Can someone explain why the Roman Catholic Church is evicting nuns to pay off pedophilia victims? This could be a rumor, but doesn’t the Vatican have, oh I don’t know, a few pieces of gold, maybe a priceless painting or two, that they could part with instead?
(see the article here)
I don’t know where you are but in San Diego were heard over and over that the the Churches position is that Church is a lot of different entities. They seem to have little to do with each other financially.
Well, one issue is that the Vatican wasn’t responsible for the judgement, or a party to the litigation that produced the judgement. The judgement was against the Archdiocese of Los Angeles, which is the entity that holds title to the property in question.
I’m sure the nuns won’t be out on the street. And somehow I doubt the nuns are upset considering what the victims went through.
P.S. Does it sound like fun to you?
Following up a legacy of kiddie diddling by turfing out a couple of infirm old ladies. Sounds real classy. On the other hand, expropriating the Church sounds like a step in the right direction. Keep selling them houses, Your Eminence. The gag order on the nuns is ridiculous, though.
There are 3 elderly nuns living there? In probably a historical building?
Minimum displacement for maximum financial return. I don’t see the problem.
She was hoping to live out her days there? I’m hoping to live out my days on a South Seas beach, doesn’t mean it will happen. If I know that, surely a 69 yr old nun knows that.
My sympathies lean toward the victims of childhood sexual abuse not 3, count 'em, 3 displaced old nuns. It’s not like they are putting them out on the street, they’ll just be moved to another convent.
It should come as a relief to many people that the church doesn’t only screw little boys.
I think it should be noted that the nuns were definitely complicit. If they would just put out, the priests might be better able to fight off those nagging child-rape impulses.
Mahoney is probably more culpable than these three nuns, or any three nuns in the archdiocese. Be better if he’d just take out a second on the Rog Mahal.
They are old, and no doubt unattractive. I’ve heard that rapes by priests of nuns are not that unusual in countries with more young nuns.
And, to be fair, I imagine consensual sex between priests and nuns is more commonplace in that situation as well. An interesting question would be whether molestation by priests is less common in those countries.
Did you miss the rest of the article?
Highly unlikely, from what I’ve read. People don’t molest children just because they can’t find an adult to sleep with them.
Their name is Legion, for they are many! 
CedricR.
Got any cites for that? I’m not arguing or picking a fight, just genuinely curious to read it. I mean, it’s a pretty commonly accepted phenomenon that nominally heterosexual guys will go after other guys in prison (where they are deprived of women). I wonder why the same wouldn’t hold true here - just the idea that the male libido will find an outlet, as surely as water will find a way downhill.
A beautiful legal fiction which allows the Catholic Church to limit their legal liability.
Well, you don’t expect them to evict a bishop, do you? These nuns, who are near or at the end of their service to the Holy Mother Church, so they can be discarded with impunity. And of course their vow of obedience makes it a simple matter to slap a gag order on them - if they violate it they can be seen as violating their vow to the Church and literally kicked out with nowhere to go.
And the Church wonders why so few young people choose to follow a religious vocation? Pretty good example right here.
Bricker, you are most likely correct that the Vatican was not a party to the litigation. It is my opinion, however, that they were heavily responsible for the orders which shifted pedophile priests from parish to parish, instead of kicking them out and/or forcing them to pay for their misdeeds. This enabled a relatively small number of priests to molest a larger number of children that they would have been able to if the Church had been honest about what was going on. I think the Vatican shares a large part of the guilt in this issue, but I am damned sure you won’t see one gold chalice on e-bay trying to raise the funds to pay the judgment. No, the priceless works of art will stay safe at the Vatican, and the parishes will have to do what they can to raise the money. If a few churches get sold, there won’t be any tears shed here.
Without defending what the diocece is doing here, I think you’ve got things inside out - if the convent were more active, with a larger population, I doubt that it would have been listed for disposal. The ongoing crisis in vocations for the Catholic Church has been an issue since the mid-1980s when I first started hearing about it.
Fewer vocations mean that the Church has a lot of properties, like this particular convent, where the property is probably more of a liability than an asset - and is being maintained for the use of a handful of people. If the convent were not moribund I doubt it would have ever been considered for disposal.
Again, this is not a defense of the idea of evicting those nuns, without letting them talk about the situation. Nor the apparant lack of an open process for determining what properties are to be disposed of.
OtakuLoki, how many people live in the bishop’s residence? Why is it cost-effective to maintain an entire residence for one (maybe he has a live-in housekeeper) or two people. What happened to the vow of poverty? In other words, why is it cost-effective to sell a residence of relatively small worth, yet keep a residence worth far more on the market?
I have no idea how many people might live in that particular Bishop’s residence. I believe that locally, the Bishop’s residence here is also the administrative center for the diocese - so it’s not only a residence. And this is also the pattern with the Episcopal church, too.