dinsdag, januari 21, 2014
Archbishop given Trotsky treatment in Vatican photo after abuse claims
Disgraced Polish Archbishop Jozef Wesolowski was removed from an official photograph after being put under investigation for alleged child abuse in the Dominican Republic
Drie aanklachten tegen pedopater ingetrokken; Erik DeJaeger geen pater meer, maar "broeder"
20/01/14
Bron: Belga
Het proces van Eric Dejaeger is vanmorgen in het Canadese Iqaluit
hervat. De 66-jarige pater, die in België geboren is, moet zich
verantwoorden voor tientallen aanklachten wegens seksueel misbruik tegen
Inuit-kinderen. Vandaag werden er al enkele aanklachten tegen hem
ingetrokken.
Tijdens de eerste vier weken van het proces werden er 41 getuigen van
het openbaar ministerie aan het woord gelaten. Maar nu was het de beurt
aan de advocaat van de verdediging, Malcolm Kempt, om zijn visie op de
feiten te geven. Tijdens die procesdag werden alvast drie beschuldigingen van één klager verworpen, omdat de getuige niet deelnam aan het proces en geen bewijs aanleverde. Kempt vroeg om daarnaast nog zeven andere aanklachten te laten vallen, omdat het openbaar ministerie die feiten volgens hem ook niet kon bewijzen.
Sinds de rechtszaak tegen Eric Dejaeger op 18 november 2013 van start is gegaan, varieert het aantal aanklachten tegen hem van week tot week. Aan het begin van het proces pleitte Dejaeger schuldig voor 8 van de 76 aanklachten. Maar in de loop van het proces zijn er nieuwe aanklachten bijgekomen. Zo moest hij zich maandagmorgen nog voor 80 gevallen van misbruik verantwoorden, in de namiddag zijn dat er mogelijk nog 70.
Paus ontneemt priesterschap van 'pedopater'
De Morgen
21-1-2014
Erik Dejaeger (66), de Vlaamse missionaris die in Canada terecht staat
voor het misbruik van tientallen Eskimo-kinderen, is geen priester meer.
De paus heeft hem zijn priesterschap ontnomen. Dat bleek bij de
herneming van zijn proces, schrijven Het Nieuwsblad en De Standaard
vandaag.
"De toenmalige paus Benedictus XVI heeft hem in 2011 het priesterschap
ontnomen", bevestigt Georges Vervust, provinciaal overste van de Vlaamse
paters Oblaten.
"De paus heeft hem het priesterschap ontnomen, kort nadat wij het Vaticaan een dossier over Dejaeger hadden bezorgd. Wij waren daartoe verplicht. Maar Dejaeger blijft wel een lid van de congregatie van de Oblaten. Hij heeft daar zelf op aangedrongen. Hij is nu een broeder."
Of Dejaeger na zijn straf kan terugkeren naar een Belgisch klooster, wou Vervust niet kwijt.
"De paus heeft hem het priesterschap ontnomen, kort nadat wij het Vaticaan een dossier over Dejaeger hadden bezorgd. Wij waren daartoe verplicht. Maar Dejaeger blijft wel een lid van de congregatie van de Oblaten. Hij heeft daar zelf op aangedrongen. Hij is nu een broeder."
Of Dejaeger na zijn straf kan terugkeren naar een Belgisch klooster, wou Vervust niet kwijt.
maandag, januari 20, 2014
NL Eijks Weltbild : Appie Hein "we zitten nog in de kerstkransenafvoer" kan de vraag niet aan overweegt aanschaf ballenbad, J.K. Rowling zegt van niets te weten, betonrot in de eieren
De vervloekingen van Trente bestaan nog altijd  |
| dank zij spiritual travels van het ship of fools |
 |
| camerawerk |
 |
| Koor business |
 |
| klik |
zondag, januari 19, 2014
Fernando Sebastián (Em. Pamplona) als de donder af gestudeerd arts: ziekte die behandeld kan worden. Fernando Sebastián, el nuevo cardenal español, que reside en Málaga, cree que Francisco es un ejemplo para el resto de gobernantes
En dan had de schat het niet over het verminderen van de hennep toevoer, 't is geen veearts en er lijken met zo'n losfietsende opperbaas geen plannen te zijn dat ze 'n zooitje veel te snel vet wordende stieren door Vaticaanstad gaan jagen . Welhaast integendeel. Ze lijken de man -waarschijnlijk voor ieders veiligheid - maar wijselijk in Malaga te hebben laten zitten, zodat ze nu nog slechts de rijtijden -van 1 naar 2 maal per eeuw - van de postkoets daar nog effe hoeven aan te passen en de man zich geen zorgen meer hoeft te maken of z'n opperbaas de gouvernantes wel met rust laat
Maar inmiddels dus een afgestudeerde Em met een roeptoeter die nu ook wel 's arts wil worden aan de Zwarte Zee
Wie zal 't 'm kwalijk nemen?
19.01.14
Maar inmiddels dus een afgestudeerde Em met een roeptoeter die nu ook wel 's arts wil worden aan de Zwarte Zee
Wie zal 't 'm kwalijk nemen?
19.01.14
«La homosexualidad es una deficiente sexualidad que se puede normalizar con tratamiento»
Fernando Sebastián, el nuevo cardenal español, que reside en Málaga, cree que Francisco es un ejemplo para el resto de gobernantes
Gloria wekker; Prime Minister insists citizenship proposal is in line with international treaties
Zoue se ut doen
dat was voor iedereen de vraag
...
Nimfen luiden met gezang
Hem zijn uitvaart: hoor: ding, dang!
Ding, ding, dang!
De Storm
vertaling Burgersdijk, bewerkt C Buddingh
18-1-2014
Malta’s citizenship programme was in line with European treaties, did not breach international laws and fulfilled requirements, Prime Minister Joseph Muscat said this morning.
Speaking on Radio Malta’s programme Ghandi X’Nghid, Dr Muscat said the government’s mistake was that it had not communicated enough but it had learnt from its mistake and after the situation was explained to the social partners, they agreed with the government’s proposal.
The Prime Minister insisted that the scheme was not selling citizenship but was a scheme bound to investment.
Because for a person to qualify for citizenship, he had to invest €150,000 in bonds to the government at favourable rates for at least 5 years, spend €350,000 to buy property or €16,000 on the rental of such, which property had to be retained for five years, pay €650,000 in cash and go through a four-tier due diligence process.
The scheme would put €1,000 million at the people’s disposal to be invested in the future and to enable the government not to leave debts for future generations to carry.
Dr Muscat said that the more the government explained what the programme was all about, more people were agreeing to it. He was seeing this with his own eyes. The scheme, he said, did not put Malta on the spot, it was the PN who had put Malta in the spotlight.
The Maltese, whatever their political beliefs, did not like it when politicians dirtied Malta’s name outside the country and the Opposition leader was feeling the negative reaction towards him.
Dr Muscat insisted that other countries, including Austria, Cyprus, Portugal, Spain and Croatia had similar programmes.
dat was voor iedereen de vraag
...
Nimfen luiden met gezang
Hem zijn uitvaart: hoor: ding, dang!
Ding, ding, dang!
De Storm
vertaling Burgersdijk, bewerkt C Buddingh
 |
Child migrants monument unveiled at Valletta Waterfront |
Malta’s citizenship programme was in line with European treaties, did not breach international laws and fulfilled requirements, Prime Minister Joseph Muscat said this morning.
Speaking on Radio Malta’s programme Ghandi X’Nghid, Dr Muscat said the government’s mistake was that it had not communicated enough but it had learnt from its mistake and after the situation was explained to the social partners, they agreed with the government’s proposal.
The Prime Minister insisted that the scheme was not selling citizenship but was a scheme bound to investment.
Because for a person to qualify for citizenship, he had to invest €150,000 in bonds to the government at favourable rates for at least 5 years, spend €350,000 to buy property or €16,000 on the rental of such, which property had to be retained for five years, pay €650,000 in cash and go through a four-tier due diligence process.
The scheme would put €1,000 million at the people’s disposal to be invested in the future and to enable the government not to leave debts for future generations to carry.
Dr Muscat said that the more the government explained what the programme was all about, more people were agreeing to it. He was seeing this with his own eyes. The scheme, he said, did not put Malta on the spot, it was the PN who had put Malta in the spotlight.
The Maltese, whatever their political beliefs, did not like it when politicians dirtied Malta’s name outside the country and the Opposition leader was feeling the negative reaction towards him.
Dr Muscat insisted that other countries, including Austria, Cyprus, Portugal, Spain and Croatia had similar programmes.
 |
| klik |
Citizenship: PM seeing the wall and crashing into it - Opposition leader
The
Prime Minister’s actions regarding Malta’s citizenship scheme reflect
those of someone seeing a wall in front of him but continues to head
towards it to crash into it, Opposition leader Simon Busuttil said this
morning.
Speaking on Radio Malta’s Ghandi X’Nghid, Dr Busuttil said the past
week had been an extraordinary one which saw the country’s name demeaned
in a way such as had not happened for years.
“This is the Prime Minister’s fault,” he said adding that had the
government not come up with the scheme none of this would have happened.
The EU would not be investigating Malta to see if it could embark on
infringement procedures against the country.
The Opposition tried to seek consensus and was continuing to do so
but one should not expect the Opposition to shut up and say yes just not
to create controversy.
“My duty is to speak up when the government is wrong,” he said.
Dr Busuttil said that during negotiations aimed to find consensus on
the matter, the PN put everything on the table but when it came to a
final decision the government failed to address the Opposition’s main
objection, which was that citizenship could not be sold.
The PN wanted the actual sale to be changed to a real investment
system - with individuals seeking citizenship having to settle and live
in Malta for a number of years, invest money in the country and create
jobs because they were granted citizenship which they would then
deserve.
Malta, he said, was not only selling just its own citizenship but EU
citizenship. The value of what was being sold was not the Maltese
passport but the EU citizenship which permitted one to go to any of 28
countries.
Dr Busuttil said the Prime Minister was going to hold a series of
press conferences next week to say how the government would be spending
the €1 billion it planned to make from the scheme. But while the PM was
saying €1 billion, his Finance Minister had told the European Parliament
€8 million.
The Opposition leader noted that the Prime Minister had more than €1
billion at his disposal to use in the next seven years obtained from the
EU through a package negotiated by the previous government.
This money was already at its disposal but it had not yet said how it
was going to spend it. This showed that the government was concerned
about spin and not substance.
Dr Busuttil said that although the EP resolution was not binding, one
had to be immature and irresponsible not to listen to what 90 per cent
of MEPs were saying.
Commissioner Viviane Reding was also clear when she said that the
scheme breached international law and European treaties and because of
this Malta was being legally investigated by the Commission, making this
a European issue.
This could mean that Malta might be taken to court and it would still have to halt the scheme.
zaterdag, januari 18, 2014
Update “Alkira” The Chief Commissioner of the Royal Commission, Peter McClellan, continues to refuse permission for Lewis Blayse to give evidence, or present a submission, at the up-coming hearings on abuses at the Salvation Army’s Indooroopilly Boys’ Home
18-1-2014 Blaysenet
Inbreeding or keeping it all in the family
The Salvation Army has been given such permission.
Maar een ding is zeker:
de man met een bril op is een zoon van mijn vader.
Inbreeding or keeping it all in the family
The Salvation Army has been given such permission.
Maar een ding is zeker:
de man met een bril op is een zoon van mijn vader.
Retraction: Vatican now confirms almost 400 priests defrocked for sex abuse
John L. Allen Jr.
NCR on line
In spite of an earlier Vatican statement denying an Associated Press story that almost 400 priests had been defrocked for the sexual abuse of minors during 2011/2012, a bishop with knowledge of the statistics says the AP story was correct.
The Vatican spokesman also confirmed the AP story in response to an NCR inquiry.
Auxiliary Bishop Charles Scicluna of Malta, who served for 10 years as the Vatican's top sex abuse prosecutor and who represented the Vatican during a Jan. 16 hearing of the U.N.'s Committee of the Rights of the Child, told NCR that in 2011 and 2012, 384 priests were either voluntarily dismissed from the clerical state or had laicization imposed as a penalty in cases related to sexual abuse.
Scicluna spoke to NCR Jan. 17 by phone.
Based on information provided in the published volume "Activity of the Holy See," (I'm sure you all read ) according to Scicluna, there were 135 priests in 2011 who voluntarily requested dismissal from the clerical state and 125 for whom laicization was imposed as a penalty.
For 2012, the numbers were 67 voluntary dismissals and 57 cases in which laicization was imposed.
In total, that comes to 384 clergy over the two year period who were removed from the priesthood in cases related to the sexual abuse of minors.
Earlier this evening, Vatican spokesman Fr. Federico Lombardi initially denied that report, saying that it was based on confusion between cases reported to the Vatican and the end result of those cases.
Lombardi later told NCR, however, that the AP report was "correct" and not based on "a confusion with reported cases."
NCR on line
In spite of an earlier Vatican statement denying an Associated Press story that almost 400 priests had been defrocked for the sexual abuse of minors during 2011/2012, a bishop with knowledge of the statistics says the AP story was correct.
The Vatican spokesman also confirmed the AP story in response to an NCR inquiry.
Auxiliary Bishop Charles Scicluna of Malta, who served for 10 years as the Vatican's top sex abuse prosecutor and who represented the Vatican during a Jan. 16 hearing of the U.N.'s Committee of the Rights of the Child, told NCR that in 2011 and 2012, 384 priests were either voluntarily dismissed from the clerical state or had laicization imposed as a penalty in cases related to sexual abuse.
Scicluna spoke to NCR Jan. 17 by phone.
Based on information provided in the published volume "Activity of the Holy See," (I'm sure you all read ) according to Scicluna, there were 135 priests in 2011 who voluntarily requested dismissal from the clerical state and 125 for whom laicization was imposed as a penalty.
For 2012, the numbers were 67 voluntary dismissals and 57 cases in which laicization was imposed.
In total, that comes to 384 clergy over the two year period who were removed from the priesthood in cases related to the sexual abuse of minors.
Earlier this evening, Vatican spokesman Fr. Federico Lombardi initially denied that report, saying that it was based on confusion between cases reported to the Vatican and the end result of those cases.
Lombardi later told NCR, however, that the AP report was "correct" and not based on "a confusion with reported cases."
vrijdag, januari 17, 2014
Francis nieuwe vertaling Christus woorden: fuck you all, we're gonna do it anyway
Roger Mahony:
Today, Thursday, January 16, it was a great grace to concelebrate Mass with Pope Francis in the Chapel at Domus Sanctae Martae, and then later in the morning, to have a private Audience with him.
De man had kennelijk hetzelfde probleem als ik zo'n duizend jaar geleden
Dan nou nog effe de medaille voor Gerd Leers ouders.
En de vervolgcursus Chinese non Niet zingen in de kerk: rénnen.
Bishop, State and adoption
Wednesday, January 15, 2014
Auxiliary Bishop Charles Scicluna has told the Italian Catholic newspaper L’Avvenire that Maltese Members of Parliament who vote in favour of the Civil Unions Bill giving same-sex couples the right to enter into a civilly-recognised union, including the right to adopt, would be committing “a gravely immoral act”.
He prayed in aid of this statement a Vatican document of 2003 stating that Catholic politicians had a “moral duty to express their opposition clearly” to civil union laws.
He went on to say that the Pope had been “shocked” and “saddened” at discovering that Malta was about to recognise gay couples, a reaction which, if true, given events in Malta over the last 12 months, must cast doubt on whether the Papal Nuncio to Malta is doing his job in keeping the Vatican informed of what’s going on here.
The bishop’s belated intervention reminds me of that wonderful Second World War comedy sketch when the battle of Dunkirk had been lost and Britain’s chances of survival against the might of Hitler looked grim. The RAF Squadron Commander calls up one of “The Few” and says “Carruthers, things are not going well. We are about to lose the war. It is time to make a futile gesture. Get into your aircraft. Go and bomb Berlin. Don’t come back”.
I suspect that Monsignor Scicluna, following the earlier, more measured joint letter by the Archbishop and the Bishop of Gozo commenting on the Civil Unions Bill, must have felt that a braver response – a futile gesture – was needed to make the Church’s voice properly heard.
Rather like the Charge of the Light Brigade at Balaclava he has succeeded admirably. But to what effect? In a liberal democracy, the arguments are, quite rightly, stacked against him.
There are three key points at issue. The first is the moral argument. To accept that what Mgr Scicluna said has any validity in the debate about same-sex unions, or any other moral debate for that matter, on the basis of the committal of “an immoral act” by those who would vote for the Bill in Parliament, the Church must also accept – as the clerical child sex abuse cases have shown – that it does not hold a monopoly on establishing the moral foundations in society, far less the right to condemn those with whom it disagrees.
If the bishop bases his argument on absolute moral values, he and the Church will inevitably be held to absolute moral standards. As he knows personally, the Church’s record on clerical abuse leads in an opposite direction – and to a justifiable charge of hypocrisy in this case.
In his first-ever encyclical letter as pope, Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI defined very clearly that “The just ordering of society and the State is a central responsibility of politics… A just society must be the achievement of politics, not of the Church”.
Benedict did not state that one was committing an immoral act if the State reached a conclusion that justice in society required a different approach from the doctrine espoused by the Church.
On the contrary, there is an explicit acceptance that society and its representatives in Parliament could do so.
As Mario de Marco correctly highlighted,
“One could indeed argue whether it would be immoral to vote against [the Bill]”. Given the manifest and overdue improvements on grounds of social justice which the enactment of this law will bring, there are unarguable moral grounds for passing this legislation. It is an approach which MPs of both political parties implicitly recognised when they stood for election on manifestos pledging their government to introduce civil partnerships or civil unions. To argue, as the bishop did, that the two parties were simply pandering to the gay lobby for votes ill-becomes him.
Secondly, our legislators are elected to a secular Parliament with a duty to cater for the needs of society as a whole, recognising that minorities also have the right to the State’s support. Legislators cannot properly represent the heterogeneous society that Malta has become while being religiously sectarian. There are different faiths within the State, but there can only be one law.
Genuine social justice requires recognition by the State of the freedom and rights of all individuals and the right, which every individual has, to well-being under the law, without any form of discrimination.
All major religions, including the Catholic Church, accept that in a democracy Parliament’s decisions about what sort of behaviour should be lawful are not necessarily the same as what is considered morally right on a purely religious basis.
This is why sodomy and adultery in Malta are no longer criminal offences even though the Church forbids them.
Social justice demanded the introduction of divorce two years ago and, pace Mgr Scicluna, social justice cries out for civil unions today.
It is the duty of society and the State to weigh up the issues on the basis of the interests of the community as a whole, not simply on the basis of private religious beliefs. Yet, rather than allowing all citizens to be protected equally – no matter what their private religious beliefs – the bishop has felt minded to apply psychological pressure to our elected representatives in Parliament for considering – as they had pledged – the introduction of the legal remedy of civil unions, which is not only a long overdue civil right but also a force for the greater common good.
The third issue is the vexed matter of adoption of children by gay couples, which this new law will allow. The Convention on the Rights of the Child states: “In all actions concerning children... the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration.”
This is the overriding criterion guiding Malta’s own civil union legislation.
Sexual orientation should not influence whether a person is allowed to adopt a
child or not. His or her suitability cannot be determined by sexual orientation
or marital status.
Maltese law, based on European human rights case law, already allows single people to adopt. As Ranier Fsadni has so perceptively pointed out, adoptions by gay couples would simply result in making adopted children more secure.
The gold standard for deciding adoption should be the best interests of the child regardless of whether the persons doing the adopting are homosexual or heterosexual. All prospective adoptive parents should undergo the same process and be allowed to adopt if they show themselves to be suitable parents, without the hair-splitting legalistic distinctions the bishop is making on whether they are a couple or single, gay, bisexual or heterosexual.
In Malta, Appoġġ lays down that all adoption applications are treated equally “ensuring that the applicant(s) can provide an environment that ensures the physical, emotional and psychological well-being of the minor to be adopted”. The civil unions scheme should reflect the same approach and specific conditions.
Homosexuality is not a threatening social reality, but one to be accepted. Gay couples have the same capacity for love, caring companionship and parenthood as heterosexual couples. The civil unions legislation before Parliament, including the way it treats the issue of adoption, is a giant leap forward in righting years of injustice towards homosexuals in Maltese society.
Auxiliary Bishop Charles Scicluna has told the Italian Catholic newspaper L’Avvenire that Maltese Members of Parliament who vote in favour of the Civil Unions Bill giving same-sex couples the right to enter into a civilly-recognised union, including the right to adopt, would be committing “a gravely immoral act”.
He prayed in aid of this statement a Vatican document of 2003 stating that Catholic politicians had a “moral duty to express their opposition clearly” to civil union laws.
He went on to say that the Pope had been “shocked” and “saddened” at discovering that Malta was about to recognise gay couples, a reaction which, if true, given events in Malta over the last 12 months, must cast doubt on whether the Papal Nuncio to Malta is doing his job in keeping the Vatican informed of what’s going on here.
The bishop’s belated intervention reminds me of that wonderful Second World War comedy sketch when the battle of Dunkirk had been lost and Britain’s chances of survival against the might of Hitler looked grim. The RAF Squadron Commander calls up one of “The Few” and says “Carruthers, things are not going well. We are about to lose the war. It is time to make a futile gesture. Get into your aircraft. Go and bomb Berlin. Don’t come back”.
I suspect that Monsignor Scicluna, following the earlier, more measured joint letter by the Archbishop and the Bishop of Gozo commenting on the Civil Unions Bill, must have felt that a braver response – a futile gesture – was needed to make the Church’s voice properly heard.
Rather like the Charge of the Light Brigade at Balaclava he has succeeded admirably. But to what effect? In a liberal democracy, the arguments are, quite rightly, stacked against him.
There are three key points at issue. The first is the moral argument. To accept that what Mgr Scicluna said has any validity in the debate about same-sex unions, or any other moral debate for that matter, on the basis of the committal of “an immoral act” by those who would vote for the Bill in Parliament, the Church must also accept – as the clerical child sex abuse cases have shown – that it does not hold a monopoly on establishing the moral foundations in society, far less the right to condemn those with whom it disagrees.
If the bishop bases his argument on absolute moral values, he and the Church will inevitably be held to absolute moral standards. As he knows personally, the Church’s record on clerical abuse leads in an opposite direction – and to a justifiable charge of hypocrisy in this case.
In his first-ever encyclical letter as pope, Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI defined very clearly that “The just ordering of society and the State is a central responsibility of politics… A just society must be the achievement of politics, not of the Church”.
Benedict did not state that one was committing an immoral act if the State reached a conclusion that justice in society required a different approach from the doctrine espoused by the Church.
On the contrary, there is an explicit acceptance that society and its representatives in Parliament could do so.
As Mario de Marco correctly highlighted,
“One could indeed argue whether it would be immoral to vote against [the Bill]”. Given the manifest and overdue improvements on grounds of social justice which the enactment of this law will bring, there are unarguable moral grounds for passing this legislation. It is an approach which MPs of both political parties implicitly recognised when they stood for election on manifestos pledging their government to introduce civil partnerships or civil unions. To argue, as the bishop did, that the two parties were simply pandering to the gay lobby for votes ill-becomes him.
Secondly, our legislators are elected to a secular Parliament with a duty to cater for the needs of society as a whole, recognising that minorities also have the right to the State’s support. Legislators cannot properly represent the heterogeneous society that Malta has become while being religiously sectarian. There are different faiths within the State, but there can only be one law.
Genuine social justice requires recognition by the State of the freedom and rights of all individuals and the right, which every individual has, to well-being under the law, without any form of discrimination.
All major religions, including the Catholic Church, accept that in a democracy Parliament’s decisions about what sort of behaviour should be lawful are not necessarily the same as what is considered morally right on a purely religious basis.
This is why sodomy and adultery in Malta are no longer criminal offences even though the Church forbids them.
Social justice demanded the introduction of divorce two years ago and, pace Mgr Scicluna, social justice cries out for civil unions today.
It is the duty of society and the State to weigh up the issues on the basis of the interests of the community as a whole, not simply on the basis of private religious beliefs. Yet, rather than allowing all citizens to be protected equally – no matter what their private religious beliefs – the bishop has felt minded to apply psychological pressure to our elected representatives in Parliament for considering – as they had pledged – the introduction of the legal remedy of civil unions, which is not only a long overdue civil right but also a force for the greater common good.
The third issue is the vexed matter of adoption of children by gay couples, which this new law will allow. The Convention on the Rights of the Child states: “In all actions concerning children... the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration.”
The legislation is a giant leap forward in righting
years of injustice towards homosexuals in Maltese society
Maltese law, based on European human rights case law, already allows single people to adopt. As Ranier Fsadni has so perceptively pointed out, adoptions by gay couples would simply result in making adopted children more secure.
The gold standard for deciding adoption should be the best interests of the child regardless of whether the persons doing the adopting are homosexual or heterosexual. All prospective adoptive parents should undergo the same process and be allowed to adopt if they show themselves to be suitable parents, without the hair-splitting legalistic distinctions the bishop is making on whether they are a couple or single, gay, bisexual or heterosexual.
In Malta, Appoġġ lays down that all adoption applications are treated equally “ensuring that the applicant(s) can provide an environment that ensures the physical, emotional and psychological well-being of the minor to be adopted”. The civil unions scheme should reflect the same approach and specific conditions.
Homosexuality is not a threatening social reality, but one to be accepted. Gay couples have the same capacity for love, caring companionship and parenthood as heterosexual couples. The civil unions legislation before Parliament, including the way it treats the issue of adoption, is a giant leap forward in righting years of injustice towards homosexuals in Maltese society.
donderdag, januari 16, 2014
Scicluna: Holy See had “very positive dialogue” with UN Committee for Rights of the Child
The Maltese bishop, Charles Scicluna, former prosecutor at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith of clergy who sexually abused minors, was part of the Holy See delegation that appeared before the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child in Geneva on January 16.
In this interview by telephone from Geneva, he spoke about the day-long session with the UN body that attracted so much interest internationally. He says it gave the Holy See an opportunity to respond to the Committee’s concerns regarding child abuse, to reaffirm its commitment to protect children and minors throughout the Catholic Church and all its institutions, and explain how it is doing so.
Q. Could you sum up how the meeting went?
A. It was a very interesting dialogue and the Committee had the opportunity to express its concerns and they are concerns that we share. And so I think it has been a very positive dialogue because the Holy See, as sovereign of Vatican City State and as central organ of government of the Catholic Church around the world, shares the high values of....
rest artikel
Scicluna: «Malta non apra alle adozioni gay»
e è preoccupata per la proposta di legge in
discussione
nel Parlamento della Valletta che equiparerebbe in tutti gli
aspetti, adozioni comprese, le unioni gay con i matrimoni civili. Lo
stesso papa Francesco ha manifestato la propria «tristezza» per questo
sviluppo legislativo
ribadendo che si tratta di un «regresso antropologico», come scrisse da arcivescovo di Buenos Aires nel 2010 in una lettera indirizzata a Justo Carbajales, direttore del Dipartimento dei laici della Conferenza episcopale argentina, che aveva organizzato una marcia contro la legge sul “matrimonio” omosessuale poi approvata dal Parlamento Avvenire Charles J. Scicluna, dal 2012 vescovo ausiliare di Malta e membro della Congregazione per la dottrina della fede, dicastero dove ha lavorato per 17 anni come promotore di giustizia (pm), ricoprendo un ruolo chiave nel contrastare il triste fenomeno degli abusi sessuali commessi da chierici verso i minorenni.
argentino. Lo spiega ad
Eccellenza, il Parlamento maltese sta discutendo una legge sulle unioni tra omosessuali. Era una esigenza realmente sentita dalla società maltese?In occasione dell’ultima campagna elettorale che si è svolta tra il gennaio e il febbraio del 2013, in una corsa frenetica per accaparrarsi i voti, tutti i partiti politici hanno promesso di agevolare le pretese della lobby gay e hanno promesso una legislazione a favore delle unioni civili. Dopo le elezioni di marzo 2013, vinte dai laburisti del dottor Joseph Muscat, il governo si è mosso per onorare il proprio impegno con la lobby gay.
Quali sono gli aspetti qualificanti questa nuova legge?La proposta di legge, ispirata a quella danese del 1994, equipara, in tutti gli aspetti, unioni civili (eterosessuali e omosessuali) e matrimonio civile. E concede alle coppie gay di diventare genitori adottivi come coppia.
Qual è la posizione della Chiesa?I vescovi hanno espresso la loro preoccupazione per la proposta di legge, riferendosi alla dottrina cattolica che è di per sé chiara, ribadendo allo stesso tempo vicinanza pastorale a tutti, incluse le persone gay.
Per un parlamentare che si proclama cattolico è lecito sostenere la legge in discussione? La dottrina cattolica al riguardo si trova nel documento della Congregazione per la dottrina della fede emanato nel 2003 col titolo “Considerazioni circa i progetti di riconoscimento legale delle unioni tra persone omosessuali”. In particolare nel paragrafo 10, che così si esprime: «Se tutti i fedeli sono tenuti ad opporsi al riconoscimento legale delle unioni omosessuali, i politici cattolici lo sono in particolare, nella linea della responsabilità che è loro propria. In presenza di progetti di legge favorevoli alle unioni omosessuali, sono da tener presenti le seguenti indicazioni etiche. Nel caso in cui si proponga per la prima volta all’Assemblea legislativa un progetto di legge favorevole al riconoscimento legale delle unioni omosessuali, il parlamentare cattolico ha il dovere morale di esprimere chiaramente e pubblicamente il suo disaccordo e votare contro il progetto di legge. Concedere il suffragio del proprio voto ad un testo legislativo così nocivo per il bene comune della società è un atto gravemente immorale».
Lei ha raccontato di aver parlato con papa Francesco di questo tema. Cosa può riferirci di questo colloquio?
Parlando con il Santo Padre il 12 dicembre, ho espresso la mia preoccupazione per la proposta di legge. Il Papa si è mostrato rattristato per questo sviluppo, specialmente per la questione delle adozioni. Gli ho detto che i promotori citano le sue parole: «Se una persona è gay e cerca il Signore, e ha buona volontà, chi sono io per giudicarla?», ma non citano le sue parole dal 2010 quando era ancora cardinale arcivescovo di Buenos Aires.
Il Papa ha ripetuto una frase presa della sua lettera del 2010: «È un regresso antropologico».
 |
| zal ik jou 's lekker insmeren? |
ribadendo che si tratta di un «regresso antropologico», come scrisse da arcivescovo di Buenos Aires nel 2010 in una lettera indirizzata a Justo Carbajales, direttore del Dipartimento dei laici della Conferenza episcopale argentina, che aveva organizzato una marcia contro la legge sul “matrimonio” omosessuale poi approvata dal Parlamento Avvenire Charles J. Scicluna, dal 2012 vescovo ausiliare di Malta e membro della Congregazione per la dottrina della fede, dicastero dove ha lavorato per 17 anni come promotore di giustizia (pm), ricoprendo un ruolo chiave nel contrastare il triste fenomeno degli abusi sessuali commessi da chierici verso i minorenni.
argentino. Lo spiega ad
Eccellenza, il Parlamento maltese sta discutendo una legge sulle unioni tra omosessuali. Era una esigenza realmente sentita dalla società maltese?In occasione dell’ultima campagna elettorale che si è svolta tra il gennaio e il febbraio del 2013, in una corsa frenetica per accaparrarsi i voti, tutti i partiti politici hanno promesso di agevolare le pretese della lobby gay e hanno promesso una legislazione a favore delle unioni civili. Dopo le elezioni di marzo 2013, vinte dai laburisti del dottor Joseph Muscat, il governo si è mosso per onorare il proprio impegno con la lobby gay.
Quali sono gli aspetti qualificanti questa nuova legge?La proposta di legge, ispirata a quella danese del 1994, equipara, in tutti gli aspetti, unioni civili (eterosessuali e omosessuali) e matrimonio civile. E concede alle coppie gay di diventare genitori adottivi come coppia.
Qual è la posizione della Chiesa?I vescovi hanno espresso la loro preoccupazione per la proposta di legge, riferendosi alla dottrina cattolica che è di per sé chiara, ribadendo allo stesso tempo vicinanza pastorale a tutti, incluse le persone gay.
Per un parlamentare che si proclama cattolico è lecito sostenere la legge in discussione? La dottrina cattolica al riguardo si trova nel documento della Congregazione per la dottrina della fede emanato nel 2003 col titolo “Considerazioni circa i progetti di riconoscimento legale delle unioni tra persone omosessuali”. In particolare nel paragrafo 10, che così si esprime: «Se tutti i fedeli sono tenuti ad opporsi al riconoscimento legale delle unioni omosessuali, i politici cattolici lo sono in particolare, nella linea della responsabilità che è loro propria. In presenza di progetti di legge favorevoli alle unioni omosessuali, sono da tener presenti le seguenti indicazioni etiche. Nel caso in cui si proponga per la prima volta all’Assemblea legislativa un progetto di legge favorevole al riconoscimento legale delle unioni omosessuali, il parlamentare cattolico ha il dovere morale di esprimere chiaramente e pubblicamente il suo disaccordo e votare contro il progetto di legge. Concedere il suffragio del proprio voto ad un testo legislativo così nocivo per il bene comune della società è un atto gravemente immorale».
Lei ha raccontato di aver parlato con papa Francesco di questo tema. Cosa può riferirci di questo colloquio?
Parlando con il Santo Padre il 12 dicembre, ho espresso la mia preoccupazione per la proposta di legge. Il Papa si è mostrato rattristato per questo sviluppo, specialmente per la questione delle adozioni. Gli ho detto che i promotori citano le sue parole: «Se una persona è gay e cerca il Signore, e ha buona volontà, chi sono io per giudicarla?», ma non citano le sue parole dal 2010 quando era ancora cardinale arcivescovo di Buenos Aires.
Il Papa ha ripetuto una frase presa della sua lettera del 2010: «È un regresso antropologico».
Gianni Cardinale
I have the right to laugh! klaar is cees
 |
| Documenten |
kerknet.be SOS bebes robados
Vatican officials are expected to face tough questions from the UN on the sexual abuse of thousands of children by Catholic clergy.
Members of the Holy See - the city state's diplomatic entity - will be grilled by a UN committee in Geneva.
The Vatican refused an earlier request for information, saying the cases were the responsibility of the judiciary of countries where abuse took place.
I have the right to freedom of speech
I have the right to be heard
I have the right to be respected
I have the right to accept and own my own power
I have the right to not disclose unless I am comfortable
I have the right to feel my emotions
I have the right to say no
I have the right to challenge the status quo
I have the right to ask questions
I have the right to be me
I have the right to own my own ideas
I have the right to my values and beliefs
I have the right to laugh
17. 27 hrs. Met de meest recente buiging naar de Malta mannen !
en de tranen voor een kleinBraziliaans wijffie en haar moeder....
wiens verkrachtnde vader nu voorlopig ook gewoon ge excommuniceerd zal worden.......
toch maar eerst internet verbindingen in de ziekenhuizen dus
.
Vijf vadem diep uw vader rust
zijn gebeente werd koraal
zijn oogen paarlen ongeblust
is hun gloed geen zegepraal
viert verderf uit ieder deel
schept de zee een rijk juweel.
....
woensdag, januari 15, 2014
Abonneren op:
Posts (Atom)
