The Week, October 16, 2009, "The World at a glance . . ."
"Bridgeport, Conn. Church papers to air . . . [T]he U.S. Supreme Court this week refused to block [the] release [of] "12,000 pages of documents, generated during 23 lawsuits against six priests accused of molesting young boys. . . .The documents could detail how and why church officials shuffled priests suspected of abuse from parish to parish. Lawyers for the diocese argued that the documents were protected by First Amendment religious privileges. 'The right of the church to determine the suitability of its own ministers has been compromised,' said Bridgeport Bishop William Lori."
I find that last comment to be as foolish, even downright stupid, as anything I've recently read. Probably, true, the church's right to determine suitability of its own ministers has been compromised, but the question is, by whom? The release of documents didn't do it. Possibly the behavior of the hypocritical bishops who shuffled the abusers from place to place and allowed them to perpetuate their sick crimes compromised a lot of integrity.
And then there is the additional hypocrisy of the Catholic church's stand on homosexuality. It's only bad if it is open, honest and often related to loving relationships. Sneaky, abusive and coercive behavior on the part of ordained priests is not, apparently, bad,but is, instead, behavior to be kept secret to protect the integrity of the clergy suitability decision.
When will we begin to recognize hypocrisy for what it is - lies covered by lies which contradict the first lies? How can people who reason in this manner be looked to for moral guidance by any segment of humanity?
Ok - I'm ranting again. Not sorry!