We are blessed!
The new Handicapped approach to the Clinic is better placed for those who need to use it. Direct entrance to the front of the Clinic.
Footers, foundation ready for added space: treatment rooms, storage/office, consultation.
.
Saturday, May 8, 2010
St. Joseph's Clinic continues to expand:
We are blessed!
The new Handicapped approach to the Clinic is better placed for those who need to use it. Direct entrance to the front of the Clinic.
Footers, foundation ready for added space: treatment rooms, storage/office, consultation.
.
Thursday, May 6, 2010
The Parable of the Prodigal Son...in Music and Song....performed by Casting Crowns
.
sin, repentance .... us, God ....
.
Wednesday, May 5, 2010
Our Local Environment
Lord . . .
Inspire us to discern what is right and to do all we can to protect and preserve our endangered waters and coastline and all the creatures therein.
Amen
Inspire us to discern what is right and to do all we can to protect and preserve our endangered waters and coastline and all the creatures therein.
Amen
Tuesday, May 4, 2010
Pray the Rosary? This is worth watching . . .
In support of priests throughout the the world, every day since June 19, 2009, I have said a rosary for priests.
Pray for priests. Including this one.
The Year for Priests ends June 19, 2010.
Thank you.
Pray for priests. Including this one.
The Year for Priests ends June 19, 2010.
Thank you.
Sunday, May 2, 2010
Saturday, May 1, 2010
We Pray for God's Creatures. our Land, our Environment, our Gulf Waters
Loving Father and Creator of all we come to you today deeply grateful for your creation. As we look around us we are amazed at the greatness and majesty of all that you have made. Nature around us speaks of your greatness - the vast expanse of the sky, the mountains, trees, lakes and streams speak of your great design. You have given us such beauty in the colors of the rainbow, the beauty of flowers and fields, the waters of the oceans and especially of the Gulf waters at our shore.
During these days of deep concern, help us in our response to the danger that threatens our shores: our sister states of Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and of our own state of Florida.
Help us to protect our environment, especially mindful of all creatures great and small which inhabit our shoreline and waters, our bayous, bays, rivers and streams. May we use our talents, our intellect, our strength and Your grace – all that You have given us - to respond correctly that we may avert the threatening elements which are near.
We praise You always..
.
.
Today is May 1: The Feast of St. Joseph the Worker
+ + + + +
For Catholics around the world today is the feast day of St. Joseph the Worker. Joseph, the foster father of Jesus, is the Patron Saint of workers.
Pope Pius XII decided in 1955 to add the optional feast day of Saint Joseph the Worker on May 1, to counteract the Communists’ May Day holiday by Christianizing this European Labor Day.
The Holy Father assured his audience and the working people of the world: “You have beside you a shepherd, a defender and a father in Saint Joseph, the carpenter whom God in His providence chose to be the virginal father of Jesus and the head of the Holy Family. He is silent but has excellent hearing, and his intercession is very powerful over the Heart of the Savior."
+++++++
St. Jospeh Clinic for the poor - indigent - uninsured ... for the Love of God
This past Wednesday ground was broken for the addition to our parish Clinic ... more doctor/patient consultation rooms ... storage ... staff work space ... etc.
The foundation has been carved out of the old Pensacola ground and today the cement for the new sidewalk is being poured. This will give our patients easier and safer access to our Clinic.
The delivery truck mixes the cement and prepares to pour: stand by
The workers finish their digging and now begin to transfer the cement by wheel barrow: at first this is tedious and heavy work.
The foundation has been carved out of the old Pensacola ground and today the cement for the new sidewalk is being poured. This will give our patients easier and safer access to our Clinic.
The delivery truck mixes the cement and prepares to pour: stand by
The workers finish their digging and now begin to transfer the cement by wheel barrow: at first this is tedious and heavy work.
.
You Are Peter: Part 6
Secular Sex Abuse Gets a Look
Friday, April 30, 2010, 3:18 PM
Elizabeth Scalia
In New York, Queens Assemblywoman Margaret Markey routinely presents a bill which seeks to open a year-long “window” into the statute of limitations on child sex-abuse cases, allowing victims whose cases may go back as far as 40 years to bring suit for damages.
Because the bill has -until now- always been limited by Markey to impact the churches, exclusively, it always either failed or been shelved. It is difficult to pass a bill that essentially finds some sexual abuse victims to be more worthy of redress than others.
Markey seems to have figured that out; her new bill includes suits against secular institutions, and the previously silent civil authorities, among others, are reeling:
Should it be possible to sue the city of New York for sexual abuse by public school teachers that happened decades ago? How about doctors or hospital attendants? Police officers? Welfare workers? Playground attendants?
For nearly a year, the city has tiptoed around that question, but in the coming months, there may be no ducking it. Legislation in Albany would force public officials to answer for the crimes of earlier generations, just as Catholic bishops have.
What began as an effort by legislators to expand judicial accountability for sexual abuse by Catholic clergy has grown to cover people in every walk of life. One bill would temporarily suspend the statute of limitations, and allow people who say they were abused as children to file lawsuits up to age 58 — that is, 40 years after they turned 18.
It is a collision of powerful civic values: the need to provide justice to people who were outrageously injured as children and manipulated into silence, and the duty of courts to decide cases based on reliable evidence.
The Hermeneutic of Continuity has a very good response to the story
In this context, the NYT story is no longer one of cover-up and denial of responsibility but of “a collision of powerful civic values”.
The excuses are all now tumbling out. The New York City Mayor is concerned about the potential impact for taxpayers. Welcome to the real world, Mayor. Catholics in the pews have seen billions of dollars, donated by them over decades, paid out in compensation to victims of clerical abuse and episcopal failure. It is tough but we have to recognise responsibility.
The State Association of Counties has issued a memo of opposition citing the problem of “significantly aged and clouded” evidence. Well, as we have learnt in the Church, extending the statute of limitations is necessary because the nature of the crime means that it may take a long time before a person is ready to confront the abuse that they have suffered in the past.
The New York State School Boards Association has said that the revelation of past misdeeds would provide no extra protection for children. They should talk to Safeguarding Officials and good lay Catholics who know that the revelation of past crimes is a very strong motivation to provide robust safeguarding procedures.
So, the secular institutional world may soon find itself forced onto the same learning curve that has impacted and the Catholic Church over the past few years; that world too may find itself finally forced to confront the filth that too often stays hidden. The confrontation -painful as it may be- will ultimately be for the good.
There is much to think about. Talk about “crisis” and “opportunity!” For many, going back forty years may seem excessive, but others may feel that the time-frame is warranted.
As we begin to acknowledge that child sex abuse has long-infected the whole of society, and not just the churches, we will be forced to take a long and difficult look at ourselves. Church-sex stories may be sensational, but these others will quickly come to seem dreary, mostly because they will indict not just those oddball celibates and religious freaks, but our cops, our doctors, our teachers, our bureaucrats – you know, the “normal” people, all around us, in our families, attending our barbecues and graduations, healing our wounds and teaching our kids.
Extending the “open window” to include secular sex abuse cases will impact the whole of society. We will be invited to look in and-seeing the width and breadth of the problem-will be forced to ponder the human animal and the human soul in ways we have not, and would rather not. It may bring home some uncomfortable truths: that “safety” is relative; that human darkness is not limited to various “theys” but seeps into the whole of “us”; that the tendency to look at the guilt of others has, perhaps, a root in our wish not to look at ourselves; that human brokenness is a constant and human righteousness is always imperfect.
The Church has endured a painful and necessary purge, one that is ongoing. In recent weeks old stories have been resurrected with new (and not completely honest) spinning, predictable howls and some sad agendizing and self-promotion and game-playing. For all the pain, however, one can look at the positive and very effective policies which have developed from these boil-lancings and conclude that the treatment has been worth it; the Church will emerge healthier for this long detoxing.
If the sins of the secular world can endure a similar scrutiny and scab-scrapping, perhaps the society as a whole will emerge healthier, too.
Should the Markey bill pass, forcing secular and civic institutions (and taxpayers) to beat out the lumps under their own rugs, these institutions may find themselves turning to the Catholic Church in America for advice, to see how they may adapt her successful policies drawn under this pope and the current bishops, to their own organizations. That would be both profoundly ironic, and further evidence that sometimes excruciating episodes and injustices end up working for a broader good.
Which is one message of the Crucifixion and the Resurrection.
Friday, April 30, 2010, 3:18 PM
Elizabeth Scalia
In New York, Queens Assemblywoman Margaret Markey routinely presents a bill which seeks to open a year-long “window” into the statute of limitations on child sex-abuse cases, allowing victims whose cases may go back as far as 40 years to bring suit for damages.
Because the bill has -until now- always been limited by Markey to impact the churches, exclusively, it always either failed or been shelved. It is difficult to pass a bill that essentially finds some sexual abuse victims to be more worthy of redress than others.
Markey seems to have figured that out; her new bill includes suits against secular institutions, and the previously silent civil authorities, among others, are reeling:
Should it be possible to sue the city of New York for sexual abuse by public school teachers that happened decades ago? How about doctors or hospital attendants? Police officers? Welfare workers? Playground attendants?
For nearly a year, the city has tiptoed around that question, but in the coming months, there may be no ducking it. Legislation in Albany would force public officials to answer for the crimes of earlier generations, just as Catholic bishops have.
What began as an effort by legislators to expand judicial accountability for sexual abuse by Catholic clergy has grown to cover people in every walk of life. One bill would temporarily suspend the statute of limitations, and allow people who say they were abused as children to file lawsuits up to age 58 — that is, 40 years after they turned 18.
It is a collision of powerful civic values: the need to provide justice to people who were outrageously injured as children and manipulated into silence, and the duty of courts to decide cases based on reliable evidence.
The Hermeneutic of Continuity has a very good response to the story
In this context, the NYT story is no longer one of cover-up and denial of responsibility but of “a collision of powerful civic values”.
The excuses are all now tumbling out. The New York City Mayor is concerned about the potential impact for taxpayers. Welcome to the real world, Mayor. Catholics in the pews have seen billions of dollars, donated by them over decades, paid out in compensation to victims of clerical abuse and episcopal failure. It is tough but we have to recognise responsibility.
The State Association of Counties has issued a memo of opposition citing the problem of “significantly aged and clouded” evidence. Well, as we have learnt in the Church, extending the statute of limitations is necessary because the nature of the crime means that it may take a long time before a person is ready to confront the abuse that they have suffered in the past.
The New York State School Boards Association has said that the revelation of past misdeeds would provide no extra protection for children. They should talk to Safeguarding Officials and good lay Catholics who know that the revelation of past crimes is a very strong motivation to provide robust safeguarding procedures.
So, the secular institutional world may soon find itself forced onto the same learning curve that has impacted and the Catholic Church over the past few years; that world too may find itself finally forced to confront the filth that too often stays hidden. The confrontation -painful as it may be- will ultimately be for the good.
There is much to think about. Talk about “crisis” and “opportunity!” For many, going back forty years may seem excessive, but others may feel that the time-frame is warranted.
As we begin to acknowledge that child sex abuse has long-infected the whole of society, and not just the churches, we will be forced to take a long and difficult look at ourselves. Church-sex stories may be sensational, but these others will quickly come to seem dreary, mostly because they will indict not just those oddball celibates and religious freaks, but our cops, our doctors, our teachers, our bureaucrats – you know, the “normal” people, all around us, in our families, attending our barbecues and graduations, healing our wounds and teaching our kids.
Extending the “open window” to include secular sex abuse cases will impact the whole of society. We will be invited to look in and-seeing the width and breadth of the problem-will be forced to ponder the human animal and the human soul in ways we have not, and would rather not. It may bring home some uncomfortable truths: that “safety” is relative; that human darkness is not limited to various “theys” but seeps into the whole of “us”; that the tendency to look at the guilt of others has, perhaps, a root in our wish not to look at ourselves; that human brokenness is a constant and human righteousness is always imperfect.
The Church has endured a painful and necessary purge, one that is ongoing. In recent weeks old stories have been resurrected with new (and not completely honest) spinning, predictable howls and some sad agendizing and self-promotion and game-playing. For all the pain, however, one can look at the positive and very effective policies which have developed from these boil-lancings and conclude that the treatment has been worth it; the Church will emerge healthier for this long detoxing.
If the sins of the secular world can endure a similar scrutiny and scab-scrapping, perhaps the society as a whole will emerge healthier, too.
Should the Markey bill pass, forcing secular and civic institutions (and taxpayers) to beat out the lumps under their own rugs, these institutions may find themselves turning to the Catholic Church in America for advice, to see how they may adapt her successful policies drawn under this pope and the current bishops, to their own organizations. That would be both profoundly ironic, and further evidence that sometimes excruciating episodes and injustices end up working for a broader good.
Which is one message of the Crucifixion and the Resurrection.
You Are Peter: Part 5
Clergy abuse wrongly explained
Posted: April 28, 2010 |
Patrick McIlheran
In the current dredge-up of old sexual abuse cases involving Catholic priests, one feels sorriest for these men in their 50s who once were the prey.
Not so much because of the awfulness of what was done to them, though it was awful. Rather, it's that they're seeking a temporal justice they never can get.
"Somebody should be punished," said one of the victims of Father Lawrence Murphy, who molested some 200 deaf boys in St. Francis from the 1950s to the 1970s. It can't be Murphy, long since dead, as are the two archbishops who oversaw him. The district attorney who took a pass is retired, so the victims' recourse is to sue the current pope, whose only involvement, decades after Murphy molested anyone, was on the question of whether the monster would wear a Roman collar in his coffin.
One wishes the victims the peace that law cannot give them.
Then there are other players, all with causes to advance. This is where trouble lies. We're told the lawsuits are about forcing Catholicism to change. Yet the changes proposed grow out of flawed explanations.
We're told, for instance, that the abuse resulted from the Catholic Church's authoritarianism.
Wrong: Abuse flourished when no one would exert authority. Bishops did not expel molesters but shuffled them off. Tellingly, claims that Benedict XVI, then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, didn't do enough all date from the era before his Vatican office took control of the crisis away from dithering bishops.
Moreover, molestation peaked in precisely that era when the church shrank from the idea of authority. In the 1970s, priests put on jeans and became friends to the faithful rather than stern fathers. The era of shalt-not gave way to days of we-understand. In hindsight, this opened a path for predators.
We're told the church erred in seeing abuse as sin, not crime.
But facts belie this. The church didn't see it as sin but as a psychiatric disorder, which is why abusers were sent to ultimately ineffective treatment. Had bishops seen it as sin, the inescapable condition of man on Earth, they would have grasped that offenders, even if repentant, had to be kept away from the occasions of further sin, such as boys' dorms.
By the church's own understanding, sin tears the soul from God with eternal, hellish consequences. It is an emergency that one combats with moral rules. A psychiatric disorder, however, is treated and managed, which is what the church tried, disastrously.
We're told it's celibacy to blame - except that most of the abuse was of boys. Not that homosexuality causes pedophilia any more than priesthood does, but it's absurd to claim that the love of a wife would have made abusers switch sexual preferences.
Was the church too medieval? Only if you suppose the Middle Ages were sexually indulgent. This was a letting go of the medieval idea that man could, by reason and spiritual diligence, rise above his immoral nature. The bishops' toleration of abuse grew from seeing abusers as pawns of biology and genes. They traded St. Augustine for Freud, and disaster ensued.
Correct understanding is critical because the sexual abuse of children is a human failing, not a particularly Catholic one. If the crisis is blamed on parts of Catholicism that people want to change, the lessons won't translate to other risky venues.
The one authoritative study of sexual abuse in schools, for instance, warned that a tenth of children suffer some sort of sexual misconduct by staff. Six years later, a former teacher, Ryan Zellner, sits jailed in Manitowoc on 12 felony accusations of sex with students, while authorities at other districts that once employed him are re-examining accusations that earlier had been discounted. Plainly, celibacy and the papacy did not cause this.
Catholicism in America has changed its rules remarkably in response to its abuse crisis. This is why new accusations have plummeted and lawyers are fishing through the 1960s for work. That's not of much use to people harnessing the crisis to forward other causes, but for men seeking justice against abusers who are mainly now beyond the reach of earthly courts, it may, one hopes, bring some comfort.
Patrick McIlheran is a Journal Sentinel editorial columnist
Posted: April 28, 2010 |
Patrick McIlheran
In the current dredge-up of old sexual abuse cases involving Catholic priests, one feels sorriest for these men in their 50s who once were the prey.
Not so much because of the awfulness of what was done to them, though it was awful. Rather, it's that they're seeking a temporal justice they never can get.
"Somebody should be punished," said one of the victims of Father Lawrence Murphy, who molested some 200 deaf boys in St. Francis from the 1950s to the 1970s. It can't be Murphy, long since dead, as are the two archbishops who oversaw him. The district attorney who took a pass is retired, so the victims' recourse is to sue the current pope, whose only involvement, decades after Murphy molested anyone, was on the question of whether the monster would wear a Roman collar in his coffin.
One wishes the victims the peace that law cannot give them.
Then there are other players, all with causes to advance. This is where trouble lies. We're told the lawsuits are about forcing Catholicism to change. Yet the changes proposed grow out of flawed explanations.
We're told, for instance, that the abuse resulted from the Catholic Church's authoritarianism.
Wrong: Abuse flourished when no one would exert authority. Bishops did not expel molesters but shuffled them off. Tellingly, claims that Benedict XVI, then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, didn't do enough all date from the era before his Vatican office took control of the crisis away from dithering bishops.
Moreover, molestation peaked in precisely that era when the church shrank from the idea of authority. In the 1970s, priests put on jeans and became friends to the faithful rather than stern fathers. The era of shalt-not gave way to days of we-understand. In hindsight, this opened a path for predators.
We're told the church erred in seeing abuse as sin, not crime.
But facts belie this. The church didn't see it as sin but as a psychiatric disorder, which is why abusers were sent to ultimately ineffective treatment. Had bishops seen it as sin, the inescapable condition of man on Earth, they would have grasped that offenders, even if repentant, had to be kept away from the occasions of further sin, such as boys' dorms.
By the church's own understanding, sin tears the soul from God with eternal, hellish consequences. It is an emergency that one combats with moral rules. A psychiatric disorder, however, is treated and managed, which is what the church tried, disastrously.
We're told it's celibacy to blame - except that most of the abuse was of boys. Not that homosexuality causes pedophilia any more than priesthood does, but it's absurd to claim that the love of a wife would have made abusers switch sexual preferences.
Was the church too medieval? Only if you suppose the Middle Ages were sexually indulgent. This was a letting go of the medieval idea that man could, by reason and spiritual diligence, rise above his immoral nature. The bishops' toleration of abuse grew from seeing abusers as pawns of biology and genes. They traded St. Augustine for Freud, and disaster ensued.
Correct understanding is critical because the sexual abuse of children is a human failing, not a particularly Catholic one. If the crisis is blamed on parts of Catholicism that people want to change, the lessons won't translate to other risky venues.
The one authoritative study of sexual abuse in schools, for instance, warned that a tenth of children suffer some sort of sexual misconduct by staff. Six years later, a former teacher, Ryan Zellner, sits jailed in Manitowoc on 12 felony accusations of sex with students, while authorities at other districts that once employed him are re-examining accusations that earlier had been discounted. Plainly, celibacy and the papacy did not cause this.
Catholicism in America has changed its rules remarkably in response to its abuse crisis. This is why new accusations have plummeted and lawyers are fishing through the 1960s for work. That's not of much use to people harnessing the crisis to forward other causes, but for men seeking justice against abusers who are mainly now beyond the reach of earthly courts, it may, one hopes, bring some comfort.
Patrick McIlheran is a Journal Sentinel editorial columnist
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
Saint Gianna Beretta Molla
* * * * * *
Today is the feast of Saint Gianna Beretta Molla. She is a great figure in the Pro-life movement and her story is really powerful! The following comes from the EWTN site:
Saint Gianna Beretta Molla was born in Magenta (Milan), Italy, on 4 October 1922, the 10th of 13 children. Already as a young girl she willingly accepted the gift of faith and the clearly Christian education that she received from her excellent parents. As a result, she experienced life as a marvellous gift from God, had a strong faith in Providence and was convinced of the necessity and effectivneess of prayer.
She diligently dedicated herself to studies during the years of her secondary and university education, while, at the same time, applying her faith in generous apostolic service among the elderly and needy as a member of the St. Vincent de Paul Society. After earning degrees in medicine and surgery from the University of Pavia in 1949, she opened a medical clinic in Mesero (near Magenta) in 1950. She specialized in pediatrics at the University of Milan in 1952 and thereafter gave special attention to mothers, babies, the elderly and the poor.
While working in the field of medicine—which she considered a "mission" and practiced as such—she increased her generous service to Catholic Action, especially among the "very young" and, at the same time, expressed her joie de vivre and love of creation through skiing and mountaineering. Through her prayers and those of others, she reflected on her vocation, which she also considered a gift from God. Having chosen the vocation of marriage, she embraced it with complete enthusiasm and wholly dedicated herself "to forming a truly Christian family."
She became engaged to Pietro Molla and was radiant with joy and happiness during the time of their engagement, for which she thanked and praised the Lord. They were married on 24 September 1955 in St. Martin's Basilica in Magenta, and she became a happy wife. In November 1956, to her great joy, she became the mother of Pierluigi; in December 1957 of Mariolina; in July 1959 of Laura. With simplicity and equilibrium she harmonized the demands of mother, wife, doctor and her passion for life.
In September 1961, towards the end of the second month of pregnancy, she was touched by suffering and the mystery of pain; she had developed a fibroma in her uterus. Before the required surgical operation, and conscious of the risk that her continued pregnancy brought, she pleaded with the surgeon to save the life of the child she was carrying, and entrusted herself to prayer and Providence. The life was saved, for which she thanked the Lord. She spent the seven months remaining until the birth of the child in incomparable strength of spirit and unrelenting dedication to her tasks as mother and doctor. She worried that the baby in her womb might be born in pain, and she asked God to prevent that.
A few days before the child was due, although trusting as always in Providence, she was ready to give her life in order to save that of her child: "If you must decide between me and the child, do not hesitate: choose the child—I insist on it. Save the baby." On the morning of 21 April 1962 Gianna Emanuela was born. Despite all efforts and treatments to save both of them, on the morning of 28 April, amid unspeakable pain and after repeated exclamations of "Jesus, I love you. Jesus, I love you," the mother died. She was 39 years old. Her funeral was an occasion of profound grief, faith and prayer. The body of the new blessed lies in the cemetary of Mesero (4 km. from Magenta).
Gianna was beatified by Pope John Paul II on April 24, 1994, and officially canonized as a saint on May 16, 2004. Gianna's husband Pietro and their last child, Gianna, were present at the canonization ceremony.
St. Gianna is a patron saint for mothers, physicians, and unborn children.
Saturday, April 24, 2010
Saturday April 24: The Feast of Saint Fidelis
Saint Fidelis died in the year 1622 in Switzerland. He was known as the "lawyer for the poor" before he entered the religious Order of the Capuchines:
.
.
Friday, April 23, 2010
Priesthood Anniversary Mass: April 2010
l-r: Father Joe Callipare celebrating 25 years, Bishop Ricard, Father Richard Altenbaugh celebrating 50 years.
Father Paul White, Master of Ceremonies (St. Peter Parish, Mary Esther), Father Callipare, Bishop Ricard, Father Altenbaugh.
Father Richard Altenbaugh
Priests' Convocation: April 2010
Father Mike Flynn, Director of Liturgy, St. Vincent de Paul Regional Seminary, Boynton Beach, FL, facilitated the Convocation for Mon evening, Tues and Wed. He was the Pastor of Resurrection Parish in Miramar Beach, FL before joining the Seminary faculty. 
Father Nick Schumm, Parochial Vicar at St. Rose of Lima Parish, Milton.
Father Bob Johnson, Parochial Vicar at St. Mary Parish, Pensacola.
Father Pete McLaughlin, Pastor of St. Michael Parish, PensacolaSunday, April 18, 2010
Save Yourself Some Energy
A reminder that comments sent in from anyone under the heading "anonymous" are neither read nor published. You should know me better than that. A name and an email address should accompany all remarks.
.
.
Saturday, April 17, 2010
You are Peter: Part 4
(truths and insights you will not find in the local media)
George Weigel on the Vatican and its Antagonists, by Bruce Chapman
Few Americans know the Vatican better than George Weigel, whose many books include the authoritative biography of Pope John Paul II, Witness to Hope. Like many Catholics--and non-Catholics--Weigel is upset about the revelations of cases of sexual depredation of priests.
More than other commentators, however, Weigel was alert to this topic eight or nine years ago when scandals were first revealed in the U.S. Back then he nudged the Vatican hard to get involved and promote stringent reform. The effort seems to have succeeded here, but is now needed in Europe. Pope Benedict XVI is directly engaged on the topic, but the relevant office at the Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith is still overburdened.
Meanwhile, there is a strange drive to blame the pope personally for the failings of a small minority of priests. The pope--formerly Cardinal Karl Ratzinger--actually has been a force for reform all along and deserves credit, not brickbats. Oddly, the liberal forces that advocate license in nearly all fields, and whose predecessors promoted the therapeutic rehabilitation theories that got the Church and other institutions into trouble in the 60s and 70s, are the ones most vehemently pursuing the Vatican now. Oddly, too, they are exaggerating the incidence of Church scandals while ignoring more common cases elsewhere in society.
It's impossible not to conclude that the object for many is not only punishment of sexual predation, but discrediting the Church's powerful worldwide voice for morality. Is it the Church that is hypocritical, then, or certain of its antagonists?
Weigel's recent guest article in the Philadelphia Inquirer is more insightful on all this than what we are seeing elsewhere.
Posted by Bruce Chapman
Church gets an unfair rap
Pope has been at forefront of change.
George Weigel is distinguished senior fellow of Washington's Ethics and Public Policy Center and the author of The Courage To Be Catholic: Crisis, Reform, and the Future of the Church
Whether the victim is a kidnapped sex slave in Thailand, a trafficked child camel jockey in the Persian Gulf states, or a fifth grader assaulted in an American elementary school, the fact that children and young people throughout the world are regularly subjected to sexual and physical abuse is a horror that ought to shock the conscience of humanity.
In the United States alone, there are reportedly tens of millions of victims of childhood sexual abuse. In the years between 1991 and 2000, according to Virginia Commonwealth University researcher Charol Shakeshaft, 290,000 students were sexually abused in American public schools. Worse yet, studies indicate that 40 percent to 60 percent of sexual abuse takes place within families - often at the hands of second husbands or live-in boyfriends.
Throughout the world, children seem to be the principal victims of lawlessness, wanton cruelty, the sexual revolution, and the hookup culture that treats sex as a contact sport: one in which everyone, of any age, is a potential player.
Yet amid this global squalor, one institution has begun to come to grips with its past failures to protect the young people in its care. One institution has acknowledged its grave failures in the past. One institution has brought perpetrators of abuse to book. That institution is the Catholic Church.
Far more than the public schools, far more than the teachers' unions, far more than other organizations that regularly work with young people, and far more than countries that turn a blind eye on sex trafficking and childhood prostitution, the Catholic Church has addressed what Pope Benedict XVI has called the "filth" in its own house.
Catholicism has cleaned house in America, where the church is likely the country's safest environment for young people today (there were six credible cases of abuse reported in 2009: six too many, but remarkably low in a community of some 68 million members). Now, the church has begun to scour the Augean stables of Irish Catholicism. A March 20 letter to Irish Catholics from Benedict unsparingly condemned abusers and sharply rebuked bishops who failed to take these problems in hand decades ago and who covered up abuse; no one should doubt that a major shake-up of Catholic leadership in Ireland is coming.
Yet the global story line of the last several weeks is that the Catholic Church is an ongoing global criminal conspiracy of sexual abusers and their enablers, centered in the Vatican.
That the church has too often failed to address past problems of abusive clergy has been frankly admitted by everyone from Popes John Paul II and Benedict to the U.S. bishops in 2002. In 2001, the Vatican put in place new measures that enabled the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (led by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, the future Benedict XVI) to deal more swiftly and decisively with clerical abusers. Those procedures are fully operational, and Benedict is determined to make them work - and to change any remaining sectors of the church that resist dealing with the church's "filth."
Recent reporting on Catholic sexual-abuse problems, however, has frequently been factually inaccurate and irresponsible.
It is charged that the church threatens whistle-blowers with excommunication; that is not true.
Prominent news organizations report that Cardinal Ratzinger blocked sanctions against a Milwaukee priest who abused deaf children in his care; that is not true.
Contingent-fee lawyers with a direct, financial stake in abuse cases (and in bringing the Vatican's resource within firing range of U.S. liability law) are cited as credible sources by newspapers that once knew what a disqualified source was.
Vicious editorial cartoons, some perilously reminiscent of Nazi-era anti-Catholic cartooning, abound.
Meanwhile, there is precious little investigative reporting on (much less cartooning about) sexual abuse in public schools, which is demonstrably far greater than in the Catholic Church.
To be sure, the Catholic Church ought to hold itself to a higher moral standard than other similarly situated institutions. But after too long a period of denial, the Catholic Church is now at the forefront of combating the sexual abuse of the young in the United States. And no one in the church has done more, over the last decade, to compel the sclerotic institutional culture of the Vatican to face these problems than Joseph Ratzinger, Pope Benedict XVI.
These are the facts. Thus the concern naturally arises, on this Easter, that those who continue to portray Catholicism as a global conspiracy of sexual predators are indulging in the last acceptable prejudice, anti-Catholicism, while aiming at nothing less than the destruction of the Catholic Church's credibility as a global moral teacher.
George Weigel on the Vatican and its Antagonists, by Bruce Chapman
Few Americans know the Vatican better than George Weigel, whose many books include the authoritative biography of Pope John Paul II, Witness to Hope. Like many Catholics--and non-Catholics--Weigel is upset about the revelations of cases of sexual depredation of priests.
More than other commentators, however, Weigel was alert to this topic eight or nine years ago when scandals were first revealed in the U.S. Back then he nudged the Vatican hard to get involved and promote stringent reform. The effort seems to have succeeded here, but is now needed in Europe. Pope Benedict XVI is directly engaged on the topic, but the relevant office at the Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith is still overburdened.
Meanwhile, there is a strange drive to blame the pope personally for the failings of a small minority of priests. The pope--formerly Cardinal Karl Ratzinger--actually has been a force for reform all along and deserves credit, not brickbats. Oddly, the liberal forces that advocate license in nearly all fields, and whose predecessors promoted the therapeutic rehabilitation theories that got the Church and other institutions into trouble in the 60s and 70s, are the ones most vehemently pursuing the Vatican now. Oddly, too, they are exaggerating the incidence of Church scandals while ignoring more common cases elsewhere in society.
It's impossible not to conclude that the object for many is not only punishment of sexual predation, but discrediting the Church's powerful worldwide voice for morality. Is it the Church that is hypocritical, then, or certain of its antagonists?
Weigel's recent guest article in the Philadelphia Inquirer is more insightful on all this than what we are seeing elsewhere.
Posted by Bruce Chapman
Church gets an unfair rap
Pope has been at forefront of change.
George Weigel is distinguished senior fellow of Washington's Ethics and Public Policy Center and the author of The Courage To Be Catholic: Crisis, Reform, and the Future of the Church
Whether the victim is a kidnapped sex slave in Thailand, a trafficked child camel jockey in the Persian Gulf states, or a fifth grader assaulted in an American elementary school, the fact that children and young people throughout the world are regularly subjected to sexual and physical abuse is a horror that ought to shock the conscience of humanity.
In the United States alone, there are reportedly tens of millions of victims of childhood sexual abuse. In the years between 1991 and 2000, according to Virginia Commonwealth University researcher Charol Shakeshaft, 290,000 students were sexually abused in American public schools. Worse yet, studies indicate that 40 percent to 60 percent of sexual abuse takes place within families - often at the hands of second husbands or live-in boyfriends.
Throughout the world, children seem to be the principal victims of lawlessness, wanton cruelty, the sexual revolution, and the hookup culture that treats sex as a contact sport: one in which everyone, of any age, is a potential player.
Yet amid this global squalor, one institution has begun to come to grips with its past failures to protect the young people in its care. One institution has acknowledged its grave failures in the past. One institution has brought perpetrators of abuse to book. That institution is the Catholic Church.
Far more than the public schools, far more than the teachers' unions, far more than other organizations that regularly work with young people, and far more than countries that turn a blind eye on sex trafficking and childhood prostitution, the Catholic Church has addressed what Pope Benedict XVI has called the "filth" in its own house.
Catholicism has cleaned house in America, where the church is likely the country's safest environment for young people today (there were six credible cases of abuse reported in 2009: six too many, but remarkably low in a community of some 68 million members). Now, the church has begun to scour the Augean stables of Irish Catholicism. A March 20 letter to Irish Catholics from Benedict unsparingly condemned abusers and sharply rebuked bishops who failed to take these problems in hand decades ago and who covered up abuse; no one should doubt that a major shake-up of Catholic leadership in Ireland is coming.
Yet the global story line of the last several weeks is that the Catholic Church is an ongoing global criminal conspiracy of sexual abusers and their enablers, centered in the Vatican.
That the church has too often failed to address past problems of abusive clergy has been frankly admitted by everyone from Popes John Paul II and Benedict to the U.S. bishops in 2002. In 2001, the Vatican put in place new measures that enabled the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (led by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, the future Benedict XVI) to deal more swiftly and decisively with clerical abusers. Those procedures are fully operational, and Benedict is determined to make them work - and to change any remaining sectors of the church that resist dealing with the church's "filth."
Recent reporting on Catholic sexual-abuse problems, however, has frequently been factually inaccurate and irresponsible.
It is charged that the church threatens whistle-blowers with excommunication; that is not true.
Prominent news organizations report that Cardinal Ratzinger blocked sanctions against a Milwaukee priest who abused deaf children in his care; that is not true.
Contingent-fee lawyers with a direct, financial stake in abuse cases (and in bringing the Vatican's resource within firing range of U.S. liability law) are cited as credible sources by newspapers that once knew what a disqualified source was.
Vicious editorial cartoons, some perilously reminiscent of Nazi-era anti-Catholic cartooning, abound.
Meanwhile, there is precious little investigative reporting on (much less cartooning about) sexual abuse in public schools, which is demonstrably far greater than in the Catholic Church.
To be sure, the Catholic Church ought to hold itself to a higher moral standard than other similarly situated institutions. But after too long a period of denial, the Catholic Church is now at the forefront of combating the sexual abuse of the young in the United States. And no one in the church has done more, over the last decade, to compel the sclerotic institutional culture of the Vatican to face these problems than Joseph Ratzinger, Pope Benedict XVI.
These are the facts. Thus the concern naturally arises, on this Easter, that those who continue to portray Catholicism as a global conspiracy of sexual predators are indulging in the last acceptable prejudice, anti-Catholicism, while aiming at nothing less than the destruction of the Catholic Church's credibility as a global moral teacher.
Sunday, April 11, 2010
You Are Peter: Part 3
(truths and insights you will not find in the local media)
Let's Get the Story Straight: Defrocking and Divorce | Fr. Joseph Fessio, S.J.
The following piece was written by Fr. Joseph Fessio, S.J., founder and editor of Ignatius Press, in response to the breaking story about a 1985 letter written by then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger to Bishop John S. Cummins of Oakland.
The so-called "stalled pedophile case", blame for which has been laid at the feet of then-Cardinal Ratzinger, had nothing to do with pedophilia and everything to do with strengthening marriage and the priesthood.
Here's what was happening in 1981 when Bishop Cummins of Oakland first wrote the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith asking that one of the priests from his diocese of Oakland, be dispensed from his promise of celibacy.
Well first, what was not happening. The letter came a week before Cardinal Ratzinger had even assumed his duties as Prefect of that congregation. This is a very important office of the Roman curia. It handles a variety of cases worldwide, mostly having to do with defending and promoting doctrinal integrity in the Church. There's a lot of work to do, and it takes time for someone to become fully engaged in its activities.
But much more pertinently here: By 1980 the effects of the sexual revolution on marriage and the priesthood had been devastating. In 1965 there had been 59 marriage annulments granted by Rome to American couples. By 2002, there were over 50,000 annulments per year in the U.S. alone. Hundreds, perhaps thousands of priests were asking for dispensation from their promise of celibacy in order to be able to marry.
The Catholic Church holds the marriage vows to be indissoluble. Even an annulment, contrary to a widespread misconception, does not dissolve those vows. It is a declaration that because of some impediment, there never was a valid marriage in the first place.
Priestly ordination is also "indissoluble", in the sense that a validly ordained priest never ceases to be a priest.
And here's the rub. It was literally scandalous in the Church that priests, who had been prepared for eight to ten years for their ordination (which would be permanent, irreversible) and their promise of celibacy (which also has the character of a solemn promise before God), were, in the 1970s, being so easily dispensed from their promise of celibacy.
Married Catholics said to themselves: If a priest, who is so well prepared for his commitment, can so easily be dispensed from it so that he can marry, why can't we be dispensed from our commitment so that we can remarry?
When John Paul II was elevated to the papacy in the Fall of 1978, he immediately changed the policy on priestly dispensations. I don't have the exact dates and numbers at hand, but I remember at the time that many of us were amazed that the hundreds of dispensations per year (and it may have been thousands) under John Paul II's predecessor, Paul VI, suddenly were reduced to almost zero. It was almost impossible to get a dispensation in 1980.
What was John Paul's intent? To restore the integrity of the priesthood and of marriage. These commitments are permanent. A priest may be removed from ministry, but he will not be given a dispensation to marry. Priests are to be made to take their commitments with utmost seriousness. They will be an example to married couples to take theirs seriously also. When a priest makes a promise of celibacy, it's forever; when a couple make vows of marriage, it's forever.
This is the decisive context of Cardinal Ratzinger's letter to Bishop Cummins. It is not a smoking gun. It did not mean that Ratzinger was not taking the priest's sins seriously. (He called the accusations "very serious" [gravis momenti].) It meant that he, following the policy of John Paul II, was taking the priesthood and its commitments very seriously.
And again, this entire affair had nothing to do with preventing further abuse by this priest. That had already been done, or should have been done, by the local bishop.
A final, minor but significant point of translation. The translation being used by the media of an important part of Ratzinger's letter is: "your Excellency must not fail to provide the petitioner with as much paternal care as possible". This has been rightly interpreted by some to mean that Ratzinger was saying that the bishop should keep a watchful eye on the priest. The original Latin makes that even clearer: "paterna...cura sequi" which means "to follow with paternal care". We get the word "persecute" from the Latin "per-sequi". "Sequi" is much stronger then "provide".
There is a completely mistaken first premise underlying all this criticism.The premise is that "defrocking" has anything to do with protecting victims and preventing further abuse.
First, the media needs to know that according to Catholic teaching, Holy Orders is a sacrament which leaves an "indelible mark"; in layman's terms, once ordained a priest, a man is always a priest. The reason the word "dispensation" is used in the correspondence is that that is what happens technically: the priest is dispensed from his obligation of celibacy. In a sense, this works in the opposite direction from protection: a restraint is being removed.
Further, as if to prove this point, the priest in question continued to abuse children after he was "defrocked" and had married. QED.
Secondly, nothing at all prevents a bishop from: removing a priest from all ministry; removing his faculties; reporting him to civil authorities. There is no need even to inform Rome about this. The only way (until 2001 or in cases of abuse of Confession) that it need get to Rome is if the priest appeals the bishop's actions.
Thirdly, why was the CDF involved anyway? That was not the congregation that handles abuse cases, except where abuse of Confession has played a role. I believe the CDF was involved in cases of dispensation from celibacy. (Though you would think that should be under the Congregation for Priests.) But, again, dispensation has nothing to do with preventing further abuse. It may appease the sense of justice on the part of victims. But at the same time, It normally takes eight to ten years to become a priest. It's not a club one joins. It is a very serious thing to dispense a priest from celibacy, and there needs to be a careful process to protect innocent priests.
Fourthly, there are definitely cased of priests who have been falsely accused. Especially the American media ought to be sensitive to the principle that a man is innocent until proven guilty. Civil law requires that to be done in a court of law. A bishop can, and in many cases, should take action against a priest before there is any canonical trial.
Finally, let's compare this to the difference between a criminal and a civil trial. Criminal trials can be expedited, but even then in all but the most grievous cases, a criminal defendant is a free man until convicted. In the case of priests, the "punishment" of removal from ministry can be applied immediately by a bishop even before there is any canonical trial, which is like a civil trial. How long do civil trials take in this country. I know of trials that have dragged out for more than seven years.
If Ratzinger took part in "stall[ing]" a "pedophile case", the worst one can say is that he wanted care taken in a canonical trial. And, let's not forget, this wasn't "punishment" at all from the priest's point of view. He had "asked" to be dispensed
.
Let's Get the Story Straight: Defrocking and Divorce | Fr. Joseph Fessio, S.J.
The following piece was written by Fr. Joseph Fessio, S.J., founder and editor of Ignatius Press, in response to the breaking story about a 1985 letter written by then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger to Bishop John S. Cummins of Oakland.
The so-called "stalled pedophile case", blame for which has been laid at the feet of then-Cardinal Ratzinger, had nothing to do with pedophilia and everything to do with strengthening marriage and the priesthood.
Here's what was happening in 1981 when Bishop Cummins of Oakland first wrote the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith asking that one of the priests from his diocese of Oakland, be dispensed from his promise of celibacy.
Well first, what was not happening. The letter came a week before Cardinal Ratzinger had even assumed his duties as Prefect of that congregation. This is a very important office of the Roman curia. It handles a variety of cases worldwide, mostly having to do with defending and promoting doctrinal integrity in the Church. There's a lot of work to do, and it takes time for someone to become fully engaged in its activities.
But much more pertinently here: By 1980 the effects of the sexual revolution on marriage and the priesthood had been devastating. In 1965 there had been 59 marriage annulments granted by Rome to American couples. By 2002, there were over 50,000 annulments per year in the U.S. alone. Hundreds, perhaps thousands of priests were asking for dispensation from their promise of celibacy in order to be able to marry.
The Catholic Church holds the marriage vows to be indissoluble. Even an annulment, contrary to a widespread misconception, does not dissolve those vows. It is a declaration that because of some impediment, there never was a valid marriage in the first place.
Priestly ordination is also "indissoluble", in the sense that a validly ordained priest never ceases to be a priest.
And here's the rub. It was literally scandalous in the Church that priests, who had been prepared for eight to ten years for their ordination (which would be permanent, irreversible) and their promise of celibacy (which also has the character of a solemn promise before God), were, in the 1970s, being so easily dispensed from their promise of celibacy.
Married Catholics said to themselves: If a priest, who is so well prepared for his commitment, can so easily be dispensed from it so that he can marry, why can't we be dispensed from our commitment so that we can remarry?
When John Paul II was elevated to the papacy in the Fall of 1978, he immediately changed the policy on priestly dispensations. I don't have the exact dates and numbers at hand, but I remember at the time that many of us were amazed that the hundreds of dispensations per year (and it may have been thousands) under John Paul II's predecessor, Paul VI, suddenly were reduced to almost zero. It was almost impossible to get a dispensation in 1980.
What was John Paul's intent? To restore the integrity of the priesthood and of marriage. These commitments are permanent. A priest may be removed from ministry, but he will not be given a dispensation to marry. Priests are to be made to take their commitments with utmost seriousness. They will be an example to married couples to take theirs seriously also. When a priest makes a promise of celibacy, it's forever; when a couple make vows of marriage, it's forever.
This is the decisive context of Cardinal Ratzinger's letter to Bishop Cummins. It is not a smoking gun. It did not mean that Ratzinger was not taking the priest's sins seriously. (He called the accusations "very serious" [gravis momenti].) It meant that he, following the policy of John Paul II, was taking the priesthood and its commitments very seriously.
And again, this entire affair had nothing to do with preventing further abuse by this priest. That had already been done, or should have been done, by the local bishop.
A final, minor but significant point of translation. The translation being used by the media of an important part of Ratzinger's letter is: "your Excellency must not fail to provide the petitioner with as much paternal care as possible". This has been rightly interpreted by some to mean that Ratzinger was saying that the bishop should keep a watchful eye on the priest. The original Latin makes that even clearer: "paterna...cura sequi" which means "to follow with paternal care". We get the word "persecute" from the Latin "per-sequi". "Sequi" is much stronger then "provide".
There is a completely mistaken first premise underlying all this criticism.The premise is that "defrocking" has anything to do with protecting victims and preventing further abuse.
First, the media needs to know that according to Catholic teaching, Holy Orders is a sacrament which leaves an "indelible mark"; in layman's terms, once ordained a priest, a man is always a priest. The reason the word "dispensation" is used in the correspondence is that that is what happens technically: the priest is dispensed from his obligation of celibacy. In a sense, this works in the opposite direction from protection: a restraint is being removed.
Further, as if to prove this point, the priest in question continued to abuse children after he was "defrocked" and had married. QED.
Secondly, nothing at all prevents a bishop from: removing a priest from all ministry; removing his faculties; reporting him to civil authorities. There is no need even to inform Rome about this. The only way (until 2001 or in cases of abuse of Confession) that it need get to Rome is if the priest appeals the bishop's actions.
Thirdly, why was the CDF involved anyway? That was not the congregation that handles abuse cases, except where abuse of Confession has played a role. I believe the CDF was involved in cases of dispensation from celibacy. (Though you would think that should be under the Congregation for Priests.) But, again, dispensation has nothing to do with preventing further abuse. It may appease the sense of justice on the part of victims. But at the same time, It normally takes eight to ten years to become a priest. It's not a club one joins. It is a very serious thing to dispense a priest from celibacy, and there needs to be a careful process to protect innocent priests.
Fourthly, there are definitely cased of priests who have been falsely accused. Especially the American media ought to be sensitive to the principle that a man is innocent until proven guilty. Civil law requires that to be done in a court of law. A bishop can, and in many cases, should take action against a priest before there is any canonical trial.
Finally, let's compare this to the difference between a criminal and a civil trial. Criminal trials can be expedited, but even then in all but the most grievous cases, a criminal defendant is a free man until convicted. In the case of priests, the "punishment" of removal from ministry can be applied immediately by a bishop even before there is any canonical trial, which is like a civil trial. How long do civil trials take in this country. I know of trials that have dragged out for more than seven years.
If Ratzinger took part in "stall[ing]" a "pedophile case", the worst one can say is that he wanted care taken in a canonical trial. And, let's not forget, this wasn't "punishment" at all from the priest's point of view. He had "asked" to be dispensed
.
You Are Peter: Part 2
(truths and insights you will not find in the local media)
The Former Mayor of New York City:
He that is without sin, let him cast the next stone - enough already
Posted by Ed Koch
I believe the continuing attacks by the media on the Roman Catholic Church and Pope Benedict XVI have become manifestations of anti-Catholicism. The procession of articles on the same events are, in my opinion, no longer intended to inform, but simply to castigate.
The sexual molestation of children, principally boys, is horrendous. This is agreed to by everyone, Catholics, the Church itself, as well as non-Catholics and the media. The pope has on a number of occasions on behalf of the Church admitted fault and asked for forgiveness. For example, The New York Times reported on April 18, 2008, that the pope "came face to face with a scandal that has left lasting wounds on the American church Thursday, holding a surprise meeting with several victims of sexual abuse by priests in the Boston area.... 'No words of mine could describe the pain and harm inflicted by such abuse,' the Pope said in his homily. 'It is important that those who have suffered be given loving pastoral attention.'"
On March 20, 2010, the Times reported that in his eight page pastoral letter to Irish Catholics, the pope wrote, "You have suffered grievously, and I am truly sorry ... Your trust has been betrayed and your dignity has been violated."
The pope also "criticized Ireland's bishops for 'grave errors of judgment and failures of leadership.'"
The primary explanation for the abuse that happened - not to excuse the retention of priests in positions that enabled them to continue to harm children - was the belief that the priests could be cured by psychotherapy, a theory now long discarded by the medical profession. Regrettably, it is also likely that years ago the abuse of children was not taken as seriously as today. Thank God we've progressed on that issue.
Many of those in the media who are pounding on the Church and the pope today clearly do it with delight, and some with malice. The reason, I believe, for the constant assaults is that there are many in the media, and some Catholics as well as many in the public, who object to and are incensed by positions the Church holds, including opposition to all abortions, opposition to gay sex and same-sex marriage, retention of celibacy rules for priests, exclusion of women from the clergy, opposition to birth control measures involving condoms and prescription drugs and opposition to civil divorce. My good friend, John Cardinal O'Connor, once said, "The Church is not a salad bar, from which to pick and choose what pleases you." The Church has the right to demand fulfillment of all of its religious obligations by its parishioners, and indeed a right to espouse its beliefs generally.
I disagree with the Church on all of these positions. Nevertheless, it has a right to hold these views in accordance with its religious beliefs. I disagree with many tenets of Orthodox Judaism - the religion of my birth - and have chosen to follow the tenets of Conservative Judaism, while I attend an Orthodox synagogue. Orthodox Jews, like the Roman Catholic Church, can demand absolute obedience to religious rules. Those declining to adhere are free to leave.
I believe the Roman Catholic Church is a force for good in the world, not evil. Moreover, the existence of one billion, 130 million Catholics worldwide is important to the peace and prosperity of the planet.
Of course, the media should report to the public any new facts bearing upon the issue of child molestation, but its objectivity and credibility are damaged when the New York Times declines to publish an op-ed offered by New York Archbishop Timothy Dolan on the issue of anti-Catholicism and offers instead to publish a letter to the editor, which is much shorter and less prominent than an op-ed.
I am appalled that, according to the Times of April 6, 2010, "Last week, the center-left daily newspaper La Repubblica wrote, without attribution that 'certain Catholic circles' believed the criticism of the Church stemmed from 'a New York Jewish lobby.'" The pope should know that some of his fellow priests can be thoughtless or worse in their efforts to help him. If the "certain Catholic circles" were referring to the Times, the Pope should know that the publisher, Arthur Sulzberger, Jr., is Episcopalian, having taken the religion of his mother, and its executive editor, Bill Keller, is also a Christian.
The Former Mayor of New York City:
He that is without sin, let him cast the next stone - enough already
Posted by Ed Koch
I believe the continuing attacks by the media on the Roman Catholic Church and Pope Benedict XVI have become manifestations of anti-Catholicism. The procession of articles on the same events are, in my opinion, no longer intended to inform, but simply to castigate.
The sexual molestation of children, principally boys, is horrendous. This is agreed to by everyone, Catholics, the Church itself, as well as non-Catholics and the media. The pope has on a number of occasions on behalf of the Church admitted fault and asked for forgiveness. For example, The New York Times reported on April 18, 2008, that the pope "came face to face with a scandal that has left lasting wounds on the American church Thursday, holding a surprise meeting with several victims of sexual abuse by priests in the Boston area.... 'No words of mine could describe the pain and harm inflicted by such abuse,' the Pope said in his homily. 'It is important that those who have suffered be given loving pastoral attention.'"
On March 20, 2010, the Times reported that in his eight page pastoral letter to Irish Catholics, the pope wrote, "You have suffered grievously, and I am truly sorry ... Your trust has been betrayed and your dignity has been violated."
The pope also "criticized Ireland's bishops for 'grave errors of judgment and failures of leadership.'"
The primary explanation for the abuse that happened - not to excuse the retention of priests in positions that enabled them to continue to harm children - was the belief that the priests could be cured by psychotherapy, a theory now long discarded by the medical profession. Regrettably, it is also likely that years ago the abuse of children was not taken as seriously as today. Thank God we've progressed on that issue.
Many of those in the media who are pounding on the Church and the pope today clearly do it with delight, and some with malice. The reason, I believe, for the constant assaults is that there are many in the media, and some Catholics as well as many in the public, who object to and are incensed by positions the Church holds, including opposition to all abortions, opposition to gay sex and same-sex marriage, retention of celibacy rules for priests, exclusion of women from the clergy, opposition to birth control measures involving condoms and prescription drugs and opposition to civil divorce. My good friend, John Cardinal O'Connor, once said, "The Church is not a salad bar, from which to pick and choose what pleases you." The Church has the right to demand fulfillment of all of its religious obligations by its parishioners, and indeed a right to espouse its beliefs generally.
I disagree with the Church on all of these positions. Nevertheless, it has a right to hold these views in accordance with its religious beliefs. I disagree with many tenets of Orthodox Judaism - the religion of my birth - and have chosen to follow the tenets of Conservative Judaism, while I attend an Orthodox synagogue. Orthodox Jews, like the Roman Catholic Church, can demand absolute obedience to religious rules. Those declining to adhere are free to leave.
I believe the Roman Catholic Church is a force for good in the world, not evil. Moreover, the existence of one billion, 130 million Catholics worldwide is important to the peace and prosperity of the planet.
Of course, the media should report to the public any new facts bearing upon the issue of child molestation, but its objectivity and credibility are damaged when the New York Times declines to publish an op-ed offered by New York Archbishop Timothy Dolan on the issue of anti-Catholicism and offers instead to publish a letter to the editor, which is much shorter and less prominent than an op-ed.
I am appalled that, according to the Times of April 6, 2010, "Last week, the center-left daily newspaper La Repubblica wrote, without attribution that 'certain Catholic circles' believed the criticism of the Church stemmed from 'a New York Jewish lobby.'" The pope should know that some of his fellow priests can be thoughtless or worse in their efforts to help him. If the "certain Catholic circles" were referring to the Times, the Pope should know that the publisher, Arthur Sulzberger, Jr., is Episcopalian, having taken the religion of his mother, and its executive editor, Bill Keller, is also a Christian.
You Are Peter: Part 1
On Easter Sunday the Pensacola News-Journal, in cooperation with the AP, decided to greet the Catholic people of our great city with Easter greetings of church scandal. So be it.
I grew up reading both the morning and evening newspaper for Pensacola. Since those days the two newspapers have become one and it hasn’t changed that much (except that it keeps getting smaller and smaller, in content and size … I wonder why!).
On Thursday morning, the PNJ contained another story about Church scandal written by Troy Moon. I have read Mr. Moon’s writings before and appreciated them and so this time I expected, well, more than I got. Apparently Mr. Moon has become an integral part of the PNJ family (he needs a job, I guess). Interesting that Mr. Moon begins his column with comments by a woman who “was thinking about going to church on Easter” … ha,ha,ha. Really! Then a concluding voice from a lapsed Catholic. Oh, yes, Mr. Moon, start and begin your article with people committed to their Church. To be honest ALL of the others quoted in his column left a lot to be desired. The article was embarrassing, to ME, I mean. (Some poor tree gave up its life for this kind of writing?)
And then Saturday morning another front page article. Do you notice that there is never included in the AP/PNJ stories alternate sites and comments for intellectual understanding and comparison of facts. I believe that the PNJ/AP are convinced that most of their readers do not go beyond the articles they distribute in their tabloid and so they have their readers right where they want them. Congratulations to the President and Publisher of the PNJ (“well done good and faithful servant” – oh, btw, that’s sarcasm).
Ok, here I go. Disgusted as I am with the local print machine, I am beginning a series of alternate articles on the very same subjects. Some of the articles are quite lengthy, many are not. Read or don’t read. But what I post are not biased against the Church and its leadership (and anyone with half a brain knows that the media has been after Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger -now Pope Benedict XVI- for years and years, ever since he accepted the post offered him by Pope John Paul II to Defend the Catholic Faith and its doctrines).
Hold on, my friends, it’s gonna be a bumpy ride: (truths and insights you will not find in the local media)
I grew up reading both the morning and evening newspaper for Pensacola. Since those days the two newspapers have become one and it hasn’t changed that much (except that it keeps getting smaller and smaller, in content and size … I wonder why!).
On Thursday morning, the PNJ contained another story about Church scandal written by Troy Moon. I have read Mr. Moon’s writings before and appreciated them and so this time I expected, well, more than I got. Apparently Mr. Moon has become an integral part of the PNJ family (he needs a job, I guess). Interesting that Mr. Moon begins his column with comments by a woman who “was thinking about going to church on Easter” … ha,ha,ha. Really! Then a concluding voice from a lapsed Catholic. Oh, yes, Mr. Moon, start and begin your article with people committed to their Church. To be honest ALL of the others quoted in his column left a lot to be desired. The article was embarrassing, to ME, I mean. (Some poor tree gave up its life for this kind of writing?)
And then Saturday morning another front page article. Do you notice that there is never included in the AP/PNJ stories alternate sites and comments for intellectual understanding and comparison of facts. I believe that the PNJ/AP are convinced that most of their readers do not go beyond the articles they distribute in their tabloid and so they have their readers right where they want them. Congratulations to the President and Publisher of the PNJ (“well done good and faithful servant” – oh, btw, that’s sarcasm).
Ok, here I go. Disgusted as I am with the local print machine, I am beginning a series of alternate articles on the very same subjects. Some of the articles are quite lengthy, many are not. Read or don’t read. But what I post are not biased against the Church and its leadership (and anyone with half a brain knows that the media has been after Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger -now Pope Benedict XVI- for years and years, ever since he accepted the post offered him by Pope John Paul II to Defend the Catholic Faith and its doctrines).
Hold on, my friends, it’s gonna be a bumpy ride: (truths and insights you will not find in the local media)
Today is Divine Mercy Sunday
Eternal Father, I offer You the Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity of Your dearly beloved Son, Our Lord Jesus Christ, in atonement for our sins and those of the whole world.
+ + + + + +
For the sake of His sorrowful Passion, have mercy on us and on the whole world.
+ + + + + +
Holy God, Holy Mighty One, Holy Immortal One, have mercy on us and on the whole world.
.
Tuesday, April 6, 2010
Every Sunday at St. Joseph's Church we Pray for Respect for all Human Life. Here's Why.
-------------------------------------
Sunday, April 4, 2010
YUM......Lent is over!
The Greatest food in the world.... well, ok, AFTER a Double Wendy's Hamburger.
Saturday, March 27, 2010
It's called: The Prayer ... take a listen and a view ...
++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++
God Bless the people of Haiti
Tuesday, March 9, 2010
It's Time to do Yourself a Favor
Watch, think, Then Do
Now, it's time to DO !
Clean your self from the INSIDE out!
The Sacrament of Penance (Confession)in our Parish
Wednesday, March 10, 2009
that's tomorrow:
6:00am - 7:00am (yep, thats right)
11:00am - 12:00 noon
5:00pm - 6:00pm
Soul WOW !
______________
Now, it's time to DO !
Clean your self from the INSIDE out!
The Sacrament of Penance (Confession)in our Parish
Wednesday, March 10, 2009
that's tomorrow:
6:00am - 7:00am (yep, thats right)
11:00am - 12:00 noon
5:00pm - 6:00pm
Soul WOW !
______________
Sunday, March 7, 2010
The Third Sunday of Lent
What of the Fig Tree?In our Gospel today, Jesus is concerned - not about a fig tree - but people. He wants us to bear fruit!
It might be helpful for us today to reflect on the ways in which we fulfill His desire for our lives:
How do I bear witness to my belief and full trust in Jesus Christ?
What is my prayer?
__________________
What are my good works?
do I participate in a soup kitchen?
food and clothing drives?
visiting the sick?
giving good counsel?
comforting the grieving?
supporting the work of evengelization?
___________________
Do I sacrifice for others?
Do I live: courage? justice? mercy? (at home and at work?)
___________________
Jesus the Gardner knows that what you and I pay attention to - grows.
Tuesday, March 2, 2010
A Lenten Refresher
How's your Lent going so far? We are now into Week Two!
Father Barron has some excellent insights.
Father Barron has some excellent insights.
Saturday, February 27, 2010
Embrace Life Now and For All Eternity
As the seat belt protects us in life, so the teachings of Christ and His Church protect us unto Life Eternal.
Make your Lent this year ... well worth it.
For yourself and for your family.
_____________ _____________ ______________
Friday, February 26, 2010
It's Friday in Lent
This is our day of Penance which through our observance deepens our commitment to Christ during this Season of Lent.
_______________ _________________ ____________
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
Warning: Don't believe everything you see !
I have my computer, my lap top, my blackberry … etc … I wouldn’t want to live without them. Technology today is incredible, mind-blowing and, yes, it even has a deceptive side to it.
When you watch tv or go to the movies … you’re not always seeing what you’re seeing. Take a look at this; sit back and enjoy the magic:
When you watch tv or go to the movies … you’re not always seeing what you’re seeing. Take a look at this; sit back and enjoy the magic:
Monday, February 22, 2010
This First Week of Lent
As Jesus was lead into the desert by the Holy Spirit, we, too, are brought into the desert of Lent. This spiritual journey of 40 days is a good time for reflection as well as renewal. Along this journey, though, we will definitely be tempted by shortcuts and attractive alternatives.
Our participation in the Sacrament of Holy Eucharist should not be taken easily and dismissively. This is our nourishment for the soul, the strength we need for this passage we have undertaken.
Since our passage is already in its sixth day, let us ask ourselves a few questions:
__________ __________ ___________ ____________ _________
What spiritual progress do I hope to make this season of Lent?
What steps am I willing to take toward that end?
What saving action am I grateful for in my own life?
Do I remember to offer God the first fruits of my own efforts?
Do I nurture the virtue of gratitude in my heart?
How am I doing in regard to temptations in my own life?
____________________ ______________________
Sunday, February 21, 2010
The First Sunday of Lent and the Temptations of Jesus in the Desert
A most unusual but compelling interpretation of today's Gospel:
Friday, February 19, 2010
Does this look delicious or what ?????
But NO my brothers and sisters: today is Friday and it's Lent.
NO Meat today!!!!!
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
Oh, no: today is Ash Wednesday
Good Bye Wendy's
Good bye Number 2 Combo
Good bye Double cheese hamburger
Good bye dessertSee you all again on Easter Monday
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
Speaking of Nuns
Twelve years ago at the Winter Olympics in Nagano, a 17-year-old speedskating prodigy named Kirstin Holum was tapped for future greatness.
When Holum placed sixth in the 3,000 meters – one of the most grueling disciplines in the women’s program, a lung-scraping four-minute bust of lactic acid torture – speedskating insiders predicted a golden future and speculated she may not even reach her peak for another decade.
Like many of the longer distances, the 3,000 is regularly dominated by older athletes, as it can take years to build up the requisite reserves of aerobic capacity and deep-tissue resilience. At Nagano, 32-year-old Gunda Niemann-Stirnemann of Germany claimed the gold.
Holum was born into speedskating royalty. Her mother Dianne was a world-class speedskater who won Olympic gold in 1972 and reached even greater heights as a coach, mentoring the legendary Eric Heiden to his clean sweep at Lake Placid in 1980.
Despite an ongoing battle with exercise-induced asthma, Holum was a champion waiting to happen. Instead, Nagano would signal the final time she would pull on a pair of skates with competitive intent.
Holum was born into speedskating royalty. Her mother Dianne was a world-class speedskater who won Olympic gold in 1972 and reached even greater heights as a coach, mentoring the legendary Eric Heiden to his clean sweep at Lake Placid in 1980.
Despite an ongoing battle with exercise-induced asthma, Holum was a champion waiting to happen. Instead, Nagano would signal the final time she would pull on a pair of skates with competitive intent.
From that point on, her life began an entirely different journey.
“Speedskating was such a huge part of my life,” Holumn said in a telephone interview with Yahoo! Sports. “I still loved the sport, but I had this incredibly strong calling that it was time to move on and take a different path in life.”
There is no television and no internet at St. Joseph’s Convent in Leeds, England, meaning Holum won’t get to watch the Winter Olympics where she was supposed to become a star.
The peaceful surrounds of the convent is where Holum, now known as Sister Catherine, devotes her life to religious service as a Franciscan nun. That calling had begun on a trip to Our Lady of Fatima, a holy site in Portugal famed for a series of religious visions that appeared nearly a century ago. It was outside the Fatima basilica where Holum decided that a path of religious dedication, not frozen skating lanes, would be her destiny.
“It is funny now to think of how different my life is now,” she said. “I had the wonderful privilege of being able to compete as an Olympian, and now I am blessed to able to serve God and help those less fortunate.”
After completing an art degree, including a thesis on the Olympics at the Art Institute of Chicago, Holum joined the Franciscan Sisters of the Renewal, a faith whose mission is “work with the poor and homeless and evangelization.”
Based first in New York, Sister Catherine and her fellow nuns stepped onto the mean streets of the Bronx to work with some of the Big Apple’s most underprivileged children in areas steeped in gang culture. Such work and sacrifice in homeless shelters and soup kitchens gave her a deep-rooted sense of satisfaction that skating had never been able to provide.
She attacked each new project with the tenacity of an Olympian, and, according to Sister Lucille, who leads operations at the order’s Bronx chapter, the “compassion of an angel.”
“It is wonderful to see people’s faces light up when Sister Catherine shares her experiences of her time in speedskating,” Sister Lucille said. “She never boasts about it but she has come to realize that we are incredibly proud of her and are lucky to have her as part of our religious family. The sisters and the people we try to reach love hearing about what she accomplished.”
Last year, missionary work took Sister Catherine to England, where she has found her previous life as an athlete a useful tool in providing some “street cred” when dealing with skeptical youngsters.
“When I give my religious testimonies, it is fun to watch the reaction of the kids when I tell them I was in the Olympics,” she laughed. “Their eyes get really big and they start paying a lot more attention. It is a great thing to share with them and it gives me a lot of pleasure to think back and talk about it.
“It is not exactly something you would normally expect from a sister. But I think it is good for people to see that members of the religious order can come from any background and any walk of life. It is all about your commitment to the message.
“It brings back so many memories and it is such a long time ago it sometimes feels like it happened to someone else. Skating was part of who I was for such a long time but having something to look ahead to made things very clear.”
Despite her time away, the speedskating world has not forgotten Kirstin Holum. Shani Davis and Tucker Fredricks, both chasing gold for the United States in Vancouver, grew up skating with her in junior competitions and asked to be remembered to her.
“I wish them all the very best too and I will be thinking of them when they compete,” said Sister Catherine. “There is not really much opportunity for me to follow how things go but my thoughts and prayers are with them.
“It is strange for me to think that things could have been different for me and I could have been at the Olympics again, but it wasn’t the Lord’s path for me and I have no regrets.”
You Gotta See This
One week ago today, Oprah interviewed the Dominican Sisters of Mary who have their Motherhouse outside of Detroit. The interview is spectacular and gives excellent insight into this convent which is 13 years old and has 100 Sisters. IN this day and age, nothing short of a miracle. You gotta see this
Sunday, February 14, 2010
Happy Valentine's Day ... 2010
Today is St. Valentine's Day
For those you love: wish them a blessed day (with you in it).
For those you love: wish them a blessed day (with you in it).
Monday, February 8, 2010
Sunday, February 7, 2010
The Fifth Sunday in Ordinary Time
Jesus stands on the shore of the lake. He saw two boats there empty; the fishermen had left their boats. Jesus calls them to get back into their boats and try again. They obeyed. Then .....
They were astonished at the size of their catch.
_______________
Do I get stuck in emptiness sometimes and abandon my boat?
Am I willing to hear God tell me to get back into my boat and set out for even deeper waters?
Have I ever witnessed in my life, like Peter and the others did, examples of great spiritual abundance?
Can I join the Prophet Isaiah (our 1st reading) and say: "here I am Lord, send me" ?
__________________________
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
