brucefoster has left a new comment on your post "STS Union Service Getting More Interesting":
Do you have additional information on Archbishop Weakland? Calling him a pedophile seems a stretch. The only reported fornication was with a 27 year old man. Mortal sin yes, Pedophile no.
***
GJ - Here is one link about Weakland. The author is a conservative, pro-life Roman Catholic. I doubt he would invite Weakland to speak anywhere.
Here is a second, even more hostile response to Weakland. And I quote:
Along with Cardinal Bernardin of Chicago, Archbishop Weakland has led the push for a far more distinctively "American Church", as independent as possible from Rome. Associated with this 'push' have been Weakland's highly controversial policies and views on abortion, homosexuality, AIDS education, sex education, clerical pedophilia and feminism. Presumably these developments would make the American Church more American. That it would also be less Catholic is equally clear. Whether it would be Catholic at all remains an open question. That is what makes Archbishop Weakland's invitation to Australia - even to a liturgical convention - more puzzling. That the invitation will be construed as an act of support for him and of his less than solidarity with the Holy See can hardly be questioned.
From the same source:
Less than a month later, Milwaukee's diocesan paper, the Catholic Herald reported the Archbishop's views on clerical pedophilia (May 26, 1988): "Not all adolescent victims are so innocent. Some can be sexually very active and aggressive and often quite streetwise. We frequently try such adolescents for crimes as adults at that age." The prosecutor of the Fr Pecore case, Milwaukee's Assistant District Attorney, criticised the Archbishop for perpetuating the "victim-must-share-the-blame syndrome."
In spring 1989 Weakland called on all archdiocesan schools to teach students how to use condoms as part of an AIDS education program. Despite the U.S. Bishops' statement that "teaching on chastity, not condoms" was the appropriate response to AIDS, the Archbishop retained the condom policy. He also approved a graphic sex education program "Valuing your Sexuality" which teaches 6th-9th grade students, for example, that "There is no right and no wrong" when it comes to contraception, abortion or sex before marriage. All of Milwaukee's Catholic schools are required to provide AIDS and sex education on the above lines to retain diocesan accreditation.
In a published interview in the Milwaukee Sentinel (May 21, 1990) headlined "Weakland: Pro-choice could be OK", the Archbishop replied to a question on whether a person could be a good Catholic and hold a pro-choice view about abortion: "Yes. There are possibilities there. One could reconcile their stance with a Church position. I think that is a possibility."
Weakland is known for saying that children had sex with adults because the children wanted that activity. That could only come from a profoundly disturbed man - just the guy to speak at a public forum sponsored by Wisconsin Lutheran College (WELS). Of course, WELS went into damage control right away. They claimed it was not a public function, even though it was a public forum, a series of lectures which included other Roman Catholic priests. Also, WLC is not a WELS college when WELS wants to disavow anything (like Charis or Church and Change).
I once held the publicity brochure from WLC in my hand. It was not a "private luncheon for a few," as they tried to claim. If it had been, the apostasy was the same, as everyone realizes.
Exactly how this developed is difficult to tell. One does not just bump into an Archbishop at the YMCA and invite him over for a carefully orchestrated public forum. Considerable effort went into this shameful debacle. It not only compromised the Lutheran position on the Antichrist, but also managed to include the worst of all Roman Catholic prelates (except perhaps the San Franscisco apostate).
The ELS was silent, as always. The ELS only disciplines those who disagree with WELS.
I have a question for those who act shocked and doubtful every time I post some well known information - Would you want Weakland speaking at your congregation? More importantly - Would you want those WELS leaders who invited him and lied about the event to speak at your church? Would you like the ELS leaders who stifled themselves to serve you Holy Communion while clearly and openly despising sound doctrine?
