Posted on 07/17/2002 6:58:26 AM PDT by Polycarp
Aeiou - Here's honesty: I don't hate anyone in this world (as my religion teaches)! But when several thousand teenage boys have been homosexually molested in the past couple of decades by Catholic priests, and the priesthood is filled with active homosexuals, many of whom are attracted to teenage boys, it's crazy to allow priests to be alone with children (particularly, as we've seen, boys). I'm a devout Catholic. But the Church can't have it both ways. If it wants the trust of parents, then stop stocking the priesthood with active homosexuals who are breaking their vows and endangering our boys. I don't hate even molesters (they need help). That doesn't mean they should have contact with our sons. They shouldn't. Christ said that to lead a child to sin was a horrible, horrible sin. Well, OUR Church has been effectively condoning thousands of such horrible sins for the past 20 years. Enough. I love the Catholic Church. But not enough to endanger my kids spiritual and sexual and physical growth.
Aeiou - The Boy Scouts had a severe problem with homosexual molestations of teenage boys for a long time. They implemented a policy where: 1) no avowed homosexual men are allowed; 2) kids can never be alone with one adult at any time and; 3) all scouts are warned in graphic terms about the dangers of homosexual molestation. The result - the incidence of homosexual molestation of Boy Scouts has dropped dramatically. The Boy Scouts put the welfare of kids FIRST (though they have been attacked relentlessly by homosexuals for doing so). The Catholic Church should adopt rules just like this. The Church has put the welfare of children LAST.
First I would like to tell you of my first hand experience with clergy molesting boys, Brothers in this case.
I attended Catholic grammer school in NE in the late 50's and early 60's, the teachers were Nuns. I then attended a Catholic HS in the late 60's, the teachers (with 80%+ being Brothers, the rest lay teachers. I was propositioned by my Chemistry teacher, during a one on one conference on my progress in his class. He got into an area where he was telling me how much he liked me, he liked me so much that he would let me "sit on my face, if you want to". Fortunatly I was so naive, It didn't occur to me that one man would do that with another, but it was very weird. He pulled the same stunt with my friends (he had a private 'conference' with each student). Later I learned that a number of his students took him up on his offer. There were also incidents with the Brother who led the school band, the boys he molested became the student band leaders (I know this from second hand information ( One of the boys involved later becaue the head of the gay student union at his college in the 70's). None of the students said anything to other adults, some didn't mention it to other kids until later.
The incident was creepy, much more so when I realized he was doing this with a lot of boys. Why didn't any of the boys say anything? Why didn't I say anything?
Simple, we were boys with no power and they were Brother, who would the other brothers and our parents believe? Would our friends think we were queer (the trem at the time) for even being approached about this? Who would our Moms and Dads believe?
If I spoke up I would be destroyed, that's what I thought. I have been told (brainwashed?) since I was a child, that the Catholic clergy was smarter than us, had a special relationship with God, were our moral mentors, heck they taught us our Catechism! They were always right, and holy and pious. I was told this by my parents and realtives and other adults (my community was 90% Catholic (Iriah and Italians).We were just teenagers, with no credibility.
They had the power and we didn't, End of Story. In this particulat school >10% of the Brothers were involved in molestation (based on first and second hand knowledge), molestation took place on school grounds ( both in the woods surrounding the school and in the school, after hours, and in the Brothers quarters). I have wondered over the years, what about the other brothers in the rectory? What did they know of their peer's behavior? How could they not know what was happening with the people they lived with for years? Our parents only saw them in controlled situations. The other brothers lived and ate and hung out with them, how could they NOT KNOW what was going on? If they knew and didn't go ballistic, I believe they are complicit in the molestation and are as guilty as the molesters.
Maybe somebody said something and it was covered up, I don't know. I do know that the criminal behavior and the damage it caused to some of my classmates was not stopped, and to the best of my knowledge no one was held accountable.
I can only imaging what it does to a boy to be drawn into this sort of sick behavior by someone you are supposed to be able to trust as much as your parents (I was warned about getting in cars with strangers, but never about catholic clergy). The guilt you would experience would be a killer. Maybe taking the money is the only way to get back at the person who is assulting you? Maybe it plays into to your belief that this is your fault, your the bad person not the clergyman.
If you were a devout, young catholic boy and were in that situation how would YOU react?
Part of my problem is that I'm largely unaware of all the nasty things being said by various people about various people. When I hear them, it upsets me.
Fr. Martin's work should be judged on its own. I used to know a little more than I now remember about it, but I remember that my conclusions in the past were that he writes some very interesting stories, but if one is to assert that they represent a thinly-disguised true story, then much of it is incredible to me.
"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?"
That is precisely my point, which is why I have no ears to hear any accusations of private immorality by the late Fr. Martin.
But one needs to distinguish between unsubstantiated rumors of sin, and interpretation of substantiated public acts as sinful. Thus, if anyone is desiring to inform me of a rumor that Fr. Martin committed some act in private, I'm uninterested in knowing about it. But if someone says that something that he wrote and published constitutes sin, that isn't spreading an unsubstantiated rumor. It's interpreting a public act of a man. One ought to do so in charity, otherwise one may guilty of rash judgement. But that wouldn't be gossip.
For myself, I know of no rumors of sin about this priest, and have no opinion about the overall moral virtue or lack thereof of his writing.
As to sinkspur's comments about Fr. Martin's sanity, that isn't inherently uncharitable. If Fr. Martin showed clear signs in his behavior or his writing of increasing mental unbalance, it isn't sinful to gently note it, or suggest it. In fact, if Fr. Martin did things publicly that put him in an unfavorable light, then it could be a kindness to point out that he wasn't really responsible for them as a result of failing mental health in his old age. Context, of course, is everything.
"How credible does a work of fiction have to be, anyway?"
If it's just a good yarn, it only needs to be sufficiently credible to hold together internally as a good story. But, Fr. Martin's work has been cited, here in this thread, as "thinly-disguised fact". In that case, if that is how one wishes to present it, it must be very, very, very credible, considering the accusations made.
sitetest
For heaven's sake, the WANDERER and the NATIONAL CATHOLIC REPORTER were talking about priestly pederasty in 1985, after Fr. Thomas Doyle gave his report to the bishops, which they promptly ignored.
Martin just struck me as a paranoid human being. David Gold of KLIF in Dallas would regularly interview him in the early and mid-90s, but finally stopped after Martin became increasingly incoherent in some of the things he said. I think he thought his novels were reality.
It's a criminological truism that women and homosexuals are far more violent (when spurred to action of this sort) than heterosexual males. Typical difference has to do with the number of wounds: women and homosexuals MORE, hetero men less.
A hetero man TYPICALLY will shoot only to kill and then stop shooting.
There are some exceptions, but they typically 'prove the rule' rather than disprove it.
Director of Rehab Center for Priests Suspended Over Sex Abuse Allegation
BOSTON — The director of a rehabilitation center for priests accused of molesting children has himself been suspended on sex allegations dating back more than 25 years.
The Rev. Robert Beale was placed on administrative leave Wednesday by the Archdiocese of Boston after church officials reviewed an allegation that Beale sexually abused a minor in the 1970s. Donna Morrissey, a spokeswoman for the archdiocese, said church officials found the accusation credible. She would not release any details.
Beale becomes the 18th priest in the archdiocese suspended since January, when the clergy sexual abuse scandal first erupted in Boston.
Victims of clergy abuse were outraged by the news that the director of Our Lady's Hall — a residential home where priests were supposed to be receiving treatment — has been accused of being a sexual offender himself.
"Clearly, there wasn't proper supervision for the priests who were staying there," said Philip Saviano, the New England director of the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests.
"If this father is someone who was a child molester himself, then you have to wonder how much supervision he was giving his colleagues at the time," Saviano said.
This is not the first time Our Lady's Hall has come under scrutiny.
In March, another priest, the Rev. Ronald Paquin, was accused in a lawsuit of molesting a teenage boy at Our Lady's Hall on numerous occasions after Paquin was sent there by the archdiocese in the early 1990s. Paquin had been removed from a Haverhill parish for allegedly molesting children. He is currently jailed awaiting trial on three counts of child rape.
The alleged victim told The Boston Globe that he visited Paquin at Our Lady's Hall several dozen times, and spent the night with him at least twice. The boy, who was 14 and 15 at the time, said other priests who were staying there never questioned his presence, even though he and Paquin always went to Paquin's bedroom.
Earlier this year, the archdiocese reclassified the Rev. Edward T. Kelley from counselor to client at the hall after the church received allegations that he, too, had molested children.
Beale could not be reached for comment Thursday. Two messages were left for him at Our Lady's Hall.
Morrissey said Beale will continue to receive his salary and benefits while the allegation is being investigated.
Beale, who was ordained in 1970, was assigned to several churches around the state before going to work at Our Lady's Hall about 20 years ago.
He also worked as a part-time chaplain at the Norfolk County jail in Dedham, where he ministered to John Salvi, a gunman who killed two women and wounded five other people in two Boston-area abortion clinics in 1994.
Beale is also a member of "The Singing Priests," a group of priests who perform show tunes and inspirational songs for charity.
Our Lady's Hall is located in an affluent section of Milton, a Boston suburb.
For years, residents of Milton thought the stately brick mansion set back from the road was a retreat house for alcoholic priests.
They were upset to learn in 1997 that Our Lady's Hall also was being used to house priests accused of sexually abusing children.
"We were notified by a resident who had young children and lived in very close proximity to Our Lady's Hall. They were very concerned," said Milton police Chief Kevin Mearn.
"I think a lot of people thought it was a retirement home for priests."
Mearn said he met with church officials, who told him they would stop sending accused sexual offenders to stay at the home.
Morrissey said there are no patients at the facility now.
People can believe whatever they want to believe.
But, basing an opinion of Bernardin solely on some of the flimsy stuff offered by RCF would be erroneous, IMO, especially the "satanic ritual" stuff.
Also, my opinion of Martin says nothing about the state of what was liklely a saintly soul. He just seemed a little nutty, that's all.
I've never heard a satisfactory answer from him as to why he left the priesthood. Would his superiors not let him write novels?
He was also a frequent guest of Art Bell--perhaps a better substantiation of your concerns than mere incoherence, which never bothers Art Bell...
He reminded me of an inverted Barry Goldwater in his later years: a former liberal, he became a rabid traditionalist.
Now is the time to air every scandal in the closet. Time to take out the trash. Let's get it all out there once and for all. And then...REBUILD OUR CHURCH!
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.