Benedict’s uncle, Catholic charities, and coming attractions

Next Wednesday is the feast of Sts. Peter and Paul, when archbishops appointed during the past year will be in Rome to receive their pallium. (A narrow band of woolen cloth, the pallium symbolizes the archbishop’s office.) This year the event takes on extra significance as the 60th anniversary of Pope Benedict XVI’s ordination to the priesthood, which took place in the Freising Cathedral in Bavaria on June 29, 1951.

As it happens, the pope isn’t the only Bavarian priest celebrating his 60th anniversary. His brother Georg, 87, was ordained in the same ceremony by then-Cardinal Michael Faulhaber, along with a seminary classmate named Rupert Berger. The brothers offered their first public Masses on July 8, 1951, in St. Oswald’s church in their home village of Hufschlag -- an event known as a Doppelprimiz, or “double first.” Since concelebration was not yet normal practice, the Ratzinger brothers celebrated two separate Masses.

The scripture verse the future pope selected for his first Mass card came from Paul’s second letter to the Corinthians: “We aim not to lord over your faith, but to serve your joy.”

To be sure, next week won’t be anything like 1996, when John Paul II celebrated the 50th anniversary of his priestly ordination. That milestone brought the book Gift and Mystery, and was marked by a year-long series of events that functioned as a warm-up for the Great Jubilee of 2000. Benedict’s anniversary will be more low-key, though not without its festive touches.

A company called Excelsis, for instance, is marketing a new brand of cologne titled “Benedictus”, made from linden blossom from Germany, frankincense from the Holy Land, and bergamot from Italy. (It would be an amusing exercise to stroll through the various pallium receptions trying to detect who’s wearing the papal scent.)

In honor of Benedict’s anniversary, here’s an oft-overlooked tidbit from the pope’s biography: He’s actually not the first celebrated priest from the Ratzinger clan. That honor belongs instead to his great-uncle Georg, a towering figure in 19th century Bavarian history. (He’s not to be confused with the pope’s brother).

In light of Benedict’s career, there are four aspects of his great-uncle’s legacy which are especially interesting:

  • He was a rarity in the 19th century, a priest was who voluntarily laicized -- not for reason of scandal, but because he wanted to pursue a career in politics.
  • He was a disciple of the progressive German theologian Johann Ignaz von Döllinger, excommunicated in 1871 for his opposition to papal infallibility.
  • He was co-founder of a populist “Farmer’s Party”, defending the poor against 19th century robber barons.
  • He reflected the anti-Semitic attitudes of his times, lending biographical subtext to Benedict’s approach to Catholic/Jewish relations.

* * *
In a 1985 anthology of Bavarian biography, Georg Ratzinger made the list of the 1,000 most important Bavarian personalities of the past 1,500 years. Ordained to the priesthood in 1867, he studied theology at the University of Munich, where he won a prize for his dissertation on the church’s care for the poor.

Subscribe to NCR

Want to read more about important issues in the life of the Church? A subscription to NCR will keep you up to date and informed.

Subscribe now!

While at the university, Ratzinger became an assistant to Döllinger, then coming into his own as a fierce critic of the movement towards papal absolutism called “ultra-montanism.” In an 1867 address, Döllinger asserted: “The papacy is based on an audacious falsification of history. A forgery in its very outset, it has, during the long years of its existence, had a pernicious influence on church and state alike.”

It was Döllinger who called for the education of German theologians in state universities rather than seminaries, and who called for the German bishops to meet regularly as an antidote to Roman influence -- both trajectories, of course, which Georg Ratzinger’s grand-nephew would later view with some ambivalence.

Monsignor Ratzinger requested, and received, laicization from the priesthood in 1888, in the middle of what had become a highly successful run as a politician and legislator.

Politically, Ratzinger was an apostle of the new Catholic social teaching, expressed in Leo XIII’s Rerum Novarum in 1891. He served in the Bavarian Landtag in 1875-78 and again in 1893-99, and in the national Reichstag from 1877-78 and 1898-99. His first term was a member of the Patriot’s Party, a Catholic party launched in 1869, and his second as a deputy of a new Bauerbund, or “Farmers Party” he helped form in 1893.

Ratzinger’s Bauerbund stood for a mix of populist protectionism and progressive social measures such as child labor laws and minimum wages. Its chief goal was a system of social supports that would insulate poor farmers and small traders from “boom and bust” cycles. It also supported nationalization of the school system and the abolition of Bavaria’s upper house of parliament, which the nobles and the church dominated. Time and again, Ratzinger stood on the floor of the Bavarian and federal legislatures and thundered against the excesses of capitalism.

Thus when Benedict XVI denounced both Marxism and capitalism as “systems that marginalize God” in Brazil in May 2007, and took a special swipe at capitalism for failing to bridge “the distance between rich and poor” and “giving rise to a worrying degradation of personal dignity,” he was to some extent building on a family legacy.

The pope’s only published comment on his great-uncle came in a 1996 interview with German journalist Peter Seewald, which later became the book Salt of the Earth:

Question: There was a Georg Ratzinger who played a certain role in Bavarian history?

Ratzinger: He was a great-uncle of mine, my father’s uncle. He was a priest and had a doctorate in theology. As a representative of the state and national assemblies, he was really a champion of the rights of the peasants and the simple people in general. He fought -- I’ve read this in the minutes of the state parliament -- against child labor, which at that time was still considered a scandalous, impudent position to take. He was obviously a tough man. His achievements and his political standing also made everyone proud of him.

Finally, Georg Ratzinger’s political populism sometimes shaded off into anti-Semitism. In his 1975 work Christians and Jews in Germany, the late Israeli scholar Uriel Tal identified Ratzinger as a leading figure in shaping anti-Jewish sentiment in Catholic circles in nineteenth-century Germany.

In a well-known book on economics, Georg Ratzinger suggested that traditional German values of discipline, modesty, family integrity and Christian faith were undermined by the financial power of Jews. He expressed similar ideas more crudely in polemical works written under pseudonyms. These included Jüdisches Erwerbsleben: Skizzen aus dem sozial Leben der Gegenwart (“The Jewish Life of Acquisition: Sketches from the Social Life of the Present”), published in 1892 and again in 1893 and 1894) and Das Judentum in Bayern: Skizzen aus der Vergangenheit und Vorschläge fur die Zukunft (“Judaism in Bavaria: Sketches from the Past and Proposals for the Future”), published in 1897.

Though the pope has never said so, it’s difficult to imagine that the memory of his great-uncle’s record on Jews and Judaism hasn’t influenced his own efforts at reconciliation.

* * *
Last week I wrote about ferment over Catholic identity in religious orders. Another slice of ecclesial life experiencing identity tensions these days is Catholic charities, and fresh proof of the point came in an address delivered on Tuesday by Denver Archbishop Charles Chaput to the Catholic Social Workers National Association.

In typically clear fashion, Chaput laid down a marker at the outset: “If our social work isn’t deeply, confidently, and explicitly Catholic in its identity, then we should stop using the word ‘Catholic,’” he said. “It’s that simple.”

Chaput warned that a “new kind of America is emerging in the early 21st century,” one that he believes will be much less friendly to religious faith. In that milieu, he said, “no one in Catholic social work can afford to be lukewarm about his faith.”

Specifically, Chaput insisted that Catholic charities “have the duty to faithfully embody Catholic beliefs on marriage, the family, social justice, sexuality, abortion and other important issues.”

Chaput conceded that Catholic charities are not required to proselytize, and that there may be solid prudential reasons in given circumstances for not speaking openly about matters of faith. Moreover, he said there’s no specifically Christian method of charitable work, and Catholic ministries should learn from the best the social sciences have to offer.

That said, Chaput offered nine ideals for Catholic charities:

  • “Every act of Catholic social work should function faithfully within the mission and structures of the local diocese, with special respect for the role of the bishop.”
  • “Every Catholic social ministry … should allow for the possibility of verbally professing the Gospel, as prudence permits.”
  • “No Catholic charitable worker should ever engage in coercive proselytism.”
  • “Every Catholic social ministry should insist on the best professional skills, and should use the best professional means -- so long as those skills and means reflect the truth of Catholic moral teaching.”
  • “Catholic Charities and similar Catholic organizations should always provide opportunities for prayer for employees and volunteers.”
  • “Every Catholic social ministry should bear witness to the truth of Jesus Christ to the wider community, including the rights of the poor, the homeless, the disabled, the immigrant and the unborn child.”
  • “Every Catholic Charities organization should seek to deepen an awareness of Catholic social teaching.”
  • “Catholic social work should involve both an effective outreach to individuals struggling with poverty, and a frank critique of the structural causes of poverty through the lens of Catholic social teaching.”
  • “Catholic social ministries should welcome opportunities to work with other individuals, groups and social agencies, but also remain alert to the risk that cooperation can easily turn Catholic organizations into sub-contractors of large donors -- donors with a very different anthropology and thus very different notions of authentic human development.”

Summing up the spirit of his address, Chaput closed with an anecdote about the Catholic novelist Flannery O’Connor. As Chaput told the story, she was once at dinner with a fellow writer who waxed on about the beautiful symbolism of the Eucharist. O’Connor supposedly replied: “Well, if it’s a symbol, to hell with it.”

Such unapologetic insistence on the reality of the faith is at the heart of what I mean by “Evangelical Catholicism,” a powerful current indeed in the church today, and it has few exponents more indefatigable than Chaput.

* * *
Two recently announced summits, one in London and the other in Rome, deserve to be on the global Catholic radar screen.

Christianity in the Holy Land

July 18-19, the Anglican Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, and the Catholic Archbishop of Westminster, Vincent Nichols, will co-host a conference on the dramatic situation facing Christians in the Holy Land. Featuring representatives of the various Christian communities in Israel, Jordan and the Palestinian Territories, the event will be held at Lambeth Palace, the residence of the Archbishop of Canterbury.

The Roman Catholic Patriarch of Jerusalem, His Beatitude Fouad Twal, and the Anglican Bishop in Jerusalem, Suheil Dawani, will be on hand. They’ll be flanked by bishops from North America and Europe who are part of the “Coordination of Catholic Bishops Conferences in solidarity with the Church in the Holy Land.”

The idea is to bring together religious leaders, politicians and media figures to discuss how the West -- especially Christians in the West -- can offer practical help to their coreligionists in the Holy Land, in part to stem what has become a Christian exodus out of the region. To keep the conversation manageable, organizers are restricting the guest list to roughly 70-80 participants, and attendance is by invitation only.

The woes of Christianity in the land of its birth are well known. Overall, there are an estimated 12 million Christians across the Middle East, less than half of the roughly 25 million Christians in the area in the middle of the last century. Daniel Pipes, writing in the Middle East Quarterly a decade ago, predicted that within a relatively brief arc of time, Christians “will effectively disappear from the region as a cultural and political force.”

In materials for the upcoming summit, Williams and Nichols asserted that the Christian presence is vital for “a plural and peaceful Middle East.”

“Their disappearance would be catastrophic, and a shameful indictment of those of us in the West who paid insufficient attention to their cry for help,” the two leaders wrote.

Among other things, organizers say the summit is designed to promote:

  • “Better monitoring of realities on the ground in the media, in the political community and among policy makers.”
  • “More attention to Christian communities … whose disappearance would have profound consequences on the map of an already dangerously radicalized region.”
  • “Development of materials for parishes, schools and civil society which accurately describe the present situation and options for helping to reverse current trends.”
  • “Financial support for Christians in the Holy Land to assist advocacy work, pilgrimage groups, youth projects, school exchanges, diocesan, school and parish links and interfaith collaboration.”

Of course, the slow-motion decline of Christianity in the Middle East is hardly a news flash. It’s been underway since the 19th century, and has been turbo-charged by the Israeli/Palestinian problem, the first and second intifada, the rise of Islamic fundamentalism, and the general political and economic stagnation of the region.

If this summit is to be more than yet another expression of pious concern, it will have to confront at least five thorny realities.

First is a general Western neglect of Middle Eastern Christianity outside specialized circles. French intellectual Régis Debray (a famed leftist who once fought alongside Che Guevara) has written that Christians in the Middle East are the “blind spot” in the Western view of the world -- too religious for Western liberals, too foreign for Western conservatives.

Second, the politics of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict are a hugely complicating factor. Since the overwhelming majority of Christians in the region are Arabs, they tend to be fiercely pro-Palestinian. They often blame Israeli occupation for Christian suffering and minimize the failures of Palestinian authorities, in ways that can alienate important sectors of Christian opinion in the West -- perhaps especially in the United States. (Recall how the Synod of Bishops for the Middle East last year ended in controversy when Greek Melkite Archbishop Cyrille Bustros said Christ “abolished” the notion of a “Promised Land” for Jews, and thus the Bible should not be invoked to support Israel at the expense of the Palestinians.)

Third, the broader realities of Christian/Jewish and Christian/Muslim relations also get in the way. In some PC circles, it’s virtually taboo to suggest that Christianity is being targeted for extinction by Muslim radicals for fear of fanning the flames of Islamophobia. Among adepts of Jewish/Christian dialogue, there’s sometimes an uncritical acceptance of the Israeli mantra that Christians in Israel are better off than anywhere else in the Middle East -- despite recent polling by Bethlehem University suggesting that Christians in Israel are at least as frustrated and inclined to leave as those in the Palestinian Territories.

Fourth, the sometimes fractious state of ecumenical and even intra-confessional relations in the region is also a complication. A distressing share of Christian energy in the Middle East is siphoned off into these internecine rivalries.

Fifth, churches in the Middle East will have to come to terms with Western expectations of accountability and transparency. Veterans of relief efforts often say the problem facing Christianity in the Holy Land is not really a lack of money, because church institutions there are often well-endowed. Some longtime donors, they say, have become hesitant about upping the ante until there are assurances resources will be effectively utilized. The Middle East synod referred to this problem obliquely, saying there’s a need for a clearer distinction between assets belonging to the church and assets for the personal use of church leaders.

How honestly, and creatively, the summit confronts these realities will partly determine its success or failure. I’ve been invited to take part, and I hope to report on the event in a future column.

* * *
As an aside, the summit on the Holy Land illustrates one likely future for official Anglican/Catholic relations, at least in the short term.

Notoriously, developments on both sides of the relationship have created new impediments to doctrinal agreement and structural reunion, including movement towards openly gay bishops and blessing same-sex unions among some branches of the Anglican Communion, and on the Catholic side a recent decision by Benedict XVI to create new structures to welcome Anglican defectors.

In that climate, forward motion in the relationship will likely come disproportionately in what Benedict has referred to as “inter-cultural” dialogue. The idea is to focus on shared social, cultural and political concerns, rather than on theological differences.

Without quite spelling it out, that’s precisely what Williams and Nichols are doing by joining forces in support of Christians in the Holy Land. The upshot is that Anglican/Catholic relations do have a future, if perhaps not quite the one envisioned by the pioneers of ecumenism.

Sex Abuse

Another recently announced event is set for February 6-9, 2012: A major conference at Rome’s Gregorian University, co-sponsored by several Vatican departments (including the Secretariat of State and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith), on combating the sexual abuse crisis.

According to Jesuit Fr. Federico Lombardi, the Vatican spokesperson, this will be the first “systematic common reflection at the international level” on the crisis. The aim, he said, is to foster a “culture of listening to victims, of prevention and reconciliation, which must be a permanent and fully integrated part of the life of the church.”

For the record, one point likely to be lost amid media hype about a “Vatican sex abuse summit” is that the event actually began as an initiative of the Jesuits and the Gregorian. Jesuit Fr. Francois Xavier Dumortier, rector of the Greg, said in a press conference last Saturday that that since the university counts more than 2,000 seminarians, priests, and religious in its student body -- some, of course, destined to be future bishops and religious superiors -- it feels a special responsibility to help heal the “pain and suffering” the crisis has caused “to the victims in a deep and specific way,” as well as “the church in the whole world.”

A website for the conference can be found here: http://thr.unigre.it/vescovi2012/intro.aspx

The idea, according to organizers, is to foster application of a recent set of guidelines for combating abuse issued by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. Released May 16, that document called on bishops to focus on support for victims, creating a safe environment in the church, and cooperation with police and civil prosecutors when crimes against minors occur. The congregation has directed bishops’ conferences which don’t yet have policies on abuse to develop them by May 2012.

Plans for the February 2012 symposium, titled “Toward healing and renewal,” were announced June 13. More than 200 representatives of episcopal conferences and religious communities are expected to attend, where among other things a new multi-lingual “e-learning” center for church officials, designed to collect and promote “best practices”, will be introduced.

Details were presented in a press conference at the Gregorian on June 18 with Lombardi and Maltese Msgr. Charles Scicluna, the Vatican’s chief prosecutor on sex abuse cases.

A preparatory committee is led by German Jesuit Fr. Hans Zollner, who heads an Institute for Psychology at the Gregorian. In 2010, Zollner and another Jesuit, Italian Fr. Giovanni Cucci, published a book on the crisis titled The Church and Pedophilia: An Open Wound. In it, they argued that a media-induced “moral panic” over pedophilia, presenting old cases as new and distorting the statistical dimensions of the problem, “doesn’t help anybody.”

The conference will be held in four languages, including English. Coverage in the English-language media ought to be helped significantly by the fact that the press consultant is Alexander Des Forges, whose day job is handling media relations for the Bishops Conference of England and Wales.

A key American contributor will be Msgr. Stephen Rossetti, a psychologist who formerly served as director of the St. Luke Institute in Silver Spring, Maryland, which treats abuser priests. (Rossetti, by the way, has a new book from Ave Maria Press titled Why Priests are Happy: A Study of the Psychological and Spiritual Health of Priests. Though I’m not sure this is really a selling point, I contributed the foreword.)

There also will be a series of workshops on the VIRTUS program developed in the late 1990s in the United States by the National Catholic Risk Retention Group. Its centerpiece is “Protecting God’s Children”, which trains clergy, religious, teachers, staff, volunteers, and parents about warning signs of abuse and ways to prevent it, as well as how to make a report and how to respond to an allegation. The program is presently in use in more than 100 dioceses across the United States.

Michael Bemi, an insurance industry veteran who’s CEO of the National Catholic Risk Retention Group, told NCR that he hopes the Gregorian conference will spawn interest in abuse prevention and detection programs around the world. In anticipation of that, Bemi said, VIRTUS has already begun adding trainers fluent in various languages who could fan out to different parts of the globe.

The central lesson of VIRTUS, Bemi said, is that child sexual abuse is “a huge problem, but it’s not insurmountable.” Hard proof, he said, is that dioceses which have made a serious commitment to prevention and detection are paying out far less these days to settle claims.

In effect, the 2012 conference shapes up as a spotlight on what might be called the best of the institutional response to the crisis.

For those inclined to give the institution the benefit of the doubt, the conference will highlight the undeniable sea change in its culture. From a pattern of denial and cover-up, the church has moved aggressively “to look the sin and crime of pedophilia in the face,” as Scicluna put it during a recent interview with Vatican Radio. Today, the institution in many parts of the world has become a pacesetter in abuse prevention and detection, and is officially committed to both civil and ecclesial punishment for abusers.

Those who view institutional claims through a hermeneutic of suspicion, however, are unlikely to be mollified. There’s no indication that the 2012 summit will be an occasion for debating priestly celibacy or Catholic sexual morality, and no suggestion that it will mark a new system of accountability for bishops who mismanage or ignore abuse reports -- still the most persistent line of criticism from those who believe the church hasn’t fully absorbed the lessons of the crisis.

As a footnote, the press conference last Saturday was noteworthy for the presence of Scicluna, the aggressive prosecutor who, in effect, represents the “tip of the spear” in the Vatican’s response to the sex abuse crisis. It was Scicluna, for instance, who led the investigation into the late Fr. Marcial Maciel Degollado, founder of the Legionaries of Christ, which resulted in Pope Benedict XVI ordering Maciel to observe a life of prayer and penance in his final years.

A canon lawyer by training, Scicluna has a reputation for both intelligence and integrity. Given the nature of his job, Scicluna is more familiar with the details of Catholic abuse cases than anyone else on the planet. He’s also highly articulate and at ease in the press culture of the Anglo-Saxon world. Among insiders, it’s long been a mystery why Scicluna hasn’t been more out front. By consensus, the few interviews he has given have been among the high points of the Vatican’s communications efforts on the crisis.

Perhaps the 2012 event is a signal that’s about to change.

[John L. Allen Jr. is NCR senior correspondent. His e-mail address is jallen@ncronline.org.]

Editor's Note: We can send you an e-mail alert every time John Allen's column, "All Things Catholic," is posted to NCRonline.org. Go to this page and follow the directions: E-mail alert sign-up. If you already receive e-mail alerts from us, click on the "update my profile" button to add "All Things Catholic" to your list.

Zollner and Cucci are still

Zollner and Cucci are still trying to blame the messenger. If it hadn't been for an aggressive press, Cardinal Law would still be prancing around Boston and his loyal clerics would still be raping kids.
I saw no indication that organizations like SNAP or individual victims would have any role in this conference. What about the German and Ductch laity who are leaving the church in droves? God forbid the laity should have any voice in this horrendous scandal that has destroyed the lives of so many. This meeting looks to be set up so that the clerical caste can once again fool themselves into thinking they are actually responding to the crisis and then continue in their smug aloofness. This isn't merely preaching to the "saved." It's whistling while the Titanic continues to take on water.

Sadly, you may be right, or

Sadly, you may be right, or mostly right. But can we hope that some real progress might happen? Cultures, even as abhorrent as the one that has allowed these atrocities, seldom change overnight. But we should try. Media attention is very helpful.

If this is another chance to blame the media, then publicize that attitude. Say it over and over until they get it right, or at least BETTER!

When will a bishop get "canned" for complicity? The Aussie bishop was fired because he said we should consider having married priests. But the Cardinal Laws are still there I suspect, though more careful than ever.

Well said, Mr. Wilson. I

Well said, Mr. Wilson. I agree completely.

"Given the nature of his job,

"Given the nature of his job, Scicluna is more familiar with the details of Catholic abuse cases than anyone else on the planet." Unless Scicluna is a victim himself, this statement is false as some of those details are born exclusively by the victims.

And a long those same lines, I do not see where Allen mentions the attendance of any victims at this seminar. In lieu of that fact, this conference is all about clericalism talking to and about clericalism. The only reform we will see is that reform approved or initiated by the insurance groups who wind up paying for all of these 'priestly sins'.

I can only quote and repeat

I can only quote and repeat what a previous commentator wrote.... well said ....where are the lay people in this gathering ?and the victims ??

"If it hadn't been for an aggressive press, Cardinal Law would still be prancing around Boston and his loyal clerics would still be raping kids.
I saw no indication that organizations like SNAP or individual victims would have any role in this conference. What about the German and Ductch laity who are leaving the church in droves? God forbid the laity should have any voice in this horrendous scandal that has destroyed the lives of so many. This meeting looks to be set up so that the clerical caste can once again fool themselves into thinking they are actually responding to the crisis and then continue in their smug aloofness. This isn't merely preaching to the "saved." It's whistling while the Titanic continues to take on water."

If the conference is

If the conference is comprised of only clerics and clerically selected lay people, then it's another white-wash. If they don't invite people such as Fr. Doyle, David Clohessy and Barbara Blaine then it's just going to be another white-wash.

"Those who view institutional

"Those who view institutional claims through a hermeneutic of suspicion, however, are unlikely to be mollified. There’s no indication that ... it will mark a new system of accountability for bishops who mismanage or ignore abuse reports -- still the most persistent line of criticism from those who believe the church hasn’t fully absorbed the lessons of the crisis."

That's right, John. We have seen time and again, as with Justin Rigali in Philadelphia and Finn in Kansas City, that bishops continue to shelter predator priests. There are no ecclesiastic penalties for these bishops. Instead, someone holds a Mass in Latin where the priests have their backs turned to the laity. That pretty much says it all. The spirit of Bernard Law is alive and well.

A company called Excelsis,

A company called Excelsis, for instance, is marketing a new brand of cologne titled “Benedictus”, made from linden blossom from Germany, frankincense from the Holy Land, and bergamot from Italy. (It would be an amusing exercise to stroll through the various pallium receptions trying to detect who’s wearing the papal scent.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A perfect accompaniment to the lace dresses and other elements of the prelate's wardrobe. Maybe an air freshener might have been more appropriate considering the mounds of dirty linen produced in recent decades.

Too bad this pope hasn't appeared to have taken much of his famous ancestor's thoughts to heart. Getting rid of the seminaries and giving the clergy a much better education and weakening the stranglehold of a corrupt Church makes a lot of sense today, as it did in the 19th century.

"Though the pope has never

"Though the pope has never said so, it’s difficult to imagine that the memory of his great-uncle’s record on Jews and Judaism hasn’t influenced his own efforts at reconciliation."
This historical info certainly explains why one of Benedict's very first post-electoral acts was to CANCEL this French beatification:
http://wwrn.org/articles/17435/?&place=europe&section=christianity
An analytical comparison of great-uncle Ratzinger's and Pere Dehon's writings would make a good M.A. thesis topic for anyone currently scratching their noggins trying to come up with one over the summer.

Mr. McKee, I have much

Mr. McKee, I have much appreciated your topical url citations over the past many months and years. Thank you.
Another one was Anne Catherine Emmerich, whose visions inspired Mel Gibson for his famous movie. In the writing of her visions she repeated the blood libel against the jews, and spewed some horrible racist drivel against black people. Beatified in 2004 (JP2).

TIMING IS

TIMING IS EVERYTHING!
"According to Jesuit Fr. Federico Lombardi, the Vatican spokesperson, this will be the first 'systematic common reflection at the international level' on the crisis."
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/19/world/europe/19vatican.html
But why now? My own "hermeneutic of suspicion" tells me that this is corporate-central DAMAGE CONTROL because the highest-archs are getting worried, and NOT about listening or healing; but because they are beginning to realize that international LEGAL SYSTEMS are stepping up their game and actual JAIL TIME is creeping up the chain of command. Orange jump suits are replacing not only black cassocks, but episcopal lavender and lace -as well it should:
http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/Trial+former+Catholic+bishop+Lahey+b...
http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/1101788.htm
Not to be confused with this flaccid response to another case by the Vatican itself:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110412/ap_on_re_eu/eu_vatican_church_abuse

One does hope, however, that some media representative (assuming the sessions are even OPEN to the public!) will address another 600 pound gorilla in an already very crowded room: the fact that clerical abuse is alive and well in the USA even AFTER the 2002 Dallas protocol - which itself will undoubtedly be touted during these proceedings as a MODEL for other episcopal conferences and religious orders to emulate. http://www.usccb.org/ocyp/charter.shtml
And, correct me if I'm wrong -Fr. Doyle, Dr. Sipe, Mr. Berry, Mr. Wall, Mr. Clohessy, Ms. Blaine and other experts who didn't "collaborate" on the recently released John Jay Report and who will most certainly NOT be on this symposium's roster of speakers- but this pattern of post-Dallas abuse and coverup seems to be unfolding (and unraveling!) in dioceses most highly invested in the neo-Tridentine REFORM of the REFORM. So, one could cynically oversimplify and ask: does the LATIN MASS create new priestly pedophiles? Or, more analytically, are those bishops spearheading the backward march by resuscitating anti-Vatican II liturgical accretions and excesses also reviving pre-conciliar infrastructures and governance styles in their jurisdictions which by their very nature are more likely to provide "safe havens" that enable abusive clergy?
http://ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/john-jay-report-sex-abuse-question-...

I'm puzzled by Chaput's final

I'm puzzled by Chaput's final summation. I think he means to imply that if another's action or actions -- presumably as they are a reflection of their morality -- are not exactly identical to our own, then to hell with what?? Where do you draw the line? A singular action? Some of the other(s)' actions? Taken to the extreme this means withdrawal from the world, doesn't it? Error has no rights. So to hell with it?

The more I reflect on this, the more divergent tangents I find myself taking. I know Chaput is an earnest man and has more theological background than I. And more dogmatic. There's a problem there. Dogmatic personality, dogma. Twentieth century English speakers blend several conflicting notions from the Latin root.

A long column of John Allen's. But every topic fresh to me and very helpful. I might well find myself going back to the genealogy topic more than this. It's that the "Tea Party" approach to American Catholicism seems to get attention first.

I suspect I'll post again.

Unfortunately the word symbol

Unfortunately the word symbol is used in three different ways. The popular use is equivalent to signpost, the sign outside the hospital rather than the hospital itself. Confusingly, some theologians use the word symbol, which means literally 'lying alongside', to mean a representative part - when they say the eucharist is a symbol they mean that it is a true part of the body of Christ. Someone once shook up a liturgy class I was in by saying 'the opposite of symbolic is not real, the opposite of symbolic is diabolic'. Chaput seems to using the word in the popular sense.
The third technical church meaning is that of creed. The Apostle's Creed is also referred to as The Baptismal Symbol.

I find complete contradiction

I find complete contradiction in Archbishop Chaput's nine ideals for Catholic social workers and his summation. That undoubtedly was not his intent, but using the final O'Conner snippet is taken as such.

O’Conner’s defense was of a mystery – the transformational union of the Body of Christ celebrated with the consecration of the Eucharist vs.being only a symbol. Being human, I think of these as two separate mysteries, but the sacrament is one.

Chaput takes that defense and turns it to a demand that the Church withdraw from mission in the world unless his specific symbol be recognized. Somewhere charity, the virtue we say is forever, is lost. I continue puzzled. Because, quite frankly, I think it's what he intended for us to "take home".

The Pope's grand uncle: "He

The Pope's grand uncle: "He was co-founder of a populist “Farmer’s Party”, defending the poor against 19th century robber barons."

Do we have anyone today who can defend the poor in our Church? It seems like the Catholic School System is serving those who can pay: the middle-class and rich. We cannot solve the problems of the New Evangelization without the help of the poor. Cardinal Claudio Hummes gives us some direction when he states: "A servant church must have as its priority solidarity with the poor," he said. "The faith must express itself in charity and in solidarity, which is the civil form of charity," Hummes said.
"Today more than ever, the church faces this challenge. In fact, effective solidarity with the poor, both individual persons and entire nations, is indispensable for the construction of peace. Solidarity corrects injustices, reestablishes the fundamental rights of persons and of nations, overcomes poverty and even resists the revolt that injustice provokes, eliminating the violence that is born with revolt and constructing peace."
May I suggest a way to practice this “solidarity” here in the USA:
A "preferential option for the poor" should be maintained in our Catholic Schools. If we find that we cannot afford to keep our schools open to the poor, the schools should be closed and the resources used for something else which can be kept open to the poor. We cannot allow our Church to become a church primarily for the middle-class and rich while throwing a bone to the
poor. The priority should be given to the poor even if we have to let the middle-class and rich fend for themselves.
Practically speaking, the Catholic Schools must close and the resources used for "Confraternity of Christian Doctrine" and other programs which can be kept open to the poor. Remember, the Church managed without Catholic
Schools for centuries. We can get along without them today. The essential factor is to cultivate enough Faith to act in the Gospel Tradition, namely, THE POOR GET PRIORITY. The rich and middle-class are welcome too. But the poor come first. (William Horan -- w.horan@comcast.net.)

A better way to do this would

A better way to do this would be to properly form those of means and the middle class in their responsibility to care for the poor. If a parish has a school, then it should be that the school is the primary ministry of the parish, and everyone is expected to do his or her part to support the school.

The parish priest should encourage those of means to support scholarship programs, fundraisers, and the donation of their time and talent in support of the school, thereby maintaining low tuition rates and scholarship and tuition assistance programs for the poor. The goal should be that no child is denied Catholic education simply because of the financial need of the parents.

However, to deny a Catholic education to children because their parents are rich or middle class, or because there are not enough poor people in the school, is manifestly unjust.

And, speaking as someone who was taught in the parish CCD program and who has taught parish CCD, and someone who attended a Catholic school later on and who also has taught in Catholic schools, there is absolutely no comparison between the two. CCD teaches children about their religion, Catholic schools teach children how their faith is integrated into their lives and how God reveals Himself to us in every way conceivable, even in math and science.

Bill, where was the press in

Bill, where was the press in LA? The problem was worse, but the prelate was much more liberal. He seemed to get a pass for that. SNAP and other such groups are not interested in child abuse. They want to actually destroy the Church. People left the Church before the scandals and they will leave after. They leave because they don't believe anymore. In Holland the age of consent is 12, so if a Dutch person leaves the Church they should leave Holland too for the same reason. I do notice that you make no mention of that ever present elephant in the room, homosexuality. I hear your whistling...

Fr. J, Anytime anyone does

Fr. J,

Anytime anyone does not agree with the church of the Vatican it ALWAYS says they are trying to destroy it. For the very Right Wing conservative church someone is ALWAYS trying to destroy the church. Someone or some evil.

The Vatican and all right wing clergy is the perfect example of a group that cannot live like normal HUMAN BEINGS, within the rules, values and strictures of everyday normal society. The Vatican is just like the Republican party, always crying that someone or other is always attacking it, doesn't like it and that everyone else is/are the evil ones.

In reality no one is attacking either the church or the Republican party. In fact it is they whom are doing all of the attacking of EVERYONE and generating ALL of the hate and evil, simply because they have not yet learned how to live in a pluralistic world full of people with other religious AND economic beliefs.

So grow up, get a life, come out of your bubble and off of your cloud and join the rest of the world in the sunshine of Christs teachings of: PEACE, LOVE, TOLERANCE and "DO UNTO OTHERS...

OR, continue to live in opposition to everyone else and in withdrawal. Just do NOT complain about everyone else who does not think as you do. You have NOT, NOT, NOT been left out. YOU have removed yourselves and then blame everyone for your self imposed isolation. You don't like the world, God's world, so you hide. You are in the very same groups with the Home-schoolers, the pre Civil War and post civil war Southern Republicans, the Neo-Confederates, the Neo-Nazis, the Aryan Brotherhood, the Skinheads, Fascists and all other white supremacist hate groups who cannot live along with others of God's children such as; women, Jews, Protestants, Muslims, other non Roman Catholics and all of the rest of us Catholics whom do not agree with your ideology of hate, degradation, supremacy, predatoery economics, etc,etc,etc!!!

So the next move is up to you and the popes and your Republican friends. You can live IN the world, you can withdraw from it, OR... My guess is you all will one day choose the 'OR' option. You WILL try to destroy the rest of the world and you will largely succeed!!! You will have tons of twisted theology to "prove" you did the correct thing, but you will only have done the RIGHT Wing thing, as Right Wingers always do.

BUT, BUT, BUT your theology is no match for God's laws: "Thou shalt not kill", not covet, not steal and not bear false witness and not have false gods, namely yourselves and your theology of death. But you will...anyway. WHY?? Because THAT IS the very nature of the Right Wing brain.

As for Homosexuality, it also is a function of the brain and ones individual genetics. It is not a plan to take over the world, or subvert God's plan. Why? Because God made Homosexuals. In one or two years Geneticists will prove that. . WHAT will you do then. Hate God. Also, what about the great number of Catholic priests who ARE HOMOSEXUALS??

My guess is that these popes whom hate homosexuals will protect homosexual priests!!! Another huge Vatican hypocrisy. There are those in the Repub party including Pat Buchanan, who want all homosexuals to be put in prison. Some have e3ven called for the execution of those caught under the "three times and your out rule".

Bob, all I can say is wow...I

Bob, all I can say is wow...I can really feel your "peace, love, tolerance, and do unto others." So we are all Republicans who are the same as Nazi's, skinheads, and other assorted groups? No hate or bigotry in your statements eh? This bodes so well for that culture of civility that the Obama messiah talked about. You exemplify the liberal mentality and I hold you up to others as a shining example of how dissent from the truth works on the human mind. Please keep posting.

Under Vatican law the age of

Under Vatican law the age of consent, as I understand it, is age 10. So that is why the Jay Report used 10 as a cutoff age. Now what?

That is incorrect. The

That is incorrect. The Vatican is a city state, but the population is very small and mostly clerics. Perhaps you could cite the law? As a canonist I would be very interested to see you back up such an absurd claim.

The John Jay report was dealing with the difference between true pedophilia which involves pre-adolescents and homosexual acts with post-adolescents. Most of the abuse involved homosexual acts with teenage boys. We call that homosexuality not pedophilia. A very uncomfortable fact for many of the liberal persuasion.

Please cite where you found

Please cite where you found the "Vatican law on age of consent as 10." You will not find that anywhere. Now what?

Regarding: "A preparatory

Regarding: "A preparatory committee is led by German Jesuit Fr. Hans Zollner, who heads an Institute for Psychology at the Gregorian. In 2010, Zollner and another Jesuit, Italian Fr. Giovanni Cucci, published a book on the crisis titled The Church and Pedophilia: An Open Wound. In it, they argued that a media-induced “moral panic” over pedophilia, presenting old cases as new and distorting the statistical dimensions of the problem, “doesn’t help anybody.”"

- On the whole, the phrase 'media-induced "moral panic" over pedophilia,..." is a best the creation of a straw man, and a purple one at that; really does melodrama have a place in any book on this crises? How can any book editor allow such observations? While a case can be made that individual articles were poorly written, the vast body of information from the secular press on the crisis was at a standard sufficient to convey accurate information needed for the readership to demand change, not only from secular authorities which were giving church bodies and clerics (of any religious organization) a pass, but also from leaders of churches. In effect the laity of the local catholic churches which are in union with the Archbishop of Rome, learned that clerics, especially bishops, lied to the People of God.

- As a counterpoint, the diocesan press was in all levels of reporting on the local church and the bishops' failures complete useless. In fact a study should be made on how the 'journalists' of the diocesan publications failed the church.

Regarding: "There’s no indication that the 2012 summit will be an occasion for debating priestly celibacy or Catholic sexual morality, and no suggestion that it will mark a new system of accountability for bishops who mismanage or ignore abuse reports -- still the most persistent line of criticism from those who believe the church hasn’t fully absorbed the lessons of the crisis. "

- No doubt this summit could not or would not take place during the lifetime of any previous Archbishop of Rome such as John Paul II, friend of Marcel Marcial. In this light then the summit is a milestone of the change that the Archbishop and his curia have experienced.

The real risk will occur if the curia is allowed, or to be frank, if the laity allow the curia to think that this summit is but a burp in their work to maintain the conditions for the the scandal of episcopal secrecy, and the continuance of their belittling of the role which all the People of God has. So, this summit can be a significant step moving the church back to a trajectory of service to the People of God, or it can be a sop to get everyone off the curia's back.

Hopefully, the 'first-steppers' will have the eternal day.

How can anyone really give

How can anyone really give the institution the benefit of the doubt when you still have bishops not following the present rules as it relates to reporting sexual abuse cases or taking seriously the potential of grooming activities ?
How can anyone really not be "suspicious" after what happened in Boston and Philadelphia, in Belgium and Ireland ? How can you hope that something productive will come out of this February meeting when they are still coming from the same points of view as those of Zollner and Cucci. Again I repeat my belief that unless the institutional RC church updates their understanding of human sexuality and gender identity, they will never get to core of the problem of clerical sexual abuse.

"His achievements & his

"His achievements & his political standing made everyone proud of him" Part of Benedict XVI's comment on his great-uncle's legacy. This, together with later analysis of Benedict's stress on reconciliation leaves me with a lacuna of connectedness.

Second: when will warnings ever be given serious attention? As reported here it was over a decade ago that Christian churches were told that Christians would effectively disappear from the Middle East politically, culturally, religiously - over a decade ago!

Third: Catholic identity. Apart from the problems it causes in the lives of good people, I think it's a case of "Damn the torpedos! Full speed ahead!" God bless Cardinal Chaput for his attempts to circumscribe its application for Denver's Catholic Charities; has he done the same thing for the Archdiocese as a whole?

Fourth: Back to the Anglican/Catholic common concerns for Palestinian Christians. Finding common ground (Common Ground) is always a better mode of beginning than arguing over differences.

Fifth: Hierarchical sex abuse scandal. Good luck. I hope the participants get that "fiero" feeling. If it makes the participants feel good, so be it. God bless the Jesuits for trying! At least it doesn't appear to be a top-down proceeding. I'm in process of studying a book called BROKEN REALITY: HOW GAMES MAKE US BETTER AND HOW THEY CAN CHANGE THE WORLD by Jane McGonigal. Although those engaged in trying to conquer this "problem" in the church probably don't think so, over time, it appears more and more as if they are "gaming" the issue. Every time they think they've conquered it another task/mission/quest appears on the screen. And so to another level. Good luck, boys. Keep trying.

(It would be an amusing

(It would be an amusing exercise to stroll through the various pallium receptions trying to detect who’s wearing the papal scent.)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Indeed. It would be the ne plus ultra of vaticanismo. Sniff, sniff.

Whether he meant it or not,

Whether he meant it or not, the implication of Chaput's statement (at least as given above) is that at present Catholic Charities (and presumably other agencies like Catholic Relief Services) are not fully reflecting Catholic faith. I wonder what precisely he had in mind when he said such things, and what he proposes we should do about it?

This is the curia's stance

This is the curia's stance towards Leslie Knight and Caritas. That is: 'we say that you're catholic idenity (read: you do not see approval from the curia) is questionable so we, the curia, will impugn your religiousity and faith and 'take over' that which we have already deemed a failure.'

Of course it is foolish to think that the bishops individually or as a group ought to be resposible for catholic idenity, they who have a track record of lies and deception with regards to to safety of children, parochial education, and, at least in the US, the strong desire to play politics of power and wealth.

This is misleading

This is misleading information about Uncle Georg. He wrote extensively about the immorality of anti-Semitism, criticized neo-Conservatism before anyone ever coined the term and literally predicted the rise of Hitler at least a decade before he was born.

This is misleading

This is misleading information about Uncle Georg. He wrote extensively about the immorality of anti-Semitism, criticized neo-Conservatism before anyone ever coined the term and literally predicted the rise of Hitler at least a decade before he was born.

Georg was prominent enough to

Georg was prominent enough to earn a place in the 1917 Catholic Encyclopaedia but why is he being dug up now? http://newadvent.org/cathen/12660a.htm
I suspect because he is being known once again thru Culture Wars Magazine...
www.culturewars.com

Fr. Georg was the furthest

Fr. Georg was the furthest thing from an anti-Semite. You have to actually read him

I am sorry to pre-judge the

I am sorry to pre-judge the symposium on priest sexual abuse to be held in Rome in 2012. On reviewing the list of those invited to the meeting, the fact that Archbishop Martin of Dublin has not been invited tells me that this meeting is likely to be another publicity stunt and Msgr Scicluna is a spinmeister.

As a Catholic physician who has met many who have been abused by priests, and as one who was sexually assaulted by a Carmelite priest when I was a young doctor in Ireland, I am saddened to witness the lack of transparency of Pope Benedict and many in the hierarchy.

The sexual abuse of children is a crime and needs to be treated that way by the leaders of the Church. I do not believe that the Pope and hierarchy are willing, even now, to give control of investigation of cases to the proper civil authorities. How is it that the Pope and members of the hierarchy are allowed to flaunt civil law?

In my own experience, when I wrote to Archbishop Martin that I was surprised to see the priest who abused me was still in active ministry, the Archbishop met me to hear my story. Then the Provincial of the Discalced Carmelites in Ireland contacted me. The police were called in to investigate. The priest admitted his guilt. Within a matter of months my case was dealt with and the priest was removed from active ministry.

The Church needs doers, like Archbishop Martin, not just talkers, if the problem of priest sexual abuse is to end.

Do Pope Benedict XVI and many in the hierarchy have the courage to DO something to end the problem and punish the priests and bishops involved, or do they want to just continue to talk about the problem?

Dr. Rosemary, you're exactly

Dr. Rosemary, you're exactly correct. The church is desperately in need of doing, not talking. One problem: the institution is inordinately addicted to symbolism and ritual to accomplish things. If the "ecclesiastically correct" people (to riff on "politically correct")come together with trumpets and fanfare for the purpose of "addressing" needs the rest of us should be placated. Along with you I long for do-ers not talkers and lament their invisibility.

This is inaccurate

This is inaccurate information regarding Fr. Georg Ratzinger. Check out the info at www.culturewars.com and you'll find he has the only consistent and coherent understanding of what the Church's relationship with the Jewish people is and should be.

Post new comment

NCR Comment code:

  1. Be respectful. Do not attack the writer. Take on the idea, not the messenger.
  2. Use appropriate language. Avoid vulgarities and slurs.
  3. Keep to the point. Deliberate digressions don't aid the discussion.

For more detailed guidelines, visit our User Guidelines page.

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
(if you have one; if not, leave this blank)
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <font> <swf> <swf list>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • You may use <swf file="song.mp3"> to display Flash files inline

More information about formatting options

CAPTCHA
This is to prove you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.