LifeSiteNews has the following statement from Fr. Tom Euteneuer, former president of Human Life International and a good and holy man.
While I would much prefer to allow this public act of contrition to stand alone, I regret having to address the malicious falsehoods that were published this past week on various internet sites. I can only say that I am shocked to the depths of my being at the malicious efforts by supposedly faithful Catholics to destroy a priest who has served the Church faithfully for 22 years. The campaigners have made intolerable attempts to contact my family, to defame innocent co-workers and even to solicit and to persuade others with whom I have prayed that they are victims despite their unequivocal statements to the contrary. Some have even claimed falsely and maliciously that there is a possessed person living in my family’s home. No one should have to endure such malevolence or such treatment of innocent family members. Despite the rhetoric of justice and truth-seeking, the sinful campaign has not made one single positive contribution to the resolution of this difficult situation that has already been handled appropriately by Church authorities for nearly six months.
The statement is worth reading in its entirety. I have had the pleasure and opportunity to meet Fr. Euteneuer on several occasions during my time at American Life League, and have always known him as an outward, deeply religious man — and never bearing the stain of pride or despair.
Prior to this statement, it was commonly assumed that Fr. Tom just got tired. He is, after all, human.
It is always the struggle with those on the side of the Catholic Church to live up to the standards of the faith. Thus the world expects all of us to be absolutely perfect in ever instance possible. When we do sin, whether it is theft, a lie, pride, or in this instance, the breaking of a vow (that Fr. Tom insists never included the sexual act), the world is quick to condemn.
The world being so quick to condemn, I have always found it a mark of worldliness when others, professing to be faithful, join the world in its condemnation.
Regarding Human Life International and the great work they do, I am relieved to see that Fr. Euteneuer’s departure was not based on punishment or PR damage control, but rather that Fr. Euteneuer was making a decision based on his own spiritual health. Moreover, he has asked for forgiveness from God, and since his actions do not impact me in the slightest, I take no offense — and neither should anyone else.
I look forward to working with Fr. Tom in the pro-life movement again in the future with every bit of confidence.
Catholics priests, like others good men and women, are flesh and bone. It is unrealistic to hold them up to standards that are impossible to meet. The only man who ever met those standards, we hung on a cross.
Likewise, we should respect and assist those struggling to become better people, apart from those who wallow in a condition of sin. To me, that is the essence of the Christian ethic buried in the logos made flesh. As Pope Benedict XVI reminded us during his memorable (and much maligned) Regensburg Address in 2006:
Modifying the first verse of the Book of Genesis, the first verse of the whole Bible, John began the prologue of his Gospel with the words: “In the beginning was the logos“. This is the very word used by the emperor: God acts, with logos. Logos means both reason and word – a reason which is creative and capable of self-communication, precisely as reason. John thus spoke the final word on the biblical concept of God, and in this word all the often toilsome and tortuous threads of biblical faith find their culmination and synthesis. In the beginning was the logos, and the logos is God, says the Evangelist. The encounter between the Biblical message and Greek thought did not happen by chance. The vision of Saint Paul, who saw the roads to Asia barred and in a dream saw a Macedonian man plead with him: “Come over to Macedonia and help us!” (cf. Acts 16:6-10) – this vision can be interpreted as a “distillation” of the intrinsic necessity of a rapprochement between Biblical faith and Greek inquiry.
Sadly, this excellent address was marked by one statement quoting the words of the Byzantine emperor Manuel II Paleologus:
The emperor must have known that surah 2, 256 reads: “There is no compulsion in religion”. According to some of the experts, this is probably one of the suras of the early period, when Mohammed was still powerless and under threat. But naturally the emperor also knew the instructions, developed later and recorded in the Qur’an, concerning holy war. Without descending to details, such as the difference in treatment accorded to those who have the “Book” and the “infidels”, he addresses his interlocutor with a startling brusqueness, a brusqueness that we find unacceptable, on the central question about the relationship between religion and violence in general, saying: “Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.” The emperor, after having expressed himself so forcefully, goes on to explain in detail the reasons why spreading the faith through violence is something unreasonable.
For that one line, one of the most profound addresses on the clash between Islam and the West was buried. The world reacted… and predictably so.
“Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a great battle,” were the words of the Jewish philosopher Plato of Alexandria. They apply here as well.