In all the media hype surrounding the sex abuse scandal, haters of the Church have wondered if that scandal could destroy the Church and the priesthood. The short answer is no, but a scandal like this one could.(Not destroy permanently, of course. Nothing could do that.)
Father David Verhasselt, a priest in the parish of St. Catherine of Alexandria Church in the diocese of Milwaukee, has been placed on administrative leave because he is under investigation for breaking the seal of confession.
The charge is so serious that Archbishop Jerome Listecki has even barred Fr. Verhasselt from visiting the church.
According to … Continue Reading @ National Catholic Register
April 23, 2010 at 12:46 am
Riddle me this: lately Cardinal Castrilon Hoyos claimed that he congratulated a French bishop for hiding a child-raping priest (in writing, stupid fool) because because the perp priest revealed it to the French bishop in the confessional.
If so, HOW THE HELL DO WE NOW ABOUT IT? How does he himself know about it? Can your bishop take the contents of your confession and chat with a Cardinal about them? No.
That being the case, these dudes really must think that we are a bunch of hopeless idiots. They must look at us and see a collection plate in the vast empty space where a brain should be.
April 23, 2010 at 1:52 am
Hey, when you over reactors read this blog, please read it in the spirit of this blog. As Catholics you should be in tune with that notion.
April 23, 2010 at 2:34 am
Early riser:
First off, I'm no troll, as I do comment here under my name from time to time. Second, sorry if I was a bit crass in my comments, but I am a bit tired of cathmomof6's radtradism – if this was the early 17th Century, she'd be complaining about how Trent was a failure, since it had failed to convert the Protestants, and how radical new orders like the Jesuits and Oratorians were dangerously innovative. If it was the 5th century, she'd likely be a Donatist, who were the radtrads of ther time. Radtrads in general remind me of the dwarves in the stable in C.S. Lewis' The Last Battle – so afraid to be taken in again that they can't be taken out.
April 23, 2010 at 3:29 am
@Dave:
I'm glad somebody finally noticed CatholicMomof6's post was, well, a bit off.
April 23, 2010 at 6:29 am
Dave – I don't care what you're a bit tired of. News Flash: neither does anyone else here since you lost all credibility or moral high ground. You do NOT get to berate or ridicule another poster simply because they share a different opinion than yours.
FYI, I personally LIKE the label "RadTrad". I wear it as a badge of honor. But unless you don't mind being called a liberal modernist closet-Protestant, I'd suggest not throwing around labels and double-down on the respectfullness around here.
Kim – her post was actually very much on the money in a lot of ways. From where I sit, it is you who are a bit off…as usual.
April 23, 2010 at 12:18 pm
You do NOT get to berate or ridicule another poster simply because they share a different opinion than yours.
Ironic advice, sayeth the man who told a fellow commenter to go back under his bridge.
April 23, 2010 at 12:20 pm
Early Riser:
Her post was a rant, fit for the pages of Traditio or the nutjobs at Tradition in Action. It is as unworthy as the cant spewed out by Call to Action types – it just comes from the other extreme. I will also tell you that anyone who knows me will not mistaken me for a liberal, a modernist, or a Protestant. I have a love for the Old Mass, and may join the parish which holds it in my hometown in the future. But I will not have all priests slandered simply because they were ordained after 1967. I will not tolerate rantings from modernists or radtrads (as opposed to real traditional Catholics).
April 23, 2010 at 12:26 pm
I agree with Dave.
Momof6 not only slandered priests, but any Catholic born after the 1960s. The attitude that traditionalist Catholics are "more" Catholic than anyone else is insulting, childish, and decidedly un-Christian. Especially since I – a convert – have sometimes been told I'm not "really" Catholic because I wasn't born and baptized into the faith. It's degrading and – more to the point – it's offputting. I know many people who will NOT attend the Old Mass because of that attitude; no where in the rites or rubrics for the Old Mass does it say to be unwelcoming, rude, or uncharitable to fellow Catholics.
This was not caused by the form of the mass; just as sexual abuse was not caused by celibacy or the all-male priesthood. This was caused by someone who allegedly broke his vows, who has been accused of sinning and violating a sacrament – and last I checked, the Old Mass and rites had not done away with the concept of sin, which means those who profess a more traditionalist bent are capable of the same thing, too.
So spare that the "moral high ground" argument, because neither you – nor Momof6 – have shown any respect or deference to those of us who attend reverent masses in the new form.
April 23, 2010 at 2:06 pm
Early Riser:
In short, if CatholicMomof6 had spoken about the so-called "Spirit of Vatican II" types (just read Hans Kung's latest open letter to bishops) then I would agree with her.
But as it is, she railed against ALL of Novus Ordo. Might I remind you that Novus Ordo is the NORM in the Roman Catholic Church?
Those who participate in the Novus Ordo Mass and those who participate in the Tridentine Mass are of the same Roman Catholic Church. There is no separation between us except from those who would create one. We have a hermeneutic of continuity.
April 23, 2010 at 3:36 pm
Good heavens! Calm down, everyone!!
Praise God. Let's just all praise God.
April 23, 2010 at 4:07 pm
Lazrry – I was holding up a mirror at Dave's behavior and not ridiculing him for his opinion. You don't seem to understand the concept of the word irony. And that is not at all ironic.
Amy – you can make a point against Catholicmom without telling her to go back to her bunker. This is the point. And FYI, re-read what she wrote. I personally would have substituted "post-conciliar" with "Novus Ordo" to stress the point. Not all priests are jokes, obviously. But the priesthood has definitely become a joke, unfortunately– a very unfunny, prolonged joke at our expense. You cannot dispute this.
April 23, 2010 at 5:03 pm
Early Riser:
An honest question: would you have responded to me thus had I been dealing with a radical feminist or a militant atheist or a fundamentalist Protestant who posted in the same fashion? Or is it because you're in the same camp of Catholicmomof6?
I will also re-state that I have no problem whatsoever with the Extraordinary Form or with Catholics who prefer it. I respect well-worded, articulate, and respectful disagreements, and will respond in kind. I have problems with attacks and rants from radtrads who think that anyone who doesn't fit their template is somehow inferior and a heretic. And this is not the first time Catholicmomof6 has made such comments. For me, she is in the same category as reddog (the bitter atheist frequenting Jeff Miller's blog).
I shall leave any further judgement on this matter to our hosts, and defer to their wishes.
April 23, 2010 at 5:25 pm
Dave – I cannot respond in hypotheticals on this, since it is a non-issue. Once again, you were out of line and should not have attacked that poster ad hominem since she did NOTHING to you personally. You simply did not like her opinion, and that is not a reason to attack her.
You are always going to come across people who think they are superior or somehow more "correct" than you. If you are not a heretic, then what does it matter? If I said you were a blue pop-tart most likely you'd say, "Uh…this guy is wrong and has something a bit off about him. Not going to waste my time debating this issue" rather than defending yourself to the last breath on why you are not a blue pop-tart. Now, if there were some truth to it, then you might be more inclined to take offense.
Once again, you can refute what she says (hopefully with substance), or simply dismiss it as unworthy of comment. But you do not have the right to attack her or anyone ad hominem for their opinion. I guess at this point I can't make it any clearer.
April 23, 2010 at 5:52 pm
Perhaps Catholicmom can come back here and explain what she meant by her Novus Ordo comments.
April 23, 2010 at 5:58 pm
Early Riser:
Point made. Not that she didn't merit a response, but the way I did it is what mattered. I was impatient and uncharitable. I apologize to you and Catholicmomof6. If I do respond again, I will do so more respectfully.
April 23, 2010 at 6:12 pm
I can't speak for Catholicmom, but on behalf of "Rad-Trads" everywhere, apology accepted.
Now, if you'll excuse me I'm going off to my apocolyptic bomb shelter to flagelate myself.
April 23, 2010 at 7:18 pm
ER – I must have missed the blog post where you were anointed Combox Patrol Guard. Patrick and/or Matthew, perhaps you could email me that memo so I have it on file. Thanks
April 23, 2010 at 7:56 pm
Larry – awe. If your friends or family gave you the impression you were wity or in any way funny, I'm sorry to say they were playing a very cruel joke on you at your expense. Sad, really.
April 23, 2010 at 8:07 pm
This thread is like being back on the AOL Catholic Message Boards! Ahhhhhh….. the good old days.
April 23, 2010 at 9:13 pm
Nightfly – HEY! What was your screen name back then? Mine was "RadTrad4U"…