NEWS ABOUT BENEDICT

OREMUS PRO PONTEFICE NOSTRO

---

The Holy Father requests the prayers of all the faithful so that the Lord may illumine the road for the Church. May the commitment of Pastors and the faithful grow, in support of the delicate and weighty mission of the Successor of the Apostle Peter as 'the guardian of unity' in the Church.
- Vatican Note, Feb. 4, 2009

---

In reply to a number of messages from new users (as well as a few veteran users but non-members) about the 'difficulty' of navigating within the Forum, I hope this helps:

FOR NEW VISITORS TO THE FORUM: To navigate within the page you are now on, scroll up or down as needed.
To see preceding entries in NEWS ABOUT BENEDICT, Click on 'Previous page', above right.
To get to other topic threads of the English section, click on the 'envelop' above right, tagged 'Fans speaking English' -
it will get you to the board with all the topic threads available in the section.
On that board, to get to the latest page containing the most recent entries on the topic you choose,
click on 'Last' in the parentheses indicating page numbers right after the subject title,
Once you get to that page, proceed as above.



P;ease see preceding page for initial posts today, including
photos and a full translation of the Holy Father's words at Angelus today.






Israel officially announces
Pope's visit in May



JERUSALEM, Feb. 15 (AFP) – Outgoing Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert announced on Sunday that Pope Benedict XVI will visit the Holy Land in May in the first official confirmation of the trip.

"In May there will be an important visit, that of Pope Benedict XVI," the Premier said at the start of the weekly cabinet meeting.

"President Shimon Peres will accompany him during his visit and the prime minister's office has been charged with organising the trip," Olmert said.

News reports said the visit would take place from May 8 to 14 and include stops in Jerusalem, Nazareth and Bethlehem as well as the Jordanian capital Amman.

The visit had been cast in doubt [Only by the media!] over comments made by Richard Williamson, an ultra-conservative English bishop who has denied that Jews died in Nazi gas chambers during the Holocaust in World War II.

On Thursday the German-born Pontiff told leaders of the Conference of American Jewish Organisations that he was still planning to visit Israel despite the Williamson controversy, but did not specify a date.

Benedict told the delegation he was "preparing to visit Israel, a land which is holy for Christians as well as Jews, since the roots of our faith are to be found there."

The Pope has come under harsh criticism since January 24 when he lifted the excommunication of Williamson and three other members of a breakaway fraternity that rejected the Vatican reforms of the early 1960s.

They rejected a declaration, Nostra Aetate, which ended a Church doctrine under which the Jews were held responsible for killing Jesus Christ. [Misleading as usual! The FSSPX questioned the idea of inter-religious dialog if it meant compromising the purity of Catholic doctrine, but Mons. Fellay, the current superior general has made it very clear in several statements over the past two weeks that the society condemns anti-Semitism in any form.]

Last week the Vatican called on Williamson to retract his negationist statements about the Holocaust, which he has so far refused to do. [Which so far he has not done - not refused to do. He made a limp face-saving statement that he will re-study the factual basis of his negationism and then decide.]

Three days before the excommunication was lifted [No! Before public announcement of the lifting, which had been communicated to the FSSPX on Jan.17, although the decree is dated Jan. 21], Swedish television aired an interview with Williamson recorded last November in which he repeated his denial of the existence of Nazi gas chambers.

His comments sparked a torrent of outrage, with German Chancellor Angela Merkel leading political condemnation of the Pope's move. ["Leading'? More like 'Me too!"! She first commented more than a week after the controversy began, and what's worse, after the Pope had already spoken on the issue in his Wednesday General Audience, which she apparently was not aware of.

I think her people let her down here as much, as the Pope was, by not having been told about Williamson's negationist views if anyone in his inner circle was aware of it sarlier. Except that his remarks on the Shoah were widely publicized, and Williamson's not before the Jan. 21 broadcast.]

Williamson told the German weekly Der Spiegel last week that he would reexamine the historical evidence of the Nazi gas chambers, but made no indication that he had changed his views.

On Thursday, Benedict recalled Pope John Paul II's 2000 visit to Jerusalem, saying: "If there is one particular image which encapsulates this commitment, it is the moment when (he) stood at the Western Wall in Jerusalem, pleading for God's forgiveness after all the injustice that the Jewish people have had to suffer."

Saying he wanted to make that prayer "my own," the Pope quoted his predecessor's words: "We are deeply saddened by the behaviour of those who in the course of history have caused (Jews) to suffer, and, asking your forgiveness, we wish to commit ourselves to genuine brotherhood with the people of the covenant."


**********************************************************************


Do you see how many 'little' details have already been twisted and codified into the media's version of events which will be perpetrated, rehashed. and more likely, further twisted, with every new development?

This episode provides a textbook example of how media today create, shape, and takes continual scrupulous care to impose their crafted version of reality on the world - which they have the power to do, unfortunately - and the truth be damned.


*********************************************************************

Anyway, it is useful to re-post the program for the Holy Land visit as anticipated by Andrea Tornielli last February 9. Apcom, in reporting on the Israel official announcement today, subsantially lifted Tornielli's story and added it on to the announcement from Israel.

---

In the Holy Land, Benedict will visit
a mosque and the Holocaust Museum
by Andrea Tornielli
Translated from

February 9, 2009


The Pope's trip to Israel has not been announced officially and can always be cancelled at the last minute if the Gaza situation has not been pacified, but Vatican and Israeli diplomats have already agreed on details of his program. [Presumably, Jordanian adn Palestinian diplomats, too.]

It includes a visit to the Yad Vashem Holocaust memorial in Jerusalem on the day he arrives there. He will also be visiting a mosque in Jordan.

The trip to the Holy Land appeared to be threatened during the most difficult moments of the crisis provoked by the negationist statements of one of four traditionalist bishops whose excommunication the Pope recently revoked. In fact, however, the preparatory activities were never interrupted.

Like John Paul II's historic pilgrimage to the Holy Land in 2000, Benedict XVI's visit will begin in Amman, capital of Jordan, where the Pope will arrive on May 8.

The next day, May 9, the Pope will visit the ancient basilica dedicated to Moses on Mount Nebo, the site from which Moses first saw the Promised Land.

A few hours later, the Pope will visit a mosque, his second to a mosque since he visited the Blue Mosque in Istanbul in November 2006.
[A subsquent report from Jordan identifies the mosque as the new King King Hussein Mosque, dedicated to the late king, who was succeeded by his son Abdullah.]

On May 10, he will celebrate Mass for the Catholic community of Jordan in the stadium of Amman, followed by a visit to the site of Jesus's baptism on the river Jordan.

On May 11, the Pontiff will fly to Tel Aviv from Amman. [From Tel Aviv, site of Israel's international airport, he will proceed to Jerusalem.] In the afternoon, after a meeting with the President of Israel in Jerusalem, he will visit the Holocaust memorial, whose museum has a picture of Pius XII with a caption that the Vatican has protested since it came up in 2006.

The Holy See is still expecting that the caption presenting Pius XII as having been insensitive to the plight of Jews persecuted in Nazi Germany will be revised, as several authoritative personalities have also requested, including Holocaust historian Sir Martin Gilbert.

In any case, the caption should not be an obstacle, and the Pope's homage to the victims of the Holocaust will take place, although the Pope is not expected to visit the Museum photo gallery with the Pius XII photographs.

On Tuesday, May 12, Papa Ratzinger will meet the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, visit the Wailing Wall and the Cenacle [site of the Last Supper], and meet with the two Chief Rabbis of Israel.

An open-air Mass will be held in the Josaphat Valley, right below the Mount of Olives.

May 13 will be a day dedicated to the Palestinians. Benedict XVI will arrive by helicopter on Palestine territory where he will meet with President Abu Mazen, and then say Mass at Manger Square in Bethlehem, as John Paul II did. In the afternoon, he will visit a Palestinian refugee camp.

The penultimate day of the visit, Thursday, May 14, will be spent in Galilee. The Pope will arrive in Nazareth by helicopter and say Mass at Precipice Mount(?). [Nazareth has a large Basilica of the Annunciation on the spot where the Angel visited Mary.]

On the morning of May 15, a few hours before he returns to Rome, the Pope will visit the Basilica of the Holy Sepulchre.

---

This is one of those deceptive pieces of reportage that seem to assure the reader he is getting something more than just the usual news report because it is quite lengthy and the reporter quotes from a number of people (never mind if all she quotes are those who tend to support her premise and thesis that are evident in the headline given by her editor).

In fact, it peddles the vulgar [in its sense of 'common' and 'popular') view of this issue, without once bothering to say in a few lines for the general reader what excommunication is - especially that it is not a moral judgment but a canonical punishment for specific canonical offenses - and the actual and pracitcal consequences of the Pope's act in revoking excommunication even for someone like Williamson.





Pope's homeland rattled
by misstep with Holocaust denier:
Germans particularly sensitive
to issue despite apology, meetings
By Christine Spolar

February 15, 2009


MUNICH — The naming of a German as the infallible father of the Catholic Church was seen nearly four years ago as a remarkable moment in papal and world history. [Since when was 'infallible father' a term used for the Pope?]

Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger offered a poignant coda to 20th Century memory. A son of Bavaria who grew up under Nazism and recognized the pain of the Holocaust was suddenly transformed into Pope Benedict XVI, the world's most revered Christian.

Now doubts, fueled by a controversy that conjured up the past in his native Germany, are rattling Benedict's reign.

Benedict in January lifted the excommunications of four breakaway bishops who boldly challenged fundamental church reforms of the 1960s. The 81-year-old Pope found out too late that he was redeeming, among others, an unrepentant Holocaust denier. [Thank you, at least, for saying 'too late', but lifting the excommunication is not exactly 'redeeming', and if it does lead to 'redemption' of an errant member of the Church, that is part of the mission of the Universal Pastor.]

Last week, the Pontiff made deep amends to Jewish groups in face-to-face meetings with rabbis and community leaders, the most visible sign that the Vatican realized an error had become a public relations folly. [As if the Pope's meeting with the rabbis was nothing but a PR move!]

Lorenz Wolf, legal counsel for the powerful Munich archdiocese, last week openly sighed when asked to explain the notorious rehabilitation of Bishop Richard Williamson. [Watch those tendentious signs sprinkled all over the place.]

Wolf had no sure answers for how the Pontiff — who also offended Muslims in a 2006 speech with a medieval reference to Islam — was advised before he eased the excommunication.

[But why would this reporter consult a 'legal counsel' to the archdiocese, presumably on civil secular law, not canonical law? This is a layman who does legal work for the archdiocese/ He certainly does not represent the archdiocese, much less the Church, on canonical matters such as this issue is, nor is his opinion any more relevant to the issue than an ordinary layman. Why could the reporter not have sought out the archdiocesan spokesman or even the Archbishop of Munich himself?

"There's an assumption that the Holy Father saw this all from the point of doctrine — the issue of excommunication — and didn't see it in any other way," Wolf said. "It is clear he did not know about Williamson" when he signed the order.

Usually, Wolf said, the Bishops' Conference within the church is consulted on such serious matters. This time, Wolf said, the phone didn't ring. "I don't think it was intentional," he added. "It just didn't happen."

[This is outrageous - and this is what happens when a layman's opinion is sought about a canonical issue.

Since when does the Pope - who alone has the power and prerogative of 'binding and loosening' excommunications - have to consult any bishops' conference on it unless the subject bishops were part of their diocese - and in this case, the FSSPX bishops are not under any diocese at all!

To begin with, when was the last time a Pope lifted any excommunications for the purpose of healing a schism? Not in modern times that I can recall - and before Vatican-II, there were no Bishops' Conferences!

Wolf is more interested in ingratiating himself with the reporter {'Hey, I'm just as outraged as you are, you know - but understand, I am trying to 'defend' what happened!"), instead of being objective and factual about the issue. But then as a layman, all he appears to have are assumptions, not facts.]

Would Wolf, who advises the Catholic Church in Germany on legal administrative church matters, or other advisers have been able to raise alarms about Williamson?

"When I heard about the excommunication order from the media — and that is how we all found out about it, from the media — I felt, immediately, this would be a hot issue," Wolf said carefully.

[Again, lifting the excommunications was a question that concerned the Pope alone - not an announcement the Vatican would announce beforehand to all bishops around the world, as Summorum Pontificum, which is a papal directive that bishops around the world must know and enforce.

And yes, Mr. Wolf, in the age of Internet, all important announcements - by the Vatican or any other institution - are necessarily communicated first through the media, which now includes the Internet.]

As clips from Swedish TV — easily found on YouTube {after it was broadcast, not before!] - showed Williamson of the ultraconservative Society of St. Pius X saying, in clear English, that he didn't believe Jews were gassed to death in Nazi-run camps, the Vatican stumbled for days.

Williamson's interview ran on Jan. 21, the same day Benedict lifted the excommunication order, media reports show. The Vatican made the decision public three days later, apparently unaware of Williamson's open denial of the Holocaust. [Thank you for granting that!]

Seven days later, as outrage spread among Jewish groups and Germans, the Pope, without directly addressing Williamson, [Madame, The Pope never ever directly names individuals in his topical comments, except Bibblical figures, the evangelists, Church writers, the saints, his predecessors, and people he is expressly honoring or thanking] condemned the Nazi genocide and expressed his deep "solidarity with the Jewish people."

Still another week passed before the Vatican told Williamson to recant his denial "in an absolute and unequivocal way."

By then, recriminations had swelled with particular fury in the Pope's homeland. Benedict's move to unify the Church — urging extreme-right traditionalists to return — had backfired badly.

[On whom and how?
- The outraged Catholics in Germany and elsewhere are out of the Church, anyway - or at least, not with the Church - for all intents and purposes.
- The militant Jews are ever on the alert for something they can slam the Pope and the Church with.
- The vast majority of Catholics around the world are unaware of the issue, and if they were, they would shrug it off since it doesn't affect them directly in any way.

But the FSSPX leadership, who are the primary object of this initiative for reconciliation, have been very positive in their support of the Pope.]

Der Spiegel magazine was among the German media that threw out tough questions as revelations grew daily: "How can it be that a German Pope, of all people, is pardoning a Holocaust denier? ... Does the Pope, a man of books throughout his life, still understand the world outside his palace walls?"

[Oh, that's precious! Ms. Spolar should look at the timeline of Spiegel's reporting and check out its role in breaking the story of the Swedish TV interview. It was hardly the disinterested Johnny-come-lately that Spolar's reporting makes it seem to be. Far from it! ]

Siegfried Wiedenhofer, a retired professor of systematic theology at Goethe University in Frankfurt, was guided for 15 years by a then-professor Ratzinger, who oversaw his doctoral thesis.

Wiedenhofer knows the Pope as a theologian who spent a lifetime reading and writing. That cerebral outlook may be a strength and a weakness, Wiedenhofer said.

Vatican advisers have yet to understand — or help — a Pope who may miscalculate other facets of his job, he said. "To work as a team or choose the right people to work for him, that is not one of his strong suits," Wiedenhofer said. "I think the whole mess has been caused by the Vatican administration."

Williamson became a riveting sideshow to Benedict's deeply serious effort to determine if the clerics and schismatic sect founded by Marcel Lefebvre were ready to accept decades-old changes of the Second Vatican Council.

That aim of his papacy appears seriously weakened. Others, even within Vatican City, fear that the damage goes deeper.

[And Marco Politi, of course, is the Anglophone media's go-to guy 'within Vatican City' who can always be counted on to give the most unfairly biased and most soundbite-worthy judgments on Benedict XVI. It seems they don't even bother to seek out Andrea Tornielli or RAI's Giuseppe di Carli or Vittorio Messori - all off whom have certainly written books about Benedict and more serious books about religion than Politi has - only they happen to admire Benedict.]

Italian journalist Marco Politi, who has written books on Benedict {Has he written a book on Benedioct at all? - I must check that out!]* and on his popular predecessor John Paul II, sees a stark difference between the papacies.

"John Paul II was a spin doctor. He knew the media was important," Politi said. [Thanks, Politi. From the Father's house, John Paul just shook his head and asked himself, "I was a spin doctor?" Politi and his ilk insist on treating Popes as if they were politicians or garden-variety celebrities.]

"Benedict XVI doesn't often calculate his decisions on public opinion. He acts very alone," Politi said.

Politi said Vatican insiders know "that certain issues — the Jews, the Holocaust, German Jews and German Christians — must be handled correctly" and in consultation. The confusing litany of Vatican explanations hurt Benedict's image if not authority, he said.

"This has not only been a mistake. This has been a crisis that has left strong unease within the Church about how the Pope is ruling," Politi said. "Inside the Vatican and outside the Vatican, you can see people questioning how he rules." [And one cannot say enough "Oh ye of little faith" to those 'inside the Vatican' who react and calibrate themselves by what the media thinks.]

Williamson, who lives in Argentina, still stokes the controversy. Just as Vatican statements cooled some tempers, Williamson told Der Spiegel that he was not yet reversing course. He instead wanted time to read more history — a pose interpreted to suggest a possible legal battle with the Vatican.

[What legal battle, for heaven's sake? Williamson has been relatively quiet, and his interview with Spiegel was obviously face-saving. He did not say, "No, I refuse to retract because I know I am right".

But what is more interesting is that Spolar does not refer to Williamson's no-fool-he statement that he is being used by liberals in order to get at the Pope! Nothing in that brief interview showed animus for the Pope or the Church, even if Williamson may be playing his own deep game for who knows what reason. Some liberal commentators have suggested he wants to torpedo FSSPX reconciliation with Rome, but his interview does not show any trace of that.]

Last Sunday, the Archbishop of Munich, already blunt in his frustration at the mistake, [Can Ms. Spolar cite something to substantiate her statement? Archbishop Marx has been one of the few German bishops who made a statement expressing solidarity with the Pope against the attacks. If Spolar had something solid behind her throaway phrase, she sure would have quoted it! Why settle for an indirect quote when you have something direct and steaming!] again warned about the dangers of anti-Semitism and Holocaust deniers. [DIM]8pt[=DIM][He would warn against them in any case.]

Since January, bishops from Freiburg to Stuttgart to Hamburg to Berlin have levied criticism at the Pope and the Vatican. [DIM]9pt[=DIM][Bravissimi all! Take a bow for insolent, flagrant disloyalty to the Pope against every canon that bishops must live by, and motivated by personal hostility to him and/or an obessession to be on the side of public opinion rather than the Church!]

Walter Kasper, a German prelate in charge of interfaith relations, took to Vatican Radio to explicitly blame the Curia, the Vatican management [of which he happens to be a leading member!]

Jewish groups in Germany, as well as global Jewish organizations, are taking heart in the Pope's assurances but remain vigilant over further potential missteps during a papal trip to Israel planned for May. [Why they ever doubted him in the first place is openly disingenuous. But once again, they seized opportunistically on a situation involving him to call attention to themselves in the mistaken idea that unless they keep the issue alive, the world will forget the Holocaust. Well, the Catholic Church does not and will not - and it has a following exponentially far beyond the total number of Jews. You cannot possibly find a stronger ally in the real world.]

"Holocaust denial must not go uncensored, and anti-Semites should not be allowed to have a say in the church," Ronald Lauder of the World Jewish Congress said in the course of the controversy. [Who says Williamson will have 'a say in the Church' even if he eventually comes into full communion? In which case, he will have as much 'say in the Church' as any sinner like all the rest of us.]

A delegation from the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations met with the Pope Thursday and responded positively to yet another statement of reconciliation from him. [Isn't it obvious by now there is a pattern? Benedict has to constantly tell them these things - he should wear a sandwich board every day of his life proclaiming what he thinks about the Jews and anti-Semitism, otherwise people won't know!]

Chancellor Angela Merkel also smoothed over relations in a headline-making phone call with the Pope last weekend, a call for peace that came after she controversially asked for clarification. [And why didn't the reporter point out it was a call she requested? She wanted to smooth out things for her personally, having spoken so badly out of turn against the Pope. It certainly was not to find out what he really thinks about anti-Semitism and negationism!]

Merkel was criticized by some for elevating Williamson to a diplomatic dispute. But her rebuke — from a country where Holocaust denial is a crime — also showed a savvy and sensitivity where the Vatican failed, observers said. ['Savvy and sensitivity' indeed! On joining the chorus of media and public opinion, yes. In the thick of an electoral year. This might have been more plausible if she had commented right away, not very belatedly, and not after the Pope ahd already spoken out on the issue.

Merkel stopped any political fallout from staining Germany. [No! From staining her party's electoral campaign! And the very idea expressed by this reporter that the Pope could 'stain Germany' in any way is OUTRAGEOUS!]

"In Germany, all things regarding Judaism and the Holocaust carry a deep burden," said Wiedenhofer, the one-time student of Benedict's. "There is a high sensitivity. It is part of the national curriculum, and there is the belief that to learn from history means we have to avoid any sign of forgetting the past.

"The relationship between Christianity and the Jewish faith here is not just a religious question," Wiedenhofer said. "It is a moral and ethical question."

[I'm pretty sure Wiedenhofer must have said other things which Spolar fails to quote, but to choose to end the story with that statement "It is a moral and ethical question" also seems to imply that even someone like Wiedenhofer, with his intimate knowledge of Benedict XVI, could think that the Pope, of all people, does not realize the collective German attitude about the Jews, much less the morality and ethics of it!]


P.S. *I've checked. Politi has written exactly five books, including HIS HOLINESS, the 1996 John Paul II biography in which his name appears as co-author with Carl Bernstein of Watergate fame. Compare his 'lean output' to the number of books written by Messori and Tornielli on religious subjects and major religious personalities, and one will easily gauge where he is really at.

The first book he wrote on his own was in 2000, a 616-page tome entitled La confessione: Un prete gay racconta la sua storia, which needs no translation, followed in 2006 by another one called Io, prete gay, purporting to be a first-person narration by a gay priest [the publisher's note does not say if it is the same priest he wrote about in 2000).

In 2007, he published Papa Wojtyla, L'addio, a 179-page account of the final days, death and funeral of John Paul II.

And earlier this year, he came out with 'La chiesa del No: Indagine sugli Italiani e la liberta di coscienza' - in which his ideological agenda is obvious. If Ms. Spolar thinks that book qualifies to be a book about Benedict XVI, then her ideological bias is even more reprehensible than I thought. But going by his title, it must sustain Politi's articles lately about Benedict XVI as someone who is 'only capable' of saying No.

www.kath.net/detail.php?id=22128

I'm shocked. In order to understand the entire situation, you also need to read: www.kath.net/detail.php?id=22126

What's next? Oh yeah.. this:

www.kath.net/detail.php?id=22127

I'm sickened to the core. Sorry, it's all in German.
I posted it in here, because it does affect the Holy Father.

BTW. is anybody going to Rome for Easter to show some support?


********************************************************************


Thanks for the alert, Heike. I have to go out just now. I will translate what there is to translate later.

But all I can say is that Mons. Wagner has proven himself the true victor in all this -
because he had the humility and the wisdom to act on his own in order to prevent harm to the Church
and to the Pope by all the unnecessary and malicious protests against his nomination. GOD BLESS HIM!

Let us pray Pope Benedict will find someone as firm and orthodox as Fr. Wagner to help strengthen the faith in Austria.

TERESA

********************************************************************


Gerhard Wagner asks the Pope
to withdraw his nomination;
and the Vatican accepts


LINZ, Feb. 15 (Translated from kath.net) - Mons. Gerhard Wagner asked for the recall of his nomination as auxiliary bishop of Linz, and the Vatican has agreed, it was announced today.

Diocesan Bishop Ludwig Schwarz requested the media to distribute this statement by Mons. Wagner:

"In the face of the heavy criticism, I have been praying, and after consulting with the Diocesan Bishop, I decided to ask the Holy Father in Rome to recall my nomination as auxliary bishop of Linz."



Here is how AP has just reported it:

Austria: 'Katrina' pastor
gives up promotion



VIENNA, Feb. 15 (AP) — A radio station says an Austrian pastor who suggested that God punished New Orleans with Hurricane Katrina because of the city's sins is giving up the auxiliary bishop post the Pope promoted him to.

The national broadcaster ORF said Sunday the Rev. Gerhard Maria Wagner made the decision because of the controversy surrounding Pope Benedict XVI's promotion of him in Linz, Austria's second largest city.

The promotion of the conservative pastor sparked an outcry among Catholics who warned it could prompt people to leave the Church. [I detest it when they say that! Most of them haven't been in the Church for ages!]
ORF quotes the 54-year-old Wagner as saying: "Regarding the fierce criticism, I am praying and after consulting the diocesan bishop I have decided to ask the Holy Father in Rome to take back my promotion as auxiliary bishop." [NB: I stand by my translation of Wagner's statement! He never used the word 'promotion - he said 'Ernennung', nomination.]


HEIKE... I decided not to translate the item about the protesting deans - which was referred to, in one of the items posted here two days ago - nor the one about the so-called 'Catholic Youth' whose attacks are most un-Christian and contemptuous of Rome, though they may think they are very clever and hip!

Fr. Baget Bozzo is always such a welcome draft of good sense and theologically secure Catholic orthodoxy! Here he also suggests - courageously and not without reason - an underlying political motivation for why some Jewish leaders are so ready to jump on the Pope for perceived offenses!



Christians and Jews
in history
by Gianni Baget Bozzo
Translated from


Negation of the Nazi attempt to destroy the Jewish people is considered by the Church incompatible with being 'in communion' with it.

And Nazism itself was the tragic outcome of a negation of Christian civilization, a negation that took root in modern times.

It was an expression of the will to build a society completely independent of God and founded on biological life and the idea of a perfect master race.

That is why the Pope's statements on anti-Semitism come from the very heart of Catholic tradition.

It is not by chance that even the Econe community [the FSSPX] recognizes the errors of denying the Shoah and of anti-Semitism in general, citing the words of Pius XI that "Spiritually, we are all Semitic".

It is evident that the Pope's intention to close the schism of the Econe group would reinforce Church unity, by showing, among other things, that the novelty of the Second Vatican Council was to underscore themes that have always been in the Christian tradition but placed in a new light by time.

The Papacy is the institution that allows Catholicism to maintain the unity of the Church not only in space but also in time. It does not see ruptures, only development.

And the strength of the Catholic Church united in tradition strengthens Christian civilization - that in which Israel [used throughout this article by Baget Bozzo to mean the Jews as the chosen people of God, and not in the secular modern-day reference to the state of Israel] will always find secure credit, even in the face of ethnic sentiments that Jews may arouse simply because they consider themselves the 'chosen people'.

As cardinal and as Pope, Joseph Ratzinger has always shown that he understands the capacity of the Papacy to unite old and new things, to re-interpret Catholic tradition without contradicting it.
He understands that the essence of the Roman Catholic Church is to maintain a unity in time and space within the Christian consciousness.

The permanence of Israel in Christian time, as taught by St. Paul in the Letter to the Romans, is now understood by the Church as being significant for Christian identity itself, as an expression of its distinction from man-made religions.

The Church was born form Jewish roots and it can only respect that derivation, but that does not and cannot limit its right and its duty to announce to everyone the Good News of salvation through Christ.

The Church knows that the 'resistance' of the Jews to the very idea of conversion is part of the divine plan which anticipates a definitive Messianism of an eschatological character [i.e., referring to the ultimate destiny of the world and mankind].

The Jewish people in the flesh are for Christians a sign of the awaited eschatology, even if we differ in our idea of that ultimate destiny, which in Christianity is seen as a new life beyond this world following the 'second coming; of Christ. [For the Jews, it is the coming at last of the Messiah who will redeem them from their temporal bondage.]

It is not for the Church to define the parameters of Jewish eschatology, nor their underlying motives. The 'need' of the existence of the Jews as eschatological witness implies confidence that Israel will not be destroyed, that its historical function cannot be ignored.

Israel is witness to the Creator God, of his presence in time and in history - a reality that the neo-paganism of the modern world tends to negate in favor of the self-sufficiency of reason, which intrinsically has totalitarian potential, and against which the Church defends the idea of the human being as the image and likeness of God.

Israel in history is the sign of Providence, which has allowed a people to remain true to itself, trusting in the help of God who 'chose' them even when they were oppressed and rejected by other peoples.

Yet this does not mean that the Church shares the actions of Israel in the flesh when such actions deviate from the precepts of divine law and contradict the commandment of love for God and one's neighbor that the New Testament takes from the Old.

There is a nexus between the Shoah and the State of Israel. That is why Israel has the support of Christian nations and the Papacy itself.

A Christian may even see an eschatological sign in the return of Israel to its own land, as an indication of the perpetuity of the gift of the Promised Land to Abraham.

But the Church cannot accept all the acts of the state of Israel as licit and right, even if it understands that as a sovereign State, Israel has every right to defend its territory with military force.

And so the Pope has described the violence recently exercised by the Israelis in the Gaza Strip as 'unheard of', even if it was done in legitimate self-defense.

Israel in the flesh as God's Chosen people is not identical to the State of Israel as a state, to which the Church applies the same standards as to all other states.

But the Jewish people should understand that the Church too has its own legitimate reality, that it cannot be judged on the basis alone of its relationship with Israel as People of God and with Israel as a state.

Just as the Church makes that distinction, the Jewish people, too, should understand the Church in its spiritual and institutional reality, and as a constituency of faith, even if they do not consider Christians as the 'people of God' that they are.

The onesidedness of the Jewish people in judging the Catholic Church only with reference to anti-Semitism is evident in the controversy over Pius XII and his beatification, and in their criticism of the Pope's lifting of excommunication from the four Lefebvrian bishops.

The Church officially defined its position on Judaism in Vatican-II - and this was surely motivated in great part by the horror of the Shoah.

But just as the Church views the Jewish people distinctly, on their terms, because of their provenance and history, so too the Jewish people should understand the Catholic Church and its faithful as a people and as an institution on the terms of the Church, not on their terms.

Reciprocity is good logic in this case - a sign of good will and good faith that when the Pope travels to Israel, he will be received as a true friend of the Jewish people even if he is different from them.

Missed this one when it first came out - but it's so rare to find a prelate openly supporting the Pope I consider it real news! From Switzerland, even!


Parable of the prodigal son
gives insight into Pope's action,
a Swiss bishop says




LUGANO, Switzerland, FEB. 10, 2009 (Zenit.org).- Catholics who are closed to a reconciliation of the Society of St. Pius X with the Church should have a look at the parable of the prodigal son -- from the perspective of the older brother, says a Swiss bishop.

Bishop Pier Giacomo Grampa of Lugano affirmed this to ZENIT as he reflected on last month's lifting of the excommunication of four Lefebvrite bishops.

The bishops, including the current superior-general of the Society of St. Pius X, were excommunicated in 1988 when they received episcopal ordination illicitly at the hands of Marcel Lefebvre, who ordained them without papal permission.

Bishop Grampa said he would advise Catholics who do not favorably view the Pope's decision to lit the exommunications as a step towards restoring Church unity, to look to the Gospel of Luke.

"I would invite them to share the benevolence of the merciful Father of the parable […] and not the attitude of the older brother who reproaches, criticizes, does not want to forgive and does not rejoice at the return of his brother, loses his temper and does not want to join in the party."

The bishop said he has invited the faithful to look at the Holy Father's decision positively, while recognizing that it does not mean full communion for those who "do not recognize the Second Vatican Council."

The Vatican Secretariat of State clarified the meaning of the lifting of the excommunication in a Feb. 4 statement. The note explained that the four bishops, though liberated from excommunication, do not have a "canonical function in the Church and they do not licitly exercise a ministry in it," and that the Society of St. Pius X continues with the same "juridical situation" and "does not enjoy any canonical recognition in the Catholic Church."

Bishop Grampa called the lifting of the excommunication an "important stage on the road, which will advance by stages, and we hope that it the goal may be reached within a reasonable time."

He said, however, that Vatican II -- which the Society of St. Pius X does not fully accept -- is not "optional" because "it is the compass to orient us on the road of the 21st century that has just begun."

"If," the bishop said, "we want to avoid dangerous ideologies, harmful fundamentalism, or an anachronistic returns to the past, we cannot disregard the prophetic orientation that the Second Vatican Council indicated, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit."


On the other hand, there's crap like this. She's OK when she's reporting factual news, but her opinions stinK - aat least to me. And I must hasten to say that I am familiar with Ms. Henneberger's writing for Newsweek when she was their correspondent in Southeast Asia in the 1980s, and repeatedly made the most condescending almost contemptuous reports about the situation in the Philippines, based on sheer prejudice and conjecture. And I see she has lost none of her smug arrogance.



For Vatican, not knowing
is no excuse
By Melinda Henneberger
AOL Political Columnist



Feb 12 - Among the American Jewish leaders who met with Pope Benedict XVI in Rome today, in the wake of the Vatican's recent decision to lift the excommunication of a Holocaust denier, was a Holocaust survivor who had said he intended to thank the Pontiff for his commitment to strong Catholic-Jewish relations.

Which is so humblingly, breathtakingly generous that I would say we Catholics just got schooled in turning the other cheek.

Our rabbi in this matter, Austrian-born Arthur Schneier, told the AP he still hoped the current tensions were only a "temporary setback'' in relations. Most of Schneier's family died in Auschwitz. After fleeing Vienna in 1939, he was confined in a camp in Hungary.

But Schneier knows Benedict personally, having hosted him at his New York synagogue last April, and said "I can rely on Pope Benedict to send the right message". [Thank you, Rabbi Schneier, and God bless you for your faith.]

In a message aimed at easing the rancor over a bishop’s denial of the Holocaust, Pope Benedict XVI on Thursday called the slaughter of 6 million Jews a crime against God, and the Vatican said he would make his first visit to Israel in May.

What Benedict did tell the 60-some American Jewish leaders who met with him today is that Holocaust denial is unacceptable, period -- particularly for a priest. He also reiterated that the Catholic Church is "profoundly and irrevocably committed to reject all anti-Semitism.''

I can't imagine why any of the leaders at the Vatican today would have made the trip if they didn't believe the Pontiff to be sincere and serious in wanting to repair the damage done by the fiasco involving Bishop Richard Williamson.

But what's hard to understand is how the Vatican could possibly contend that Benedict knew nothing about the bishop's history as a denier when Williamson repeated his vile views last month, just days before the Vatican announced its decision to lift his excommunication.

[I have been looking for any enterprising to cite when Williamson expressed similar views before the interview with Swedish TV, but no one has so far. And I would appreciate it if any Forum reader can track it down, if it exists.

So yes, Melinda, it is possible not to know about if any such views had not been reported earlier. It turns out Swedish TV never used the material nor reported about it until January 21 even if they taped it in November.]

Could a vast bureaucracy of people from around the globe really be that insulated, that reluctant to Google, that wholly oblivious of the forest while gazing fixedly at trees? (Hint: What's the last place on the planet where they still communicate the most important possible news by smoke signal?)

I was covering the Vatican for the New York Times at the height of the American clerical sex scandals, and am even now amazed at how literally out-of-touch top officials there were with events in the U.S.

So, sad to say, I don't doubt that Benedict did not know about Williamson. I say that not to excuse, but to indict.

Indeed, the history of the Church's tragic failure to act during the Holocaust makes the claim that "We just didn't know" all the more painful. [And that's a Jewishly partisan opinion - ignoring not just what the Church did and was able to do, but also the fact that Catholics were just as much victims of Nazi persecution as the Jews - although with far less numbers because the anti-Catholic persecution was not programmed into anything like the 'Final Solution' against the Jews. But just ask the Poles!]

How could they not know? Here's how: The four breakaway bishops in this case weren't excommunicated for anything related to the Holocaust; they were thrown out of the church for being party to a schism. (But, wouldn't this be like a doctor treating a broken bone but ignoring the unrelated but not insignificant fact that the patient had stopped breathing? To me, yes.) [You lost me there. What exactly is the analogy to 'the patient stopped breathing'? That one of them held negationist views about the Holocaust?

a) The bishops' personal views had nothing to do with their excommunication, which was about their having been ordained illegally under canon law. And b) who could possibly have known about Williamson's views about the Holocaust in 1988 when he was just one of four anonymous priests Mons. Lefebvre handpicked to consecrate as bishops?

The Church did not vet them at the time, nor need to, because they were ordained against the express request of John Paul II. In the agreement Lefebvre signed with Cardinal Ratzinger but reneged on days later, one of the provisions was that the Pope himself would name a traditionalist bishop for their community.]

The intent in lifting the excommunication was to open a dialogue that might eventually bring these four, and other followers of the late Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, back into full communion with the church.
Williamson and three others were illegally ordained by Lefebvre, who rejected the reforms of the Second Vatican Council -- in particular its changes to the liturgy, the declaration in support of religious freedom, and the separation between church and state.

[It's not as simple as that, and it must be pointed out Lefebvre did sign all the Council documents as a participating bishop. He started protesting the interpretaiton of VAtican-II after the overnight liturgical reform of 1969-1970 which he saw - and not without reason - as the ascendancy, if not the triumph, of all those who insisted on looking at Vatican II as a complete break with the past.]

But while studying the particulars of the schism, Church bureaucrats neglected to wonder about such basic, real-world considerations as, "Hey, who is this guy? Who are these people?"

[That's very disingenuous. Of course, the Vatican was aware in a general sense about who the followers of the FSSPX were - most of whom are not wild-eyed ideological fanatics; and many outstanding representatives came back to Rome on their own, starting with the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter which broke off from the FSSPX in 1988 shortly after the illegal ordinations and obtained autonomous life under the Ecclesia Dei as a 'Society of Apostolic Life by Pontifical Right', to the Institut du Bon Pasteur which re-integrated into the Church in 2006.]

After two weeks of intense protest, the Vatican belatedly asked Williamson to recant his statement that "There was not one Jew killed by the gas chambers." He has subsequently apologized to the Pope, but he has not taken back anything he has said.

[For someone who was based in Hongkong for many years, Melinda, have you not learned anything about 'saving face'? It's a charitable and quite pragmatic practice in the Orient when you want to give someone a chance to atone - you don't rub his face in the dust and grind him down with your heel while he tries to make up!

Someone pointed out that all the critics would have snorted in disbelief anyway had Williamson suddenly said, "I am sorry. I was wrong". At least, he had the intellectual honesty to offer a face-saving but at the same time more plausible "Let me re-study the matter, and if I am wrong, I will correct myself".

Which does not, of course, excuse the fact that he must have deliberately limited his previous 'studies' only to books by negationists, because the literature of documented fact about teh Holocaust is just overwhelmingly torrential!]

Ahead of today's meeting, Malcolm Hoenlein, of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, told Reuters that something positive might still come of this if the Benedict made clear that "there is no place in the Church for people who espouse such abhorrent views". Only, that's the easy part.

If Benedict's Curia wishes to avoid such debacles in the future, they must get serious about modern modes of communication, both internally and externally. They must become tech literate, for heaven's sake.

Currently, for an institution that knows a little something about the power of sign and symbol, there is ridiculously little attention paid to the consequences of failing to do so -- until, as in this case, the damage has already been done. In short, in the future, the Vatican must choose to know.

[God knows there is little to instill confidence that Vatican authorities will have learned a lesson from this, and I bet no one is hoping that they will have a chance to prove or disprove that any time soon - or ever!]


Melinda Henneberger is a columnist and editor of AOL's forthcoming political Web site, PoliticsDaily.com.

Cowgirl,

I feel terrible too that Fr. Wagner has bowed to pressure and asked the Vatican to find someone else to be bishop. I am sure he did what he thought was best for the church and the pope but I also wonder if Cardinal Schoenborn encouraged him to make that decision. From what Teresa has posted about Fr. Wagner, he seemed to have excellent qualifications to be a bishop EXCEPT for the goofy remark about natural catastrophes being punishment for sins. I have to admit that I sometimes say stuff like that too, usually only half joking, and, of course, there are a number of situations like that depicted in the Old Testament.

At Mass this evening, our associate pastor, who is a married former Anglican priest, gave a sermon related to today's readings which were about lepers. He made the comment that in Biblical days, people with any number of skin ailments were mistakenly labeled "lepers" and were banished from the community. He said even today it is too easy and too common to point at another person and say they are some kind of "leper" and cast them out of the group. He mentioned several reasons why he finally became Catholic. 1) The church is not a community of saints or a society of perfect people. Instead, we are all lepers. We are all sinners. 2) The 264th successor of Peter is the head of the church and keeps the church following the path Jesus laid out for it. We don't vote every few years to change what we want to believe. 3) Catholic means all inclusive. Everyone is welcome, or should be.

I mention this sermon because it seems very relevant to Fr. Wagner's situation and to what is going on regarding the pope's efforts to reunite the St. Pius X Society with the church.

Well, the problem here is the effect this will have in the future.

Currently, it seems that Mons. Wagner buckled under the constant pressure of the 'we are church' movements and of the pressure of the majority of the clergy in that dioceses.
Those 'Priests' started collecting signatures, protesting against his installation.

Then, Bishop Schwarz didn't exactly stand up for Wagner and further criticism arrived from Bishops from all over Austria.

It makes you wonder who all those Bishops are, and also who recommended them to the Holy See? I assume most of them were named by JPII, who relied on the prefect of the congr. of Bishops.

The ultra liberal movement in Linz has been notorious and a problem in Austria for years. They won. They also put all types of pressure on Rome, considering there will be four more vacancies this year.

"See what happens if you don't nominate the guy we support. We bully him to the point of him giving up."

Just great.

ABOUT FR. WAGNER
AND RELATED ISSUES

I must salute Benefan's ex-Anglican parish priest for giving the kind of homily that Catholics need to hear - about catholicity being inclusiveness, and that the Church is a community of sinners kept together under the Pope.

The Holy Father not only works for unity - to keep the flock together - as one of his primary functions, but constantly admonishes each us to be aware of our sins and try to overcome these human failings daily, by a continuing friendship with Christ through prayer and the sacraments.

None of us can say who should or should not belong to the Church (even if I myself have asked why those who cannot bear the Church's most elementary moral strictures do not simply leave the Church if they disagree with it so much, and even speak about it with shame and mortifiation).

But the Holy Father recently reminded us that baptism confers a seal on every Christian - even if we often forget the seal has been given to us as a gift.

The Austrian 'We are Church' types may be celebrating their 'victory' in the case of Fr. Wagner. Let them - because the true victor is Fr. Wagner, who has shown self-abnegation, consideration for the Church and the Pope, and pragmatism.

His foes celebrate a false victory - the triumph of being un-Christian and uncharitable, even if they do not see that in their arrogance. Do they pray at all? How does one pray with arrogance when prayer implies humility?

They hounded a man whose real fault in their eyes is that he apparently succeeded in getting his own parishioners to follow Catholic orthodoxy, and used a couple of politically incorrect comments of his as their pretext for 'bringing him down'.

Let us pray for the Church in Austria that more Father Wagners may be out there trying to do what Roman Catholic priests should do. Hopefully, such creative minorities will keep the genuine flame of Catholicism alive enough to inspire other creative minorities to arise, persist and prevail.

Inevitably, I have to think of the FSSPX seminaries who have trained some 500 priests in the past 20 years in the traditional way - traditional doctrine, traditional rites, traditional humanistic and theological formation as the best European Catholic seminaries used to give, before progressivists used Vatican II as a pretext to change all that.

The contrast to all the 'We are Church' and cafeteria-Catholic types cannot be greater.

If we individual laymen can feel so heavily troubled by the dissidents among us (on top of our own personal failings), imagine the burden that must weigh on the Holy Father every moment of his life for his responsibilities to God and every single one of his flock.

I have the image of him as Atlas-St.Sebastian carrying the world on his shoulders while being assailed with arrows from all sides.

Thank God there is prayer - it is our only recourse, along with good deeds that make our prayers meaningful.

God bless the Pope, the Church, and all of us who make up his flock -with courage, strength and wisdom, and with faith, hope and charity.

P.S. I do regret that all the stories about Fr. Wagner in the Anglophone press so far say nothing about his background and outstanding formation - and his model parish work - so that English-speaking readers get the impression he is nothing but a benighted anahronistic caricature who dislikes Harry Potter and thunders fire-and-brimstone about natural catastrophes.

Though I can almost bet that if we went back to what he said integrally about Katrina - not the convenient sound bites we have been fed - he probably expressed himself in a Biblical prophetic context and not as someone imposing his ex cathedra judgment on New Orleans. If I have the time, I will try to research his original statements.

P.P.S. Equally relevant, I believe, is to refer back to what Cardinal Schoenborn said about the nomination one week after it was announced. This item was posted on this thread earlier:

---

Cardinal Schoenborn stands
behind Mons. Wagner
Translated from



VIENNA, Feb. 6 (kath.net) - In his column on Friday in the free newspaper Heute, Cardinal Christoph Schoenborn defended the nonination of Gerhard Wagner as Auxiliary Bishop of Linz.

"He seems to do very well where he has been assigned," Schoenborn said.

Schoenborn said he was amazed at the media outcry against the nomination of the conservative prelate, because "according to all reports, he has led his parish in an outstanding manner. He has the best relations with young people. His parish faithful love him. His churches are full. What else do they want of him?"

Perhaps he can be 'somewhat sharp' and is 'fond of pithy sayings', but he seems to do very well in his parish, Schoenborn added. Schoenborn also said that 'convervative' means 'somewho saves and preserves', but "a bit more conservation would do us all good".

---

And still from kath.net, in a report from the Vatican on Feb. 11 (posted in NOTABLES):

---

...

Benedikt Steinschulte, the only German-speaking official in the Pontifical Council for Social Communications, said about Mons. Wagner: "He lived and studied in Rome for some time. That makes for good relations and contacts".

Wagner studied at the Jesuit-run Pontifical Gregorian UnIVersity from 1974 to 1979, subsequently earning a doctorate in theology, summa cum laude.

Steinschulte said the nomination dossiers for Wagner came from Cardinal Schoenborn, from the Apostolic Nuncio in Austria, and what he called 'an informal structure' for information gathering.

---

The Vatican announced Wagner's nomination on January 31. One week later, on Feb. 6, Schoenborn appeared to believe that the outcry against Wagner was only in the media. And now he is talking of widespread 'indignation' and 'damage control'!

Is he that naive or does he refuse to see how many of the clergy in Austria are really more 'We are Church' than 'cum Ecclesia'????

And why could he not stand firm on his glowing words in the column of Feb. 6? It was his personal column, so it is unlikely anyone solicited his good words then. Suddenly, those words are no longer valid because Austria's media and liberal Catholics detest Wagner?

Plus, it appears he sent in a nomination dossier for Wagner to the Vatican. Was that supposed to be his prerogative alone, or did he need to consult the other bishops of his conference? And this is someone who was openly critical of the Roman Curia for its blunders in the FSSPX excom recall!

Quite a feeble, fickle reed the Archbishop of Vienna is proving to be! To think he is widely seen as Benedict XVI's ranking disciple!

Monday, February 16

St. Gilbert of Sempringham(12th-cent)
Founder of the Gilbertines



No OR today.


THE POPE'S DAY

The Holy Father met with

- Mons. Bruno Musarò, Apostolic Nuncio in Peru
- Bishops of Nigeria, Group 4, on ad-limina visit




The Office of Papal Liturgical Celebrations announced
an Ordinary Public Consistory on Saturday morning, Feb. 21,
at the Sala Clementina of the Apostolic Palace
to proclaim the canonization of ten Blesseds (1 bishop, 6 priests, 3 nuns),
including Fr. Damian of Molokai.

- ZYGMUNT SZCZĘSNY FELIŃSKI, Bishop, and founder of the Congregation of the Franciscan Sisters of Mary's Family
- ARCANGELO TADINI, Priest, and founder of the Congregation of Working Sisters of the Holy House of Nazareth
- FRANCISCO COLL Y GUITART, Priest of the Order of Preachers (Dominicans) and founder of the Congregation
of the Dominican Sisters of the Annunciation
- JOZEF DAMIAN DE VEUSTER, Priest of the Congregation of the Sacred Hearts of Jesus and Mary and of the Perpetual
Adoration of the Blessed Sacrament
- BERNARDO TOLOMEI, Abbot and founder of the Congregation of St. Mary of Mt. Olivet, of the Order of St. Benedict
- RAFAEL ARNÁIZ BARÓN, Religious of the Cistercian Order of Strict Observance
- NUNO DE SANTA MARIA ÁLVARES PEREIRA, Religious of the Order of Carmelites
= GERTRUDE (CATERINA) COMENSOLI, Virgin, and founder of the Institute of Sisters of teh Blessed Sacrament
- MARIE DE LA CROIX (JEANNE) JUGAN, Virgin, and founder of teh Congregation of Little Sisters of the Poor
- CATERINA VOLPICELLI, Virgin, and founder of the Congregation of the Handmaids of the Sacred Heart.

Pope mourns death
of Korean Cardinal Kim


The Vatican today released tht text of the telegram sent by the Holy Father to the Archbishop of Seoul expressing hios condolences for tHE death this morning of Cardinal Stephen Kim, emeritus Archbishop of Seoul. He was 86.

---

TO MY VENERABLE BROTHER
CARDINAL NICHOLAS CHEONG JINSUK
ARCHBISHOP OF SEOUL

DEEPLY SADDENED TO LEARN OF THE DEATH OF CARDINAL STEPHEN KIM SOU-HWAN, I OFFER HEARTFELT CONDOLENCES TO YOU AND TO ALL THE PEOPLE OF KOREA.

RECALLING WITH GRATITUDE CARDINAL KIM’S LONG YEARS OF DEVOTED SERVICE TO THE CATHOLIC COMMUNITY IN SEOUL AND HIS MANY YEARS OF FAITHFUL ASSISTANCE TO THE HOLY FATHER AS A MEMBER OF THE COLLEGE OF CARDINALS, I JOIN YOU IN PRAYING THAT GOD OUR MERCIFUL FATHER WILL GRANT HIM THE REWARD OF HIS LABOURS AND WELCOME HIS NOBLE SOUL INTO THE JOY AND PEACE OF THE HEAVENLY KINGDOM.

TO CARDINAL KIM’S RELATIVES AND ALL ASSEMBLED FOR THE SOLEMN MASS OF CHRISTIAN BURIAL I CORDIALLY IMPART MY APOSTOLIC BLESSING AS A PLEDGE OF CONSOLATION AND STRENGTH IN THE LORD.

BENEDICTUS PP. XVI

---

Catholics in Seoul mourn the loss of their former archbishop.

Pastoral Letter of the Austrian Bishops

Here's the outcome of the much ballyhoed extraordinary meeting of the Austrian bishops to clam the waters over Mons. Gerhard Wagner's contested nomination as auxiliary bishop of Linz. (I will continue posting the updates on 'Causa Wagner' as an Austrian news agency has called it because it involves episcopal 'reception' of a papal decision and right).

I was just reading the full text on the site of the Austrian bishops conference and wringing my hands at the opaqueness of the pastoral doublespeak that I would have to translate, when to the rescue come the folks at

who have provided an instant translation, which I am posting here, though I tweaked the word order here and there to make it more readable.

It has to be read in full, as bloated as it is with hot air and dripping with pieties, to appreciate the mindset of these bishops. If this is the way they address the faithful, no wonder people keep away from their churches.

---

Dear Catholics, dear sisters and brothers in the faith,
dear citizens of our country!


The Austrian diocesan bishops gathered on Monday to search in common prayer and discuss the events in the last days which have caused worry and anger inside and outside the church.

We owe the people a word of clarification, but also want to express the hope that as with every crisis there are opportunities. This can only mean for us as a church that we focus on Christ and be open.

Our talk about God must always also be a talk about people. For interaction in the church, this means that we listen to one another better, to be able to see together "the signs of the times" with the eyes of faith. Thereby the church can serve all the people.

1. The first word applies to the faithful, who share with the bishops the distress of a crisis, and yet have shown full confidence. The faithful have had to experience some criticism, even ridicule and rejection caused in part by errors in the Church.

Many people in this situation proved their loyalty and their love for the Church. We thank the many people who prayed, so the Church may endure, and offer them the blessings of God.

We thank the bishops, priests and deacons for their support of the episcopate, that it may be a aervant of unity. We thank the many major office holders and volunteers, who work generously for parishes, for young people, for the suffering, for the sick, for people in any emergency, and who strengthen a caring society.

The thanks apply also to the many people in Austria, near and far, who trust that the Church has dealt with this difficult situation.

2. The Catholic Church in Austria is the largest community of our country and part of the worldwide community of the Catholic Church. This involves actual communion with the Bishop of Rome, the Successor of Saint Peter.

Just as we bishops know the loyalty of the faithful, we want to show our attachment to the Pope in the situations that are serious and stressful for him and to show our commitment - this is an expression of loyalty, which precisely in difficult times has to be maintained. This attachment is also a inseparable element of Catholic identity.

3. In this context, we also want to make a statement about the "repeal of excommunication” for the four bishops illegally consecrated in 1988.

Pope Benedict XVI has unequivocally stated that the Lefebvrist Bishop Richard Williamson has disqualified himself by his denial of the Shoah and that he must clearly take back in public his untenable denial of the mass murder of the Jewish people.

The lifting of the excommunication by the Pope is a hand outstretched to those who are separated from the Church. It follows that in no case can these four bishops automatically hold office in the Catholic Church.

Rather, the Lefebvriast community must give a clear signal on their part that they take this outstretched hand, and actually seek reconciliation.

The prerequisite is of course, the unconditional acceptance of the Second Vatican Council. [Have they looked at all at the charter for the Institut du Bon Pasteur which allows them to continue discussions on their questions regarding Vatican-II?* I've footnoted it below.][DIM]

We hope that the inadequate communication processes in the Vatican will also be successfully improved so that the worldwide service of the Pope does not suffer damage.

4. There were questions of communication also in the recent appointment of a suffragan bishop for the Diocese of Linz. The bishops are aware that Fr Wagner asked the Pope to withdraw the appointment.

The theme of episcopal appointments is important because since the mid-1980s, it has been associated with a number of problems in Austria. For many, the controversy over episcopal appointments led to painful conflict, which triggered splits in the Church.

It is precisely in this area where sensitivity is most appropriate. There is no question that the Pope is free to appoint bishops. The bishops do not want to go back in time where - as in 1918 - the Emperor alone chose the bishops.

Even a "people's choice" of the bishops would divide the Church into parties, and conflicts would be inevitable.

We bishops are convinced that the procedure provided for in canon law for the selection and the examination of candidates has proved its worth, if this procedure is really followed. [Are they saying the oprocedure was not followed in the case of Fr. Wagner's nomination?]

But before the Holy Father takes the final decision, reliable and thoroughly tested basic information must be provided on which he can rely. [And aren't the bishops supposed to provide that? What did they do, or not do, this time?] In Austria in the next few years a number of bishops are to be appointed. The faithful are legitimately concerned that the process of candidate search.

Examination of the proposals and the final decisions should be carefully undertaken with pastoral sensitivity where possible. This can ensure that bishops are appointed who are not "against" but "for" a local church. [How exactly does this apply to Mons. Wagner. Did he ever express himself against the local Church of Linz? If he had, would Bishop Schwarz have welcomed his appointment so promptly and warmly?]

We bishops will make every possible effort to support the forthcoming episcopal appointments in the sense of monitoring these procedures in close cooperation with the relevant Vatican offices.

[And what exactly, if anything, did you bishops do in the case of Mons. Wagner's appointment? If Cardinal Scoenborn sent a nimnation dossier on him as did the Apostolic Nuncio in Austria, did any of you bishops communicate your concerns with Schoenborn and the Nuncio, knowing very well that an auxiliary bishop of Linz was bound to be named soon? Or were you all so tied up in your own local affairs you did not really care until someone was named who is diametrically opposite everything you stand for?]

5. It is a highly desirable sign of the unity in the Church if the appointment of a bishop for the faithful means joy and encouragement. Despite reservations, it is possible i na good human and Christian atmosphere, to greet a newly appointed bishop with good will. [But good will was precisely lacking from any of the Austrian bishops with the exception of Bishop Schwarz, who was the one most directly affected by Wagner's appointment, or Cardinal Schoenborn for that matter, as late as Feb. 6, one week after the nomination.]

It is also expected that a bishop will meet the faithful with sensitivity and thus win their confidence. [Wagner from all accounts has the full confidence of his parishioners. He was never given a chance to try to to do that in Linz.]

6. The situation in the vast diocese of Linz makes the bishops worry - this even after the resignation of Father Gerhard Wagner. There is much good news from this diocese, which is often too little seen, even if some problems should be mentioned.

Upper Austria has a very vibrant church, with a dense network of active parishes and pastoral centers, a keen sense of the social dimension of the Christian faith, provides great help in the solidarity in the worldwide church with the poor and marginalized. Major monasteries and religious communities dominate the country. Catholic lay organizations are especially active.

We are also moved as bishops that in the Diocese of Linz once again there has been significant tension with the recent appointment. It is not just about differences of opinion in terms of structures and methods, but ultimately the question of the sacramental identity of the Catholic Church. [But the reports indicated Mons. Wagner was particularly strong at having his parish express this identity! Except it's the traditional orthodox spiritual identity, not a progressivist secular identity]

This especially concerns the ordination of priests and deacons in relation to the general priesthood of all the baptized. The pastoral path to be followed must be in accordance with the universal church.

In the case of differences, this path of the church persevering in prayer and in conversation with the universal Church should be undertaken on the basis of the Second Vatican Council.

[What the hell does all that mean? Was Fr. Wagner involved at all in ordinations that do not 'follow the path of the universal Church? And if it has nothing to do with him, it is unfair to raise the problem in connection with his case!]

7. Trusting in God's help, we will overcome the crisis of recent weeks. But we must learn from the events and from the mistakes see the proper consequences for the future. [Hey, who made the 'mistakes'? Schoenborn and the Nuncio who submitted their dossiers on Wagner to the Vatican? The rest of the bishops who raise a hue and cry after the fact, and apparently simply sat on their hands before the nomination was announced? Or are they implying without saying so, that 'the Vatican' [and with it the Pope] made the mistakes?]

Without ignoring other pending issues, we will again draw near primarily to the centre of faith. That means beholding Christ, who does not desert his Church and whose word and deeds must be a measure of our words and our deeds. [Oh please, do as you preach, not as you please!]

During this time, the major economic problems and the problems of day-to-day existence continue, Christians should have hands, heart and brain free for the task of living the Gospel and to pass the Good News to all people.

To this end we ask at the intercession of Mary, the Magna Mater Austriae, the blessing of God the Father, the power of Jesus Christ and the light of the Holy Spirit.

Archbishop Christoph Cardinal SCHÖNBORN
ArchbishopAlois KOTHGASSER
Diocesan Bishop Egon KAPELLARI
Diocesan Bishop Klaus KÜNG
Military Bishop Christian WERNER
Diocesan Bishop Paul IBY
Diocesan Bishop Alois SCHWARZ
Diözesanbischof Ludwig SCHWARZ
Diocesan Bishop Manfred SCHEUER
Diocesan Bishop Elmar FISCHER

---

I do not think the above letter provides the least bit of clarity that the situation requires, and it speaks of 'errors' and 'mistakes' as though they happen by themselves.

And yet, they refer to Mons. Wagner's nomination as an error or mistake without saying specifically how and why it was an error or mistake. Someone had to propose his name to the Vatican. A priest, no matter, how highly he thinks of himself, cannot act on his own behalf.

Kath-net earlier reported that nomination dossiers for Wagner came from Cardinal Schoenborn and the Apostolic Nuncio in Austria (as well as by an 'informal structure' used by the Vatican). That has not been denied by either of the two parties named.

But those of us who follow Church news got the full drill during the unfortunate Wielgus case in Poland - and the nominations and files do have to come from those two primary sources. The question is whether Schoenborn consulted the other bishops at all or simply acted on his own.

Also, it is interesting that the bishops considered it more important to chip in their two cents worth about the FSSPX excom recall before going on to tackle their local problem. Oh yes, the whole world must know they condemn Williamson, even laying down that the condition for full repair of the Lefebvrian schism is 'unconditional acceptance' of Vatican-II.

Frankly, I feel very sickened by this blatant grandstanding - more sickened than I am by Williamson's denial of the Shoah and conspiracy theories about 9/11. Those are at least outright crank ideas, not incomprehensible nonsense masquerading as pieties in a pastoral letter that reads like an assault on common sense - and on the authority of the Pope.

Thank God Fr. Wagner had the good sense to cut to the chase and simply bowed out. He certainly reacted more promptly, sensibly and wisely than the Austrian bishops, about whom I am finding it very hard to feel charitable just now.


More pictures from the bishops' mutual lovefest: Cardinal Schoenborn with a T-shirt sitributed by a Catholic youth group that says 'Build instead of tearing down'; center, Bishop Schwarz of Linz.

P.S. Meanwhile, the Italian news agencies are reporting that Pope Benedict has not yet acted on Fr. Wagner's request to withdraw his nomination. The announcement by the Diocese of Linz yesterday stated that the Vatican had granted his request.


And Andrea Tornielli makes this very pertinent observation on his blog today:

---

One cannot help noting that something is very wrong when some illustrious cardinals and bishops openly question the Magisterium - and get praise and applause in the media - whereas lesser prelates are forced to give up an episcopal assignment for questioning not any Catholic doctrine but the intrinsic value of the Harry Potter books.

---

[Tornielli explains earlier in the blog that he and his children read the Harry Potter books; and that he deplored Mons. Wagner's comments about Katrina because it slurs all the residents of New Orleans, but not for raising the possible correlation of some catastrophe with what would seem to be providential retribution, recalling that the venerated Cardinal Siri of Genoa (a very traditional bishop who was once very papabile) made a similar correlation to the AIDS phenomenon.]


*Since questions on Vatican-II constitute the major obstacle to full communion in the eyes of the FSSPX, it is very pertinent to look at the Vatican's concession to the Institut du Bon Pasteur - set up by French priests who had broken away from the FSSPX.

The Vatican recognized the IBP in September 2006 as a society of pontifical right, dedicated to preserving the traditional liturgy and directly answerable to Rome, not to the local bishop. On the matter of Vatican-II, this was the condition giben to them:

---

The members of the institute may engage in a criticism of the Second Vatican Council that is serious and constructive and in accord with Pope Benedict XVI's address of 22 December 2005 to the Roman Curia, while recognizing that it is for the Apostolic See to give the authentic interpretation.

---

*********************************************************************

2/17/09
P.S. Sorry to have such an 'interminable' post on this matter - but this statement by the Austrian bishops is highly objectionable for its insolent attitude towards the Holy Father on the nomination process, and it is, of course, their open criticism of the Pope that is emphasized in this Reuters account of the pastoral letter. I will forego the fisking for now because the entire report is fiskable!

Austria bishops urge better Vatican communication



VIENNA, Feb. 16 (Reuters) – Austria's diocesan bishops on Monday urged the Vatican to improve its inadequate communication skills, after holding an emergency meeting to discuss a crisis of confidence in the Catholic church.

Austrian Catholicism is in turmoil because Pope Benedict, one week after readmitting Holocaust denier Bishop Richard Williamson, named an auxiliary bishop in Linz who said Hurricane Katrina in 2005 was God punishing New Orleans for its sins.

"We hope inadequate channels of communication in the Vatican can be improved so the Pope's service to humanity is not impaired," Austria's bishops said in a statement after their day-long meeting.

The Williamson case and the appointment of Gerhard Maria Wagner in Linz sparked doubts about the Pope's leadership and concern the church was taking an increasingly conservative turn.

Both decisions were apparently taken without consultation with local churches.

Last week, 31 of the 39 deans (senior priests) in the Linz diocese passed a declaration of no confidence in Wagner, a rare event in the tightly governed Catholic Church. Wagner withdrew on Sunday, and the Vatican accepted his decision, the Catholic news agency Kathpress reported.

Austria's bishops said it was essential for the Pope to have reliable and thorough briefings before appointing bishops.

Faced with rising numbers of Catholics quitting the church and protests from clergy, Vienna Cardinal Christoph Schoenborn called all diocesan bishops to Monday's meeting to "give our best to overcome the crisis."

The bishops expressed solidarity with the Pope but linked the communication problems and lack of adherence to official nomination procedures to the disputed promotion of Wagner.

"We bishops will do everything within our power to insure the upcoming bishop nominations are conducted according with the official procedure, in close cooperation with the relevant Vatican officials," they said.

Paul Zulehner, a theologian at the University of Vienna, called the Wagner nomination a putsch by church conservatives in Austria and an attempt to sideline the official church leaders.

"The seizure of power by the right-wingers has now failed, apparently through the clear intervention of several Austrian bishops," he said.

"I think people will now say: 'it is really good that Cardinal Schoenborn has taken over the leadership of the Church again'," Zulehner added. (Reporting by Sarah Marsh; Editing by Jon Boyle)

TERESA BENEDETTA, 2/16/2009 9:45 PM:

---

P.S. Meanwhile, the Italian news agencies are reporting that Pope Benedict has not yet acted on Fr. Wagner's request to withdraw his nomination. The announcement by the Diocese of Linz yesterday stated that the Vatican had granted his request.

---

Very, very interesting. I don't think that the Italian newspapers are behind. So perhaps the Diocese released that announcement expecting and hoping the Pope would accept Fr. Wagner's request.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here is Rorate Caeli's comment on the Bishop's statement:

Austrian Bishops in open revolt
Monday, February 16th, 2009

And they complain about the "Lefebvrist" Bishops?! "Why seest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye; and seest not the beam that is in thy own eye?"

From the statement of the Bishops of Austria, signed and released today:

---

"4. There were problems of communication also in the recent appointment of an auxiliary bishop for the Diocese of Linz. The bishops are aware that Fr Wagner asked the Pope to withdraw the appointment. The theme of Episcopal appointments is therefore important because since the mid-eighties in Austria it has been associated with a number of problems. For many, the controversy over episcopal appointments led to a painful conflict, and they have triggered splits in the church,. It is precisely in this area that sensitivity is most appropriate. There is no question that the Pope is free to appoint bishops. The bishops do not want to go back in time where - as in 1918 - the Emperor alone chose the bishops. Even a 'popular choice' of the bishops would divide the church into parties and conflicts would be inevitable. We bishops are convinced that the procedure provided for in canon law for the selection and the examination of candidates has proved its worth, if this procedure is really followed. Therefore, before the Holy Father takes the final decision, reliable and thoroughly tested basic information must be provided on which he can rely. In Austria in the next few years a number of bishops are to be appointed. The faithful are legitimately concerned that the process of candidate search, examination of the proposals and the final decisions should be carefully undertaken and with pastoral sensitivity are possible. This can ensure that bishops are appointed who are not 'against' but 'for' a local church. We bishops will make every possible effort to support the forthcoming episcopal appointments in the sense of monitoring these procedures in close cooperation with the relevant Vatican offices."

....
"Trusting in God's help, we will overcome the crisis of recent weeks." [Adapted according to original text]

---

There was no true "crisis", but open revolt against the Pope, inflamed and supported by the shameless Bishops of Austria, first among them the Cardinal-Archbishop of Vienna. If the Pope does not intervene urgently in this case, if a PUBLIC response is not given - since the Bishops of Austria chose to make the matter public - the perception of the authority of the Pope in Europe is finished. The anti-Roman rebellion of the Austrian Bishops is intolerable.


Source: rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2009/02/austrian-bishops-in-open-rev...

February 17

Seven Founders of
the Order of Servites(Florence, 13th-cent)
[Friar Servants of Mary, OSM]


OR for 2/16-2/17/09:

At the Sunday Angelus, the Pope reaffirms the value of confession in Christian life:
'Jesus raises man from religious and civilian death'


Other Page 1 stories: Hugo Chavez wins referendum allowing no term limits for politicians in
Venezuela; Russia re-proposes a Russia-Europe-US tripartite missile shield; a US airstrike hits
an Al Qaeda camp in Pakistan; and the Pope's condolence on the death of the emeritus Archbishop
of Seoul, Cardinal Stephen Kim.


The Holy Father has no scheduled events today.


Elsewhere at the Vatican:

Mons. Rino Fisichella, President of the Pontifical Academy for Life, led a news conference
to present an international congress of scientists and academics to be held on February
21-22 at the Vatican's Synod Hall (in Aula Paolo VI) on the theme "The new frontiers
of genetics and the risk of eugenics'. The Congress is a highlight of the Academy's XV
General Assembly.

Pope's program in Jordan
on Holy Land visit




AMMAN, Jordan, Feb. 16 (AP) — A Jordanian Catholic church leader says Pope Benedict XVI will visit an Amman mosque during his Mideast tour in the second week of May.

The Pope will arrive in Jordan on May 8 as part of an eight-day tour which will include Israel and the West Bank.

Father Rifat Bader, the spokesman and coordinator of the Jordanian portion of the tour, said Tuesday the Pontiff will visit the Hussein Bin Talal Mosque, named after Jordan's late king who died in 1999.

It will be the Pope's second visit to a place of Muslim worship since he prayed at the Blue Mosque in Istanbul in 2006.

Bader added that the pontiff would meet with Muslim leaders to underline "coexistence between religions."

The Pope also will visit biblical sites in Jordan.

Amid scandals,
questions of where the Pope’s focus lies
By RACHEL DONADIO and NICHOLAS KULISH
February 16, 2009



Only the secular media and their liberal fellow travelers - Catholics and non-Catholics alike - would question 'where the Pope's focus lies'. The true Catholic faithful know because they understand what the function of the Vicar of Christ is and because Benedict XVI himself has never stopped defining what he is trying to do.

Yet the MSM, liberal, anti-Catholic loudmouths have found a perfect opportunity to consolidate one of their periodic exercises in "What's wrong with this Pope?", using the pretext of two 'scandals' they created. Here's the New York Times version.

Of course, it mindlessly, robotically parrots all the mistakes - deliberate or not - that MSM has been perpetrating these past few weeks... And makes some sweeping Chicken-Little alarmist conclusions in its lead sentence that are presumptuous because based solely on the writers' biased perceptions.



ROME — Close on the heels of the Pope’s rehabilitation of a group of schismatic bishops, including one who denied the Holocaust, a second scandal has compounded a debate within the Church over whether Pope Benedict XVI’s focus on doctrine and his perceived insensitivity to political tone are alienating mainstream Catholics and undermining the church’s moral authority.

[What does undermine the Church's moral authorty is lily-livered, placatory, bending-with-the-wind actions and statements like those of the bishops of Austria over the Linz appointment.

They give a great example of "Love your enemies but not your own family and neighbors" which is increasingly supplanting God's original commandment among many sanctimonious Christians. But to see it so blatantly exemplified by the Austrian bishops' conference is truly shameful for them. They have been so frantic to run for cover - and dissociate themselves from the Pope - that in the process, they seem to have forgotten what it means to be a Christian, let alone to be a bishop who has a duty of loyalty to the Pope.

They have been most un-Christian in their treatment of Mons. Wagner whose only apparent fault appears to be that he holds a couple of opinions which mmany people disagree with and find ludicrous. What about his qualifications as a priest and his achievements in his parish? They count less than the opinion of anti-Church people about what he thinks of Harry Potter and Katrina?

Your Excellencies, think about it, apologize to the Pope first of all for your insolence and temerity, and make rightful amends to the man you have pilloried so unfairly.]

Pope Benedict XVI drew criticism when he appointed a priest known for provocative statements for a post in Austria.

On Sunday, a priest known for such provocative statements as blaming the sins of New Orleanians for Hurricane Katrina asked the Pope to rescind his appointment as an auxiliary bishop in Austria.

The affairs have engendered a storm of criticism of the Church hierarchy and led to frantic efforts to mollify angry and confused parishioners around the globe, while the latest controversy has raised concerns that the actions could be part of a disturbing pattern. [On the basis of what? The arrogant bishops of Germany and Austria are not the entire Catholic world!]

The Vatican expert George Weigel, in a recent essay in First Things, an American religion journal, criticized the Vatican for its “chaos, confusion and incompetence.” [This is unfair to George Weigel and deliberately misused. The setnece is lifted totally out of its context, which was the 'PR' ineptitude with regard to the FSSPX excom recall.]

In Vienna on Monday, 10 Austrian bishops convened a crisis session to deal with the fallout. Erich Leitenberger, a spokesman for the Vienna Archdiocese, said church officials around the country had been inundated with letters, phone calls and e-mail messages, including from parishioners saying they were leaving the church.

[C'mon, Austrian Catholicism has been dying for decades - and this fact should have been stated at this point. It was hammered home again and again before and during the Pope's visit to Austria - and now, all of a sudden, it is irrelevant? Letienberger is as detestable as his boss. The sanctimonious reaction was from people who have long ago withdrawn in practice from the Church.]

Austria, a majority-Catholic country with a complicated Nazi past, had been reeling [Really! As if they care. If they were 'reeling' at all, it was from ecstatic giddiness that the Church and the Pope were being pilloried so mercilessly!] from the Pope’s revocation of the excommunication of four schismatic bishops from the ultraconservative Society of St. Pius X, including Bishop Richard Williamson, who has denied the existence of the Nazi gas chambers as well as the scale and genocidal intent of the Holocaust.

While that firestorm was still raging, Benedict ignited another by appointing the Rev. Gerhard Maria Wagner, known for his Katrina comment and for saying that homosexuality was curable, as the auxiliary bishop of Linz. [So he has some views that are politically incorrect. How about saying something about his eminent qualifications and his record as a parish priest? By omitting any mention at all of his background, the media make it appear the Pope simply picked up some backward country lout and 'yet another crackpot like Williamson' to be an auxiliary bishop.]

Cardinal Christoph Schönborn, the highest ranking Catholic official in Austria, said Monday that the decisions about the schismatic bishops and Father Wagner were unrelated, and that they were “made on different tracks.” But their proximity intensified the rancor among more reform-minded Austrian Catholics.

Mr. Leitenberger said, “The displeasure grew exponentially.” [Stuff Leitenberger! Remember who these people are: the diocese and the cardinal who ignored all the protests by true Catholics against their exhibition of a 'gay' Last Supper last year, and are now overly solicitous of the protests by people they know very well to be anti-Church!]]

Outside St. Stephen’s Cathedral in Vienna, Elisabeth Felbermair, 28, said she was relieved that Father Wagner was stepping aside. “Thank God he’s going,” she said, calling his views “too reactionary.”

She said she would probably leave the Church, though for personal reasons not directly related to the controversies of recent weeks.

For many Catholics, the issues are larger than Father Wagner. As the Austrian newspaper Die Presse said on its front page on Monday, “His name stands for a battle over direction: should Linz be more faithful to Rome or should the church be more democratic and more liberal?” [In more basic terms - between Catholic orthodoxy and laissez-faire 'Catholicism'.]

Likewise, the outrage over Bishop Williamson was directed not only at his Holocaust denial and the Vatican’s delay in fully condemning it, but also over concerns by centrist Catholics about the direction of the Church and their place within it. [Cite a few of those centrist Catholics by name, please - and some quotations to 'substantiate' your statement if you can. This is a typically presumptuous and most dishnoest journalistic ploy of attributing the reporter's opinion to unnamed persons ro worse, groups of people.]

Indeed, even as local churches have scrambled to reassure parishioners that the controversies were anomalous, others see Benedict’s interest in reaching out to traditionalists as perfectly consistent with his past views.

A theologian more at home in the library than the stadium Mass, Benedict was for two decades head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and was more attuned to the theology of esoteric doctrinal questions rather than their potential political ramifications. If his recent missteps had unintended consequences, they have still demonstrated to many parishioners that his concerns are far removed from theirs.

“We had to restore a lot of confidence to those who were upset, who needed to know that we recognize the concerns of many Catholics,” said Msgr. Bernard Podvin, the spokesman for the French Bishops Conference. “It’s a very, very big job.” [Another hypocritical group - who have been smarting for decades because the FSSPX - and its seminaries - have been flourishing in France while the local bishops have steadlily lost grtoud. Gee, there must be a reason for that!]

Monsignor Podvin said the French Catholic hierarchy had been trying to explain that the values of the Society of St. Pius X did not represent the views of “the Catholic community.”

The society was founded in 1970 by a French archbishop, Marcel Lefebvre, in opposition to the liberalizing reforms of the Second Vatican Council, which included a commitment to religious liberty and a document absolving contemporary Jews of responsibility for the crucifixion of Jesus.

The four schismatic bishops were excommunicated in 1988 after Archbishop Lefebvre consecrated them without a papal mandate. In revoking the excommunications, the Pope sought to heal a lingering schism, seemingly oblivious to how it might play beyond the walls of the Vatican.

The most intense outrage came from Benedict’s native Germany, where the Holocaust remains a third rail and its denial is a crime. Both Chancellor Angela Merkel and the German Catholic hierarchy have been fiercely outspoken in their criticism of the Pope.

The Vatican later called on Bishop Williamson to recant and said that the pope had not known of his views at the time of the decision. Bishop Williamson has apologized for the “media storm” caused by his remarks, but not for their content.

In the United States, “the outrage is coming not so much from the pews, but from the community of professional theologians who fear that by accepting the bishops of the Society of St. Pius X back into the church, the liturgical and theological reforms of Vatican II are somehow endangered,” [AYE, AND THERE'S THE REAL RUB!] said the Rev. James Massa, the executive director of the Secretariat for Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs at the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.

He called that fear “an overreaction,” noting that Benedict’s “whole career as a priest and scholar has been shaped by the council.” [Thank you, Fr. Massa].

In Mexico, another crisis is undermining confidence in the church: this month, the Legionaries of Christ, a conservative religious order, said that its founder, the Rev. Marcial Maciel Degollado, had led a double life and fathered a child in an affair.

Before his death last year at 87, Father Maciel was forced by the Vatican to leave his ministry after allegations that he had sexually abused seminarians.

In his criticism of the Vatican hierarchy, known as the Curia, Mr. Weigel said a curia that allowed the Bishop Williamson controversy to explode was not “a curia capable of conducting an investigation that can command public credibility.” [Again, this is misrepresenting Weigel's article which was an analysis of the post-Maciel Legionaries and an argument for the Vatican to step in to try and rescue the movement, which has its good points even if its present leadership is suspect for a possible cover-up - or at least, a psychological denial - that their founder was flawed, to say the least. The comments on the FSSPX case were incidental.]

The quick decision by the Vatican to accept Father Wagner’s withdrawal in Austria may reflect a new sensitivity to that concern and would not have been made lightly, says Hubert Feichtlbauer, an author in Vienna who writes about church issues.

“The Vatican really took a risk, and had to consider the possibility that other places might put up similar resistance to unwanted candidates,” he said.

That risk may have been overridden by other concerns.

“The larger problem is the inability of the church leadership to come to terms with the modern world,” Mr. Feichtlbauer said. “The problem is a long-term one, and in no way is it solved.”

No, it's not. The Church has been trying its best to adapt its faithful to the modern world - but the way it is doing so does not please the 'modernists'. Because it is not adapting its eternal, 'non-adaptable' doctrine, but the way Catholics today should apply that doctrine against modern practices which violate it.


Rachel Donadio reported from Rome, and Nicholas Kulish from Vienna. Laurie Goodstein contributed reporting from New York, and Elisabeth Malkin from Mexico City.


********************************************************************

P.S. I'm reposting here my reply to Janice's comment below, in order to bring David84's last comment to the same page, as the page changes come on the basis of the number of posts (not on the length of the posts) .

Reply to Janice's comment:

---

I still think Donadio's use of Weigel's comments was improper because they were taken out of context.

As far as Weigel's 'changing' atttitude about Benedict XVI, I have to see more than his last column to conclude that - since his beef was clearly against the Vatican set-up in relation to the FSSPX imbroglio, not against the Pope.

---

I don't think Donadio's comment is at all unfair to George Weigel. He's been on a tear ever since it became clear to him that Pope Benedict wasn't going to be a John Paul clone. He's criticized Summorum Pontificum, he's gone out of his way to "caution" all of us about the SSPX, he's gone on and on about the "reform of the Curia," despite the fact that John Paul never did a thing about it, etc., etc., etc.

What he's really worried about is the end of the "Springtime" of Vatican II and the end of the idolatry of John Paul II. He got a pretty good ride out of that and now has few, if any, good connections at the Vatican. More importantly, his theological interpretations are falling on deaf ears.

It's a new ball game and Weigel doesn't like it.

Well, isn't it nice!! The Cardinal-Arch Bishop of Vienna posing with a T-shirt created by the 'Catholic Youth' of Austria.

Either he's ignorant to their agenda, or he's so desperate to please the liberal church from below/we are church movement that he would pose with one of their creations. I've seem some of the slogans they come up with.. it's simply despicable and disrespectful.

I never really liked him. He did have a small bonus, but that's all gone!!

*****************************************************************

The uproar in Austria was not caused by the Vatican, it was started by a gang of low and medium level wimpy-whiny Priests, and was then joined by overly press/public consent hawking 'Bishops'.

If anything calls for a papal fury attack, it's this one. Considering how dear Austria is to him. Bavarians are def. closer related in culture and nature to Austria(ns)than to non Bavarian Germany. It must hurt him tremendously. And those people know it!

Well, luckily I'm not Pope . But a calmer, wiser man who's full of humility and grace.
He'll do whatever is best for the person concerned. And he will take the shots for it.
I pray that he'll be able to deal with all the blows he's been taking!!

********************************************************************

Dear Heike,

When I first saw those T-shirt pictures from the Austrian bishops' site, the first thought that came to my mind was that they were from the 'Catholic Youth' group that an earlier kath-net report said was marketing T-shirts with anti-Church and anti-Pope slogans. And I was more outraged than I already was.

But I did check out that article again before even copying the pictures, and "Aufbauen statt anhauen' - 'Build instead of tearing down' (which seems to be a pretty constructive message - literally as well!) - was definitely not one of their slogans. Plus, the webnet address on the T-shirts is not that of the 'bad' group. I would not otherwise have used the pictures.

But if I interpreted wrong, please correct me.

Teresa

I agree with many of you here that Cardinal Schönborn has in some sense added insult to injury, but I have a feeling that Pope Benedict does not disapprove of what is happening, not that both men sat down and discussed a cunning plan to make the best of the situation. No, rather, the Pope by taking the bullet has strengthened Schönborn's hand in Austria. Think about it, the general editor of the Catechism of the Catholic Church can outflank the liberals from now on by pointing to his Martin Luther episode.

This has done for the top cleric in Austria what the promise of tax cuts for 95% of Americans did for Barack Obama during the U.S election campaign.

I imagine that when Schönborn stands beside a "We are Church" person with a poster or t-shirt, he's thinking to himself, "Yeah Right....", like a politician getting a picture taken holding a baby.

He's putting himself over as the "Rebel Conservative", it's a political trick, in the good sense of the word, he is to Pope Benedict XVI what Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger was to Pope John Paul II. Good Cop - Bad Cop.

Maybe I'm off by a mile. I just sense it.

Let's see what comes out of this whole episode at the end. As of now, the Vatican hasn't issued an official announcement on the Wagner case.
Who knows... we might be in for a surprise.

I might be missing the big picture in this. Who knows. Sometimes I do wish Pope Benedict had the equivalent of a Card. Ratzinger on his side. Card. Bertone can not fill those shoes, fully.

Anyway, certain things just make my skin crawl. And the pic. of the good Cardinal with that T-shirt was def. one of them!!

Let me just expand on the below quote,

"he is to Pope Benedict XVI what Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger was to Pope John Paul II. Good Cop - Bad Cop"

The constituency that Schönborn is appealing to is of course different but the effect is the same, that of creating a tension whereby, this time, the genuine liberals by being somewhat embraced by Schönborn can be controlled just as Ratzinger's siding with the more conservative Catholics allowed him to have more control over them.

By "liberals" I really mean dissidents, and by "conservatives" I mean the Orthodox.


********************************************************************


"Sometimes I do wish Pope Benedict had the equivalent of a Card. Ratzinger on his side."

If someone other than Joseph Ratzinger had been elected as Pope, say Cardinal Marc Ouellet, you'd be able to pull it off again with another person playing the tough guy role. In this case, Pope Benedict is the tough guy and he'll never in the minds of the media be anything else. Therefore, what you do is turn the new "Ratzinger" into a good guy. You reverse the roles.

*********************************************************************

Dear David -

You certainly have a novel way of looking at Schoenborn's role in all this. But I must disagree with you.

First, the Pope would never encourage anything that appears to undermine his authority or that of the Church, as the Austrian bishops statement does, even assuming that he were capoable of even thinking in such a Machiavellian way, which [S]nothing in his history suggests[/S].

Second, the Austrian bishops statement was just too insolent and Pilate-like - "Look, we had nothing to do with all this - it's all the Vatican!" - when in fact, they do have everything to do with it, only they evdently chose not to act [S]until way after the fact[/S].

Third - Schoenborn is just too weak to be a 'good cop' even. And to compare him to what Cardinal Ratzinger was to John Paul II is almost an insult to Cardinal Ratzinger. And it's not as if this was Schoenborn's first 'accommodation' ever to his 'We are Church' (in name or otherwise) constituencies! - Remember that obscene 'artwork' his cathedral museum exhibited, or his participation in that pop Mass. God knows what other things he may have done that we who live outside Austria are not aware of.

And I agree with Heike that even Cardinal Bertone, whom most of us had hoped would be the Pope's moest effective backstop, has proved far from being so.

The only two cardinals in Rome who have always come [S]promptly, consistently and forcefully[/S] in support of the Pope in the past four years have been Cardinals Ruini and Bagnasco, I'm sorry to say.

TERESA

P.S. As David is unregistered, I cannot make any text 'enhancements' as I would certainly have liked to reduce my comment to 8 pts.