When Pope Francis was asked by a reporter what he thought about Archbishop Vigano's letter, he refused to comment. Rather, he encouraged the media to dig for the truth. According to Catholic News Agency:
“I read the statement this morning, and I must tell you sincerely that, I must say this, to you and all those who are interested: Read the statement carefully and make your own judgment,” he answered. “I will not say a single word on this.”
In his letter, Archbishop Vigano accused Pope Francis of covering up the sexual misconduct of Cardinal McCarrick. He claimed that the cardinal was sanctioned by Pope Benedict XVI due to sexual abuse, and Pope Francis uplifted the sanctions. Archbishop Vigano claimed the sanctions imposed on the cardinal was that he was removed from ministry, cannot celebrate Mass, and was given a life of prayer and penance in which he could not travel. Some of the news media took the pope's advice and did their own investigation. Since the letter came out, many photos of Cardinal McCarrick were collected, contradicting Archbishop Vigano's allegation against the Pope. Below is a photo that has been circulating the Internet. It is a photo of Archbishop Vigano together with Cardinal McCarrick (who was supposed to be sanctioned):
2 May 2012, during Benedict XVI’s Pontificate, the nuncio Viganò participates to the awarding of the “sanctioned” Cardinal McCarrick (photo taken from Cardinal Sean O’Malley’s blog)
The numerous photos collected by investigative reporters contradicted Archbishop Vigano's accusation against Pope Francis. There is also a question that Archbishop Vigano need to answer. If he knew that Pope Benedict XVI had sanction Cardinal McCarrick, then what was he doing participating in a ceremony with McCarrick who was supposed to be in seclusion, leading a life of prayer and penance? Why did he not come out then and tell everyone that the cardinal was not supposed to be there? If the cardinal was sanctioned by Pope Benedict XVI, why was it not publicized?
The Vatican Insider was one of the news media who took the pope's advice; thereby uncovering many things about the Archbishop's allegation against Pope Francis. According to the Vatican Insider:
The Viganò dossier suggests that in the last three or four years of Ratzinger’s pontificate McCarrick lived as a hermit or a cloistered monk and that only after the election of Francis was his cage opened. Once again, we must stick to the documented facts, and that is not the case at all. The reality is different, documented and documentable. At everyone’s fingertips, just a click on the web away. During Ratzinger’s last years of pontificate, McCarrick’s did not change his way of life: it is true that he left the seminary where he resided, but he celebrated diaconal and priestly ordinations alongside important cardinals of the Roman Curia close collaborators of Pope Ratzinger, he gave lectures. On 16 January 2012, he participated together with other US bishops in an audience with Benedict XVI in the Vatican and his name among the participants was indicated in the bulletin of the Holy See’s Press Office. On 16 April 2012, he met Benedict again at the audience of the Papal Foundation and celebrated the Pontiff’s birthday together with all those present. He traveled and returned to Rome in February 2013 to bid farewell to the Pope who had resigned and shook his hand with a smile (all immortalized by the cameras of Vatican TV). It is clear that his position was not considered so serious, that the indications of guilt were not considered so obvious and that the sanctions should not be so restrictive.
You can read the full story of Vatican Insider here.
And we think that conspiracy exists only on Guam. At any rate, here are a few updates: 1. The man who wrote Archbishop Vigano's letter was journalist Marco Tossati, who is a critic of Pope Francis. You can read the story here. 2. After the letter was published in the media, Archbishop Vigano disappeared and went into hiding. No one knows where he is, not even the journalist who wrote the letter. 3. The story below can be found here. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CNN)Even before Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano called for Pope Francis to resign on Sunday, the two men had a history, and it wasn't good.
Vigano, the former Vatican ambassador to the United States, angered some church officials in 2015 by arranging a meeting at the Vatican's embassy in Washington between the Pope and Kim Davis, the Kentucky clerk who refused to sign same-sex marriage certificates.
During his trip to the United States, the Pope had tried to stay above the country's culture wars. Vigano foisted Francis right into the fray. The Vatican, which tried to distance the Pope from Davis, was displeased. Two years later, Francis quietly accepted Vigano's resignation.
On Sunday, Vigano struck back.
In an 11-page "testimony" released to conservative Catholic media, Vigano accused Francis of ignoring his warnings about Archbishop Theodore McCarrick, who led the Archdiocese of Washington from 2000-2006. Under Francis' orders, McCarrick resigned from the College of Cardinals last month after accusations that he molested an altar boy and seminarians.
But Vigano said the Pope earlier had lifted restrictions on McCarrick put in place by Pope Benedict XVI, who resigned in 2015.
"In this extremely dramatic moment for the universal Church," Vigano wrote, "he must acknowledge his mistakes and, in keeping with the proclaimed principle of zero tolerance, Pope Francis must be the first to set a good example for cardinals and bishops who covered up McCarrick's abuses and resign along with all of them."
Vigano's accusations come as Francis and his church are trying to contain a quickly escalating sexual abuse crisis that has spread from Australia to Pennsylvania. In Ireland, a country devastated by its own clergy abuse scandals, the Pope repeatedly apologized last weekend for the sins and crimes of church leaders, lamenting that "some members of the hierarchy didn't own up to these painful situations and kept silent."
On the plane ride home, the Pope himself kept silent about Vigano's accusations.
"I will not say a single word about this," he said. "I believe the statement speaks for itself. And you have the sufficient journalistic ability to make your conclusions. It's an act of trust."
While journalists dig for the truth, and the Pope keeps silent, Vigano's letter has emerged as a sort of Rorschach test for Catholics: Many conservative Catholics say the Pope must go. Liberal Catholics accuse the archbishop of launching a coup d'etat against his boss.
"This is a coup operation against Pope Francis," said Massimo Faggioli, a professor of Catholic history and theology at Villanova University in Pennsylvania.
"It is a stunning convergence between the personal agenda of Vigano and the theological agenda of those who do not like Pope Francis."
Turning the tables on Vigano, the Archdiocese of Washington suggested his tenure in the United States should itself be investigated.
A 2014 memo shows that Vigano himself demanded that evidence be destroyed in an attempt to end an investigation against a former archbishop of St. Paul and Minneapolis, according to CNN Vatican analyst John Allen.
But the Bishop of Phoenix, the Most Rev. Thomas J. Olmsted, issued a statement defending Vigano, whom he said he has known since 1979.
"Although I have no knowledge of the information that he reveals in his written testimony of August 22, 2018, so I cannot personally verify its truthfulness, I have always known and respected him as a man of truthfulness, faith and integrity," Olmsted wrote.
A 'hit list'
Even before he tussled with Francis, Vigano was adept at courting controversy.
In 2011, when he ran the Vatican City State, the Italian churchman clashed with his superiors, accusing Vatican officials of corruption. The charges became enmeshed in the Vatileaks scandal, when former Pope Benedict's butler leaked documents detailing the infighting.
"Vigano presented himself as a whistle blower," said John Thavis, who was the Rome bureau chief for Catholic News Service at the time. "But he also had a persecution complex. He saw conspiracy theories all around him."
Thavis said Benedict didn't seem impressed by Vigano's views. "He sent him 4,000 miles away, to the United States."
Vigano was appointed the Vatican's US ambassador in October 2011. For the most part, he kept a low profile, though some accused the archbishop of breaking with church protocol by appearing at an anti-gay marriage rally at the Supreme Court. (Typically, Vatican ambassadors -- known as nuncios -- do not publicly involve themselves in another country's internal political debates.)
Besides representing the Pope, nuncios typically advise popes on whom to appoint as bishops.
In his letter Sunday, Vigano seemed bitter that Francis had relied on other Vatican officials for recommendations, saying that "the nunciature in Washington was now out of the picture in the appointment of bishops."
Instead, Vigano said, the appointment of several bishops to top posts in Chicago and New Jersey were "orchestrated" by McCarrick and his successor in Washington, Cardinal Donald Wuerl, as well as Cardinal Oscar Maradiaga, a Honduran who is one of the Pope's closest advisers.
More salaciously, Vigano said the Catholic Church is plagued by "homosexual networks" that "act under the concealment of secrecy and lies with the power of octopus tentacles, and strangle innocent victims and priestly vocations, and are strangling the entire Church."
Those "networks," Vigano said, were complicit in a "conspiracy of silence" that allowed McCarrick's and others' alleged abuses to continue.
In statements, Wuerl of Washington and Cardinal Joseph Tobin of Newark, New Jersey, both of whom were named in Vigano's letter, denied any allegations against them.
"The factual errors, innuendo and fearful ideology of the 'testimony,' serve to strengthen our conviction to move ahead resolutely in protecting the young and vulnerable from any sort of abuse," Tobin said, "while guaranteeing a safe and respectful environment where all are welcome and breaking down the structures and cultures that enable abuse."
The fact that most of the bishops Vigano criticizes are well-known liberals has led some church experts to suspect his motives.
"This letter is a hit list," said Faggioli. "It's all the people he thinks are bad for the church because of their 'homosexual agenda.'"
Apparently, that includes Pope Francis.
Vigano saves most of his ammunition for the Pope, who he says he told in 2013 that McCarrick was "a serial predator" but "continued to cover for him."
But the Pope didn't cover for McCarrick. Unlike his predecessors, Francis forced the former cardinal to resign in July.
And Thavis said Vigano's assertions about Benedict putting restrictions on McCarrick, including not allowing him to participate in church events or celebrate Mass in public, are patently false.
"McCarrick appeared at several high-profile events with Benedict," he said.
Still, Thavis and Faggioli, as well as other church experts, said the Vatican should respond in detail to Vigano's charges, even if the Pope himself refuses to do so.
"They still need to answer some questions," Faggioli said. "This is something that cannot be ignored."
There are always two sides to every story. In his long-page testimony, Archbishop Vigano claimed that Pope Francis, Cardinal Wuerl, and several others knew that Cardinal McCarrick was sanctioned by Pope Benedict XVI. However, Cardinal Wuerl has come out denying those allegations. According to Catholic News Agency dated August 25, 2018 (the bold is mine):
Cardinal Donald Wuerl of Washington has denied a report that he was informed about restrictions apparently placed by the Vatican upon his predecessor, Archbishop Theodore McCarrick.
“Cardinal Wuerl did not receive documentation or information from the Holy See specific to Cardinal McCarrick’s behavior or any of the prohibitions on his life and ministry suggested by Archbishop Vigano,” the cardinal’s spokesman, Ed McFadden, told CNA.
On Aug. 25, Archbishop Carlo Vigano, apostolic nuncio to the United States from 2011 to 2016, released a “testimony,” alleging that in 2009 or 2010, after receiving reports of habitual sexual misconduct on the part of McCarrick, Pope Benedict XVI had ordered that “the Cardinal was to leave the seminary where he was living, he was forbidden to celebrate [Mass] in public, to participate in public meetings, to give lectures, to travel, with the obligation of dedicating himself to a life of prayer and penance.”
In his testimony, Archbishop Vigano claimed that Cardinal McCarrick was staying at the Redemptoris Mater Seminary and was ordered to leave the seminary by Pope Benedict XVI after placing sanctions on him. The jungle eagerly pounced on this information because they have an agenda. The agenda is to discredit an demonize RMS and the NCW anyway they can without even looking at the other side of the story. In an earlier news report dated July 24, 2018, Catholic News Agency reported (the bold is mine):
Cardinal Theodore McCarrick is reported to have lived alongside a Maryland house of formation for members of a religious order whose founder has faced Vatican charges of sexual misconduct.
St. John Baptist de la Salle is located in Chillum, Md., adjacent to Washington, D.C. The parish is staffed by the Institute of the Incarnate Word (IVE), and the property serves as the headquarters of the community's Province of the Immaculate Conception........
Sources told CNA that Cardinal McCarrick lived with the IVE community at St. John Baptist de la Salle during his retirement, after residing for a period at the Redemptoris Mater Seminary of the Archdiocese of Washington.
One source close to the Archdiocese of Washington told CNA that the cardinal had for a time an IVE brother in formation living in his residence, which was on the parish property but separate from the house of formation.
An additional source also told CNA that McCarrick had young priest and seminarian assistants while living with the IVE, but did not comment on whether any seminarian resided with the cardinal.
An Archdiocese of Washington spokesperson did not confirm those reports. The spokesperson told CNA that Cardinal McCarrick “made his own living arrangements for his retirement,” as well as his own arrangements for secretarial assistance.
Cardinal McCarrick stayed at the Redemptoris Mater Seminary in the Archdiocese of Washington for a short period of time and then stayed at St. John Baptist de la Salle in Maryland during his retirement years. There is no evidence showing that Cardinal McCarrick was told to leave RMS by then Pope Benedict XVI. Apparently, he left on his own to settle elsewhere. As a matter of fact, CNA reported in August 25, 2016 as to why the cardinal left RMS (the bold is mine):
While McCarrick is reported to have moved from Redemptoris Mater Seminary, McFadden said that “Cardinal Wuerl categorically denies that he was ever provided any information regarding the reasons for Cardinal McCarrick’s exit for the Redemptoris Mater Seminrary.”
A source close to the cardinal told CNA that Wuerl had the impression some issues had arisen when McCarrick left the seminary, but neither McCarrick nor the apostolic nuncio spoke with him about the matter.
So, there may have been an issue between RMS and Cardinal McCarrick when he left the seminary. This issue that rose between them remains unknown. For all we know, RMS had probably discovered that he was hitting on some of the seminarians, and RMS politely told the cardinal to leave. But of course, the other side of the story are things the jungle would never report to its readers. They simply tell their readers that a homosexual cardinal was staying at RMS, and then assume that RMS harbors child abusers. Now, you know the other side of the story.
First came the sexual scandal by the clergy in the Catholic Church, which was taking down priests and then later bishops who covered up the scandals. These sexual allegations goes back decades that even dead priests were accused. Then came the #MeToo Movement, which was taking down powerful men in business, Hollywood, and politics. However, as a result of the #MeToo movement, women are now being locked out in the world of business, government, and elsewhere. According to the New York Post:
Men are scared, and feminists are delighted. But the urge to call out and punish male sexual transgression is bound to clash with an inescapable truth: We’re all in this together, men and women.
Consider what’s happening in the capital of Florida. Female staffers and lobbyists have found “many male legislators will no longer meet with them privately,”reported the Miami Herald. “I had a senator say, ‘I need my aide here in the room because I need a chaperone,’ ” lobbyist Jennifer Green told the paper. “I said, ‘Senator, why do you need a chaperone? . . . Do you feel uncomfortable around me?’ ‘Well,’ he said, ‘anyone can say anything with the door shut.’ ”.........
This kind of thinking is catching on in aggressively P.C. Silicon Valley, where men are taking to message boards like Reddit to express interest in sex segregation — sometimes labeled “Men Going Their Own Way,” or the “Man-o-Sphere.” How will that work out for women in the tech industry, where they already face substantial challenges?
Across industries, “Several major companies have told us they are now limiting travel between the genders,” Johnny Taylor, president of the Society for Human Resource Management, told the Chicago Tribune, citing execs who tell men not to go on business trips or share rental cars with women co-workers. UCLA psychologist Kim Elsesser, the author of “Sex and the Office,” sees a nascent “sex partition.” If men start to back away from women, at least in professional settings, it’s difficult to see how that will aid the feminist cause.
Women are now seeing a decrease in business travel, mentoring, and even invitations to business holiday parties. The aftermath of the #MeToo Movement has turned men and women into two contentious and opposing sides, which is not good for either of them. So, now we see the impact of the #MeToo Movement. Now, what is the impact of the sexual scandal on the Catholic Church? First of all, we already know that more Catholics left the Church. There is a rapid decline of Catholicism in the United States and Europe as these decades old sex scandal were published in the media. Secondly, there will be less priests and bishops as more of them are being accused. It does not even matter whether the accusation is true or not. The Church had already abandoned the Truth and chose to believe all allegations. In the third place, the Catholic Church will lose much of its assets and services (parishes, Catholic schools, etc.). In the U.S., the impact may not be so noticeable. In Guam, which is a very small island with limited amount of land, it may be a different story as more and more lawsuits come out. Finally, as we are now seeing, bishops are turning against each other. According to one news report (the bold is mine):
In his testimony, dated August 22, Archbishop Viganò, who served as apostolic nuncio in Washington D.C. from 2011-2016, states that in the late 2000s, Benedict had “imposed on Cardinal McCarrick sanctions similar to those now imposed on him by Pope Francis,” and that Viganò personally spoke with Francis about the gravity of McCarrick’s abuse soon after his election in 2013.
But he says that Francis “continued to cover him” and not only did he “not take into account the sanctions that Pope Benedict had imposed on him” but also made McCarrick “his trusted counselor” who helped him to appoint a number of bishops in the United States, including Cardinals Blase Cupich of Chicago and Joseph Tobin of Newark.
Archbishop Viganò also implicates Cardinals Sodano, Bertone and Parolin in the cover-up and insists various other cardinals and bishops were well aware, including Cardinal Donald Wuerl, McCarrick’s successor as Archbishop of Washington D.C.
So, now even the Pope is being accused of covering up the sexual misconduct of Cardinal McCarrick with ADULT seminarians and priests. Bishops are now pointing fingers at others. This is the impact of the sexual scandal in the Catholic Church. Just as the #MeTwo movement brought men and women against each other, the sex scandal is also bringing bishops against each other.
The Vatican has announced that it will establish a Redemptoris Mater Seminary in Tokyo, Japan. According to the Editor's note of Catholic World News (the bold is mine):
Citing his concern for the evangelization of Asia, Cardinal Fernando Filoni, prefect of the Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples, announced that the Redemptoris Mater seminary for Asia will be established in Tokyo. Cardinal Filoni said that the project has papal approval. The archbishop of Tokyo said he was “confused” by the decision and that he had not been consulted.
It was also brought to my attention that the jungle is once again spreading misinformation about the NCW. Because the Archbishops in Japan were not consulted about erecting an RMS in Tokyo, Chuck White cites the Statutes of the Neocatechumenal Way to mislead people into thinking that the NCW violates its own statutes. According to Chuck White:
This, despite the fact that the Statute of the Neocatechumenal Way specifically says that the Neocatechumenal Way “is at the service of the bishop“ [Art. 1] and that it is “under the jurisdiction, direction of the diocesan bishop” [Art. 2]
The Statutes of the Neocatechumenal Way is ONLY for the Neocatechumenal Way. Nowhere in that Statutes does it even mention "Redemptoris Mater Seminary." Why? Because RMS has its own Statutes and bylaws to follow. RMS does not follow the Statutes of the Neocatechumenal Way. RMS is not owned by the Neocatechumenal Way, and RMS has its own statutes and bylaws to follow.....plain and simple.
This is my response to "Faithfully yours" whose comments can be found here.
First of all, our justice system is good, but it is not perfect. We have set guilty persons free and incarcerated innocent people. Although our justice system is not perfect, it is better than the justice systems found in totalitarian governments. Regarding the case of Father Gordon MacRae, you stated:
Excerpt from New Hampshire attorney general's report on Father Gordon MacRae March 3, 2003 The Rev. Gerald MacRae was convicted in 1994 on five sexual assault counts stemming from his abuse of teenage boys while he was stationed at St. Bernard's parish in Keene, N.H., in the 1980s. During those years, MacRae repeatedly molested three brothers whom he first met during an earlier assignment in Marlborough.
After much research was done on the MacRae case, it was found that Father MacRae was never a pastor in the St. Bernard's parish in Keene, New Hampshire at the time his accusers claimed to be sexually abused. See the story here. So, why is he still in prison? Because our justice system is not perfect and can be just as political as our government. In fact, the court is part of our government. And our justice system is very very slow. Do not get me wrong. Despite its imperfection, I still think our justice system is better than what I have seen in other countries especially in communist countries. In a similar situation, an accuser claimed that he was sexually abused by Father Ray Cepeda at the Santa Barbara Church in Dededo for 8 years from 1992-1999. The problem with this accuser's story is that Father Ray was not a pastor of the Dededo parish until 1997. What Sean O'Malley said is true. The Church decades ago did not care about the little ones. They did not care to determine what was the truth. Instead, they found it much easier to move the pastors around. Today, the Church STILL has NOT changed. Hundreds of alleged victims are coming out claiming rape, sexual abuse, and child molestation by the clergy. And the Church STILL does not care to determine what is the truth. Instead, they found it much easier to settle out of court. Decades ago, the Church should have investigated what is the truth. If the Church had done that decades ago, those priests who are found guilty would have been defrocked and punished. But the Church still has not learned its lesson. Take the McCarrick case. Many seminarians, bishops and priests knew that McCarrick was gay. They knew about his inappropriate behavior with the ADULT seminarians and priests. However, recently a man claimed he was sexually abused by McCarrick when he was a minor at St. Patrick's Cathedral during Christmas Eve. What is wrong with that picture? Was McCarrick judged according to that sexual allegation alone? Or was he judged because he was gay and had a history of sexual misconduct with adult seminarians and priests? Likewise, Mark Apuron claimed he was raped by his uncle during a gathering of people in which no one heard or saw anything. What is wrong with that picture? Also, two accusers in Australia said they were sexually molested by Cardinal Pell while they were swimming in the pool. The problem with their story is that Cardinal Pell does not know how to swim. So, what is wrong with that picture? Or should I say, what is wrong with their story? Father McRae was accused of sexually abusing a minor in a parish where he was never assigned to at the time his accusers claimed to be sexually abused. In fact, his accusers never even met Father Gordon MacRae. What is wrong with that picture? Does the Church care to investigate any of these allegations? No. They found it easier to simply settle out of court. The Church have not changed one bit nor learned its lesson from the past. And the Church is supposed to stand by and represent the truth. The people of Guam have been fooled by the Junglewatch Nation, CCOG, and LFM when they introduced and supported a bill to lift the statutes of limitations. Even Father Mike Crisostomo came out on K57 supporting the bill. They claimed that they can rebuild the church, and even gave Boston as their example. Innocent people in Boston suffered as a result of the lawsuits. And even after 15 years, allegations of sexual abuse are still coming out in Boston. Today, the jungle have lost a lot of credibility. Just look at the jungle blog now. Hardly anyone makes any comments on it. CCOG and LFM are silent because more and more people are starting to question these allegations. There is an anti-Catholic movement out there whose agenda is to destroy the Catholic Church, and this movement have used some of our Catholic brothers and sisters (including our priests and bishops) as instruments to bring down the Church. Yes, we pray for genuine victims who have been sexually abused by the clergy. However, money is NOT going to heal these victims. We also need to pray for the clergy and the entire Church as well because they are also suffering.
As I had previously mentioned, Cardinal McCarrick claimed he was innocent of child sexual abuse. He was surprised to learn about this allegation because in his lifetime, he knew that he had slept with ADULT seminarians and priests, which was consentual. Nevertheless, these certain facts were ignored by the news media and only focused on the allegation that Cardinal McCarrick sexually abused a minor. Below is an excellent article written by Catholic author David F. Pierre, Jr. through Father McRae's blog, These Stone Walls. You can find the following article here.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Catholic Media Join the Sex Abuse Pile-On by David F. Pierre, Jr.
In an exclusive for These Stone Walls, Catholic author David F. Pierre, Jr takes a soul-searching measure of the Catholic media at this time of crisis in the Church.
Introduction by Father Gordon MacRae: I wrote a post for this week with a searing assessment of the media and moral crisis that now embroils the Catholic Church in America. Then noted Catholic writer, David F. Pierre, Jr. sent me a stunning article that is a perfect prelude to next week’s post on These Stone Walls.
It is an honor this week to present this guest post by Dave Pierre, moderator of The Media Report and author of Catholic Priests Falsely Accused and Sins of the Press. David’s writings have also appeared at Catholic World Report and numerous other Catholic and secular media venues. Please share this most important contribution to the current state of Catholicism in America. I now present “Losing Perspective: Catholic Media Join the Sex Abuse Pile-On” by David F. Pierre, Jr:
LOSING PERSPECTIVE: CATHOLIC MEDIA NOW JOINING THE SEX ABUSE PILE-ON
By David F. Pierre, Jr.
The high-profile allegations that the prominent Cardinal Theodore McCarrick sexually abused seminarians and teenagers decades ago are indeed revolting and maddening. The hearts of all faithful Catholics ache for the unimaginable suffering that anyone may have endured at the hands of Church leaders and others. [See: Cardinal Theodore McCarrick and the Homosexual Matrix by Father Gordon J. MacRae.]
However, when it comes to writing about the McCarrick story, there are signs that some Catholic writers have pushed aside truth to attack those with whom they disagree and further their own ideological agenda.
For example, a prominent Catholic web site recently published the claim from a woman that she was repeatedly abused for years decades ago by a priest who was living at the Cathedral of St. Francis of Assisi in Metuchen, New Jersey, at the very same time Theodore McCarrick was bishop there.
It is a startling story indeed. The woman all but stated that McCarrick endorsed her abuse. Except there was one major problem with her narrative: The diocese said there was “no record showing [the priest] having lived with then-Bishop McCarrick at the Cathedral.”
In other words, the woman’s story didn’t check out at all. There would be more than enough justification not to believe her story and surely good reason not to publish her tale. (The woman was also promoting a book she had written.) But because the woman’s story had the name “McCarrick” in it, the site rolled out the story anyway under the banner, “Woman abused under McCarrick’s roof,” as if we should accept her story despite the glaring factual issue.
“BITTERNESS, BAD TEMPER, ANGER, EVERY KIND OF MALICE”
For many years I have been sensing a palpable fear among many Catholic writers, a fear that they will be accused of being “soft” or “silent” in their reporting on the issue of clergy sex abuse, or worse, that they will beaccused of “defending the indefensible” (as I have been).
A result of this fear has been that fairness and historical context have been thrown out the window in writing about the issue of clergy sex abuse. (And, yes, there is a historical context to why Catholic leaders handled cases decades ago the way they did.) It seems there is an untold competition among Catholic writers to see who can appear the most hard-edged and hysterical about these crimes committed decades ago.
However, recently a certain mean-spiritedness has even permeated the reporting in Catholic media, a mean-spiritedness most evident in the recent coverage of the McCarrick story.
Typical of the nastiness has been the treatment of Cardinal Kevin Farrell, who worked with McCarrick in the Archdiocese of Washington D.C., from 2001 to 2006. Farrell has twice voluntarily gone to the media to emphatically deny that he knew anything about McCarrick’s past with regards to seminarians, adding that he was “shocked” when he first heard of the charges against McCarrick.
It is here where I believe Catholic writers may be suffering from a form of insular bias from which they cannot assess a situation clearly.
Take it from someone who still works in the “regular world” and does not make his living writing on a computer. Even if you work closely with someone every day for years, you still know relatively little about them. Sure, you may come to know a bit about your co-workers’ families, a bit about their daily lives, the restaurants they’ve tried. But do you know with whom they socialized last weekend? A year ago? Five years ago? Twenty years ago? No, not at all. Not in the least bit.
In truth, it makes perfect sense that Cardinal Farrell had no idea what was going on at a beach house twenty years before he started working with McCarrick. And Catholic writers are reckless in accusing Farrell of lying without a shred of evidence.
A CALL FOR BALANCE AND SKEPTICISM
And it is a bit disturbing that so many are accusing Cardinal Farrell of lying while at the same time wholeheartedly believing decades-old accusations from anonymous men profiled in the New York Times.
When the Times published its first story back in June claiming abuse in 1971 (47 years ago) by McCarrick, did not a single cleric raise an eyebrow when the accuser – anonymous, of course – claimed that he was abused while his inseam was being measured for a cassock? (Think about it.) Was there not a degree of skepticism when the accuser claimed that this abuse occurred in the sacristy at St. Patrick’s Cathedral in New York City on Christmas Eve, a time when as many as two dozen clerics would have been living there and whose bustling atmosphere would have rivaled Macy’s department store?
When yet another accuser came forward to the Times – this one anonymous also, of course, but going by the name “James” – initially there was little reason not to believe the claims, even if they were a half-century old. Yet after James talked to additional media outlets, obvious contradictionsand strange elaborations soon became apparent. By the time he spoke to a popular conservative writer, his story included bizarre roles with Cardinal Law and the notorious Paul Shanley, people he had never previously mentioned when talking to the Times or the Associated Press. Why were there sudden cameo appearances by two of the most notorious names in
the clergy abuse narrative in James’ story?
Fr. Gordon MacRae has been serving time in a New Hampshire prison for nearly a quarter of a century for abuse which evidence concludes never occurred. If he admitted to his crimes, he would have been out of prison ages ago. He writes a weekly blog, and he recently made a salient point about the McCarrick case:
“A man accused of a crime – like the sexual abuse of a 16-year-old – must be judged on the evidence of the crime and not on his reputation. This is why our legal system has so-called ‘rape shield laws.’ A woman who is a victim of assault is protected from having her sexual history placed on trial. The same must be true of a defendant.”
Indeed, just because McCarrick regularly cavorted with gay seminarians at a beach house decades ago does not in itself make the stories in the New York Times about the sexual abuse of minors true. Not a single Catholic writer – with the exception of MacRae in prison, of course – has recognized this truth.
And having studied abuse cases in the Church for quite a while, I can say that the mere fact that the accusers’ decades-old claims have been deemed “credible” and/or “substantiated” have little bearing on their veracity. As I have written in the past, “credible” could mean as little as that the abuse was geographically possible, that it can be shown that the accuser was merely at a parish at the same time as an accused cleric. The “credible” bar is a very low one indeed.
What do we truly know about the McCarrick scandal? We know he had a beach house. We know that he often invited priests and seminarians there. We know that McCarrick often shared a bed with a guest. We know a lot of clergy were uncomfortable with it.
People ask, “Why didn’t people say anything?” Well, here’s an idea: Maybe there was no abuse. Maybe the whole beach house thing was gay, creepy, and wildly inappropriate, but no one ever felt that the interactions rose to the level of “abuse.” Has anyone ever thought of that?
Yes, gay seminarians and priests should not be sharing a beach house. But was anyone really surprised by this public revelation? Really? If you were, then you really have not been paying attention for the last forty years.
ONE FINAL THING
A lot is being made out of a grand jury report in Pennsylvania which alleges abuse and cover-up spanning decades across dioceses in the state.
But here is some important information: A “grand jury report” is not actually written by jury members. As any lawyer will tell you, the report is written by a district attorney’s office with a predetermined outcome. The people chosen for the jury are merely a formality, window dressing to make the matter legal. There is no fact-checking, and those cited in the report have almost no recourse to defend themselves. A jury member just puts his signature on it to make it official. Press conferences ensue, and hysteria follows.
It is being reported that the PA grand jury report is 800 pages long yet does not recommend a single criminal charge. Many of the priests in the report are long dead. Reported lines such as, “Priests were raping little boys and girls and the men of God who were responsible for them not only did nothing: they hid it all” are nothing but inflammatory and bereft of any proven fact but founded only upon twisted narratives and unsupported assumptions. The truth that countless tax dollars were spent on a report studying actions from many decades ago should raise serious questions among everyone.
And please keep this in mind: One of the last times a grand jury report about the Catholic Church made big news, it was in Philadelphia back in 2011. Mug shots were plastered across the media landscape and endless bandwidth was expended to excoriate the Catholic Church yet again.
It eventually took years for all the facts to come to the surface, but in the end, it turned out that the entire report was a complete work of fiction. Really. Innocent men went to prison, and one priest even died there. The report was a complete crock.
If you didn’t already know this, you should. And when the Pennsylvania grand jury report is eventually released, we should all remember Philadelphia. We can believe that bishops horribly mishandled abuse cases decades ago.
We can believe that an evil culture of homosexual predation has poisoned the Church. We can believe that homosexual priests are still a major problem in the Church today. We can demand change. We can demand a return to orthodoxy, and we should.
But the answer should not be the echo chamber and pile-on that is coming from the Catholic media today.
David F. Pierre, Jr. is the author and creator of TheMediaReport.com, an educational cooperative chronicling and monitoring the mainstream media’s coverage of the Catholic Church sex abuse narrative. He is also the author of three books on the topic.
The Boston sex abuse scandal by the clergy was made public in 2002. It is now 2018, and you would think with all the sex abuse policy and "zero tolerance" in place, there would be little to no sex abuse in the Church. However, according to the Boston Globe dated January 2017, hundreds of alleged victims from around the world still continue to come forward claiming they were sexually abused in the State of Massachusetts. That is correct. The sexual allegations continue to come even after FIFTEEN YEARS. The only difference is that these new wave of sexual allegations are coming from younger people in their 20s and 30s. Guam passed a law, lifting the Statutes of Limitations in 2016. It has only been two years, and already almost 200 alleged victims have come forward. The latest one to come forward is a woman who claimed that Father Jack Niland exposed himself to her when she was 10 years old. The woman is suing the Archdiocese for 5 million dollars. According to the Guam Daily Post:
In 1976, when she was 10, J.E.L. recalled playing in the sand at her family's beach when Niland parked his car and walked up to her and introduced himself as Father Jack. The girl was scared because he was a stranger but answered his questions because she was raised to be obedient to priests, court documents state.
The lawsuit states Niland asked the minor if she wanted to see his "gun" and performed a sex act. Niland allegedly told her he'd be seeing her at Eskuelen Pale Sunday School and left.
J.E.L. alleges the incident affected her attendance at the school as she walked around in fear and had anxieties about seeing Niland. She was frightened when she saw him, the lawsuit states.
Regarding her story, this is my response: Where were her parents? Her parents left their 10 year old child on the beach alone without supervision? What made these parents think that it was okay to leave their 10 year old child on a beach and not think that their child would not get into the water and drown? Pennsylvania is considering lifting the Statutes of Limitations so that the Churches in Pennsylvania can be sued for millions of dollars. Well, we are already seeing that Boston is STILL paying for those millions of dollars even after 15 years and even after the settlement was supposed to be already settled out of court. The same thing will happen to Guam. The latest lawsuit against the Archdiocese is by J.E.L on August, 2018. Next year, there will be more lawsuits. And we will see the same thing the following year even after the settlements are paid off. After the first settlement is paid off, many more will come making allegations of sexual abuse, rape, and molestation. Like Boston, the Archdiocese of Agana will continue to be in "out of court settlements" for many years to come. Many people are already suspecting that these allegations are false, and simply want money from the Church. Even J.E.L.'s story is questionable to some people because it is unheard of to see very young children alone by themselves on a beach without family members around. Even the 6 year old boy who almost drowned at the beach was not left alone. See the story here. So, why was this 10 year old girl left alone on a beach where no one was able to even see Father Jack Niland exposing himself to her? Furthermore, the lawyers of these alleged victims are even asking for the transfer of the deeds of properties. According to the Pacific Daily News (the bold is mine):
Clergy sex abuse accusers are supposed to be paid by the defendants "no later than the close of business on the 90th day" after the memorandum of settlement's execution.
Payments include the transfer of the deed of any property that the parties agreed to in the settlement.
In the United States, properties were sold and the money was used to pay the victims of sex abuse. But in Guam, they are asking for the TRANSFER of the deed of properties? How did this agreement come about, and which of the lawyers made this agreement? Who is the Archdiocese going to transfer the deed of property to? Is the deed going to be transferred to the alleged victims or to a lawyer of the alleged victims? Is the Archdiocese going to transfer the deed of property to the alleged victims and it would be up to the alleged victims to fight over which portion they want? Or perhaps, the Archdiocese is going to transfer the deed to a lawyer, and the lawyer will decide who gets what portion? Bear in mind, however, that the real winners of these sex abuse allegations are always the lawyers. They also get a portion of the payment.
This line "for the good of the Church" has been the excuse used by many bishops to cover up crimes or unfair practices. Innocents were sacrificed by some bishops because they thought they were protecting the Church when in reality they were following the wiles of Satan who influenced them to do it "for the good of the Church." A bishop who sacrifices an individual "for the good of the Church" is not following Jesus Christ because Christ never sacrificed anyone for the "good of the Church." Rather, he sacrificed HIMSELF and only HIMSELF for the good of the Church. The bishop would have done better had he stood up for the truth and turned in the priest to the civil authorities for committing a crime. Likewise, a bishop who sacrificed an innocent priest to appease a hateful mob "for the good of the Church" is no better. He would have done better had he stood up for the truth and taught the mob to oppose hatred, which is a sin offensive to God. Some priests have now come out to tell their stories anonymously. According to Catholic News Agency:
Seminarians and priests from ordination classes spanning 30 years, during the terms of McCarrick and Myers, reported to CNA that they had observed an active homosexual subculture of priest and seminarians within Newark’s Immaculate Conception Seminary.
One priest ordained in the early years of McCarrick’s term in Newark said that “a lot of people lost their innocence in the seminary.”
He told CNA that there were two distinct groups of students. “You had the men who were there because they had a deep love of the Lord and a vocation to serve his Church,” he said, adding that those men were the majority of seminarians.
“But there was a subculture, with its own group of men, that was openly homosexual and petty and vindictive with everyone else,” he explained.
In his book entitled Goodbye Good Men: How Liberals Brought Corruption Into The Catholic Church, published in 2015, investigative reporter Michael S. Ross uncovered how radical liberalism had infiltrated the Catholic Church, attenpting to overthrow traditional beliefs and doctrines, especially the Church teachings on human sexuality. This book went on to become a bestseller. By the way, I read the book. Radical liberalism and the gay activists have not only infiltrated our Church, but also our government and schools. In fact, the Guam Legislature has already introduced a bill to allow transgenders to change the gender in their birth certificate despite the fact that they never went through a sex change. According to KUAM news (the bold is mine):
Legislation has been introduced that would allow individuals who identify as transgender to change their birth certificates without having to undergo a sex change operation. Supporters say similar laws have now been passed in 19 states and 200 cities across the country.
Bill sponsor Senator Fernando Esteves explained, saying, "It allows them to do this and make the amendment to their birth certificate without having to undergo the surgical procedure. And so with that, it allows them to live and be recognized as the gender that they identify with, which I believe is inherent in their ability to live freely, and live happily with who they are."
Senatorial candidate Lasia Casil, who identifies as transgender herself, says it's a tool for empowerment that can help lift them up in the face of discrimination. "It is a means for gaining employment, health care, housing and safety. I was fired from a job in 1993 because of these ID problems. Not being able to get a job put me out homeless and working on the street. As many, many people, transyouth are subject to cause they can't get the right ID," she said.
But one woman testified against the bill citing concerns about individuals who have not undergone a sex change who might use the same public restroom as their child. Esteves says the bill requires name change applicants to undergo a psychological evaluation, and a criminal record check.
These are my comments regarding what I placed in bold. Ms. Casil who identifies as transgender claimed she was fired from a job in 1993 because of these ID problems. Was the ID really the issue or was it because she checked marked herself on the application and document forms as "male" instead of female? Guam's ID only specifies "male" and "female" on the form. As long as your physicalgender is female, it should be marked "female" regardless of whether you THINK you are male, Superman, or Santa Claus. Senatorial candidate Lasia Casil is physically a female and should enter the women's restroom. After she gets a physical sex change, then he can enter the men's restroom.
One woman testified against the bill citing concerns about individuals who have not undergone a sex change who might use the same public restroom as their child. Her concerns are legitimate. Once the bill is passed, a person can change their ID, passport, and other forms of identification to the gender they identify with despite the fact that they have not had a sex change. This certainly means that a male person can enter a female restroom. And to prove it, he has a ID labeling his gender as "female" despite that his physical gender is still a male. Are our senators thinking ahead? Are they aware of the consequences of this bill if they choose to pass it into law? Don't you think it would be wiser to first install a "transgender" restroom before even considering that bill into law? After all, how is a psychological exam going to be helpful in a society that is starting to accept homosexuals and transgenders as "normal" rather than as an "intrinsic disorder." We are seeing the consequences of accepting homosexual seminarians into a Catholic seminary today. It caused a depravity in our Church. Do we want to see depravity in the rest of our society starting with the restrooms of men and women? Are our senators thinking ahead? Are they thinking of the consequences of this bill if passed into law? If passed into law, law enforcement will be unable to stop a male who holds a "female" ID from using the women's restroom. When the Guam Legislature introduced a same-sex union bill, Archbishop Apuron vehemently opposed the bill. Now that a bill has been introduced, allowing transgenders to change the gender in their birth certificate despite that they have not gone through a sex change, where is Archbishop Byrnes on this issue? And where is CCOG? Are they not concern of a man being in a woman's restroom with their mothers and daughters and vice versa?
The following letter was written by Archbishop Samuel J. Aquila, which was published in the website of the Archdiocese of Denver. Although we are not from Denver, his letter touched our hearts. His letter is published here.
Letter to the Archdiocese of Denver on the abuse crisis
At its root, this is a spiritual crisis that requires fidelity, reparation, and reliance on Christ for the grace and path to true, lasting freedom.
My dear brothers and sisters in Christ,
This past week I was on my annual silent retreat and the accusations against Archbishop McCarrick were a part of my prayer. Faithful have written to me and have asked questions about the situation. Some have felt that the Lord has abandoned the Church. Other bishops have spoken out on this tragedy, and today I offer to you, the faithful of the archdiocese and my brother priests and deacons, the following reflections.
As noted by Cardinal DiNardo, president of the U.S. bishops conference, the revelations about Archbishop McCarrick have caused both bishops and the laity “anger, sadness, and shame.” Personally, I am deeply sorry that both laity and clergy have had to experience this type of betrayal. In response, I am asking every priest in the archdiocese to offer a Mass each month in reparation for the sins committed by cardinals, bishops, priests and deacons, and for all sins committed by clergy and lay people against the commandments of our Lord, as well as to pray for healing for the victims of sin. This Mass is to be announced publicly so the lay faithful can attend and offer prayers in reparation for these grave sins that have wounded so many and for their own sins.
The staff of the Archdiocese of Denver and I strive to make every effort to ensure that such things do not occur here. Our preventative measures include: background checks, safe environment classes, mandatory reporter training, creating a conduct response team that is primarily made up of lay people, an annual independent audit of our abuse reporting structures, having a laywoman (Christi Sullivan, 303-715-3241 or Christi.Sullivan@ArchDen.org) serve as the coordinator of our Safe Environment Office, which deals with all cases of any type of abuse against minors by clergy or laity, and providing psychological screening for candidates for the priesthood.
We also have a Victim’s Assistance Coordinator, Jim Langley, Psy.D., who can be contacted at 720-239-2832 or Victim.Assistance@ArchDen.org. If anyone in the archdiocese has an abuse situation concerning any member of the clergy or a lay employee of the archdiocese with a minor or the elderly, they may contact one of them. Both Bishop Rodriguez and I take these matters with the utmost seriousness.
During my retreat, my director encouraged me to pray with the calls of Isaiah, Jeremiah and Samuel. In praying with the call of Samuel, I was struck by the Lord’s words to Samuel concerning Eli. The Lord told Samuel to tell Eli, “…I will fulfill against Eli all that I have spoken concerning his house from beginning to end. And I tell him that I am about to punish his house forever, for the iniquity which he knew, because his sons were blaspheming, and he did not restrain them. (1 Samuel 3: 12-13, emphasis added). Too many seminarians, priests and bishops knew of Archbishop McCarrick’s behavior and did not restrain him.
Due to this, I call on the U.S. bishops’ conference to ask for and allow an independent investigation that includes members of the lay faithful and those clergy who had nothing to do with the matter. Since the oversight of bishops and cardinals falls under the jurisdiction of Rome, I humbly ask Pope Francis to conduct an independent investigation like he did in Chile.
Like Jesus weeping over Jerusalem, so have I wept for the Church and for the innocent victims. I remember when I visited Auschwitz for the first time in 1988. As I walked with horror in my heart over the palpable evil present, pondering how could human beings do this to other human beings, I heard in prayer, only Jesus Christ and he alone can redeem this evil. The same is true with the sexual abuse crisis of today, as well as with the emptying of our pews, and the abandonment of God by the world. So, what must we do?
We must recognize that complacency about evil and sin is present both in the Church and the world and has led us to where we are today. This culture of complacency among clergy and laity must come to an end!
We have also failed to recognize that the spiritual battle is real. Some say the Lord has forsaken the Church, but this is not true. Rather, there are some within the Church who have forsaken Jesus and the Gospel. Pope Francis speaks often in his homilies of the devil and his workings. The devil is real and pulls us away from the ways of Jesus and the love of the Father. The devil uses confusion, chaos, discouragement, and negative thinking to draw us away from Jesus. When one looks at salvation history one sees, beginning with Adam and Eve, moving through the Old and New Testaments, and down through the centuries to now, that it is human beings who abandon the ways of God. When the ways of God are abandoned, God lets human beings go their own way and there are always dire consequences.
Jesus tells his disciples in John 15 that “apart from me you can do nothing” and he further tells us that if we separate ourselves from the vine, Jesus, we will wither. Perhaps the reason for our empty pews, the sharp decline of the faith in Europe and the west, the decimation of many religious orders, and the sexual abuse crisis is that we are not attached to Jesus, the true vine. At the heart of this crisis today is a spiritual crisis that depends more on the solutions of men than on the Gospel and Jesus. The cost of discipleship is real and it includes dying to ourselves, a complete surrender to Jesus, who loves us and desires only our good and joy (Lk 9: 23-26; Lk 14: 25-35; Mt 16: 24; Jn 15:11).
Thus, our response to this complacency must be a return to the ways of God, which lays out the path of grace that preserves us from the real dangers of sin and the attacks of the evil one. The Father has given us his son Jesus, the Beatitudes, the Gospels, the truth, and his commandments out of love for us to keep us on the narrow way of love. He is merciful in all that he has given to us. Charity and truth must always go together. A disciple should never lead someone into sin or condone sin. Jesus never condoned sin! But rather taught that for the unrepentant, the consequence for doing so is hell (Mk 9:42, Lk 17: 1-4). Just as a parent provides boundaries for their children for their own good and protection, so has the Lord provided for us.
All of us within the Church, including the Holy Father, cardinals, bishops, priests, deacons, consecrated and laypersons need to examine our consciences and ask ourselves: Do I truly know, love and serve the Father, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit? And do I follow the ways of Jesus or the ways of the world? In the formation of my conscience do I listen to the voice of God, the voice of the world, or my own voice, and do I test the voice I hear to make sure that it is in accord with the Gospel? Have I personally put my faith in Jesus Christ, and in this time of tribulation do I keep my eyes fixed on “Jesus the leader and perfecter of faith” (Heb 12: 2)? Do I know where I have come from; that God loves me and knew me before I was born (Ps 139)? Do I know where I am going, that I am created for eternal life and to know the Father, as Jesus knows him (Jn 8:14)? Do I truly believe that intimacy with Jesus can heal the wounds of my sins, weakness, or brokenness? And finally, as Jesus so frequently reminds his disciples in John 14 and 15, those who love him keep the commandments, just as he kept the Father’s commandments. Do I do that?
Pope Francis and every pope since Blessed Paul VI, has called us to a deeper encounter with Jesus Christ. This encounter leads to faith in Jesus Christ and a deep personal relationship with him, who in turn leads us to the Father and the Holy Spirit. His desire is for each disciple to be one with the Father and him. Once we put our faith in Jesus, love him and keep the commandments, then the Father and the Son will make their home in our hearts (Jn 14:23). Each one of us must pray for a deeper faith in Jesus each day, the faith that will move mountains (Mt 17:20) and make us into missionary disciples. With God “all things are possible,” (Mk 10:27) and that includes the forgiveness of our sins, the healing of our wounds, becoming a saint, and living a life of holiness and virtue, including chastity. And that brings me to another important aspect of this crisis.
Cardinal DiNardo noted in his statement that “the Church is suffering from a crisis of sexual morality” and it is not just the Church, it is the world. Sadly, too many, both clergy and lay, have listened more to the world than to Christ and the Church when it comes to human sexuality. The consequences of the worldly approach to sexuality are clear in the distortion of this precious gift and the confusion about sexuality that grows daily.
The teaching of the Church on human sexuality has been clear over the centuries, and St. John Paul II helped tremendously with his positive message about the Theology of the Body. Furthermore, those who have received the teaching of the Church and have been accompanied in a loving and merciful way, both young and old, have testified to the truth contained in this teaching, as well as the healing, freedom and joy it brings. This is observed in many of the young people whom I have encountered through the Fellowship of Catholic University Students program, those who have walked in the Neocatechumenal Way, those who have shared in Living Waters or Courage retreats, or participated in Sexaholics Anonymous. Their witness, joy and freedom are real, and it embraces the truth of who they are in the merciful eyes of the God. The God who heals and restores order.
Amidst the darkness of the sexual revolution and all that it has brought about, the Church must decisively return to the truth, dignity and beauty of human sexuality.
We must teach that every sexual act that takes place outside of a marriage between a man and woman, is not in keeping with God’s plan for our happiness. When one separates the procreative aspect from sex, one can justify just about any sexual act. As Blessed Paul VI noted in Humanae Vitae, this separation has had and will continue to have negative consequences on the Church and society.
We must also teach that, according to the Sacred Scripture and tradition, “homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.” They are contrary to the natural law and they “do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity.” (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2357).
We must also be sure to carefully form seminarians, as we have been doing in the archdiocese for quite some time. However, all seminaries need to devote special attention to the formation of our future priests and their education in chastity, so that they can develop an authentic maturity, and embrace celibacy for the Kingdom of God, respecting and fostering the nuptial meaning of their bodies (Pastores Dabo Vobis, 44). Chastity is a great good that needs to be lived!
The sexual revolution occurring in our culture, which essentially says, “Anything goes if adults consent to it,” is not the way of God and only leads to where we are today. We must be willing to accompany people into the truth of Jesus Christ who will set them free to live the virtues, which bring true freedom, peace and joy.
In closing, I ask all of us to remember to pray and stay close to the heart of Jesus, to ask for the humility of Jesus and the gift of loving others as Jesus loves (Jn 13:34). Every disciple must pray for the gift of faith and a deeper trust and confidence in Jesus, most especially in his healing power. We must pray for all victims of sexual abuse in our culture today, for their healing and their encounter with Jesus Christ, who can bring healing to them.
We must pray for the clergy of the Church, the Pope, cardinals, bishops, priests and deacons, that the Holy Spirit will stir into flame the gifts he has bestowed on them, help them to be faithful to Christ and the Gospel, and to be true servants of the faithful with the heart of Christ. We must pray for the Church, our Mother, that is holy, though having sinners in her midst, and suffers for the offenses of all her members.
Let us pray for the virtue of hope, so that we come to the awareness that we can do all things in Christ, who gives us the strength to be saints (Phil 4:13). Let us ask for the gift of piety, so that we truly behave as God’s children and reverence our own and each other’s bodies as temples of the Spirit. Let us beg for the grace to have pure hearts (Mt 5: 7).
Finally, as those who belong to Jesus, we must pray for our enemies and those who persecute us. We can never wish evil or seek vengeance on another (PV 24:29; Mt 5: 44-48; Col 3:13; Rom 12:19-21). Every human being is a sinner whom Jesus loves and is in need of the mercy of Jesus. Jesus forgave every human being from the Cross when he said, “Father forgive them for they know not what they do.” No matter how egregious the sin, the Lord is willing to forgive us if we “repent and believe in the Gospel” (Mk 1:15). This forgiveness, like his love, must be received. He reminds us to be merciful as his Father is merciful and that the Father loves both the just and unjust (Mt 5:44-48). In this time of darkness, may we put our faith, trust and love in Jesus who is our Savior and Redeemer, the one who will free us, and may we live in his truth and light!
