If Bishop Zanchetta were a pastor and his bishop moved him around like Pope Francis did, Bishop Zanchetta would be laicized and Pope Francis would be removed from office. Or is this why Bishop Stika stays in place, because he has not done anything the pope would not himself do?
This is why Vos Estis is useless. Friends of the accused bishop can decide he's innocent, no matter what he has done or how much evidence there is. So no matter what they find, it's probably a sign that the bishop was either liked or disliked by his peers. I doubt the courts would have convicted Zanchetta if the evidence hadn't been solid. From here it looks like Rome is trying to tamper with the evidence after the fact.
The scandals of abuse occurring at many levels of the Church is sickening and disheartening. Bishop Zanchetta getting special treatment is certainly not a good look for Pope Francis.
I think one of the things that have might motivated the Pope to do what he did was he believed people are innocent until proven guilty. He’s very tolerant and “who is he to judge”.
I do not mean this in a negative or sarcastic way. While I do not always agree with him we can not make a judgement against him either. I believe he is a good man but he is a human being and will not always say or do the right thing. Judgement is for God.
Zanchetta, Chilean bishops, Puerto Rican bishop, US bishops who "resign" early... It's like we don't learn. It seems thisis one of those demons that can only be cast out by fasting and prayer.
This case has some particularly troubling aspects.
The greatest virtue of the current pope is the commitment to transparency and good governance. This, unfortunately, appears to bring that into question. Since the accused has a close personal connexion to the pope, greater transparency is required to provide confidence that papal policy is being enacted. This takes a great deal of courage, but the consequence of not doing so will cause greater damage to the proclamation of the Gospel.
Another concerning aspect is the time frames. People have been putting in complaints for years, and the Vatican bureaucracy seems to only have received them years later. And since receiving them, it has been almost four years. The man has been convicted by a civil court and the Vatican is still waiting. It appears that for some, investigation by the curia is a way to memory hole complaints. It gives the correct impression that the curia is not interested in investigating its own and the process is but a sop to quieten the masses.
I appreciate that it takes a long time to change the culture of an organisation, particularly one such as the curia, but such a high profile case is an opportunity to provide the direction needed. The Pope intervening and ensuring that Vos Estis was followed and demonstrating transparency would have provided a clear signal to the curia that they need to line up.
The Zanchetta scandal - and Francis' central role in it - is a complete disgrace.
It speaks volumes that the mainstream media will not touch it with a barge pole.
They are happy to let Francis the wrecker continue in office (as compared to Benedict the builder), and obviously do not care to run any form of 'negative' stories concerning homosexuality.
If Bishop Zanchetta were a pastor and his bishop moved him around like Pope Francis did, Bishop Zanchetta would be laicized and Pope Francis would be removed from office. Or is this why Bishop Stika stays in place, because he has not done anything the pope would not himself do?
Zanchetta will be one of many things to trash the legacy of Pope Francis' pontificate in future, likely after his death.
Mt 23:1-2
This is why Vos Estis is useless. Friends of the accused bishop can decide he's innocent, no matter what he has done or how much evidence there is. So no matter what they find, it's probably a sign that the bishop was either liked or disliked by his peers. I doubt the courts would have convicted Zanchetta if the evidence hadn't been solid. From here it looks like Rome is trying to tamper with the evidence after the fact.
The scandals of abuse occurring at many levels of the Church is sickening and disheartening. Bishop Zanchetta getting special treatment is certainly not a good look for Pope Francis.
I think one of the things that have might motivated the Pope to do what he did was he believed people are innocent until proven guilty. He’s very tolerant and “who is he to judge”.
I do not mean this in a negative or sarcastic way. While I do not always agree with him we can not make a judgement against him either. I believe he is a good man but he is a human being and will not always say or do the right thing. Judgement is for God.
Zanchetta, Chilean bishops, Puerto Rican bishop, US bishops who "resign" early... It's like we don't learn. It seems thisis one of those demons that can only be cast out by fasting and prayer.
This case has some particularly troubling aspects.
The greatest virtue of the current pope is the commitment to transparency and good governance. This, unfortunately, appears to bring that into question. Since the accused has a close personal connexion to the pope, greater transparency is required to provide confidence that papal policy is being enacted. This takes a great deal of courage, but the consequence of not doing so will cause greater damage to the proclamation of the Gospel.
Another concerning aspect is the time frames. People have been putting in complaints for years, and the Vatican bureaucracy seems to only have received them years later. And since receiving them, it has been almost four years. The man has been convicted by a civil court and the Vatican is still waiting. It appears that for some, investigation by the curia is a way to memory hole complaints. It gives the correct impression that the curia is not interested in investigating its own and the process is but a sop to quieten the masses.
I appreciate that it takes a long time to change the culture of an organisation, particularly one such as the curia, but such a high profile case is an opportunity to provide the direction needed. The Pope intervening and ensuring that Vos Estis was followed and demonstrating transparency would have provided a clear signal to the curia that they need to line up.
The Zanchetta scandal - and Francis' central role in it - is a complete disgrace.
It speaks volumes that the mainstream media will not touch it with a barge pole.
They are happy to let Francis the wrecker continue in office (as compared to Benedict the builder), and obviously do not care to run any form of 'negative' stories concerning homosexuality.