Boston Ex-Archbishop Named to Rome Post

Cardinal Bernard Law was appointed by the pope Wednesday to a ceremonial but highly visible post in Rome, outraging many in the archdiocese Law left in disgrace as the height of the clergy sex scandal.
<snip>
Pope John Paul II's announcement came two days after the Boston Archdiocese said it would lose at least 65 parishes as it grapples with declining collections, a shortage of priests and fallout from the scandal.
<snip>
Law was named in hundreds of lawsuits accusing him of failing to protect children from known child molesters. After 18 years leading the nation's fourth-largest archdiocese, Law resigned in 2002.

Ten months later, Law's successor, Archbishop Sean P. O'Malley, helped broker an $85 million settlement with more than 550 victims of pedophile priests.
<snip>
http://www.nynewsday.com/news/nationworld/nation/sns-ap-vatican-cardinal-law,0,5312388.story?coll=ny-nationalnews-headlines

Boston Cardinal Reassigned To Rome
Vatican Issues Statement On Law's New Assignment
M.R.F. Buckley, Staff Writer

POSTED: 6:50 am EDT May 27, 2004
UPDATED: 2:57 pm EDT May 27, 2004

BOSTON -- The former head of the Boston Archdiocese, forced to resign because of clergy sex abuse that took place under his watch, has been promoted to a job overseeing a church in Rome.

The Vatican press office released a statement Thursday morning announcing that Cardinal Bernard F. Law was chosen for a new job in the Holy City.

The Vatican statement said Pope John Paul II named Law archpriest of St. Mary Major Basilica in Rome, one of four churches under direct Vatican jurisdiction. Law will now be responsible for the financial management of that church, succeeding an 82-year-old Italian cardinal. It's said to be largely a ceremonial position reserved for retired prelates.

Sources say St. Mary's is one of the biggest churches in Rome.

Law, 72, resigned as archbishop of Boston on Dec. 13, 2002, over the clergy sex abuse crisis and his failure to protect children from sexually abusive priests. At that point, Boston had been the center of a national Catholic church sex abuse scandal that raged for two years after it was revealed church officials shuffled accused priests from parish to parish instead of removing them from ministry.

http://www.ktvu.com/news/3352943/detail.html

</sarcasm>

:eyes: :eyes: :eyes:

that's my favorite church in Rome. It's now been spoiled.

Oh well, at least he was against family planning and those gays </EXTREME SARCASM>

On Edit: Dr. Megele resumes his medical practice.

And the Pope probably wonders why people (Catholics like myself) are disgusted by the sheer hypocrisy.

This article spells it out perfectly.

The level of indifference to the Catholic faithful is outlandish and inexcusable. Anyone who has seen my posts knows I believe in the Catholic faith and think they have every right to preach and follow the beliefs set down by The Church. This, however, is a personnel situation that was unnecessary and insulting.

Note: I didn't mean to reply to Demsunite, I just got in a rant and forgot which post I was reading. This was a comment on the original post.

Extrememly disappointing.

It's no wonder I'm losing my faith in the hierarchy of the Catholic Church!

But to have little faith in the hierarchy.

between the integrity of regular Catholics and the Catholic clergy

and SOME of the Catholic clergy?

Revolting.

Rome has a problem with Cardinal Law, he is a CARDINAL. He is also in disgraced because of how he handled the situation in Boston. In the Church Hierarchy all a Cardinal is is simply an elector of the next pope. It is NOT a position in the Hierarchy EXCEPT TO VOTE FOR THE NEXT POPE (And a honorary position if over 80, Cardinals over age 80 can not vote for the next pope).

A complicating factor is that Bishops in Catholic Religious Law are viewed as absolute monarchs of their Diocese since at least the Middle Ages. As such Monarchs Bishops may resign their Bishopcy but they can NOT be removed by the Vatican. As in the case of the Bishop who while drunk, killed a man in the Southwest, that Bishop RESIGNED, he was not removed, for the Vatican can NOT remove a Bad Bishop. Furthermore a Bishop can not entered into another Diocese without the permission of that Diocese's Bishop. This is commonly given but if withheld if not appealable to the Vatican.

Thus the problem for the Vatican, how do you handle Law. You can not leave him in the US, he is in disgrace. He had been a Bishop and Bishops can ONLY travel into another Diocese with permission of that Diocese's Bishop, so it is difficult for Law to leave Rome (And stay in good graces of th Catholic Church).

The Vatican has had this problem for the last 1600 years (Ever since the time of Constantine). Like the later Roman Emperors when ever they had someone who has been disgraced and had to be removed from a position of trust, the preferred solution has been to kicked that person upstairs to a position in the Vatican that sounds great but has no real power.

Thus Law's "promotion" to be parish priest of St. Mary Major Basilica is such an act of kicking him upstairs to bury him away from the US. From the description of the post this sounds like this position has long been used for such disgraced bishops.

I hope he is thoroughly unhappy in his exile in Rome. Many of us might be thrilled to be exiled to Rome (though personally I'd prefer Florence) but Law may hate it. We may at least hope he does!

He was caught up in a Scandal involving paying for Heroin for a Drug Addict out of the Dioceses Development Fund in the early 1970s (maybe late 1960s). The fund for years before had been a huge provider for funds for the Dioceses, than the Scandal broke and the donations dropped like a rock.

Soon afterwords Wright was made a Cardinal and made head of the Vatican Library (Which is actually run by a professional Librarian but under a Bishop. I remember hearing people saying he would be the first American Pope, and better informed people saying he had been kicked upstairs to try to kill that Scandal.

I can understand why he paid for the drugs, but he should have know better than to use church funds to do it with. Bishops are human and it is hard to Criticize someone you personally know, it is even harder to punish a friend of yours.

This problem is the heart of the pedophile cases. The Bishops involved know the Priests involved personally. The Bishops rarely know the victims. Thus in decisions involving the Priests unless absolute proof existed (such as the Priest admitting to the abuse) the Bishops adopted a policy of separating the parties involved in the dispute rather than discipline the offending priest. It was this failure, the moving of the priest to separate him from his victim, instead moving the priest to a location where the priest could have no contact with potential victims that the Church was held liable.

The Courts have NOT punished the Church for any one act of its priests. The courts have been clear that such acts were not permitted nor condoned by the Church. The Church liability was in HOW the Church reacted to the accusation of Abuse, not the abuse itself. The church could NOT prevent any one act of abuse, but once such accusation had been made, the accusation should have been investigated and precautions taken to prevent it from happening again. It was this Failure to prevent further abuse by the Priest that the Church was held liable for.

Thus the Church has a problem with Law, his failure is NOT a personal Failure (Law did NOT abuse the Children) but a Failure to properly supervise his Priests. Law's sin was one of omission NOT action. Thus Law's resignation of his Bishopcy remove him from being able to do anymore such Sins of Omission.

Law is still a Cardinal of the Church. He is no longer capable of doing the Sin that caused him to resign. Thus Law's resignation returned him to the good graces of the Church (based on the Ground he will NEVER again become a Bishop except for maybe an axillary Bishop somewhere in the Vatican). Thus the problem for the Vatican, where to bury him. He is still a Cardinal, thus the decision to bury him (like Bishop Wright) somewhere in the Vatican bureaucracy where no one will hear of him again.