Cardinal Law

That's a horrible thing to insinuate...

 

Unfortunately, the Catholic Church in the Boston area has become something of a joke. Law was whisked out of the country and given a job in the Vatican. Many hurt Catholics were left behind here. Absolutely no winners in this situation.
Now the new archbishop is closing churches all over the area. There has been no real explanation as to why the particular parishes were chosen, but curiously, the ones chosen sit on prime real estate. Now once obedient Catholics are forced to have "sit ins" to keep their faith communities intact.
One parish in the area has hired a married priest and held masses in a protestant church. These people don't want the building, they just don't want to be told that they aren't a community anymore.
I cannot fathom someone outside my immediate church being able to dissolve my local church. How do these leaders think these people will react to them?

 

Joseph, it gets worse: Cardinal Law leads controversial Mass

I wouldn't want to have anything to do with any service he was leading, never mind presiding at a Eucharist.

I'd feel physically sick having any contact with anything he'd touched, since he's a man who supported and passed around child abusers.

I'd be with the people outside the church who were protesting against him.

OK, that's my rant done! Posting rather more rationally, the question is not whether he should be allowed to lead this mass; it's part of his current job. The real question is whether he should be the archpriest at Santa Maria Maggiore. IMO, the answer is no. Prison ministry maybe, but not a nice job in Rome. He was rightly sacked - far too late - by Wojtyla from the Boston Archiepiscopate; I'm not quite sure why he still pitches up at S Maria Maggiore...

Yours in Christ

Matt

 

"A little leaven leavens the whole lump."

The system of which we speak is corrupted--from it's birth.

Corruption+ reformation= reformed corruption.

The Bride of Christ is undefiled--She is still out there.

Selah,

Bro. James

 

Unfortunately, the official line in the RCC and other major institutions encouraged covering up sex crimes by their members, whether priests, teachers, doctors or other emminent persons.

This is no longer acceptable practice, as the victims spoke up after coping with the ugliness of being sacrifices for way too long. Hindsight is very easy to stand on a high moral ground.

Cardinal Law has not actaully committed a crime (has he?) his actions are possibly reprehensible but there are many ugly folks in the world who get along okay. However, he may vote as he is entitled to and what have you, but he and everyone else must make an account of themselves when before God at Judgement.....

Having been a sacrifice for the lust of an adult from 5 yrs old I know the pain and the injustice of the world but if I can prevent it from being reoccuring to one more kid, that is good.

 

When our sins be "uncovered", we find a different "covering". It is kind of like "turning a new leaf".

The only problem is: the other side is just as rotten. We(all humans) are totally depraved--by nature. We know not how to do anything "good".

Only Jesus can change this condition.

There are many people in high places who do not know Jesus.

Selah,

Bro. James

 

Once again agreeing with Joseph.

 

I never heard of ex-communication for a sin. If he was teaching error or false doctrine or was unrepentant about his sins, I could possibly see it.


Jesus Christ shows that as Christians we can be forgiven and should forgive others.

John 8:10-11

10. Straightening up, Jesus said to her, "Woman, where are they? Did no one condemn you?"
11. She said, "No one, Lord." And Jesus said, "I do not condemn you, either. Go. From now on sin no more."

If Cardinal Law is guilty of breaking the law than he can be and should be legally prosecuted.

[ April 29, 2005, 01:02 PM: Message edited by: Kathryn ]

 

Isn't ex-communication a discipline used when someone refuses to listen to the church, to bring them back to their senses and hopefully back into full communion?

 

Joseph:
Ex-communication is a discipline used when someone refuses to listen to the church, to bring them back to their senses and hopefully back into full communion.

Threatening ex-Communication to keep the Cardinals from talking to the media is in line with church discipline to keep the voting from being influenced by outside pressures and factions, which is very important. If someone deliberately goes to the media, he is not in communion with the church. Even if he was not formally ex-communicated, he would automatically be ex-communicating himself.

Ex-Communicating someone for having sinned, no matter how seriously, who has publically asked for forgiveness makes no sense to me. The Cardinal has been placed where he has no authority to transfer anyone. If he has done anything illegal he will have to answer to civil authorities. Sins are not treated with ex-communication if a person is repentant and sorrowful. This makes sense to me.

 

Actually he wasn't promoted and all the Cardinals vote regardless of their personal sins, which in this case Cardinal Law has publically asked forgiveness for. Jesus Christ says that the Church will have wheat and chaff until He comes and He will separate. You don't seem to understand what ex-communicating means. It's not to kick someone out so they never come back. It a break in communion. The goal is restoration to full communion.