MALAWI GAY COUPLE SENTENCED

The heroic (if foolhardy?) Malawi gay couple I posted about several days ago have been sentenced to 14 years of hard labor. Prayers are needed, action more so. 

Today a gay couple in Malawi were sentenced to serve the maximum possible sentence of 14 years in prison. They were convicted on May 18th of unnatural acts and gross indecency. Personally, I think jailing people for expressing their love is both unnatural and indecent.

In December, Steven and Tiwonge celebrated their love with a traditional engagement ceremony at the hotel where Tiwonge worked. The publicity generated by the ceremony alerted authorities, leading to their arrest. They knew the risk they took, but are so dedicated to each other and their relationship, they proceeded anyway with their public declaration of love. Because of that commitment and desire to spend their lives together in a loving relationship, they are now sentenced to serve prison time. Tiwonge purportedly released the following statement  prior to the sentencing:

“I love Steven so much. If people or the world cannot give me the chance and freedom to continue living with him as my lover, then I am better off to die here in prison. Freedom without him is useless and meaningless.”

At the sentencing, the judge stated he was giving the maximum sentence in order to scare the public and inhibit other gay people from following this “horrendous example.” Amnesty International considers Steven and Tiwonge to be Prisoners of Conscience  and declared the sentence to be an “outrage.” The men have three weeks to file an appeal and Amnesty will continue to campaign vigorously on behalf of these two men. We will call upon the Appeals Court to overturn their conviction and release them unconditionally. Check back soon as an action will be live on this case in the next few days. In the meantime, please go here to get information about how you can urge the US Congress to take action on behalf of Steven and Tiwonge.

Taken from: Opposing Views.

Read More

QUOTE OF THE DAY:ON RITUAL and THE OCC

Taken from the lovely site, Confessions of a Liturgy Queen, this is a passage with which I resonate completely. Please read the whole article here: On Ritual

When I first returned to the Catholic Church after a long absence, one of the chief reasons for doing so was to become connected with something much larger than myself, something more significant, more meaningful, more serene than my own emotional turmoil, my own misguided and failed aspirations. I now believe that it is, for me and for millions of Catholics, the ritual of the Mass that helps to make that connection. That ritual, in all its component elements—the entrance procession, accompanied by the opening hymn, with the crucifer, the acolytes, followed by the priest in his vestments and moving slowly up the centre aisle of the church, and ending in the genuflection before the altar; the consecration of the bread and wine and the elevation of the host and the chalice before the assembled congregation; the final blessing by the celebrant—transports me to a place of peace and joy that the HD broadcast of a gorgeous opera from the Met does not, that a thrilling concert of baroque music does not, that a brilliantly written and acted play or film does not.

The same author has written an insightful article on the Old Catholic Church for the website, Life as a Human:


Not far from where I live there is a pretty little blue and white church called St. Raphael’s Old Catholic Church. I didn’t really notice this lovely church until I read an article about it in the local newspaper a couple of years ago. Since reading that piece I have passed the little church many times, and as my relationship with Roman Catholicism began to take on a more disaffected tone, I thought more and more about attending Mass at St. Raphael’s.

From that newspaper story and from research online, I learned that the Old Catholic Church (OCC) was inclusive and non-judgmental, but still Catholic in its fundamental theology and in its liturgy. These qualities are certainly a draw for me. Yet I could not seem to make the move; in fact, I couldn’t even step through the door of the little church.

I am not sure about other denominations, but Roman Catholics are funny people when it comes to loyalty to their Church. I have been angry with my Church on so many occasions over its intransigent stance on issues like homosexuality, clerical celibacy, the ordination of women, and contraception.

I have been frustrated by rigid adherence to doctrine that simply does not make sense to the modern mind. But I could not turn my back on the Church of my baptism. I have spoken with and read about other Roman Catholics, more disaffected than I, who also could not see themselves crossing over to the OCC, even if they had stopped attending their own church. One blogger who had just written about his experience attending a beautiful Christmas Mass at an Old Catholic church in Prague told me that he would somehow rather be a “schism of one” than join the OCC (This is not 'Yours Truly' living in Prague, though I don't feel inclined to join either, but that's a gentle dis-inclination. Joining seems like a perfectly respectable option to me if you feel so called. I don't.)

Perhaps it was my writer’s curiosity that overcame my reluctance, but about a month ago I finally made myself attend the Wednesday 8:30 am Mass at St. Raphael’s. I have attended twice more since then.

Read the whole article here: The Old Catholic Church by Ross Lonergan

Just for the record, I did not find the liturgies of the OCC here in Prague to be in any remote way dissimilar to RCC ritual, except for the fact that the celebrants received communion last - after the congregation. 

Read More

Malawi gay couple who 'married' face harsh prison sentences

Taken from The Guardian UK

  A man whose same-sex "marriage" has become a symbol of the struggle for gay rights in Africa has vowed to become a martyr rather than give in to homophobia, campaigners say. Tiwonge Chimbalanga and his partner Steven Monjeza are facing a possible 14 years in prison with hard labour after becoming the first gay couple in Malawi to declare their commitment in a public ceremony .

Peter Tatchell, the veteran British gay rights campaigner, has maintained contact with the pair at the maximum security Chichiri prison in Blantyre as they prepare to stand trial next week.

Tatchell told the Guardian he received a defiant message from Chimbalanga that said: "I love Steven so much. If people or the world cannot give me the chance and freedom to continue living with him as my lover, then I am better off to die here in prison. Freedom without him is useless and meaningless."

Tatchell, of the rights group Outrage!, also quoted Monjeza – who is described as thin and weak with jaundiced eyes – as saying: "We have come a long way and even if our family relatives are not happy, I will never stop loving Tiwonge."

Chimbalanga, 20, and Monjeza, 26, made history when they committed to marriage at a symbolic ceremony last December – the first same-sex couple to do so in the southern African state, where homosexual acts are illegal.

Two days later, the couple were arrested at their home. Facing taunts and jeers, Chimbalanga, wearing a woman's blouse, and Monjeza appeared in court to answer three charges of unnatural practices between males and gross indecency. They were denied bail, supposedly for their own safety, and have been forced to endure dire conditions in jail.

The couple are due back in court on Tuesday, when magistrate Nyakwawa Usiwa Usiwa will deliver his verdict. Angry residents and relatives from Machinjiri township, on the outskirts of Blantyre, say they will not allow them to return home if they are set free.

"They have given this township a bad name," said Maikolo Phiri, a local vendor.

Zione Monjeza, an aunt of Monjeza, said: "We as a family have been terribly embarrassed to be associated with this gay thing. It's a curse and a big shame. We will chase them away if they are freed."

Nchiteni Monjeza, Monjeza's uncle, said: "I won't drop a tear if they are jailed – they deserve it."

But for others, the couple are social revolutionaries in this impoverished, landlocked nation that usually makes headlines only when someone like Madonna flies in.

Homosexuality has an Orwellian invisibility in Malawi, where gay rights and transgender activism was not merely suppressed but virtually non-existent. Yet Chimbalanga told the New York Times in February: "I have male genitals, but inside I am a complete woman. Maybe I cannot give birth to a child, but I menstruate every month – or most months – and I can do any household chores a woman can do."

Some have now been emboldened to speak out. George Thindwa, head of the Association for Secular Humanism, said: "The gay movement is gaining ground. The country should simply accept gays."
A retired economist, Thindwa, who has not openly declared whether he is gay, added: "We are giving them moral support by bringing them food, money and clothes to prison." Thindwa's group has joined the Centre for the Development of the People, which is financing the couple's defence. The case could be seen as a test case for the struggle between gay rights movements and resistant conservative sentiment across the continent.

Gay sex is still illegal in 37 countries in Africa. A recent poll by the Pew Research Centre found that 98% of people in Cameroon, Kenya and Zambia disapprove of homosexuality. But encouraged by legal advances in South Africa, a new wave of activist movements are making a stand and pushing the boundaries in Kenya, Ghana, Malawi, Zimbabwe and other countries in ways unthinkable a generation ago. Gay and lesbian lifestyles are also much more visible.

This assertiveness is apparently being met by a ferocious backlash from religious fundamentalists and politicians determined to preserve the status quo. It has been described as a proxy war between US liberals and Christian evangelicals, both of which pour in funding and support to further their cause.

Uganda has become a central battlefield after legislation was proposed last year advocating punishments for gay sex that range from life imprisonment to the death penalty. The country has come under intense pressure from activists both inside Uganda and overseas.

It emerged last week that a special committee organised by president Yoweri Museveni has recommended that the bill be withdrawn. That would be a important victory for organisations such as Freedom and Roam Uganda (Farug) and Sexual Minorities Uganda (Smug).

Val Kalende of Farug, which was set up in 2003, said: "I believe that now is the season and time for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender rights in the continent. The LGBT rights movement has grown and it has come to a point where people can no longer be silent about injustices."

Asked if the gay rights lobby is resulting in a surge of homophobia, Kalende added: "Yes. Long before we built a movement here, no one bothered about us. We got away with so many things. When we decided to come out and claim our space, society came harshly against us.

Read More

Britain Refuses Lesbian Iranian Filmmaker’s Asylum Request

 From Coilhouse Magazine and Bloghttp:

Kiana Firouz, 27 years old, is an outspoken Iranian LGBT rights activist, filmmaker, and actress. When clips of her video documentary work featuring the struggle and persecution of gays and lesbians in her country were acquired by Iranian intelligence, agents began to follow Firouz around Tehran, harassing and intimidating her. She fled for England where she could safely continue her work and studies.

She plays a starring role in Cul de Sac, a documentary film produced in the UK about the condition of lesbians in Iran, and based heavily on Firouz’s own life story. Directed by Ramin Goudarzi-Nejad and Mahshad Torkan, the movie will premiere in London in a few days. Since the trailer was posted on YouTube in December 2009, Cul de Sac has attracted global media attention, with thousands of views. Apparently, some of those views included members of Ahmadinejad’s puppet media in Iran. They know who Firouz is and what she stands for. They may want her to come back to the country she was born in to answer for it.

Still from Cul de Sac.

Firouz, understandably, has requested asylum from the British government. Much to everyone’s shock and dismay, the British Home Office has rejected her application for refugee status. Yes, they know she’s gay. Yes, they know she could be deported back to Iran at any time, and that if this happens, Firouz will most likely be sentenced to torture and death after being found guilty of the “unspeakable sin of homosexuality” because she has participated in explicit lesbian sex scenes in the movie, and been a fierce proponent for human rights in her country.

In Iran, the punishment for lesbianism involving mature consenting women consists of 100 lashes. This punishment can be applied up to three times. After a fourth violation of Iranian law, a woman convicted of “unrepentant homosexuality” is finally executed by hanging, often publicly, in front of a howling mob.

From EveryOne Group:

Kiana filed for a court appeal following the Home Office’s decision to reject her application for asylum, but the judge overruled her appeal. According to Kiana’s lawyer, the last remaining chance is to appeal the judge’s decision, but the risk of deportation is imminent.

The EveryOne Group, an international human rights organization, which was involved in the asylum cases of the lesbian Pegah Emambakhsh, who risked being deported from London to Tehran in 2007, and of the Iranian gay, Mehdi Kazemi, appeals to the British government and the democratic forces of the European Union, the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees, Antonio Guterres, that Kiana Firouz be immediately guaranteed adequate humanitarian protection and that the order for her deportation be repealed, given that on return to Iran she will face a death sentence not only because a lesbian but because of her civil rights activism.

The EveryOne activists invite concerned readers to send protest e-mail messages to the British Home Office (public.enquiries@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk) requesting that Kiana receive refugee status as soon as possible, for she is a symbol of the international fight against homophobia and repression of gays and lesbians in Islamic countries.

I’ve spent a fair amount of my day researching, fact-checking and  attempting to verify this story, and I can’t figure it out: why is this news not EVERYWHERE right now? Why is this petition for Firouz so anemic? There should be hundreds of thousands of names on that list.

And yet, I am only just catching wind of Firouz’s story from a chance visit to Kim Boekbinder’s blog, where Kim posted a heartbreaking letter written by an Italian friend of hers, Sylvia K.

An excerpt:

No major newspaper even remotely talks about Kiana’s story, nor do gay activists. People don’t seem to care much at all. I do. Last night I wrote to Kiana. Nothing much, only to say that I was so saddened and angry, that her story had moved and inspired me and that I was SO thankful to her for standing up for what she truly believed in… This morning before going out I found her reply. It goes like this :

“Dear Sylvia
I am proud of you. we should proud of each other for being strong. I am so thankful for your supportive and kindly letter. It does not matter what is going to happen to me. Its all about freedom.
Take care and do not forget you are not alone, we are many…
Kiana”

I wrote it on a piece of paper and hurried out of the house.

I spent the greater part of this rainy day sitting in one of the University’s courtyards, crying alone [...]  I look at myself, always complaining about homophobia in Italy, about the fact we have no equal rights, and I feel like a fucking piece of shit. Because for me, it is SO easy to go to London, to Paris, to Berlin and be the butchest fiercest lesbian around, without having to be afraid of being lashed 100, 200, 300 times and then hung, a thick rope around my neck, people rejoicing all around.

It does matter what happens to Kiana Firouz. This should not be a reality for her, or anyone else.
Here is the official Cul de Sac website.
Here is the petition endorsed by Kiana Firouz herself.
And this is her story.
Let’s make some noise, comrades.

Read More

AFTER RELIGION FIZZLES WE'RE STUCK WITH NIETZSCHE

Chris Hedges' column from Truth Dig: May 9, 2010  

Both an outstanding critique and a heartrending lament for the demise of organized religion, if a little bleak.  It tends to ignore more positive signs of spiritual renewal outside the framework of religious institutions. Food for Thought. 

It is hard to muster much sympathy over the implosion of the Catholic Church, traditional Protestant denominations or Jewish synagogues. These institutions were passive as the Christian right, which peddles magical thinking and a Jesus-as-warrior philosophy, hijacked the language and iconography of traditional Christianity. They have busied themselves with the boutique activism of the culture wars. They have failed to unequivocally denounce unfettered capitalism, globalization and pre-emptive war. The obsession with personal piety and “How-is-it-with-me?” spirituality that permeates most congregations is narcissism. And while the Protestant church and reformed Judaism have not replicated the perfidiousness of the Catholic bishops, who protect child-molesting priests, they have little to say in an age when we desperately need moral guidance.

I grew up in the church and graduated from a seminary. It is an institution whose cruelty, inflicted on my father, who was a Presbyterian minister, I know intimately. I do not attend church. The cloying, feel-your-pain language of the average clergy member makes me run for the door. The debates in most churches—whether revolving around homosexuality or biblical interpretation—are a waste of energy. I have no desire to belong to any organization, religious or otherwise, which discriminates, nor will I spend my time trying to convince someone that the raw anti-Semitism in the Gospel of John might not be the word of God. It makes no difference to me if Jesus existed or not. There is no historical evidence that he did. Fairy tales about heaven and hell, angels, miracles, saints, divine intervention and God’s beneficent plan for us are repeatedly mocked in the brutality and indiscriminate killing in war zones, where I witnessed children murdered for sport and psychopathic gangsters elevated to demigods. The Bible works only as metaphor.

Read More

JOHN MCNEILL ON BENEDICT IN PORTUGAL

Once again, John McNeill has posted a very wise, compassionate and insightful response to Pope Benedict’s recent oblique reference to gay marriage as one of ‘the greatest threats to the human race.’ John reminds us that ‘gay marriage’ isn’t just about fairness and justice for gay people, it constitutes an essential gift to the culture at large by helping to heal the imbalance and defects of patriarchy. Therefore, gay people have an ethical responsibility to press for  equality of marriage that goes beyond our own personal needs and rights. We are called to offer a new paradigm of human relationships, one that is more human and fulfilling because both partners remain in touch with the masculine and feminine aspects of their psyches. Against all of the opposition and hatred, intolerance and bigotry, LGBT people must offer a service of love and justice to a wounded, confused and imbalanced world. However, as Terence Weldon reminds us frequently with his numerous stories at Queering the Church, LGBT are making advances each day in the most unlikely of places. The tide is turning and from the point of view of history, the recent intransigence of Church leaders towards gay marriage, however painful to contemplate, is just one small bump on the road.

Below are three paragraphs from John’s inspiring article, the beginning, middle and end. Please go to John’s website to read the whole article: John McNeil: Spiritual Transformation

On his recent pilgrimage to the shrine of Our Lady of Fatima in Portugal, Pope Benedict XVI used the occasion to announce that he thought the greatest threat to the human race, apart from abortion, was gay marriage! To my knowledge no mention was made of the nuclear arms race; no mention of the destruction of the environment; no mention of disease, poverty and starvation which afflict the vast majority of humanity; no mention of the decrease in respect for the sacred value of the human person which has led to a remarkable increase in genocide, violence, murder, torture and enslavement. Which leads me to wonder what alternate universe the Pope lives in; what alternate reality is he dealing with? ….

Jesus Christ’s message of equality and love has been contaminated by the institutions of patriarchy, male privilege, and the repression of the feminine. The time has come for the Church to cleanse itself and throw off these aberrations. Gay spiritual groups, I believe, are leading the way for the whole Church to bring about this transformation. The primary example of this liberation can be found in gay marriage. ….

Which brings us back to the question : Why is Pope Benedict XVI so consistently over the top with his homophobia and so out of touch with the reality of the LGBT world? He was willing, at least unconsciously, to destroy the celibate gay priesthood by forbidding gay men the right to ordination. The only explanation I can reach to understand the ferociousness of Benedict’s attack on the LGBT community is that unconsciously he is a self-hating gay man who projects out his fear and loathing on the gay community at large!

Read More

GAYS IN THE MILITARY

:D

NO COMMENT!

Read More

Loss and Liberation from the Formal Institutional Church

A very interesting post from Confessions of a Liturgy Queen (which I'm shamelessly borrowing in part-thanks to Glorfindel for alerting me to this blog!) A 'lapsed' Catholic forty years away from the fold, returns to the Church, only to withdraw from his parish because of the institutional homophobia of the Church. He finds this withdrawal both painful and liberating, an experience which mirrors my own, and that of many marginal Catholics in these days.

 

A Priest's Loyalty

It has been almost two weeks since I wrote to my parish priest to tell him that I was excusing myself from membership in the parish I love because I could no longer accept the institutional homophobia of the Church and at the same time maintain my personal integrity. I copied the priest-in-residence in the e-mail. Both of these men know me quite well. As of today, I have not received a response from either priest.

I am frankly not sure whether I am surprised or not by their silence. I do know that I am disappointed. And although I do not like to admit this, I am hurt. I feel as if I have been left in the cold; it may even be that they are glad to be rid of me because my absence means there will be no more letters or comments on the Church and homosexuality. Or they may have sought advice from the Chancery and been told that the best response is no response; after all, this guy has chosen not to accept the wise teachings of Mother Church.

Anyway, although I am obviously feeling sorry for myself over this, and these feelings certainly cannot be separated from what I write here, the purpose of this post is not to elicit sympathy (after all, it was I who made the decision to withdraw; I was not kicked out of the parish) - so please do not offer any. It is rather to muse about what might be going on in the minds of these two men. And I do mean muse - or speculate - as I am in no way privy to their thoughts, nor am I a psychologist.

In the two weeks since I withdrew from my parish, I have felt the loss keenly. Yet I am also beginning to experience a kind of liberation. The Church has unwittingly freed me to explore other options like the Old Catholic Church, which welcomes everyone without judgment, and gay-friendly Anglican communities. No matter which option I choose, however, I believe that if I were ever fortunate enough to find a Roman Catholic parish in which the pastor was truly modern and truly pastoral, I would return in a heartbeat. 


Read the rest of the article here: Confessions of a Liturgy Queen

Read More

MODELS OF THE FUTURE CHURCH

(thanks to Terence Weldon at Queering the Church for the link to this article at dot.commonweal. Very interesting comments follow the article at the site. )

 

Models of the Future Church

May 9, 2010, 11:16 pm

Posted by Lisa Fullam

Back in 2004, the archdiocese of Boston announced the closure in one fell swoop of more than 18% of its parishes . In the midst of all the shock, sadness, anger and dismay, some parishes decided to refuse the order to close, and began to maintain round-the-clock vigils in the churches to keep them open. Saturday’s Boston Globe included a piece from a member of one such church. Money quote:

While the universal Catholic Church seems on the verge of imploding under the weight of its own moral crisis, the weekly gathering of this close-knit congregation generates a palpable spirituality that is rare and unique.

The St. James phenomenon (replicated across sister parishes in Massachusetts that also chose vigil over closure) is changing church culture by pioneering a post-institutional brand of grass-roots Catholicism.

I’m intrigued by this. We all know of situations of priestless parishes still under the auspices of various dioceses: a priest may zoom through to dispense the sacraments, but day-to-day pastoral care is carried out by non-ordained people. One troublesome point in these parishes is the separation of the practice of ministry from the celebration of the sacraments, in which the latter are rare special events run by strangers, not a regular part of the worship life of the community. A second concern is the lack of uniform standards for people running such churches–one parish might be run by a gifted lay minister with an M.Div., but the next might be run by a person without a shred of theological or pastoral training. 

But these “Heavens, no, we won’t go” parishes are a different kettle of fish. Instead of divorcing ministry from sacraments, these communities have formed a new model of church with generally egalitarian leadership, continuing to celebrate Eucharist as the “source and summit of the Christian life,” and developing a vibrant sense of community. The divorce here is of the community from the hierarchy of the Church. (I still worry about the theological training of the leadership. But there are lots of qualified people thereabouts–if theologically-literate leadership is important to the community, they can find people with both vocation and education to lead and/or teach.) 

We’re at a time of increasingly diverse “versions” of Catholic parish life, including the two I mention here. With or without the cooperation of Church leaders, the Church is changing. 

To which I'd like to add this quoted discussion from NCR which I posted last September:

It was Schillebeeckx who contended in his 1980 book Ministry: Leadership in the Community of Jesus Christ that the church had gone awry by connecting the faithful’s right to Eucharist to some “magical power” of the hierarchy to ordain, thereby disconnecting it from the community of Christians. He noted that the Council of Chalcedon in the fifth century had declared any ordination of a priest or deacon illegal, as well as null and void, unless the person being ordained had been chosen by a particular community to be its leader.

Because the church has basically ignored that clear directive of the early church throughout the second millennium, Schillebeeckx recommended “new possibilities” for reconnecting the Eucharist to its community roots, even if such actions contradict current church law. In “Church and Ministry,” the newly released document, the Dominicans put forward such “new possibilities” as this: “Men and women can be chosen to preside at the Eucharist by the church community; that is, ‘from below,’ and can then ask a local bishop to ordain these people ‘from above.’ ”

If, however, “a bishop should refuse a confirmation or ordination” of such persons “on the basis of arguments not involving the essence of the Eucharist, such as a requirement that deacons or priests be celibate, parishes may move forward without the bishops’ participation, remaining confident “that they are able to celebrate a real and genuine Eucharist when they are together in prayer and share bread and wine." 

taken from National Catholic Reporter interview, December 14, 2007

This quote has always had a powerful effect on me, as a daring solution to so many ills besetting the Catholic community in this time, the sexual scandals being at the top of the list. It would require extraordinary daring to implement, however, and culturally would be next to impossible to receive widespread acceptance (to judge by the comments and reactions at dot.commonweal. to the above article.) However, in those communities deprived of the services of a priest for as long as a year (1 yearly visit for confession and baptisms in some remote mountain villages in South America), the 'lay catechist' should surely be entitled to lead the community in the celebration of the Eucharist. But I've also proposed elsewhere that communities of disaffected gay Catholics, who feel bound in conscience to remain outside the formal worship of the Church, should then gather together and celebrate the Supper of the Lord.

Read More

OPEN LETTER TO POPE BENEDICT XVI FROM BISHOP GENE ROBINSON

 (thanks to reader John Lliff for this link to The Washington Post)

Your Holiness, 

Though our churches differ in many ways, we believe in the same God. As your brother in Christ, it pains me to see Catholics struggle with your response to recent allegations of sex abuse by priests. Since my denomination has also battled these demons, I want to share with you what I have learned as a bishop of the Episcopal Church. 

About 20 years ago, our church became aware of sex abuse by our clergy here in the United States. To our shame, we learned of it in lawsuits filed by victims alleging that some of our bishops had minimized the seriousness of the abuse and/or swept their claims under the rug. Some cases were related to the abuse of children; others involved male clergy who took advantage of their pastoral relationship with vulnerable women to manipulate them into sexual relationships. These men violated the sacred trust placed in clergy to focus on parishioners' needs and to separate those needs from their own. To prevent further such abuses of power, we moved quickly for the good of the victims and of our church.

Whether or not civil courts recognize a statute of limitations, the church must hold its clergy members accountable to their vows to be faithful shepherds of their people. In 1994, the Episcopal Church opened a two-year window of opportunity to hear complaints about priestly abuse of the pastoral relationship with adults. Just because an event occurred many years ago did not make it any less egregious, especially since perpetrators rarely have only one victim. We addressed all complaints through our canonical disciplinary process. 

As for instances involving children, we have no statute of limitations on reporting abuse. Those suspected of committing child abuse are immediately reported to the civil authorities for investigation.

Rather than refusing to acknowledge our transgressions, we sought to change our church's culture -- an effort that took no small amount of courage. In my diocese in New Hampshire, and across the Episcopal Church, we perform a thorough background check on every bishop, priest or deacon who serves under my authority. We correspond with every employer the clergyperson has ever had and every bishop under whom the clergyperson has ever served to determine whether there is a history of complaints. 

While procedures vary from diocese to diocese, we here in New Hampshire require six hours of abuse-prevention training for clergy, all other employees of the church (organists, parish administrators, maintenance workers), youth workers and elected parish leaders. A refresher course is required every five years. Events with and for children may never be conducted without two adults present and always in view of each other. This protects children from abusive behavior and protects adults who might be falsely charged. Many of our parishes have installed windows in the clergy office doors, so that no activity -- even private counseling -- may go unobserved.

We want many pairs of eyes watching for signs of abuse. We want everyone to know how to report suspected abuse of children and abuse of the pastoral relationship between clergy members and parishioners. We want to keep the issue before our church -- clergy and laity alike -- and to keep the conversation going.

But the thing victims most want to hear from the church, especially its leadership, is: "I am so sorry. This should never have happened to you, especially here. We are going to do everything in our power to see that nothing like this happens again." Victims live with their horrific experiences and know that their abuse can never be undone. And so they seek assurance that the church will change the system that allows abuse to go undetected and take action to hold perpetrators accountable. Child abusers do not deserve protection; they must be reported immediately to civil authorities and prosecuted.

The Christian church -- like any institution -- is as capable of sin as any individual. We have been wrong before, from the Inquisition and the Crusades down to our defense of slavery (using scripture) and our denigration of women. Over time, the church has repented for these sins and sought to change its ways. The discovery of sexual abuse by clergy is another situation that calls for the church's repentance and reform. 

I would not presume to instruct you. That would be arrogant. Nor would I impose upon you advice you've not sought. But I do offer you the benefit of my experience as you seek to deal responsibly with these challenges to the integrity of your church. Your letter to the faithful in Ireland and your meeting in Malta with victims were a good start. I hope the future will bring more truth-telling, which will make your church a better, safer place. 

However, I believe it is misguided and wrong for gay men to be scapegoated in this scandal. As a gay man, I know the pain and the verbal and physical violence that can come from the thoroughly debunked myth connecting homosexuality and the abuse of children. In the media, representatives of and advocates for the Roman Catholic Church have laid blame for sexual abuse at the feet of gay priests. These people know, or should know, that every reputable scientific study shows that homosexuals are no more or less likely to be child abusers than heterosexuals. Psychologically healthy homosexual men are no more drawn to little boys than psychologically healthy heterosexual men are drawn to little girls.

Sexual activity with children or teenagers is child abuse, pure and simple. Meaningful consent is impossible, by definition, for the underaged. You will not rid your church of sexual abuse by throwing homosexuals out of your seminaries or out of the priesthood. Homosexual priests have faithfully and responsibly served God throughout Catholic history. To scapegoat them and deprive them of their pulpits is a tragedy for the people they serve and for the church. Yours is a problem of abuse, not sexual orientation. 

I will pray for your church and for you, as I hope you will pray for my church and for me. In Luke 12:2-3, Jesus tells us: "Nothing is covered up that will not be uncovered, and nothing secret that will not become known. Therefore whatever you have said in the dark will be heard in the light, and what you have whispered behind closed doors will be proclaimed from the rooftops."

And may God have mercy on our souls.

Your brother in Christ,

Gene Robinson

V. Gene Robinson was elected bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of New Hampshire in 2003 as the first openly gay bishop in the Episcopal Church. He is also a part-time senior fellow at the Center for American Progress

Read More

HONORING THE REAL CATHOLIC CHURCH

 This just in from Nicholas Kristof of the New York Times

Maybe the Catholic Church should be turned upside down.

Jesus wasn’t known for pontificating from palaces, covering up scandals, or issuing Paleolithic edicts on social issues. Does anyone think he would have protected clergymen who raped children?

Yet if the top of the church has strayed from its roots, much of its base is still deeply inspiring. I came here to impoverished southern Sudan to write about Sudanese problems, not the Catholic Church’s. Yet once again, I am awed that so many of the selfless people serving the world’s neediest are lowly nuns and priests — notable not for the grandeur of their vestments but for the grandness of their compassion.

As I’ve noted before, there seem to be two Catholic Churches, the old boys’ club of the Vatican and the grass-roots network of humble priests, nuns and laity in places like Sudan. The Vatican certainly supports many charitable efforts, and some bishops and cardinals are exemplary, but overwhelmingly it’s at the grass roots that I find the great soul of the Catholic Church.

The Vatican believes that this newspaper and other news organizations have been unfair and overzealous in excavating the church’s cover-ups of child rape. I see the opposite. No organization has done more to elevate the moral stature of the Catholic Church in the United States than The Boston Globe. Its groundbreaking 2002 coverage of abuse by priests led to reforms and by most accounts a significant reduction in abuse. Catholic kids are safer today not because of the cardinals’ leadership, but because of The Boston Globe’s.

Yet the church leaders are right about one thing: there is often a liberal and secular snobbishness toward the church as a whole — and that is unfair. 

It may be easy at a New York cocktail party to sniff derisively at a church whose apex is male chauvinist, homophobic and so out of touch that it bars the use of condoms even to curb AIDS. But what about Father Michael Barton, a Catholic priest from Indianapolis? I met Father Michael in the remote village of Nyamlell, 150 miles from any paved road here in southern Sudan. He runs four schools for children who would otherwise go without an education, and his graduates score at the top of statewide examinations. 

Father Michael came to southern Sudan in 1978 and chatters fluently in Dinka and other local languages. To keep his schools alive, he persevered through civil war, imprisonment and beatings, and a smorgasbord of disease. “It’s very normal to have malaria,” he said. “Intestinal parasites — that’s just normal.” Father Michael may be the worst-dressed priest I’ve ever seen — and the noblest. Anybody scorn him? Anybody think he’s a self-righteous hypocrite? On the contrary, he would make a great pope.

In the city of Juba, I met Cathy Arata, a nun from New Jersey who spent years working with battered women in Appalachia. Then she moved to El Salvador during the brutal civil war there, putting her life on the line to protect peasants. Two years ago, she came here on behalf of a terrific Catholic project called Solidarity With Southern Sudan. Sister Cathy and the others in the project have trained 600 schoolteachers. They are fighting hunger not with handouts but with help for villagers to improve agricultural techniques. They are also establishing a school for health workers, with a special focus on midwifery to reduce deaths in childbirth. At the hospital attached to that school, the surgeon is a nun from Italy. The other doctor is a 72-year-old nun from Rhode Island. Nuns rock. Sister Cathy would like to see more decentralization in the church, a greater role for women, and more emphasis on public service. She says she worries sometimes that if Jesus returned he would say, “Oh, they got it all wrong!” She would make a great pope, too.

There are so many more like them. There’s Father Mario Falconi, an Italian priest who refused to leave Rwanda during the genocide and bravely saved 3,000 people from being massacred. There’s Father Mario Benedetti, a 72-year-old Italian priest based in Congo who fled with his congregation when their town was attacked by a brutal militia. Now Father Mario lives side by side with his Congolese congregants in the squalor of a refugee camp in southern Sudan, struggling to get schooling for their children.

It’s because of brave souls like these that I honor the Catholic Church. I understand why many Americans disdain a church whose leaders are linked to cover-ups and antediluvian stances on women, gays and condoms — but the Catholic Church is far larger than the Vatican. 

And unless we’re willing to endure beatings alongside Father Michael, unless we’re willing to stand up to warlords with Sister Cathy, we have no right to disparage them or their true church.

Read More

ALMOST ABDUCTED

Ruminating over the sex abuse scandal in the Church today, I was reminded of a disturbing incident from my own childhood, which I didn't fully appreciate at the time, but which has taken on increasing significance with the passing years. My mother, Mary Jane Cameron, was a math and PE teacher at Marina Junior High School in San Francisco, at the corner of Chestnut and Fillmore Streets. and most of her students were blacks and Hispanics who had been bused in from the poor districts and projects of the city to this exclusive Marina neighborhood school for the very rich, a situation I never fully understood.  I can remember walking down the hallway to my mother's classroom and hearing her shouting authoritatively at her students, something I never heard her do at home,  and once I even witnessed her slap a boy in the face, which was truly shocking. It was a tough school and a very tough job and my mother hated it, because it required her to be so strict in order to be kind. The year would have been 1953, I was nine years old and attended the distinguished Madison Grammar School, which has since been changed to the Claire Lilienthal Elementary School.

l

These pictures bring back such memories of those years and I can still see myself being carried kicking and screaming down the hallway in the enormous arms of the gigantic Mrs. Mary O'Leary, our first grade teacher, because I was having a wild tantrum (the drama queen in the making). Mrs. O'Leary, because of her large bulk, always wore smocks that concealed the bumpy  outlines of her body. In the fourth grade, I was allowed to walk on my own the seven blocks from the Madison School on the corner of Divisadero and North Point Street to Chestnut and Fillmore streets, where I would skip up the stairs of Marina Junior High and enter my mother's classroom to wait for her school day to be over and the bus ride to our apartment in Pacific Heights, overlooking the San Francisco Bay.

 

On one bright, warm, sunny spring day, I was skipping down Chestnut street and had almost come to the corner of Fillmore, when a strange man stopped me and said, "Where are you going, sonny?" At that age, I was a very chatty, friendly child and would talk to anyone anytime anywhere, though I had been warned, and very severely at that, not to talk to strangers. Because the incident registered in my young mind at the time I have little difficulty remembering what I said to him. "Oh, I'm going across the street to meet my mother, she's a math teacher at Marina Junior High, and she also teaches PE and one time I went into the girls' locker rooms and I saw them in the showers together and once I saw a girl's titties." Babble, babble. The man laughed and then said, "Would you like a ride across the street?" and opened the door of a very large black limousine parked by the curb. I was delighted by the suggestion, and said cheerfully, "Oh, thank you very much," and jumped inside and began immediately bouncing up and down on the wide back seat. I had never been in such a large car before and this felt like such an exciting adventure. It never occurred to me until much later to notice that the car was facing in the wrong direction! The man walked around behind the car and came to the driver's door. He stopped and seemed nervous somehow, as I clearly remember it, because I got a good look at him at that moment. Very close cropped hair, almost balding, on a round head with a series of bumps in the back, stubble on the chin, not very tall, and chewing a tooth pick. After some moments of hesitation, in which he seemed to be looking at something behind the car, he opened the driver's door, leaned in and said, "Sorry, kid, I can't take you today." I was so disappointed that I just sat there with my mouth in a round little 'O.' Had I done something to offend him, I wondered, had I farted when I was bouncing up and down on the seat? Before I could figure the situation out, the man barked at me, "Beat it, kid, I'm busy." I scrambled out of the car, somewhat frightened, confused, and offended. What was that all about, I wondered, and I ran across Fillmore Street, into the swinging front doors of Marina Junior High School and up the stairs to my mother's classroom, determined to tell her all about it. However, by the time I got up onto her floor I had one of those 'uh oh' moments. My mother had always admonished me very severely for being so friendly to people on the streets and warned me time and again about the dangers of taking candy from strangers, getting into their cars, talking to them in parks. She had always advised me to "walk away" very quickly and if anyone attempted to 'interfere 'with me in any way, I was to shout out, "Police" at the top of my lungs. And so for prudence' sake, I decided to keep this little incident to myself. It would only be many years later that I would fully appreciate what a close call I had had that day, and had it not been for a fortuitous circumstance (someone staring at the man from behind the car?), I might never have seen my mother again.

My mother wasn't the only one to so admonish me. I remember an incident with my next door neighbors, Mary and Anne Murray, who had been accosted by a flasher in the park. I was in their living room when the girls told this story to their mother, and she asked very severely, "What did you do?" Anne, the oldest, said, "Oh, we just stood there and giggled." Mrs. Murray grabbed her daughter by the arm and shook her and shook her, yelling, "Don't you realize how dangerous that could have been. Don't you ever do that again. You run, you scream, you yell for the police, do you understand me? Do you understand me?" Repeated for emphasis and shouted at all three of us children. Both girls were almost in tears and I was stunned by the vehemence of the outburst, but it impressed on all of us children the fact that there were evil men out there in the world preying on young children, desiring to do nasty things to them, and we must always run and always yell for the police.

That was 1953, and the present day apologists for the sex abuse scandal in the church are trying to tell us that those were different times and people didn't appreciate the seriousness of sexual abuse and bishops wouldn't have felt the urgency to report incidents of abuse committed by priests to the civil authorities. To which my aunt Gini (mother of 13) would simply reply, "Bullshit."

Read More

POPE SHOULD RESIGN: RICHARD SIPE

This just in from National Survivor Advocates Coalition (NSAC) News (thanks to William Lindsey at Bilgrimage for the link to this at Voice from the Desert Blog)
 

Received from A. W. Richard Sipe

Pope Benedict XVI is a good man. He has served the Church long and well. It takes nothing away from his goodness to suggest that he should resign his office. Nine of his predecessors have resigned, most for the good of the Church. The clerical sex abuse crisis that now exposes a corrupt pattern and practice of a system has escaped and confused many good, brilliant people and left generations paralyzed. There is no need to point fingers.

However, the Roman Catholic Church is in a period of Reformation as profound (and breathtaking) as any its history has ever recorded. The voluntary resignation of Pope Benedict XVI would be a gesture that would match the epic challenge that faces Catholicism today. Such leadership would break the pattern and practice that holds the church hostage to a past that no longer serves the Christian message. The monarchy that rules the church has outlived its service in the evangelization of peoples, an evangelization that Paul the apostle taught and that Pope John Paul II championed. The People of God, hierarchy included, are shackled by a secret system designed to control rather than free them.

Whether or not Benedict's  resignation is a real possibility in the near future and quite apart from the issue of who might succeed him (Cardinal Levada?), just to see such a statement presented from such a distinguished voice is uplifting indeed. However, I was particularly struck by the following comment/response to the above statement  by Tom Barnes at Voice from the Desert Blog. A bleak and pessimistic statement. to be sure, the conclusion of which I do not share, but sometimes the harsh reality of the situation needs to be presented in it's starkest terms before we get the point. 



With all due respect to a good and decent man, Richard Sipe, we are well beyond the stage now where the Pope’s resignation would mean anything substantial to a world hungering for a Cosmic Christ to take hold, Teilhard de Chardin’s vision of life’s human meaning and Christianity’s purpose. What we actually need is less ‘catholic church’ and more Cosmic Christ. The question is, how do we do that?
Hint: Do not look to me. I have no idea how to implement this. Maybe let the Holy Spirit work in our lives for once?

The Catholic Church has proven itself to be….how shall I say this?….meaningless in the general flow of modern human discourse on values and ethics. It is seen by most educated people on the planet as quaint, trite and perhaps a bit odd. It allows child rape en masse for millenia and then tries to blame the Fourth Estate for the crisis….or it blames ‘modern values’ degeneration…or it blames Protestants or Masons or disenfranchised former Catholics for the problems it is now facing. 

In fact, the Catholic Church and Chrisitanity as a whole is more or less passe. We don’t matter anymore. That is our fault. This was a long time coming. The sex abuse crisis in Catholicism is simply a symptom of deeper problems that probably stem all the way back to the very beginning of the Jesus Movement. Perhaps our time has come….and gone. We have to be open to that possibility.

When we have arrived at the point where children are raped as a matter of course by nuns and priests and brothers and bishops and then evidence is hidden by the powers that be, we have given up all call as a group to anything even resembling holiness. Lets not add hypocrisy to this tragedy.

Lets take a look at ourselves, at Christianity, and see it for what it is: a quaint myth based on Hellenized, apocolyptic Judaism of Second Temple Judaism under the Romans and be open to the possibility that it is a value system that no longer works.

Changing popes won’t change any of this. We need to be realistic.
Tom Barnes

Read More

THEN AND NOW: John McNeill and Joachim of Fiore

Contrast the two following statements: The first is a report of Pope Benedict's address on March 10th of this year.

“The Pope’s address to the weekly audience continued the reflections on St. Bonaventure that he had begun the previous Wednesday. In this second talk, the Holy Father concentrated on St. Bonaventure’s response to Joachim of Fiore and the “spiritual” Franciscans, who had taught that a new phase of history was beginning, in which the Church hierarchy would disappear and the enlightened faithful would be guided only by the Holy Spirit.

“St. Bonaventure opposed that error, the Pope observed, and in rebutting it he upheld the true teaching of St. Francis of Assisi. The faithful should not follow radical new teachings, but should recognize that “there is no other Gospel, no other Church to be awaited.” The Franciscans, St. Bonaventure insisted, should work within the structure of the hierarchical Church.

The second reading is from John McNeill's recent posting, Theology of Fallibility Part IV

There is no doubt in my mind that we are at present in a new stage of the collapsing Temple and the emergence of a new form of shepherding. Joachim of Flores in the 13th century saw three stages in the development of God's church. The first was the Church of obedience to the Father, the Church of Israel; the second was the Church of the Son, Jesus, which he identified with the hierarchical Catholic church. He prophesied that there would come the day when the hierarchical church, becoming superfluous, would in time dissolve and in its place would emerge the Church of the Holy Spirit. I believe that time is now.

Ministry in the Church of the Holy Spirit will come from a direct call of the Holy Spirit to any baptized person from within their spiritual self-awareness. The task of authority will be to listen prayerfully to what the Holy Spirit is saying through the people of God. All authority will proceed from the bottom up and not from the top down. Every community should prayerfully discern spirits to select among their members the one whom God is calling to leadership. That individual could be a man or woman, married or single, gay or straight! The Church of the Holy Spirit must become a totally democratic church with no caste system, no higher or lower, totally equal, women with men, gays with straights; everyone possessing the Holy Spirit within them; everyone an authority.

Read More

EL GRECO'S MARTYRED PROPHET

We should never forget that many of the greatest saints now recognized as saints at one time or another found themselves on the wrong side of the Vatican power structures, in deep trouble with the papacy and church bureaucrats. Heresy, it has been said, is just a matter of timing.

And as your pictures remind us more directly, Jesus himself was no respecter of strict adherence to church law, or respecter of religious authority. Sticking to the more important issues of love, justice and speaking the truth got Him into a great deal of trouble with the clerics of the day - and just see what a difference that has made to religious history. 

Terrence Weldon of Queering the Church

Read More

QUOTE OF THE DAY

It should be evident to all that the paternalistic hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church has lost contact with the Spirit of God and is no longer its instrument. The pedophile crisis, the effort of the hierarchy to cover that up and the attitude in the hierarchy that their primary objective is not to convey the message of Christ but to do anything to protect their own power, prestige and wealth has made their very existence idolatrous. The hierarchy as presently constituted is the exact opposite to the movement based on the indwelling of the Holy Spirit that Jesus announced at the last supper.

John McNeil: (an article not to be missed) The Theology of Fallibility Part IV

Read More

EQUALITY AMONG CELEBRANTS

I was inspired by a Eucharistic celebration this Sunday at the very beautiful baroque church of St. John of Nepomuk on the Rock, a short walk from my apartment. The little church is an exquisite jewel-box of perfect loveliness and gives off an aura of humble pride in it's delicate and ornate artistry. I couldn't find any actual photos of the interior of the church and it's remarkable ceiling, so have contented myself with some shots of the more famous St. Nicholas church in the Mala Strana District of Prague, a rather gaudy maidenly aunt up the road a ways,  completely lacking in her garishness the finesse and restraint of St. John's On the Rock at Paleckeho Namesti. Frescoes of St. John Nepomuk adorn the ceilings in pastels of pink and green, depicting events of his torture by the king's servants and his death by drowning in the Vltava River. Most of these events are now considered legendary, and though the Catholic Encyclopedia defends the historicity of St. John of Nepomuk, more secular historians doubt his existence. Wicked people even go so far as to 'blame' the Jesuits for oh so wickedly concocting the entire legend in order to lead the Czech people away from their growing devotion to the great reformist martyr, Jan Hus, burned at the stake by the Catholic Inquisition for insisting, among other things, that laity and clergy should both partake of bread and wine at the Eucharistic celebration. Hus felt this was a vital practice to restore  in order to  teach the fundamental equality among all Christians, with no clerical caste assuming spiritual supremacy and superiority. It all sounds oh so familiar. He was burnt to a crisp for his views and here we are some hundreds of years later! The naughty slander against the Jesuits is probably unfounded, since the cult of John of Nepomuk, the saintly confessor who refused to break the seal of confession by revealing to the king the identity of the queen's lover, was already widespread by the time of the Jesuits' triumphalist takeover of Catholic culture in Prague in 1620 after the battle of White Mountain. Recent historical investigations have revealed, however,  that no John of Nepomuk was ever the queen's confessor, so out the window goes that legend of 'the martyr of the confessional' (the first in Church history.) However, it also seems clear that the Jesuits did all in their power to further the cult of the 'saintly confessor,' which they inherited, and it's not unfair to say that counteracting the growing  devotion to the saintly and genuine martyr, Jan Hus, was the Jesuits' prime motive. How familiar it all seems. At Sunday's mass, conducted in German for a small, very polite and restrained congregation of fifty, all of us together received the Eucharist under both elements, by tincture, under the watchful gaze of St. John - being tortured on the rack up above us on the ceiling - in delicate pastels of pink, lavender and green.  Was he also watching with a bemused eye the two male altar servers, one a very poised, handsome and self-possessed young man of about twenty-two and the other a fidgety, blond, blue-eyed Aryan boy of twelve as they attended to the grizzled, bearded and very somber celebrant? What thoughts we now have, O Lord,  and how long will they be with us? In any event, it all seemed rather peaceful up there on the ceiling, and perhaps that was St. John's opinion of us down below, on this post Easter morning tincturing our hosts in the sacred wine, all of  us more or less equal together before the Lord and infused with the peace that "passeth understanding."  Yesterday's heresies and crimes have become today's common practices and virtues. There's a lesson in this somewhere. But despite all of the follies of past history and the present turmoil within the church, including the dismaying and rather ugly defense presently underway of a dying and corrupt clerical caste system, one could not deny the palpable sense of peace and sacredness that permeated this beautiful little church on this Fourth Sunday of Easter, a sacred mystery still thriving despite all attempts to sully it or use it in the interests of naked power.

But these ruminations only reminded me of another great monument to Catholic Culture (writ large), the grand basilica of Sacre Coeur in Paris, once the most hated structure in the city after the Eiffel Tower and now the second most recognizable symbol of Paris after la Tour Eiffel. (to be continued with reflections on the Paris Commune of 1871, the erection of Sacre Coeur by the reactionary Catholic hierarchy as both a guilt offering and symbol of celebration for the defeat of the working class revolutionaries, the essence of Triumphalist Catholic Culture, and the fact the Eucharist has been 'exposed' at Sacre Coeur without interruption since 1885, or one hundred and twenty five years.)

Read More

AN UNHOLY MESS: CLERICAL ABUSE OF WOMEN IN INDIA

It is such a beautiful spring day today here in Prague and I experienced such a moving and mystical Eucharist this morning at the beautiful little baroque church of St. John of Nepomuk 'On the Rock' behind my house, that it seems a shame to sully the purity of the day with another scandalous tale of sex abuse in the Church. But these stories coming out of India are important in all of their horror and monstrosity because they involve women rather than young boys, and reveal a degree of violence and torture inflicted on women that we have not seen in the cases involving male youth. This, in my opinion, is the real underbelly of the sex abuse scandal, the unholy tale that has yet to be told - the horrendous abuse of nuns by priests that is going to make the abuse of young boys look like kindergarten pranks by comparison (an exaggeration to be sure). What strikes me immediately about these tales, and others like them coming out of Africa,  is the disparity in the level of violence imposed upon female victims in contrast to male victims, as if women are the recipients of a more cynical form of manipulation, domination and contempt. Boys can be  dominated, manipulated, abused...but only up to a certain point, when their sacred maleness protects them from the worst excesses of abuse of women. An editorial generalization on my part, of course, but there it is. I'm reminded of a line from Francis Ford Coppola's Godfather Part III, which he puts into the mouth of the saintly cardinal (modeled on Albino Luciani, Pope John Paul I. "Great goodness always attracts great evil." Indeed. 

For my more positive and more hopeful thoughts of the day,  inspired by this morning's Eucharist, I've written a reflection for the progressive blog Open Tabernacle which I hope to post later today.

from India Today

The sex scandals that have rocked the Roman Catholic Church from the Americas to Europe may have hogged international headlines, but for Kerala, cases of rape and sexual abuse by priests and nuns, and attempts by the church to brush such cases under the carpet, have had a history of recurring as media stories.

Sex is taboo for nuns in all Christian denominations and for priests in most of them. Yet a section violates this rule with impunity, even resorting to murder to silence the voices that may blow the whistle. And in most such cases in Kerala, the church has had no qualms in flexing its financial, religious and political muscles to shield the black sheep from the law of the land. The Sister Abhaya case is a classic example.

According to the CBI, Sister Abhaya, a 17-year-old college student in Kottayam, had inadvertently stumbled upon the tryst of Father Jose Poothrikkayil, Father Thomas Koottoor and Sister Sephy at the St Pius X Convent on March 2, 1992. Apprehensive of the consequences, the trio killed Sister Abhaya, hitting her with an axe on the head and throwing her body in the convent's well. The Church tried its best to hush up the case and succeeded to an extent as it took 16 years for the investigating agencies to make the first arrests-the accused were nabbed on November 19, 2008. Further investigations, however, have hit roadblocks. Even after the arrests, the Church has not stripped the accused of their rights and privileges. On the contrary, it has fought strongly on behalf of the three. Consider this: The copies of the CD of the trio's narco-analysis were mysteriously leaked and shown on television. Again, a crucial prosecution witness, an assistant sub-inspector, was found dead a week after the arrests. And Sister Sephy has moved the Mumbai High Court against the medical finding that her hymen had been surgically re-implanted. Says Jomon Puthenpurcakkal, the activist who has relentlessly fought for justice for Sister Abhaya, "The church uses all its resources to protect its people from any heinous crime. The real world behind its shining walls is a trash pit." 

Yet another case of the church's defence of its violators is that of Father Benedict, a Roman Catholic priest who was arrested in the late 1960s in connection with the murder of a young woman. The local sessions court had awarded him five years' rigorous imprisonment. The Church, however, hired the services of one of the most expensive Supreme Court lawyers then, to argue Father Benedict's case in the High Court. The court acquitted the accused and till he died a few years ago, the Church took care of him. Such instances abound.

Another case, which is almost as well-known as that of Sister Abhaya, is that of the suicide of Sister Anupa Mary, resident of St Mary's Convent, Kollam, on August 11, 2008. Her suicide note stated that she was ending her life due to the sexual harassment she had faced at the hands of a senior nun. In a fit of originality, the convent's mother superior denied the allegation, stating that the nuns slept in a cubicle that was only six-feet high, so it was "impossible" to abuse her sexually.

In yet another shocking incident dating back to October 2008, a 60-year-old nun of the Congregation of Daughters of Mary Convent at Anchal near Kollam had alleged that young nuns from the convents were being forced to have abortions. The nun is now in a mental hospital at Thodupuzha in Idukki district. Her nephew alleges that she has been forcibly admitted to the hospital by the convent authorities. A nun who has gone public with such allegations is Sister Jesme, who quit the holy order after 33 years of service to it to expose the wrongdoings within the church through her book, Amen: The Autobiography of a Nun.

The 53-year-old Jesme, who was the principal of a leading women's college managed by the church, has given explicit details of sexual encounters that nuns face almost daily. She writes in the book: "At a retreat for novices, I noticed that girls in my batch were unsettled about going to the confession chamber. I found that the priest there asked each girl if he could kiss them. I gathered courage and went in. He repeated the question. When I opposed, he quoted from the Bible which spoke of divine kisses." In yet another instance, she discloses: "I was sent to teach plus-two students at St Maria College. There, a new sister joined to teach Malayalam; she was a lesbian. She would come to my bed in the night and do lewd acts and I couldn't stop her.' A recall of a priest's sexual overture towards her is the most shocking: "Back in his room, he tried to fondle me and when I resisted, he got up and asked angrily if I had seen a man. When I said no, he stripped himself, ejaculated and forced me to strip." 

Sister Jesme equates the Church with a greedy father who does not marry off his daughters and does not allow his sons to marry as well. What is disturbing, however, is the Church's defence of acts it prohibits when committed by the upholders of its values and virtues.

Read More