Pope Benedict XVI's Apology

I've been very reluctant to write concerning the Pope's letter apologising for abuse of minors. Some of the things that have happened in the past I find despicable, and believe so many of those priests who have abused their positions should be deeply ashamed. However, I also find it disgusting how secularists and so many others are jumping on the bandwagon and attacking the majority of innocent Catholics who have never done a thing wrong, you can't tar everyone with the same brush. I believe the letter speaks for itself, however I'd like to refer you to the editorial in the Telegraph on Sunday which speaks more common sense than I've seen in any newspaper in a very long time, as well as the article on the matter which Archbishop Timothy Dolan published on his blog - see the following link:

http://blog.archny.org/?p=581


Pope Benedict XVI's challenge
Telegraph View: The Pope must continue to take calm, decisive action that will prevent his visit to Britain being overshadowed by this scandal.


On Saturday, Pope Benedict XVI delivered a heartfelt apology to the victims of revolting abuse by Irish priests and members of religious orders. His statement was remarkable not just for the power of its language – the pontiff spoke of his own "shame" – but also for its determination to dismantle the culture of buck-passing that has disgraced the Catholic Church in Ireland. The Vatican is planning a Visitation of Irish dioceses. Certain prelates and bureaucrats are rightly terrified of what it will uncover.

Victims' groups have declared themselves unsatisfied by the Pope's apology. To an extent, this is understandable: as Benedict XVI says, no apology can heal wounds caused by child abuse. Victims and families will carry them to the grave. Even so, a few unfashionable points need to be made.

First, these crimes reached their peak in the years between the Second World War and the early 1980s. Many perpetrators are long dead, and so are the clergy who abetted their crimes. Second, it is important that the legitimate concerns of victims are not drowned out by the synthetic rage of militant secularists who see a chance to advance their agenda. Third, the Roman Catholic Church is a community of a billion people, most of whom have never suffered or committed abuse. It is largely a force for good in the world. Christianity as a whole will suffer if innocent Catholics are tarred with the brush of paedophilia.

Let guilty men be pursued relentlessly – but only the guilty. The Pope must continue to take calm, decisive action that will prevent his important visit to Britain being overshadowed by this terrible scandal.

Do not be afraid - Vocations Sunday

With Vocations Sunday coming up in April there will undoubtedly be plenty of articles, stories, etc concerning a need for an increase in vocations to Priesthood and Religious life. Especially with us being in the Year of the Priest, April should be a great time to pray for an increase in vocations and actively encourage anyone who is considering taking that leap. For this year I've written an article that will appear in The Catholic Voice of Lancaster encouraging young men to be brave and consider whether they are being called, even though it seems like a huge commitment that they struggle to endear to. I've included it below:




“Do not be afraid, for I am with you; I give you strength, truly I help you.” (Isaiah 41:10)


The image of the apostles in the upper room cowering, afraid and unsure as to what they must now do, is one of great relevance for so many young men today. So also is the culmination of this event – when flames of fire came upon them, the Holy Spirit dwelled within them and they had the courage to go out as witnesses to Christ. That step which the apostles took doesn’t seem to be quite as straightforward to those whom the Lord calls forth in this day and age. There seems to be no straightforward answer as to why: so many people pray unceasingly for an increase in vocations to the Priesthood; vocations promoters, directors and so many other individuals are fervent in their encouragement to young men. However, great comfort should be taken from Jesus’ promise to always provide shepherds for his flock.

Many times throughout His ministry Jesus had to reassure His own disciples, “Do not be afraid”, they often lacked the faith and conviction to wholeheartedly enter into the mission Jesus had for them. Peter was often the worst offender “Peter took fright and began to sink,”(Matthew 14:22-23), yet we know that he was successfully entrusted with being the rock which the Church was build upon. If the very first disciples of Christ, who were there and saw all he did and said, were afraid to follow their vocation in life, it is no wonder many men 2000 years on can struggle to embrace their vocation from God. However, just as the disciples were strengthened when they most needed the love and guidance of Christ, so are those called to Priesthood – the Spirit is already directing their “whole being,spirit, soul and body”, and it is only through discernment that they will come to see whether or not they are being called to a Priestly Vocation.

Seminary formation is designed to bring you closer to God, to help you hear and understand the plan he has for your life. Many people are scared or worried about committing themselves, however the discernment process puts no pressure upon young men, more so it is tailored to help the individual work out whether Priesthood is what God is asking of them. The Holy Father speaks of these years as:

“a time of journeying, of exploration, but above all of discovering Christ. It is only when a young man has had a personal experience of Christ that he can truly understand the Lord’s will and consequently his own vocation. The better you know Jesus, the more His mystery attracts you.”

Seminaries are abundant with people from all walks of life, all with their own personal vocation stories. Many will come to realise in the first couple of years that this isn’t their vocation in life, whilst others enter formation unsure or without much confidence and soon become aware that they are being pointed in the direction of ordination. “Taste and see that the Lord is good, How blessed are those who take refuge in him” (Psalm 34:8)

One of the greater barriers that many put up in front of themselves revolves around issues of unworthiness and ability. The late Cardinal Basil Hume described it as “a dismaying gap between what we know ourselves to be and what the priesthood demands of us.” Such demands upon our human nature such as celibacy, confidence in authoritative public speaking, interpersonal skills and a comprehensive knowledge of the faith are all dealt with and encouraged throughout training for each person as an individual. When we think back to Pentecost, we can see there that the Holy Spirit will always be with us to guide and protect us. If you do feel there is a possibility that God is calling you to priesthood, open up your heart and pray for the Lord to give you strength, encouragement and direction in your life.

“God’s chosen instrument may well have many personal failings; the chief requirement however is a willingness to let God work through us.” (Cardinal Basil Hume)

England 3-0 Egypt - Play to our potential and success follows, the need to address the weaknesses is still prevalent though

In the end it was more than a credible result, but it certainly took a kick up the backside at half time to ignite the ability that exists in the England players. From the off England were lacklustre, they seemed to be half asleep and dumbfounded by the attacking threat that Egypt offered. The visitors came out the blocks determined to prove that they deserved to be at the World Cup this year instead of England's 2nd opponents Algeria. They haven't fluked the last 2 African Cup of Nations, they've been by far the better side. At this years tournament they beat every African side that have qualified for the World Cup and on the performance of the first half hour it seemed extraordinary how they they aren't going to South Africa.

Egypt's opener was almost inevitable, the speed and skill that they were exerting had put England on the back foot, Upson's slip that led to the goal epitomised the home team's inability to cope with a team who played at pace and counter attacking finesse. This shouldn't take anything away from the goal though, Zidan's finishing was almost worthy of his French namesake.

Come half time the crowd and Capello had seen enough. Off went Lampard and Defoe, on came Carrick and Crouch. Although Lampard hadn't done too badly in the 1st half, Carrick bossed the centre more, his passing and control of the game seemed to be very influential. As for Crouch, well he was fantastic in an England shirt yet again. Almost unplayable, it was a fine example of how continental country's seem to be clueless whe it come to handling him. Capello has previously said that he prefers a big man and small man up front, he's also stated about Crouch that he prefers not to play with him because it encourages a long ball game. Well maybe its time for the Italian to eat a bit of humble pie and see that Crouch is much much more than that kind of player. Why would anybody choose Heskey over Crouch??! If they both fit the 'big man' tag alongside Rooney then how exactly can the excuse about the long ball game be used when Heskey is the sort of player that encourages such play. The big difference - Heskey doesn't score much, Crouch cannot stop scoring for England. His two goals tonight makes it almost a goal a game in his last 8 internationals. If Crouch unsettles defenders as much as Heskey does, yet also scores goals then maybe it's about time Capello experimented more with Rooney and Crouch from the start against Mexico.

PLAYER RATINGS


Robinson - 6 - A suprising starter bearing in mind the form of Hart and return to actin of James, but it seems Capello has decided on him as 1st choice. Didn't do anything wrong but to be fair wasn't hugely tested.

Brown - 6 - Was more attacking than Baines and seemed assured after a shaky start.

Upson - 5 - Was at fault for Egypt's goal and looked shaky all night. Should have been much better bearing in mind his teammate was in goal.

Terry - 7 - Given a hot reception by the crowd who certainly made their feelings towards him known. After his early slip that nearly cost England a goal, Terry was rock solid at the back. Controlled the back four and let his football do the talking.

Baines - 7 - Although he looked nervy in the opening exchanges, he put in an assured performance and staked a claim to be the main understudy for Cole at the World Cup.

Gerrard - 7 - At times was looking back to his best when surging forward, strayed inside alot in the first half but balanced his positioning much more to great effect in the 2nd half.

Lampard - 5 - Didn't get into the game too much, the 2 chances he did have he squandered.

Barry - 7 - Better than he's been in previous games, was much better playing alongside Carrick in the 2nd half.

Walcott - 5 - After a promising start he was all puff and no smoke. Threatened to show glimpses of the player who destroyed Croatia in the qualifiers but nowhere near fit enough and needs more playing time back at Arsenal.

Defoe - 6 - Had a couple of chances in 1st half but was substituted at half time. The teams problems in the 1st half couldn't have helped his stake for a starting bearth alongside Rooney.

Rooney - 7 - Had a few chances on the night, although he struggled to link up too well with Defoe, once Crouch came on they were formidable.

SUB: Carrick - 7 - Opened up the Egypt midfield 5 and made them look far more vulnerable. Worked well with Barry and supplied the strikers well.

SUB: Crouch - 8 - Once again proved that he is much more than a target man. Both goals at the end of great passing movements by England, and nearly pulled off another one of his fantastic acrobatic kicks.

SUB: Wright-Phillips - 7 - Was much more productive down the right hand side in 25 minutes than Walcott had been all game. Ran at the wingback and did well to get a goal.

SUB: Milner - 6 - Didn't have too much time to show his class, but is surely a certainty on the plane to South Africa with how well he's progressed of late.

SUB: C Cole - 6 - Too late to do anything.

Is it just me that's bored of reading about affairs?

So Ashley and Cheryl Cole have finally split up after more allegations against Ashley. Why exactly are the public expected to be amazed by this news? I would put my future life savings on this being front page news for at least 2 more weeks if not longer - why though? Do the media see the general public as being having so little genuine interest in their lives or is it more of a case of dictatorship on the medias part. I'd certainly say the latter - its the old case of someone is raised up on high so that when they fall it'll be so much more of a 'sensational' ending.

Only a few years back the tabloids were desperate to make Cheryl Cole (or Tweedy, as she was then)public enemy number one. For weeks upon end the tabloids dragged out the story that she was involved in a nightclub altercation, into a huge scandal - vicious assault, racist Cheryl, a thug - in the end she admitted to being drunk and punching the nightclub attendant, but strenuously denied being a racist - she served her punishement and tried to rebuild her career and grow up from the 19 year old young woman she was then. When the hairdresser who revealed her affair with Ashley spoke to the same papers in January 2008, Cheryl was now the poor victim and the papers turned on Ashley.

This being the same Ashley who the tabloids adore! Not because of his wonderful talent as one of the best left backs in the world, how stupid to think that, nope it's because he seems to be such an easy target for scandal. They loved making him out as a greedy, arrogant overpaid celebrity when he moved to Chelsea for the money...and possibly success (but that isn't controversial so not print worthy) yet scrambled to make his and Cheryl's wedding pictures the front page news as a beautiful and wonderful celebrity occasion. Since then, every sniff of promiscuity has been pounced upon like an elephant sitting on an ant! Until eventually they find out enough and publicise it to destroy the marriage that they promoted only 4 years earlier.

So is this my own damning verdict on Ashleys personal life, or the transitional character change and moral development of them both? Not at all. I'm merely highlighting the fickle and hypocritical nature of our national press. They aren't interested in the emotional trauma, the deep personal issues involved with such stories, they want to make money out of them, out of us. Cheryl in her statement earlier today has asked that "the media respect her privacy at this difficult time" - Do you honestly think they will??

Not a chance!!!!!

They'll milk this story for what will seem like an eternity, with apparent new revelations and insights into either of the 2 peoples lives - and they'll only get bored of it when they tell us, the nation when we're supposed to be bored of it. Sound bizarre?! It should do, but unfortunately what I'm getting at is that the national media have manipulated so much of the country into being obsessed with celebrity culture and delving into the ordinary of these people's lives. Personally, I feel sorry for Cheryl and don't agree with what Ashley has done, but it's the same way I feel about the same situation with anybody in the world - but in the end it's their business, their problems, and it's very personal - so do we really need to know the ins and outs of 'celebrities' personal lives or are we going to continue to be playthings for the tabloids?

Arsene "Whinging" Wenger yet again

The predictability of last nights post match comments re: the Arsenal v Porto game was far too easy. The Porto winner certainly was nothing short of bizarre and comical, however the reality of it is that the referee made the correct decision with regards to the rules of the game. No matter how much Wenger tries to plead the "not deliberate" backpass card, it won't wash. Sol Campbell touched the ball back to the the goalkeeper, who in turn picks it up; if anyone is to blame there it's Fabianski, he should have spotted that Campbell kicked it back to him (from literally feet away) and booted it out of touch.

Thats the first part where Wenger is talking nonsense. Secondly, was his line that competes with a Jimmy Carr one liner -

"I think the referee also has to give us time to build a wall or else you will never have a chance to defend an indirect free-kick in the box...Has he ever played football? If he has played I don't see how he can explain to me how we can defend."

Mr Wenger that is precisely the point of playing an advantage! At the time of the original infringement within a few yards of the ball was the Porto player, one Arsenal defender and the goalkeeper. Thus, when the offence takes place(which is in a way cheating the opposing side of a goal opportunity) there are those 3 players in the immediate vicinity as well as another player from each side just coming into play. Now let's skip forward to when the referee allows the attacking side to compensate from the offence. In the immediate vicinity when this quick free kick is taken there is Fabianski, the 2 attacking Porto players and the 2 Arsenal defenders - precisely the number of players and exact players that were around when Arsenal illegally stopped their goalscoring opportunity!! So where's the problem? Exactly why should Arsenal be given time to build up a wall and bring all their players into the situation? - if this happens then Porto lose any chance of an advantage. Maybe Mr Wenger ought to think a bit more before he speaks.

The goal in question starts at 3:00

http://www.footytube.com/video/fc-porto-arsenal-2-1-17-02-2010-34514

The problem is that Wenger realises that the Porto players were alert and ready to take advantage of the situation, they weren't dithering about and complaining like the Arsenal players. The Arsenal defence showed complete naivity in their approach to the situation. Why did Campbell briefly bend down and clutch his face? Why does the goalkeeper walk halfway back complaining then throw the ball to the Porto players? Where is Vermaelan's immediacy in repositioning himself? All these are the real contributors to the 2nd goal sham, but Wenger insists on trying to make a scapegoat out of the referee in the full knowledge that it is the same referee involved in the "Henry handball scandal" Rather than hold his hand up like Fabregas his own captain and admit wrong he insists on blaming the one man who is most vulnerable, in the hope that the press will get behind Wenger and make Hansson the excuse for another naive performance by his own players.

Back from the oblivion

A hectic diary of late, combined with laziness and summoning the energy to compile opinion on so many issues of late, has led to my lack of posts. I do wish in one way that I had stayed an ever present, especially with some fascinating and controversial storylines since Christmas. The big debate once again that has arisen from the John Terry affair - Does a footballers private life really matter when it comes to being an example on the pitch? Is the stereotypical football fan really bothered about the fact that the England captain has been playing away, just as long as it doesn't influence his performance on the pitch?

The additional complication of the woman he had an affair with being a teammates ex girlfriend, as well as the allegation that he paid her to have an abortion further complicates this one and brings in so many more questions and dilemmas. Effect on team morale, will there be support for the captain or is his authority going to be undermimed, huge moral questions surrounding the allegations that he used his financial clout to "quick fix" the problem. When these factors are added to the equation, one can start to understand why Capello has taken the decision to strip Terry of the England Captaincy, especially being so close to the World Cup. Under no circumstances should England's chance at the World Cup be jeopardised, not when we've got out best squad in years with the best chance in years of glory! (Take note national press by the way, if your on side stop making such an effort to disrupt pre-tournament morale and plans!!)

Apparently, the Popes defence of his clergy, the Church and religious freedom for our Country in his Ad Limina address was a direct attack on the rights of homosexuals and other marginalised groups.

Your country is well known for its firm commitment to equality of opportunity for all members of society. Yet as you have rightly pointed out, the effect of some of the legislation designed to achieve this goal has been to impose unjust limitations on the freedom of religious communities to act in accordance with their beliefs. In some respects it actually violates the natural law upon which the equality of all human beings is grounded and by which it is guaranteed.

I urge you as Pastors to ensure that the Church’s moral teaching be always presented in its entirety and convincingly defended. Fidelity to the Gospel in no way restricts the freedom of others – on the contrary, it serves their freedom by offering them the truth. Continue to insist upon your right to participate in national debate through respectful dialogue with other elements in society. In doing so, you are not only maintaining long-standing British traditions of freedom of expression and honest exchange of opinion, but you are actually giving voice to the convictions of many people who lack the means to express them: when so many of the population claim to be Christian, how could anyone dispute the Gospel’s right to be heard?

The above is merely a snippet of Pope Benedict XVI's address, but I'd advise such people to have a proper read through it all. He is staunchly defending our right to have religious freedom, our right to adhere to the religious traditions that have co-existed in our society for hundreds of years, before this ludicrous government starting inventing over the top nitty gritty laws that have no sensitivity to anyone. It is the agenda of Harriet HarmMEN that should be scrutinised and opposed by England as a united nation.