BishopAccountability.org
	Vatican Hierarchy Should Resign Ledger-Enquirer April 2, 2010 http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/2010/04/02/1072390/vatican-hierarchy-should-resign.html The Roman Catholic Church’s sex abuse scandals not only taint Pope Benedict XVI but also point the fingers of blame at his predecessor, Pope John Paul II and the entire College of Cardinals who elected Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger as their successor of St. Peter. Only a fool would believe that the late Pope John Paul II and his cardinals were unaware of the magnitude and scope of their pedophile priest problems. It will take a second coming of Martin Luther to shake up the Catholic Church, to get it to admit that its clerical arrogance and insistence on protecting priestly sex abusers was more important than telling the public the truth and confessing the sins of the priests, bishops, cardinals, and popes involved in the worldwide scandals. At this point, papal letters of apologies are meaningless. If Pope Benedict XVI really wants to solve the sex abuse problem once and for all, he should demand that all of today’s cardinals submit an immediate letter of resignation, which will go into effect the day the pope himself also resigns. The target date for such a worldwide resignation of the entire hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church should be the first day following the convening of a Third Vatican Council in Rome of all Catholic bishops. The primary business of a Third Vatican Council should be that of publicizing a comprehensive list of all known priestly sex offenders and detailing the specific church’s past actions taken by all bishops and cardinals. Subsequently, this worldwide council of bishops should elect a new successor pope. A new pope can then appoint a new College of Cardinals consisting of only bishops whose hands were clean. In a heavenly sign of good faith, the bishops should consider electing the first woman pope — Pope Mary. Joseph A. Blair Columbus Take another look This past week, we were treated to another screed by the local savant who professes to be an expert on the Constitution. This time the rant was about the number of representatives we have in the House. This individual accurately states that the number of representatives to be elected is clearly spelled out in Article 1, Section 2, clause 3. According to his calculation, by the letter of the Constitution, we should have about 10,000 representatives (300,000,000/30,000=10,000). If this expert had bothered to keep reading, he would have found out that the above-noted article was superseded by Section 2 of the 14th Amendment. This set us on the current system of apportionment by population. This of course takes us into the whole controversy of Law 65-2, which is a debate in and of itself and has been for many years. The most disturbing thing about his latest rant was the tone and language. This individual appears to be a very bitter, angry, venomous person and should be pitied. Jeff Josefsberg Midland Truth in labeling Enough is enough. I direct your attention to the articles by Kaffie Sledge and M. Malkin, both on March 27. My first issue is with placing the article by Ms. Sledge in the “Local” portion of your publication. I find it offensive and misleading to parade the opinions of Ms. Sledge as local news, thereby providing implied and unwarranted validity. Ms. Sledge takes the position that to disagree automatically makes one a racist. I find it highly disturbing that you such commentary anywhere other than in the “Opinion” section. While on the subject of Opinion, I want to go on record as regarding the article by Ms. Sledge as an example of unsupported racist hate mongering. At the same time you do print the article by Ms. Malkin in the Opinion section, and it takes direct issue with the content of the Kaffie Sledge article. Can you provide a credible and convincing argument why this isn’t included in the Local section? I feel that you are not fulfilling your responsibility to the public at large as editor(s) of the Ledger-Enquirer. This type of publishing and editing is one of the many reasons for the decline in readership of what was once the backbone of a profession we all so desperately need to maintain an honestly informed public. Label it what it is; News is news and opinion is opinion. Do not mix or confuse the two, or you severely diminish the value of your publication. Bill Peters Midland Improvement? After reading the article about the Army’s new parachute, I wondered if Airborne doctrine had changed from enveloping the enemy from the sky to landing a safe distance away and walking to meet the enemy like the 173d Airborne did in Iraq. The slow opening, slow descending chute would have been totally useless in Grenada, where the Rangers jumped in just above the deck. It would probably have cost lives in Panama, where ground forces fired at the Airborne Rangers and even hit some while still in the aircraft. Stabilize the wobble, slow the descent and enhance the target. Wonder why the PEO rep never brought that aspect of the chute up during his interview. R.J. McDowell Midland
Any original material on these pages is copyright © BishopAccountability.org 2004. Reproduce freely with attribution.