Bishop Finn should be in jail, but the Catholic church spent $2 million and used its power to protect the pedophile protector much more vigilantly than they ever protected the victims.

In Philly, the Catholic church paid $11 MILLION in legal fees to protect one admitted pedophile protector in 2012.  Msgr Lynn, along with 2 bishops, a cardinal, and at least one other priest, hid 37 known pedophile priests from 1994 until 2011, as Lynn admitted in court.  They all let those pedophile priests roam free until 2011 when they were caught.  Lynn blamed his boss, Cardinal Bevilacqua.

There is no question that Lynn was guilty of a crime against humanity, but Catholics paid $11 million in legal fees to try to get Lynn off on a technicality.

At what point do Catholics realize that God is on the side of the child rape victim, and wants Christians to find them all and help them?  At what point do Catholics realize that raping children in God’s name is an unforgivable crime (as Jesus said in John 20:23), and supporting the organization is an indefensible position.

Catholics will certainly realize it on Judgment Day.

Maybe the bishop’s underling should have been tried instead of the Bishop. I thought the church in the U.S. has the policy of reporting such things to the police as soon as possible?

Would Planned Parenthood be prosecuted as vigorously if a review of their records underage children being given abortions without reporting the matter to the local law enforcement authorities too?

It is clear now that every relative, friend, teacher, medical worker, government employee and anybody elas who doea not report child abuse of any kind will be prosecuted. If not, why not?

How many cases involved Diocesan employees and volunteers???

God Bless the bishops and the responsibility they carry but if one looks objectively at this case, the conviction is fair and appropriate.  Protection of innocent children from terrible harm was not paramount.  Every priest and bishop that does the right thing everyday and serves Christ was thrown under the bus by the decisions in the diocese.  Bishop Finn has the ultimate responsibility and should be a true man of God and accept his responsibility and do his penance.

All this is well and good, I suppose, but what is the odd, from a societal perspective is that the same sort of principles are not applied to all crimes. For instance, the “stop snitching” stance that is so popular in the degenerate portions of teenage culture these days, where to be a “snitch” is viewed as “un-cool” and worse. Until such double-standards are removed, justice will suffer. This is a bit tangential to the matter at-hand, but nonetheless important. Please pray on it. Thanks.—Mark Kamoski

@ Post by I_M_Foreman on Friday, Sep 7, 2012 12:00 AM (EST):

Would Planned Parenthood be prosecuted as vigorously….?

Good question and it reminds of something.

Planned Parenthood (and their ilk) have been caught numerous times on video to be quite willing and happy to provide their “services” to pimps and human-traffickers and the like and yet they are still taxpayer-funded.

That is a bit odd, to say the least.

Doug, I am from Philly and your rant is not entirely true. There is a change in the culture now as is with school districts, police departments and others who protect their members yes even hiding child abuse. Lets move forward to protect our children.

On a side note, look at the recent developments with the boy scouts as well. All people in our diocese who are employed or volunteer to be around children go through background checks. Something our school districts do not do…...

I’m missing exactly what the priest was guilty of-downloading child pornography or physically abusing children? Or both?

CONGRATULATIONS BISHOP FINN! I am very happy to hear that your moral voice, so decidedly above that of your detractors, will not be silenced.

Until more convictions for covering up child abuse at all levels are entered, the church will have a continuing dark cloud over its collective head. Born and raised in a Catholic family it is becoming more and more difficult to accept the continuing abuse that seems to be rampant throughout the universal church.

Bishop Finn is not ‘evil’ just… wussy and though tremendously sincere, not very worldly.  He has a trusting, childlike quality that is great in a Franciscan friar but REALLY gets on my nerves for a bishop. His speech to the parents of possibly abused children was jaw-dropping-ly clueless and frankly infuriating. Clueless. They DON’T make men of the Church like they used to!

@Mark - I’m not sure what you’re getting at.  Lots of things are cool in degenerate teenage culture, but what does that have to do with a Catholic Bishop?  It is against the law not to report child abuse.  And the reason it’s against the law is because of men like Bishop Finn who apparently don’t know how to make a moral decision without a commission and proper training.  Disgraceful!

Doug. God will judge us all not you.

“The protection of children is paramount. Sexual abuse of any kind will not be tolerated…“and how could they tolerate abortion???

Dougflorey: One of the two MISDEMEANOR counts of “failure to report” against the Bishop were dropped. The Diocese was removed as a defendant. The guy hasn’t had as much as a traffic ticket. It is a MISDEMEANOR case. The Bishop wasn’t going to be sent to jail, ever. His probation is to become an expert in reporting these incidents and understand what constitutes pornography.He already has a standing appointment in another county with the Prosecutor to personally report any allegations of abuse or other behaviors.That will last for the next five years.
Sorry you don’t agree that everyone deserves an adequate defense. Remember that the next time you’re in a legal jam.
This case involved the Church and state legal precedent. It is important to mount a defense.
That said: I live in Kansas City, MO and am an active member of the Diocese.This situation has decimated any goodwill between a majority of Catholics here and the Bishop. There are his “true believers” and there are the rest of us who have to explain to our friends and neighbors why this situation is unfolding. The local newspaper has been all over this case, and the Ratigan case, from the beginning. The Bishop may be the ultimate person in responsibility, but there are plenty of others who failed as a “mandated reporter” who were not pursued.I’m not sure what happens next. The Kansas City Star may demand Bishop Finn resign, but I keep reminding people it’s not his call..it’s a Vatican decision.

And all the while, the most vociferous practicing homosexuals want laws against sex between males and young boys to be overturned!!! Look up NAMBLA. And if they achieve that goal, what happens to all the priests who have convicted or accused (sometimes wrongly)? Sexual abuse against anyone, especially minors, will always be a serious sin, no matter if it is “legalized” in any state.

During the proceedings, the bishop’s secretary had reported he used the phrase “boys will be boys” to describe his reaction to finding out about the priest’s involvement in pornography.

That disturbs me for two reasons.  First, it was a casual dismissal of a great moral flaw that affects many men (and even some women) in our country, and around the world, and our church leaders are not to be among those that fall for it, and secondly because of a GROWN MAN being considered a “boy”.

Just look at all the clergymen that fathered children and that had inappropriate sexual relations (outside of marriage) with women (and other men) and that are not called to task for their behavior.

Bishop Zavala of Los Angeles fathered two children.  L of C priest Fr. Thomas Williams fathered a child prior to 2005, his superior knew about it, and allowed him to remain a priest and teacher of ethics.  It’s the “boys will be boys” mentality, and it is not God-honoring.

Giving Bishop Finn a pass sends the wrong message.  The church will not self-correct, reining in priests that have sex outside of marriage, unless civil government goes harsher in punishing clerics that not only don’t protect children, but that put them in harm’s way, through porn.  Send more bishops to jail and get their attention.

Is Good Samaritan a rule in the law of the land?  First, if a person witnesses a crime (OK, let’s say anything other than child abuse), is he obligated by laws to report to the police?  And if so, how extensive it goes and what will be the punishment if failed to report?  Second, isn’t it if a priest absolves a sinner his misdeed, the sinner is in good term with God.  OK, even if the sinner is still not in good term with the human society, isn’t it only up to the law enforcement to solve the misdeed?  Isn’t it supposed the priests’, doctors’, lawyers’, and psychiatrists’ conversations confidential, especially of priests?  Nobody here is giving an excuse of child abuse or sexual abuse, but just want to find out the priority of the priest, is he to absolve the sinner, or report the sinner to the law?  And if they say “Mandate,” they better mandate a lot more things, like at least why the US is fighting the bogus war with a lie of WMD, etc.

As it says in the book, Adam and Eve after the pill, by Mary Eberstadt. There was a gentlemens agreement that this subject would not be discussed by the laity and the priest would not talk about the pill. Since therefore we are in discusion of this issue, are the priest released from thier agreement to not speak of the contraception. Let the conversations begin.

Terah:
The supposed comment “boys will be boys” was started in a deposition from the IT Director, not the Bishop’s Secretary. When this piece of information was cherry-pi9cked for publication in the Kansas City Star, the IT Director had already taken steps to try and get a correction added to the proceedings, though it was too late. She stated she “misspoke”. Did she? Was “boys will be boys” actually stated? We won’t know, now.

This—priests and their apparent predilection for sex with kids and the hierarchy’s apparent unwillingness to put the kids interests over their priest’s—is a story that won’t die. It is the case that the media loves a scandal and a lot of people hate the Church, but this is a self inflicted wound. This case and that of the Philadelphia archdioscese have all kinds of nuances, but it only makes things worse to try and explain them. It’s like you’re equivocating about child sexual abuse. I suppose most of us can agree that it should be simple enough for a bishop to know that he has to go to the authorities when one of his priests commits a crime associated with sex and children. Why would “saving the priesthood” of a guy who likes lewd pictures of little girls so much he has to collect them be worthwhile under any circumstances, much less a reason to risk prosecution? Bishop Flynn should, by any reasonable standard, have been concerned about making sure that a suicidal child porn collector was not one of his priests any more. What am I missing?

The conviction is right and just, but the suspended sentence is a travesty.  He should not only be removed as bishop but as a priest as well.  He has failed on all counts and his moral voice (which has mostly been about the maintenance of clerical privilege at all costs) is hopelessly compromised. 

On this thread I have seen a new distraction among the same old ones that get repeated again and again (it’s the gays, it’s the culture, other people do it too).  This one is “what about abortion?”  A sure sign that some people just can’t accept the truth.

This “man of God” has served only himself and his sexually repressed underlings—who are in one of the oldest “boys clubs” in history. The Catholics (who are, in general, good people) who give money to their church should understand that they are directly financing the sexual abuse of children—period. Hundreds of millions of dollars, given by parishioners, has been the only way the church has freed itself of legal responsibility for these monstrous acts and outrageous cover-ups. Wake up Catholics! The personnel of this church repeatedly and systematically abused young innocent souls for their own twisted, evil self-interest and pleasure. Then they have the arrogance to follow-up that abuse with the repeated and systematic abuse of the good people who generously give their treasure! “In the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit” should be changed to “In SPITE of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit”.

Jehovah’s Witnesses hit with $28 million sex abuse settlement Oakland,Calif.-Google it.

Many court documents and news events prove that Jehovah Witnesses require two witnesses when a child comes forward with allegations of molestation within the congregation.
It has also been shown that child molesters within the organization usually have not been identified to the congregation members or the public at large.
These people engage in a door to door ministry, possibly exposing children to pedophiles.
The Watchtower corporation has paid out millions in settlement money already.
—
Danny Haszard *tell the truth don’t be afraid*

I see the usual anti-Catholic troll responses here.
If folks recall back to the 1970’s or thereabouts, there was a movement to lower the age of consent & grant kids sexual “freedoms”,not excluding relationships with adults.“Child Rights” advocates lobbied for kids to be granted the right to be “sexual beings.”
That movement’s become political suicide now since the sexual abuse of children has become associated with, & used against, the Church by anti-Catholics.

@ Post by Eileen on Friday, Sep 7, 2012 2:18 PM (EST): I’m not sure what you’re getting at.  Lots of things are cool in degenerate teenage culture, but what does that have to do with a Catholic Bishop? 

What I am getting at, in the particular example that I give, (and others like it), there is an inconsistency in the argument—the same people who are in a witch-hunt after the Catholic Church turn a blind-eye and even promote other things that are considered “in” by the progressive culture today.

The point here is that these people hate the Catholic Church and THAT is their motivation. They are not concerned about the children, or if they are then it seems to be an after-thought at best. This is evidenced by their many laws that actually promote underage kids having sex. Just a few examples are noted below.

The other tell-tale factor is that the cases of abuse that involve the Catholic Church seem to be the only ones discussed in such detail, in such fervor. And yet, the same abuse occurs in other sectors in a much greater frequency—but you hear more about the “Catholic Church” being the main culprit, which is simply not the case.

- Some schools passing out condoms to elementary students.
http://www.sheknows.com/parenting/articles/815931/school-passing-out-condoms-to-elementary-students-1

- So what does that say—underage sex is promoted (not discouraged)—while at the same time, in many case, underage sex is de facto statutory rape.

http://www.wnd.com/2011/06/39783/
- “Sex Ed for Kindergarteners ‘Right Thing to Do,’ Says Obama”, really??? That is no surprise. The message here is that sexual beings “start early” and you need “identify” and “relate” to sex at a very early age. Why? Because that is the agenda of such “progressives”. What does it do to the kid? Well, instead of knowing a given thing as “a balloon” he or she knows it as a “condom”—which robs them of their innocence.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2007/07/sex-ed-for-kind/
- Many states allow on-demand abortion, even by those underage, and yet is is statuatory rape.

http://www.essortment.com/teen-abortion-laws-united-states-50073.html
- Many 15 year-olds get abortions—allowed and promoted by law and taxpayer funded-, and yet it IS, in fact, statutory rape.

- It is “hip” to “love” an underage student, so many think, and the “progressive” society often gives very small sentences to such cases.

http://www.wnd.com/2011/06/39783/
Etc, etc, etc.
HTH wrt perspective and unmasking the motivations.
God bless you.
—Mark

The bishops approved zero-tolerance for priests. It is now time to apply zero-tolerance to bishops.

It does not matter if the conviction involves jail time or not, if it is a misdemeanor or a felony, the bishop knowingly and willfully committed a mortal sin that should incur a latae sententiae excommunication and removal from office. His actions are precisely those of bishops which allowed the worst of the sex abuse scandal to continue.

While forgiveness and reconciliation must always be a part of the Church’s ministry to such delinquents, individually, allowing them to continue in a position of ministry, much less as a diocesan bishop, is utterly untenable. Bishops have been removed unilaterally for less in the last year.

@ Post by Andrew on Monday, Sep 10, 2012 3:34 PM (EST): “if it is a misdemeanor or a felony”

Dear Andrew—

While I generally agree with you in spirit (except for the excommunication bit), I do think that something you say is cause for concern, and I hope that it is a matter of poor word choice but, perhaps, it is something else looming. And so I will discuss the matter a bit.

The bottom line, and thing to watch out for, is that the atheist/ agnostic/ secularist/ progressive (insert whatever fad token of identification is vogue now here) “State” wants to control the Catholic Church, so they can destroy it.

They want to apply the terms “misdemeanor” and “felony” to the Catholic Church. They want to put the Church under the laws of the State. They want to put the State ahead of the Church.

While it is true that the CCC notes, rightly so and clearly, that one is obligated to follow good and true laws. BUT, it also is quite clear that this is only insofar as such laws are expressed via a “legitimate authority”, uphold the “natural law”, and etc. In fact, when so-called “laws” of the State go against the “natural law” (AKA “God’s Law”), then the CCC is also clear that one MUST disobey such laws. Case and point: Abortion Laws, Euthanasia Laws, Fetal Stem Cell Research Laws, etc, etc, etc.

Just mention the “natural law” and the progressives get their hackles up good. Why? Simple—because they do not want to recognize the supreme objective authority that is necessary in order to ground ANY moral judgement—and that absolute is God (AKA Jesus AKA The Holy Spirit AKA The Trinity).

The short story is that moral-relativists want to make their own moral laws (and change them at-will) and they do not want to follow God’s moral laws. The pathetically sad part about the moral-relativists is the fact that they cannot seem to apply simple rules of logic to see the fact that the stance “morals are relative” equates to the stance “morals are opinions”. It it is painfully obvious that “morals” based on a relativist foundation means, in the end, that we just have “opinions”, and in the end all a moral relativist can say to someone like Hitler is “I do not like your opinions”. Only the moral absolutist has any footing to say “Hitler’s actions were absolutely, objectively, intrinsically, evil”

The Catholic Church, on the other hand, recognizes the fact that God makes the moral law (and anything else worth following). As such, the good and true moral principles are absolute, unchanging, objective, and transcendental.

So, we are not going to get too far with ideas such as “laws” and “misdemeanor” and “felony” given that those that espouse such distinctions subscribe to moral relativism. This is the crux of what I have been trying to point out here. These moral relativists are, by their own admission, simply stating their “opinions” and, in general, such talk is just talk. The funny thing is that only moral absolutists, like the Catholic Church (the organization the progressives are attacking) have any standing to judge the actions of sexual predators and judge their actions as wrong.

That’s why we have folks like Nambla and the American Nazi Party and whatever other twists we can find trotted out as free-speech exercisers. That is why we (the State) is fine to pay taxpayer dollars to protect and honor them when, in fact, such kind should be anathema to a truly moral society. Until THAT changes, until moral-relativism is supplanted with moral-absolutism, discussions such as this are going in circles.

HTH.

Thanks and God bless you and Mary pray for us.

—Mark Kamoski

(NotProofread)

@Mark. I don’t know where to begin on how misguided you are. I am a cradle Catholic that is shocked how little concerted and coordinated effort the institutional church has taken to protect children and be transparent.

“The bottom line, and thing to watch out for, is that the atheist/ agnostic/ secularist/ progressive (insert whatever fad token of identification is vogue now here) “State” wants to control the Catholic Church, so they can destroy it.”

Um, no. The reason “The State” is having anything to do with the Catholic Church is because Catholic Bishops refuse to follow their own child protection guidelines as set up in 2002 in the Dallas Charter.

Bishop Finn for five months failed to report Father Ratigan, a man producing (!) and distributing child pornography. A man who faces a minimum of 75 years in federal prison.

The State now has to take control of the KC diocese reporting of sexual abuse because Finn was negligent and irresponsible.

Here in Boston serial molester Father John Geoghan had few limits put on his ministry even though its own records show that the archdiocese knew about his sexual deviance as early as 1979, yet it took an arrest in the late 90s for the church to finally take action against him.

Father Geoghan was arrested by CIVIL authorities for groping a boy in a public pool; it was only after that that his almost 20 year history in the Church of abusing children was revealed.

Google “Cardinal Justin Rigali” and read all about how the disgraced prelate ignored the Dallas charter.

“They want to apply the terms “misdemeanor” and “felony” to the Catholic Church. They want to put the Church under the laws of the State.

No, “they” want to apply the terms “misdemeanor” and “felony” to mentally ill priests who act on their sexual desires for underage males and to the bishops who do not do enough to stop them.

“The funny thing is that only moral absolutists, like the Catholic Church (the organization the progressives are attacking) have any standing to judge the actions of sexual predators and judge their actions as wrong.”

Really, so in your ideal society, if anyone suspected sexual abuse or perhaps even witnessed it, they should bring their concerns to the Catholic Church to learn if in fact the actions of sexual predators are wrong, the Catholic Church which so far has had to pay 1.2$ Billion in lawsuits to over 1800 victims of sexual abuse inflicted by their own employees in over 20 US states.

The Church needs effective, honest leadership, not secretive toadies who’d do anything to avoid embarassment.

@Posted by Ted on Wednesday, Sep 12, 2012 9:53 AM (EST)

Dear Ted—

I am sorry for your anger and discontent. I too feel pain at the damage done. It is wrong.

However, to correct such moral errors, one need (first and foremost) God. One does not need a society that has done much to push God out of human society.

It is interesting that you did not address my points about moral relativism.

Are you are moral relativist?

I am interested to hear your detailed answer and explanation of your position.

Regarding your statement that “The [Catholic] Church needs effective, honest leadership”, perhaps you have not noticed but please do note now (and try to remember) the Catholic Church already has eternally perfect leadership—his name is Jesus Christ.

God bless you.

—Mark Kamoski

Mark, the devil is where he usually is: in the details.

Simplistic grand pronouncements are all well good, but they tend to burn to ash in the crucible of daily experience, in the messy world that human beings actually live in.

“However, to correct such moral errors, one need (first and foremost) God. One does not need a society that has done much to push God out of human society.”

If that’s true why were there no Catholic whistleblowers on the sexual abuse scandal? Why wasn’t the abuse scandal handled internally and properly? Why has it taken the pressure and cost of lawsuits and jail time for the Church to implement tough new child protection guidelines.

Why didn’t the Dallas Charter come out before the scandal in Boston, and not after the public embarassment and millions lost in lawsuits?

I don’t disagree with you. God should be first and foremost, but what happens when the institution founded by his son fails to fail protect children, when some of its high ranking officials knowingly shield repeat offender child molesters from the civil law.

I’d like to see the institutional church adopt some basic parlimentary procedures to serve as checks and balances to the power of bishops. I’d like to see every diocese have a council of priests and lay people empowered to review diocesan records, review financial descions, and basically prevent Bishops or other officials from pulling a Robert Finn or Justin Rigali, i.e., sweeping credible abuse allegations under the rug.

What happens when a mother comes to the law enforcement agency accusing a priest (or anyone for that matter) with molesting her child? What is society supposed to do? Ignore it? Let the Church handle it?

Like any rational, compassionate human being, I’m a moral relativist…and so are you.

Let’s take an example from Ethics 101:

The Catholic Church and most well meaning rational people would say that
1)lying is morally wrong.

We’d also all agree that 2) the murder of innocents is morally wrong.

I’m not going out on too far of a limb here.

The question is “are there any situations in which breaking a moral is the only moral thing to do?”

Let’s consider the following scenario from Ethics 101:

You’re living in Holland during WW2. Nazi forces have invaded your country. They begin rounding up Jews for the concentration camps. They announce that anyone sheltering Jews will be shot. Your neighbors, your lifelong friends, the Cohens have no way to escape the country. You hide them in your attic.

One day an SS trooper comes to your door and asks: “Are you hiding any Jews?”

What do you do? Do you tell the truth and cause your own and the Cohens’ deaths? Or do you act immorally and lie?

In this situation is their one moral that is relatively more important to follow than the other?

“the Catholic Church already has eternally perfect leadership—his name is Jesus Christ.”

Again, Mark, devil in the details. How does Jesus lead us? Does he speak to us directly? Or did he entrust the spreading of his message to a group of men, say 12, and did he then command one of them to build his church and make disciples of all the world?

Is his communication to us mediated through Popes, bishops, and priests and the Catechism?

Jesus is the head but there are thousands of limbs, some wonderful, some not so wonderful.

@ Post by Ted on Friday, Sep 14, 2012 9:12 AM (EST):

Regarding this…

“Simplistic grand pronouncements are all well good, but they tend to burn to ash in the crucible of daily experience”

Not so with He who is, Jesus. There nothing “simplistic” or “grand” (your derrogatory connotations noted) in Him. He is the head of the Catholic Church. He alwas has been and always will be. Bishops are the servants (not the leaders) of His Church. The Pope is, by self-declared title, known as the “Servant of the Servants”. We (humans) do not lead the Church—just the opposite, the Church leads us. By extension, human society neesd the Church, not the other way around. Those are immutable facts of reality, attested to by the Blood of the Cross and 2000+ years of perfect leadership.

Another fact is that many (perhaps you???) get a bit antsy when the conversation is brought back to the spirtual reality at play here. We are dealing with immortal souls, eternity, and other aspects of existence that are not discussed comfortably by the “media at large”, and usually not even in path of general human discourse. That is part of my point (as noted above)—that the society is, in many ways, blind to such matters, a self-inflicted blindness, sadly. Mention the “immortal soul” or “spiritual communion with the Lord in the Blessed Sacrament” or “the Precious Blood of Christ” in court (or even at the water cooler) and what happens? Blank stares, at best. More likely, snickers and smiles behind hands. And yet, these things are the most important in all eternity.

The Eucharist is the most important, in all eternity—that is a fact—but society does not see it.

Society, at-large and in general, cannot even figure out that human rights derive necessarily from the “right to life” and that to commit direct abortion is, as such, murder.

So too, few understand that the life of a single human is more important than the physical universe itself—a single human soul is more important than all non-human matter in the universe. Infinitely more important.

Christ’s blood, of infinite value, was shed for each human souls—how could they be overvalued?

Etc.

Those ARE the vital parts of reality that “society” does not know—so, how can one trust society’s viewpoint?

“If that’s true why were there no Catholic whistleblowers on the sexual abuse scandal? Why wasn’t the abuse scandal handled internally and properly? Why has it taken the pressure and cost of lawsuits and jail time for the Church to implement tough new child protection guidelines?”

Are you surprized there aer “wolves among the sheep”. He promised us this. He told us it would happen. There are sinners among us. That should NOT be a shock. I see the saving hand of the Holy Spirit and The Blessed Mother in at work here, not the product of “lawsuits” or other human efforts.

Why didn’t the Dallas Charter come out before the scandal in Boston, and not after the public embarassment and millions lost in lawsuits?

Again, humans are a fallen creation. It is only by turning to Christ that we can be saved. If we rely on our own efforts, then we are doomed. It is not the “Charter” that matters here; rather, it is “Christ”. More Christ and fewer “Charters” is the order of the day. How about daily Mass? How about weekly confession? How about fasting? Etc. Etc. These are ways to heal a society.

“what happens when the institution founded by his son fails to fail protect children, when some of its high ranking officials knowingly shield repeat offender child molesters from the civil law”

Again, you are mixing human endeavors (which often do fail) with the Church (which can never fail). Human action versus Divine action. Humans fail. Jesus succeeds. As long a person confuses human-implementation with the Divine Church then that person is going to be confused. They are not the same thing. They are not the same thing.

“Let the Church handle it?”

Yes.

“Like any rational, compassionate human being, I’m a moral relativist”

It seems to me that you obviously have not been reading Pope Benedict XVI, in his continual denouncement of moral relativism as a scourge upon humankind.

http://www.christianpost.com/news/pope-continues-push-against-moral-relativism-for-2012-peace-day-66107/

http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/commentandblogs/2012/01/23/we-should-never-give-in-to-moral-relativism/

http://www.catholic.org/international/international_story.php?id=42946

Catholic Encyclopedia

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12731d.htm

“and so are you [a moral relativist]”

No, I am not.

“Let’s take an example from Ethics 101…”

There is a very simple answer here and no “moral dilemma”. See CCC 2488. “The right to the communication of the truth is not unconditional. Everyone must conform his life to the Gospel precept of fraternal love. This requires us in concrete situations to judge whether or not it is appropriate to reveal the truth to someone who asks for it.” Besides the fact that there would be, in any case, no such intent on the person to kill an innocent. This is a silly red herring.

Again, the fundamental point is that moral relativism fails because without a moral absolutes (God’s commands) then anything is permissible and “morals” become “just opinions”.

See my notes above.

Also see Peter Kreeft’s wonderful refutation.

Book…
http://www.amazon.com/Refutation-Moral-Relativism-Interviews-Absolutist/dp/0898707315/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1347910737&sr=8-1&keywords=peter+kreeft+refutation

Audio…
http://www.peterkreeft.com/

Text….
http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=9510

“Again, Mark, [d] in the details”

No “details” required—see “The Simplicity Of God” in the Catholic Encyclopedia http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06612a.htm#IC and elsewhere. It is simple (not detailed).

I’m not sure what you are driving at, Ted. Humans do not need more failed “laws” and “rules” and “regulations” and “committees” and “Boards” and “oversight” where such are derived from human effort.

For the record—Jesus Christ is perfect and He is all we need.