Now this is tricky because if we follow Christ we really do believe in a new kind of life--a life that is abundant and free. However, any kind of political or religious leader or any kind of political or religious method or community who offer this to us is very often offering us some kind of easy way to the new life, and easiest is rarely best.

Utopian dreams

I really don't think I'm being cynical, but I've decided that one of the biggest disasters is the Utopia instinct. This is the instinct in the human race (and part of our fallen condition) to create perfect little worlds. Someone comes along with an ideology which will solve all our problems and we go trooping off to join him and his mission from God.

We're suckers for politicians who feed us a dreamy lie. We're suckers for the advertising and media men who sell us a dreamy lie to get us to buy a particular product or a particular way of life. We're suckers for religious leaders who give us a dreamy lie about the new life and the wonderful community they have on offer.

St. Thomas Aquinas

"Break off all delays, rise from sleep, and do that which is commanded."

St. Thomas says

God on his side gives to everything as much of himself as it can take in; and if something falls short of its share in god's goodness, that must be because it presents some obstacle to the sharing . . . by the recipient, who turns away from a light that never turns itself away.

St. Thomas says

The peacemakers are called blessed, namely those who first make peace within their own hearts, then between brethren who are at odds. For what avails it to make peace between others, while in your own heart are wars of rebellious vices.

By Fr. William Saunders

The Catholic Church continues to teach that sexual love between a man and a woman is reserved to marriage. We find this teaching in the creation account of Genesis—Book 1, Chapter 1 of Sacred Scripture: First, God creates man in His own image and likeness, making them male and female (Genesis 1:27). In the next verse, the Bible reads, "God blessed them, saying, ‘Be fertile and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it’"(Genesis 1:28). Before the man and woman come together as husband and wife, and before they express their love as husband and wife, they are first blessed by God.

Only in marriage do we find God’s blessing upon the act of sexual love, or what is better termed, marital love. This physical expression of love in marriage is a sacred sign of a husband and wife’s covenant of love and love that they share in union with God. This marital love signifies the vows freely exchanged between each other and thereby reflects the faithful, permanent, exclusive, and self-giving love they have promised to each other and to God. This understanding is evident in Jesus response to the Pharisees’ question regarding divorce: "Have you not read that at the beginning the Creator made them male and female and declared, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and cling to his wife, and the two shall become as one’? Thus they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore let no man separate what God has joined" (Matthew 19:4-6). Thorough the Sacrament of Holy Matrimony, God blesses the couple joined in this sacred bond and generously bestows grace so that they may assume the duties of marriage in mutual and lasting fidelity.

Moreover, the marital love of husband and wife which unites them as "one flesh" may overflow and participate in God’s creative love: a child may be born from their love. Here again, God gives abundant graces so that the husband and wife can fulfill their duties as father and mother. Therefore, in accord with God’s design, sexual love is reserved to marriage.

Think though of this issue from the perspective of the child, who may be conceived by an act of sexual love. A child has the inviolable right to life from the moment of conception until death. He has the right to be born. He has the right to two loving parents who are husband and wife, who have pledged their total love to each other, and who have the means to provide for raising a child. He has the right to be considered as a gift from God, not as an "unplanned pregnancy," an "accident," or a "burden." In essence, a child has the right to the best family possible—a family filled with love. (Confer Donum vitae, II, 8.) Here again, just using our reason, we can conclude that sexual love ought to be reserved to marriage.

Taking sexual love outside the context of marriage is contrary to the dignity of each person and of marriage. Our Holy Father, Pope John Paul II, lamented the decline in respect for marital love in his encyclical The Gospel of Life: "Sexuality too is depersonalized and exploited, from being the sign, place and language of love, that is, of the gift of self and acceptance of another, in all the other’s richness as a person, it increasingly becomes the occasion and instrument for self-assertion and the selfish satisfaction of personal desires and instincts" (#23).

Given this teaching, little wonder the Bible has grave condemnations against both fornication, "carnal union between an unmarried man and an unmarried woman" (Catechism, #2353), and adultery, "when two partners, of whom at least one is married to another party, have sexual relations—even transient ones . . . " (Catechism, #2381). Jesus said, "Wicked designs come from the deep recesses of the heart: acts of fornication, theft, murder, adulterous conduct, greed, maliciousness, deceit, sensuality, envy, blasphemy, arrogance, and obtuse spirit. All these evils come from within and render a man impure" (Mark 7:21-23; cf. also Matthew 15:19). St. Paul warned, "Can you not realize that the unholy will not fall heir to the kingdom of God? Do not deceive your selves: no fornicators, idolaters, or adulterers, no sexual perverts, thieves, misers or drunkards, no slanderers, or robbers will inherit God’s kingdom" (I Corinthians 6:9-10). In the last judgment scene depicted in the Book of Revelation, God said, "As for the cowards and traitors to the faith, the depraved and murderers, the fornicators and sorcerers, the idol-worshipers and deceivers of every sort—their lot is the fiery pool of burning sulphur, the second death!" (Revelation 21:8). God’s upholding of the sacredness of marital love is clearly evidenced in the blatant condemnation of the sins against it.

Sadly, in our society, we see the act of marital love trivialized. Whether we would turn to pornography or even to a comedy show, the act or marital love is oftentimes portrayed as a selfish expression without any sense of permanence, fidelity or exclusivity. The act is reduced simply to an immediate, fleeting pleasure without any sense of responsibility to each other or to the possible child conceived. The couple easily forgets that the action could conceive a child and that they could become "Mommy and Daddy." And what then? Would the child be aborted? Would he be raised by one parent, by grandparents, or by two parents "forced" to get married?

We see the tragedy that occurs when we deviate from God’s plan. Many people have thought they were in love with someone else, gave themselves to that person in the most intimate expression of human love, then were later discarded. Many people have heard the phrase, "I want you," but all the person really wanted was a body; not a person, a sensation, not a commitment of life and love. Many people speak of "making love," without realizing we cannot make love: God Himself is love, we can only love in His love in accord with His design (I John 4:16). Yes, the eyes of many people today reveal an internal emptiness which comes from spending oneself on a fleeting pleasure rather than on building upon a marriage and a family.

In response, the Church calls people to live the virtue of chastity. Chastity respects the dignity of our human sexuality and the sacredness of marital love. In chastity, a person strives for mastery over feelings and passions, respects the sacredness of marital love, and takes responsibility for his actions. This virtue, moreover, gives great freedom: freedom from slavery to passions; freedom from any sexually transmitted disease, so easily contracted in this age because of promiscuity; freedom from loss of a good reputation and being known as "easy," "a slut" or "a womanizer;" freedom from painful memories or regrets of past relationships; freedom from mortal sin and eternal punishment. St. Paul challenges us to live in the freedom of God's children. Granted, the temptations of this world are great. By the grace of God, we can live in such freedom, respecting the sacredness of marital love.

In 1838, Abraham Lincoln said:

At what point shall we expect the approach of danger? By what means shall we fortify against it?—Shall we expect some transatlantic military giant, to step the Ocean, and crush us at a blow? Never!—All the armies of Europe, Asia and Africa combined, with all the treasure of the earth (our own excepted) in their military chest; with a Buonaparte for a commander, could not by force, take a drink from the Ohio, or make a track on the Blue Ridge, in a trial of a thousand years.

At what point then is the approach of danger to be expected? I answer, if it ever reach us, it must spring up amongst us. It cannot come from abroad. If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen, we must live through all time, or die by suicide.

Easter Sequence

Christians, to the Paschal Victim
Offer your thankful praises!
A Lamb the sheep redeems:
Christ, who only is sinless,
Reconciles sinners to the father.
Death and life have contended in that battle stupendous:
The Prince of life, who died, reigns immortal.
Speak, Mary declaring
What you saw wayfaring.
“The tomb of Christ, who is living
The glory of Jesus’ resurrection;
Bright angels attesting,
The Shroud and napkin resting.
Yes, Christ my hope is arisen, our new life obtaining.
Have mercy, victor King, ever reigning!
Amen. Alleluia!

The husband of St. Gianna Beretta Molla passed away at the age of 97 last weekend on Holy Saturday, a day that carries special significance for the Molla family. “Pietro Molla was a pillar and rock – a man of extraordinary faith, simplicity and holiness,” wrote Fr. Thomas Rosica, CEO of Salt and Light TV, on his blog. “He lived a remarkable, saintly life and like his beloved wife, Gianna, made holiness something attainable for all of us.”

Pietro spent much of his life as a widower after his wife died in 1962, having chosen to give birth to her daughter instead of having an abortion, despite the dangers it presented to her own life. Gianna, a physician herself, died a week after their baby was born. Her husband was left with four children to raise and never remarried. Nevertheless, “I am convinced,” wrote Fr. Rosica, “that the story of holiness did not end with St. Gianna Beretta Molla.

“I am certain that the cause for Pietro Molla’s beatification and canonization will be opened soon,” he continued. “What a powerful witness this would be to the dignity and sacredness of marriage and family life!”

Fr. Rosica added that the Molla family “is somehow linked to the mystery of Holy Saturday.” Pietro and St. Gianna's daughter Laura, explained to Fr. Rosica that “It was on Holy Saturday 1962 that Gianna Beretta Molla gave birth to her daughter, Gianna Emanuela. One week later, on Easter Saturday, St. Gianna died from the serious medical condition that resulted from bringing her child to term. St. Gianna gave her life so that the child in her womb would live. And now Pietro returns to the house of the Father on Holy Saturday morning 2010.”

“St. Gianna and her husband are now reunited in heaven and celebrate the mystery of Christ’s dying and rising in the company of the Lord and his saints,” Fr. Rosica wrote. "I can only imagine the scene in heaven on Holy Saturday morning as this wonderful couple was reunited after forty-eight years of being apart. They would embrace their daughter Mariolina, who died as a child, and be welcomed by the Venerable Pope John Paul II who enrolled Gianna in the book of the Saints. May St. Gianna, Pietro and Mariolina intercede for us now from heaven, and watch over all married couples and families on earth."

Pietro Molla’s funeral Mass will be celebrated in Mesero, Italy on Tuesday. He will then be buried in the town cemetery, next to his wife.

What is scandal?

We read in the Catechism of the Catholic Church (#2284: “Scandal is an attitude or behavior which leads another to do evil. The person who gives scandal becomes his neighbor’s tempter. He damages virtue and integrity; he may even draw his brother into spiritual death. Scandal is a grave offense if by deed or omission another is deliberately led into a grave offense.”

A Response to the New York Times

Saturday, March 27, 2010

[Fr. Raymond J. de Souza]

The New York Times on March 25 accused Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI, of intervening to prevent a priest, Fr. Lawrence Murphy, from facing penalties for cases of sexual abuse of minors.

The story is false. It is unsupported by its own documentation. Indeed, it gives every indication of being part of a coordinated campaign against Pope Benedict, rather than responsible journalism.

Before addressing the false substance of the story, the following circumstances are worthy of note:

• The New York Times story had two sources. First, lawyers who currently have a civil suit pending against the Archdiocese of Milwaukee. One of the lawyers, Jeffrey Anderson, also has cases in the United States Supreme Court pending against the Holy See. He has a direct financial interest in the matter being reported.

• The second source was Archbishop Rembert Weakland, retired archbishop of Milwaukee. He is the most discredited and disgraced bishop in the United States, widely known for mishandling sexual-abuse cases during his tenure, and guilty of using $450,000 of archdiocesan funds to pay hush money to a former homosexual lover who was blackmailing him. Archbishop Weakland had responsibility for the Father Murphy case between 1977 and 1998, when Father Murphy died. He has long been embittered that his maladministration of the Archdiocese of Milwaukee earned him the disfavor of Pope John Paul II and Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, long before it was revealed that he had used parishioners’ money to pay off his clandestine lover. He is prima facie not a reliable source.

• Laurie Goodstein, the author of the New York Times story, has a recent history with Archbishop Weakland. Last year, upon the release of the disgraced archbishop’s autobiography, she wrote an unusually sympathetic story that buried all the most serious allegations against him (New York Times, May 14, 2009).

• A demonstration took place in Rome on Friday, coinciding with the publication of the New York Times story. One might ask how American activists would happen to be in Rome distributing the very documents referred to that day in the New York Times. The appearance here is one of a coordinated campaign, rather than disinterested reporting.

It’s possible that bad sources could still provide the truth. But compromised sources scream out for greater scrutiny. Instead of greater scrutiny of the original story, however, news editors the world over simply parroted the New York Times piece. Which leads us the more fundamental problem: The story is not true, according to its own documentation.

The New York Times made available on its own website the supporting documentation for the story. In those documents, Cardinal Ratzinger himself does not take any of the decisions that allegedly frustrated the trial. Letters are addressed to him; responses come from his deputy. Even leaving that aside, though, the gravamen of the charge — that Cardinal Ratzinger’s office impeded some investigation — is proven utterly false.

The documents show that the canonical trial or penal process against Father Murphy was never stopped by anyone. In fact, it was only abandoned days before Father Murphy died. Cardinal Ratzinger never took a decision in the case, according to the documents. His deputy, Archbishop Tarcisio Bertone, suggested, given that Father Murphy was in failing health and a canonical trial is a complicated matter, that more expeditious means be used to remove him from all ministry.

To repeat: The charge that Cardinal Ratzinger did anything wrong is unsupported by the documentation on which the story was based. He does not appear in the record as taking any decision. His office, in the person of his deputy, Archbishop Bertone, agreed that there should be full canonical trial. When it became apparent that Father Murphy was in failing health, Archbishop Bertone suggested more expeditious means of removing him from any ministry.

Furthermore, under canon law at the time, the principal responsibility for sexual-abuse cases lay with the local bishop. Archbishop Weakland had from 1977 onwards the responsibility of administering penalties to Father Murphy. He did nothing until 1996. It was at that point that Cardinal Ratzinger’s office became involved, and it subsequently did nothing to impede the local process.

The New York Times flatly got the story wrong, according to its own evidence. Readers may want to speculate on why.

Here is the relevant timeline, drawn from the documents the New York Times posted on its own website.

15 May 1974

Abuse by Fr. Lawrence Murphy is alleged by a former student at St. John’s School for the Deaf in Milwaukee. In fact, accusations against Father Murphy go back more than a decade.

12 September 1974

Father Murphy is granted an official “temporary sick leave” from St. John’s School for the Deaf. He leaves Milwaukee and moves to northern Wisconsin, in the Diocese of Superior, where he lives in a family home with his mother. He has no official assignment from this point until his death in 1998. He does not return to live in Milwaukee. No canonical penalties are pursued against him.

9 July 1980

Officials in the Diocese of Superior write to officials in the Archdiocese of Milwaukee about what ministry Father Murphy might undertake in Superior. Archbishop Rembert Weakland, archbishop of Milwaukee since 1977, has been consulted and says it would be unwise to have Father Murphy return to ministry with the deaf community. There is no indication that Archbishop Weakland foresees any other measures to be taken in the case.

17 July 1996

More than 20 years after the original abuse allegations, Archbishop Weakland writes to Cardinal Ratzinger, claiming that he has only just discovered that Father Murphy’s sexual abuse involved the sacrament of confession — a still more serious canonical crime. The allegations about the abuse of the sacrament of confession were in the original 1974 allegations. Weakland has been archbishop of Milwaukee by this point for 19 years.

It should be noted that for sexual-abuse charges, Archbishop Weakland could have proceeded against Father Murphy at any time. The matter of solicitation in the sacrament of confession required notifying Rome, but that too could have been done as early as the 1970s.

10 September 1996

Father Murphy is notified that a canonical trial will proceed against him. Until 2001, the local bishop had authority to proceed in such trials. The Archdiocese of Milwaukee is now beginning the trial. It is noteworthy that at this point, no reply has been received from Rome indicating that Archbishop Weakland knew he had that authority to proceed.

24 March 1997

Archbishop Tarcisio Bertone, Cardinal Ratzinger’s deputy at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, advises a canonical trial against Father Murphy.

14 May 1997

Archbishop Weakland writes to Archbishop Bertone to say that the penal process against Father Murphy has been launched, and notes that the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has advised him to proceed even though the statute of limitations has expired. In fact, there is no statute of limitations for solicitation in the sacrament of confession.

Throughout the rest of 1997 the preparatory phases of penal process or canonical trial is underway. On 5 January 1998 the Tribunal of the Archdiocese of Milwaukee says that an expedited trial should be concluded within a few months.

12 January 1998

Father Murphy, now less than eight months away from his death, appeals to Cardinal Ratzinger that, given his frail health, he be allowed to live out his days in peace.

6 April 1998

Archbishop Bertone, noting the frail health of Father Murphy and that there have been no new charges in almost 25 years, recommends using pastoral measures to ensure Father Murphy has no ministry, but without the full burden of a penal process. It is only a suggestion, as the local bishop retains control.

13 May 1998

The Bishop of Superior, where the process has been transferred to and where Father Murphy has lived since 1974, rejects the suggestion for pastoral measures. Formal pre-trial proceedings begin on 15 May 1998, continuing the process already begun with the notification that had been issued in September 1996.

30 May 1998

Archbishop Weakland, who is in Rome, meets with officials at the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith, including Archbishop Bertone but not including Cardinal Ratzinger, to discuss the case. The penal process is ongoing. No decision taken to stop it, but given the difficulties of a trial after 25 years, other options are explored that would more quickly remove Father Murphy from ministry.

19 August 1998

Archbishop Weakland writes that he has halted the canonical trial and penal process against Father Murphy and has immediately begun the process to remove him from ministry — a quicker option.

21 August 1998

Father Murphy dies. His family defies the orders of Archbishop Weakland for a discreet funeral.

— Father Raymond J. de Souza is a chaplain at Queen's University in Ontario.

03/27 03:56 PMShare