Following on the heels of a rather confusing and regrettable action yesterday, the Vatican further sullies its image today by saying it can – and will – prove that it isn’t liable for the sexual abuse of minors by priests in the U.S.

Now, before you get your panties in a wad, know that, like all countries and businesses, the Vatican has lawyers, and lawyers, whom I believe have been placed by Dante in the third level of hell, have a job to do. That job is to protect the vested interest of their clients. In this case, the vested interests of the Vatican are quite broad and are not, as some might assume, solely the archives or the artwork. The vested interests are all the millions of people the Church helps via its charitable arms.

Thus, the argument goes, if one victim of clergy sexual abuse is able to sue the Vatican for millions, then it will open the doors to hundreds more and pretty soon, the good the Church does will simply stop for lack of money. S0, for all those who think I’m criticizing the Vatican’s action because I don’t know my nose from my naval, rest assured, I understand what is at stake. I also understand the legal arguments and how the Vatican can, as a nation-state, attempt to claim diplomatic immunity in this case. (more…)

Cardinal Christoph Schonborn; image courtesy of Ingodscompany2

Early Monday, Austrian Cardinal Christoph Schönborn had a Come to Jesus meeting with Pope Benedict XVI, and in an event as rare as the Virgin birth, the Vatican Press Office, via its blog (never let it be said that Rome is behind the technological times), released a communique in the afternoon detailing what happened in the private meeting. The news of this hit the mainstream press just after 5 and, oddly, neither the New York Times’ report nor the one from the Associated Press had a link to the actual document or copy of the text. I had to find that via one blog then another. (Those bloggers, go figure.)

The memo is written as all political and religious pronouncements are: in jargon. You can read the entire thing at the links above, but the basics are this: Schönborn asked for the meeting to clarify his prior statements regarding Cardinal Angelo Sodano, dean of the College of Cardinals and the former Vatican Secretary of State. Sodano had given an Easter speech in which he called media reports of sexual abuse in the Church in Europe as “petty gossip.” After Sodano’s speech, Schönborn publicly criticized him, saying Sodano “deeply wronged” victims of sexual abuse with his speech. This Vatican memo on Monday’s meeting essentially says that Schönborn recognizes that he was out of line publicly shaming a fellow Cardinal.

Various voices are weighing in with opinions and analysis about what all this means (here’s one from the left, and one from the right), so I’m not going to add much to that mix. But as someone who knows intimately the after-affects of sexual abuse, I will say this: When someone as high up as Schönborn has the guts to call out a brother Cardinal who is essentially poo-pooing the soul-murder and suffering of sexual abuse victims, his boss should commend him, for God’s sake, not have him participate in a public mea culpa. Especially, as in this case, said Cardinal is defending you, the boss. (more…)

For those who missed it, Leonard J. Pitts had a great Sunday column about Michelle Alexander’s new book, “The New Jim Crow.” Read his column, then go out and get the book and read it.

Pitts is no Chicken Little, and he’s often written about the need for the black community to stop making excuses and start taking responsibility. But in this column facts trump preaching to the choir. Just one tidbit:

“… blacks and whites use drugs at roughly equal rate in percentage terms. In terms of raw numbers, WHITES are far and away the biggest users – and dealers – of illegal drugs. So why aren’t cops kicking THEIR doors in? Why aren’t THEIR sons pulled over a dozen times in nine months?

While it is convenient to think that we are a post-racist society (we’ve got a bi-racial president, after all), it is also woefully ignorant of what happens out there on the mean streets on a daily bases. If you doubt that, just talk to any black mother about how she and her sons are followed by security guards when they go shopping at Dillard’s – and think back to if that ever happened to you or your whites sons.

I’m not black, so I can’t speak to this with as much street cred as Pitts can. I am, however, someone who raised four children in a paycheck-to-paycheck, no-extras existence for a number of years. From that experience I learned that people in the poor parts of town frequently get treated differently than people in the wealthier parts of town. Worse still, people who look poor but happen to live in upper middle class neighborhoods get treated differently than people who look like they “belong.” (more…)