The Pontifical Secret

After spending hours, yet days, yet weeks of our duly elected political officials on a constant hatred loop, I try to find some distractions.

Growing up, we had certain people we trusted.

Our parents were trusted because they fed us and gave us a place to sleep and provided enough direction to send us to some form of education so we wouldn’t grow up sleeping in a cardboard box. The extended family was trusted because we were family and all had the last name. Our teachers were trusted to tell us what we needed to know and then ask if we remembered any of it. Our police and fire folks were trusted because they wore uniforms like the military and kept us safe from bad things. Our coaches were trusted (and we see how that worked out). Our clergy was trusted since they gave us the instructions of faith.

All along there were these dark little secrets that no one talked about.

As sex abuse scandals rocked the Catholic Church over the last few decades, there’s been mounting criticism that pontifical secrecy was used to protect pedophiles, silence victims and prevent law enforcement from investigations.

The ‘pontifical secret’ or pontifical secrecy or papal secrecy is the code of confidentiality that, in accordance with the canon law of the Roman Catholic Church, applies in matters that require greater than ordinary confidentiality:

Business of the Roman Curia at the service of the universal Church is officially covered by ordinary secrecy, the moral obligation of which is to be gauged in accordance with the instructions given by a superior or the nature and importance of the question. But some matters of major importance require a particular secrecy, called ‘pontifical secrecy’, and must be observed as a grave obligation.

It is also now time for the pope to mandate that crimes be reported to the police by bishops, religious superiors and others and to make documents and testimony public with the appropriate redactions of victims’ names.

Now the pope sounds like a swell guy.

The pope also known as the supreme pontiff (pontifex maximus) is the bishop of Rome, leader of the worldwide Catholic Church, and head of state representing the Holy See.

Since 1929, the pope has official residence in the Apostolic Palace in the Vatican City, the Holy See’s city-state enclave within Rome, Italy.

While his office is called ‘the papacy’, the jurisdiction of the Episcopal see is called the Holy See. It is the Holy See that is the sovereign entity by international law headquartered in the distinctively independent Vatican City State, established by the Lateran Treaty in 1929 between Italy and the Holy See to ensure its temporal, diplomatic, and spiritual independence. The primacy of the bishop of Rome is largely derived from his role as the apostolic successor to Saint Peter, to whom primacy was conferred by Jesus, giving him the Keys of Heaven and the powers of “binding and loosing”, naming him as the “rock” upon which the church would be built.

The papacy is one of the most enduring institutions in the world and has had a prominent part in world history. In ancient times the popes helped spread Christianity, and intervened to find resolutions in various doctrinal disputes. In the middle ages, they played a role of secular importance in Western Europe, often acting as arbitrators between Christian monarchs.

Currently, in addition to the expansion of the Christian faith and doctrine, the popes are involved in ecumenism and interfaith dialogue, charitable work, and the defense of human rights.

So the pope is sort of the mouthpiece of God?

‘Pontifical secrecy’ is the subject of the instruction Secreta continere of 4 February 1974 issued by the Secretariat of State. The text is published in Acta Apostolicae Sedis, 1974, pages 89–92. German Cardinal Reinhard Marx challenged Pontifical secrecy in the Vatican’s 2019 Meeting on the Protection of Minors in the Church and the rule was subsequently abolished in respect of sexual abuse of minors.

It was imposed officially in 1974 as a way of trying to protect the name of both the accuser and the accused until the point at which there had been a firm judgment.

The pope has vowed two documents issued known as rescriptums, where the pope uses ‘his’ authority to rewrite specific articles of canon law or parts of previous papal documents.

Now, according to the pope…

“The person who files the report, the person who alleges to have been harmed and the witnesses shall not be bound by any obligation of silence with regard to matters involving the case.

The well being of children and young people must always come before any protection of a secret, even the ‘pontifical’ secret.

Transparency is now being implemented at the highest level.”

So sayeth the pope.

Well that takes care of that.

But that is only those naughty nuns and pedophile priest.

What about the Lutherans or the Methodist or the Presbyterians or those wild dancing Baptist? Let’s not forget the Quakers.

Maybe the Jews need a pope to speak for them?

Oh, that’s right, they had one.

Speaking of the Jews.

In the United States, an ‘executive order’ is a directive issued by the president of the United States that manages operations of the federal government. The legal or constitutional basis for executive orders has multiple sources. Article two of the United States Constitution gives the president broad executive and enforcement authority to use their discretion to determine how to enforce the law or to otherwise manage the resources and staff of the executive branch. The ability to make such orders is also based on express or implied Acts of Congress that delegate to the president some degree of discretionary power (delegated legislation).

Executive Order on Combating Anti-Semitism

Issued on: December 11, 2019

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1.  Policy.  My Administration is committed to combating the rise of anti-Semitism and anti-Semitic incidents in the United States and around the world.  Anti-Semitic incidents have increased since 2013, and students, in particular, continue to face anti Semitic harassment in schools and on university and college campuses.

Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VI), 42 U.S.C. 2000d et seq., prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, and national origin in programs and activities receiving Federal financial assistance.  While Title VI does not cover discrimination based on religion, individuals who face discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin do not lose protection under Title VI for also being a member of a group that shares common religious practices.  Discrimination against Jews may give rise to a Title VI violation when the discrimination is based on an individual’s race, color, or national origin.

It shall be the policy of the executive branch to enforce Title VI against prohibited forms of discrimination rooted in anti-Semitism as vigorously as against all other forms of discrimination prohibited by Title VI.

Sec. 2.  Ensuring Robust Enforcement of Title VI.  (a)  In enforcing Title VI, and identifying evidence of discrimination based on race, color, or national origin, all executive departments and agencies (agencies) charged with enforcing Title VI shall consider the following:

(i)   the non-legally binding working definition of anti Semitism adopted on May 26, 2016, by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA), which states, “Anti-Semitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews.  Rhetorical and physical manifestations of anti-Semitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities”; and

(ii)  the “Contemporary Examples of Anti-Semitism” identified by the IHRA, to the extent that any examples might be useful as evidence of discriminatory intent.

(b)  In considering the materials described in subsections (a)(i) and (a)(ii) of this section, agencies shall not diminish or infringe upon any right protected under Federal law or under the First Amendment.  As with all other Title VI complaints, the inquiry into whether a particular act constitutes discrimination prohibited by Title VI will require a detailed analysis of the allegations.

Sec. 3.  Additional Authorities Prohibiting Anti-Semitic Discrimination.  Within 120 days of the date of this order, the head of each agency charged with enforcing Title VI shall submit a report to the President, through the Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy, identifying additional nondiscrimination authorities within its enforcement authority with respect to which the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism could be considered.

Sec. 4.  Rule of Construction.  Nothing in this order shall be construed to alter the evidentiary requirements pursuant to which an agency makes a determination that conduct, including harassment, amounts to actionable discrimination, or to diminish or infringe upon the rights protected under any other provision of law.

Sec. 5.  General Provisions.   (a)  Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i)   the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or

(ii)  the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b)  This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c)  This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

 DONALD J. TRUMP

THE WHITE HOUSE,
December 11, 2019.

News of President Trump’s recent executive order to combat ‘anti-Semitism’ on college campuses set off a firestorm online.

To use ‘Title VI of the Civil Rights Act’ to fight discrimination against Jews, Jews would have to be defined under that law as a nationality or a race, since Title VI does not address discrimination against religious groups.

But according to polls, the vast majority of Jews in the United States do not see themselves as a separate nationality or a race. In most polls, they describe their Jewishness as a cultural or religious identity, or simply as a matter of heritage, while their nationality is ‘American’.

Bias is prejudice in favor of or against one thing, person, or group compared with another, usually in a way considered to be unfair.

Bigotry is intolerance toward those who hold different opinions from oneself.

Synonyms: prejudice · bias · partiality · partisanship · sectarianism · discrimination · unfairness · injustice · intolerance · narrow-mindedness · fanaticism · dogmatism · racism · racialism · sexism · heterosexism · homophobia · chauvinism · anti-Semitism · jingoism · Jim Crowism

Yet it makes one wonders about Tiki torches and tweets?

First Amendment.

An amendment to the United States Constitution guaranteeing the rights of free expression and action that is fundamental to democratic government. These rights include freedom of assembly, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, and freedom of speech.

If you think about these Constitutional writings, one wonders.

Amendment XIII

Section 1.

Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

Section 2.

Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

How has that worked out?

Jim Crow laws were state and local laws that enforced racial segregation in the Southern United States. All were enacted in the late 19th and early 20th centuries by white Democratic-dominated state legislatures after the Reconstruction period. The laws were enforced until 1965.

In practice, Jim Crow laws mandated racial segregation in all public facilities in the states of the former Confederate States of America and other states, starting in the 1870s and 1880s.

Jim Crow laws were upheld in 1896 in the case of Plessy vs. Ferguson, in which the U.S. Supreme Court laid out its “separate but equal” legal doctrine for facilities for African Americans. Moreover, public education had essentially been segregated since its establishment in most of the South after the Civil War (1861–65).

The legal principle of “separate but equal” racial segregation was extended to public facilities and transportation, including the coaches of interstate trains and buses. Facilities for African Americans and Native Americans were consistently inferior and underfunded compared to the facilities for white Americans; sometimes, there were no facilities for people of color. As a body of law, Jim Crow institutionalized economic, educational, and social disadvantages for African Americans and other people of color living in the South.

Jim Crow laws and Jim Crow state constitutional provisions mandated the segregation of public schools, public places, and public transportation, and the segregation of restrooms, restaurants, and drinking fountains for whites and blacks. The U.S. military was already segregated. President Woodrow Wilson, a Southern Democrat, initiated the segregation of federal workplaces in 1913.

In 1954 segregation of public schools (state-sponsored) was declared unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court under Chief Justice Earl Warren in landmark case Brown v. Board of Education. In some states, it took many years to implement this decision, while the Warren Court continued to rule against the Jim Crow laws in other cases such as Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. v. United States (1964). The Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 overruled the remaining Jim Crow laws.

So now it is time to see the president impeached.

Just another day in ‘Just Another Life’.