Pope rejects resignation of two Dublin auxiliary bishops

ballsymchugh

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2010/0811/breaking38.html

don't think this is a wise move. diarmuid martin looks like he's fighting a lonely battle now.

prinz

From what I gather the Vatican are lining up a team of replacements some from abroad to take over. (Can't remember where I picked this up, will look for a link - IIRC they were assembling a candidate list including Americans, Canadians, Australians etc)


Probably just leaving the status quo until a proper change over can be undertaken. Possibly just way out of touch with the reality on the ground Either way the time this is taking is ridiculous.

Plowman

This post has been deleted.

The Smurf

Plowman wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Perhaps the Holy Father wishes to retain these two bishops for a strategic reason. If they resign, then potentially two more auxilliary (sp) bishops would have to be appointed. Bearing in mind that dioceses are probably going to be reorganised, with less bishops, it might be a good idea to not hastily create more bishops but make do with what we have. It also sends out the signal to the media that the Holy Father won't be bullied into acting according to the media agenda, which isn't actually about the children at all, but rather to further the media agenda of control over the Church. I don't know what these bishops did or didn't do, or what they should have done. But I trust the Holy Father to do what is the best at this time for the Church.

Pal

These two lads should probably be in court. Not back at work. :mad:

kelly1

Does anyone have concrete info on what these bishops did wrong? Are we jumping to judgment?

ballsymchugh

kelly1 wrote: »

Does anyone have concrete info on what these bishops did wrong? Are we jumping to judgment?

good point, i think it was more about what they didn't do. they resigned because of their inactions and was seen as a gesture to somehow repair the image of the church. the decision of the Pope not to accept the resignations, coupled with stories about what happened in Germany while he was there don't really help in the rebuilding of trust after the scandals.

The Smurf

I talked to a friend about this today. He believes that the Pope is sending out a couple of messages:

1. Bishops have responsibilities and they can't just resign when the going gets tough.

2. The Church can't throw bishops under the bus to create scapegoats to make life easier for other bishops.

3. The Church won't be dictated to by the world (media, unbelievers etc...) on how to manage its affairs. Where would that end? It wouldn't. Hence the need to send out a clear signal.

My friend also suggested that although these bishops were mentioned in the report, they weren't culpable so much as they were part of the way things were done at that time. Not only the Church, but Guards, health professionals etc... all had a deficient approach to this matter of abuse. The guards turned many's a blind eye to things that they should have investigated, but they didn't. We also know more about abuse, why it happens and how difficult it is to treat and how offenders should be removed completely from access to the young. Hindsight is wonderful. Things were dealt with badly (why were priests not removed immediately and permanently from ministry? Why give them a second chance?) and people suffered and even died because of it. The Church has learned from this scandal (spare the rod, savage the flock, as Benedict alluded to recently, when he said it was not love to tolerate conduct unworthy of the priesthood, as happened often) and the Church is now probably the safest place in Ireland for young people. Compare this to the atrocious current situation with the HSE and their poor record up to this point in time.

kelly1

Article by David Quinn in the Indo:

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/case-against-bishops-lost-amid-the-hysteria-2295498.html