Jump to content
An Old School Catholic Message Board

A Nope For Pope Ny Times Op-Ed By Maureen Dowd


StMichael

Recommended Posts

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/28/opinion/28dowd.html?pagewanted=print

March 28, 2010
OP-ED COLUMNIST
A Nope for Pope

By MAUREEN DOWD
WASHINGTON

Yup, we need a Nope.

A nun who is pope.

The Catholic Church can never recover as long as its Holy Shepherd is seen as a black sheep in the ever-darkening sex abuse scandal.

Now we learn the sickening news that Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, nicknamed “God’s Rottweiler” when he was the church’s enforcer on matters of faith and sin, ignored repeated warnings and looked away in the case of the Rev. Lawrence C. Murphy, a Wisconsin priest who molested as many as 200 deaf boys.

The church has been tone deaf and dumb on the scandal for so long that it’s shocking, but not surprising, to learn from The Times’s Laurie Goodstein that a group of deaf former students spent 30 years trying to get church leaders to pay attention.

“Victims give similar accounts of Father Murphy’s pulling down their pants and touching them in his office, his car, his mother’s country house, on class excursions and fund-raising trips and in their dormitory beds at night,” Goodstein wrote. “Arthur Budzinski said he was first molested when he went to Father Murphy for confession when he was about 12, in 1960.”

It was only when the sanctity of the confessional was breached that an archbishop in Wisconsin (who later had to resign when it turned out he used church money to pay off a male lover) wrote to Cardinal Ratzinger at the Vatican to request that Father Murphy be defrocked.

The cardinal did not answer. The archbishop wrote to a different Vatican official, but Father Murphy appealed to Cardinal Ratzinger for leniency and got it, partly because of the church’s statute of limitations. Since when does sin have a statute of limitations?

The pope is in too deep. He has proved himself anything but infallible. And now he claims he was uninformed on the matter of an infamous German pedophile priest. A spokesman for the Munich archdiocese said on Friday that Ratzinger, running the diocese three decades ago, would not have read the memo sent to him about Father Peter Hullermann’s getting cycled back into work with children because between 700 to 1,000 memos go to the archbishop each year.

Let’s see. That’s two or three memos a day. And Ratzinger was renowned at the Vatican for poring through voluminous, recondite theological treatises.

Because he did not defrock the demented Father Murphy, it’s time to bring in the frocks.

Pope Benedict has continued the church’s ban on female priests and is adamant against priests’ having wives. He has started two investigations of American nuns to check on their “quality of life” — code for seeing if they’ve grown too independent. As a cardinal he wrote a Vatican document urging women to be submissive partners and not take on adversarial roles toward men.

But the completely paternalistic and autocratic culture of Il Papa led to an insular, exclusionary system that failed to police itself, and that became a corrosive shelter for secrets and shame.

If the church could throw open its stained glass windows and let in some air, invite women to be priests, nuns to be more emancipated and priests to marry, if it could banish criminal priests and end the sordid culture of men protecting men who attack children, it might survive. It could be an encouraging sign of humility and repentance, a surrender of arrogance, both moving and meaningful.

Cardinal Ratzinger devoted his Vatican career to rooting out any hint of what he considered deviance. The problem is, he was obsessed with enforcing doctrinal orthodoxy and somehow missed the graver danger to the most vulnerable members of the flock.

The sin-crazed “Rottweiler” was so consumed with sexual mores — issuing constant instructions on chastity, contraception, abortion — that he didn’t make time for curbing sexual abuse by priests who were supposed to pray with, not prey on, their young charges.

American bishops have gotten politically militant in recent years, opposing the health care bill because its language on abortion wasn’t vehement enough, and punishing Catholic politicians who favor abortion rights and stem cell research. They should spend as much time guarding the kids already under their care as they do championing the rights of those who aren’t yet born.

Decade after decade, the church hid its sordid crimes, enabling the collared perpetrators instead of letting the police collar them. In the case of the infamous German priest, one diocese official hinted that his problem could be fixed by transferring him to teach at a girls’ school. Either they figured that he would not be tempted by the female sex, or worse, the church was even less concerned about putting little girls at risk.

The nuns have historically cleaned up the messes of priests. And this is a historic mess. Benedict should go home to Bavaria. And the cardinals should send the white smoke up the chimney, proclaiming “Habemus Mama.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='StMichael' date='28 March 2010 - 12:22 PM' timestamp='1269796937' post='2082004']
“Habemus Mama.”
[/quote]

Latin fail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

cmotherofpirl

Wouldn't it be amazing if people had opinions based on facts and reality instead of their hatred of the church. But again it IS from the New York Tantrum...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

geetarplayer

[quote]A dead thing can go with the stream, but only a living thing can go against it.
-G.K. Chesterton[/quote]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thy Geekdom Come

[quote name='Resurrexi' date='28 March 2010 - 01:24 PM' timestamp='1269797067' post='2082005']
Latin fail.
[/quote]
Ditto. Aside from her grammatical error, she probably doesn't realize that the spelling is "mamma," which has two revealing meanings: 1) breast (specifically the lactating variety), and 2) mammon.

Well, if she meant option 1, it's no surprise that she'd want a boob for pope. If she meant option 2, well, Jesus says we cannot serve both God and mammon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

HisChildForever

If clerical celibacy was the problem, said priests would run away with women. Not molest and rape boys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thy Geekdom Come

This article has so many problems with it.

#1 - The facts are all wrong, as Zenit pointed out the other day.

#2 - Infallibility has nothing to do with prudent governance of the legal affairs of the Church.

#3 - If people had followed his teachings on contraception, abortion, et al., which this article turns its nose up at, we wouldn't be in this mess because they would treat humans with dignity.

#4 - Nuns have historically begun a lot of reform, but the sisters she's referring to could hardly be called nuns and I think St. Catherine of Sienna would be ashamed of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

HisChildForever

[quote name='Raphael' date='28 March 2010 - 01:41 PM' timestamp='1269798116' post='2082015']
#2 - Infallibility has nothing to do with prudent governance of the legal affairs of the Church.
[/quote]

This is one of the first red flags I caught. The quote: [b]"The pope is in too deep. He has proved himself anything but infallible."[/b] The Pope is not infallible in and of himself, only when speaking on matters of faith and morals. "Dowdy Maureen" acts as if he as a person is infallible.

Edited by HisChildForever
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archaeology cat

[quote name='HisChildForever' date='28 March 2010 - 05:35 PM' timestamp='1269797726' post='2082009']
If clerical celibacy was the problem, said priests would run away with women. Not molest and rape boys.
[/quote]
Yeah, I've never understood how having married clergy would stop that, either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Marie-Therese

Reminds me of a quote that Fr. Corapi attributed to his office manager Tamara...when discussing the issue of the abuses, someone had suggested that clerical celibacy was to blame. She scoffed and said, paraphrasing, why would we expect child abusers to keep another vow when they can't keep the one they already took?


If I had a nickel for every time Maureen Dowd wrote something arrogant and stupid I would be a multimillionaire. Nothing new at Hell's Bible (:rolling: I love how Fr. Z calls it that).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hate to say it, but Maureen Dowd has given further evidence that she is an intellectual lightweight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Theologian in Training

There has always been one major flaw in the whole "priests should get married thing." What if the priest does not want to get married? What if the priest is content without a family? What if the priest's vocation was, indeed, to be celibate? Sometimes, the argument is like a nagging mother, asking when I am going to get married, when, I, myself, have made the choice to not do so. I don't tell Maureen that she would be better off single or married, why does she feel as though she, or anyone, for that matter, has that unique right or even knows what would be best for my life or really any priest's life? The argument never asks the priest what he wants and always assumes that the priest would be better off married. Don't get me wrong, I am sure I would have been a good father, in the limited sense of the word, but I am happy living celibate, otherwise, I would be doing something else right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is the kind of silly article that passes for intellectual discourse in our society. It's not even worth the time to read it. And not merely because she's critical of the Church. It's just a silly article. "Habemus Mama"? Are you serious?

Edited by Era Might
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Eastern Churches have a different custom in connection with priestly celibacy (n.b., only our bishops are celibate), but the Western custom is not a secret, and no man is forced to become a priest. That said, the present difficulties are a result of the moral relativism promoted by modern culture, and the issue of celibacy - if it has any impact at all - is only of minor importance. It is interesting to note that the people who relish attacking the Church in connection with these terrible crimes are in most cases the same people who support the promiscuity of the "sexual revolution" of the 1960s.

Edited by Apotheoun
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...