Sex scandal death knell for Church? [Bernadin & Co.'s ritualistic abuse exposed]

SUFFER THE CHILDREN
Sex scandal death knell for Church?
Catholics take matters into own hands after Bishops' 'band-aid' solution

As the crisis of confidence grows in the scandal-ridden American Catholic Church, many in the laity and clergy are skeptical that Church hierarchy will take effective corrective action and are moving toward reforming the institution from the grass-roots level.

According to long-time observers of the Church, June's conference of bishops arrived at no real solution to the decades-long problem of clerical abuse, providing only vague reassurances and a "charter" on abuse to a thoroughly disgusted nation.

The "Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People" promises in its preamble: "We reach out to those who suffer. We apologize to them and offer our help for the future." The body of the charter guarantees that child abuse will be reported and the faithful supported in their grief.

"If they [the bishops] think they've solved the underlying problem, they're deluding nobody but themselves," declared the Rev. Charles Fiore, a veteran of the struggle to expel abusers from the Catholic priesthood.

Fiore, a Catholic priest for 42 years, has fought the homosexual influence in the clergy almost from the date of his ordination. With degrees in philosophy and theology, as well as clinical training at Menninger's and the State Hospital in Topeka, Kan., Fiore has both condemned the actions of homosexual priests and counseled the victims of their abuse.

The solutions offered by the bishops were nothing but a "band-aid applied to the real problem of the pandemic corruption of the Church in the United States," Fiore declared, adding that the bishops gave no evidence of "an intention of addressing the skeletons in their own episcopal closets."

The charter itself remains voluntary until the Vatican gives its approval and may, in fact, never have the force of law. Negotiations over the charter may take years, and the American bishops have for decades ignored Vatican directives they found to be objectionable.

While allowing some priests to go behind bars, American Catholic bishops have a firm track record of protecting their brother bishops, even under the most adverse circumstances.

The Catholic reform group Roman Catholic Faithful, or RCF, closely follows the continuing careers of disgraced bishops and, among many similar instances, has noted the following:

Currently, Bernard Cardinal Law, Roger Cardinal Mahony and Edward Cardinal Egan are among the top Church officials under legal and media scrutiny for their handling – or mishandling – of child-abuse cases in their jurisdictions.

Roman Catholic Faithful, founded in 1996 by Stephen Brady and located in Petersburg, Ill., has devoted itself to bringing to account priests and bishops for their moral outrages and criminal activity. By 1999, Ryan resigned under pressure initiated by RCF, while not admitting any guilt.

Brady's group also has brought to the public's attention a priest-oriented international homosexual Internet site called St. Sebastian's Angels, which continues to operate at various Web locations.

One individual with ties to the Catholic homosexual group Dignity, as well as St. Sebastian's Angels, published Brady's private home address and phone number on the Internet, referred to RCF as a "hate group," described Brady as motivated by "evil purposes" and labeled him as a "perpetrator."

In another incident, which was reported to the FBI, Brady learned from a second-hand source that an e-mail message was circulating on the Internet stating that someone has placed a "contract" out for Brady's assassination.

While the threats against Brady are unsettling, there are indications that those who delve too deeply into the connection between clerical homosexuality and child abuse – finding perversion slipping into an abyss of satanic ritual – may pay for their curiosity with their lives.

In the late 1980s, two young Chicago private investigators, Bill Callaghan and Hank Adema, agreed to assist a "friend of a friend," whose child had been molested by a priest of the Chicago Archdiocese.

The parents of the abused child sought help after the Archdiocese under Joseph Cardinal Bernardin threatened to counter-sue following their original allegations. Before the scandal of clerical child abuse came to the public's attention through the efforts of the mass media, it was common practice for a diocese to file a libel suit against parents who charged diocesan clergy with abusive behavior.

As their investigation into the background of the abusive priest proceeded, Callaghan and Adema discovered the existence of a homoerotic group, made up mostly of priests, calling itself The Boys' Club.

During their inquiry into the membership and activities of The Boys' Club, a woman identifying herself as the girlfriend of a murdered church organist contacted the investigators and stated that she had information that would be useful to them.

The woman's friend was one Frank Pellegrini, once the organist and choir director at All Saints-St. Anthony of Padua Catholic Church on Chicago's South Side. Pellegrini had also served as chair of the Sociology Department of Loyola University of Chicago.

According to the information obtained from the girlfriend, Pellegrini had a homosexual relationship with one of the priests involved in The Boys' Club, but was in the process of leaving the priest-lover and marrying her.

Before completely severing ties with the priest, however, Pellegrini discovered that The Boys' Club was involved with far more than homosexual relations. Tied closely with their sexual exploits was ritualistic satanic worship and the regular abuse of young children from low-income, ethnic families.

Pellegrini informed the Chicago Archdiocesan Chancery, and scheduled a meeting with one of the archdiocese's top officials.

The day before the meeting, Pellegrini was brutally murdered in his home, which showed no signs of forced entry.

Callaghan, who spoke with police personnel originally working on the case, stated that Pellegrini was found with his hands tied with barbed wire and had been stabbed repeatedly.

In the opinion of police detective/profilers working on the case, the brutality and manner of the killing indicated that it was carried out either by a woman or a homosexual, Callaghan stated.

Just after Pellegrini's body was discovered, and while police were still on the scene of the murder, police observed two unusual incidents, Callaghan reported.

The first involved the arrival of then-Cardinal Archbishop of Chicago – and one of the most powerful men in the American Catholic Church – Joseph Bernardin. Although there was never an indication that Bernardin met Pellegrini, he arrived at the murder scene and quizzed police personnel on the progress of the investigation.

Left unanswered was how Bernardin learned of the killing and why he should personally visit the scene of a relatively unimportant individual whom he had no reason to know.

The second incident involved Pellegrini's dog. As the police conducted their investigation at the scene, the dog remained quiet, still suffering from its wounds. When the dog saw priests come into the apartment, it suddenly became aggressive and barked wildly.

The Pellegrini murder occurred in 1984 and was "reopened" with federal funds in the early 1990s, but many of the investigation's informal police notes have been "lost," and important leads in the case have never been fully followed up, according to Callaghan. The Pellegrini case, at present, remains one of the many hundreds of unsolved Chicago murders.

Although Callaghan never met Pellegrini, nor participated in the original investigation, he and Adema found that whatever secrets the case entailed posed a direct threat to their own lives.

As Callaghan and Adema pressed on with their investigation on behalf of their client, they learned of a warning, which came through contacts in the Chicago Police Department.

Callaghan learned that mob informants had stated that a contract had been offered on his life, and on that of Adema, by an individual closely tied to the Pellegrini case.

Although no one in the local underworld was interested, there did exist the real possibility that the contract could be accepted by "a black or biker gang," Callaghan revealed.

The full extent of The Boys' Club influence in Chicago – and beyond – still remains unclear, as does the extent of ritual abuse associated with clerical assaults on children.

There is, however, ample evidence that ritual abuse does occur, and it is most obvious in the case of "Agnes."

In the opening pages of his best-selling book, "Windswept House," The Rev. Malachi Martin describes a satanic ritual carried out on a young girl. Although Martin used a degree of literary license in the description of the event, there is a real individual behind the story and an actual instance of satanic abuse.

"Agnes," a pseudonym for her actual name, met Fiore some years ago for assistance with spiritual guidance and counseling for the long-term effects of cult abuse she had suffered at age 11.

Agnes has consented to and passed several polygraph examinations and is now married with a family in a Southern city. She has made her accusations in sworn affidavits, written statements to Vatican officials and has directly confronted those whom she has accused.

Among those Agnes has implicated in the attack upon her was a young, rapidly advancing priest named Joseph Bernardin.

Agnes states that in the fall of 1957, in Greenville, S.C., with her father present, Bishop John Russell of the Charleston Archdiocese and his chancellor, Bernardin, raped her as part of a satanic ritual, which included, as a RCF report stated, "a perverted, sacrilegious use of a [consecrated] host."

According to Catholic teaching, a consecrated host is the true and total body, blood, soul, and divinity of Jesus Christ, Second Person of the Blessed Trinity.

Agnes also became acquainted with Steven Cook, another individual who accused Bernardin of abuse. Cook accused Bernardin of coercing him into homosexual acts while he was a seminarian and Bernardin was archbishop in Cincinnati, Ohio.

While the media consistently have reported that Cook "recanted" his accusation against Bernardin, Cook, who was dying of AIDS, simply stated that he could "no longer trust his memory."

Callaghan interviewed Cook as part of his own investigation, and verified that Cook did not "recant." He learned that the dying homosexual, formerly of very modest means, suddenly had developed considerable financial resources. Estimates of the value of the newly established estate range from $250,000 to several million. After Cook's death, the money was divided between his mother, his sister and his male lover.

Bernardin, who said he had never met Cook, also left the dying man a costly chalice, which Bernardin had used to offer Mass in Cook's Philadelphia apartment. In addition to Cook and Bernardin, Cook's homosexual lover was also in attendance at the Mass. Cook made no secret of his homosexuality, and there is no indication that Cook would have hidden the identity of his male lover.

Giving Holy Communion under such circumstances, according to traditional Catholic teaching, constitutes sacrilege.

Bernardin also was implicated in an alleged incident of abuse perpetrated against seminarians attending the Immaculate Heart of Mary Seminary in Winona, Minn., in the 1980s.

According to a Boston Globe report, Bernardin, along with several "top prelates," were accused of "coercing seminarians at Immaculate Heart of Mary Seminary … into having sex."

The rector of the seminary, the Rev. Robert H. Brom, was also implicated in the sex-abuse charges. At the time the seminarian made his allegations, Brom served as Bishop of Duluth, Minn. Brom now is bishop of San Diego, Calif.

The Winona seminarian later retracted his charges, but he received a settlement payment of "less than $100,000," according to the Globe report, which quoted Archbishop Roger L. Schwietz, of Anchorage, successor to Brom as bishop of Duluth.

The circumstances of the seminarian's retraction, however, recently have come into question.

In a sworn affidavit, Mark Brooks, a friend of the seminarian who received the settlement payment, claims that the retraction of the charges against the bishops is false, according to a report in the San Diego Union-Tribune. The retraction was issued, according to Brooks, because the seminarian "needed the money."

Brooks' affidavit was filed in San Diego Superior Court in connection with a press investigation of abuse allegations against Brom.

In the mid-1980s, the Diocese of San Diego settled a lawsuit initiated by Brooks claiming abuse. The Diocese settled for an undisclosed sum.

Confronted with constant scandal, and a sometimes callous, hostile clergy, many Catholics have lost their faith and left the Church.

Other Catholics, however, have banded together and are seeking to support the faithful clergy, while denying money to those elements that they feel are bent upon the destruction of the Catholic Church.

Michael J. Tario, who works closely with Wall Street traders, is leading a group called the Ad Hoc Committee for the Prevention of Clergy Sex Abuse.

Tario is suggesting that Catholics redirect – not boycott – contributions to the Church.

"Good Stewardship," said Tario, "is not just sending money to the chancery for a cover-up." Tario is urging Catholics to contribute only to Church organizations that use their funds for charitable purposes, rather than legal expenses and costly settlements.

Tario lives in the Chicago Archdiocese and personally knows parents whose children have been abused by archdiocesan clergy. Their callous treatment at the hands of the Archdiocese and a growing awareness of the extent of clerical abuse in the Chicago area and around the United States have compelled Tario to take action. Tario's group works closely with other organizations having similar goals across the nation.

The group is demanding that the Chicago Archdiocese implement four basic reforms:

Tario periodically cites a statement of Bishop William B. Friend of the Diocese of Shreveport, La., on the right of the laity to know where and how the money they contribute is spent. "The Church consists of the people, so the people ought to know what is going on," declared Friend, who was a banker before becoming a priest.

Chicago Archdiocesan Financial Director Tom Brennan claims, however, that Tario's group is having little impact. Brennan expressed his confidence that archdiocesan revenues would continue to flow, stating that "we're expecting growing revenues," according to a report from the Rome-based Zenit news agency.

Quizzically, Brennan also stated in the same report that "he has not yet seen hard numbers from the past six months."

Tario cites reports from several of the wealthiest parishes in the Archdiocese where contributions have significantly fallen, with some estimates noting a drop by as much as 25 percent. The information confirms an earlier Business Week article documenting a steep decline in donations as well as an increased need for funds from a top-heavy, lay bureaucracy.

As Tario's campaign of redirected giving gains momentum, another ominous threat to the American Catholic Church's money supply is appearing on the horizon.

What one attorney terms the "unholy trinity of litigation" – liability, damages and "deep pockets" – may prove to be the most potent stimulus for reform and relief to a hard-pressed laity, since Church structures would no longer be able to support the abusers within its ranks.

When Tario proposed a program of redirected giving to Francis Cardinal George of Chicago, the cardinal archbishop asked in response if Tario wanted the archdiocese to go back to an "immigrant Church," poor and struggling.

Many observers, Catholic and non-Catholic alike, are pressed to respond that, if necessary to gain a more faithful Church, the answer would be, "Amen."

Dear nineot,

I don't think it's as faulty as you think.

Washington, DC also sports a Jesuit institution: Georgetown University. Our archbishop doesn't have the same relationship with GU as with CUA. Yet, our last cardinal archbishop, James Cardinal Hickey, made his presence felt there, as well, to the point of intervening in the administration of the university at times.

Certainly, the ordinary of the diocese may decline to be involved with the Catholic institutions of higher learning in his see.

But the bishop may also choose to have a greater level of involvement, as well. I don't know what was Cardinal Bernadin's level of involvement at Loyola. I do know that it isn't unreasonable to think that the men knew each other through that nexus.

My friend who died lived with her sister, and had no husband or children of her own. Friends showed up to find out what had happened. No one came with meals or other offers of help. It was a sudden, unexpected death, and the first rumors on the telephone lines included a hint of foul play. People came from the sense of shock and bewilderment. "What happened?" was all that could be heard. Within a couple of hours, the police were so swamped with friends, they were shooing them away.

If Cardinal Bernadin were friends with the victim, I would not find it at all unusual that he would have showed up at the scene.

sitetest

"Most reliable estimates have consistently put the percentage of homosexual priests at 25-40% of the priesthood. Further, several serious surveys have indicated that 90% of these are ACTIVE homosexuals."

Now, THAT'S scary...And so sad. Sad that men who have such evil habits and tendencies have all but taken over the one profession I can think of that people should be able to trust implicitly. Sad that the men with true vocations have been turned away at the doors of almost every seminary in the country if they refused to participate in this evil. Sad, that all through these 40, 50, 60, or even 80 years, as mentionend in the article, men with no respect for their holy vows have been in positions of trust all througout the church in America. If there was ever any doubt in my mind that there was an organized effort to undermine the authority of Rome in the American church, it has been wiped away.

Sad that men who have such evil habits and tendencies have all but taken over the one profession I can think of that people should be able to trust implicitly.

One of the very saddest days in my entire life was the one, not too long ago, when I had to sit my two sons down and tell them about this scandal. (Which I had to do, given the jokes starting to spread all over school, and given that my younger son's Catholic school had been involved in a horrible way in it.) My oldest son's first question was: Why would any man do such things? His second question: How could a priest do such things?

If anything in the article is even remotely factual, it deserves a thorough investigation by people more competent than Gov. Keating, Bennett, and the U.S. bishops. IF the allegations are just smears, they still should be investigated and put to rest.

I completely agree. We must pray very hard for Gov. Keating -- prayers, sacrifices, fasting. The Lord has chosen him for this important service, and he will be under all sorts of temporal and spiritual assault.

We really need to pray for him and to plead the Most Precious Blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ.

I am reminded of Chesterton saying that sensationalism is not as great a danger as secrecy, for most of society's ills are more due to secrecy than to startling revelations. (Sorry for the paraphrase - I don't have time to track down the quote.)

The last I looked, most bishops are still hoping this will all "go away" and disappear from the newspapers if they just wait long enough. It hasn't sunk in yet that this is a turning point in Church history for the Church in America, and through its resolution here, the Church at large. If the bishops do not step up to the plate and deal with the homo-pedo-hebo-philes in the priesthood, then at some point the laity are either going to walk away from their hypocracy, or rise up to do the job for them. The bishops would be well advised to recall the Tennis Court of Versailles and its consequences.

"The Lord has chosen him for this important service, and he will be under all sorts of temporal and spiritual assault."

It's started already but the man has acorns.

At the same time, Oklahoma Gov. Frank Keating is promising to use his unprecedented new position with the U.S. bishops’ conference to help lay people remove bishops who might have looked the other way or transferred known priest-abusers.

Remember, it was Martin Luther who suggested early in his efforts that the lay community get involved in reforming the Church so there would not be a collapse of faith by the faithful,” Keating said, answering critics who say laity boards should not seek removal of bishops.

I like Keating's approach. This article may have been posted already.

NCR

Dear Polycarp,

"'With her father watching? Polycarp, there is NOTHING to this story'

"BS, sink.

"We just had a local case of a man that sodomized his own son for 10 years.

"Your point does not refute the validity of this woman's story of abuse, as recent history highlights. "

Of course, this detail of itself doesn't disprove the story. However, it is a detail that demands explanation.

Though in-home sexual abuse of children is far more commonly committed by non-related adult males in the household, some small number of biological fathers abuse their own children.

However, being a little familiar with the literature (I used to be in the mental health field), the common pattern of abuse is one-on-one, with a heavy emphasis on the part of the adult on absolute secrecy. Because of the way the abusive father frames the relationship in his own mind, it'd be exceedingly rare to see a biological father "share" his daughter with another.

Thus, the detail reduces the credibility of the story, at least without further explanation.

sitetest

"...and the fact that Malachi Martin highlighted it in a book does it no favors."

I was too polite to mention that.

Are some people more dead than others? Is it not OK to impugn the reputation of a Cardinal, but it's OK to impugn the reputation of a priest? Unless you two have evidence regarding Fr. Martin, I would suggest being more circumspect. Otherwise your suggestions to others on this thread ring rather hollow.

From the original article:

In the opinion of police detective/profilers working on the case, the brutality and manner of the killing indicated that it was carried out either by a woman or a homosexual, Callaghan stated."

This sentence caught my eye.

Just how does a homosexual or a woman murder someone, and how does their manner of murder contrast with that of a heterosexual man??

This sentence does not make a lot of sense to me. It seems to me that the police should report on "the facts...just the facts, ma'am", and leave speculation -- es[pecially speculation that, on its surface, is somewhat non-sensical to the airheads in the media.

Dear ELS,

"Are some people more dead than others? Is it not OK to impugn the reputation of a Cardinal, but it's OK to impugn the reputation of a priest?"

Differences abound. It surprises me that they need to be pointed out.

Here's the first:

The difference between discussing what is openly known and discussing rumor and gossip. Fr. Martin's work is openly known. To discuss its merits and demerits is not gossip. To criticize his work as possibly being less-than-totally credible is not rumormongering.

To discuss and spread unproven allegations about deceased bishops is rumormongering and gossip.

If we were speaking about generally-accepted facts which reflected poorly on the deceased, that wouldn't be the same thing, now would it? If we find uncontrovertible evidence, and it is made public for all to see and test, that a deceased bishop committed a grave sin or crime, then the discussion thereof will no longer be rumormongering and gossip.

I'm sure that you can appreciate the difference.

There is, of course, another dimension to the difference:

The accusation that someone's professional work may be somewhat inaccurate is of a different nature than the accusation of grave, deeply hurtful personal sin.

If one speaks charitably, the former is a perfectly reasonable topic for discussion. The latter often is not. Open discussion of the latter is often the sin of detraction.

I've alluded to a question of the credibility of Fr. Martin's work. I've made no allegations that Fr. Martin was engaged in some sort of grave personal sin. And if you are aware of any such accusations, please don't let me know. I'm just not interested.

The discussions around here concerning various dead Catholic bishops have centered around grevious personal sin that they may or may not have committed. It's a discussion with a different character.

sitetest

"If you have no proof, then refrain from offering opinions"

So very well intentioned for Yendu..He does have a knack of repeating accusations that ultimately will be seen, heard by the gullible and will result in further harm to a reputation of a great many honest, devoted men of cloth. Rather, I would like to see and hear more positive attitudes. I have been greatly blessed, for I have always been associated in a parish where integrity was prevelant. Listening and reading of yendu, I pray that his circumstances will change for the better. He most likely was exposed to the worst, if not in mind then in spirit.

sitetest, thank you for your thoughtful reply. I apologize if I have misinterpreted your comment in response to sinkspur's.

My interpretation of sinkspur's initial comment, "...and the fact that Malachi Martin highlighted it in a book does it no favors." is that it was an unsubstantiated swipe at Fr. Martin's character. My interpretation was confirmed in sinkspur's response to me. Sinkspur wasn't discussing the credibility of the novel. Rather, he was expressing his opinion of Fr. Martin. sinkspur, do you have a mental health expert's report on Fr. Martin's mental state? Did you personally interview Fr. Martin? or are you drawing a conclusion based on what you've read and heard in the public media?

If we were speaking about generally-accepted facts which reflected poorly on the deceased, that wouldn't be the same thing, now would it?

My concern is the "generally-accepted facts" regarding Fr. Martin. It appears there have been many unsubstantiated rumors about Fr. Martin (including accusations of his having committed mortal sins) that have taken on the appearance of "truth" because they have been repeated so many times. If a lie is repeated often enough, they will believe it, eh? If there is incontrovertible evidence of said accusations, then I'm with you, but as far as I've seen there has been much mud slinging at Fr. Martin after his death with no hard evidence to back it up. That, to me, is no different than what you are warning others of doing to Cardinal Bernardin.

The accusation that someone's professional work may be somewhat inaccurate...
I've alluded to a question of the credibility of Fr. Martin's work.

How credible does a work of fiction have to be, anyway?

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.