Why Pope Francis' Sex Abuse Summit in Rome Will Fail

The Roman Catholic Church is in crisis in the western world, especially in the United States,  as the never ending lawsuits by victims of clerical sex abuse goes on, dioceses continue to file for bankruptcy protection, parishioners are walking away, and criminal investigations are expanding. Indeed, several high clerics have been convicted in criminal prosecutions.  Only in the undeveloped world where uneducated populations abound is the Church growing.  Hence, Pope Francis' calling of a gathering in Rome next month.  Many expect the summit to fail for various reasons, not the least of which in my view is Francis' refusal to (i) undertake a thorough house cleaning of the Vatican hierarchy and removal of numerous bishops and cardinals, and (ii) discard the Church's 12th century dogma on human sexuality.  A piece in the National Catholic Reporter (which is not controlled by the Vatican) by a long time Vatican observer lays out why the summit will fail.  Here are excerpts:

Next month's meeting in Rome, called by Pope Francis to deal with the sex abuse crisis in the Catholic Church, may well be a failure before it even starts.

The stakes for the meeting have been ratcheted up, at least for the American church, as the Pennsylvania grand jury report on clergy sex abuse has summoned up new scrutiny of the church's response, from the pews and from government officials; then, in November, the Vatican squelched a vote at the U.S. bishops' fall meeting on measures designed to hold the hierarchy accountable for not dealing with abuse. . . . According to the Vatican, the meeting will focus on three main themes: responsibility, accountability and transparency.

There are five reasons this meeting will fail.

First, four days is much too short a time to deal with such an important and complicated issue. The Vatican says the meeting will include "plenary sessions, working groups, moments of common prayer and listening to testimonies, a penitential liturgy and a final Eucharistic celebration." . . . To think that the February meeting can accomplish anything in such a short time is not supported by experience.

Second, the expectations for this meeting are so high that it will be impossible to measure up. . . . In addition, having sidelined the efforts of U.S. bishops in November, the meeting must come up with a way to hold bishops accountable, or it will make the excuse look unwarranted and phony.

Third, a strength of this meeting is that it will include presidents of episcopal conferences from all over the world. These are some of the most important bishops from their countries. But the cultures and legal systems of the participants vary tremendously, which will make agreement on policies and procedures difficult.

Many bishops in the Global South do not believe that sex abuse of minors is a problem in their countries. . . . This is in part because many Global South bishops have no idea how bad the problem is. In their traditional cultures, victims of abuse are very reluctant to come forward to report the abuse to the church or civil authorities.  As a result, too many bishops around the world are making the same mistakes that the U.S. bishops made.

Fourth, as far as can be seen at present, the meeting is not well-prepared. . . . This meeting, on the other hand, was only announced by the pope in September, and the committee created to organize it was not appointed until the end of November. The committee's first communication with the meeting's participants was in the middle of December, which gave the bishops until Jan. 15 to send in their response to a questionnaire enclosed with the letter.

Nonetheless, the meeting will also fail because, in order to succeed, Francis will have to lay down the law and simply tell the bishops what to do, rather than consulting with them. He'll have to present a solution to the crisis and tell them to go home and implement it.  Francis will not do that. He does not see himself as the CEO of the Catholic Church.

Francis appears to believe that the current laws are sufficient but need to be enforced. His goal, then, will be to get the bishops on board, not come up with new solutions. This is important, but it will not satisfy those wanting accountability structures to punish bishops who do not do their jobs. . . . Francis may pull it off, but I fear that when the meeting is over, it will only be seen as a small step forward in an effort that is going to take years.

Expect the exodus from the Church in the developed world to continue, especially among the younger generations, and be prepared for more horrific bombshells like the Pennsylvania grand jury report that came out last year. 

Hypocrisy on Display: Richmond Bishop Francis DiLorenzo

On issues of human sexuality the Roman Catholic Church continues to ignore modern knowledge and science, especially on issues of sexual orientation.  Rather than accept the fact that homosexuality is (i) a normal, naturally occurring condition for a portion of the world's population, and (ii) no more sinful than breathing, the Church continues to embrace 13th century batshitery first launched by individuals who modern experts would likely label as mentally disturbed.  Locally, one of the worse proponents of such backwardness is the Bishop of the Diocese of Richmond, Bishop Francis DiLorenzo, who is virulently anti-gay.  Similarly, he believes in the subjugation of women to men and bars divorced and remarried Catholics from positions  in the diocese's schools.  Yet this Neanderthal knuckle dragger is now exhorting local Catholics to accept the science of climate change.  As regular readers know, I am all for accepting and acting on scientific knowledge of climate change and regularly , but for DiLorenzo to suddenly embrace knowledge and science on every other issue, is the height of hypocrisy.  The Virginian Pilot looks at this hypocrisy on display:

Responding to Pope Francis' call this summer for prompt action to address climate change, Catholic Bishop Francis DiLorenzo told an audience of about 200 Tuesday night that people must learn about the science of what is happening to the world.

DiLorenzo's remarks came at the start of a symposium of theologians and climate experts, including retired naval officers, that was sparked by the lengthy papal encyclical in June that called for a worldwide effort to confront climate change.

The pontiff condemned the destruction of the environment for personal profit and short-term gain. Such a pronouncement from the pope in a formal letter to Catholics is considered an authoritative teaching.

The bishop said he believes the region's Catholics should begin with stronger education about environmental problems and issues in the church's elementary and high schools, as well as colleges and adult education.

Tackling environmental problems is in keeping with the Catholic beliefs that "every human being has the right to life, food, clothing, shelter, health care," he said.

The last part of the quoted language is perhaps the most hypocritical since DiLorenzo consistently opposes any and every gay friendly proposal in Virginia as well as women's rights.   He epitomizes the bitter old men in dresses that are steadily killing Catholicism in America.  Oh, and before he condemns gays, perhaps he should focus on his own sin of gluttony - the man obviously hasn't missed any meals given his large girth.

Pope Francis: Gay Parents Not Capable Of Loving Children Like Straight Parents

I am beginning to wonder whether Pope Francis is bi-polar.  One minute he is saying something progressive and accepting of science and modern knowledge - e.g., his encyclical on climate change - yet the net minute he says something worthy of the worse ignorance embracing Christofascist.  The later is exemplified by his statement claiming that gay couples with children are not capable of loving children like heterosexual parents.  Of course, Francis knows nothing of marriage or parenting himself being a celibate man.  And I suspect that he has never sat down with a same sex couple and their children, nor has he read any of the legitimate studies finding that the children of same sex couples do just as well as those with heterosexual parents - or that most child abuse is done by heterosexual parents.  The Daily Grind looks at this outburst of batshitery.  Here are excerpts:

Pope Francis once again stressed the importance of children being raised by heterosexual parents on Sunday (June 14), likening a long-lasting marriage to a good wine, in which a husband and wife make the most of their gender differences.

Francis addressed a crowd of about 25,000 followers from the Diocese of Rome, saying the differences between men and women are fundamental and “an integral part of being human.”

“They’re not scared of the differences!” the pope said. “What great richness this diversity is, a diversity which becomes complementary, but also reciprocal. It binds them, one to the other.”

He stressed that heterosexual marriages ensure a couples’ happiness and are essential for good parenting.

The pontiff’s address came a day after Rome celebrated gay pride with a parade which included the city’s mayor, Ignazio Marino, just outside the Vatican walls.

What children need are parents. Parents who will love them, nurture them and protect them. What they don’t need is to be told that the anatomy of the parents raising them will somehow make them into better people. In fact, research shows that children raised by same sex couples do as well as those raised by heterosexual couples.

Francis, not gays is the one who is afraid.  Francis also conveniently ignores the reality that at least here in America, 50% of straight marriages end in divorce and that the children of such marriages witness a reality that is far different than Francis' fairytale vision of marriage.   Why anyone listens to the blather of celibate old men when it comes to issues of marriage and child rearing is baffling.  These are the LAST people to give realistic advice or guidance.

Mexico Supreme Court: Prohibitions on Same Sex Marriage are Unconstitutional in Every State

Mere weeks before the U.S. Supreme Court is to rule on the constitutionality of state bans on same sex marriage, Mexico Supreme Court for the first time has issued an opinion that states that laws prohibiting same-sex couples from marrying are unconstitutional in every state.  The opinion has yet to be released publicly, but the Clerk of the Mexico Supreme Court has written about the ruling in a blog post and indicates the broad application of the opinion.  Do Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia want to be more backward than Mexico (no slight intended to Mexico)?  A piece in BuzzFeed looks at this development south of the border which appears to be yet another major defeat for the Roman Catholic Church and its efforts to inflict 13th century knowledge and beliefs on all.  Here are highlights:

The Supreme Court and several lower courts have already ruled in almost every state that same-sex couples have the right to marry under the Mexican constitution. But because of the Mexican court system’s often confusing technicalities, none of those decisions have been binding in future cases. Theoretically, any court could rule against a couple who has sued for the right to marry even though there have been many cases decided in favor of others couples.

That is no longer true. On Wednesday, Mexico’s Supreme Court issued the first blanket statement that laws prohibiting same-sex couples from marrying are unconstitutional in every state — what is known as “generic jurisprudence.” The opinion is not yet public, but Supreme Court clerk Geraldina Gonzalez de la Vega — who worked on one of the early marriage equality suits before joining the court — wrote about the unpublished opinion in a blog post. (Decisions like these are ordinarily published within a week of when they are decided by the court.)

“The law of whatever federal entity that, on the one hand, considers the goal of marriage is procreation and/or defines marriage as celebrating the union of a man and a woman is unconstitutional,” held a Supreme Court panel in response to a suit out of the state of Colima, according to Gonzalez.

It will still take a lot more cases before same-sex couples can marry as easily as straight couples can in Mexico; federal judges must rule five times in each state to create precedent that would lead to full nullification of a local marriage code. And it’s not entirely clear how this process ends, Gonzalez told BuzzFeed News, because this marriage cases still making their way through the legal system are doing so under reforms enacted in 2011 that have never been fully tested.

“We’re playing in a new court,” Gonzalez said.

With South and Central America steadily moving towards marriage equality, the Catholic Church may find that its brand of ignorance and bigotry only has a market in Africa.

Pope Francis Rejects France's Gay Ambassador To His Face

I have been pretty consistent in throwing cold water on the near orgasms of those who have wanted to believe that Pope Francis is the harbinger of change and a shift toward modernity.  Despite much greater PR skills than his predecessor, Pope Francis has in reality brought no substantive change to the Roman Catholic Church.  Occasional nice words do not equate to a change in antiquated, ignorance inspired dogma.   Now, Francis is showing his true colors as yet more of the same by meeting with France's openly gay ambassador to the Vatican and telling him that he is unacceptable.  How should France respond?  Personally, I'd  recommend flipping the figurative bird to Francis by ceasing to have any ambassador to the Vatican which in truth is not a sovereign nation.   The New Civil Rights Movement looks at Francis' contempt toward France and nastiness to Laurent Stefanini, the openly gay foreign service officer chosen by France to be ambassador to the Vatican.  Here are highlights:

It is very unusual for a pope to get personally involved with the confirmation of an ambassador to the Vatican, but this weekend, Pope Francis met in private with Laurent Stefanini, the gay diplomat appointed by France to be its representative to the Vatican.

The French weekly newspaper Le Canard Enchâiné reported yesterday that during the meeting, Pope Francis informed Msr. Stefanini personally that he could not accept his appointment to the Vatican. The pope is said to have told Msr. Stefanini that France’s legalization of same-sex marriage in 2013 was part of the reason he could not allow him into the Vatican’s diplomatic community. Reuters translated this concern to mean the pope fears Ambassador Stefanini could decide to marry while serving at the Vatican.

[T]he Curia in Rome refused to act on the nomination - effectively a "pocket veto" of the appointment. Pope Francis himself was reported to have personally rejected the posting, telling members of the Curia that he "would not yield". The Vatican used this method in 2007, to reject a previously nominated gay ambassador from France. In that case, the French government withdrew the nomination after receiving no response, but this time around the French refused to back down. 

The French government confirmed the papal audience took place, but is taking the position the meeting changed nothing. A spokesman said the Vatican still has not informed them Ambassador Stefanini has been officially rejected.

The French government appears to be determined; if Pope Francis rejects the French ambassador because he is gay, he is going to have to own his bias in front of the world. 

 Kudos to France.  As for Francis, I extend my middle finger upward.