In reference to the scandal (should we be doing something?)


There are 4 recommendations from the PA grand jury report. Put pressure on Church leaders to support these (or at least stop opposing them)

  • Eliminating age limits for victims of sexual abuse in childhood to file criminal complaints. The law now requires they be made by the age of 50.

  • Opening a “civil window” to allow victims who have been barred by the statute of limitations to file civil suits against their perpetrators. The law now gives people 12 years to file a complaint once they reach age 18. No retroactive window is provided.

  • Tightening the law that requires teachers, clergy, police and a wide array of other professionals to report abuse. Language mandating reporting if a person suspects a child is “actively being subjected to child abuse” is vague, the grand jury said.

  • Eliminating nondisclosure agreements that bar victims from cooperating in criminal prosecutions.


It’s from LifeSiteNews.

If we’re playing that game, let’s even things out:

During the Benedict papacy, with my own eyes I witnessed McCarrick celebrate Mass in public, participate in meetings, travel, etc. More importantly, so did Pope Benedict! If Benedict imposed these penalties, he certainly did not apply them. He continued to receive McCarrick with the rest of the Papal Foundation, continued to allow him to celebrate Mass publicly at the Vatican, even concelebrating with Benedict at events like consistories. (See photo above taken in 2010.) But, as Vigano tell is, it is all Pope Francis’ fault.

Vigano is more than a little obsessed with homosexuality and names prelates whom he accuses of supporting efforts at “subverting Catholic doctrine on homosexuality.” Filmmaker Stone was obsessed with the grassy knoll. Back in my seminary days, when one of the seminarians would give evidence of this kind of obsession, making wild claims about homosexuality, its sources and its effects, ignoring the emerging scientific and psychological data, the rest of us would look at each other and someone would say, “I would like to take a look at her dance card.”


This is problematic from a legal standpoint having nothing to do with whether we are discussing a priest or the local hardware store owner or somebody’s dad. I don’t support it and wont encourage others to do so.


How about fasting from dropping the envelop into the collection basket?


Which will probably hurt your local parish more than it hurts anyone else.


IRIS, I understand how you feel. All of us are hurt and angry. However we don’t know for a fact yet the the Holy Father was involved. Innocent until proven guilty. As far as those suggestions of not giving money/tithing at collection. I assume those are protestant Christians who don’t understand how it works. The majority of the collection stays right there in your Parish and Diocese. There are a lot of good preist and bishops that are not involved in these scandals. Plus that is the money that supports our parishes, keeps the heat on, maintains building and charities. We would only be hurting ourselves by not contributing, very little goes to the Vatican.

As for what to do, I am praying, praying, praying!


The spin doctors have worked fast to deflect from the real issue


Prayer alone is not enough. As someone who knows a victim, I can ASSURE you that he and others familiar with his plight prayed to eliminate these priests’ collective actions.

If this were a government conducting this behavior, prayer would be one response, but so would action.

If this were a business conducting this behavior, prayer would be one response, but so would action.

If this were an individual conducting this behavior, prayer would be one response, but so would action.

What actions can be taken?


I don’t like these at all.

Teachers, police and other related professionals are already mandated reporters. Priests are complicated due to the confessional, I’m not up on their mandate.

We have the statue of limitations for very sound reasons. Though abuse is very hurtful, it doesn’t equate to 1st degree murder in my eyes. After many decades it also becomes unfair to the rights of the accused.

Our focus should be on prevention and reporting/investigation, not dredging up possible crimes from many decades past.


Assuming that the people “fasting” from this were even contributing in the first place.


As I stated above:


The Dallas reforms put into place already mandate that accusations of clergy abuse be reported to the civil authorities. While a priest cannot violate the confessional or risk excommunication, bishops can and do report accusations about priests to civil authorities. There is currently a zero policy of abuse put in place after 2002.

If the statute of limitations is going to be lifted for clergy then it MUST be lifted for all abusers.


Yes, and find our what else our own diocese are doing.


I believe if Vigano knew about this for all these years and is just now coming forward, he is part of the problem.


Yes, it’s rather convenient of him to do so now, isn’t it?


I think you forgot to closeread your sentence. Here it is, semantically corrected:

“I believe if Vigano knew about this for all these years and is just now coming forward, he WAS part of the problem.”

And he was. But people change. If he is not lying, he is certainly not part of the problem now.


Did you read the 11-page letter? Read it. He tried too do something, and ran into bureaucratic slow-walking, inaction and resistance. Finally he put the good of his own soul first, and made it all public.


I don’t see how it is right to stay calm when children are being molested and raped and then this is covered up. These are children being attacked.


one more came forward: Critical parts, at least, of Vigano’s charges agains the pope were confirmed by Monsignor Jean-François Lantheaume, the former first counsellor at the U.S. apostolic nunciature: Vigano “told the truth,” he said.

And the pope would not deny it!

I will say sincerely that I must say this, to you, and all of you who are interested: Read the document carefully and judge it for yourselves. I will not say one word on this. I think the statement speaks for itself.


Or there is a lot more then meets the eye here.

I look at Vatican finance, I think of the theory a certain Cardinal is on trial to stop his purge of it, and start to go hmmmm

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit