The system will protect itself versus the those of an individual-
that's universal. Perhaps the vow of chastity enlarges the scowl but I
fail to see the sins of the RCC as any different from the casting
couch, incest, rape as a reward of conquest, the cabin boy, the sex
slave trade, etc. The upshot is that the RCC lost a great deal of
respect, money and valuable real estate plus now has a rep for
attracting derelicts into Holy Orders- nuns were considered spinsters.
Read Chaucer (let off a rape charge- thank heavens, for the sake of
the English language!)

On Dec 2, 9:01 am, Molly <[email protected]> wrote:
> I think that this is much to the point of what is "true", Francis.
> Because we are not in the head or heart of Murray, Moriarty etc., we
> cannot know if they are acting on what they know to be true,
> justifying their position with what they think can cover up what is
> true, or formulating a relative truth based on personality disorder.
> Because we can see the destructive results of the actions of these
> priests, those that abused children and those that abused public
> trust, we feel they cannot be true to what we know as loving
> behavior.  They may be true examples of how viewpoints limited to
> selfish and material aspects also have limited experience of absolute
> truths.  Unfortunately, these are the folks that we expect to lead us
> in our spiritual journeys if we are Roman Catholic, yet they cannot
> really, because they are so limited they have no real experience of
> the unity consciousness that Christ leads us into.  If they really
> believe that they acted correctly, they have not yet found the
> intrinsic moral system that leads to truthful action, (When you have
> lifted up the Son of Man, then you will know that I AM, and that I do
> nothing on my own authority. Instead, I speak only what the Father has
> taught me.)  This cannot include following orders from the Vatican
> that allow harm to others.
>
> Understanding what others find to be "true" necessitates understanding
> their viewpoint and arrival at the truth.  Each state and stage of
> consciousness represents a different viewpoint. Some of those
> viewpoints are survival level, self serving, and far from universal.
>
> On Dec 2, 9:14 am, fran the man <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 2 Dez., 13:48, Molly <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > I felt the deep, abiding, heart pang while reading Francis' post.  It
> > > reminded me of the movie the Mission, with Robert De Niro, which I
> > > think beautifully portrayed the moral conflict of decent men in the RC
> > > church that are following instruction of authority.  The fact that the
> > > story of Francis involves children makes the damage unimaginable in
> > > terms of shattered lives.  Knowing some of the people involved,
> > > whether they were pedophiles or simply turned away from the truth of
> > > the terrible acts, must make that guilt we all feel about the
> > > injustice we cannot influence all the more real.  In the end, we can
> > > only do what we are called to do in the moment, and give voice
> > > immediately to what we find true.  The Logos is more powerful than we
> > > can imagine.  There is limitless humility in that part of us that
> > > connects us all brings us to the reckoning that we cannot judge if we
> > > are to accept ourselves in the whole of mankind, and the god within.
>
> > Perhaps slightly off topic, but as a reaction to your post, Molly, a
> > small example, of what you describe as as "do[ing] what we are called
> > to do in the moment and giv[ing] voice immediately to what we find
> > true..." I posted this elsewhere on the web, on the blog of an Irish
> > friend of mine who has reasons to be more immediately concerned with
> > what is going on in the Irish Catholic Church. It concerns the bishops
> > whose handling of paedophile abuse was criticized specifically by the
> > commission:
>
> > "Men like Murray, Moriarty, et al. - and I would include Des Connell
> > in this group - are, most probably, very sure that they acted
> > correctly, acording to their own lights. For them, their loyalty to
> > the institutional church is genuinely primary. The Catholic Church,
> > including indivisibly its institutional component, is the infallible
> > voice of God on earth. They serve it, and that is their whole
> > justification.
>
> > Des Connell taught me philosophy at UCD and I feel I know a bit about
> > what makes him tick. He can use the artifice of the "mental
> > reservation" and believe that this is morally correct, because he can
> > justify it in the edifice of scholastic theology, the truth of which
> > he is convinced. For this reason he can simultaneously be horrified at
> > the abuse of children by churchmen, and at the same time subjugate it
> > to the supremacy of his duty, as he sees it, to serve the church and
> > protect it from harm.
>
> > Donal Murray seems to think similarly. If I understand his reaction to
> > the criticism of him in the Murphy report correctly, he wants to wait
> > for feedback from the priests and people of his diocese. If he gets
> > the impression they think he should resign, he may even do so.
>
> > But both Connell and Murray, as well as the others, have got it
> > basically wrong. This is not a question of their responsibility to the
> > Church, or their obedience to the pope (I'm expecting that there will
> > be smokescreens raised about the so-called Holy Father not accepting
> > some offered resignations), or their own theological justifications.
> > It is a question of their moral responsibility to the victims of the
> > abusers.
>
> > As a result of their positions, they were faced with difficult but
> > ultimately clear moral decisions and they chose wrongly. All the
> > extenuating arguments regarding damage to the church, loyalty to the
> > pope, the prospect of horrifying scandals do not change this (and the
> > truth - at least some of it - has come out anyway).
>
> > It happened on their watch and they let the victims down. No
> > theological arguments, no opinions of the priests and laity of the
> > Limerick diocese, no wishes of the pope can change this. And this is
> > why Murray and the others must resign and Connell must go much further
> > than he has in terms of unreserved apology. Apart from any
> > considerations of the victims and their feelings, it is a question of
> > their own moral integrity. In this sense, to use the terminology they
> > (not I) would use, it's a question of saving their own souls.
>
> > I fear most of them do not seem capable of discovering the basic
> > backbone within themselves to save themselves morally - spiritually,
> > if you like. And this is, perhaps, the most damning judgement of all
> > on the system which produced them, formed them and which they have
> > served.
>
> > I am relieved and glad not to be in any way associated with that
> > system any more. And, at the same time (thinking also of my idealistic
> > young self who entered the Dominican Order 32 years ago and spent nine
> > fruitful and formative years there) saddened that the institutional
> > Catholic Church has so managed to corrupt and pervert what was,
> > potentially, a beautiful ideal."
>
> > With regard to the Vatican and the pope, Lee, the silence has - up to
> > now - been deafening. Worse, requests for Vatican co-operation from
> > the investigating commission, through the papal nunciature in Dublin,
> > were ignored because, according to the Vatican, "they were not
> > submitted through proper diplomatic channels." Diplomatic protocol
> > apparently stipulates that such requests should have come through
> > official government channels.  Words simply fail me to express what I
> > think of this position.
>
> > Francis- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
""Minds Eye"" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en.


Reply via email to