Pope Francis 10 year anniversary: He is now the only Pope since Benedict XVI died

Cardinal Blase Joseph Cupich

On October 9, 2016, Pope Francis named him a Cardinal and he was elevated to the College of Cardinals in a consistory on November 19, 2016, at St. Peter’s Basilica in Vatican City.

"The struggle is not just with the hierarchy in this country, but around the world,” Cardinal Cupich said. “It’s very clear there are even people in the Vatican who have opposed the pope from the get-go.”

American conservatives now have one Pope!

Cardinal Cupich on 10 years of Pope Francis: women, LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender) Catholics, sex abuse and what comes next.

Echo article published in America the Jesuit review.

When Pope Francis named Blase Cupich as archbishop of Chicago in 2014, some interpreted the appointment as a signal that the pope sought to reorient the U.S. hierarchy. 

Francis, who was elected pope 10 years (March 13, 2013) ago on Monday, has spent the last decade reforming the Vatican bureaucracy and trying to implement his vision of a church that acts as what he describes as a field hospital, responding with mercy to the needs of ordinary Catholics. In the United States, home to a vocal group of Catholics who have challenged Francis’ vision, Cardinal Cupich has proven a key papal ally, acting as an interpreter of the pope’s message for Catholics here and advising Francis on key matters, including the appointment of new bishops and the church’s handling of sexual abuse allegations.

In a wide-ranging 30-minute interview with America, conducted in his downtown Chicago office, Cardinal Cupich reflected on what Pope Francis has accomplished so far. He described the Francis era as “a historic papacy” that comes at “a watershed moment” for the church. The cardinal, who turns 74 later this month, offered his thoughts on various hot-button issues that have dominated Francis’ papacy thus far, including calls to make the church more welcoming for L.G.B.T. people, the church’s handling of sexual abuse allegations and whether the church should open the diaconate to women.

Pope Francis was Pope Francis is the head of the Catholic Church, the bishop of Rome and sovereign of the Vatican City.

Pope Francis has faced criticism that he moves too slowly. 

But Cardinal Cupich said he believes this is a deliberate style of leadership, calling it “a very methodical, Jesuit way of doing things in terms of discernment. He’s not rash; he doesn’t make rash decisions.”

“He has a strategy of where he wants to go,” the cardinal said. “But he’s patient enough not to want to preempt it, realizing that things have to unfold organically.”

Since the earliest days of the Francis papacy, the pope has called on Catholics to be more welcoming to gays and lesbians. 

In recent months, another influential American bishop, Cardinal Robert McElroy of San Diego, suggested that the church should reconsider language in the Catechism that L.G.B.T. Catholics have said is particularly hurtful, including text that describes homosexuality as “objectively disordered.”

Asked if he agrees with the proposal to alter the language used in the Catechism, Cardinal Cupich said yes. “Anytime language comes across as hurtful to people, the church has an obligation to examine that,” he said. “I would hope that the church would always be willing to examine the way it speaks, especially if it’s made known to us that it’s hurtful and that it is categorically exclusive of individuals.”

Cardinal Cupich said that concepts present in church teaching can be preserved even while altering language to make it less “cold, calculated, harsh language that, in some ways, is a door-closer.”

He said that the church must express its teaching in ways that attract people to Jesus.

“Language has to be, in some way, speaking to people in a way that brings healing,” the cardinal said. “Maybe there are some concepts within an expression of doctrine that will have to be attended to, but that doesn’t mean that the language itself can’t change.”

The church’s handling of sexual abuse allegations:  In 2019, the Vatican adopted provisions aimed at providing recourse for victims of sexual abuse and holding bishops accountable in their handling of complaints. Recently, one the church’s top experts on child protection, Hans Zollner, S.J., told a group of survivors of sexual abuse that the procedures are not perfect and admitted that they sometimes are “not working.” Some advocates for survivors of clergy sexual abuse agree.

Asked about that claim, Cardinal Cupich, who helped formulate the guidelines, suggested that Rome could do more in terms of staffing and resources when it comes to the protection of children and vulnerable adults.

“We have to look at ‘Do the various dicasteries in Rome have the proper staffing in order to do this in a timely way?’” the cardinal said. He said there is a “willingness” among church leaders “to be faithful to ‘Vos Estis Lux Mundi,’” the document that lays out the procedures. But he acknowledged, “We need to do a better job.”

In 2019, the Vatican adopted provisions aimed at providing recourse for victims of sexual abuse and holding bishops accountable in their handling of complaints. 

Recently, one the church’s top experts on child protection, Hans Zollner, S.J., told a group of survivors of sexual abuse that the procedures are not perfect and admitted that they sometimes are “not working.” Some advocates for survivors of clergy sexual abuse agree.

Asked about that claim, Cardinal Cupich, who helped formulate the guidelines, suggested that Rome could do more in terms of staffing and resources when it comes to the protection of children and vulnerable adults.

“We have to look at ‘Do the various dicasteries in Rome have the proper staffing in order to do this in a timely way?’” the cardinal said. He said there is a “willingness” among church leaders “to be faithful to ‘Vos Estis Lux Mundi,’” the document that lays out the procedures. But he acknowledged, “We need to do a better job.”

“If we need increased staffing in order to take care of it, to do it in a timely way, then that should be done,” he said, adding that the church has challenges when it comes to staffing at every level. “‘Vos Estis Lux Mundi’ is a good structure, but the structure and document has to be implemented accordingly.”

Promoting a synodal church:  With the church in the midst of a years long effort to gather insight from Catholics around the world, known as the synodal process, Cardinal Cupich said “there’s work to do” when it comes to engaging U.S. Catholics in the effort.

“We have to make sure that voices of people that have not been heard before are heard,” the cardinal said. He added that it is important to help people understand that the synod is not viewed “as a parliamentary procedure” that could leave some Catholics disillusioned if their own hopes for change in the church are not realized.

“It’s not as though we’re taking a vote on something,” Cardinal Cupich said. “But we are listening, and we are dialoguing, to find the pathway forward. I think people are getting that. But it is a new concept.”

He said that communities of religious sisters have used a process similar to the synod in discerning their own future and hopes church leaders can find inspiration from them.

“I’ve seen that when I was in South Dakota [where he was bishop of the Diocese of Rapid City, S.D., from 1998 to 2010], with a group of Benedictine nuns, the way that they carefully considered and dialogued in a synodal way, in a way that calls for the voices of everybody to be included in the discussion, to make some very important decisions,” he said. “But it took patience.”

Francis recognizes part of his job is to keep Catholics united and “to make sure that people stay at the table and keep talking,” Cardinal Cupich said.

That can be difficult, the cardinal acknowledged, in an institution as large and diverse as the Catholic Church.

Asked about recent comments made by Bishop Thomas Paprocki of the Diocese of Springfield, Ill., who suggested that Cardinal McElroy could be guilty of heresy due to his calls to be more welcoming to L.G.B.T. Catholics, Cardinal Cupich said it was a “serious” matter that will have to be addressed. But he said he did not believe that such accusations wield the “power to upset the whole process” of church reform.

Restrictions on the pre-Vatican II Mass:  Last month, Pope Francis reaffirmed restrictions on celebrating the pre-Vatican II Mass, reminding bishops that they must obtain permission from the Holy See and that they cannot interpret the decree in a way that differs from Rome’s intent. The restrictions on the Latin Mass have generated significant pushback from some Catholics, especially in the United States. But Cardinal Cupich said bishops have a duty to help believers in their dioceses understand why the restrictions exist in the first place.

“It’s because the [post-Vatican II] liturgy is the vehicle by which the full teachings of the church are being accepted by people today,” he said, pointing to the teachings of Pope John Paul II, as he also did in a recent essay for America. “That’s key.”

He said that helping Catholics understand that the Holy Spirit guided the Second Vatican Council, including its decrees on liturgy, is an essential task for bishops.

“There’s no two ways around that,” he said. “John Paul II said that, and Francis is doing it.”

Asked if he worried that devotees of the pre-Vatican II Mass could feel alienated by the restrictions, the cardinal said yes, but he added, “I think that that’s where the role of a bishop comes. The bishop has to show some leadership here,” especially when it comes to catechesis. “We don’t want to alienate people,” he said. “But there is a truth that the Holy Father is identifying, that bishops have a responsibility to promote.”

Women in the life of the church:  In 2016, Pope Francis established a commission to study whether the church had ever admitted women to the diaconate. The findings, he said at the time, would help him discern whether to restore the practice, which could open leadership positions for women in the church. Three years later, Francis said the commission had not come to any agreement and the issue needed further study. Some critics have grown frustrated with Francis, accusing him of stalling rather than making a clear decision.

But Cardinal Cupich said, “if the Holy Father hasn’t acted on it,” it is probably because he has “serious concerns.” On the other hand, he said, it is possible that Francis “has a long-term strategy here and it’s going to unfold in an incremental and organic way.”

The future of the U.S. hierarchy and the papacy:  Pope Francis has appointed about half of the bishops in the United States, but there is still significant skepticism of the pope’s agenda from some in the U.S. hierarchy. Cardinal Cupich said opposition to the pope’s vision for the church is not confined to the United States.

“The struggle is not just with the hierarchy in this country, but around the world,” he said. “It’s very clear there are even people in the Vatican who have opposed the pope from the get-go.”

But Cardinal Cupich said Francis is “not daunted by it. He just moves forward.”

Several leaders of large U.S. dioceses are at or approaching 75, the age at which bishops must submit their letters of resignation to the pope; they include Cardinal Cupich, who turns 74 later this month. That means Francis could have the opportunity to continue reshaping the U.S. hierarchy.

Cardinal Cupich, who advises the pope on the selection of bishops, said Francis has been clear from the beginning that he wants pastors who are close to their flocks.

“He wants people who are well-educated, who are faithful to the teachings of the church, and [who] realize being faithful to church also means having a pastoral outreach to people that unites,” he said. “I think that’s the legacy of this papacy.”

As for the next pope, Francis has not said for certain whether he will retire, like his predecessor, Pope Benedict XVI, or stay in office until his death. Asked what he thinks the church needs in a future leader, Cardinal Cupich laughed, recalling a toast he gave when he was elevated to cardinal in 2016: “That the pope will have a long life and that I may never have to vote in a conclave.”

Pope Benedict XVI died December 31, 2022

But should he have a vote—cardinals can vote in conclaves until they turn 80—he said the church will benefit from the leadership of a pope who is “faithful to the tradition.”

“And the tradition, of course, means the handing-on of what has immediately preceded it, not just 2,000 years ago, or 1,500 years ago, or 500 years ago,” he said.

But Cardinal Cupich said trying to predict the future of the papacy is a fool’s errand, noting how few people thought the cardinals would elect then-Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio in 2013.

“I think that we have to be attentive to the fact, as the pope has said, that God is full of surprises,” Cardinal Cupich said. “And I want to be surprised. I like surprises.”

Afghanistan refugees: Biblical teaching prevails! Welcome the strangers. Matthew 25: 31-40

Matthew 25: 31-40. “I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me.”

"Those who end up getting out will be very fortunate. Many deserve recognition as heroes for what they did, with so little promised in return." Echo report published in America: The Jesuit Review by Rich McKinless:

What would you do if armed men broke into your home tonight, dragged your husband or grown son into the street, and had them publicly executed—solely for perfectly legal work he had performed to support your family? Suppose, instead, that these armed men demanded that your unmarried daughter immediately be turned over to them, soon to be offered to a jihadist in forced marriage, likely never to be seen again?

Afghanistan

If you cannot imagine such scenes in your home, by all means offer a prayer of thanksgiving that such excruciating circumstances just don’t happen where you live. You might also consider not waiting until next Veterans Day to say thank you to a veteran or a soldier now serving—those who have willingly risked harm’s way to safeguard the sense of personal security many of us simply take for granted.

Sadly, scenes such as those I described are taking place in Afghanistan and are reliably expected to continue with increasing frequency in the months to come. The question I grapple with today is no longer how or even why this can be happening. It is a bit simpler: What’s a Christian to do?

Welcoming the stranger. " ...being 'one in Christ' should be taken literally as acknowledging no fundamental differences in kind among human beings."

My wife and I live very comfortably in the Virginia suburbs, just outside of Washington. But the events now making daily headlines as civil society collapses in Afghanistan in the vacuum left by the departing U.S. military nonetheless feel different for my family than perhaps they do for many Americans. I am of course thankful that I need not be terrified that my spouse or child may suddenly be taken from our home in the middle of the night. But knowing that this is in fact happening to other families, even halfway around the world, is now personal, in a different way.

Six years ago, the U.S. insurgency into Afghanistan was already 14 years long. Most Americans had more personally pressing matters occupying their attention. While international terrorism had by no means gone away, with Osama bin Laden gone, incidents of terror had moved to the background of American consciousness, no longer atop any poll of public concerns. That would certainly be true for my family as well.

At that same time, our local Catholic Charities began to share volunteer opportunities to assist families from Afghanistan attempting to resettle in the D.C. area.

This was when my wife and I first learned of the Special Immigrant Visa program, approved in 2009, by Congress. Its goal was to encourage the local Afghan population to assist the U.S. military in its community and infrastructure rebuilding during the conflict. The explicit promise was that those who worked with our armed forces as interpreters and in other essential support roles could apply for a permanent U.S. work visa (or green card) if they faced serious threats as a result of their work. Approval of such applications required written recommendations from their supervisory U.S. personnel and the successful completion of a series of security clearances conducted by our in-country embassy staff.

Migration and Refugee Services is a program of Catholic Charities nationally and is very active in the Diocese of Arlington where we live. It serves as one of the federal government’s contract providers assisting S.I.V. families who resettle in the Washington D.C. area. When we asked how we might help, one simple answer came in learning that families may have no place to sleep upon arrival. Our State Department provides S.I.V. immigrants (as it does for others admitted as refugees) a resettlement allowance of a few thousand dollars, based mostly on family size. The allowance is intended to defray the startup costs of finding a place to live and other living expenses while gainful employment is sought. We learned from the Catholic Charities staff that these allowances disappear very quickly if the family has no local sponsor family to stay with initially, given the cost of commercial lodging in our major cities.

My wife and I agreed to host an arriving S.I.V. Afghan family while they looked for work and a lease for a small apartment. Abdul and his wife Fatima arrived at Dulles Airport with three beautiful young children, ages 5, 3 and a newborn. (Names have been change to protect the subjects and their families.) Abdul qualified for the S.I.V. program because he had worked in one of the most dangerous support roles: joining U.S. Army teams to locate undetonated roadside bombs—improvised explosive devices—intended for coalition soldiers. His excellent English allowed Abdul to reach out to trusted locals regarding recent activities of jihadist groups and then share gathered intelligence with bomb disposal teams.

Most roadside I.E.D.s are set off remotely by cell phone once coalition troops or their local “collaborators” are close by.

Afghan boys carry water, pass through destroyed houses in the west of Kabul. Many houses in Kabul lack running water due to damage caused in the country's long civil war.

Moreover, the Taliban sympathizers were not always identifiable, even by locals. Efforts to disarm the devices always risked life and limb. For those like Abdul, the daily risk did not end with successful bomb disposal. Helping Americans disarm the Taliban was a heresy beyond simply taking a security or clerical job at a U.S. military base. If he were caught, his demise would not be quick or painless.

We hosted a second S.I.V. family the following year, in 2016. Sayed and his wife, Mina, were newly married when their approved visa came through from the U.S. embassy in Kabul. Sayed was a licensed physician in Afghanistan and had agreed to provide health care at a clinic set up by the U.S. Army in a village lacking any medical facilities.

For bureaucratic reasons that could never be defended, the average approval time for a successful S.I.V. application now exceeds three years. If your green card eventually comes through, you are advised to board the first flight you are able to book to the United States. In this case, that meant the couple said goodbye to their extended families (both are one of nine siblings) just three days after they were married.

Both families that we hosted found apartments and work within the first few months following their arrival in Northern Virginia. We have kept in touch, and one of our joys has been watching our own adult children seek out spending time with these wonderful families. They have been self-supporting, even throughout the pandemic that saw so many Americans lose their jobs.

Abdul and Fatima welcomed their fourth child a year ago, and their two oldest are looking forward to in-person school beginning this week. Abdul is now completing a certification program in cybersecurity, which he expects will enhance his own professional opportunities significantly. Sayed and Mina started a family of their own since their arrival; they now have a daughter and son who they quite proudly remind us are full American citizens. Sayed, who continues to take classes to improve his English, recently moved from driving for a food delivery service to a full-time position as a medical technician at a major local hospital. Mina works from their home as a beautician while juggling responsibility for the kids and attending an evening cosmetology certification program after her husband arrives home from work.

These families are thriving by any measure—including facing and managing the struggles that nearly all newcomers to any country face. What impresses me most is not how hard they have worked, or even how much they genuinely appreciate America’s freedoms. For me it is the courage it took for these young couples to leave behind their large and very close extended families, fully understanding they might never see them again. All to move halfway around the world to a place where they knew nearly no one. It surely takes some level of personal courage to start over with nothing while leaving everyone and everything you know behind.

I must balance this admiration with the knowledge that they also feared for their lives if they didn’t leave. They knew others who tried and did not make it

Those left behind: Fast forward! We heard from both families as the images of desperation from their country appeared on everyone’s TVs, laptops and smartphones. They watched in horror as the Taliban entered Kabul, the U.S. embassy was evacuated and tens of thousands fled toward the airport—where, for most, their slim hopes of a quick escape to any refuge were dashed.

Our Afghan friends now experience a personal terror all over again: for the family members they left behind. They don’t understand how the country that may have literally saved their lives has now seemingly given up on everyone else still in Afghanistan. They don’t care about our politics, for the most part—they just want their loved ones to survive. They are, of course, Muslim by faith and culture—but reject everything the Taliban represents, most of all the jihadist philosophy of intolerance toward all those who oppose their conception of the faith.

We have just learned that Abdul’s brother also worked with the U.S. Army on “U.X.B.s”—unexploded bombs. Unlike Abdul, he wasn’t sure about leaving his native country, the ongoing danger notwithstanding. He waited until 2018, before applying for S.I.V. status. Abdul told us his brother’s paperwork was “99 percent complete” when Kabul fell. His brother now knows there will be no more green cards coming from our embassy in Kabul. He went into hiding when the Taliban entered the capital, leaving his wife and three young children at home alone in the city. He knows that Taliban fighters have little use for married women or their young children. If the family has no valuable possessions, they are likely to be left alone. The father, on the other hand, would not survive if found and identified.

Fatima’s brother worked in a less dangerous job for the U.S. embassy, which hired many locals during the conflict to work as translators as well as in security positions, clerical jobs and other roles in Kabul. He too finds himself now an unapproved S.I.V. applicant, fearing each day he may be identified, awaiting a safe way out that may never come.

Mina’s mother and 17-year-old sister live in a northern province of Afghanistan, two days by bus from Kabul. Last month, they had fled to the capital when the city appeared to be the last safe haven, knowing they would have a place to stay with their in-laws. They have now chosen to flee back to their home village, where they hope the Taliban will have less interest. While an elderly widow is probably safe, an unmarried teenage girl, sadly, is the most attractive of targets.

What can be done?  News-loving Americans have no shortage of heart-wrenching stories from around the world. The 24-hour news cycle combined with our mobile phone addictions guarantees us access to any and all places where civil order is broken, public corruption is rampant, or natural disaster has decimated communities. It really can become numbing. Our natural compassion for people in such terrible plights can begin to give way to feelings of hopelessness—or at least that things are beyond our reach to make a difference.

For those of us in mostly safe neighborhoods and climate-controlled worlds, Covid-19 may have been the most unnerving threat we have experienced in years. For me and my family, Afghanistan is not just on the front pages, one more distant problem we really can’t do anything about. It isn’t the same when the anxiety, and even terror, is experienced by your friends—not anonymous victims in your news feed. Of course, my second-order connection to these victims doesn’t mean I have any more answers.

Reports in The Washington Post estimate that there may be over 80,000 eligible S.I.V. applicants (including their spouses and minor children) still in Afghanistan. As of this writing, U.S. forces control the airport perimeter outside Kabul but essentially no other territory in the country. We are told our government is still assessing how to facilitate safe passage from the city, and hopefully the outer provinces, with the Taliban. Time will tell how many of those eligible are able to emigrate and realize the opportunity our friends were given. It seems clear many are certain to be left behind—or will not survive the wait.

Our government’s policy decisions made (and not made) over four different presidential administrations will be debated for years to come. Political finger-pointing remains a favorite pastime inside the D.C. beltway. It does nothing for our friends’ family members, or the tens of thousands of others in now trapped in potentially lethal circumstances.

There seems to be broad agreement that America owes those who stood with us in Afghanistan at least our protection, if not a new life here. But the reality for even those who care is that most of us have no way to help any evacuation effort now underway or to influence how extensive it will be.

But this cannot be just one more international crisis from which we move on as the news cycle rolls on, concluding we just can’t make any difference. There in fact may be little any of us can do to change the fate of those who are ultimately left behind. But thousands will get out. Those who do come to America will soon face the daunting challenges that immigrants have always faced in a strange new land. Most every American can and should do something for them. Just three ideas:

Remember: Your own family first came to this country from a foreign place, likely leaving hardships behind, willingly coming to a strange land that promised them little more than the freedom to start over.

Learn: Who in your city or town works with S.I.V. refugees? The need for these services is about to explode. One well-regarded nonprofit dedicated solely to this effort is No One Left Behind, founded by a retired U.S. Army captain and his former Afghan interpreter. They play a coordinating role with other N.G.O.s around the country that assist in resettlement efforts at the community level.

There are currently nine umbrella social service organizations (including the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops) designated by the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services to provide direct assistance to S.I.V. families in finding places to live, securing jobs, enrolling their kids in school, or even finding used furniture or shopping for a used car.

Local parishes and other faith communities are now “adopting” one or more refugee families to help play these support roles. Find out what is already happening in your area.

These arriving families are brave, and they are willing to work. But they don’t know how our society works or how to figure it out on their own. Local parishes and other faith communities are now “adopting” one or more refugee families to help play these support roles. Find out what is already happening in your area.

Share: Most S.I.V. arrivals choose to resettle in large U.S. cities, where they believe they will more readily find work and perhaps others from their home country who may have recently resettled. If you are not in one of these larger metropolitan areas, consider supporting one of the charitable groups that are meeting their needs. These nonprofits have learned what the barriers to success are for these families, and how to leverage existing community networks effectively. Demands for services from these organizations will grow dramatically in the months and years to come. Help in that way if you are able.

Keeping our promises:  For me, Afghanistan is not at all about the larger ongoing debate regarding U.S. immigration policy. Those challenges need addressing, to be sure. But no matter how welcoming a country we choose to be, America cannot invite everyone inside our borders who would rather be here than where they find themselves. Pray for all who face hunger, political instability or economic deprivation. We know they deserve better.

Those who end up getting out will be very fortunate. Many deserve recognition as heroes for what they did, with so little promised in return.

This situation is different: America made a promise to the people of Afghanistan when we invaded their country to remove Osama bin Laden, disable Al Qaeda and degrade safe havens for radical Islamists. We told the Afghan people: Work with us. We will help you create a democracy of your own—this is your child’s chance for a better life. Whether that was ever a realistic promise, we did make it, and our presence there for 20 years meant most Afghans came to believe that we really meant it.

Historians and foreign policy experts can argue whether different policy choices would have led to better outcomes. What I will not leave to those experts is the moral judgment that our country’s promise must still mean something. Even if we have given up on building democracy in Afghanistan, leaving behind those who trusted us and risked everything to do so should be wholly unacceptable.

Those who end up getting out will be very fortunate. Many deserve recognition as heroes for what they did, with so little promised in return. It is time for Americans to do all we can to treat them accordingly.

Vote! Vote! Vote! Destroy "The Big Lie": Transcript

President Joe Biden-

Voting Rights Speech Transcript July 13: 

“The Big Lie is Just That— A Big Lie”

PHILADELPHIA, PA- July 13 (Reuters) - President Joe Biden, under pressure from U.S. civil rights leaders, on Tuesday called it a "national imperative" to pass sweeping voting rights legislation that has stalled in Congress, but he did not outline a path to overcome Republican opposition.

Biden made a searing critique of what he called efforts to undermine voting rights, likening them to past laws that prevented Black people and women from voting in the United States.

According to the Brennan Center for Justice, at New York University Law School, at least 17 states this year have enacted laws that restrict voting access, with more being considered.

Joe Biden: I see an awful lot of good friends out there. Please have a seat, if you have one. Let me begin by saying I used to be important. I used to be the chairman of the board of this place. And Jeffrey Rosen allowed me to do that for a while. But thank you all for being here, I truly appreciate it.

Joe Biden: Governor, it’s above and beyond the call. Mr. Mayor, I thought you were a great mayor still think you are, but your judgment in finances is even stronger. But all of you. And a good friend Bobby Brady… I see so many friends. Al Sharpton, Al, how are you pal? It’s great to see you.

Joe Biden: I’m going to get in trouble here because I’m going to recognize my Congresswoman from the state of Delaware, Lisa Blunt Rochester and her sister who used to run my office. Stand up.

Joe Biden: Folks, good afternoon. There’s a serious subject I’d like to talk about today. I’m here in Philadelphia at the National Constitution Center, the city and the place where the story of We The People began. It’s a story that’s neither simple, nor straightforward. That’s because the story is the sum of our parts, and all those parts are fundamentally human. And being human is to be imperfect, driven by appetite and ambition, as much as by goodness and grace.

Joe Biden: But some things in America should be simple and straightforward. Perhaps the most important of those things, the most fundamental of those things, is the right to vote. The right to vote freely.

Joe Biden: The right to vote freely, the right to vote fairly. The right to have your vote counted. The democratic threshold is Liberty. With it, anything’s possible. Without it, nothing, nothing. And for our democracy and the work, and to deliver our work and our people, it’s up to all of us to protect that right. This is a test of our time and what I’m here to talk about today.

Joe Biden: Just thinking about the past election, 102 year old woman in Arkansas who voted for the first time on the very spot she once picked cotton. A 94 year woman in Michigan voted early and in person in her 72nd consecutive election. You know what she said said? She said this election was quote, “the most important vote that we ever had.”

Joe Biden: A daughter who voted in memory of her dad who died of COVID-19, so others wouldn’t have the experience of pain and darkness and loss that she was going through. Patients out there. And the parents, the parents who voted for school their children will learn in. Sons and daughters voted for the planet they’re going to live on. Young people just turning 18 and everyone who for the first time in their lives thought they could truly make a difference.

Joe Biden: America, America, and Americans of every background voted. They voted for good jobs and higher wages. They voted for racial equity and justice. They voted to make healthcare a right, not a privilege. The reason Americans went to vote and the lengths they went to vote, to be able to vote, this past election were absolutely extraordinary.

Joe Biden: In fact, the fact that so many election officials across the country made it easier and safer for them to be able to vote in the middle of a pandemic is remarkable. As a result, in 2020 more people voted in America than ever, ever in the history of America in the middle of a once in a century pandemic.

Joe Biden: All told, more than 150 Americans of every age, of every race, of every background exercised their right to vote. They voted early, they voted absentee. They voted in person. They voted by mail. They voted by Dropbox. And then, they got their families and friends to go out and vote.

Joe Biden: Election officials, the entire electoral system withstood unrelenting political attacks, physical threats, intimidation and pressure. They did so with unyielding courage and faith in our democracy with recount after recount after recount, court case after court case, the 2020 election was the most scrutinized election ever in American history. Challenge after challenge brought to local, state, and election officials, state legislatures, state and federal courts, even to the United States Supreme Court not once but twice.

Joe Biden: More than 80 judges, including those appointed by my predecessor, heard the arguments. In every case, neither cause nor evidence was found. Don’t undermine the national achievement of administrating the historic election in the face of such extraordinary challenges.

Joe Biden: Audits, recounts were conducted in Arizona and Wisconsin. In Georgia it was recounted three times. It’s clear, for those who challenge the results and question the integrity of the election, no other election has ever been held under such scrutiny and such high standards. The big lie is just that— a big lie.

Joe Biden: The 2020 election, it’s not hyperbole, suggest the most examined and the fullest expression on the will of the people in the history of this nation. That should be celebrated, it is the example of America at its best. But instead, we continue to see an example of human nature at its worst, something darker and more sinister.

Joe Biden: In America, if you lose you except the results. You follow the Constitution, you try again. You don’t call facts fake and then try to bring down the American experiment just because you’re unhappy. That’s not statesmanship.

Joe Biden: That’s not statesmanship, that’s selfishness. That’s not democracy it’s the denial of the right to vote. It suppresses, it subjugates. The denial full of free and fair elections is the most un-American thing that any of us can imagine. The most undemocratic, most unpatriotic and sadly not unprecedented.

Joe Biden: From denying enslaved people full citizenship until the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments after the Civil War to denying women the right to vote until the 19th Amendment 100 years ago. To poll taxes and literacy tests and the Ku Klux Klan campaigns of violence and terror that lasted into the ’50s and ’60s. To the Supreme Court decision in 2013 and then again just two weeks ago, a decision that weakened the landmark Voting Rights Act. To the willful election attacks in 2020, and then to a whole other level of threat, the violence and the deadly insurrection on the Capitol on January 6th.

Joe Biden: Just got back from Europe, speaking to the G7 and to NATO. They wonder, not a joke… They wonder, Gov. They asked me, “Is it going to be okay?” The citadel to democracy in the world, “Is it going to be okay?”

Joe Biden: Time and again, we’ve weathered threats to the right to vote in free and fair elections and each time we found a way to overcome. That’s what we must do today. Vice President Harris and I have spent our careers doing this work, and I’ve asked her to lead, to bring people together to protect the right to vote in our democracy. And it starts with continuing the fight to pass H.R. 1, the For the People Act.

Joe Biden: That bill would help end voter suppression in the states, get dark money out of politics, give voice to the people at the grassroots level, create fair district maps and end partisan political gerrymander. Last month Republicans opposed even debating, even considering For the People Act. Senate Democrats stood United to protect our democracy and the sanctity of the vote. We must pass the For the People Act, it’s a national imperative.

Joe Biden: We must also fight for the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act to restore and expand voting protections, to prevent voter suppression. All the Congress women and men here, there’s a bunch of you, you knew John, many of you.

Joe Biden: Just weeks ago the Supreme Court, yet again, weakened the Voting Rights Act and upheld what Justice Kagan called quote, “A significant race based disparity in voting opportunities.” The Court’s decision, as harmful as it is, does not limit the Congress’s ability to repair the damage done. That’s the important point.

Joe Biden: It puts the burden back on Congress to restore the Voting Rights Act to its intended strength. As soon as Congress passes the For the People Act and the John Lewis Voting Rights Advanced Act, I will sign it and let the whole world see it. That will be an important moment.

Joe Biden: And the world is wondering, and Dwight knows what I’m talking about, for real. You know, the world is wondering what is America going to do? But we also have to be clear-eyed about the obstruction we face. Legislation is one tool, but not the only tool. And it’s not the only measure of our obligation to defend democracy today.

Joe Biden: For example, Attorney General Merrick Garland announced that the United States Department of Justice is going to be using its authorities to challenge the onslaught of state laws undermining voting rights in old and new ways. The focus will be on dismantling racially discriminatory laws like the recent challenged to Georgia’s vicious anti voting law.

Joe Biden: The Department of Justice will do so with the Voting Rights Division that at my request is doubling its size and enforcement staff. Civil rights groups and other organizations have announced their plans to stay vigilant and challenge these odious laws in the courts. In Texas, for example, Republican led state legislature wants to allow partisan poll watchers to intimidate voters and impartial poll workers.

Joe Biden: They want voters to dive further, and be able to be in a position where they wonder who’s watching them, and intimidate them. To wait longer to vote, to drive a hell of a lot… Excuse me… A long way to get to vote. They want to make it so hard and inconvenient that they hope people don’t vote at all. That’s what this is about.

Joe Biden: This year alone, 17 states have enacted, not just proposed but enacted, 28 new laws to make it harder for Americans to vote. Not to mention, it gets this nearly 400 additional bills Republican members of the state legislatures are trying to pass. The 21st Century Jim Crow assault is real, it’s unrelenting, and we’re going to challenge it vigorously.

Joe Biden: While this broad assault against voting rights is not unprecedented, it is taking on new and literally pernicious forms. It’s no longer just about who gets to vote or making it easier for eligible voters to vote. It’s about who gets to count the vote, who gets to count whether or not your vote counted at all.

Joe Biden: It’s about moving from independent election administrators who worked for the people, to polarized state legislatures and partisan actors who work for political parties. To me, this is simple, this is election subversion. It’s the most dangerous threat to voting in the integrity of free and fair elections in our history. Never before have we decided who gets to count, count, what votes count.

Joe Biden: Some state legislators want to make it harder for you to vote. And if you vote, they want to be able to tell you your vote doesn’t count for any reason they make up. They want the ability to reject the final count and ignore the will of the people if their preferred candidate loses.

Joe Biden: They’re trying, not only targeting people of color, they’re targeting voters of all races and backgrounds. With a simple target, who did not vote for them? That’s the target. It’s unconscionable. I mean, really, I it’s hard to declare just how critical this is. It’s simply unconscionable. We’ve got to shore up our election system and address the threats of election of subversion, not just from abroad, which I spent time with Putin talking about, but from home.

Joe Biden: We must ask those who represent us at the federal, state and local levels, “Will you deny the will of the people? Will you ignore their voices?” We have to ask, “Are you on the side of truth or lies, fact or fiction, justice or injustice. Democracy or Autocracy?” That’s what it’s coming down to.

Joe Biden: Which is bringing me to perhaps the most important thing we have to do. We have to forge a coalition of Americans of every background and political party, the advocates, the students, the faith leaders, the labor leaders, the business executives to raise the urgency of this moment. Because as much as people know they’re screwing around with the election process. I don’t think that most people think this is about who gets to count what vote counts. Literally, not figuratively.

Joe Biden: You vote for certain electors to vote for somebody for president. A State legislature comes along, under their proposal, and they said, “No, we don’t like those electors, we’re going to appoint other electors who are going to vote for the other guy or other woman.”

Joe Biden: Because, here’s the deal, in 2020 democracy was put to a test. First by the pandemic, then by a desperate attempt to deny the reality of the results of the election. And then, via violent and deadly insurrection on the Capitol, the Citadel of our democracy.

Joe Biden: I’ve been around a long time in public life. I thought I’d seen it all, or most of it all, but I never thought I’d see that for real. And in spite of what you see on television and you saw it, you have Senators saying it was just a day at the Capitol, just people visiting the Capitol.

Joe Biden: Folks, we met the test. Because of the extraordinary courage of election officials, many of them Republicans, our court system and those brave Capitol police officers, because of them democracy held.

Joe Biden: Look how close it came, I mean for real, how close it came. We’re going to face another test in 2022, a new wave of unprecedented voter suppression and raw and sustained election subversion. We have to prepare now.

Joe Biden: As I’ve said time and again, no matter what you can never stop the American people from voting. They will decide, and the power must always be with the people. That’s why just like we did in 2020, we have to prepare for 2022. We’ll engage in an all out effort to educate voters about the changing laws, register them to vote and then get them vote out.

Joe Biden: We’ll encourage people to run for office themselves at every level, we’ll be asking my Republican friends in Congress and states and cities and counties to stand up for God’s sake and help prevent this concerted effort to undermine our elections and the sacred right to vote.

Joe Biden: Have you no shame? Whether it’s stopping foreign interference in our elections, or the spread of disinformation from within, we have to work together. Vice President Harris and I, we’re making it clear that there’s real peril in making raw power, rather than the idea of liberty, the centerpiece of the common life.

Joe Biden: The founders understood this. The women of Seneca Falls understood this. The brave heroic foot soldiers of the Civil Rights Movement understood this. So must we. This isn’t about Democrats or Republicans, it’s literally about who we are as Americans. It’s that basic.

Joe Biden: It’s about the kind of country we want today, a kind of country we want for our children and grandchildren tomorrow. And quite frankly, the whole world is watching.

Joe Biden: Folks, I’m not being sentimental. I’m not preaching to you. I’m just giving it to you straight, as I promised I would always do. Lay things out on the line and honor your trust with trust. So hear me clearly, there’s an unfolding assault taking place in America today, an attempt to suppress and subvert the right to vote in fair and free elections. An assault on democracy, an assault on liberty, an assault on who we are, who we are as Americans.

Joe Biden: For make no mistake, bullies and merchants of fear, peddlers of lies are threatening the very foundation of our country. It gives me no pleasure to say this. I never thought in my entire career I’d ever have to say it. But I swore an oath to you, to God to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution. That’s an oath that forms a sacred trust to defend America against all threats, both foreign and domestic.

Joe Biden: The assault on free and fair elections is just such a threat, literally. I’ve said it before. We’re facing the most significant test of our democracy since the Civil War. That’s not hyperbole, since the Civil War. The Confederates back then never breached the Capitol as insurrectionist did on January the sixth.

Joe Biden: I’m not saying this to alarm you, I’m saying this because you should be alarmed. I’m also saying this, there’s good news. It doesn’t have to be this way. It doesn’t have to be, for real. We have the means, we just need the will. The will to save and strengthen our democracy.

Joe Biden: We did it in 2020. The battle for the soul of America. In that battle the people voted, democracy prevailed, our Constitution held. We have to do it again.

Joe Biden: My fellow Americans, it requires fair mindedness, devotion to justice, as corny as it sounds, love of country. It requires us to unite in common purpose to declare here and now, We the People will never give up. We will not give in. We will overcome. We will do it together.

Joe Biden: Guaranteeing the right to vote. Ensuring that every vote is counted has always been the most patriotic thing we can do. Just remember, our late friend John Lewis said, “Freedom is not a state, it’s an act. Freedom is not a state, it’s an act.” And we must act and we will act, for our cause is just, our vision is clear, and our hearts are full. For We the People, for our democracy, for America itself, we must act. God bless you all and may God protect our troops and all those who stand to watch over our democracy. But act! 

We’ve got to act! Thank you.

Roman Catholics in parishes without priests

Gérald Cardinal Lacroix prepares the dwindling number of Catholics in Quebec for the end of parish life as they know it.

America Magazine by Phillipe Vallancourt with Catholic News Service (CNS)

Cardinal Lacroix in Quebec Canada
Lacroix was born on 27 July 1957, in Saint-Hilaire-de-Dorset in the Archdiocese of Quebec and completed his secondary and higher education at Trinity High School in Manchester, New Hampshire, and Saint Anselm College, in the neighboring town of Goffstown. He then studied for his theological training at Université Laval, obtaining a Bachelor of Arts degree in theology.

QUEBEC CITY (CNS) — The Archdiocese of Quebec announced its intention to reorganize its parishes to focus on local missionary activities. This move comes as human and material resources continue to diminish.

At least 75% of the parishes will be affected by this change, in both urban and rural areas.

In a video, Cardinal Gerald Lacroix stressed that the church of Quebec was born out of mission. But, he said, it is now clear that the parish system that had a strong impact on French Canadian society is not sustainable and needs to evolve.

“We can no longer be satisfied with giving good pastoral services to the people who faithfully participate in our assemblies and movements,” said Cardinal Lacroix. “These people now represent a tiny part of the population entrusted to us.”

Quebec Auxiliary Bishop Marc Pelchat added that in recent years, the life of the parishes has relied on teams that have carried out “almost everything” of the daily functioning, often focusing on “expected services.”

“We must now reorient our pastoral teams toward a more intensely missionary activity, turned toward the people and groups that we reach too little,” said Bishop Pelchat.

This call to go beyond the usual frameworks aims at “freeing energies” to better reach out to the population that is currently not reached by the church’s message.

Priests, deacons and laypeople must “envisage working to spread the Gospel message outside our usual frameworks,” with new means, in new territories, Cardinal Lacroix said.

Over the past decade, the number of parishes in the Archdiocese of Quebec decreased from 200 to 38. These 38 parishes were then organized into 29 large “pastoral units.”

“For a long time now, the resources available have not allowed us to appoint pastors and other pastoral collaborators in sufficient numbers to meet the needs of all the communities,” confirmed Marie Chrétien, diocesan pastoral coordinator. “We now lack the resources to assign a pastoral team to each of these large units.”

From now on, the diocese will constitute expanded pastoral units, which will be articulated around new teams that will collaborate with people involved in the various areas.

The communications director of the Archdiocese of Quebec, Valérie Roberge-Dion, said that, in a first step, 22 of the 29 pastoral units will become 10 missionary units. Human resources will be shared, but no juridical grouping of parishes — a process that ended in 2019 for the Archdiocese of Quebec — is expected initially.

These changes will be made for the pastoral year that begins Aug. 1. In the meantime, the diocese intends to continue consultations to “clarify the roles and responsibilities of each one” and to determine according to which new financial and administrative agreements the parishes will continue to operate.

Cardinal Lacroix said he believes it will be necessary to get used to a “new face of the organization of the church.” He called on employees to welcome these changes and invited them to see how they can collaborate.

He also announced other changes anticipated for the church of Quebec. He raised the possibility that eucharistic celebrations could eventually be centered around “a few central churches.”

“The use of our places of worship and other buildings will have to be reevaluated, for the financial weight of these has increased and considerably restricts our ability to fulfill our essential mission,” he said. “The number of eucharistic celebrations will also have to be reviewed, because priests, far fewer in number than before, cannot limit themselves to multiplying sacramental celebrations while neglecting other forms of presence.”

He said he also expected the diocese will have fewer paid personnel and more volunteers.

Dr. Martin Luther King transformational spirituality

Echo essay by Marcia Chatelain*, published in America, the Jesuit Magazine:

In the summer of 1967, Ebony magazine readers were offered a rare and deeply personal look into the life of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. The esteemed leader had dispensed with his suits and ties—the standard uniform for mass meetings and court appearances.

An elegant photo spread, captured King in swim trunks, pajamas and slippers. King was at rest. Surrounded by the natural beauty of Ochos Rios, Jamaica, and unknowingly in the penultimate winter of his life, King’s time away from his multiple responsibilities to the freedom movement revealed an intimate portrait of a leader in transformation.

Although Ebony titled the somewhat breezy feature “MLK’s Tropic Interlude,” the reporter noted that despite King modeling his life after Gandhi, the pastor failed to devote any great portion of his time to “leisurely reflection.” The frequently overworked and exhausted King agreed and the article concluded that “nobody deserved a vacation more than MLK.”

King used his time on the telephone-free estate to complete the draft of his final book, Where Do We Go From Here: Chaos or Community?, which was published the following summer.

In presenting the two possibilities for the global future in the book’s title, King presented the solution to growing militarism, escalating racial unrest and deepening levels of poverty: togetherness. Despite his partial isolation in Jamaica, King’s mind was always fixed on the strength and the radical potential of human connection, from the crowds that marched behind and beside him to the scores of people whose hearts were transformed by the images of protestors assaulted while at prayer.

Many of us today may not be able to understand King’s commitment to nonviolence or his unshakeable focus on the beloved community. In a year in which most of this year’s celebrations of the King holiday will be convened virtually and apart, due to the scourge of Covid-19 and with a heightened vigilance due to the most recent rash of white supremacist attacks on the U.S. Capitol and statehouses across the country, King’s vision is woefully out of focus.

As an educator routinely tasked with teaching the U.S. civil rights movement or invited to reflect on King’s legacy for the annual holiday, I often return to King’s retreat in Jamaica because it set in motion the pivotal 11 month-period between the appearance of Where Do We Go From Here and his final oration, delivered the day before he was assassinated on April 4, 1968. In thinking of this period in King’s life, I am reminded of St. Ignatius Loyola’s 11 months in Manresa, Spain. For Catholics, particularly those who find great wisdom and hope in the life of St. Ignatius, King provides us numerous examples of how Ignatian spirituality can be lived and modeled outside of the church.

In the same way that nearly a year of contemplation allowed St. Ignatius to bequeath Catholics a roadmap for faith in the Spiritual Exercises, King provided keys to understanding the complexity of realizing racial justice and defined the moral grounds in which this work could happen in Where Do We Go From Here. The collection of essays answered timely questions about the direction of the civil rights movement, the roots of Black radicalism, and highlighted the importance of economic justice to ending his “three evils” —racism, excessive materialism and militarism.

While in Jamaica, King undoubtedly reflected on how he would communicate the urgency of his nascent Poor People’s Campaign, which would include advocacy for a $12 billion investment in universal basic income, a federal jobs guarantee program and fair, affordable housing. The leader most likely meditated on how he would make a weary public empathize with victims of police brutality. He probably prayed for the courage to continue to speak out against a growing American military presence in Vietnam and knew that these actions would alienate some of his veteran allies and the president of the United States.

King’s time in Jamaica was drastically different than Ignatius’s cave, but both men found themselves needing to turn inward to feel the graces that would inspire their hearts and their pens to share how God was working through them in moments of personal strife. 

In the way that encountering the Cardoner River** gave Ignatius tremendous clarity, I often wonder if King’s time gazing upon the Ocho Rios Bay imbued him with a similar assurance about the next phase of his journey.

It is hard to relate to the King that is rightfully memorialized in voluminous biographies and artful documentaries. Yet, we are able to return to King’s writings and speeches, and when paired with a review of the Spiritual Exercises, we can sharpen our gaze and our resolve to do justice to these compatible visions. Both provide us inspiration in seemingly opposite models, which are both necessary to identify and repair our fractured world: Ignatius’ mystic experience and King’s most humble revelations of faith. And Ignatius’ great emptying of ego while alone and King’s luminous spirit in front of many. In 1959, King wrote: “My call to the ministry was neither dramatic nor spectacular. It came neither by some miraculous vision nor by some blinding light experience on the road of life. Moreover, it did not come as a sudden realization. Rather, it was a response to an inner urge that gradually came upon me.”

The slow and gradual process of King’s life reminds us that our own purpose requires patience, moments of retreat and ultimately a return to ourselves and others to build community. King’s Ignatian spirit impressed itself on those he loved and cared for, and for many of us who never knew him personally. It is particularly fitting that in the foreword to the revised edition of Where Do We Go From Here, his widow, the activist Coretta Scott King described her late husband as having “toiled vigorously to offer discerning leadership.” King’s many discernments throughout his life and in his final year were declared in the last minute of the last speech he gave before his death. While delivering an address that assessed the history of human struggle, called for economic solidarity with striking sanitation workers and recounted his many near-death experiences, King shared the greatest desire of his life:

“Like anybody, I would like to live a long life—longevity has its place. But I’m not concerned about that now. I just want to do God’s will.”

*Marcia Chatelain is professor of history at Georgetown University. 

**He sat down for a little while with his face to the river—Cardoner—which was running deep. While he was seated there, the eyes of his understanding began to be opened; though he did not see any vision, he understood and knew many things, both spiritual things and matters of faith and learning, and this was with so great an enlightenment that everything seemed new to him. It was as if he were a new man with a new intellect.

Maine Writer epilogue-  Not sure that I agree with the Ebony article as describing Dr. King's transformational spirituality.  IMO, not being a historian, just my take, but Dr. King's transformation happened when he wrote, "Letter from a Birmingham Jail".