The
Knights of Malta – A Sorry Tale.
On the 2nd
and 3rd May 2018
there was a meeting of the Sovereign Military Order of Malta (SMOM)
to either re-elect their interim Grand Master or to elect an entirely
new Grand Master. In the event the interim Grand Master was elected
for life. It was held in the context of a major crisis in the Order
which to a certain degree can be traced back to England and disputes
at the Hospital of St John & St Elizabeth. That Hospital was
founded in 1856 by Cardinal Wiseman and staffed by Sisters of the
Order of Mercy returning from assisting Florence Nightingale in the
Crimea. Cardinal Wiseman put the Hospital under the protection of
the Order of Malta who built their Conventual Church next to the
Hospital then in Great Ormond Street. The Hospital moved in 1899 to
St John's Wood and the Church was re-erected stone by stone there.
It
was in the 1980s when the Sisters of Mercy decided to leave the
Hospital that matters began to go wrong. The management found the
Catholic connection irksome and by a subterfuge managed to deceive
the Charity Commission into removing all trace of the Catholic
connection from the constitution and those Knights on the board of
the Hospital whom the management described as 'somnolent' allowed
this to happen – one claiming that he did not know what was meant
by 'a Catholic Hospital'. Cardinal Hume, on being appraised of the
situation, managed to have the situation corrected and wanted to
promote the Hospital as a centre of Catholic medical excellence.
Unfortunately he died soon thereafter and again a worldly secular
mindset predominated. Protests began to be made about policies
permitting gender re-assignment, contraception and abortion. The
Order of Malta began to take action to get the Hospital back on
track as regards Catholic teaching. Unfortunately Cardinal Hume's
successor Cardinal Cormac Murphy O'Connor was asleep on the job and
eventually when a new Board had been appointed with the assistance of
the Grand Priory with the aim of adhering to Catholic teaching,
Cardinal Cormac decided to sack the entire board and put his own men
in who promptly eviscerated the Code of Ethics.
An
unfortunate incident then arose concerning child protection
procedures. A knight was appointed by the Archdiocese of Westminster
as child protection officer. He endeavoured to find out what his
duties were but both the Hospital and the Archdiocese fobbed him off
. Suspicions
arose about someone who had been helping out at Masses organised by
both the Order and the Hospital Chaplain. He was doing duties
normally performed by a sacristan, but without having been appointed
to such a position. He was found to be training a young boy to
participate as a reader or server in the Church, without the
knowledge and consent of the Order. As the boy would also have been
serving at masses celebrated by the Hospital Chaplain
it was decided to bring the matter up with the Chaplain the
following Sunday meaning there was a delay of a week before reporting
the matter. This was a gift to the Hospital who saw a wonderful
opportunity to make a mountain out of this molehill and eventually
get rid of the Knights once and for all. The Knights engaged
Baroness Cumberlege to inquire into what had happened and she after
criticising all concerned: the Knights, the Hospital and the
Archdiocese concluded:
“Fortunately,
the safeguarding limitations did not lead to an incident of actual
harm before the proper procedures were activated. However, in our
view all parties
need to review their handling of the
episode and improve their procedures and practice in line with the
recommendations of this Inquiry.”
The Chairman of the Hospital
Board, Lord Guthrie, himself a member of the Knights of Malta, had
refused to co-operate in anyway with Baroness Cumberlege's inquiry
and was subsequently reprimanded by the Order for his failure so to
do. However this did not deter the Hospital from removing all
mention of the Knights from their constitution and the Archdiocese
took the draconian step of suspending the Order of Malta from using
their Conventual Church until further notice.
Before this last episode Fra
Matthew Festing had been elected Grand Master of the whole Order of
Malta and was therefore based in Rome. This preliminary skirmish in
England with the religious Knights of the Grand Priory on one side
and other Knights who either were ignorant or careless of Catholic
teaching on the other set the scene for a much greater battle in Rome
between the Grand Master and Baron Albrecht von Boeselager first as
Grand Hospitaller, a position he had occupied for twenty-five years,
and secondly as Grand Chancellor. Indeed Boeselager had been
appealed to some years earlier by those concerned at what was
happening at the Hospital in London but he refused to assist.
The question that arose in Rome
was whether the Order through its subsidiary Malteser International
(MI) was distributing condoms as part of its work in Burma, Kenya and
South Sudan. In May 2015 the Grand Master, having consulted the
Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) instituted an
inquiry into the matter which reported in January 2016.
To know what all this was about we
have to go back to the founding of MI in 2005. It grew out of the
work of the Order organised from Germany. There were already
projects in hand such as an HIV and AIDS project in Thailand started
in 2003. In 2004 similar projects started in Kenya and Burma.
It seems that MI had in place an
unpublished policy on contraceptives totally at odds with the
teaching of the Church and they had been distributing contraceptives
in accordance with this policy for several years. Further this
policy had never been communicated by Boeselager, as Grand
Hospitaller, to the Grand Master or the Sovereign Council of the
Order. In 2004 there was a Reproductive Health (RH) project in
Myanmar and Thailand which continued right through to 2015. The use
of the term 'Reproductive Health' should have rung alarm bells.
Anyone familiar with the Aid Industry would know that 'Reproductive
Health' is a highly controversial title as it usually includes the
promotion of contraception and abortion.
It
is notable that the
U.S. “Country Reports on Human-Rights Practices” for 2017 were
released at the end of April 2018 , and they now feature statistics
on “coercion in population control” instead of “reproductive
rights.”
Some of the motivation driving aid agencies is not so much a
humanitarian concern but rather a neo-Malthusian policy of population
control. The problem was that MI did not take account of what the
ethics of donors were and thus they got into bed with people they
should have never had anything to do with. Apparently no real
concern arose in MI.
It was not that they did not have
policies to guide them. It was just that the policies had little
relation to the teachings of the Church. In 2010 MI was advertising
a post in Myanmar for someone to carry out ' counselling on correct
and consistent use of Condoms'. It was not that they were just
distributing condoms in order to limit the spread of AIDS where there
have been some dodgy views from certain theologians but they were
distributing condoms to all and sundry by the tens of thousands. For
example they claimed to have seen a strong need for birth spacing
methods which included not only condoms but contraceptive pills some
of which were abortifacient and they claimed this was in line with
their Bioethics policy. A further problem arose because they were
distributing condoms on behalf of organisations such as Pathfinder
International, one of the leading USA advocates of population control
by contraception and abortion historically very close to the eugenics
movement.
Indeed
it was this association with Pathfinder International that came to
the attention of the Federal Association of the Order of Malta in
the USA in October 2013 who raised questions. This led to the
Secretary General of MI ordering a review of their compliance with
Catholic teaching. Boeselager as Grand Hospitaller said this review
must be done confidentially to MI as it could give rise to
misunderstandings. In the end this led to two documents Basic
Principles on Birth Spacing and Reproductive Health and
Catalogue
of exclusion criteria in relation to Institutional Donors in
2015. Both documents were woefully inadequate despite having input
from MI's Spiritual Director, Bishop Marc Stenger, and other
theologians with heterodox views not difficult to find in Germany.
At a meeting of MI in October 2014
in Hong Kong contraception was openly discussed to the amazement of
some of those attending the meeting who later reported their concerns
to the Grand Master Matthew Festing. His response was to set up a
Commission of Inquiry in May 2015.
The
Commission particularly analysed the two documents produced by MI in
2015. Bishop Stenger in his preface to Basic
Principles on Birth Spacing and Reproductive Health wrote
“decision-making cannot rely only on theoretical premises” but
also on concrete situations. This sounds like the idea that doctrine
can be ignored in favour of discerning concrete situations which is
reminiscent of the controversy over Amoris
Laeititia
with the idea that the 'pastoral' does not have to follow the
'doctrinal'. The text of the policy says “a balance needs to be
struck between the values-oriented identity of the organisation, the
needs in the field and the trends and policies of the international
community”. A clear invitation to compromise with evil.
The
Grand Master's Commission of Inquiry reported in January 2016. The
report was then sent to Cardinal Mueller, as head of the Congregation
for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) in order to check that the
Commission's interpretation of Catholic doctrine was correct.
Cardinal Mueller replied on 12th
March 2016 saying that 'this Ministry has found no doctrinal problem
in the above-mentioned report' and he concludes by quoting a note
issued by the CDF in December 2010: “In the battle against AIDS,
the Catholic faithful and the agencies of the Catholic Church should
be close to those affected, should care for the sick and should
encourage all people to live abstinence before and fidelity within
marriage. In this regard it is also important to condemn any
behaviour which cheapens sexuality because, as the Pope (Benedict
XVI) says, such behaviour is the reason why so many people no longer
see in sexuality an expression of their love”.
An Austrian Catholic News website
Kath.net at about that time reported an interview between a Knight
and Cardinal Burke who had been appointed Patron of the Order of
Malta by Pope Francis. The report read:
“The
responsibility of the Grand Chancellor [von Boeselager] was evident
since the appearance of the investigation report. The Grand Master
therefore informed Cardinal Burke that he had asked the Grand
Chancellor to resign, but that he had refused. During the following
months, the Grand Master told the Cardinal of his further attempts to
convince the Grand Chancellor of his responsibility to resign. As he
is the Cardinal Patron responsible for the spiritual constitution of
the Order, [Cardinal] Burke
encouraged the Grand Master in this sense so that the scandal
surrounding the distribution of contraceptives and abortifacients
would not progress unimpeded, leading to further moral confusion and
aberrations within the Order.”
On
10th
November 2016 Cardinal Burke met with Pope Francis and in the same
interview reported by Kath.net Cardinal Burke is reported as saying
of this meeting with Pope Francis:
“Pope
Francis expressed profound concern and dismay about the practice of
distributing contraceptives by any work of the Order. He urged me
[Burke] to collaborate diligently with the Grand Master to make
certain that all such practices cease and that those in highest
authority who had approved of them be appropriately disciplined.”
On
1st
December 2016 Pope Francis wrote to Cardinal Burke referring to the
meeting of 10th
November. The key paragraph in that letter reads:
'Furthermore,
the Order must ensure that the methods and means it uses in its
initiatives and healthcare works are not contrary to moral law. If
in the past there has been a problem of this nature, I hope that it
can be completely resolved. I would be very disappointed if, as you
told me some of the high Officers were aware of practices such as the
distribution of any type of contraception and have not yet intervened
to end such things. I have no doubts that by following the principle
of Paul and “speaking
the truth in love”
(Ephesians 4, 15) the matter can be discussed with these Officers
and the necessary rectification obtained.'
Note that whilst the Pope
recommended discussion he does not preclude further action if that
discussion does not lead to matters being put right. Discussion did
not work, Boeselager was invited to resign and refused. On legal
advice the Grand Master suspended Boeselager and established a
disciplinary commission which was to investigate his behaviour. This
meant he could no longer continue as Grand Chancellor.
There
was then a complete volte-face by the Pope who on 24th
January 2017 requested and received the resignation of the Grand
Master. What caused this volte-face? It would appear that
Boeselager got in touch with Cardinal Parolin the Secretary of State
to complain about his treatment. Cardinal Parolin is very close to
Pope Francis and has spoken of a 'paradigm shift' in the Church.
That paradigm shift is seen as
reinterpreting moral absolutes as ‘ideals’. It is already there
in Amoris Laetitia in regard to adultery; the appointment of Chiodi
and others to the ‘reconstructed’ Pontifical Academy for Life
presages the targeting of the exception-less norm against
contraception.
Did Parolin see the promulgation under Boeselager of the faulty
policies followed by MI as being in line with his 'paradigm shift'?
Those policies which called for a balance between the teaching of the
Church and worldly concerns in a relativist and consequentialist
manner probably recommended themselves to Parolin and he convinced
Pope Francis likewise so the Grand Master, Fra Matthew Festing, was
made to resign and Boeselager was reinstituted as Grand Chancellor
and the commission of inquiry into his behaviour cancelled.
According
to a recent article in The Tablet Baron Boeselager has claimed that
he 'himself
has never publicly defended the use of condoms and says that the
order has always followed the Church’s teaching' and the
implication is that as soon as the matter came to a head two projects
were shut down and a third was continued until some other
organisation could take it over as otherwise the beneficiaries would
be deprived of healthcare! The point is however that Boeselager was
Grand Hospitaller for twenty-five years and had oversight of Malteser
International. Whatever he did or did not know about their
activities he should have known that the condoms issue was a key
problem in the aid world and he should have made the necessary
inquiries and insured that the Church's teaching was followed.
More
relevant is the fact that Boeselager took legal proceedings against
Kath.net who were reporting all this and he obtained an interlocutory
injunction to shut them up. When the matter came before three judges
of the District Court of Hamburg, Kath.net asked for the injunction
to be lifted. Baron Boeselager either by himself or through his
lawyers asserted “Until
the end of November 2013, the Applicant [Boeselager] had no knowledge
of the distribution of condoms and, thereafter, immediate
counter-measures were taken ...
In
the Judgement the Court held: “On
the basis of these principles, the reporting in paragraph 1.1 does
give the compelling impression that the Applicant had indeed been
aware that aid operations were being used to distribute condoms
within the UNHCR rescue packages”.
The judges go on to discuss the
impression made by the Kath.net article:
“The Court is persuaded that the
contested passage in paragraph 1 of the interim injunction does give
the compelling impression that the Applicant knew that condoms had
been distributed in relief operations by Malteser International using
the UNHCR aid packages. …
It is the use of the words
"similar activities" that leads the reader to understand
that the Applicant initiated the above-mentioned relief operations,
in full knowledge of all the circumstances described. Finally, the
contested meaning necessarily follows from the context of the
reporting: the entire third paragraph of the Kath.net article deals
critically with various aspects of the work of the Applicant as
Hospitaller and seeks to prove the initially-contended thesis, namely
that a small circle from the German-speaking sphere wanted to
preserve the benefits to the Order of exclusivity and sovereignty,
but also wanted to see a weakening of what, in their opinion, was too
narrow an adherence to Catholic doctrine and of loyalty to the Pope.
The Court considers that an impartial reader could, indeed, thereby
be led to believe that the Applicant himself was indeed responsible
in respect of all the afore-mentioned charges against him, which
necessarily also entails his having full knowledge of all the
relevant circumstances.
In its judgment, the Court in
these proceedings finds that the impression given is true as a matter
of fact.”
Thus the court lifted the
injunction on that part of the Kath.net article and awarded costs
against Boeselager as they did not believe his version of what had
happened. And yet the Boeselager party is now in the ascendant in the
Order of Malta. This sorry tale of the Knights has yet to finish.
