September 29, 2007

The Feast of Saints Michael, Gabriel, and Raphael, the Archangels

I have posted a homily for the occasion.
Click HERE for it.

September 28, 2007

One of the finest online sources of information about Saint Peter's Basilica in Rome

Click HERE for it.

September 27, 2007

A visitor asks about the Benedictine monk's "habit"

It's for the visitor's school project.

I've re-published a post I did some time ago about the monastic habit.

It's right below.


September 26, 2007

"Learning from scandal"

Analyzing facts on clergy sexual abuse


By Bishop Salvatore Cordileone, Auxiliary Bishop of the Diocese of San Diego


From The San Diego Union-Tribune, September 23, 2007


“Pedophile priest.”

The alliteration is almost irresistible. But does it correspond to reality? Now that the dust is settling from the San Diego diocese sex-abuse settlement, it might be time to take an objective look at the question of sexual abuse of minors by Catholic clergy in the United States. That is, if it is not already overdue.

In response to the overwhelming media attention given to this issue in the spring of 2002, U.S. Catholic bishops adopted the Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People, which, among other things, commissioned a study to be conducted by the John Jay College of Criminal Justice on the nature and scope of the problem for all incidents alleged to have occurred between 1950 and 2002. The study's results were released in February 2004.

It would be impossible to summarize the entire 120-page report here, but it is worthwhile to note some of the more salient points. First, the study revealed that the problem of sex abuse of children and young people by Catholic clergy was, indeed, widespread, in the sense that nearly all dioceses across the nation reported at least one incident during that time. Also, the patterns applied consistently throughout all dioceses, regardless of such factors as its size and the region in which it is located. The majority of the clergy accused had only one allegation against them; in fact, 3.5 percent of the priests accused account for 26 percent of all of the allegations. Most of the verified incidents, however, involved more serious types of abuse. It was in this context that the report referred to the results of the study as “very disturbing.”

Furthermore, with regard to prevalence, the study demonstrated that a total of roughly 4 percent of all priests and deacons serving during these 52 years were accused of sexual abuse of minors, with 10,667 people making allegations. In basically all of the categories studied from the historical perspective (e.g., when the incidents occurred, the number of accused priests, priests accused as a percentage of all ordinations), the trend is the same: an increase in the 1960s with an upward spike around 1970, followed by a precipitous decline in the early 1980s. Indeed, 75 percent of the events were alleged to have occurred between 1960 and 1984. Along the same lines, the majority of priests accused were ordained between the 1950s and 1970s.

Of those priests with substantiated allegation(s) (80 percent of those originally accused), slightly over half were either dead or out of active ministry at the time of the allegation, or were voluntarily or forcibly removed. Of the others, 9.2 percent were reprimanded and returned to ministry; in most of the remaining cases, some precaution was taken before restoring the priest to ministry, such as evaluation, treatment and/or administrative leave. It should be borne in mind, though, that the way offenders were treated evolved with our growing understanding of the problem. Thus, in the earlier years of this period, when it was more common to believe this to be solely a moral fault, returning a priest to ministry after a reprimand was much more common; by the 1980s, the standard approach was to send the offender for treatment and not return him to ministry unless and until he had a positive evaluation of rehabilitation from a qualified professional.

While the patterns of Catholic clergy sexual abuse of minors more or less followed those of the general male population, one significant statistic stands out: 81 percent were perpetrated against males. Also worth noting is that 78.2 percent of the victims were between the ages of 11 and 17 when the abuse began. Also, of all offenders, only 3.3 percent were abused in more than one diocese. Indeed, with regard to this last statistic, in a letter to the president of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops in 2004, the principal investigator of the John Jay study, Karen Terry, and its administrative coordinator, James P. Levine, wrote: “It is clear that transferring priests [among dioceses] with allegations of child sexual abuse was not a general response to the problem, and was limited to a finite number of cases.”

These are scientifically verified data from a study by a highly reputable college of criminal justice. While they give some reassurance against the allegation that bishops recklessly transferred abusive priests, they also indicate— to put it colloquially— that something must have gone wrong sometime in the 1960s, but began to be corrected by the 1980s, and, moreover, that the problem was something other than pedophilia (i.e., the sexual abuse of prepubescent children). More insight into this should be gained by the second study commissioned by the U.S. bishops currently under way, on the causes and context of the problem.

But how far do we still have to go in understanding this problem and what to do about it?

The answer would seem to be “still far indeed,” if any indication is to be taken from something published in The Boston Globe less than three years before that newspaper opened the floodgates of reports in January 2002 by breaking the story of one of the worst cases of clerical sex abuse, that of John Geoghan. On Aug. 1, 1999, the Globe published a commentary by psychology professor Sharon Lamb of St. Michael's College in Colchester, Vt., in which she criticizes the president of the American Psychological Association for stating that the APA “may have erred” in publishing an article the year before about a study that “found that not all sexually abused children are wounded for life, and not all victims are traumatized.” To those of us who have seen the devastation that child sex abuse does to those who suffer it, Lamb makes some truly disturbing statements that seem almost to dismiss this trauma, such as, “In a culture supported by a victim-hungry media and made-for-TV movies, we have bought into the idea of a victim as long-suffering and damaged. It is not always accurate.” Even the very headline on her article was shocking: “Some Victims Don't Need Pity.”

Another question involves the chances for rehabilitation of the perpetrators. It was in June 2002 that the California Legislature passed a bill that revived expired claims against private institutions that were on notice of sexual abuse of minors by their members and did not take sufficient action, and specified that sufficient action does not include sending the offender for therapy (something the bishops typically did before reassigning an accused priest). The implied presumption here is the unlikelihood that sex offenders can ever be cured so that they will no longer be a danger to children. But were these lawmakers consistent in applying this principle? The same Legislature passed a bill providing a program of rehabilitation for sexual predators of minors and restoring them to society. According to an article in the Union-Tribune on Aug. 7, 2003, in the first such case, that of Brian DeVries, his restitution to society erupted in controversy because it was “shrouded in secrecy as officials tried to avoid the community outrage that often arises when sex offenders move into a neighborhood.”

Neighborhood residents are hardly to be blamed for such outrage.

These are only two examples that demonstrate we still have far to go in learning about the insidious problem of sexual abuse of minors and in protecting our children.

In this area, no institution has been subject to greater public scrutiny, and self-scrutiny, than the Catholic Church in the United States. For those of us bearing the shame of our deviant confreres in the ministry, our greatest hope in this whole ordeal is that it has shed light on just how widespread and prevalent this problem is throughout our entire society. I pray that our painful experience may be a catalyst for all institutions to be held, and to hold themselves, so accountable, and for governments to enact laws and make provisions to enable families to more easily confront this problem in their own homes and to seek, and be given, the help they need to address it.

Short of this, we will fail to be a truly just society that protects and cherishes its children.


September 25, 2007

The Parable in Last Sunday's Gospel

Luke 16:1-13
Jesus said to his disciples,
“A rich man had a steward
who was reported to him for squandering his property.
He summoned him and said,
‘What is this I hear about you?
Prepare a full account of your stewardship,
because you can no longer be my steward.’
The steward said to himself, ‘What shall I do,
now that my master is taking the position of steward away from me?
I am not strong enough to dig and I am ashamed to beg.
I know what I shall do so that,
when I am removed from the stewardship,
they may welcome me into their homes.’
He called in his master’s debtors one by one.
To the first he said,
‘How much do you owe my master?’
He replied, ‘One hundred measures of olive oil.’
He said to him, ‘Here is your promissory note.
Sit down and quickly write one for fifty.’
Then to another the steward said, ‘And you, how much do you owe?’
He replied, ‘One hundred kors of wheat.’
The steward said to him, ‘Here is your promissory note;
write one for eighty.’

And the master commended that dishonest steward for acting prudently.
“For the children of this world
are more prudent in dealing with their own generation
than are the children of light.
I tell you, make friends for yourselves with dishonest wealth,
so that when it fails, you will be welcomed into eternal dwellings.
The person who is trustworthy in very small matters
is also trustworthy in great ones;
and the person who is dishonest in very small matters
is also dishonest in great ones.
If, therefore, you are not trustworthy with dishonest wealth,
who will trust you with true wealth?
If you are not trustworthy with what belongs to another,
who will give you what is yours?
No servant can serve two masters.
He will either hate one and love the other,
or be devoted to one and despise the other.
You cannot serve both God and mammon.”

It seems odd that Jesus positively recommends to us the corrupt, self-serving solution of the steward in the parable.

However, strangely enough, the steward's method does offer an image of what Jesus himself has done for us.

Jesus has taken the debt that we owe to the Father, and has written off a great part of it.


September 24, 2007

An Obituary for Abbot Claude, O.S.B.

The following is my adaptation of the text that appears on my monastery's website, princeofpeaceabbey.org.


On September 17, 2007, the monastery tolled the bell for Abbot Claude Ehringer, O.S.B., who persevered in his monastic commitment for 77 years, and was 60 days short of his 99th birthday. He was an ordained priest for 73 years. Abbot Claude Ehringer was born Charles Perrette Ehringer, to John Ehringer and Margaret Perrette on November 16, 1908, in Jeffersonville, Indiana. He was the second child of five born to this family.

In 1922 he entered St. Meinrad Preparatory School, Indiana, at the age of thirteen years, to undergo formation for the priesthood. He graduated from St. Meinrad Preparatory school in 1927 with 25 other young men— men whose names he would remember with fondness even up to the last years of his life. He entered St. Meinrad College in 1927. In 1929 he would accept his calling to the Benedictine life at St. Meinrad Abbey. Among his class of novices for St. Meinrad, 1929-1930, he was with other monks who would eventually come to California in 1958 to begin a new monastery, St. Charles Priory, which became Prince of Peace Abbey in 1983. These monks were Fr. Rudolph Siedling, O.S.B., Fr. Bernardine Shine, O.S.B., and Fr. Cornelius Waldo, O.S.B.

On August 6, 1930, he professed his temporary vows. He professed his solemn perpetual vows in 1933, and was ordained to the Diaconate on December 23, 1933. On May 22, 1934, he was ordained to the Priesthood. He fondly remembered the men ordained with him, and on his desk in his cell was a remembrance card of those who were ordained with him. On May 27, 1934, he offered his First Mass at his home parish of St. Augustine in Jeffersonville, Indiana. At the time of his death was one of the oldest living members of this parish by church records. His fondness for his parish was well known and he always would offer Mass at the parish when he was in the area.

From 1934 to 1948 Fr. Claude was Assistant Novice Master of the Benedictine clerical students at St. Meinrad. He was also involved in conducting retreats. In 1948, he was appointed Novice Master and Superior of the non-clerical Brothers at St. Meinrad. In 1961 he was assigned to St. Charles Priory at Oceanside, California. Again, he would be heavily involved in retreat work, as St. Charles was becoming a popular retreat center. Fr. Claude would succeed Fr. Rudolph Siedling, O.S.B., the founding prior of the Oceanside Priory on August 26, 1965. Fr. Prior Claude would hold this position of religious superior of the Priory through the dependent and independent years of the Priory's existence. In 1983, the Priory became Prince of Peace Abbey, and Fr. Claude was elected its first abbot of the abbey at the age of 75. He would serve in this capacity until his resignation on August 20, 1994. He always remarked, he never retired but only resigned. This was evident from all the good work that he performed after his resignation. He was a well-respected spiritual mentor to many people and a well-beloved Oblate Director. Membership in the Oblate (“lay Benedictine”) program increased greatly under his leadership.

In his latter years of ill health, he was always positive and never complained. He was always faithful to the Divine Office, and was always the first monk to enter the church early in the morning. He faithfully kept a holy hour every afternoon. He was a most community-minded monk, and would be at all community functions unless ill health prevented him.

When his father was seriously ill he wrote a letter from St. Meinrad providing hope for his father who had just received the Sacrament of Extreme Unction (now called the Anointing of the Sick): "God by granting you the graces of this Sacrament is so preparing you to share with my dear mother in heaven the joys that will one day will be that of our whole family when we are all again together in heaven." His brothers, Edgar and Cornelius, and his sisters, Frances and Margaret, preceded him in death. Nephews and nieces, Mary Sifferlen, Mary Voigt, Kevin Ehringer, Joan Smith, Marsha Underwood, Mary Lynn Jerrell, Charles Voigt, Jim Oeffinger, Dennis Ehringer, and Bobby Ehringer survive him, along with many grandnephews & nieces and great-grandnephews & nieces.

The wake for Abbot Claude will take place in the abbey church on September 26 at 7:00 P.M., and the Funeral Mass will take place on September 27 at 11:00 A.M., with burial immediately after in the abbey cemetery. A reception for the public will follow the burial.

For the repose of his soul three Masses will be offered by each priest of the monastery. The customary suffrages of charity are recommended to all the monks of the Swiss-American Benedictine Congregation.


Abbot Charles and the Monks of Prince of Peace Abbey
Oceanside, California


ProLifeInternet.com ... Google here, and save babies!

A renewed pro-life search engine!
It is powered by "Google" and,
at no cost to you,
generates donations through paid advertising.
Click HERE for it.