Visit our new blog!
Please visit http://AskWhoWhyWhatHow.com.
It’s our new blog where we now continue posting articles that promote life plus many other positive things.
See you there!
With the sex abuse scandal still surrounding the Catholic Church, critics might say Catholics are really blinded by their faith when they see or read about the huge turnout of people who wanted to be with the Pope in Fatima, Portugal. That’s their option.
But I would say, here are people who have gathered around the Holy Father knowing enough about the scandal – who wouldn’t with the way media has been covering it? They continue united to the Church and what she stands for because they recognize that they are part of the Church and therefore, together with the Pope, ask for forgiveness for the crimes committed and support the Church’s decisive steps especially taken since early 2000 to protect children and prevent further similar incidents.
Below are excerpts from AFP:
FATIMA, Portugal (AFP) – – Half a million people flocked to a giant mass with Pope Benedict XVI in Portugal Thursday in what the Church said was a massive show of support for his handling of the paedophile priest crisis.
The Fatima sanctuary’s huge esplanade was full to overflowing and Church organisers said the crowd gathered for the outdoor mass was bigger than that which joined Benedict’s popular predecessor John Paul II here in 2000.
The huge turnout was vibrant proof that the paedophilia scandal shaking the Church has not “weakened” the pope’s position, Vatican spokesman Federico Lombardi said.
…
In a separate speech later, the pope criticised gay marriage and abortion as “insidious and dangerous threats to the common good” as Portugal prepares to legalise same-sex unions.
He described abortion as a “tragedy” and said the family was based “on the indissoluble marriage between a man and a woman”, receiving a standing ovation from his audience of Church and lay social workers.
…
A rock festival atmosphere unfolded ahead of the pope’s arrival for mass as flags flew, pilgrims climbed on statues of saints to get a view and the obligatory queues formed for toilets.
Thursday’s mass was the high point of a four-day visit to Portugal and rain fell on thousands who spent the night on the esplanade in sleeping bags — and a lucky few under tents — to make sure they got a place.
“I have come to Fatima to pray, in union with Mary and so many pilgrims, for our human family, afflicted as it is by various ills and sufferings,” Benedict declared in his homily.
…
“People need something that gives them hope, there are many problems in the world and it is not surprising that there are so many people here,” said pilgrim Maria Caldeira, 66, wearing a transparent blue plastic raincoat to protect against intermittent showers.
Earlier, the pontiff blessed and kissed two swaddled babies thrust at him through the open window of his popemobile, before stoking the crowd’s enthusiasm by circling the esplanade on his way to the altar, smiling and waving to the massed ranks of flag and hat-waving pilgrims.
“What’s happened in the last few months, with the problems of the abuse scandal, could lead one to think that the attention and energy towards the pope has been weakened, but that has not happened,” Lombardi told reporters.
“This energy is not being threatened by the debates of recent months, and the fact that the strength of the faith is shown in such an evident way is very encouraging,” said Lombardi, referring to the huge turnout.
He said police figures estimated the turnout at around 500,000 people.
Portuguese episcopal spokesman Manuel Morujao told AFP that “as far the crisis and scandals are concerned, I think that the people wanted to show that they can distinguish between exceptions and the vast majority of their priests.”
The two-hour ceremony marked the 93rd anniversary of the Virgin Mary’s reported apparitions to three shepherd children. The incident in 1917 led to the founding of the pilgrimage site, now one of Christianity’s biggest.
…
Election results: Finally, who did you vote for?
I’ve searched the Comelec website for any updates on the ballot counts and there wasn’t really anything at this time. I’ve no access to TV right now and the only video coverage I could find were GMA 7‘s.
I’ve cast my ballot. San Juan is a small city and so voting here is relatively quicker than in many other areas. Arrived at the school in Corazon de Jesus, Barangay Pasadena. Found my precinct at the second floor. I found the teachers and other volunteers quite accommodating though there were inevitably complaints, mainly this: this election might be quicker in counting the ballots but it sure is taking longer in terms of casting one’s vote. For instance, I arrived at 9 in the morning and had stay in a “waiting area” to stand then sit in line (pretty much like the game trip to Jerusalem since we had to stand up and move to the next emptied seats each time people ahead of us were called to the voting area). Just before 10, I was called to go to the voting area to wait for about 5 minutes more then it was my turn.
Contrary to what some friends had warned me to watch out for, in our precinct we were not made to have our thumbmark done until after we had put the ballot inside the PCOS machine, just as well. There weren’t really any untoward incidents I encountered, except for the complaints I mentioned and that’s understandable.
Just some observations I made while inside that “waiting area” which is actually one of the classrooms there. First, no wonder our public school students are so lacking in motivation to study. The classroom was so warm you run the danger of dehydration – there was only one electric fan (a wall fan type) for the whole classroom; chairs were in bad physical condition (no tables/arms, broken seats, etc); on the wall are broken switches or casings for switches that aren’t there; etc.
Second, Pinoys are truly friendly by nature. The person ahead of me started talking naturally and found things in common.
Third, just like in the elections we’ve had in the past, we’re wasting so much money on print promotional materials. Not to mention all the garbage it has created along the streets leading to the voting areas.
Anyway, here’s to a truly fast ballot-counting and hopefully a more significantly honest one. Whoever wins, may he or she make the Philippines truly triumphant!
Marcello Pera is an Italian philosopher and politician. He was the president of the Italian Senate from 2001 to 2006. In the wake of the allegations of priestly sexual abuse and the accusations of inaction on the part of Catholic Church authorities, he sent this letter to the Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera (see MercatorNet). He considers himself a secularist (see World Religion Watch).
You can read the full article on his website: An Attack on the Pope and Democracy
Below are some highlights:
…The war is between anticlericalism and Christianity. The anticlericals know that a spot of mud on that white robe would mean that the Church was sullied, and if the Curch were sullied so the Christian religion likewise. So they accompany their campaign with such refrains as who will take the children to Church?” or “who would send their children to Catholic schools ?” or “who would have our little ones cared for in a Catholic hospital or clinic?”.
A few days ago an anticlerical casually revealed their real thinking: “The extent of the problem of child abuse by priests undermines the right of the Catholic Church to educate the very young”. No matter that this sentence contains no evidente as “the extent of the problem…” is carefully concealed. Are the paedophiles one per cent of the priesthood ? Ten per cent ? All of them ? No matter that the sentence lacks logic: it would be enough to substitute the word “priests” with “teachers” or “politicians” or “journalists” to undermine the legitimacy of state schools, of parliaments and of the press. What matters is the insinuation that, regardless of the coarseness of the subject matter, priests are paedophile, therefore the Church has no moral authority, therefore Catholic education is dangerous, therefore Christianity itself is a fraud and a danger.
…
From an ethical angle it is the barbarity of those who kill the foetus because its life might endanger the mother’s phsychic health; those who consider an emhryo a “cluster of cells” useful for experimentation; those who would kill an old person because he has no family to look after him; those who would hasten the death of a son because he is unconscious and incurable; those who think that “parent A” and “parent B” are the same as “father” and “mother”; those who believe that faith is like the coccyx, that part which no longer has any place in evolution because man no longer needs a tail and can stand up by himsel. And so on.
Or looking at the political side of the anticlerical war against Christianity, barbarity will mean the destruction of Europe. Because, once Christianity is vanquished, we would be left with multiculturalism which claims that each group has a right to its own culture; with relativism which claims that every culture is as good as any other, and pacifism which denies the existence of evil.
This war on Christianity would not be so dangerous if the Christians understood what was at stake, but a large number of them join in the general incomprehension.
…
This anticlerical war will continue, if only because a Pope like Benedict XVI who smiles but doesn’t give an inch, fuels their fire. But if we understand why he is immovable, then the situation can be in hand and there is no need to just wait for the next blow. Those who are content with merely agreeing with him are either like a man who goes to the Garden of Olives at night under the cloak of darkness or one who doesn’t realise why he is there anyway.
Here’s the almost complete piece written by Brendan O’Neill on spiked.
The Secular Inquisition
The campaign to arrest the pope is the product of an increasingly desperate secularism, which can only find meaning through ridiculing the religious.
The New Atheist campaign to have Pope Benedict XVI arrested when he visits Britain later this year exposes the deeply disturbing, authoritarian and even Inquisitorial side to today’s campaigning secularism. There is nothing remotely positive in the demand that British cops lock up the pope and then drag him to some international court on charges of ‘crimes against humanity’. Instead it springs from an increasingly desperate and discombobulated secularism, one which, unable to assert itself positively through Enlightening society and celebrating the achievements of mankind, asserts itself negatively, even repressively, through ridiculing the religious.
Christopher Hitchens, author of God is Not Great, first came up with the idea of arresting the pope. Richard Dawkins, author of The God Delusion and generally the Chosen One amongst the New Atheists, has backed the idea ‘wholeheartedly’. Together they are consulting Geoffrey Robertson, the human rights lawyer, on the legalities and logistics of cornering His Holiness in Britain this September. Numerous columnists are cheering them on, one wildly fantasising that the angelic Hitchens/Dawkins/Robertson trio will wield the sword of justice in the name of all those ‘victims of sacerdotal rape’ and show the whole world that ‘the powerful’ cannot hide from justice.
It’s worth asking why otherwise fairly intelligent thinkers get so dementedly exercised over the pope and the Catholic Church. What exactly is their beef? What are they objecting to? Very few (if any) of the pope-hunters were raised Catholic, so this isn’t about personal vengeance for some perceived slight by a priest or nun…
Also, while of course one incident of child sexual abuse by a priest is one too many, it simply isn’t the case that the Catholic Church is a vast, institutionalised paedophile ring wrecking the lives of millions of children around the world. One pope-hunting columnist describes the Vatican as an ‘international criminal conspiracy to protect child rapists’, yet the facts and figures don’t bear that out. If these anti-pope crusaders really were interested in justice and equality, there are numerous other, even worse crimes and scandals that they might investigate and interrogate and try to alleviate.
Yet despite the lack of any obvious, sensible reason why they break out in boils at the mention of the words ‘Benedict’, ‘priest’ or ‘Catholic’, the pope-hunters’ campaign has acquired a powerfully pathological, obsessive and deafeningly shrill character. It is screeching and emotional. It talks about ‘systematic evil’ and discusses the pope as a ‘leering old villain in a frock’. It uses up almost all the intellectual and physical energies of men and women who consider themselves to be serious thinkers. What is going on here?
The reason this crusade is so hysterical is because it is not really about the pope at all – it is about the New Atheists themselves. The contemporary pope-hunting springs from a secularist movement which feels incapable of asserting a sense of purpose or meaning in any positive, human-centred way – as the great atheists of old such as Marx or Darwin might have done – and which instead can only assert itself negatively, in contrast to the ‘evil’ of religion, by posturing against the alleged wickedness of institutionalised faith. It is the inner emptiness, directionless and soullessness of contemporary secularism – in contrast to earlier, Enlightened and more positive secular movements – which has given birth to the bizarre clamour for the pope’s head.
Secularism is in crisis……Driven more by doubt and disarray than by a desire to Enlighten, the New Secularists come across as alarmingly intolerant of any system of meaning which, unlike theirs, appears to have some coherence and authority.
This is what drives their war against religion: an instinct for ridiculing those who still, unlike contemporary secularists themselves, have an overarching outlook on life and a strong belief system. That is really what they find so alien about the Catholic Church in particular – its beliefs, its faith, its hierarchy. An atheism utterly alienated from the mass of humanity and from any future-oriented vision can only lash out in an extreme and intolerant way against those who still seem to have strong beliefs: the religious, or the ‘deluded ones’, as the New Atheists see it.
As a consequence, their campaign against the pope really does have the feel of a witch-hunt to it, even, ironically, of the Inquisition itself. Firstly because, in order to endow their campaign with some logic, the pope-hunters must vastly exaggerate the scale and impact of the Catholic Church’s crimes against children. Secondly because they are implicitly seeking to create a policing, repressive climate in relation to what they see as a problematic religion, to the extent that religious leaders might no longer feel free to travel the globe to visit their followers. And thirdly, and most importantly, because their hunting of the pope is designed to satisfy themselves, to provide them with a feeling of power and purpose and legitimacy which they cannot secure through their own ideas or vision.
No doubt some will accuse me of ‘defending paedophile priests’ in contrast to the New Atheist campaign on behalf of ‘powerless victims’. In truth, my only concern, as an atheistic libertarian, is with analysing the emergence of a new form of hysterical and repressive atheism. And the New Atheists are not the first group of people in history to pursue their own, deeply problematic, fearmongering, illiberal agenda under the guise of trying to win justice for ‘the powerless’.
Read more from this atheist author: Why humanists shouldn’t join in this Catholic-bashing
The Catholic Church and the sex abuse scandal: Answering Christopher Hitchens, the great Catholic cover-up
At times, no matter how preposterous a claim may be, if repeated often enough and those who hear or read it are ready to be believe it, it can actually be acceptable in public opinion. Take for instance the accusations made against Pope Benedict XVI. Many are repeating it but do they actually know if these accusations have real basis, or are they doing just that, repeating? Here we give you A Response to Christopher Hitchens’ ‘The Great Catholic Coverup’ (with references).
It’s a highly recommended read not because the writer is a Catholic–that would actually be an outright reason for rejection for certain people who have shown a very strong dislike for anything Catholic–but because of the many references it provides, offering any reader the chance to dig in deeper into the issue and reports if he or she really wants to discern for himself or herself.
We are not defending the Pope because he is Catholic, but because accusations have been hurled at him without substantiating these accusations. Anyone who, knowing that an innocent person is continually accused, and is in a position to defend that person’s name and integrity, can only but speak up in that person’s defense.
Following is the body of the shorter response of the author. If you wish to read the links to the footnotes, please go to the complete article here.
Mr. Hitchens states that in May, 2001, Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger sent a “confidential” letter to Catholic bishops to remind them that anyone who disclosed “child rape and torture” by priests would be excommunicated. He claims that Cardinal Ratzinger imposed a ten year “statute of limitations” on actions against such priests, and was thus guilty of “obstruction of justice.”
These assertions are false.
The 2001 instruction1 was issued to clarify how reports of clerical sexual misconduct were to be handled.2 Ratzinger’s directive actually facilitated Church proceedings against clerical sex offenders by extending time limits that had previously hampered prosecutions.3 Limitations of action are not unique to Canon Law. They exist in secular legal jurisdictions,4 and can prevent prosecution of serious sex crimes.5
The so-called “confidential” instruction was published and appeared in English in 2001.6 It has been ‘discovered,’ ‘revealed’ or ‘exposed’ by so many reporters since then that it might give pause to those who doubt the possibility of the resurrection of the dead.7 Certainly, Mr. Hitchens’ wild fabrication that Cardinal Ratzinger threatened to excommunicate anyone who revealed “child rape and torture” has trumped the rhetoric of his predecessors. However, lurid prose is hardly a substitute for sound research.
Bishops were not “reminded” by Cardinal Ratzinger of secrecy or excommunication. The passage quoted by Mr. Hitchens as ‘proof’ of his extravagant claim is not (as his readers might believe) from Ratzinger’s instruction. It is from Crimen Sollicitationis, a 1962 instruction8 that Ratzinger merely noted had been under review.9
Virtually all of Crimen Sollicitationis concerned the investigation and prosecution of complaints of sexual solicitation of penitents by priests in confession.10 Such procedures are difficult and sensitive because the seal of confession cannot be violated; a priest cannot break the seal even to defend himself against an accusation.11 The same policies and procedures were to be adapted and applied to the “worst crimes,” including sexual aggression against minors.12
Crimen Sollicitationis did not threaten excommunication of people who revealed “child rape and torture” by priests. On the contrary: it imposed not only a duty to denounce such crimes (and the lesser offence of solicitation) to the bishop, but the automatic excommunication of anyone who knowingly failed to do so.13
Officials investigating or involved in proceedings pertaining to these “unspeakable crimes” were required to take an oath of perpetual secrecy, on pain of excommunication.14 This was the passage perverted by Mr. Hitchens’ selective quotation and extraordinary accusation. An oath of secrecy was also to be given to witnesses in the proceedings, but was not, it seems, to be backed by a threat of excommunication.15 Analogous oaths of secrecy and confidentiality are taken by secular professionals and officials. Confidentiality is usually maintained during secular investigations, and secular proceedings – Family Court hearings for example – sometimes proceed in secret.16
Media reports over the last several years have mentioned some of the reasons the Church had for secrecy: protecting the seal of confession, ensuring the integrity of an investigation, shielding victims from publicity and encouraging them to come forward, and protecting reputations before guilt has been established.17
Of course, such reasons are not always justified and not always persuasive. What is significant, however, is that canon law specialists consulted about Crimen Sollicitationis, while properly critical of wrongful conduct by bishops and priests, have dismissed the theory that the document was meant to cover up clerical wrongdoing, or that it was used for that purpose.18
It would be unfair to conclude that Mr. Hitchens deliberately distorted and withheld all of this information. One hesitates to attribute his failings to malicious anti-catholic bigotry.
Perhaps he was just remarkably careless in his reading and incompetent in his research.
Sean Murphy
Powell River, B.C.ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Sean Murphy. “Response to Christopher Hitchens’ ‘The Great Catholic Coverup’.” submitted to the National Post (March 22, 2010).
Reprinted with permission of the author, Sean Murphy.THE AUTHOR
Sean Murphy is a Catholic layman. He retired from the Royal Canadian Mounted Police in 2009 after almost 35 years’ police service. While not a specialist in sexual assault, during the course of his service he was responsible for the investigation of current and historical sex crimes against children and adults (including false allegations), leading, in one case, to the conviction of a Catholic priest. Over the years he was described by superiors as “tenacious,” “conscientious” and “meticulously thorough.” This article should not be understood to represent the views of the RCMP or its members.
Mr. Murphy has made a special study of the documents of the Second Vatican Council and Catholic teaching on sexuality and marriage. His paper on the nuptial meaning of the Eucharist was among three chosen for presentation at the 1993 conference of the Canadian Fellowship of Catholic Scholars, and later published in the conference proceedings. His articles have appeared in Catholic periodicals, including the BC Catholic, Catholic Insight magazine and the Journal of the Fellowship of Catholic Scholars (Canada). Others are posted on the Internet at the Catholic Education Resource Centre, Catholic Exchange (http://www.evangelization.com) and the Catholic Civil Rights League website. His comments and responses to attacks on religious freedom and Catholic teaching have appeared in the media, including some BC community papers, the Vancouver Sun, The Province, Xtra West, the Ottawa Citizen, Halifax Daily News, the BC Catholic, and Christian Week.
We are not here to defend a crime that has been proven true. We only ask that we keep our good sense clear and intact even as we deplore such a crime.
This one was written by former New York Mayor Ed Koch, a Jew: Koch’s Comments: He that is without sin, let him cast the next stone – enough already.
I believe the continuing attacks by the media on the Roman Catholic Church and Pope Benedict XVI have become manifestations of anti-Catholicism. The procession of articles on the same events are, in my opinion, no longer intended to inform, but simply to castigate.
The sexual molestation of children, principally boys, is horrendous. This is agreed to by everyone, Catholics, the Church itself, as well as non-Catholics and the media. The pope has on a number of occasions on behalf of the Church admitted fault and asked for forgiveness. For example, The New York Times reported on April 18, 2008, that the pope “came face to face with a scandal that has left lasting wounds on the American church Thursday, holding a surprise meeting with several victims of sexual abuse by priests in the Boston area…. ‘No words of mine could describe the pain and harm inflicted by such abuse,’ the Pope said in his homily. ‘It is important that those who have suffered be given loving pastoral attention.'”
On March 20, 2010, the Times reported that in his eight page pastoral letter to Irish Catholics, the pope wrote, “You have suffered grievously, and I am truly sorry … Your trust has been betrayed and your dignity has been violated.”
The pope also “criticized Ireland’s bishops for ‘grave errors of judgment and failures of leadership.'”
The primary explanation for the abuse that happened – not to excuse the retention of priests in positions that enabled them to continue to harm children – was the belief that the priests could be cured by psychotherapy, a theory now long discarded by the medical profession. Regrettably, it is also likely that years ago the abuse of children was not taken as seriously as today. Thank God we’ve progressed on that issue.
Many of those in the media who are pounding on the Church and the pope today clearly do it with delight, and some with malice. The reason, I believe, for the constant assaults is that there are many in the media, and some Catholics as well as many in the public, who object to and are incensed by positions the Church holds, including opposition to all abortions, opposition to gay sex and same-sex marriage, retention of celibacy rules for priests, exclusion of women from the clergy, opposition to birth control measures involving condoms and prescription drugs and opposition to civil divorce. My good friend, John Cardinal O’Connor, once said, “The Church is not a salad bar, from which to pick and choose what pleases you.” The Church has the right to demand fulfillment of all of its religious obligations by its parishioners, and indeed a right to espouse its beliefs generally.
I disagree with the Church on all of these positions. Nevertheless, it has a right to hold these views in accordance with its religious beliefs. I disagree with many tenets of Orthodox Judaism – the religion of my birth – and have chosen to follow the tenets of Conservative Judaism, while I attend an Orthodox synagogue. Orthodox Jews, like the Roman Catholic Church, can demand absolute obedience to religious rules. Those declining to adhere are free to leave.
I believe the Roman Catholic Church is a force for good in the world, not evil. Moreover, the existence of one billion, 130 million Catholics worldwide is important to the peace and prosperity of the planet.
Of course, the media should report to the public any new facts bearing upon the issue of child molestation, but its objectivity and credibility are damaged when the New York Times declines to publish an op-ed offered by New York Archbishop Timothy Dolan on the issue of anti-Catholicism and offers instead to publish a letter to the editor, which is much shorter and less prominent than an op-ed.
I am appalled that, according to the Times of April 6, 2010, “Last week, the center-left daily newspaper La Repubblica wrote, without attribution that ‘certain Catholic circles’ believed the criticism of the Church stemmed from ‘a New York Jewish lobby.'” The pope should know that some of his fellow priests can be thoughtless or worse in their efforts to help him. If the “certain Catholic circles” were referring to the Times, the Pope should know that the publisher, Arthur Sulzberger, Jr., is Episcopalian, having taken the religion of his mother, and its executive editor, Bill Keller, is also a Christian.
Enough is enough. Yes, terrible acts were committed by members of the Catholic clergy. The Church has paid billions to victims in the US and will pay millions, perhaps billions, more to other such victims around the world. It is trying desperately to atone for its past by its admissions and changes in procedures for dealing with pedophile priests. I will close with a paraphrase of the words of Jesus as set forth in John 8:7: He [or she] that is without sin among you, let him [or her] cast the next stone.
If you want to read the comments, click here to go to the source page.
Happy Birthday, Pope Benedict!
Today is the Holy Father Pope Benedict XVI’s 83rd birthday. I join the many who are praying for him now, especially for that inner strength to continue leading the Church through the present crisis: that he continue, with the serenity that comes from trust in God, to lead us in living this period as a personal call to purification and a new conversion of heart.
St Paul says, for all those who love the Lord, everything turns out for the good. This crisis is a call to be more united to the Pope and all the bishops and clergy who are doing their earnest best to continue giving their lives in serving others despite all the accusations and hate thrown over and over at all of them because of the sin and crime of certain priests who have betrayed their call and victimized the young and innocent. It is also definitely a good time to understand the victims and help them carry the burden of their sufferings by reaching out to them, praying for them, helping them in whatever means are in our reach.
The Catholic Church and the sex abuse of children
I will be posting here articles i have come across in the internet which I hope will balance of the one-sided, and often, biased coverage by mainstream media of the sex abuse of children by Catholic priests. Let me begin by quoting excerpts from Pope John Paul II’s address to the American bishops in 2002:
Dear Brothers,
1. Let me assure you first of all that I greatly appreciate the effort you are making to keep the Holy See, and me personally, informed regarding the complex and difficult situation which has arisen in your country in recent months.
…
Like you, I too have been deeply grieved by the fact that priests and religious, whose vocation it is to help people live holy lives in the sight of God, have themselves caused such suffering and scandal to the young. Because of the great harm done by some priests and religious, the Church herself is viewed with distrust, and many are offended at the way in which the Church’s leaders are perceived to have acted in this matter. The abuse which has caused this crisis is by every standard wrong and rightly considered a crime by society; it is also an appalling sin in the eyes of God. To the victims and their families, wherever they may be, I express my profound sense of solidarity and concern.
2. It is true that a generalized lack of knowledge of the nature of the problem and also at times the advice of clinical experts led Bishops to make decisions which subsequent events showed to be wrong. You are now working to establish more reliable criteria to ensure that such mistakes are not repeated. At the same time, even while recognizing how indispensable these criteria are, we cannot forget the power of Christian conversion, that radical decision to turn away from sin and back to God, which reaches to the depths of a person’s soul and can work extraordinary change.
Neither should we forget the immense spiritual, human and social good that the vast majority of priests and religious in the United States have done and are still doing. The Catholic Church in your country has always promoted human and Christian values with great vigor and generosity, in a way that has helped to consolidate all that is noble in the American people.
…
3. The abuse of the young is a grave symptom of a crisis affecting not only the Church but society as a whole. It is a deep-seated crisis of sexual morality, even of human relationships, and its prime victims are the family and the young. In addressing the problem of abuse with clarity and determination, the Church will help society to understand and deal with the crisis in its midst.
It must be absolutely clear to the Catholic faithful, and to the wider community, that Bishops and superiors are concerned, above all else, with the spiritual good of souls. People need to know that there is no place in the priesthood and religious life for those who would harm the young. They must know that Bishops and priests are totally committed to the fullness of Catholic truth on matters of sexual morality, a truth as essential to the renewal of the priesthood and the episcopate as it is to the renewal of marriage and family life.
4. We must be confident that this time of trial will bring a purification of the entire Catholic community, a purification that is urgently needed if the Church is to preach more effectively the Gospel of Jesus Christ in all its liberating force. Now you must ensure that where sin increased, grace will all the more abound (cf. Rom 5:20). So much pain, so much sorrow must lead to a holier priesthood, a holier episcopate, and a holier Church.
…
I beg the Lord to give the Bishops of the United States the strength to build their response to the present crisis upon the solid foundations of faith and upon genuine pastoral charity for the victims, as well as for the priests and the entire Catholic community in your country. And I ask Catholics to stay close to their priests and Bishops, and to support them with their prayers at this difficult time.
The peace of the Risen Christ be with you!
If you want to read more resources from the Vatican, click here.
On Pope Pius XII: Are you open to the truth?
Here’s an article by Michael Coren on the recent visit of Pope Benedict XVI to Rome’s main synagogue. This balances off the coverage given by mainstream media.
It also contributes significantly to clarifying history: what were Pope Pius XII’s real stand and actions with regard to Nazism and the Jews?
Benedict and the synagogue, Pius and the Holocaust
Last week Pope Benedict made his first official visit to Rome’s main synagogue and met with the leaders of Italy’s Jewish community. His speech was interrupted by applause and cheers several times and the smiles and embraces from Catholic and Jew alike were enough to convert any cynic to a faith in human dignity and understanding. This was a great, grand success. Unless, of course, you read the mainstream press and were told that many Jewish observers were offended by the Pope’s comments on how much was done by the Church to help Jewish people during the Holocaust and by his support for the beatification of Pius XII, who is now named as venerable by the Church. There were, naturally, some disagreements and concerns but to highlight these would be like explaining soccer by analyzing the color of grass. The overall result, the context, the epicenter of the visit was triumph, love, understanding and mutual regard. Put simply, Jew and Catholic are closer now than at any other time in history, in spite of what some would have us believe.
What certain journalists wanted to see were Jewish leaders becoming angry over the alleged actions of Pope Pius XII and the current Pope’s regard for the man. Indeed articles highlighted the words of some Roman Jewish leaders on “the silence” of Pius XII while downplaying the warm welcome the pontiff received and the balanced assessment of other Jewish leaders. What these journalists didn’t understand is that many people are now seeing through the myth of Papal indifference during the Nazi hell and are coming to appreciate just how much was actually done by the Roman Catholic Church at all and every level and often at colossal cost and sacrifice.
It’s an issue that I have studied for a long time out of familial and emotional necessity. I am a Catholic whose father was Jewish. Not only Jewish but from a Polish family. The role of Pope Pius and the Church during the Second World War is to me at the epicenter of identity, loyalty and truth. There are Jewish leaders who claim that Pope Pius said little and did less as Europe’s Jews were rounded up and slaughtered. There are non-Jewish activists – often liberal Catholics fighting modern battles vicariously through the tragedy of the Holocaust – who want to discredit Papal history and thus the contemporary Papacy by arguing that the Pope abandoned his moral authority and that his successors have to delegate power because of this. Was Pius silent, was the Church complicit in its indifference, is Catholic orthodoxy opposed to social justice? The latter, by the way, is the genuine issue at play here. The new orthodoxy of the Church is terrifying to the older generation of liberals and they will use history as a battering ram if they can.
Read the whole article on MercatorNet
Celebrate LIFE! 