I have occasionally let anger blind me and have let myself become confused about the facts of a case, so I will not be too hard on a critic by posting his intemperate and inaccurate criticism (he should watch his language)
He claims that I called a leader of the Sancta Muerte cult a “Catholic Bishop.”
If he had read the post carefully, he would have noticed that it was not I but the usual confused newspaper reports who called him that, and I corrected the reports
The newspaper said:
“We are being persecuted,” said Catholic Bishop David Romo, who has become the black sheep of Mexico’s Catholic church for leading services to the bejeweled, scythe-wielding Santa Muerte, or Saint Death, in the rough Mexico City neighborhood of Tepito.
I corrected the newspaper by pointing out:
“However Romo, despite inaccurate news reports, is not a Catholic, but rather a self-styled bishop of a traditionalist church, whose traditionalism seems to include pagan worship.”
However, it is nice to know that someone is reading even older posts.
The Sancta Muerte cult needs close watching. Mexico I suspect has a death rate from violence in the same league as Iraq, and Mexico is a lot closer.
President Calderon of Mexico has correctly blamed the drug users of the United States for the crisis that threatens to tear México apart: without money from the U.S., the drug cartels would wither.
Leon, I don’t think the Vatican will do a thing about the “santa muerte” cult. If the Pope didn’t publicly discipline a fellow bishop — one of his own countrymen, as well — who publicly denied a fundamental truth of the faith, do you think he’ll do anything about “santa muerte”?
As far as the drug cartels are concerned, do you seriously believe that if Americans stopped using illegal drugs tomorrow, the cartels would disappear or go bankrupt? Hardly. The cartels have too much organization and influence to go gently into that good night. They’ll just find another commodity to sell. Besides, I’m sure Americans aren’t their *only* customers. The cartel leaders would be stupid to target just one market, even if it is a wealthy and large one.
Why is Mexico, along with so many other Latin American countries, in such a mess? I refer to things like the very uneven distribution of wealth, widespread corruption, a high degree of violence, etc. It seems that given their resources and size, countries like Mexico, Brazil, Columbia, etc. should be flourishing. What went wrong and what did the RC Church in those regions do or not do to help?
Fr. Koening, here’s what I think:
1. Spanish colonies in the Western Hemisphere, unlike their English counterparts, had extremely centralized governments. Usually, no provincial legislatures (such as the House of Burgesses in Virginia) existed. The viceroy represented the king and executed his decisions w/o legislative interference. That set the tone for Latin American governments once nations achieved independence.
2. The Catholic Church, for far too long, identified itself with the governing elements and elites. That tendency was based on the European model, in which church and state (and not just in Catholic countries) had a symbiotic, co-dependent relationship. The ecclesiastics would do nothing to upset the rulers and their supporters because the church’s political influence was at stake.
Thanks Joseph. That sounds like what I’ve heard from others.
We have a number of Columbians in our parish who all tell the same story of incredible violence and widespread danger. Similarly, Philipinos, who were also under Spain, tell me their country is considered the most corrupt in East Asia. Too bad the Church wasn’t more of a “leaven in the dough” while these societies formed. Like so much of our history, these are instances of missed opportunities.
To me it seems to come down to Church leaders acting as princes rather than pastors.
I am so grateful for the ABUSE TRACKER..
Kathy Shaw is someone who deserves much thanks..
I dont think that bishop accountability has the names of every accused abusive catholic priest in the united states in it’s archives, because they require court documents and or newspaper articles with the priests name in it in order to be part of their lists..
I had proof of both those requirements and tried for a year to get the perps name on their list.. After much pain he finally made it..
(the jesuits have ways of manipulating lists and information)
I think there are probably thousands of more priests in the usa who abused.. i have met some of their victims in my travels in america and in mexico.. they mention a name but then turn and walk away when i have asked them if they want to report it.. (some were young people in their 30s another was a woman in her 70s who died shortly after she broke her secret to me about the abuse of her husband and son by a priest in the midwest..
I think bishop accountability is wonderful..
but i think neither they nor you should say they have the name of every accused priest on their list.. because they don’t
it is dangerous to do that because if a parent is looking to protect their child and checks out your list and their priests name is not on it they may think he or others are safe .
thanks