Dang, I think this one might have been Flynn Unleashed! And deservedly.
I did not know about John Allen's statements in the McCarrick Report. I only vaguely knew of him as a long-time trusted name when it came to Vatican news, but yikes, yikes, yikes. It might - *might* - be the job of an employee of the Vatican Press Office to "build up"…
Dang, I think this one might have been Flynn Unleashed! And deservedly.
I did not know about John Allen's statements in the McCarrick Report. I only vaguely knew of him as a long-time trusted name when it came to Vatican news, but yikes, yikes, yikes. It might - *might* - be the job of an employee of the Vatican Press Office to "build up" the reputations of those in the clerical state, but I disagree with him that it's the job of a person who self-identifies as a journalist.
I think that for a long time (and still) many people in and out of the Church hierarchy have considered it to be a participation in evangelization to make the Church look good, with leaders who have integrity and trustworthiness, because it makes the Church more inviting to non-believers.
Which, of course, requires a lack of integrity and trustworthiness when it devolves into priest-splaining, bishop-splaining, cardinal-splaining, or pope-splaining.
Perhaps the worst of John Allen's article is that he just provided an argument for people to put their hands on peoples' genitals in religious contexts. As inappropriate but not abusive - inappropriate just means the circumstances were wrong, not that you should never do it. Maybe it's appropriate if they're adults. Or if they consent. Or if they've joined this one group. Or if particular people are there, and no one else. Or if they invent a ritual for it first.
I agree with that idea, that integrity and trustworthiness in leadership could be a lead-in to evangelization. If by leadership we mean the Holy Trinity and the saints!
A lot of people come to the Church through the influence of Catholic laity or clergy. We often meet God in other people first. Even for those who are already in the Church, honest, trustworthy clergy can have an enormous effect on those they lead.
But lying, prevaricating, omitting, or deceiving people about those clergy who lack integrity and trustworthiness only serves to make the Church less trustworthy and less holy. It serves to make outsiders think that the Church's members are mildly brainwashed, to be defending such things, and it weakens those seeking holiness who are already members. It is whitewashing a tomb while rolling in the bones.
Dang, I think this one might have been Flynn Unleashed! And deservedly.
I did not know about John Allen's statements in the McCarrick Report. I only vaguely knew of him as a long-time trusted name when it came to Vatican news, but yikes, yikes, yikes. It might - *might* - be the job of an employee of the Vatican Press Office to "build up" the reputations of those in the clerical state, but I disagree with him that it's the job of a person who self-identifies as a journalist.
Yep. Yuck, yuck, yuck.
I think that for a long time (and still) many people in and out of the Church hierarchy have considered it to be a participation in evangelization to make the Church look good, with leaders who have integrity and trustworthiness, because it makes the Church more inviting to non-believers.
Which, of course, requires a lack of integrity and trustworthiness when it devolves into priest-splaining, bishop-splaining, cardinal-splaining, or pope-splaining.
Perhaps the worst of John Allen's article is that he just provided an argument for people to put their hands on peoples' genitals in religious contexts. As inappropriate but not abusive - inappropriate just means the circumstances were wrong, not that you should never do it. Maybe it's appropriate if they're adults. Or if they consent. Or if they've joined this one group. Or if particular people are there, and no one else. Or if they invent a ritual for it first.
Or if... Or if... Or if...
I agree with that idea, that integrity and trustworthiness in leadership could be a lead-in to evangelization. If by leadership we mean the Holy Trinity and the saints!
A lot of people come to the Church through the influence of Catholic laity or clergy. We often meet God in other people first. Even for those who are already in the Church, honest, trustworthy clergy can have an enormous effect on those they lead.
But lying, prevaricating, omitting, or deceiving people about those clergy who lack integrity and trustworthiness only serves to make the Church less trustworthy and less holy. It serves to make outsiders think that the Church's members are mildly brainwashed, to be defending such things, and it weakens those seeking holiness who are already members. It is whitewashing a tomb while rolling in the bones.