An Opportunity To Show We Really Are The Church

By now every one must have heard of the survey our Bishops are to be circulating among the people of their respective dioceses.

It was the express mandate by the Vatican to the chanceries of the world that they share the text "as widely as possible to deaneries and parishes" for their input. Some Stateside dioceses began quickly to move toward extending the consultation process into the local level. Others not so much. The Archdiocese of Hartford has had a link on its website for quite some time [along with the announcement of the installation of Archbishop Leonard P. Blair as the successor to Archbishop Henry J. Mansell on Monday, December 16, at 2 PM at the Cathedral of St. Joseph. We can talk about Blair’s role in the “investigation” of the LCWR later]. It’s interesting to note that the link leads to the Vatican Synod Preparatory Document without a “user friendly” survey format provided. You’ll see that link along the right column just a little below the picture of the new head of the  Archdiocese:

http://www.archdioceseofhartford.org/  

But this original Vatican Preparatory Document has value in providing background about why this survey is to be made available by each diocese to all the people.

Okay, I know Vatican documents are not the most engrossing reading.

More useful is the site giving the letter to the US Bishops from the USCCB Secretary Msgr. Ronny Jenkins along with a downloadable format of the survey questions:  

 http://www.scribd.com/doc/180575701/Vatican-questionnaire-for-the-synod-on-the-family

So if you want to cut to the chase, just go to that site to see the survey and make your responses.

So you figure “What’s the use? They never listen anyway.” But stop and think about this. When  has the whole Church—that is, the people of God, not just the hierarchy—been asked their opinion on anything? This step is historical and momentous!

I side with the comment by one reviewer. “WillS” at the survey site of NCR:

 I personally am a bit disappointed to the responses of my fellow "liberal" bloggers here. We have an option,  finally, to have some input, and yet we complain it's not perfect. Not what "should" be done. Get over it! Fill out the survey. The survey, while a little heady and long, provides a great opportunity to cast wide answers to the questions asked, so do it. If we don't respond because we think the answers will be watered-down by the bishops, we've created...and used the excuse ourselves. It is one of our tools to communicate our needs, something that we've been asking for forever. Use the tools, good or bad, and maybe the next one will be better. Don't give our bishops an excuse to dismiss us. Who would have thought the Vatican would be asking for lay input a year ago? Is this not , with all its faults, a move in the right direction?

Source: http://ncronline.org/news/vatican/vatican-bishops-must-consult-grass-roots-family-synod

And okay, the last time the Vatican sought an opinion from the faithful was back in the 60’s when Pope Paul VI followed up on the work of John XXIII in extending the Pontifical Commission of Birth Control to 72 members. And as we see from history, according to Wikipedia:

Paul VI explicitly rejected his commission's recommendations in the text of Humanae Vitae, noting the 72 member commission had  Cardinal Ottaviani, the commission's president and Bishop Colombo, the papal theologian).  Humanae Vitae did, however, explicitly allow the modern forms of natural family planning that were then being developed.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontifical_Commission_on_Birth_Control

On the basis of that ill-conceived decision, many were disillusioned about Papal consultation with “the people.” [A significant contribution to the narrative of that history, Turning Point, by Robert McClory is available at http://www.amazon.com/Turning-Point-Control-Commission-Humanae/dp/0824514580

http://www.amazon.com/Turning-Point-Control-Commission-Humanae/dp/0824514580

But then, this is not 1966. And a lot has happened—in Church and in our world—since then, significantly Pope Francis.

All I can say is that this is an opportunity to be part of history and a chance to express opinion on some very significant topics. A number of years ago, Call to Action marketed a T-shirts with the logo “We are the Church. What if we really believed it?” For my part, I’m responding. And in a follow up entry, I’ll be posting my commentary. Will you share yours as a comment on this site?

A Response to the Blog by the Catholic League about SNAP

A classmate of too-many-years-ago-to mention forwarded me an email of the "Latest News Release" (in effect a blog) by William  Donohue, president of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights [CLRCR], titled, "SNAP Is in Panic Mode." SNAP is Survivors Network of Those Abused by Priests.The full article is at:
http://www.catholicleague.org/snap-is-in-panic-mode/

Donohue's article is the kind of writing that just gets my dander up. And I'm not sure which I'm more upset about: the content of the CLRCR "news release" or the forwarding of this blog by my very intelligent classmate to our class email list. I was hoping that one of my class would formulate a commentary in response to the article. But since none have responded yet, I suppose I can start the discussion by sharing this with you—and them—in the form of an email response:

Aw, Bill, please don't be taken in by the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights, which considers itself "more Catholic than the Pope" and might be considered the Catholic equivalent of the check-out counter rumors-gossip-innuendo magazine The Star.
Even just a quick perusal of the Catholic League's website tells the story. And the Wikipedia essay on the organization is equally enlightening.

The Survivors Network of Those Abused by Priests is doing a great service. While I didn't care for SNAP's use of the term "dirty dozen" to describe "cover-up" hierarchy, I was glad to see that their staff offered this apology for their use of the term:

We sincerely apologize for offending anyone by using the phrase "dirty dozen."

We are a staff of three abuse victims working very hard to protect kids, help victims, expose wrongdoers and deter cover ups in a huge, powerful, global institution. We simply are incapable of monitoring how a 40 year old movie title translates into multiple languages and a slang expression.

Source: http://www.snapnetwork.org/canada_victims_respond_to_criticism_over_cardinal_ouellet 

That being said, there are so many important concerns facing the "administrators" as they enter the conclave.

For first-world cardinals, these include the flight from faith by younger Catholics, loss of confidence in the church, the clergy sex abuse crisis and how to handle such controversial social issues as the place of women, homosexuality, gay marriage, abortion, divorce and remarriage, and the decline in priests.
For cardinals from the developing world, social justice, poverty, environmental issues and relations with Islam and other faiths take centre stage. For both groups, the government of the church and reform of the Curia have risen sharply up the agenda. 

source: http://www.canberratimes.com.au/world/as-cardinals-get-down-to-business-tensions-rise-20130309-2fser.html

It's good to hear, even if it's just a rumor, that Cardinal George is active in comments about cardinals with a "past." You probably saw the news item in the Tribune.

source:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/religion/ct-met-sex-abuse-0307-20130307,0,7784915.story

SNAP's comment:

In a new interview with the Chicago Tribune, Cardinal George says that Cardinals are ‘vetting’ one another on abuse and cover up. If he is correct about this – and we hope he is – we are encouraged. But such vetting should go beyond just likely papal candidates. It should be vigorously expanded to include all church officials.

source:

http://www.snapnetwork.org/il_victims_offer_to_help_with_papal_candidate_vetting

The point is that "It's about the children."

On the other hand, as the Wikipedia article indicates, the Catholic League's Donohue has a history of "defending priests against accusations of child sexual abuse."

If it comes down to a choice between SNAP and the CLRCR, for my part, the children win my support.

It's About The Children, The Holy Spirit Knows

As we enter this period of "sede vacante" at the Vatican, a friend of mine shared an  "Open Letter" last week with our group.

Her message brought to mind the many forms of abuse and violence being revealed in the news about the actions of official members of the Church--especially in the sexual abuse of children over the years.

What she wrote moved me to send a "Letter to the Editor" at the Hartford Courant. That letter, admittedly a plagiarized edit of Judy's email with her gracious permission, was published March 3rd.

http://www.courant.com/news/opinion/letters/hcrs-12758hc--20130227,0,5135814.story

Here is her email. My commentary follows it:

Dear Laity & Priests,

It is time. We have experienced over ten years of ongoing revelations of clergy sex abuse scandals involving the rape of children, the protection of pedophiles, and the conspiracy of cover-up by bishops around the globe.

We have a pope who, as head of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith, was the key person responsible for every abuse case reported.

We have Los Angeles Cardinal Roger Mahoney, clearly exposed in clergy sex abuse cover up activity, and now Scottish Cardinal Keith O’Brien whose resignation has been accepted early amid allegations by four priests of inappropriate behavior.

First, I would like to commend the four priests in Scotland for reporting to the Vatican their experiences. Those “inappropriate actions” were examples of abuse; sexual harassment at the least, perhaps assault—and definitely abuse of authority. It took great courage to report this man, and I am sorry for the pain it has caused them. It is the systemic dysfunctional clericalism within the Roman Catholic priesthood that has destroyed any sense of integrity that may have been present and more importantly prohibits any real integrity to flourish.

It is time for the laity and the priests to assume responsibility for our part in this disgraceful reality.

Our sin is complacency. But it can be forgiven quickly and sincerely if apologies are made, accompanied with action.

1.     Provide a safe and welcoming environment which encourages and even urges all victims of clergy sex abuse to come forward.

2.     Provide a safe and welcoming environment which encourages and urges all priests and seminarians, past and present, former or currently working, to come forward and name the bishops who violated them through sexual harassment or abuse.

3.     Recognize that within the priesthood there is a certain percentage of the population that is gay. Also recognize that while celibacy is a vow taken at ordination it is not necessarily a gift given or call heard by each priest. It is an unfortunate mandatory requirement at this time. Require any priests weather gay or straight, who are living double lives, to come forward. Let us tackle the issues of celibacy, homosexuality and sexuality and equality. It is time.

4.     Priests and Laity hold public rallies and press conferences proclaiming apologies to victims while holding signed letters and petitions to our bishops stating that we will not financially support the diocese until the following things occur:

a.     Public listing of all priests credibly accused by lay persons

b.     Public listing of every bishop reported of harassment or abuse by priests.

c.      Release of all records showing any cover-up of pedophiles or other abuses of authority.

d.     Full financial disclosure of the diocese

It is time.

The truth and only the truth will set us free! Be not afraid.

Judy Lorenz

Great rallying statement, Judy! You've provided material that could be edited down to 200 words as "Letter to the Editor" today for newspapers across the country seeking counterpoint to the saccharin-sweet "We'll Miss You" messages on "B16 End Day."

What are daunting are the various forms of inertia apparently plaguing even those who term themselves "progressive Catholics." With all the ubiquitous Catholic reform organizations around the world, one would think that the message of your "OMG!" would be heard "from the housetops" of the media in all languages. Seems the outrage of the progressive element even just here in the U.S. was missed in the poll results in the USA Today article "U.S. Catholics Split on Church Direction Under New Pope" on Feb 21st:

Looking back over Benedict's papacy, U.S. Catholics are overall pleased with the work he has done. However, his favorability rating isn't as high as its peak of 83% right after his papal visit to the United States in April 2008.

About 74% of U.S. Catholics polled express a favorable view of Benedict, 85, who served eight years as pope. Benedict was a staunch conservative when it came to church teachings, but brought about many technology changes to modernize the church. He tweets from an iPad, has a Facebook page and provides Vatican news from a YouTube channel.

Pope Benedict's ratings have never soared as high as his predecessor Pope John Paul II, who was rated favorably by 90% of U.S. Catholics in three separate Pew Research polls in the 1980s and 1990s.

U.S. Catholics are united on some fronts. Most give Benedict negative ratings for his handling of the sex-abuse scandal in the church. Among Catholics who say they followed news of the pontiff's resignation, 63% are displeased with how he addressed the sex-abuse scandal, while 33% give him positive ratings. These ratings are significantly more negative than in April 2008. [emphasis mine]

More at http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/02/21/catholics-pope-change-church/1935299/

Seems those who want to respond to the "OMG!" and other calls for church reform have their work cut for them with those of the 33% as well with those other 4% who, I'm guessing, "don't know".

Seems those who want to respond to the "OMG!" and other calls for church reform have their work cut for them with those of the 33% as well with those other 4% who, I'm guessing, "don't know".

In addition to the children, there are so many voiceless who have suffered what Judy outlines in her email at the hands of the men in charge of the Church who see themselves as powerful and forget the message of the Gospel Jesus.

One cannot but wonder how all good Catholic people haven't risen up in an outrage and a call to action akin to that expressed in Judy's email. The Catholic Church—or better, the people of God—have certainly responded with outrage to past situations with action. 

The unfortunate alternative to inaction is the blessing for the Czar offered by the Rabbi in Fiddler on the Roof which we might apply to the new pope: "May the Lord bless and keep him. . . as far away as possible!" or at least far enough away to let God's Spirit truly have free reign. If the Holy Spirit were in charge and being heeded by our church administrators, the abusers of children and the other voiceless would have received justice instead of cover-ups. After all, as I always say: The Holy Spirit knows what she's doing!

Media Release

B16’s RESIGNATION: REAL REASON REVEALED

VATICAN CITY –  February 13 - After an extensive attempt at a cover-up of a recent unprecedented reversal of church opinion by an erratic Benedict XVI, Vatican Secretary of State Tarcisio Cardinal Pietro Evasio Bertone today revealed that the recent “resignation” announced by Benedict XVI on Monday was actually a “coup” carried out by a cadre of the leading conservative cardinals heading the various dicasteries of the Vatican.

This unprecedented move by these Vatican officials was occasioned by a recent incident involving the Pontiff. Archbishop Georg Ganswein, the pope's  secretary, reported that a few weeks ago Benedict, having just finished his morning meditation, shuffled to his office and taking out a scroll of paper was seen scrawling letters on it with a jumbo permanent marker. Finishing his message, the papal secretary reports, the pope walked, more resolutely than usual, down the corridor of the papal residence to the elevator. Puzzled by the Pope’s unusual behavior, his secretary followed him, but he reached the elevator just as the doors closed.

“I’d never seen his Holiness quite so intense,” Archbishop Ganswein was quoted as saying, “he was like a man on fire!”

Ganswein, 58, and in very good physical condition, was able to get down the stairs to the ground floor quickly enough, frantically calling the Swiss Guard. But Benedict had already exited the residence and was walking down the steps to St. Peter’s Square holding up the scroll before a small group of pilgrims gathered there. Witnesses said the pope began greeting people with his typical grandfatherly grin, seemingly unconcerned about security as he began to shake hands with the the gathered pilgrims. One of the group taking pictures of the Basilica turned to see the Pope coming toward her and quickly snapped a shot of the Pontiff as he held up the scroll on which he’d written in English “Ordain Women!”

Witnesses reported the Pontiff appeared at peace with himself and relieved, before the Swiss Guard, with the help of Archbishop Ganswein, intervened and quickly began ushering him back into the papal residence.

One of the other Swiss Guards on the scene approached the woman who took the picture and demanded the camera from her. Witnesses said she appeared intimidated and readily surrendered her camera on the promise it would be returned to her. It was later determined that the camera’s memory card had been removed. And, once this was discovered, they could not locate the woman. Her whereabouts is still unknown.

But the picture was just released today to world-wide media.

For obvious reasons, this unprecedented demonstration by the Pontiff had not been made public at the time it occurred. But the release of the picture forced the Vatican’s hand, and Osservatore Romano reported today it had received information on Tuesday from an anonymous source that the woman, a progressive Catholic, had removed the memory card immediately after taking the picture knowing she's be asked to surrender the camera. She had immediately entered into negotiations with  leading international media about how the picture would be used.

Only now has Archbishop Ganswein revealed when his first suspicions had been aroused, saying, "Through the door, I could hear the Holy Father during his meditation speaking with someone he was addressing as “Holy Spirit.” Ganswein reported that it was a woman’s voice saying, “C'mon, Josef, do the right thing!”

Meanwhile, preparations are going forward to prepare the Sistine Chapel for the conclave.

Today, one Vatican official refusing to give a name for fear of reprisals reported seeing a distinctive white dove perched on the roof of the Sistine Chapel, apparently resting after several failed attempts to gain entrance to the building.

Learning About Guns Can Teach a Lesson

.22 Caliber Bolt-action Rifle

AR-15  

I last fired a gun back in about 1948 when i was 10 years old. My older brother--age 16--owned a 22 caliber bolt-action rifle. Sixty-five years in hindsight, I am grateful that he afforded me the opportunity to experience the power of a gun because I learned that I never need, now wanted, to own a gun ever again. Of course, he had  probably skirted the requirements about gun registration in Illinois, and our parents didn't know he had the gun. He had a "range" set up in the basement shooting into a thick stand of newspapers. I cringe to think what might have happened in that make-shift range and when he used a gun to shoot out street lamps in another town--for which he was fortunately only reprimanded and parents fined. What's happening today is much more than just teenage misbehavior ignoring both gun laws and parental authority. Laws exist today that need stricter enforcement. We've come a long way from that .22 rifle to AR-15s. And our society and culture has changed radically. Objections to gun restrictions based on an over-200-year-old 2nd amendment need to be tempered by a common sense application of that amendment to bipartisan solutions to the mass shootings proliferating in our day.

Volunteer Lemonade from NRA's Lemons

Perhaps the NRA’s Wayne LaPierre criticism of the administration's pushing of failed solutions could make lemonade from its lemons by taking his “crazy” suggestion a step further by asking NRA members to come forward and offer their volunteer service to their school districts. We have volunteers in our schools for other purposes; why not licensed and gun-use-trained volunteers for security? Seems the presence of sane and law-abiding NRA members guarding our schools would serve to make everybody happy: “tea-party” types would be glad no state or federal monies would be used, thereby keeping “big government” out of local issues; the defenders of 2nd Amendment rights would be happy that the ”right to bear arms” is not being trampled; the anti-gun folks would be content there’d be no added proliferation of guns, since volunteers would have their own; and what red-blooded, gun-totting American would not jump at the chance to “strut their stuff” in a public place? Promoters of volunteerism have reason to rejoice in the renewal of a GHW Bush era “million points of light” solution at the grass-roots level.

Disclaimer: As neither a gun owner nor a member of the NRA, I see the suggestion of armed guards in our public places as one more step toward the “security state” seen by those who recoil at military personnel armed with assault-rifles at foreign airports. And I don’t agree with LaPierre’s concept: "the best way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun." While this is a somewhat "tongue-in-cheek" commentary, I'd like to think the suggestion might have merit in giving the NRA a chance to "put it's money where its mouth is."