CNA News

Subscribe to CNA News feed CNA News
ACI Prensa's latest initiative is the Catholic News Agency (CNA), aimed at serving the English-speaking Catholic audience. ACI Prensa ( is currently the largest provider of Catholic news in Spanish and Portuguese.
Updated: 2 hours 4 min ago

Each Catholic diocese in Michigan raided in abuse investigation

Thu, 10/04/2018 - 13:48

Lansing, Mich., Oct 4, 2018 / 11:48 am (CNA/EWTN News).- Police raided diocesan properties at all seven Catholic dioceses in Michigan this week as part of an ongoing investigation into cases of child sex abuse by clergy.

In the Archdiocese of Detroit, officials searched multiple diocesan properties, including the chancery, the Cardinal Mooney Building at Sacred Heart Major Seminary, and the office of Msgr. Michael Bugarin, the archdiocesan Delegate for Clergy Misconduct, according to the Detroit Free Press.

The raids are part of an investigation launched last month by Michigan Attorney General Bill Schuette, which will look into cases of clerical sex abuse of children in all seven of the dioceses in the state: Gaylord, Lansing, Marquette, Grand Rapids, Saginaw, Kalamazoo, and Detroit.

“The Archdiocese of Detroit cooperated fully with law enforcement officials executing a
search warrant for clergy files today,” the Archdiocese  said in an Oct. 3 statement.

The investigation followed the release of the Grand Jury report in Pennsylvania, which detailed decades of clergy sex abuse cases from six of the state’s dioceses. Several states, including Michigan, launched their own investigations into clergy sex abuse after the report was published.

The Archdiocese of Detroit stated that it welcomes the investigation as part of its “continuing commitment to transparency and healing.”

“We have worked closely with authorities from all six counties within our Archdiocese since 2002, when we shared past case files involving clergy misconduct and committed to turning over all new allegations regardless of when the alleged abuse occurred. We remain committed to protecting everyone - especially children and vulnerable adults - and therefore look forward to working closely with officials to determine if there is more we can do to accomplish this goal,” the archdiocese stated.

The Diocese of Saginaw is included in the new investigation despite recently having undergone a local investigation earlier this year, after the diocese and authorities received multiple complaints of sexual misconduct by priests in the diocese.

Police in Saginaw raided the home of Bishop Joseph Cistone and the diocesan chancery and its cathedral rectory in March as part of the local investigation, citing a lack of cooperation with authorities on the part of the diocese. Two priests were placed on leave from their duties during that investigation; one was criminally charged.

In 2012, Cistone was accused of misleading a grand jury about his compliance in the destruction of documents containing the names of priests suspected of child molestation in 1994, while he was serving as a priest in the Archdiocese of Philadelphia. Cistone was not criminally charged in the incident. In February, Cistone announced that he had been diagnosed with lung cancer.

In an Oct. 3 statement, the Diocese of Saginaw emphasized their willingness to cooperate in the new investigation.

“The Diocese of Saginaw continues to cooperate with the Michigan Attorney General’s statewide investigation,” the statement said.

“We are thankful for the professionalism with which the warrant was executed, today, as well as the acknowledgment by the attorney general’s office of our desire to cooperate. Our cooperation, the attorney general’s office said, is appreciated. The Diocese is grateful for the work of law enforcement, and will continue to cooperate fully and meet all requests.”

The Saginaw diocese added that it hoped the new investigation will be another step toward healing for all survivors of clergy sexual abuse.

In a statement given to local media in September, Schuette’s office said that the investigation will cover accusations of "sexual abuse and assault of children and others by Catholic priests,” including priests from religious orders, in Michigan. The the investigation will cover a period of nearly 70 years, from 1950 until the present.

Spooky, scary, saintly? How Catholics can see Halloween at its best

Thu, 10/04/2018 - 05:01

Tulsa, Okla., Oct 4, 2018 / 03:01 am (CNA/EWTN News).- Whether you dress up as a ghoul, a hero, or a saint, Halloween has a Christian origin that should inspire us to remember our mortality and our redemption in Christ, Bishop David Konderla of Tulsa has said.

“In contrast to popular culture’s observance of Halloween, even the customary appeal to the ‘frightful’ has a devotional meaning in the Catholic tradition. Props such as skulls and scythes have historically recalled our mortality, reminding us to be holy because we are destined for judgment,” the bishop said, citing Hebrews 9:27 and Revelation 14:15. “Visible symbols of death thus represent a reminder of the last things – death, judgment, Heaven, and hell.”

Bishop Konderla discussed the upcoming holiday, which falls before the Nov. 1 feast of All Saints, in a Sept. 28 memorandum on the celebration of Halloween in the Diocese of Tulsa.

Halloween has origins in the Catholic liturgical calendar, he said, but the customs surrounding it have “drifted from the feast’s intended meaning and purpose.” The name itself derives from the archaic English phrase “All Hallows’ Evening,” referring to the Eve of All Saints. Since All Saints can begin with evening prayer the night before, Halloween is the feast’s “earliest possible celebration.”

“While the ‘Gothic’ aspect of Halloween reminds us of Christian teaching about the resurrection of the dead, our culture often represents this in a distorted manner, for when the dead are raised they will in truth be ‘clothed with incorruptibility’,” said Bishop Konderla.

When separated from Catholic teaching, the holiday’s grim, ghoulish, or “Gothic” costumes can be mistaken as “celebration or veneration of evil or of death itself, contradicting the full and authentic meaning of Halloween.”

“For the Christian, Christ has conquered death, as has been prophesied and fulfilled,” he said.  “Christ has conquered death by his Passion, Death, and Resurrection, the Paschal Mystery whose graces are evident in the glory of all saints.”

The bishop also discussed the custom of dressing up as Christian saints.

“The custom of dressing up for Halloween is devotional in spirit,” he said. “By dressing up as the saints whom we most admire, we imagine ourselves following their example of Christian discipleship. This practice allows the lay faithful in festive celebration to become ‘living icons’ of the saints, who are themselves ‘icons’ or ‘windows’ offering real-life examples of the imitation of Christ.”

“In dressing up as saints we make Christian discipleship our own in a special way, following the exhortation of St. Paul: ‘Be imitators of me, as I am of Christ’,” he said, citing Paul’s First Letter to the Corinthians.

Bishop Konderla invoked the imagery of the saints used in the Book of Revelation.

“Proper veneration of the saints naturally leads to adoration of the Lamb who was slain, whom the saints adore and follow wherever he goes,” he said. “True devotion to the saints, through our prayers and imitation of their witness, leads us sinners back to Christ.”

The bishop also voiced a few warnings. He said it is important to avoid Halloween popularizations of things that are contrary to the Catholic faith. These include the glamorization or celebration of “anything involving superstition, witches, witchcraft, sorcery, divinations, magic, and the occult.”

“We want to be good models of Christian virtue for those we serve and make clear distinctions between that which is good and that which is evil,” he added.

“Let us urge one another this Halloween to express in every detail of our observance the beauty and depth of the Feast of All Saints,” Bishop Konderla concluded.

“Let us make this year's celebration an act of true devotion to God, whose saints give us hope that we too may one day enter into the Kingdom prepared for God's holy ones from the beginning of time.”

US Catholics' confidence in Francis shaken

Wed, 10/03/2018 - 16:24

Washington D.C., Oct 3, 2018 / 02:24 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- A recent poll has shown a drop in popularity for Pope Francis in the United States over the past year. The poll suggests that many Americans increasingly disapprove of how the pope has handled the abuse crisis.

According to a Pew Research Forum survey conducted in mid-September, fewer Americans, and specifically American Catholics, express favorable feelings about the Roman Pontiff.

The pope has enjoyed a very high favorability rating among Americans, and American Catholics, throughout his pontificate.

Throughout his papacy, Pope Francis has had a net favorable rating among American Catholics of around 80 percent, spiking at a high of 90 percent in February 2015. According to the recent poll, this total stands at 72 percent, his lowest so far.

The sharpest drop in the pope’s numbers were among those who expressed “very favorable” views of him, rather than just “favorable.”

When Pope Francis was elected in March 2013, 43 percent of American Catholics had a “very favorable” view of his pontificate. That number rose to 62 percent in October of 2015, immediately after he visited the United States, but the most recent survey saw just 30 percent of American Catholics reporting a “very favorable” view of the pope.

American impressions of the pope appear to be tied to his percieved handling of the sexual abuse crisis. In February 2014, just under a year into his papacy, Pew found that 54 percent of American Catholics said that Pope Francis was either doing an “excellent” or “good” job of addressing the scandal. That figure stayed relatively the same through 2015, before dropping to just 31 percent last month.

Conversely, at the start of his papacy, 39 percent of American Catholics thought Pope Francis was doing an “only fair” or “poor” job at dealing with the scandal, with 15 percent saying that the pope was doing “poorly.” In September of 2018, that figure had jumped to 62 percent, with the number of people saying they believed the pope is doing “poorly” sitting at 36 percent.

The survey showed that American Catholics are also less positive about other aspects of Pope Francis’ performance, including his work spreading the Catholic faith, appointing new bishops and cardinals, and standing up for traditional values.

Since January 2018, the number of Catholics who think Pope Francis has done an “excellent” or “good” job at spreading the faith and standing up for traditional values has dropped sharply, from 81 percent to 55 percent.

When it comes to appointing bishops, only 43 percent of Americans think the pope is doing an excellent or good job at this, a 15-point drop since the beginning of the year. The percentage of people who think that Pope Francis is doing a “only fair” or “poor” job at this task has risen from 24 percent to 39 percent over the last nine months.

Villanova University Professor and Church historian Massimo Faggioli told CNA he believes there are “many factors” influencing American perceptions of the pope, including the “tragic moment of crisis” gripping the Church in the United States, as well as cultural, political, and ecclesiastical issues.

“There are expectations that the pope acts against bishops and cardinals quickly; but the pope cannot act on the basis of a grand jury report only or of media reports only,” Faggioli told CNA. “There must be a formal investigation or a process.”

Faggioli told CNA that for many people in the United States, used to a rolling newscycle, it was hard to understand why Pope Francis has taken so long to respond to emerging scadnals, such as the 11-page “testimony of former apostolic nuncio Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano, something Faggioli called “obviously frustrating” for many Catholics.

“The choice of not responding immediately to the Vigano’ report is hard or impossible to understand for many in the US media culture and for those who do not consider the long-term view of the Church in Pope Francis,” Faggioli said.

When faced with a large-scale crisis, it is normal for the leadership of any institution to suffer a backlash. “This is especially true for those who tend to see in the pope the CEO of the Catholic Church,” he told CNA.

“There is also an ecclesial factor: it seems that some US Catholics are blaming pope Francis for not doing what the US bishops should do to address the abuse crisis. The pope cannot act in total disregard of the local episcopate while the USCCB is putting together an action plan.”

Overall, Faggioli warned that the drop in popularity reflected a decline in confidence not only in Francis personally but in the office of pope.

“More importantly, pope Francis’ drop in popularity in the USA is here also a drop in the popularity of the papacy itself as an institution in the USA - also of his predecessors John Paul II and Benedict XVI.”

While timing of the decline in papal popularity would seem correlated to the still-emerging global abuse crisis, Faggioli told CNA that Francis was the subject of “a systematic campaign of undermining coming from US conservatism.”

“The papacy has become now a partisan issue in the US Church like never before - there is an increasing political polarization in the views of US Catholics toward pope Francis, in which the abuse crisis is a very important element but that element must be seen in the context of a growing distance between Rome and US Catholicism.”

<a href=""><img width="640" height="401" src="" class="attachment-large size-large" alt="Increasing political polarization in U.S. Catholics’ views toward Pope Francis" /></a>

Priest in South Dakota charged with child sex abuse

Wed, 10/03/2018 - 14:21

Rapid City, S.D., Oct 3, 2018 / 12:21 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- A priest in Rapid City, South Dakota has been arrested and charged with two counts of sexual contact with a child under 16, according to local police.

Authorities took Father John Praveen, 38, into custody Oct. 2 following a joint investigation conducted by the Rapid City Police Department and the Pennington County Sheriff’s Office. The investigation began Sept. 30 after a juvenile victim came forward to authorities, alleging two separate incidents, according to a city statement.

Father Praveen, also known as John Praveen Kumar Itukulapti, was born in India and served with the Sanjeev Sadana Society (Holy Spirit Fathers) in the state of Telangana. According to the Rapid City diocesan newsletter, Father Praveen was approved by his congregation to serve in South Dakota for ten years, beginning November 2017.

The Diocese of Rapid City said Church officials are “fully cooperating with law enforcement in this ongoing investigation...Bishop Robert Gruss has also removed him from all ministry in the Diocese of Rapid City.”

After being assigned originally to All Saints Church in Eagle Butte, South Dakota, Father Praveen most recently served as parochial vicar at the Cathedral of Our Lady of Perpetual Help in Rapid City, according to the diocesan website.

The Rapid City Journal reported that Bishop Gruss said the diocese conducted a background check on Praveen, but did not go into detail about the process.

San Diego bishop holds ‘listening sessions’ on abuse crisis

Wed, 10/03/2018 - 12:00

San Diego, Calif., Oct 3, 2018 / 10:00 am (CNA).- Bishop Robert McElroy told a crowd of more than 300 people that he was committed to increasing accountability for bishops and to maintaining a zero-tolerance approach to abuse in the diocese. The San Diego bishop spoke at the first of eight public meetings scheduled to provide a forum for feedback from the laity on recent abuse scandals.

The meeting was held Oct. 1 at Our Mother of Confidence parish in University City, San Diego.

“These meetings will focus on seeking input from people in the pews on the pathway to such reform, listening to those who have been victimized by clerical sexual abuse either directly or in their families, and praying for God's grace to be our only guide,” McElroy said in a statement announcing the fora which was distributed after weekend Masses in the diocese.

Bishop McElroy began the session Monday evening by acknowledging the “wrenching” effect that recent scandals had had on Catholics, and he invited the audience to help form the Church’s response to the crisis.   

The open forum proved to be a difficult event for the bishop, according to local media. The San Diego Union-Tribune reported that McElroy fielded vocal criticism, including some booing, for his perceived “downplaying” of recent scandals, including the revelations about Archbishop Theodore McCarrick and the “testimony” of former apostolic nuncio Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò.

McElroy has previously called Viganò’s initial public letter, released Aug. 22, a “distortion of the truth” and an attempt “to settle old personal scores.”

During the event, McElroy was asked about a number of topics related to the recent scandals, including increased accountability for bishops, the safety of seminarians from sexual abuse and coercion, and the existence of a “homosexual subculture” in some parts of the Church.

McElroy told those attending that there was no link between the sexuality of priests and instances of abuse. “Abuse is not about sex,” he said. “It is about power and domination.”

In an Aug. 27 statement on the crisis of sex abuse in the Church, Bishop McElroy wrote that “the bishops of our nation, in union with the Holy Father, should be focused solely on comprehensively revealing the truth about the patterns of the sexual abuse of minors and vulnerable adults by clergy in our Church, so that deep reform can be enacted.”

As part of the listening session, McElroy also explained the measures which the diocese has had in place since 2003 to enforce its policy of zero-tolerance for abuse.

“I think we’re in an OK place in the structures we have put in place for the protection of minors,” McElroy said.

According to the Union-Tribune, McElroy also said that the diocese had received no credible allegations of abuse against living priests in more than three years.

In March of this year, the Diocese of San Diego removed a religious priest from his position as associate pastor in the parish of St. Patrick in Carlsbad, CA, following an alleged sexual assault on a seminarian after a parish event.

While parishioners were not told why Fr. Juan Garcia Castillo was removed from his post, the diocese confirmed to CNA in September that they had suspended his priestly faculties. The priest is facing criminal charges of sexual battery.

Despite the sometimes aggravated tone of questions and contributions, loud bursts of applause did break out in appreciation of the priests of the diocese, of whom attendees spoke warmly.

A further seven “listening sessions” have been scheduled by the diocese, with the next taking place at 7pm, Oct. 3, at St. Joseph Cathedral.

Supreme Court rejects appeal of Tennessee pro-life amendment

Tue, 10/02/2018 - 15:00

Washington D.C., Oct 2, 2018 / 01:00 pm (CNA).- The United States Supreme Court will not hear a challenge to a pro-life amendment to the Tennessee state constitution.

Amendment 1 categorically excludes abortion rights from the state’s constitution. The Supreme Court declined to admit an appeal on the matter in a decision released on Oct.1, the first day of the court’s new session.

Without further avenues of appeal, the amendment - which explicitly states that “nothing in this Constitution secures or protects a right to abortion" - will stand. 

State attorney general Herbert Slatery III released a statement Monday welcoming the news, saying that it "finally puts to rest any uncertainty surrounding the people’s 2014 approval and ratification of Amendment 1 by 72,000 votes."

The full text of the amendment reads:

“Nothing in this Constitution secures or protects a right to abortion or requires the funding of an abortion. The people retain the right through their elected state representatives or state senators to enact, amend, or repeal statutes regarding abortion, including, but not limited to, circumstances of pregnancy resulting from rape or incest or when necessary to save the life of the mother.”

The amendment was adopted by voters in 2014, with 53 percent in favor. It was drafted to ensure the constitutionality of other state legislation restricting abortion access, including the imposition of a two-day waiting period.

Despite the clear margin by which the amendment passed at the ballot box, questions were raised over the wording of the Tennessee constitution’s provision for adopting amendments. The text says that amendments can be passed only by a "majority of all the citizens of the state voting for governor voting in [the amendment’s] favor."

This phrasing was the subject of different interpretations and led to a legal challenge by eight “no” voters.

State election officials interpreted the wording of the constitution as requiring that in addition to receiving a majority of votes, the number of votes cast in favor of the amendment be at least equal to the number of votes which constitute a majority in the gubernatorial election.

Those opposed to Amendment 1 argued that the state’s constitution requires that the same people that voted for the amendment must also have concurrently voted in the gubernatorial election.

While the distinction may seem pedantic, at issue is a controversial campaign tactic deployed by some “yes” campaigners, in which they encouraged those in favor of the pro-life measure to vote for the amendment but abstain from the governor’s ballot.

The thinking behind this tactic was that by lowering the number of votes cast in the governor’s race the majority threshold for the passage of the amendment would be similarly lowered, but with a higher turnout.

The same tactic could not be deployed by abortion advocates, since they had no means of inflating turnout in the gubernatorial race. Opponents of the amendment said that this was a "fundamentally unfair voting scheme” that gave more consideration to a “yes” vote  than a “no” vote.

The legal challenge argued that “no” voters did not have the choice to abstain from voting for governor to make their vote possibly “count” more.

A federal court in Nashville ordered a recount in April of 2016, but in January of 2018, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with the state’s interpretation of how the ballots should be tallied. The eight “no” voters then appealed to the Supreme Court, which declined to hear the case.

The amendment was conceived following a 2000 Tennessee Supreme Court decision which struck down various abortion restrictions, including a 48-hour waiting period for women seeking abortions, and a requirement that they receive in-person counseling by a doctor who had to give them specific information about the procedure as determined by the state.

That decision held the state restrictions to be unconstitutional under Tennessee law, and found for a “right to privacy” and greater protections for abortion than was recognized at the federal level. Amendment 1 effectively prevents such a finding from standing.

A new 48 hour waiting period law was passed by state legislators in 2015, but is currently being challenged in federal court.

Following the passage of tighter restrictions on abortion in neighboring states, Tennessee saw a increase in the number of abortions being performed for women from elsewhere.

Statistics from 2014 found that a quarter of abortions in the state were for non-Tennessee residents. At the time of the Amendment 1 vote, “yes” campaigners encouraged voters to stop Tennessee from becoming an “abortion destination.”

Underage and undocumented, young migrants confined to Texas tent city

Mon, 10/01/2018 - 20:01

El Paso, Texas, Oct 1, 2018 / 06:01 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- Hundreds of undocumented migrant children and teens have been moved to a tent city in a Texas desert, months after Catholic leaders warned of the dangers of the plan.

In recent weeks, young immigrants in various states have been awakened in the middle of the night and loaded onto buses to be sent to the camp near the west Texas border town of Tornillo, about 35 miles southeast of El Paso.

Shelter workers, speaking anonymously to the New York Times, said children and teens are moved at night to help avoid escape attempts. They are given short notice before a move, in part to prevent them from panicking or trying to run away.

More than 1,600 of these undocumented migrants are moved to west Texas each week. The New York Times said the camp first opened in June for a 30-day period with a capacity for 400 children. In September the camp expanded to a capacity of 3,800, with plans to stay open through the end of the year. Those sheltered in Texas tend to be older children age 13 to 17 who are expected to be released sooner.

The children and teens are kept in groups of 20 and segregated by sex. They sleep in bunks. Instead of school, they are given workbooks but are not required to finish them. They have limited access to legal services.

The west Texas camp has portable toilets and air-conditioned tents provide space for housing, recreation, and medical care.

However, the tent city is not regulated. This is a contrast from other unaccompanied minors’ shelters that are licensed and monitored by state child welfare officials, with requirements for safety, education, and staff hiring and training.

Patricia Zapor, communications director for the Catholic Legal Immigration Network, Inc., had criticized the plan for the tent city in July remarks to CNA.

“Detaining children in any kind of setting is never a good idea for the children. It leads to all sorts of medical, emotional and developmental repercussions, even when they are detained with their parents,” Zapor said. “Detaining children away from their parents is an even worse idea, and in tents, in the harsh climate of Texas – that’s a recipe for disaster.”

Evelyn Stauffer, a spokeswoman for the Health and Human Services Department, discussed the west Texas camp.

“It is common to use influx shelters as done on military bases in the past, and the intent is to use these temporary facilities only as long as needed,” Stauffer, whose department is responsible for caring for these migrants, told the New York Times.

She said a “broken immigration system” is the larger problem that causes immigrant families and unaccompanied minors to be apprehended. Underage migrants in particular face a “hazardous journey” and are at risk of being trafficked or subjected to other exploitation and abuse.

There are over 13,000 detained migrant children in the U.S., a new record. Their numbers have increased 500 percent since last year. Some crossed illegally, while others are seeking asylum.

Shelters for underage migrants have been operating at 90 percent capacity since May. The Department of Health and Human Services estimates that since last year the average time they spend in custody has increased from 34 days to 59.

Shelter capacity is further strained by the Trump administration’s decision to separate children from their parents. This increased the numbers in underage shelter care by 2,500.

In June remarks at the opening of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, Cardinal Daniel DiNardo of Galveston-Houston, the conference president, criticized family separation at the border.

“Our government has the discretion in our laws to ensure that young children are not separated from their parents and exposed to irreparable harm and trauma,” he said. Calling families “the foundational element of our society,” he said they must be able to stay together.

Undocumented underage migrants are held in federal custody until they can be matched with sponsors, like relatives or family friends, until their legal cases can be resolved.

However, many sponsors are themselves undocumented migrants and they now fear that increased scrutiny from federal authorities will put at risk their ability to remain in the U.S.

In June, federal authorities said potential sponsors and other adults in their households must submit fingerprints, and this data would be shared with immigration authorities, the New York Times said.

The Holy Spirit can guide, heal nation, justices hear at DC Red Mass

Mon, 10/01/2018 - 18:42

Washington D.C., Oct 1, 2018 / 04:42 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- Americans should call on the Holy Spirit to guide and heal the Church and nation, Msgr. Peter J. Vaghi said to attendees at Sunday’s annual Red Mass, celebrated at the Cathedral of St. Matthew the Apostle in Washington, DC.

Vaghi, who is chaplain of the John Carroll Society as well as pastor at the Church of the Little Flower in Bethesda, Md., spoke at the Sept. 30 Mass of the Holy Spirit, which traditionally marks the beginning of the judicial year. The US Supreme Court's 2018-2019 session opened Oct. 1.

The name Red Mass is taken from the red vestments worn to symbolize the tongues of fire of the Holy Spirit.

It is this Holy Spirit whom people should call upon “to return and enlighten us, to enlighten in a special way each of you who serves the cause of justice and the common good,” said Vaghi.

“The Spirit comes with the tenderness of a true friend and protector to save, to teach, to counsel, to strengthen, to console, to renew, to heal,” he said. “Yes, to heal us.”

Vaghi noted that both the Church and country could benefit from this healing power, as “it is a power that treats the anger and divisions that so need the healing touch of our God if we are to continue our respective missions with love and effectiveness in our day.”

The Holy Spirit is a guide for those working in the legal profession and in government service, as the Holy Spirit helps people experience God’s wisdom and love as “the guiding principles and foundation of our very existence moving us to be men and women of justice, compassion, boundless mercy and joy” in their jobs.

Vaghi drew comparisons between the Holy Spirit as “the spirit of truth” and the words used in the Declaration of Independence.

“So we call upon the Holy Spirit to help us understand and deepen our understanding of these 'truths' referred to in our Declaration of Independence” – life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The Red Mass, he said, is “a most appropriate time” for one to think about these truths.

“In our day, these 'truths,' truths whose origin is the Holy Spirit, are sometimes seen in ways not always as self-evident – these truths that from the beginning of our national experiment helped define us as Americans – these truths of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness,” he said. The country is divided, but Vaghi believes that the truths laid out in the Declaration of Independence are a solid base for rebuilding the American consensus.

The Red Mass is celebrated each year prior to the start of the Supreme Court’s new term, and stems from a tradition in the Middle Ages. It is meant for all members of the legal profession, including lawyers, judges, law students, and government officials, Catholic or otherwise. The Red Mass has been celebrated in D.C. for the past 66 years.

This year three Supreme Court Justices, Stephen Breyer, John Roberts, and Clarence Thomas, attended the Mass, along with newly-retired Justice Anthony Kennedy. Attorney General Jeff Sessions was also in attendance. Notably not present at the Mass was Judge Brett Kavanaugh, who is currently in the midst of a heated confirmation process for the Supreme Court.

California governor vetoes campus ‘abortion pill’ law

Mon, 10/01/2018 - 16:00

Sacramento, Calif., Oct 1, 2018 / 02:00 pm (CNA).- California Gov. Jerry Brown (D) vetoed a bill Sunday that would have mandated that public universities in the state offer abortion inducing “medication” through campus student health centers starting in 2022.

The bill, SB 320, was “not necessary,” Brown said in his veto message signed Sept. 30, as abortion services are already “widely available” off campus. Governor Brown is a public supporter of abortion rights.

Student health centers at California’s public universities do not provide abortions, but they do provide referrals to abortion facilities.  However, many of these centers do distribute the “morning-after pill,” which can block fertilization or prevent a fertilized egg from implanting in a uterus.

Kathleen Buckley Domingo, senior director of the Office of Life, Justice & Peace for the Archdiocese of Los Angeles, said that she was “grateful” Brown vetoed the bill.

“He recognized that this bill was unnecessary for California and did not empower our college women, but only offered more abortion for our state,” said Domingo.

Instead, Domingo said she hoped the state would pass bills to assist college students who are already parents. Such legislation would “ensure women’s Title IX protections for pregnancy are known and understood, and to make childcare and family housing for student mothers and fathers readily available and accessible for California women.”

Her comments were echoed by executive director of the California Catholic Conference Andy Rivas, who said that “Hopefully next session we can convince legislators to pass a bill that students and universities really need, one that provides financial support for students with children.”

Rivas said he was not surprised by the veto, and that students “were not pushing for passage” of the bill and universities “did not want the responsibility of providing abortion pills to students.”

Pro-life advocates also applauded Brown’s move. Abby Johnson, a former Planned Parenthood employee-turned-pro-life advocate, said that the veto was a “huge victory for not only the pro-life movement in California, but the students at these universities” as well.

“These drugs are dangerous and are often not discussed truthfully with women who decide to take them to end their pregnancy,” Johnson told CNA. 

“I took these same drugs to end one of my pregnancies and I thought I was dying. I was in a bathtub full of blood but the abortion clinic was unfazed by my reaction - it happens often but is hardly ever disclosed.”

Johnson’s group, And Then There Were None, provides assistance to abortion industry employees who are looking to leave their jobs.

Catherine Glenn Foster, President and CEO of Americans United For Life, agreed with Brown’s description of the bill as unnecessary, and said that the governor’s veto had “made California safer for women, and college campuses safer for their unborn children.”

“Governor Brown recognized that in a state where Medicaid already pays for elective abortions, there is no issue of access, since, as he said yesterday, ‘the average distance to abortion providers in campus communities varies from 5 to 7 miles, not an unreasonable distance,’” said Foster.

Foster also pointed out that “college health clinics are not equipped to handle the very serious risks of chemical abortion drugs,” which can include bleeding and infection.

Holy See-China agreement draws criticism from US religious freedom advocates

Sun, 09/30/2018 - 17:02

Washington D.C., Sep 30, 2018 / 03:02 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- The Holy See’s provisional agreement with China on the appointment of bishops has drawn criticism from some U.S. religious freedom leaders, who contend that it concedes too much to power to the government and undermines efforts to protect other suffering religious groups.

“I confess that I am skeptical, both as a Catholic, and as an advocate for the religious freedom of all religious communities in China,” Thomas Farr, president of the Religious Freedom Institute, said Sept. 27.

“Earlier this year the Vatican quite properly expressed grave concerns about China’s comprehensive anti-religion policy, and its apparent goal of altering Catholicism itself.”

Farr is a former American diplomat who was the first director of the U.S. State Department’s Office of International Religious Freedom, from 1999-2003. He spoke before the U.S. House Committee on Foreign Affairs, Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, Global Human Rights, and International Organizations. His comments addressed the state of religious freedom in China, especially for Catholics; the potential for further action from Congress and American diplomacy; and the Vatican-China agreement.

On Sept. 22 the Holy See announced that Pope Francis had recognized seven illicitly ordained bishops after the signing of a provisional deal with the Chinese government over the nomination of bishops. Under the deal, the Chinese government can propose candidates as part of the nomination process, but the Pope must give final approval.

The Pope explained his decision in a Sept. 26 letter to China’s Catholics, acknowledging the “deep and painful tensions” centered especially on the figure of the bishop as “the guardian of the authenticity of the faith and as guarantor of ecclesial communion.” He said it was “essential” to deal first with the issue of bishop appointments in order to support the continuation of the Gospel in China and to re-establish “full and visible unity in the Church.”

He acknowledged the different reactions to the provisional agreement, both from those who are hopeful and from those who might feel abandoned by the Holy See and question “the value of their sufferings endured out of fidelity to the Successor of Peter.”

Farr, speaking to the congressional subcommittee, said he is concerned the provisional agreement “will not improve the lot of Catholics in China, much less the status of religious freedom for non-Catholic religious communities.” It risks harming religious freedom and “inadvertently encouraging China’s policy of altering the fundamental nature of Catholic witness.”

“In my humble opinion as a Catholic, and an advocate for religious freedom, the Vatican’s charism is to support that witness, as Pope Saint John Paul II did in Communist Poland,” he said.

Farr thought the process for choosing Catholic bishops was comparable to “the way parliamentary candidates are approved in Iran” where theologians vet prospective candidates for their loyalty to the government.

“Is it likely that the Chinese government would forward to the Vatican the name of a bishop faithful to the fundamental teachings of the Catholic Church?” Farr asked. “It seems far more likely that the bishop would be chosen at a minimum for his acquiescence to the regime, if not his fidelity to its anti-Catholic purposes.”

Johnnie Moore, a religious freedom advocate who now serves on the United States Commission for International Religious Freedom, told CNA he entirely supports “direct engagement with governments which have a checkered past when it comes to religious freedom, working together to find a better future.”

However, he thought many people outside of the Catholic community are “entirely confused by the timing and why the Holy Father agreed to – for all intents and purposes – demote faithful, persevering priests who had endured so much for so long.”

Moore, a past vice-president of communications at the evangelical Christian, Virginia-based Liberty University, is now CEO of communications firm The Kairos Company.

“Surely, (Pope Francis) could have found a way to have a meaningful relationship with the Chinese-appointed bishops without picking sides between his flock and those who’ve viciously opposed it for so long,” he said. “I’m also afraid that clever leaders in China will use this deal with the Vatican to distract the world from their resurgent, egregious mistreatment of other religious communities.”

Farr’s remarks tried to place China-Vatican relations in a historical context. In the centuries that Catholics have been in China, beginning even before missionary priest Matteo Ricci’s founding of a Jesuit mission in 1601, they have encountered “the assertion that Catholicism is incompatible with Chinese culture and must either be rooted out or adapted in ways that would change its fundamental nature.”

While Christianity became associated with European imperialism in the 19th and 20th centuries, against which many Chinese rebelled, it also suffered intense persecution after the Cultural Revolution after communist forces took power in 1949 under Mao Zedong.

China’s government attempted to absorb or destroy all religion. It expelled the papal representative to China and over a decade’s time engaged in “brutal treatment” of Catholics, Protestants and other religious groups, Farr said. This intensified under the Cultural Revolution begun in the 1960s.

“Priests and nuns were tortured, murdered (some were burned alive), and imprisoned
in labor camps. Lay Christians were paraded in their towns and villages with cylindrical hats
detailing their ‘crimes’,” he said. Catholic clergy and laity were among the tens of millions who died “terrible deaths.”

“While Mao proved that a policy of eliminating religion is unrealistic, his successors have constantly experimented in finding the ‘correct’ way to control, co-opt, and absorb religion into the communist state,” Farr continued. Since the 1970s, China’s religious policies have had “ups and downs as new Chinese leaders adapted policies to achieve the objective of control.”

“Not all Chinese policy involves overt repression of religion,” he said. In recent decades, China’s leaders have at times supported “religious groups perceived to be capable of consolidating Beijing’s absolute power.” According to Farr, this has sometimes meant praise for non-Tibetan Chinese Buddhism, Confucianism, and Taoism as China’s “traditional cultures.”

“Clearly those three groups pose a lesser threat to Communist rule than do the Uighur Muslims, Tibetan Buddhists, and Christians,” he said. “For the moment at least, it is the latter three religious communities that are the objects of continuing repression, especially the Uighurs.”

Citing State Department estimates of 70 million to 90 million Christians in China, with about 12 million Catholic, he said the growth of Chinese Christianity, especially through conversions to Protestant denominations, is “of great concern to the Chinese.”

Moving the State Administration for Religious Affairs to the United Front Work Department, which historically has been tasked with controlling China’s ethnic minorities, ensures “increased monitoring and control over the perceived threat posed by religion’s growth in China.”

Moore, a commissioner on the U.S. international religious freedom commission, had voiced astonishment that the Vatican would normalize its relationship with China “within one week of China so brazenly closing Beijing’s large Zion Church and just a few weeks after the United Nations, the New York Times and the U.S. State Department all revealed that China has forcibly placed as many as one million Muslims in re-education camps.”

“Honestly, I was in total disbelief. I said to myself, ‘not this, not now’ and then, I just prayed,” he continued.

Following a two-day review of China’s record in August, the U.N. Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination has said that up to 1 million Uyghurs may be held against their will and without trial in extra-legal detention, on pretext of countering terrorism and religious extremism.

Farr voiced fear that the agreement reflects a “failed Cold War ‘realpolitik’ diplomacy” of the 1960s Vatican that was changed by St. John Paul II, a failure he blamed on a lack of realism about “the evil of communism.”

“It harmed the Church in parts of Eastern Europe,” he said. “The post-war Vatican was not then, and is not now, a secular power capable of changing the behavior of communist governments by dint of its political diplomacy.”

He contended that the Vatican is “the only authority in the world constituted precisely to address the root causes of totalitarian evil,” citing ST. John Paul II’s cooperation in the 1980s with U.S. President Ronald Reagan and U.K. Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher.

“The Holy See’s role should be now, as it was then, to press for human rights and, especially, for religious freedom for all religious communities in China,” he said, arguing that the Vatican’s charism is not diplomacy, but “witness to the truth about God and man.”

“As for China’s Catholics, the Vatican should demand nothing less than libertas ecclesiae, the freedom of the Church to witness to its adherents, to the public, and to the regime its teachings on human dignity and the common good.”

Farr suggested to Congress that the U.S. government should make the case to China that the growth of religion and religious communities is natural and inevitable in all societies. Efforts to kill it or blunt its growth are “impractical and self-defeating,” and persecution only slows economic development and increases social instability and violent extremism. Accommodating religious groups, by contrast, will help economic growth, social harmony, and stability.

China is a major force in the world and has enormous influence on global affairs and American interests, he said. U.S. policymakers do not typically address religious freedom in this context.
“Far more than a humanitarian issue, the way China handles its internal religious matters is of sufficient importance that the United States should make religious liberty a central element of its relationship with the East Asian nation,” he said.

The agreement between the Holy See and mainland China has met with varied reactions within China.

Bishop Stephen Lee Bun-sang of Macau wrote Sept. 24 that he was pleased to have learned of the agreement: “I thoroughly reckon that both parties have worked towards this provisional agreement after a long period of time with persistent effort of research and dialogue. This agreement is a positive move especially in favour of the communion of the Catholic Church in Chin and the Universal Church.”

Bishop Lee encouraged the faithful “to pray for the progress in Sino-Vatican relationship, with the hope that this provisional agreement may really be implemented, so as to contribute to and benefit the Chinese society and the Church's charitable, pastoral, social, and educational apostolates, striving to spread the Gospel of Jesus Christ far and wide.”

But Cardinal Joseph Zen Ze-kiun, who has long been an opponent of rapprochement with the Chinese government, told Reuters just days before the agreement was reached that “they're giving the flock into the mouths of the wolves. It's an incredible betrayal.”

The Bishop Emeritus of Hong Kong said the consequences of the deal “will be tragic and long lasting, not only for the Church in China but for the whole Church because it damages the credibility.”


Mary Rezac contributed to this report.

CNA Explainer: What rights does a pastor have?

Sat, 09/29/2018 - 11:30

Chicago, Ill., Sep 29, 2018 / 09:30 am (CNA).- The recent case of Chicago's Fr. Paul Kalchik has generated considerable publicity, and left more than a few questions unanswered.
Kalchik was “temporarily” removed from his post at Resurrection Parish in northwestern Chicago last week, following a Sept. 14 incident in which a rainbow banner which had previously hung in the church building was burned by parishioners, with Kalchik in attendance.
Kalchik had previously announced that he planned to burn the flag publicly on Sept. 29. He acknowledged recently that the archdiocese had instructed him not to proceed with that plan.

Almost everything else about the case remains disputed.
The Archdiocese of Chicago told CNA recently that Fr. Kalchik had agreed not to burn the banner. Kalchik, in a recent interview, claimed that he merely was told not to conduct the specific Sept. 29 public event he had previously announced.
An archdiocesan spokesperson also told CNA that Kalchik’s departure from the parish – which the archdiocese says is temporary – was not linked to the banner burning at all, but had been “in the works” for some weeks. Chicago’s Cardinal Blase Cupich was apparently concerned about “a number of issues” at the parish. The archdiocese added that Kalchik’s departure was arranged by “mutual agreement” and that he is presently receiving “pastoral support” for unspecified needs.
Kalchik says his departure was anything but a mutual decision.
The priest says that two diocesan officials, priests, arrived at his rectory and ordered him off the premises, threatening to call the police if he refused to comply. According to Kalchik, the priests said that he would be sent to St. Luke’s Institute, a Maryland psychiatric assessment and treatment center for priests.

The Archdiocese of Chicago declined CNA’s request for confirmation or denial of those claims.
Amid the conflicting narratives surrounding Kalchik, a question emerges: what canonical rights does a parish priest actually have?

While a priest’s ministry is dependent upon that of his bishop, and every priest promises respect and obedience to the bishop at ordination, it is a common mistake to think of a pastor as a kind of branch manager or tenant farmer of the bishop. The pastor’s canonical role is much different than that.
Canon law treats the subject of a parochus -  the pastor of a parish - very explicitly.
Canon 515 §1 of the Code of Canon Law says that each parish is to be entrusted to the care of a parochus, who serves as the shepherd of the community under the authority of the bishop.
The same canon makes clear that the parish itself is not a piece of land, a church, or any other collection of buildings. A parish is properly understood as a group of the faithful, usually defined as those living in a particular area.
The relationship between the pastor and his parish is, in a technical sense, personal: a relationship between persons, defined and circumscribed by law.  
In canon law, every parish has its own “juridic personality,” meaning that is a freestanding legal entity, with its own property, and its own rights and obligations.
The Code clarifies that the pastor represents the parish “in all juridic affairs,” and it is his responsibility to lead the community and decides what is in its best interests. Of course, the bishop is free to establish policies for all parishes in his diocese- called particular laws- provided that they do not conflict with universal canon law or divine law. But within the boundaries established by canon law, divine law, and civil law, it is the pastor’s job to lead the parish, and to determine, prayerfully and consultatively, how best to govern the community with which has has been entrusted.

There have been cases where the pastor and the bishop disagree about parish needs, and canon law provides mechanisms to address such conflicts, including processes of appeal from episcopal decisions and directions, and canonical courts in which they can be adjudicated.
A bishop and pastor might disagree, for example, about parish property. A bishop may direct a pastor to sell a piece of property, or to give it over to meet a diocesan need, and the pastor may judge that to be a bad idea. Such a dispute could become a matter of “hierarchical recourse,” if the pastor appeals a decision he does not support. When disputes over such matters are appealed to Rome, the Congregation for Clergy is often obliged to remind the bishop to respect the rights of the pastor.
Similarly, within the scope of universal and particular canon law and the teachings of the Church, a pastor also has the autonomy to teach and preach in a way he believes is best suited to the needs of the people.

This does not mean, of course, that bishops have no authority over parish pastors. In addition to establishing particular laws for his diocese, a bishop has the authority to oblige any priest or member of the faithful to do, or not do, a particular thing he may determine to be detrimental to the wider community. He can do this through a precept- a kind of canonical induction directed at a specific person or situation.

Since a precept is a formal legal action, a pastor has the right to appeal it, provided he does so according to the procedures established by canon law. But he does not have the right to simply ignore a legitimately issued precept.

Bishops also have the authority to appoint pastors. Except for very exceptional cases, canon law gives the diocesan bishop a free choice to appoint whatever priest he thinks is most suitable for the job. This is understandable, since the pastor carries out his role “under the authority of the diocesan bishop in whose ministry of Christ he has been called to share.”

A bishop is not free, however, to remove or transfer a pastor from his office without following a detailed and non-negotiable process defined by canon law. This procedure can only be initiated if a priest has met one or more conditions for removal outlined in the law, which include actions “gravely detrimental or disturbing to ecclesiastical communion,” along with permanent infirmity of mind or body, a loss of good reputation among his flock, and neglect of his duties in the parish.

Even if a priest has met those conditions, before he can be removed from the office of pastor, the bishop must formally consult with certain priests appointed by the diocesan priests’ council, he must allow the pastor the opportunity to see the evidence against him and make a defense, and he must discuss that defense with the priests appointed to consult with him.

During this whole process, the bishop can neither remove the pastor, nor appoint a replacement.
If the bishop does issue a decree of removal, the priest has the right to appeal his case to Rome, where the Congregation for Clergy, or eventually the Apostolic Signatura, can examine the decision and the process used to reach it.

A bishop also has the prerogative, in certain limited circumstances, to declare that a priest is impeded from exercising priestly ministry, but that must be done through a delineated process as well. A bishop could also withdraw certain faculties for ministry from a priest, but only if he has good reasons, and only if he has followed the procedural requirements of canon law.

In short, while no priest has a right to an assignment or to ministry, once a priest is appointed a pastor, he cannot be removed from his office, or from his ministry, without serious cause, and without observation of the law’s procedural requirements. Similarly, prohibiting a priest from residing in a certain place can only be done in the limited circumstances allowed by canon law.

This also means that, except in very limited and unusual circumstances, a bishop is not within his rights to attempt to remove the legitimate pastor of a parish from its property, or to threaten to have the police do so. Were a bishop to do such a thing without observing canonical requirements, and the priest appeal to Rome, it is likely that the Vatican would order the pastor to be reinstated.

Neither can a bishop compel any priest to undergo a psychological evaluation or engage in psychological treatment. While a bishop might condition future assignments on a “clean bill of mental health,” he can not force a priest to be diagnosed or treated against his will, or to disclose the details of his mental health if he does not wish to do so.

Canon 519 says that the pastor exercises “the pastoral care of the community committed to the pastor under the authority of the diocesan bishop in whose ministry of Christ he has been called to share, so that for that same community he carries out the functions of teaching, sanctifying, and governing.”

The authority of the diocesan bishop is not absolute. Nor is the autonomy of the pastor. But both exist, as defined by canon law, for the service of the Church, and the salvation of souls. Understanding the authority of bishops, and the rights of pastors, is important at a moment in the Church’s life when so much seems unclear, and when many questions remain unanswered.


Prolife Democrat laments ‘homogenization’ within parties

Fri, 09/28/2018 - 17:30

Washington D.C., Sep 28, 2018 / 03:30 pm (CNA).- Rep. Dan Lipinski (D-IL), one of the few prolife members of the Deomcratic Party with a seat in Congress, has spoken about his commitment to life issues and his concern at the increasing divide between the two major parties.

The congressman spoke at an event entitled Being a Faithful Catholic as a Public Servant on Sept. 27. The event was hosted at the Catholic University of America and sponsored by the university's Institute for Human Ecology.

Lipinski, along with CUA Professor Joseph Capizzi, discussed what life is like in Washington for one of the last remaining Blue Dog Democrats, and how his party has shifted to the point of effectively trying to force people like him out. He has represented Illinois’ 3rd district for the last 14 years, a time in which he says divisiveness and polarization has gotten worse.

Although voting as a committed Democrat, with a 91 percent rating from the AFL-CIO and a 100 percent rating from the League of Conservation Voters--- Lipinski also calls himself a strong and proud pro-life legislator, something which can leave him isolated from his party colleagues.

"The parties have really gotten more homogeneous," he said. "It used to be that you had conservative Democrats, largely southerners but not all, and you had some more liberal Republicans. The parties have really sorted out."

His constituents, he explained, are largely the “old-fashioned Democrats”--a phrase that he himself identifies himself with.

Over his nearly decade and a half in Congress, "things have changed. There's less bipartisanship, but things have really gotten so much worse."

The two major parties are generally found on opposite sides of the abortion debate. The Democratic Party’s platform has support for the public funding of abortion as one of its planks, while the Republican Party’s platform states that all Americans have an “unalienable right to life.”

In addition to being a relative rarity in his party, his pro-life views have made him something of a target.

This past March, Lipinski barely survived a primary challenge in his Illinois constituency. His challenger, Marie Newman, made abortion the central issue of that campaign, and received considerable support and money from numerous pro-abortion groups.

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee initially declined to endorse Lipinski, but finally endorsed the sitting congressman about two weeks before the primary election.

Lipinski said that while he is hopeful about the future of the pro-life movement, he was not comfortable with how the movement had “embraced” President Donald Trump. He explained that he pulled out of speaking at the annual March for Life when he learned that Trump would also be addressing the event.

"It very much concerns me,” said Lipinski about Trump. “I understand he's done some very good things when it comes to protecting life, but I'm scared that getting too close is going to hurt the movement in the long run."

Those who attended the talk were impressed with what Lipinski had to say, even if they were not necessarily on board with all of his policy positions. Many of the attendees at the Catholic University told CNA that they appreciated the stance he was taking for life.

"It's wonderful to hear a pro-life politician who remains firm in his stance and is willing to speak out publicly in defense of life,” Sr. Mary Elizabeth, SV, told CNA.

Nick Swanson, a freshman at Catholic University who described himself as a Republican, said that he thought it was interesting how blunt Lipinski was about his time in Congress.

“It wasn't as if he was playing to a political audience, he just wanted to be honest about the struggles he faced in making his decisions. It's almost like he, when he approaches these decisions he takes them seriously. It's not as if he just follows the party line,” said Swanson.

John Dashe, another freshman, told CNA that he thought it was refreshing to find ideological diversity within a party.

“Being from (Massachusetts), we have a lot of Democrats, but none of them are pro-life,” said Dashe.

“Coming from a perspective where I thought they all had a sort-of uniform view, it’s interesting to see that he was different in that way.”

Vermont AG investigates abuse allegations at Catholic institutions

Fri, 09/28/2018 - 16:21

Montpelier, Vt., Sep 28, 2018 / 02:21 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- As the attorney general of Vermont investigates allegations of abuses at Catholic institutions, the state's bishop has announced that the diocese is waiving nondisclosure agreements for abuse victims.

Attorney General T.J. Donovan announced Sept. 11 an investigation of allegations surrounding St. Joseph's Orphanage in Burlington.

“The allegations include murder, for which there is no statute of limitations, as well as abuse and sexual abuse,” the attorney general's office stated. “The Burlington Catholic Diocese, which operated St. Joseph’s Orphanage, has expressed willingness to fully cooperate with the investigation.”

The orphanage, founded in the mid-1800s, was operated by the Sisters of Providence, and overseen by Vermont Catholic Charities. It closed in 1974.

The allegations were described by Christine Kenneally in an Aug. 27 article in BuzzFeed News.

“I wish to inform all survivors of abuse who entered into a Nondisclosure Agreement (NDA) with the Diocese of Burlington as part of a legal settlement that the Diocese waives that agreement and they are now free to tell the story of what happened to them as they see fit,” Bishop Christopher Coyne of Burlington said Sept. 28.

He noted that this applies only “to NDAs that were signed with the Diocese and not any other Church entity such as a religious community or school.”

“Out of respect for those who asked for an NDA so as to maintain their own personal privacy in these matters, the Diocese will continue to maintain the agreement.”

The bishop added that the Diocese of Burlington has not required nondisclosure agreements on the part of survivors since 2002.

“It is my hope that this past action as well as the present one will allow the truth of what happened to survivors and their families to be heard,” Bishop Coyne wrote. “I pledge to you, as the bishop of Burlington, that I will do everything that I can to make sure this never happens again and to work for healing and reconciliation with those who were so badly abused by clergy.”

Alleged abuses at St. Joseph's Orphanage were the subject of lawsuits brought by former residents in the 1990s. Some of the cases were dismissed, and some reached settlements.

VTDigger reported Sept. 26 that Donovan's investigation will include Weston Priory, a Benedictine monastery. Michael Veitch has said he was sexually abused by a visiting priest at the priory around 1970, when he was 15 years old.

Msgr. John McDermott, vicar general of the Burlington diocese, told VTDigger that the diocese will cooperate with Donovan “in any way … If the Vermont Attorney General decides to expand the investigation we will cooperate to the best of our ability.”

Veitch has said that memories of his alleged abuse were triggered by reports of sexual abuse of minors in Pennsylvania.

In August, a Pennsylvania grand jury report found more than 1,000 allegations of abuse at the hands of some 300 clergy members in six dioceses in the state. It also found a pattern of cover up by senior Church officials.

The report has prompted questions nationwide on the Church’s response to abuse claims.

Since then, numerous state attorneys general have announced investigations into abuse by clerics, including those in Michigan, Nebraska, New York, New Jersey, Missouri, New Mexico, and Illinois.

Denver archbishop releases letter responding to claims by priest

Fri, 09/28/2018 - 14:30

Denver, Colo., Sep 28, 2018 / 12:30 pm (CNA).- The Archdiocese of Denver has released a letter in response to accusations posted online by one of its priests. Fr. David Nix alleged in a blog post that he had been left homeless by the archdiocese. The letter, signed by Archbishop Samuel Aquila, said that Fr. Nix’s account made a number of false claims, and called the situation “unfortunate.”

In a post published on his own website Sept. 27, Nix alleged that earlier this year he relayed allegations of sexual misconduct to archdiocesan authorities and in response was left without an assignment or a residence.

Aqulia responded strongly to this accusation, writing to all the priests of Denver Sept. 28 saying that Fr. Nix had effectively tried to blackmail the archdiocese.

“The truth is that in an email he wrote on May 24, Fr. Nix made threats that if he couldn’t dictate his own assignment, he would pursue civil litigation, embarrass me personally, or make known to the media supposed harmful information about two historical situations,” Aquila wrote to his priests.

“This approach of using a threat to obtain his desired outcome raises serious civil and canonical implications, which is exactly what he was told, and frankly it is offensive to any right-thinking person.”

Nix alleged that in May he relayed a “third-hand” account about a “high-power priest” concerning an event in the 1980s. Since reporting the allegations, he claimed, he has been left “homeless” by the archdiocese.

The online post also said that the priest knew of a case from five years ago concerning misconduct by a seminarian. In the latter case, Nix said the seminary reported the matter to the police at the time.

The Archdiocese of Denver responded strongly to Nix’s accusations.

“To be clear, the two allegations Fr. Nix was using to try to control his assignment are not dark secrets that somehow make Fr. Nix a “whistle blower.” One involved a seminarian and the matter was fully reported to law enforcement in 2012 and the seminarian involved was dismissed from the seminary,” Aquila’s letter said.

“The second allegation involves a third-hand report from the 1980s, and Fr. Nix confirmed in writing, and then in person to both an official of the curia and a member of the Conduct Response Team, that there was absolutely no allegation of any sexual contact or abuse.”

Aquila made it clear in his letter that there was no question of suppressing any allegation of misconduct against anyone.

“In all of our dealings with Fr. Nix, we have been clear that if there is information about a crime, it must be reported to law enforcement… Most importantly, I have always been direct that in no event would I allow any wrongdoing to be “covered up,” for his benefit or for any other reason.”

In the narrative posted online, Nix claimed that since relaying the allegations he had frequently requested an assignment and a residence from the archdiocese over the last few months but that he has not received either. Instead, he maintains, he has nowhere to live and has been left to stay in motels or in his car.

The letter from Aquila called this “just another sad chapter” in the “long saga” of Nix’s dealing with the chancery dating back to before his installation as archbishop.

“Rest assured that contrary to Fr. Nix’s claims, he has been paid the full salary due to him, which of course is a documented fact,” Aquila said. “We have tried to speak with Fr. Nix, but he fails to show up for scheduled meetings, is hard to get ahold of, and even just yesterday he rebuked [Denver auxiliary] Bishop Rodriguez.”

“We will continue to try to help Fr. Nix, if he will let us.”

Nix was ordained eight years ago for the Archdiocese of Denver. In the first four years of his ministry he had four parochial assignments in what he refers to on his website as “novus ordo parishes.” According both to his own blog and to the archdiocese of Denver, Nix found it difficult to settle in any of these parishes.

Aquila’s letter explained that “It reached a point where, after four failed parish assignments, it became very difficult to find a pastor who would receive Fr. Nix as a parochial vicar. In the face of this difficulty, my staff and I have continued to work hard to find an assignment for him, including with various groups outside of the Archdiocese.”

In 2014, Nix was permitted to seek ministry in other dioceses and with religious orders, often asking to celebrate the sacraments according to the extraordinary form of the liturgy. In each case, he was eventually asked by the other dioceses to return to Denver. More recently, Nix said he had asked the Archdiocese of Denver to allow him live as a hermit in the archdiocese.

Nix’s website contains numerous postings on his travels, reflections on liturgy, and other Church related matters. In some posts, he writes about what he sees as the infiltration of the priesthood by “communists, gays, and freemasons.”

Several priests in the archdiocese told CNA that they remembered Nix from his time in parish ministry, but didn’t not wish to have their names made public.

One such priest told CNA that the behavior detailed in Aquila’s letter was familiar.

“When I read Archbishop’s letter, I was not surprised to hear Fr. Nix had threatened him in that way. Years ago, Fr. David made a similar threat to undermine me in my ministry if I didn’t accede to demands he made,” the priest told CNA.

Another priest told CNA that Nix had told him he was initially held back from ordination because of “psychological issues.”

For his part, Nix insists that he is a priest “in good standing” and noted in his post online that the archdiocese have not restricted his faculties in any way. The Archdiocese of Denver also stressed that no disciplinary action had been taken against him.

CNA attempted to reach Fr. Nix for comment, but calls to his phone went unanswered.

Aqulia stressed to the priests of Denver that he did not wish for the situation to become either public or acrimonious, telling them that in priest personnel matters “it is the Archdiocese’s and my practice to honor confidentiality.”

In this situation, he said, “because Fr. Nix is attacking the Church, my staff, and me, and is speaking about these things in a very public way, it is necessary to be clear with you about this matter.”

The letter concluded with the archbishop asking the priests of Denver “not to be mad or upset with Fr. Nix, but instead we must always act with compassion and caring.”

Archbishop McCarrick to lead life of prayer, penance at Kansas friary

Fri, 09/28/2018 - 12:01

Salina, Kan., Sep 28, 2018 / 10:01 am (CNA/EWTN News).- Archbishop Theodore McCarrick has begun his life of prayer and penance at St. Fidelis Capuchin Friary in Victoria, Kansas, according to statements from the Diocese of Salina and the Archdiocese of Washington.

McCarrick was sentenced to a life of prayer and penance by Pope Francis July 28, pending the completion of a canonical process against him, after he was credibly accused of sexually abusing a minor. After the accusation became public, he then resigned from the College of Cardinals in July, becoming the first American cardinal ever to step down.

It also came to light that the Archdiocese of Newark and the Diocese of Metuchen had previously reached out-of-court settlements with several adult men who alleged they were sexually abused by McCarrick during their time as seminarians.

Cardinal Donald Wuerl of Washington, Bishop Gerald L. Vincke of Salina, and Father Christopher Popravek, the provincial of the Capuchin Friary in Denver, made the arrangements to house McCarrick for his potentially indefinite stay.

While living in prayer and penance, McCarrick will be forbidden from any sort of public appearances or ministry. Bishop Vincke said that the diocese will not be incurring any costs for housing McCarrick, and that he requests privacy “out of consideration for the peace of the community” at the friary.

The Archdiocese of Washington, in a separate statement from spokesperson Ed McFadden, echoed Vincke’s request for privacy.

In a letter to the Diocese of Salina entitled “Why I said ‘Yes’,” Vincke explained that he received a phone call from Cardinal Wuerl Sept. 13 asking if McCarrick could be moved to St. Fidelis Capuchin Friary. At this point, Wuerl had already received the agreement of the Capuchin provincial superior.

“I realize this decision will be offensive and hurtful to many people,” said Vincke.

“Archbishop McCarrick is, in many ways, at the forefront of the recent firestorm in the Church. Many of us are confused and angry by what Archbishop McCarrick is alleged to have done several decades ago.”

Vincke said that he agreed to allow McCarrick into his diocese knowing that he would be prohibited from making public appearances, and that the diocese would not be paying for any of the costs.

“I believe in justice,” said the bishop, noting that the USCCB is in support of a full investigation by lay experts into the allegations against McCarrick. The timeline for this proposed investigation is unclear. McCarrick is 88 years old.

The decision to host McCarrick was neither taken lightly nor was it easy, Vincke said.

“I also believe in mercy. In saying ‘yes,’ I had to reconcile my own feelings of disappointment, anger and even resentment toward Archbishop McCarrick,” he explained.

“I had to turn to Christ for guidance. Jesus is rich in mercy. He did not come to give us permission to sin, he came to forgive our sins.”

Vincke said he was “deeply sorry” for all victims of abuse, and that his “heart aches for you and your families.”

“This purification of the Church by God is painful, but much needed. We need the eyes of faith as we suffer through this.”