarnation of Mary or something, and then set about overseeing a really strange set-up (from the little I picked up over the years). It’s no longer a recognised church and hasn’t been for long time. There were many many years of scandalous abuse reports and the Royal Commission re-examined everything in very great detail. The Crux article is nothing new.
The Uniting Church of Australasia, however, is a totally different matter and is a combination of the Methodist, Presbyterian and Congregationalist churches here, since 1977. Some congregations chose to remain as they were, but most chose to join the new Assemblies and form into voting synods and councils.
i don’t know enough about how they work. I do know that they strive to be more open and effective than they had been about all kinds of abuse, including racial, sexual, wage theft and there are some discussions about improper handling of bequests. Which is more than has been acknowledged by the Catholic Church in regards to much of its land holdings in trust for many decades (centuries) here. (I remember news discussions about this in the 60s and 70s over disputed land in several cities but that’s another matter)
joanne said:
The Uniting Church of Australasia, however, is a totally different matter and is a combination of the Methodist, Presbyterian and Congregationalist churches here, since 1977. Some congregations chose to remain as they were, but most chose to join the new Assemblies and form into voting synods and councils.
It's probably the Uniting Church of Australia being mentioned (remember, the article is probably a translation into English from the original language of what was said). The Wikipedia gives a membership figure from the church of 243,000, which is close to the figure used in the article.
They're totally different!
I would have thought there are more practising United Church members than that, but a lot of people don't label themselves. And a lot of people are blending their beliefs, as they blend families.
I do think God works in mysterious ways!
Here we have a conversation parsing the meaning of a word, written in Italian by a Spanish priest, and translated into English, about the spelling of the name of an Australian church!
There is hope for us all!
For Sale
-
leather couches $300
More info
Garage Sales
-
Multi Family Garage Sale Sale Date: Apr 20, 2024
More info
Free Items
Featured Events
-
Stephen Whitty Presents - Hometown Movie Stars: The Celebrated Actors Of CHS
May 6, 2024 at 7:00pm
"The pope also gave his approval for children and adults who love to add to the nativity scene other figures that have no apparent connection with the Gospel accounts, as is a common practice in Italy and parts of Latin America."
Caganers!