Extraordinary
August 23, 2018
As I write this, at 21:46 British Summer Time, an extraordinary situation prevails.
Try to get to the website of the Catholic Diocese of Portsmouth, and you will be told that "this page has been suspended".
Why might anybody want to access that site? Because Bishop Philip Egan has just published the text of his letter to PF suggesting an Extraordinary meeting of the Synod of Bishops to discuss the paedophile crisis. He suggests that it be preceded by a Congress affording an opportunity for laypeople to express their views.
The letter is, of course, easily to be found on the internet; and the substance of its suggestions are reported in the Catholic Herald and even the Tablet. So if this is an attempt at censorship, it is remarkably ill-judged.
I hope that when I open my computer in the morning, not only will this situation have been resolved, but that there will be an explanation of what has happened.
It would be unfair to PF, the Congregation for Bishops, the Papal Nuncio, and to Bishop Philip's Metropolitan Archbishop Peter Smith (I can't think of anybody else who is in the chain of Dr Egan's 'Line Managers') for suspicions of skulduggery to remain in the air.
Earlier, Fr H had written this about Mons Egan's letter...
Clericalism, the root of all evils...
or ... not?
August 23, 2018
Dr Philip Egan, Bishop of Portsmouth, has called for an Extraordinary Synod to discuss the current crisis.
My first reaction is a feeling that this is a very interesting idea, which we could agree to support.
PF has written a letter to us all in which he blames the Clerical Sexual Abuse crisis on "Clericalism".
This is quite a different analysis from that of Benedict XVI, a rather more acute judge: he believed it was the 1960s atmosphere of ethical Relativism and of freedom from moral constraints and rules, that led to a collapse of sexual morality in clerical (and other) circles.
You pays your money and you picks your pontiff. Personally, I buy Benedict.
There is a paradox in PF's words.
The most obvious segment of the Christian community in which Clericalism, in my quite considerable experience, is totally absent, is in Traddy circles.
Traddidom, nationally and internationally, is organised, run, and managed by laity. The clergy who serve it, among whom I am proud to include myself, run nothing, dominate nobody, and follow lay initiatives. We are asked to do things, and we ... er ... assent; I nearly said, we obey.
This is fundamentally like the structures of Medieval Catholicism, in which the powerful elements in local communities were the lay guilds. Their cultic activities did, of course, involve clergy, and they hired and paid their clergy to do what they needed done. Just as they hired and paid their robemakers to make their robes and their kitchen boys to roast their beef.
But it is more important for us to face today's disgusting realities than to discuss the Middle Ages.
Someone called Wuerl has denied that the McCarrick business is a crisis. That crass observation just about says it all. (OK, now that he's become a liability, Wuerl's resignation will probably be accepted; but
how many more decades will Cupich be around promoting Bergoglianism? For how many years was Daneels riding high, papally nominated to Synods on the Family?)
PF's cronies appear to be defensively circling their wagons round his latest and most absurd mantra: his expressed view that Clerical Sexual Abuse is the result of Clericalism! But the main Clericalism I detect in this whole sorry affair is the Clericalism of Establishment cover-ups.
Who knew what McCarrick was up to, and did nothing? Who, in England, knew of Kieran Conry's womanising, and just kept their fingers crossed? And perhaps we should look over the fence into the Church of England and contemplate the abusive life of sanctified sadism led for decades by Bishop Peter Ball.
For this blasphemous libertine, "being strong for Jesus" meant "letting me flog you". But, even more disgraceful than the abuse itself were the strenuous attempts made by many within the Establishment, from Prince Charles downwards, to manoeuvre Ball back into public ministry (especially in schools!!) even after his cover was comprehensively blown in 1992, and one of his victims had committed suicide.
Deference towards the mighty, the Great and the Good, not "Clericalism" among the lower clergy, is the root problem.
You know what they're going to do now, don't you? Under the skilled and careful guidance of the Enemy himself, they're going to use this scandal, this crisis, as an excuse to try to root out of the presbyterate any surviving relics of a sense of true Priesthood (aka 'Clericalism'). Those corrupt structures of deference towards prelates which have landed us all where we are today will be viciously reinforced, and those who suffer, as well as abused victims, will be Catholic laity and Catholic clergy.
I expect to see a new onslaught* on the training of seminarians and junior clergy, in which anybody possessing a Breviarium Romanum or a cassock will risk getting the boot. And, as soon as Joseph Ratzinger is dead, the Gestapo will be let loose on
Summorum pontificum.
These people are running scared and that means they will be very dangerous.
*Actually, what I foretell started last year. Between 17 July and 2 August 2017, I published a number of blogposts about a leaked draft Instruction ordering that priest students in the Roman colleges be forced to concelebrate with their teachers rather than saying a private Mass (which might, of course, be a Traditional Mass). I have no idea whether that iniquitous draft, contradicting the canonical rights given by Vatican II and Summorum pontificum to every Latin presbyter, was put into effect.
The con man in the cardinal’s cap
By Hugh Hewitt
August 22, 2018
The demands that Donald Wuerl be dismissed as archbishop of Washington and resign from the Roman Catholic Church’s College of Cardinals are proportionate in their degree of outrage with their degree of disappointment with the failed priest.
Thanks to a Pennsylvania grand jury, we now know of the evil that took place during his time as bishop of Pittsburgh.
Wuerl’s diocesan record included the coverup of an alleged priest-run child porn ring, including priests who would reportedly mark victims for other predators via a gold cross. If that isn’t satanic, then the word defines nothing.
And Wuerl covered up that ring. And dozens of other cases. And he allowed predators to feel free to move around the country provided they didn’t endanger his career. Did Cardinal Theodore McCarrick support Wuerl as his successor in Washington confident of the latter’s ability to keep the ugliest sins under the carpet? It would not surprise.
Indeed, nothing surprises anymore. Those of us in the Catholic community who gave the church a second and even a third chance have been left disgusted. There was a 2002 “Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People” put out by U.S. bishops. There was “A Report on the Crisis in the Catholic Church in the United States” put out in February 2004. Upon its release, the church-appointed lay review board that wrote the report held a big event at the National Press Club. I went. I wanted to hear in person that change had come.
Some leaders stepped up. Philadelphia’s indefatigable Archbishop Charles Chaput was tasked by the pope to investigate the scandal-plagued Legion of Christ, and it was scoured. Archbishop José Gomez of Los Angeles put his predecessor Roger Mahoney under what is effectively house arrest. On the other side of the coin, Cardinal Bernard Law had to flee the country and take up residence in Rome until his death.
We thought the coverups were over. Then
the Pennsylvania grand jury revealed the most skilled conspirator turns out to be Wuerl, who managed his nondisclosure agreements with victims and his predators, according to the report, so well that he got promoted to be the face of the church in the most powerful city in the world. And his boss in Rome [THE POPE] wrote a pablum-filled letter on Monday assigning collective responsibility for the crimes and the coverups to everyone.
To be very specific: To hell with that. I didn’t abuse my CCD students (mandatory Saturday or weeknight classes for students attending public schools) when I taught them as a volunteer in the ’80s. I didn’t have a single abusive priest or nun in 12 years of Catholic education.
This horror has ownership, and the deed’s many names include Wuerl. And with Monday’s “everybody is to blame” mea non-culpa from Pope Francis, his name is on it too.
Wuerl needs to resign. And the church would be better off with two retired popes and a new man absolutely dedicated to supporting the reformers, not suppressing them.
The church, despite leaders such as Chaput and Gomez, cannot be trusted to tear out the rot. There are too few like them and too much rot. There should be 49 other state attorneys general investigations or, given the interstate movement of predators with the cooperation of the church, perhaps a Justice Department investigation leading to a consent decree on practices that the church is obliged to follow when a pedophile is discovered in its midst. It wouldn’t violate the free exercise clause to insist that every bishop simply agree to follow the law.
Chaput has always argued that if statutes of limitations are extended for victims of church abuse, they should be extended for all victims, and he’s right. It’s not like Penn State University, Michigan State University and the University of Southern California — homes to terrible abuse scandals — are any less culpable than Catholic dioceses. But at least those three institutions didn’t keep their presidents around (though USC took its time in dumping its president, to the disgrace and injury of the university).
Every day that Wuerl continues in his job injures every victim and every Catholic. He undermined all the work of reform that went before him. He conned his colleagues. He conned the review board by avoiding its gaze. The con man should be gone. This week.
Yet another one of McCarrick's proteges rewarded by the reigning pope with a cardinalate on McCarrick's recommendation continues to be an embarrassment to the Church and to himself, most of all...
Cardinal Tobin instructs
whistleblowers to shut up
by Kenneth Wolfe
RORATE CAELI
August 22, 2018
A letter from Joseph Cardinal Tobin, archbishop of Newark, was sent to all archdiocesan priests on Friday following an explosive investigative report earlier that day on former Newark Archbishop Theodore McCarrick and a homosexual subculture that still exists in northern New Jersey, from the seminary to the priesthood.
The report, by Ed Condon of Catholic News Agency (CNA), featured six priests from within the archdiocese speaking on background for the story.
Tobin's letter of response, according to CNA, stated
"no one -- including the anonymous 'sources' cited in the article -- has ever spoken to me about a gay subculture in the Archdiocese of Newark."
The
Catholic Herald highlighted a very important point made in the cardinal's letter. In it,
Tobin instructed clergy not to speak to the media, a remarkable reaction considering the cardinal's extreme friendliness with reporters who swoon over his breaks from Church teaching and tradition.
Instead of speaking on background or on the record with reporters about what they have witnessed in the Archdiocese of Newark, Tobin said priests should send any media inquiries to the archdiocese's communications office.
Rorate tried, earlier this year, to work with that office. It is where investigative journalism goes to die.
After Cardinal Tobin sent a tweet that said: "Nighty-night, baby. I love you" while boarding a plane in February, the tweet was widely reported before Tobin deleted it. He claimed it was meant to be a text message to his sister. The media did almost no follow-up on the bizarre explanation, instead believing every word the cardinal said, as if it was perfectly normal for a 65-year-old man to write like that to his sister.
That same month, this writer contacted the director of communications for the Archdiocese of Newark, following the protocol Tobin dictates. Questions were as follows:
1) Which of the cardinal's sisters was the writing intended to reach when accidentally tweeted?
2) Were they texting immediately prior to the cardinal's flight, and is there proof of any such texts? (If so, will those texts be released?)
3) Will the respective sister be confirming any such texting back and forth before the flight?
4) Has the cardinal addressed his sister as "baby" before this incident? (And will she confirm this?)
The response, from the longtime director of communications, Jim Goodness, was: "The statements we have released already are sufficient. We will not be commenting further on this issue."
Those statements were two tweets. No further comment. End of story.
German theologian who was a Pro-Pope Francis signatory
rejects papal letter on abuse and withdraws from movement
by Giuseppe Nardi
THE EPONYMOUS FLOWER
August 22]3, 2018
BERLIN - Yesterday Pope Francis published
'a letter to the People of God'. On the same day, the German theologian, lawyer and journalist, Markus Büning, responded by withdrawing his support signature for the Pro Pope Francis initiative of 2017, in protest. Büning himself belongs to those who are victims of sexual abuse by clerics. As a child he had been abused by a priest.
Büning's victim status was officially recognized by the Church. The competent diocese apologized to him and made a symbolic compensation.
This personal concern leaves the lawyer, who also holds a degree in theology, an aptitude for the question of how Pope Francis, as head of the church, deals with the issue of child abuse by clerics and the handling of this abuse by the ecclesiastical hierarchy.
Büning's juridically and theologically trained sensibility was disappointed by the letter of Pope Francis. He had expected more. Instead,
the Pope remained too vague and unspecific for Büning despite the large number of cases, including some with which he had been personally involved in the past 12 months. Büning writes:
"This text is absolutely inadequate and a great disappointment".
Indignation prompted the lawyer to ask Pope Francis to repent instead of removing the bishops who were guilty.
Büning had reproached worried Catholic intellectuals a year ago when they issued
Correctio Filialis, a clear criticism of the administration of Pope Francis. They accused him of tolerating, if not promoting, the spread of heresies in the Church, especially with the controversial post-Synodal letter Amoris laetitia.
But Büning thought that the nature and tone of the criticism went too far and violatedthe duty of obedience and allegiance to the reigning pope. For this reason, he was one of the initial signatories of the counter-initiative Pro Pope Francis, which was launched by the Viennese pastoral theologian Paul Zulehner to respond to the Correctio filialis. Other signatories included Alt-Bishop Erwin Kräutler, Völker Beck [Green Party’s Meth user and Pedophile Apologist], Thomas Sternberg, Leonardo Boff, Alder Abbot Martin Werlen, Alt-Bishop Fritz Lobinger and P. Anselm Grün.
After yesterday's letter from Pope Francis, Büning told Zulehner to cancel his name from the Pro-Pope Francis list. The German theologian and lawyer also sharply criticized Pope Francis. Maike Hickson quotes him on LifeSiteNews as saying:
"Meanwhile, it is clear that Pope Francis, apart from many words, does not assume his responsibilities. I can only pity such a pope."
He shared his protest not only with the initiator of the Pro Pope Francis initiative, but also with the Apostolic Nuncio in Germany and a number of leading church representatives, including Cardinal Woelki and Cardinal Burke.
So far it has been only US Cardinal Raymond Burke, who has, by the way, already been demoted twice by Pope Francis, who has responded to the recent abuse scandal in the United States in a way that would be expected of a pope.
The Cardinal told EWTN in an interview on 16 August that the abuse scandal "hits the heart of the Church":
"We are dealing with the most serious sins here. For the bishop, who has failed in this area painfully, the penal means of the Church are also means of expiation for his well-being... That a bishop exploits the flock and commits deadly sins: that is simply unacceptable and must stop."
Büning summarizes his critique:
Pope Francis proclaims zero tolerance with words, but does not implement it."
[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 24/08/2018 07:03]