Just as the New York Yankees return to the World Series, Yogi Berra’s spirit is evident in Rome: deja vu repeatedly. A Northern European cardinal insults African bishops and then walks away from his own words.

In 2014 it was Cardinal Walter Kasper. Ten years later, Cardinal-elect is Timothy Radcliffe.

Kasper on Africans

Ten years ago this month, Cardinal Walter Kasper spoke about Africans at the 2014 Synod on the Family, telling the Register’s Edward Pentin that Africans oppose liberalization on divorce, remarriage and homosexuality.

“Africa is completely different from the West,” Cardinal Kasper said. “Asian and Muslim countries are also very different, especially regarding homosexuals. You cannot talk about this with Africans and people of Muslim countries. This is not possible. It’s a taboo. … There should also be room for local bishops’ conferences to solve their problems, but in the case of Africa I would say that it is impossible (for us to solve). But they shouldn’t tell us too much what to do.”

There was widespread outrage after Pentin’s interview was published, with some going so far as to call Cardinal Kasper’s remarks racist. Putting this accusation aside, Cardinal Kasper firmly suggested that the African point of view must be overcome by “our”, presumably European liberals.

Cardinal Kasper denied saying such a thing and claimed that after Pentin prepared the audio recording, it was off the record and it was not clear that it was a media interview. Pentin made his own statement To clarify the matter.

Article by Father Radcliffe

Cardinal Kasper’s misfortune was repeated this month when Dominican Father Radcliffe, who was appointed preacher to synodal meetings last year and this year, referred to Africa’s attitude towards homosexuality in general, and specifically the refusal of African bishops to offer blessings to same-sex couples. . In an article dated October 12 L’Osservatore RomanoFather Radcliffe wrote It’s about African resistance.

“Is the refusal to bless homosexuals in Africa an example of acculturation or a refusal to be non-conformist?” wrote the priest. “African bishops are under intense pressure from evangelicals with American money; From Russian Orthodox with Russian money; and from Muslims with money from rich Gulf countries.”

This was a provocative analysis that suggested African bishops were not courageous in defending the Gospel, were cowards, and were corrupted by money from foreign sources.

The Register’s Joan Frawley followed Desmond last year more than twenty years Father Radcliffe’s comments “clearly (contradict) Church teachings on homosexuality.” Father Radcliffe’s views were well known when Pope Francis appointed him chief of hearings of synodal assemblies. However, accusing African delegates at the same meetings of being subject to the pressure of foreign money is, if not a great slander, then certainly a deviation from the synodal spirit.

­

Delayed Reaction

Pope Francis, who visited Vatican Radio in March 2021, surprised his hosts with the following words: berate the effectiveness.

“I have only one concern,” said the Holy Father. “But there is an issue that I care about very much: How many people listen to the radio? How many have read L’Osservatore Romano?”

The answer is very little; Even in the Vatican. Despite Father Radcliffe’s comment published on October 12, there was no reaction in the Synod regarding Synodality. Nobody bothered to read it. The notable person was the astute American Catholic commentator Phil Lawler. And he openly challenged Father Radcliffe’s analysis on October 17th.

“Father Radcliffe wanted us to believe that foreign pressure on African culture reflected the financial influence of American evangelicals and Russian Orthodox,” Lawler wrote. “But the missionary efforts of these small groups pale in comparison to the huge sums being poured into Africa by the European Union and the Obama and Biden administrations, whose foreign aid programs are designed to promote the gay agenda. Does Father Radcliffe want us to believe that the financial power of the Russian Orthodox Church (in Africa, not the home of Orthodoxy) can rival the influence of Planned Parenthood?”

First Statement

Lawler sounded the alarm, and so it was no surprise that Cardinal Fridolin Ambongo of Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo, whom Father Radcliffe specifically mentioned in his article, was asked about this issue at a press conference on October 22. in question He said that Father Radcliffe had discussed this issue with him personally.

“Father Radcliffe was shocked that such things could have been written with attribution to him,” Cardinal Ambongo said. “Father Radcliffe never said those things, and it doesn’t fit his personality at all. … I don’t know who wrote this article, but I think their intention is to create a stir. Fortunately, that didn’t happen.”

Although the article was published under Father Radcliffe’s signature, Cardinal Ambongo’s response showed that Father Radcliffe had said that he had not written it to him. While this absolves Father Radcliffe of writing that his fellow Africans had bad intentions, it still raises profound journalistic questions.

If what Father Radcliffe told Cardinal Ambongo is true, it seems L’Osservatore Romano must be condemned professionally and publicly. To include the provocative analysis in a text written by Father Radcliffe would be a staggering fraud and a violation of journalistic ethics.

Who would do such a thing and for what possible reason? A serious investigation will be required to get to the truth. The credibility of official Vatican communications was at stake.

In fact, if what Father Radcliffe told Cardinal Ambongo is true, this is Msgr. Communications Secretariat head Dario Viganò was forced to resign misrepresented to the public Pope Benedict XVI to the press. Benedict’s private letter. In this case, Msgr. Viganò presented excerpts from a letter in a way that changed the meaning of what Pope Benedict had written. In this case, Cardinal Ambongo’s explanation of Father Radcliffe’s statement reveals that part of the article is completely fabricated.

What Did Father Radcliffe Actually Say?

Apparently Father Radcliffe had said something about Africans and foreign oppression. In April, the British Catholic newspaper Tabletpublished a similar text By Father Radcliffe. Tablet described the text as “adapted from a speech given at Stonyhurst College, Clitheroe, on Good Friday”.

On September 22, Zenit published a publication very similar text By Father Radcliffe, including comments on foreign currency. L’Osservatore Romano the text may be an Italian translation of what ZENIT published in English. “Reverend Timothy Radcliffe, OP, delivered the following keynote address online to the ‘25th Anniversary Conference of LGBT+ Catholics Westminster’ at the Jesuit Center in London on Saturday 25 May 2024,” ZENIT explained in its text.

What Cardinal Ambongo said to him by Cardinal Radcliffe-elect was incompatible with the existence of earlier English texts from April and May 2024. So the first explanation failed.

Second Statement

While the previous texts were quoted, Father Radcliffe had to give a different explanation. On Wednesday afternoon, following Cardinal Ambongo’s press conference, the Vatican released a statement from Father Radcliffe.

“Cardinal Ambongo’s response did not refer to the article published in the journal. L’Osservatore Romanobut a book by Phil Lawler in Catholic Culture dated October 17. This was the article that the cardinal showed me on his phone and that we discussed,” said Father Radcliffe, indirectly admitting that even he does not read his own articles. L’Osservatore Romano.

“I have never written or suggested that the positions taken by the Catholic Church in Africa were influenced by financial considerations,” Father Radcliffe said in his statement. “I was just acknowledging that the Catholic Church in Africa is under tremendous pressure from other religions and the church (sic) that is well funded by external sources.”

Like Cardinal Kasper in 2014, Father Radcliffe, faced with the record, was forced to admit that he had indeed said what he had initially refused to say. But now Father Radcliffe has clarified that he did not mean what the reader thought he meant by raising the issue of foreign money in the context of refusing to give blessings to same-sex couples.

Father Radcliffe’s statement can be summarized as follows: Africans rejected the Vatican’s proposed same-sex blessing in December 2023. Father Radcliffe raised the question of whether this position was a refusal to be challenged by the Bible. Father Radcliffe has argued for decades that his reading of the Bible means the Church’s teaching on homosexuality is wrong. He is then quick to point out that African bishops are under tremendous external pressure, including financial incentives. Now, although in the same section of his article, he clarifies that he had no intention of making any connection between financial pressure and the positions of African bishops.

All concerned in the Synod on Synodality agreed to accept this second explanation, unlike the first and contrary to a plain and reasonable reading of the article and the previous texts of April and May.

Everyone walks in harmony.