Link to Over 20 Brand New Articles About the Homosexual Scandal
Posted on 04/25/2002 9:18:29 AM PDT by Notwithstanding
Church uncovers file on Shanley NAMBLA activity
<!CAT-LONW!>
<!SUMM!> In the latest example of the Boston archdiocese's chaotic record-keeping on problem priests, church officials acknowledged yesterday their discovery of new records detailing allegations of the Rev. Paul R. Shanley's involvement in NAMBLA - the North American Man-Boy Love Association.<!ENDSUMM!> The documents, part of a larger group a judge earlier this month ordered turned over to Roderick MacLeish, a lawyer representing several alleged victims of Shanley, were located late last week by an unnamed archdiocesean staff member, the Rev. Christopher Coyne, said an archdiocesan spokesman. ``It's terribly embarrassing at this late date to come out and say this,'' Coyne said in addressing reporters on the lawn of the Brighton Chancery. ``No one knew that the files were around,'' Coyne said. ``It wasn't just one letter that was overlooked. It's another bad thing. It makes us look like we are not being honest. It's just awful.'' The Shanley file released to date - more than 800 pages of secret records - detailed the priest's long history of alleged sexual misconduct, and, on some pages, his admissions of the actions. But more damning were numerous documents revealing that Bernard Cardinal Law, his predecessor, Humberto Cardinal Medeiros, and other archdiocesean officials were aware of Shanley's behavior as far back as 1967, but continued to assign him to posts that put him in direct contact with children. Coyne appeared visibly angry as he revealed the discovery of the documents, saying there is no question now that there had been numerous written complaints made in past years to chancery officials about Shanley's behavior. MacLeish, who will receive the papers today, said he was furious with the discovery. ``If they're NAMBLA materials, as they say they are, then it's absolutely appalling. I can't believe it,'' he said, adding that he intends to investigate how the documents were missed. ``We are taking the deposition of (the church officials) involved in this document retrieval. The truth will have to come out,'' he said. In the initial document release three weeks ago, records showed that Shanley spoke in favor of sex between men and boys at a December 1978 Boston convention that led to the founding of the intergenerational sex advocacy organization. But a Shanley supporter who organized the meeting and later co-founded NAMBLA insists that it has been mischaracterized, and that many different points of view on the subject were presented. ``It certainly was not some kind of a man-boy group,'' said the man, who goes by the pseudonym of Socrates. ``There were social workers, psychiatrists, ministers and even law enforcement personnel. At that time, these issues could be discussed in an objective forum. You can't do that now.'' More germane to the accusations of MacLeish's clients is Socrates' contention that it would have been totally out of character for Shanley to have had violent sex with a 6-year-old. In his suit and in a criminal complaint to Newton police, Gregory Ford, 24, claims that Shanley yanked him out of CCD classes and repeatedly fondled and raped him as a child in the rectory of Newton's St. Jean's Parish for six years beginning in 1984. ``I don't believe it, based on what I know of him,'' Socrates said, insisting that the priest would never have had sex with a pre-pubescent boy. ``I don't believe he ever did anything by force.'' MacLeish vehemently disputed that, saying, ``They say he wasn't violent. That's absolute total nonsense.'' ``I have a forcible rape case against Paul Shanley from 1990 involving a 13-year-old. This notion that you're either interested in pedophilia or ephebophilia (sex with teens) is absolute nonsense,'' MacLeish charged. MacLeish also said Ford and a second alleged victim, Paul Busa, who attended the classes with Ford but hasn't seen him in years, could not have collaborated to fabricate their allegations. ``NAMBLA has as much credibility on this as Ken Lay does on suggestions to reform Enron,'' MacLeish said.
by Maggie Mulvihill and Robin Washington
Thursday, April 25, 2002
"Fool me once, you're a fool. Fool me twice, I'm the fool."
The account in the Gospel of Mark appears to explain it:
And the scribes that came down from Jerusalem said, He hath Beelzebub, and, By the prince of the demons casteth he out the demons. And he called them unto him, and said unto them in parables, How can Satan cast out Satan? And if a kingdom be divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand. And if a house be divided against itself, that house will not be able to stand. And if Satan hath risen up against himself, and is divided, he cannot stand, but hath an end. But no one can enter into the house of the strong man, and spoil his goods, except he first bind the strong man; and then he will spoil his house. Verily I say unto you, All their sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, and their blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme: but whosoever shall blaspheme against the Holy Spirit hath never forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin: because they said, He hath an unclean spirit. (Mark 3:22-30 ASV)This seems rather plain. Jesus did have a spirit—the Holy Spirit. By saying "he hath an unclean spirit" they were rejecting the Holy Spirit, labeling Him an evil spirit. It says that Jesus taught about "the unforgivable sin" BECAUSE they had said this. The clear implication is that this act of speaking against the Holy Spirit as an evil spirit WAS blasphemy against Him. This also fits well with the definition of "blasphemeo"—to speak evil of, to revile.
Being unfamiliar with your terminology, I'm not sure how closely this view would line up with "final impenitence."
What walking excrement.
The above can be translated two different ways:
1) "Gee, like, ya know..............we could bugger little boys back then, but it was so repugnant a thought that no one was hip to what we were doing......and we got away with it. DAMN the publicity!"
OR
2) "You know, back then, everyone was, like, you know, cool with the idea of grown men sticking it to little boys. Now, it's, like, you know, as if we're doing something wrong. We are just so..............constrained now, ya know???"
I don't know who "Socrates" is, but I'll recommend a cure for his "disease": a .45 round to the temple.
WRONGO. :D
And you love to jump on him while he is down. Nice.
Well, let's just give him an award, shall we?
Cardinal Law has displayed an egregious lack of common sense and total disregard for the welfare of children. Cardinal Law and Cardinal Egan are a blot on the face of the church and would be better to step down to allow the healing to begin.
And why do you like Cardinal Law so much?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.