The Scandal

[Lil Red]

found this from [url="http://www.bettnet.com/blog/index.php/weblog/comments/half_billion_dollar_butchers_bill/"]bettnet.com:[/url]

[quote]Half-billion dollar butcher's bill

Catching up with news from last week, the bishops’ conference revealed last Thursday that in 2005 alone the cost to the Church of the Scandal was $467 million. That’s nearly a half billion dollars paid out to lawyers, therapists, victims in settlements, training programs, background checks, and more. More than $399 million was for settlements alone. Since 1992, the total is $1.2 billion, not including undisclosed payments made in 2003.

And we’re not done yet. The hundreds of victims in Los Angeles alone want more than $1 billion in penalties. A dollar figure alone is not the true measure of the destructiveness of the Scandal, but it is difficult to quantify damaged faith or lost innocence. But we know what a billion dollars is. Think of the loss to the spiritual and corporal works of mercy just by the wasting of those billions of dollars: how many widows and orphans left without comfort; how many hungry gone unfed; how many naked unclothed; how many sick and imprisoned unvisited.

Someone’s going to have to answer for all this. [/quote]

and in the comments section:

[quote]"Someone’s going to have to answer for all this.”

In a hierarchy, the responsibility HAS to go to the top.

This was all on JPII’s watch.  He was involved in VII; he installed more Cardinals than anyone in history; he oversaw the virtual collapse of Catholicism in the west, and “tolerated” dissent from every quarter.

I know everyone loves JPII, but he has to go down in history as one of, if not THE worst managers of all time.[/quote]

and

[quote]The remark about JPII brought me up short.  I love the guy, but the poster is right.  He did tolerate dissent.  He spent most of his time writing and praying, but he had to have known about it.[/quote]

what do you all think? without getting heating emotions and such, what do you think?

[Brother Adam]

Well, if you ask dUSt, JPII knew everything that happened into the Church, down to the last time you went to confession, but personally, I don't plan on guessing what he did or did not know. I do believe the Church is on the rebound though, in the West.

[Era Might]

To answer the comment, we would have to pretend to know the mind of Pope John Paul II. We don't.

Some people lambaste Pope Pius XII for not acting as they think he should have acted during World War II. Maybe they have some legitimate points, maybe they don't.

But there's one thing we know for sure about Pope John Paul II as much as we know about Pope Pius XII: they were Saints. They lived every moment of their ministry in obedience to the will of God, and tried lead the Church as best they could. They were both faithful to God's revelation, and profoundly in love with the people they served.

So when we ask "Why did John Paul do this" or "Why didn't Pope Pius XII do that", we can't answer the question. We have to contextualize everything within the entire of their Pontificate. John Paul worked tirelessly to lead the Church to holiness and truth, and we know that however he dealt with the internal workings of the Church, he had the holiness of Christ in mind.

Beyond that, we must leave it to inscrutable wisdom of God.

[Era Might]

And I disagree strongly with the pessimistic appraisal of John Paul's pontificate. But I'll leave that for another time..

[jmjtina]

He did not tolerate dissent. If they read everything our dear Late Pope JP2 has written and said, they would not come to such misinterpretations.

Most posters who state this, I would be wary if they are the fanatic traditionalists who state that every NO Mass is not valid. I would very much like to discuss with them why they think he was "THE WORST".

[journeyman]

With little first hand knowledge - I think the fault lies with the bishops.

They are the managers of the diocese - the Pope is the manager of the diocese in Rome and chairman of the board for the rest of the Church. He only knows what his "handlers" tell him. How much financial reporting goes to Rome? Is there a line on the diocesan balance sheet that says "settlements for shameful behavior" or some other similarly innocuous accounting term?

The bishops are the ones who reassigned offenders to new parishes instead of assigning them to specific adult ministries or to overseas missions or to the military chaplain corps or to monasteries.

I can't fault the desire to believe in the rehabilitation of the offending priests, but the reality is the prayerful rehabilitation might have had better success if the priests weren't immediately re-assigned into the same sort of assignments.

Other priests and the parish/diocesan leaders bear some of the blame as well. The folks at the front lines of parish/diocesan administration would have to have known about the abuse and the settlements. They had to find the money to pay the lawyers and health professionals. They had to settle with the victims and their families. When it comes to children, I don't think they needed to wait for a third strike . . . at the first sign of recidivism, send the offender off to the mountain retreat . . . full time.

[jasJis]

I would not disagree with the article too much. Too much non-Christian behavior was allowed. As a man, I believe JPII was a stunning example of piousness, holiness, etc. As a disciplinarian...a failure. Does not the Holy See have to approve Bishops AND Cardinals? Was not the Vatican in charge of overseeing discipline. It's not a mistake Ratzinger was elected Pope. But it isn't my problem to argue...

[ardillacid]

I agree. I think Benedict needs to start kickng some major ass

[Lil Red]

wow color me surprised. i thought this would be argued more

[dspen2005]

the devil

[Thy Geekdom Come]

Pope John Paul II did an excellent job taking care of the problem to the extent he was able.

People must think he micromanaged...real leaders teach others to be leaders by delegating tasks. Pope John Paul the Great was a real leader. There's no reason to blame him for what was going on at any level. His response was beyond reproach.

[jswranch]

Who to blame? Lawyers, Bishops and psychologists.

1) Psychologists: We (contemperary society) agree molesters are,for the most part, incurrable. So when someone in authority touches a kid, we know they may very well be tempted to do it again for the rest of their lives. However, we (contemperary society) did not always know this. When the first reports came in, they were thought of as sexual sins, such as a priest's decision to be sexually intimate with a woman. A bishop would counsel, repremand and send to another parish for fornication. The same with child molestation. With the scandal with kids, the psychologists promised the bishops they could and did cure the priests. The bishops believed them. When the treatment didn't 'take,' they were sent back for retreatment before their confession and reasignment. Today we know better.

2) Who are to blame for the high legal fees? The 'ambulance' chasers. They jack up the price on drugs, medical fees, amusement parks, transportation etc. They can be blamed inpart for the $.5 billion.

3) Bishops: They did not see ahead of these two. They allowed the offending priest to return to the parishes. They did not put their heads together on this issue soon enough.

[MissScripture]

I would also like to point out that looking at things in hindsight and being upset for what people didn't do doesn't really make sense. Vision in hindsight is 20/20...we don't know for sure what was known by whom.

[MC Just]

who to blaim? Liberals!!

[stbernardLT]

This is ridiculous. JPII wasn't some all knowing being, there is no way all of this can be put on him. He gets information from all over the world, who's to say he was getting all the info. needed or even the correct info. And why is it a bad thing to pay lawyers and court cost. Not every case is a guilty verdict, we must defend our priest if they are indeed innocent. And we must protect our church from public scandals that is why we try to settle out of court, otherwise like we have seen recently the church looks like the criminal instead of the actual pedophile and worldly bishop. And the point of this continuing from parish to parish definitely lies on the bishops who have the authority to move priest, they don't need Vatican permission to do a routine clergy move.

We have had our share of heart ache in our diocese, from a priest who molested boys at several different parishes after the bishop new about it, and most recently a priest who was wrongly convicted on child porn by the FBI (talk about mess up a good reputation) and because of the new zero tolerance policies he has to wait several years to come back. Who cares about the money when it is being used for important things. I'm sure the poor are still getting fed.

When a article starts off by talking about money and christianity you can bet they missed the boat completely.

If you think that JPII would have personally allowed priest to continue molesting children, you probably think the "Da Vinci Code" was a good book. The world can never seperate fact from fiction, because it denies truth and faith. Wake up and start being honest about all this, it wasn't his fault.

Some of you have talked about leaving the church just because you might have seen the devil knocking at the gates, but stand firm in knowing he will never prevail. The battle is already won just pick a side and move on. (Winner or Loser)