Pope John Paul and Maciel
Pope Benedict has waived the 5 year period that is normally required for beatification so that John Paul II can be beatified in May.
But John Paul’s role on enabling sexual abuse has not been fully explored.
Bishop Edward Burns of Juneau has said some very good and very true things:
It has hurt to learn the truth. It has hurt to listen to the pain and anguish of abuse survivors. It has hurt to learn that in this diocese and elsewhere there were priests who betrayed their authority and the trust we had placed in them. Catholics and members of the wider community have been disappointed and angered that Church leaders did not fully exercise their responsibility in dealing with this issue.
But learning the truth of what happened and facing up to it has been the first, necessary step towards healing for victims and to insure the safety of our children. From my perspective, I am convinced that the truth, however painful, will help to free victims and survivors from the hurtful burden of silence which has been imposed on them for too long.
The Vatican should learn and tell the truth about what John Paul’s role was before he is beatified – but Benedict has decided not to do this.
I know that John Paul refused to act.
Cardinal Schönborn told me that he sat directly opposite John Paul and pleaded with him to make a statement about Cardinal Groër, the Fatimaniac molester that John Paul had appointed, against the advice of the bishops of Austria, to the see of Vienna. John Paul told Schönborn that he would like to make statement, but that “they” wouldn’t let him. “They?” John Paul wouldn’t explain, but it was clear then and Schönborn has sine publicly made it clearer that Cardinal Sodano, the Secretary of State of the Vatican, and his underlings were protecting molesters like Groër, Gino, and Maciel.
Father Tom Doyle wrote a report on sexual abuse and Cardinal Krol personally put it in the hands of the pope.
John Paul ignored all this information and let abusers continue in the Church.
The Vatican claims that John Paul is not being canonized because he was pope but because of his personal sanctity. This is disingenuous. If he had remained a priest or a bishop, and he had been just as holy would there be any move for his canonization?
The Vatican also claims that canonization is not intended to approve all actions that John Paul took as pope. But part of fulfilling the will of God is fulfilling the duties of our state of life – and in John Paul’s case it was the governance of the church. His errors were not of the order of allowing mismanagement of the Vatican Bank or of making ill-advised episcopal appointments. His errors were ignoring the suffering of abuse victims and refusing to rid the church of the culture of sexual molestation. John Paul called Maciel, a drug addict, incestuous child molester and thief “an efficacious guide to youth.”
Almost all Catholics don’t want to think about sexual molestation by the clergy and they will not think about John Paul’s role in allowing abuse to go on. They will turn away from the victims, like people turn their eyes from torture victims, because such thoughts make them uncomfortable – and what is religion supposed to do except make us comfortable?
The Holy See must open the files and be clear what John Paul II did know about the abuse world wide.
On the National Catholic Register’s site, Edward Pentin had a post about JPII possibly being beatified in 2011, before the formal announcement. Much of the initial response came from skeptics *precisely* because of the JPII dealt (or failed to deal) w/the sex-abuse crisis. The exchange not only was refreshing but unusual for that site.
Here’s the link:
http://www.ncregister.com/blog/john-paul-ii-to-be-beatified-in-2011/
I always thought that the “They wouldn’t let me” excuse was ridiculous. If it’s true, then the Pope’s immediate subordinates and the bureaucrats that work for them hold far more power and influence than the Pope does. If *that’s* true, then there’s really no reason to remain a Catholic, because the prelates and bureaucrats have proven *time and again* that they value power, prestige and influence more than humble service to God and His people.
Leon, I think this early beatification is a P.R. move. Why beatify JPII now? Well, it would rally his large and passionate personality cult around the institutional Church. It would quiet *any* criticism of his role in the clerical sex-abuse crisis, and stifle criticism of the Church’s role as a whole in that crisis….at least, I think that’s what the vaticanisti are hoping. I don’t doubt that Benedict had a sincere and profound respect for the man. But I think other factors besides Benedict’s respect are pushing this.
I am inclined to agree that the beatification of JP-2 at this time, will serve to further undermine the credibility of the Church. That being said, I am not sure that the Pope himself is personally responsible for a dereliction of duty, if for no other reason that by the time he became aware of the full magnitude of the scandal (in 2002) he was a man in poor health. The responsibility seems to fall more broadly across the Church, primarily the bishops and seminary rectors, and ultimately the Vatican bureaucracy. What we may be witnessing in the pederasty scandal is a manifestation of the systemic corruption of the Vatican which is the prime mover in Church governance. A structure that has served the people of God for so many centuries, may have reached the point that it is incapable of reform from within. If it is so that the Church is no longer capable of real governance, it does not follow, as Joseph D’Hippolito suggests, that there is no reason to remain Catholic. We know from Our Lord that the Church is preserved from error in teaching—as to governance, well that is another matter. To leave the Church leaves one susceptible to doctrinal error.
Rick, I agree with you about not leaving the Catholic Church (though not every teaching on faith or morals comes under the protection of infallibility). However, we’ve seen on the this website that Father Tom Doyle sent a detailed report to JP II on clerical sex abuse, and that this document was stamped by Cardinal Pio Langhi and presonally presented to the Pope by Cardinal John Krull. If I’m not mistaken, this took place in the 90’s. As you said, governance of the Church is not covered by infallibility. I fear that the former Holy Father simply dropped the ball.
My own contacts in Ireland told me that they find comfort and strength in the Church but do not expect much from its leaders in terms of good governance. I sympathise with them. I believe the Church was founded by Christ and that it has the gift of infallibility (especially as described in that beautiful document of Second Vatican Council Lumen Gentium) in teaching on faith and morals. As well, it has the fulness of sacramental life. Thus, the Church gives me sure guidance on my pilgrimage to Heaven and the strength to make the journey. Its leaders however, and that includes popes, have not governed God’s People well and I’m afraid I’ve come to expect little in the way of quality with respect to this aspect of their ministry. I find a number of sincere Catholics agree.
Leon Podles on the Beatification of Pope John Paul II | Top US News Today
[…] can he be a role model to others even if he was personally holy? Good question. Read the article here and pray for our poor Church. Will the beatification of John Paul encourage others to cover up evils […]
http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/rome-told-bishops-not-to-report-abuse-142338.html
My Dad told me about a documentary on Irish National TV RTE1 Unspeakable Crimes that he saw last night. This newspaper documents part of what the documentary touched on. In short a letter was sent from the vatican telling bishops not to report paedophile priests to the Police.
The overall impression my dad got was that the scanctity and brotherhood of all priests was more important than the victims – the victims were never a concern. It also paints Benedict as the one who started the change of attitude in the Vatican, focusing on victims and processing criminals.
The Irish Bishops were often helpless and had to act against their own instinct and wishes. The Cardinal Primate of Ireland threatened to resign if one priest in particular was not laicised. He had been ordered to be laicised but this was overturned by the vatican. This happened on more than one occasion.
It is already recorded how the Archibishop of Dublin tried very hard to cooperate fully with the police and those appointed by the state to investigate abuse in Ireland, but was unable to because of Vatican orders going against his reccomendations.
My Dad said the article mentions Marcial Maciel.
It can be viewed online here, Im not sure if there are international restrictions on viewing it (click on the “watch the show” button:
http://www.rte.ie/tv/wouldyoubelieve/index.html
It may only be live at this link for a week, so in future you may need to search Would you believe? Unspeakable Crimes 18/01/2011 RTE
It is not realistic to say that JPII was a sick man by the time he could possibly know of the magnitude of the scandal in 2002 – the scandal was so great because of his INACTION during his whole pontificate before this.
During his entire reign the victims were ignored and the priests protected. Yet there were plenty in the vatican who agreed with this, JPII was not alone.
If the reasons for his beatification are his personal sanctity, then he will not mind (being a humble man already in heaven) if he is not promoted in this way on earth.
His beatification really is an insult to the victims – maybe he was well intentioned and followed his conscience, and maybe he is in heaven – but as an earthly leader he failed so many and in such a drastic way. So many children and youth have been destroyed BECAUSE of his lack of responsibility.
A saint in heaven, but not on earth.
Thank you for this clear thinking about a very painful development. As our leaders continue to live out their delusions they also continue to destroy their credibility as teachers of the Gospel. Lying, obfuscating, and denial do not function under the canopy of infallibility. Not for John Paul II and not for Benedict XVI.
ps.22:1 My God, my God, why has though forsaken me. Would that this were the worst of it. In the process of wrenching documentation from various diocese it is coming to light that while some of us battle on the front lines of ” The Life Issue” (abortion), some if not many of our diocese have procuring abortions. Both secular and Church Officially,
grant us the transparency of which we have heard much. Release the documents please.
Ratzinger and his Vatican people continue to be transparently self-absorbed as they fumble to use every stunt available to evade the truth of their situation.
just one survivor’s take: it would have been really neato if Karol Wotyla had been my ally against evil, but he wasn’t. When push came to shove, I found him on the “pervert priest’s” side of the fence. If he is now in Heaven, it means that he has repented of his sins and has suffered purgatorial pangs, either here or after death. ( I’m okay with that of course, because honestly, my own best bet is probably a quick martyrdom). But declaring him a saint means that the Church finds him worthy of emulation, and that just makes me want to go to Belgium for a debaptizing.
So Ratzinger waived the 5 year period that is normally required so John Paul II (saint in waitting) can be beatificated. All because some nun who never had Parkinson’s Disease was cured of it.
Oh wait. What about the 1997 letter from the vatican ordering all bishops to not notify police when a child is sodomized by a priest.
If the Ratzinger pulls this one off he should be in line for sainthood himself when he crooks because this would definitely be a miracle.
How, in the name of heaven, is it posible to make a Saint out of Pope John Paul II?
Is the Vatican gone mad or has the Catholic population really fell asleep.
Crimes have been committed. No one has been held responsible. Criminals are completely controlling the Catholic Church and by the way, all Church funds.
No more excuses. No more lies. No more covering up. If the pope won’t fess up, is there no one else in power at the vatican that is still sane?
I’m sure God has given up on his failed leadership.
It is outrageous for the Vatican to turn a blind eye about JPII and all the valid reasons people are bringing up to halt this process.
It causes me to disregard ALL the other “saints” in the Church – cheapening their contribution too. If the others went through a similar process as JPII, the Office for the Causes of Saints is a sham.
Our Sunday Visitor has in its Dec. 27th issue, an article about 3 saints that were POORLY treated by the institutional church- from the 1200’s to the mid 1500’s.
Their “sainthood” to me, sounded like a Booby prize for dead people, and a way to soothe the conscience of the Vatican. That’s not to say they weren’t valiant Christians, wonderful witnesses to the faith. But “saints”?
With the Internet and instantaneous news, with CLEAR reasons to HOLD OFF on declaring JPII blessed, this shows how OFF BASE the Vatican really is. It is making itself irrelevant. So sad.
JPII may have been a great statesman. But he did a lot of damage in the 26 years of his “reign”.
He also appointed many gutless bishops that towed the party line; they too, did damage.
Benedict applauding that, casts doubt on his wisdom.
Priests and bishops should just study Scripture, and spend their time preaching and teaching it to the faithful.
Even in Italy, 80% call themselves “Roman Catholic”. Yet 25% of sought out non-Christian help (New Age beliefs, the occult, etc.), enough to warrant their clammoring to priests for “exorcisms” = another sham teaching coming from the Vatican, with the way it’s done having NOTHING to do with Bible teaching. God help us.
I’m sure God has given up on his failed leadership.
TomassoTuscon, I suggest you do some research on a vision that Pope Leo XIII had while saying Mass at the Vatican in the 1880s. Making a long story short, Christ tells Satan that he (Satan) will have the power and the time to destroy the Church within a century.
The only analogous thing I can find in Scripture is 1 Samuel 2: 16-35.
J.D’Hippolito, I’m afraid I don’t know what your trying to tell me.
TomassoTuscon, did you read the citations I suggested? Please read them first, if you haven’t already.