The Permanent Diaconate in the Latin Rite was restored by Blessed Pope Paul VI in 1967 following the discernment of the need for and relevancy of the Order by the Council Fathers of Vatican II.
Eastern Catholic Churches consistently maintained the Apostolic Tradition of a Permanent Diaconate ordered to service and the work of charity, while the Latin Church suppressed the Order as a permanent Clerical state, still considering it to be part of the Sacrament of Holy Orders but only as a transitional stage to the Order of Priesthood.
In 1968, just one year after the Pope restored the Permanent Diaconate, United States Bishops petitioned the Holy See for permission to restore the Order in this country.
As of 2017, there were 18,287 Permanent Deacons in the United States, compared to 37,181 Priests, comprising almost 50% of Catholic Clerics in the country.
Remarkably, 40 % of all Permanent Deacons worldwide are in the United States.
Every diocese in the country has Permanent Deacons. Almost every diocese has an active Permanent Diaconate recruiting and formation office.
I raise the subject of the history of the Permanent Diaconate as a sign of what we might expect will happen should Pope Francis allow for the Ordination of married men of proven virtue to the Priesthood.
We should remember that the impetus for restoring the Permanent Diaconate was the lack of Clergy to serve the needs of the missionary efforts of the Church especially in South and Latin America.
Pope Francis has signaled an openness to ordaining married men of proven virtue even as he named an 18-person preparatory committee to help draw up next year’s Synod whose official theme is “Amazonia: New Pathways for the Church and for an Integral Ecology”.
The Synod will address the difficulties of a region troubled by poverty, environmental destruction and a lack of Clergy to cover a vast area.
Several Bishops and theologians in the Amazon region have proposed allowing married Priests as a necessary and practical response to the Priest shortage.
Neo-conservative reactionaries have already labeled the proposal a “backdoor” way to undermine Clerical celibacy in the Church.
In previous posts, I have suggested that Pope Francis will most likely respond to such a proposal by leaving the decision in the hands of the local Bishops of the area who know best what is needed to care for those entrusted to their spiritual and Sacramental care.
But, let there be no doubt that, should the Church go forward with the ordination of married men of proven virtue in the Amazon, one can expect that in a decade or so the overwhelming majority of married Priests will found in the United States.
No question in my mind whatsoever.
And why not.
No one can doubt there is a shortage of Priests almost everywhere around the world.
Why would a proposal to supplement the Cleric in the Amazon with ordained married Priests not be an equally acceptable response to the shortages of Priests elsewhere?
The virtue of individual Permanent Deacons and their commitment to their vocation notwithstanding, the reality is that they provide little in the way of vital Sacramental care in the fulfillment of the ministry available to them.
Permanent Deacons are not able to offer Holy Mass, hear Confessions, anoint the sick and the dying. And, while they occasionally witness weddings and baptize infants as well as preach here and there on weekends, theirs is what I refer to as an “attendant ministry” assisting but not providing much needed Priestly ministry.
The point I am making is simply this.
Should the Amazon Synod open the door to married men being ordained Priests, they will in a decade or so constitute the majority of Priests serving in the United States and American married Priests will far outnumber those in any other part of the world as well.
All this is dependent on whether Pope Francis, by the grace of God, is still alive and well at the time the Synod is to be convened in 2019.
If he is not, it's anyone's guess whether or not the Synod will even proceed.
But if Francis is still Vicar of Christ, I think the proposal will be made and the response which I have suggested the Pope will make are rather certain.
So the Church needs to prepare for what may be coming in the way of how the face of the Priesthood may appear in the not too distant future.
And remember: you heard it hear first!
Tuesday, July 31, 2018
Monday, July 30, 2018
WHAT MIGHT A PROTOCOL FOR INVESTIGATING BISHOPS LOOK LIKE?
In the wake of the McCarrick scandal, I (and others wiser than I ever will be) have insisted that the Pope Francis and the Holy See establish legal protocols which would govern how allegations against Bishops are investigated and adjudicated.
But what would such a protocol look like?
I suggest the following.
Upon receipt of a allegation of criminal behavior against a Bishop, the Holy See should be immediately informed as well as police and civil authorities.
The Holy See should dispatch emissaries to conduct a preliminary investigation to determine if there are reasons to suspect the allegation is credible and actionable.
Archbishop Scicluna has done an excellent job investigating such allegations. More of his character and skill are needed to conduct such inquiries for the Holy See, perhaps assisted by those with expertise in criminal investigations: private detectives and retired police officers, for example.
If the preliminary investigation finds that an allegation is credible and actionable, the Bishop should be immediately suspended from Office and an Apostolic Administrator be appointed to govern the diocese in the interim.
From that moment on, two investigations would proceed: one by the Holy See and the other by local government prosecutors.
For its part, the Vatican would conduct further investigation, employing independent forensic agencies whose findings, along with the testimony of victims and witnesses, would be submitted to an ecclesiastical tribunal for judgment.
Of course, the accused Bishop would be given every opportunity to defend himself, including the cross-examination of accusers and witnesses as well as the presentation of evidence to refute the findings of any experts called to offer testimony.
The secular criminal prosecution would follow the protocols established by the courts.
The Vatican tribunal, weighing the probative value of the evidence presented to it, would then make conclusions to be presented to the Pope, who alone is competent to judge a Bishop.
This tribunal would be a permanent Vatican agency and operate completely independent from interference or influence by Roman Curia.
Within 30 days of receipt of the tribunal's conclusions, the Pope would render judgment and issue a sentence either exhonorating the Bishop or finding him guilty of the charges made against him.
If exhonorated, the Bishop would be publicly declared to have been found not guilty of the alleged charges and be returned to ministry, pending the outcome of the civil proceedings.
If found guilty, the Bishop would be suspended a divinis (from the exercise of his Priestly ministry) and, if warranted, be removed from the Clerical state by way of laicization.
This is but a broad overview of what such an ecclesiastical judicial process would look like.
Certainly, details would have to be added and tweeked to insure justice not only for victims but for the accused as well.
One thing is certain: the Church needs to get its act together. It must provide for a fair and rapid adjudication of allegations against a Bishop.
It must rely on outside and independent investigators competent in the prosecution of such charges. And it must be completely transparent throughout the entire process of adjudication.
Unless such a clear protocol is established and put into practice, the confidence of the faithful in the Holy See, the Bishops and the Church itself will continue to deteriorate.
The time to act is now!
But what would such a protocol look like?
I suggest the following.
Upon receipt of a allegation of criminal behavior against a Bishop, the Holy See should be immediately informed as well as police and civil authorities.
The Holy See should dispatch emissaries to conduct a preliminary investigation to determine if there are reasons to suspect the allegation is credible and actionable.
Archbishop Scicluna has done an excellent job investigating such allegations. More of his character and skill are needed to conduct such inquiries for the Holy See, perhaps assisted by those with expertise in criminal investigations: private detectives and retired police officers, for example.
If the preliminary investigation finds that an allegation is credible and actionable, the Bishop should be immediately suspended from Office and an Apostolic Administrator be appointed to govern the diocese in the interim.
From that moment on, two investigations would proceed: one by the Holy See and the other by local government prosecutors.
For its part, the Vatican would conduct further investigation, employing independent forensic agencies whose findings, along with the testimony of victims and witnesses, would be submitted to an ecclesiastical tribunal for judgment.
Of course, the accused Bishop would be given every opportunity to defend himself, including the cross-examination of accusers and witnesses as well as the presentation of evidence to refute the findings of any experts called to offer testimony.
The secular criminal prosecution would follow the protocols established by the courts.
The Vatican tribunal, weighing the probative value of the evidence presented to it, would then make conclusions to be presented to the Pope, who alone is competent to judge a Bishop.
This tribunal would be a permanent Vatican agency and operate completely independent from interference or influence by Roman Curia.
Within 30 days of receipt of the tribunal's conclusions, the Pope would render judgment and issue a sentence either exhonorating the Bishop or finding him guilty of the charges made against him.
If exhonorated, the Bishop would be publicly declared to have been found not guilty of the alleged charges and be returned to ministry, pending the outcome of the civil proceedings.
If found guilty, the Bishop would be suspended a divinis (from the exercise of his Priestly ministry) and, if warranted, be removed from the Clerical state by way of laicization.
This is but a broad overview of what such an ecclesiastical judicial process would look like.
Certainly, details would have to be added and tweeked to insure justice not only for victims but for the accused as well.
One thing is certain: the Church needs to get its act together. It must provide for a fair and rapid adjudication of allegations against a Bishop.
It must rely on outside and independent investigators competent in the prosecution of such charges. And it must be completely transparent throughout the entire process of adjudication.
Unless such a clear protocol is established and put into practice, the confidence of the faithful in the Holy See, the Bishops and the Church itself will continue to deteriorate.
The time to act is now!
FOR BISHOPS: THE MOMENT OF RECKONING HAS ARRIVED
As I predicted early on, the McCarrick scandal would mark a turning point for Bishops.
On Saturday, Pope Francis accepted McCarrick’s resignation from the College of Cardinals. This moment, not witnessed by the Church since 1911, marks a new era: Bishops will no longer be able to divert attention away from their failings in matters pertaining to the sexual abuse of minors.
But, in McCarrick’s case only one half of that story played out.
McCarrick resigned (or was forced to resign) because he personally abused minors.
The question still remained regarding the response of the Pope toward those Bishops who, while personally not guilty of sexual abuse, failed to act to protect those entrusted to their care?
That question appears to have been answered today.
The Pope Francis accepted the resignation of Australian Archbishop Philip Wilson, the most senior Catholic Church leader to be convicted in a criminal court of concealing sexual abuse.
The turning point I predicted has come to pass.
Today marks the second time in three days that the Pope has accepted a major resignation stemming from a Bishop’s involvement in the sexual of abuse of minors.
For the Pope and the Church long reluctant to hold those at the highest echelons of authority accountable for their criminal actions or omissions the moment has come.
Archbishop Wilson was the Adelaide Archbishop who had been found guilty in May of concealing child sex abuse during the 1970s. He had previously refused to resign, saying he was entitled to due process and was pressing forward with an appeal.
But Wilson’s case had become a point of widespread contention in a nation scarred by decades of sex abuse within the Church. And earlier this month, earlier this month, Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull called on Francis to discipline Wilson, saying, “The time has come for the Pope to sack him.”
At the present time, two other Cardinals, Riccardo Ezzati and Francisco Errazuriz, face multiple accusations of having known about cases of sexual abuse, as well as abuses of power and conscience, and failed to act - in some cases, actively attempting to shelter the Clergy involved.
Victims, activists and outraged Chileans have all called for both men to exit the College of Cardinals too, but, at least so far, such action hasn’t been forthcoming.
Now that McCarrick's fall from grace has come to pass, one can only assume (dangerous as that always is) that Ezzati and Errazuriz (if the charges against them are proven) will be held to the same accountability imposed upon McCarrick and Wilson.
Still, Pope Francis has yet to make a public (if not personal) commitment to establish a protocol by which Bishops are to be held accountable.
While we don’t know what private pressures the Holy Father placed upon McCarrick and Wilson to resign, publicly they were the ones who acted and not the Holy See.
They resigned. They were not removed.
Some would hold it is a distinction without a difference. I disagree.
Questions, very serious questions remain of how McCarrick’s behavior could have gone unaddressed for so long. Who knew the history of McCarrick’s abuse and failed to insist that he be held accountable, even remaining silent as McCarrick advanced even to the point of being made a Prince of the Church?
If you listen to the reactions of the Bishops to McCarrick’s resignation, they are eager to put the disturbing and lingering questions to rest.
But the Bishops strategy to “duck and cover” is not going to work.
The secular media (especially The New York Times and the Washington Post) have latched onto this story and have been successful in raising the ire of the Catholic faithful who are now beginning to clamor publicly that all those who knew about the allegations against McCarrick and failed to act are culplable parties and must be held equally accountable.
That list may prove to be long indeed.
July ends tomorrow. The next General Assembly of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) convenes November 12 through 15.
The USCCB best prepare itself for what will a most uncomfortable assembly indeed.
On Saturday, Pope Francis accepted McCarrick’s resignation from the College of Cardinals. This moment, not witnessed by the Church since 1911, marks a new era: Bishops will no longer be able to divert attention away from their failings in matters pertaining to the sexual abuse of minors.
But, in McCarrick’s case only one half of that story played out.
McCarrick resigned (or was forced to resign) because he personally abused minors.
The question still remained regarding the response of the Pope toward those Bishops who, while personally not guilty of sexual abuse, failed to act to protect those entrusted to their care?
That question appears to have been answered today.
The Pope Francis accepted the resignation of Australian Archbishop Philip Wilson, the most senior Catholic Church leader to be convicted in a criminal court of concealing sexual abuse.
The turning point I predicted has come to pass.
Today marks the second time in three days that the Pope has accepted a major resignation stemming from a Bishop’s involvement in the sexual of abuse of minors.
For the Pope and the Church long reluctant to hold those at the highest echelons of authority accountable for their criminal actions or omissions the moment has come.
Archbishop Wilson was the Adelaide Archbishop who had been found guilty in May of concealing child sex abuse during the 1970s. He had previously refused to resign, saying he was entitled to due process and was pressing forward with an appeal.
But Wilson’s case had become a point of widespread contention in a nation scarred by decades of sex abuse within the Church. And earlier this month, earlier this month, Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull called on Francis to discipline Wilson, saying, “The time has come for the Pope to sack him.”
At the present time, two other Cardinals, Riccardo Ezzati and Francisco Errazuriz, face multiple accusations of having known about cases of sexual abuse, as well as abuses of power and conscience, and failed to act - in some cases, actively attempting to shelter the Clergy involved.
Victims, activists and outraged Chileans have all called for both men to exit the College of Cardinals too, but, at least so far, such action hasn’t been forthcoming.
Now that McCarrick's fall from grace has come to pass, one can only assume (dangerous as that always is) that Ezzati and Errazuriz (if the charges against them are proven) will be held to the same accountability imposed upon McCarrick and Wilson.
Still, Pope Francis has yet to make a public (if not personal) commitment to establish a protocol by which Bishops are to be held accountable.
While we don’t know what private pressures the Holy Father placed upon McCarrick and Wilson to resign, publicly they were the ones who acted and not the Holy See.
They resigned. They were not removed.
Some would hold it is a distinction without a difference. I disagree.
Questions, very serious questions remain of how McCarrick’s behavior could have gone unaddressed for so long. Who knew the history of McCarrick’s abuse and failed to insist that he be held accountable, even remaining silent as McCarrick advanced even to the point of being made a Prince of the Church?
If you listen to the reactions of the Bishops to McCarrick’s resignation, they are eager to put the disturbing and lingering questions to rest.
But the Bishops strategy to “duck and cover” is not going to work.
The secular media (especially The New York Times and the Washington Post) have latched onto this story and have been successful in raising the ire of the Catholic faithful who are now beginning to clamor publicly that all those who knew about the allegations against McCarrick and failed to act are culplable parties and must be held equally accountable.
That list may prove to be long indeed.
July ends tomorrow. The next General Assembly of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) convenes November 12 through 15.
The USCCB best prepare itself for what will a most uncomfortable assembly indeed.
LESSONS FROM 1790
The French nobility was a privileged social class in France during the Middle Ages and the Early Modern period to the Revolution in 1790.
In the political system of pre-Revolutionary France, Catholic Clergy comprised the First Estate, nobility made up the Second Estate of the Estates General, and the bourgeoisie and peasant making up the Third Estate.
As all too often happens, those at the top of the social order become so engrossed in their own comfort and sense of worth, that they become indifferent to those over whom they exercise authority or care. It is always the cause of their undoing.
Queen Marie Antoinette, consort to Louis XVI, would become a symbol of the excesses of the French monarchy and nobility. She is often credited with the famous quote "Let them eat cake," upon learning that the peasants had no bread.
Such indifference to the suffering of the people would lead to her beheading nine months after her husband was likewise executed by order of the Revolutionary Tribunal.
History has powerful lessons to teach, if we are willing to be its apt students.
There can be little doubt that Bishops have never lost their sense of nobility and aristocratic superiority over the Catholic faithful.
That which was the undoing of the French aristocracy is playing out today within the ranks of the Episcopacy and may prove to be the undoing of the Bishops as well.
Nowhere does this corruption show itself with greater clarity than at the highest level of Church authority, the Vatican itself.
Pope Francis, an outsider to Vatican maneuverings and intrigues, has yet to prove himself capable of tearing down the walls of Curial bureaucracy which has remained completely closed to the slightest suggestion that the Church has lost touch with the Catholic faithful and needs to restore vitality in fulfilling its Divine Mandate to make disciples of all nations.
And nowhere is renewal and restoration a more pressing need than within the College of Bishops.
Like the French nobles insensitive to the dire straits of the suffering masses, the Church and the Bishops are likely to reap a bitter harvest indeed.
Up until now, Pope Francis has appeared to be a victim of the corruption and intransigence within the walls of the Vatican.
He must act now and he must act decisively to respond to this crisis or risk the judgment of history that he was incapable of resolving the problem because he himself was the problem.
The Pope's first step in the restoration of the Episcopacy must be a commitment to justice by way of care for victims and punishment for offenders.
Not only Priests, but more importantly Bishops, who have shown that they are unfit for ministry must be removed from the Clerical state and the reasons for that removal communicated to the faithful with total transparency.
Up until the present, the Pope’s responses have been personal and removals arbitrary and largely in response to public outrage.
The Pope must establish canonical procedures and protocols which will ensure that such justice is administered quickly, fairly and without prejudice.
The French monarchy and nobility were oblivious to the rebellion which would lead to their ignominious and bloody deaths at the guillotine.
A rebellion is likewise seething within the Church at this moment.
It will not be a revolution within the Body of Christ, but (as I continue to fear) an abandonment of it by multitudes of souls who simply lost faith, not in God, but in the institution he imparted to continue His redemptive work.
Death, to be sure, will accompany this revolution of abandonment. But it will be the death of charity and hope, of faith and goodness, a fate worse than human death itself.
God be with Pope Francis at this critical moment in the life of Your Church. Give him wisdom and the fortitude to do what is right and be guided by Your powerful grace.
Come, Holy Spirit, come!
In the political system of pre-Revolutionary France, Catholic Clergy comprised the First Estate, nobility made up the Second Estate of the Estates General, and the bourgeoisie and peasant making up the Third Estate.
As all too often happens, those at the top of the social order become so engrossed in their own comfort and sense of worth, that they become indifferent to those over whom they exercise authority or care. It is always the cause of their undoing.
Queen Marie Antoinette, consort to Louis XVI, would become a symbol of the excesses of the French monarchy and nobility. She is often credited with the famous quote "Let them eat cake," upon learning that the peasants had no bread.
Such indifference to the suffering of the people would lead to her beheading nine months after her husband was likewise executed by order of the Revolutionary Tribunal.
History has powerful lessons to teach, if we are willing to be its apt students.
There can be little doubt that Bishops have never lost their sense of nobility and aristocratic superiority over the Catholic faithful.
That which was the undoing of the French aristocracy is playing out today within the ranks of the Episcopacy and may prove to be the undoing of the Bishops as well.
Nowhere does this corruption show itself with greater clarity than at the highest level of Church authority, the Vatican itself.
Pope Francis, an outsider to Vatican maneuverings and intrigues, has yet to prove himself capable of tearing down the walls of Curial bureaucracy which has remained completely closed to the slightest suggestion that the Church has lost touch with the Catholic faithful and needs to restore vitality in fulfilling its Divine Mandate to make disciples of all nations.
And nowhere is renewal and restoration a more pressing need than within the College of Bishops.
Like the French nobles insensitive to the dire straits of the suffering masses, the Church and the Bishops are likely to reap a bitter harvest indeed.
Up until now, Pope Francis has appeared to be a victim of the corruption and intransigence within the walls of the Vatican.
He must act now and he must act decisively to respond to this crisis or risk the judgment of history that he was incapable of resolving the problem because he himself was the problem.
The Pope's first step in the restoration of the Episcopacy must be a commitment to justice by way of care for victims and punishment for offenders.
Not only Priests, but more importantly Bishops, who have shown that they are unfit for ministry must be removed from the Clerical state and the reasons for that removal communicated to the faithful with total transparency.
Up until the present, the Pope’s responses have been personal and removals arbitrary and largely in response to public outrage.
The Pope must establish canonical procedures and protocols which will ensure that such justice is administered quickly, fairly and without prejudice.
The French monarchy and nobility were oblivious to the rebellion which would lead to their ignominious and bloody deaths at the guillotine.
A rebellion is likewise seething within the Church at this moment.
It will not be a revolution within the Body of Christ, but (as I continue to fear) an abandonment of it by multitudes of souls who simply lost faith, not in God, but in the institution he imparted to continue His redemptive work.
Death, to be sure, will accompany this revolution of abandonment. But it will be the death of charity and hope, of faith and goodness, a fate worse than human death itself.
God be with Pope Francis at this critical moment in the life of Your Church. Give him wisdom and the fortitude to do what is right and be guided by Your powerful grace.
Come, Holy Spirit, come!
Sunday, July 29, 2018
BACK HOME IN ARIZONA
It's good to be back home in Arizona after a wonderful visit to the beautiful environs of San Diego, California.
It was a short trip, just two days, but worth it.
The trip takes about 6 hours from Mesa and is practically all interstate highway except for the last 20 miles or so.
I enjoyed a delicious supper at Jake's in Del Mar, just north of La Jolla along the spectacular shores of the Pacific.
Good food, great conversation and breath-taking scenery!
Who could ask for anything more.
Thanks, Lord, for being so kind to me.
Will be posting again tomorrow.
Great to be back.
My two kitties, Cowboy and Snuggles, seem genuinely happy to have their "Dad" back home as well.
Until tomorrow's post, God bless!
It was a short trip, just two days, but worth it.
The trip takes about 6 hours from Mesa and is practically all interstate highway except for the last 20 miles or so.
I enjoyed a delicious supper at Jake's in Del Mar, just north of La Jolla along the spectacular shores of the Pacific.
Good food, great conversation and breath-taking scenery!
Who could ask for anything more.
Thanks, Lord, for being so kind to me.
Will be posting again tomorrow.
Great to be back.
My two kitties, Cowboy and Snuggles, seem genuinely happy to have their "Dad" back home as well.
Until tomorrow's post, God bless!
Thursday, July 26, 2018
AWAY UNTIL THE WEEKEND
The last few weeks have been very busy for me trying to keep pace with the various stories which have brought embarrassment and shame to our beloved Church.
I confess I have been overwhelmed by following the news and commenting on the reports each day.
I need a break. And so....
I will be away from home the next two days visiting with an old friend from my seminary days in Rome.
During this brief time, I will not be posting articles.
I beg your indulgence and patience until the weekend.
In the meantime, let us continue to pray for the Church, our most precious gift and treasure!
I confess I have been overwhelmed by following the news and commenting on the reports each day.
I need a break. And so....
I will be away from home the next two days visiting with an old friend from my seminary days in Rome.
During this brief time, I will not be posting articles.
I beg your indulgence and patience until the weekend.
In the meantime, let us continue to pray for the Church, our most precious gift and treasure!
KEEPING FAITH IN THE POWER OF THE HOLY SPIRIT
Of late, much of the news about the Church has been pretty negative and frustrating.
Sadly, the Church has shown little evidence that it is prepared to engage in the type of restoration necessary to protect and pass on the legacy of authoritative teaching to the next generations of the Christian faithful.
Modernity presents humanity with some difficult choices.
It is the duty and mission of the Bishops to provide the wisdom discernible from the Sacred Scripture and the wealth of the Church’s Tradition that humanity will require to avoid its own destruction.
Bishops of late have shown themselves much to eager to compromise their legitimate teaching office to preserve a kind of artificial tranquility between the Church and modern society.
Something needs changing.
The needed change is possible.
But the restoration and reform called for will come at a price.
To restore confidence, dignity and respect in their moral voice, Bishops will need to make personal sacrifices and make controversial, unpopular decisions. The willingness to do so will be the source of inspiration for Catholic believers to follow.
But these days, the Episcopal Office itself has been so decimated by scandal that there appears to be little hope that the People of God will be willing to once again submit themselves to the authority of the Successors of the Apostles entrusted by the Lord to pastor his flock.
Trust is a precious commodity. Once lost, it is near impossible to re-establish.
As difficult as it may seem, there is reason to maintain hope that the Holy Spirit will not fail to raise up leaders within the Body of Christ capable of assuming the tasks the Spirit lays upon their shoulders.
Often such leaders comes from outside the College of Bishops.
The history of the Church has shown this to be the case time after time in the lives of such prophetic reformers as Francis, Dominic, Benedict, Peter Canisius, Joan of Arc, Theresa of Avila, and Teresa of Calcutta.
But as needful as the People of God are of reformers and prophets, they themselves must also prove to be worthy of them.
We cannot expect the needed restoration of the Church to take place only at the top echelon of Apostolic authority.
Individual Catholics must be willing to accept and defend the authority of the Successors of the Apostles, but at the same time hold them accountable for their words and actions.
Catholics must engage themselves in the work of the Gospel.
The days of mindless, obsequious obedience must end. Bishops can no longer parade themselves as aristocratic autocrats with no concern for the impact which their actions have upon the faithful.
For their part, the faithful must demand that their Bishops are committed to providing for their spiritual and sacramental care and must hold them accountable to higher authority when they do not.
The Bishops need to speak with a clear, uncompromising voice. The People of God must be willing to open their ears, their minds and their hearts.
The Bishops, on their part, must show themselves willing and capable of listening to the faithful, even when what they hear in response to their words and actions may be difficult and burdensome.
At present, it seems as though the Bishops have lost interest in being pastors and are more concerned with acting like CEOs. Likewise, the People of God seem much too ready to abandon their Catholic heritage and listen the wisdom of the secular gurus and high-priests of materialism.
Only the Holy Spirit can break the stranglehold of indifference and apathy at the corruption presently assaulting the Church.
We fail when we do not pray. When we do not entrust ourselves to the powerful presence and influence which the Holy Spirit can exercise among God’s People, we are lost.
Each day, we need to surrender and entrust ourselves to the Paraclete and Comforter, the Lord and Giver of Life.
Come, Holy Spirit, renew the face of the Church and kindle within Your People the fire of Your Love.
Come, Holy Spirit, come!
Sadly, the Church has shown little evidence that it is prepared to engage in the type of restoration necessary to protect and pass on the legacy of authoritative teaching to the next generations of the Christian faithful.
Modernity presents humanity with some difficult choices.
It is the duty and mission of the Bishops to provide the wisdom discernible from the Sacred Scripture and the wealth of the Church’s Tradition that humanity will require to avoid its own destruction.
Bishops of late have shown themselves much to eager to compromise their legitimate teaching office to preserve a kind of artificial tranquility between the Church and modern society.
Something needs changing.
The needed change is possible.
But the restoration and reform called for will come at a price.
To restore confidence, dignity and respect in their moral voice, Bishops will need to make personal sacrifices and make controversial, unpopular decisions. The willingness to do so will be the source of inspiration for Catholic believers to follow.
But these days, the Episcopal Office itself has been so decimated by scandal that there appears to be little hope that the People of God will be willing to once again submit themselves to the authority of the Successors of the Apostles entrusted by the Lord to pastor his flock.
Trust is a precious commodity. Once lost, it is near impossible to re-establish.
As difficult as it may seem, there is reason to maintain hope that the Holy Spirit will not fail to raise up leaders within the Body of Christ capable of assuming the tasks the Spirit lays upon their shoulders.
Often such leaders comes from outside the College of Bishops.
The history of the Church has shown this to be the case time after time in the lives of such prophetic reformers as Francis, Dominic, Benedict, Peter Canisius, Joan of Arc, Theresa of Avila, and Teresa of Calcutta.
But as needful as the People of God are of reformers and prophets, they themselves must also prove to be worthy of them.
We cannot expect the needed restoration of the Church to take place only at the top echelon of Apostolic authority.
Individual Catholics must be willing to accept and defend the authority of the Successors of the Apostles, but at the same time hold them accountable for their words and actions.
Catholics must engage themselves in the work of the Gospel.
The days of mindless, obsequious obedience must end. Bishops can no longer parade themselves as aristocratic autocrats with no concern for the impact which their actions have upon the faithful.
For their part, the faithful must demand that their Bishops are committed to providing for their spiritual and sacramental care and must hold them accountable to higher authority when they do not.
The Bishops need to speak with a clear, uncompromising voice. The People of God must be willing to open their ears, their minds and their hearts.
The Bishops, on their part, must show themselves willing and capable of listening to the faithful, even when what they hear in response to their words and actions may be difficult and burdensome.
At present, it seems as though the Bishops have lost interest in being pastors and are more concerned with acting like CEOs. Likewise, the People of God seem much too ready to abandon their Catholic heritage and listen the wisdom of the secular gurus and high-priests of materialism.
Only the Holy Spirit can break the stranglehold of indifference and apathy at the corruption presently assaulting the Church.
We fail when we do not pray. When we do not entrust ourselves to the powerful presence and influence which the Holy Spirit can exercise among God’s People, we are lost.
Each day, we need to surrender and entrust ourselves to the Paraclete and Comforter, the Lord and Giver of Life.
Come, Holy Spirit, renew the face of the Church and kindle within Your People the fire of Your Love.
Come, Holy Spirit, come!
Wednesday, July 25, 2018
CARDINAL O'MALLEY'S FAILED ATTEMPT AT THE "WASHINGTON TWO-STEP"
Bureaucracies are made by man. The pathology of irresponsible authority is to hide behind these bureaucracies to avoid responsibility for actions based upon them.
Within any complex organization, there is need for bureaus to process and handle the many demands which are part of day to day administration in the effort to fulfill the organization’s purpose or mission.
That mission demands the full attention of the organization and not internal squabbles over department competencies or responsibilities.
The bureaucracy must serve the true agenda of the organization.
In the context of the Church, that agenda is always the care and salvation of souls.
And so, it is with no a little curiosity and much astonishment that I note the remarks by Cardinal Sean O’Malley of Boston who called for Bishops to be held accountable for abuse or cover up.
“These cases and others require more than apologies. They raise up the fact that when charges are brought regarding a Bishop or a Cardinal, a major gap still exists in the Church’s policies on sexual conduct and sexual abuse,” Cardinal O'Malley wrote on Tuesday of this week.
“While the Church in the United States has adopted a zero tolerance policy regarding the sexual abuse of minors by Priests we must have clearer procedures for cases involving Bishops. Transparent and consistent protocols are needed to provide justice for the victims and to adequately respond to the legitimate indignation of the community. The Church needs a strong and comprehensive policy to address Bishops’ violations of the vows of celibacy in cases of the criminal abuse of minors and in cases involving adults.”
Cardinal O’Malley stated he had reached this conclusion through his experience in several dioceses and with the Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors.
I fully concur with the remarks of His Eminence.
But, in the same statement, O'Malley addressed reports that he he was contacted in 2015 by Father Boniface Ramsey, who was reported allegations of McCarrick's misconduct with seminarians.
And here precisely is where O’Malley showed how inept he is at the art of misdirection.
Cardinal O’Malley stated that he did not “personally receive” the letter from Father Ramsey: “In keeping with the practice for matters concerning the Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors, at the staff level the letter was reviewed and determined that the matters presented did not fall under the purview of the Commission or the Archdiocese of Boston, which was shared with Father Ramsey in reply.”
And so, the Cardinal wishes to leave it at that, as though the fact that a report of McCarrick’s sexual assault upon seminarians was somehow misdirected in the myriad departments of the Roman Curia somehow absolves him of any personal responsibility.
O’Malley is President of the Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors. In that post, he is responsible for what does or does not come to the attention of the Commission for investigation and recommendation to the Holy See.
The proverbial "buck stops at your desk", Your Eminence.
And if such a critical and sensitive communication from the rector of a seminary regarding a Cardinal’s sexual abuse of seminarians doesn’t appear on your desk, Your Eminence, then some answers are in order to a whole host of questions about your ability and competence to head a Pontifical Commission specifically formed to address such horrific crimes, especially when they are alleged to have been perpetrated by a fellow-member of the College of Cardinals.
If there is any “misdirection” happening in this story, it is that which Cardinal O’Malley is trying to accomplish.
It’s the old strategy customarily employed by government officials, in America we call it the “Washington two-step”.
In this “dance”, you avoid responsibility by getting a “step ahead” of an embarrassing or scandalous story by decrying the actual misconduct or negligence you yourself are responsible for committing.
So O’Malley blasts the Church for not taking Bishops to task for their sexual abuse, while the very office he heads to do that shuffled Father Ramsey’s incriminating letter concerning Cardinal McCarrick through bureaucratic channels until it was utterly ignored.
It doesn’t play, Your Eminence.
First, an apology from you is warranted.
Common decency and respect for the office you hold would suggest that you step down because you bumbled what very well may become the scandal of the decade.
Within any complex organization, there is need for bureaus to process and handle the many demands which are part of day to day administration in the effort to fulfill the organization’s purpose or mission.
That mission demands the full attention of the organization and not internal squabbles over department competencies or responsibilities.
The bureaucracy must serve the true agenda of the organization.
In the context of the Church, that agenda is always the care and salvation of souls.
And so, it is with no a little curiosity and much astonishment that I note the remarks by Cardinal Sean O’Malley of Boston who called for Bishops to be held accountable for abuse or cover up.
“These cases and others require more than apologies. They raise up the fact that when charges are brought regarding a Bishop or a Cardinal, a major gap still exists in the Church’s policies on sexual conduct and sexual abuse,” Cardinal O'Malley wrote on Tuesday of this week.
“While the Church in the United States has adopted a zero tolerance policy regarding the sexual abuse of minors by Priests we must have clearer procedures for cases involving Bishops. Transparent and consistent protocols are needed to provide justice for the victims and to adequately respond to the legitimate indignation of the community. The Church needs a strong and comprehensive policy to address Bishops’ violations of the vows of celibacy in cases of the criminal abuse of minors and in cases involving adults.”
Cardinal O’Malley stated he had reached this conclusion through his experience in several dioceses and with the Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors.
I fully concur with the remarks of His Eminence.
But, in the same statement, O'Malley addressed reports that he he was contacted in 2015 by Father Boniface Ramsey, who was reported allegations of McCarrick's misconduct with seminarians.
And here precisely is where O’Malley showed how inept he is at the art of misdirection.
Cardinal O’Malley stated that he did not “personally receive” the letter from Father Ramsey: “In keeping with the practice for matters concerning the Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors, at the staff level the letter was reviewed and determined that the matters presented did not fall under the purview of the Commission or the Archdiocese of Boston, which was shared with Father Ramsey in reply.”
And so, the Cardinal wishes to leave it at that, as though the fact that a report of McCarrick’s sexual assault upon seminarians was somehow misdirected in the myriad departments of the Roman Curia somehow absolves him of any personal responsibility.
O’Malley is President of the Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors. In that post, he is responsible for what does or does not come to the attention of the Commission for investigation and recommendation to the Holy See.
The proverbial "buck stops at your desk", Your Eminence.
And if such a critical and sensitive communication from the rector of a seminary regarding a Cardinal’s sexual abuse of seminarians doesn’t appear on your desk, Your Eminence, then some answers are in order to a whole host of questions about your ability and competence to head a Pontifical Commission specifically formed to address such horrific crimes, especially when they are alleged to have been perpetrated by a fellow-member of the College of Cardinals.
If there is any “misdirection” happening in this story, it is that which Cardinal O’Malley is trying to accomplish.
It’s the old strategy customarily employed by government officials, in America we call it the “Washington two-step”.
In this “dance”, you avoid responsibility by getting a “step ahead” of an embarrassing or scandalous story by decrying the actual misconduct or negligence you yourself are responsible for committing.
So O’Malley blasts the Church for not taking Bishops to task for their sexual abuse, while the very office he heads to do that shuffled Father Ramsey’s incriminating letter concerning Cardinal McCarrick through bureaucratic channels until it was utterly ignored.
It doesn’t play, Your Eminence.
First, an apology from you is warranted.
Common decency and respect for the office you hold would suggest that you step down because you bumbled what very well may become the scandal of the decade.
Tuesday, July 24, 2018
WHAT DID CARDINAL MARADIAGA KNOW AND WHEN DID HE KNOW IT
Speaking about Bishops who knew what and when!
Last week, the Vatican announced the resignation of Honduran Auxiliary Bishop Juan Jose Pineda Fasquelle.
Bishop Pineda’s resignation involved allegations of sexual abuse and misappropriation of finances.
But the story does not begin or end there.
What is most noteworthy is the Bishop’s relationship with his superior, Cardinal Oscar Andrés Rodriguez Maradiaga, an influential member of Pope Francis’ inner circle, the C9 group of cardinals.
Was the Cardinal acting as Bishop Pineda's protector, intervening with the Holy See on his behalf?
The answer will be forthcoming when Cardinal Maradiaga reveals what he knew and when he came to know about the misdeeds of his Auxiliary Bishop.
Here's what we know thus far.
In May of last year, Pope Francis called for an investigation of the Bishop. Scores of diocesan staff and Clergy testified to the team, spearheaded by Argentine Bishop Alcides Caseretto, who reported that he was “appalled” by the evidence presented.
Last December, L’Espresso, an Italian scandal-sheet, reported serious allegations regarding Bishop Pineda’s sexual abuse of seminarians as well as indications of financial misconduct.
Then in March of this year, two former seminarians came forward and accused the Bishop of sexual assault.
What has come to light is that fact that Bishop Pineda’s sexual advances toward seminarians was an “open secret” (very similar to the case of Cardinal McCarrick) among diocesan officials.
The situation became so intolerable that the seminary’s former rector and his faculty took active steps to keep the Bishop away from the seminary, denying him the opportunity to teach the young men in Priestly formation.
It was also generally known that the Bishop kept a stable of intimate male associates upon who he lavished expensive gifts, going so far as to present one, Erick Cravioto Fajardo, a downtown apartment.
This same individual lived at the Cardinal’s residence, Villa Iris, where Bishop Pineda likewise resided.
Reportedly, Cardinal Maradiaga turned a blind eye to the Bishop’s relationship with Fajardo and, according to diocesan officials, made excuses for it.
In addition, the Bishop has been accused of misappropriating $1.3 million from the Honduran government destined for charitable projects in the diocese, funds never accounted for.
Yet, between last June and the beginning of this year, Bishop Pineda spent more than $18,000 in air fares, including two separate first-class trips to Madrid in November to meet close male friends.
When the Vatican announced the Bishop’s resignation, he released a statement saying that he had tendered his resignation to Pope Francis months ago.
What is remarkable about all this is that, to date, the Holy See has taken no action but to accept the Bishop’s resignation.
No judgment of guilt for criminal misdeeds (sexual or financial) has been rendered by the Vatican.
One must wonder whether Cardinal Maradiaga intervened to protect Bishop Pineda.
Cardinal Maradiaga needs to either explain why he tolerated Bishop Pineda’s misbehavior, or at least explain how he could have been so blind to what was going on for years within his own residence.
The fact is the Church, the People of God, deserve better than this culture of corruption and silence that has infected the very institution of the College of Bishops and brought it such universal shame and scandal.
The veil of secrecy and deception which for so long has protected those in authority from rightful accountability for their misdeeds is being thrown back more and more with each passing horror story of sexual abuse and criminal behavior.
Pope Francis must realize that his silence and hesitancy in removing these brigand-Bishops from office and even from the Clerical state is costing the Church a brace of believers.
Dear Holy Father, you must act now and decisively for the very fabric and future of the Body of Christ is at stake.
May the Holy Spirit give Your Holiness the fortitude and the stamina to rid the Church of this plague of villains who cover themselves in the mantle of the Successors of the Apostles.
Last week, the Vatican announced the resignation of Honduran Auxiliary Bishop Juan Jose Pineda Fasquelle.
Bishop Pineda’s resignation involved allegations of sexual abuse and misappropriation of finances.
But the story does not begin or end there.
What is most noteworthy is the Bishop’s relationship with his superior, Cardinal Oscar Andrés Rodriguez Maradiaga, an influential member of Pope Francis’ inner circle, the C9 group of cardinals.
Was the Cardinal acting as Bishop Pineda's protector, intervening with the Holy See on his behalf?
The answer will be forthcoming when Cardinal Maradiaga reveals what he knew and when he came to know about the misdeeds of his Auxiliary Bishop.
Here's what we know thus far.
In May of last year, Pope Francis called for an investigation of the Bishop. Scores of diocesan staff and Clergy testified to the team, spearheaded by Argentine Bishop Alcides Caseretto, who reported that he was “appalled” by the evidence presented.
Last December, L’Espresso, an Italian scandal-sheet, reported serious allegations regarding Bishop Pineda’s sexual abuse of seminarians as well as indications of financial misconduct.
Then in March of this year, two former seminarians came forward and accused the Bishop of sexual assault.
What has come to light is that fact that Bishop Pineda’s sexual advances toward seminarians was an “open secret” (very similar to the case of Cardinal McCarrick) among diocesan officials.
The situation became so intolerable that the seminary’s former rector and his faculty took active steps to keep the Bishop away from the seminary, denying him the opportunity to teach the young men in Priestly formation.
It was also generally known that the Bishop kept a stable of intimate male associates upon who he lavished expensive gifts, going so far as to present one, Erick Cravioto Fajardo, a downtown apartment.
This same individual lived at the Cardinal’s residence, Villa Iris, where Bishop Pineda likewise resided.
Reportedly, Cardinal Maradiaga turned a blind eye to the Bishop’s relationship with Fajardo and, according to diocesan officials, made excuses for it.
In addition, the Bishop has been accused of misappropriating $1.3 million from the Honduran government destined for charitable projects in the diocese, funds never accounted for.
Yet, between last June and the beginning of this year, Bishop Pineda spent more than $18,000 in air fares, including two separate first-class trips to Madrid in November to meet close male friends.
When the Vatican announced the Bishop’s resignation, he released a statement saying that he had tendered his resignation to Pope Francis months ago.
What is remarkable about all this is that, to date, the Holy See has taken no action but to accept the Bishop’s resignation.
No judgment of guilt for criminal misdeeds (sexual or financial) has been rendered by the Vatican.
One must wonder whether Cardinal Maradiaga intervened to protect Bishop Pineda.
Cardinal Maradiaga needs to either explain why he tolerated Bishop Pineda’s misbehavior, or at least explain how he could have been so blind to what was going on for years within his own residence.
The fact is the Church, the People of God, deserve better than this culture of corruption and silence that has infected the very institution of the College of Bishops and brought it such universal shame and scandal.
The veil of secrecy and deception which for so long has protected those in authority from rightful accountability for their misdeeds is being thrown back more and more with each passing horror story of sexual abuse and criminal behavior.
Pope Francis must realize that his silence and hesitancy in removing these brigand-Bishops from office and even from the Clerical state is costing the Church a brace of believers.
Dear Holy Father, you must act now and decisively for the very fabric and future of the Body of Christ is at stake.
May the Holy Spirit give Your Holiness the fortitude and the stamina to rid the Church of this plague of villains who cover themselves in the mantle of the Successors of the Apostles.
THE PRETENSE PARTY IS OVER...IT BETTER BE
As I suggested in my previous post, the Church cannot feign shock or surprise especially with reference to the history of the sexual assault of seminarians by Cardinal McCarrick.
As has been documented in the secular press, any number of Church leaders were aware of the disgraced Cardinal’s deviant behavior. The local dioceses where he served as Bishop were fully aware; the Papal Nuncio had been informed; even Pope BenedictXVI had been apprised of McCarrick’s perverse antics.
How is it then that McCarrick continued to rise through the ranks becoming both Archbishop of the nation’s capital and even a member of the College of Cardinals?
How is it that even now McCarrick has yet to be stripped of his title as Archbishop emeritus of Washington, DC? Why is it that he remains a member of the College?
The Church cannot plead that it has been overwhelmed by what is an isolated incident.
The Church cannot pretend that it has not had to deal with similar reports involving other Bishops who crimes have been ignored for decades.
Others are now starting to come forward with their tales of McCarrick’s sordid past and we can expect that they will be worse than what we already know.
Pope Francis must show his resolve to remove Bishops and other leaders in Church ministry who are responsible not only for any manner of sexual misconduct but who have been complicit by their silence and negligence in reporting such behavior to rightful authority, civil and ecclesiastical.
The proverbial ball is in the Pope’s court at this moment when the attention of the nation’s Catholic faithful is focused upon the shameful conduct of one of the Church’s leaders of note as well as those who were his abettors by their silence.
Certainly, Cardinal Wuerl as well as the Bishops of Metuchen and Newark, the Papal Nuncio and perhaps even Pope Saint John Paul II, who elevated McCarrick to the College of Cardinals (at least the history books about his Pontificate), have some serious explaining and answering to do.
I dare say, the country’s Catholics are watching and waiting.
Pope Francis must act decisively to forestall any further damage to the credibility and moral authority of the Church itself, fragile as they are.
As has been documented in the secular press, any number of Church leaders were aware of the disgraced Cardinal’s deviant behavior. The local dioceses where he served as Bishop were fully aware; the Papal Nuncio had been informed; even Pope BenedictXVI had been apprised of McCarrick’s perverse antics.
How is it then that McCarrick continued to rise through the ranks becoming both Archbishop of the nation’s capital and even a member of the College of Cardinals?
How is it that even now McCarrick has yet to be stripped of his title as Archbishop emeritus of Washington, DC? Why is it that he remains a member of the College?
The Church cannot plead that it has been overwhelmed by what is an isolated incident.
The Church cannot pretend that it has not had to deal with similar reports involving other Bishops who crimes have been ignored for decades.
Others are now starting to come forward with their tales of McCarrick’s sordid past and we can expect that they will be worse than what we already know.
Pope Francis must show his resolve to remove Bishops and other leaders in Church ministry who are responsible not only for any manner of sexual misconduct but who have been complicit by their silence and negligence in reporting such behavior to rightful authority, civil and ecclesiastical.
The proverbial ball is in the Pope’s court at this moment when the attention of the nation’s Catholic faithful is focused upon the shameful conduct of one of the Church’s leaders of note as well as those who were his abettors by their silence.
Certainly, Cardinal Wuerl as well as the Bishops of Metuchen and Newark, the Papal Nuncio and perhaps even Pope Saint John Paul II, who elevated McCarrick to the College of Cardinals (at least the history books about his Pontificate), have some serious explaining and answering to do.
I dare say, the country’s Catholics are watching and waiting.
Pope Francis must act decisively to forestall any further damage to the credibility and moral authority of the Church itself, fragile as they are.
Monday, July 23, 2018
SHOCK AND DISMAY OVER SEXUAL ABUSE OF MINORS DOESN'T CUT IT ANYMORE
The scandal of the sexual abuse of minors by Catholic Clergy is more prevalent today than it has every been.
Almost daily, new stories of criminal sexual abuse tell tales of horror and suffering visited upon youngsters at hands of those they trusted for spiritual guidance and support.
Articles in newspapers, blog posts, podcasts and tweets instantaneously and to an infinite number of recipients repeat the latest story of perverted and deviant attacks against innocent victims by Priests, and increasingly by Bishops, even a Cardinal or two.
Thus far, each time these incidents surface, the Church feigns surprise and shock.
How could this happen? Is it possible that such a popular, well respected Prelate could have done such a terrible thing? How could so many who knew or should have know been silent?
The timeline repeats itself incesantly: (1) the incident is reported; (2) feigned surprise and shock from diocesan officials; (3) spokespersons representing local Church leadership promise investigations; (4) weeks pass with no word from the diocese; and (5) reports of financial settlements are announced at a hurriedly-called news conferences.
Here’s my word to the Bishops: this isn’t working anymore.
The longer the Church pretends to be shocked and appalled by these stories of sexual abuse of minors, the more the Catholic faithful become mistrustful and suspicious, and the more they become convinced that corruption within the ranks of the Clergy is pervasive and unchecked.
But, along with the feigned shock, comes the second kicker: fake enlightenment and false promises.
This is perhaps even more damaging to the credibility of the Church than the crimes of abuse themselves.
This deception takes a number of forms but has the following common characteristics:
(1) an announcement that the offending Cleric has been removed from his assignment and all forms of public ministry in order to protect the faithful from further abuse; (2) the findings of panels of so-called experts looking into the patterns of abuse; (3) publication of policies and guidelines which the diocese will follow in investigating future incidents; and (4) assurances that these policies and guidelines will protect Catholic youngsters from future abuse.
It’s all nonsense.
Church officials tells us that Clergy-abusers are so fundamentally and psychologically disordered that they should never have been Ordained and certainly will never be allowed to public minister in the future. Some are do disturbed that they must be laicized and cease to be numbered among Catholic Clergy.
Yet, the same Church officials promise that such disturbed and disordered pyschopaths will be attentive to diocesan guidelines and allow their deviant inclinations to be ordered by them.
And such deceptive double-talk actually poses the risk of harming even more people who are foolish enough to believe it.
Simply put, the Church tells people what they want them to believe, knowing all the while that there is no certain or sure way of protecting their youngsters from criminal sexual abuse by the Clergy now or any time in the future.
And when the inevitable story of yet another incident of abuse occurs, the backlash is often even worse than before because the feigned shock and fake enlightenment which followed earlier incidents is seen as nothing less than lies and deceptions by Church leaders who only pay lip service to concerns about the safety of young people.
If the Church is going to experience any progress when it comes to addressing the scandal of sexual abuse of minors, it is going to have to be radically honest. That will be painful and difficult indeed.
It means that the Church is going to have to first admit that anyone in ministry (Ordained or not) is human and subject to all the foibles, follies, and frailties of sinful humanity. Not every person in the Priesthood or in Church ministry is trustworthy and capable of that ministry.
It means that the Church will never be able to guarantee the protection of every child and youngster in its care. No policy or guideline is foolproof, but reasonable steps can be taken and both those in ministry and those they serve need to be mutually cooperative in overseeing the safety and security of young people.
It means that the Church will take the initiative in reporting incidents of abuse and swiftly remove from positions of ministry and authority all those who in anyway were associated with the abuse including even the top echelon of authority within the diocese, the Bishop himself.
This depth of honesty and commitment will not guarantee that incidents of future abuse will not occur, but will assure the faithful that they will be dealt with immediately, openly and honestly.
That in and of itself may bring much healing to a critically wounded Church.
Almost daily, new stories of criminal sexual abuse tell tales of horror and suffering visited upon youngsters at hands of those they trusted for spiritual guidance and support.
Articles in newspapers, blog posts, podcasts and tweets instantaneously and to an infinite number of recipients repeat the latest story of perverted and deviant attacks against innocent victims by Priests, and increasingly by Bishops, even a Cardinal or two.
Thus far, each time these incidents surface, the Church feigns surprise and shock.
How could this happen? Is it possible that such a popular, well respected Prelate could have done such a terrible thing? How could so many who knew or should have know been silent?
The timeline repeats itself incesantly: (1) the incident is reported; (2) feigned surprise and shock from diocesan officials; (3) spokespersons representing local Church leadership promise investigations; (4) weeks pass with no word from the diocese; and (5) reports of financial settlements are announced at a hurriedly-called news conferences.
Here’s my word to the Bishops: this isn’t working anymore.
The longer the Church pretends to be shocked and appalled by these stories of sexual abuse of minors, the more the Catholic faithful become mistrustful and suspicious, and the more they become convinced that corruption within the ranks of the Clergy is pervasive and unchecked.
But, along with the feigned shock, comes the second kicker: fake enlightenment and false promises.
This is perhaps even more damaging to the credibility of the Church than the crimes of abuse themselves.
This deception takes a number of forms but has the following common characteristics:
(1) an announcement that the offending Cleric has been removed from his assignment and all forms of public ministry in order to protect the faithful from further abuse; (2) the findings of panels of so-called experts looking into the patterns of abuse; (3) publication of policies and guidelines which the diocese will follow in investigating future incidents; and (4) assurances that these policies and guidelines will protect Catholic youngsters from future abuse.
It’s all nonsense.
Church officials tells us that Clergy-abusers are so fundamentally and psychologically disordered that they should never have been Ordained and certainly will never be allowed to public minister in the future. Some are do disturbed that they must be laicized and cease to be numbered among Catholic Clergy.
Yet, the same Church officials promise that such disturbed and disordered pyschopaths will be attentive to diocesan guidelines and allow their deviant inclinations to be ordered by them.
And such deceptive double-talk actually poses the risk of harming even more people who are foolish enough to believe it.
Simply put, the Church tells people what they want them to believe, knowing all the while that there is no certain or sure way of protecting their youngsters from criminal sexual abuse by the Clergy now or any time in the future.
And when the inevitable story of yet another incident of abuse occurs, the backlash is often even worse than before because the feigned shock and fake enlightenment which followed earlier incidents is seen as nothing less than lies and deceptions by Church leaders who only pay lip service to concerns about the safety of young people.
If the Church is going to experience any progress when it comes to addressing the scandal of sexual abuse of minors, it is going to have to be radically honest. That will be painful and difficult indeed.
It means that the Church is going to have to first admit that anyone in ministry (Ordained or not) is human and subject to all the foibles, follies, and frailties of sinful humanity. Not every person in the Priesthood or in Church ministry is trustworthy and capable of that ministry.
It means that the Church will never be able to guarantee the protection of every child and youngster in its care. No policy or guideline is foolproof, but reasonable steps can be taken and both those in ministry and those they serve need to be mutually cooperative in overseeing the safety and security of young people.
It means that the Church will take the initiative in reporting incidents of abuse and swiftly remove from positions of ministry and authority all those who in anyway were associated with the abuse including even the top echelon of authority within the diocese, the Bishop himself.
This depth of honesty and commitment will not guarantee that incidents of future abuse will not occur, but will assure the faithful that they will be dealt with immediately, openly and honestly.
That in and of itself may bring much healing to a critically wounded Church.
Sunday, July 22, 2018
...BY THE COMPANY YOU KEEP!
Why is it that only know I realize how truly wise and completely selfless my dear parents where in bringing up our family of one sister and three brothers.
The Bible has its Proverbs. Dad and mom had their adages.
“Keep your nose clean,” one of my father’s favorites, was a cautious reminder to stay out of trouble because each of us was responsible for the reputation of our entire family.
Mom inspired us to fulfill our obligations promptly with her familiar refrain, “Get you work done first thing in the morning so you can enjoy the rest of the day for yourself."
And, sitting here so many years after they have both passed from this life to eternity, I still remember both of them admonishing us always, “Watch the company you keep,” because people will identify your character by those with whom you associate.
This article isn’t a just a trip down memory lane.
But, by way of those memories of such wise watchwords, I wish to call attention to some curious and disturbing trends I see among the ranks of the American Bishops.
The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) is getting very close to revealing its true, secular and socialist self....by the company its keeping.
For decades, I have been lamenting how much of what the USCCB publishes is eerily similar to the political platform of the Democratic Party, but not the Democrats of old, but Democrats of today who advocate the elimination of all borders everywhere in the hope of creating in America one huge hemispheric mass.
And in their folly, the Bishops have convinced themselves that a borderless country of Latino immigrants is the hope of the American Catholic Church.
Get real!
But, the fraternization of the USCCB with radical leftist and left-leaning advocates does not end with the Democratic Party.
Increasingly disturbing is the uncomfortable alliance the Conference of Bishops seems to have adopted with the likes of those who will say and do anything to advance their angry, self-centered agendas.
In one of the most curious of these alliances, it was quite revealing how left the USCCB has moved in recent decades when the Bishop of Tucson encouraged the American Conference of Bishops to consider excommunicating Border Patrol and Immigration and Custom Enforcement (ICE) Officers for carrying out their sworn duty to enforce the country’s laws.
Rather than rebuke their brother-Bishop, the majority of the Conference’s Bishops listened in relative silence, hoping their lack of response would be seen as a tacit assent of what the Bishop had proposed.
Of course, the Bishop of Tucson couldn’t be anymore ridiculous and shameful to himself and the Church in the propaganda he was attempting to pass off as a Catholic moral imperative, but he was passionate nonetheless.
Funny (not really), I can’t quite remember such passion within the USCCB in condemning the blatant propaganda and misinformation by members of Black Lives Matter.
Where were the indignation and calls for excommunication of the politicians who advocated same-sex marriage, attacks upon law enforcement, the revocation of religious freedom as well as the demonstrably anti-family provisions of the Health Care Act?
The recently elected President of Mexico boldly asserted that immigrating to America is a “human right”.
Does any, can any Catholic believe that members of the USCCB are not in sympathetic agreement with such nonsense.
There are politicians sitting on City Councils throughout the country who espouse and advocate sanctuary status for illegal immigrants, some of whom are counted among the most notorious and violent members of drug cartels such as MS13.
And yet, not a whisper from the USCCB about this deplorable state of affairs.
It’s clear and becoming clearer with each passing day how far removed American Bishops have become from the faithful for whom they are charged with providing spiritual care.
The fact is that an overwhelming majority of the Clergy and the faithful see the Conference for what it has become, a haven for and bastion of secular, socialist, irrational and shrill politics rather than the instrument of evangelization and conversion it was created to be.
The price tag for such political nit-picking has been the very credibility and relevance of the Church itself.
Permit me to offer the USCCB the wisdom of my dearly departed parents, "Watch the company you keep." The faithful are watching you.
The Bible has its Proverbs. Dad and mom had their adages.
“Keep your nose clean,” one of my father’s favorites, was a cautious reminder to stay out of trouble because each of us was responsible for the reputation of our entire family.
Mom inspired us to fulfill our obligations promptly with her familiar refrain, “Get you work done first thing in the morning so you can enjoy the rest of the day for yourself."
And, sitting here so many years after they have both passed from this life to eternity, I still remember both of them admonishing us always, “Watch the company you keep,” because people will identify your character by those with whom you associate.
This article isn’t a just a trip down memory lane.
But, by way of those memories of such wise watchwords, I wish to call attention to some curious and disturbing trends I see among the ranks of the American Bishops.
The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) is getting very close to revealing its true, secular and socialist self....by the company its keeping.
For decades, I have been lamenting how much of what the USCCB publishes is eerily similar to the political platform of the Democratic Party, but not the Democrats of old, but Democrats of today who advocate the elimination of all borders everywhere in the hope of creating in America one huge hemispheric mass.
And in their folly, the Bishops have convinced themselves that a borderless country of Latino immigrants is the hope of the American Catholic Church.
Get real!
But, the fraternization of the USCCB with radical leftist and left-leaning advocates does not end with the Democratic Party.
Increasingly disturbing is the uncomfortable alliance the Conference of Bishops seems to have adopted with the likes of those who will say and do anything to advance their angry, self-centered agendas.
In one of the most curious of these alliances, it was quite revealing how left the USCCB has moved in recent decades when the Bishop of Tucson encouraged the American Conference of Bishops to consider excommunicating Border Patrol and Immigration and Custom Enforcement (ICE) Officers for carrying out their sworn duty to enforce the country’s laws.
Rather than rebuke their brother-Bishop, the majority of the Conference’s Bishops listened in relative silence, hoping their lack of response would be seen as a tacit assent of what the Bishop had proposed.
Of course, the Bishop of Tucson couldn’t be anymore ridiculous and shameful to himself and the Church in the propaganda he was attempting to pass off as a Catholic moral imperative, but he was passionate nonetheless.
Funny (not really), I can’t quite remember such passion within the USCCB in condemning the blatant propaganda and misinformation by members of Black Lives Matter.
Where were the indignation and calls for excommunication of the politicians who advocated same-sex marriage, attacks upon law enforcement, the revocation of religious freedom as well as the demonstrably anti-family provisions of the Health Care Act?
The recently elected President of Mexico boldly asserted that immigrating to America is a “human right”.
Does any, can any Catholic believe that members of the USCCB are not in sympathetic agreement with such nonsense.
There are politicians sitting on City Councils throughout the country who espouse and advocate sanctuary status for illegal immigrants, some of whom are counted among the most notorious and violent members of drug cartels such as MS13.
And yet, not a whisper from the USCCB about this deplorable state of affairs.
It’s clear and becoming clearer with each passing day how far removed American Bishops have become from the faithful for whom they are charged with providing spiritual care.
The fact is that an overwhelming majority of the Clergy and the faithful see the Conference for what it has become, a haven for and bastion of secular, socialist, irrational and shrill politics rather than the instrument of evangelization and conversion it was created to be.
The price tag for such political nit-picking has been the very credibility and relevance of the Church itself.
Permit me to offer the USCCB the wisdom of my dearly departed parents, "Watch the company you keep." The faithful are watching you.
Saturday, July 21, 2018
THE MCCARRICK SCANDAL RAISES SERIOUS QUESTIONS ABOUT THE CULTURE OF SILENCE WITHIN THE CHURCH
Pope Francis has accepted the resignation of the Honduran deputy to Cardinal Oscar Rodriguez Maradiaga, who is one of the Pope’s top advisers.
Auxiliary Bishop Juan Jose Pineda Fasquelle was accused of sexual misconduct with seminarians and lavish spending on gay lovers.
But that is only part of this story.
Perhaps what needs further investigation is what Cardinal Maradiaga knew of Bishop Pineda’s misdeeds and the reasons why he may have tolerated the antics of such a sexually active gay Bishop under his immediate supervision.
The scandal involving Cardinal Theodore McCarrick raises the same questions.
According to Priests who have been quoted in the secular press, it was an “open secret” that McCarrick regularly invited seminarians to his beach house and molested them.
How is it possible there could have been such a deafening silence from those who knew, especially among the ranks of fellow-Bishops?
As I have been predicting, the McCarrick scandal will be a turning point in this sordid chapter in the history of the Church..
I expect that pressure will be brought to bear upon the Holy Father to expel McCarrick from the College of Cardinals.
Thus far, the Holy Father has only ordered that the Cardinal be removed from public ministry, pending a full investigation into the “credible” allegation that he sexually assaulted a teenager while a Priest in New York.
But it was only after the Pope issued his decree that the Dioceses of Newark and Metuchen, New Jersey, simultaneously revealed that they had received three complaints of misconduct by McCarrick against adults who became Priests. The Dioceses settled suits brought against them by two of McCarrick’s victims.
Why only then?
Additional victims of McCarrick’s deviant behavior have started to come forward to tell the horror stories of their abuse at the hands of the disgraced Cardinal.
McCarrick was protected and promoted because there exists in the Church a culture of silence and corruption previously inconceivable in the minds of Catholics and non-Catholics alike.
The revelation of this corruption has now reached into the once-sacrosanct College of Cardinals itself.
One can only imagine the depth to which the confidence, trust and respect of the Catholic faithful has collapsed due to these awful tales of perversion and cover up.
The Church has lost its moral voice and the world is being deprived of the Gospel counsels on account of these scandals.
Pope Francis must respond. He must do so quickly. He must do so justly. He must do so articulating both the outrage and suffering of the victims and the absolute commitment of the Church to root out of the Clerical ranks not only the abusers themselves but those who enabled them and abetted them by their silence.
McCarrick must be removed from the College, perhaps even laicized for the grave scandal he has brought to the Church.
So must other Bishops guilty of the same deviances.
But so must their protectors and abettors.
Justice to the mission of the Church, to the victims, the millions of Catholic faithful and to the Gospel itself demands this.
Thus, far the response of the Holy Father has been woefully inadequate and dreadfully lacking.
Auxiliary Bishop Juan Jose Pineda Fasquelle was accused of sexual misconduct with seminarians and lavish spending on gay lovers.
But that is only part of this story.
Perhaps what needs further investigation is what Cardinal Maradiaga knew of Bishop Pineda’s misdeeds and the reasons why he may have tolerated the antics of such a sexually active gay Bishop under his immediate supervision.
The scandal involving Cardinal Theodore McCarrick raises the same questions.
According to Priests who have been quoted in the secular press, it was an “open secret” that McCarrick regularly invited seminarians to his beach house and molested them.
How is it possible there could have been such a deafening silence from those who knew, especially among the ranks of fellow-Bishops?
As I have been predicting, the McCarrick scandal will be a turning point in this sordid chapter in the history of the Church..
I expect that pressure will be brought to bear upon the Holy Father to expel McCarrick from the College of Cardinals.
Thus far, the Holy Father has only ordered that the Cardinal be removed from public ministry, pending a full investigation into the “credible” allegation that he sexually assaulted a teenager while a Priest in New York.
But it was only after the Pope issued his decree that the Dioceses of Newark and Metuchen, New Jersey, simultaneously revealed that they had received three complaints of misconduct by McCarrick against adults who became Priests. The Dioceses settled suits brought against them by two of McCarrick’s victims.
Why only then?
Additional victims of McCarrick’s deviant behavior have started to come forward to tell the horror stories of their abuse at the hands of the disgraced Cardinal.
McCarrick was protected and promoted because there exists in the Church a culture of silence and corruption previously inconceivable in the minds of Catholics and non-Catholics alike.
The revelation of this corruption has now reached into the once-sacrosanct College of Cardinals itself.
One can only imagine the depth to which the confidence, trust and respect of the Catholic faithful has collapsed due to these awful tales of perversion and cover up.
The Church has lost its moral voice and the world is being deprived of the Gospel counsels on account of these scandals.
Pope Francis must respond. He must do so quickly. He must do so justly. He must do so articulating both the outrage and suffering of the victims and the absolute commitment of the Church to root out of the Clerical ranks not only the abusers themselves but those who enabled them and abetted them by their silence.
McCarrick must be removed from the College, perhaps even laicized for the grave scandal he has brought to the Church.
So must other Bishops guilty of the same deviances.
But so must their protectors and abettors.
Justice to the mission of the Church, to the victims, the millions of Catholic faithful and to the Gospel itself demands this.
Thus, far the response of the Holy Father has been woefully inadequate and dreadfully lacking.
AN AFFRONT TO NATURAL JUSTICE AND COMMON DECENCY
The laicization of Bishops, by punitive dismissal or voluntarily, is historically very rare.
Some examples in recent times, however, include both Bishop Emmanuel Milingo of Zambia in 2009 and Bishop Raymond Lahey of Canada in 2012.
Józef Wesołowski, a Polish Archbishop who had been a Papal Nuncio was dismissed from the clerical state in 2014 on grounds of sexual abuse of minors.The Vatican had made criminal charges against Archbishop Wesołowski related to his abuse of minors and was going to try him. However, in July 2015 the trial was postponed due to the Archbishop’s ill health, He died in August of 2015 before a trial could be conducted.
In an example of a Bishop voluntarily requesting laicization, the Bishop of San Pedro, Fernando Lugo, requested laicization in Paraguay in 2005 to allow him to run for President of the country. The Holy See at first refused, going so far as to suspend him as Bishop when he ran for office anyway, but eventually granted him lay status in 2008 after he was elected.
Most recently, two very public scandals involving Bishops have rocked the Church.
In America, Cardinal Theodore McCarrick was accused of the sexual abuse of a minor almost a half century ago when he was a Priest in New York. A Review Board investigated the allegation and found it to be “credible and substantiated".
The Cardinal has stated he has no recollection of the abuse but has accepted the Review Board's findings.
In response, the Holy See prohibited the Cardinal from any exercise of public ministry. However, he remains Archbishop emeritus of Washington, DC and a Cleric of the Church.
In Australia, Archbishop Philip Wilson's has been convicted of the criminal concealment of child sex abuse and has been sentenced to a twelve month detention under “house arrest".
The Archbishop is appealing the guilty verdict. He is the most senior Catholic Bishop in the world to be convicted by a secular court of covering-up child sex abuse crimes.
The Holy See has taken no action against Archbishop Wilson who remains in his Episcopal assignment as Archbishop of Adelaide.
Recently, the Prime Minister, Malcolm Turnbuall, publicly called upon Pope Francis to remove Archbishop Wilson from office.
That call was echoed by the National Council of Priests of Australia (NCP) which endorsed the appeals for Archbishop Philip Wilson to resign, and have called on the Pope to intervene.
The NPC says Archbishop Philip Wilson's position has been "compromised" since his conviction. In a public statement to Australian media, the organization of Priests insisted: “The welfare of the People of God of the Archdiocese of Adelaide must take precedence over the desire of an individual to remain in office.”
Clerics (Bishops, Priests and Deacons) who commit sexual abuse are charged under a Canon of Church Law (c. 1395 §2) which criminalizes those offenses against the sixth commandment which are committed by force or threats or publicly or with a minor below the age of 16.
However, another Canon of Church Law may have equal application. Canon 1399 covers the situation in which the criminal “goes against a divine or ecclesiastical law with harm or danger of grave scandal.”
It speaks volumes that, when an accusation of the sexual abuse of a minor is made against a Priest or when a Priest is actually charged with a criminal offense, he is automatically removed from his assignment and prohibited from any public exercise of his ministry.
Yet, Archbishop Wilson has remained in office as Archbishop of Adelaide for the duration of his trial.
Following the sentencing, ArchbishopWilson said he would not quit his post, despite the growing calls.
"I intend to lodge an appeal against my conviction to the District Court of New South Wales," he said in a statement. "I am conscious of calls for me to resign and have taken them very seriously. However, at this time, I am entitled to exercise my legal rights and to follow the due process of law. Since that process is not yet complete, I do not intend to resign at this time."
The NCP stated: "For the good of the Church in Australia and for the benefit of the People of God in the Archdiocese of Adelaide, we request that the Holy Father, Pope Francis, remove Archbishop Philip Wilson from his See, the Diocese of Adelaide."
While Archbishop Wilson’s appeal works its way through the Australian court process, Port Pirie Bishop Greg O'Kelly was appointed by Pope Francis as Apostolic Administrator of the Archdiocese of Adelaide last month, taking over responsibilities formerly in the hands of Archbishop Wilson.
The inequity in the way the Church responds to Priests who have been alleged to have been guilty of child sex abuse and the way the Holy See has responded to the scandals involving Cardinal McCarrick and Archbishop Wilson is an affront to natural justice and is rightfully condemned by both Priests and laity alike.
The time has come and is, in fact, long overdue for the Supreme Authority of the Church to take both disciplinary and punitive action against those Bishops who have directly by their own criminal acts or by engaging in a conspiracy of silence to be removed from the office and, given the grave damage done to the Church by their scandalous behavior, be laicized and removed from the clerical state.
We shall see if Pope Francis is capable of the distasteful duty which has been laid at his feet in these appalling cases of abuse and cover up.
Some examples in recent times, however, include both Bishop Emmanuel Milingo of Zambia in 2009 and Bishop Raymond Lahey of Canada in 2012.
Józef Wesołowski, a Polish Archbishop who had been a Papal Nuncio was dismissed from the clerical state in 2014 on grounds of sexual abuse of minors.The Vatican had made criminal charges against Archbishop Wesołowski related to his abuse of minors and was going to try him. However, in July 2015 the trial was postponed due to the Archbishop’s ill health, He died in August of 2015 before a trial could be conducted.
In an example of a Bishop voluntarily requesting laicization, the Bishop of San Pedro, Fernando Lugo, requested laicization in Paraguay in 2005 to allow him to run for President of the country. The Holy See at first refused, going so far as to suspend him as Bishop when he ran for office anyway, but eventually granted him lay status in 2008 after he was elected.
Most recently, two very public scandals involving Bishops have rocked the Church.
In America, Cardinal Theodore McCarrick was accused of the sexual abuse of a minor almost a half century ago when he was a Priest in New York. A Review Board investigated the allegation and found it to be “credible and substantiated".
The Cardinal has stated he has no recollection of the abuse but has accepted the Review Board's findings.
In response, the Holy See prohibited the Cardinal from any exercise of public ministry. However, he remains Archbishop emeritus of Washington, DC and a Cleric of the Church.
In Australia, Archbishop Philip Wilson's has been convicted of the criminal concealment of child sex abuse and has been sentenced to a twelve month detention under “house arrest".
The Archbishop is appealing the guilty verdict. He is the most senior Catholic Bishop in the world to be convicted by a secular court of covering-up child sex abuse crimes.
The Holy See has taken no action against Archbishop Wilson who remains in his Episcopal assignment as Archbishop of Adelaide.
Recently, the Prime Minister, Malcolm Turnbuall, publicly called upon Pope Francis to remove Archbishop Wilson from office.
That call was echoed by the National Council of Priests of Australia (NCP) which endorsed the appeals for Archbishop Philip Wilson to resign, and have called on the Pope to intervene.
The NPC says Archbishop Philip Wilson's position has been "compromised" since his conviction. In a public statement to Australian media, the organization of Priests insisted: “The welfare of the People of God of the Archdiocese of Adelaide must take precedence over the desire of an individual to remain in office.”
Clerics (Bishops, Priests and Deacons) who commit sexual abuse are charged under a Canon of Church Law (c. 1395 §2) which criminalizes those offenses against the sixth commandment which are committed by force or threats or publicly or with a minor below the age of 16.
However, another Canon of Church Law may have equal application. Canon 1399 covers the situation in which the criminal “goes against a divine or ecclesiastical law with harm or danger of grave scandal.”
It speaks volumes that, when an accusation of the sexual abuse of a minor is made against a Priest or when a Priest is actually charged with a criminal offense, he is automatically removed from his assignment and prohibited from any public exercise of his ministry.
Yet, Archbishop Wilson has remained in office as Archbishop of Adelaide for the duration of his trial.
Following the sentencing, ArchbishopWilson said he would not quit his post, despite the growing calls.
"I intend to lodge an appeal against my conviction to the District Court of New South Wales," he said in a statement. "I am conscious of calls for me to resign and have taken them very seriously. However, at this time, I am entitled to exercise my legal rights and to follow the due process of law. Since that process is not yet complete, I do not intend to resign at this time."
The NCP stated: "For the good of the Church in Australia and for the benefit of the People of God in the Archdiocese of Adelaide, we request that the Holy Father, Pope Francis, remove Archbishop Philip Wilson from his See, the Diocese of Adelaide."
While Archbishop Wilson’s appeal works its way through the Australian court process, Port Pirie Bishop Greg O'Kelly was appointed by Pope Francis as Apostolic Administrator of the Archdiocese of Adelaide last month, taking over responsibilities formerly in the hands of Archbishop Wilson.
The inequity in the way the Church responds to Priests who have been alleged to have been guilty of child sex abuse and the way the Holy See has responded to the scandals involving Cardinal McCarrick and Archbishop Wilson is an affront to natural justice and is rightfully condemned by both Priests and laity alike.
The time has come and is, in fact, long overdue for the Supreme Authority of the Church to take both disciplinary and punitive action against those Bishops who have directly by their own criminal acts or by engaging in a conspiracy of silence to be removed from the office and, given the grave damage done to the Church by their scandalous behavior, be laicized and removed from the clerical state.
We shall see if Pope Francis is capable of the distasteful duty which has been laid at his feet in these appalling cases of abuse and cover up.
Thursday, July 19, 2018
CARDINAL MCCARRICK: ADMISSIONS AND UNANSWERED QUESTIONS
In a copyrighted story by Kelly Heyboer and Ted Sherman, writing for NJ Advance Media for NJ.com, the Catholic dioceses in New Jersey are said to have paid two former Priests a total of $180,000 after they said Cardinal Theodore McCarrick sexually abused them.
The settlements included $80,000 paid to a former Priest turned lawyer from New Jersey who said Cardinal McCarrick would invite him and other young seminarians and priests to a shore house in Sea Girt where they would be expected to share a bed with the former Archbishop of Newark.
Robert Ciolek, the former Priest who said he was abused by McCarrick for years, said he felt unable to say “no” when the then-Bishop would rub his back and touch him in bed.
Cardinal McCarriack has been removed from public ministry after he was accused of sexually abusing a teenage boy 50 years ago while he was a Priest in New York.
The Cardinal is one of the highest-ranking American Church officials to have been removed from ministry over sex abuse allegations.
On the day he was removed, the Archdiocese of Newark revealed for the first time he had been previously accused of sexual misconduct with adults during his time in New Jersey and two resulted in settlements. But Church officials would provide no details.
What is known is this: Robert Ciolek was in his early 20s and studying to be a Priest when McCarrick allegedly singled him out and began inviting him on overnight trips.
McCarrick would touch him in bed, but only above the waist. They would never kiss. The alleged abuse lasted for several years.
McCarrick rose from Bishop of Metuchen to Archbishop of Newark, then eventually Archbishop of Washington, D.C. He was eventually appointed a Cardinal by Pope Saint John Paul II.
Ciolek, who later became a Priest, told no one about the abuse until he started to get counseling after he left the Priesthood, married and became a lawyer. Then, in 2004, he filed for a settlement from the church and received $80,000 from the Archdiocese of Newark and the Dioceses of Trenton and Metuchen the following year.
Ciolek said he could not speak publicly about the settlement until the Church released him from a confidentiality agreement after McCarrick was removed from ministry.
McCarrick's second alleged adult victim was a Priest who received a $100,000 in a 2007 settlement.
The Priest, who has not been named, alleged McCarrick asked him to put on a striped sailor shirt and a pair of shorts and join him in bed, where McCarrick put his arms and legs around him. The Priest also alleged he saw McCarrick having sex with another young Priest during a fishing trip.
The priest who accused McCarrick of abuse was later forced to resign from the priesthood himself after he allegedly abused teenage boys.
Cardinal McCarrick has not spoken about the settlements or the allegations by the adult victims.
When he was removed from ministry last month, McCarrick said he had no memory of abusing a teeenager 50 years ago while he was a Priest in New York.
"While I have absolutely no recollection of this reported abuse, and believe in my innocence, I am sorry for the pain the person who brought the charges has gone through, as well as for the scandal such charges cause our people," McCarrick said in a June 20th statement.
"I fully cooperated in the process," McCarrick said. "My sadness was deepened when I was informed that the allegations had been determined credible and substantiated."
Unbelievable!
The man who accused McCarrick of abusing him as a teenager nearly 50 years ago is a married New Jersey businessman who does not want his name revealed.
The man said he was a 16-year-old attending Cathedral Prep Seminary in Manhattan when he was measured for a special cassock for altar servers at the 1971 Christmas Mass at St. Patrick’s .Cathedral. He alleged, McCarrick, then a monsignor, unzipped the teenager's pants him while measuring him for the garment. The boy pulled away. The following year, McCarrick allegedly cornered the same teenager in a bathroom and put his hand down the boy's pants.
Now 62, the New Jersey businessman contacted the Archdiocese of New York when he heard there was a panel considering settlements for alleged victims. He stated that he is relieved to hear the Vatican used his complaint to remove McCarrick from ministry.
Because there are statutes of limitation in New York, it is unlikely the Cardinal will be charged and prosecuted for the sexual abuse of the teenage boy. It is even more unlikely that he will be charged with any crime involving his sexual antics with the adult former Priests.
But Cardinal McCarrick has disgraced himself and the Church.
Yet, he is not the only one at fault in these horrific stories of perversion and predation.
The Archdiocese of Newark has yet to explain why the settlements it executed with the former Priests were never disclosed.
In a statement to the New York Times, Cardinal Joseph W. Tobin, the current head of the Newark Archdiocese, said he was disturbed by the reports about McCarrick.
“I recognize without any ambiguity that all people have a right to live, work and study in safe environments,” Cardinal Tobin said in a statement. “I intend to discuss this tragedy with the leadership of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops in order to articulate standards that will assure high standards of respect by Bishops, Priests and Deacons for all adults.”
Nice gesture, Cardinal Tobin, but still not good enough! That strategy is out of the old Dallas playbook which doesn't cut it any longer.
Serious questions remain and need answering by the local churches of Newark, New York, Metuchen and Washington, DC.
Erin Friedlander, a spokeswoman for the Diocese of Metuchen, said the allegations of sexual misconduct by McCarrick were reported to authorities.
"At the time each claim was received, each was reported to law enforcement. When the two settlements were reached, each within a few months' time, they were reported to representatives of the Holy See in the United States," Friedlander said.
But all this was kept secret in the continuing grand conspiracy of silence responsible for so much of the suffering attendant to these horror stories.
One must wonder how McCarrick could have been promoted to the College of Cardinals with all this baggage that was clearly known within the dioceses where the sexual predation of the Priests occurred.
Wasn’t McCarrick vetted at all? And, if he was, who protected his sordid past from being revealed and who continued to advance his promotion?
These are the unsettling questions which no one in Church authority has yet to explain.
But silence won’t serve to quell the voices of inquiry into what I predicted will be a watershed moment in the vulnerability to which all Bishops in America will be subject.
The scandal in Chile worsens, even as Pope Francis (sadly only after his public gaffes related to allegations against Bishop Barros) personally called the entire Chilean Conference of Bishops to Rome to read them the riot act, in response to which the entire Conference submitted their resignations.
How long before Pope Francis engages the Bishops in the USA. How long before USCCB members board jetliners for their rendezvous with the Holy Father?
And if not, why not?
Can the scandal in Chile possibly be worse than that in the US Church? Than in Australia? Spain? Argentina? Mexico?
How can the Church survive the onslaught of such waves of corruption and scandal?
Dear Holy Spirit, come to our aid. Jesus entrusted the Church to Your protection and guidance. Come, Holy Spirit, come!
The settlements included $80,000 paid to a former Priest turned lawyer from New Jersey who said Cardinal McCarrick would invite him and other young seminarians and priests to a shore house in Sea Girt where they would be expected to share a bed with the former Archbishop of Newark.
Robert Ciolek, the former Priest who said he was abused by McCarrick for years, said he felt unable to say “no” when the then-Bishop would rub his back and touch him in bed.
Cardinal McCarriack has been removed from public ministry after he was accused of sexually abusing a teenage boy 50 years ago while he was a Priest in New York.
The Cardinal is one of the highest-ranking American Church officials to have been removed from ministry over sex abuse allegations.
On the day he was removed, the Archdiocese of Newark revealed for the first time he had been previously accused of sexual misconduct with adults during his time in New Jersey and two resulted in settlements. But Church officials would provide no details.
What is known is this: Robert Ciolek was in his early 20s and studying to be a Priest when McCarrick allegedly singled him out and began inviting him on overnight trips.
McCarrick would touch him in bed, but only above the waist. They would never kiss. The alleged abuse lasted for several years.
McCarrick rose from Bishop of Metuchen to Archbishop of Newark, then eventually Archbishop of Washington, D.C. He was eventually appointed a Cardinal by Pope Saint John Paul II.
Ciolek, who later became a Priest, told no one about the abuse until he started to get counseling after he left the Priesthood, married and became a lawyer. Then, in 2004, he filed for a settlement from the church and received $80,000 from the Archdiocese of Newark and the Dioceses of Trenton and Metuchen the following year.
Ciolek said he could not speak publicly about the settlement until the Church released him from a confidentiality agreement after McCarrick was removed from ministry.
McCarrick's second alleged adult victim was a Priest who received a $100,000 in a 2007 settlement.
The Priest, who has not been named, alleged McCarrick asked him to put on a striped sailor shirt and a pair of shorts and join him in bed, where McCarrick put his arms and legs around him. The Priest also alleged he saw McCarrick having sex with another young Priest during a fishing trip.
The priest who accused McCarrick of abuse was later forced to resign from the priesthood himself after he allegedly abused teenage boys.
Cardinal McCarrick has not spoken about the settlements or the allegations by the adult victims.
When he was removed from ministry last month, McCarrick said he had no memory of abusing a teeenager 50 years ago while he was a Priest in New York.
"While I have absolutely no recollection of this reported abuse, and believe in my innocence, I am sorry for the pain the person who brought the charges has gone through, as well as for the scandal such charges cause our people," McCarrick said in a June 20th statement.
"I fully cooperated in the process," McCarrick said. "My sadness was deepened when I was informed that the allegations had been determined credible and substantiated."
Unbelievable!
The man who accused McCarrick of abusing him as a teenager nearly 50 years ago is a married New Jersey businessman who does not want his name revealed.
The man said he was a 16-year-old attending Cathedral Prep Seminary in Manhattan when he was measured for a special cassock for altar servers at the 1971 Christmas Mass at St. Patrick’s .Cathedral. He alleged, McCarrick, then a monsignor, unzipped the teenager's pants him while measuring him for the garment. The boy pulled away. The following year, McCarrick allegedly cornered the same teenager in a bathroom and put his hand down the boy's pants.
Now 62, the New Jersey businessman contacted the Archdiocese of New York when he heard there was a panel considering settlements for alleged victims. He stated that he is relieved to hear the Vatican used his complaint to remove McCarrick from ministry.
Because there are statutes of limitation in New York, it is unlikely the Cardinal will be charged and prosecuted for the sexual abuse of the teenage boy. It is even more unlikely that he will be charged with any crime involving his sexual antics with the adult former Priests.
But Cardinal McCarrick has disgraced himself and the Church.
Yet, he is not the only one at fault in these horrific stories of perversion and predation.
The Archdiocese of Newark has yet to explain why the settlements it executed with the former Priests were never disclosed.
In a statement to the New York Times, Cardinal Joseph W. Tobin, the current head of the Newark Archdiocese, said he was disturbed by the reports about McCarrick.
“I recognize without any ambiguity that all people have a right to live, work and study in safe environments,” Cardinal Tobin said in a statement. “I intend to discuss this tragedy with the leadership of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops in order to articulate standards that will assure high standards of respect by Bishops, Priests and Deacons for all adults.”
Nice gesture, Cardinal Tobin, but still not good enough! That strategy is out of the old Dallas playbook which doesn't cut it any longer.
Serious questions remain and need answering by the local churches of Newark, New York, Metuchen and Washington, DC.
Erin Friedlander, a spokeswoman for the Diocese of Metuchen, said the allegations of sexual misconduct by McCarrick were reported to authorities.
"At the time each claim was received, each was reported to law enforcement. When the two settlements were reached, each within a few months' time, they were reported to representatives of the Holy See in the United States," Friedlander said.
But all this was kept secret in the continuing grand conspiracy of silence responsible for so much of the suffering attendant to these horror stories.
One must wonder how McCarrick could have been promoted to the College of Cardinals with all this baggage that was clearly known within the dioceses where the sexual predation of the Priests occurred.
Wasn’t McCarrick vetted at all? And, if he was, who protected his sordid past from being revealed and who continued to advance his promotion?
These are the unsettling questions which no one in Church authority has yet to explain.
But silence won’t serve to quell the voices of inquiry into what I predicted will be a watershed moment in the vulnerability to which all Bishops in America will be subject.
The scandal in Chile worsens, even as Pope Francis (sadly only after his public gaffes related to allegations against Bishop Barros) personally called the entire Chilean Conference of Bishops to Rome to read them the riot act, in response to which the entire Conference submitted their resignations.
How long before Pope Francis engages the Bishops in the USA. How long before USCCB members board jetliners for their rendezvous with the Holy Father?
And if not, why not?
Can the scandal in Chile possibly be worse than that in the US Church? Than in Australia? Spain? Argentina? Mexico?
How can the Church survive the onslaught of such waves of corruption and scandal?
Dear Holy Spirit, come to our aid. Jesus entrusted the Church to Your protection and guidance. Come, Holy Spirit, come!
SPARE US, O LORD, WE PRAY!
It’s embarrassing!
Cardinal Francesco Coccopalmerio, President emeritus of the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts, has proposed that a new Canon be inserted into the Code of Canon Law.
The new Canon would be dedicated to the “grave duty” of all the Christian faithful to not only “not harm” but even “improve” the environment.
The Cardinal has called on Pope Francis to require Catholics under Canon Law to care for the environment, calling it “one of the most serious duties” for the faithful today.
His Eminence stated: “The Code of Canon Law, at the beginning of the second book, in Canons 208-221 under the title ‘Obligations and rights of all the Christian faithful’, an authoritative sketch of the believer and his life as a Christian. Unfortunately, nothing is said about one of his most serious duties: to protect and promote the natural environment in which the believer lives.”
“My proposal,” the Cardinal said, “would be to ask the Pope, on behalf of the Dicastery for Legislative Texts, to insert into the Canons I have just cited a new Canon that sounds more or less like this: ‘Every faithful Christian, mindful that creation is our common home, has the grave duty not only not to damage, but also to improve, both through normal behavior, as well as through specific initiatives, the natural environment in which each person is called to live.’”
He first announced this proposal during a July 12th event in Rome entitled “Dialogue on Catholic investments for energy transition.”
The closed-door (why I wonder) meeting brought together representatives of the Vatican and Catholic organizations to discuss how to invest responsibly towards a transition to renewable energies.
Inspired by Pope Francis’ 2015 Encyclical on the environment, Laudato si’, and by his recent address to CEOs of major oil and gas companies, participants in the July 12th event agreed on the importance of the Catholic Divest-Invest Program currently being sponsored by the World Catholic Climate Movement.
According to the organization’s website, the Catholic Divest-Invest Program calls on Catholic institutions to commit publicly to completely divest from all fossil fuels within five years, and to invest in “socially and ethically responsible companies that protect creation and all who share it.”
What an embarrassment to the proper and dignified role of Canon Law in the governance of the Church and care of the Christian faithful!
The Cardinal trivializes the importance of the Law by such a nonsensical proposal.
Unfortunately, Pope Francis has created his own Frankenstein-like monster in his call for a kindler, gentler hierarchy and Presbyterate.
The Pope loves to paint a picture of how the Church should be, a Church wherein Bishops and Priests accompany the Christian faithful with compassion and empathy, sensitive to their needs and capacities to submit themselves to Evangelical counsels.
But, much too often in my opinion, the Holy Father is figuratively slapped in the face by the reality that the hierarchs and Clergy presently in positions of authority and influence are completely incompetent to fulfill that very mission of accompaniment.
These European pseudo-aristocrats in the Curia and elsewhere are so completely out of touch with the modern world.
In a recent post, I referred to a plaque here in my home-office which reads: “If you can’t convince ‘em, confuse ‘em”, a jibe at another Cardinal (Farrell) who suggested that Priests, whom Francis is depending upon to accompany those in irregular marital situations, are the least capable of providing counsel to married people!
I rather pointedly suggested to Cardinal Farrell that he reflect upon his own inadequacies in ministry before pointing a defamatory finger at his brother-Clergymen.
But, Cardinal Coccopalmerio journeys even further into absurdity as he suggests an even more ridiculous strategy of evangelization and governance: “If you can’t convince ‘em, coerce ‘em.”
Well, Your Eminence, outside the walls of the Vatican where the real world is, where people are not so readily disposed to surrender their common sense and personal dignity in obsequious hopes of attention and promotion, where people claim the right to personal freedom and discretion over their investments and property, your proposal is just plain goofy.
Propriety and etiquette prohibit me from telling Your Eminence what response you’d receive from the man on the street versus the sychophants who attend these lofty-sounding yet completely irrelevant Vatican seminars.
Canon Law, as Your Eminence must of all people rightly know, is rightly ordered to the governance of the Church and offers the Christian faithful the reasonable and justice means by which they are to be incorporate into and cooperate with the mission of the Church.
Canon Law does not exist as a separate Gospel which values material creation over spiritual redemption.
Rather, Canon Law exists for the “for the salvation of souls, which is always the supreme law of the Church.” (Canon 1752)
Your Eminence, Church law is about saving souls not trees!
May I offer Cardinal Coccopalmerio, now retired President of the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts, the simple and clear admonition my mother addressed to me when, as a child, I was a bothersome and distracting: "Now be quiet, and let Mother get on with her work."
It's a wisdom His Eminence should embrace.
Oh Lord, how long! How long, O Lord!
Cardinal Francesco Coccopalmerio, President emeritus of the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts, has proposed that a new Canon be inserted into the Code of Canon Law.
The new Canon would be dedicated to the “grave duty” of all the Christian faithful to not only “not harm” but even “improve” the environment.
The Cardinal has called on Pope Francis to require Catholics under Canon Law to care for the environment, calling it “one of the most serious duties” for the faithful today.
His Eminence stated: “The Code of Canon Law, at the beginning of the second book, in Canons 208-221 under the title ‘Obligations and rights of all the Christian faithful’, an authoritative sketch of the believer and his life as a Christian. Unfortunately, nothing is said about one of his most serious duties: to protect and promote the natural environment in which the believer lives.”
“My proposal,” the Cardinal said, “would be to ask the Pope, on behalf of the Dicastery for Legislative Texts, to insert into the Canons I have just cited a new Canon that sounds more or less like this: ‘Every faithful Christian, mindful that creation is our common home, has the grave duty not only not to damage, but also to improve, both through normal behavior, as well as through specific initiatives, the natural environment in which each person is called to live.’”
He first announced this proposal during a July 12th event in Rome entitled “Dialogue on Catholic investments for energy transition.”
The closed-door (why I wonder) meeting brought together representatives of the Vatican and Catholic organizations to discuss how to invest responsibly towards a transition to renewable energies.
Inspired by Pope Francis’ 2015 Encyclical on the environment, Laudato si’, and by his recent address to CEOs of major oil and gas companies, participants in the July 12th event agreed on the importance of the Catholic Divest-Invest Program currently being sponsored by the World Catholic Climate Movement.
According to the organization’s website, the Catholic Divest-Invest Program calls on Catholic institutions to commit publicly to completely divest from all fossil fuels within five years, and to invest in “socially and ethically responsible companies that protect creation and all who share it.”
What an embarrassment to the proper and dignified role of Canon Law in the governance of the Church and care of the Christian faithful!
The Cardinal trivializes the importance of the Law by such a nonsensical proposal.
Unfortunately, Pope Francis has created his own Frankenstein-like monster in his call for a kindler, gentler hierarchy and Presbyterate.
The Pope loves to paint a picture of how the Church should be, a Church wherein Bishops and Priests accompany the Christian faithful with compassion and empathy, sensitive to their needs and capacities to submit themselves to Evangelical counsels.
But, much too often in my opinion, the Holy Father is figuratively slapped in the face by the reality that the hierarchs and Clergy presently in positions of authority and influence are completely incompetent to fulfill that very mission of accompaniment.
These European pseudo-aristocrats in the Curia and elsewhere are so completely out of touch with the modern world.
In a recent post, I referred to a plaque here in my home-office which reads: “If you can’t convince ‘em, confuse ‘em”, a jibe at another Cardinal (Farrell) who suggested that Priests, whom Francis is depending upon to accompany those in irregular marital situations, are the least capable of providing counsel to married people!
I rather pointedly suggested to Cardinal Farrell that he reflect upon his own inadequacies in ministry before pointing a defamatory finger at his brother-Clergymen.
But, Cardinal Coccopalmerio journeys even further into absurdity as he suggests an even more ridiculous strategy of evangelization and governance: “If you can’t convince ‘em, coerce ‘em.”
Well, Your Eminence, outside the walls of the Vatican where the real world is, where people are not so readily disposed to surrender their common sense and personal dignity in obsequious hopes of attention and promotion, where people claim the right to personal freedom and discretion over their investments and property, your proposal is just plain goofy.
Propriety and etiquette prohibit me from telling Your Eminence what response you’d receive from the man on the street versus the sychophants who attend these lofty-sounding yet completely irrelevant Vatican seminars.
Canon Law, as Your Eminence must of all people rightly know, is rightly ordered to the governance of the Church and offers the Christian faithful the reasonable and justice means by which they are to be incorporate into and cooperate with the mission of the Church.
Canon Law does not exist as a separate Gospel which values material creation over spiritual redemption.
Rather, Canon Law exists for the “for the salvation of souls, which is always the supreme law of the Church.” (Canon 1752)
Your Eminence, Church law is about saving souls not trees!
May I offer Cardinal Coccopalmerio, now retired President of the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts, the simple and clear admonition my mother addressed to me when, as a child, I was a bothersome and distracting: "Now be quiet, and let Mother get on with her work."
It's a wisdom His Eminence should embrace.
Oh Lord, how long! How long, O Lord!
THE SCANDAL IN CHILE WORSENS
The Church in Chile continues to suffer allegations of Clerical sexual abuse and cover-ups.
Chilean Prosecutor, Emiliano Arias, announced that authorities have arrested Father Oscar Munoz, former Chancellor of the Archdiocese of Santiago, following accusations that he had sexually abused seven minors in Santiago and Rancagua since 2002.
In May of this year, Father Munoz confessed to Church authorities and was suspended -- all this occurring just before the visit of Pope Francis to the country.
The irony of all this is that the survivors, with whom Pope Francis eventually met after his infamous declarations about Bishop Baros’ innocence, had reported the abuse they suffered precisely to Father Munoz in his capacity as former Chancellor of Santiago.
Juan Carlos Cruz, a survivor, expressed shock and outrage: “The insolence – to put it mildly – is astonishing. (Father Munoz) was the one who took our statements, and nothing happened,” Cruz tweeted.
The Archdiocese of Santiago confirmed that Prosecutor Arias, accompanied by police, conducted a second search and seizure operation in connection with the charges against Father Munoz as well as several other pending investigations.
During the first search operation June 13, police raided the tribunal offices of the Archdiocese of Santiago as well as the offices of retired Bishop Alejandro Goic Karmelic of Rancagua.
Bishop Goic, who served as president of the Chilean Bishops’ Commission for Abuse Prevention, was forced to suspend 14 of the Diocese’s 68 Priests after an investigative report by a Chilean television channel revealed the existence of a sex-abuse ring made up of Clergy.
After the report’s broadcast, Bishop Goic apologized for his failure to act “with the appropriate agility in the investigation” of the Priests allegedly involved in the sex-abuse ring.
Pope Francis accepted the Bishop’s resignation on June 28.
Prosecutor Arias has confirmed his office is investigating the alleged sex-abuse ring in Rancagua as well as possible cover-ups of abuse cases by senior members of the Clergy, including Cardinal Riccardo Ezzati of Santiago and his predecessor, Cardinal Francisco Javier Errazuriz.
The news from Chile just keeps getting worse and worse.
Dear Holy Spirit, heal the wounds and ease the suffering of the Church in Chile. Give Pope Francis the strength and resolve to hold those responsible for these atrocities accountable for their misdeeds. Bless the Catholic faithful of Chile who have been so betrayed and abandoned by their Bishops and their Priests.
Chilean Prosecutor, Emiliano Arias, announced that authorities have arrested Father Oscar Munoz, former Chancellor of the Archdiocese of Santiago, following accusations that he had sexually abused seven minors in Santiago and Rancagua since 2002.
In May of this year, Father Munoz confessed to Church authorities and was suspended -- all this occurring just before the visit of Pope Francis to the country.
The irony of all this is that the survivors, with whom Pope Francis eventually met after his infamous declarations about Bishop Baros’ innocence, had reported the abuse they suffered precisely to Father Munoz in his capacity as former Chancellor of Santiago.
Juan Carlos Cruz, a survivor, expressed shock and outrage: “The insolence – to put it mildly – is astonishing. (Father Munoz) was the one who took our statements, and nothing happened,” Cruz tweeted.
The Archdiocese of Santiago confirmed that Prosecutor Arias, accompanied by police, conducted a second search and seizure operation in connection with the charges against Father Munoz as well as several other pending investigations.
During the first search operation June 13, police raided the tribunal offices of the Archdiocese of Santiago as well as the offices of retired Bishop Alejandro Goic Karmelic of Rancagua.
Bishop Goic, who served as president of the Chilean Bishops’ Commission for Abuse Prevention, was forced to suspend 14 of the Diocese’s 68 Priests after an investigative report by a Chilean television channel revealed the existence of a sex-abuse ring made up of Clergy.
After the report’s broadcast, Bishop Goic apologized for his failure to act “with the appropriate agility in the investigation” of the Priests allegedly involved in the sex-abuse ring.
Pope Francis accepted the Bishop’s resignation on June 28.
Prosecutor Arias has confirmed his office is investigating the alleged sex-abuse ring in Rancagua as well as possible cover-ups of abuse cases by senior members of the Clergy, including Cardinal Riccardo Ezzati of Santiago and his predecessor, Cardinal Francisco Javier Errazuriz.
The news from Chile just keeps getting worse and worse.
Dear Holy Spirit, heal the wounds and ease the suffering of the Church in Chile. Give Pope Francis the strength and resolve to hold those responsible for these atrocities accountable for their misdeeds. Bless the Catholic faithful of Chile who have been so betrayed and abandoned by their Bishops and their Priests.