I've been witnessing with distress the phenomenon of certain parties in the Brazilian news media turning tragic events into literal soap-operas for TV.
For them, events like floods, street violence and tragic traffic accidents have been covered in such a way as to turn them into some manner of eerie "reality show". Recently, the sad case of a young girl assassinated by her father and step mother in the city of Sao Paulo, Brazil, has resurfaced in the local news media as just such a dysfunctional piece of entertainment.
The entire event was exploited by the local media into painstaking detail. Things like reports of what it was that the accused had eaten for lunch and dinner would pop up between reports speculating on the proceedings themselves.
I have observed with concern the media manipulating public opinion by carefully selecting and incisively divulging those facts that would provoke the public. I was surprised to see the public's response of crowding the facade of the courts to accompany the progress of the trials on site. It was distressing to see reporters interviewing the public, on an hourly basis, about their wagers on what the verdict would be. I was appalled to see a girl who had been trying to gain access to the courtroom confirming she was not a student of law, but that she was there for a life experience she could identify with. What experience would that be? Was she planning on assassinating her own daughter?
It seems that the people following the trial forgot the fact that this was a real life situation. They seemed to have forgotten that a real girl had died cruelly and that her assassins, her very parents, were about to be judged and sentenced for that heinous and most unnatural crime. This was no fictional show constructed for the public's enjoyment.
In the end, when the verdict was announced, the general gender gathered at the courts commemorated the result with enthusiasm and - to my distaste - with fireworks. Fireworks?!?! What were they celebrating? A girl assassinated cruelly? Her two siblings left without parents because they were convicted on charges of killing their sister? Was it the conviction of two deranged felons who were insane or wicked enough to kill their own daughter? There was NOTHING worth celebrating in this entire ordeal.
Nevertheless, given that the news media had presented this sad tale in the same fashion as an entertainment channel would present a mini-series, the tragic account of the assassination of one Isabela Nardoni became just that: "entertainment for the masses". The Simpsons at 17:00h, the Tudors at 19:00h and the Nardonis marathon in between. Don't miss it!
Monday 29 March 2010
Thursday 25 March 2010
On the NYT's Piece About a Cleric Abuser from Winsconsin
Contatcted today by the BBC on account of an article published by the New York Times, I was baffled to see an enduring enimity towards the present Catholic Pontiff. The BBC producer asked me to express an opinion on the said article, so here it is:
I think that, horrible as the facts involving children in Wisconsin may have been, the article published in the NY Times concerns facts that took place between 1950 and 1974. It added nothing new to the present discussion.
All it did was to attempt to smear the reputation of the Church a little further on a “dark past” that’s already been amply commented and that is already being addressed at the present, after Pope Benedict’s pastoral letter of last week.
The attempt to link this story to the then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger is, to my view, incomplete and unsuccessful. The fact that the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith led by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger was notified only some 20 years after the fact, in 1996, and that by then the civil authorities of Wisconsin had dropped any charges against the supposed malefector, should be clear enough evidence that the Pope was not involved in any "cover up" of the Wisconsin accusations.
However, there's more that points to the integrity of the Pope: for by the time the Congregation received news of the accusations in 1996, the accused, who was actually in his deathbead and died 4 months latter, was indeed submitted to a canonical investigation authorised by the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith against him. Had he not died, I'm sure it would have followed through to its bitter end.
More to the point, as I understand it, in US soil, particularly at the present, the Constitution takes precedence over any other institution’s internal rules, however cherished they may be. It must then follow as a surprise that this felon hasn’t been prosecuted by the authorities of the State of Wisconsin, even in the face of a report to the authorities in 1973. Where were they? Why haven't the media pointed fingers at the deputy of police, the xeriff and the like?
Hence, in view of the copious amount of evidence pointing to the honesty of purpose of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith whilst under Joseph Ratzinger, and in view that no other authority has been even questioned as to why things turned out the way they did, this latest media effort reeks of malice and seems to use the reputation of the Pope lightly and irresponsibly.
After the Pope’s unprecedented letter of last week, the standing instruction of the Pontiff is that such cases must be dealt with in conjunction with properly constituted authorities and in accordance to the civil authorities and the laws of a sovereign state.
The odd thing to me is that I have seen very little about Bishop Magee’s resignation in Ireland in the news. This is an event, which was a direct result of affirmative action by the Pope and Vatican, but I saw next to nothing about it in the media.
What I do see is another derogative story dug up in Wisconsin. I can't help but think that some institutions in the media are engaged on a witch-hunt against the Catholic clergy. If you are looking for all the facts, have a look here:
http://www.zenit.org/article-28750?l=english
I think that, horrible as the facts involving children in Wisconsin may have been, the article published in the NY Times concerns facts that took place between 1950 and 1974. It added nothing new to the present discussion.
All it did was to attempt to smear the reputation of the Church a little further on a “dark past” that’s already been amply commented and that is already being addressed at the present, after Pope Benedict’s pastoral letter of last week.
The attempt to link this story to the then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger is, to my view, incomplete and unsuccessful. The fact that the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith led by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger was notified only some 20 years after the fact, in 1996, and that by then the civil authorities of Wisconsin had dropped any charges against the supposed malefector, should be clear enough evidence that the Pope was not involved in any "cover up" of the Wisconsin accusations.
However, there's more that points to the integrity of the Pope: for by the time the Congregation received news of the accusations in 1996, the accused, who was actually in his deathbead and died 4 months latter, was indeed submitted to a canonical investigation authorised by the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith against him. Had he not died, I'm sure it would have followed through to its bitter end.
More to the point, as I understand it, in US soil, particularly at the present, the Constitution takes precedence over any other institution’s internal rules, however cherished they may be. It must then follow as a surprise that this felon hasn’t been prosecuted by the authorities of the State of Wisconsin, even in the face of a report to the authorities in 1973. Where were they? Why haven't the media pointed fingers at the deputy of police, the xeriff and the like?
Hence, in view of the copious amount of evidence pointing to the honesty of purpose of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith whilst under Joseph Ratzinger, and in view that no other authority has been even questioned as to why things turned out the way they did, this latest media effort reeks of malice and seems to use the reputation of the Pope lightly and irresponsibly.
After the Pope’s unprecedented letter of last week, the standing instruction of the Pontiff is that such cases must be dealt with in conjunction with properly constituted authorities and in accordance to the civil authorities and the laws of a sovereign state.
The odd thing to me is that I have seen very little about Bishop Magee’s resignation in Ireland in the news. This is an event, which was a direct result of affirmative action by the Pope and Vatican, but I saw next to nothing about it in the media.
What I do see is another derogative story dug up in Wisconsin. I can't help but think that some institutions in the media are engaged on a witch-hunt against the Catholic clergy. If you are looking for all the facts, have a look here:
http://www.zenit.org/article-28750?l=english
Wednesday 24 March 2010
On the BBC's "Has the Pope’s apology gone far enough?"
When producer Paul Vassalo from the BBC's World Have Your Say programme asked me to join in the debate about Pope Benedict XVI's pastoral letter to the Irish, I immediately recalled the document and I commented that I was aware of the BBC's own articles on the subject. It was my impression that most people who commented on the Pope's ground-breaking document had not read it, but simply formatted an opinion based on the media's own comments of it.
I knew the above was true because chiefly among the persistent grievances of the public commenting on the letter were terms like “lack of accountability” and “lack of practical action”. They regarded the letter as a mere apology, which is of course an incomplete assessment.
I did read the Pope’s heartfelt manifest and I see in his letter the words of a man committed to resolving a problem. He courageously admitted to the problem and publically pledged himself, personally and as Pontiff, to correcting these wrongs not only for the present generation and not just for Ireland, but for the future and for all nations where the Catholic Church is inserted. This is so because the Catholic Church is a Universal Church. Canon Law and Doctrine are to be applied equally everywhere that the Church is present; hence, whatever is decided in Ireland will guide the decisions made elsewhere that similar problems arise.
The letter did have an apology. However, there was much more than solidarity in it, there was a commitment to implementing practical action. Here are the points I learned from the Pope’s message:
1. The Pontiff has officially and unequivocally expressed regret and shame about the fact itself and the about the mishandling of it.
2. He reaffirmed that both the crimes and the way they were handled were not coherent with the precepts of the Church (both in Canon Law and Doctrine). He called the attention of the perpetrators of this erroneous policy and the abusers to the fact that they compromised the Church's moral credibility; calling them traitors to the Faith.
3. He has urged the abusers to repent and submit to divine and secular authority, and he has made recommendations that any such offence be treated lawfully per the laws of the Church and of the respective sovereign nation.
4. He has admonished the bishops who have mishandled the matter and has set teams to scrutinise their actions and to look over their shoulders on this and in other matters.
5. He has initiated a revision of seminaries and the processes of indoctrination of priests to prevent reoccurrence. This is all very practical and very affirmative action.
6. He announced that these actions would continue to be updated in an ongoing process.
Therefore we can conclude that all this was just the beginning, for the Pope has not limited his actions to what’s in the letter, but reaffirmed that he is engaged in the continuity of investigations and in studying means of correcting the wrongs of the past to promote a better future for Catholic institutions; a future more consistent with the precepts of our Faith. There's no mistake: This is all very practical and very assertive action.
Whereas there were many commentators wishing to capitalise on the moment to pursue changes to the precepts of celibacy and ordination of women, threatening defection from the Church and other such silly approaches, I still think that the present problem is but two-fold:
1. Paedophilic individuals are deranged and they’ll go to great lengths to perpetrate their abominations. They are not inherent of the Catholic Church and are present everywhere in our Western Society. The root of paedophilic behaviour is not celibacy nor is it religion, as proven by statistics on child abuse. We need to find out what the root is, so that we may better screen these predators from our institutions. For the Catholic Church the Pope has already manifested his will that this is done by ordering the revision of screening processes, seminaries and moral formation policy. The Church is also promoting training for parents that they may be better prepared to detect problems.
2. An erroneous policy of cover-ups was implemented that was not coherent with Canon Law nor with the Catholic Doctrine. This is being addressed as well and the Pope has commanded the villains to repent and to submit to the civil authorities. He has also commanded that full cooperation is extended to the authorities of each sovereign nation, according to the law of the land.
As I see it, the abuse of minors is indeed a great injustice and it needs to and shall be addressed. However, we cannot correct this injustice by perpetrating another one: The injustice of calling the whole of the Catholic Church a disappointment.
I grew up going to Catholic institutions; having studied many, many years in Catholic schools. I’ve also partaken in activities and visits to Catholic Healthcare, Homing, Charity and Humanitarian efforts and institutions. I can tell you this from personal experience: There are always rotten apples – as this is part of the human experience and we are all imperfect – but for every one rotten apple I have encountered, there were basketfuls of good priests, nuns and volunteers.
So, if you haven't read the letter for yourself, I reccommend that you do: http://www.vatican.va/resources/index_en.htm
I knew the above was true because chiefly among the persistent grievances of the public commenting on the letter were terms like “lack of accountability” and “lack of practical action”. They regarded the letter as a mere apology, which is of course an incomplete assessment.
I did read the Pope’s heartfelt manifest and I see in his letter the words of a man committed to resolving a problem. He courageously admitted to the problem and publically pledged himself, personally and as Pontiff, to correcting these wrongs not only for the present generation and not just for Ireland, but for the future and for all nations where the Catholic Church is inserted. This is so because the Catholic Church is a Universal Church. Canon Law and Doctrine are to be applied equally everywhere that the Church is present; hence, whatever is decided in Ireland will guide the decisions made elsewhere that similar problems arise.
The letter did have an apology. However, there was much more than solidarity in it, there was a commitment to implementing practical action. Here are the points I learned from the Pope’s message:
1. The Pontiff has officially and unequivocally expressed regret and shame about the fact itself and the about the mishandling of it.
2. He reaffirmed that both the crimes and the way they were handled were not coherent with the precepts of the Church (both in Canon Law and Doctrine). He called the attention of the perpetrators of this erroneous policy and the abusers to the fact that they compromised the Church's moral credibility; calling them traitors to the Faith.
3. He has urged the abusers to repent and submit to divine and secular authority, and he has made recommendations that any such offence be treated lawfully per the laws of the Church and of the respective sovereign nation.
4. He has admonished the bishops who have mishandled the matter and has set teams to scrutinise their actions and to look over their shoulders on this and in other matters.
5. He has initiated a revision of seminaries and the processes of indoctrination of priests to prevent reoccurrence. This is all very practical and very affirmative action.
6. He announced that these actions would continue to be updated in an ongoing process.
Therefore we can conclude that all this was just the beginning, for the Pope has not limited his actions to what’s in the letter, but reaffirmed that he is engaged in the continuity of investigations and in studying means of correcting the wrongs of the past to promote a better future for Catholic institutions; a future more consistent with the precepts of our Faith. There's no mistake: This is all very practical and very assertive action.
Whereas there were many commentators wishing to capitalise on the moment to pursue changes to the precepts of celibacy and ordination of women, threatening defection from the Church and other such silly approaches, I still think that the present problem is but two-fold:
1. Paedophilic individuals are deranged and they’ll go to great lengths to perpetrate their abominations. They are not inherent of the Catholic Church and are present everywhere in our Western Society. The root of paedophilic behaviour is not celibacy nor is it religion, as proven by statistics on child abuse. We need to find out what the root is, so that we may better screen these predators from our institutions. For the Catholic Church the Pope has already manifested his will that this is done by ordering the revision of screening processes, seminaries and moral formation policy. The Church is also promoting training for parents that they may be better prepared to detect problems.
2. An erroneous policy of cover-ups was implemented that was not coherent with Canon Law nor with the Catholic Doctrine. This is being addressed as well and the Pope has commanded the villains to repent and to submit to the civil authorities. He has also commanded that full cooperation is extended to the authorities of each sovereign nation, according to the law of the land.
As I see it, the abuse of minors is indeed a great injustice and it needs to and shall be addressed. However, we cannot correct this injustice by perpetrating another one: The injustice of calling the whole of the Catholic Church a disappointment.
I grew up going to Catholic institutions; having studied many, many years in Catholic schools. I’ve also partaken in activities and visits to Catholic Healthcare, Homing, Charity and Humanitarian efforts and institutions. I can tell you this from personal experience: There are always rotten apples – as this is part of the human experience and we are all imperfect – but for every one rotten apple I have encountered, there were basketfuls of good priests, nuns and volunteers.
So, if you haven't read the letter for yourself, I reccommend that you do: http://www.vatican.va/resources/index_en.htm
Thursday 18 March 2010
Is Modern Democracy Really Democratic?
This is a question that often vexes me. The very concept of modern democracy as a “rule of the people” would require that “the people” be well educated and well informed about what goes on in the world and what goes on about their elected leaders. Yet, this is not so.
Here’s the point that compromises most modern democracies: DISINFORMATION. There are so many lies and half-truths going around about situations and about world leaders that it is utterly confusing to “the people”. We “the people” are baffled by an inexorable daily flow of conflicting news and contradictory public affirmations. We are bombarded by lies and half-truths mingled cunningly with what’s real and proven fact.
When it is not about the lies that are publicized all around us by a media that displays little concern for the veracity of the bombastic material they bring to the public, it is about the secrecy that is kept on certain public circles. National security and the safeguarding of individual politician’s rights have more often than not signified that “the people” must be kept ignorant of important facts.
How can we call ourselves democratic when the ability of “the people” to make an educated choice is so compromised by disinformation and secrecy that we are faced with nothing but lies and half-truths upon which to base our decisions?
We will only have TRUE DEMOCRACY on the day that “the people” are given all the facts by transparent public institutions and the REAL power to format and convey an opinion.
Here’s the point that compromises most modern democracies: DISINFORMATION. There are so many lies and half-truths going around about situations and about world leaders that it is utterly confusing to “the people”. We “the people” are baffled by an inexorable daily flow of conflicting news and contradictory public affirmations. We are bombarded by lies and half-truths mingled cunningly with what’s real and proven fact.
When it is not about the lies that are publicized all around us by a media that displays little concern for the veracity of the bombastic material they bring to the public, it is about the secrecy that is kept on certain public circles. National security and the safeguarding of individual politician’s rights have more often than not signified that “the people” must be kept ignorant of important facts.
How can we call ourselves democratic when the ability of “the people” to make an educated choice is so compromised by disinformation and secrecy that we are faced with nothing but lies and half-truths upon which to base our decisions?
We will only have TRUE DEMOCRACY on the day that “the people” are given all the facts by transparent public institutions and the REAL power to format and convey an opinion.
Adendum on the BBC's "Should the Pope Resign"
The very question is ignorant, but let's indulge in it for a moment longer. Shakespeare wrote, quite correctly, in his Henry V - Act4 Scene1:
“If a son that is by his father sent about merchandise do sinfully miscarry upon the sea, the imputation of his wickedness, by your rule, should be imposed upon his father that sent him. Or if a servant, under his master's command transporting a sum of money, be assailed by robbers and die in many irreconciled iniquities, you may call the business of the master the author of the servant’s damnation: but this is not so. The king is not bound to answer the particular endings of his soldiers, the father of his son, nor the master of his servant; for they purpose not their death, when they purpose their services. (…) Every subject’s duty is the king’s; but every subject’s soul is his own.”
This has not changed and it holds to the particular situation of Pope Benedict XVI. The Pope and his Church do not purpose the ills of children when they purpose the good service of priests, and so he is not bound to answer for the particular sins of deranged men hidden amongst his tens of thousands of good priests.
If you say the Catholic Church needs to be purged of whatever evils still lurking in the shadows of churches, hospitals and schools, you'll get no argument from me. I agree with you and with Pope Benedict XVI, who declared he would rather have a smaller but truer flock of the faithful.
I see in him a man willing to go the lengths to clean-up the Catholic Church and reestablish its values wherever they have been compromised. He has shown himself more than willing to do it. What he needs is support, not a bashing.
“If a son that is by his father sent about merchandise do sinfully miscarry upon the sea, the imputation of his wickedness, by your rule, should be imposed upon his father that sent him. Or if a servant, under his master's command transporting a sum of money, be assailed by robbers and die in many irreconciled iniquities, you may call the business of the master the author of the servant’s damnation: but this is not so. The king is not bound to answer the particular endings of his soldiers, the father of his son, nor the master of his servant; for they purpose not their death, when they purpose their services. (…) Every subject’s duty is the king’s; but every subject’s soul is his own.”
This has not changed and it holds to the particular situation of Pope Benedict XVI. The Pope and his Church do not purpose the ills of children when they purpose the good service of priests, and so he is not bound to answer for the particular sins of deranged men hidden amongst his tens of thousands of good priests.
If you say the Catholic Church needs to be purged of whatever evils still lurking in the shadows of churches, hospitals and schools, you'll get no argument from me. I agree with you and with Pope Benedict XVI, who declared he would rather have a smaller but truer flock of the faithful.
I see in him a man willing to go the lengths to clean-up the Catholic Church and reestablish its values wherever they have been compromised. He has shown himself more than willing to do it. What he needs is support, not a bashing.
Tuesday 16 March 2010
Should the Pope be Removed?
Yesterday, I was asked by the BBC World Service whether I thought that Pope Benedict XVI should resign over the scandals involving pedophiles within the body of the Church.
My first reaction was to denounce the fact that our Society as a whole is currently afflicted by a great many abominations and perversions such as hedonism and pedophilia. This is not a monopoly of the Catholic Church as much as it is a sign that our Society is so afflicted by such atrocities that even in the Church we find them. We should be looking at this as a much wider problem than just deranged members of the clergy.
I'm sorry to say I do have enough contact with social workers and civil servants to know that this particular problem of child abuse is more frequent than we care to admit and that it happens even in the sanctity of home and family with harrowing assiduity. If we ask ourselves why this problem has become so frequent, we need only look around us to find how widespread pornography and eroticism are in Western Society.
Even so, there’s no excuse for child abuse and no admonishment harsh enough, so I won’t try to understand a pedophile’s mind. I’ll simply accept they exist and that they need to be restrained. Furthermore, it appears to me that the trust put in a priest is no greater or smaller than that placed in step fathers, uncles, cousins etc. Pedophiles are deranged; period. Whether they are priests or not is less relevant. That they are already NOT celibate is painfully clear. Marrying them won’t make them forgo their disturbed desires.
That having been said, the Church did fail to deal with the matter. The clergy should have been more objective and more assertive in removing these offenders and locking them up where they could be monitored, controlled and even lawfully punished.
Nevertheless, the Church and its Pope are not evil and calling for the removal of the very Pope who is actually striving to make things right and who is working towards purifying the Catholic Church is counterproductive. We should instead support Pope Benedict XVI in his endeavours to clean up the Church.
Do I trust him and my Church? Do I still have faith in them? Yes! Why? Because I grew up going to mass and studying in Catholic schools and I know first hand that for every rotten apple in the Catholic Church there are basketfuls of good apples.
My first reaction was to denounce the fact that our Society as a whole is currently afflicted by a great many abominations and perversions such as hedonism and pedophilia. This is not a monopoly of the Catholic Church as much as it is a sign that our Society is so afflicted by such atrocities that even in the Church we find them. We should be looking at this as a much wider problem than just deranged members of the clergy.
I'm sorry to say I do have enough contact with social workers and civil servants to know that this particular problem of child abuse is more frequent than we care to admit and that it happens even in the sanctity of home and family with harrowing assiduity. If we ask ourselves why this problem has become so frequent, we need only look around us to find how widespread pornography and eroticism are in Western Society.
Even so, there’s no excuse for child abuse and no admonishment harsh enough, so I won’t try to understand a pedophile’s mind. I’ll simply accept they exist and that they need to be restrained. Furthermore, it appears to me that the trust put in a priest is no greater or smaller than that placed in step fathers, uncles, cousins etc. Pedophiles are deranged; period. Whether they are priests or not is less relevant. That they are already NOT celibate is painfully clear. Marrying them won’t make them forgo their disturbed desires.
That having been said, the Church did fail to deal with the matter. The clergy should have been more objective and more assertive in removing these offenders and locking them up where they could be monitored, controlled and even lawfully punished.
Nevertheless, the Church and its Pope are not evil and calling for the removal of the very Pope who is actually striving to make things right and who is working towards purifying the Catholic Church is counterproductive. We should instead support Pope Benedict XVI in his endeavours to clean up the Church.
Do I trust him and my Church? Do I still have faith in them? Yes! Why? Because I grew up going to mass and studying in Catholic schools and I know first hand that for every rotten apple in the Catholic Church there are basketfuls of good apples.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)