News, Views, Articles and Roman Petty Gossip (7/4/10) (News Stories)

Late last month, the Legionaries issued a vaguely worded statement of regret to unnamed victims of Maciel -- four years after Pope Benedict XVI banished him from active ministry to "a life of prayer and repentance" for abusing seminarians.

I don't know specifically what the seminarians were alleging, but the word "abuse" these days is a euphemism for what is essentially sexual assault on persons who have in fact not consented, on persons who are deemed not to be able to consent sex (minors) or on persons who, at least up to a certain age, are deemed not to be able to consent because of the relationship of trust and reliance, such as teacher/student relationships.

Was Maciel sent to a monastery because there was no evidence of a crime against the law where the offences took place - presumably Mexico and elsewhere?

Or is that just further confirmation of what Manuel Vicent described recently in his article in El Pais, that the Church ignores issues as to the criminality of its priests and the maximum punishment is stripping them of their right to minister publicly to the faithful as priests and sending them off to a monastery to do penance.

If Benedict, now as Pope, ignored what may well have been criminal activity in the secular sense on the part of Maciel, and did not report that to the relevant police or prosecuting authorities, isn't that just one more reason why he should resign?

After all, is not bound by any of the provisions of Canon Law. The Pope is Canon Law. Canon 1404 states,

"The First See is judged by no one."

So, if he is above the law and is not bound by his own declaration in 2001 of "Pontifical Secret", what excuse does he have for not handing the information over to the police?

May I repeat for the umpteenth time:

The present structure of Church is corrupt from top to bottom with the abuse of power. There can be no renewal as called for by Vatican II until the present structure of church collapses completely.

For the third time (I think), may I drop the word, simony, into our conversations.

Also for the third time may I recall this article, with no connection to anything above implied, of course:

http://www.counterpunch.org/navarro04082005.html

Peter

Paul, this is breath-taking. I have long been suspicious of all the so-called New Movements encouraged by the late JPII. I suspect this is not the only New Movement that is going to eventually end up under intense scrutiny in that blinding light that history eventually sheds on the past. What is unfolding now even puts Benedict's reluctance to respond in an appropriate way in his Pastoral to the Irish People in a new light. This single article is another major turning point in the events of recent weeks. This is now not only about the Legionaries — it's about the behaviour of the men in very high places on the receiving end of Maciel's largesse. The comment from the Vatican's official excorcist a few weeks ago about the extent of corruption at the centre of the institution takes on a whole new meaning.

What I find breath-taking is these rich-as-all-get-out lay Catholics but as totally dumb-as-f*ck people who are taken in by all this and who over the centuries are the ones who fund this mess. I have long believed there is a culture of worship of mammon in the institution — even down at our sort of level. I've told the story in my own family of a bachelor uncle who left his entire estate to the institution and that secured the presence of an Archbishop at his funeral. His brother, my father, who was effectively head of the family, and who left $5,000 to the institution, didn't even get a letter of thanks and I struggled to find a priest to actually officiate at his funeral. That uncle had long been seen in my family as "the odd one" or the nutter, God rest his soul. None of the real 'saints' amongst my fathers' brothers and sisters are going to get an archbishop at their funerals.

Various groups around the world keep talking about a boycott of the collection plate. It ain't gunna work. Just look at the huge exit out of the pews in the last half century — which effectively amounts to a massive "boycott of the Sunday collection plate": Has it made the slightest of difference to those who run the institution? The answer is no. And the reason it is "no" is because of the massive inflow of funds down through the centuries from these really quite dumb lay people who have happened to be blessed with making a huge pile and who leave a substantial proportion of it to the institution. That's the "funding source" that needs to be cut off — not the Sunday collection (which largely goes to keeping the many good priests in their poverty — particularly those not blessed with large or wealthy congregations).

Just look around society, the accumulation of wealth does not necessarily operate in direct proportion to the amount of intelligence individuals have been blessed with. That is another of the paradoxes of life that Jesus Christ came into the world to teach us in the Parable of the Talents? Some seem to have forgotten this part of the lesson.

We are now witnessing, folks, a revolution on the scale of the French and American Revolutions or the collapse of the old Soviet Empire. We sure live in interesting times.

Brian Coyne
[Editor & Publisher]

Just in by email some quotes from an article in the latest edition of L'Osservatore Romano (6-7 April not available online).

Cardinal Angelo Sodano, the 82-year-old former Secretary of State and current dean of the College of Cardinals, has implied that supporters of abortion and gay rights are waging a campaign against the pope. He said so in an interview in the latest issue of the Vatican's newspaper. Here are some quotes:

"There is by now a cultural contrast: the Pope embodies moral truths that are not accepted and so the shortcomings and mistakes of priests are used as weapons agains the Church."

"Behind these unjust attacks against the Pope are views of the family and life that are contrary to the Gospel. Now accusations of paedophilia are being brandished against the Church. Before there were the battles of modernism against Pius X, then there was the offensive against Pius XII for his behaviour duing the last world war and, finally, that against Paul VI for Humanae vitae."

"We are told that we are using the wrong strategy to confront these unjust attacks, that we should react differently. The Church has its own style and does not adopt the methods that are currently being used against the Pope. The only strategy we have comes from the Gospel."

"It's not Christ's fault if Judas betrayed him. It's not the fault of a bishop if one of his priests has stained himself with serious faults. Certainly the Pope is not responsible."

(Cardinal Angelo Sodano in an interview with L'Osservatore Romano 6-7 April)

Brian Coyne
[Editor & Publisher]

Yes Brian, I'm sure he's right - but even if 'the monarch' agrees, who is going to choose them?

Long live the weeds and the wilderness yet. - Gerard Manley Hopkins