200129

6

the Southern Cross, January 29 to February 4, 2020

LEADER PAGE LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Editor: Günther Simmermacher

A time to get radical

E

VERY time it seems that the Catholic Church is making some progress in addressing the sex abuse scandal, new revelations of alleged abuse and their cover-up emerge.

Among several disturbing stories hitting the news lately, there was one that truly drove home how pervasive the culture of cover-ups still is.

Ana Lucia Salazar, a 36-yearold Mexican television personality and mother of three, went public this month with her testimony of how priests from the Legion of Christ, the religious order founded by the notorious serialabuser Marcial Maciel, would sexually abuse pre-pubescent girls.

The girls at the school, run by the Legion of Christ in Cancun, would be called out of class into the school’s chapel, where they would be sexually assaulted.

Ms Salazar was eight when she was sexually assaulted by a priest.

Her parents reported the abuse to the local bishop. Nothing was done. A teacher who raised the alarm was fired.

Ms Salazar’s distressing story has been corroborated by other victims and eventually acknowledged by the Legion itself.

The rape of these girls was covered up for many years. When in 2010 Pope Benedict XVI sent an envoy to uncover these and other abuses, the cover-ups continued.

Cardinal Velasio De Paolis, who died in 2017, refused to investigate abusers, or hold accountable those who concealed these crimes.

Appointed to uncover the cover-ups, Cardinal De Paolis covered up himself, continuing a long history of the Vatican and the Mexican bishops protecting the wealthy Legion of Christ.

Ms Salazar’s revelations have changed the mood. Remarkably, the Mexican bishops’ conference has criticised the Legion’s failure to provide “a specific act of justice or reparation for the victims”.

Even the apostolic nuncio to Mexico, Archbishop Franco Coppola, denounced the Legion’s inaction and called on the Vatican to investigate the “web of coverup” that protected the order.

The nuncio must know that such an investigation would implicate officials close to St John Paul II, who counted Maciel among his close friends. Either the nuncio, a man versed in the art of diplomatic

prudence, is showing great personal courage, or his sentiments find an echo in the Vatican.

The recurring cases of abuse and their mishandling show that the Church has yet to get a grip on a long-running scandal.

More than lofty words and bold promises, we need concrete action and solidarity with the victims of abuse and its mishandling.

Ms Salazar has called on Pope Francis “to get radicalised” on the question of sexual abuse, saying: “There’s only one position: to be on the side of the violated children.”

Indeed, the whole Church must be radicalised on that issue.

In that, it can take the lead from the Vatican’s Fr Hans Zollner SJ. The Church must also come to fully understand that the wounds on the Body of Christ were inflicted not only by abuser priests, but even more insidiously by those who cultivated cover-ups, silence and sometimes even reaction against those who alleged abuse.

The Church in South Africa has not yet experienced an avalanche of abuse revelations. But there has been abuse and there have been cover-ups.

There are many survivors of clerical abuse who have not reported it. There may be many reasons for that.

These could include the fear of not being believed and/or condemned; reluctance to relive the humiliation of abuse; lack of understanding of what constitutes sexual abuse; low self-esteem (often caused by the abuse); and anxiety about recriminations for implicating a popular priest or bishop.

In 2018, Archbishop Stephen Brislin of Cape Town issued a call for those who had been abused by Church personnel to come to report their experiences, “so that the Church can acknowledge the deep individual hurt caused by abuse and contribute, with humility, to the process of healing”.

This call must be repeated and amplified, coupled with an undertaking that due action will be taken against perpetrators of abuse and cover-ups.

In the meantime, after almost two decades of incessant revelations, it is overdue that the Church, on every level, become radicalised beyond mere rhetoric on the abuse scandal.

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.

Voting for life or against life T HE records of the four Democratic Party contenders for nomination in the US presidential election this year regarding the crucial issue of abortion were not included in the article titled: “Poll shows how US Catholics may vote” (December 25).

Scrutiny into the public stance of candidates concerning the fate of unborn children is essential to ensure fully-informed voters.

Catholic challenger Joe Biden has dropped his support of the Hyde amendment, which means he supports federal-funded abortions.

Bernie Sanders has spoken of his 100% pro-abortion voting record.

Elizabeth Warren has called on Congress to enshrine the right to abortion in federal law, in case the Roe v Wade landmark Supreme Court decision falls.

Pete Buttigieg supports abortion as a national right.

No proof being gay is our choice

I

N his letter (January 8), JH Goossens claims to have found scientific proof to back up the theory that homosexuality is a choice.

You can find evidence on the Internet to back up any theory, whether bigoted or not; or damaging, such as opponents of immunisation asserting it is harmful, resulting in measles outbreaks and deaths, or climate deniers, who put the survival of humanity at risk.

I suggest that possibly the article quoted by Mr Goossens is taken out of context and I record below more accurate summaries on the Internet of the outcome of that research: “The largest-ever study of its kind has concluded that there is no single gay gene that makes a person gay and that many of them play a role. It also affirms that homosexuality is a natural variation in our species” (my emphasis).

Or this research, published in Science, which “found that many genetic components play a part in same-sex sexual behaviour, combined with non-genetic factors”.

Or this: “What we found is that there is no one gay gene—instead, there are many, many genes that influence a person’s likelihood of having same-sex partners,” according to Brendan Zietsch of the University of Queensland, in The Conversation.

“Individually, each of these genes has only a very small effect, but their combined effect is substantial.

We could be statistically confident about five specific DNA locations; we could also tell with high confi-

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

Opinions expressed in The Southern Cross 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

dence that there are hundreds or thousands of other locations that also play a role, although we couldn’t pinpoint where they all are.”

Or an article by molecular biologist Bill Sullivan in The Conversation: “Stop calling it a choice: Biological factors drive homosexuality”.

Or, in the same journal Dr Goossens quotes from, Science, there are articles expressing views opposed to his, such as “The genetics of sexual orientation” by Laura M Zahn or “How do genes affect samesex behaviour?” by Melinda C Mills.

The jury is still out, but strong evidence backs the truth that homosexuality is not a choice. It is the way our Creator made people.

June Boyer, Johannesburg

Gap between rich and poor growing

T

HE letter by Frans van Neerijnen on capitalism (January 8) refers.

Capitalism is the most efficient economic system in producing wealth. The markets, however, are inefficient in redistributing wealth among a country’s population.

The disparity between rich and poor has increased significantly in our country since 1994: we are the most unequal country in the world.

Even some of the richest capitalists, like Microsoft founder Bill Gates, have realised that the fruits

of capitalism are shared disproportionately between capitalists and the working class. They have pledged to give the poor 90% of their wealth during their lifetimes.

Comments by Bishop Sithembele Sipuka in his recent Southern Cross interview about the serious weaknesses of the capitalist system are true. It remains the best in producing wealth for the elite but fails to redistribute wealth fairly, and essentially condemns the majority of the population to poverty.

Jeffrey Mothuloe, Pretoria

Musical delights

T

HANK you for Günther Simmermacher’s very good article “The history of a famous Christmas carol”, on “Once in Royal David’s City” (December 18.

This did indeed become a muchloved carol and, as you say, is sung as the processional hymn in King’s College Cambridge Chapel for the “Nine Lessons” service.

When Roger O’Hogan worked at the SABC, this service was broadcast and what a great pleasure that was!

Older listeners might recall the religious programme he broadcast each Sunday evening, “O Come Let Us Sing”, at 21:45. This always began with a seasonal hymn and a chanting of one of the settings of the psalms from the (Anglican) psalter, followed by music by composers like JS Bach, Mozart or Palestrina.

I recall a wonderful Easter evensong in 1962, which I attended, with philosopher Ross Robinson, at St Aidan’s in Yeoville, where O’Hogan was choirmaster and organist.

Peter Onesta, Johannesburg

CATHOLIC NEWS THAT COUNTS

SUBSCRIBE TODAY! ONLINE PAYMENT FOR EASY RENEWAL

For Bookings:

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

In contrast to these Democratic hopefuls, the current presidential incumbent—also expected to run—has a strong pro-life record. President Donald Trump’s tenure has seen the loss of federal funding from some 876 pro-abortion clinics. Further, the Trump administration reversed abortion-related US policy, so many children have been born who might otherwise never have been.

In 2000 an election statement by bishops of the dioceses in Massachusetts called on Catholics to exercise their moral obligation to vote, and to recognise the centrality of protecting human life when doing so.

Part of their statement reads: “We all have a responsibility to become informed about the candidates and the issues so that our choices will be based on the truth and will reflect the principles of our faith and our nation. We wish to

underscore the absolute centrality of the protection of human life.

Support and promotion of abortion by any candidate is always wrong and can never be justified. We will never cease to denounce abortion and euthanasia and teach all Catholics that to support those positions is to support death over life.”

The truth of the bishops’ statement still holds today. Discernment prior to voting requires that voters are fully informed on the true position of candidates as part of presidential challenger public records.

For informed votes, full information is required. This includes public records of candidates’ declarations for or against the law of God, “You shall not kill” (Exodus 20:13).

Those running for election are either pro-life or pro-abortion. So, too, are voters. The American electorate and we ourselves likewise either vote for or against life.

Nicolette Whittle, Kroonstad

Cellphones: 071 757 8048 083 544 1504

Fr Sbusiso Mkhize Bro Crispin Graham

Digital: R420 a year, Print: R550 a year (Surface mail) Call us 021 465 5007, fax 021 465 3850, Email: subscriptions@scross.co.za