This morning in the Salvatorkirche in the German city of Duisburg there was a service of remembrance for those killed in the disaster in the city last week. Among those present were the German President and German Chancellor.
At the end of the service, Hannelore Kraft, prime minister of Nordrhein Westfalen gave an address. She spoke of the need to help and support those who have been bereaved and all those who have been injured.
She said that she had been greatly moved during the week while speaking to the bereaved. She quoted one father, who said to her that his daughter would not be lost in vain if as a result of this accident we would all put more value on the importance of people. Frau Kraft reiterated his words and promised she would do all in her power as prime minister of NRW to place the worth of the individual above everything else.
Frau Kraft was visibly moved by the occasion. No doubt her words will ring around the world in the next days.
Saturday, July 31, 2010
Friday, July 30, 2010
All the Vatican's men
The article below appears this week in the regional papers of Independent Newspapers.
Has any organisation or institution ever been so much in the media limelight as has the Catholic Church of late? It’s doubtful. By this stage most columnist worldwide have had their say. It is also the perfect organisation about which someone can have a good rant. And strange as it may seem it continues to grab the headlines.
Almost on a daily basis we hear of new revelations. You would imagine we would all be punch drunk at this stage. And then the Vatican issues Norme de gravioribus delictis. In English it means Norms concerning grave crimes. The document lists norms governing how to deal with clerical child sex abuse. And in this same document it refers to the crimes of ordaining women priests and of a Catholic priest taking part in the Eucharist with ministers of ecclesial communities, which do not have apostolic succession nor recognise the sacramental dignity of priestly ordination.
A Vatican official, Monsignor Charles Scicluna, explained that the illicit ordination of women is a sacramental crime, whereas child abuse is a moral crime.
The sacraments have to do with theology. Child abuse has to do with immoral and illegal behaviour. How could any person or organisation talk about sacramental wrong-doing and sexual abuse in the same document? The institutional, hierarchical church has just done so. One thing is for sure, the Vatican doesn’t do spin.
But there is a delicately woven thread linking these issues. Something to do with the fact that the world is made up of women and men but that within the institutional hierarchical church, women are excluded.
This is not at all a rant or a bashing of Mother Church but it is a call for an open, honest and real debate about how the institutional hierarchical church thinks about and relates to women.
Are there any theologians or bishops out there who are simply embarrassed by so much of the shenanigans that come from the Vatican? If so, it would be great if they had the wisdom and courage to express their opinions in a genuine and prophetic fashion.
When I was a novice we were given two reasons for celibacy. We were told it had an eschatological sign and that it gave the priest more time to work with and for his people. Both arguments simply don’t stand up. I have seldom if ever found any priest anywhere who was as holy and heaven-focused, and as hard working as my late mother and father.
But it is not simply the celibacy issue. The institutional hierarchical church seems to have an ‘out-of-world’ vision or attitude towards women and so much of that has to do with sexuality. There are those who will argue that the institutional hierarchical church is at its core misogynistic.
I keep using the expression ‘institutional hierarchical church’ because it is essential to distinguish between the church – the people of God – and the career priests who work in the Vatican.
Over generations, centuries, millennia, the church leadership has been in the incredibly fortuitous, and powerful position to choose what men it calls to Rome to sit in positions of power and influence. Its gene pool encompasses all five continents. It has developed its system over a long period of time. Many aspects of Vatican governance are the envy of the world. It is generally accepted that the Vatican has the best secret service agency in the world. Its library and archives are the envy of the world. It does things well. It has the brightest and the best and it has always known that. And then added to that aura it has that ingredient called God. It actually has inscribed in its vocabulary the word ‘infallible’. So is it possible for the men in the Vatican to sit up and listen to views and opinions that express any sort of criticism?
People outside the walls of the Vatican consider it impossible to come to any understanding about what is at the roots of child sexual abuse without the help and insight of women. Of course, child sexual abuse is a society-wide problem.
The men inside the Vatican genuinely believe they know best and that they have that remarkable and infallible word of God to support and help them in their deliberations. Is there any other way whatsoever to try to begin to explain the mindset of the authors of Norme de gravioribus delictis?
Has any organisation or institution ever been so much in the media limelight as has the Catholic Church of late? It’s doubtful. By this stage most columnist worldwide have had their say. It is also the perfect organisation about which someone can have a good rant. And strange as it may seem it continues to grab the headlines.
Almost on a daily basis we hear of new revelations. You would imagine we would all be punch drunk at this stage. And then the Vatican issues Norme de gravioribus delictis. In English it means Norms concerning grave crimes. The document lists norms governing how to deal with clerical child sex abuse. And in this same document it refers to the crimes of ordaining women priests and of a Catholic priest taking part in the Eucharist with ministers of ecclesial communities, which do not have apostolic succession nor recognise the sacramental dignity of priestly ordination.
A Vatican official, Monsignor Charles Scicluna, explained that the illicit ordination of women is a sacramental crime, whereas child abuse is a moral crime.
The sacraments have to do with theology. Child abuse has to do with immoral and illegal behaviour. How could any person or organisation talk about sacramental wrong-doing and sexual abuse in the same document? The institutional, hierarchical church has just done so. One thing is for sure, the Vatican doesn’t do spin.
But there is a delicately woven thread linking these issues. Something to do with the fact that the world is made up of women and men but that within the institutional hierarchical church, women are excluded.
This is not at all a rant or a bashing of Mother Church but it is a call for an open, honest and real debate about how the institutional hierarchical church thinks about and relates to women.
Are there any theologians or bishops out there who are simply embarrassed by so much of the shenanigans that come from the Vatican? If so, it would be great if they had the wisdom and courage to express their opinions in a genuine and prophetic fashion.
When I was a novice we were given two reasons for celibacy. We were told it had an eschatological sign and that it gave the priest more time to work with and for his people. Both arguments simply don’t stand up. I have seldom if ever found any priest anywhere who was as holy and heaven-focused, and as hard working as my late mother and father.
But it is not simply the celibacy issue. The institutional hierarchical church seems to have an ‘out-of-world’ vision or attitude towards women and so much of that has to do with sexuality. There are those who will argue that the institutional hierarchical church is at its core misogynistic.
I keep using the expression ‘institutional hierarchical church’ because it is essential to distinguish between the church – the people of God – and the career priests who work in the Vatican.
Over generations, centuries, millennia, the church leadership has been in the incredibly fortuitous, and powerful position to choose what men it calls to Rome to sit in positions of power and influence. Its gene pool encompasses all five continents. It has developed its system over a long period of time. Many aspects of Vatican governance are the envy of the world. It is generally accepted that the Vatican has the best secret service agency in the world. Its library and archives are the envy of the world. It does things well. It has the brightest and the best and it has always known that. And then added to that aura it has that ingredient called God. It actually has inscribed in its vocabulary the word ‘infallible’. So is it possible for the men in the Vatican to sit up and listen to views and opinions that express any sort of criticism?
People outside the walls of the Vatican consider it impossible to come to any understanding about what is at the roots of child sexual abuse without the help and insight of women. Of course, child sexual abuse is a society-wide problem.
The men inside the Vatican genuinely believe they know best and that they have that remarkable and infallible word of God to support and help them in their deliberations. Is there any other way whatsoever to try to begin to explain the mindset of the authors of Norme de gravioribus delictis?
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
The hope and promise on the wings of Concorde
Last evening Channel 4 showed an hour-long documentary on the rise and fall of the Concorde.
The programme brought you right into the mind set that created this extraordinary flying machine, which travelled at Mach 2.2.
And then at the end we saw it go up in flames on take-off on a runway in Paris.
Many of the pilots were interviewed and they all spoke of their hope and belief in the aircraft. One of the pilots spoke of how it was the greatest piece of engineering in the 20th century and how it began in such hope and promise and then collapsed. He argued that there was no need for it to collapse.
The then UK transport secretary, Tony Benn spoke of the aircraft's grace and speed and how it lifted the spirit of the British and French people. And why they added that famous 'e'.
The programme in many ways could mirror the hopes and promises that Vatican ll offered so many. It began with such promise and so much of it crash landed - just like Concorde.
The programme brought you right into the mind set that created this extraordinary flying machine, which travelled at Mach 2.2.
And then at the end we saw it go up in flames on take-off on a runway in Paris.
Many of the pilots were interviewed and they all spoke of their hope and belief in the aircraft. One of the pilots spoke of how it was the greatest piece of engineering in the 20th century and how it began in such hope and promise and then collapsed. He argued that there was no need for it to collapse.
The then UK transport secretary, Tony Benn spoke of the aircraft's grace and speed and how it lifted the spirit of the British and French people. And why they added that famous 'e'.
The programme in many ways could mirror the hopes and promises that Vatican ll offered so many. It began with such promise and so much of it crash landed - just like Concorde.
Sunday, July 11, 2010
Pudding bomber dies
The obituary of Fritz Teufel in Saturday's Irish Times is well worth a read. There certainly has to be an allegorical content to it. What would he have to say about Irish society today?
Saturday, July 10, 2010
Getting the facts wrong
On Sunday there was an incident on the railway near Mountrath where a man lost his life.
The following day an Irish national newspaper reported the incident. It said that the man was hit sometime around 7pm by the 6pm Intercity Express from Cork.
Has an Irish train yet managed to travel from Cork to Mountrath in 60 minutes? It would mean we have the fastest trains in the world. Not so. The fastest Irish trains can travel is 160km/h.
There is no train timetabled to leave Cork at 18.00 on Sundays.
The following day an Irish national newspaper reported the incident. It said that the man was hit sometime around 7pm by the 6pm Intercity Express from Cork.
Has an Irish train yet managed to travel from Cork to Mountrath in 60 minutes? It would mean we have the fastest trains in the world. Not so. The fastest Irish trains can travel is 160km/h.
There is no train timetabled to leave Cork at 18.00 on Sundays.
Thursday, July 8, 2010
Haiti earthquake
Monday July 12 marks six months since the earthquake in Haiti.
This week Morning Ireland is reporting from the country and Ireland's. Peter Power, Ireland's minister for development aid is currently in Haiti.
The generosity of the Irish people towards the people of Haiti has been extraordinary.
This week Morning Ireland is reporting from the country and Ireland's. Peter Power, Ireland's minister for development aid is currently in Haiti.
The generosity of the Irish people towards the people of Haiti has been extraordinary.
Tuesday, July 6, 2010
Criticism of parliamentary democracy
In the weekly newsletter of the Dominican priory in Tralee, dated July 4, there is an editorial-type comment, which compares democracy in the Irish State with democracy in the Dominican Order. The piece is not signed.
It is curious article. It tells us that every priest and brother votes according to his own conscience and that each brother is bound to carefully weigh (sic) up all that is said and decide on what he believes is the best for the Community (sic).
How does the author know that the voter votes according to those criteria?
The article then goes on to criticise how Irish politicians are forced to take the party whip when it comes to parliamentary votes.
Is that not how parliamentary democracy works?
Reading the piece it shares a commonality with Vincent Twomey's article in last week's Irish Times.
There is a bias and dishonesty about it that is worrying.
The article also states that the people elect local and national leaders. Of course that is not the case as the taoiseach is elected by Dáil Éireann.
It is curious article. It tells us that every priest and brother votes according to his own conscience and that each brother is bound to carefully weigh (sic) up all that is said and decide on what he believes is the best for the Community (sic).
How does the author know that the voter votes according to those criteria?
The article then goes on to criticise how Irish politicians are forced to take the party whip when it comes to parliamentary votes.
Is that not how parliamentary democracy works?
Reading the piece it shares a commonality with Vincent Twomey's article in last week's Irish Times.
There is a bias and dishonesty about it that is worrying.
The article also states that the people elect local and national leaders. Of course that is not the case as the taoiseach is elected by Dáil Éireann.
Thursday, July 1, 2010
The word according to Stanley McChrystal
This link brings you to the famous Stanley McChrystal interveiw. Well worth a read.
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/17390/119236
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/17390/119236
Let the Irish people decide
Below is an opinion piece written by Vincent Twomey, which appeared in The Irish Times on Tuesday, June 29.
What is it about the article that leaves one feel that the author is breathtakingly arrogant? The writer at the flick of his hand dismisses people who disagree with his opinion. The adjectives he uses in describing those who hold a different opinion than he are so different from the adjectives he uses to describe his allies. Note how he talks about a tiny but vocal minority when referring to his opponents but when referring to his allies he writes, 'the sincere convictions of most citizens'. This is similar to a style used by the tabloids. There is nothing refreshing or hopeful about it. It is non-convincing and simply non nice writing.
Also there seems to be evident that tendency to create fear in the reader. The piece about the photographer has simply to be laughable.
Vincent Twomey has a problem with political decision being taken in secret. Is this man for real and does he believe what he write?
Is the article not shrouded in some type of worrying spoof?
Surely if there is a constitutional issue, the Irish Courts will and can decide.
The Civil Partnership Bill – before the Dáil this week – forces citizens to collude in things they believe to be morally wrong
NO CHURCH-STATE controversy in recent times has raised so many difficult political and moral issues compared with those raised by the proposed Civil Partnership Bill. These include:
the nature of the family and its status in the Irish Constitution;
the rights and obligations of citizens arising from the fact that they live together in a mutually supportive and stable partnership, or plan to do so;
the rights and obligations of legislators when legislating on laws which touch on fundamental constitutional or moral issues;
the right of citizens to make conscientious objections on the basis of their moral convictions or religious beliefs;
and, finally, the rights and obligations, if any, of ordained ministers of the Catholic Church either individually (bishops and priests) or as a body (through the bishops’ conference) to express publicly their views on any proposed legislation.
All of these issues touch on the nature of democracy, more specifically on the question of the role of conscience in democracy – and, by implication, the rights of the church with regard to its obligation to form the conscience of its adherents.
When the Irish Bishops’ Conference issued its statement recently on the proposed legislation, there was an outcry from a handful of members of the Oireachtas. A tiny but very vocal minority were outraged at the audacity of the bishops to express any opinion on this or, presumably, on any other matter. They effectively claimed that the church – in particular, in the wake of the Ferns, the Ryan and the Murphy reports – should remain silent.
This, of course, would leave the way free for that tiny but vocal minority of secularists to impose their views on the whole of society, views that are repugnant to the sincere convictions of most citizens. These same citizens are being increasingly intimidated by a media that has adopted these “liberal-progressive” views. Is this democracy, Irish style?
Citizens may disagree on the nature of marriage and the morality of sexual relations outside marriage. But they cannot be indifferent, since, apart from personal moral wellbeing, the wellbeing of society as a whole is at stake. In addition, the Bill touches on the Constitution and its recognition of the privileged role of marriage due to its unique significance for the common good of society.
Even though the Bill avoids the actual term, it fundamentally redefines the well-known legal definition of marriage as the “voluntary union for life of one man and one woman, to the exclusion of all others” (recently cited by Baroness Deech, the chairwoman of the Bar Standards Board, professor of law at Gresham College, London).
This definition seems to be at the basis of the recent ruling of the European Court of Human Rights (see The Irish Times , June 26th, 2010) rejecting the claims of same-sex couples to a right to marry.
One may disagree with the usual legal definition but this is such a fundamental issue that citizens must be free to make up their own minds in the debate. And here, I would argue, members of the Oireachtas have the primordial right as citizens and legislators to be free of the Party Whipparty whip and to follow their conscience. Conscience is the only bulwark against the totalitarian tendencies of all states. This finds recognition in the present German Basic Law (or constitution), which, to avoid a repetition of totalitarianism of the Nazi period, when the conscience of citizens was mercilessly crushed, insists those elected to parliament “ . . . shall be representatives of the whole people, not bound by orders or instructions, and responsible only to their conscience” (Art 38.1).
As a result, the German parliament, like Westminster, allows a free vote on contentious moral issues. By asking for a free vote in the Dáil on the proposed Bill, the Irish bishops in their recent statement did nothing less than reiterate this basic democratic principle.
I have elsewhere argued that Irish democracy has been neutered by the inordinately dominant role played by the party whip. Though necessary in many instances in order to expedite business in parliament, the way the party whip is invoked in the Oireachtas effectively eliminates the need for real debate in parliament. It reduces parliament to rubber-stamping decisions which have been taken in secret.
Legislators are thereby deprived of their right to exercise their own responsibility for the common good as legislators acting according to their own conscience. The overuse of the party whip effectively “banishes conscience to the bathroom” (to quote Vaclav Havel in a similar context) and so undermines democracy.
But the proposed Bill goes a step further. It effectively deprives all citizens of their right of conscientious objection to the provisions of the Bill, should it become law. All appeals – including those from two Church of Ireland bishops – to make provisions in the Bill for citizens to follow their conscience have been rejected.
Should the Bill become law, people such as registrars, photographers or those responsible for parish halls, etc, will be forced to co-operate in acts they consider in good conscience to be morally wrong.
In sum, the refusal to include a conscience clause in the proposed Civil Partnership Bill undermines the primacy of conscience which is the bedrock of democracy. The imposition of the party whip for the vote on this particular Bill (and on other similar Bills) is contrary to the right and duty of TDs and Senators to act as legislators in the full sense of the term, responsible to their conscience.
What is it about the article that leaves one feel that the author is breathtakingly arrogant? The writer at the flick of his hand dismisses people who disagree with his opinion. The adjectives he uses in describing those who hold a different opinion than he are so different from the adjectives he uses to describe his allies. Note how he talks about a tiny but vocal minority when referring to his opponents but when referring to his allies he writes, 'the sincere convictions of most citizens'. This is similar to a style used by the tabloids. There is nothing refreshing or hopeful about it. It is non-convincing and simply non nice writing.
Also there seems to be evident that tendency to create fear in the reader. The piece about the photographer has simply to be laughable.
Vincent Twomey has a problem with political decision being taken in secret. Is this man for real and does he believe what he write?
Is the article not shrouded in some type of worrying spoof?
Surely if there is a constitutional issue, the Irish Courts will and can decide.
The Civil Partnership Bill – before the Dáil this week – forces citizens to collude in things they believe to be morally wrong
NO CHURCH-STATE controversy in recent times has raised so many difficult political and moral issues compared with those raised by the proposed Civil Partnership Bill. These include:
the nature of the family and its status in the Irish Constitution;
the rights and obligations of citizens arising from the fact that they live together in a mutually supportive and stable partnership, or plan to do so;
the rights and obligations of legislators when legislating on laws which touch on fundamental constitutional or moral issues;
the right of citizens to make conscientious objections on the basis of their moral convictions or religious beliefs;
and, finally, the rights and obligations, if any, of ordained ministers of the Catholic Church either individually (bishops and priests) or as a body (through the bishops’ conference) to express publicly their views on any proposed legislation.
All of these issues touch on the nature of democracy, more specifically on the question of the role of conscience in democracy – and, by implication, the rights of the church with regard to its obligation to form the conscience of its adherents.
When the Irish Bishops’ Conference issued its statement recently on the proposed legislation, there was an outcry from a handful of members of the Oireachtas. A tiny but very vocal minority were outraged at the audacity of the bishops to express any opinion on this or, presumably, on any other matter. They effectively claimed that the church – in particular, in the wake of the Ferns, the Ryan and the Murphy reports – should remain silent.
This, of course, would leave the way free for that tiny but vocal minority of secularists to impose their views on the whole of society, views that are repugnant to the sincere convictions of most citizens. These same citizens are being increasingly intimidated by a media that has adopted these “liberal-progressive” views. Is this democracy, Irish style?
Citizens may disagree on the nature of marriage and the morality of sexual relations outside marriage. But they cannot be indifferent, since, apart from personal moral wellbeing, the wellbeing of society as a whole is at stake. In addition, the Bill touches on the Constitution and its recognition of the privileged role of marriage due to its unique significance for the common good of society.
Even though the Bill avoids the actual term, it fundamentally redefines the well-known legal definition of marriage as the “voluntary union for life of one man and one woman, to the exclusion of all others” (recently cited by Baroness Deech, the chairwoman of the Bar Standards Board, professor of law at Gresham College, London).
This definition seems to be at the basis of the recent ruling of the European Court of Human Rights (see The Irish Times , June 26th, 2010) rejecting the claims of same-sex couples to a right to marry.
One may disagree with the usual legal definition but this is such a fundamental issue that citizens must be free to make up their own minds in the debate. And here, I would argue, members of the Oireachtas have the primordial right as citizens and legislators to be free of the Party Whipparty whip and to follow their conscience. Conscience is the only bulwark against the totalitarian tendencies of all states. This finds recognition in the present German Basic Law (or constitution), which, to avoid a repetition of totalitarianism of the Nazi period, when the conscience of citizens was mercilessly crushed, insists those elected to parliament “ . . . shall be representatives of the whole people, not bound by orders or instructions, and responsible only to their conscience” (Art 38.1).
As a result, the German parliament, like Westminster, allows a free vote on contentious moral issues. By asking for a free vote in the Dáil on the proposed Bill, the Irish bishops in their recent statement did nothing less than reiterate this basic democratic principle.
I have elsewhere argued that Irish democracy has been neutered by the inordinately dominant role played by the party whip. Though necessary in many instances in order to expedite business in parliament, the way the party whip is invoked in the Oireachtas effectively eliminates the need for real debate in parliament. It reduces parliament to rubber-stamping decisions which have been taken in secret.
Legislators are thereby deprived of their right to exercise their own responsibility for the common good as legislators acting according to their own conscience. The overuse of the party whip effectively “banishes conscience to the bathroom” (to quote Vaclav Havel in a similar context) and so undermines democracy.
But the proposed Bill goes a step further. It effectively deprives all citizens of their right of conscientious objection to the provisions of the Bill, should it become law. All appeals – including those from two Church of Ireland bishops – to make provisions in the Bill for citizens to follow their conscience have been rejected.
Should the Bill become law, people such as registrars, photographers or those responsible for parish halls, etc, will be forced to co-operate in acts they consider in good conscience to be morally wrong.
In sum, the refusal to include a conscience clause in the proposed Civil Partnership Bill undermines the primacy of conscience which is the bedrock of democracy. The imposition of the party whip for the vote on this particular Bill (and on other similar Bills) is contrary to the right and duty of TDs and Senators to act as legislators in the full sense of the term, responsible to their conscience.
From Mark to Deutschmark to euro
This day 20 years ago the citizens of the GDR went along to their banks and transferred their Marks for the coveted Deutschmark. A short 12 years later they changed again, this time from Deutschmark to euro.
Thursday, June 24, 2010
The war in Afghanistan
The Stanley McChrystal show seems to be the only show in town these days.
It all happens because of Eyjafjallajokull, a long drive to Berlin, journalist getting too pally with army types and then too much drink in an Irish pub in Berlin.
It is also an insight into the shadowy world of who actually runs the show in democracies. The mix of army and secret service agencies seems to be the lethal cocktail that controls the engines in democracies.
Think of the power, privilege and prestige of MI5/6, CIA, Mossad (המוסד), BND(Bundes Nachrichten Dienst) etc and then compare their ethos and lives with what it must be for the mother, father, partner, child of the young soldier who is maimed or killed while 'fighting for country' in far-off Afghanistan.
And think of the thousands of Afghans who have been killed.
The soldier, whatever his nationality and his dead Afghan 'enemy' share the reality that most of them are the dispossessed, the unemployed.
And we keep glorifying the endeavours of war.
The calamity that is hitting the church at present is a result of people daring to uncover 'secrets'. Why cannot the same discovery process take place in armies and secret service agencies?
It should. Everything is possible.
It all happens because of Eyjafjallajokull, a long drive to Berlin, journalist getting too pally with army types and then too much drink in an Irish pub in Berlin.
It is also an insight into the shadowy world of who actually runs the show in democracies. The mix of army and secret service agencies seems to be the lethal cocktail that controls the engines in democracies.
Think of the power, privilege and prestige of MI5/6, CIA, Mossad (המוסד), BND(Bundes Nachrichten Dienst) etc and then compare their ethos and lives with what it must be for the mother, father, partner, child of the young soldier who is maimed or killed while 'fighting for country' in far-off Afghanistan.
And think of the thousands of Afghans who have been killed.
The soldier, whatever his nationality and his dead Afghan 'enemy' share the reality that most of them are the dispossessed, the unemployed.
And we keep glorifying the endeavours of war.
The calamity that is hitting the church at present is a result of people daring to uncover 'secrets'. Why cannot the same discovery process take place in armies and secret service agencies?
It should. Everything is possible.
Schmidt talks of foreign policy delusions
Helmut Schmidt comments about the current trend in Berlin are most worrying. He refers to the 'pompous Wilhelmine slant'. He accuses the administration of foreign policy delusions not seen since the Kaiser era, particularly in Franco-German relations.
The former chancellor refers to a 'new national egotism'. In similar fashion Juergen Habermas and former foreign minister Joschka Fischer have criticised the Merkel government.
A spokesperson for Dr Merkel declined to comment directly, adding that the only monarch in Dr Merkel's chancellery office was a portrait of Catherine the Great.
"She admires her as a strong woman, not because she shares her political views," he said, adding hastily "and certainly not the views of the Kaiser.
The former chancellor refers to a 'new national egotism'. In similar fashion Juergen Habermas and former foreign minister Joschka Fischer have criticised the Merkel government.
A spokesperson for Dr Merkel declined to comment directly, adding that the only monarch in Dr Merkel's chancellery office was a portrait of Catherine the Great.
"She admires her as a strong woman, not because she shares her political views," he said, adding hastily "and certainly not the views of the Kaiser.
Wednesday, June 23, 2010
A sudden move from edicts to scurrying
In the last few days Bishop Walter Mixa was reported to be planning rescinding his resignation. Other reports told the story of the bishop being stitched up by more liberal German bishops and in today's Irish Times there is a short news piece 'confirming' that Germany's Catholic bishops yesterday said that they had sent a damning report to Pope Benedict to persuade him the man had to be removed from his post in Augsburg.
What at all is happening? Here are these men, constantly running for cover, confused and really looking pathetic and yet, in the past they spoke with such 'authority'.
Cardinal Meissner is reported in recent days as saying, "When the faithful ask me: 'How can we help our priests?' I always respond: 'Go to confession'."
If it were all so simple and as 'pious' as that? And why ask a cardinal?
It's difficult to hear those words when one recalls the days when Cardinal Meissner was cardinal bishop in Berlin. The man drove about in a top of the range Mercedes. A catholic bishop driving a Mercedes in the capital city of the GDR looked, to say the least, odd. The then Berlin diocese straddled east and west. On one occasion speaking at a seminar for priests, Cardinal Meissner said that when it came to faith and morals his word was the last word to be heard in the diocese. There was to be no discussion.
If one were to compare the edicts of bishops some 30 years ago with their current scurrying about, once is forced to ask for what do they stand, what do these men hold sacred?
Bishop Mixa has been for a long time associated with a trenchant conservative element within the German Catholic church. Their words have always sounded suspect.
These days it all makes for sad and maybe laughable reading.
What at all is happening? Here are these men, constantly running for cover, confused and really looking pathetic and yet, in the past they spoke with such 'authority'.
Cardinal Meissner is reported in recent days as saying, "When the faithful ask me: 'How can we help our priests?' I always respond: 'Go to confession'."
If it were all so simple and as 'pious' as that? And why ask a cardinal?
It's difficult to hear those words when one recalls the days when Cardinal Meissner was cardinal bishop in Berlin. The man drove about in a top of the range Mercedes. A catholic bishop driving a Mercedes in the capital city of the GDR looked, to say the least, odd. The then Berlin diocese straddled east and west. On one occasion speaking at a seminar for priests, Cardinal Meissner said that when it came to faith and morals his word was the last word to be heard in the diocese. There was to be no discussion.
If one were to compare the edicts of bishops some 30 years ago with their current scurrying about, once is forced to ask for what do they stand, what do these men hold sacred?
Bishop Mixa has been for a long time associated with a trenchant conservative element within the German Catholic church. Their words have always sounded suspect.
These days it all makes for sad and maybe laughable reading.
Tuesday, June 22, 2010
God mammon and carelessness
Last week's Der Spiegel magazine carries a four page article on money issues within the Catholic Church in Germany. The article is alarming and most worrying.
It begins with the reporting of two priests, who are involved in personal scams and then moves on to the vast financial portfolio of the church in Germany. Its underlying tone is the arrogance of church officials and the disconnect of many of them from 'reality'.
Reading the article one is forced to think about current developing trends within the church in Ireland.
Is it inevitable that when people do not have to work for their living that they lose touch with what it means to buy a loaf of bread? In this current economic crisis is the institutional clerical church feeling any pain or discomfort?
And then the latest news coming from Rome that the Vatican has a property portfolio of €9 million in the city.
In a parish in a diocese in Ireland there is an appeal for funds to rehabilitate a wall in a church that has given trouble since renovations some few years ago. The problem has happened because of clerical mismanagement and simple laziness and sloppiness - not being present, off on holiday, etc. And now the parish/diocese has simply gone to the people asking for funds to correct the error. It is yet another example of breathtaking arrogance. And what is most worrying is that there has not been a word of criticism from a single member of church personnel in the diocese. The spin on the story is shocking.
And that story probably replicated right across the country.
It begins with the reporting of two priests, who are involved in personal scams and then moves on to the vast financial portfolio of the church in Germany. Its underlying tone is the arrogance of church officials and the disconnect of many of them from 'reality'.
Reading the article one is forced to think about current developing trends within the church in Ireland.
Is it inevitable that when people do not have to work for their living that they lose touch with what it means to buy a loaf of bread? In this current economic crisis is the institutional clerical church feeling any pain or discomfort?
And then the latest news coming from Rome that the Vatican has a property portfolio of €9 million in the city.
In a parish in a diocese in Ireland there is an appeal for funds to rehabilitate a wall in a church that has given trouble since renovations some few years ago. The problem has happened because of clerical mismanagement and simple laziness and sloppiness - not being present, off on holiday, etc. And now the parish/diocese has simply gone to the people asking for funds to correct the error. It is yet another example of breathtaking arrogance. And what is most worrying is that there has not been a word of criticism from a single member of church personnel in the diocese. The spin on the story is shocking.
And that story probably replicated right across the country.
Thursday, June 10, 2010
Pope Benedict on Thomas Aquinas
In the general audience held in St Peter's Square on June 2, Benedict XVI continued with his catechesis dedicated to the great saints of the Middle Ages, speaking on St Thomas Aquinas, called the "Angelic Doctor" for the elevated nature of his thought and the purity of his life".
The Pope explained that Thomas was born around 1225 to a noble family in Roccasecca, Italy near the Abbey of Montecasino. He was sent to the University of Naples at a young age where he first became interested in Aristotelian thought and felt a call to the religious life.
In 1245 he went to Paris to study theology under the guidance of St Albert the Great who held this student in such esteem that he was asked to accompany him to Cologne, Germany to open a centre for theological studies.
"Thomas Aquinas, at St. Albert the Great's school, carried out a task of fundamental importance in the history of philosophy and theology as well as for history and culture", the Pope said. "He studied Aristotle and his interpreters in depth" and "commented on a great part of Aristotle's works, discerning what was valid in it from what was doubtful or refutable, demonstrating its consonance with the facts of Christian revelation, using Aristotelian thought with great breadth and intelligence in presenting the theological writings he composed. In short, Thomas Aquinas demonstrated that a natural harmony exists between reason and the Christian faith".
"His great intellectual endowment brought him again to Paris to teach theology. That is where he began his monumental literary output: commentaries on the Sacred Scriptures and the works of Aristotle along with his masterpiece, the Summa Theologiae".
"There were a few secretaries who assisted in drafting his works, among whom was Reginald of Piperno [...] who was bound to him by a fraternal and sincere friendship characterised by great trust and reliance. This is a characteristic of the saints", the pontiff observed. "They cultivate friendship because it is one of the most noble manifestations of the human heart and holds something of the divine within it".
In 1259 Thomas Aquinas participated in the general chapter of the Dominicans in Valenciennes, France to establish the order's constitutions. On his return to Italy, Pope Urban IV charged him with composing the liturgical texts for the feast of Corpus Christi.
"St Thomas has a profoundly Eucharistic soul", the pope affirmed. "The beautiful hymns that the liturgy of the Church sings to celebrate the mystery of the real presence of the Body and Blood of the Lord in the Eucharist are due to his faith and theological wisdom".
In Paris, where he returned in 1269, a great number of students followed his courses, but the "Angelic Doctor" also dedicated himself to preaching to the people, who listened with attention. "It is a great gift that theologians know how to speak with simplicity and fervour to the faithful. The ministry of preaching, on the other hand, also helps those who are experts in theology to develop a healthy pastoral realism and enriches their research with stimulation", the pontiff remarked.
In the final months of his life, St Thomas -- who died in 1274 at the Abbey of Fossanove, Italy when he was heading to Leon to participate in an ecumenical council -- confessed to his friend Reginald of Piperno that, after a divine revelation, he considered his work as "so much straw", writing nothing further afterwards.
"It is a mysterious episode that helps us understand not only Thomas's personal humility but also the fact that all that we are able to think and say about the faith, as elevated and pure as it may be, is infinitely surpassed by the greatness and beauty of God who will reveal himself to us in the fullness of paradise," Benedict XVI
The Pope explained that Thomas was born around 1225 to a noble family in Roccasecca, Italy near the Abbey of Montecasino. He was sent to the University of Naples at a young age where he first became interested in Aristotelian thought and felt a call to the religious life.
In 1245 he went to Paris to study theology under the guidance of St Albert the Great who held this student in such esteem that he was asked to accompany him to Cologne, Germany to open a centre for theological studies.
"Thomas Aquinas, at St. Albert the Great's school, carried out a task of fundamental importance in the history of philosophy and theology as well as for history and culture", the Pope said. "He studied Aristotle and his interpreters in depth" and "commented on a great part of Aristotle's works, discerning what was valid in it from what was doubtful or refutable, demonstrating its consonance with the facts of Christian revelation, using Aristotelian thought with great breadth and intelligence in presenting the theological writings he composed. In short, Thomas Aquinas demonstrated that a natural harmony exists between reason and the Christian faith".
"His great intellectual endowment brought him again to Paris to teach theology. That is where he began his monumental literary output: commentaries on the Sacred Scriptures and the works of Aristotle along with his masterpiece, the Summa Theologiae".
"There were a few secretaries who assisted in drafting his works, among whom was Reginald of Piperno [...] who was bound to him by a fraternal and sincere friendship characterised by great trust and reliance. This is a characteristic of the saints", the pontiff observed. "They cultivate friendship because it is one of the most noble manifestations of the human heart and holds something of the divine within it".
In 1259 Thomas Aquinas participated in the general chapter of the Dominicans in Valenciennes, France to establish the order's constitutions. On his return to Italy, Pope Urban IV charged him with composing the liturgical texts for the feast of Corpus Christi.
"St Thomas has a profoundly Eucharistic soul", the pope affirmed. "The beautiful hymns that the liturgy of the Church sings to celebrate the mystery of the real presence of the Body and Blood of the Lord in the Eucharist are due to his faith and theological wisdom".
In Paris, where he returned in 1269, a great number of students followed his courses, but the "Angelic Doctor" also dedicated himself to preaching to the people, who listened with attention. "It is a great gift that theologians know how to speak with simplicity and fervour to the faithful. The ministry of preaching, on the other hand, also helps those who are experts in theology to develop a healthy pastoral realism and enriches their research with stimulation", the pontiff remarked.
In the final months of his life, St Thomas -- who died in 1274 at the Abbey of Fossanove, Italy when he was heading to Leon to participate in an ecumenical council -- confessed to his friend Reginald of Piperno that, after a divine revelation, he considered his work as "so much straw", writing nothing further afterwards.
"It is a mysterious episode that helps us understand not only Thomas's personal humility but also the fact that all that we are able to think and say about the faith, as elevated and pure as it may be, is infinitely surpassed by the greatness and beauty of God who will reveal himself to us in the fullness of paradise," Benedict XVI
Tuesday, June 8, 2010
AA celebrates 75 sober years
This week Alcoholics Anonymous is celebrating its 75th anniversary. Today's Irish Times carries a feature to mark the occasion.
Most people are only too aware of the damage that alcohol abuse can cause.
There is probably not a family in Ireland that is not touched by the demon drink.
AA traces its origins to June 10, 1935 the day when Dr Bill Smith had his last ever drink. He and businessman Bill Wilson met and talked about their drinking habits and experiences. Today the global fellowship is in 150 countries with a membership of two million.
On a personal note, up to last year I suppose I could say that I was a social drinker. Maybe on no more than three or four occasions I drank too much. But I would seldom if ever go out for a meal without having a glass of wine outside of Lent or Advent.
Then last year on June 12 I made a spontaneous decision to give up all alcoholic drink until a particular issued had been resolved. The year is up on Saturday and the issue has been resolved.
Surely it would be silly ever again to imbibe.
Most people are only too aware of the damage that alcohol abuse can cause.
There is probably not a family in Ireland that is not touched by the demon drink.
AA traces its origins to June 10, 1935 the day when Dr Bill Smith had his last ever drink. He and businessman Bill Wilson met and talked about their drinking habits and experiences. Today the global fellowship is in 150 countries with a membership of two million.
On a personal note, up to last year I suppose I could say that I was a social drinker. Maybe on no more than three or four occasions I drank too much. But I would seldom if ever go out for a meal without having a glass of wine outside of Lent or Advent.
Then last year on June 12 I made a spontaneous decision to give up all alcoholic drink until a particular issued had been resolved. The year is up on Saturday and the issue has been resolved.
Surely it would be silly ever again to imbibe.
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
Investigators have much to do
The episcopal line-up to investigate the Irish Catholic Church seems impressive. They seem a decent enough bunch of men. But is it at all possible to get to the core of so many issues that need serious investigation?
One aspect all the media seem to get wrong and that is a link between so-called liberal minded people and homosexuality. Within the church it is the opposite that is the case. Most closet homosexual priests and brothers espouse to a right wing style of thinking.
The resignation of the Lib Dem member of the British Cabinet because of his fear in expressing his sexual orientation surely has to be a powerful allegory for similar issues within priesthood.
Hopefully when the investigators arrive in Ireland there will be full, open, honest and candid discussion. It might a chance for truth to happen.
One aspect all the media seem to get wrong and that is a link between so-called liberal minded people and homosexuality. Within the church it is the opposite that is the case. Most closet homosexual priests and brothers espouse to a right wing style of thinking.
The resignation of the Lib Dem member of the British Cabinet because of his fear in expressing his sexual orientation surely has to be a powerful allegory for similar issues within priesthood.
Hopefully when the investigators arrive in Ireland there will be full, open, honest and candid discussion. It might a chance for truth to happen.
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
Dunkirk 70 years ago
Today is the 70th anniversary of the evacuation of more than 338,000 Allied troops from Dunkirk.
Tuesday, May 25, 2010
Arrive at 17.25 depart 19.00
What's the glue or 'itness' that keeps the world together?
A man in his late 60s, early 70s travels from Dublin Heuston to Millstreet every Thursday evening. Departure time is 19.00.
He is on it every Thursday. Then one day he is seen travelling on the Kerry Dublin train that arrives in Heuston at 17.25.
Is it that the man does this every day? Of course it is his business. If he does do it every day is there something sad about it? Is he anymore sad than the rest of humankind?
Observing him walking out through the car park at Millstreet just before 10pm on Thursday one had to ask where was he going. Was he going to someone? Would he be chatting at home later with family? There is a frightened look in his face, a look that says, 'I'm all on my own'. There is also a severity about him. On the train he never seems to speak with anyone and all the time his eyes seem to move with great speed observing everything within reach.
Of course it would be inappropriate to ask him about himself. Or would it?
A man in his late 60s, early 70s travels from Dublin Heuston to Millstreet every Thursday evening. Departure time is 19.00.
He is on it every Thursday. Then one day he is seen travelling on the Kerry Dublin train that arrives in Heuston at 17.25.
Is it that the man does this every day? Of course it is his business. If he does do it every day is there something sad about it? Is he anymore sad than the rest of humankind?
Observing him walking out through the car park at Millstreet just before 10pm on Thursday one had to ask where was he going. Was he going to someone? Would he be chatting at home later with family? There is a frightened look in his face, a look that says, 'I'm all on my own'. There is also a severity about him. On the train he never seems to speak with anyone and all the time his eyes seem to move with great speed observing everything within reach.
Of course it would be inappropriate to ask him about himself. Or would it?
Thursday, May 20, 2010
Church cries out for prophetic and brave voices
The editorial in today's Irish Times comments on Ian Elliott's report earlier in the week. It again brings to notice his comments on clericalism.
"Until clericalism is completely behind us, we are not going to see change," Morgan argues. "Clericalism is the antithesis of what the church is supposed to be about." And he challenged lay Catholics 'to take initiatives, to put it up to church leadership.
All our views and opinions are partly formed by our own experiences and sometimes it can be difficult to be wise and objective. Notwithstanding, it seems that at present a greatly worrying 'clericalism' is spreading across seminaries and clerical institutions. And not a word of worry or protest is to be heard.
Simply look at some of the men who are placed in charge of those studying for priesthood. Look at their dress, their interests and style. Examine how perfectly coiffured they are, whether in their monastic habits or their fashionable glitzy apparel for dinners in top class restaurants. Listen to their conversations and note the misogyny and total disdain for the 'material world'.
Simply examine the links between a worrying closet homosexual behaviour and style with an obsessive 'obedience' to church 'dogma'.
Not for a moment is this a comment about homosexuality or homosexual practice. But it is an observation about clerics, who hide their sexual orientation and there seems to be a real link between this closet 'behaviour/atmosphere' and an unhealthy interest in Rome and all its gossip.
Watch their inordinate interest in liturgical dress and practice and above all listen to their bizarre sermons.
Surely this has nothing to do with church but everything to do with the clericalism that Ian Elliott is talking about. That anyone should think that this form of clericalism is on the wane is another sign of how far removed people actually are from the 'clerical church'.
The Irish Times editorial ends with the following sentence. "That essential recognition of the necessity for a revolution of lay empowerment in the church remains a battle unwon."
Clericalism will never allow that battle to be won. Alas the damage and pain, that clericalism causes is an untold story. The recent revelations about the Legionaries of Christ give some, just some insight into the realities of clericalism.
Is this what Dermot Martin was speaking about last week? Maybe.
"Until clericalism is completely behind us, we are not going to see change," Morgan argues. "Clericalism is the antithesis of what the church is supposed to be about." And he challenged lay Catholics 'to take initiatives, to put it up to church leadership.
All our views and opinions are partly formed by our own experiences and sometimes it can be difficult to be wise and objective. Notwithstanding, it seems that at present a greatly worrying 'clericalism' is spreading across seminaries and clerical institutions. And not a word of worry or protest is to be heard.
Simply look at some of the men who are placed in charge of those studying for priesthood. Look at their dress, their interests and style. Examine how perfectly coiffured they are, whether in their monastic habits or their fashionable glitzy apparel for dinners in top class restaurants. Listen to their conversations and note the misogyny and total disdain for the 'material world'.
Simply examine the links between a worrying closet homosexual behaviour and style with an obsessive 'obedience' to church 'dogma'.
Not for a moment is this a comment about homosexuality or homosexual practice. But it is an observation about clerics, who hide their sexual orientation and there seems to be a real link between this closet 'behaviour/atmosphere' and an unhealthy interest in Rome and all its gossip.
Watch their inordinate interest in liturgical dress and practice and above all listen to their bizarre sermons.
Surely this has nothing to do with church but everything to do with the clericalism that Ian Elliott is talking about. That anyone should think that this form of clericalism is on the wane is another sign of how far removed people actually are from the 'clerical church'.
The Irish Times editorial ends with the following sentence. "That essential recognition of the necessity for a revolution of lay empowerment in the church remains a battle unwon."
Clericalism will never allow that battle to be won. Alas the damage and pain, that clericalism causes is an untold story. The recent revelations about the Legionaries of Christ give some, just some insight into the realities of clericalism.
Is this what Dermot Martin was speaking about last week? Maybe.
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
Aspirations and reality differ
The chairman of the Catholic Church's National Board for Safeguarding Children has called for a 'radical change' to the church's clericalism.
"Until clericalism is completely behind us, we are not going to see change," John Morgan said. He went on to say that "clericalism is the antithesis of what the church is supposed to be about".
Is it this clericalism that Dermot Martin is speaking about?
Is Mr Morgan saying there is a link between clericalism and what has happened?
While at face value what Mr Morgan is saying is great to see, the reality is something different.
What he says about the word 'lay' and 'cleric' is a powerful way of explaining the situation.
Right across church institutes there is a growing clericalism evolving. It is a most worrying trend. There seems to be a link between closet homosexuality and an exaggerated interst in liturgy. It is difficult to understand how young men can express great interest in old monastic traditions and at the same time be fully in touch with a world that espouses totally different interests and values. It also seems there is a move away from a real and honest interest in people and their daily struggles. Instead of praying with the people, there is the trend to replace the cloister and do the praying behind closed doors.
There is something profoundly worrying happening. People are talking about these developments, yet nothing is being done. More or less the old story with different chapters.
"Until clericalism is completely behind us, we are not going to see change," John Morgan said. He went on to say that "clericalism is the antithesis of what the church is supposed to be about".
Is it this clericalism that Dermot Martin is speaking about?
Is Mr Morgan saying there is a link between clericalism and what has happened?
While at face value what Mr Morgan is saying is great to see, the reality is something different.
What he says about the word 'lay' and 'cleric' is a powerful way of explaining the situation.
Right across church institutes there is a growing clericalism evolving. It is a most worrying trend. There seems to be a link between closet homosexuality and an exaggerated interst in liturgy. It is difficult to understand how young men can express great interest in old monastic traditions and at the same time be fully in touch with a world that espouses totally different interests and values. It also seems there is a move away from a real and honest interest in people and their daily struggles. Instead of praying with the people, there is the trend to replace the cloister and do the praying behind closed doors.
There is something profoundly worrying happening. People are talking about these developments, yet nothing is being done. More or less the old story with different chapters.
Wednesday, May 12, 2010
Church leaders may be seeing the light
Dermot Martin gave a 4,000 word speech to the Knights of Columbanus in Dublin on Monday. It was a far reaching talk. A pity he was not more specific. But he did speak about 'dark forces'. He also referred to 'clericalism'
Is it possible that the penny has dropped with high officials within the Catholic Church? The Archbishop of Vienna too has spoken out in recent days.
But words are not enough. The climate, instead of improving, seems to be deteriorating.
When 'clerics' can travel the world to attend a Cher concert surely there is something very wrong in the State of Denmark. Cher is the world's great gay iconic figure.
Again, it is the juxtaposition of the high life with monastic utterances, an impression of being conservatively orthodox with extensive air miles in the back pocket.
Sinn Féin or the IRA were accused of having the ballot paper in one hand and the rifle in the other. The analogy applies appropriately to modern day clericalism.
Is it possible that the penny has dropped with high officials within the Catholic Church? The Archbishop of Vienna too has spoken out in recent days.
But words are not enough. The climate, instead of improving, seems to be deteriorating.
When 'clerics' can travel the world to attend a Cher concert surely there is something very wrong in the State of Denmark. Cher is the world's great gay iconic figure.
Again, it is the juxtaposition of the high life with monastic utterances, an impression of being conservatively orthodox with extensive air miles in the back pocket.
Sinn Féin or the IRA were accused of having the ballot paper in one hand and the rifle in the other. The analogy applies appropriately to modern day clericalism.
Thursday, May 6, 2010
65th anniversary of ending of WW II
Tomorrow, May 7 is the 65th anniversary of the ending of World War II. Signing took place in Reims on May 7 and in Karlshorst on May 8.
The first Instrument of Surrender was signed at Rheims, France, at 02.41 on May 7, 1945. The signing took place in a red brick schoolhouse that served as the Supreme Headquarters Allied Expeditionary Force (SHAEF). It was to take effect at 23.01 Central European time on May 8, 1945.
The unconditional surrender of the German armed forces was signed by Generaloberst Alfred Jodl, on behalf of the Oberkommando der Wehrmacht and as the representative for the new Reich President, Grand Admiral Karl Dönitz. Walter Bedell Smith signed on behalf of the Western allies, and Ivan Susloparov on behalf of the Soviets. French major general François Sevez signed as the official witness.
In Rheims, the United States and Britain acted on behalf of all Allied forces, whereas France, Germany and the USSR acted individually. The Rheims' instrument of surrender was ratified May 8, which was agreed at the time of the May 7 signing.
Signing at Karlshorst
This ratification was a response to both Soviet and British concerns. The Soviets desired a signature in the presence of the Soviet Supreme Commander (Major General Susloparov, who had accepted the May 7 surrender for the Soviets, was only liaison officer at the Western Headquarters). The British wanted the surrender to be signed by the highest military and civilian representatives of the German Reich, in order to avoid a repeat of the "stab in the back" legend which had been cultivated by the Germans after World War I because the armistice had been signed only by a civilian politician and an unknown general. (Jodl, who signed in Rheims, was an officer without the power of command). It was agreed to have the May 7 act ratified with the signatures of the commanders in chief of the Wehrmacht, army, air force and marines, who were brought to Karlshorst, the seat of the Soviet Supreme Commander. The representatives of the Western Headquarters, the United Kingdom, France and the United States entered the dining room of the officers' mess in Karlshorst shortly before midnight. The German delegation, which had been flown in from Flensburg to Tempelhof in a US aircraft, entered the room shortly after midnight after Marshal Georgy Zhukov, the Soviet representative, had opened the ceremony.
The ratification of the German Act of Unconditional Surrender was signed at 00.15 after its regulations had already been in effect for over an hour 23.01 (Central European Time).
Representatives:
Soviet Union: Marshal Georgy Zhukov on behalf of the Supreme High Command of the Red Army. United Kingdom: Air Chief Marshal Arthur William Tedder as Deputy Supreme Commander of the Allied Expeditionary Force. United States: General Carl Spaatz, Commanding United States Strategic Air Forces as witness .France: General Jean de Lattre de Tassigny, Commanding First French Army, as witness
Germany: Admiral Hans-Georg von Friedeburg as Commander-in-Chief of the navy (Kriegsmarine), Colonel-General Hans-Jürgen Stumpff as the representative of the air force (Luftwaffe),Field Marshal Wilhelm Keitel as the Chief of Staff of the German Armed Forces and as representative of the army (Oberkommando der Wehrmacht)
Text of the Instrument of Surrender (Rheims)
Only this text in English is authoritative
Act of Military Surrender
1. We the undersigned, acting by authority of the German High Command, hereby surrender unconditionally to the Supreme Commander, Allied Expeditionary Force and simultaneously to the Soviet High Command all forces on land, sea, and in the air who are at this date under German control.
2. The German High Command will at once issue orders to all German military, naval and air authorities and to all forces under German control to cease active operations at 23.01 Central European time on May 8 and to remain in the positions occupied at that time. No ship, vessel, or aircraft is to be scuttled, or any damage done to their hull, machinery or equipment.
3. The German High Command will at once issue to the appropriate commanders, and ensure the carrying out of any further orders issued by the Supreme Commander, Allied Expeditionary Force and by the Soviet High Command.
4. This act of military surrender is without prejudice to, and will be superseded by any general instrument of surrender imposed by, or on behalf of the United Nations and applicable to Germany and the German armed forces as a whole.
5. In the event of the German High Command or any of the forces under their control failing to act in accordance with this Act of Surrender, the Supreme Commander, Allied Expeditionary Force and the Soviet High Command will take such punitive or other action as they deem appropriate.
Signed at Rheims at 02.41 France on the 7th day of May, 1945.
On behalf of the German High Command. Alfred Jodl
On behalf of the Supreme Commander, Allied Expeditionary Force. Walter Bedell Smith
On behalf of the Soviet High Command. Ivan Sousloparov
Major General, French Army (Witness) François Sevez
Text of the Instrument of Surrender (Berlin)
1. We the undersigned, acting by authority of the German High Command, hereby surrender unconditionally to the Supreme Commander, Allied Expeditionary Force and simultaneously to the Supreme High Command of the Red Army all forces on land, at sea, and in the air who are at this date under German control.
2. The German High Command will at once issue order to all German military, naval and air authorities and to all forces under German control to cease active operations at 23.01 hours Central European time on 8th May 1945, to remain in all positions occupied at that time and to disarm completely, handing over their weapons and equipment to the local allied commanders or officers designated by Representatives of the Allied Supreme Commands. No ship, vessel, or aircraft is to be scuttled, or any damage done to their hull, machinery or equipment, and also to machines of all kinds, armament, apparatus, and all the technical means of prosecution of war in general.
3. The German High Command will at once issue to the appropriate commanders, and ensure the carrying out of any further orders issued by the Supreme Commander, Allied Expeditionary Force and by the Supreme Command of the Red Army.
4. This act of military surrender is without prejudice to, and will be superseded by any general instrument of surrender imposed by, or on behalf of the United Nations and applicable to GERMANY and the German armed forces as a whole.
5. In the event of the German High Command or any of the forces under their control failing to act in accordance with this Act of Surrender, the Supreme Commander, Allied Expeditionary Force and the Supreme High Command of the Red Army will take such punitive or other action as they deem appropriate.
6. This Act is drawn up in the English, Russian and German languages. The English and Russian are the only authentic texts.
Signed at Berlin on the 8 day of May, 1945
Von Friedeburg
Keitel
Stumpff
On behalf of the German High Command
IN THE PRESENCE OF: A.W.Tedder
On behalf of the Supreme Commander, Allied Expeditionary Force
Georgi Zhukov On behalf of the Supreme High Command of the Red Army
At the signing also were present as witnesses:
F. de Lattre-Tassigny General Commanding in Chief
First French Army
Carl Spaatz, General, Commanding
United States Strategic Air Force
The first Instrument of Surrender was signed at Rheims, France, at 02.41 on May 7, 1945. The signing took place in a red brick schoolhouse that served as the Supreme Headquarters Allied Expeditionary Force (SHAEF). It was to take effect at 23.01 Central European time on May 8, 1945.
The unconditional surrender of the German armed forces was signed by Generaloberst Alfred Jodl, on behalf of the Oberkommando der Wehrmacht and as the representative for the new Reich President, Grand Admiral Karl Dönitz. Walter Bedell Smith signed on behalf of the Western allies, and Ivan Susloparov on behalf of the Soviets. French major general François Sevez signed as the official witness.
In Rheims, the United States and Britain acted on behalf of all Allied forces, whereas France, Germany and the USSR acted individually. The Rheims' instrument of surrender was ratified May 8, which was agreed at the time of the May 7 signing.
Signing at Karlshorst
This ratification was a response to both Soviet and British concerns. The Soviets desired a signature in the presence of the Soviet Supreme Commander (Major General Susloparov, who had accepted the May 7 surrender for the Soviets, was only liaison officer at the Western Headquarters). The British wanted the surrender to be signed by the highest military and civilian representatives of the German Reich, in order to avoid a repeat of the "stab in the back" legend which had been cultivated by the Germans after World War I because the armistice had been signed only by a civilian politician and an unknown general. (Jodl, who signed in Rheims, was an officer without the power of command). It was agreed to have the May 7 act ratified with the signatures of the commanders in chief of the Wehrmacht, army, air force and marines, who were brought to Karlshorst, the seat of the Soviet Supreme Commander. The representatives of the Western Headquarters, the United Kingdom, France and the United States entered the dining room of the officers' mess in Karlshorst shortly before midnight. The German delegation, which had been flown in from Flensburg to Tempelhof in a US aircraft, entered the room shortly after midnight after Marshal Georgy Zhukov, the Soviet representative, had opened the ceremony.
The ratification of the German Act of Unconditional Surrender was signed at 00.15 after its regulations had already been in effect for over an hour 23.01 (Central European Time).
Representatives:
Soviet Union: Marshal Georgy Zhukov on behalf of the Supreme High Command of the Red Army. United Kingdom: Air Chief Marshal Arthur William Tedder as Deputy Supreme Commander of the Allied Expeditionary Force. United States: General Carl Spaatz, Commanding United States Strategic Air Forces as witness .France: General Jean de Lattre de Tassigny, Commanding First French Army, as witness
Germany: Admiral Hans-Georg von Friedeburg as Commander-in-Chief of the navy (Kriegsmarine), Colonel-General Hans-Jürgen Stumpff as the representative of the air force (Luftwaffe),Field Marshal Wilhelm Keitel as the Chief of Staff of the German Armed Forces and as representative of the army (Oberkommando der Wehrmacht)
Text of the Instrument of Surrender (Rheims)
Only this text in English is authoritative
Act of Military Surrender
1. We the undersigned, acting by authority of the German High Command, hereby surrender unconditionally to the Supreme Commander, Allied Expeditionary Force and simultaneously to the Soviet High Command all forces on land, sea, and in the air who are at this date under German control.
2. The German High Command will at once issue orders to all German military, naval and air authorities and to all forces under German control to cease active operations at 23.01 Central European time on May 8 and to remain in the positions occupied at that time. No ship, vessel, or aircraft is to be scuttled, or any damage done to their hull, machinery or equipment.
3. The German High Command will at once issue to the appropriate commanders, and ensure the carrying out of any further orders issued by the Supreme Commander, Allied Expeditionary Force and by the Soviet High Command.
4. This act of military surrender is without prejudice to, and will be superseded by any general instrument of surrender imposed by, or on behalf of the United Nations and applicable to Germany and the German armed forces as a whole.
5. In the event of the German High Command or any of the forces under their control failing to act in accordance with this Act of Surrender, the Supreme Commander, Allied Expeditionary Force and the Soviet High Command will take such punitive or other action as they deem appropriate.
Signed at Rheims at 02.41 France on the 7th day of May, 1945.
On behalf of the German High Command. Alfred Jodl
On behalf of the Supreme Commander, Allied Expeditionary Force. Walter Bedell Smith
On behalf of the Soviet High Command. Ivan Sousloparov
Major General, French Army (Witness) François Sevez
Text of the Instrument of Surrender (Berlin)
1. We the undersigned, acting by authority of the German High Command, hereby surrender unconditionally to the Supreme Commander, Allied Expeditionary Force and simultaneously to the Supreme High Command of the Red Army all forces on land, at sea, and in the air who are at this date under German control.
2. The German High Command will at once issue order to all German military, naval and air authorities and to all forces under German control to cease active operations at 23.01 hours Central European time on 8th May 1945, to remain in all positions occupied at that time and to disarm completely, handing over their weapons and equipment to the local allied commanders or officers designated by Representatives of the Allied Supreme Commands. No ship, vessel, or aircraft is to be scuttled, or any damage done to their hull, machinery or equipment, and also to machines of all kinds, armament, apparatus, and all the technical means of prosecution of war in general.
3. The German High Command will at once issue to the appropriate commanders, and ensure the carrying out of any further orders issued by the Supreme Commander, Allied Expeditionary Force and by the Supreme Command of the Red Army.
4. This act of military surrender is without prejudice to, and will be superseded by any general instrument of surrender imposed by, or on behalf of the United Nations and applicable to GERMANY and the German armed forces as a whole.
5. In the event of the German High Command or any of the forces under their control failing to act in accordance with this Act of Surrender, the Supreme Commander, Allied Expeditionary Force and the Supreme High Command of the Red Army will take such punitive or other action as they deem appropriate.
6. This Act is drawn up in the English, Russian and German languages. The English and Russian are the only authentic texts.
Signed at Berlin on the 8 day of May, 1945
Von Friedeburg
Keitel
Stumpff
On behalf of the German High Command
IN THE PRESENCE OF: A.W.Tedder
On behalf of the Supreme Commander, Allied Expeditionary Force
Georgi Zhukov On behalf of the Supreme High Command of the Red Army
At the signing also were present as witnesses:
F. de Lattre-Tassigny General Commanding in Chief
First French Army
Carl Spaatz, General, Commanding
United States Strategic Air Force
Wednesday, May 5, 2010
Theologian fights church tax law
Great story in today's Irish Times about a German theologian taking his tax case to the Vatican.
He refuses to pay church tax but argues he is still a believer. He argues by refusing to pay the German church tax he has not exited from the church as a community of believers, but from the church as a public corporation.
This story is sure to run and prove most interesting.
When a person signs the dotted line to leave, it is called a Kirchenausstritt or church exit. the person's name is struck from the church register and they are excluded from the sacraments. Of course it is fraught with profound problems. Today's Irish Times says that such 'Kirchenqustritters' are also excluded from church services. This reporting error highlights the silliness of the current dispensation.
He refuses to pay church tax but argues he is still a believer. He argues by refusing to pay the German church tax he has not exited from the church as a community of believers, but from the church as a public corporation.
This story is sure to run and prove most interesting.
When a person signs the dotted line to leave, it is called a Kirchenausstritt or church exit. the person's name is struck from the church register and they are excluded from the sacraments. Of course it is fraught with profound problems. Today's Irish Times says that such 'Kirchenqustritters' are also excluded from church services. This reporting error highlights the silliness of the current dispensation.
With an eye on the job in Armagh
Alan Dukes has called for the resignation of all bishops in Ireland.
It would make more sense if he asked for a change in the method of appointment of bishops worldwide.
It is most worrying that a significant number of today's bishops were appointed by John Paul ll. It was John Paul ll who promoted the founder of the Legionaries of Christ.
The system and environment in which bishops are appointed needs a route and branch change.
The blatant careerism of priests and bishops is worrying. Already it is clear that some bishops have already begun to throw shapes hoping to be the next archbishop in Armagh. Distasteful, undignified and another proof that nothing has changed.
When these men appear to speak 'lofty' words one is forced to smile.
It would make more sense if he asked for a change in the method of appointment of bishops worldwide.
It is most worrying that a significant number of today's bishops were appointed by John Paul ll. It was John Paul ll who promoted the founder of the Legionaries of Christ.
The system and environment in which bishops are appointed needs a route and branch change.
The blatant careerism of priests and bishops is worrying. Already it is clear that some bishops have already begun to throw shapes hoping to be the next archbishop in Armagh. Distasteful, undignified and another proof that nothing has changed.
When these men appear to speak 'lofty' words one is forced to smile.
Ar ais leis an Ash
Smart letter in today's Irish Times from David FitzGERALD in Finland.
Madam,
Ar ais aris. - Yours, etc.
Madam,
Ar ais aris. - Yours, etc.
Thursday, April 29, 2010
Beckett play at Gate
Samuel Beckett's Krapp's Last Tape, starring Michael Gambon and directed by Michael Colgan is running at the Gate. A great production and not to be missed.
While it all may be futile between the moments of joy, it does give hope to those heading into an older age. Or does it? But Krapp admits to experience a 'fire' in his older age. Great.
While it all may be futile between the moments of joy, it does give hope to those heading into an older age. Or does it? But Krapp admits to experience a 'fire' in his older age. Great.
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
Dublin's bikes for hire
Sean MacConnell's Irishman's Diary in today's Irish Times is worth a read and makes for a good laugh.
He makes some terrible assumptions. He presumes that someone who lives in Dublin and owns a bike would not bother with the bicycles for hire. The man is downright wrong.
The bike for hire scheme is the best thing that has hit Dublin in a long time. Yes, he is correct in saying, that there are many dodgy 'cyclists' availing of the scheme. But so too are there dodgy drivers, riders etc. How many spivs have availed of the scrappage scheme and driving about in flash 2010 cars?
It is striking that it seems to be a middle class sport.
Dublin City Council intends increasing the number of bikes available at present.
It is a pity that there are no stands or bays at the main rail stations. There should be bikes available at Heuston and Connolly stations. I wonder why they are not there?
Seán MacConnell could well be in breach of age and sex discrimination laws in this piece! The bikes are great and Seán, I reccommend you jump up on one and take a trip around the city.
But he is saying something about the 'type' of people who are moving over to the bicycle. The Government 'cycle to work' scheme seems to have put a lot of undesirables on to saddles. One gets the impression that some arrogant show-off car drivers have moved over to bikes and are now as selfish and arrogant on two wheels as they were on four. Pretentious gits. Why don't you write about those idiots Mr MacConnell?
He makes some terrible assumptions. He presumes that someone who lives in Dublin and owns a bike would not bother with the bicycles for hire. The man is downright wrong.
The bike for hire scheme is the best thing that has hit Dublin in a long time. Yes, he is correct in saying, that there are many dodgy 'cyclists' availing of the scheme. But so too are there dodgy drivers, riders etc. How many spivs have availed of the scrappage scheme and driving about in flash 2010 cars?
It is striking that it seems to be a middle class sport.
Dublin City Council intends increasing the number of bikes available at present.
It is a pity that there are no stands or bays at the main rail stations. There should be bikes available at Heuston and Connolly stations. I wonder why they are not there?
Seán MacConnell could well be in breach of age and sex discrimination laws in this piece! The bikes are great and Seán, I reccommend you jump up on one and take a trip around the city.
But he is saying something about the 'type' of people who are moving over to the bicycle. The Government 'cycle to work' scheme seems to have put a lot of undesirables on to saddles. One gets the impression that some arrogant show-off car drivers have moved over to bikes and are now as selfish and arrogant on two wheels as they were on four. Pretentious gits. Why don't you write about those idiots Mr MacConnell?
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
Moral theologian speaks to FR
Apologies that this is in German. But an English translation does not appear to be available at present.
It is in today's
The church cannot avoid the issue any longer but unfortunatley it does. It also avoids any open and honest discussion within priesthood on the topic.
The media constantly gets the conservative/liberal divide on this issue so wrong. The media portayal is totally at odds with the reality.
Homosexuelle in der Kirche
Schwule Liebe "verdient Rückhalt"
Moraltheologe Eberhard Schockenhoff im FR-Interview über das Verhältnis der katholischen Kirche zur Homosexualität.
Herr Professor Schockenhoff, ist Homosexualität Sünde?
Die kirchliche Lehre ist differenzierter, als Sie Ihre Frage formulieren.
Das ist gar nicht meine Formulierung, sondern die des Essener Bischofs Franz-Josef Overbeck in der TV-Sendung "Anne Will".
Er hat die kirchliche Lehre dargestellt ...
. .. und da hat er gesagt, Homosexualität sei Sünde.
Streiten wir doch nicht um Worte in der hitzigen Situation einer Talkshow! Betrachten wir lieber das, was wirklich Lehre der Kirche ist!
Nämlich?
Erstens sagt die Kirche: Niemand darf wegen seiner sexuellen Orientierung diskriminiert werden. Die sexuelle Veranlagung eines Menschen ist keine Frage der Moral, und ein homosexuell empfindender Mensch, nach dem Ebenbild Gottes geschaffen, verdient die gleiche Achtung und Wertschätzung wie jeder andere.
So redet die Kirche aber noch nicht lange und nicht laut, oder?
Öffentlich wird leider nur wahrgenommen, was die Kirche zweitens sagt: Homosexuelle Handlungen sind in sich ungeordnet, sündhaft und daher strikt abzulehnen.
Hunger haben ist erlaubt, aber essen ist verboten?
Die Unterscheidung zwischen Veranlagung und Handlung ist vielen in der Tat zu abstrakt. Sie wird der Lebenserfahrung der Betroffenen nicht gerecht. Sie fühlen sich darum von der Kirche zurückgestoßen, ganz zu schweigen vom Unverständnis in weiten Teilen der Gesellschaft. Die Kirche muss homosexuellen Menschen eine Antwort geben, wie sie mit ihrer Veranlagung umgehen sollen.
Tut sie doch: "Kein Sex!"
Das überfordert aber viele. Und ich bezweifle, dass es das letzte Wort der Kirche sein kann, alle homosexuellen Handlungen gleich zu beurteilen, unabhängig vom Kontext. Wenn homosexuell empfindende Menschen eine feste, auf Solidarität und Dauer angelegte Beziehung eingehen, dann ist das ethisch wertvoll. Ihr Bemühen verdient Rückhalt und ein positives Echo der Kirche. Ich denke, in solchen Fällen muss das Urteil über homosexuelle Handlungen in den Hintergrund treten. Ich sage das auch, weil erkennbar immer mehr Gläubige auf Distanz zu einer kirchlichen Sexualmoral gehen, die ihnen insgesamt lebensfremd und lebensfeindlich vorkommt. Papst und Bischöfe sollten das ernst nehmen und nicht als Laxheit abtun.
Zur Person
Eberhard Schockenhoff, 57 Jahre alt, ist Professor für Moraltheologie an der Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg. Der katholische Geistliche studierte in Tübingen und Rom. Von 2001 bis 2008 gehörte er dem Nationalen Ethikrat an, seither ist Schockenhoff Mitglied des Nachfolgegremiums, des Deutschen Ethikrates. jf Der homosexuelle Theologe David Berger hat sich am 23. April in der FR geoutet und der katholischen Kirche Bigotterie vorgeworfen: Nach außen bekämpfe sie Homosexualität, nach innen würden homosexuelle Geistliche und Mitarbeiter mit subtilem Druck gefügig gemacht. Teilen Sie seine Beobachtung?
In extrem konservativen Kreisen mag das so sein. Die Pfarrgemeinden sind zumeist durchaus aufgeschlossen gegenüber Homosexuellen.
Berger spricht ausdrücklich von den Bischöfen. Manche sollen gar behaupten, homosexuelle Priester gebe es in ihren Bistümern nicht. Ein "Programm der Unehrlichkeit" nennt Berger das.
Sicher erhöhen Bischöfe mit einer solchen Position die Gefahr, dass die Betroffenen sich verstellen und verstecken müssen. Manche in der Bischofskonferenz sagen, homosexuelle Männer könnten nicht zu Priestern geweiht werden, weil die ehelose Lebensform im Zölibat für sie ja kein Verzicht sei. Die meisten Bischöfe dagegen sehen - wie ich finde, zu Recht - im Zölibat eine Form des Einsatzes für die Glaubensverkündigung, unabhängig von der sexuellen Orientierung. Enthaltsam leben, ohne Sex - damit tun sich Homosexuelle genauso leicht oder schwer wie Heterosexuelle.
Interview: Joachim Frank
Lesen Sie auch
Missbrauchsskandal: "Leitlinien" können die Kirche nicht retten
Bekenntnis: Schwuler klagt Kirche an
It is in today's
Frankfurter Rundschauand is well worth reading.
The church cannot avoid the issue any longer but unfortunatley it does. It also avoids any open and honest discussion within priesthood on the topic.
The media constantly gets the conservative/liberal divide on this issue so wrong. The media portayal is totally at odds with the reality.
Homosexuelle in der Kirche
Schwule Liebe "verdient Rückhalt"
Moraltheologe Eberhard Schockenhoff im FR-Interview über das Verhältnis der katholischen Kirche zur Homosexualität.
Herr Professor Schockenhoff, ist Homosexualität Sünde?
Die kirchliche Lehre ist differenzierter, als Sie Ihre Frage formulieren.
Das ist gar nicht meine Formulierung, sondern die des Essener Bischofs Franz-Josef Overbeck in der TV-Sendung "Anne Will".
Er hat die kirchliche Lehre dargestellt ...
. .. und da hat er gesagt, Homosexualität sei Sünde.
Streiten wir doch nicht um Worte in der hitzigen Situation einer Talkshow! Betrachten wir lieber das, was wirklich Lehre der Kirche ist!
Nämlich?
Erstens sagt die Kirche: Niemand darf wegen seiner sexuellen Orientierung diskriminiert werden. Die sexuelle Veranlagung eines Menschen ist keine Frage der Moral, und ein homosexuell empfindender Mensch, nach dem Ebenbild Gottes geschaffen, verdient die gleiche Achtung und Wertschätzung wie jeder andere.
So redet die Kirche aber noch nicht lange und nicht laut, oder?
Öffentlich wird leider nur wahrgenommen, was die Kirche zweitens sagt: Homosexuelle Handlungen sind in sich ungeordnet, sündhaft und daher strikt abzulehnen.
Hunger haben ist erlaubt, aber essen ist verboten?
Die Unterscheidung zwischen Veranlagung und Handlung ist vielen in der Tat zu abstrakt. Sie wird der Lebenserfahrung der Betroffenen nicht gerecht. Sie fühlen sich darum von der Kirche zurückgestoßen, ganz zu schweigen vom Unverständnis in weiten Teilen der Gesellschaft. Die Kirche muss homosexuellen Menschen eine Antwort geben, wie sie mit ihrer Veranlagung umgehen sollen.
Tut sie doch: "Kein Sex!"
Das überfordert aber viele. Und ich bezweifle, dass es das letzte Wort der Kirche sein kann, alle homosexuellen Handlungen gleich zu beurteilen, unabhängig vom Kontext. Wenn homosexuell empfindende Menschen eine feste, auf Solidarität und Dauer angelegte Beziehung eingehen, dann ist das ethisch wertvoll. Ihr Bemühen verdient Rückhalt und ein positives Echo der Kirche. Ich denke, in solchen Fällen muss das Urteil über homosexuelle Handlungen in den Hintergrund treten. Ich sage das auch, weil erkennbar immer mehr Gläubige auf Distanz zu einer kirchlichen Sexualmoral gehen, die ihnen insgesamt lebensfremd und lebensfeindlich vorkommt. Papst und Bischöfe sollten das ernst nehmen und nicht als Laxheit abtun.
Zur Person
Eberhard Schockenhoff, 57 Jahre alt, ist Professor für Moraltheologie an der Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg. Der katholische Geistliche studierte in Tübingen und Rom. Von 2001 bis 2008 gehörte er dem Nationalen Ethikrat an, seither ist Schockenhoff Mitglied des Nachfolgegremiums, des Deutschen Ethikrates. jf Der homosexuelle Theologe David Berger hat sich am 23. April in der FR geoutet und der katholischen Kirche Bigotterie vorgeworfen: Nach außen bekämpfe sie Homosexualität, nach innen würden homosexuelle Geistliche und Mitarbeiter mit subtilem Druck gefügig gemacht. Teilen Sie seine Beobachtung?
In extrem konservativen Kreisen mag das so sein. Die Pfarrgemeinden sind zumeist durchaus aufgeschlossen gegenüber Homosexuellen.
Berger spricht ausdrücklich von den Bischöfen. Manche sollen gar behaupten, homosexuelle Priester gebe es in ihren Bistümern nicht. Ein "Programm der Unehrlichkeit" nennt Berger das.
Sicher erhöhen Bischöfe mit einer solchen Position die Gefahr, dass die Betroffenen sich verstellen und verstecken müssen. Manche in der Bischofskonferenz sagen, homosexuelle Männer könnten nicht zu Priestern geweiht werden, weil die ehelose Lebensform im Zölibat für sie ja kein Verzicht sei. Die meisten Bischöfe dagegen sehen - wie ich finde, zu Recht - im Zölibat eine Form des Einsatzes für die Glaubensverkündigung, unabhängig von der sexuellen Orientierung. Enthaltsam leben, ohne Sex - damit tun sich Homosexuelle genauso leicht oder schwer wie Heterosexuelle.
Interview: Joachim Frank
Lesen Sie auch
Missbrauchsskandal: "Leitlinien" können die Kirche nicht retten
Bekenntnis: Schwuler klagt Kirche an
Sunday, April 25, 2010
Walter Mixa offers his resignation
Walter Mixa has offered his resignation as bishop of Augsburg and as bishop to the Bundeswehr.
Tonight with Craig Doyle
On Saturday evening on the 'Tonight with Craig Doyle' show on RTÉ1 the Three Priests group featured. They spoke about their singing careers and their priesthood.
What impression of priesthood did these men convey? For the writer of this blog it was a worrying and disturbing portrait of profession/vocation.
What impression of priesthood did these men convey? For the writer of this blog it was a worrying and disturbing portrait of profession/vocation.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Featured Post
How many of us blindly follow the prevailing fashions?
This week's column in The Kerryman newspaper. Michael Commane Over the weekend I visited three people, two with developed stages of deme...
-
An interesting quote from Napoleon Bonaparte: “The honest man never doubts the existence of God’.
-
This is a worrying story. It’s written by Conor Pope and appeared in The Irish Times on Monday. It becomes ever more worrying how large org...
-
Former Dominican priest Tom Tom Brodie Brodie died in a nursing home in Galway yesterday. He had been ailing for some time. He was born in C...