DANGER AHEAD -- PRIESTLY POLITICS

What happens in Peoria stays in Peoria? Hardly. Talk radio was all abuzz this morning with news that Peoria, IL Bishop Daniel Jenky (above, with Pope Benedict XVI) held a mass in which he essentially compared President Barack Obama to Hitler and Stalin. On April 14, Jenky had this to say during his mass, titled “A Call to Catholic Men of Faith”:

“Hitler and Stalin, at their better moments, would just barely tolerate some churches remaining open, but would not tolerate any competition with the state in education, social services, and health care. In clear violation of our First Amendment rights, Barack Obama – with his radical, pro-abortion and extreme secularist agenda, now seems intent on following a similar path.”

Just to re-iterate: He said this in a MASS. There are so many things wrong with Jenky’s statement that one is hard pressed to know where to begin. Jenky, who has been a priest since the 1970s, was in the midst of a somewhat traditional sermon when he made these comments about two-thirds of the way through. It begs the question: Did the bishop inexplicably not realize how insensitive his statement was? Those who lived through the Holocaust to tell of its horrors surely would take issue with his comparisons. Those who uphold the time-tested tradition of the separation of Church and State would wonder why he ventured into this rhetorical territory. Clearly a personal political statement, did Jenky not realize he was putting his archdiocese’s tax-exempt status at risk by politicizing from the pulpit? And above all, whether he approves of Obama’s policies and job performance or not, is there no respect left for the office of the President? Comparing Obama to maniacal mass murderers is surely a stretch that most Americans would not support, many Catholics included.

Predictably, a number of Catholic Americans have come out in support of Jenky for making these comments, even though among them are surely thousands who know, in their hearts, that the President of the United States is not a supporter of mass murder. At issue is Obama’s health care initiative, which includes a provision that compels Catholic schools, hospitals and charities to provide birth control coverage for their employees via their health insurance. Although Obama’s plan prohibits federal dollars from being spent on abortions, it does make exceptions for rape and incest. Catholic leaders are incensed at what they perceive as Obama’s disregard of the Church’s strict anti-abortion stance.

That evidently prompted Jenky to add this comment to his sermon:

“This fall, every practicing Catholic must vote, and must vote their Catholic consciences, or by the following fall our Catholic schools, our Catholic hospitals, our Catholic Newman Centers, all our public ministries -- only excepting our church buildings – could easily be shut down. Because no Catholic institution, under any circumstance, can ever cooperate with the intrinsic evil of killing innocent human life in the womb.”

Those of us who are not Catholic have often been left to wonder about the Church’s rigid stance on social issues. We have often questioned policies such as denying birth control in third world countries where overpopulation has caused mass starvation. We wonder about people who go to the Catholic church every Sunday and worship, and then come home and use the exact artificial birth control methods the Church stands against. Why, we wonder, are women denied the right to ascend to the priesthood, simply because of their gender? We are astonished at the decades and decades of the church’s now-admitted coverup of sexual assault of children among priests. The Catholic church’s discrimination against homosexuals is now legendary.

If Jenky has strong convictions against Obama, or against the healthcare plan, the pulpit was the last place he should have expressed them. And even if he felt somehow compelled to do so, perhaps it would have been wise for him to at least foresee the media firestorm he was about to create, at a time when the Catholic church should be doing everything possible to avoid bad publicity. Just this week headlines were once again international in scope about the Vatican’s chastising American Catholic nuns for their “radical feminist themes.” Criticism was especially harsh for the nuns "protesting the Holy See's actions regarding the question of women's ordination and of a correct pastoral approach to ministry to homosexual persons." In its report to the nuns, the Vatican said, “Public disagreement with the bishops — ‘who are the church’s authentic teachers of faith and morals’ — is unacceptable.”

Some critics of the Vatican see moves like this one as those of desperation. The Vatican (right) knows that traditional Roman Catholic doctrine stands in stark contrast to contemporary Western culture. The Pope, in his 80s and ailing, is largely seen as a leader who does not know how to reign in those he views as “radical.” The nuns who were the subject of the latest report from the Vatican are represented in an organization called the Leadership Conference of Women Religious, which includes a reported 80 percent of the country’s’ approximately 57,000 nuns. Are we to believe that tens of thousands of American nuns are radicals?

That Jenky’s comments were ill-conceived is inarguable. But that they were so ill-timed is stunning. Barack Obama is not a threat to the Catholic church. In fact, he is probably no match for the massive, unwieldy, socio-industrial complex the Church has become. However, with mass communication and proliferation of media what it is in 2012, people like Jenky are the ones who stand to cause the church and its devotees the most harm.

IS POPE BENEDICT XVI THE NEW RICHARD NIXON?

For the past decade, the Catholic priesthood has become synonymous with pedophilia. That is unfortunate, because the odds are that the majority of priests do not sexually abuse children. However, enough of them have done so that now, we laypeople out here are highly suspicious of Catholic priests. Reportedly, the U.S. dioceses have paid up to $2 billion in victim settlements in the past eight years. Who can forget former Archbishop Bernard Francis Law of Boston, whose complicity in covering up sexual abuse of children by priests resulted in his resignation? For those who haven’t thought much of Law since his resignation, you should know he is currently serving in Rome as an “archpriest,” which means he is the authority over several parishes. He is also a member of the Pontifical Council for the Family, which the Catholic Church defines as the body that "promotes the pastoral care of families, protects their rights and dignity in the Church and in civil society.” Law is typical in the church, in that even priests who have personally fondled children or raped them are currently still the in the papal fold. They are often just moved to different geographic locations and placed in lower profile positions.

Just to put the issue of sexual abuse by priests in perspective, watch and listen to the courtroom testimony of Father Patrick Gerald O’Donnell of Spokane, who admitted sexually molesting more than 30 teenage boys, many of them inside the church rectory.

Is it just me, or does there seem to be some dangerous disconnect between the Vatican and societal morality? Lately, the church’s morality has been called into question throughout Europe. Among the most high profile issues that Pope Benedict XVI has to deal with right now is alleged misconduct on the part of his own brother, George Ratzinger. Ratzinger has publicly admitted that sexual abuse of members of a boys’ choir occurred in Regensburg, Germany. Ratzinger directed the school where the abuse happened for three decades. For his part, the Pope says he knew nothing about it. Oh, apparently the Pope also knew nothing of Ratzinger’s common practice of slapping children in the face to discipline them. Are you buying any of this? No, I didn’t think you were. The Pope thinks we’re buying it. That has to do with powerful, egotistical leaders in religion, industry and government worldwide who believe their own b.s. and somehow convince themselves that you will believe it, too.

Does it sound a little Richard Nixonish to you? It does to me. When illegal behavior was taking place in all of the ranks that reported to then-President Nixon back in the early 1970s, Nixon’s initial position was one of complete ignorance. Of course,later we found out that he knew everything and even helped to keep it quiet. Does the Pope know everything, and how much has he done and is he currently doing to keep it quiet? Nixon resigned. Should Pope Benedict resign? Some say absolutely he should. It’s not the first time a Pope has had to step down. Okay, it last happened 600 years ago, but who’s counting years when supposed holy men across the globe are raping children?

Not the 53-year-old Austrian man who recently went on the radio to detail his own sexual abuse at the hands of Austrian priests decades ago. His story is quite telling, because the alleged abuser, Bruno Becker, offered the victim 5,000 Euros ($6,790) to keep quiet about it, calling the payment compensation, rather than hush money. That, of course begs the question: How does the church decide how much cash to ante up for prolonged and repeated incidents of molestation? Did Becker just pull that figure of 5,000 Euros out of thin air? And if so, is there truly anything arbitrary about child rape? Is oral sex worth more Euros than say, genital fondling? Who gets the highest payment? Those who experienced penetration? Is there a sliding scale? I think not, and clearly the church thinks not, because the church is currently shaking in its holy boots as one report after another surfaces about priests using boys for sexual gratification. And so far, the church has been quite mixed in its reaction to European reports.

For example, the spokesperson (read: PR flack) for the Vatican, Federico Lombardi, was arrogant enough to make the following comment in the midst of the mounting reports of abuse: "All objective and informed people know that the issue [of child sexual abuse] is much wider, and to focus accusations only on the Church leads to a skewed perspective." So, if I’m hearing this correctly, Lombardi is saying, ‘everybody’s doing it, so don’t pick on us.’ Again, is it just me, or is there an incomprehensible disconnect between the Vatican and the world at large? Let’s pull numbers out of the air like the church does: If say, oh, I don’t know…10% of child sexual abuse happens through the church and 90% happens everywhere else, should that 10% get a free pass? Lombardi is desperate, and therefore, we know the Pope is desperate. Kind of like Richard Nixon was desperate when he knew he could no longer hide the illegal activity of his administration.

By some estimates, there are more than 14,000 known victims of sexual abuse by U.S. priests since the 1960’s by up to 5,000 priests. And that’s just one country. How many children have had to live with their own dirty little secrets worldwide, many who will never feel able to come forward with their stories? Right now, for example, the Dutch Catholic church is relying on an independent commission to investigate more than 200 claims of reported sexual abuse by priests. In addition to Ratzinger’s school, priests in two other Catholic schools in Germany stand accused of beating and sexually molesting students. In Ireland the issue has become so pervasive that the Irish government issued a report that clearly details widespread sexual abuse of children by priests over the past three decades. Pope Benedict recently called Irish bishops to Rome to reprimand them. A nice high-profile p.r. move, but who is being held accountable and will anybody go to jail?

That’s the billion-dollar question. Why aren’t the rapists being put away for life like other rapists? If U.S. Congressmen raped children, would they be simply reprimanded? If executives with Microsoft, AIG or Bank of America raped children, would they just be reassigned to another city in a different position? If Harvard University teachers raped children, would they merely be called into the Chancellor’s office and slapped on the wrist? What is going on here with the Catholic Church and why are not hundreds or perhaps thousands of priests worldwide being tried in courtrooms and sent to prison with all of the other pedophiles and rapists?

And, finally: What is it that attracts pedophiles to the priesthood, and is this really the bigger issue at hand? If there is a silent, clandestine understanding somewhere that the priesthood has an immoral sexual component that has been covertly perpetuating child rape for decades and decades, perhaps the gig is finally up. The buck stops with Benedict. For my part, I am just egalitarian enough to be fully ready for this criminal sin to be stopped now. If the Pope is complicit in this dangerous sham, he needs to resign now. His successor needs to take on the international crimes of sexual abuse by priests as job one. And governments, worldwide, need to prosecute priests in the exact same judicial manner they treat all other pedophiles and rapists.

THE GATHERING CLOUDS OVER VATICAN CITY

Until this month, the biggest recent news out of the Vatican was that Pope Benedict XVI (below, left) was stepping up – way up – to the digital age, by starting his own YouTube channel. That caused passing interest among the world’s population, but nothing even close to international reaction to two later announcements:

First came news that the Pope is bringing disgraced Bishop Richard Williamson back into the church. Williamson, who had been consecrated as a bishop without the approval of the Vatican, was excommunicated in 1988. The current Pope refers to this reversal of his predecessor’s decision as “rehabilitation.” Williamson is most known for his assertion that the holocaust has been blown way out of proportion, that six million Jews did not die, and that there were no gas chambers in the German concentration camps.

Increasingly liberal columnist Christopher Buckley wrote a good piece on this debacle this week. As you read it, you will have an opportunity to click through to another piece by Buckley about his in-person visit to Auschwitz. Buckley’s account of visiting the infamous death camp is more than riveting. Further, it is all the evidence needed to cause one to wonder what Pope Benedict’s motivation could possibly be for readmitting Williamson to the church. And if all of that were not enough to outrage an otherwise compassionate populous, an interview Williamson granted Swedish TV in November of last year should do the trick – especially the part where Williams posits that the buildings we always thought were gas chambers could not have served that purpose since their chimneys were not high enough. Yes, he honestly said that. See for yourself:



The Pope lifted Williamson’s excommunication on January 21. Immediately there was a worldwide uproar, especially when the video you just viewed found wide distribution. On January 30, Williamson, probably fearing the Pope might rethink his unfortunate reversal, wrote a public letter to Cardinal Castrillón Hoyos, apologizing for his “imprudent remarks” on Swedish TV. By the end of the week, the Pope was issuing statements reassuring naysayers that the Vatican does not support holocaust deniers. Except apparently, Richard Williamson. It remains to be seen how the Pope and his minions will handle this international public relations disaster. Stay tuned.

Just as the groundswell of outrage was making itself heard about Williamson came news that Pope Benedict had installed Father Gerhard Maria Wagner (below, right) as Bishop in the Austrian city of Lenz. Wagner’s name will ring an off-key bell with some readers, particularly those in New Orleans. Back in 2005, Wagner publicly stated that Hurricane Katrina was the direct result of “spiritual pollution,” and that God was exacting retribution on a city with “the best brothels and the prettiest prostitutes.” As evidence of the widespread debauchery that New Orleans represents, he pointed out that the hurricane destroyed abortion clinics and nightclubs. He did not, however, mention the churches, hospitals, hospices, homeless shelters, nursing homes or schools for the disabled that were also under water. He failed to include the elderly citizens who washed away in the storm because they were too weak or too poor to escape. And, of course, he neglected to mention the good citizens who were found dead, weeks, even months after the storm, in the attics of their homes, where they sought refuge from the merciless rising waters. “The conditions of immorality in this city are indescribable,” Wagner said at the time. As it turned out, the real and sole issue of immorality during Katrina was the level of poverty that demanded some citizens stay behind and perish. Wagner, of course did not understand that -- because he wasn't here.

Wagner’s ascent to Bishop of Lenz was strictly an executive decision from the Pope. Reportedly, Pope Benedict did not confer with any of the reigning clerics in Lenz.

News reports about Williamson and Wagner routinely refer to these Papal decisions as signs of increasing “conservatism” from the Vatican. More importantly, such moves are truly signals of intolerance. By supporting and promoting a revisionist priest who denies the holocaust, and another whose judgmental and disrespectful comments condemn the entire population of a U.S. city, the Pope sets an example of dogmatism and arrogance that contributes nothing to the greater good. Catholics, Jews and the good citizens of New Orleans deserve so much better.