Thirty-two years ago, Bishop Carroll T. Dozier, retired head of the Roman Catholic Church's Memphis Diocese, died after suffering a stroke. He was 74 years old.
Bishop Dozier, like Archbishop Hunthausen of whom I posted an article, was someone with whom I was acquainted with some familiarity.
I first met the Bishop when he came to visit the seminarians from Memphis who, like me, were students at the Pontifical North American College seminary in Rome. During these visits, he would often spend evenings in the Student Lounge sharing a beer and a snack or two with the seminarians and regaling us with stories about his seminary days and early days of Priesthood.
Bishop Dozier was perhaps the friendliest, most down-to-earth Bishop I have ever met in my entire life. He was jovial and had a hardy laugh that I remember to this day, some 45 years later.
He was also a very controversial Bishop.
I remember that he was called to Rome in the Fall of 1976 for having offered Masses in Memphis to bring back to the Church Catholics who had abandoned the practice of their Faith on account of divorce or other disagreements with Church discipline. His Masses drew capacity crowds to the municipal auditoriums where they were celebrated both in Memphis itself as well as the City of Jackson, Tennessee. Prior to and after the Masses, estranged Catholics were offered opportunities to speak to Priests and seek counseling for ways they could return to the Church.
Bishop Dozier would also provide the Sacrament of Reconciliation at these Masses under the form of General Absolution rather than requiring the ordinary form of auricular (private and individual) confession of sins.
According to Canon Law, General Absolution was only to be considerate appropriate and proper under extraordinary conditions, such as the absence of enough Priests to hear Confession in times of emergency or imminent danger of death.
Both Pope Paul VI and James Cardinal Knox, Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, summoned Bishop Dozier to Rome on a number of occasions expressing their displeasure at his actions. But, the Bishop refused to back down.
Shortly after his last summons to Rome in 1983, Pope Paul VI asked for and accepted Bishop Dozier’s resignation and Bishop J. Francis Stafford was named by the Holy Father to succeed him.
Bishop Dozier came to mind when I was writing about Archbishop Hunthausen of Seattle, Washington. These two Bishops were certainly ahead of their time and appear to have called for a pastoral care of souls very much in tune with that of Pope Francis many decades later.
And in his case, as in that of Archbishop Hunthausen, both seem to have been prophets who appeared on the Church’s horizon but simply at the wrong time.
In any case, my fond memories of Bishop Dozier linger to this day. His optimism and his joy were infectious. We need more Bishops like him now more than ever!
May God rest his soul and grant him the blessings of Eternal Life with Christ Jesus!
Friday, July 7, 2017
Thursday, July 6, 2017
REMEMBERING ARCHBISHOP RAY HUNTHAUSEN OF SEATTLE, WASHINGTON
In thinking how fickle life can be, even within the Church, Raymond Hunthausen, Archbishop Emeritus of Seattle, Washington, came to mind the other day.
I did a bit of research and discovered that, with God’s grace, he will celebrate his 96th Birthday this coming August. He requires assisted living arrangements now. I ask the Lord’s blessings upon him as I do all those who have given their lives in service to the Gospel and the Church.
Archbishop Hunthausen is familiar to me. I remember the controversy he caused in Seattle during the days I was serving in the Marriage Tribunal in St. Louis.
In the 1980s, the Archbishop was hailed by many liberal-leaning activists in the Church as a champion of markedly controversial social, theological and pastoral agendas.
During his tenure as Archbishop of Seattle, he spoke openly and often of his condemnation of the proliferation of nuclear weapons and the presence the Trident submarine bases off the coast of the Archdiocese. He made national headlines when he joined protesters on the outskirts of the military installation and announced that he would refuse to pay a portion of his income tax to the Federal government in protest against nuclear armament.
He was among the first and very few of the American Bishops to begin a public dialogue with activists seeking political equality for homosexuals.
The actions of the Archbishop eventually came to the attention of then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger and Pope Saint John Paul II who called for an investigation of the Archbishop to be conducted by then-Archbishop James Hickey of Washington, DC.
Among the official findings of the investigation, Archbishop Hunthuasen was accused of the following: that he had allowed divorced Catholics without annulments to take communion; gave lay people unauthorized influence in shaping programs as “a kind of voting process on doctrinal or moral teachings”; permitted intercommunion at weddings and funerals; and that he allowed a homosexual group to meet in the cathedral, which risked ignoring the Magisterium’s judgment that same-sex acts were “an intrinsic moral evil, intrinsically distorted and self-indulgent.”
In addition to welcoming the gay group to the cathedral, the investigation charged that the Archbishop had defended homosexual dignity in the Seattle Gay News in 1977.
Lastly, the Archbishop was accused of ignoring the canonical restrictions placed upon the licit celebration of General Absolution.
The Vatican’s reaction was to appoint an Auxiliary Bishop with special faculties, Donald Wuerl, who was to have final authority over six areas: liturgy, marriage, clergy and seminarians, ex-priests and any issues related to health care and homosexuals.
In effect, Archbishop Hunthausen was canonically stripped of office. He resigned as Archbishop of Seattle in 1990.
One of the things prophets most consistently get wrong is timing.
Does this mean that the prophet should cease speaking or forgetting the inspiration he has received? Often, even when the timing is wrong, prophetic words convey something from God that the Church should heed or at least notice.
Was Raymond Hunthausen a prophet? Was he a forerunner of the activist, pastoral, and socially-conscious style of church leadership that has been championed by Pope Francis?
Much of what Archbishop Hunthausen proclaimed sounds a great deal like the kind that harmonize with Pope Francis’ message, one which inspires, one which forgives, treats those who fall outside strict doctrinal with tolerance and bestows mercy on those who might be considered unworthy under other regimes. Openness to homosexuals, broader welcome to communion, a greater, equal role for lay people, a witness to faith determined by compassion and attention to suffering rather than law and order.
The overlap between the Pope and the former Archbishop appears rather astounding.
And so, I just wonder if the Archbishop was just another example of a prophet with wrong timing!
I did a bit of research and discovered that, with God’s grace, he will celebrate his 96th Birthday this coming August. He requires assisted living arrangements now. I ask the Lord’s blessings upon him as I do all those who have given their lives in service to the Gospel and the Church.
Archbishop Hunthausen is familiar to me. I remember the controversy he caused in Seattle during the days I was serving in the Marriage Tribunal in St. Louis.
In the 1980s, the Archbishop was hailed by many liberal-leaning activists in the Church as a champion of markedly controversial social, theological and pastoral agendas.
During his tenure as Archbishop of Seattle, he spoke openly and often of his condemnation of the proliferation of nuclear weapons and the presence the Trident submarine bases off the coast of the Archdiocese. He made national headlines when he joined protesters on the outskirts of the military installation and announced that he would refuse to pay a portion of his income tax to the Federal government in protest against nuclear armament.
He was among the first and very few of the American Bishops to begin a public dialogue with activists seeking political equality for homosexuals.
The actions of the Archbishop eventually came to the attention of then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger and Pope Saint John Paul II who called for an investigation of the Archbishop to be conducted by then-Archbishop James Hickey of Washington, DC.
Among the official findings of the investigation, Archbishop Hunthuasen was accused of the following: that he had allowed divorced Catholics without annulments to take communion; gave lay people unauthorized influence in shaping programs as “a kind of voting process on doctrinal or moral teachings”; permitted intercommunion at weddings and funerals; and that he allowed a homosexual group to meet in the cathedral, which risked ignoring the Magisterium’s judgment that same-sex acts were “an intrinsic moral evil, intrinsically distorted and self-indulgent.”
In addition to welcoming the gay group to the cathedral, the investigation charged that the Archbishop had defended homosexual dignity in the Seattle Gay News in 1977.
Lastly, the Archbishop was accused of ignoring the canonical restrictions placed upon the licit celebration of General Absolution.
The Vatican’s reaction was to appoint an Auxiliary Bishop with special faculties, Donald Wuerl, who was to have final authority over six areas: liturgy, marriage, clergy and seminarians, ex-priests and any issues related to health care and homosexuals.
In effect, Archbishop Hunthausen was canonically stripped of office. He resigned as Archbishop of Seattle in 1990.
One of the things prophets most consistently get wrong is timing.
Does this mean that the prophet should cease speaking or forgetting the inspiration he has received? Often, even when the timing is wrong, prophetic words convey something from God that the Church should heed or at least notice.
Was Raymond Hunthausen a prophet? Was he a forerunner of the activist, pastoral, and socially-conscious style of church leadership that has been championed by Pope Francis?
Much of what Archbishop Hunthausen proclaimed sounds a great deal like the kind that harmonize with Pope Francis’ message, one which inspires, one which forgives, treats those who fall outside strict doctrinal with tolerance and bestows mercy on those who might be considered unworthy under other regimes. Openness to homosexuals, broader welcome to communion, a greater, equal role for lay people, a witness to faith determined by compassion and attention to suffering rather than law and order.
The overlap between the Pope and the former Archbishop appears rather astounding.
And so, I just wonder if the Archbishop was just another example of a prophet with wrong timing!
Wednesday, July 5, 2017
POPE FRANCIS FACES SHOWDOWN IN MBASIE
The order of Pope Francis after a June 8 meeting at the Vatican with a delegation from the Ahiara Diocese has been defied again as 3,000 faithful of the Diocese of the Catholic Church protest the appointment of Bishop Peter Okpaleke.
The protesters were reportedly backed by the laity, Priests and community leaders.
Okpaleke was appointed as Bishop and consecrated by Pope Benedict XVI in 2012, but both the Laity Council and the Priests in the diocese rejected his appointment on the grounds that he is not an indigene of the area, Mbaise.
In continuation of their defiance, worshipers again converged on Saturday on the Mater Ecclesiae Cathedral, Mbaise in Imo State for a rally to restate their total rejection of the embattled Bishop, an Anambra indigene, who the Pope said could not be rejected.
At the Vatican meeting, the Pope had called for a truce and directed all the Priests and major actors in the crisis to tender letters of obedience to the Church which he said is not owned by the community.
Pope Francis laid down an ultimatum to the defiant Nigerian Priests in Ahiara Diocese in Imo State: suspension a divinis if they did not obey the order and accept Bishop Okpaleke. The Holy Father said he was acting “for the good of the people of God” by threatening to suspend the Priests from the ministry.
Those priests opposing Bishop Okpaleke’s taking up of his office “want to destroy the church, which is not permitted,” the Pope said in his address to the delegation.
However, the Pope’s move to end disobedience to the Vatican appears to have been rebuffed again.
According to The Punch newspapers on Sunday, the diocesan youths, who put on black attire, chanted solidarity songs to reaffirm their support for the position taken by the Ahiara Diocese Priests and the Laity Council to reject the appointment.
Other Catholic men and women who dressed in different church uniforms, also participated in the rally, which started with a rosary procession round the cathedral.
Addressing the congregation inside the cathedral, the President of the Diocesan Laity Council, Gerald Anyanwu, maintained that the people of Mbaise were not against the Supreme Pontiff, but that they were against the irregularities and injustices allegedly perfected against the people of the diocese in the selection of the Bishop. Mr. Anyanwu insisted that Okpaleke was forced on them, and that he was not a Priest “incardinated in the Ahiara Presbyterate.”
“There was no time we insisted that the bishop of the diocese must be an Mbaise son, but the Prelate should at least be a Priest incardinated in the diocese. We shall accept any bishop whether a Hausa man or a Yoruba man as far as he is incardinated in Ahiara Diocese.”
The Pope’s next move, scheduled by his own edict, on Sunday, July 9th, will be most interesting indeed!
The protesters were reportedly backed by the laity, Priests and community leaders.
Okpaleke was appointed as Bishop and consecrated by Pope Benedict XVI in 2012, but both the Laity Council and the Priests in the diocese rejected his appointment on the grounds that he is not an indigene of the area, Mbaise.
In continuation of their defiance, worshipers again converged on Saturday on the Mater Ecclesiae Cathedral, Mbaise in Imo State for a rally to restate their total rejection of the embattled Bishop, an Anambra indigene, who the Pope said could not be rejected.
At the Vatican meeting, the Pope had called for a truce and directed all the Priests and major actors in the crisis to tender letters of obedience to the Church which he said is not owned by the community.
Pope Francis laid down an ultimatum to the defiant Nigerian Priests in Ahiara Diocese in Imo State: suspension a divinis if they did not obey the order and accept Bishop Okpaleke. The Holy Father said he was acting “for the good of the people of God” by threatening to suspend the Priests from the ministry.
Those priests opposing Bishop Okpaleke’s taking up of his office “want to destroy the church, which is not permitted,” the Pope said in his address to the delegation.
However, the Pope’s move to end disobedience to the Vatican appears to have been rebuffed again.
According to The Punch newspapers on Sunday, the diocesan youths, who put on black attire, chanted solidarity songs to reaffirm their support for the position taken by the Ahiara Diocese Priests and the Laity Council to reject the appointment.
Other Catholic men and women who dressed in different church uniforms, also participated in the rally, which started with a rosary procession round the cathedral.
Addressing the congregation inside the cathedral, the President of the Diocesan Laity Council, Gerald Anyanwu, maintained that the people of Mbaise were not against the Supreme Pontiff, but that they were against the irregularities and injustices allegedly perfected against the people of the diocese in the selection of the Bishop. Mr. Anyanwu insisted that Okpaleke was forced on them, and that he was not a Priest “incardinated in the Ahiara Presbyterate.”
“There was no time we insisted that the bishop of the diocese must be an Mbaise son, but the Prelate should at least be a Priest incardinated in the diocese. We shall accept any bishop whether a Hausa man or a Yoruba man as far as he is incardinated in Ahiara Diocese.”
The Pope’s next move, scheduled by his own edict, on Sunday, July 9th, will be most interesting indeed!
Tuesday, July 4, 2017
GOD BLESS AMERICA --- HAPPY JULY 4TH, AMERICA
Today, Americans celebrate the 241st Anniversary of the ratification of the Declaration of Independence.
That noble document would both summarize the reasons and defend the decision of the Colonies of the British Empire to formally separate and withdraw their allegiance from the Sovereignty of the King and declare the establishment of a new governing authority: self-governance by the citizenry of the land.
The foolishness with which the Crown of England had chosen to administer and govern the American colonists will go down in the annals of history as among the most colossal of political blunders any government could commit.
The oppressive taxation, the arbitrary confiscation of property and means of livelihood, the imposition of restrictive ordinances, the conscription of colonists for military service, all these deprivations of freedom and the advancement of commerce placed the colonist in an untenable situation from which they sought relief by the boldest of political decisions: separation from the King, a blatant act of treason punishable by death.
Today, almost two and a half centuries later, we Americans remain the standard bearers of liberty and freedom.
And yet, truth be told, America has become a land marked by a permissiveness and licentiousness threatening the very freedoms which inspired the historic declaration of independence giving birth to our nation.
Liberty, freedom unchecked by what is right, honest, decent and good can become the most destructive of forces.
Laws are just when they provide for the common good, not the gratification of the selfish or irresponsible.
Yet, that is exactly what seems to have happened in our country.
A tyranny of a minority of irresponsible, politically expedient, morally perverse dissidents has been allowed by the majority of Americans to hold sway over the political conversation and decisions of recent decades.
On this July 4th, America finds itself struggling to recapture the values which once inspired our nation to achieve its greatness.
There are many voices which oppose this effort to recapture the stature and the dignity of the country which has been the beacon of hope for so many who long to be free.
May honesty, decency and righteousness prove equal to the task which defending the principles of successful governance will require.
May God bless America on this July 4th. And may we prove ourselves to be worthy and deserving of that blessing always.
That noble document would both summarize the reasons and defend the decision of the Colonies of the British Empire to formally separate and withdraw their allegiance from the Sovereignty of the King and declare the establishment of a new governing authority: self-governance by the citizenry of the land.
The foolishness with which the Crown of England had chosen to administer and govern the American colonists will go down in the annals of history as among the most colossal of political blunders any government could commit.
The oppressive taxation, the arbitrary confiscation of property and means of livelihood, the imposition of restrictive ordinances, the conscription of colonists for military service, all these deprivations of freedom and the advancement of commerce placed the colonist in an untenable situation from which they sought relief by the boldest of political decisions: separation from the King, a blatant act of treason punishable by death.
Today, almost two and a half centuries later, we Americans remain the standard bearers of liberty and freedom.
And yet, truth be told, America has become a land marked by a permissiveness and licentiousness threatening the very freedoms which inspired the historic declaration of independence giving birth to our nation.
Liberty, freedom unchecked by what is right, honest, decent and good can become the most destructive of forces.
Laws are just when they provide for the common good, not the gratification of the selfish or irresponsible.
Yet, that is exactly what seems to have happened in our country.
A tyranny of a minority of irresponsible, politically expedient, morally perverse dissidents has been allowed by the majority of Americans to hold sway over the political conversation and decisions of recent decades.
On this July 4th, America finds itself struggling to recapture the values which once inspired our nation to achieve its greatness.
There are many voices which oppose this effort to recapture the stature and the dignity of the country which has been the beacon of hope for so many who long to be free.
May honesty, decency and righteousness prove equal to the task which defending the principles of successful governance will require.
May God bless America on this July 4th. And may we prove ourselves to be worthy and deserving of that blessing always.
Monday, July 3, 2017
GERMANY LEGALIZES SAME SEX MARRIAGE
Last Friday, lawmakers in Germany voted to allow same-sex marriage after a brisk but emotional debate in Parliament, setting the stage for the country to join more than a dozen European nations — including Ireland, France and Spain — in legalizing such unions.
The historic decision came with a swiftness rare in Germany’s politics, after Chancellor Angela Merkel unexpectedly eased her conservative party’s opposition to gay marriage and said she would allow lawmakers to vote their conscience on the measure, although she personally voted against it.
Ms. Merkel’s softened resistance paved the way for her coalition partners in the Social Democratic Party and two other political groups to press for Friday’s vote, which passed 393 to 226, with four abstentions.
“If the Constitution guarantees one thing, it is that anyone in this country can live as they wish,” Thomas Oppermann, the parliamentary leader of the Social Democrats, said in opening the floor debate. “If gay marriage is decided, then many will receive something, but nobody will have something taken away.”
How wrong you are, Herr Oppermann!
His remark was clearly intended to defuse conservatives — including Ms. Merkel — who argued that the Constitution protected conventional marriage.
Germany was jolted in the direction of approving gay marriage last weekend, when two major political parties said they would make the legislation a condition of any future coalition agreement with the Christian Democrats, led by Ms. Merkel, who is seeking a fourth term in the general election in September.
Approval of same-sex marriage in Germany could build momentum for similar legislation in other German-speaking countries, like Austria and Switzerland, said Katrin Hugendubel, advocacy director of ILGA-Europe, a gay and transgender rights group.
She said the developments in Germany illustrated the difference that opposition parties could make.
“For us, the most important lesson is for the opposition to be very outspoken in supporting L.G.B.T.I. rights,” Ms. Hugendubel said. “The Social Democrats’ and the Greens’ making it a coalition condition raised the pressure on the conservatives, so it’s very important that those in favor across Europe make it a condition, and be very strong in their support.”
It is unfortunate that the Catholic community is not as outspoken in defending traditional marriage as the LGBT activists.
The fact that a political party can pass legislation on matters so opposed to classical Christian teaching against homosexuality and still call itself the “Christian” Democratic Party is the greatest of hypocrisies.
Generations to come will condemn the lack of witness and courage manifested by Catholic leaders and members of the faithful in the utter failure to defend the sanctity of Holy Matrimony against the attacks of perverse and deviant forces within the secular culture.
What a shocking display of indifference and cowardice on the part of the Catholic communities around the world who are permitting the undoing of Biblical teachings and centuries of Christian formation which have defended Marriage and family life, the bedrock of society itself.
How clear it is that the Church has lost its place in influencing and affecting the culture and society in which it finds itself in the modern world of permissiveness and self-gratification.
The cost to future generations deprived of the guidance of Biblical and theological teaching which once promoted and supported civilized society will be great indeed.
We are witnessing the collapse of Western Civilization itself and the Church is useless and ineffectual in coming to its rescue.
How sad indeed!
The historic decision came with a swiftness rare in Germany’s politics, after Chancellor Angela Merkel unexpectedly eased her conservative party’s opposition to gay marriage and said she would allow lawmakers to vote their conscience on the measure, although she personally voted against it.
Ms. Merkel’s softened resistance paved the way for her coalition partners in the Social Democratic Party and two other political groups to press for Friday’s vote, which passed 393 to 226, with four abstentions.
“If the Constitution guarantees one thing, it is that anyone in this country can live as they wish,” Thomas Oppermann, the parliamentary leader of the Social Democrats, said in opening the floor debate. “If gay marriage is decided, then many will receive something, but nobody will have something taken away.”
How wrong you are, Herr Oppermann!
His remark was clearly intended to defuse conservatives — including Ms. Merkel — who argued that the Constitution protected conventional marriage.
Germany was jolted in the direction of approving gay marriage last weekend, when two major political parties said they would make the legislation a condition of any future coalition agreement with the Christian Democrats, led by Ms. Merkel, who is seeking a fourth term in the general election in September.
Approval of same-sex marriage in Germany could build momentum for similar legislation in other German-speaking countries, like Austria and Switzerland, said Katrin Hugendubel, advocacy director of ILGA-Europe, a gay and transgender rights group.
She said the developments in Germany illustrated the difference that opposition parties could make.
“For us, the most important lesson is for the opposition to be very outspoken in supporting L.G.B.T.I. rights,” Ms. Hugendubel said. “The Social Democrats’ and the Greens’ making it a coalition condition raised the pressure on the conservatives, so it’s very important that those in favor across Europe make it a condition, and be very strong in their support.”
It is unfortunate that the Catholic community is not as outspoken in defending traditional marriage as the LGBT activists.
The fact that a political party can pass legislation on matters so opposed to classical Christian teaching against homosexuality and still call itself the “Christian” Democratic Party is the greatest of hypocrisies.
Generations to come will condemn the lack of witness and courage manifested by Catholic leaders and members of the faithful in the utter failure to defend the sanctity of Holy Matrimony against the attacks of perverse and deviant forces within the secular culture.
What a shocking display of indifference and cowardice on the part of the Catholic communities around the world who are permitting the undoing of Biblical teachings and centuries of Christian formation which have defended Marriage and family life, the bedrock of society itself.
How clear it is that the Church has lost its place in influencing and affecting the culture and society in which it finds itself in the modern world of permissiveness and self-gratification.
The cost to future generations deprived of the guidance of Biblical and theological teaching which once promoted and supported civilized society will be great indeed.
We are witnessing the collapse of Western Civilization itself and the Church is useless and ineffectual in coming to its rescue.
How sad indeed!
Sunday, July 2, 2017
CARDINAL PELL ACCUSED OF PERSONAL HISTORICAL ACTS OF SEXUAL ABUSE
Cardinal Pell, a key adviser to Pope Francis, has been ordered to appear in a Melbourne court next month to respond to charges that he personally committed acts involving the sexual abuse of minors.
Of course, in Australia as in America, defendants alleged to have committed crimes, as Cardinal George Pell has been, are considered innocent until proven guilty after due process of law.
At a news conference in Rome, Cardinal Pell stated unequivocally: “ I'm looking forward, finally, to having my day in court. I'm innocent of these charges, they are false. The whole idea of sexual abuse is abhorrent to me.”
The Cardinal made those remarks after hearing from Shane Patton, a police official in the Australian State of Victoria, that he had been accused by numerous alleged victims of “historical acts of sexual abuse” dating as far back as the 1970s and 1980s, before he became the senior Vatican official he is now.
With these allegations, Cardinal Pell becomes the highest-ranking Catholic prelate to face sexual assault charges.
The case against Cardinal Pell actually began more than a decade ago, with accusations that, when he was a Priest and Bishop both in Melbourne and Sydney, had mishandled abuse allegations against others.
However, these latest allegations against him personally - that is, charges that he himself had committed abuse - are more recent, that is, they have been around now for a couple of years.
Pope Francis was asked about them last year when he was returning from Poland and on the Papal plane on the way back to Rome. He was asked what he planned to do about them. The Pope responded, “ I am going to let the justice system speak, and then I will speak.”
It should be said that during his final years, when he was the Archbishop of Sydney, there was a great deal of controversy that made it a bit of a surprise that newly-elected Pope Francis brought him to Rome to be his financial-cleanup man in the newly created Secretariat for the Economy.
It is probably fair to say that Cardinal Pell's power inside the Vatican peaked probably a year and a half ago. Since then, he has spoken publicly about issues over which he disagrees with Pope Francis. For his part, the Holy Father has seemed to limit the power and influence which Cardinal Pell once enjoyed early on in his Vatican post. That may not directly be related to the charges against him but perhaps has more to do with internal Vatican politics. However, these accusations will not serve the Cardinal’s interests whatsoever.
The press in Australia has quoted leading legal scholars who raised the question of whether Cardinal Pell can get a fair trial because public opinion has been so thoroughly poisoned - not just by the personal attacks against the Cardinal, but also by the broader narrative of the sexual-abuse scandal in the country.
We can only hope and pray that the allegations against Cardinal Pell are false and that he will exonerated. If that were to happen and happen quickly, perhaps it could allow the Cardinal to return to his Vatican post strengthened in his position which, for the time being, clearly has been compromised.
Of course, in Australia as in America, defendants alleged to have committed crimes, as Cardinal George Pell has been, are considered innocent until proven guilty after due process of law.
At a news conference in Rome, Cardinal Pell stated unequivocally: “ I'm looking forward, finally, to having my day in court. I'm innocent of these charges, they are false. The whole idea of sexual abuse is abhorrent to me.”
The Cardinal made those remarks after hearing from Shane Patton, a police official in the Australian State of Victoria, that he had been accused by numerous alleged victims of “historical acts of sexual abuse” dating as far back as the 1970s and 1980s, before he became the senior Vatican official he is now.
With these allegations, Cardinal Pell becomes the highest-ranking Catholic prelate to face sexual assault charges.
The case against Cardinal Pell actually began more than a decade ago, with accusations that, when he was a Priest and Bishop both in Melbourne and Sydney, had mishandled abuse allegations against others.
However, these latest allegations against him personally - that is, charges that he himself had committed abuse - are more recent, that is, they have been around now for a couple of years.
Pope Francis was asked about them last year when he was returning from Poland and on the Papal plane on the way back to Rome. He was asked what he planned to do about them. The Pope responded, “ I am going to let the justice system speak, and then I will speak.”
It should be said that during his final years, when he was the Archbishop of Sydney, there was a great deal of controversy that made it a bit of a surprise that newly-elected Pope Francis brought him to Rome to be his financial-cleanup man in the newly created Secretariat for the Economy.
It is probably fair to say that Cardinal Pell's power inside the Vatican peaked probably a year and a half ago. Since then, he has spoken publicly about issues over which he disagrees with Pope Francis. For his part, the Holy Father has seemed to limit the power and influence which Cardinal Pell once enjoyed early on in his Vatican post. That may not directly be related to the charges against him but perhaps has more to do with internal Vatican politics. However, these accusations will not serve the Cardinal’s interests whatsoever.
The press in Australia has quoted leading legal scholars who raised the question of whether Cardinal Pell can get a fair trial because public opinion has been so thoroughly poisoned - not just by the personal attacks against the Cardinal, but also by the broader narrative of the sexual-abuse scandal in the country.
We can only hope and pray that the allegations against Cardinal Pell are false and that he will exonerated. If that were to happen and happen quickly, perhaps it could allow the Cardinal to return to his Vatican post strengthened in his position which, for the time being, clearly has been compromised.
Saturday, July 1, 2017
THE USCCB DISCUSSES SYNOD 2018 ON YOUTH AND VOCATIONS
The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) recently concluded meetings in Indianapolis.
Among the topics discussed was the October 2018 Synod of Bishops which Pope Francis will convene to discuss young Catholics’ affiliation with the Church and vocations to the Priesthood and Religious Life.
Speaking on th topic of the synod, Cardinal Joseph Tobin of Newark is quoted as telling the assembled Bishops, “We know that there are both challenges and opportunities here in the U.S. The increased amount of disconnected millennials is certainly a concern for us, as is the decline and the delay of marriage among young people.”
Hardly an insightful observation, yet to quote the adage: “In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king”!
According to Pew Research Center, one out of three people raised Catholic have left the church. Almost half of those left before reaching 18 years of age. These are not just Catholics who do not practice their Catholic Faith. These are people who have abandoned the Catholic Faith. This is a devastating exodus unprecedented in the life of the Catholic Church in America.
Tobin’s strategy in addressing the critical loss of young Catholics?
"This is a time to learn from youth and young adults, to listen to their stories and to engage them in authentic dialogue," Tobin said. "We can also remember that youth and young adults are the agents, not the objects, of this process and of this synod. So they must have as much at stake in this as we do. Further, we can involve leaders in youth, campus and young adult ministries, vocations, marriage and family life — all who connect with youth and young adults in their work."
To that end, the Vatican has created an online questionnaire inviting young people from all over the world to participate and give input to the Synod. By doing this, the Pope is modeling how Bishops should listen to young people prior to the synod.
“Listening and accompanying” is a pastoral style quite different from patriarchal style of “teaching and directing.”
The pastoral style recognizes that these youths are adults who cannot be forced into prefabricated molds. Trust and understanding are essential to a fruitful conversation. The result may be accompanying people on a lifelong pilgrimage, rather than preparing them for an entrance exam.
The question is this: are the Bishops disposed to listen — even to those with whom they disagree — so that they might propose to young people the essentials of the Gospel in a more persuasive, life-changing way?"
Whether the Bishops will listen and accompany Catholic youth who have become indifferent and, in some cases, hostile to Church teaching is a whole other question.
The fact remains that the majority of the members of the USCCB have been and are content to pretend that the problem is not a critical one, that the next generation of Catholics will be there when the Church of the future will need to depend upon their presence and support.
It’s the only conclusion one can draw from the Bishops' rather lackluster consideration of the issue and their willingness to simply relegate their consideration of it to the laundry list of other social programs which appear to garner their greater attention and energy.
So be it, but life has a terrible way of disrupting preconceived notions and ideas, even those of Bishops, Cardinals and Popes.
Among the topics discussed was the October 2018 Synod of Bishops which Pope Francis will convene to discuss young Catholics’ affiliation with the Church and vocations to the Priesthood and Religious Life.
Speaking on th topic of the synod, Cardinal Joseph Tobin of Newark is quoted as telling the assembled Bishops, “We know that there are both challenges and opportunities here in the U.S. The increased amount of disconnected millennials is certainly a concern for us, as is the decline and the delay of marriage among young people.”
Hardly an insightful observation, yet to quote the adage: “In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king”!
According to Pew Research Center, one out of three people raised Catholic have left the church. Almost half of those left before reaching 18 years of age. These are not just Catholics who do not practice their Catholic Faith. These are people who have abandoned the Catholic Faith. This is a devastating exodus unprecedented in the life of the Catholic Church in America.
Tobin’s strategy in addressing the critical loss of young Catholics?
"This is a time to learn from youth and young adults, to listen to their stories and to engage them in authentic dialogue," Tobin said. "We can also remember that youth and young adults are the agents, not the objects, of this process and of this synod. So they must have as much at stake in this as we do. Further, we can involve leaders in youth, campus and young adult ministries, vocations, marriage and family life — all who connect with youth and young adults in their work."
To that end, the Vatican has created an online questionnaire inviting young people from all over the world to participate and give input to the Synod. By doing this, the Pope is modeling how Bishops should listen to young people prior to the synod.
“Listening and accompanying” is a pastoral style quite different from patriarchal style of “teaching and directing.”
The pastoral style recognizes that these youths are adults who cannot be forced into prefabricated molds. Trust and understanding are essential to a fruitful conversation. The result may be accompanying people on a lifelong pilgrimage, rather than preparing them for an entrance exam.
The question is this: are the Bishops disposed to listen — even to those with whom they disagree — so that they might propose to young people the essentials of the Gospel in a more persuasive, life-changing way?"
Whether the Bishops will listen and accompany Catholic youth who have become indifferent and, in some cases, hostile to Church teaching is a whole other question.
The fact remains that the majority of the members of the USCCB have been and are content to pretend that the problem is not a critical one, that the next generation of Catholics will be there when the Church of the future will need to depend upon their presence and support.
It’s the only conclusion one can draw from the Bishops' rather lackluster consideration of the issue and their willingness to simply relegate their consideration of it to the laundry list of other social programs which appear to garner their greater attention and energy.
So be it, but life has a terrible way of disrupting preconceived notions and ideas, even those of Bishops, Cardinals and Popes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)