Quote:
Originally Posted by Fish In The Water
Right, but as large an issue as this is in the outside world it's pretty much dust under the carpet in Catholic circles.
Personally, I don't attach a large degree of personal blame on John Paul himself as I think the institution was already corrupt when he took over. That being said, (while I don't think he should be blamed for the misdeeds of individual priests), he does become culpable in my mind for the lack of a more appropriate response. This is where I think his leadership (or lack thereof) should be measured.
IMO, his primary shortcoming was in failing to help reform the institution in the wake of such shocking scandal. This is where I think he erred on the side of the status quo.
|
I don't agree with that, A saint is supposed to be somebody who does great things, It's hard to believe he didn't know about these offenses. If he would have done the opposite and stopped these acts, then yes, he deserves Sainthood...but...nothing was done, the church went so far as to move offenders out of jurisdiction to protect them.
I'm sorry..I just can't see why someone who had to power to stop this, but did nothing deserves to be a saint.