Pope accuses Sex abuse victims with slander?

[eastcoast_bsc]

I pose this as a question. Various stories from various news sources are running with it.

What say ye?

SANTIAGO, Chile – Pope Francis is accusing victims of Chile's most notorious pedophile of slander, in an astonishing end to a visit that was meant to help heal the wounds of a sex abuse scandal that has cost the Catholic Church its credibility in the country.

Francis said Thursday that until he sees proof that Bishop Juan Barros was complicit in covering up the sex crimes of the Rev. Fernando Karadimas, such accusations against Barros are "all calumny."

The pope's remarks drew shock from Chileans and immediate rebuke from victims and their advocates. They noted the accusers were deemed credible enough by the Vatican that it sentenced Karadima to a lifetime of "penance and prayer" for his crimes in 2011. A Chilean judge also found the victims to be credible.

 

[Halbhh]

Well, we can only judge words in context. What precisely was Francis referring to, exactly, as the calumny?

That someone had done serious wrong won't free us to actually condemn them (the person themself), but only their wrong actions....

There can be wrongs in response to wrongs,
And that suggests we need precise context for the actual thing referred to accurately.

 

[Michie]

Wow. This story is everywhere. Getting ready to read. Here are some links.

Pope shocks Chile by accusing sex abuse victims of slander against bishop

Pope Francis shocks Chile by accusing sex abuse victims of slander - The Boston Globe

Pope shocks Chile by accusing sex abuse victims of slander

Pope shocks Chile by accusing sex abuse victims of slander

 

[Go Braves]

What I saw yesterday was that Pope Francis had apologized to the folks in Chile for “irreparable damage” priests had inflicted on minors, saying he was pained and ashamed they'd done that. I'm interested in the OP's link.

 

[Michie]

What I saw yesterday was that Pope Francis had apologized to the folks in Chile for “irreparable damage” priests had inflicted on minors, saying he was pained and ashamed they'd done that. I'm interested in the OP's link.

I'm trying to find a Catholic source with a transcript now.

 

[eastcoast_bsc]

Well, we can only judge words in context. What precisely was Francis referring to, exactly, as the calumny?

That someone had done serious wrong won't free us to actually condemn them (the person themself), but only their wrong actions....

There can be wrongs in response to wrongs,
And that suggests we need precise context for the actual thing referred to accurately.

That is the thing that bothers me. When ever the Pope makes a statement we need a team of cryptologist to uncover the real meaning of what he actually meant. He should certainly be savvy enough to understand that words are powerful.

 

[Michie]

From Crux. I'm still looking though.

Pope gives support to controversial bishop in Chile, says accusations "calumny"

 

[eastcoast_bsc]

Pope shocks Chile by accusing sex abuse victims of slander


https://www.pri.org/stories/2018-01-18/chile-pope-francis-defends-bishop-sex-abuse-scandal

Pope Defends Chilean Bishop Accused of Covering Up Pedophile Priest Case

Pope defends Chilean bishop accused of abuse cover-up

 

[eastcoast_bsc]

‘This is calumny’: Pope Francis defends Bishop Barros against charges he knew of sexual abuse

 

[Glaucus]

This is so typical, sadly.

 

[eastcoast_bsc]

Pope shocks Chile by accusing sex abuse victims of slander against bishop

 

[Michie]

More from Crux.
Controversial bishops in Chile deny sex abuse cover-up

 

[Michie]

*dp*

 

[AvilaSurfer]

“Several news sources” = One (usually unreliable) source followed by 20-30 places that are good at cut n paste.
I’d put money on this being false.

 

[kepha31]

Controversial bishops in Chile deny sex abuse cover-up

good background resource:
https://www.catholicleague.org/shining-the-light-on-spotlight/

 

[AvilaSurfer]

“Several news sources” = One (usually unreliable) source followed by 20-30 places that are good at cut n paste.
I’d put money on this being false.

The OP should have contained a link. A reliable Catholic link. Otherwise it’s just garbage. It’s irresponsible.

 

[eastcoast_bsc]

The OP should have contained a link. A reliable Catholic link. Otherwise it’s just garbage. It’s irresponsible.

Look news sources are acceptable as sources. Catholic links are certainly open to scrutiny. Think sex abuse scandal.

 

[joshua 1 9]

I pose this as a question. Various stories from various news sources are running with it.

What say ye?

A congregation of bishops has vetted Barros and found no “objective reason” to stop his appointment. What evidence do you have that would suggest the pope should question the vetting process in this situation? There does not seem to be any objective evidence to substantiate the claims made against the bishop in this case. People have a right to their opinion but it would appear the church is based on objective reason and not subjective or what is unsubstantiated.

 

[AvilaSurfer]

Look news sources are acceptable as sources. Catholic links are certainly open to scrutiny. Think sex abuse scandal.

Look, the fact is your OP has no source. My statement stands. Trash the pope if you want. It’s irresponsible.

 

[Rhamiel]

He should certainly be savvy enough to understand that words are powerful.

why do you think this?
he has always been careless with words
why do you think he would come to understand this now?