Evangelization In the Life of Catholics

Jesus Christ has entrusted the mission of proclaiming the Gospel primarily to the body of pastors who need to work together and with the Successor of Peter, so that it reaches all people. . . . The Bishop, the first witness of faith, accompanies the journey of believers offering the example of a life lived in trusting in God . He, therefore, in order to be an authoritative teacher and herald of the faith, must live in the presence of the Lord, as a man of God.  One cannot be in the service of men, unless being first a servant of God.

Pope Benedict XVI

The Catholic Church is the one and only Church founded by Jesus Christ, and it is through the Catholic Church, which is the mystical body of Christ, that all truth and light comes into the world.  All spiritual truth in the world originates from the Church.  This is a great blessing, but it also places a tremendous responsibility upon the Church.  As Luke 12:48 tells us:

But the one who does not know and does things deserving punishment will be beaten with few blows. From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked.

There can be no greater gift than eternal life.  We who are the unworthy recipients of this great gift are commanded by our Saviour to lead others to it.  Our Lords tells us that a candle cannot give light if it is put under a bushel basket and a city set on a hill cannot be hid.  We are that city on the hill and that candle meant to give light, life and truth to the world.  If instead we become the unworthy servant spoken of in Matthew 25, who took his one talent and hid it away, we too will be banished as he was.   From Matthew 25:

For [the Kingdom of Heaven] is just like a man about to go on a journey, who called his own slaves and entrusted his possessions to them. But he who received the one talent went away, and dug a hole in the ground and hid his master’s money. His master said to him: "Throw out the worthless slave into the outer darkness; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth."

 

The truth is, those who are outside of the Church will be judged much less harshly and be held far less responsible than those who are a part of the Mystical Body of Christ.  However, for the last 50 years since Vatican II, a large part of the Catholic Church has lost her identity as the one true Church.  Far too many in the Church have been more focused on what they call ecumenism, which in reality has been a false ecumenism.  True ecumenism means bringing back our fallen brothers and sisters to the church.  False ecumenism is all about high fiving and congratulating each other about what great churches we have.  Too many Catholics have been trying so hard to become one with all of the other religions in the world that they have forgotten who they are and what their mission should be.  Many Catholics have, in effect, become the worthless servant  who hid his talent in the ground.  It reminds me of a wealthy man forgetting about all the riches that he has and then wondering why he is always hungry and cold.

But what of the wealthy man who doesn't even know he has riches?  He is sitting on a pile of gold and yet lives like the poorest among us because he doesn't realize the value of what he has.  That is the state of many Catholics in our world today.  They have no idea of the treasure that they have been given in the church.  They feel like they are just one church among many.  They don't know they have been given a candle to light the world.  They don't know they are the city set on a hill that is the shining example to all others.  They have hidden their candles under a basket and turned off the lights to that city on the hill so they don't stand out from other religions.  They don't know they have been given talents that they must develop.  They don't understand that they are uniquely the Body of Christ and have been given spiritual riches beyond comprehension.  How has the Church come to this state?

Our Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI, recently gave a very interesting talk in Rome to the newly ordained bishops on the topic of evangelization and the bishops' vital role in this.  The Holy Father seems to feel very strongly that the bishops are the key to the "new evangelization", as Pope Benedict XVI calls it.  I have copied an article below from Catholic Online about this talk.  The article was written by Deacon Keith Fournier.  He includes his own comments before giving us the transcript of the Holy Father's talk. 

In his comments, Deacon Fournier emphasizes the role of the laity in the "new evangelization."  However, that is not what the Holy Father emphasized in this particular talk.  Yes, Pope Benedict definitely believes that the laity needs to be involved in evangelization, as he says, "Each believer, in and with the ecclesial community should feel responsible for announcing and witnessing to the Gospel." Yes, every person has his or her part in preaching the Gospel, but not every one has the same role.  Cloistered nuns have a far different role than a priest in a city parish.  A wife and mother of five children has a much different responsibility than a single man working in a large corporation.  And the bishops and priests have a much different role than the laity.  That does not make one lesser or greater than the other, but it does change how they "preach."

Pope Benedict puts the primary responsibility of preaching the Gospel on the shoulders of the bishops.   "Jesus Christ has entrusted the mission of proclaiming the Gospel primarily to the body of pastors who need to work together and with the Successor of Peter, so that it reaches all people."  Pope Benedict XVI is telling us here that it is vital for the bishops to do their part in teaching and supporting the Body of Christ.  It is the bishops' responsibility to make sure the laity is well catechized.  How can we expect the laity to be involved in evangelization when they don't practice the teachings of the Church or even know the teachings of the Church?  Without pointing fingers, it is quite obvious from the state of the Church that too many of the bishops have fallen down on the job. 

Pope Benedict to Bishops: Evangelization Not the Work of 'Specialists' but the Whole Catholic Church

By Deacon Keith Fournier
September 21st, 2012
Catholic Online (www.catholic.org)

The New Evangelization challenges each one of us to take this call to heart and live differently as a result. This mission will require an authentic renewal of the whole Catholic Church so that she can undertake this new missionary outreach. [I think the important word here is "renewal."  The Church as a whole has lost her way and needs to find her identity again]  The consistent teaching at the Council and since has been that the Church is by nature missionary and that every baptized Christian is to participate in that mission. This Pope wants to make sure that we hear this message and respond!

VATICAN CITY (Catholic Online) - On Thursday, September 20, 2012, Pope Benedict XVI addressed Bishops from five continents who have been appointed during this past year. They were in attendance at a conference organized by the Vatican Congregation for Bishops and the Congregation for the Oriental Churches. His theme; the major theme of his pontificate, the Church exists to evangelize!

The Pope recently challenged all the Lay Faithful to take their critical role in the life of the Church, alongside of the Clergy, and to fully participate in her mission to the world.  He chose an address he delivered to the 6th Assembly of the International Catholic Action Forum on August 10, 2012 to call for "ecclesial and social co-responsibility". His address to the New Bishops this week continues this challenging message to the whole Church that we are all involved in the work of evangelizing and missionary activity. [This message seems to me to be more directed to the bishops and their vital role in preaching the Gospel, most especially to the different segments of the church.]

In October of 2012 a Bishops Synod on the "New Evangelization" will be held in Rome and the participating Council Fathers were announced this week. At that Synod, the Pope will inaugurate a "Year of Faith" for the Catholic Church throughout the world. It will also mark the fiftieth anniversary of the Second Vatican Council. Since the Second Vatican Council we have been constantly reminded that the Church is by nature missionary and that every baptized Christian participates in her mission. [I think this is a great message, but unfortunately, it's not the message I got from Vatician II    The post Vatican II message seemed to be that people are fine where they are and can reach God from whatever church they are in.] This New Evangelization challenges each one of us to take this call to heart and live differently as a result. This mission will require an authentic renewal of the whole Catholic Church so that she can undertake this new missionary outreach. [How is the laity suppose to do "missionary outreach" when so many either don't know or don't even believe what the Church teaches?]  The consistent teaching at the Council and since has been that the Church is by nature missionary and that every baptized Christian is to participate in that mission. This Pope wants to make sure that we hear this message and respond!  [This annoys me.  It's like the Church didn't even exist before Vatican II, and anything worth knowing is only what has come since that time.]

In other words, our task, you and me, no matter what our state in life, is to be Christian missionaries - in every nation and to every culture. We are to be ready to share the Good news of who Jesus Christ is - and then lead people to Him through membership in the Church which is His Body. This mission is what lies at the heart of what it means to be a Christian - we carry forward in time the continuing redemptive mission of Jesus Christ.

What is clear to anyone following this Pope is that he is very, very serious about this mission of the Church to evangelize the Nations. He is also keenly aware of the desperate need within the Catholic Church for the faithful to be re-evangelized - and properly catechized - if they are going to bear fruit in this vital work of this New Missionary Age.  [Bingo!  Deacon Fournier finally says it here.  The "New Evangelization" needs to start first and foremost within the Church since a majority of the laity barely knows what the Church teaches.] He is a man on a mission.

Throughout the Pontificate of Blessed John Paul II he spoke of the need for such a re-evangelization of the faithful and coined the phrase "New Evangelization." Pope Benedict XVI has made this New Evangelization a central pillar of his pontificate. He erected a Pontifical Council for the New Evangelization tasked with evangelizing countries where the Gospel was announced centuries ago, but where its presence in peoples' daily life seems to be all but lost.  [Why does the Gospel's presence seem to be lost in people's lives?  What happened to all that great teaching from Vatican II?]

All of the faithful, men, and women, lay, clergy and religious, in every state and station in life - ALL of the faithful - are members of the Body of Christ and as such called to His mission. As Pope Benedict recently reminded us, we are "Co-Responsible" for the Church. We all need to view ourselves as missionaries. This work of evangelization is not reserved for a group of "professionals", evangelization is the mission of all the Christian faithful. 

Below is a Vatican Radio Translation of the Holy Fathers Message to the Bishops*****

Dear Brothers in the Episcopate,

Your pilgrimage to the tomb of St. Peter [interesting name that the Holy Father uses for the Vatican] for these days of reflection on the Episcopal ministry, takes on particular importance this year. It is the eve of the Year of Faith, of the 50th anniversary of the Second Vatican Council and of the Thirteenth General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops on the theme: "New Evangelization for the Transmission of the Christian faith." These events, to which the twentieth anniversary of the Catechism of the Catholic Church must be added, are an opportunity to strengthen the faith of which, my dear Brothers, you are teachers and heralds (cf. Lumen Gentium, 25).

I greet you, one by one, and I express my deep gratitude to Cardinal Marc Ouellet, Prefect of the Congregation for Bishops, for the words he addressed to me, and Cardinal Leonardo Sandri, Prefect of the Congregation for the Eastern Churches. This gathering together in Rome at the beginning of your Episcopal service, is a propitious occasion for you to concretely experience communication and communion among each other, and, in meeting with the Successor of Peter, nourish your sense of responsibility for the entire Church.

As members of the Episcopal college, in fact, you should always have a special solicitude for the universal Church, firstly by promoting and defending the unity of the faith. Jesus Christ has entrusted the mission of proclaiming the Gospel primarily to the body of pastors who need to work together and with the Successor of Peter (cf. ibid., 23), so that it reaches all people.  [Although all are involved to one degree or another in spreading the Gospel, the Holy Father reminds us that it starts with the bishops and priests, and they will be held most accountable.] This is particularly urgent in our time, who calls on you to boldly invite the people from every walk of life to an encounter with Christ and to render more solid the faith (cf. Christus Dominus, 12).

Your primary concern must be to promote and support "a more determined commitment of the Church in favor of the new evangelization in order to rediscover the joy in believing and find the enthusiasm to communicate the faith" (Apostolic Letter. Porta fidei, 7).  [Is Pope Benedict telling the Bishops that they have lost something along the way since Vatican II, and now they must "rediscover" it?] Here too you are called to encourage and foster communion and collaboration between all the realities of your dioceses. Evangelization, in fact, is not the work of some specialists, but of the entire People of God, under the guidance of the Pastors.  [And there's the rub - have the Bishops been giving guidance to the Church?]  Each believer, in and with the ecclesial community should feel responsible for announcing and witnessing to the Gospel. Blessed John XXIII, opening the great assembly of Vatican II envisaged "a leap forward toward a doctrinal penetration and a formation of consciences," and for this reason - he added - "it is necessary that this certain and unchangeable doctrine, which must be faithfully respected, be both deepened and presented in a way that meets the needs of our time "(Address at the Opening of the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, October 11, 1962).

We could say that the new evangelization began precisely with the Council, which Blessed John XXIII saw as a new Pentecost that would see the Church flourish through its inner wealth and maternally extend to all fields of human activity (cf. Address The closing session of the Council, December 8, 1962). [We're still waiting, 50 years later, for the "New Pentecost".  Instead, the Church has become far more impotent in the world in spreading the message of the Gospel.] The effects of the new Pentecost, despite the difficulties of the times, spread to reach the life of the Church in all its forms: from the institutional to the spiritual, from the participation of the lay faithful in the Church to the charismatic flowering and holiness. In this regard, we cannot but think of both Blessed John XXIII and Blessed John Paul II, as well as the many figures of bishops, priests, religious and lay people who have rendered the face of the Church beautiful in our time.  [I'm sorry, Your Holiness, but I don't see the face of the Church as beautiful in our time.  Not when most Catholics don't even attend weekly Mass and openly disobey major Church dogma.]  This legacy was also entrusted to your pastoral care. Draw from this wealth of doctrine, of spirituality and of holiness to form the faith of your people, so that their testimony is more credible. [Does this mean that we actually need to go back before Vatican II to learn how to spread the message?  What an innovative idea!  And it seems the Holy Father is telling these bishops that it is their responsibility that the laity is well catechized.] At the same time, your Episcopal service demands you "give reason for the hope that is in you" (1 Pet 3:15) to those who are in search of faith or the ultimate meaning of life, " in whose hearts grace works in an unseen way. For, since Christ died for all men, and since the ultimate vocation of man is in fact one, and divine,"(Gaudium et Spes, 22).

I encourage you, therefore, to make an effort so that everyone, according to their age and living conditions, are presented with the essential contents of the faith, in a systematic and organic manner, to respond to questions posed by our globalized and technological world. The words of the Servant of God Paul VI are still timely, who said:

"We need to evangelize man's culture and cultures (not in a purely decorative way, as it were, by applying a thin veneer, but in a vital way, in depth and right to their very roots),... always taking the person as one's starting-point and always coming back to the relationships of people among themselves and with God "(ibid., n. Evangelii nuntiandi, 20).

For this purpose it is essential to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, a sure norm for teaching the faith and communion in the creed. The reality in which we live demands that the Christian should have a solid formation!  The Faith needs credible witnesses, who trust in the Lord and trust Him to be "living sign of the presence of the Risen Lord in the world" (Apostolic Letter. Porta Fidei, 15). The Bishop, the first witness of faith, accompanies the journey of believers offering the example of a life lived in trusting in God . He, therefore, in order to be an authoritative teacher and herald of the faith, must live in the presence of the Lord, as a man of God. In fact, one cannot be in the service of men, unless being first a servant of God. [The Bishops cannot be about pleasing men, they must be all about serving God.]  Your personal commitment to holiness requires that each day you assimilate the Word of God in prayer and nourish yourselves in the Eucharist, to draw from this dual table the lifeblood of your ministry. Charity spurs you to be close to your priests, with a fatherly love that knows how to support, encourage and forgive; they are your first and most precious collaborators in bringing God to men and men to God.

In the same way, the love of the Good Shepherd will make you attentive to the poor and the suffering, to support and console them, as well as to guide those who have lost the meaning of life. Be especially close to the families: parents, helping them to be the primary educators of the faith of their children, the children and young people so that they can build their lives on the solid rock of friendship with Christ. Take special care of seminarians, concerned that they are formed humanly, spiritually, theologically and pastorally, so that the community can have joyful and mature pastors and reliable guides in the faith.

Yes, all members of the Body of Christ have a responsibility to spread the Gospel.  However, our Holy Father tells the Bishops the responsibility is first and foremost on their shoulders.  The crosier they carry has tremendous meaning.  The Bishops are the shepherds of the flock.  We need to pray that the Bishops will take this seriously as millions of souls are dependent on them.

 

The Miracle Of San Gennaro in 2012

The 2000 year history of the Catholic Church is filled with miracles, of great healings, apparitions, prophecies, of communion hosts being changed to flesh which were scientifically determined to be specifically flesh from the heart, bleeding communion hosts, the great miracle of the tilma of our Our Lady of Guadalupe.  The list seems almost endless. 

One of these miracles is the miracle of San Gennaro, in which the blood from Saint Gennaro, who was martyred in 305 A.D., liquifies every year on the same days.  From portanapoli.com:

Yearly on the first weekend of May (on Saturday) and on the 19th September amazement spreads through Naples Cathedral. There one can marvel at how the blood of the beheaded San Gennaro liquifies in its ampoule.

The day of the blood miracle is an important feast for Naples and the people celebrate it accordingly. The Cathedral is surrounded by stalls selling sweets, cobs and all kinds of curiosities and kitsch.

In advance a procession takes place, whereby holy figures are carried through Spaccanapoli. The silver bust of San Gennaro leads the procession, followed by holy Teresa, Lucia, Patricia and many more. The Neapolitans like to bet on the sequence of these holy statues, while applauding their favourite saint in the hope that these would get a place at front at the following procession.

At the subsequent service a centuries-old ritual takes place: the Saint’s silver bust is positioned next to the altar and the ampoule with blood is shown to the faithful by the "abate del tesoro" and then slowly turned. Shortly after this, traditional prayers of the "parenti di San Gennaro" (relatives of San Gennaro, a group of faithful women, sitting in the front row) are said. These prayers heighten ecstatically until the blood liquifies. The wild rejoicing of the faithful is crowned by the sound of the cathedral’s bells ringing. The crowd starts pushing its way through to kiss the ampoule of blood. This overcrowded service is attended by spiritual authorities, political dignitaries and hundreds of anticipating believers.

According to the people this blood miracle takes place, when no disaster is expected in the near future. For most of the natives of Naples the service has an oracle character. The absence of the miracle augurs tragedy for Naples and its surroundings. For instance in 1980 before the harsh earthquake took its toll on 2000 lives, the blood didn’t liquify.

The people of Naples rather have a personal than religious relationship with San Gennaro. They present him their wishes with love and expect them to be fulfilled.

The story of the blood miracle.Saint Gennaro was the bishop of Benevento and was beheaded during the persecution of Christians by Diocletian in 305. According to the legend a woman collected and kept some of the martyr’s blood in an ampoule, after he died. In 313 the miracle occurred for the first time, after the Saint’s skeleton and the ampoule with blood were brought to Naples. The skeleton was placed to rest in the catacomb together with the ampoule. In the 9th century the remains and blood of S. Gennaro were in a small chapel, next to the church, where in the 14th century the cathedral was built.

There are numerous records on the liquefaction of the blood, dating from times before 1649 when they officially started recording this miracle. One of the descriptions of the procession dates from the year 1389. According to writings in 1528 the blood miracle didn’t take place. This was the year the pest broke out and Naples didn’t receive its raise from France. There are hundreds of records of the liquefaction dating from the 16th Century.

* * *

The people of Naples were very happy and pleased when the miracle of San Gennaro happened once again yesterday, September 19.  No one can explain this miracle, and no one should even try.  Our Lord is always giving us signs that He is always with us and working miracles in our lives.  Here is the story from yesterday:

San Gennaro 'miracle' repeated

19/09/2012
Liquefaction of saint's blood a good omen for city

(ANSA) - Naples, September 19 - The Miracle of San Gennaro was repeated on Wednesday when the blood of Naples' patron saint liquefied at 9.12am. A huge crowd of faithful, who had been pouring into the city's cathedral and the square outside from the early hours of the day, greeted the announcement of the miracle recurrence with warm applause. Cardinal Crescenzio Sepe, the Archbishop of Naples, held up a phial containing the blood of the 3rd-century saint while a traditional white handkerchief was waved. For religious and superstitious Neapolitans, the ritual's success is a good omen for the city. The miracle takes place on the anniversary of the martyrdom of San Gennaro (St. Januarius) in September 305 AD. The dried blood of the saint is preserved in two glass phials and traditionally liquefies three times a year, the Church says, thanks to the devotion and prayers of the faithful. Aside from the anniversary of the saint's beheading, the miracle also takes place on December 16 to commemorate the 1631 eruption of Mt. Vesuvius, believed to have been halted by the saint's intervention, and again on the Saturday before the first Sunday in May. On this occasion, there is a procession through the city's streets to recall the many times the relics have been moved over the centuries. The liquefaction process sometimes takes hours, even days, and on occasions fails to happen at all. When the miracle does not occur it is seen as a sign of impending disaster. In fact, disaster has struck on at least five occasions when the blood failed to liquefy, including in 1527 when tens of thousands of people died from the plague and in 1980 when 3,000 people were killed in an earthquake which devastated much of southern Italy. The phials will remain on view in the cathedral for several days before being returned to a vault in the chapel of the cathedral's treasury. The first historical reference to the liquefaction of the martyr's blood is dated 1389.

The beheading of San Gennaro

Although now a headline-making saint, little is known about San Gennaro except that he was bishop of Benevento to the south of Naples and was martyred during the persecution of Christians spearheaded by the Roman Emperor Diocletian. The bishop was beheaded for refusing to bow down to his 'pagan' persecutors. According to legend, his body and head, still dripping blood, were gathered up by an old man and taken to a safe place while a local woman filled a phial with his spilt blood. A group of Italian scientists has analysed the contents of the phials, establishing that they do contain blood, but have been unable to explain the phenomenon. Some sceptics believe it is due to the shaking of the containers or the penetration of warmth from the holder's hands.

* * *

In the midst of so much evil happening in the world, it is reassuring to know that our Lord is still at work in our presence and will not leave us.  Pray for us, San Gennaro, that we may be filled with the courage you displayed in defending the Truth of God.

Feast of The Seven Sorrows of Our Lady

Today, September 15, is the Feast Day of our Lady of Sorrows.  This day is to commemorate the sorrows that our Blessed Mother experienced during her life.  It is traditionally taught that there are seven sorrows of Mary, pictured by the seven swords piercing her heart:

1. The Holy Family had to flee to Egypt to escape the murderous wrath of King Herod.

2. Simeon's prophecy at the presentation of Jesus at the temple, that a sword would pierce Mary's heart as well. 

3. The Child Jesus is lost for three days until he is found in the temple.

4. Mary and Jesus meet on the way to Calvary when He is carrying his cross.

5. The Crucifixion of our Lord when Mary stood at the foot of the cross.

6. Jesus is taken down from the Cross and placed in his blessed mother's arms. 

7. Jesus is placed in the tomb.

 

With the exception of her Divine Son, no one has ever suffered more than our Lady did.  As St. Alphonsus de Liguori wrote:

In this valley of tears every man is born to weep, and all must suffer, by enduring the evils which are of daily occurrence. But how much greater would the misery of life be, did we also know the future evils which await us! ‘Unfortunate, indeed, would his lot be,’ says Seneca, ‘who, knowing the future, would have to suffer all by anticipation

Our Lord shows us this mercy. He conceals the trials which await us, that, whatever they may be, we may endure them but once. He did not show Mary this compassion; for she, whom God willed to be the Queen of Sorrows, and in all things like His Son, had to see always before her eyes and continually to suffer all the torments that awaited her; and these were the sufferings of the Passion and death of her beloved Jesus; for in the temple Saint Simeon, having received the Divine Child in his arms, foretold to her that that Son would be a mark for all the persecutions and oppositions of men. “Behold, this Child is set… for a sign which shall be contradicted.” And therefore, that a sword of sorrow should pierce her soul: “And thy own soul a sword shall pierce.”

The Blessed Virgin herself told Saint Matilda, that, on this announcement of Saint Simeon, ‘all her joy was changed into sorrow.’ 

The Presentation and Circumcision of our Lord

 * * * 

We have just passed the 11th commemoration of 9/11, when so many innocent people, who had done nothing more sinister than go to work, were brutally murdered right here in New York City.  They all woke up that morning thinking it was like any other day, having no idea that they would be dead in just a few hours.  When they left for work that day, their families had no idea they would never see them again. What if all these people had had to live their entire lives knowing this would be their fate?  This is, in effect, what our Lord and his Mother had to live with.  These were the two most innocent and perfect people who had ever lived.  Yet there was never a moment of their lives when they did not have the great sorrow of the Cross hanging like an ominous cloud over their heads.  And it was all done out of love for us, the very ones responsible for our Lord's death, so that we could be rescued from sin and spend eternity in blissful happiness with them.

Venerable Archbishop Fulton Sheen gave a beautiful sermon on the suffering of Mary, why it was necessary and what it accomplished.  Here are a few excerpts:

Not only did our Blessed Mother beget a Son, but the Son also begot her. This is the connection between Bethlehem and Calvary. She gave Him Sonship, but He also gave her Motherhood. At the crib ... His Mother; at the Cross she was called the "Woman." No Son in the world but Christ could ever make His Mother the mother of all men, because the flesh is possessive and exclusive. Making her the Woman or the Universal Mother was like a new creative word. He made her twice: once for Himself, and once for us in His Mystical Body. She made Him as the new Adam; He now installs her as the new Eve, the Mother of mankind.

John and Mary at the foot of the Cross
when Mary was given to us as our Blessed Mother

This transfer of His Mother to men was, appropriately, at the moment He redeemed them. That word "Woman" from the Cross was the second Annunciation, and John was the second Nativity. What joy went with her mothering Him! What anguish went with His Mothering her! Mary's mind was filled with the thought of Divinity in the stable; but at Golgotha it is sinners that are uppermost in her mind, and she now begins their mothering. The curse of Eve hangs heavily on Mary: "Thou shalt bring forth children in sorrow." When we contrast the great difference between her Divine Son and us, her sorrow, from our point of view, must have been not only "How can I live without Him?" but also "How can I live with them?" This was the miracle of substitution, for how can one be satisfied with straggling rays when one has been with the sun? The humility of which she sang at the Magnificat was not only a confession of unworthiness to be the Mother of God, but also the admission now of her readiness to be the Mother of man. It was a grief not to die with Him; it was a greater grief to live on with us.
 

Tradition indicates that Mary was pierced seven times with swords of sorrow and that these constitute her Seven Dolors. The position we will take is not that there were seven swords, but seven thrusts of the one sword, and the sword that pierced her soul was Christ Himself. This Sword has a double edge: one edge ran into His Own Sacred Heart, the other into her Immaculate Heart. . . .There were not seven swords but only one, and it plunged into two hearts. The Seven Dolors are as seven thrusts of the Sword Christ, one edge for Him as Redeemer, the other edge for her as the Mother of the Redeemer. Christ is the Sword of His Own Passion; He is the Sword of her compassion. Pius XII says that she, as the true Queen of Martyrs, more than any of the faithful, filled up for His Body the Church the sufferings that were wanting to the Passion of Christ! This was the first reason why God permitted her Dolors, that she might be the first after the Redeemer Himself to continue His Passion and death in His Mystical Body.

An unsuffering Christ Who ignored sin would be reduced to the level of an ethical reformer, like Buddha or Confucius. An unsuffering Madonna to the suffering Christ would be a loveless Madonna. Who is there who loves, who does not want to share the sorrows of the beloved? Since Christ loved mankind so much as to want to die to expiate their guilt, then He should also will that His Mother, who lived only to do His will, should also be wrapped in the swaddling bands of His griefs.
 

But she also had to suffer for our sakes as well as for His. As Our Lord learned obedience by which He suffered, so Mary had to learn motherhood, not by appointment but by experience with the burdens of the human heart. The rich cannot console the poor unless they become less rich for the sake of the poor; Mary cannot wipe away human tears unless she herself has been their fountain. The title "Mother of the Afflicted" had to be earned in the school of affliction. She does not expiate for sins; she does not redeem; she is not a savior — but by His will and by her own, she is so much bound up with Him that His Passion would have been entirely different had there not been her compassion.

He also plunged the sword into her own soul in the sense that He called her to be a cooperator with Him, as the new Eve, in the regeneration of humanity. When the mother of James and John asked political preferment for her sons, they were asked if they could drink of His chalice. That was the condition of being in His Kingdom. What draining of the chalice, then, shall be the condition of being the Mother of the Crucified! St. Paul tells us that we cannot be partakers of His glory unless we partake also of His crucifixion. If, then, the sons of Mary are not exempt from the law of sacrifice, certainly Mary herself, who is the Mother of God, shall be less exempt.

If you wish to read the entire magnificent sermon by Venerable Fulton Sheen, go here. 

Venerable Fulton Sheen concludes his sermon with this:

As she became the Refuge of Sinners by knowing what it is to lose God and then find Him, so He became the Redeemer of sinners by knowing the deliberateness, the willfulness, the resoluteness of those who wound the ones they love! She felt the creature losing the Creator; He felt the Creator losing the creature. Mary lost Jesus only in mystical darkness of the soul, not in the moral blackness of an evil heart. Her loss was a veiling of His face, not a flight. But she does teach us that, when we lose God, we must not wait for Him to come back. We must go out in search of Him; and, to the joy of every sinner, she knows where He can be found!

* * * 

There is no pain, no heartache that is foreign to our Blessed Mother.  Her understanding and compassion of the sorrows we experience on this earth is beyond our ability to comprehend.   She suffered intimately with our Lord.  Their hearts were pierced together for our salvation.  She is, as the Venerable Fulton Sheen said, the Refuge of Sinners. 

Republicans Vote To Fund Planned Parenthood and Obamacare

One person after another has told me that I MUST vote for Mitt Romney and the Republicans because they are the lesser of two evils and anything is better than Obama.  Really?  I will readily agree that it doesn't get much worse than Barack Obama, our abortion-loving, anti-Catholic president whose goal is to completely socialize and secularize America. 

The Republicans put on a much better face than what we see with Obama and the Democrats, but when it comes down to the nitty gritty, the Republicans are no better.  The House Republicans just voted for a bill that funds Planned Parenthood, the nation's largest abortion provider.  This bill also funds Obamacare, including the HHS Mandate forcing Catholic institutions to provide free contraception to their employees,

 Back in February of this year, thehill.com told us this:

Senate Republicans are pushing legislation to overturn the Obama administration’s decision that the health plans of faith-based organizations must cover contraception if they serve people of multiple religious backgrounds.

Sens. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) and Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.) are leading the effort.

“This is about whether the government of the United States should have the power to go in and tell a faith-based organization that they have to pay for something that they teach their members shouldn’t be doing,” said Rubio.

“I hope that the Senate and the House will act on it as well because the American people are asking us to,” he said.

Well, the House Republicans seem to have forgotten about this as on Thursday, September 13, they passed legislation that not only funds Planned Parenthood, but also funds Obamacare including the HHS mandate. 

Here is the story from cnsnews.com:

House Republicans Pass Funding for Planned Parenthood, Obamacare and Regulation Forcing Catholics to Act Against Faith

By Matt Cover
September 13, 2012



House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, House Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy and House Speaker John Boehner (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

(CNSNews.com) – The Republican-majority House of Representatives on Thursday passed a $1.047 trillion bill funding the federal government through March 2013 that will permit funding for Planned Parenthood and ObamaCare--including the regulation that took effect on Aug. 1 that will require virtually all health plans in the United States to cover, without fees or co-pay, sterilizations and all FDA-approved contraceptives, including those that induce abortions.

The vote was 329-91, and the bill now goes to the Senate for expected approval next week.

The bill funds the government for six months into the new fiscal year and for almost five months after the November elections. Congress turned to the stop-gap measure after failing to pass any of the 12 appropriation bills necessary to fund day-to-day government operations.

The Catholic bishops of the United States have unanimously declared the Obamacare sterilization-contraception-abortifacient regulation an "unjust and illegal mandate" that violates the right to free exercise of religion not only of Catholic institutions but also of Catholic business owners and workers.

The bill, a continuing resolution (CR), does not prohibit funding for either ObamaCare programs or Planned Parenthood. Nor does it stop the government from enforcing regulations, such as the mandate from the Health and Human Services Department that nearly all health insurance plans provide contraceptives, sterilizations, and abortion-inducing drugs free of charge.

House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), who supports the CR along with the GOP House leadership, earlier this year described the health insurance mandate as an “unambiguous attack on religious freedom in our country” and a violation of the First Amendment protecting the free exercise of religion.

The CR does prohibit the government from initiating any new programs or using the $1.047 trillion in the bill to carry out any programs or functions it was not engaged in during fiscal year 2012.

The resolution also extends for six months the federal pay freeze enacted in FY 2012 and the welfare reform legislation enacted in 1996.

Further, the bill prohibits grant programs that spend their allocations all at once--block and other types of grant programs--from doing so with the money allocated in this bill.

In terms of policy, the bill allows the government to continue executing the functions under ObamaCare that it was carrying out last year and that Congress had funded. In other words, the government cannot move forward on implementing ObamaCare outside of what it was doing last fiscal year.

The bill does not prohibit funding of Planned Parenthood, the nation's largest abortion provider.

According to its 2009-2010 annual report, Planned Parenthood received $487.4 million in government money; and according to its fact sheet, Planned Parenthood performed 329,445 abortions in 2010.

The bill represents a slight increase in spending over fiscal year 2012--about $4 billion--keeping to the spending cap outlined in the Budget Control Act of 2011. [I thought Republicans were going to cut spending.  Hmmmm.  That promise seems to have disappeared somewhere along the way.]

The CR is a product of a deal announced in July between House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) to extend federal spending past both the November election and the following lame-duck session of Congress.

* * *

Even Chris Smith of New Jersey, supposedly pro life, voted for this bill which funds Planned Parenthood and Obamacare.   Paul Ryan, the Republican VP candidate, voted yes on this bill.  I'll give Michelle Bachman credit, she voted against the bill.  Interestingly, Speaker John Boehner did not cast a vote.  Todd Akin also was not present for the voting and did not cast a vote.

As redstate.com tells us, only 70 Republicans voted against this bill, along with 21 Democrats. 

As we noted earlier this week, the Continuing Resolution voted on in the House will increase spending, fund Obamacare, and extend the main welfare program without forcing Obama to reinstate work requirements. This bill is really an embarrassment to everything House Republicans professed to stand for. It will delay the major battles until March 27, 2013. And let me tell you, they will really really really take the Democrats’ lunch money then. Just wait and see. 

We have one party in this nation, and that party is out only for its own interests, not ours.

Old TV Shows Are Good For Your Mental Well Being

The Bob Newhat Show
TV doesn't get any better than this

I don't watch any current TV shows either on network or cable TV.  I cannot relate to them nor do I want to try.  I find the characters, for the most part, to be shallow and annoying, and I get really, really tired of the constant sexuality of the shows and the secular, anti-traditional moral values that they promote. 

But that doesn't mean I never watch TV.  In my opinion, one of man's greatest creations is Netflix streaming.  That has become my favorite TV channel by far.  I love being able to sit down and watch the old Dick Van Dyke Show, Murder She Wrote, Twilight Zone, Wonder Years, or Monk.  My all-time favorite comedy is the first Bob Newhart Show.  Bob, Emily, Jerry, Carol and Howard are all like old friends to me.

I always thought I was a little weird in this.  Why would I enjoy watching something from 40 years ago that I've seen literally dozens of times, and still laugh just as hard as when I first saw it?  Well, a new study tells me that I'm not crazy, and that I'm actually doing something that's good for me. 


One thing the study doesn't mention, but for me is a very real factor, is that when I watch old TV shows, and I'm talking from 30 or more years ago, I love the fact that they are not overtly sexual, they still for the most part promote traditional values, and they are characters who honestly care about one another.  On the Bob Newhart Show, Bob and Emily truly love one another, and the characters are all fiercely loyal to one another.  It really is like spending time with old friends.  For a short time I can forget the evil world that surrounds me and immerse myself in another time and place.  The cast on The Mary Tyler Moore Show are old friends to me.  I love Mary's apartment, the fact that she always looks absolutely perfect, the way in which she interacts and really cares about the people in her life.  

And of course, the music from all these shows is wonderful.  "You can turn the world on with your smile."  Does it get any better?

Here is an article from the The Daily Mail about the study.  The article mentions shows more from the last 10 to 20 years.  I'm an old geezer.  For me you have go to back 30 years, to the 80's, to get anything decent. And 40 to 50 years ago - the 60's and 70's - is when you will find the truly great TV shows.

Why watching reruns of your favourite TV shows can give you a mental boost

Researchers found will power and self control boosted
People were even able to perform better on puzzles after an episode 
By Mark Prigg

PUBLISHED:06:57 EST, 7 September 2012| UPDATED:08:43 EST, 7 September 2012

If you've ever settled down with a box set of your favourite TV show, then good news - scientists say it may have given you a mental boost.

Researchers at the University of Buffalo found people had boosted will power and self control after watching a favourite show.

They say people even performed better on puzzles after settling down in front of an episode they had seen several times before.

Researches found that watching old TV show repeats such as Sex and the City The Bill Cosby Show can actual give you a mental boost and increase willpower.

 'When you watch a favorite re-run, you typically don't have to use any effort to control what you are thinking, saying or doing,' said Jaye Derrick at the University at Buffalo, who led the research.

'You are not exerting the mental energy required for self-control or willpower,'

'At the same time, you are enjoying your 'interaction,' with the TV show's characters, and this activity restores your energy.'

She believes that watching a rerun of a favorite TV show may help restore the drive to get things done in people who have used up their reserves of willpower or self-control.

'People have a limited pool of these valuable mental resources,' she said.

'When they use them on a task, they use up some of this limited resource.

'Therefore, they have less willpower and self-control for the next task.

'With enough time, these mental resources will return.

'However, there may be ways to more quickly restore them.'

However, the team found the key was a rerun - new shows simply had no effect.

Hit shows from the past such as Knight Rider I Love Lucy can give people a boost and even improve their ability to complete puzzles.

 'The restorative effect I found is specific to re-watching favorite television shows." Derrick says.

'Just watching whatever is on television does not provide the same benefit.

And perhaps surprisingly, watching a new episode of a favorite television show for the first time does not provide the same benefit.

'Based on my research, I would argue that watching television is not all bad.

'While there is a great deal of research demonstrating that violent television can increase aggression, and watching television may be contributing to the growing obesity epidemic, watching a favorite television show can provide a variety of benefits, which may enhance overall wellbeing,' she said.

In the first of her two studies published in the journal Social Psychological and Personality Science, Derrick asked half of the participants to complete a structured task which required concentrated effort.

The other half were asked to complete a similar but less structured task that allowed them more freedom and required much less effort.

Then half of the participants were asked to write about their favorite television show while the other half listed items in their room (a "neutral" task).

Following this, the participants were tested to measure any reduction or renewal of willpower.

Those who wrote about their favorite television show (rather than listing items in their room) wrote for longer if they had done the structured task than if they had done the less-structured task.

This, Derrick says, indicates these participants were seeking out their favorite TV shows and they wanted to spend more time thinking about them.

Classic shows such as Columbo were key to the boost, watching modern shows was found to have no effect.

And writing about their favorite television show restored their energy levels and allowed them to perform better on a difficult puzzle.

In the second study, participants did a daily diary study.

They reported on their effortful tasks, media consumption and energy levels each day.

If they had to do difficult tasks, they were more likely to seek out a re-run of their favorite television show, to re-watch a favorite movie or to re-read a favorite book.

Doing so restored their energy levels.

The team found the key was to watch an episode where the viewer identified with the characters, and relaxed completely as they watched

'In other words, there was a measurable restorative effect from a familiar fictional world,' Derrick finds.

Derrick's new research will expand on these findings and examine other social consequences of television.

'I have found, for example, that favorite television shows can actually increase people's pro-social behavior.

'Specifically, after thinking about a favorite television show, people are more willing to forgive others, are more willing to help a stranger and are more willing to sacrifice for their romantic partner,' she says.

Shows such as Dawson's Creek Wonder Years can actually help people feel more forgiving as they empathise with characters and plots.

And just because I love it so much, here's the theme to The Bob Newhart Show:

Bishop: We Have to Err On the Side of Protecting Children

"If there's any, any possibility that the law has been broken, if there's any possibility that an act of abuse has occurred, whether recently or in the decent past, then we need to report it to the civil authorities. We should never hesitate.."

Bishop R. Daniel Conlon

Father Zuhlsdorf is attacking the wrong party

Father John Zuhlsdorf is still on a rant about the "unfair" treatment given to Bishop Robert Finn of Kansas City, who was convicted for not reporting one of his priests who was eventually found guilty of child pornography.  Father Z is specifically upset with the National Catholic Reporter, which he calls Fishwrap.   The Reporter has been calling for the removal of Bishop Finn following his conviction.  I'm not taking either side of that issue.  It's not for me to decide what if anything happens to Bishop Finn, although I will say that he has severely undermined his authority with this incident.

Father Z defends Bishop Finn against the Reporter with statements like this:

I don’t remember seeing National catholic Reporter‘s editorials demanding the resignation of Archbp. Rembert Weakland or Card. Mahony. They were into some truly deep problems, but there was no high dudgeon from NCR about them. 

Father Z really should know better.  You don't defend the bad actions of one person by pointing to even worse actions by another.  That's just a cheap shot.  Plus, who cares what the National Catholic Reporter has to say.  The fact is, Bishop Finn screwed up, and now he has to pay the price.



Should the rant be against
"Fishwrap" or Bishop Finn?

Ah, but Father Z will not admit just how serious this matter is.  He tries to shake it off as no big deal.

Bp. Finn got what we can only describe as a hand-slapping by a court. He received suspended probation the record of which is then to be expunged from his record. If what Finn did was truly a massive crime, would the court have done this?

Father Zuhlsdorf does not tell us that the bishop is required as part of his sentence to start a training program for diocesan employees in detecting early signs of child abuse, and in what constitutes child pornography and obscenity. He must also create a fund of $10,000 to pay for victims’ counseling. Bishop Finn and the diocese still face 27 civil suits, 4 of them involving Father Ratigan.

But Father Z, does it really matter what the court says?  The fact is, Bishop Finn tried to hide the wrongdoings of one of his priests.  When he reprimanded the priest and put restrictions on him, Bishop Finn did not include any kind of supervision.    Father Ratigan promptly violated Bishop Finn's regulations by being around children, and Bishop Finn never checked on him.  Father Ratigan was invited to a parishioner's house for dinner, and he took pictures under the table and up the skirt of the daughter of the parishioner. This is not a non-incident as you make it out, Father Zuhlsdorf.   Father Ratigan is now awaiting his sentencing.

Father Z ends his rant with this:

The editors hate Bp. Finn, bishop of the diocese where their offices are. They hate him with a personal hatred, unhinged animus. I think they are actually happy that the diocese had to spend piles of money on this, because, in the end, it hurt Bp. Finn. They are inflating what the court recognized as something so vaporous as to require that even the record of it be expunged, and they are dancing around it with pikes and torches.

Again, I can only say, who cares what the National Catholic Reporter has to say?  That doesn't change the facts of this case.  Bishop Finn received a just sentence.  And you are absolutely wrong, Father Z, the court did not see this as "something so vaporous as to require that even the record of it be expunged."  The court obviously believes that Bishop Finn has learned his lesson and is being very lenient towards him, and I commend the judge in this case for that.  Yes, the probation is suspended if Bishop Finn fulfills the terms imposed on him.  He did not get off scott free as Father Z implies.  The conviction may be legally expunged in the eyes of the law, but it will not be expunged in the court of public opinion.  This will always be used to persecute the church.

One person who seems to be in stark disagreement with Father John Zuhlsdorf is Bishop R. Daniel Conlon, chairman of the U.S. bishops' Committee on the Protection of Children and Young People.  This article is from Fishwrap, as Father Z affectionately calls the National Catholic Reporter, so Father Z probably won't pay any attention to it.  Nonetheless, Bishop Conlon did make these statements, and it is well for all to heed them.  As Bishop Conlon said,

I think what this case brings up is that we always have to err on the side of caution -- we have to err on the side of protecting children. If there's any, any possibility that the law has been broken, if there's any possibility that an act of abuse has occurred, whether recently or in the decent past, then we need to report it to the civil authorities. We should never hesitate.

Here is the interview from Fishwrap, as Father Z calls them (NCR questions in blue):

US bishops' point man on sex abuse addresses Kansas City case

Sep. 11, 2012
By Joshua J. McElwee [1]

Joliet, Ill., Bishop R. Daniel Conlon, chairman of the U.S. bishops' Committee on the Protection of Children and Young People, is pictured in Rome in 2011. (CNS/Paul Haring)

In the wake of the first conviction of a Catholic bishop in the decades-long clergy sex abuse crisis, bishops throughout the country have to recognize they are accountable to their own people for their actions to protect children, the bishop who heads the U.S. bishops' committee tasked with advising their national conference on sexual abuse said Tuesday.

Bishops also have to be "firm" in applying the procedures that the body of bishops adopted 10 years ago to prevent child abuse, said Joliet, Ill., Bishop R. Daniel Conlon, the chair of the U.S. bishops' committee for the protection of children and young people.

Conlon spoke to NCR by phone from the sidelines of a meeting of the U.S. bishops' administrative committee. He addressed last week's conviction [2] of Kansas City-St. Joseph, Mo., Bishop Robert Finn for failing to report suspected child abuse.

In a non-jury trial Sept. 6, Finn was found guilty of one count of failing to report suspected child abuse, a misdemeanor in the state of Missouri, making him the first sitting U.S. bishop to be convicted of a crime stemming in the decades long sex abuse scandal.

During Tuesday's interview with NCR, Conlon discussed the impact of that conviction on the continuing progress of the national church to address sex abuse, 10 years after the U.S. bishops' adopted the Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People.

"We've got a long, long way to go," Conlon said. "But I think that diligent application of the Charter is essential. That doesn't mean that there's going to be 100 percent perfection because we're still human beings.

"And we have 190 dioceses in the United States. I can't help the fact that if there is a flaw in one place, that it's counted against one of us. I can't help that."

Following is NCR's interview with Conlon, edited slightly for context and length.

NCR: How do you see the U.S. bishops' conference addressing concerns about how the church handles reports of abuse in the light of Finn's guilty verdict?

Conlon: I think what this case brings up is that we always have to err on the side of caution -- we have to err on the side of protecting children. If there's any, any possibility that the law has been broken, if there's any possibility that an act of abuse has occurred, whether recently or in the decent past, then we need to report it to the civil authorities. We should never hesitate.

In the Kansas City case, we know that Bishop Finn never consulted his diocesan review board about a priest in possession of child pornography. How is that being dealt with by the national conference? What happens when a bishop doesn't report it to a review board? 

I think we have to make a distinction between what is printed in the charter -- and that, of course, is what we have bound ourselves to -- and what is good practice. The charter states that diocesan review boards are "to advise the diocesan/eparchial bishop of its assessment of allegations of sexual abuse by minors and its determination of a cleric's suitability for ministry."

That's what it says. Not -- it seems to me by interpretation, and this is just a matter of interpretation -- that if the review board is going to fulfill its responsibility as laid out in the charter to advise the bishop in his assessment of allegations of sexual abuse, then it has to be notified that there's been an allegation.

Again, as I said in terms of reporting to civil authorities, likewise in reporting to the diocesan review board. The bishop has to, it seems to me, report any allegation of abuse to the review board so that it can fulfill its obligation of advising them. And I don't think the bishop should put a doubt before that obligation to bring the matter to the review board.

In cases like Kansas City, how do you see the issue of accountability for bishops who don't follow the guidelines in the charter? What should happen to them?

The responsibility that we have to deal properly with allegations of abuse, to try to create a safe environment for young people is part of our overall responsibility for pastoral care of God's people.

In looking at that general responsibility, the first person to whom we are accountable is Christ, who is the good shepherd, and we're called to act in his place. That's a very serious responsibility to the Lord himself.

Secondly, a bishop is accountable to the representative of Christ who calls a bishop to that office of bishop and that's the pope. So each bishop is directly on earth accountable to the pope.

And then a bishop, I think, is also accountable to the people of the diocese. And has to be attentive to what people say, what he hears people say -- the priests, the deacons, the laypeople in the diocese. He has to listen to what people say in terms of how they feel he is fulfilling his office.   [I think it's safe to say that Bishop Finn fell down on the job on all three points.]

In terms of accountability on the issue of child abuse and child protection, all of us, every day, have to ask ourselves if we are being accountable to all three points.

In instances like this, is there any accountability for bishops from the members of the U.S. bishops' conference or does everything have to come from Rome?

There definitely is no accountability to the conference of bishops. There is an accountability to the college of bishops, the whole college of bishops. But the conference of bishops has no authority over individual bishops and the individual bishop has no accountability to the conference other than a sense of fraternal responsibility.

I mean, I pray for the bishops of the United States, and I am concerned about my brother bishops across the country, that sort of thing, but we have no line responsibility for other bishops. It's more the spiritual, fraternal kind of responsibility.

How do you address the questions of trust here? Even with the changes since adoption of the charter, laypeople in parishes and schools around the country have to trust that their bishop will report these things to the review board or to civil authorities, should they come up. How do you address that issue after the verdict in Kansas City?

I think sometimes in our human relationships, we have to presume trust. I think that, for example, when two people marry, they have to presume trust in one another. I think that when a bishop is appointed to a diocese, the people have to presume that they can trust him to carry out his responsibilities.

And if they begin to see that he fails in that trust, then they're going to lose trust. And just as spouses may lose trust in one another as they see each other fail. But they don't start out with the presumption of not trusting.

And I think that it's important to treat each human being on his or her individual terms. I think it's wrong, for example, for a husband or wife to say, "I'm not going to trust you because I know there are a lot of husbands and wives who are not trustworthy."

So I don't think we should treat all bishops as untrustworthy because one or two or three or 10 or 20 have failed to fulfill their responsibilities in one form or another. But this issue of child abuse is extremely important. A lot of human lives have been devastated by sexual abuse within the church.

So I believe that bishops have an extraordinary level of responsibility to deal with these allegations. At the same time, there is a lot of prudential judgment that has to be exercised. And I have discovered over the years that no two cases ever seem exactly the same.

But the basic responsibility of reporting an allegation to the civil authorities and cooperating with the civil authorities in any investigation that they undertake is very straightforward. It's a very simple obligation. And I think that people should be able to assume that the bishop or anyone who is operating directly under the authority of the bishop is going to make those reports.

You were reported in recent days as saying that the church's credibility on this issue was "shredded." [3] In the light of hoping that there's trust there, how can the bishops address that trust when their credibility seems to be so devastated over the past few years?

I was speaking at a national conference of safe environment coordinators and victims' assistance coordinators, so I wasn't addressing bishops.

That particular phrase, "our credibility is shredded," was specifically in a part of the talk where I was suggesting that the victims' assistance coordinators and safe environment coordinators might be of some help to the bishops in putting the work that they're doing out to the media. I was trying to say that the bishops' credibility with the media is shredded.

It is different. I was not saying that our credibility in general is shredded. I'd like to say that we still have some credibility with Catholic people and maybe in some other quarters as well. But we do have a credibility issue, there's no question about that.

On the other hand, I think we have made considerable progress. There's a recent Pew study that suggests we've made some progress in not only creating a safe environment for young people and dealing effectively with incidents of abuse, but in terms of our credibility.

But we've got a long, long way to go.  [And Bishop Finn has made it that much harder.]  And I think that in addition to the usual spiritual assistance that we have to count on -- and that's very important, we do have to count on prayer and the Holy Spirit to help us -- but I think that diligent application of the charter is essential. That doesn't mean that there's going to be 100 percent perfection because we're still human beings.

And we have 190 dioceses in the United States. I can't help the fact that if there is a flaw in one place, that it's counted against one of us. I can't help that.

But we have to try to prevent that by doing the best we can. But I don't think we're ever going to get to a point where there are not going to be failures. No institution in the world, including the Catholic church, even with the divine assistance that we have, is going to be perfect.

That doesn't mean that we should excuse our mistakes or that we should not be held accountable for our mistakes. I think continuing to be firm about applying the norms of the charter is a very important step.

Is there anything that we didn't get to that you'd want to say about this issue?

Just to be clear, I don't think that there's much room for making excuses for failures.  [Maybe Bill Donohue and Father Z should heed this and stop trying to excuse and downplay the actions of Bishop Finn.] To acknowledge that there are going to be failures is simply dealing with the reality of life. But, at the same time, I want to be clear that I'm not trying to make excuses. And I do think that bishops, in this area of child abuse, have to expect a very high level of accountability.

Accountability from civil and church authorities?

Yes. But all things in proportion.

[Joshua J. McElwee is an NCR staff writer. His email address is jmcelwee@ncronline.org.]
 

I believe Father Z is completely wrong in this matter, and  Bishop Conlon would also seem to be of that opinion.  Bishop Finn did not mean any harm, but he did not take the matter seriously enough.  He did not take into account the risk that Father Ratigan was to children and the scandal that this could cause to the church.  Proverbs 28:13 says:  "If you hide your sins, you will not succeed. If you confess and reject them, you will receive mercy."  Bishop Finn tried to hide the sins of his priest, and now the entire church is paying the price in every way imaginable.  It never pays to hide our sin, it will always find us out.