Saturday, March 9, 2013

Network of victims of clerical sex abuse endorses Cardinal...



The Survivors Network of Those Abused by Priests (SNAP) has issued a list of three prelates the group regards as “promising” candidates for the papacy: Cardinals Luis Tagle of Manila and Christian Schönborn of Vienna, and Archbishop Diarmuid Martin.

SNAP, which has mounted an energetic media campaign in Rome during the sede vacante period, has been persistently critical of prelates who, in the opinion of the group’s leaders, have not been sufficiently aggressive in eliminating abusive priests from the Catholic clergy. The group had previously issued a statement condemning a “dirty dozen” cardinals who, SNAP said, should not be regarded as suitable candidates for the papacy: Cardinals Tarcisio Bertone, the Secretary of State; Timothy Dolan of New York; Dominik Duka of Prague; Sean O'Malley of Boston; Marc Ouellet, prefect of the Congregation for Bishops; George Pell of Sydney; Norberto Rivera Carrera of Mexico City; Oscar Rodriguez Maradiaga of Tegucigalpa; Leonardo Sandri, prefect of the Congegation for the Eastern Churches; Angelo Scola of Milan; Peter Turkson, president of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace; and Donald Wuerl of Washington, DC.


After it was revealed that some accusations are complete fabrications against some priests and bishops, and after it was also revealed that the lawyer of SNAP was just out to get money, it was downhill for me for them.

Makes me did they get to their decision to endorse a certain cardinal?  Do they know how one actually handled a sex abuse case?

How will they endorse one cardinal who actually DID NOTHING???

As it looks, I have no idea how they judged a cardinal as promising in handling sex abuse cases, when in fact, and this is privileged information, I know those who handled these cases properly and YET they are not named Cardinals!


  1. It's not necessarily their endorsement that makes me wary, but who they labeled as "Dirty Dozen". Cardinal Sean O'Malley has been of the most prominent responders to these abuse cases. He sold property in order to compensate and pay for the litigation arising from these cases. It's also interesting to note that many of the Cardinals they listed are some very preeminent prelates within the Curia and the Church in general. I think it should be noted that these are some very conservative Cardinals as well. Makes me wonder if there isn't some kind of hidden motive, based on something other than response to these scandals.

    I would be very interested to see their reasoning in endorsing those particular cardinals.