Posted on 06/11/2002 1:21:39 PM PDT by Timesink
----
I'm sitting here, having a little trouble getting started. We have reported on this scandal several times so far. For the most part, the stories are fairly similar, the anguish of the victims, and their anger, and the response by the Church. But it is sort of like profiling each tree, one at a time, and not looking at the forest, to use an old metaphor. Just how widespread is this problem? If it were just one person here, and maybe another there, it might be easier to understand. But there has always been a feeling that this is a systemic problem, that underlying the individual stories that have come into the public eye, and those that have not, is some sort of widespread problem.
Some say the issue is celibacy. Others that the priesthood attracts those disposed towards children. Still others argue that the issue is homosexuality in the priesthood. And there are many other explanations. And they may all be partly true, and party false. But tonight we will address just how widespread this problem is. This week, the bishops are meeting in Dallas to debate a proposed policy to deal with priests who are accused of, or proven to be guilty of molestation. Many of the victims say the policy doesn't go far enough, that it is too lenient. But with the bishops and others beginning to arrive in Dallas today, our friends at the Dallas Morning News came to us with the results of an investigation they conducted. Their story will be in the paper tomorrow, and on their Web site tonight. They tried to track down every credible allegation. And the numbers they found are staggering.
Roughly two-thirds of the bishops have either been accused themselves, actually a relatively small number, or more commonly, are accused of covering up the actions of one of their priests. We'll be reporting on the details of what the Morning News found tonight, but clearly the numbers indicate that the problem is more than just the crimes of isolated individuals. So we'll have a report from ABC News correspondent Bill Blakemore from Dallas on the Morning News investigation, and a preview of what will happen later in the week. Ted will interview the bishop who headed the committee that wrote the proposed policy. But I think tonight's broadcast will make it clear that this is much more than a couple of isolated cases being given too much publicity. Something has gone terribly wrong.
Tuesday, June 11, 2002
Leroy Sievers and the Nightline Staff
Nightline Offices
Washington, D.C.
The press broke this scandal hoping to liberalize the Church and encourage having married priests and women priests. I'm sure Nightline will play it the same way. Instead, the campaign will backfire and the homosexuals will be dealt a great setback. The Church has been given a great opportunity here to turn things around and reform itself. If the American bishops don't seize this golden opportunity they will deserve to be thrown out of office and replaced by faithful and competent pastors.
I think it is very probable that many bishops came into office years after the offense,documentation showed that 1)it was not proven,or 2)it was excessive affection with no bare skin contact 3)counselling and treatment clearly stated that the priest was contrite,asked for forgiveness and never had a problem again,and made the decision that this man had fallen but would not succumb in the future.
I do believe Christ promised to send the Holy Spirit to the Apostles and the successors of same,and I am willing to allow good Bishops,those that are in accord under the Holy Father,to make some decisions,that only he can have the knowledge and holiness to make.
I have watched my own bishop,who is the only one that I can observe first hand,and he needs to be removed or resign.Our bishop constantly stands truth on its head. He lies about just anything;altar rails,Latin Mass,school closings,exiting Orders,priest shortage and on and on.Once you know a man cannot be trusted with little things you know he will lie about big things. He was still mouthing how we were ahead of the curve with respect to our harrassment policies all the while harboring all sorts of unfit priests who were supporting all kinds of unCatholic causes,blatently living with their same sex partners,burning churches,allowing porno to be filmed on an altar,exhibiting themselves in public(several),paying money to shut people up,allowing priest treated and found to be a risk around women and children to be placed at a church with a school and it goes on and on. But what is really frightening is that people here are not up in arms,they had a very successful diocesan fund drive and they cheer the perverted priests when they see them. Scary,scary.
Many of our bishops are very bad and they must be removed but in the process let us use great caution to ensure that we don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. That would suit that ole enemy just fine. And,I do think unless cooler heads prevail that's where we are headed. We need to pray.
In case anyone's making book,I will say that one third of our bishops are actually perverts or covering up for same,and they must go. Anybody want to hazard their own guess on the percentages?.
When They Came for the Catholics, Part 2
Michael Savage
Friday, April 12, 2002
Michael Savage interviews William Donahue
SAVAGE: William Donahue, I read somewhere that some are saying there's a velvet mafia that took over many Catholic seminaries. Is there any truth to that statement, in your opinion?
DONAHUE: Well, Andrew Greeley, who is famous for writing sex novels, did come out and say that there was a lavender mafia. There's no question there's a homosexual network. Here's the proof, Mike. I'm looking at this stuff, of course, day in, day out, I'm living it. And these pedophiles would say to the kids, "You'd better not say anything because if you do, no one will believe you."
Now, when a guy says that in New York, the other guy says it in Dallas, that's a network. They're all on the same page, they've got their cue cards together. And that's the scary thing about it; it became a mantra. So there is a network there. How big is it? I don't exactly know, but whatever it is, it's damaging.
Though the sexual revolution took place in terms of ideas in the 1960s, all hell didn't break loose until the '70s. The Catholic Church is not an insular institution. It hit the church like a hurricane, and these guys just took their libidos and threw it to the wind. They should have just left the priesthood and said "It's not working out for me."
Instead, they reinterpreted everything. Even bestiality now could be understood as not intrinsically evil. And there was a book, by Father Anthony Kosnick, that was used in seminaries in the late '70s that was used to promote this. So if anything, this is not a church run by conservatives, run by the ruler. This has been a free-for-all for decades.
I was in a Catholic college and you should see the anti-Catholicism that existed there at the highest ranks, including the nuns who ran the place and who didn't want anybody with a collar, namely a monsignor, any priest, to get the job.
You know what? The liberals are saying it all has to come out. Oh, boy, nobody wants it all to come out more than Bill Donahue, and once it does, people will find out what a bunch of phonies a lot of these liberals have been. They've been eating away at the Catholic Church like a bunch of termites for a long time. Some of these priests and nuns are like welfare kings and queens. They should have the decency to get off the dole.
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/4/12/224854.shtml
It's been a long time coming, but the maturation of plans laid much earlier, foreshadowed in the 60s sexual upheaval, to destroy the church from within is upon us.
And I thought we had it bad in Boston. Who is your bishop?
Yes, there are surely such cases. Unwanted attention or affection which does not involve genital contact or nudity, of course, is not rape and in a very different category. There are various types of affection or sexual attention which fall short of abuse or molestation in the technical sense.
Some of these other areas of Catholic life (liturgy, sacraments, iconoclasm in sacred art & architecture, theology, doctrine, higher education, wacky liberal nuns, etc.) are perhaps just as disturbing in some ways in that they do permanent damage to faith as well, sometimes destroying entire institutions, parishes, universities, seminaries, or religious orders. Bishops have to promote the entirety of Catholicism and Catholic culture throughout all the institutions of the Church. A bishop who tolerates anti-Catholic agitation at the local Catholic college or allows a religious order full of liberal kooks to run wild damages the Church. Where the rights of the laity to have access to proper Catholic teaching and sacramental practice are abused, the whole Church suffers. As an example, what the American Jesuits have done to Catholic educational institutions in this country is every bit as damaging as being sodomized. It's the metaphorical-intellectual variation of being sodomized.
By requiring celibacy they in turn have put themselves in a position where it 'sounds like' they're willing to do almost anything to either keep priests or at least continue getting new ones (e.g. look the other way on homosexual preiests). That may be why there is this 'homosexual problem' in the priesthood that others have been talking about. Granted the secretive nature doesn't help. But when you need every available man, then you're vulnerable to giving in to just taking 'available' and not 'worthy'.
Who knows the extent... but as to celibacy.... why? Where in the Bible does it state that a pastor/preacher/priest must be? Paul said he viewed it as a 'gift' but it isn't for all men.
Peter had a wife (the first pope btw). Don't know how well documented that is, but I've seen that in a few different places. If the first pope (and for that matter apparently many others for the first few hundred years of the Catholic Church (which has been reported... although how accurate that is I don't know), then why make man's wishes into a requirement that is acting as a ball and chain.
If I need to see a priest about a marriage issue then I'd much rather talk to a man who knows what it's about. How can these men relate to their congregation in that manner?
If it's in the Bible as a requirement, then folks please show me? Show us all. And if it's not, then why the ball and chain.
However,a great deal of the perverse behavior is a natural outcome of an organization with a significant number of those who do not believe in God.You see,when man becomes god,he can do anything he thinks is beneficial to himself,the victim or society in general with no remorse. The human mind has an uncanny ability to rationalize behaviors to be compatible with one's desires. And,afterall who knows better than god himself what is best for everybody?
Anyhow the biggest reason this occurred is because the Catholic Church was infiltrated by communists and socialists from the time of the Russian revolution. As the years went by they adopted Gramcian techniques and by the mid fifties all was in order for the takeover. Concomitantly,the Church was gaining great strength in this country after WWII and the take over was not effected as smoothly as anticipated.So what was supposed to occur in the late seventies brewed and simmered until now. For those of you interested in saving Christianity and Western Civilization,there is a lot riding on how this plays out. It is not the time for petty bickering and inter religious nit=picking,it is a time to pray for God's assistance and to work with all of our might to bring the truth ooout and uncover all the secret,corrupt and devilish machinations that have been festering for some time now.
BTWThis has been going on in some form or another since the Fall. It certainly has happened in the Church before but I am just describing the latest unfolding event,the one that is taking place in our lives and time.
If you read Michael Rose's book, Goodbye! Good Men, you will see that far too many seminaries have been rejecting men simply because they are in PC lingo "homophobes." Who does that leave?
But don't ask me who it was. When I was at Notre Dame there were no less than three active homosexuals in theology (and in some kind of hot water). I suspected more but I'm not going to say who. My wife thought it was odd that the retired president of Notre Dame lived on a floor of the ND library with another priest. The floor was designed for their apartment. That does not mean that they were homosexuals. However, it seemed peculiar.
Hesburgh?
Now, of course, institutional Communism has collapsed. But that ol'left wing feeling still lives on, and perhaps these supposed Johnny Appleseeds of Communism had something to do with it. But then, remember, the "Devil like a roaring lion goes about seeking whom he may devour," and he probably didn't even need the help of the Communists once Church doctrine had collapsed.
A consideration worth repeating.
Term limits in the Curia, however, seem like a good idea.
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.