tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10038924.post3549908707521388060..comments2024-03-15T19:18:22.881-05:00Comments on Servant and Steward: The New York Times persists in it's lieRev. Daren J. Zehnle, J.C.L., K.C.H.S.http://www.blogger.com/profile/12695652221601203187noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10038924.post-67909066873749989212010-03-31T17:07:54.001-05:002010-03-31T17:07:54.001-05:00Steve,
This is, I think, where the problem comes ...Steve,<br /><br />This is, I think, where the problem comes in: Dowd and others presume blame on Pope Benedict. But he cannot be expected to have known what no one told him. If no one brought it to his attention what is he to do about it? The man beneath the then-Cardinal in the Munich case has already accepted full responsibility for the matter and has said in no uncertain terms that it is his fault Ratzinger was not not informed.<br /><br />It’s one thing to say he say he should have known, but it’s quite another to look for information that you do not know needs to be sought. In that, there is no guilt, no sin of omission. One cannot go looking for a needle in a haystack when there is no needle to find.<br /><br />You’re absolutely right to say that every (Arch)Bishop should say to those to whom they delegate power that they should be immediately apprised of serious situations. Even so, that cannot guarantee that those under them will actually notify them, as happened in Munich.<br /><br />What is a Bishop to do? Call in those beneath him each week and ask, “Is there something you aren’t telling me that I need to know about before it’s too late?” That would mean an ever present presumption of guilt on the part of everyone.<br /><br />If what you suggest is true that Benedict bears some responsibility for what his underling did – a suggestion I understand but with which I disagree – and he could honestly say what you suggest ought to be said, I really don’t think that would help the situation or satisfy the media one bit. <br /><br />Obermeier has accepted full responsibility and has resigned; that ought to settle it.<br /><br />I know I haven’t fully satisfied your question; perhaps another reader can chime in.Rev. Daren J. Zehnle, J.C.L., K.C.H.S.https://www.blogger.com/profile/12695652221601203187noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10038924.post-87224942436132927782010-03-31T15:18:34.425-05:002010-03-31T15:18:34.425-05:00Ms Dowd needs to get her facts straight...and mayb...Ms Dowd needs to get her facts straight...and maybe seek a "deliverance" because the evil she is spewing is not of human origin (in my humble opinion!).<br />Ex-Irish-Catholics can be the worst.<br />And I say this as someone with the Irish in me.<br />Good grief!Fr. John Mary, ISJhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13093937327145346752noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10038924.post-72168512927545815902010-03-31T15:18:34.424-05:002010-03-31T15:18:34.424-05:00Ms Dowd needs to get her facts straight...and mayb...Ms Dowd needs to get her facts straight...and maybe seek a "deliverance" because the evil she is spewing is not of human origin (in my humble opinion!).<br />Ex-Irish-Catholics can be the worst.<br />And I say this as someone with the Irish in me.<br />Good grief!Fr. John Mary, ISJhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13093937327145346752noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10038924.post-67009666273136942602010-03-31T15:04:34.794-05:002010-03-31T15:04:34.794-05:00Father,
In reference to Pope Benedict (and in res...Father,<br /><br />In reference to Pope Benedict (and in response to Dowd's accusation), you stated "[He has nothing to confess, as is clearly documented. If Dowd would simply do her journalistic homework without her biased and bigotted template she would see this]." <br /><br />This is sort of the point I was trying to get at in that friendly e-mail exchange you and I had last weekend. There are in this world (obviously enough) both sins of commission and sins of OMISSION. If then-Cardinal Ratzinger was not detail-oriented enough to know that one of his priests in Munich stood credibily accused of raping an eleven-year-old, wouldn't that potentially be a serious sin of OMISSION? Now, I realize that even the Pope goes to confession sacramentally, and there's always the possibility that he's confessed that sin (or something along those lines) to his confessor. But when there is the taint of scandal surrounding one's sin of commission OR omission, is there perhaps not some justification for people wanting the pope to own up to lax oversight (at least) during his time as archbishop?<br /><br />I remember that when Ted Kennedy died, many conservative bloggers lamented the fact that he had not publicly acknowledged his sinful support for abortion rights -- his actions amounted to (or contributed to) a "public scandal" among the faithful. There is such a thing as one's actions (or inaction) contributing to scandal and a loss of faith and trust among members of the church, as well as the culture at large, is there not? Hence the call from some (including me, frankly) for the Pope to say, "I should have paid better attention to my priests. There is such a thing as delegating too much. The buck has to stop somewhere [to parapharase Truman], and I do bear SOME degree of responsibility for Fr. H not being immediately pulled from parish ministry in the Munich archdiocese. May God forgive me and all who did not pay close enough attention to what types of priests were serving the people and what dangers some of those priests (certainly not most of them) posed." <br /><br />Is the very idea of such a statement ludicrous? Can any of us delegate-away some of the greatest responsibilities of our jobs without that choice having any moral implications? Even when the archbishop is a scholar and theologian, is there not a minimal level of attention to priestly life that is required--attention from the archbishop himself--within each and every archdiocese? Shouldn't EVERY archbishop tell his chief of staff, "Look, when a priest is in a major crisis or has caused major controversy, I need to be in on that case." Is that really such a crazy thing thing to expect? If it IS a reasonable expectation, why shouldn't lax oversight in the past be acknowledged by the pope? <br /><br />Respectfully,<br />SteveStevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17284905121465747077noreply@blogger.com