Cardinal O'Malley Rebukes Pope for Wanting Evidence Before Conviction

Submitted by LocutusOP on Wed, 01/31/2018 - 23:32
Author: 

Anonymous, M. Prodigal ,          

Date: 
Wednesday, January 31, 2018 - 23:30
Article link: 
Cardinal O'Malley Rebukes Pope for Wanting Evidence Before Conviction

 

 
Anonymous said...

We are in utter pandemonium. It is beyond any rational understanding and completely lacking in decency to presume guilt based upon an accusation, alone. Any person who holds to such nonsense is unfit in any type of leadership position. Simply because an accusation relates to an act or acts of incredible moral repugnance, is no justification for presuming guilt.

But Cardinal "O'Malice" is far from alone. It is mind boggling that so many people agree with such presumptions of guilt. Such thoughts/beliefs will ultimately lead to anarchy and civil war or they will lead to oppression that will make America, Stalin/Hitleresque.

What seems to be coming our way is truly abhorrent.

Karl

January 21, 2018 at 12:49 PM
M. Prodigal said...

Even dubious "allegations" against faithful priests are enough to remove them. Or perhaps an unfaithful priest with porn on his computer can bring down a faithful bishop.
But there were many speaking against the assignment of a bishop for good reasons and they are ignored and called names thus leading to more souls being disgusted with the high placed men and thus the Church. New scandals weekly and sometimes daily. We can only look to the Good Shepherd and cling to Him and Our Lady.

January 21, 2018 at 1:03 PM
Anonymous said...

Very well said!

My gut is also telling me that something is up, something is happening all over the world. We may be at a turning point, I don’t know....
Sexual abusers are being called out in all walks of life, not just Hollywood. Porn stars are committing suicide right and left (3 or 5 in the past maybe three months alone - don’t remember the exact number - widespread despair within that immoral industry?). Pope Francis makes a statement, which angers a great number of people in Chile/Peru, that credible evidence is needed for action to be taken against accused abusers (innocent until proven guilty), and this also apparently angers Cardinal O’Malley? Something, as you say, is going down.

Something in the realm of the morality of human sexuality may be about to explode upon our society. I hope and pray that we are about to witness the return of solid traditional Christian sexual ethics. Please God make it so!

January 21, 2018 at 1:26 PM

...

M said...

"Juan Carlos Cruz has publicly accused Father Karadima of abusing him and alleges that Bishop Barros was present when this happened, though the bishop categorically denies it."
https://www.americamagazine.org/faith/2018/01/18/calumny-pope-francis-de...

https://twitter.com/jccruzchellew/status/953992484140519424
“As if one could have taken a selfie or a photo while Karadima abused me and others and Juan Barros standing next to him watching everything. These people from above are crazy and @Pontifex is talking about reparation to the victims. We remain the same and his forgiveness remains empty.”

I don't know what Mr. Cruz's credibility in this whole thing is, but if he was a Karadima victim (my understanding is that this is not under dispute) then this would be eyewitness testimony which is not zero evidence even if it doesn't reach the level of actionable for some reason which would mean the charge of calumny is wrong.

January 22, 2018 at 1:54 AM
TTC said...

How could you possibly write that facts are not in dispute when your own account states that Bishop Barros disputes it?

The likelihood of a reasonably prudent and just person sitting in the room with some popcorn and lemonade to watch a child being sodimized and do nothing about it is not credible. So examining that allegation takes into account the how Bishop Barris has behaved in the past. If that allegation is inconsistent with his nature, if he denies it, if he has proof he was elsewhere, those things are factored into the determination of credibility.

Not everyone who claims they slept with John F Kennedy actually did. Nobody would dispute he was unfaithful.

If a person came along and said I was in the room when they were raped and did nothing about it, I would think that my 20 year history in the public square would be enough for most people who know me to conclude that is a lie. It is impossible to my nature. But there is always going to be people who just don't give a damn enough to think it through, or for whatever reason, they are going to go along with every single accusation. That's why so many women were burned as witches in Salem. It happens.

January 22, 2018 at 5:44 AM

 

 

 

 

 

Own comment: 

We have to give credit to the author, who is willing to broach the topic of falsely-accused priests. That she should choose one who Bergoglio defends is odd, but perhaps not so, given that O'Malley's approach of presumption-of-guilt is the intended target of the piece.

My gut instinct is that whoever Bergoglio defends, especially if he knows him personally, has to be the worse for it, given that Bergoglio seems to enjoy surrounding himself with perverts. Nonetheless, the principle of presumption of innocence must be upheld always, especially when we are more inclined to pre-judge someone on account of what he has done or those with whom he consorts.

We do know that it is a principle Bergoglio does not follow, given that he has had no problem deposing bishops on the most spurious of charges, so it will be interesting to know why Bergoglio defends Barros as vehemently as he does.