Have you read or heard that the Vatican has released a new and improved version of the seven deadly sins?
Well, not quite!
To get the real scoop check in with Catholic News Service or CNS News Hub.
Can you name the seven deadly sins?
Give it a few minutes' thought and then click and pass your cursor over the next line:
pride, greed, envy, anger, gluttony, lust, and sloth.
How many did you remember?
I remembered most of them, mainly because years ago at Our Lady's you hung cardboard gravestones on the stations with the seven deadly sins. I think you may have added some to the list also.
ReplyDeleteThis is so perfect. The bishop raises the alert level on sinfulness, just as our government raises the terror alert, to keep us in a constant state of fear, guilt and shame. That way we don't have the inclination to pay attention to what our leaders, political and religious are doing. We can be kept silently in our place because we are not patriotic, or worse yet, sinners. See the quote from the story below.
ReplyDelete----------------------------
"Bishop Girotti was asked about public reaction to sin among the church's own members, a reference to priestly sex abuse.
"One cannot underrate the objective seriousness of a series of acts that have recently been reported and that carry with them the signs of the church's human and institutional fragility," he said.
But he said it should also be recognized that the church reacted to these reports and is continuing to do so, with "rigorous interventions and initiatives" aimed at protecting the church's good name and the people of God.
He added, however, that he thought the mass media had overemphasized these scandals in a way that brought discredit upon the church."
--------------------------------
This quote is a perfect reflection of how the church has dealt with the scandal.
1. This is a recent development. Actually, Fr. Tom Doyle has researched this thoroughly and the effort to prevent perverted sexual acts by clergy goes back to the 5th century. It's nothing new.
2. The church only reacted because they got caught and were dragged kicking and screaming into court. They fought vigorously to prevent release of incriminating documents. Most of these cases were settled the night before the trials were supposed to start so the bishop wouldn't have to testify under oath and subject themselves to purgery and potential jail time.
3. Please notice that "protecting the church's good name" once again comes before protecting "the people of God". Coincidence?
4. Finally, the church is the victim of the big bad media who is making it look bad.
I'm not worried about how many of the 7 deadly sins I remember, and I don't even feel guilty about it. This church has much bigger issues to address.
How ironic that first holy virtue which is the opposite of the first deadly sin is chastity.
Michael is certainly correct in pointing out that Bishop Girotti's comments regarding the recent chapters in the history of abuse by clergy are an embarrassment in their denial and/or ignorance of the realities on the table.
ReplyDeleteGirotti's comments do precisely what he says we cannot do: they "underrate the objective seriousness" of the scandal.
Pride is excessive belief in one's own abilities, that interferes with the individual's recognition of the grace of God. It has been called the sin from which all others arise. Pride is also known as Vanity.
ReplyDeleteEnvy is the desire for others' traits, status, abilities, or situation.
Gluttony is an inordinate desire to consume more than that which one requires.
Lust is an inordinate craving for the pleasures of the body.
Anger is manifested in the individual who spurns love and opts instead for fury. It is also known as Wrath.
Greed is the desire for material wealth or gain, ignoring the realm of the spiritual. It is also called Avarice or Covetousness.
Sloth is the avoidance of physical or spiritual work.
Re Bishop Girotti's remarks on the clergy sex abuse crisis and cover up, which he terms "a series of acts" and refers to protecting the church's good name and the people of God, but does not mention, per se protecting children from "these series of acts." Once again I cannot decide if the "Church" just doesn't get it or if they are so used to protecting the institutional church they cannot get out of that mindset. No wonder so many people are fed up with Curiaspeak. Perhaps Curiaspeak should become a new sin. Re the Seven Capital Sins: Pride and Lust are alive and well in New York. The revelations about the Governor and the Emperor's Club are to me truly disgusting. As for the new sins, I do think it is time for all of us to address the growing wealth gap in our country and around the world. Another recent news item: the head of Countrywide who got $120,000,000 (that's $120 million!) for stepping down from his post while his mortgage company was tanking and foreclosures continue unabated. Unconscionable. And this "golden parachute" situation is not unusual, it has become the norm in our country. The income disparity between the top executives and the average workers in a company grows wider daily and on top of that the unfair tax cuts for the very wealthiest have made the disparity even greater. THIS IS A SIN THAT SHOULD BE ADDRESSED. Well, this post set me off on a tear.
ReplyDeleteI wonder how many of these sins the governor of New York would recognize.
ReplyDeleteI just don't get it. What was he thinking? Marriage; how much can one endure??
So, why didn't you publish my comment? Just inquisitive. I don't think I like that you have to preview every comment. It makes it less interesting. If you don't tune in, then we have to wait for you. And if you don't think our comments are good enough to publish, then we are just left feeling bad. Any explanation? OR will you just not publish this?
ReplyDelete...is it ever not a sin to be proud or feel pride? or what about anger? I have always been afraid of anger and being angry- but, I am trying to learn to be okay with my feelings, to accept and respect how I feel...
ReplyDeleteone more- envy. It's "ugly", but, somebody told me that sometimes jealousy gives you the energy and motivation to make a change for the better...
??
And I wonder how many of these sins I recognize... how often I don't get it... how often I'm not thinking...
ReplyDeletePeggy:
ReplyDeleteI am moderating the comments because my blog is receiving comments with virus links in them which can infect the computers of readers who open the links without understanding the damage that might be done.
An option is to have a scrambled code that each commentor would need to type in before posting a comment. Given that commenting is slow here (although increasing), I have opted not to introduce yet another step into the commenting process.
You wrote, "If you don't tune in,then we have to wait for you."
That is true. However, I think most readers will agree that I'm pretty much up to speed on clearing comments - not to mention posting on a daily basis.
I have only (and rarely) rejected comments when: they contain suspect links or contain vulgarity or advertising. I have never refused to publish a comment because it was not "good enough to publish."
Might I have inadvertently not published a comment? That's certainly possible, but just a reminder note would correct that.
Today is my day off and a friend from out of town was visiting and because I drove him into Boston I didn't check my blog for about 4 hours. Believe it or not - I have a life beyond this blog and it's fairly demanding. I'm blogging as fast as I can - and often into the wee hours of the morning.
These "new sins" are not new sins at all. I'll take it as a reminder. We've always known that over indulgence or abuse to our bodies is wrong because we are "temples of the Holy Spirit". We've always known that God wants us to take care of our planet. A concern I have about the "new sin" of substance abuse is that people who are desperately trying to overcome their "illness" will be labled as "sinners". That goes as well for those who haven't reached the point of rehab yet. Medicine has confirmed that substance abuse is definately an illness. These people need our compassion. Why is the Church doing this? I say it's another smokescreen. It's true...they just don't get it! Or, on second thought, they do get it and put the reputations of the hierarchy above the Body of Christ.
ReplyDeleteAnne
I remember a few years ago listening to a priest give a talk about sin. He said he believed all our sins stem from one sin - that sin being "selfishness." Our sins effect those around us. For example look at how many people the governor effected from his selfishness. His wife, his children, his extended family, his friends, and people of New York who believed in him. I guess it really teaches to think before you act, because our decisions can ultimately hurt those around us.
ReplyDeleteThanks for "blogging as fast as you can"! I must say I am amazed at how current you are with multiple postings on many days.
ReplyDeleteWe must remember that this is an on-line journal not "texting" or "instant messaging". It is easy for the lines to become blurred in this world of rapid response.
My computer recently picked up some kind of bug...not from your blog...and it was annoying and not easily erased. I appreciate your watching out in this regard.
While we may have "always known" that God wants us to take care of the planet, our score card on that effort has not been great. Nor do I think that we have understood, until recently,that we have a moral responsibility and obligation in faith to care for the environment.
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure that "medicine has confirmed that substance abuse is definitely an illness." I am not an alcoholic but that does not mean that I cannot abuse alcohol. And I believe that I can sin by abusing alcohol, on occasion and not habitually. In that case, I have no problem with speaking of abusing alcohol as sinful.
What I believe does have the support of medicine is that addiction to substances can be classified as an illness and as such deserves a much different understanding, response and treatment than individual instances of substance abuse.
When one considers the numerous ways in which Catholic ministries and agencies support those in recovery (beginning with all the 12 Step meetings held in the buildings of Catholic parishes and hospitals), I'm not sure its fair to charge the Church with a lack of compassion or to accuse it of smoke-screening - at least not on this issue.
Anonymous said:
ReplyDelete“Re Bishop Girotti's remarks on the clergy sex abuse crisis and cover up, which he terms "a series of acts" and refers to protecting the church's good name and the people of God, but does not mention, per se protecting children from "these series of acts." Once again I cannot decide if the "Church" just doesn't get it or if they are so used to protecting the institutional church they cannot get out of that mindset.”
-----------------------------------
The answer to the question is both. They don’t get it AND are unwilling to take all the steps necessary to protect our children because they want to protect the church (and the accused priests). Let me give you 3 specific examples.
Example 1. In the March 7, 2008 edition, of the PILOT and the March 6, 2008 Boston Globe separate stories report that ,as a result of a recent self-audit, the RCAB was not compliant with the “Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People” created by the US Conference of Catholic Bishops. This is the SECOND YEAR IN A ROW that the RCAB, the epicenter of the sexual abuse crisis in the US was NOT COMPLIANT. The PILOT pointed out that the diocese was compliant on 12 out of the 13 articles reviewed.
The RCAB is not compliant because 44 parishes (out of 295 that’s 15%) have not fully implemented the “Talking about Touching” training for children that the RCAB has MANDATED. Of those 44, 16 parishes refused because they have “philosophical problems with the program”. Not 1 or 2 parishes, 16!! In two cases, it was a priest who refused to implement the program. In the rest of the cases it was parents or educators. The RCAB refused to name the parishes that prevented it from being compliant. The secrecy continues.
If keeping our children safe was really a priority, (not a PR talking point) after failing last year, don’t you think that Cardinal O’Malley would assign one or more people whose FULLTIME job was to do everything humanly possible to make sure the diocese was brought into compliance? If it was really a priority, Cardinal O’Malley should have made a personal visit to those 16 parishes to settle the dispute and make sure that the training was accomplished. It is obviously not a real priority. Although he deserves credit for settling the sexual abuse cases, Cardinal O’Malley is not able to settle many recent disputes. Just ask the parishioners of 5 reconfigured parishes who have sat in vigil in their closed churches for over a year without resolution.
Example 2. The Survivors of clergy sexual abuse in the RCAB have asked Cardinal O’Malley to post the names of all credibly accused priests on the RCAB website, as 12 other diocese have already done. He has refused to do so. At a recent meeting in Carlisle, I asked Fr. Erickson, the Moderator of the Curia, Cardinal O’Malley’s right hand man, what could WE and HE do to change that decision.
He responded perfectly with the company line. He said it was not possible for a number of reasons. 1. The information is not all available in one place. 2. If they published the list and it was not 100% accurate they would be accused of withholding information. 3. What definition of “credibly accused” could they use to determine which names should go on the list?
I do not believe answer number 1. But let’s assume for a minute that it is true. If keeping our children safe was really a priority, (not a PR talking point) don’t you think that the RCAB, the epicenter of the sexual abuse crisis in the US, could hire a couple of temps for a week to go through the files and collect the information? Sure they could.
In response to his answer 2, I pointed out that even if information was only 50% accurate would be 100% better than zero information that we have today. His third answer was the most insulting of all. I reminded him that the RCAB has already investigated these cases and they have used some definition to determine which accusations are credible. We can use the work that has already been done. Just publish the names on the website. But, no the institutional church and the credibly accused priests continue to be protected. Our children are an afterthought.
Example 3. The RCAB lobbied against a proposed law that would have eliminated the statute of limitations for civil cases involving the sexual abuse of children.
------------------------------
Just in case you think the sexual abuse crisis is “history”, as Bishop Wilton Gregory said two years ago, the Globe story also mentioned that 60 abuse claims were settled in the RCAB over the LAST YEAR and there are still 70 cases pending.
Deadly sins, indeed.
I just want to thank Michael for keeping us informed on the latest re child protection issues. I am sorry that so few Catholics seem to be interested or involved in trying to see that child abuse in our Church will never happen again. When this story broke in January 2002 in Boston, there was a huge outcry of anger, horror, sadness, etc., by thousands of area Catholics. Where have you gone? Those who are working to try to see that this will NEVER happen again could use your help.
ReplyDelete