Dear Friends and Benefactors:

Triumph Communications has just published Peter in Chains, the fifth book in our series of books by Malachi Martin.  The title of the book, Peter in Chains, probably applies more accurately to the situation of Pope Benedict XVI than to his predecessor, Pope John Paul II.  The pontificate of Pope Benedict has recently come under ferocious attack from the media.  This did not occur during the pontificate of Pope John Paul II, who often enjoyed a favorable press.

Certainly, flaws exist in the pontificate of Pope Benedict.  For example, Pope Benedict has continued much of his predecessor’s policy of ecumenism.  Yet, he has done enough good to incur the hostility of the liberals in the Vatican and in the media.  Liberals are furious at Pope Benedict for initiatives such as: the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum, which strengthened the legal position of the Traditional Latin Mass; the lifting of the excommunications of the four bishops of the Society of St. Pius X; and the overtures made to conservative Anglicans.

The liberals’ attacks on Pope Benedict focus on his handling of the clerical sexual abuse scandals.  Yet, are these scandals the liberals’ real concern?  If the scandals were their real concern, then why did they not go after Pope John Paul II on this issue?  These scandals have been going on for decades.  Pope  Benedict has actually done more than his predecessor to deal with this problem.  The obvious answer is that the liberals have seized on this issue, using it as a battering ram against Pope Benedict’s pontificate, because, unlike most of their agenda, it is an issue which resonates with the public.  They scent blood and hope to use the issue to cripple Pope Benedict’s pontificate.  A parallel from the field of politics is the media’s approach to the scandals of the Nixon and Clinton administrations.  The media used the Watergate scandals to mortally wound the Nixon administration, while glossing over the scandals of the comparatively more liberal Clinton administration.

It is an act of incredible nerve for the liberals to make use of these scandals.  It was the liberals who caused the problem!  Before Vatican II, scandals of this kind were rare.  For the most part, the clergy lived lives of discipline and prayer, which gave them the inner strength to resist the temptations of the world, the flesh, and the devil.  Seminaries screened out undesirable candidates for the priesthood.  After Vatican II, the clergy’s discipline was relaxed and their prayer life was diminished.  There is another factor.  In Goodbye, Good Men: How Liberals Brought Corruption into the Catholic Church, Michael S. Rose documents how modern seminaries systematically screened out good candidates for the priesthood, while accepting less desirable candidates.  I know of a case where a seminarian was dismissed from his seminary because he “exhibited rigid piety” by praying the rosary daily.

It is a characteristic of liberals to propose phony solutions to problems.  For example, they promote the establishment of safe injection centers as a solution to the drug problem.  Often, liberals promote the idea of getting rid of priestly celibacy as a solution to the problem of the scandals.  Yet, priestly celibacy existed in the Church prior to Vatican II, when there were comparatively few scandals.  Of course, liberals would not consider as a solution to restore the discipline and prayer life that the clergy followed before Vatican II.  And they certainly would not support a return to the traditional criteria for screening candidates for the priesthood.

God Bless,

Bernard Janzen