#vox amoris | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

diceriadelluntore · 5 years

Photo

Storia Di Musica #67 - Prozac+, AcidoAcida, 1998

Mi sento scossa agitata, agitata, un po' nervosa\Oo oo oo oo!\Acida come di più non si può, di più non si può, come un acido\Oo oo oo oo!. Fu la canzone dell’anno, nel 1998: una veloce base punk ed un testo un po’ nonsense che giocava sul doppiosenso, tra l’acidità intesa come freddezza e irritazione personale e il suo significato legato alle droghe. Poteva essere prevedibile da un trio che come nome scelse la denominazione commerciale della fluotexina, uno dei più famosi farmaci antidepressivi. I Prozac+ sono stati il primo gruppo famoso del Nord-est italiano della nuova generazione. Il trio principale era composto da Gian Maria Accusani alla chitarra, che aveva già suonato nel primo gruppo di Davide Toffolo, poi leader dei Tre Allegri Ragazzi Morti, Eva Poles al canto e Elisabetta Imelio al basso. Formatisi a Pordenone, in breve grazie ad una intensissima attività live nei locali iniziano a farsi un piccolo nome. Si interessa di loro l’etichetta Vox Pop, che in quel periodo pubblicava gli Africa Unite, i Casino Royale, i Sottotono e gli Afterhours di Manuel Agnelli, socio della compagnia discografica. Il loro stile musicale è semplice ed ad effetto: riff schizzati alla Ramones e testi che giocano sull’ironia e sul doppiosenso, con un’immaginario perfettamente decadente anni ‘90 fatto di alienazione giovanile ma soprattutto amori tossici e un rapporto contraddittorio con le sostanze stupefacenti. Nel 1996 la prima prova discografica, Testa Plastica, è un pop punk fulmineo, spesso divertente, che ha in Pastiglie la prima canzone famosa. L’anno successivo la EMI acquista tutto il catalogo dalla Vox Pop e ripubblica il disco con l’aggiunta di una cover dei Violent Femmes, Gone Daddy Gone. Nel settembre dello stesso anno, aprono i due megaconcerti del PopMart Tour degli U2 a Roma e a Reggio Emilia, quest’ultimo davanti a 150 mila spettatori. Nel 1998 il disco di oggi: trascinato dall’irresistibile riff del singolo che dà titolo all’album, Acido Acida diviene uno dei dischi del decennio: le radio impazziscono e Acido Acida solo come singolo venderà 170 mila copie. la formula è la stessa del punk, elementare ma digeribilissimo, soprattutto dal vivo. I riff veloci e riconoscibili di Accusani vengono cullati dalla voce altera e rassicurante della Poles, in un mix davvero riuscito. Prova ne sono alcuni bravi: Colla, che anch’essa gioca sul doppio senso tra una “una colla che ripari tutto\ quello che ho rotto anche i ricordi” e il riferimento alla colla come allucinante a buon mercato (con omaggio sentito ai Ramones e alla loro storico Now I Wanna Sniff Some Glue). La Poles che aggiunge “la là” alla fine di ogni verso è una genialata e diventerà un marchio di fabbrica. Ma il disco offre anche una prova canora di Accusani in GM, dove elenca tutto quello che farebbe e si farebbe fare per conquistare la propria amata, Ics, dove si racconta la vicenda di una sorta di superoeroe che mentre dorme aggiusta le ingiustizie del mondo, e un altro dei brani cult della band, Betty La Tossica, cantata da Accusani, e che parla di una bellissima eroinomane, “ha 15 anni ma ne mostra 30\vive nei parchi assieme ai gatti\tutti si innamorano di Betty tossica\un'eroinomane, la piu' bella che c'e'”. Il successo è formidabile, così come le critiche sulla deriva morale della musica giovanile (non vi ricorda qualcosa questo passaggio attualmente?). Dopo un tour biennale di quasi 200 concerti, un mezzo anno di pausa, e il ritorno con 3, nel 2000. Magica Cagna vorrebbe essere la sorella sfacciata di Acido Acida, e la tecnica è la stessa dell’exploit del ‘98, sebbene il disco mostri una migliore intesa e una forza più matura, ben rappresentati da Angelo, che rispetto al punk ha un arrangiamento decisamente ambizioso; meno da “slogan” il disco però non ottiene il successo del precedente ed induce la band ad un profondo ripensamento. Accusani inizia a prendere in mano anche le parti vocali in Miodio del 2002, disco molto curato ma che segna la fine del progetto iniziale, sancita da Gioia Nera, con atmosfere progressive alla Muse. Resta innegabile la scossa che dettero al movimento musicale italiano, attraverso anche una scelta provocatoria nella “banalità” di certi testi, che però è sempre stata supportata da una musica che è definitivamente trascinante. In una discutibile classifica dei 100 dischi italiani più belli di sempre (discutibile perchè tutte le classifiche basate sul gusto lo sono) stilata da Rolling Stone Italia figura al 98° posto. Che abbiano lasciato una traccia non c’è dubbio, a segni di ritornelli con i “la la la”.

#prozac+#acidoacida #1998 #recensione

13 notes · View notes

digi-drummer · 6 years

Text

Tagged by: @the-star-anon & @lirmn

tag people you want to get to know better or start talking to: @xenodrums @makoxnightlight @blvkpeach @kenjisatoru @amoris-aeternus @amaixyume @sato-midori @akitoame @azuxsama @izumanami @sisenboi @anonymousmachine @yyk-mam0 @yuujibaba @hideaki-jirou @ma-ko-t0 @sea-0f-blue @sena-jiluka @xmyynx @xyunana @vox-de-tenebris @tsuki-no-mushi @etheral-yuma @digitalis-pvrpvrea @sanctus-lux

BOLD THE STATEMENTS THAT ARE TRUE.

APPEARANCE: i am 5'7" or taller · i wear glasses · i have at least one tattoo · i have at least one piercing · i have blonde hair · i have short hair · my abs are at least somewhat defined · i have or have had braces

PERSONALITY: i love meeting new people · people tell me that I’m funny · helping others with their problems is a big priority for me · i enjoy physical challenges · i enjoy mental challenges · i’m playfully rude with people i know well · i started saying something ironically and now i can’t stop saying it · there is something I would change about my personality

ABILITY: i can sing well · i can play an instrument · i can do over 30 push-ups without stopping · i am a fast runner · i can draw well · i have a good memory · i’m good at doing math in my head ·i can hold my breath underwater for over a minute · i have beaten at least 2 people in arm wrestling · i know how to cook at least 3 meals from scratch · i know how to throw a proper punch

HOBBIES: i enjoy playing sports · i’m on a sports team at my school or somewhere else· i’m in an orchestra or choir at my school or somewhere else · i have learned a new song in the past week · i work out at least once a week · i’ve gone for runs at least once a week in the warmer months · i have drawn something in the past month · i enjoy writing · fandoms are my #1 passion · i do or have done martial arts.

EXPERIENCES: i have had my first kiss · i have had alcohol · i have scored the winning goal in a sports game · i have watched an entire season of a tv show in one sitting · i have been at an overnight event · i have been in a taxi · i have been in the hospital or er in the past year · i have beaten a game in one day · i have visited another country · i have been to one of my favourite band’s concerts.

MY LIFE: i have at least one person I consider a “best friend” · i live close to my school · my parents are still together · i have at least one sibling · i live in the United States · there is snow right now where I live · i have hung out with a friend in the past month · i have a phone · i have at least 15 CDs · i share my room with someone

RELATIONSHIPS: i’m in a relationship · i have a crush on a celebrity · i have a crush on someone I know · i have been in at least 3 relationships · i have never been in a relationship · i have asked someone out or admitted my feelings to them · i get crushes easily · i had a crush on someone for over a year · i have been in a relationship for at least a year · i have had feelings for a friend

RANDOM: i have breakdanced · i know a person named Jamie · i have had a teacher with the last name that’s hard to pronounce · i have dyed my hair · i’m listening to one song on repeat right now · i have punched someone in the past week · i know someone who has gone to jail · i have broken a bone · i have eaten a waffle today · i know what I want to do with my life · i speak at least 2 languages · i have made a new friend in the past year

#.about.

16 notes · View notes

nikkilev78 · 5 years

Photo

Come to Whoopee! A Sex-Positive Variety Show + Kinky Karaoke afterparty!! Show is at 7:30 and features a slew of amazing performers bringing you performances in the theme of "Fire and Ice" including an amazing debut number from me and Johnny Nuriel including live vox and hot fire! Then, stick around for the Whoopee! 2 Year Anniversary Kinky Karaoke After Party! Hosted by me and Luke Matter! More info about the Karaoke After Party Here: Whoopee! A Sex-Positive Variety Show + Kinky Karaoke afterparty is happening on Saturday, January 19th. (Note: Whoopee! attendees get free admission to the afterparty. For everyone else, the cost is just 5 bucks!) Join Portland's favorite karaoke duo - Nikki and Luke + Whoopee's producers Amory Jane & Lady Coquine for our anniversary celebration + karaoke night with a kinky and playful twist. What is Kinky Karaoke? Put in a song to sing, just like you normally would…except for that when your turn is called, you have to spin the Wheel of Kink. Whatever the wheel lands on, you get to have done to you (or if you’re more of a giver, we can make that happen too). The catch is, you have to do this all while singing your karaoke song! For instance, one wedge on the wheel would be labeled “Bondage” and we would have one of our experts do a simple rope tie on you as you sing. Or, a favorite real-life example was when a brave soul sang Celine Dion’s My Heart Will Go On while receiving a spanking from sex educator Stella Harris. It was the best. Kinky Karaoke is one part karaoke, one part sex education & BDSM demo/tasting, and one part hilarious entertainment for the audience. Not into karaoke? Don't worry, this party is fun anyway. There will be drinking, dancing, and socializing with Whoopee's hosts and performers! Also - sex toy and cannabis prizes from our sponsors and maybe even a secret after party addition to be announced the week of the show... #whoopeelive #whoopeeasexpositivevarietyshow #kinkykaraoke #kinkykaraokepdx #karaokepdx #karaoke (at Bossanova Ballroom) https://www.instagram.com/p/BszArG5B9EI/?utm_source=ig_tumblr_share&igshid=h8riopld8rtx

#whoopeelive #whoopeeasexpositivevarietyshow #kinkykaraoke #kinkykaraokepdx #karaokepdx #karaoke

0 notes

yesiamdrowning · 7 years

Text

l’altra Manchester (che ricordavo)

Per fortuna succede sempre così. Passata la paura dei nuovi mostri, cessato l'allarmismo e rimossa ancora una volta la morte dalla nostra quotidianità, si preferisce nuovamente scegliere la vita. Sarà l'istinto di sopravvivenza, sarà che l'alternativa non è allettante, sarà che Trainspotting qualcosa di buono ce l'ha insegnato. A mente fredda si pensa così di organizzare fiaccolate, sit-in e soprattutto concerti: una carrettata di concerti per esorcizzare la paura di nuovi attacchi nei luoghi dell'universo culturale a cui appartengono sia i carnefici che le vittime di quella oramai ribattezzata “generazione Bataclan”. Alle centinaia di ragazzi uccisi mentre ascoltavano musica a Parigi, Orlando, Manchester - o mentre facevano lo “struscio” sul mare di Nizza o gli acquisti di Natale a Berlino - si risponde con immutata voglia di godersela.

Tolta però questa, giusta e comprensibilissima, parentesi à-la volemose bene, incuriosito dal recente concertone di Manchester, il mio spirito critico non può evitare di notare una cosa. Perché possiamo essere d'accordo su tutto ma se lasciamo che la pietà e l'emotività sconfinino nel populismo e nella demagogia, sospendendo una qualsiasi forma di giudizio, seppure arduo in simili contesti, si finisce per perdere il senso stesso della risposta (sociale) agli attacchi. Dal momento che, direbbe Hegel, se vale tutto niente vale.

Quindi cos'è, al di là del clamore dei nomi scesi in campo, ad avere contraddistinto, sotto-sotto, la parata del One Love Manchester? La vacuità, condita da una supponenza tanto più patetica perché clamorosamente orfana di storia e contenuti, del messaggio espresso. Un crogiolo di banalità che ci avrebbe seccato sulle labbra del solito Bono Vox di circostanza (sostituito da quel Chris Martin che di Bono è già la versione discount) ma che pronunciate da grandi statisti come Miley Cyrus e Justin Bieber ci hanno pure fatto cambiare canale. “Grazie”, “forza” e “coraggio” (...che dopo aprile viene maggio) sono state le parole più usate da cantanti dai contenuti basici, timorosi di lanciare messaggi al di fuori della propria visuale di soli-cuori-amori, dalla rediviva boy band messa lì come trattino di unione tra la pochezza dei genitori e quella dei figli, dalle ragazzine dalla timbrica opinabile ma di coscia lunga (che i morti certo apprezzeranno) che starebbero bene in un college movie e invece si ostinano coi vocalizzi. Il tutto condito col produttore che fu di talento, oggi pieno di singoli dalla caratura inversamente proporzionale alla grandezza dei cappelli che indossa, che rompe i coglioni con la sua (e solo sua) dose di presa bene; e quegli altri che attaccano a ogni contesto la stesso brano da quindici anni: dal terrorismo al femminismo, passando dalla salvaguardia dell'aglio nel pesto alla genovese. E sì che Manchester di artisti di un certo spessore ne aveva da offrirne, senza neanche scivolare nel liturgico o nell'accademico. Dai socialmente sensibili come Morrissey agli eterni romanticoni come Mick Hucknall dei Simply Red, dai riformati Stone Roses ai Chemical Brothers, dai doppiamente storici New Order ai più recenti 1975, passando per Buzzcocks, Elbow, Richard Ashcroft e persino i Bee Gees. Di tutto questo e molto altro non abbiamo visto niente, nascosto da uno spettacolo made in USA che non ha preso nulla della “Madchester” che impara a mescolarsi, lasciando impigliati nella sua rete suoni, tendenze, mode per poi scaricarle a riva con onde pregne di schiuma carica di nuova energia schiumante, sabbiosa e viva. Sono morte 22 persone, e il fatto che tra loro ci fossero dei bambini non basta per trasformare il lutto di un'intera città-simbolo della musica in un siparietto per maniaci dei gessetti, dei girotondi coi pulotti, dei buoni sentimenti e delle canzoncine. Domenica scorsa abbiamo assistito invece a questa sorta di VMA sui generis dove improvvisamente artisti consapevoli di piacere al popolino, se non di filato al popolaccio, hanno trovato una loro cassa di risonanza per dire al Mondo cosa è giusto e no. Sprecandola. Un super-potere di cui di solito si fa forte gente che non accetta mediazioni, dà consigli, stabilisce urgenze ma di certo non condiziona palinsesti, non è corteggiata dalle grandi kermesse e si bea della propria indipendenza – ed è pronta a fiondarsi dove ci sia un'occasione socialmente Giusta. Una parata insolita di cantanti per cui “la visibilità innanzitutto” si è palesata ai 3O mila del Old Trafford Cricket e nelle casa di milioni di telespettatori. Di duro e puro si è visto solo Liam Ghallagher degli Oasis, arrivato quasi sgomitando, apparendo quasi fuori contesto a casa sua. Resta da capire se tutti gli altri non sono andati di proposito o non sono stati invitati. Ma in entrambi i casi resterebbe comunque la macchia, in una serata in cui presenze e assenze sono apparse ugualmente ingombranti.

I tempi sono certo duri e non si può stare a menarla tanto su chi vuole dire no a uno stato di terrore che oramai ci viene imposto come quotidiano. C'è da capirlo, anche se in casi come questo si fa un po' fatica davanti a chi in passato ha suonato solo per bimbiminchia, che di terrorismo sonoro sono da sempre incauti portabandiera, o magari per politici che dei terroristi sono l'altra faccia della luna. Una scelta ipocrita figlia del buonismo e dello showbiz su cui è stata messa su l'intera faccenda a tempo di record – dopo il Bataclan ci sono voluti mesi a lapparci le ferite per metabolizzare. Allora c'è da capire tutto, anche la defezione di Noel e non solo la presenza di Liam, i nasi storti di chi Manchester se la ricordava diversa, come Mark E. Smith dei The Fall (“Manchester was pretty grey but not that gray at all”) o, nei casi più disperati, le goffe precisazioni di chi avrebbe dato oro per essere invitata a corte ed è stata esclusa. Sono tempi duri e il buon senso scarseggia ovunque, così qualche volta l'uovo tocca mangiarlo con tutto il pelo. Però, che controsenso cercare di arrivare nel cuore dei terroristi attraverso i volti e le ugole di chi sta sul culo pure a chi terrorista non è.

3 notes · View notes

theconservativebrief · 6 years

Link

Reeling from new claims of unfettered sexual abuse at the hands of priests and cover-ups by high-ranking officials, the Catholic Church is facing one of its most serious and divisive crises of the 21st century.

Last weekend, a former Vatican official, ex-papal nuncio Carlo Maria Viganò, published an incendiary open letter calling for Francis to resign for willfully turning a blind eye to ex-Cardinal Theodore McCarrick’s decades of sexual abuse and harassment against junior seminarians under his authority. (McCarrick has also been accused of abusing two minors; Viganò does not make any mention of those cases and does not imply Francis knew about them.)

Viganò claims that Francis’s predecessor, Pope Benedict XVI, had imposed sanctions against McCarrick, mandating that he carry out the remainder of his life in prayer and seclusion, only for Francis to lift the ban upon ascending to the papacy in 2013. During Francis’s papacy, McCarrick served as a trusted Vatican adviser and influential voice on both internal church appointments and global affairs.

Viganò’s letter contains serious charges. Fundamentally, it alleges that Francis was knowingly negligent in dealing with known abuse by a major Catholic figure. But reading between the lines, it’s also possible to see in Viganò’s letter a wider political concern: the accusation that Pope Francis’s liberal ideology and lax attitude toward homosexuality fostered a culture of sexual abuse, propped up by a gay lobby operating at the highest echelons of the Vatican.

Viganò’s open letter exists in a much wider political context, in which both Vatican officials and Catholic conservative intellectuals — two groups that have historically been protective of the church’s secrecy — are willing to use the latest round of abuse accusations as an opportunity to speak out against Pope Francis. In the aftermath of both the McCarrick case and the Pennsylvania report implicating hundreds of priests in the abuse of more than 1,000 children over several decades, arch-conservatives like Viganò have painted the picture of a church dominated by a shadowy progressive gay lobby, ruled by networks of blackmail and sexual favors, and willing to turn a blind eye to systemic abuse. The McCarrick case in particular — which, in a departure from many other abuse cases, predominately involved allegations of sexual harassment of adults — has been a particular lightning rod for this kind of discourse.

While it’s important not to conflate the very real concerns about Pope Francis’s response to the child sex abuse crisis with mere Vatican partisanship, it’s also important to recognize that the current crisis at the top of the Catholic hierarchy also has a political dimension. As Massimo Faggioli, a professor at Villanova University and a frequent commentator on Catholic issues, told Vox last week, conservatives are using the scandal as an “opportunity to reform the Church from abuses as a counter-revolution … against the Church of Vatican II itself.” (Vatican II, which took place from 1962 to 1965, was a major church council that critics say moved the church in an undesirably “progressive” direction.) Such dissent, he says, would not have been imaginable under a more traditional pope like John Paul II or Benedict XVI. But because of Francis’s perceived liberal agenda, conservative Catholics are seizing an opportunity to weaken what they see as a pro-Francis progressive bloc within the Church hierarchy.

And perhaps most importantly, this politicking loses sight of the fact that thousands of people around the world were abused as children over the course of several decades by the priests in their communities, whom their parents and families trusted.

Since the beginning, Pope Francis’s papacy has galvanized conservative ranks within the Vatican hierarchy. Francis’s perceived laxity when it comes to LGBTQ people, as well as divorced-and-remarried couples, has worried conservatives, who have often characterized him as a dictatorial reformer running roughshod over tradition in order to move the church unilaterally toward progressivism.

One of those conservatives was Viganò. Back in 2016, Viganò was dismissed from his post as papal nuncio (essentially an ambassador) after having brokered a meeting, without Francis’s knowledge or consent, between the pope and Kim Davis, the Kentucky county clerk lionized for refusing to sign marriage certificates for same-sex couples.

While Viganò’s allegations about Francis’s knowledge of McCarrick’s harassment of other adults may indeed be accurate (Francis has refused to confirm or deny his claims), his letter is nevertheless rooted in the wider language of the Vatican culture wars. He not only accuses Francis of knowing about McCarrick, but also indicts more broadly “the homosexual networks present in the Church,” which, he says, “must be eradicated.”

Viganò is far from the only Vatican insider to speak critically of Francis. Several longtime critics of Francis, such as Cardinal Raymond Burke, have raised their concerns about Francis through other open letters. For instance, a group of four senior cardinals signed the “dubia,” a list of objections to Francis’s 2016 apostolic exhortation Amoris Laetitia, which opened the door to granting divorced-and-remarried couples communion. In a statement in response to Viganò’s letter, Burke wrote, “The corruption and filth which have entered into the life of the Church must be purified at their roots,” and then called for a full investigation of the allegations.

Michael Sean Winters, a columnist for the National Catholic Reporter, told the Washington Post that he believed “we are a step away from schism.”

Francis has long attracted ire from conservative critics for his relatively moderate stance toward homosexuality. While he has always formally maintained the Catholic doctrinal line that homosexual behavior is a sin, some of his more off-the-cuff remarks to journalists have suggested a personal reticence to render judgment. He famously asked a journalist on a press flight “who am I to judge” gay people, and may have told a gay survivor of clerical sex abuse that God loved him the way he was.

Viganò’s conflation of same-sex attraction, homosexual activity, sexual harassment of adults, and child abuse is common among some of Francis’s more conservative critics. Because most of the allegations about McCarrick are about his abuse of adults, and because it seems clear that McCarrick’s behavior toward adults was something of an open secret within the Vatican hierarchy (but not, it’s important to note, with minors), this case in particular has galvanized conservative discourse about gay and bisexual priests.

For example, in an email interview with Vox conducted shortly after the McCarrick scandal broke in July, American Conservative columnist Rod Dreher (a former Catholic, now a member of the Eastern Orthodox Church) stressed that progressive influence — and, in particular, gay influence — within the Vatican was central to the Catholic sex abuse crisis.

“The predatory culture is — or was at that time — so entrenched, and so ravenous,” he wrote, “that a young gay man who intends to live celibacy will be walking into a lion’s den. If he is drawn into sexual misconduct, he will likely be permanently compromised, because the tribe never forgets. That’s how this works.”

Dreher’s remarks are representative of a wider conservative stance on the sex abuse crisis, a stance that is largely inseparable from attitudes toward Francis’s papacy: A gay cabal (often, but not invariably, associated with the progressive wing of the church) is protecting its own — including abusers — and Francis is allowing this because of his progressive sympathies. (That said, Dreher has pointed out in a recent column that the “left-right framework is fairly useless as a guide to understanding matters” and noted that “conservative” cardinals, such as Bernard Law, have also been caught up in clerical sex abuse scandals.)

Dreher is right to point out that (consensual) sexual activity is more common among priests than the Vatican might like to admit. Within the Catholic Church, priests are supposed to be totally celibate, regardless of sexual orientation. Furthermore, same-sex attraction itself is not understood to be sinful — the Catholic Catechism, the church’s official teaching document, formally deems it “intrinsically disordered,” but acting on that attraction is considered sinful. Officially, even priests with a homosexual orientation who remain celibate are barred from ministry, something that contributes to the rhetorical conflation of pedophilia and homosexuality that many conservatives espouse.

According to research by Richard Sipe, however, it’s estimated that about half of all priests are sexually active at some point in their lives. He also suggests that up to 30 percent of Catholic priests are gay, and about half of these are sexually active.

Dreher’s portrait of an institution subject to systemic corruption based on sexuality, therefore, is not entirely unfair. In a profession as hierarchical, as insular, and as self-protective as Catholic ministry, this culture of sexual activity and secrecy can easily create toxic conditions under which professional advancement becomes linked to sexual involvement, even as participants resist coming forward out of threats to their own reputation, including the threat of being outed themselves.

In an email interview with Vox last month, Miguel Diaz, former Ambassador to the Holy See and a professor at Loyola University in Chicago, argued that a lack of clarity within the Vatican hierarchy about the relationship between homosexuality, abuse, and pedophilia has clouded the Vatican’s ability to meaningfully reform after the Catholic sex abuse crisis.

“What we need is nothing less than for Church leaders to enact actions and promote policies more consistent with a healthier, psychologically well-informed, and theologically sound approach to human sexuality,” he told Vox. “The elephants in the room, namely, heterosexism and homophobia, and how these cultural systems relate to … the abuse of ministerial power must be dismantled for the sake of all.”

Conservative opposition to Pope Francis has been fomenting for years.

While conservative critics of Francis have criticized a number of his “progressive” policies, including his implied tolerance for LGBTQ people and his critiques of capitalism, most conservative opposition to Francis up to now has been based on his handling of divorced-and-remarried couples. Under Catholic teaching, divorce is not permitted, and Catholics who remarry after divorce are therefore understood to be in a state of sin that precludes their ability to take communion. However, Pope Francis’s 2016 apostolic exhortation, Amoris Laetitia, contained a footnote suggesting that it was up to individual parish priests to make a decision on whether or not remarried couples in their parish should be allowed communion.

To Francis’s critics, this was an underhanded way of changing the Church’s practice on divorce and remarriage while leaving its official policy officially intact. A group of conservative Cardinals and clergy submitted a list of dubia, or doubts, to Francis, in late 2016, as a form of public protest; he has yet to respond to them.

However, the sex abuse crisis has opened up Francis to new channels of attack.

Until this point, Francis’s legacy on the clerical sex abuse scandal has been fairly positive. He has met with abuse victims worldwide, and frequently spoken of the necessity of the Church atoning for its past. He did attract negative press last year for dismissing accusations against a Chilean bishop accused of participating in an abuse cover-up as “calumny.” Ultimately, though, he apologized for his remarks, and pressured the entire Chilean bishopric to resign.

However, the allegations against him — that he knowingly lifted sanctions on McCarrick whose abuse of adults (although, again, not children) was common knowledge — represent an unprecedented level of seriousness. While Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI was accused of having once overseen a transfer of a German pedophile priest into therapy, the alleged incident happened in the 1980’s, well before Benedict became pope.

Right now, however, Francis must face a more immediate goal: how, and if, to address Viganò’s accusations. While Viganò called upon Francis to resign — an incredibly incendiary and rare statement to make about a sitting pope — it’s unclear how likely this would be, even if Viganò’s allegations were found to be true.

These days, CEOs, university presidents, and public figures resign from their posts as a way to take responsibility for negligence or wrongdoing that occurred on their watch. Papal resignation, though, is exceedingly rare — popes are believed to be chosen by God to serve for the duration of their lives. Before Francis’s predecessor, Benedict XVI, resigned in 2013, for reasons that have never fully been made public (he cited ill health, although many Vatican-watchers have doubted this, given that Benedict remains in decent health now), the last Pope to resign was Gregory XII in 1415, and only a handful of popes have done so before him.

For Francis to resign so quickly after Benedict, therefore, would set a discomfiting new precedent for the Catholic Church: that the papacy was no longer an automatic lifelong role, which could in turn weaken the Catholic tradition that the pontiff is, fundamentally, chosen by God. Given the seriousness of that precedent, a resignation is unlikely. But that doesn’t mean that Francis’s political enemies will see in this scandal an opportunity to pressure his allies into resignation, nor that they won’t see his weakness as an opportunity to advocate against what they see as his dangerous “progressivism” more generally.

Meanwhile, few solutions have been proposed to rectify the abuse of countless children and adults over the course of several decades. The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops’ issued a charter in 2002 which mandates that all allegations of abuse from 2002 on, be handed over to law enforcement. Church officials throughout the country say this process has been successful in addressing more recent cases.

Still, there have been few codified, centralized efforts at addressing the legacy of the scale of abuse prior to that. Likewise, Francis’s recent 2,000-word apology for the Church’s history of sex abuse contained few concrete policy solutions, something that has frustrated some advocates. Marie Collins, an Irish clerical abuse survivor, recently told Catholic website Crux that she felt the Church lacked transparency and clarity in dealing with the crisis.

“The only thing that will restore respect,” she said, “is to see those men properly dealt with by the Church in an open and clear manner, and to have consequences for their actions that are strong and public. They need to prove that the Church is serious in cutting [abuse] out of the Church.”

In his book To Change the Church, published in March, New York Times columnist Ross Douthat made the case that, even before this latest round of sex abuse revelations, Francis’s divisive papacy threatened to seriously damage the unity of the Church. The current battle between “progressive” and “traditionalist” Catholics, though, threatens not only to further weaken any sense of unity, but to alienate rank-and-file believers, while miring the Church’s response to a crisis of sexual abuse in destructive political partisanship.

Ultimately this church infighting between “liberal” and “conservative” camps may hinder the it from the wider goal of protecting children and helping survivors heal by acknowledging abuse and repairing negligence. As clerical abuse survivor Peter Isley told the New York Times, “This is infighting between curia factions that are exploiting the abuse crisis and victims of clergy sexual abuse as leverage in the struggle for church power. The sexual abuse crisis is not about whether a bishop is a liberal or a conservative. It is about protecting children.”

Original Source -> Catholic Church insiders are calling for Pope Francis to resign. Here’s why.

via The Conservative Brief

#IFTTT #The Conservative Brief

0 notes