THE PAPAL CONCLAVE

To the left, the cardinals are shown processing into the mass in St Peter's Basilica this morning before gathering in the Sistine Chapel to begin the Papal Conclave.

To the right is the Sistine Chapel set up for the for the cardinals meeting in the Papal Conclave to elect the new pope.

The cardinals walk up the aisle toward Michangelo's "The Last Judgement" to place their ballots in the ballot box.

Black smoke issued from the chimney this evening to signal that no pope was elected on the first ballot.  When the new pope has been chosen, white smoke will come from the chimney, and a bell will ring as an additional signal.

The picture of the cardinals in procession made me smile because in my Roman Catholic elementary school such a straggly line would not have been tolerated. We would have heard from the sister in charge, "Straighten that line!"

PLUS ÇA CHANGE, PLUS C'EST LA MÊME CHOSE

Garry Wills in the New York Times:

Wistful Catholics hope that on this and other matters of disagreement between the church as People of God and the ruling powers in the church, a new pope can remedy that discord. But a new pope will be elected by cardinals who were elevated to office by the very popes who reaffirmed “eternal truths” like the teaching on contraception. They were appointed for their loyalty, as were the American bishops who stubbornly upheld the contraception nonsense in our elections.

Will the new conclave vote for a man who goes against the teachings of his predecessors? Even if they do, can the man chosen buck the structure through which he rose without kicking the structure down? These considerations have given the election of new popes the air of watching Charlie Brown keep trying to kick the football, hoping that Lucy will cooperate.

John Paul II and Benedict XVI, two conservative, traditionalist pontiffs, had 34 years to appoint members of the College of Cardinals. What are the chances for a progressive pope to be elected? Close to zero, I'd say. The few progressive cardinals (if there are any at all) in the college would be too old.  Of course, surprises do happen. Choosing the next pope will hardly be an exercise in democracy, since no clergy, lay people, or even a large number of bishops have a say in the appointments of cardinals.

And, if by a near miracle, even a semi-progressive pope were elected, he would have a hard time implementing progressive policies, considering that Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI had those same number of years to appoint like-minded bishops throughout the world.   

"BEL GIORGIO" MAKES THE COVER OF "VANITY FAIR"

Now Georg Ganswein, the Pope's private secretary, has appeared on the cover of the Italian edition of Vanity Fair.

The 56-year-old, blue-eyed Bavarian, who was recently elevated to the rank of archbishop by Benedict XVI and wields ever greater influence within the Vatican, was placed on the cover of the latest edition of the magazine, which went on sale on Wednesday.

"It's not a sin to be handsome" the magazine wrote on its front cover, describing Father Ganswein as "the George Clooney of St Peter's".

Hmm.  Of course, it's no sin to be handsome.  Georg's hairline seems to be receding a bit, but bald can be beautiful, and he has a way to go.  The brand new archbishop and keeper of the pope's household admits to listening to Pink Floyd and Cat Stevens and wearing long hair in his teen years.  Georg is a pilot and a skier, a "man-of-action". Italians call him "Bel Giorgio".  I expect Georg will continue his quick climb up the hierarchical ladder.  He may even be pope one day.

GOOD HEAVENS!

Is this a joke? Apparently not. The toilet paper was designed by Renova especially for World Youth Day (WYD) in Madrid, where Pope Benedict will be present. The company suggests that the rolls be used as streamers.

Thanks to Ann.

A BRAVE PRIEST

From Boston.com:

An East Longmeadow priest called yesterday from his pulpit for Pope Benedict XVI to step down, demanding greater protection of children and greater accountability from the Catholic Church hierarchy.

The church’s top leader has not been truthful, said the Rev. James Scahill of St. Michael’s Parish, violating an important tenet of the faith. His strongly worded sermon echoed sentiments he shared with parishioners several weeks ago, but this time, he spent more time and spoke with greater conviction on the controversial subject.
....

“If we cannot get a pope that’s going to give us the truth, then our church is dead,’’ Scahill said.

Mark Dupont, a spokesman for the Diocese of Springfield, was quick to distance the diocesan leadership from the comments made by Scahill.

“It in no way represents the position of the bishop,’’ Dupont said. “We find his statements to be unfortunate.’’

Scahill, he said, has not properly recognized measures to ensure safety undertaken by the American Catholic leadership, which has “led the world in their efforts,’’ as well as steps the Diocese of Springfield took over the years to deal with the issue of sexual abuse.

Below is a video interview with Fr. Scahill.



H/T to Paddy Anglican for the video.

"THE SMOKING GUN"?

From the AP:

The future Pope Benedict XVI resisted pleas to defrock a California priest with a record of sexually molesting children, citing concerns including "the good of the universal church," according to a 1985 letter bearing his signature.

The correspondence, obtained by The Associated Press, is the strongest challenge yet to the Vatican's insistence that Benedict played no role in blocking the removal of pedophile priests during his years as head of the Catholic Church's doctrinal watchdog office.

The letter, signed by then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, was typed in Latin and is part of years of correspondence between the Diocese of Oakland and the Vatican about the proposed defrocking of the Rev. Stephen Kiesle.
....

But the future pope also noted that any decision to defrock Kiesle must take into account the "good of the universal church" and the "detriment that granting the dispensation can provoke within the community of Christ's faithful, particularly considering the young age." Kiesle was 38 at the time.

Kiesle had been sentenced in 1978 to three years' probation after pleading no contest to misdemeanor charges of lewd conduct for tying up and molesting two young boys in a San Francisco Bay area church rectory.

The information in the article sickens me, but I'm running out of words on the pope's role in the cover-up of child abuse. What's next? What sort of revelations will it take before the Vatican stops circling the wagons and hunkering down?

I'd add that there's something very wrong with the criminal laws when a person who ties up and molests young children can plead guilty to a misdemeanor and get off with no jail time and only three years probation.

H/T to Box Turtle Bulletin for the link to the article. Jim Burroway has more commentary there.

I'M SORRY! I'M SORRY!

From the AP via the Times-Picayune:

It was the Catholic calendar's holiest moment — the Mass celebrating the resurrection of Christ. But with Pope Benedict XVI accused of failing to protect children from abusive priests, Easter Sunday also was a high-profile opportunity to play defense.

"Holy Father, on your side are the people of God," Cardinal Angelo Sodano told the pontiff, whom victims of clergy sexual abuse accuse of helping to shape and perpetuate a climate of cover-up. Sodano, dean of the College of Cardinals, dismissed those claims as "petty gossip."

The ringing tribute at the start of a Mass attended by tens of thousands in St. Peter's Square marked an unusual departure from the Vatican's Easter rituals, infusing the tradition-steeped religious ceremony with an air of a papal pep rally.

Dressed in gold robes and shielded from a cool drizzle by a canopy, Benedict looked weary during much of the Mass, the highlight of a heavy Holy Week schedule. But as he listened intently to Sodano's paean, a smile broke across the pope's face, and when the cardinal finished speaking, Benedict rose from his chair in front of the altar to embrace him.

"[A]n air of a pep rally"? I suppose the characterization will be labeled as more persecution by the media.

Jewish leaders, and even some top Catholic churchmen, were angered after Benedict's personal preacher, in a Good Friday sermon, likened the growing accusations against the pope to the campaign of anti-Semitic violence that culminated in the Holocaust.

The preacher, the Rev. Raniero Cantalamessa, told Corriere della Sera daily in an interview Sunday that he had no intention "of hurting the sensibilities of the Jews and of the victims of pedophilia," expressed regret and asked for forgiveness.

He was quoted as saying that the pope wasn't aware of what the sermon would say beforehand, and that no Vatican officials read the text before the Good Friday service.

The apology satisfied one Jewish leader, Elan Steinberg, vice president of the American Gathering of Holocaust Survivors and their Descendants.

"Now that he has apologized and the Vatican has distanced itself from those remarks, the matter is closed," Steinberg said in a statement.

Since Fr Cantalamessa apologized, I won't say more about the matter, either.

Meanwhile back in Anglicanland comes another apology.

From the BBC:

The Archbishop of Canterbury has expressed his "deep sorrow" for any difficulties caused by his comments about the Catholic Church in Ireland.

His claim that the Church had lost all credibility because of its handling of child abuse by priests was criticised by both Catholic and Anglican clergy.

The Catholic Archbishop of Dublin, Diarmuid Martin, said he was "stunned".

Dr Rowan Williams later telephoned Archbishop Martin to insist he meant no offence to the Irish Catholic Church.

BBC religious affairs correspondent Robert Pigott said Dr Williams' words represented unusually damning criticism from the leader of another Church.

Did Archbishop Williams speak anything but the truth? It seems to me that he had nothing for which to apologize. Once again, the ABC waffles and ends up pleasing no one.

JESUS AND MO

 

Thanks to Lisa.

From Jesus and Mo.

Permission under Creative Commons use.

BREATHTAKING!

From the Times:

A defiant Pope Benedict XVI indicated yesterday that he would not be intimidated by the clerical sex abuse crisis now engulfing the Church and threatening to undermine his authority.

Speaking during Palm Sunday Mass, he said that faith in Christ “helps lead us towards courage which does not allow us to be intimidated by the chatter of dominant opinions”.
....

Father Lombardi said: “The recent media attacks have without doubt caused damage. But the authority of the Pope and the commitment of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith against sex abuse of minors will come out of this not weakened but strengthened.”

The Archbishop of Westminster, the Most Rev Vincent Nichols, defended the Pope, saying that he was at the forefront of efforts to tackle the problem of clerical sex abuse. The archbishop told The Andrew Marr Show on BBC One: “The Pope will not resign. Frankly there is no strong reason for him to do so. In fact, it is the other way around. He is the one above all else in Rome that has tackled this thing head on.” (My emphasis)

The RCC tries the "putting facts on the ground" strategy. Just keep saying the words, and they will come to be true. The magic words will not work this time around. The pope and his close advisors are in denial about the damage to their moral authority, which is in shreds at the present time. New revelations of older abuse will probably continue to come to light. The pope's problems are not behind him, and he and his advisors will need to come out of denial if the church is to make a new beginning and the powers in the church restore to themselves any sort of credibility.

H/T to Mark Harris at Preludium for the link to the article in the Times.

THOUGHT FOR THE DAY

One path forward for the Roman Catholic Church to recover from the numerous revelations of child abuse by clergy and cover-up by those in authority might be for Pope Benedict to call for the establishment of a Truth and Reconciliation Commission.

"SORRY, HOLY FATHER...."

From Rod Liddle in the TimesOnline:

Last year Pope Benedict XVI invited disillusioned Anglicans to join the Church of Rome if they were disapproving of, or merely bored by, women priests and homosexuals but fancied instead a few Latin incantations, rosary beads and the whiff of incense; this took the Church of England by surprise.

Now is Beardo’s chance to get his own back. He should strike while the iron is hot. Give the émigré left-footers free passage, one of those Christingle oranges and a DVD collection of The Vicar of Dibley — they can even cling on to transubstantiation, if they keep quiet about it.

Rod is naughty. Nevertheless, you may want to read his entire column.

Thanks to Ann V.

ET TU, RATZI?

Yahoo News:

Pope Benedict XVI rebuked Irish bishops Saturday for "grave errors of judgment" in handling clerical sex abuse cases and ordered an investigation into the Irish church. But he laid no blame for the problem on the Vatican's policies of keeping such cases secret.

In a letter to the Irish faithful read across Europe amid a growing, multination abuse scandal, the pope apologized to victims but doled out no specific punishments to bishops blamed by Irish government-ordered investigations for having covered up abuse of thousands of Irish children from the 1930s to the 1990s.

Ireland's main group of clerical-abuse victims, One in Four, said it was deeply disappointed by the letter because it failed to place responsibility with the Vatican for what it called a "deliberate policy of the Catholic Church at the highest levels to protect sex offenders, thereby endangering children."

"If the church cannot acknowledge this fundamental truth, it is still in denial," the group said.

Yes. And who was a bishop in Germany when child abuse by clergy was taking place there? And who was a cardinal serving at the Vatican advising bishops on how to handle the charges of child abuse? Et tu, Ratzi?

The letter directly addressed only Ireland, but the Vatican said it could be read as applying to other countries. Hundreds of new allegations of abuse have recently come to light across Europe, including in the pope's native Germany, where he served as archbishop in a diocese where several victims have recently come forward. One priest suspected of molesting boys while the future pope was in charge was transferred to a job where he abused more children.

While a cardinal at the Vatican, Joseph Ratzinger penned a 2001 letter instructing bishops around the world to report all cases of abuse to his office and keep the church investigations secret under threat of excommunication. While the Vatican insists that secrecy rule only applied to the church's investigation and didn't preclude reporting abuse to police, Irish bishops have said the letter was widely understood to mean they shouldn't report the cases to civil authorities.

Then from the New York Times:

Faced with a church sexual abuse scandal spreading across Europe, Pope Benedict XVI on Saturday apologized directly to victims and their families in Ireland, expressing “shame and remorse” for what he called “sinful and criminal” acts committed by clergy.

But the pope did not require that church leaders be disciplined for past mistakes as some victims were hoping; nor did he clarify what critics see as contradictory Vatican rules they fear allow abuse to continue unpunished.

But wait!

The strong letter was written in language at once passionate, personal and sweeping. And the pope did take the relatively rare step of ordering a special apostolic delegation to be sent to unspecified dioceses in Ireland to investigate.

See. The pope ordered a special apostolic delegation.

The most recent revelation came last week when a psychiatrist who treated a priest decades ago in an archdiocese run by the future pope in Germany said he repeatedly warned that the accused priest should never work with children again. The priest was reassigned to pastoral work, but another church leader had taken responsibility for that decision.

Ratzi said, "I didn't do it!" and sure enough, an underling took the blame.

Here's the link to the text of Pope Benedict's pastoral letter to the Irish church.

The pope cites a changing world and creeping secularism as partial explanations for the child abuse and cover-up. Yes, the world turns, and secularism creeps, but please, Your Holiness, give us a break from lame excuses and put the major blame where it belongs - on the institutional structure led by the powers in the Vatican.

EYE-ROLL OF THE DAY

Leaders of the Roman Catholic Church in Britain attempted to distance the Pope from the sex abuse scandal engulfing the institution, instead pledging that Benedict XVI will “give guidance on the great moral issues of our day” when he visits Britain in September.
....

Although it has official status, the usual trappings of a state visit will be absent. There will be neither a procession in a gilded carriage up the Mall nor a banquet at Buckingham Palace, as the Queen will be in Scotland. The Pope will stay in Church accommodation as is normal when he visits other heads of state around the world.

A snub by the Queen? Perhaps not. Once in Scotland, the royal lady does not like interrupting her visits to return to England. The Queen will receive the pope at the Palace of Holyroodhouse in Edinburgh.

The Archbishop of Canterbury today offered an uncharacteristically terse welcome ahead of the visit.

Dr Rowan Williams, recently surprised by the Catholic announcement of a new Anglican Ordinariate in England to tempt dissatisfied Anglicans over to Rome, said: “The Pope's visit will be an opportunity to cement ties not only between the Holy See and the United Kingdom but also the Roman Catholic Church and other Christian churches in Scotland, England and Wales. I look forward particularly to welcoming Pope Benedict to Lambeth Palace on behalf of the Church of England.”

Hmmm. No comment.

H/T to MadPriest for the link to the article in the Times.

STILL BEATING....

From the New York Times:

A widening child sexual abuse inquiry in Europe has landed at the doorstep of Pope Benedict XVI, as a senior church official acknowledged Friday that a German archdiocese made “serious mistakes” in handling an abuse case while the pope served as its archbishop.

The archdiocese said that a priest accused of molesting boys was given therapy in 1980 and later allowed to resume pastoral duties, before committing further abuses and being prosecuted. Pope Benedict, who at the time headed the archdiocese of Munich and Freising, approved the priest’s transfer for therapy. A subordinate took full responsibility for allowing the priest to later resume pastoral work, the archdiocese said in a statement.

The Vatican spokesman, the Rev. Federico Lombardi, said he had no comment beyond the statement by the Archdiocese of Munich and Freising, which he said showed the “nonresponsibility” of the pope in the matter. (My emphasis)

And we are to take the statement by the Rev. Lombardi at face value? Not if we attend to the words of Fr Thomas P Doyle.

The priest from Essen, “despite allegations of sexual abuse, and in spite of a conviction — was repeatedly assigned work in the sphere of pastoral care by the then-Vicar General Gerhard Gruber,” who worked under Benedict, at the time Archbishop Joseph Ratzinger.
....

But Mr. Gruber took full responsibility for the decision to reinstate the priest to pastoral work. “I deeply regret that this decision resulted in offenses against youths and apologize to all who were harmed by it,” Mr. Gruber, according to a statement posted on the archdiocese Web site.

There was immediate skepticism that Benedict, as archbishop, would not have known of the details of the case.

Rev. Thomas P. Doyle, who once worked at the Vatican Embassy in Washington and became an early and well-known whistle-blower on sexual abuse in the church, said the vicar general’s claim was not credible.

“Nonsense,” said Father Doyle, who has served as an expert witness in sexual abuse lawsuits. “Pope Benedict is a micro-manager. He’s the old style. Anything like that would necessarily have been brought to his attention. Tell the vicar general to find a better line. What he’s trying to do, obviously, is protect the pope.”

I take no pleasure in writing this post. In fact, I feel sick. I'm no admirer of Benedict XVI, and I never was. I remember him as Cardinal Ratzinger in his role as Prefect of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith, or the Enforcer, as he was known in the US. The theologians, presidents, and professors in the Roman Catholic universities, and certain bishops dreaded his periodic visits to the US to assure that all were following the orthodox line. The list is long of the great thinkers and teachers in the RCC who were silenced or otherwise disciplined by Cardinal Ratzinger. Although I had been out of the RCC for nearly 10 years, my heart sank low when he was elected pope. He was not an unknown. My heart sank for the sake of my many family members and friends who are still part of the church.

As pope his policies and practices have been even worse than I expected. I think of him declaring just last year that married couples in which one partner is HIV positive are forbidden to use condoms.

From CNN:

Pope Benedict XVI refused Wednesday to soften the Vatican's ban on condom use as he arrived in Africa for his first visit to the continent as pope.

He landed in Cameroon, the first stop on a trip that will also take him to Angola.

Sub-Saharan Africa has been hit harder by AIDS and HIV than any other region of the world, according to the United Nations and World Health Organization. There has been fierce debate between those who advocate the use of condoms to help stop the spread of the epidemic and those who oppose it.

The pontiff reiterated the Vatican's policy on condom use as he flew from Rome to Yaounde, the capital of Cameroon, CNN Vatican analyst John Allen said.

Pope Benedict has always made it clear he intends to uphold the traditional Catholic teaching on artificial contraception -- a "clear moral prohibition" -- Allen said. But his remarks Tuesday were among the first times he stated the policy explicitly since he became pope nearly four years ago.

The world and the Roman Catholic Church would be better off if the pope resigned. There I've said it.

Other recent posts on child abuse in the Roman Catholic Church at Wounded Bird are here, here, here, and here.

Gertrude Stein On The Pope

From the MadPriest, who took it from Shimmy and added the balloon.

To me, this is one of the funniest cartoons ever on the pope. I burst out laughing when I looked at it. The quote from Stein, in a balloon, with her stolid portrait are just perfect. I can hear her saying the words.

No one commented on it at Of Course I Could Be Wrong, not even me, until a few days ago, so I suppose it's not for everyone, but I felt it was neglected at Shimmy's and MadPriest's sites, and I wanted to post it again and give all of you another chance to show proper appreciation.

Belatedly, I left a comment for Shimmy, too.

Rick, I'm afraid you will think me disrespectful of my former and your present leader, but remember: I did not say this. Gertrude did.

Chacun à son goût.