Wednesday, March 22, 2006

More O'Malley Hypocrisy

Excellent column by Eileen McNamara in the GLOBE. (It's only available on the Boston Globe's website for a few days then you have to pay to view it). Essentially she talks about the silence from the Boston's Catholic Church on the recent bill to eliminate the statute of limitations on sexual crimes against children:

Curiously, Archbishop Sean P. O'Malley was not on Beacon Hill to support the bills that would eliminate the statute of limitations on sexual crimes against children, bills drafted in response to the sexual abuse scandal in the very institution he heads.

It could not have been an aversion to politics that kept the archbishop away. O'Malley has had a busy political time of it lately. One week he is defending an exemption from state financial disclosure laws that apply to other charities because opening his books would be an assault on religious independence.

Another week he is seeking an exemption from state antidiscrimination laws because acknowledging the civil rights of same-sex parents would be an affront to Catholic religious teachings. No time in the schedule, though, to stand up for the proposition that those who rape children should be held accountable no matter when their victims come forward.

O'Malley also had no problem appearing on the Boston Common in the dead of winter 2004 to denounce same sex couples marrying. How very Christian.
Maybe O'Malley is being rewarded with a cardinal's skullcap for his willingness to confront the difficult challenges facing an archdiocese in disarray. What he is not being rewarded for is his commitment to justice for childhood victims of sexual abuse.

15 comments:

Anonymous said...

O'Malley is a hypocrite. The fact that he will receive the red hat this week, confirms, once again, the hypocrisy of the Catholic Church!

Anonymous said...

Why is he a hypocrit?

He means what he says....and does what he says. Thats the opposite of a hypocrit.

WhyI (of course) do not agree with his understanding of gays in the church, he is doing what anyone should expect from him.

Reasonable people can reasonably disagree.

But you can hardly call him a hypocrite

Anonymous said...

Why is he a hypocrite? Because he doesn't give a damn about the children. Why didn't he go to Beacon Hill and testify for the hearing? He met with the Gov. to stop gay people from adopting. Why is he so silent about child abuse? Because he's afraid he will have to spend more of the Church's money to bail about priests who abuse kids.

Anonymous said...

In what world is O'Malley a straight shooter? Part of the reason the church closings went so poorly is he constantly said one thing and did another. Despite the Fransican trappings, he's retained almost all of Cardinal Law's machine, and the accompanying "the only important thing is the church's reputation and bank account" attitude.

Anonymous said...

He's a straight shooter because he says what he means and does what he says.

Are you surprised he is acting against Gay marriage?

He has spoken against the idea all along! Surprised? I'm not..thjat's what I expect from him.

>>Why didn't he go to Beacon Hill and testify for the hearing?<<

Because he wasn't going to DO something he SAID he was against all along. Surpised?

>>He met with the Gov. to stop gay people from adopting.<<

Because he said he was against it all along. Surprised?

>>Why is he so silent about child abuse?

He has been DOING something to make the necessary changes so that it never happens again. Virtually no abuse has/is taking place within the Church now

>>Part of the reason the church closings went so poorly is he constantly said one thing and did another.<<

Example? He has been saying Churches will have to close long before the first one ever closed.

He says what he means.....and does what he says.

Again, I don't agree with his conclusions....but he is a Catholic.....Do you expect him to be embracing gay marriage and gay adoption?

You may not like him or his ideas, but the word hypocrite hardly applies here.

Marcie said...

Last anonymous poster, I guess you forgot the part where the Boston Catholic Church HASN'T made the changes it was supposed to. Read this story and tell me what O'Malley is doing or rather NOT doing: Gaps alleged in church plan to prevent sexual abuse

Anonymous said...

Virtually no abuse is taking place within the Church now? How would anyone know? They hid the last round for twenty years.

And remember when he was going to get input from the community before closing parishes? I supposed people locking themselves in churches is a form of input...

BTW, just repeating a statement over and over doesn't make it true. You should mention it to Brian, too.

Anonymous said...

>>Virtually no abuse is taking place within the Church now? How would anyone know? <<

If you know of any, please prove me wrong.

>>And remember when he was going to get input from the community before closing parishes? <<

Yes, we were all invited to attend meeting to give our input. I went to one. Did you? The people camping out in the Church, had input....they just didn't like the result.

>>Last anonymous poster, I guess you forgot the part where the Boston Catholic Church HASN'T made the changes it was supposed to. Read this story and tell me what O'Malley is doing or rather NOT doing:<<

I read the article and saw this:

""The board chairwoman, Regis College administrator M. J. Doherty, said yesterday that the archdiocese has fully complied with the central promise of the child protection program: to remove from ministry any priest credibly accused of abuse.""

I guess we seee what we want to see. Although, in one of his Rome interviews (now) Cardinal O'Malley has said more needs to be done.

>>You should mention it to Brian, too. <<

I am a gay Catholic (and I don't know Bryan). I have manny issues with the Church, however, no one can be surprised they are against gay marriage. They've been against it for 2000 years.

Anonymous said...

I'm a gay Catholic as well. I just rememember the time before John Paul II. The church I grew up in wasn't about greed and intolerance.

My calling O'Malley a hypocrite has little to do with gay marriage. It has everything to with him being another face on Cardinal Law. Protecting the churches finances and image is still more important than anything else.

Anonymous said...

>>I just rememember the time before John Paul II. The church I grew up in wasn't about greed and intolerance.<<

You seem to be living in an imaginary past.

Gee, you don't remember Richard Cardinal "money" Cushing, do you? Money was the first word out of his mouth every time he spoke!

No matter who the Bishop was, it was always about money.

Who was the Bishop when the Fr. Porters, Gheoghans and Shanleys' were given free run in the Diocese? I think it was Medeiros.

Are those they Bishops you grew up with? You have a skewed memory if you think things were better then.

And intolerance? There are more "Welcoming Churches" in Boston now than ever before.

Anonymous said...

I grew up in the Midwest, Ann Arbor, MI, to be exact. Our church was very gay-positive. Dignity was still welcome...

Anonymous said...

Surprise!

The Church is *still* Catholic!

Anonymous said...

Not really. I was born in 1963, so grew up with Vatican II. I remember the church before John-Paul II and his policy advisor (and head of the inquisition) Cardinal Ratzenberger moved the church firmly towards intolerance (especially of gays and other religions) and right wing politics.

They may have been moving it "back" but they moved it just the same. Church identity has always been subject to politics and the opinions of each Pope.

Of course, I also remember when claiming to know what Jesus thinks (as Ms. MassResistance does) was called blasphemy...

Anonymous said...

>>Not really. I was born in 1963, so grew up with Vatican II. I remember the church before John-Paul II and his policy advisor (and head of the inquisition) Cardinal Ratzenberger moved the church firmly towards intolerance (especially of gays and other religions) and right wing politics. <<

I was born in 1959 and remember nothing of the sort!

>>They may have been moving it "back" but they moved it just the same. Church identity has always been subject to politics and the opinions of each Pope.<<

JPII was the most forward thinking Pope of recent memory...although he did not budge on the gay issues.

>>Despite the Fransican trappings, he's retained almost all of Cardinal Law's machine<<

And he just sent Bishop Lennon packing.....and replaced him with a former military chaplain. Looks like some fresh air is blowing in.

Anonymous said...

You mean the guy who wrote liner notes for Bobby Vinton? Yeah, that's straight.