Apologies at the Service of Ecumenism

by John Vennari
Editor of Catholic Family News

In 1964, the eminent English writer Evelyn Waugh, disillusioned by the progressive orientation of Vatican II, complained that Paul VI was a Pope who preferred Italian literature to apologetics.¹

Today we have a Pope who prefers apologies to apologetics.

Asking forgiveness has been called the leit-motif of John Paul’s papacy. By 1998, the Pope had spoken publicly of alleged "mistakes" and sins of Christians in connection with, among other things, the Crusades, the Inquisition, persecution of Jews, etc., at least 94 times.²

On March 12th, within the post-Vatican II framework of creative liturgy, Pope John Paul II delivered an unprecedented sweeping apology for what he called "wrongdoings" of Catholics throughout the past two thousand years. Wearing purple vestments, the Pope sought "pardon" for seven categories: general sins; sins in the service of truth; sins against Christian unity; against the Jews; against respect for love, peace and cultures; against the dignity of women; and against fundamental rights of the person.³ Seven Vatican prelates participated in the ceremony.

Apology to Whom?

This apology raises numerous questions, all of which cannot be addressed here. The first question that comes to mind, however, is to whom exactly is the Pope apologizing?

According to official Vatican statements, in so many words, the March 12th mea culpa is an apology to God for the sins of Catholics long dead.⁴ This explanation is not only ludicrous, it also does violence to traditional Catholic teaching and practice.

In one sense, an individual can only ask forgiveness for himself. I can’t go to confession for anyone else, and no one can go to confession for me. Further, I cannot "apologize" to God for the sins of my ancestors, even if my great, great, great, great grandpapa Vennari happened to be the terror of the neighborhood in Calabria. Any Catholic now dead has already been judged, has either been forgiven or condemned, and is now receiving his just desserts in heaven, hell, or purgatory.

By contrast, Catholic teaching encourages us to make reparation for the sins of those now living, but this is to appease God’s wrath and for the salvation of souls. Our Lady of Fatima said, "Many souls go to hell because there is no one to pray and make sacrifices for them." Catholics may also pray for the relief of souls suffering in purgatory. This too fits the framework of the Fatima Message. Sadly, prayers of reparation for sinners now living, or prayers for the souls in purgatory were nowhere to be found in the March 12th "apology".

Further, the category of "sins" enunciated seemed designed to accommodate the most trendy subjects of the day; "marginalization of women", "intolerance", "anti-Semitism", etc.

Thus, all official protestations to the contrary, it seems the true "target audience" of the apology is not God, but the world.

How, then, has the world reacted?

From reading dozens of news reports on the subject by writers of various persuasions, and from numerous other sources, I’ve found three prevailing responses.

The first is that of those non-Catholics who say "we always knew that you Catholics were hypocritical dirt and it’s high time you’ve admitted it".

The second comes primarily from rabbis who claim the apology was "not enough". Israel’s chief rabbi said he was deeply frustrated by the Pope’s failure to mention the Holocaust and described the service as a "severely warped view".⁵ The official response from the Anti-Defamation League voiced similar dissatisfaction: "Pope John Paul II has missed an historic opportunity to bring to closure Christian responsibility for specific sins against the Jewish people over the past 2,000 years."⁶ Predictably, there are no reports of rabbis offering reciprocal apologies to Catholics for the teaching contained in the Jewish Talmud that describes Jesus Christ as a fool, a seducer, an idolater, and a magician.⁷

The third group comprises those who are hooting and laughing over the entire event. For example, I know of a senior editor at a large secular newspaper who stated at a recent meeting that John Paul’s apology had given him an idea. He said he planned to write all his sins onto paper, place it in a sealed envelope and leave it to his children so that his descendants can apologize for his sins 150 years from now. This statement set off a chain reaction in the boardroom of all types of jabs and jokes at the "great apology".

Thus, if the target audience of the great apology was the world, it failed. The world either mocks, or complains "not enough". Yet it is a predictable response whenever Catholic churchmen pander to the world. Perhaps this is one of the many reasons why Our Lord never commanded Peter to offer an apology for Judas.

Like Father Like Son?

The Pope’s actions also set off a chain reaction among prelates who decided to issue a mouthful of apologies themselves. The March 12th Jerusalem Post reported of various Catholic prelates who "followed the Pope’s lead" in voicing sorrow for local Catholics’ alleged "sins against Jews." Cardinal Bernard Law of Boston apologized for Boston Catholics’ "past and present sins against Jews, blacks, non-Catholics" and others. In Santa Fe, Archbishop Michael Sheehan "sought pardon from non-Catholics, American Indians," etc. Colorado Archbishop Charles J. Chaput asked Jews to forgive Catholics for a "history of wrongs". He also asks forgiveness for "the ignorance and prejudice which still exist" against the Jewish people. Cardinal Roger Mahony of Los Angeles apologized to groups including "homosexuals and members of other religions".⁸

Yet not all Catholic churchmen chose to follow the fashion. The March 12th Salt Lake City Tribune reported that none of Utah’s Catholic hierarchy or parish clergy planned to reiterate the Pope’s plea for forgiveness. "The bishop has not made any statements on that matter," said Monsignor M. Francis Mannion, the diocesan theologian, "whatever the Pope does does not have to be reflected in each parish." Father Joseph Morris of Good Shepherd parish commented, "I know that a mea culpa sounds newsworthy, but I’m not sure it has any effect. We’re always sorry for our sins. What else is new? Every single Mass we’re always confessing our sins and lack of charity among our own people." When asked if he would follow the Pope’s example of asking pardon, Father Erick Richest from St. Anthony of Padua said "Of course not. I don’t believe in apologizing for things one didn’t do personally."⁹

Panders to Historic Lies

Ever since "asking forgiveness" became chic among modern Churchmen, sharp Catholic writers have decried it as an affront to common sense and Catholic history. Take, for example, the Pope’s apology for the supposed "marginalization of women". The eminent professor Romano Amerio did not hide his annoyance when in 1985, he responded:

"Historic truth forbids supporting this denigration of the Church, and indeed obliges one to counterattack ... In the face of all the ancient civilizations that held women in subjection by their male despotism, their ‘sacred prostitution’ and their divorce more or less at will, it was Christianity alone that freed women from a deplorable servitude by sanctifying marriage and making it unbreakable, by teaching the supernatural equality of man and woman, by raising the status of both virginity and marriage and lastly by raising the human race to a height it would have never imagined for itself, through the recognition of a woman as the Mother of God."¹⁰

Similar defenses of Catholic history could be enumerated demonstrating the falsehood of the latest litany of alleged "sins". Rather than discuss particulars, however, it is necessary to focus on the true motive of today’s avalanche of apologies.

The Program of Vatican II

In 1998, Pauline Books and Media published When a Pope Asks Forgiveness, The Mea Culpas of John Paul II by Italian journalist Luigi Accattoli, a firm believer in the new program of apology.

The book explains that the whole point of today’s mea culpas is to advance the novel ecumenism nurtured at Vatican II. Accattoli states "with this project (of apologies) the Pope completes the work of the Second Vatican Council and makes his Church take a step forward, possibly a definite step for its full insertion into the ecumenical movement."¹¹

The author admits openly that today’s papal apologies run contrary to twenty centuries of papal practice,¹² and he praises John Paul who pursues this new program "without being intimidated by the statues and tombs of his predecessors".¹³

Accattoli explains that these mea culpas are the brainchild of progressive theologians and credits Hans Urs von Balthasar as "one of the most influential promoters of a ‘confession’ of sins committed by the Church throughout the centuries."¹⁴ (CFN has published repeatedly that the modernist-leaning von Balthasar was considered so theologically unsound that the Swiss bishops did not allow him to attend Vatican II as an expert theological advisor.)¹⁵

In 1965 just after the close of Vatican II, von Balthasar, whom Accattoli admits is a "radical theologian"16 called for a "full confession of sin." Von Balthasar said "Things that were not only permissible, but even recommended under medieval Popes seem, from the double perspective of Christ’s own word and our present state of knowledge, absolutely impermissible and even gravely sinful." Von Balthasar concludes "the honest reaction is not only an immediate recognition of sinful responsibility, but also a full one that will emphasize the harsh tragedy of the past."¹⁷

Pope John Paul has followed the plan of this "radical theologian" exactly.¹⁸

Accattoli explains that the mea-culpas play a key role in the "two elements in the next development in the ecumenical movement", which he describes as:

1) "the purification of historical memory, facilitated by each mea culpa will foster an encounter between ancient adversaries"

2) "the adoption of a method of ‘confession of sin’ as used in the Churches of Reformation" (Protestant).¹⁹

Thus, today’s mea culpas are based on a Protestant model for the promotion of inter-religious collaboration. Accattoli observes that "most of (John Paul’s) request for forgiveness are in the field of ecumenism."²⁰

The Protestant Model

Protestants were the first to issue a "confession of sin" in the early days of the Ecumenical Movement. The 1920 Anglican Lambeth Conference, the 1927 Faith and Constitution Conference, the first Assembly of the World Council of Churches in 1948, and the second Assembly of the World Council of Churches in 1954 all issued statements confessing their part in the "sin of division" for which "all churches are responsible".²¹

The Popes prior to John XXIII refused to play the game. On December 20, 1949, Pius XII’s Holy Office warned Catholics against "confession of sin" for religious divisions: "Do not turn history against Catholics by exaggerating their faults, nor in favor of the Reformers by concealing their faults. All things considered, what constitutes the true essence of the events is the defection from the Catholic faith."²² This Instruction harmonizes with traditional Catholic teaching that kept Catholics at a distance from the ecumenical movement.

Ecumenism as practiced today is condemned both by Scripture²³ and Tradition since it places the one true Church of Jesus Christ on the same level with false creeds. Pope Benedict XV restated the traditional teaching in 1919 when invited to take part in the ecumenical movement, he refused. He stated that the Church of Christ, the Catholic Church, was already one, and could not give the appearance of searching for a unity that it already possessed.²⁴

This teaching was also reiterated forcefully by Pius XI in his 1928 encyclical Mortalium Animos. The Pope warned that the "fair and alluring words" of the ecumenists "conceal a most dangerous error, subversive to the Catholic faith." He forbade Catholic involvement with the ecumenical movement warning that this inter-religious activity will "give rise to a false Christianity quite alien to the one Church of Christ." In fidelity to the consistent teaching of his predecessor, Pius taught that unity could only be realized by a return of separated brethren to the Catholic Church.

Since Vatican II, however, our Church leaders have abandoned the wisdom of the previous Popes in favor of an ecumenical orientation which no longer seeks conversion of non-Catholics to the one true Faith, but a mutual cooperation of religions for the betterment of the human family.²⁵ This mirrors the "false Christianity" warned against by Pope Pius XI.

Pope vs. Pope

Today’s mea culpas also establish a contest between the Popes of the past and the present. Whether he intended it or not, John Paul has undermined his own integrity by pitting himself against his predecessors, thus forcing Catholics to side with one or the other. Catholic journalist Vittorio Messori observed: "If those past Popes had erred so badly, how can I be sure the current one is not doing likewise? Who can guarantee me that this Pope’s successor won’t be asking pardon for what he has done?"²⁶

Ironically, the institution over which John Paul presides is a Church in ruins. Modernist theologians destroy the faith of millions with impunity, perverse sex-education pollutes countless Catholic schools, bishops are no longer trustworthy, homosexuality stampedes throughout the clergy, many good priests are persecuted, doctrinal, moral and liturgical anarchy abounds, Catholic influence in society and social institutions is non-existent, thousands of Catholic parents must shoulder the great sacrifice of home- schooling because of the poisoned curriculum in parochial schools. This has left many Catholics asking why John Paul spends his time apologizing for the "sins"of his predecessors when he can’t keep his own house in order.

These apologies, however, can serve as a tremendous distraction to the present turmoil. By focusing our attention on "sins" of the past for which "we should apologize," and by promising a "new springtime of evangelization" that’s sure to emerge in the future once we’ve "purified our memory", these apologies can keep souls blind to the present disastrous state of the Church. Further, the "new springtime of evangelization" spoken of so giddily is actually a "new evangelization" in which members of false religions are not taught they must convert to the one true Church for salvation. In fact, appeasement of false religions is the program for the future.

A New Direction

Now that the great apology is accomplished, the next step in the ongoing revolution is new policies to insure these alleged sins of the past happen "never again."

The Official Presentation document for the Vatican’s "Day of Pardon" stated, "Confessing the historic sins of Christians is not however aimed solely at the purification of memory: it is also meant to be an occasion for a change of mentality and certain attitudes in the Church, as well as the source of a new teaching for the future, in the consciousness that the sins of the past remain as temptations in the present."²⁷

An example of this new "change of mentality" is a project currently underway entitled "The Word Set Free, The Lectionary Free from Anti-Judaism." It is a joint effort between the National Council of Catholic Bishops and the Anti-Defamation League of the B’nai B’rith to "purge" the Catholic Lectionary from anything deemed to be "anti-Jewish". The formulators of this program accuse the Church of two-thousand years of anti-Semitism in theology and liturgy. They claim that this "teaching of contempt" (as they call it) is found even in the Gospels. The end result of this project will be a Lectionary where the Gospel is "deconstructed" and then "reconstructed" so as not to offend Jews who reject the Divinity and Messiahship of Jesus Christ. In short, it is an ecumenically-sensitive, false gospel. The target of this new Lectionary is every parish in the United States.²⁸

Fatima is Ignored

The mea culpas are a radical departure from the plan outlined by Our Lady of Fatima. At Fatima, Our Lady never asked the Pope to make grand apologies for alleged "sins of intolerance", "sins against women" or "sins of anti-Semitism" – apologies that disgrace Catholics, pander to historic lies and give comfort to the enemies of the Church. No, Our Lady commanded the Pope to "consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary" so that souls would be converted to the one true Catholic Church of Her Divine Son – a direct command from Heaven which John Paul has yet to obey.

Unlike the novel program of Vatican II, the Message of Fatima is not a modernist-ecumenical experiment, but an unequivocal Catholic solution. As we await tearfully its fulfillment, there is one request from Fatima that we must obey with increased zeal: that is Jacinta’s prophetic plea to "Pray, pray a great deal for the Holy Father."

Footnotes:

1. Essays, Articles and Reviews of Evelyn Waugh, Little Brown, 1983, p 629.
2. These were documented in the 1998 book When A Pope Asks Forgiveness, The ‘Mea Culpas" of Pope John Paul II, Luigi Acaudal, St. Paul Media, (Daughters of Saint Paul), 1998.
3. The full text of the "Prayer of Pardon" that includes the complete list of the "7 categories" is posted on the Vatican web page.
4. Sins of the present were also included in the "Day of Pardon", but the main focus was a "purification of memory" of sins of Catholics throughout the centuries.
5. "Pope says sorry for sins of Church." The Guardian (London), March 13, 2000.
6. "Anti-Defamation League Reacts to Pope’s Liturgy of Forgiveness", U.S. Newswire, March 12, 2000.
7. The Talmud Unmasked, by Rev. I.B. Pranaitis, Imprimatured by Archbishop Kozlowsky, April 13, 1892. (See pages 30-38). The fact that the Talmud contains these horrendous teachings was confirmed by the eminent theologian Msgr. Joseph Clifford Fenton in his superb apologetics book, We Stand With Christ. He cited these teachings to demonstrate: 1) that Christ truly existed, (otherwise the Talmudic writers would not have written of Him) and 2) the reality of Christ’s miracles. Fenton writes: "They speak of Jesus as a magician who went about performing wonders, and thereby indicate the reality of His miracles." (Bruce Publishing Co, 1942), p. 107.
8. "Various US church leaders voice sorrow for local Catholics’ sins against Jews", Jerusalem Post, March 12, 2000.
9. "Utah’s Catholic Hierarchy Not Planning to Reiterate Pontiff’s Apology for Past Wrongs", Salt Lake City Tribune, March 12, 2000.
10. Romano Amerio, Iota Unum, (Sarto House, Kansas City, 1995), p. 202-203. Amerio’s response was to a May, 1979 "confession of sins against women" by John Paul and to similar statements printed subsequently in the L’Osservatore Romano.
11. When a Pope Asks Forgiveness, p. xvi.
12. With the lone exception of Pope Adrian VI who issued an admission of guilt of corruption in clergy that contributed to the Protestant Revolt, but this was a very specific admission, not an all encompassing " apology" for sins of Catholics throughout the centuries. (See Ibid., p. 6-7.) Paul VI issued an apology during Vatican II for the sake of the new ecumenical orientation in September, 1963. (Ibid., p. 47.)
13. Ibid. p. xix.
14. Ibid. pp. 3-4.
15. See the 7 part series presently running in Catholic Family News "Von Balthasar and the Miserablist Church" by Atila Sinke Guimaraes. See also the series on the "New Theology" by Si Si No No "They Think They Have Won" Angelus Press, Kansas City, MO.
16. When a Pope Asks Forgiveness, p. 5.
17. Ibid. p. 4
18. Ibid. p. 5
19. Ibid pp. xxi-xxii.
20. Ibid. p. 47. Accattoli also quotes here, John Paul’s Ecumenical Encyclical, Ut Unun Sint, #88: "I join my predecessor Paul VI in asking forgiveness."
21. Ibid. Chapter II, "The Protestants Were First".
22. Ibid. p. 14.
23. See "Ecumenism Condemned by Sacred Scripture", Bishop George Hay (Catholic Family News, May, 1998) Reprint #292 for $1.75.
24. Catholic Encyclopedia for Home and School, Vol. 3, (McGraw-Hill, 1965) p. 670.
25. One recent example: "... An invitation to dialogue between the great monotheistic religions in their service of the human family," Pope John Paul II, "On Pilgrimage to Mt. Sinai," Origins, March 9, 2000. See also Iota Unum, Chapter XXXV where Romano Amerio demonstrates that converting non-Catholics to the one true Church is not the aim of today’s practice of ecumenism.
26. "Pope Confesses 2,000 Years of Church Sins (But Makes No Mention of the Inquisition)," The Independent (London), March 13, 2000.
27. "Presentation", Vatican Basilica, March 12, 2000, "Day of Pardon". Vatican Information Service. Emphasis added.
28. I tell a more complete story on this new Lectionary in the audio cassette, "Save Yourselves from this Perverse Generation: Modernism and the Old Covenant" (#3) available from Oltyn Library Services, 2316 Delaware Ave, PMB# 325, Buffalo, NY 14216 $7.99 post paid.

- taken from the April, 2000 edition of
Catholic Family News
MPO Box 743
Niagara Falls, NY 14302
Published once a month (12 times a year).
Subscriptions: $26.00 per year.