> Rev. Robert Prevost bears responsibility for allowing former Providence Catholic H.S. President and priest Richard McGrath to stay at the high school amidst sex abuse allegations that dated back to the 1990s.
> That's according to Eduardo Lopez de Casas, a clergy abuse survivor and national vice president of the Chicago-based Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests (SNAP).
[0]: https://willcountygazette.com/stories/671124585-if-he-saw-an...
No one, from any religion, should directly or indirectly support crimes against minors. If people really cared about kids, we would protect them from sexual abuse from priests and prosecute priests via the legal system.
This is "why didn't she go to the police" for children. The police are not to be trusted, certainly not to against the Catholic Church.
They did absolutely nothing until it became too hard to ignore reality and now they are dealing with that.
I would think the bare minimum is when multiple children tell you they are being molested by the same person, you tell that person they are fired if they are seen near a school, and you interview other children at the school. Or you go to the police yourself and ask them to investigate. You know, common sense things. You don't, for instance, do this.
> "As the Archdiocese of Chicago had already placed restrictions on Ray being in the company of minors for nine years prior to his residence at St. John Stone Priory and communicated these when seeking approval from the Provincial, Robert Prevost, Cardinal Prevost was aware of the danger that Ray posed to minors when he gave approval," the letter says. "Nonetheless, Ray was permitted to live at the Priory in the vicinity of an elementary school without informing the administration of the school. By doing so, Cardinal Prevost endangered the safety of the children attending St. Thomas the Apostle."
I would invite you to apply skepticism to the adults who famously covered all of this up, and not to catholic children.
Not to mention saying things like "we disapprove of this behavior".
Overall, I think your claim that the church cannot do anything except the one thing you named is obviously false. There are in fact many things the church can do. Otherwise nobody would give a damn who is Pope. Just a guy who can not do anything.
> Is there a single entity to have ever existed in the history of humanity that has more blood on its hands?
Depending on how you count, probably many. In wars, more than 98% of casualties are attributable to political wars that had no religious motivation, and fewer so of Roman Catholic motivation. So, whatever those political entities are.
A confounding factor in answering the question is that the Catholics have been around for 2000 years, and many violently bloody entities fell after comparably short periods of time. For example, the Khmer Rouge existed for 4 years and killed 3 million people, no religious entity could attain the same level of bloodshed over their long existence even if they tried, which they don't.
Also christianity has always preached foregiveness. They often shouldn't do anything about past sins without being hypocrytical. If the law takes over they don't need to figure this out.
It's the bias of the Church and the unwillingness to involve the law that people are criticizing.
Also "The law is unbiased" is a new one. They are as unbiased as you and I.
Very disgusting that, to this day, this cover-up is defended.
This is a fundamental misunderstanding of catholic doctrine. One cannot have their priesthood 'removed'. However, they can be banned from the public performance of it, which is usually the punishment doled out.
As for excommunication... excommunication is removeable via confession, which is freely given.
Lifting an excommunication has a higher bar than just absolution of sins in confession. It requires permission of the local ordinary (usually the diocesan bishop), and for excommunications for especially bad things like desecrating the Eucharist or violating the seal of confession, it requires permission of the Apostolic See.
You just have to find a priest willing to offer you absolution (which could be an orthodox priest by Catholic doctrine), and either way, if you're on your deathbed, the priest must give you last rites, which will have the same effect.
The whole not-being-able-to-receive-communion thing is just an administrative punishment. While the church can make policies regarding various things, it cannot remove the efficacious power of the sacraments.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excommunication_in_the_Catholi...
> If for any reason the absolution from the censure is invalid, or is not given at all, nevertheless, provided the penitent is rightly disposed, his sins will always be forgiven in the sacrament of confession