Comments for Mudslinging at http://www.thecatholicthing.org , comment 1 to 15 out of 15 comments http://www.thecatholicthing.org Mon, 06 Sep 2010 07:12:41 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.3 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2010/mudslinging.html#comment-4304 As I wrote: "This is breaking news, and we’ll need more time and more thorough reporting to sift through the facts." One thing I'd like to know: Is the word "secret," as you and some news stories have it, more along the lines of "secret," as in the Vatican Secret Archives, which is probably better translated as "private" or "confidential": an internal matter . . . ? - Brad Miner Tue, 16 Mar 2010 06:27:52 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2010/mudslinging.html#comment-4303 While I was predisposed to take the wait and see position you mention, Mr. Miner, concerning the German abuse cases, the disclosure of then Card. Ratzinger's secrecy memorandum of 2001 (And Pope John XXIII's earlier orders) give me much more pause for concern. - Ron Tue, 16 Mar 2010 06:16:40 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2010/mudslinging.html#comment-4300 Mr. Coleman has urged us to take down the comment of "Joseph" to the effect that journalist Matt Drudge is homosexual. It's tempting to do so, since the assertion about Mr. Drudge has been made by the likes of Michelangelo Signorile, to whom I refer in the column. No one at The Catholic Thing is making such an assertion about Mr. Drudge, who steadfastly denies that he is "gay." The comments of visitors to this site have no relation whatsoever to the opinions of TCT or its columnists. - Brad Miner Mon, 15 Mar 2010 20:35:50 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2010/mudslinging.html#comment-4298 I am trying to caution you about a threat to your site. You have let stand an accusation without substansiation about well known person Matt Drudge, for whom contempt has become socially correct. In addition to the legal question, what about the moral question of facilitating the airing of baseless allegations? - Thomas C. Coleman, Jr. Mon, 15 Mar 2010 20:07:45 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2010/mudslinging.html#comment-4297 Let us discuss John Geogan. It was discovered in seminary through confession that he was deviant. The rector of the seminary put him out. His uncle, who was a monsignor, intervened, and despite the rector's protestations, Geogan was reinstated and ordained. He sodomized over 138 boys/young men. If the rector of the seminary in Massachusetts knew the dimensions of this problem, why didn't the Abp of Munich know? These men NEVER SHOULD HAVE BEEN ORDAINED. - William H. Phelan Mon, 15 Mar 2010 20:07:24 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2010/mudslinging.html#comment-4296 Please protect this wonderful site from a lawsuit that could shut it down! If the person who made the allegation about Drudge cannot provided evidence you NEED to take that down. Don't jeopardize this great benefit to the Catholic community! - Thomas C. Coleman, Jr. Mon, 15 Mar 2010 20:06:54 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2010/mudslinging.html#comment-4295 When you talk about unblemished reputations, you must be speaking of the previous pope. This one was a Nazi. - Reader Mon, 15 Mar 2010 20:06:31 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2010/mudslinging.html#comment-4294 I'm not a lawyer, but common sense seems to suggest that TCT should be cautious about printing the kind of assertion made below about the sexuality of a public figure. If the person making the allegation cannot cite a source, you should consider removing the post for both legal and ehtical reasons. - Thomas C. Coleman, Jr. Mon, 15 Mar 2010 20:06:12 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2010/mudslinging.html#comment-4293 It's all President Bush's fault. - Mack Mon, 15 Mar 2010 13:59:34 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2010/mudslinging.html#comment-4292 The Catholic Church has been the favorite whipping boy of many over the centuries. The elite in the media and in other positions do not like to be told they are wrong. They despise the moral direction of the Catholic Church. The only way to deal with truth is for them is to attempt to ruin the reputations of virtuous character. The Church has had its unsavory characters over the centuries, but Benedict XVI is not one of them. Shame on these harbingers of demonic lies. - Willie Mon, 15 Mar 2010 13:59:22 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2010/mudslinging.html#comment-4291 Mr. Phelan and many others insist that the Catholic Church always and still fails to protect children. My own recollection of 1979 is that society was only becoming aware of child sexual abuse and it wasn't until the late 1980's that we became far more vigilant about protecting children and prosecuting offenders. Whatever happened in 1979, it has to be judged according to the common practices of the time. - Lauri Friesen Mon, 15 Mar 2010 10:16:09 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2010/mudslinging.html#comment-4290 Sine the Council, the Church has adopted the therapeutic steps of "counseling" abusers. Too much of this for too long. When prelates dance with the devil instead of calling evil "evil," the outcome cannot be healthy. - Dennis Mon, 15 Mar 2010 10:15:46 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2010/mudslinging.html#comment-4289 Drudge Report splashed its page with all the libelous stories. Drudge, being homosexual, is the last person in the world you would expect to retract. The mindless mass media, is particularly lazy these days, stealing stories from each other so they don't look like they got beat (the worst sin in modern journalism) rather than checking on the facts. The old International News Service had this rule: Get it first, but first get it right. Thanks, Brad, for setting record straight. - Joseph Mon, 15 Mar 2010 10:15:21 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2010/mudslinging.html#comment-4288 Mr. Phelan: Thanks for what is an editorial catch. The sentence (now corrected with a strike-through) should have read: "Whether any Churchman was or wasn’t (is or isn’t) homosexual may matter very much . . ." These errors occur when one attempts to submit a column from a Starbucks during a several-day power outtage. - Brad Miner Mon, 15 Mar 2010 07:55:33 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2010/mudslinging.html#comment-4287 Interesting piece, Mr. Miner. "Whether any Churchman was or wasn't (is or isn't) homosexual may not matter very much,...."??? The Church states that homosexuals have "disordered personalities". It matters VERY MUCH if priests/bishops are homosexual as it affects other facets of their lives and the way they guide their flocks. After 2000 years the Church still cannot deal with this issue. Ratzinger is guilty because the diocese under his control had no in-place procedures to deal with this. - William H. Phelan Mon, 15 Mar 2010 07:49:00 +0100