Historical Christian

New Blog Up

Finally got the new blog ready to go.  Take a look!  Just a heads up, this old one won’t be around much longer as I’ll disconnect it soon, but I transferred most of the good stuff from this blog over to the new one, so it’s still accessible.

 

It took a long time to make the transfer, for a couple reasons.  The main reason for a new blog is I wanted to change blogging platforms.  My old blogging platform, Typepad, has a lot of good things to offer, but the increasing zeal of the company to offer ever-unceasing “improvements” without thorough testing resulted in increasingly frustrating numbers of glitches. 

 

In short, it became a drag and a hassle to blog, because I could never seem to just write a post and post it quickly – I was constantly running into technical issues that turned simple posting into a time-consuming exercise in frustration, to the point I found myself actually avoiding blogging – unacceptable for a paid service like Typepad.   At that point I realized: it’s time for a change.

 

I then discovered a second problem with Typepad: it’s incompatible with common blogging platforms such as Wordpress or Blogger, who offer an easy import-export feature for changing platforms.  Typepad, being built on a different structure, offers no such ease.  I would have to transfer my hundreds of posts, and reformat them, by hand.

 

Problem is, I was embarking on an extremely busy year, with little time for sitting around transferring one post at the time, reformatting each, re-loading images and videos and such, fixing broken links – aaagh!  What was I to do?  It would take hours – and a corresponding fortune – to pay someone else to do it.  Being a tremendously tedious and boring activity, I didn’t dare ask one of my friends to do it.  But I didn’t want to blog on Typepad anymore, with all of its frustrations.

 

So I had to do it myself, and that took forever, basically putting me on blogging hiatus for a year, because there were so few times during the past year that I could actually sit down and focus on the tedious process of transferring, fixing, and reformatting, one post at a time. 

 

But I finally got it done.  Last week I found myself with a few days free, and decided it was time to bear down and finish it.  Several days and an aching wrist and blurry vision later, all the posts are transferred and most of the re-design is complete.  I didn’t transfer everything, only the things I really wanted to preserve – but that still came to nearly 250 posts.  Some of the text formatting on the transferred posts is still funny and a few links may be bad, but at least I got the bulk of it done.  I also transferred lots of comments, as past readers provided such a wealth of great discussion.   Those are pasted right into the text of the post itself, as you’ll see.

 

One thing is for sure:  I’ll never use Typepad again, or any blogging platform that’s not compatible with others.  If there’s one lesson to be learned from all this: if you want to blog, use a platform that’s compatible with the other major blogging platforms out there, and that offers an automatic export/import feature for transferring posts from one platform to another.  Otherwise you could get stuck like me, not blogging at all for an entire year!

Transitioning . . .

To a new blog.  Not using this one anymore.  I'll let you know when the new one is ready.

Peace,

Aimee

Attacks on Pope Benedict Related to His Strong Leadership

Sandro Magister has a great article putting more perspective on the Pope "scandal."  Honestly, the more I read about it, the more I realize: the accusations against Pope Benedict are simply untrue.  Not to minimize abuse where it has happened, but rather to conclude that our Pope is, in fact, the strongest leader against sex abuse the Church has seen, countering the culture of the Vatican and even countering, at moments, his predecessor, Pope John Paul II (whom I also dearly love).

What Magister has done is point out the connection between the various attacks on Benedict since he became Pope, and his strong leadership on specific issues related to the attacks.  I already noticed that this current attack came during Holy Week, and it seems like at Christmas and Easter every year there is some sort of attack on the Church that, according to the worldly pundits, will "bring the Church down," (though they never do).  But Magister's article really is interesting, and I reproduce it in entirety here.

The Passion of Pope Benedict. Six Accusations, One Question

Pedophilia is only the latest weapon aimed against Joseph Ratzinger. And each time, he is attacked where he most exercises his leadership role. One by one, the critical points of this pontificate

by Sandro Magister

ROME, April 7, 2010 – The attack striking pope Joseph Ratzinger with the weapon of the scandal posed by priests of his Church is a constant of this pontificate.

It is a constant because every time, on different terrain, striking Benedict XVI means striking the very man who has worked and is working, on that same terrain, with the greatest foresight, resolve, and success.

*

The tempest that followed his lecture in Regensburg on September 12, 2006 was the first of the series. Benedict XVI was accused of being an enemy of Islam, and an incendiary proponent of the clash of civilizations. The very man who with singular clarity and courage had revealed where the ultimate root of violence is found, in an idea of God severed from rationality, and had then told how to overcome it.

The violence and even killings that followed his words were the sad proof that he was right. But the fact that he had hit the mark was confirmed above all by the progress in dialogue between the Catholic Church and Islam that was seen afterward – not in spite of, but because of the lecture in Regensburg – and of which the letter to the pope from the 138 Muslim intellectuals and the visit to the Blue Mosque in Istanbul were the most evident and promising signs.

With Benedict XVI, the dialogue between Christianity and Islam, as with the other religions as well, is today proceeding with clearer awareness about what makes distinctions, by virtue of faith, and what can unite, the natural law written by God in the heart of every man.

*

A second wave of accusations against Pope Benedict depicts him as an enemy of modern reason, and in particular of its supreme expression, science. The peak of this hostile campaign was reached in January of 2008, when professors forced the pope to cancel a visit to the main university of his diocese, the University of Rome "La Sapienza."

And yet – as previously in Regensburg and then in Paris at the Collège des Bernardins on September 12, 2008 – the speech that the pope intended to give at the University of Rome was a formidable defense of the indissoluble connection between faith and reason, between truth and freedom: "I do not come to impose the faith, but to call for courage for the truth."

The paradox is that Benedict XVI is a great "illuminist" in an age in which the truth has so few admirers and doubt is in command, to the point of wanting to silence the truth.

*

A third accusation systematically hurled at Benedict XVI is that he is a traditionalist stuck in the past, an enemy of the new developments brought by Vatican Council II.

His speech to the Roman curia on December 22, 2005 on the interpretation of the Council, and in 2007 on the liberalization of the ancient rite of the Mass, are thought to be the proofs in the hands of his accusers.

In reality, the Tradition to which Benedict XVI is faithful is that of the grand history of the Church, from its origins until today, which has nothing to do with a formulaic attachment to the past. In the speech to the curia just mentioned, to exemplify the "reform in continuity" represented by Vatican II, the pope recalled the question of religious freedom. To affirm this completely – he explained – the Council had to go back to the origins of the Church, to the first martyrs, to that "profound patrimony" of Christian Tradition which in recent centuries had been lost, and was found again thanks in part to the criticism of Enlightenment-style reason.

As for the liturgy, if there is an authentic perpetuator of the great liturgical movement that flourished in the Church between the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, from Prosper Guéranger to Romano Guardini, it is precisely Ratzinger himself.

*

A fourth terrain of attack runs along the same lines as the previous one. Benedict XVI is accused of derailing ecumenism, of putting reconciliation with the Lefebvrists ahead of dialogue with the other Christian confessions.

But the facts say the opposite. Since Ratzinger has been pope, the journey of reconciliation with the Eastern Churches has taken extraordinary steps forward. Both with the Byzantine Churches that look to the ecumenical patriarchate of Constantinople, and – most surprisingly – with the patriarchate of Moscow.

And if this has happened, it is precisely because of the revived fidelity to the grand Tradition – beginning with that of the first millennium – that is one characteristic of this pope, in addition to being the soul of the Eastern Churches.

On the side of the West, it is again love of Tradition that is driving persons and groups of the Anglican Communion to ask to enter the Church of Rome.

While with the Lefebvrists, what is blocking their reintegration is precisely their attachment to past forms of Church and of doctrine erroneously identified with perennial Tradition. The revocation of the excommunication of four of their bishops, in January of 2009, did nothing to the state of schism in which they remain, just as in 1964 the revocation of excommunications between Rome and Constantinople did not heal the schism between East and West, but made possible a dialogue aimed at unity.

*

The four Lefebvrist bishops whose excommunication Benedict XVI lifted included Englishman Richard Williamson, an antisemite and Holocaust denier. In the liberalized ancient rite, there is even a prayer that the Jews "may recognize Jesus Christ as savior of all men."

These and other facts have helped to feed a persistent protest by the Jewish world against the current pope, with significant points of radicalism. And it is a fifth terrain of accusation.

The latest weapon of this protest was a passage from the sermon given at Saint Peter's Basilica on Holy Friday, in the pope's presence, by the preacher of the pontifical household, Fr. Raniero Cantalamessa. The incriminating passage was a citation from a letter written by a Jew, but in spite of this the uproar was aimed exclusively at the pope.

And yet, nothing is more contradictory than to accuse Benedict XVI of enmity with the Jews.

Because no other pope before him ever went so far in defining a positive vision of the relationship between Christianity and Judaism, while leaving intact the essential division over whether or not Jesus is the Son of God. In the first volume of his "Jesus of Nazareth" published in 2007 – and close to being completed by the second volume – Benedict XVI wrote splendid pages in this regard, in dialogue with a living American rabbi.

And many Jews effectively see Ratzinger as a friend. But in the international media, it's another matter. There it is almost exclusively "friendly fire" that rains down. From Jews attacking the pope who best understands and loves them.

*

Finally, a sixth accusation – very current – against Ratzinger is that he "covered up" the scandal of priests who sexually abused children.

Here too, the accusation is against the very man who has done more than anyone, in the Church hierarchy, to heal this scandal.

With positive effects that can already be seen here and there. Particularly in the United States, where the incidence of the phenomenon among the Catholic clergy has diminished significantly in recent years.

But where the wound is still open, as in Ireland, it was again Benedict XVI who required the Church of that country to put itself in a penitential state, on a demanding path that he traced out in an unprecedented pastoral letter last March 19.

The fact is that the international campaign against pedophilia has just one target today, the pope. The cases dug up from the past are always intended to be traced back to him, both when he was archbishop of Munich and when he was prefect of the congregation for the doctrine of the faith, plus the Regensburg appendix for the years during which the pope's brother, Georg, directed the cathedral children's choir.

*

The six terrains of accusation against Benedict XVI just referred to bring up a question.

Why is this pope so under attack, from outside of the Church but also from within, in spite of his clear innocence with respect to the accusations?

The beginning of an answer is that he is systematically attacked precisely for what he does, for what he says, for what he is.

__________


English translation by Matthew Sherry, Ballwin, Missouri, U.S.A.

__________

A Sociologist on the Pope Crisis: A Manufactured Moral Panic?

I've been collecting articles, wanting to write about this, getting whiplash from going back and forth between wild accusations and impassioned defenses of Pope Benedict, whom it happens I dearly love.  I've studied his theology for years, and I cannot reconcile his deep thinking and gentle demeanor with the wild distortions, the ugly images of a secretive, uncaring pedophile protector being projected in much of the media. 

And as I read the facts of cases in Wisconsin, Germany, Arizona, it becomes increasingly apparent that most, even all, of the accusations against the Pope are factually untrue, unsubstantiated, even fabricated, and easily disproved by data on record in the various tribunals and in statements made by the people directly involved in the cases - if only those leading the charge against the Pope were even minimally interested in actual facts.

I'm not going to write that article today, but I am going share an article I just ran across  on MercatorNet that is so good, I'm going to post it in it's entirety.  It's good because it's written dispassionately from the perspective of sociology, by Italian sociologist Massimo Introvigne.  It's a fascinating read, and helps put things in perspective.  At least I think so.  (And by the way, I found it in the combox of this very interesting defense of the Pope written by a Lutheran theologian.)

Moral panic flares again

Is priestly paedophilia a problem? Yes, says an Italian sociologist. Is it a big problem? No.

Why is there talk again of paedophile priests, based on a case in Germany, which drags in people who are close to the Pope and now even the Pope himself? Does sociology have something to say about this or should we leave it completely to the journalists? I believe sociology has much to say, and it must not remain silent because of a fear of displeasing some.

The current discourse on paedophile priests – considered from a sociological perspective – represents a typical example of "moral panic". The concept was coined in the 1970s to explain how certain problems become the subject of "social hyperconstruction". More precisely, moral panics are defined as socially constructed problems that are characterised by a systematic amplification of the true facts in the media or in political discourse.

Two other characteristics have been cited as typical of moral panics. First, problems that have existed for decades are reconstructed in the media and political accounts as new or as the subject of a recent dramatic increase. Second, their incidence is exaggerated by statistics plucked from the air which, while not confirmed by academic studies, are repeated by the media and inspire persistent media campaigns. Historian and sociologist Philip Jenkins, of Pennsylvania State University, has emphasised the role of "moral entrepreneurs" in the creation and management of panics whose agenda is not always revealed. Moral panics do not bring any good. They distort the perception of the problems and compromise the efficacy of the measures which should resolve them. After a harmful analysis inevitably there comes a harmful intervention.

Let there be no misunderstanding: at the origin of moral panics are objective and real dangers. They do not invent a problem; they exaggerate its statistical dimensions. In a series of excellent studies, Jenkins demonstrated how the issue of paedophile priests is perhaps the most typical moral panic. Two characteristic elements exist: a fact which serves as a starting point, and an exaggeration of this fact by moral entrepreneurs.

First of all, the fact which serves as a starting point. Paedophile priests exist. Certain cases are both unsettling and disgusting; they have resulted in convictions and the accused priests never even protested that they were innocent. These cases – in the United States, Ireland and Australia – explain the severe words of the Pope and his request for forgiveness from the victims. Even if there were only two cases – and unfortunately there are more than two – these would still be two too many.

But asking for forgiveness –noble and appropriate as it is – is not enough. We have to ensure that this will not happen again. Thus, it is relevant whether to inquire whether there are 2, 200, or 20,000 cases. And it is relevant whether the number of cases is higher or lower among Catholic priests and consecrated persons compared to other categories of persons. Sociologists are often accused of working on cold numbers, forgetting that behind each number is a human individual. But numbers, while not sufficient of themselves, are necessary. They are essential for adequate analysis.

To understand how from a tragically real fact one passes to a moral panic we must ask how many priests are paedophiles. The largest body of information has been collected in the United States, where in 2004 the US Conference of Catholic Bishops commissioned an independent study by the John Jay College of Criminal Justice of the City University of New York. This is not a Catholic university and is unanimously recognised as the most authoritative academic institution of criminology in the United States.

This study concluded that from 1950 to 2002 4,392 American priests (of over 109,000) were accused of having sexual relations with minors. Of these, just over 100 were convicted in the courts. The low number of convictions is due to various factors. In some cases the true or alleged victims reported priests who were already dead, or for whom a statute of limitation barred the action. In others, the accusation and even the canonical sentence did not involve any violation of the law: such is the case, for example, in various American states where a priest has sexual relations with a consenting person over the age of 16.

But there have also been many sensational cases of priests who have been falsely accused. Indeed, these cases multiplied in the 1990s, when some legal firms recognised they could reap million dollar returns even on the basis of mere suspicion. Appeals for zero tolerance are justifiable, but there should also be zero tolerance for defaming innocent priests. Nor do the numbers change significantly from 2002 to 2010. The John Jay College study already noted a "significant decline" in cases in the 2000s. New investigations have been rare, and sentences extremely rare, as a result of more rigorous controls introduced by American bishops as well as the Holy See.

So, does the John Jay College study tells us then, as one often reads, that 4 percent of American priests are paedophiles? Not at all. According to the research, 78.2 percent of the accusations involved minors who had advanced beyond puberty. Having sexual relations with a 17-year-old is certainly not a beautiful thing, and much less so for a priest, but it is not paedophilia. Therefore, only 958 American priests were accused of true paedophilia over 52 years, 18 per year. There were only 54 convictions, a little less than one per year.

The number of convictions of priests and consecrated persons in other countries is similar to that of the United States, even if no other country has available a study as comprehensive as that of the John Jay College. Often government reports in Ireland are cited which describe as "endemic" the level of abuses in boarding schools and in (male) orphanages managed by certain dioceses and religious orders. There is no doubt that there have been some very serious cases of sexual abuse involving minors in this country. A systematic perusal of these reports indicates, however, that many accusations involve the use of excessive or violent means of disciplining. The so-called Ryan Report of 2009 used very harsh language in relation to the Catholic Church. It studied 25,000 pupils in boarding schools, reformatories and orphanages in the period and found 253 accusations of sexual abuse of boys and 128 of girls. Not all of them were against priests or consecrated persons. These were of different natures and levels of seriousness, but they rarely involved prepubescent children. Convictions were even rarer.

The controversies in recent weeks involving Germany and Austria demonstrate a typical characteristic of moral panics: "new" facts going back many years, in some cases over 30 years, in part already known. Events of the 1980s -- especially from the Pope's own region of Bavaria -- appear on the front pages of newspapers if they had occurred yesterday. Wild controversies spring up, in a concerted attack which announces sensational new "discoveries" every day. This is how moral panics are promoted by moral entrepreneurs in an organised and systematic manner.

The fact that headlines say "it involves the Pope" is in its own way a textbook case. These refer to an episode of abuse in the Archdiocese of Munich in Bavaria and Freising, where the Pope was the Archbishop, dating back to 1980. The case emerged in 1985 and was settled by a German court in 1986, which decided among other things that the decision to accept the priest in question into the Archdiocese had not been taken by Cardinal Ratzinger. He did not even know about it, which is not at all strange in a large diocese with a complex bureaucracy. Why a German daily newspaper would decide to exhume this case and plaster it over the front page 24 years after the conviction should be the real question.

Now we come to an unpleasant question – because the simple raising of it appears defensive, and does not console victims – but it is an important one. Is being a Catholic priest a condition which involves a risk of becoming a paedophile and sexually abusing minors which is higher than the rest of the population? As we have seen the two things are not the same since abusing a 16-year-old is not paedophilia. Answering this question is fundamental to discovering the cause of the phenomenon and thus preventing it.

According to studies by Jenkins, if one compares the Catholic Church in the United States to the major Protestant denominations, one discovers that the presence of paedophiles – depending on the denominations – is from two to ten times higher for the major Protestant denominations compared to Catholic priests. The question is important because it demonstrates that the problem is not celibacy. Most of the Protestant pastors are married.

In the same period in which about 100 American priests were convicted for sexually abusing minors, the number of gym teachers and coaches of junior sporting teams – also mainly married – who were convicted of the same crimes in the US reached about 6,000. The examples could continue, not only in the US. And above all, according to regular US government reports, two-thirds of sexual abuse against minors does not come from strangers or educators – including priests and Protestant pastors – but from family members: stepfathers, uncles, cousins, brothers and, unfortunately, even parents. Similar facts exist for numerous other countries.

While it may hardly be politically correct to say so, there is a fact that is much more important: over 80 percent of paedophiles are homosexuals, that is, males who abuse other males. And – again citing Jenkins – over 90 percent of Catholic priests convicted for sexually abusing minors have been homosexual. If a problem has sprung up in the Catholic Church, it is not due to celibacy but to a certain tolerance of homosexuality in seminaries, particularly in the 1970s, when most of the priests later convicted for the abuses were ordained. This is a problem that Benedict XVI is rigorously correcting. More generally, a return to moral principles, to ascetical discipline, to meditating on the true greatness of the priesthood are the antidotes to the real tragedy of paedophilia. The Year of the Priest must also help.

Compared to 2006, when the BBC broadcast a trash-documentary featuring the Irish parliamentarian and homosexual activist Colm O'Gorman, and to 2007, when the Italian media personality Santoro broadcast an Italian version on his program Annozero, there is little new -- except for increased severity and vigilance in the Church. The painful cases of recent weeks have not been invented, but they go back 20 or even 30 years.

However, perhaps, there is something new.

Why are old and very often well-known cases being exhumed in 2010 on a daily basis, always attacking the Pope? This is paradoxical if one considers the great severity of then Cardinal Ratzinger and of Benedict XVI on this very theme. The moral entrepreneurs who organise the panic have an agenda which is increasingly clear and which is not essentially the protection of children. This is a time when political, juridical and even electoral decisions in Europe and elsewhere are being made about the abortion pill RU-486, euthanasia, the recognition of same sex unions. Only the voice of the Pope and the Church is being raised to defend life and the family. The reading of certain articles in the media shows that very powerful lobby groups are seeking to silence this voice with the worst possible defamation -- and unfortunately an easy one to make -- that of favouring or tolerating paedophilia.

These more or less Masonic lobby groups show the sinister power of technocracy which was raised by Benedict XVI himself in his encyclical Caritas in veritate and in the denunciation of John Paul II, in his Message for the World Day of Peace of 1985. They warned of "hidden aims" – alongside others which are "openly promoted" which are "directed at subjecting all populations to regimes in which God does not count".

This is truly a dark hour. It takes one back to the prediction of a great Italian Catholic thinker of the 19th century, Emiliano Avogadro della Motta (1798-1865). He predicted that after the devastation caused by secular ideologies an authentic "demon worship" would spring up which would attack the family and the true concept of marriage. Reestablishing the sociological truth about moral panics over priests and paedophilia will not of itself resolve the problems and will not stop the lobby groups. But it is a small and proper tribute to the greatness of this Pope and to a Church which is wounded and defamed because they will not be silent on the issues of life and the family.

Massimo Introvigne is an Italian sociologist of religion. He is the founder and managing director of the Center for Studies on New Religions (CESNUR). This article from the CESNUR website has been reprinted and translated with permission.

Pope's Letter to Ireland about Sex Abuse

The Pope has issued his letter to Catholics in Ireland about the sex abuse scandal there.  My favorite part is the one addressed directly to abusers:

To priests and religious who have abused children

You betrayed the trust that was placed in you by innocent young people and their parents, and you must answer for it before Almighty God and before properly constituted tribunals. You have forfeited the esteem of the people of Ireland and brought shame and dishonour upon your confreres. Those of you who are priests violated the sanctity of the sacrament of Holy Orders in which Christ makes himself present in us and in our actions. Together with the immense harm done to victims, great damage has been done to the Church and to the public perception of the priesthood and religious life.

I urge you to examine your conscience, take responsibility for the sins you have committed, and humbly express your sorrow. Sincere repentance opens the door to God’s forgiveness and the grace of true amendment. By offering prayers and penances for those you have wronged, you should seek to atone personally for your actions. Christ’s redeeming sacrifice has the power to forgive even the gravest of sins, and to bring forth good from even the most terrible evil. At the same time, God’s justice summons us to give an account of our actions and to conceal nothing. Openly acknowledge your guilt, submit yourselves to the demands of justice, but do not despair of God’s mercy.

Amen.  Take responsibility, admit your sins, and submit to both Church and civil justice. 

My least favorite part is the one addressed to the bishops:

To my brother bishops

It cannot be denied that some of you and your predecessors failed, at times grievously, to apply the long-established norms of canon law to the crime of child abuse. Serious mistakes were made in responding to allegations. I recognize how difficult it was to grasp the extent and complexity of the problem, to obtain reliable information and to make the right decisions in the light of conflicting expert advice. Nevertheless, it must be admitted that grave errors of judgement were made and failures of leadership occurred. All this has seriously undermined your credibility and effectiveness. I appreciate the efforts you have made to remedy past mistakes and to guarantee that they do not happen again. Besides fully implementing the norms of canon law in addressing cases of child abuse, continue to cooperate with the civil authorities in their area of competence. Clearly, religious superiors should do likewise. They too have taken part in recent discussions here in Rome with a view to establishing a clear and consistent approach to these matters. It is imperative that the child safety norms of the Church in Ireland be continually revised and updated and that they be applied fully and impartially in conformity with canon law.

Only decisive action carried out with complete honesty and transparency will restore the respect and good will of the Irish people towards the Church to which we have consecrated our lives. This must arise, first and foremost, from your own self-examination, inner purification and spiritual renewal. The Irish people rightly expect you to be men of God, to be holy, to live simply, to pursue personal conversion daily. For them, in the words of Saint Augustine, you are a bishop; yet with them you are called to be a follower of Christ (cf. Sermon 340, 1). I therefore exhort you to renew your sense of accountability before God, to grow in solidarity with your people and to deepen your pastoral concern for all the members of your flock. In particular, I ask you to be attentive to the spiritual and moral lives of each one of your priests. Set them an example by your own lives, be close to them, listen to their concerns, offer them encouragement at this difficult time and stir up the flame of their love for Christ and their commitment to the service of their brothers and sisters.

The lay faithful, too, should be encouraged to play their proper part in the life of the Church. See that they are formed in such a way that they can offer an articulate and convincing account of the Gospel in the midst of modern society (cf. 1 Pet 3:15) and cooperate more fully in the Church’s life and mission. This in turn will help you once again become credible leaders and witnesses to the redeeming truth of Christ.

All well and good, but something critical is missing.  This addresses what needs to be done in the future - but there is nothing about the bishop's own accountability for what happened in the past. 

In the US it is a felony to fail to report a felony, and those who fail to report it, if caught, do jail time.  In my opinion, if it is true that the bishops, as the Pope writes, "failed, at times grievously, to apply the long-established norms of canon law to the crime of child abuse," then the bishops should be held to the same standard as the abusers.  Any bishops who on their watch in any way colluded, enabled, or concealed abuse should also be investigated, appear before tribunals and in civil court, and, if found guilty in civil court, do jail time.

If there is no provision in canon law for such accountability, then perhaps canon law should be revised.  In today's world we simply cannot afford the kind of lax leadership we've seen in recent decades, first because of the damage to and possible loss of innocent souls, which is a truly damnable offense against God, and then because of the damage to the Church herself and the many good bishops, priests, and lay people unjustly shamed by such scandals - truly the Church Crucified, along with the innocent Christ.

In the movie Remember the Titans, the white captain of the football team begins berating a black player for not looking out for a white player on the team.  The player responds, "Why should I?  You're not looking out for the black players, we're not being guarded at all.  With all due respect, sir, teamwork reflects LEADERSHIP.  If you don't lead, why should we follow?"  It's one of the turning points in the movie as the young football players learn to overcome racism and work together.

It's the same way in the Church.  Teamwork reflects leadership, and the bishops are the leaders who fell down on the job and let the team fall into disarray.  They are the ones ultimately responsible, and should be held accountable.  Otherwise justice will not have been served, and the Church sends a message that those in leadership are protected and can get away with the most egregious of crimes, while the rest of us have to suffer the consequences.

Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone fastened round his neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea. - Matthew 18:6

Living the Catholic Faith Conference Update and Talks

The Living the Catholic Faith Conference went great, and I got quoted in a Denver Catholic Register article about it.  I'm one of just two speakers quoted - the other was the keynote speaker, Dr. Tim Gray, a professor of mine at the Augustine Institute.  I must have done alright!

You can order copies of the talks, including of mine, here.

Speaking and Teaching Events Coming Up!

Wow, I haven't been blogging regularly for a long time!  Things have been so busy, doing a lot of speaking and teaching (and writing off-line, I do have a manuscript in progress).  But in case anyone is looking here, I just want to remind folks that I do have a couple of events coming up.

First, speaking at the Living the Catholic Faith Conference in Denver this Friday and Saturday, giving a talk on the gospel message in the Catholic Tradition, as I've been developing it in my evangelization training program.  Should be fun!

And, a new round of classes through the Archdiocese of Denver are beginning, the first next week, on the gospel message in the Catholic Tradition.  Teaching both locally, and online by downloadable audio recording.

Thanks for dropping by!  Got to get back to work!

Letter to the Women's Media Center Regarding Tim Tebow Super Bowl Sunday Ad

Emailed today to the three staff members who have their email address on their website, regarding this story.

Dear Women’s Media Center,

One of the principles of feminism is that women’s voices have not been heard enough throughout history, and a goal of feminism is that women’s voices be heard, our stories be told.  And yet I just read a story about how your organization is trying to stop the airing of an ad on Super Bowl Sunday about how a woman chose to give birth rather than succumb to pressure to abort her child, a child that grew up to be football star Tim Tebow.

Frankly, as a life-long feminist, I am tired of a movement that claims to speak for all women, but in truth only speaks for a few and tries to suppress the rest.  If you say you support women, then you have to support all women.  If you want women’s voices to be heard, you need to allow us all to speak – including on Super Bowl Sunday, notorious for sexist ads that use women to sell everything from cars to Pepsi - and take us all seriously.  

Your objection that it is an issue advocacy ad is not a reason, but an excuse.  Were it any other issue, you wouldn’t be going after it.   Your reason is that you want to silence this woman, prevent her story from being told.  You don’t want to hear it – us – because it is prolife and counters your own pro-choice position.

If you were truly feminist, you would be using all the resources of the Women’s Media Center to make sure this woman’s voice is heard, issue advocacy be damned.  If you don’t, then the name of your center, “Women’s Media Center,” is truly ironic and a terrible misnomer.

Sincerely,

Aimee M. Cooper
Former pro-choice feminist
Present prolife feminist

On Babies, Abortion Survival, and a Ghastly Idea

Sometimes our cultural contradictions just come piling on.  Like when I read the news.  Today, three things jumped out at me.

First, a movie trailer about babies.  Wonderful!

Then, a story about a woman who survived a saline abortion when she was just six months old, was adopted, now has a baby of her own, is a child welfare worker and educator about the cross-generational effects of abortion.  God bless her!

And finally, a story about an idea to get rid of carbon-consuming African babies in order for first-world jet-setters to continue their carbon-indulgent lifestyle.  Egad!

Words leave me at this point.  I'll leave you to draw your own conclusions.

Superstitious Make-Believe: Religion, or Science?

And everyone thought religion was the one that was supposed to be superstitious make-believe, and science was going to save us.  Then along came Climategate.  Turns out science is just as susceptible to human greed, self-deception and irrationality as anything else.  It has become political, warps facts to suit political agendas, so we can't trust it anymore. 

Of course us prolifers already know that, don't we?  Been happening with abortion for decades now.  Never mind the rational, science-based facts of human DNA, beating heart, tiny hands and face, brainwaves, rapid swimming activity, clearly alive - it's NOT a baby.  Right.  Keep telling yourself that nice self-delusion.  But don't call it "science."  It's a self-justifying superstition, make-believe, which enables our selfish lifestyles.  I mean, if abortion were outlawed, we wouldn't be able to sleep around so much now, would we?  Might actually have to take responsibility for our actions.

Meanwhile, real science keeps on proving theology.  But that's the subject of another article.

On Advent and the Afternoon of Christmas Day

Today is the first day of Advent, a time of penitential purple, fasting, stripping-down, detaching, preparing for the coming of the Lord.  Traditionally, the Church speaks of two comings: at Christmas, His Incarnation as the baby Jesus, and the second coming at the end of time, as the King Jesus.

But I think there is a third coming, in between the first and second: His coming into each of us, individually.  And this coming, though it has a beginning, the first moment of conversion, the first moment of faith, or, for a baby, the first moment of baptism, never ceases, is something meant to always grow.  Why?  Because Jesus is God.  And God is infinite, His life an outpouring of divine love that gives rise to the Trinity and pours out to us through Jesus on the Cross - the reason why He came, was born, so He could die for us, pour out the life of God to us - and into us in the sacraments, especially the Eucharist.  Jesus Incarnated in Mary, so He could Incarnate in us, through the Eucharist.

And He is the infinite God, so there is no end to His Incarnation in us.  His presence begins in us, but never ends, should never cease to grow, if we are really giving ourselves and opening up ourselves, surrendering ourselves, to Him.

When I was growing up, my parents went to church, not a Catholic church because we weren't Catholic, but an Episcopalian church from which they eventually resigned, because of the even-then downward spiral of Episcopalianism.  Maybe that is why the faith never "took" with me, why I never had a conversion experience when young: the EC even then was watered down, heartless, soulless, a mere husk of what Christianity is meant to be.

And Christmas for us was focused, not on the creation-altering Incarnation of God in Jesus, the interruption of normal time by the intrusion of the eternity of God in a mere babe, but on presents, material presents.  Things.  Dolls and dollhouses, bicycles, model car kits, modeling clay, all the things which feed a child's immediacy and fantasy.  How our anticipation grew as the pile of presents under the tree grew, how the magicalness of the season flavored everything, the porcelain Christmas angels perched around our living room and the music box playing, the Santa Claus mugs on the table, the scent of pine.

And how we woke up early on Christmas morning, dragged a groggy mom and dad out of bed, and tore into our presents.  Such thrill, such joy, as we shrieked "I got it!  I got it!" when some coveted gift was discovered.

But what I remember most: after the presents were opened, explored, and played with.  After everything was discovered and handled.  After what had seemed like limitless treasures had turned into what was, after all, a very small pile of things whose limits were easily exhausted after the first hour of excitement. Afterward, there came the afternoon: the afternoon of Christmas day.

The afternoon of Christmas day, after the excitement had died down and there were no more presents to open, no more discoveries to be made.  The candies had all been tasted, the wrapping paper all thrown away.  And in its place: emptiness.  Ennui. 

Ennui is exactly the word: a feeling of utter weariness and discontent resulting from satiety or lack of interest; boredom.  We had been satiated, and we found that our gifts, so exciting on Christmas morning, were just a small heap of meaningless things on Christmas afternoon - and did not satisfy, but left us bored, empty, irritable, longing for something else, something more.

It was not until a very long time later that I discovered that something more that we longed for, the thing that never wears out, never comes to end, only grows larger and deeper and more satisfying and unending the more you explore it - Him.  And how our culture tries to cheat us of it - Him - with its suppression of public expressions of Christmas, and focus on the season as the Christmas shopping season.  How we cheat and deprive ourselves of what the season actually is: the season of preparation for the coming of our Lord, the infinite God who has no end, as a babe in the commemoration of His birth, and in the anticipation of His second coming - and, for me, increasingly, my readiness for Him to enter me personally, more and more without end, as He does each day that I live and breathe on this earth since the day I came to faith in Him.

Presents are fine.  I love giving gifts to those I love, and love receiving gifts.  But material gifts are not what make us happy, and in the end leave us bored - because we are not made for finite things, but for the infinite, for God, Whom alone is Infinite, Whom alone can make us truly, lastingly, unendingly happy, because we never run out of Him to know, love, explore, imbibe, take in. 

So as much as the "season" shrieks at us with premature light displays and shopping ads and sales, remember: this is not the Christmas season.  This is the season of Advent, of preparation.  And before you are tempted to throw your Christmas tree into the gutter on Christmas afternoon, please know: Only on Christmas Day does the season of Christmas begin.  And when we know Him, it truly is a beginning, of a celebration of company with Him, and His presence growing in us, as we receive Him as a babe and again in the Eucharist, and pray for and await His final coming as King of all creation, prepared for as He enters and Incarnates and grows in us, much as He did in Mary but now in the Eucharist, soul by soul until the end of time and He finally comes in His fullness to fill all of creation for eternity.

Tonight, as I tasted His Body on my tongue and His Blood purpled my lips, I felt His presence enter me again, and grow even more, as it always should from our first moment of faith.  And I knew, as I did not know as a child, but am so grateful to know now, why it is we celebrate Advent, and then the Christmas season.  Christ is coming, has come, will continue to come, until finally He has come in all His fullness, all His humanity and Divinity has come, and filled every single bit of creation, every nook and cranny of our bodies and souls, with Himself, His presence and life and love.  And then creation itself will be renewed, lifted up, into God. 

And He is coming now, and we celebrate year by year by preparing, and then celebrating, the great Gift that God has made, is making, will always make without end or exhaustion or limit or boredom, of Himself to us in and through Jesus, as a babe, in the Eucharist, and as the coming King of all creation.

That is the meaning of Advent, and of Christmas, why we wait, why we prepare, and why, when He has come, we rejoice.  There is no emptiness in Him, no limit or boundary or end, for He is the infinite God, and we will never run out of Him to explore, and taste, and learn about, and experience and express, from our first moment of faith through our daily Eucharist to His second coming and into all eternity.

Maranatha!  Come, Lord Jesus!

PS: This piece was inspired by this piece by Joseph Bottum of First Things, a worthy read.

Obama Calls for Massive Investigation of Global Warming Hoax!

Uh, not.  In the wake of release of massive emails showing massive fraud on the part of pro-warming theory scientists, he decides to rush off to Copenhagen and push for a treaty with massive reductions in emissions that will have massive effects on the global economy.  And it appears the major news media, like the New York Times , the Wall Street Journal, Reuters, the UK's Telegraph  (the UK, where the fraud was perpetuated) - is complicit, because they're completely ignoring the global warming hoax.

I'm not normally into conspiracy theories, but in this case it sure looks like Obama and others must really want that one-world government that a global warming treaty may well lead to. But don't take my word for it.  Just read the evidence, and decide for yourself.

Youth Eucharistic Procession clogs the streets in Kansas City!

Did you ever see a Eucharistic Procession like this? 22,000 high school students in Kansas City, no kidding! Go to the Catholic Key blog for the rest of the pictures.

How to Brainwash a Nation

And we're in the middle of it right now.  This amazing interview was done back in 1985 with a former KGB agent who was trained in subversion techniques. He explains the 4 basic steps to socially engineering entire generations into thinking and behaving the way those in power want them to. It's shocking because our nation has been transformed in the exact same way, following the exact same steps.

 

Here are the four steps:

1. Demoralization (immorality, basically getting everyone used to it, thinking it's normal, and moral people are the bad folks)
2. Destabilization (of the economy, politics, etc.)
3. Crisis (caused by immorality and destabilization, which replaces the old government with a new controlling regime)
4. Normalization (as everyone gets used to the new regime)

If that isn't happening in our nation, I don't know what is.  We're clearly in the destabalization period, immorality having been normalized and now our economy going down the tubes.  And we might be near the crisis point.

I sometimes feel like we are living in the decline of society, and unaware of the tsumani about to hit us.  And here is one form the tsunami is taking: Last year, fully 40% of US children were born out of wedlock, to single mothers. 40% - that's nearly half. The statistics on children raised by single mothers are not good: higher rates of poverty, abuse, and crime, trouble completing school, drug abuse, difficulty become productive adults.  Considering that 50% of marriages already end in divorce and many of those kids also wind up being raised by their mothers alone, how many of our kids in total will be raised by single mothers?  Half?  Or more, realistically?

The single motherhood problem has serious economic implications. Congress and the Obama administration are creating record deficits and new programs to be funded by taxpayer money, while we have an aging population soon to retire and fewer children to support the retirees. AND: if half or more of our kids are being raised by single mothers, their earning power, if statistics are correct, will be much lower than those raised in stable two-parent homes with better economic and educational opportunities. How will this future generation be able to earn enough taxable income to support these programs and pay back the deficit? Is anyone thinking about this?

Help get new movie into theaters: Blood Money

Help get a new independent film, Blood Money, which needs our support to expose the corruption of Planned Parenthood.  In order for the producers to get it into the theaters they need to show that millions of interested people have visited their website. You need only visit the website; there is no need to sign-up as a supporter unless you are compelled to do so.   PLEASE HELP GET THIS IMPORTANT FILM INTO THEATERS BY VISITING THE WEBSITE, then forward this to your family and friends! Americans NEED to see this.