BENEDICT XVI: NEWS, PAPAL TEXTS, PHOTOS AND COMMENTARY

Please see previous page for earlier posts today, 3/11/10.







Well, one can't buck a tide that is threatening to be a tsunami... The sharks saw blood in the water once Mons. Ratzinger was brought into the picture, and now they're circling in, hoping for a kill with Benedict XVI himself as their prey.....

The latest flashpoint is an article by the Archbishop of Vienna in which he mentions priestly celibacy as one of the causes of priestly perversion that the Church must look into. {Of course, because of Schoenborn's known closeness to the Pope, this is yet another way to further exploit the Pope's name in conenction with these scandals.

Many Italian newspapers led by La Repubblica have reported it today as though Schoenborn had said that it was the only cause of sexual perversion in priests. The Times story, though still tendentious, is more accurate - I have checked Schoenborn's site for the original article - but inevitably, Schoenborn's statements have to be taken in the context of the fact that when the Austrian bishops last met with Benedict XVI last year, he very ostentatiously conveyed to him a petition by Austrian lay movements against priestly celibacy.


Cardinal Schönborn says celibacy
partly to blame for clerical sex abuse
by Richard Owen in Rome

March 11, 2010

A cardinal seen as a future candidate for the papacy has broken a Vatican taboo by raising the possibility that priestly celibacy is among the causes of the sex abuse scandal sweeping the Roman Catholic Church.

Cardinal Christoph Schönborn, the Archbishop of Vienna and a protégé of Pope Benedict XVI, wrote in his archdiocese's magazine this week that the Church must make an "unflinching examination" of the causes of the scandal.

He said that these included "the issue of priests' training, as well as the question of what happened in the so-called sexual revolution of the generation of 1968".

He added: "It also includes the question of priestly celibacy and the question of personality development. It requires a great deal of honesty, both on the part of the Church and of society as a whole."

His remarks came days after Father Hans Kung, the dissident Catholic theologian, blamed the Church’s “uptight” views on sex for child abuse scandals in Germany, Ireland and the US.

The cardinal's spokesman, Erich Leitenberger, later issued a "clarification" claiming that the cardinal was not "in any way seeking to question the Catholic Church's celibacy rule" after headlines in the German and Italian press such as "Schönborn says priestly abuse is the fault of celibacy" and "Celibacy must be reconsidered, Schönborn says".

The cardinal's office said that he had been misinterpreted. Some observers said that he had been obliged to issue his "clarification" under pressure from the Vatican.

Despite calls by a number of theologians and lay Catholic organisations for priestly celibacy to be abolished or made optional, it has been repeatedly reaffirmed as untouchable by successive Popes, including Pope Benedict XVI.

It may be raised, however, at a conference today and tomorrow at the Pontifical Lateran University in Rome marking the "Year of the Priest".

The Lateran conference is being organised by Cardinal Claudio Hummes, the Brazilian head of the Congregation for the Clergy, who once observed that celibacy was "not dogma".

The celibacy rule for priests was not part of the early Christian Church but was introduced in the Middle Ages. A number of early Christian fathers were married, including St Peter himself, according to St Mark's Gospel.

Tomorrow Pope Benedict is to meet Robert Zollitsch, Archbishop of Freiburg and head of the German bishops’ conference, to discuss the growing crisis over clerical sex abuse in several countries, including the Pope's native Germany.

Archbishop Zollitsch has described clerical abuse as outrageous and asked the victims for forgiveness, but has denied any link between sex abuse and celibacy.

In his article Cardinal Schönborn said that he could understand the frustration of many of the faithful over the paedophilia scandals.

"Enough is enough. That's what many people are saying and thinking," he wrote. "Enough of the scandals!"

A number of sex abuse scandals involving priests have come to light in Austria recently, one involving a man of 53 who says he was abused repeatedly for six years from the age of 11 by two priests.

Pope Benedict is due to issue a pastoral letter to the faithful in Ireland on the sex abuse issue after meeting Irish bishops in Rome last month.

The scandal has come closer to the Pontiff himself after it emerged that a former chorister in Regensburg – where the Pope once taught – had claimed he was abused while a member of the Cathedral choir, which was led for three decades by Monsignor Georg Ratzinger, the Pope's older brother.

Monsignor Ratzinger admitted this week that he had slapped choirboys but said he knew nothing of sexual abuse allegations.

An article published today in L'Osservatore Romano, the Vatican newspaper, by the historian Lucetta Scaraffia suggested that a greater presence of women in high-level decision-making bodies in the Church would have helped to lift the "veil of masculine secrecy" over clerical sex abuse cases.

This week Father Kung, who was stripped of his licence to teach Catholic theology in 1979 after he rejected the doctrine of papal infallibility, said in The Tablet that denials of any link between abuse and celibacy were “erroneous”.

He said celibacy was not the only cause of the misconduct but described it as “the most important and structurally the most decisive” expression of the Church’s repressive attitude to sex.

Father Kung added: “Compulsory celibacy is the principal reason for today’s catastrophic shortage of priests, for the fatal neglect of eucharistic celebration, and for the tragic breakdown of personal pastoral ministry in many places.”

Four years ago Pope Benedict reaffirmed the value of priestly celibacy after the issue of allowing priests to marry was raised at a Synod of Bishops. Last November the Vatican made clear that its new rules facilitating the conversion of Anglicans, including married Anglican priests, did not signify any change in its rules on priestly celibacy.

Cardinal Schönborn, 65, is a leading conservative theologian of aristocratic origin. Born Christoph Maria Michael Hugo Damian Peter Adalbert von Schönborn at a castle in Bohemia, he studied theology and Church history in Paris and philosophy and psychology in Austria.

He was ordained in 1970 in Vienna and later studied theology at Regensburg University under the then Professor Joseph Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI. He was a theologian in France and Switzerland before becoming auxiliary Bishop of Vienna, rising to be Archbishop of Vienna in 1995 and a cardinal three years later.


I think it is worthwhile at this point to post Ruth Gledhill's copious blog today, because it gives an overview of Anglophone media reaction. Surprisingly, she is not as snarky as she usually is.


Roman Catholic priests:
'Wise or foolish virgins?'

Blog by Ruth Gledhill
March 11, 2010


Cardinal Christoph Schönborn of Vienna has intervened in the debate on celibacy and clerical sex abuse.

In this area, Cardinal Schönborn's prvious intervention is interesting, albeit that an attempt has been made to minimise its significance, because he is conservative, hugely rated and is close to the Pope.

Rentapriest has details...

---

'On the eve of the opening of the Year For Priests sought by Pope Benedict XVI, the question of priestly celibacy was again forcefully raised at the Vatican.

During the two days of meetings that the Pope and the most important representatives of the Roman Curia had on June 15-16 (2009) with the Archbishop of Vienna and other representatives of the Austrian Church, discussion was not limited to the case of Gerhard Marie Wagner, the ultra-conservative priest named auxiliary bishop of Linz and later forced to step down because of a revolt by priests and laity in the diocese.

At the Vatican, Cardinal Schönborn also presented a supposed “Lay Initiative”, that is, a call launched at the beginning of the year by important Austrian Catholics, demanding the abolition of the celibacy requirement, the return to duty of married priests, opening the diaconate to women, and the ordination of so-called «viri probati».

Schönborn, who had met with the promoters of the initiative a few days before arriving in Rome, explained in an interview with Vatican Radio that 'while not agreeing with any of its conclusions, as I have said several times', he presented the Memorandum by the Austrian laity – accompanied by a note written by himself -- to Cardinal Claudio Hummes, prefect of the Congregation for the Clergy, 'asking him to read it attentively.'

'I think,' he explained on the German language program of Vatican Radio, 'that it is important for someone in Rome to know what some of our lay people are thinking about the problems of the Church.'

He linked the shortage of priests to 'the growing number of people who are alienated from the Church and the faith.

---

After the Wagner case, in the Linz Diocese, several cases emerged of priests who had been living with a woman for years, which contributed to drawing the attention of Austrian public opinion to the priestly celibacy problem, Rentapriest wrote.

Catholic News Service also reported the same story:

The cardinal did say then that Pope Benedict has been 'very impressive' in explaining how the continued requirement of celibacy for priests in the Latin-rite 'ultimately is a question of whether we believe that it is possible for a man to give his life entirely to God' in serving the church and his brothers and sisters.

On the present crisis, Austen Ivereigh has a good analysis at America Magazine. He quotes Tom Heneghan at Reuters, who writes:

---

The more the scandal of Catholic priests sexually abusing boys in Germany spreads, the more the focus turns to Rome to see how Pope Benedict reacts. The story is getting ever closer to the German-born Pope, even though he has been quite outspoken denouncing these scandals and had just met all Irish bishops to discuss the scandals shaking their country.

Nobody’s saying he had any role in the abuse cases now coming to light in Germany. But the fact that some took place in Regensburg while he was a prominent theologian there, that his brother Georg has admitted to smacking lazy members of his choir there and that Benedict was archbishop in Munich from 1977 to 1991 lead to the classic cover-up question: what did he know and when did he know it?

This is only the start of what can be a long, drawn out and possibly damaging story for Benedict’s PR-deficient papacy. His crises to date have been linked to his statements or decisions, such as the controversial Regensburg speech that offended Muslims or several run-ins with Jews over restoring old prayers they consider anti-Semitic or rehabilitating an ultra-traditionalist priest who is also a Holocaust denier. But now it’s about what he did or didn’t do in the past and how he moves to avoid further scandals in the future

---

.

Austen told me: "In so far as celibacy is a part of the Catholic priesthood and that the formation of Catholic priests has been under the spotlight in clerical sex abuse cases, then celibacy is part of the question, but is not in and of itself a cause of sex abuse. The issue in these cases in Europe has been, as in Ireland, cover-up and collusion, putting the institution and priests before victims. That is what needs to be changed. Celibacy survives very happily without clericalism."
In his article he concludes:

---

Having now ruptured the noli me tangere cloud which has traditionally surrounded the pope on this issue -- Pope John Paul II always seemed like a bewildered and saddened spectator - Benedict XVI is forcing himself to get involved with local Churches.

The recent summit with all 24 Irish ordinaries, and the promised Lenten letter to the Irish -- next Wednesday, St Patrick's Day, seems the obvious date for its release -- are both unprecedented.

On Friday the Pope meets Archbishop Robert Zollitsch, president of the German bishops' conference, to discuss the crisis. Whether or not these result in concrete initiatives is less important than Rome being seen to be involved and taking responsibility.

---

This crisis could well have other effects, not least that of shaking out issues normally considered off-limits for discussion. Two recent examples from impeccably orthodox sources:

1. Cardinal Christoph Schönborn, Archbishop of Vienna and editor of the Catechism, has said that the causes of the abuse crisis must be examined, and that these include "priestly formation and the understanding of celibacy in personal development."

2. A front-page piece in the Vatican daily L' Osservatore Romano, no less, argues that a greater presence of women in high-level decision-making bodies in the Church would have helped to lift the "veil of masculine secrecy" over clerical sex abuse cases.'

[She should have added the two major international symposia in Rome last week and this week tackling the priestly celibacy issue head-on.]

Earlier this week the Holy See itself acknowledged the 'grave crisis' the Church is facing.

St Paul suggested that marriage could be an antidote to carnal desires, but the view in conservative Catholic circles is that contraception is more to blame for this[????] It is this kind of reasoning that does so much to discredit the Church. Some pro-life groups still argue that condoms don't prevent pregnancy and increase the risk of HIV. What can a celibate priesthood possibly understand about how to manage desire within a marriage, either for men or for women?

[A priest who is genuinely sincere about his vocation does understand and know that it is possible for human beings to abstain, ilfelong if need be, from indulging in human desires, including sexual desire. And that is the lesson that a celibate priesthood can also set for Catholic homosexuals, who really must be extra-heroic or genuinely saintly to bridle their sexual desires, or who could possibly sublimate them into a genuine affectionate relationship of matrimony with a woman.]

Andrew Brown explains in The Guardian today why the Catholic Church is now likely to be a far safer environment for children than many institutions, including some families.

---

The world, bereft of moral and spiritual leadership, and confused by widening gaps between poor and wealthy, gaps that noticeable more than ever because of the new communications, needs a strong and credible Catholic Church.

---

None can dispute the right of the Church to maintain the vocationally celibate priesthood but few would surely dispute the need for its foolish virgins to wise up, and wise up fast.

[To stay with Gledhill's metaphor, the overwhelming majority of the world's 400-thousand-plus Catholic priests have been and are wise virgins - surely at the cost of great personal discipline - but wise nonetheless! AND HEROIC FOR THIS, I must repeat, because it is heroic to subdue and control natural desires as they have to do. Let us remember to pray everyday, as we pray for our Holy Father, that his priests and bishops may follow his example and be credible witnesses for Christ to the whole world.]


The latest development from Germany continues the pattern of blaming the Church and trying to make Benedict XVI the ultimate villain in all this. This article has someone describing him as having 'his back to the wall' on this issue! They won't stop until they can pin something on him directly....


German schools angry
over Church abuse scandal
By VERENA SCHMITT-ROSCHMANN


Excuse me, but didn't a prestigious public school with a lay faculty own up earlier this week to verified cases of pedophile abuse in that school? How can this sanctimonious teachers' union be absolutely sure that all of their schools are totally blameless and above suspicion? And why does the AP reporter not ask them that obvious question?????


BERLIN, March 11 (AP) – German educators sharply criticized Roman Catholic church officials on Thursday for their handling of a spiraling child abuse scandal — comments that came a day before the country's highest bishop was to meet Pope Benedict XVI in Rome.

Germany's top education representative, Ludwig Spaenle, said the Church failed to report cases of physical and sexual abuse in a timely fashion.

"We have seen, unfortunately, that internal church guidelines as well as school authority directives to report criminal offenses instantly have been circumvented," Spaenle, who is president of Germany's 16 education ministers, was quoted as saying by the Passauer Neue Presse newspaper.

Church officials need to put "everything on the table," he said.

Spaenle and his colleagues set up a task force to come up with a new strategy against sexual abuse in schools.

"For us there is 'zero tolerance' for the perpetrators," he said in a statement Thursday.

The Pope has not commented personally on the German scandal, in which at least 170 former students from Catholic schools have come forward with claims of sexual abuse and others have spoken of physical abuse.

Benedict is to meet the head of Germany's bishop's conference, Robert Zollitsch, at the Vatican on Friday.

Petra Dorsch-Jungsberger, a former Munich communications professor who specializes in church matters, said everyone in Germany was waiting for the Pope come forward and offer guidance. She said Benedict might be facing the greatest moral issue for the Roman Catholic Church since World War II.

"He is standing with his back against the wall," Dorsch-Jungsberger told The Associated Press in a telephone interview.

The Roman Catholic Church has been hit by years of sexual abuse claims in the United States, Canada, Ireland, Australia and other countries.

Yet the German abuse allegations are particularly sensitive because Germany is the Pope's homeland and because some of the scandals involve the choir that the Pope's brother, the Rev. Georg Ratzinger, led for 30 years.

Dorsch-Jungsberger said it's likely that more details will emerge about the abuse cases in Germany.

"This issue is not at its end by a long shot," she said. "We can expect a few surprises."


The sex-abuse stories are sucking up all the air from regular coverage of the Pope. And yet, we cannot ignore what's out there in public. It all becomes part, unfortunately, of the public 'record' for this Pontificate, and the least I can do ( not that anyone cares) is to keep track of the lies, misinformation, disinformation and general black mythmaking associated with these episodes.

Teresa: I can't find anything on that 'behavior of priests' point. Sorry.

Those teachers certainly have some nerve... zero tolerance?! Wow! What a breakthrough! I don't see an apology from any of them for slapping students while it was legal!! I'm rather disappointed... NOT!!
Most teachers in Germany meet the profile of the journalist:
left, liberal, anti-authority, but pro- everything else.
The type that has the deepest empathy for anything and anybody – except for conservative values. Too intelligent and educated to believe in something as ludicrous as a creator, blindly following the Gods of science.
Jesus is a nice, cute, little guy... almost on the same level as Buddha, Gandhi or the Dalai Lama... or Barrack Obama.

Sad! Just sad! Luckily there is a younger generation, which hasn't been completely brainwashed by cable TV and the rest of the media, who longs for values and orientation points. Let's hope they remain strong and don't get sucked into the twirling maelstrom of decadence.
But then, they have to defy their own parents, who have been turned into mindless puppets of the left wing elite!

Eieieiei… I’m beginning to sound like an old women… HELP!!!!

Amazingly enough, media coverage here has died down... I guess it's not selling as well anymore, as it did a week ago.

Thanks to Lella's blog

for leading me to this.
It's a very direct approach to the real aim of this current media manipulation of the German sex abuse stories. It also makes a clarification that L'Osservatore Romano itself has never bothered to do.

Where are Mr. Vian's priorities? If he could give valuable front-page space today to a rather peripheral idea of hiring more women in managerial positions to work with priests as a way to minimize sexual abuses by priests, he could have given as much space, even in the inside pages, to a simple at-a-glance presentation of the church documents that are always cited so erroneously to accuse the Church, in general, and Cardinal Ratzinger, in particular, as the basis for the 'cover-ups' and an alleged 'wall of silence' about these abuses. And because it appears in OR itself, the article would necessarily be picked up by the worldwide media - an opportunity to put the facts out in some 'official' way and get some traction, at least!

It is even more necessary because after decades of carrying it in Latin only, the Vatican has pulled Crimen sollicitationis offline, and the 2001 documents - John Paul's Motu Proprio and Cardinal Ratzinger's implementing letter - are only posted in Latin!

Why does it take a regional newspaper to lead in doing the obvious? BTW, the author of this editorial which appears on Page 1 of ALTO ADIGE today, is Ferdinando Camon, the writer who gave a couple of accounts of attending the Pope's encounter with artists last November.

What they really want
is to strike at the Pope
by FERDINANDO CAMON
Translated from

March 11, 2010


They want to strike at the Pope. This Pope was Archbishop of Munich, and there, they are seeking out any trace of scandal similar to that which has emerged from other German, Austrian and Dutch dioceses in recent weeks.

The German justice minister accused the Vatican of not cooperating - and blames it on Cardinal Ratzinger even if she does not mention his name.

She does refer to a 2001 directive from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (prepared and signed by Cardinal Ratzinger as CDF Prefect) which, she claims, calls on every Catholic, lay or faithful, to report any cases of sexual abuse to the Church, but to keep such reports within the Church, on pain of excommunication!

Which is simply wrong. These sex abuses are a terrible stain on the Church but let us not tar everyone with the same brush, even the blameless.

This accusation that the Church itself has sabotaged justice was promoted even in Italy. and on Italian TV by the program Annozero. [It was responsible for buying and airing in 2007 the 2006 BBC documentary that perpetrated the black myth about Church directives.]

All those who accuse the Vatican itself of directing a cover-up of sex offenses by priests cite two documents, Crimen sollicitationis (1962) and De delictis gravioribus (2001). The first contains and the second reiterates the obligation to denounce known sexual incidents.

Denounce to whom? To the Church or to the police? The texts say that internal processes regarding "the most serious offenses" (sexual abuse by priests) "are reserved for the exclusive competence of the Congregation of the Doctrine for the Faith".

But what does 'exclusive' mean? The critics have interpreted it to mean that it excludes civilian courts. But the Vatican text, which refers to Church processes, means exclusive to the CDF and therefore, not within the competence of lower ecclesiastical tribunals, such as a diocesan one.

The clear message was that the Vatican considers these sexual offenses so grave that it intends to handle them directly, not leave it to diocesan discretion. [It must be remembered that *John Paul II's motu proprio of 2001 - of which Cardinal Ratzinger's De delictis gravioribus* constituted the implementing instructions - were drawn up and issued after the US sex scandals first erupted, of which a distinguishing mark was the systematic cover-up employed by some diocesan bishops.]

Massimo Introvigne wrote an article about this in Avvenire on May 30, 2007 [I have to check that out, but I do know I translated one by Introvigne for the PRF, from Il Giornale dated 5/27/07 - which was a simple and crystal-clear presentation of what the two documents really set out to do.]

In the Avvenire article, Introvigne points out that the Catechism of the Catholic Church itself (Art. 1916 and 2238) - published under the overall guidance of Cardinal Ratzinger - provides that with regard to all offenses that are punishable according to the penal and civil codes, every citizen, lay and religious, is obliged to 'collaborate' faithfully with the State.

Both Crimen.. and De delictus... provide that anyone, including lay faithful, who fails to denounce a case of sexual abuse known to him, risks excommunication. But the critics have flagrantly claimed that the excommunication threat is directed at those who denounce sexual abuses to the courts. [And this has been perpetrated terribly by many American lawyers who sue in behalf of abuse victims.]

Therefore, what the documents say is clearly the contrary of what the German justice minister claims. [As justice minister, and presumably, a laywer, all she had to do was to ask her staff first to check the actual documents, not make misinformed and uninformed statements without verifying her 'data'.]

It is also proposed repeatedly that sexual scandals in Catholic institutions would be solved by simply abolishing the requirement for priestly celibacy. This was reiterated recently by the Swiss theologian Hans Kueng, leading critic of both John Paul's 'showy' Pontificate which he called a 'a disaster', and of Benedict XVI's 'restoration' rule ('a step back in time').

But if we look at the pedophile scandals involving priests around the world, it is always priests violating boys or adolescent males. The problem among priests and seminarians is not sexuality, but homosexuality. Abolishing priestly celibacy will not eliminate that.

And the problem begins with the unwise or careless selection of seminarians. [Which is sought to be remedied by the November 2006 Instruction from the Conggregation for Catholic Education entitled 'Criteria for vocational discernment in persons with homosexual tendencies requesting admission to seminaries and religious orders'.]

As for the failure to denounce or partial reticent denunciations of priestly sexual abuses known to the Catholic faithful, a letter to the editor from a Catholic lady said: "Before saying anything, I ask myself. Who will this benefit? Christ or Satan?" She is among those who think that denouncing a priest benefits Satan. Who knows how many there are who think like her?

Therefore, the Church also needs to carry out an anthropological re-education: to make every Catholic understand that truth represents what is good, and that anything else is evil.


*NB: For those who are interested, the English translation of the two documents are posted in the REFERENCES thread that I created in the PRF precisely to accommodate - in two pages - all the clarificatory articles about these documents dating from 2005 shortly after the Pope'es election, and controversing the defenses of Cardinal Ratzinger written by people like Sandro Magister, John Allen and Massimo Introvigne.
freeforumzone.leonardo.it/discussione.aspx?idd=354564&p=1

All this is extremely upsetting. "What they really want is to strike at the Pope". Indeed. That has become as clear as daylight.

And with a more than deficient PR department in the Vatican I am beginning to think Benedict stands quite alone.

Anyhow, thank you, Teresa, for keeping record of the main developments and especially the reportage in the MSM with all its misrepresentations. It is so very seldom that one finds a "story" about the Pope/Church that is factually a 100% correct. What a (seemingly?) losing battle......

I hope the latest drama in Germany won't make him ill. And in a certain sense I wish his brother had not volunteered to tell the public he sometimes smacked kids! Especially since it happened in most state schools as well at that period in time, a fact that is conveniently forgotten by all and sundry.





Hi Mags! Lovely to hear from you.

Yes, unfortunately, our beloved Holy Father is going through another one of those stations of the Cross that necessarily mark his journey as the Vicar of Christ. I am sure he is greatly comforted with the prayers of the faithful. All of us who love him would gladly share his burden if we could, and probably suffer more than he does because he has the strength of purity. But meanwhile we pray and hope he feels our love.

He is probably more personally concerned at this time for his older brother who has to go through this public ordeal because he happens to be the Pope's brother and for no other reason. But he also knows him better than anyone and knows his strengths. We can only be glad they have each other - a providential circumstance not given to many Popes in recent memory.

And so, we pray....


Best wishes,

TERESA


P.S. Thanks to Lella's follower-scouts, I just saw a wonderful testimonial by Tobias Weber, now a music publisher in Hofkirchen (passau district), as an entry on his blog,
musica-in-tempore.blogspot.com/2010/03/noch-einmal-domspat...
recalling his years as a Domspatzen choirboy under Mons. Ratzinger. I will try to translate as soon as I can but probably not now, because it is already 1:30 a.m.

Pope to priest-confessors:
Open a 'dialog of salvation'
with penitents'

March 11, 2010




At 12:30 this afternoon, in the Sala Clementina of the Apostolic Palace, the Holy Father met particiapnts of this year's course in the Internal Forum organized by the Apostolic Penitentiary.

Here is a translation of his address to them:

---

Dear friends,
I am happy to meet with you today and to address my welcome to each of you, on the occasion of the annual course in the internal forum organized by the Apostolic Penitentiary.

I cordially greet Mons. Fortunato Baldelli, who, as the Major Penitentiary, is leading your study sessions for the first time, and I thank him for the words he addressed to me. With him, I greet the Regent, Mons. Gianfranco Girotti; the personnel of the Penitentiary; and all of you who, with your participation in this initiative, manifest the strong need to examine in depth a topic that is essential for the ministry and the life of priests.

Your course takes place providentially during the Year for Priests, which I decreed for the 150th anniversary of the the birth in Heaven of St. Jean Marie Vianney, who exercised the ministry of Reconciliation in a heroic and fruitful way.

As I stated in my letter decree: "All of us priests must feel that the words that he, the Cure of Ars, placed on the lips of Christ, applies to all of us: 'I will give my ministers the responsibility of announcing to sinners that I am always ready to receive them, that my Mercy is infinite'."

From the Holy Cure of Ars, we priests can learn not only his inexhaustible trust in the Sacrament of Penance, which urges us to place it back at the center of our pastoral concerns, but also the method of the 'dialog of salvation' that should take plcae in it.

Where are the roots of the heroicity and fecundity anchored with which St. Jean Marie Vianney lived his own ministry as confessor? Above all, in an intense personal dimension of penitence.

The awareness of his own limits and the need to resort to Divine Mercy in order to seek forgiveness, to convert the heart. and to be sustained in the path of sanctity, are fundamental in the life of a priest.

Only he who has experienced its grandeur can be a be a convincing announcer and adminstrator of the mercy of God. Every priest becomes a minister of Penance through his ontological configuration to Christ, Supreme and Eternal Priest, who reconciles mankind with the Father. And so, fidelity in administering the Sacrament of Reconciliation is entrusted to the responsibility of the priest.

We live in a cultural context marked by a hedonistic and relativistic mentality, which tends to cancel God from the horizon of life, does not favor the acquisition of a clear set of reference values, and does not help to discern good from evil nor to mature a correct sense of sin.

This situation makes the need more urgent for the service of those who administer Divine Mercy. Indeed, we must not forget that there is a kind of vicious cycle in the obfuscation of the experience of God and losing the sense of sin.

Nonetheless, if we look at the cultural context in which St. Jean Marie Vianney, we see that, in various aspects, it was not that dissimilar from ours. Indeed, even in his time, there was a mentality that was hostile to faith, expressed by forces that sought outright to prevent the exercise of priestly ministry. In these circumstances, the Holy Cure of Ars made the church his home in order to lead men to God.

He lived with radicality the spirit of prayer, a personal and intimate relationship with Christ, the celebration of holy Mass, Eucharistic Adoration, and evangelical poverty, appearing to his contemporaries as a sign that was so evident of fhe presence of God, that it pushed so many penitents to come to his confessional.

In the conditions of freedom in which one can exercise the priestly ministry today, it is necessary that priests live
in ‘high mode’ their own response to vocations, because only he who daily becomes a living and clear presence of the Lord could inspire in the faithful a sense of sin, to give them courage and to cause the birth of the desire for the forgiveness of God.

Dear brothers, it is necessary to go back to the confessional as a place in which to celebrate the Sacament of Reconciliation, but also as a place to ‘inhabit’ more often, so that the faithful may find mercy, counsel and comfort, feel themselves loved and understood by God, and experience the presence of Divine Mercy alongside the real Presence in the Eucharist.

The ‘crisis’ in the Sacrament of Penance that is often spoken of interpellates priests first of all and their great responsibility to educate the People of God in the radaical exigencies of the Gospel. In particular, it asks them to dedicate themselves generously to listening to sacramental confessions; to guide the flock with courage so that it may not conform to the mentatlity of this world (cfr Rm 12,2), but that they may know to make choices which may even be counter-current, avoiding accommodations or compromises.

For this, it is important that the priest have a permanent ascetic tension, nourished by communion with God, and dedicate himself to constantly keeping abreast of studies in theology and human sciences.

St. Jean Marie Vianney knew how to institute with penitents a true and proper ‘dialog of salvation', showing the beauty and grandeur of the Lord’s goodness and inspiring that desire for God and heaven of which saints are the first bearers.

He affirmed: “The Good Lord knows all. Even before you confess, he already knows that you will sin again, and yet, he still pardons you.
How great is the love of our God, who goes so far as to voluntarily forget the future in order to pardon us!” (Monnin A., Il Curato d’Ars. Vita di Gian-Battista-Maria Vianney, vol. I, Torino 1870, p. 130).

It is the task of the priest to favor the experience of that ‘dialog of salvation’, which, born of the certainty that one is loved by God, aids man to recognize his own sin and to introduce himself progressively, in that stable dynamic of the conversion of the heart, which leads to radical renunciation of evil and towards a life according to God (cfr Catechism of the Catholic Church, No. 1431).

Dear friends, what an extraordinary ministry the Lord has entrusted to us! Just as in the Eucharistic Celebration, He places himself in the hands of the priest in order to continue to be present in the midst of his people, analogously, in the Sacrament of Reconciliation, he entrusts himself ideally to the priest so that men may experience the embrace with which the father welcomed back the prodigal son, giving him back once more his filial dignity, and reconstituting him fully as an heir (cfr Lk 15,11-32).

May the Virgin Mary and the Holy Cure of Ars help us to experience in our life the breadth, the height and the depth of God’s love (cfr Ef 3,18-19), in order to be his faithful and generous administrators. I thank you all and gladly impart my Apostolic Blessing.

---

The Pope's day in Turin
Translated from the official site
of the Shroud of Turin

March 11, 2010


The Archbishop of Turin, Cardinal Severino Poletto, announced today the program for the Pope's visit to Turin on Sunday, May 2, during the Exposition of the Holy Shroud which starts in early April.

Cardinal Poletto's full statement:

---

As I renew my appreciation to the Holy Father Benedict XVI for having accepted the invitation from me and the city authorities to come to Turin for a pastoral visit on the occasion of the solemn Exposition of the Shroud, I am now able to announce, with the approval of the Pontifical Household, to communicate the official program of the Pastoral Visit that the Holy Father will be making on Sunday, May 2, 2010.

PROGRAM FOR THE HOLY FATHER'S PASTORAL VISIT

TORINO, May 2, 2010

09.15 The Pope arrives at Caselle airport
He will proceed directly by car to Piazza San Carlo in Torino for the Eucharistic Celebration.

09.45 The Pope meets the faithful.
- Greeting from the mayor of Torino, the Hon. Sergio Champarino, and from Cardinal Poletto.
The Pope will then prepare himself for Mass.

10:00 Solemn Eucharistic Concelebration presided by the Holy Father with cardinals, bishops and priests.
- Homily by the Holy Father

12:00 The Pope leads the Regina Caeli
- Reflection by the Holy Father

12.30 The Pope proceeds to the Archbishop's Residence by car.

13.30 Lunch with the Bishops of Piedmont region, at the Archbishop's Residence.

16.15 The Pope leaves the Archbishop's Residence by car for Piazza San Carlo.

16.30 Encounter with the youth, Piazza San Carlo
- Greeting from Cardinal Poletto and two youth representatives.
- Address by the Holy Father

17.15 The Pope proceeds by car to the Cathedral

17.30 The Pope arrives at the Cathedral.
- Adoration at the Chapel of the Most Blessed Sacrament.
- Veneration of the Shroud
- Meditation by the Holy Father on the theme 'Passio Christi, Passio hominis'
- The Holy Father greets the organizers of the Exposition.
Cloistered nuns from the city's monasteries will also be at the Cathedral.

18.15 The Pope leaves the Cathedral by car for the Piccola Casa del Cotolengo.

18.30 Visit at the Piccola Casa
- Greeting from by Fr. Aldo Sarotto, Superior General of the Cotolengo family.
- Address by the Holy Father
- Meeting with a group of patients in the church of Cotolengo

19:00 The Pope leaves Torino by car for Caselle airport

19.30 Departure from Caselle airport
- The Pope will be seen off by the authorities who welcomed him in the morning

20:30 Arrival in Rome's Ciampino airport


I ask everyone during this period of awaiting the Holy Father to pray for him and his intentions. In order to show unity and communion with the Holy Father and in order to facilitate the participation of priests and faithful at the Papal Mass, there will be no other Masses celebrated at that time within the Archdiocese.

I am sure that the Pastoral Visit of Benedict XVI to our city and diocese will mark a new and glorious page in the rich history of faith of our Church in Torino.

Let us make sure that our numerous and warm presence at the meetings scheduled with the Pope will be the sign of our affection and sincere communion with his person and his Magisterium.


CARDINAL SEVERINO POLETTO
Archbishop of Torino

---

Heike, good news! That lengthy KathNet article by Bishop Mueller the other day that I have not found time to translate is finally on the site of the Diocese of Regensburg in French, English and Italian.

It really is a great general presentation of the issue that every diocese should use or adopt to their local conditions. I am posting it first on this thread for thematic continuity in presenting the major pastoral issue confronting the Pope today.


'Sexual abuse' and
its anti-Catholic instrumentalisation
by Prof. Dr. Gerhard Ludwig Müller
Bishop of Regensburg

March 11, 2010


The reprehensibility of sexual abuse

1. The sexual assault of children and young people is a disgraceful infringement of their personal dignity. From a theological perspective it is an instance of severe guilt, a sin that brings with it exclusion from the Kingdom of God (1Cor. 6, 9-10). In terms of state law the sexual abuse of adolescents is a criminal offence carrying a penalty of up to ten years’ imprisonment.

2. State and Church jurisdiction in dealing with the perpetrator and the victim are to be seen as strictly separate.

3. As a state citizen the perpetrator is subject to civil and criminal law. Hence the establishment of the facts, the penalty, the carrying out of the sentence and the surveillance of the conditions of probation are the sole responsibility of the relevant state institutions.

4. Should the perpetrators be individuals employed in the service of the Church (clerics, members of religious orders or laypeople) then the Church penalty is to be established in accordance with court guidelines and conditions as well as on the basis of expert therapeutic assessment. The Church penalty extends from the severe restriction of pastoral duties through to permanent removal from the service of the Church.

5. The victim is owed a demonstration of profound remorse on the part of the perpetrator for the physical and emotional injury caused. There is also the fulfilment of the court conditions and penalty, such as the payment of compensation or the costs of therapy.

6. If the perpetrator was employed in the service of the Church, the dioceses or the relevant Church institutions must provide an offer of pastoral and therapeutic help through committees created especially for this purpose, as well as through the facilities of the Caritas association and the Catholic Youth Welfare who provide support and guidance for the victims of sexual abuse at the hands of all groups of offenders.

Anti-Catholic campaigns

7. The SPIEGEL’s leading story “Holier-Than-Thou. The Catholic Church and Sex” has again triggered an anti-Catholic media avalanche. We are dealing here with the abuse of the sexual misdemeanours of specific individuals for political and ideological purposes.

The intention is quite simply to present the whole of the Catholic Church and its sexual morals as a “biotope” in which child abuse simply “has to” flourish.

The SPIEGEL is guilty of infringing on the human dignity (cf. also Art.1 of the German Constitution) of all Catholic priests and members of religious orders.

The attribution, in contradiction to all logic and statistical findings, of the sexual abuse of children by specific individuals to the sexual morals of the Church and to voluntary commitment to a life of celibacy in the service of the Kingdom of God (cf. Matthew 19; 1 Cor. 7) through the celibacy of all priests or monastic vows is an insult to all honest, thinking people.

8. The endless use of anti-Catholic clichés and the revival of age-old resentments are intended to obscure the contradiction between virtual media reality and reality itself, which is always a mixture of light and shadow (legenda negra).

There is a risk that today’s “media faithful” aquire the firm opinion that it must be true if “it’s in the newspaper”. The abuse of the freedom of the press can no longer be differentiated from a defamation licence allowing those individuals and religious communities not subscribing to the totalitarian power claims of neo-atheists and the relativist dictatorship to be robbed of their honour and dignity in an apparently legal manner.

9. In the context of the periodic media campaigns against celibacy and Catholic sexual morals, even the Süddeutsche Zeitung cites the infamous speech by the master of sedition held in Berlin’s Deutschlandhalle in 1937.

Thousands of Catholic priests and members of religious orders were systematically degraded and criminalised as celibacy-impaired, sexually perverse subjects in front of 20,000 fanatical [Nazi] party members with the intention of exposing the Catholic clergy to public contempt.

“Collective responsibility” was the means to the end. It was not the (actual or falsely accused) perpetrator named XY who was guilty, but the whole of the priesthood to which he belonged or in fact the Catholic Church “system”.

Theological and Historical Background

10. In times of religious and cultural conflict Christians rely on the Holy Spirit as “their counsellor and teacher” (John 14, 26) to help them test the spirits that are from God.

The hatred against the Church, however, reveals the difference between the true and the false prophets in the Church. For the Holy Spirit taught the disciples and reminded them of all that Jesus had said to them: “Blessed are you when men hate you and when they exclude you and insult you and reject your name as evil, because of the Son of Man. (...) For that is how their fathers treated the prophets (...) Woe to you when all men speak well of you, for that is how their fathers treated the false prophets.” (Luke 6, 22-26).

11. The dogmatist agnosticism towards the acknowledgement of God’s self-revelation constantly invokes (with an element of self-betrayal) “weakness”, i.e. in the face of reason limited by transcendence.

This creates an image of man restricted to an immanent, materialistic horizon. There is no place for free will, moral responsibility and personal conscience within this naturalistic fallacy. Man as no more than a plaything at the mercy of his passions and appetites that somehow have to be rendered socially acceptable with the intention of the greatest possible damage limitation. This cynical approach makes a positive and optimistic view of human corporeality and sexuality impossible.

12. This disregards the extent of human reason which is able to see God’s eternal power and divinity in Creation itself (cf. Romans 1, 20) and which has fundamental philanthropic demands written into the conscience of every human being (cf. Romans 2,26).

Ethics based on reason are possible and universal. We ought to remain optimistic despite all the talk of the weakness of reason: “For the Spirit helps us in our weakness” (Romans 8, 26), even the weak reason of the neo-atheists and the will of the hedonists. “Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free” (John 8, 32) applies to them too.

Human sexuality from the holistic
perspective of Christian anthropology

13. The reduction of sexual appetite to a material, mechanical act contradicts the holistic view of Man as a personal unity comprising body, soul and spirit and his incorporation within the community for which he assumes responsibility. With the help of the Holy Spirit all human beings are themselves able to make the conscious decision freely in favour of personal love.

14. Catholic sexual morals are characterised by a holistic image of mankind. Mankind was created by God as man and woman and personal love is therefore the determining element in the community of body and life between marriage partners.

Founded in the order of creation, marriage between a man and a woman participates as a marriage among Christians in the sacramental unity of Christ and the Church which it also symbolizes. It is the origin of the family as the community of father and mother with their sons and daughters.

15. Renunciation of marriage and a life of sexual abstinence are possible and livable when based on free choice and when this celibate way of life is adopted for the cause of service to the Kingdom of God as a charismatic calling. Jesus himself provides the explanation of this: “Not everyone can accept this word, but only those to whom it has been given.... The ones who can accept this should accept it” (Matthew 19,11ff).





Mueller says priestly celibacy
isn't root cause for sex abuses
Adapted and translated from

March 11, 2010

Bishop Mueller was one of the speakers at the opening day today of the International Theological Convention on the priesthood at the Pontifical Lateran University.

He spoke on 'The priest in today's culture'. [The full text of his lecture is on the annussacerdotalis.org site but only in German.]

Answering journalists' questions later, told them it was 'stupid' to hypothesize that priestly celibacy is the root cause of pedophilia in priests, and that therefore, there was no reason for the Church to reconsider celibacy for priests.

He also underscored that any priest shown to have been guilty of sexual abuse of minors cannot continue to be priests, namely, to carry out the priest's role as 'representative of Christ".

Convention participants will meet Benedict XVI Friday at the Apostolic Palace.


An extensive report from Reuters leads off with a very pertinent point made by Bishop Mueller that one can only wish all bishops everywhere kept in mind. They want to exerise authority? This is one of the most crucial areas that they can and should exercise maximum authority but have not usually done so:


We don't need the Pope
to fix abuse, Bishop Mueller says
by Antonio Denti and Gabriele Pileri




VATICAN CITY, March 11 (Reuters) - A German Catholic bishop said on Thursday the media had exaggerated a child abuse scandal in his diocese and there was no need to involve the Pope.

A day before a meeting between Pope Benedict and the head of the German Bishops Conference in the Vatican, Bishop Gerhard Mueller of Regensburg said the Church would offer counselling to victims of priestly abuse but most of these cases were old.

"A lot of this is a great fuss made by mass media and we have other problems in Germany at the moment," Mueller told journalists at the Vatican. "Besides, there is no need to act because those are cases in the past."

"We can't turn back the clock but our main task is to offer justice to the victims from that time."

Reports last month of over 100 cases of abuse at Jesuit schools sparked outrage in Gemany. They have been followed by accusations of beating and paedophilia at three Catholic schools in Bavaria, including one linked to the prestigious Regensburg choir run by the Pope's brother from 1964-1994.

Archbishop Robert Zollitsch, due for annual talks with the Pope on Friday, has admitted German bishops initially under-estimated the problem. They have since vowed to cooperate with investigators and urged those responsible to come forward.

"The Holy Father does not need to be called for help because we as the Church and we as the German bishops are perfectly capable of dealing with this situation," Mueller said. [That's the spirit!]

With allegations of abuse multiplying in Austria and the Netherlands, Vatican spokesman Father Federico Lombardi acknowledged this week the "gravity of the crisis the Church is undergoing".

The allegations follow years of damaging scandals in Ireland and the United States. The U.S. Church has paid some $2 billion in settlements since 1992, bankrupting some dioceses, while Irish victims have called for 1 billion euros ($1.36 billion) in compensation.

The Murphy report commissioned by the Irish government found that the Church concealed abuse in the Dublin archdiocese from 1975 to 2004. On Monday, Germany's justice minister accused the Vatican of covering up the scandals there.

Regensburg, where the Pope taught theology at the university from 1969 to 1977, said on Wednesday it had appointed a lawyer to investigate abuse cases from the 1950s and 1960s.

Mueller defended the Pope's brother, Rev. Georg Ratzinger, 86, who has acknowledged he slapped pupils in the face to discipline them but has denied any knowledge of sexual abuse.

"A smack used as a punishment has nothing to do with sexual abuse. These were educational methods used all over Europe," Mueller said. "For us, sexually abusing children is a serious sin and it is a crime."

In Austria, however, accusations of clerical abuse continue to grow. Former pupils of the Kremsmuenster Abbey told media that three of their Benedictine monk teachers committed sexual abuse on children and beat them during the 1980s.

More alleged cases of abuse were reported in two other regions from former students at religious institutions.

Helpline services in the Salzburg province, where an arch-abbot resigned on Monday after confessing to abusing a boy 40 years ago, said they were planning to increase their capacity to cope with an influx of calls.

The scandal has stirred a debate within the Church about sexual ethics. An opinion article in the Vatican newspaper L'Osservatore Romano suggested a greater female presence in the Church hierarchy might have helped remove the "veil of masculine secrecy" that concealed priestly abuse.

Vienna Cardinal Christoph Schoenborn has also called for the Church to openly discuss taboo issues such as celibacy, priestly training and more liberal social attitudes to sex.

Friday, March 12

Center photo: Bl. Angela's urn at the Franciscan church in Cracow.
ST. ANIELA (Angela) SALAWA (Poland, 1881-1922), Lay Franciscan
The eleventh of 12th children in a poor family of rural Poland, she received rudimentary education
and by age 15, was working as a domestic for a farm family where she tended children and cows.
Three years later, she moved to Cracow where one of her sisters lived (and died shortly after
she arrived). She began what she would be doing the rest of her life - as a household domestic.
She joined the local Association of St. Zita, the Italian patron of domestics, and helped instruct
other domestic workers. Always very pious, she was an intense reader of the mystics Teresa of
Avila and John of the Cross and was devoted to the Blessed Sacrament. In 1911, she was
diagnosed with an illness which would eventually lead to her death, In 1912, she joined the
Third Order of St. Francis (for laymen). During World War I, she volunteered to care for wounded
soldiers and POWs in Cracow. By the end of the war, her health had deteriorated, so in 1918,
she gave up her last job and retreated to an attic where she lived for another four years, in close
contact with her confessor who encouraged her to write down her mystical experiences. John Paul II
beatified her in Cracow in 1991, when her remains were transferred from the city cemetery to the
Church of the Conventual Franciscans.
Readings for today's Mass: www.usccb.org/nab/readings/031210.shtml


OR today.

Meeting with participants of a Vatican course for confessors,
Pope urges them to preach the mercy of God in the confessional:
'Only those who ask to be forgiven can forgive'
Other Page 1 stories: an essay 'Chinese roulette' looks at China's delicate game of chance between pursuing
internal development and world leadership; the UN reports that almost half of international aid to Africa -
about $200 million last year - is diverted to other purposes including arming rebel groups; a teaser for a
selection of four excerpts in the inside pages from lectures delivered yesterday at the March 11-12 Lateran
University theological convention on the priesthood; and an essay on Indian miniature paintings by the
Rajput warrior culture which opposes the Muslim Mogul dynasties in the 17th-19th centuries.


THE POPE'S DAY

The Holy Father began the day by attending the second Lenten sermon at the Redemptoris Mater chapel by
Fr. Raniero Cantalamessa, preacher of the Pontifical Household.

Later he met with

- Bishops of Sudan (Group 2) on ad-limina visit

- Mons. Robert Zollitsch, Archbishop of Freiburg and president of the German bishops conference

- Participants in the International Theological Convention on the priesthood, sponsored by the
Congregation for the Clergy. Address in Italian.

In the afternoon, he met with

- Cardinal William Joseph Levada, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (weekly meeting)



The Vatican today released this statement on the Pope's summer vacation. So, my surmise was right...

Pope will spend all summer
in Castel Gandolfo
Translated from

March 12, 2010

---

This summer, the Holy Father will proceed directly to Castel Gandolfo where he will spend the entire season. He appreciates the invitations received this year from Alpine localities to spend a few weeks this summer and has thanked all the bishops who presented these invitations, but this year he prefers to start his summer rest and study period without having to travel beyond Castel Gandolfo.

---

One obvious advantage and immediate implication of this decision is that his brother will be able to join him earlier for the summer.

Pope meets German bishops' president
on sexual abuse crisis

As widely anticipated, Pope Benedict XVI met today with Mons. Robert Zollitsch, Archbishop of Freiburg and president of the German bishops' conference (DBK) who reported on what the German Church has done so far with respect to the disclosure of sexual abuses committed by priests in various German schools and dioceses.





The Vatican has not issued a statement about the meeting, but immediately afterwards, Mons. Zollitsch held a news conference at the German College within the Vatican grounds.



Here is the first available Engish language report on Mons. Zollitsch's press conference:

Mons. Zollitsch reiterates
apology to abuse victims



VATICAN CITY, March 12 (AFP) - The head of Germany's Roman Catholic Church issued a new apology to victims of paedophile priests after he met the Pope Friday and announced the creation of a watchdog to deal with the abuse issue.

"I want to repeat here in Rome the apology that I made two weeks ago," Archbishop Robert Zollitsch of Freiburg told a news conference in the Vatican after meeting Pope Benedict XVI.

Zollitsch said the Pope had praised "the steps taken by the German Bishops Conference (including) the naming of a bishop as a special counsel" who would act as a watchdog on the issue of the sexual abuse of children.

Paedophile priest scandals have swept Germany since late January, one coming close to the Pontiff's brother Georg Ratzinger, a former choirmaster.

On February 22, Zollitsch said he was "deeply shocked" by the scandals and asked for victims' forgiveness.

"Sexual abuse of minors is always a heinous crime. I want to associate myself with this statement from Pope Benedict and apologise to all those who were a victim of such crimes," he said then.

The tidal wave of scandals over predator priests and teachers has now engulfed 19 of Germany's 27 dioceses and are among several to have rocked the Catholic Church lately, notably in Ireland last year, and now Austria and The Netherlands as well.

Germany's shock revelations began in late January when an elite Jesuit school in Berlin admitted systematic sexual abuse of pupils by two priests in the 1970s and 1980s.

Among other boarding schools implicated is one attached to the Domspatzen ("Cathedral Sparrows"), Regensburg cathedral's thousand-year-old choir which was run for 30 years by Georg Ratzinger.

On Tuesday Ratzinger, 86, said that the alleged sexual abuse in the 1950s and 1960s -- before his time -- was "never discussed".

The German government spoke out on the scandal, with Education Minister Annette Schavan saying there should be "zero tolerance" of the sexual abuse of children.

The Church has promised to shed light on all allegations, even those that are decades old.


Mons. Zollitsch: 'Pope dismayed
at clerical abuse scandal'



VATICAN CITY, March 12 (AP) — Germany’s top bishop briefed Pope Benedict XVI on the spiraling cases of clerical sex abuse in the Pontiff’s native Germany on Friday and said the Pope encouraged him to pursue the truth and assist the victims.

Archbishop Robert Zollitsch said the Pope was "greatly dismayed" and "deeply moved" as he was being briefed on the scandal during his 45-minute private audience in the Vatican. Zollitsch said he briefed the Pope in particular on the measures being taken so far to confront the scandal.

"The Holy Father was very satisfied with our decisions," Zollitsch told a press conference after the meeting.

At least 170 former students from Catholic schools in Germany have come forward recently with claims of physical and sexual abuse, including at an all-boys choir once led by the Pope’s brother.

Zollitsch also said he briefed the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith on measures implemented in Germany, and that the Vatican is considering a set of universal norms to deal with cases of clerical sex abuse.

"I’m grateful for the encouragement he (Benedict) gave me to continue carrying out our measures in a decisive and courageous way," he said.

Benedict hasn’t commented on the German scandal himself. But he decried the sexual abuse of children as a "heinous crime" after he summoned Irish bishops to Rome last month to discuss the even more widespread scandal in the Irish church.

In addition to the cases in Germany and Ireland, three retired priests at a Catholic school in Austria were relieved of their clerical duties this week after allegations of physical and sexual abuse emerged. Two other priests in Austria have resigned amid similar allegations.

And in the Netherlands, Catholic bishops announced an independent inquiry into more than 200 allegations of sexual abuse of children by priests at church schools and apologized to victims.

But of all the European scandals, the German abuse allegations are particularly sensitive because Germany is Benedict’s homeland, where he served as archbishop of Munich from 1977 to 1982, and because the scandals involve the prestigious choir that was led by his brother, Georg Ratzinger, from 1964 until 1994.

Zollitsch said he and Benedict did not discuss the allegations surrounding the Pontiff’s brother. [Regensburg Bishop Ludwig Mueller is in Rome this week as a participant in the International Theological Convention on the priesthood, whose participants met the Pope at noon today. It is conceivable that the Pope would have met with him privately afterwards on the Regensburg cases.]

Ratzinger has repeatedly said the sexual abuse allegations date from before his tenure as choir director and that he never heard of them, although he acknowledged slapping pupils as punishment.

According to a poll conducted by the Emnid institute for N24 television, a full 86 percent of Germans contend the Roman Catholic Church has failed to do enough to explain the allegations of abuse in Church-run schools and institutions. Only 10 percent of the 1,000 people polled on March 10 felt the church was doing enough.

Also, 68 percent of those polled say the abuse scandal has raised their criticism of the Church’s educational abilities, while 28 percent still trust the Church to teach their children.

Bishop Stephan Ackermann, who has been appointed by the Church to handle abuse allegations in Germany, said that he would also follow up on any charges against bishops.

"Bishops or parishes that are not cooperative will be asked for information," Ackermann said Thursday on ZDF television.


Mons. Zollitsch after his news conference:




So far, the Italian newspaper Il Velino has the most comprehensive report on Mons. Zollitsch's news conference with extensive quotations. I hope to translate soon. All the principal language service of Vatican Radio have narrative accounts (i.e., not limited to audio excerpts that one would have to listen to and transcribe).

Pope says priests must adhere
completely to Christ and the Church

March 12, 2010



An International Theological Convention with the theme 'Faithfulness of Christ, Faithfulness of the Priest'took place at the Pontifical Lateran Unviersity March 11-12 under the sponsorhip of the Congregation for the Clergy.

At 12:15 Friday morning, the Holy Father received the convention participants in the Aula della Benedizione of St. Peter's Basilica, during which he addressed them in Italian. Here is a translation of the address:

---

Eminent Cardinals.
Dear brothers in the Episcopate and Priesthood,
Distinguished Convention Participants:

I am happy to meet you on this particular occasion, and I greet everyone with affection. A special thought for Cardinal Claudio Hummes, prefect of the Congregation for the Clergy, whom I thank for the words he addressed to me.

My thanks to the entire dicastery for its efforts in coordinating the multiple initiatives of the Year for Priests, such as this theological convention on the theme "The faithfulness of Christ, the faithfulness of the priest". I rejoice at this initiative which has the participation of more than 50 bishops and more than 500 priests, many of you national or diocesan offials responsible for the clergy and for continuing formation of the clergy.

Your attention to topics regarding the ministerial priesthood is one of the results of this special Year that I decreed precisely to "promote the commitment to interior renewal of all priests towards a stronger and more incisive evangelical testimony in today's world (Letter decreeing the Year for Priests).

The topic of priestly identity, which was the objective of your first day of study, is decisive for the exercise of the ministerial priesthood now and in the future. In a time like ours, which is so 'polycentric' and which tends to blur every type of identity concept - considered by many to be contrary to freedom and democracy - it is important to be very clear about the theological specificity of the ordained ministry, in order not to yield to the temptation of reducing it to the prevailing cultural categories.

In the context of widespread secularization, which is progressively excluding God from the public sphere, and trending even to his exclusion from the collective social consciousness, the priest often appears 'extraneous' to common sense, precisely for the most fundamental aspects of his ministry, such as being a man of the sacred, removed from the world in order to intercede for the world, constituted in this mission by God and not by men (cfr Heb 5,1).

For this reason, it is important to overcome dangerous reductionisms that in past decades, have presented the priest as almost a 'social worker', risking betrayal of the Priesthood of Christ himself.

Just as it appears ever more urgent to apply a hermeneutic of continuity in order to adequately understand the texts of the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, analogously, a hermeneutic that we may call one of 'priestly continuity' is also needed, which starts from Jesus of Nazareth, Lord and Christ, passing through 2000 years of a history of greatness and holiness, of culture and piety, that the priesthood has written in the world, and has come down to our day.

Dear brother priests, in the times in we live, it is particularly impportant that the call to take part in the unique Priesthood of Christ through the ordained ministry may flourish in the 'charism of prophecy': there is a great need for priests who speak of God to the world and who present the world to God - men who are not subject to ephemeral cultural modes, but able to authentically live that freedom which only the certainty of belonging to God can give.

As your convention has underscored well, today the most needed prophecy is that of faithfulness, which, starting with Christ's faithfulness to mankind, through the Church and the ministerial priesthood, leads to living one's own priesthood in total adherence to Christ and to the Church.

In fact, the priest no longer belongs to himself, but, through the sacramental seal he received (cfr Catechism of the Catholic Church, Nos. 1563; 1582), becomes the 'property' of God. This quality of 'belonging to Another' should be recognizable to everyone through the priest's limpid testimony.

In how he thinks, talks, judges the facts of the world, how he serves and loves, how he relates to persons, and even in his habit, the priest should draw prophetic power from his sacramental belonging, from his profound being. Consequently, he should take every care not to place himself under the dominant mentality, which tends to associate the value of the minister not to his being but only to his function - thus misunderstanding the work of God which leaves a mark on the profound identity of the priest's person, configuring it to himself in a definitive way (cfr ibid., No, 1503).

The horizon of ontological belonging to God also constitutes the right framework for understanding and reaffirming, even in our day, the value of holy celibacy, which in the Latin Church is a charism required for Holy Orders (cfr Presbyterorum Ordinis, 16) and is held in greatest consideration by the Eastern Churches (cfr CCEO, can. 373).

It is an authentic prophecy of the Kingdom, sign of consecration with undivided heart to the Lord and to "the things of the Lord" (1Cor 7,32), an expression of the gift of oneself to God and to others (cfr Catechism of the Catholic Church, No. 1579).

Thus, that of the priest is a very high calling which remains a great mystery even for us who have received it as a gift. Our limitations and our weaknesses should lead us to live and guard with profound faith sucn a precious gift with which Christ has configured us to himself, making us participants in his salvific Mission.

In fact, understanding the ministerial priesthood is linked to faith, and calls, ever more strongly, for a radical continuity between seminary formation and continuing permanent formation. The prophetic life, without compromises, with which we serve God and the world, announcing the Gospel and celebrating the Sacraments, will favor the coming of the Kingdom of God which is already present, and the growth in faith of the People of God.

Dearest priests, the men and women of our time only ask of us to be priests to the core and nothing else. The lay faithful will find in so many other persons that which they need humanly, but it is only in the priest that they will find the Word of God which should always be on their lips (cfr Presbyterorum Ordinis, 4); the mercy of the Father, abundantly and freely given in the Sacrament of Reconciliation; the Bread of new life, 'true food given to men" (cfr Hymn of the Office on the Solemnity of Corpus Domini in the Roman Rite).

Let us ask God , through the intercession of the Blessed Virgin Mary and St. Jean Marie Vianney, to be able to thank him every day for the great gift of vocation and to live our priesthood with full and joyous faithfulness.

Thank you all for this meeting. I gladly impart to each of you the Apostolic Blessing.

---

Theologian participants express
soidarity with the Pope
in this time of trial

The Italian news agencies report that during his greeting to the Holy Father in behalf of the conference participants, Cardinal Claudio Hummes, Prefect of the Congregation for the Clergy, expressed the following:

---

"In these times which are far from easy and full of suffering for the Church and for your august person, we wish to manifest to you, Holy Father, our full solidarity, communion, support and prayer."

---

In 2000, while the wntire Christian world was marking two millennia since the birth of Christ, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith issued a declaration that became arguably the most controversial doctrinal document issued by the Church since Paul VI's Humanae Vitae.

And while everyone else in the Church was celebrating the Jubilee, Cardinal Ratzinger stood virtually alone as the target of critics, particularly from other Christian church communities - notably the evangelical denominations - besieged on all sides, as it were, but standing and defending the doctrinal ground by himself.

It is remarkable that the attacks on Dominus Iesus were almost a direct personal assault on Cardinal Ratzinger, as though he alone were responsible for the declaration, as if John Paul II had not ratified the Declaration before it was issued!

And yet, it was a necessary reminder in the Jubilee Year of the uniqueness of the Catholic Church as the one true Church of Christ, against the false 'ecumenical and inter-religious' relativistic concept that was becoming entrenched after Vatican-II, namely, "that each religion is just as good as any other" - a misreading of the Council's concepts of ecumenism and inter-religious dialog as embodied in Nostra aetate


Reviewing 'Dominus Iesus'
ten years later

March 11,2010

Another significant convention in Rome this week marks the tenth anniversary of the Declaration Dominus Iesus on the singularity and salvific universality of Jesus Christ and the Catholic Church.

The document, signed by then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, as Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF), was ratified by John Paul II on June 16, 2000.

The March 11-12 convention is sponsored by the Faculty of Theology of the Pontifical University Regina Apostolorum.

Cardinal Antonio Cañizares Llovera, prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of Sacraments, delivered the introductory lecture yesterday.

Sergio Centofanti reviews the principal points of Dominus Iesus:

The declaration Dominus Iesus, often wrongly interpreted, does not intend "to treat in a systematic manner the question of the unicity and salvific universality of the mystery of Jesus Christ and the Church... but rather to set forth again the doctrine of the Catholic faith in these areas, pointing out some fundamental questions that remain open to further development, and refuting specific positions that are erroneous or ambiguous. For this reason, the Declaration takes up what has been taught in previous Magisterial documents, in order to reiterate certain truths that are part of the Church's faith.

The document begins with these words: "The Lord Jesus, before ascending into heaven, commanded his disciples to proclaim the Gospel to the whole world and to baptize all nations: “Go into the whole world and proclaim the Gospel to every creature. He who believes and is baptized will be saved; he who does not believe will be condemned” (Mk 16:15-16).

“All power in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, until the end of the world” (Mt 28:18-20; cf. Lk 24:46-48; Jn 17:18,20,21; Acts 1:8).

Thus, "The Church's universal mission is born from the command of Jesus Christ", but today, the Declaration says, " it is still far from fulfillment".

Therefore the Church echoes the cry of St. Paul: “Preaching the Gospel is not a reason for me to boast; it is a necessity laid on me: woe to me if I do not preach the Gospel!” (1 Cor 9:16).

"The Church's proclamation of Jesus Christ, 'the way, the truth, and the life' (Jn 14:6), today also makes use of the practice of inter-religious dialogue (which) certainly does not replace, but rather accompanies the missio ad gentes".

Nonetheless, "The Church's constant missionary proclamation is endangered today by relativistic theories which seek to justify religious pluralism, not only de facto but also de iure (or in principle."

That is why the Declaration reaffirms some points: above all, "the definitive and complete character of the revelation of Jesus Christ... Son of God and the only savior"; the inseparability of Christ and the Church; and the fact that "the only Church of Christ subsists in the Catholic Church, governed by the Successor of Peter and by the Bishops in communion with him".

"The Churches which, while not existing in perfect communion with the Catholic Church, remain united to her by means of the closest bonds, that is, by apostolic succession and a valid Eucharist, are true particular (local) Churches. Therefore, the Church of Christ is present and operative also in these Churches, even though they lack full communion with the Catholic Church, since they do not accept the Catholic doctrine of the Primacy, which, according to the will of God, the Bishop of Rome objectively has and exercises over the entire Church.

"On the other hand, the ecclesial communities which have not preserved the valid Episcopate and the genuine and integral substance of the Eucharistic mystery, are not Churches in the proper sense; however, those who are baptized in these communities are, by Baptism, incorporated in Christ and thus are in a certain communion, albeit imperfect, with the Church."

"It must be firmly believed that “the Church, a pilgrim now on earth', is necessary for salvation... (but) this doctrine must not be set against the universal salvific will of God (cf. 1 Tim 2:4).

Thus, "it is necessary to keep these two truths together, namely, the real possibility of salvation in Christ for all mankind and the necessity of the Church for this salvation”.

"For those who are not formally and visibly members of the Church, salvation in Christ is accessible by virtue of a grace+ [God-given 'through ways known to him alone"] which, while having a mysterious relationship to the Church, does not make them formally part of the Church, but enlightens them in a way which is accommodated to their spiritual and material situation. This grace comes from Christ; it is the result of his sacrifice and is communicated by the Holy Spirit”.

"The truth of faith does not lessen the sincere respect which the Church has for the religions of the world, but at the same time, it rules out, in a radical way, that mentality of indifferentism characterized by a religious relativism which leads to the belief that ‘one religion is as good as another'."

Certainly, the Church "rejects nothing of what is true and holy" in other religions which "not seldom reflect a ray of that truth that enlightens all mankind".

"Moreover, the salvific action of Jesus Christ, with and through his Spirit, extends beyond the visible confines of teh Church to all of mankind". Indeed, Christ died for all men and grace operates in any works "for man's liberation from evil in all its forms".

But "f it is true that the followers of other religions can receive divine grace, it is also certain that objectively speaking they are in a gravely deficient situation in comparison with those who, in the Church, have the fullness of the means of salvation. However, all the children of the Church should nevertheless remember that their exalted condition results, not from their own merits, but from the grace of Christ. If they fail to respond in thought, word, and deed to that grace, not only shall they not be saved, but they shall be more severely judged”.

The announcement of the Gospel to all men,- concludes Dominus Iesus, even in the context of inter-religious dialog, " "conserves in full, today as always, its validity and necessity" insofar as god "wants all men to be saved and to achieve knowledge of the truth" (1 Tim,2,4).

"Precisely because she believes in the universal plan of salvation, the Church must be missionary".

The concluding paragraphs of Dominus Iesus starts out by reaffirming its intention:

---

The intention of the present Declaration, in reiterating and clarifying certain truths of the faith, has been to follow the example of the Apostle Paul, who wrote to the faithful of Corinth: “I handed on to you as of first importance what I myself received” (1 Cor 15:3).

Faced with certain problematic and even erroneous propositions, theological reflection is called to reconfirm the Church's faith and to give reasons for her hope in a way that is convincing and effective.

---

The complete English text of Dominus Iesus may be found on
www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20000806_dominus-iesus...



How I welcomed this item as a respite from the all-pedophilia-all-the-time news menu these days!

Uh-oh! Here comes something the critics are likely to seize eagerly as the 'smoking gun' linking Joseph Ratzinger directly to at least one case of an abusive priest! The Munich archidocese has apparently moved right away to counteract a story that will come in tomorrow's edition of Munich's leftist Sueddeutsche Zeitung, which has never been too sympathetic to Benedict XVI, but nonetheless...


Pope's former diocese
admits error over priest
by GEIR MOULSON and NICOLE WINFIELD



BERLIN, March 12 (AP) – Pope Benedict XVI's former German diocese said Friday it made a mistake when the Pontiff was archbishop in allowing a priest suspected to have abused a child to return to pastoral work. However, it said Benedict wasn't involved in the decision.

The details came hours after Germany's top bishop briefed Pope Benedict XVI on the spiraling cases of clerical sex abuse in the pontiff's native Germany and said the Pope encouraged him to pursue the truth and assist the victims.

At the Vatican, Archbishop Robert Zollitsch said the Pope was "greatly dismayed" and "deeply moved" as he was being briefed on the scandal during his 45-minute private audience in the Vatican. Zollitsch said he briefed the pope in particular on the measures being taken so far to confront the scandal.

"The Holy Father was very satisfied with our decisions," Zollitsch told a news conference after the meeting.

In Germany, the Munich archdiocese said the chaplain was sent to Munich in 1980 for therapy. The diocese says it was made aware of the "serious errors" by the Munich-based daily Sueddeutsche Zeitung which first reported on it for its Saturday edition.

The man, identified only as H., was allowed to stay in a vicarage while undergoing therapy — a decision in which then-Archbishop Joseph Ratzinger was involved [I thought the lead paragraph said he was 'not involved'], the statement said. It said officials believe it was known the therapy was related to suspected "sexual relations with boys."

However, it says a lower-ranking official — vicar general Gerhard Gruber — then allowed him to help in pastoral work in Munich, a decision for which he takes "full responsibility."

The Vatican press office noted in a brief statement Friday evening that Gruber was assuming "full responsibility" for the transfer of the priest, after therapy, to pastoral duties. Without further comment, the statement included a link to the Munich archdiocese's statement in German.

The archdiocese says there were no accusations against the chaplain relating to his February 1980 to August 1982 spell in Munich. He then moved to nearby Grafing, but was suspended in early 1985 following accusations of sexual abuse — which the archdiocese didn't detail. The following year, he was convicted of sexually abusing minors.

The conviction resulted in an 18-month suspended prison sentence and a fine of 4,000 marks, now worth nearly $2,800, the archdiocese said.

Ratzinger was archbishop of Munich and Freising from 1977 to early 1982.

Gruber told The Associated Press by telephone Friday that he was in sole charge of staffing decisions.

"Personnel matters were delegated," Gruber said. "I decided that on my own."

Gruber also said Benedict would not have been aware of his decision because the case load was too big.

"You have to know that we had some 1,000 priests in the diocese at the time," Gruber said. "The cardinal could not deal with everything, he had to rely on his vicar general."

After his conviction, the chaplain was ordered to undergo psychotherapy, the archdiocese said. In 1986 and 1987, he was assigned to a home for seniors and was then a curate and an administrator until 2008.

At least 170 former students from Catholic schools in Germany have come forward recently with claims of physical and sexual abuse, including at an all-boys choir once led by the pope's brother.

Zollitsch also said he briefed the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith on measures implemented in Germany, and that the Vatican is considering a set of universal norms to deal with cases of clerical sex abuse.

"I'm grateful for the encouragement he (Benedict) gave me to continue carrying out our measures in a decisive and courageous way," he said.

Benedict hasn't commented on the German scandal himself. But he decried the sexual abuse of children as a "heinous crime" after he summoned Irish bishops to Rome last month to discuss the even more widespread scandal in the Irish church.

{The rest of the story repeats material identical to the AP story posted two boxes above on the Zollitsch news conference.]


[And I was quite confident that Archbishop Marx would have reviewed the records relating to the period when Cardinal Ratzinger was Archbishop well enough by this time. It's very disconcerting that it took a newspaper to unearth the case.

The circumstances as explained by the cardinal's vicar general at the time sound plausible, but the critics will cry 'Command responsibility!' and find the Cardinal culpable of 'inaction' in the face of a known case of abuse... I hope to God I am completely wrong in my suspicions about his critics!]

Look at the headline already by one of the first Anglophone news agencies to pick up the story:




The BBC's first report is surprisingly - and thankfully - circumspect:

Pope Benedict's former diocese
're-housed' abuser priest

March 12, 2010


Pope Benedict once unwittingly approved housing for a priest accused of child sex abuse, his former diocese has said.

The episode dates back to 1980 when he was archbishop of Germany's Munich and Freising diocese and known as Joseph Ratzinger.

However, a former deputy said he - not the future Pope - made the decision to re-house the priest, who later abused other children and was convicted.

Roman Catholic clergy have recently been linked to paedophilia scandals.

German Bishop Robert Zollitsch has apologised to victims of abuse. At a meeting with the German-born Pope on Friday he discussed accusations made in some 170 cases.

The Pope himself has defended celibacy among priests, saying it is a sign of "full devotion" to the Catholic Church.

Following a report in the Munich-based newspaper Sueddeutsche Zeitung, the diocese of Munich and Freising confirmed that Archbishop Ratzinger had let the priest, known only as H, stay at a vicarage in Munich for "therapy".

The repeated employment of H in priestly spiritual duties was a bad mistake, the diocesan statement said.

Gerhard Gruber, former vicar-general in Munich and Freising said
H had been suspected of forcing an 11-year-old boy to perform a sex act upon him in the northern city of Essen.

While he was in Munich, between February 1980 and August 1982, no wrongdoing was reported.

He was then transferred to the town of Grafing, where he was relieved of his duties in 1985 after allegations of child sex abuse, the diocese said.

In 1986, he was given an 18-month suspended jail sentence and a fine for sexually abusing minors, details of which were not given by the diocese.

Archbishop Ratzinger's former deputy, Gerhard Gruber, stressed that the man who now heads the Catholic Church was not made aware of H's alleged abuse history.

"The repeated employment of H in priestly spiritual duties was a bad mistake," Gerhard Gruber said in a statement.

"I assume all responsibility."

Speaking to the Associated Press, he added: "You have to know that we had some 1,000 priests in the diocese at the time.

"The cardinal [Joseph Ratzinger] could not deal with everything, he had to rely on his vicar-general [deputy]."

Pope Benedict made his remarks about celibacy at a theological conference in the Vatican before meeting Bishop Zollitsch.

He defended "the value of sacred celibacy, which in the Latin Church is... required for ordination and is held in great regard by Eastern Churches".

Austrian Cardinal Christoph Schoenborn had called for an examination of priestly training, saying that the issue of celibacy needed to be looked at with "a great deal of honesty, both on the part of the Church and of society as a whole".

He later clarified his comments saying it would be wrong to say that celibacy was a prime cause of sexual abuse.

"If celibacy is the problem, then without celibacy there should be no sexual abuse but unfortunately this is not the case," he said.

"It has to be seen as a question of personal maturity, how someone relates to his personal development."


I had to go the site of the Archdiocese of Munich to check out the report about the priest, and have since translated it. It's not a very tidy narration, and the facts it discloses raises more questions - though it does make clear that Cardinal Ratzinger's only direct involvement with the case was that he approved the initial decision to give him housing in a local vicarage while he underwent pscyhotherapy. It is not clear why the diocese accepted the priest, to begin with, taking him on from the Diocese of Essen at the request of Essen. I felt I should post the entire account for 'full disclosure':

---

Priest given pastoral duties
despite sexual abuse accusations
and subsequent court sentence and fine
Translated from


MUNICH, March 12, 2010. In the review of possible cases of sexual abuse in earlier decades, the Ordinariate of the Archdiocese has uncovered a serious mistake in its re-assignment of a priest to pastoral work in the diocese in the 1980s.

As indicated by Sueddeutsche Zeitung on Thursday, March 11, the work group appointed by Vicar General Peter Beer to review old cases has established that a priest from the Diocese of Essen was assigned to pastoral work by then Vicar General Gerhard Gruber despite accusations of sexual abuse and despite a subsequent verdict.

Gruber has taken full responsibility for that wrong decision. During the time of the priest’s first assignment (from February 1, 1980, to August 31, 1982), no complaint or new accusations were raised against the priest.

According to the work group’s research of the case, this is what happened:

At the request of the Diocese of Essen, priest H was taken on by the Archdiocese of Munich-Fresing in 1980 as a chaplain (assistant to a parish priest) while he was to undergo therapy.

Based on the files, the work group has determined that at the time, the therapy was presumed to be related to improper sexual relationships with minors. In 1980, it was decided to allow H to stay in a vicarage while he underwent therapy. This decision was approved by the Archbishop at that time [Cardinal Ratzinger].

Deviating from that decision, H was assigned by the then Vicar General to be a parish assistant in a Munich parish. During that time (February 1, 1980, to August 31, 1982), no complaints or accusations were made against H.

Subsequently, from September 1982 to the start of 1985, H served as parish assistant in Grafing. However, after receipt of policce information about his record of sexual abuse, he was given a written dismissal from service on January 29, 1985.

In June 1986, H was sentenced by a court in Ebersberg for sexual abuse to a suspended sentence of 18 months in prison and a fine of 4000 marks. The probationary period was for five years. He was also advised by the court to undergo psychotherapy.

[So he was reassigned to pastoral work even after he was sentenced!]

From November 1986 to October 1987, H was assigned as curate in an old people’s home. Subsequently, he served until September 2008 in Garching/Alz (a different commune), first as curate and then as parish administrator.

His re-employment in pastoral positions was apparently decided on the basis of the relatively mild punishment he received from the Ebersburg court and the attestations of his treating psychologist.

Since the judgment in 1986, the Archdiocese has received no reports of further misbehavior.

However, since October 2008, he was reassigned to work in the field of tourism and health cures (spas), on the condition that he must not perform any work with children and youth. In the view of the archdiocese, a forensic appraisal report ordered by the new Archbishop Reinhard Marx justified that H could not remain in parish work.

The Vicar General in the 1980s who had re-assigned H has given this statement: “Reassigning H to a parish was a serious mistake. I take full responsibility for it. I regret most deeply that this decision enabled him to be in contact with young people, and I apologize to all who suffered harm from this”.

---

Other than great relief that Cardinal Ratzinger's involvement in this case was at the very beginning and that according to this report, he only authorized giving him accommodation, as requested by the Diocese of Essen, I find the rest of the story troubling because it replicates the now familiar story of dioceses re-assigning known sex offenders to pastoral work. Critics of the Church - especially in the US and Ireland - can go to town on the basis of this story because it appears to prove their point that dioceses are too accommodating with known sex offenders. This is particularly sensitive to those like me who live in the United States, where everyday, there are multiple stories of children or young women killed by repeat sex offenders who were let off too lightly by judges or who were not properly monitored as convicted sex offenders after they get free.


Well, it didn't take long...AP has filed a second version of its report on this case, and already the story contains the main elements of the predictable exploitation of the Munich story by the Pope's enemies:

Pope under fire for transfer and
2001 document on sex abuse
By NICOLE WINFIELD



VATICAN CITY, March 12 (AP) — Germany's sex abuse scandal has now reached Pope Benedict XVI: His former archdiocese acknowledged it transferred a suspected pedophile priest while Benedict was in charge and criticism is mounting over a 2001 Vatican directive he penned instructing bishops to keep abuse cases secret.

The revelations have put the spotlight on Benedict's handling of abuse claims both when he was archbishop of Munich from 1977-1982 and then the prefect of the Vatican office that deals with such crimes — a position he held until his 2005 election as Pope.

Benedict got a firsthand readout of the scope of the scandal Friday in his native land from the head of the German Bishop's Conference, Archbishop Robert Zollitsch, who reported that the pontiff had expressed "great dismay and deep shock" over the scandal, but encouraged bishops to continue searching for the truth.

Hours later, the Munich archdiocese admitted that it had allowed a priest suspected of having abused a child to return to pastoral work in the 1980s, while Benedict was archbishop. It stressed that the former Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger didn't know about the transfer and that it had been decided by a lower-ranking official.

The archdiocese said there were no accusations against the chaplain, identified only as H., during his 1980-1982 spell in Munich, where he underwent therapy for suspected "sexual relations with boys." [This was not in the diocesan statement.] But he then moved to nearby Grafing, where he was suspended in early 1985 following new accusations of sexual abuse. The following year, he was convicted of sexually abusing minors.

The Vatican spokesman, the Rev. Federico Lombardi, issued a statement late Friday noting that the Munich vicar-general who approved the priest's transfer had taken "full responsibility" for the decision, seeking to remove any question about the pontiff's potential responsibility as archbishop at the time.

Victims' advocates weren't persuaded. [Of course, they wouldn't be. they have been waiting for this to play GOTCHA! in the nastiest ways.]

"We find it extraordinarily hard to believe that Ratzinger didn't reassign the predator, or know about the reassignment," said Barbara Blaine, president and founder of SNAP, Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests.

The Pope, meanwhile, continues to be under fire for a 2001 Vatican letter he sent to all bishops advising them that all cases of sexual abuse of minors must be forwarded to his then-office, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, and that the cases were to be subject to pontifical secret. [THIS IS AN OUTRIGHT FALSITY! And Winfield, a Vatican veteran reporter, is committing a deliberate error of omission by fialing to explain exactly what were the main provisions of the 2001 letter and why the CDF became involved, nor its relation to the US revelations that had occupied the world media at that time.]

Germany's justice minister, Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger, has cited the document as evidence that the Vatican created a "wall of silence" around abuse cases that prevented prosecution. Irish bishops have said the document had been "widely misunderstood" by the bishops themselves to mean they shouldn't go to police. And lawyers for abuse victims in the United States have cited the document in arguing that the Catholic Church tried to obstruct justice. {Yeah, each of them trying to place the 2001 letter in the worst possible light now. Perhaps they should look back at the news reports of the time and see how, in the context of what was happening in the US, the CDF letter was welcomed as a possible game-changer.]'

But canon lawyers insisted Friday that there was nothing in the document that would preclude bishops from fulfilling their moral and civic duties of going to police when confronted with a case of child abuse.

They stressed that the document merely concerned procedures for handling the church trial of an accused priest, and that the secrecy required by Rome for thathearing by no means extended to a ban on reporting such crimes to civil authorities.

"Canon law concerning grave crimes ... doesn't in any way interfere with or diminish the obligations of the faithful to civil laws," said Monsignor Davide Cito, a professor of canon law at Rome's Santa Croce University.

The letter doesn't tell bishops to also report the crimes to police. [Does any citizen need to be told that? You've got to be kidding. A Church document spells out what the Church intends for its own internal purposes - it is not meant to be a civil primer, as well. In any case, as Massimo Introvigne shrewdly pointed out in 2006, the Catechism of the Catholic Church itself provides that it is the duty of every Catholic to be agood citizen and to report crimes and cooperate with civilian authorities.]

But the Rev. John Coughlin, a law professor at the University of Notre Dame Law School, said it didn't need to. A general principle of moral theology to which every bishop should adhere is that church officials are obliged to follow civil laws where they live, he said. [BUT ALL IT TAKES IS COMMON SENSE, RIGHT? How on earth did these bishops get to be bishops anyway?]

Yet Bishop John McAreavey of Dromore in Northern Ireland, told a news conference this week that Irish bishops "widely misinterpreted" the directive and couldn't get a clear reading from Rome on how to proceed.

"One of the difficulties that bishops expressed was the fact that at times it wasn't always possible to get clear guidance from the Holy See and there wasn't always a consistent approach within the different Vatican departments," he said. [GOD SAVE US from bishops like these!]

"Obviously, Rome is aware of this misinterpretation and the harm that this has done, or could potentially do, to the trust that the people have in how the church deals with these matters," he said.

An Irish government-authorized investigation into the scandal and cover up harshly criticized the Vatican for its mixed messages and insistence on secrecy in the 2001 directive and previous Vatican documents on the topic.

"An obligation to secrecy/confidentialtiy on the part of participants in a canonical process [WHICH IS NO DIFFERENT FROM AN OBLIGATION TO CONFIDENTIALITY IN CIVILIAN CASES THAT ARE UNDER INVESTIGATION ADN ADJUDICATION!] could undoubtedly constitute an inhibition on reporting child sexual abuse to the civil authorities or others," it concluded.

In the United States, Dan Shea, an attorney for several victims, has introduced the Ratzinger letter in court as evidence that the church was trying to obstruct justice. He has argued that the church impeded civil reporting by keeping the cases secret and "reserving" them for the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. [MORON! The 'reserving' was to make sure the CDF handles the complaints instead of the diocesan bishops, many of whom had covered up for their offending priests.]

"This is an international criminal conspiracy to obstruct justice," Shea told The Associated Press. [And the Associated Press cannot add a single statement to say that "Actually this is what the letter meant by 'reserving' for the CDF..." My God, having to deal with this utter incompetence and disregard for journalistic objectivity in the news that's being fed to the gullible public mind is almost as morally adn ethically reprehensible as a priest taking advantage of minors!]

The revelations out of Munich yesterday are necessarily getting prominent play in the European newspapers today. For the record, here is how the most hostile anti-Church newspaper in Italy reports the Munich revelations in its issue of 3/13/10. I am reproducing the headlines and subtitles as they appear.

So, despite at least two places in the story where the writer affirms the 'complete non-involvement' of Archbishop Ratzinger in the fact that a priest offender from another diocese was given a pastoral assignment, the headline and subtitle - which I am translating as is - are ambiguous enough to suggest something questionable:

PEDOPHILIA: THE SCANDAL REACHES THE POPE
IN HIS DIOCESE, A CONVICTED PRIEST
The press: A case in Munich when he was Archbishop
by our correspondent
ANDREA TARQUINI
Translated from


BERLIN – Pedophiles disguised as priests turn up everywhere and succeed in deceiving even the finest minds such as that of then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, and to escape their attentive and rigorous surveillance. [Not applicable to the case referred to since apparently, as this story says later, the then Archbishop of Munich was not provided with negative nformation about the priest offender, in the one decision he made about him.].

The revelation that originated on the site of Sueddeutsche Zeitung is alarming and scandalous: In the years when the present Pope was Archbishop of Munich and Freising - the most important in Catholic Bavaria – he admitted to pastoral service a pedophile priest who had a record of violating children. [He did not - At the request of the Diocese of Essen, he approved the priest's residing in a local vicarage during therapy.]

And in Bavaria, the ex-offender eventually lapsed again, according to the authoritative Munich newspaper. He is still serving as a priest in some part of Upper Bavaria.

The reaction of the Holy See was immediate. As explained by the spokesman, Fr. Federico Lombardi, a statement on the site of the Archdiocese of Munich presents a clear account.

The priest offender, referred to as H, was accepted by the Church in Bavaria [at the request of the Diocese of Essen] and assigned to a parish residence to allow him to undergo psychotherapy for pedophile tendencies.

But, without the knowledge of the then Archbishop Ratzinger, his vicar general for the archdiocese, Gerhard Gruber, decided to admit H to full pastoral service in contact with the faithful, not excluding children and minors.

“I commtted a serious error, but I take full responsibility,” ex-Vicar Gruber said yesterday, now 81. “I regret profoundly that because of my decision at the time, other young people were violated. I apologize to all the victims”.

Joseph Ratzinger therefore did not know because he was not informed by his subordinates as they should have. The decision to readmit H to pastoral service (i.e., daily contact with the faithful, even with nmnors) was taken by Gruber alone.

Sueddeutsche Zeitung writes: “Gruber decided on his own, and then, after the fact – according to the spokesman of the Archdiocese of Munich, Bernhard Kellner – provided Cardinal Ratzinger with generic documents regarding recent diocesan assignments. In which there was no mention of the criminal past of H. There is no certainty that Ratzinger ever saw the full dossier on H."
 
The offenses were serious, and therefore the case is ‘hot’, although everything indicates a total non-involvement and innocence on the part of the future Pope.

The mysterious H was censured in Essen, in North Rhine-Westphalia, for having forced an 11-year-old boy to practice oral sex on him. [These details are not in the Archidocesan statement, which does not provide any background at all on what H did in Essen – and apparently no one has asked Gruber exactly what information he had about H at the time he assigned him to pastoral work. If he knew these facts at the time, then his attitude would seem to be typical of the reflex reaction of prlates in those years prior to 2001 – when the Boston scandals were first disclosed – to under-estimate if not igrnore a priest’s record of sex offenses.]

The Church in Bavaria accepted H from Essen in 1980, ostensibly to undergo therapy, but then reassigned him to pastoral service. Without the knowledge or approval of Ratzinger, everyone says. [H served in this first assignment from 1980 to 1982, by which time Cardinal Ratzinger had moved to Rome. The timeline is important, as far as it concerns the caridnal's involvement in the case.]

Then, in 1986, the priest was given a suspended sentence of 18 months and a fine of 4000 marks by a Bavarian court for abuses committed on a minor. Despite this, the Church subsequently assigned him to pastoral service in another community.

The presumption of innocence and all available evidence so far indicate that the future Benedict XVI was totally not involved in the original pastoral assignment of H. [What he approved was giving him accommodation in a local vicarage while he underwent psychotherapy, as requested by the Diocese of Essen.]

But the very fact that it was possible to hide the pastoral assignment given to a priest who already had a record and was clearly a danger, casts new and heavy clouds of doubt on the credibility and image of the Catholic Church in Germany.

[The revelations came] on the very day when Benedict XVI received the president of the German bishops conference, and expressed his dismay about priests who commit crimes against children, promising full inquiries and zero tolerance for all such cases.


[As I noted earlier, the Archdiocesan account of the story raises many logical questions, but so does the reporting I have seen so far. Even the account of H's pastoral itinerary in Bavaria after that initial assignemnt - which was provided by the Archdiocesan statement - is very incomplete here.]

And here is how Andrea Tornielli reported it today:

From Germany, new poison
against the Pope
by Andrea Tornielli
Translated from

March 13, 2010

After Georg, it has come to Joseph, in the attempt to involve the Pope in the scandals over pedohpile priests.

In 1980, when Joseph Ratzinger was Archbishop of Munich and Freising, it did happen that a priest was assigned to pastoral service despite a record of sexual offense and who was later convicted for sexual offenses in Bavaria [for something that took place around 1986, when Joseph Ratzinger had been out of Bvaaria for four years.]

The story, recounted by the newspaper Sueddeutsche Zeitung, was meticulously reconstructed by the Archdiocesan Curia in Munich which had previously formed a work group to review the dicoesan files for possible cases of priest offenders.

Beneict XVI turns out to be not involved in the priest's pastoral assignment because the assignment contradicted what he had approvef for the priest.

Moreover, in the period from January 1980 to August 1982, when the said priest was in the diocese, no complaints were filed against him and no incidents reported.

I must be recalled that Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, named by John Pul II to be Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in November 1981, left Munich in February 1982 to tkae up his new position in Rome.

The priest, referred to as H, came to Munich from the Dicoese of Essen. The Munich Curia now says that "it should have been noted that the psychotherapy was for having had sexual relationships with boys". [Objectively, the first question that came to my mind reading the diocesan statement yesterday was "Would the archbishop not have asked, logically: What was the priest undergoing psycotherapy for? And why is Essen sending him to Munich for psychotherapy?" Essen surely has competent psychotherapists for this purpose!]

Moreover, the man who served as Ratzinger's vicar general at the time in Munich, Gerhard Gruber, yesterday took full responsibility for having authorized pastoral service for the priest, whereas what the Archbishop had approved was simply to allow the priest to live in a local parish residence while he underwent psychotherapy.

But "deviating from that decision", says the diocesan statement, Fr. H was assigned by the vicar general to be a pastoral assistant in a Munich parish without any limitations. From January 1980 to August 1982, there were no complaints or accusations against him".

In September 1982, when the future Pope had already been in Rome for months, Fr. H was transferred to the parish of Grafing where he remained until the start of 1985.

Acoused of sexual molestations by a minor and while police opened an inquiry into the charge, H was relieved of his tasks. In June 1986, the court in Ebersberg sentenced him to 18 months of imprisonment but on a suspended sentence [he did not actually go to jail but was on probationfor five years] and a fine of 4000 marks, as well as to undergo psychotherapy and surveillance for the next five years.

From November 1986 to October 1987, the diocese assigned him to be the chaplain at a home for the aged, then in May 2008, he was named parish vicar of Garching-Alz.

"This new pastoral assignment", the diocesan statement says, "was justified by the fact that the judicial penalties imposed on him were light and that he had undergone therapy" [DIM]8t[=DIM][wnat the statement actually says: "and because of attestations from his psychotherapist"]

After that 1986 conviction, no other episodes involving H have been reported. In the past two years, H has been employed in ministry related to the tourism and health spa industries.

"The repeated pastoral assignments of H in the parishes," Mons. Gruber, now 81, said yesterday, "was a very serious mistake on my poart. But I fully assume responsibility. I profoundly regret that because of my decisions, further abuse against minors resulted. I apologize to all I have harmed".

The Vatican press director, Fr. Federico Lombardi, gave a statement yesterday afternoon to reiterate the non-involvement of Archbishop Ratzinger in H's pastoral assignemnt:" refer you to the statement on teh site of teh Munich archdiocese, which is competent in this matter, and has all the elements to reconstruct the case and to explain who was responsible for what in the case...The not eends with the archbishops vicar general at the time taking onevery responsibility, because it was he who had assigned the priest to pastoral care."


A Vatican bulletin today says this:

NOTICE TO JOURNALISTS;
Interview with Mons. Charles Scicluna,
Justice Advocate at the Congregation
for the Doctrine of the Faith

March 13, 2010


The newspaper Avvenire has published today an interview with Mons. Charles J. Scicluna, justice advocate in the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, on the investigative and judicial acitivites of the Congregation on 'delicta graviore' (serious crimes) which include pedohpile offenses committed by members of the clergy.

The Press Office points to this interview because it answers many questions recently posed by newsmen.

Besides Avvenire itself (Page 5 of today's issue, 3/13/2010), accredited newsmen may found the interview in Italian, with working translations in English, French, German and Spanish, on the area reserved for them on the Vatican website.

The tests will also be made available on the respective language sites of Vatican Radio (www.radiovaticana.org).

[I have checked the RV English site, and it is already posted under World News. I will post it in full in the next box).

Was I not demanding that OR do something to clear up the provisions of the documents spelling out the role of the CDF and the Vatican procedures for dealing with the sex abuse cases? [Instead of wasting front-page space for a rather tangential suggestion that assigning more women to work with priests would reduce the incidence of sexual perversion!] What does it say of its editors that Avvenire took the initiative in this matter?

The Vatican should e-mail this interview to every editorial newsroom in the world, bolding the most striking facts and statistics! Better yet, accompanied by a table that shows these statistics at a glance. Why did the CDF not come out with all this in 2006 when the slanderous BBC documentary when it was shown in Italy?... The next logical question is - how much of this information will the media report????


Interview with the Promotor of Justice at
the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith
regarding cases of sexual abuse by priests
by GIANNI CARDINALE
Translated by Vatican Radio from

March 13, 2010


Below is the full English Translation of a print interview with the prosecutor of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Msgr. Charles J. Scicluna, regarding cases of clerical sexual abuse. The interview was originally published in the newspaper of the Italian Bishops' Conference, Avvenire.

Msgr. Charles J. Scicluna is the "promoter of justice" of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. He is effectively the prosecutor of the tribunal of the former Holy Office, whose job it is to investigate what are known as delicta graviora; i.e., the crimes which the Catholic Church considers as being the most serious of all: crimes against the Eucharist and against the sanctity of the Sacrament of Penance, and crimes against the sixth Commandment ("thou shall not commit impure acts") committed by a cleric against a person under the age of eighteen.

These crimes, in a motu proprio of 2001, Sacramentum sanctitatis tutela, come under the competency of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. In effect, it is the "promoter of justice" who deals with, among other things, the terrible question of priests accused of paedophilia, which are periodically highlighted in the mass media.

Msgr. Scicluna, an affable and polite Maltese, has the reputation of scrupulously carrying out the tasks entrusted to him without deferring to anyone.


Monsignor, you have the reputation of being "tough", yet the Catholic Church is systematically accused of being accommodating towards "paedophile priests"...
It may be that in the past - perhaps also out of a misdirected desire to protect the good name of the institution - some bishops were, in practice, too indulgent towards this sad phenomenon.

And I say in practice because, in principle, the condemnation of this kind of crime has always been firm and unequivocal. Suffice it to recall, to limit ourselves just to last century, the famous Instruction Crimen Sollicitationis of 1922.

Wasn't that from 1962?
No, the first edition dates back to the pontificate of Pius XI. Then, with Blessed John XXIII, the Holy Office issued a new edition for the Council Fathers, but only two thousand copies were printed, which were not enough, and so distribution was postponed sine die.
In any case, these were procedural norms to be followed in cases of solicitation during confession, and of other more serious sexually-motivated crimes such as the sexual abuse of minors.

Norms which, however, recommended secrecy...
A poor English translation of that text has led people to think that the Holy See imposed secrecy in order to hide the facts. But this was not so.

Secrecy during the investigative phase served to protect the good name of all the people involved; first and foremost, the victims themselves, then the accused priests who have the right - as everyone does - to the presumption of innocence until proven guilty.

The Church does not like showcase justice. Norms on sexual abuse have never been understood as a ban on denouncing the crimes to the civil authorities.

Nonetheless, that document is periodically cited to accuse the current Pontiff of having been - when he was prefect of the former Holy Office - objectively responsible for a Holy See policy of covering up the facts...
That accusation is false and calumnious. On this subject I would like to highlight a number of facts. Between 1975 and 1985 I do not believe that any cases of paedophilia committed by priests were brought to the attention of our Congregation.

Moreover, following the promulgation of the 1983 Code of Canon Law, there was a period of uncertainty as to which of the delicta graviora were reserved to the competency of this dicastery. Only with the 2001 motu proprio did the crime of paedophilia again become our exclusive remit.

From that moment Cardinal Ratzinger displayed great wisdom and firmness in handling those cases, also demonstrating great courage in facing some of the most difficult and thorny cases, sine acceptione personarum. [The best example would be the case of Fr. Marcial Maciel.] Therefore, to accuse the current Pontiff of a cover-up is, I repeat, false and calumnious.

What happens when a priest is accused of a delictum gravius?
If the accusation is well-founded, the bishop has the obligation to investigate both the soundness and the subject of the accusation. If the outcome of this initial investigation is consistent, he no longer has any power to act in the matter and must refer the case to our Congregation where it is dealt with by the disciplinary office.

How is that office composed?
Apart from myself who, being one of the superiors of the dicastery, also concern myself with other matters, there are the bureau chief Fr. Pedro Miguel Funes Diaz, seven priests and a lay lawyer who follow these cases. Other officials of the Congregation also make their own vital contribution depending upon the language and specific requirements of each case.

That office has been accused of working little and slowly...
Those are unjustified comments. In 2003 and 2004 a great wave of cases flooded over our desks. Many of them came from the United States and concerned the past. Over recent years, thanks to God, the phenomenon has become greatly reduced, and we now seek to deal with new cases as they arise.

How many have you dealt with so far?
Overall in the last nine years (2001-2010) we have considered accusations concerning around three thousand cases of diocesan and religious priests, which refer to crimes committed over the last fifty years.

That is, then, three thousand cases of paedophile priests?
No, it is not correct to say that. We can say that about sixty percent of the cases chiefly involved sexual attraction towards adolescents of the same sex, another thirty percent involved heterosexual relations, and the remaining ten percent were cases of paedophilia in the true sense of the term; that is, based on sexual attraction towards prepubescent children.

The cases of priests accused of paedophilia in the true sense have been about three hundred in nine years. Please don't misunderstand me, these are of course too many, but it must be recognised that the phenomenon is not as widespread as has been believed.

The accused, then, are three hundred. How many have been tried and condemned?
Currently we can say that a full trial, penal or administrative, has taken place in twenty percent of cases, normally done in the diocese of origin - always under our supervision - and only very rarely here in Rome.

We do this also in order to speed up the process. In sixty percent of cases there has been no trial, above all because of the advanced age of the accused [This was the case with Fr. Maciel], but administrative and disciplinary provisions have been issued against them, such as the obligation not to celebrate Mass with the faithful, not to hear confession, and to live a retired life of prayer.

It must be made absolutely clear that in these cases, some of which are particularly sensational and have caught the attention of the media, no absolution has taken place. It's true that there has been no formal condemnation, but if a person is obliged to a life of silence and prayer, then there must be a reason...

That still leaves twenty percent of cases...
We can say that in ten percent of cases, the particularly serious ones in which the proof is overwhelming, the Holy Father has assumed the painful responsibility of authorising a decree of dismissal from the clerical state. This is a very serious but inevitable provision, taken though administrative channels.

In the remaining ten percent of cases, it was the accused priests themselves who requested dispensation from the obligations deriving from the priesthood, requests which were promptly accepted. Those involved in these latter cases were priests found in possession of paedophile pornographic material and, for this reason, condemned by the civil authorities.

Where do these three thousand cases come from?
Mostly from the United States which, in the years 2003-2004, represented around eighty percent of total cases. In 2009 the United States "share" had dropped to around twenty-five percent of the 223 cases reported from all over the world.

Over recent years (2007-2009), the annual average of cases reported to the Congregation from around the world has been two hundred and fifty. Many countries report only one or two cases.

There is, then, a growing diversity and number of countries of origin of cases, but the phenomenon itself is much reduced. It must, in fact, be borne in mind that the overall number of diocesan and religious priests in the world is four hundred thousand, although this statistic does not correspond to the perception that is created when these sad cases occupy the front pages of the newspapers.

And in Italy?
Thus far the phenomenon does not seem to have dramatic proportions, although what worries me is a certain culture of silence which I feel is still too widespread in the country. The Italian Episcopal Conference (CEI) offers an excellent technical-juridical consultancy service for bishops who have to deal with these cases. And I am very pleased to observe the ever greater commitment being shown by Italian bishops to throw light on the cases reported to them.

You said that a full trial has taken place in around twenty percent of the three thousand cases you have examined over the last nine years. Did they all end with the condemnation of the accused?
Many of the past trials did end with the condemnation of the accused. But there have also been cases in which the priest was declared innocent, or where the accusations were not considered to have sufficient proof. In all cases, however, not only is there an examination of the guilt or innocence of the accused priest, but also a discernment as to his fitness for public ministry.

A recurring accusation made against the ecclesiastical hierarchy is that of not reporting to the civil authorities when crimes of paedophilia come to their attention.
In some English-speaking countries, but also in France, if bishops become aware of crimes committed by their priests outside the sacramental seal of Confession, they are obliged to report them to the judicial authorities. This is an onerous duty because the bishops are forced to make a gesture comparable to that of a father denouncing his own son. Nonetheless, our guidance in these cases is to respect the law.

And what about countries where bishops do not have this legal obligation?
In these cases we do not force bishops to denounce their own priests, but encourage them to contact the victims and invite them to denounce the priests by whom they have been abused. Furthermore, we invite the bishops to give all spiritual - and not only spiritual - assistance to those victims.

In a recent case concerning a priest condemned by a civil tribunal in Italy, it was precisely this Congregation that suggested to the plaintiffs, who had turned to us for a canonical trial, that they involve the civil authorities in the interests of victims and to avoid other crimes.

A final question: is there any statue of limitation for delicta graviora?
Here you touch upon what, in my view, is a sensitive point. In the past, that is before 1898, the statute of limitations was something unknown in canon law. For the most serious crimes, it was only with the 2001 motu proprio that a statute of limitations of ten years was introduced. In accordance with these norms in cases of sexual abuse, the ten years begin from the day on which the minor reaches the age of eighteen.

Is that enough?
Practice has shown that the limit of ten years is not enough in this kind of case, in which it would be better to return to the earlier system of delicta graviora not being subject to the statue of limitations. On 7 November 2002, Venerable John Paul II granted this dicastery the power to revoke that statue of limitations, case by case following a reasoned request from individual bishops. And this revocation is normally granted.



Another perspective on the actual extent of the problem in the United States can be derived from this brief summary of the report commissioned by the Americanbishops in 2002:

---

The Nature and Scope of the Problem of Sexual Abuse of Minors
by Catholic Priests and Deacons in the United States -
the study commissioned in 2002 by the US Conference of Catholic Bishops "to provide the first-ever complete accounting, or census, of the number of priests, deacons and religious against whom allegations of child sexual abuse were made and of the incidents alleged to have occured between 1950-2002."

The study was conducted by the John Jay College of Criminology in New York City.

The full report can be found on
usccb.org/nrb/johnjaystudy/

Just some general data from the report:

195 dioceses and 140 religious communities were surveyed;
7 of the dioceses and 30 of the communities did not respond to the survey.

From the responses, a total of 4,392 priests, deacons and religious were identified to have been accused of such offenses.

They represented 3-6% of priests in the dioceses and 1-3% in the communities. The overall percentage of accused in terms of all priests and religious in the US was 4%.

75% of the alleged incidents took place between 1960-1984.

A report to the police resulted in an investigation in almost all cases. 384 of the 4,392 were criminally charged. Overall 9.1% ended up being charged.

Of the 384 charged, 252 were convicted.
(Some of them had more than one conviction on different counts).

As of 2002 (before all the massive costs since then imposed by subsequent court rulings), the cost to the dioceses and communities between 1950-2002 was estimated at about $573 million - $501 million for victim compensation and treatment, and the rest for priest treatment and legal fees.

Insurance paid about $289 million of the costs for victim compensation and treatment.

---

Incidental Note: The prompt translation of Mons. Scicluna's interview proves - as if there were any doubt of ti - that the Vatican is well capable of providing immediate translation of papal texts when they have to? WHY THE HECK ARE THEY NOT DOING IT?????

Saturday, March 13

Second from left: Medieval illustration of Pope Gregory and Leandro; extreme right, the Virgin of Guadalupe (Spain).
ST. LEANDRO DE SEVILLA [Leander of Seville] (Spain, 550-600), Benedictine, Bishop and Confessor
All four siblings in this Hispano-Roman family became saints. Leandro was the older brother of Isidore, who succeeded him as Bishop of Seville
and went on to become a Doctor of the Church. Their brother Fulgencio, who became Bishop of Cartagena, and their sister Florentina, who was
an abbess over a thousand nuns, are also saints. Leandro spent most of his life fighting the Arian heresy. He is credited with introducing the
Credo into the Mass in order for the faithful to always keep in mind the essentials of their faith. He was named Bishop of Seville in 579 but in
the same year he was exiled by the Visigoth king who was Arian. He spent three years in Constantinople where he met the future Pope Gregory
the Great (Pope 590-604), who was papal legate to the Byzantine court. They were to carry on a correspondence. Gregory gave Leandro an
image of Mary which became venerated in Seville. In 711, when the Moors invaded Seville, the Spanish king's men placed the image in a casket
and buried it in the mountains. In 1326, a peasant in the western region of Extremadura had a vision of Mary which led him to the casket. The
image was found intact and a church was built for it in the village of Guadalupe, and her cult grew nationwide. Columbus and the Spanish
conquistadors carried her image on their travels. Not surprising that the Spanish bishop in Mexico who certified Jaun Diego's Marian vision
in 1531 named the miraculous image Our Lady of Guadalupe, whose renown has now far outstripped the original. After his exile, Leandro went on
with his campaign to root out the Arian heresy and converted two Visigoth kings away from Arianism. In 589, he convoked the Third Council of T
oledo, at which Visigoth Spain abjured Arianism. Leandro was considered a greater writer than Isidore but only two short works survive.
Readings for today's Mass: www.usccb.org/nab/readings/031310.shtml


OR today.

To participants of a Rome convention on the priesthood, the Holy Father recalls
the sacramental identity of priests and reiterates the value of priestly celibacy:
'Live a prophetic life without compromises to serve God and the world'
Other Page 1 stories: A belated report about a February 11 homily by the Archbishop of Westminster opposing proposed euthanasia laws in the UK; a conflict between the USA and the European Union on proposed reforms in the financial markets; and Russia's Putin is in India to strengthen cooperation on defense and nuclear matters. In the inside pages, an essay by a German psychologist on the values and reasons for priestly celibacy; a belated report on Regensburg Bishop Gerhard Mueller's statement from March 9 (undated in the newspaper) protesting the false statements made by the German justice minister; and a reproduction of Mons. Zollitsch's note on the German bishops' website about his meeting with the Pope yesterday. But not a word about the revelations from Munich yesterday. [The unprofessional editorial decisions at OR are increasingly troubling! You cannot ignore 'news' as it happens, especially when it involves the Pope himself. One might have expected a sober reassuring front-page editorial!]



THE POPE'S DAY

- H.E. Madame Jadranka Kosor, Prime Minister of the Republic of Croatia, with her delegation

- Bishops of Sudan (Group 3) on ad-limina visit, with the Apostolic Administrator in Sudan

- Cardinal Oscar Andrés Rodríguez Maradiaga, S.D.B., Archbishop of Tegucigalpa (Honduras)

- All the bishops of Sudan on ad-limina visit. Address in English.

NB: This is not exactly Fr. Lombardi's weekly editorial, usually carried also on the CTV weekly enwsmagazine Octavo Dies, but it is an editorial nonetheless.


A clear way forward
even in agitated waters
Translated from
the Italian service of



At the end of this week when the attention of much of the European press was focused on the question of sexual abuses committed by persons and in institutions of the Catholic Church, allow me to make three observations.

First of all, the line taken by the German bishops' conference (DBK) has taken the correct way to face the problem in its various aspects. The statements made by the DBK president, Archbishop Zollitsch, after his meeting with the Holy Father, summarizes the lines established by the recent plenary assembly of the German bishops, and recalls the essential operative points thereof: to seek the truth and help the victims, reinforce the prevention of abuses, and collaborate constructively with the authorities - including those of the state judiciary - for the common good of society.

Mons. Zollitsch also reiterated with certainty the opinion of experts that the question of priestly celibacy must not in any way be confused with that of pedophilia in priests.

The Holy Father encouraged the approach of the German bishops which, despite the circumstances of its specific German context, can be considered a very useful and inspiring model for other bishops' conferences who find themselves having to face similar problems.

Moreover, the important and wide-ranging interview granted by the promoter of justice in the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith, Mons. Charles Scicluna, explains in detail the significance of the specific canonical norms established by the Church in recent years to bring to justice the serious crimes of sexual abuse of minors by priests.

It becomes absolutely clear that these norms have not favored any cover-up of such offenses, but rather have led to intense activity to confront, evaluate and adequately punish such crimes in the context of canon law.

It is right to recall that all these norms were set up and implemented when Cardinal Ratzinger was prefect of the CDF. His line has always been that of severity and consistency in facing even the most difficult situations.

Finally, the Archdiocese of Munich has responded, with a lengthy and detailed statement, to questions raised about a priest who was transferred from the Diocese of Essen to the Diocese of Munich when Cardinal Ratzinger was Archbishop of the Diocese - a priest who was subsequently convicted for sex offenses against minors.

The statement makes it clear that th archbishop was completely not involved in the decision which led eventually to the commission of new sexual offenses by the priest.

It is quite evident that in recent days, there has been an attempt - with some persistence in Regensburg and Munich - to search out elements that could involve the Holy Father personally in the question of sexual abuse by priests,

To every objective observer, it is clear that these efforts have failed.

Notwithstanding the storm, the Church sees clearly the way it must pursue, under the sure and strict leadership of the Holy Father.

As we have had occasion to say before, let us hope that this turmoil may ultimately be of help to society as a whole in order that it may take better responsibility for the protection and education of children and young people.


If Vatican Radio can do this, why not L'Osservatore Romano???? Cherchez le Cardinal [Bertone]!?!?! - a question as well as an imperative.


How the Vatican has reacted -
or failed to react, yet again,
in defense of the Pope
by GIACOMO GALEAZZI

March 13, 2010


VATICAN CITY - The storm that was coming from his native Bavaria was pre-announed to Benedict XVi on Thursday morning by the Archdiocese of Munich.

The diocesan working group which has been reviewing records for incidents of sexual abuses in the diocese investigated a report by Sueddeutsche Zeitung and had verified that a priest offender had been assigned to parish duties during Benedict XVI's tenure as Archbishop of Munich.

Archbishop Reinhard Marx communicated this to the papal apartment on the eve of the Pope's meeting with the president of the German bishops' conference.

Considering that there was foreknowledge of the Munich story, the aseptic embarrassed reaction of the Holy See is a snapshot of the confusion and difficulties in the Curia which has been ponderously slow in defending the Pope.

In the face of the worldwide hunt to find a direct involvement of Joseph Ratzinger at some point in the pedophile scandals rocking the Church, the Vatican press office limited itself last night to a note "about a priest from the Diocese of Essen, with a previous record of sexual abuse, who was transferred to the Diocese of Munich and assigned to pastoral care, after a period of therapy, at the time when Joseph Ratzinger was Archbishop" and referring to the statement from the Archdiocese of Munich "for the facts of which the then Vicar General of the diocese, Gerhard Gruber, has taken full responsibility". [Just because Gruber took full responsibility does not mean the story ends there, as far as the media is concerned - and that would be evident to anyone with realistic common sense!]

A few hours earlier, the president of the German bishops conference met the Pontiff who listened "with great dismay, attentive interestand profound commotion" to the latest disclosures about pedophile priests in Germany.

"The Pope approves of tightening the screws as the Church in Germany is doing," Zollitsch said at a news conference afterwards. "The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith is assembling experiences form various countries in order to make an overall evaluation of the situation and update its norms".

In particular, he said, the Holy See intends to reinforce the mechanisms of collaboration between ecclesiastical justice and the civilian courts.

But weighing down on all these developments yesterday morning was the as-yet unacknowledged fact of the 'lightning bolt' from Munich.

The defensive strategy of the Vatican continues to be weak in denouncing the apparent machinations to find a way to link the Pope himself to prior knowledge of sexual abuses by priests in his own Germany.

For instance, L'Osservatore Romano today decided to publish today a "statement by the Bishop of Regensburg, Gerhard Ludwig Müller, regarding to the alleged silences of the Church", instead of directly challenging the merits of the statements made by the German Justice Minister (according to whom the Church has been blocking any penal sanctions for sexual abuses committed by priests since a 'wall of silence; has made it difficult even to pursue ivnestigations in Catholic schools"), the Vatican newspaper limits itself to Bishop Mueller's statement that the minister's statements are 'false and slanderous'.

[As I pointed out earlier, Mueller released the statement on March 9, and OR only used it in today's issue undated - never having replied itself previously to the German justice minister's false statements.]

Mueller had challenged the minister "to show proof' of her allegations, and "if she is unable to do so", she should "stop instrumentalizing her position to make such outrageous statements".

Behind all this must be the great disappointment of a Pope who has emphasized 'zero tolerance' for abuse of minors and is now seeing the Curia slow and inept* in clarifying the context of what he did in Munich relative to this single case that has been uncovered.

*[Yet again! But not the Curia in general, as much as those closest to the Pope who are dutybound to be his immediate 'protectors'. Has anyone heard anything from Cardinal Bertone lately? Once again he is conspicuously missing in action! Apparently, not even to tell his editor protege at OR to respond directly in the newspaper to the Munich insinuations.

He's the Secretary of State, for heaven's sake. Any statement that he issues, if only in his personal capacity as a Cardinal of the Church, would get prominent media play. Why is he letting opportunities go to waste? His habitual passivity in the matter of coming to the immediate defense of the Holy Father when push comes to shove has become too obvious and repeated to be ignored. And it's only been a few weeks since his Secretariat of State released that unsigned note that was not only a lame and belated response to the Boffo controversy but also uncharitable and even mean. Now another flagrant inaction!

In fairness to Cardinal Bertone, he has usually been excellent at defending the Pope and expounding on his basic messages when he gives set speeches. Why is he unable to show the same fierceness and loyalty in moments of crisis?

As weak as the official Vatican Press Office statements have been on this issue, one must commend Fr. Lombardi who has made use of Vatican Radio, which he also directs, in order to make statements - as this one today - that apparently his bosses at SecState do not allow him to make in the form of a Vatican Press Office bulletin! If Lombardi's unofficial notes through Vatican Radio get media play as they do, so much more would a statement from Bertone!]

The non-involvement of Joseph Ratzinger in the scandal has not been adequately supported by both Munich and the Vatican. [Munich, I think, has been deficient in failing to answer the logical and objective question of what was Archbishop Ratzinger told about the reason for the therapy ordered for the priest who was sent to his diocese from Essen - in itself, already a suspicious maneuver by Essen. If the archbishop approved giving the priest accomodations while he undertook his cure, surely he must have asked what the cure was about, and if he had been told it was because of sexual offenses, he would have asked why Essen should pass on the offender to another diocese! And if a loyal supporter like me can see this obvious 'holes' in the story, imagine what his critics can do with them!

I have not dared look at how the Irish media are playing this. They will almost certainly use it - besides all-purpose ammunition to denigrate Benedict XVI - to undermine the pastoral letter that the Holy Father intends to address to Irish Catholics. It is now thought the letter could be released on Monday, March 15.]

The isolation of the Pontiff emerges again, as it did after he recalled the excommunication of the Lefebvrian bishops, the Williamson case, condoms in Africa, and the cause of Pius XII. ['Isolation' is the wrong word - abandonment is what it is. All the well-plumed cowards around him suddenly become invisible and mute when he needs them most.]

In short, a Pope in the trenches, without his Curia or despite it.

[I take issue with this last statement. He's by no means in the trenches. He's always been an open target, as the tallest tree in the forest necessarily is. And he has kept his head with great equanimity and his habitual serenity, as far as we can tell from the photos and videos of his appearances all this week. He is handicapped in that, as Pope, he cannot come to his own personal defense because that would be seen as inappropriate, unseemly and selfish.

I do think that after being satisfied that all his questions about Priest 'H' have been satisfactorily researched by the Archdiocese of Munich, he will make an exception - as he did with his epochal letter to the bishops of March 10, 2009, the first anniversary of which passed by unnoticed because of all this hullaballoo - and issue a statement as to his own recollection of the event, and have done with it.]

Let me indulge myself: it's bad enough March 10 passed by unnoticed, by me as well. This letter to the bishops is always worth re-reading - and I do consider it the most unique and emblematic sign of Benedict XVI's Pontificate so far. How many times when making a post I find myself returning to it!



The Holy Father giving a lectio divina to Rome seminarians on 2/20/09, when he reflected on a passage from St. Paul
which he says spurred him to write this letter.

---

LETTER OF HIS HOLINESS POPE BENEDICT XVI
TO THE BISHOPS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
concerning the remission of the excommunication
of the four Bishops consecrated by Archbishop Lefebvre

Dear Brothers in the Episcopal Ministry!

The remission of the excommunication of the four Bishops consecrated in 1988 by Archbishop Lefebvre without a mandate of the Holy See has for many reasons caused, both within and beyond the Catholic Church, a discussion more heated than any we have seen for a long time.

Many Bishops felt perplexed by an event which came about unexpectedly and was difficult to view positively in the light of the issues and tasks facing the Church today.

Even though many Bishops and members of the faithful were disposed in principle to take a positive view of the Pope’s concern for reconciliation, the question remained whether such a gesture was fitting in view of the genuinely urgent demands of the life of faith in our time.

Some groups, on the other hand, openly accused the Pope of wanting to turn back the clock to before the Council: as a result, an avalanche of protests was unleashed, whose bitterness laid bare wounds deeper than those of the present moment.

I therefore feel obliged to offer you, dear Brothers, a word of clarification, which ought to help you understand the concerns which led me and the competent offices of the Holy See to take this step. In this way I hope to contribute to peace in the Church.

An unforeseen mishap for me was the fact that the Williamson case came on top of the remission of the excommunication. The discreet gesture of mercy towards four Bishops ordained validly but not legitimately suddenly appeared as something completely different: as the repudiation of reconciliation between Christians and Jews, and thus as the reversal of what the Council had laid down in this regard to guide the Church’s path.

A gesture of reconciliation with an ecclesial group engaged in a process of separation thus turned into its very antithesis: an apparent step backwards with regard to all the steps of reconciliation between Christians and Jews taken since the Council – steps which my own work as a theologian had sought from the beginning to take part in and support.

That this overlapping of two opposed processes took place and momentarily upset peace between Christians and Jews, as well as peace within the Church, is something which I can only deeply deplore.

I have been told that consulting the information available on the internet would have made it possible to perceive the problem early on. I have learned the lesson that in the future in the Holy See we will have to pay greater attention to that source of news.

I was saddened by the fact that even Catholics who, after all, might have had a better knowledge of the situation, thought they had to attack me with open hostility.

Precisely for this reason I thank all the more our Jewish friends, who quickly helped to clear up the misunderstanding and to restore the atmosphere of friendship and trust which – as in the days of Pope John Paul II – has also existed throughout my pontificate and, thank God, continues to exist.

Another mistake, which I deeply regret, is the fact that the extent and limits of the provision of 21 January 2009 were not clearly and adequately explained at the moment of its publication.

The excommunication affects individuals, not institutions. An episcopal ordination lacking a pontifical mandate raises the danger of a schism, since it jeopardizes the unity of the College of Bishops with the Pope.

Consequently the Church must react by employing her most severe punishment – excommunication – with the aim of calling those thus punished to repent and to return to unity. Twenty years after the ordinations, this goal has sadly not yet been attained.

The remission of the excommunication has the same aim as that of the punishment: namely, to invite the four Bishops once more to return. This gesture was possible once the interested parties had expressed their recognition in principle of the Pope and his authority as Pastor, albeit with some reservations in the area of obedience to his doctrinal authority and to the authority of the Council.

Here I return to the distinction between individuals and institutions. The remission of the excommunication was a measure taken in the field of ecclesiastical discipline: the individuals were freed from the burden of conscience constituted by the most serious of ecclesiastical penalties.

This disciplinary level needs to be distinguished from the doctrinal level. The fact that the Society of Saint Pius X does not possess a canonical status in the Church is not, in the end, based on disciplinary but on doctrinal reasons.

As long as the Society does not have a canonical status in the Church, its ministers do not exercise legitimate ministries in the Church. There needs to be a distinction, then, between the disciplinary level, which deals with individuals as such, and the doctrinal level, at which ministry and institution are involved.

In order to make this clear once again: until the doctrinal questions are clarified, the Society has no canonical status in the Church, and its ministers – even though they have been freed of the ecclesiastical penalty – do not legitimately exercise any ministry in the Church.

In light of this situation, it is my intention henceforth to join the Pontifical Commission "Ecclesia Dei" – the body which has been competent since 1988 for those communities and persons who, coming from the Society of Saint Pius X or from similar groups, wish to return to full communion with the Pope – to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

This will make it clear that the problems now to be addressed are essentially doctrinal in nature and concern primarily the acceptance of the Second Vatican Council and the post-conciliar magisterium of the Popes.

The collegial bodies with which the Congregation studies questions which arise (especially the ordinary Wednesday meeting of Cardinals and the annual or biennial Plenary Session) ensure the involvement of the Prefects of the different Roman Congregations and representatives from the world’s Bishops in the process of decision-making.

The Church’s teaching authority cannot be frozen in the year 1962 – this must be quite clear to the Society. But some of those who put themselves forward as great defenders of the Council also need to be reminded that Vatican II embraces the entire doctrinal history of the Church.

Anyone who wishes to be obedient to the Council has to accept the faith professed over the centuries, and cannot sever the roots from which the tree draws its life.

I hope, dear Brothers, that this serves to clarify the positive significance and also the limits of the provision of 21 January 2009.

But the question still remains: Was this measure needed? Was it really a priority? Aren’t other things perhaps more important?

Of course there are more important and urgent matters. I believe that I set forth clearly the priorities of my pontificate in the addresses which I gave at its beginning. Everything that I said then continues unchanged as my plan of action.

The first priority for the Successor of Peter was laid down by the Lord in the Upper Room in the clearest of terms: "You… strengthen your brothers" (Lk 22:32). Peter himself formulated this priority anew in his first Letter: "Always be prepared to make a defence to anyone who calls you to account for the hope that is in you" (1 Pet 3:15).

In our days, when in vast areas of the world the faith is in danger of dying out like a flame which no longer has fuel, the overriding priority is to make God present in this world and to show men and women the way to God.

Not just any god, but the God who spoke on Sinai; to that God whose face we recognize in a love which presses "to the end" (cf. Jn 13:1) – in Jesus Christ, crucified and risen.

The real problem at this moment of our history is that God is disappearing from the human horizon, and, with the dimming of the light which comes from God, humanity is losing its bearings, with increasingly evident destructive effects.

Leading men and women to God, to the God who speaks in the Bible: this is the supreme and fundamental priority of the Church and of the Successor of Peter at the present time.

A logical consequence of this is that we must have at heart the unity of all believers. Their disunity, their disagreement among themselves, calls into question the credibility of their talk of God. Hence the effort to promote a common witness by Christians to their faith – ecumenism – is part of the supreme priority.

Added to this is the need for all those who believe in God to join in seeking peace, to attempt to draw closer to one another, and to journey together, even with their differing images of God, towards the source of Light – this is interreligious dialogue.

Whoever proclaims that God is Love "to the end" has to bear witness to love: in loving devotion to the suffering, in the rejection of hatred and enmity – this is the social dimension of the Christian faith, of which I spoke in the Encyclical Deus Caritas Est.

So if the arduous task of working for faith, hope and love in the world is presently (and, in various ways, always) the Church’s real priority, then part of this is also made up of acts of reconciliation, small and not so small.

That the quiet gesture of extending a hand gave rise to a huge uproar, and thus became exactly the opposite of a gesture of reconciliation, is a fact which we must accept.

But I ask now: Was it, and is it, truly wrong in this case to meet half-way the brother who "has something against you" (cf. Mt 5:23ff.) and to seek reconciliation?

Should not civil society also try to forestall forms of extremism and to incorporate their eventual adherents – to the extent possible – in the great currents shaping social life, and thus avoid their being segregated, with all its consequences?

Can it be completely mistaken to work to break down obstinacy and narrowness, and to make space for what is positive and retrievable for the whole?

I myself saw, in the years after 1988, how the return of communities which had been separated from Rome changed their interior attitudes; I saw how returning to the bigger and broader Church enabled them to move beyond one-sided positions and broke down rigidity so that positive energies could emerge for the whole.

Can we be totally indifferent about a community which has 491 priests, 215 seminarians, 6 seminaries, 88 schools, 2 university-level institutes, 117 religious brothers, 164 religious sisters and thousands of lay faithful?

Should we casually let them drift farther from the Church? I think for example of the 491 priests. We cannot know how mixed their motives may be. All the same, I do not think that they would have chosen the priesthood if, alongside various distorted and unhealthy elements, they did not have a love for Christ and a desire to proclaim him and, with him, the living God.

Can we simply exclude them, as representatives of a radical fringe, from our pursuit of reconciliation and unity? What would then become of them?

Certainly, for some time now, and once again on this specific occasion, we have heard from some representatives of that community many unpleasant things – arrogance and presumptuousness, an obsession with one-sided positions, etc.

Yet to tell the truth, I must add that I have also received a number of touching testimonials of gratitude which clearly showed an openness of heart.

But should not the great Church also allow herself to be generous in the knowledge of her great breadth, in the knowledge of the promise made to her?

Should not we, as good educators, also be capable of overlooking various faults and making every effort to open up broader vistas?

And should we not admit that some unpleasant things have also emerged in Church circles?

At times one gets the impression that our society needs to have at least one group to which no tolerance may be shown; which one can easily attack and hate. And should someone dare to approach them – in this case the Pope – he too loses any right to tolerance; he too can be treated hatefully, without misgiving or restraint.

Dear Brothers, during the days when I first had the idea of writing this letter, by chance, during a visit to the Roman Seminary, I had to interpret and comment on Galatians 5:13-15.

I was surprised at the directness with which that passage speaks to us about the present moment: "Do not use your freedom as an opportunity for the flesh, but through love be servants of one another. For the whole law is fulfilled in one word: ‘You shall love your neighbour as yourself’. But if you bite and devour one another, take heed that you are not consumed by one another."

I am always tempted to see these words as another of the rhetorical excesses which we occasionally find in Saint Paul. To some extent that may also be the case.

But sad to say, this "biting and devouring" also exists in the Church today, as expression of a poorly understood freedom.

Should we be surprised that we too are no better than the Galatians? That at the very least we are threatened by the same temptations? That we must always learn anew the proper use of freedom? And that we must always learn anew the supreme priority, which is love?

The day I spoke about this at the Major Seminary, the feast of Our Lady of Trust was being celebrated in Rome. And so it is: Mary teaches us trust. She leads us to her Son, in whom all of us can put our trust. He will be our guide – even in turbulent times.

And so I would like to offer heartfelt thanks to all the many Bishops who have lately offered me touching tokens of trust and affection, and above all assured me of their prayers.

My thanks also go to all the faithful who in these days have given me testimony of their constant fidelity to the Successor of Saint Peter.

May the Lord protect all of us and guide our steps along the way of peace. This is the prayer that rises up instinctively from my heart at the beginning of this Lent, a liturgical season particularly suited to interior purification, one which invites all of us to look with renewed hope to the light which awaits us at Easter.

With a special Apostolic Blessing, I remain

Yours in the Lord,


From the Vatican, 10 March 2009

---

And another timely reminder - I posted this when I opened the REFERENCES thread in the PRF back in 2006 to put together easily referable facts about what the Church in general - and Cardinal Raztinger in particular - have done about the problem of priests who violate minors in their care:

---

No one who has read Cardinal Ratzinger's Meditation and Prayer for the Ninth Station of the Via Crucis at the Roman Colosseum in March 2005 can possibly not be moved by the anguish he expressed about the fallibility of priests - a failing that exceeds more than average human fallibility because priests are supposed to be in persona Christi. I believe it is an appropriate epigraph to meditate upon whenever we come across an instance of a priest who commits an offense that outrages common decency.

MEDITATION

What can the third fall of Jesus under the Cross say to us? We have considered the fall of man in general, and the falling of many Christians away from Christ and into a godless secularism. Should we not also think of how much Christ suffers in his own Church? How often is the holy sacrament of his Presence abused, how often must he enter empty and evil hearts! How often do we celebrate only ourselves, without even realizing that he is there! How often is his Word twisted and misused! What little faith is present behind so many theories, so many empty words! How much filth there is in the Church, and even among those who, in the priesthood, ought to belong entirely to him! How much pride, how much self-complacency! What little respect we pay to the Sacrament of Reconciliation, where he waits for us, ready to raise us up whenever we fall! All this is present in his Passion. His betrayal by his disciples, their unworthy reception of his Body and Blood, is certainly the greatest suffering endured by the Redeemer; it pierces his heart. We can only call to him from the depths of our hearts: Kyrie eleison ­ Lord, save us (cf. Mt 8: 25).

PRAYER

Lord, your Church often seems like a boat about to sink, a boat taking in water on every side. In your field we see more weeds than wheat. The soiled garments and face of your Church throw us into confusion. Yet it is we ourselves who have soiled them! It is we who betray you time and time again, after all our lofty words and grand gestures. Have mercy on your Church; within her too, Adam continues to fall. When we fall, we drag you down to earth, and Satan laughs, for he hopes that you will not be able to rise from that fall; he hopes that being dragged down in the fall of your Church, you will remain prostrate and overpowered. But you will rise again. You stood up, you arose and you can also raise us up. Save and sanctify your Church. Save and sanctify us all.

---

PAPAL AUDIENCE WITH
PRIME MINISTER OF CROATIA

March 13, 2010




This morning, Saturday 13 March 2010, the Holy Father received in audience Jadranka Kosor, prime minister of the Republic of Croatia. The prime minister subsequently went on to meet with Cardinal Secretary of State Tarcisio Bertone S.D.B. who was accompanied by Archbishop Dominique Mamberti, secretary for Relations with States.

The focal point of the cordial discussions was a fruitful exchange of opinions on a number of current international questions, and on the situation in the region.

Particular attention was given to the condition of the Croatian community in Bosnia and Herzegovina, one of the three peoples who make up that country.

Subsequently the parties reconfirmed their mutual will to continue constructive dialogue on matters of joint interest for the Church and the Croatian State.

Finally attention turned to certain themes concerning Croatia's path towards full integration into the European Union.

The baying of the wolves

Is the predatory circle tightening? Der Spiegel has apparently found a second ex-Domspatzen who has come forward with lurid tales of his experiences in their Regensburg school... I'll take AP's wrod for this, as I have no desire to look up these stories.... To its credit, AP leads with something less 'sensational' but note the headline that mentions 'sex allegations' in the same phrase as 'the Pope'.

If you had not been following this particular story before and just happened to see this headline, your first thought might well be, "My God! Sex allegations about the Pope!" And that is precisely what the headline hunters aim for - the first impression that could be all that's left in the mind of raaders who are not really interested in the details of the story and will never read it...


Vatican officials defend Pope
on sex allegations



VATICAN CITY, March 13 (AP) ― The Vatican on Saturday denounced what it called aggressive attempts to drag Pope Benedict XVI into the spreading scandals of pedophile priests in his German homeland, and contended he has long confronted abuse cases with courage.

In separate interviews, both the Holy See's spokesman and its prosecutor for sex abuse of minors by clergy sought to defend the pope.

After decades of similar scandals in the United States, Ireland and elsewhere, the sex abuse scandal moved closer to Benedict in recent days.

After accusations of abuse connected to the Regensburg boys choir directed by the Pope's elder brother for some 30 years, the Munich archdiocese acknowledged Friday that it had transferred a suspected pedophile priest to community work while Benedict was archbishop there.

Criticism has also mounted over a 2001 church directive Benedict wrote while a Vatican cardinal, instructing bishops to keep abuse cases confidential. [DURING INVESTIGATION!!!! TO PROTECT THE INNOCENT!!!! Deliberate omission of pertinent facts is one of the most effective ways that newsmen adn editors can shape their storyline to reflect their agenda and biases, instead of the truth!]

"It's rather clear that in the last days, there have been those who have tried, with a certain aggressive persistence, in Regensburg and Munich, to look for elements to personally involve the Holy Father in the matter of abuses," Vatican spokesman the Rev. Federico Lombardi told Vatican Radio.

"For any objective observer, it's clear that these efforts have failed," Lombardi said, reiterating his statement a day earlier noting the Munich diocese has insisted that Benedict wasn't involved in the decision, while archbishop there, to transfer the suspected child abuser.

Lombardi cited an interview with the Italian bishops conference daily Avvenire Saturday, in which the Vatican's prosecutor for sex abuse cases, Monsignor Charles Scicluna, contended that the future pope dealt firmly with the abuse.

"To accuse the current pope of hiding (cases) is false and defamatory," Scicluna said.

As Vatican cardinal in charge of the policy on sex abuse, the future Pope, "showed wisdom and firmness in handling these cases," said Scicluna, a Maltese prelate in an interview entitled "The Church is tough on pedophilia."

The Archdiocese of Munich and Freising announced late Friday it was setting up a new task force to focus on raising awareness about an preventing sexual abuse within the church and its institutions.

"There is no 100 percent protection against sexual abuse, because we can never rule out the failure or misdoing of individuals, but we want to apply ourselves 100 percent to prevent it from happening again," said the General Vicar of the archdiocese, Prelate Peter Beer.

The new task force will also collaborate with the workgroup tasked with working through allegations of past abuse. Beer said that group would be expanded to include an external, independent legal office.

The archdiocese, where Pope Benedict XVI served as Archbishop from 1977 to 1982, set up the workgroup last month after allegations of abuse in a church-run school surfaced.

Thomas Mayer told Germany's Der Spiegel weekly that he had been sexually and physically abused while singing in the Regensburger Domspatzen boys choir through 1992.

Mayer's abuse allegations, published Saturday, are the first that overlap with the tenure of the Pontiff's brother Georg Ratzinger, who led group from 1964 to 1994. Previously reported cases of sexual abuse dates back to the late 1950s.

Mayer charged in Spiegel that he had been raped by older pupils. Spiegel quoted him as saying that pupils were forced to have anal sex with one another in the apartment of a prefect at the church-run boarding school attached to the choir. The Regensburg diocese has refused to comment on the report.


The New Yotk Times story which will come out in the 3/14/10 paper edition, begins very much like the AP story, but it provides some follow-up on the Munich chapter of this latest showcase of yellow journalism:


Vatican sees campaign against the Pope
By RACHEL DONADIO and NICHOLAS KULISH

March 14, 2010

ROME — As new details emerged on allegations of child sexual abuse by priests ['Priests'? Only one has been named so far!] in the Munich archdiocese then led by Pope Benedict XVI, the Vatican spoke out on Saturday to protect the Pope against what it called an aggressive campaign against him in his native Germany.[Not just in Germany!]

At the same time, a high-ranking Vatican official overseeing internal investigations on Saturday acknowledged that 3,000 cases of suspected abuse of minors had come to its attention in the past decade, of which 20 percent had been brought to trial in Vatican courts.

In a note read on Vatican Radio on Saturday, the Vatican spokesman, the Rev. Federico Lombardi, said it was “evident that in recent days there are those who have tried, with a certain aggressive tenacity, in Regensburg and in Munich, to find elements to involve the Holy Father personally in issues of abuse.” He added, “It is clear that those efforts have failed.”

In Germany, a man who said he was sexually abused by a priest there in 1979 said Saturday that church officials had told him then that the priest would not be allowed to work with children again. Instead, the priest was allowed, under Benedict’s watch, to resume full duties almost immediately, where he went on to abuse more children.

The Vatican also sought to defend the Pope against criticism that a Vatican rule requiring secrecy in abuse cases was tantamount to obstruction of justice in civil courts.

Msgr. Charles J. Scicluna, the director of a tribunal inside the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the Vatican’s doctrinal arm, dismissed as “false and calumnious” accusations that Benedict covered up abuse cases when he oversaw investigations as prefect of that congregation for four years before becoming Pope.

In a rare and unusually frank public interview that appeared on the front page of Avvenire, the Italian Bishops Conference newspaper on Saturday, and circulated by the Vatican Press Office, Monsignor Scicluna acknowledged [That implies that he was holding back earlier! This is his first interview ever, these figures have never been known before, and no one - absolutely no one - thought of doing a story on the abuse cases raised to the CDF even after Scicluna first made the news in 2007 as the CDF's lead investigator into the case of Fr. Marcial Maciel!] that the Vatican had received about 3,000 accusations of abuse by priests of minors in the past decade, 80 percent of them from the United States.

He said that about 300 priests had been accused of pedophilia in the past nine years. The cases involved both diocesan and religious priests and regarded acts committed over the last 50 years, he said. He added that only 20 percent of priests had been tried — mostly in local dioceses but sometimes in Rome — and some of them had been acquitted.

Of the 3,000 total cases, he said, “We can say that about 60 percent of the cases chiefly involved sexual attraction towards adolescents of the same sex, another 30 percent involved heterosexual relations, and the remaining 10 percent were cases of pedophilia in the true sense of the term; that is, based on sexual attraction towards prepubescent children.”

He said that 60 percent of the total cases had not come to trial, largely because of the advanced age of the accused, but that they faced other “administrative and disciplinary provisions,” including being required to live in seclusion and prohibition from celebrating Mass and hearing confession.

“It’s true that there has been no formal condemnation,” Monsignor Scicluna said, adding, “It must be made absolutely clear that in these cases, some of which are particularly sensational and have caught the attention of the media, no absolution has taken place.”

In Germany, where hundreds of people have come forward in the last few months with accusations of abuse by priests, new details emerged Saturday about a case in the Munich Archdiocese that the church has acknowledged it made “serious mistakes” in handling. Pope Benedict, then Archbishop Joseph Ratzinger, was head of the archdiocese at the time.

The daily newspaper Süddeutsche Zeitung said that the pastor previously identified as H sexually abused an 11-year-old boy in Essen in 1979, including by forcing him to perform oral sex.

In a telephone interview on Saturday, the victim, who asked to be identified as Wilfried F. to protect his anonymity, said that the abuse occurred after a vacation trip to the Eifel mountains. The priest gave him alcohol, locked him in his bedroom, took off his clothes, and molested him, Wilfried F. said.

When the abuse was reported to the Church, the Church handled it as an internal matter without notifying the police or prosecutors. Wilfried F. said that church officials said the priest had been transferred to Munich “and that he would no longer be allowed to work with children.”

The archdiocese said in a statement on Friday that the priest was moved to Munich in 1980 for therapy with the approval of Archbishop Ratzinger. Vicar General Gerhard Gruber took responsibility for allowing him to return to pastoral work, where he later was convicted of sexually abusing minors.

“You see how they just kept moving him around,” Wilfried F. said. “He could keep doing it like before.”

In the interview on Saturday, Monsignor Scicluna also addressed accusations that the Vatican was obstructing justice by imposing secrecy on reports of abuse.

In 2001, Benedict, who was then in charge of Vatican investigations of abuse allegations, sent a letter to bishops counseling them to forward all cases of abuse of minors to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, where they were to be subject to secrecy.

While dismissing the idea that the Vatican imposed secrecy “in order to hide the facts,” Monsignor Scicluna said that “secrecy during the investigative phase served to protect the good name of all the people involved; first and foremost, the victims themselves, then the accused priests who have the right — as everyone does — to the presumption of innocence until proven guilty.”

But he said church secrecy had “never been understood as a ban on denouncing the crimes to the civil authorities.”

Monsignor Scicluna also dismissed as “unjustified” criticism that the wheels of Vatican justice moved too slowly. At the same time, he acknowledged that he oversaw an office of 10 people.

[It is very disingenuous, if not downright dishonest, for these newsmen to write as though 'justice' for the victims had to depend only on what the CDF can do and cannot do! - when in these days of multimillion-dollar settlements, complainants know they can always go directly to the police and seek criminal justice for their aggressors. At which point their success or failure will depend on what they can prove. They do not need teh CDF for that! ]



Catholic fury over The Times's
coverage of Pope Benedict XVI

March 13th, 2010

There is international outrage in Catholic circles over a headline in The Times this morning that many people regard as utterly misleading and part of the newspaper’s reliably biased coverage (reinforced by vicious cartoons) of anything to do with Pope Benedict XVI.

The headline, over a story by Richard Owen, reads: “Pope knew priest was paedophile but allowed him to continue with ministry.” A universally admired Catholic journalist contacted me this morning and accused The Times of (and I am toning this down for legal reasons) an extremely serious error of judgment.

Another respected commentator, the American journalist Phil Lawler, takes the headline to pieces on CatholicCulture.org. This is what he has to say:

---

Count on the London Times to offer the most sensational coverage of a news story involving the Catholic Church. The headline on today’s report by Richard Owen screams: 'Pope knew priest was paedophile but allowed him to continue with ministry'

That’s grossly misleading, downright irresponsible. The reporter runs ahead of his evidence – standard procedure for a Times journalist – but even Richard Owen does not allege anything to justify the headline.

[Lawler goes on with a summary of the 'Story of H', but he gets some things wrwong - I do not know what translation he read - so I won't reproduce it]

A grievous mistake was made in this case; that much is clear now, and the vicar general has sorrowfully taken responsibility for the error. Could you say that the future Pontiff should have been more vigilant? Perhaps. But to suggest that he made the decision to put a pedophile back in circulation is an outrageous distortion of the facts.

The AP story carries a very different headline:
Pope’s former diocese admits error over priest
That’s not so eye-catching. But the headline fits the facts.

---

And now let us turn to the commentary by Ruth Gledhill, under another nasty headline: “Scandal still not enough to threaten the Pope”. (The Times will just have try harder, eh?) It begins:

---

The case of a sex abuser being given accommodation in Munich with the approval of its then archbishop, now the Pope, is reminiscent of the scandal that engulfed Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor soon after his appointment to Westminster.

---

No, it is NOT reminiscent of that scandal, Ruth. The Pope did not put a paedophile back into circulation; in contrast, the Cardinal showed very bad judgment in the case of Michael Hill and was lucky to hang on to his position. But, by writing such bollocks, you make it reminiscent.

And then there is this gem: [Still fron Gledhill]
"The Pope is pretty unassailable. He is not elected…"

Ruth, it long ago became clear to me that you do not know nearly enough about the Catholic Church to comment on it authoritatively. But surely even you have heard of something called a conclave.



I was really trying to keep clear of the news media that one can count on the be predictably nasty and try their very best to exact a pound of flesh from the Pope, but I thought I'd check what Damian Thompson has said so far of this wolves-baying-for-the-kill MSM narrative, and the above is what I get.

As much as I have railed against Richard Owen in the past for his many and glaring journalistic 'crimes', it is much more likely that the desk editor at The Times is the culprit for the inflammatory headline. Not that Owen isn't once again guilty of his habitual bad faith in the article itself, but it's less blatant...

[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 14/03/2010 10:37]