Vatican City, Aug 26, 2018 / 07:05 pm (CNA).- Please read below for CNA’s full transcript of the Pope’s Aug. 26 in-flight press conference from Dublin to Rome:
Greg Burke: Holy Father, thanks for this time you’re dedicating to us after two intense days. Certainly, there were difficult moments. In Ireland, there was the matter of abuses, but also very beautiful moments: the Festival of Families, testimonies from families, the meeting with the young couples and the visit to the Capuchins, but maybe you want to say something else first…
Pope Francis: To say thank you, because if I am tired I think of you who have work, work, work… I thank you so much for your effort and your work. Many thanks.
Greg Burke: The first question, as usual, comes from a journalist of the [host] nation which is Tony Connelly, RTE.
Tony Connelly, RTE: Your Holiness, you spoke on Saturday about the meeting you had with the minister for children. You talked about how moved you were by what she said about the mother and baby homes. What exactly did she tell you? Were you shocked because it was the first time you had heard of these homes?
Pope Francis: The minister first told me something that didn’t have too much to do with mother and children (Editor’s note: mother and baby homes). She told me, and she was brief: “Holy Father, we found mass graves of children, buried children, we’re investigating… and the Church has something to do with this.” But she said it very politely and truly with a lot of respect. I thanked her to the point that this had touched my heart. And, this is why I wanted to repeat it in the speech… and it was not at the airport, I was mistaken, it was at the president’s. At the airport, there was another lady minister and I made the mistake there.
But, she told me, “I’ll send you a memo.” She sent me a memo and I haven’t been able to read it yet. I saw it was a memo, that she sent me a memo. She was very balanced in telling me, “There’s an issue, the investigation has not yet finished.” But, she made me understand that the Church has something to do with this. For me, this was an example of constructive collaboration, but also of, I don’t want to say the word “protest” … of complaint, of complaint for that which at one time maybe the Church was of help to do. That lady had a dignity that touched my heart, and now I have the memo there that I will study when I get home.
Greg Burke: Now, another Irishman, exchanging places, which is Paddy Agnew, who is from the Sunday Independent, a resident in Rome but an Irish journalist.
Paddy Agnew, Sunday Independent: Holy Father, thanks and good evening. Yesterday, Marie Collins, an abuse victim that you know well, said that you are not favorable to a new tribunal for Vatican inquiries on the issue of abuses, new inquiries on the problem of sexual abuse, and in particular on a so-called tribunal of inquiry on bishops, bishop accountability. Why do you think this is not necessary?
Pope Francis: (speaking over the last part of the question) No, no, it is not like this. Marie Collins is a bit fixated on the idea that came up. I esteem Marie Collins so much. At times, we call her to give Vatican conferences. She is fixated on the idea, the idea of the “madre amorevole” (editor’s note: The motu proprio, “As a loving mother”), in which it is said that to judge bishops, that it would be good to have a special tribunal. Then, we saw this wasn’t practical and it also wasn’t convenient for the different cultures of the bishops that had to be judged.
You take the recommendations of “madre amorevole” and you make the “giuria” (Editor’s note: a special commission of bishops) for each bishop, but it’s not the same. This bishop is judged and the Pope makes a “giuria” that is more capable of taking that case. It is a thing that works better and also because not all bishops are able to leave their dioceses. It’s not possible.
In this way, the tribunals, the “giurias” change. And that’s what we’ve done up until now. Rather many bishops have been judged. The latest is that of Guam, the Archbishop of Guam, who appealed. And, I decided – because it’s a very difficult case – to take the privilege that I have of taking on the appeal myself and not sending it to the council of appeal that does its work with all the priests. I took it upon myself. And made a commission of canonists that are helping me and they told me that when I get back, after a maximum of a month, a recommendation will be made so I can make a judgment. It is a complicated case, on one hand, but not difficult because the evidence is clear. I cannot pre-judge, I await the report and then I will judge. I say that the evidence is clear because there is this evidence which led the first tribunal to the condemnation.
This is the latest step. Now, there’s another and we’ll see how it ends. But, of course, I told Marie that the spirit and also the recommendation of “as a loving mother” is being done… a bishop is judged by a tribunal, but it isn’t always the same tribunal, as it is not possible. She did not understand that well. But, when I see her, sometimes she comes to the Vatican, I will explain it more clearly. I love her.
Greg Burke: Now, the Italian group. Holy Father, Stefania Falasca from Avvenire is coming.
Stefania Falasca, Avvenire: Good evening, Father.
Pope Francis: Good evening.
Falasca: You said also today that it is always a challenge to welcome migrants and the foreigner. Well, precisely yesterday a painful matter was resolved, that of the Diciotti ship. Is your hoof behind this solution? What was your involvement?
Pope Francis: The paw of the devil.
Falasca: Yes, then the second question: many in Europe see extortion on the backs of these people. What do you think?
Pope Francis: The welcoming of migrants is something as old as the bible. It’s in Deuteronomy, in the Commandments. God commands welcoming the migrant, the foreigner. It’s so old that it is in the spirit of revelation but also in the spirit of Christianity. It’s a moral principle. I spoke about this. Then, I saw that I needed to bit a bit more explicit because it’s not a welcoming with the “Belle etoile,” no! It should be a reasonable welcoming. That’s why Europe is all in this. And when did I realize how this reasonable welcome must be? When there was the terrorist attack in Zaventem (Editor’s note: the Brussels Airport), that that young men, the guerillas that made the attack on Zaventem were Belgians, but sons of migrants, not integrated, from ghettoes! That is, they were received by the country and left there, and they made a ghetto. They were not integrated. Then I remembered when I went to Sweden, and Franca (Editor’s note: Franca Giansoldati, Vatican correspondent for il Messaggero) in an article mentioned this, of how I explicitly made this though and when I went to Sweden, I knew it, I spoke about integration, as it was, because I knew because during the dictatorship in Argentina, from 1976 to 1983, many, many Argentinians and also many Uruguayans escaped to Sweden and there the government would integrate them immediately. It taught them the language, gave them a job and integrated them. To the point that, this is an interesting anecdote, a Minister who came to bid me farewell at the airport in Lund was the daughter of a Swedish and an African immigrant. This African migrant was so integrated to the extent that his daughter became a minister. Sweden was a model. But in that moment Sweden was beginning to have difficulties, not because it did not have the good will for this, but because it didn’t have the possibility of integration. This was the reason for which Sweden stopped for a bit. (After this step of integration) And then, I spoke during the press conference among you about the virtue of prudence, the virtue of the government. I spoke about the prudence of peoples, about the number or the possibility. A people that can receive but does not have the means to integrate [migrants], it’s better not to receive them. There, there is the issue of prudence. And I believe that this is the real core of the dialogue today in the European Union. We must continue to speak. Solutions will be found.
What happened with the Diciotti? I didn’t put my “paw” there. He who did the work with the minister of the interior was Fr. Aldo (Editor’s note: Fr. Aldo Bonaiuto, member of the Association “Giovanni XXIII”), the good Fr. Aldo that continues the work of Fr. Benzi, who the Italians know well, who work of liberating prostitutes, those that are exploited… The Italian Bishops’ Conference also was part. Cardinal Bassetti was there, but at the telephone, he guided everything by way of one of his two under-secretaries, Fr. Maffeis (Fr. Ivan Maffeis, director of communications) negotiated with the minister. And I believe that he went to Albania. Albania, Ireland took a number. Montenegro, I think not. I’m not sure. The others were picked up by the Conference, I don’t know if under the umbrella of the Vatican or not, I don’t know how it was negotiated there, and they’re going to a better world at Rocca di Papa (Editor’s note: an Italian town near Rome). They will be welcomed there. The number I believe that it is more than 100 and there they will begin to learn the language and to do that work that is done with integrated migrants. I’ve had an experience that was very gratifying for me. When I went to Roma Tre (University), there were students that wanted to ask me questions and I saw a student that “I know this face.” (Nour Essa, see story here, editor note), and it was one that had come with me among the 13 I brought back from Lesbos. And that girl was at the university because Sant’Egidio from the day after at school, to study, had integrated her at a university level. This is the work with migrants. There is an openness of heart for everyone, suffering, then integration as a condition for welcoming and then the prudence of those who govern for doing this. I have seen a clandestinely made film of the things that happen to those who are sent back. They are taken by the traffickers. Painful, the things that they do to the men… the women and the children, out! They sell them. But to the men, they do the most sophisticated torture. There was one there that was capable, a spy, of making that film that I sent to my two under-secretaries for immigration (Editor’s note: Fr. Michael Czerny and Fr. Fabio Baggio, undersecretaries of the Migrants and Refugees Section). For this, to send them back you have to think well. Then, one last thing: there are these migrants that come, but there are also those who are tricked at Fiumicino. They are tricked. “We give you work, they give you documents.” And they end up on the sidewalk enslaved, under threat from traffickers of women. That’s it.
Greg Burke: Thanks, Holiness. Let’s go to the question from the English-speaking group. Anna Matranga from the American television, CBS.
Anna Matranga, CBS: Good evening, Holy Father. I’ll return to the subject of sex abuse about which you’ve already spoken. This morning, very early, a document by Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano’ came out. In it, he says that in 2013 he had a personal talk with you at the Vatican, and that in that talk, he spoke to you explicitly of the behavior of and the sexual abuse by former-Cardinal McCarrick. I wanted to ask you if this was true. I also wanted to ask something else: the Archbishop also said that Pope Benedict sanctioned McCarrick, that he had forbidden him to live in a seminary, to celebrate Mass in public, he couldn’t travel, he was sanctioned by the Church. May I ask you whether these two things are true?
Pope Francis: I will respond to your question, but I would prefer last first we speak about the trip, and then other topics. I was distracted by Stefania, but I will respond.
I read the statement this morning, and I must tell you sincerely that, I must say this, to you and all those who are interested. Read the statement carefully and make your own judgment. I will not say a single word about this. I believe the statement speaks for itself. And you have the journalistic capacity to draw your own conclusions. It’s an act of faith. When some time passes and you have drawn your conclusions, I may speak. But, I would like your professional maturity to do the work for you. It will be good for you. That’s good. (inaudible)
Matranga: Marie Collins said that after she met you during the victims gathering, that she spoke with you precisely about ex-Cardinal McCarrick. She said you were very tough in your condemnation of McCarrick. I want to ask you, when was the first time that you heard talk about the abuses committed the former cardinal?
Pope Francis: This is part of the statement about McCarrick. Study it and then I will say. Yesterday, I had not read it but I permitted myself to speak clearly with Marie Collins and the group, it was really an hour-and-a-half, something which made me suffer a lot. But, I believe it was necessary to listen to these 8 people and from this meeting came the proposal. I made it, the others accepted and they helped me to do it, to ask forgiveness today in the Mass. But, in concrete things. The last thing. I had never heard about those mothers, they called it the women’s laundry, when an unmarried woman got pregnant she went to the hospital, I don’t know what the school was called, and the sisters said that and then they gave the child away in adoption to people. There were two sons from that time, they tried to find their mothers, if they were alive. And they would tell them that it was a mortal sin to do this, and to the mothers who called for their children also it was a mortal sin. For this reason, today I finished by saying that this is not a mortal sin but it’s the fourth commandment. And the things that I said today some I didn’t know (before). It was painful for me but I also had the consolation of being able to help clear these things up. I await your comment on the document, I would like that. Thanks.
Greg Burke: Thanks, Holy Father. Now, Cecile Chambraud of Le Monde.
Cecile Chambraud, Le Monde: Good evening, Holy Father. I hope you don’t mind if I pose my question in Spanish. I ask you to reply in Italian for all of the colleagues. In your speech in Ireland, you refer to your recent letter to the people of God. In that letter, you call all Catholics to take part in the fight against abuses in the Church. Can you provide details for us what concretely Catholics can do each in their place to fight against these abuses and on this theme, in France, a priest has started a petition for the removal of Cardinal Barbarin accused by victims. Does this initiative appear adequate to you or not?
Pope Francis: If there are suspicions, proofs or half-proofs, I do not see anything bad in making an investigation, but always that is done according to the fundamental juridical principal of “nemo malus nisi probetur” – No one is evil until it is proven. But many times there is the temptation not just to do the investigation but to publish that there is an investigation and why he’s culpable and so some media – not yours, I don’t know yours – to create a climate of culpability. I will tell you something that happened to me in these days that can help with this… because for me it is important how you proceed, how the media can help. Three years ago, more or less, the problem of the so-called “pedophile priests” started in Granada, involving 7, 8 or 10 priests accused of abuse of minors and of having festival or orgies and this kind of thing.
I received the accusation myself, directly, a letter made by a young 23-year old, according to him he was abused, he gave his name and everything, a young man who was working in a prestigious college of Granada, and the letter was perfect. And he asked me what to do to report this. I told him to go to the archbishop of Granada and tell him this, and the archbishop will know what to do. He did, and the archbishop did all that he should do. Then it also went to the civil tribunal and so there were two processes. But then the local media began to speak and speak (about this), and three days later, they wrote “in the parish, three pedophile priests” and so on, and in this way the consciousness was formed that the priests were criminals.
Seven were interrogated and nothing was found. On three, the investigation went ahead and they stayed in jail, for five days, two of them and one, Fr. Romani, the parish priest, was in for 7 days. For almost three years and more, they suffered hate, slaps from the whole town… “criminals!” They couldn’t go outside. They suffered humiliations made by the “giuria” declared to prove the accusations of the boy, that I don’t dare repeat here. After three years, meanwhile, the “giuria” declares the priests innocent, all innocent, but most of all these three, the others were already out of the case and the accuser was then denounced because it was seen that he had a vivid imagination. He was very intelligent and he worked in a Catholic college, he had this prestige and gave the impression of telling the truth.
He was condemned and had to pay the expenses. These men (the priests) were condemned by the local media before justice was done. For this reason, your work is very important, you must accompany the investigation but there must be the presumption of innocence, not with the legal presumption of culpability. There is a difference between the informer who provides information on a case, who isn’t playing for a foreseen condemnation, and the one who investigates, who acts like Sherlock Holmes and presumes that everyone is guilty, When we read the technique of Hercules Poirot, for him everyone was guilty, but this is the work of the investigator. They are two very different positions: but those who inform must start from the presumption of innocence, but saying their admirations, but this is a bit special, but why, to say doubts, but without making condemnations. This case that happened in Granada for me is an example that it will do us all good in our work.
Greg Burke: In the first part, you asked what could the people of God do about the issue…
Pope Francis: When you see something, speak immediately. I will say another thing that’s a little nasty: many times there are parents that cover up the abuse of a priest. Many times. You see it in the condemnation. “No, but…” they don’t believe… They are convinced that it’s not true and the boy or the girl remain like that. I by method receive every week one or two, but it’s not mathematical. And I’ve received a person, a woman, that for 40 years suffered this scourge of silence because her parents didn’t believe: she was abused at 8 years old. Speak! This is important. It’s true that for a mother to see it is better that it wasn’t, seeks that the child maybe is dreaming… speak! And speak with the right people, speak with those who can start a judgment, at least an preliminary investigation. Speak with a judge, with the bishop and if the parish priest is good speak with the parish priest, this is the first thing the people of God can do, this should not be covered up. A psychiatrist told me time ago, but I don’t want that this be an offense for the women, that for sense of maternity, women are more inclined to cover the things of the child than men. But I don’t know if it’s true, but… speak!
Greg Burke: Holy Father, we’re moving… the Spanish group. There’s Javier Romero, of Rome Reports.
Javier Romero, Rome Reports: Holiness, excuse me but I’d like to pose two questions. The first is the that the Prime Minister of Ireland, who was very direct in his speech, is proud of the new model of family different from that which traditionally the Church has proposed up until now: I mean homosexual marriage. And this is perhaps one of the models that generates more battles, and I thought in the case especially of a Catholic family , when there is a person of this family that declares themselves to be homosexual. Holiness, the first question that I’d like to pose you is: what do you think, what would you say to a father whose son says he is homosexual, that he would like to go live with his… this is the first question. And the second that you also in your speech to the Prime Minister spoke about abortion, and we saw how Ireland has changed so much in recent years and that it seems that the Minister was satisfied at these changes. One of these changes was abortion, and we saw that in recent months, in recent years abortion has come out in many countries, Argentina among others, your country. How do you feel when you see this is an issue of which you speak often and that in many countries it’s put in…
Pope Francis: Alright. I’ll begin from the second, but there are two points. Thanks for this. There are two points that are connected to the matter that we’re speaking about, on abortion you know what is thought. The problem of abortion is not religious. We are not against abortion for religion, no! It’s a human problem and it should be studied anthropologically. To study abortion, beginning with the religious fact is to skip over thought. The problem of abortion should be studied anthropologically. There is always the anthropological problem of the ethics of eliminating a human being to resolve a problem. But this is already to enter into the discussion. I just want to underscore this: I will never allow that the discussion on abortion begins on the religious fact. No, it’s an anthropological problem, it’s a human problem. This is my thinking.
Second. There have always been homosexuals, people with homosexual tendencies. Always. Sociologists say, I don’t know if it’s true, that in times of epochal changes, some social, ethical phenomena increase; one of them would be this. This is an opinion of some sociologists. Your question is clear: what would I say to a father who sees that his son or daughter has that tendency? I would say first to pray, pray! Don’t condemn. Dialogue, understand, make space for son and the daughter. Make space so they can express themselves.
Then, at what age does this restlessness of the child express itself? It’s important. One thing is when it shows itself in a child. There are many things to do with psychiatry, to see how things are. Another thing is when it manifests itself after 20 years of age… But I’ll never say that silence is a remedy. To ignore a son or daughter with homosexual tendencies is a lack of paternity and maternity. You are my son, you are my daughter as you are! I’m your father, mother. Let’s talk! And if you, father and mother aren’t up to it, ask for help, but always in dialogue because that son and that daughter have the right to a family and that family of not being chased out of the family. This is a serious challenge, but that makes paternity and maternity. Thank you for the question! Thanks!
Greg Burke: Thanks to you, Holy Father.
Pope Francis: And then I would like to say something for the Irish that are here. I found so much faith in Ireland. So much faith. It’s true, the Irish people have suffered for the scandals. So much. But there is faith in Ireland. It’s strong. And also the Irish people know how to distinguish. And I cite what today I heard from a prelate: the Irish people know how to distinguish well between the truth and half-truths. It is something that they have within. It’s true that it’s in a process of elaboration, of healing from these scandals. It’s true that positions are being opened that seem to distance themselves from any faith. But the Irish people have a deep rooted faith. I want to say it because it’s what I’ve seen, what I’ve heard, of which in these two days I’ve been informed. Thanks for you work. Thanks a lot. And pray for me please.
Greg Burke: Thanks to you. Have a good dinner. Rest well!
[…]
This sort of thing is exactly why I completely dismiss the actions taken against Fr. Frank Pavone. The hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church has simply lost all credibility and all claim to obedience.
Agreed. Come Holy Spirit!
I’ve long had concerns about Fr Pavone. But I have to say, in reading accounts like this, I really do feel the anger so many of his defenders feel over the blantant double standards that apply to the friends and courtiers of those in power.
Totally gross and scandalous beyond belief. Yet Fr. Frank Pavone is defrocked (excuse me, Mr. Pavone). What did Jesus say about straining the gnats?
Well, both those guys are camels. Just different species. Thankfully, we don’t get a limit on the number of bad priests we need to eject from ministry.
That said, let’s remember that the cover-up crisis of 2001 and the subsequent charter never addressed priest misbehavior against adults. Only children. The clerical culture protects its own: it delayed six years for Mr Pavone’s blasphemy, and 29 on his disobedience. I think Fr Rupnik will be out a lot sooner.
That said, let’s remember that the cover-up crisis of 2001 and the subsequent charter never addressed priest misbehavior against adults.
That, definitely; but it also failed to create any process of accountability for bishops, either. And that’s really what made this crisis so severe.
I certainly agree. People knew for decades that priests and nuns abused their authority. We even made jokes about rulers rapping knuckles and weird priests in the confessional. No, what many bishops have missed, including the last three popes, is that the most severe scandal is their own leadership and defense of the clerical culture.
Church teaching on holding bishops accountable is in serious need of update.
Boycotts.
Boycotts.
Boycotts.
Against these vermin and those in the Vatican who enable the vermin, nothing except comprehensive lay boycotts has any hope of working.
For the love of the Crucified God, stay home from Mass this Christmas Day. And keep staying home every Sunday until the sacerdotal trailer-trash get the message.
Not one dollar to diocesan schools.
Not one dollar to diocesan charities.
Until at the very least the election of a future pipe.
Let the priestly predators eat, not cake, but grass.
future *pope*
I don’t agree with skipping Mass, where we receive the Lord Jesus Christ Himself, Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity. I also don’t agree with withholding funds from Catholic charities and schools. What I think should happen is the appointment of more women to leadership positions (not priests!) in the Church–women are more likely to sense, confirm, and report sexual sins, and be tireless and unrelenting in the pursuit of justice for the victims, which include Holy Mother Church.
“What I think should happen is the appointment of more women to leadership positions (not priests!) in the Church–women are more likely to sense, confirm, and report sexual sins, and be tireless and unrelenting in the pursuit of justice for the victims”
Oh? Any statistics on that?
There’s possibly nothing wrong with women in senior positions in the Church. The problem is the type of women who would be attracted by these posts.
Too dangerous, keep them out! The last thing the Church needs on top of all the other appalling scandals is a an influx of feminists. We have enough of them in every parish under the sun.
Have you seen what has happened with the many Protestant Denominations that have given great influence, power and rank to women, from making them deacons and Pastors, to power to decide which doctrines to approve and dissaprove? Corruption in those churches has exploded and as a direct consequence, they now fully embrace more and more of the corruption, language and delusions of the world, including abortion, homosexuality, transgenderism, imaginary identities, critical race theory, etc.
Women are by no means inferior but neither are they superior and, on top of that, generally more easily influenced by false sentimentalism, false compassion, false love, false justice, etc. Ask Eve from the Garden of Eden, as Satan preached “equality” from the “patriarchal”, “colonialist”, “misogynist”, “oppressor” God by portraying Him as supposedly cheating Adam and Eve away from higher glory and power. It is those power-hungry women that are showing to be more devastating than any crooked man ever.
It is the women like Mary, much stronger than any man ever in defeating pride, that have built the Church for 2,000 years. We must all, women and men, learn from Mary, who being the absolute very highest among all humans, never demanded power, position, priesthood or any privilege. God’s tough love and loving order is infinitely superior to Satan’s disguised-as-love, soft, poisonous, deceiving feelings.
Until now, I have refrained from commenting on any articles on this website, but, Phil, I just HAD to give them my name and email just to say – you hit it right on the head inasmuch as women thinking that if they have more power they can fix this. I am a woman. I believe that with Vatican II, women have already been given too much power…. I don’t have to say anything else because you’ve said it all and so well and correctly. I don’t have an answer to the disgust and evil that permeates the Church, but I do know that softer and more emotional is NOT better.
Perfectly stated Phil.
As one woman convert observed about her journey from her Protestant church to the Catholic: the purpose of women priestesses is to sanctify abortion.
What also tends to occur in denominations that ordain women are ageing, shrinking congregations. Last time I checked the mainline branch of US Presbyterians had the oldest average age of church members in America.
I saw a photo of a local Presbyterian female minister and her flock in our hometown weekly newspaper. They were performing some charitable deed at Christmastime. The church appeared to consist of half a dozen congregants. I suppose those were the able bodied ones.
My grandpa was Presbyterian when it meant something. The hero of Chariots of Fire was Presbyterian. There are still old school, conservative Presbyterian congregations that are thriving but none of those ordain women.
I agree ! But I also see a problem with that. Many women that seek leadership roles are also radical activists in supporting and promoting the women’s rights movements , many of which I do not support.
The poor female victims of Fr.Rupnik weren’t especially prompt or tireless in reporting his misdeeds. I don’t blame them considering their circumstances but women have just as many conflicting issues reporting abuse as men do. Having more women in leadership roles is not going to solve that institutional problem.
“–women are more likely to sense, confirm, and report sexual sins, and be tireless and unrelenting in the pursuit of justice for the victims”
Ghsilaine Maxwell and Allison Mack would like a word with you.
Oh my dear, I agree with this a 10000%z these things are happening but yet I was condemmned as sinful for being gay? NO THX
A lot of children abused by their mothers’ boyfriends would argue with you. Even when the mothers call themselves feminists.
Right, its all the fault of those “diocesan schools” and “diocesan charities”. And by suggesting people stay home from mass you should understand what spirit you are being inspired by.
You advocate boycotting mass, starting with Christmas? Putting ourselves in mortal sin, deserting Christ on his birthday, of all days? Shame on you!
That is exactly what Satin wants.
He infiltrates the Church with some bad Priests. Why? to get Catholics to blame the whole Church for their actions, and leave. DO NOT do what the Devil calls you to do!!
You are going to Mass for God, not for a priest, bishop or anyone else. You go there to worship God and receive his Strengthening Presence.
Amen!
That might be the only viable option at this point. Vote with your feet and your wallet.
Dear Athanasius:
Christmas blessings.
We fight for the church because God wants us there and to give our good witness. We help one another because it lifts us up. Our presence is needed and our responsibility is to support the church financially and to pray for one another. The Catholic Church is too important not to fight for. Bad people come and go, let the faithful stand strong.
In Jesus name,
Brian
That is already happening in fact. One need only look at the average (Novus Ordo) parish and see that it is overwhelmingly grey-haired. Marriages, childbearing, and baptisms are way down. Vocations to the priesthood are down. So are weekly collections.
.
Catholic School enrollment has increased in recent years, but there are often charges that they are simply schools for the wealthy who can afford to escape the public school system.
.
Catholic charities often get large sums from “public-private” partnerships and tend to behave in a more secular fashion.
.
Tridentine Rite communities and religious orders have seen growth, but they must be very careful not to allow the, um, corrupt types back into their ranks.
Robert, how can you suggest this action? In the swirling lies of today in civil and church(Pachamama) government, the only refuge I have is the Eucharist (Mass) and the Rosary. As far as the funds, there are smaller local charities like pregnancy life centers and soup kitchens that directly honor the Corporal Works of Mercy. I’ve witnessed two healthy church communities lately. One in PA and one in TX. Both led by pastors with diametrically different backgrounds. One led by a man in his 80’s and the other by a man in his late thirties. One who had a very typical Archdiocese of Philadelphia upbringing (I know this, me too.) The other priesthood born of incredible hardship for him and his entire family as a Catholic at the hands of the Communist Viet Cong. There are miracles happening in the church too. Not always reported or too visible. Watch how the communities hold each other up. Stand by with your lamp post watching, waiting, listening and don’t miss Mass!
One wonders what the mystic Adrienne von Speyr and the Rev. Thomas Joseph White, O.P., would have to say about the repulsively stupid, evil, and self-serving interpretation espoused by Fr. Marko Ivan Rupnik, S.J. of the relationships that exist within the Trinity.
Charles, I know! I was stunned by the Trinity comment. I often wonder where the church will go with the Holy Family as an image for marriage. (It isn’t Joseph, Joseph and Jesus or Mary, Mary and Jesus after all.) It all seems in line with “Don’t believe your lying eyes” we’ve all been subjugated to lately.
Isn’t this what we’ve come to expect from those in positions of authority in the Catholic Church?
And not one other bishop among the thousands there are raises his voice to decry the scandals among the hierarchy… NOT ONE! Not one bishop calls on these others to resign their office…NOT ONE. That, too, is a scandal.
Lord have mercy.
The picture speaks a thousand words, a famous Jesuit, and known sex-abuser, previously excommunicated for criminal sexual abuse of nuns, is restored and invited to meet face-to-face with the Pontiff Francis.
That says it all about such men.
Weak indecisive leadership emboldens the degenerate to do his part to destroy the Church. Let Rupnik face criminal charges. Where is the protection for sisters in the Lord? Some will say that Papa has lost control.
I agree, Brian. He should face criminal charges. Harvey Weinstein deserved his criminal prosecution, as does this priest for his more grievous offenses.
And moreover, his vaunted art is creepy and repulsive.
Indeed. Seminarians I know ridicule Rupnik’s “Year of Mercy” theme piece as The Three-Eyed Mercy Monster. The overlapping third eye appears elsewhere in Rupnik’s portfolio of repulsive, disturbing mosaics and one wonders if there is an occult demonic inspiration behind it.
Indeed. A critic’s report is at:
onepeterfive.com/year-mercy-logo-merge-god-man-rupnik/
For anyone who’s read Michael D. O’Brien’s *Voyage to Alpha Centauri: A Novel* (2013, Ignatius Press), this is just too bizarre. In the novel, the Luciferian god to which a lost civilization made human sacrifices was depicted as having three eyes.
His art appears to be inspired by Japanese cartoons.
Hard to disagree with Sandra. I suggest that we use Rupnik’s art as a new Rorschach projective test for seminary admissions. The rule is this: if the seminary applicant admires that art, he should be denied entry; if he finds it “creepy” or “repulsive”, he gets admitted. ; > )
I hesitate to call it “art.”
Christopher Altieri wrote: “(If you are doing a double take right now, wondering how it is that there should be no independent investigative arm or judicial tribunal for these sorts of matters even this late in the day, well, you are not alone.)” Let’s not ignore that this is part of a pattern under Bergoglio. In Pope Francis’ name, Cardinal Cupich sabotaged the USCCB’s rational proposed plan in November 2018 to institute bishop accountability in the wake of the McCarrick scandal. Not only was the USCCB forced to wait until the February 2019 summit on clerical abuse in Rome when it was already ahead of the other bishops’ conferences in grasping the gravity and nature of the problem, but even worse, afterwards Cdl. Cupich was able to force the inferior “Metropolitan Plan” on the U.S. With Bergoglio’s blessing, the investigation of sexual misconduct by a suffragan bishop would be headed by his metropolitan and any such investigation of an archbishop would be overseen by one of his suffragan bishops. Partiality is guaranteed and the corruption will continue!!!
It was a pattern under the other two also. Cardinal Ratzinger would school you on it. It’s church teaching: bishops are not accountable to underlings. They missed it in the US in 2001.
Any immoral act makes anyone, no matter what his status, accountable to his victims, which whould include any and everyone involved institutionally, and to God. Joseph Ratzinger would school you on it.
Except that he was a bit slow on institutional accountability. Though he did take action against Maciel once his boss moved along into eternity.
My observation of the pattern isn’t an endorsement of clericalism. I just recognize that the previous two popes weren’t that far ahead of Pope Francis, and the years 1978-2005 weren’t shining moments for bishops and their (in)ability to side with survivors and help heal the Church.
It seems the Jesuits need to do some serious soul searching…
Et tu Francis?
This papacy along with the Biden admin is tiring & destructive. I will not give a cent to any papel or bishop appeal. I go to mass tobe with Jesus and to recieve him and I’m starting to ignore anything that comes out of the Vatican I can hardly wait till this self destruct
Thank you for this thought provoking article, God will judge this dreadful sinful man. God Bless You All
Mr. Altieri has written a grimly satisfying column. “Francis with all his coterie of implausible goons” is particularly good. Having read his work here for years now, I get the impression of a very decent man whose seemingly unlimited reservoir of patience has been just about exhausted.
The Bergoglian rule for the Church is simple: If Bergoglio sees that you are one of the beautiful people, you can do no wrong; if he sees you as an untouchable, you can do no right. It is futile to look beyond Bergoglio for any other rule, as long as Bergoglio is Pope.
Alexis de Tocqueville said that in a democracy, the people get the government they deserve.
As part of the prophesied chastisement, God Himself has given us – the worldly, the lukewarm, the apostate, the sinner – the Church leadership we now deserve. It isn’t just the other person’s fault. Each of us, in our own unique way, is also culpable.
We Seminarists from the Eastern Catholic Churches back in the 90’s were obliged by the Congregation for the Eastern Churches to follow upon our arrival in Rome a preparatory course of one month, plus a Supplementary Year between Philosophy and Theology, organized by the Centro Aletti, headed by Fr. Marko Ivan Rupnik at the Pontifical Oriental Institute. He was teaching us for the discernment of the heart and was responsible to report to the Congregation who was worthy to be ordained and who’s not. I remember in 1996 a Woman who was preparing her doctoral thesis at the above mentioned institute accused Fr. Marko Ivan Rupnik that he proposed to her having sex in exchange of good grades. Everyone knew about this in the Institute and the Pontifical Congregation and all covered father Rupnik. Nothing has been done. Everyone knew about him, in the Vatican and the community he was directing and all covered him, Cardinal Spidlik included, according to my opinion.The Centro Aletti he was directing was also ironically called Centro A Letto.
A long and unrelenting pattern indeed from the Pontiff Francis, which, as noted by Chris Altieri, was signaled with his personal “rehabilitation” of the repulsive sex abuse coverup Cardinal Godfried Danneels of Belgium, a bishop publicly retired in 2010 in utter disgrace, having been caught in the act of trying to protect and coverup for his friend and fellow Bishop Roger Vanguelhue, the homosexual predator who chose as his victim his own nephew. And while the entire nation of Belgium knew the story, and the entire Church hierarchy and Church establishment, the Pontiff Francis brazenly signaled his tyranny, and apparently his complete disregard for the victims of sex abuse everywhere, by rehabilitating the fraudulent coverup Cardinal Danneels, and placing him on Francis’ committee steering “The Family Synod of Pontiff Francis.”
This pontificate is, as St. Paul warned against, the preaching of “a different gospel.”
“This pontificate is, as St. Paul warned against, the preaching of ‘a different gospel.’”
Mmm. Not unlike the previous two. All those JP2 bishops. Promoted, still under B16. And priests like Maciel. A lot of Catholics have blind spots, especially to the figures they support.
It rings hollow that you attempt to defend Bergoglio by pointing to two previous Popes. It falls into the category of hearing someone say, “Biden socks as a president” and the responder commenting, “But, but, but…Trump.”
I’ll say it again, along with the groundswell of faithful Catholics who think similarly, “Bergoglio is one lousy Pope.”
I’m hardly defending Pope Francis. In fact, I associated him with two other popes who were often painted as ditherers in confronting scandal. I’m merely pointing out the great momentum of the institution, and perhaps how powerless even sainted popes are from its shadows, and how similar the stories of the past three papacies seem to be.
Perhaps it’s not about the popes, but about the human indulgence for the cult of celebrity. Perhaps we do best to focus on Jesus and to commend all others to prayer, be they heroes or goats.
Dear Mr. Flowerday:
The Pontiff Francis has distinguished himself from this predecessors by his unfailing preference and restoration of sex abusers and coverup artists.
There can be no doubt that observers, regardless of their preference or not for the Pontiff Francis, know that the Pontiff Francis and his entourage reject and live for dismantling the teaching of JP2 and B16.
And as candid observers can all recall, or make recourse to, years ago in First Things, both Jody Bottum as editor and Cardinal Avery Dulles as contributor, attested that indeed, JP2 was certainly enchanted with Maciel, and it was B16 who was facing the reality of mounting evidence. Dulles chalked to up to JP2 not admitting the Augustinian candor about the power of sinfulness.
When B16 became Pope, Maciel was taken down. And many other predator priests and coverup Bishops were likewise removed.
We can all recall that the “trusted voices” of the McCarrick Establishment didn’t like the fact that even bishops we’re getting taken to task, so the serpents led by Danneels and McCarrick (as they themselves have publicly attested), worked harder in 2013 to finally get their candidate Jorge Bergoglio elected Pontiff (after failing at it in 2005).
They all knew that the Pontiff Francis would protect and promote Bishops and celebrity priests of their “value system,” and the Pontiff Francis has done what they elected him to do: restore sex abusers and sex abuse coverup artists.
So while humming around at this inflection point, some might ponder whether there was just too much neglect of governance by JP2, and to a degree B16 himself, as Father Gerald Murray has stated.
On the other hand, no one can deny that the distinction between JP2/B16 and the Pontiff Francis is this: for the former, sex abuse is a grave problem mishandled, for the latter, it is apparently a preferred feature.
That preference is quite apparent, as we can be sure the photo is intended to convey.
And I’m sure other readers, like myself, appreciate your concern for the all of the blind.
And three cheers for clear-sightedness…
And as the topic is about the Pontiff Francis, it seems off topic (though understandable) that any reader might prefer to divert one’s attention to other matters.
I think the topic is “these people,” according to the headline. And “these people,” being plural, part of an institution, part of ordained ministry, are very definitely part of the problem.
“What is wrong” didn’t start in 2013. My criticism of Pope Francis is very much like my criticism of his two predecessors and many of the bishops of the past forty years. Those prelates qualify as “these people.” Including a sainted pope and his top theologian.
Perhaps Mr Altieri would like to change the title of his opinion piece.
The people in question are clearly identified in Mr. Altieri’s essay. All one has to do is read and comprehend.
I think we can expand the list of people and ask the same question. As I said, it didn’t start in 2013. A blessed Christmas to all in the CWR fold.
Sorry, but your argument of equivalence falls flat and is, as most progressive arguments, short on facts. JPII and BXVI, on their worst days, were nothing like Francis. Neither of them met to support and encourage the homosexualist priest James Martin, SCH or his ilk, for example. Francis did it twice. Francis has had many opportunities to exercise firm leadership and deal decisively with these predators but has dropped the ball more times than I can count. Once again, you are defending the indefensible.
Well Said. Thank you and God bless.
And this kind of thing shocks anyone anymore?
.
That is what is really surprising.
I’d suggest Rupnik be made a Cardinal ASAP, along with James Martin. Then, include them among the inner circle of advisors to St. Pope Francis I of Argentina & Italy. These two would round out the current group of Cupich, McElroy, Tobin and Gregory. What a Church we have!
God has sent men such as you mention as a scourge and wake up call to the church. Good men and women must repudiate heresy and protect the church thru their witness. Some denominations have let the gates down and it has made for chaos.
God bless you in your desire to proclaim Christ crucified and stand for godliness.
I’d suggest all readers for Christmas to reread Philothea’s chapter 28, and in particular the final words,”it’s the occupation of an idle person to be busy with scrutinizing the life of another. I make an exception of those who have charge of others whether in the family or in the state. For a great part of their responsibility consists in looking into and watching over the functions of others. Let them accomplish their duty with love. Beyond this, let them abide in themselves for their own improvement.”
The church has become the church of “situational ethics”. Church leaders for years have downplayed all violations of the 6th Commandment. It’s not a big sin for them. Does anyone really believe they take the abuse crisis seriously? They don’t think God punishes forever. There is no Hell for them. Fornication, adultery, masturbation, pornography, sodomy, homosexuality, are all downplayed by leaders in the highest position. These are small sins for them. Little imperfections. They are children of the 60’s sexual revolution. Don’t expect these leaders to fix this crisis. They are part of the crisis. They caused the problem. The younger clergy, who have seen the destruction of the church and society by this sexual license will have to fix it. That is if God doesn’t intervene first. Our Lady of Fatima, who taught us Hell exists, and many are the damned due to sexual sins, Pray for us!
Canon Lawyer Fr. Gerald Murray expressed being troubled by the fact that dismissal from the clerical state goes far beyond what Canon Law prescribes for those offenses. But I am very troubled by another factor. This dismissal came just months after the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in the Dobbs Case overturning Roe v. Wade. This created great political turmoil in the U.S. as you know. There are some who interpret the Father Pavone decision as political payback. He has alluded to evidence that some progressive bishops may have lobbied his bishop to push for this outcome. If there is any truth to that, it would be a scandal of immense proportions for the pro-life community and the Church. This is my primary concern. What a terrible thing to be debating at Christmas.
Putting this all on Francis is disingenuous, when you too easily skip over the period of time in which action should have been taken and instead accusations were covered up – the 1990s. The failures of John Paul II on similar cases are well known, it would hardly stretch the imagination to acknowledge this crisis, too, is a result of his negligence at least. It was under Wojtyla, after all, that Rupnik came to fame, and even decorated a Vatican chapel. The criticism of the Jesuit superiors of Rupnik are valid, but that does not include the current pope. It seems that an opportunity for transparency and accountability is missed in the reporting here, not only in the hierarchy.
This is exactly right. There is a certain misconception that as long as one “side” rails against sexual sins they and their heroes are somehow more virtuous than their opposites. This is hardly the case.
Pope Francis and his two predecessors are all men formed by the same system. Different flavors, perhaps, coming from a religious order or a diocesan priesthood. But all three are men of the institution. They each nurtured blind spots and were betrayed by people they favored.
There are certainly good aspects of the clerical subculture in Roman Catholicism. But it is having a very difficult time pulling itself into a modern accountability to the laity. As long as it misdiagnoses the problem, it will continue to flail when its members fail and give scandal. Likewise, as long as ideological elements get the root problem wrong, they will continue to be on the sidelines. Irrelevant at best. Unhelpful at worst.
I can think of a certain homosexualist, also a Jesuit, who should be laicized. I mentioned his name in a previous comment that was omitted.