181031

6

The Southern Cross, October 31 to November 6, 2018

LEADER PAGE LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Editor: Günther Simmermacher

The Viganò papers

M

ANY Catholics have been left uncertain by the letters issued by Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò which sought to implicate Pope Francis in the abuse scandal involving a disgraced US cardinal.

Archbishop Viganò, a former nuncio to the United States, dropped a bomb in late August when he issued his so-called “testimony”. In it he claimed, among other things, that Pope Francis had lifted sanctions imposed by Pope Benedict XVI on Archbishop Theodore McCarrick—the former cardinal accused of serial abuse of seminarians.

Mainly on the basis of that claim, Archbishop Viganò called for the pope’s resignation—a remarkable act of rebellion.

The statement’s release was timed to coincide with Pope Francis’ visit to Ireland, which was overshadowed by the abuse crisis.

The same evening, the pope told reporters that he would not respond to the statement—a refusal to drink from a poisoned chalice—suggesting that its thrust would diminish when the facts became known. He was not wrong.

It quickly emerged that no formal sanctions had been imposed on McCarrick, only a request that he should keep a low profile— which he ignored to the point of freely attending papal functions with Pope Benedict.

There were no sanctions which Pope Francis could have annulled.

This has since been confirmed by Cardinal Marc Ouelett, prefect of the Vatican’s Congregation for Bishops.

Moreover, at the time when McCarrick was supposed to have kept a low profile, Archbishop Viganò himself celebrated him as “very much loved by us all” at a 2012 gala in honour of the disgraced cardinal—six months after the supposed restrictions were communicated to McCarrick.

Viganò has now withdrawn the accusation that Pope Francis overturned formal sanctions—the very claim that underpinned his call for the pope’s resignation.

The Viganò statement—a cocktail of facts, half-truths, falsehoods, omission, distortion, deduction, innuendo and impudence—can be located within an ideological campaign against Pope Francis.

Given his diplomatic training, Archbishop Viganò did surprisingly little to disguise his purpose: the timing of the statement’s re-

lease and the now withdrawn call for the pope’s resignation leave no doubt that it was intended to cause confusion and damage the Holy Father’s reputation.

Even as elements of his various accusations merit investigation, Archbishop Viganò’s “testimony” is discredited, not only by the false characterisation of the supposed sanctions but also by its perfidious intent.

By placing his grievances within the context of opposition to Pope Francis—his letters were disseminated through right-wing organs that are hostile to the pope—Viganò has compromised the investigation, now ordered by Pope Francis, into what was known about McCarrick as he rose up the ranks during the pontificate of Pope John Paul II. There are other issues raised by Archbishop Viganò—and by Catholics from all ideological corners—which merit investigation and, if required, remedy. But before that can happen in a nonpartisan way, these issues must be divorced from the Viganò statement.

Among them is the rumour of a so-called “Lavender mafia” of active homosexuals among senior clergy in the Vatican and other levels of power in the Church.

If there are such networks of gay priests who work together in maintaining dissolute and potentially abusive activities—and talk about the existence of such cabals is by no means new—then this must be dealt with.

But precaution must be taken that this would not give rise to discrimination against gay priests who are exercising their ministry without reproach, never mind a purge of homosexual priests and bishops.

As for Pope Francis, for all his sincere attempts to do the right thing, he has revealed certain blind spots and occasionally poor judgment on the subject of abuse.

At the same time, his turnaround in the crisis in Chile indicates that he is open to reason and persuasion, and willing to act decisively.

Even as we may hope for more coherent papal leadership on the abuse crisis, it must also be clear that the weight of the scandal cannot be hung on one man who has more than his fair share of other responsibilities.

And we must not allow the abuse scandal to be hijacked for the purposes of ideological battles.

The Editor reserves the right to shorten or edit published letters. Letters below 300 words receive preference. Pseudonyms are acceptable only under special circumstances and at the Editor’s discretion.

Name and address of the writer must be supplied. No anonymous letter will be considered.

Mary gave birth fully to God I N his letter (October 10), Peter Hoar stated that our faith is not based on mystery, but on Christic revelation.

Mr Hoar pointed out that because the Church declares the Trinity a mystery, three persons in one God, we wrongly believe that Mary is the Mother of God, when in fact she is the Mother of Jesus.

Herein lies the same dilemma with which the early Church wrestled, and which the Council of Ephesus clarified. The event of the Incarnation of the Son of God means that Jesus became truly man while remaining truly God. (Catholic Catechism 464).

The Council of Ephesus pro-

Wrong to knock ‘Church now in apartheid memoir transition period’

I

REFER to the letter (October 10)

by Mary Dantu on Beryl CrosherSegers’ book A Darker Shade of Pale.

Obviously Ms Dantu didn’t read the book before she commented on it. A Darker Shade of Pale isn’t a book of “sentimentality from yesteryear”, as she claims, but a condemnation of apartheid. Beryl’s book explains very well why she and her family had to take the difficult decision to leave South Africa.

What right does Ms Dantu have to deny Beryl her hurtful memories of apartheid, or publishing them?

It is good that the pain of the previously oppressed is told, and, yes, our struggle for equality continues.

Maybe Ms Dantu could use her time better writing her own memories rather than writing letters attacking others’ memoirs?

Let’s laud Beryl Crosher-Segers for giving victims of apartheid a voice.

Carol Jacobs, Cape Town

Pik Botha and elderly Irish nun

P

IK Botha’s recent death brought to mind the time the foreign minister visited a very old Catholic nun at Good Shepherd Convent, Hartbeespoort Dam, in 1979.

The elderly Sister of Mercy had written to him that she was praying for him and South Africa every day during the daily rosary, which she led in the convent chapel. Mr Botha responded with a letter of thanks.

He then visited her, bringing a rosary from the recently elected Pope John Paul II, with whom he had an audience in the Vatican.

This was a highlight in the life of the wonderful old Irish Sister; and unforgettable for us who happened to be there on that day.

Fr Sean Collins CSsR, Howick, KZN

MONASTERY RETREAT HOUSE PO Box 11095, Mariannhill 3624

individual, directed or private retreats can be arranged for periods of 2-8 days throughout the year. Diocesan, Parish and Church meetings and workshops should be booked well in advance

‘T

HE difficulty which we [the Catholic Church] face today, is that we are living in a transition period between a dying model of Church and an emerging model of Church.

“Much of the clerical structure of our Church reflects the now-dying model of Church. Besides the tendency on the part of the hierarchy to revert to the default position, there is also a small but vocal movement which seeks to resist change and to reestablish the old order.”

The above is an excerpt from an address by Bishop Vincent Long Van Nguyen of Paramatta, Australia.

His words echo those of one of the early Greek philosophers, Heraclitus, who maintained the world is governed by a law of change.

The Gospel was written at a time when there was a schism in Jewish society, due to leaders having differences in interpreting Mosaic Law. The Temple had gradually become corrupted during the Hellenistic period (323-31 BC), and the Essenes, who rejected Temple rituals, had moved to Qumran in the desert.

Two factions had emerged in Jerusalem: those who supported the “new way” and those determined to maintain old religious ways.

The story played itself out with Jesus arguing for a new direction which, as we now know, succeeded in becoming Rabbinic Judaism. This did not happen overnight; it took a further 500 years to be fully accepted as the normative religious practice of the Jewish people.

Coincidentally, it was 500 years ago that the foundation of Christianity was rocked with the advent of the Reformation, when its forerunners, similar to Jesus, dared to confront iron-clad doctrinal concepts.

Pope Francis showed us the (ecumenical) way by attending the 500-year Reformation jubilee in

Sweden in October 2016.

St John Paul II had done likewise, being the first pope to attend a Jewish service in Rome.

St John XXIII had seen the need for a “new way” with the inauguration of Vatican II. Will Pope Francis succeed in perpetuating his mission, and—more importantly—will the next pope continue with the “Francis baton”?

Patrick Dacey, Johannesburg

Pope and cover-up

C

OMMENTING on the crisis in the Catholic Church, Cecil Cullen (October 17) writes that decisive action needs to be taken but he does not trust commissions and enquiries.

He suggests action should come from above, from the pope himself.

But the pope himself does not set a good example. He does not practise what he preaches. He preaches “no tolerance of clerical abuse”, but his actual record includes silence and, if Archbishop Viganò’s allegations are true, cover-up, as we see in his handling of the Theodore McCarrick abuse case.

Covering up for predator priests is not new to Pope Francis. Already as president of the Argentine bishops’ conference, he defended notorious abuser Fr Mario Napoleon Sasso, and did not respond to the family’s request to meet him.

It is not admiration for the incumbent pope that defines a Catholic, but adherence to the faith.

JH Goossens, Pretoria Opinions expressed in The Southern Cross, especially in Letters to the Editor, do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editor or staff of the newspaper, or of the Catholic hierarchy. letters can be sent to PO Box 2372, cape town 8000 or editor@scross.co.za or faxed to 021 465-3850

Catholic news that COUNTS Print or Digital

For Bookings:

reception: 031 700 2155 Fr Sbusiso Mkhize 031 700 2890 Fax 031 700 2738 Email: monretreat@saol.com

claimed in 431 that Mary truly became the Mother of God by the human conception of the Son of God in her womb.

“Mother of God, not that the nature of the Word or his divinity received the beginning of its existence from the holy Virgin, but that, since the holy body, animated by a rational soul, which the Word of God united to himself according to the hypostasis, was born from her, the Word is said to be born according to the flesh (Catechism 466).”

The hypostasis refers to the union of Christ’s humanity and divinity in one hypostasis, or individual existence.

Mary is not the initiating princi-

ple of the first person of the Trinity, the Creator: she is the created. Neither is she the origin of the third person of the Trinity, the Holy Spirit: rather, she is the overshadowed at the Incarnation, the enkindled at Pentecost.

It is by virtue of the indivisible unity of the Triune God that Mary, in giving birth to Jesus—the second person of the Trinity—gave birth fully to God, as affirmed by the Council of Ephesus (DS 251).

This reality, though divine fact, is not always fully explicable to human understanding. Thus, mystery.

Mary is indeed a special and blessed woman: she is the Theotokos, the “Mother of God” or “God-bearer”.

Nicolette Whittle, Kroonstad

Cellphones: 071 757 8048 083 544 1504

Fr Sbusiso Mkhize Bro Crispin Graham

SUBSCRIBE Digital: R420 • Print R500 • call Michelle 021 465 5007 or email subscriptions@scross.co.za • www.scross.co.za/subscribe the catholic Newspaper, Standard Bank, thibault Square Branch code:020909, Acc No: 071534342