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

WorldNetDaily ^ | 7/17/02 | Toby Westerman

[yendu bwam]

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.

Such might cause the Church to become more holy, more humble, more truthful, more true to the word of God, more careful with the souls and psyches of children, less Sodomaniac, and finally, more Godly.

[sitetest]

Dear yendu bwam,

I've read a number of allegations. I haven't seen any evidence.

And that's the point. Not whether or not it's true. I don't know, and neither do you. The point is that all we're doing here is passing around the same (unproven) allegations and rumors that have been circulating, apparently, for some time. And the more the allegations are repeated, the more people say, "See! It's true!"

The original piece here offers no hard evidence, and the second one by Mr. Brady, in the body of the thread just rehashes some of the same allegations, and adds a few more.

Mr. Brady has done great work actually documenting the evil acts of some of the bishops. We've seen the actual websites involved, we've heard from real people who have come forward, not cloaked by anonymity, to make real, and specific charges.

But against Cardinal Bernadin, it is all allegation and rumor. It is certainly possible that some of the allegations are true. Or all of them. Or none of them.

Many things are possible. Two possibilities are:

Perhaps Cardinal Bernadin was sufficiently clever to sufficiently cover his tracks that it will be impossible to ever overcome a prudent doubt against the charges, and in this life, his reputation will never be successfully destroyed.

Perhaps Cardinal Bernadin was entirely innocent of personal immorality, and that those who hate him will succeed in permanently destroying his personal reputation.

My own preference is that I should avoid the latter by risking the former.

My perspective is that if someone can't produce the evidence, the individual should be quiet.

Frankly, I'm done arguing the point. Re-read the Catechism, Article 8, The Eighth Commandment, starting with paragraph 2464. Especially examine rash judgement, calumny, and detraction.

I'm going to take a break from these threads. I find it devastating to find so many good Catholics so willing to trade in gossip and rumors about our bishops and priests, especially dead ones who can't defend themselves.. Those of you who want to dump on our bishops can do so, and be confident that I'll offer no resistance for now.

I just have a question for some of you: So which cardinal was outed by the NY Times at the start of the Dallas shindig? None? Oh my! And I was just promised that all the rumors would be validated by then!

sitetest

[sinkspur]

Sinkspur, you need to speak more clearly concerning the priesthood and the Church

I understand the priesthood perfectly.

Do you understand the priesthood of the laity?

You spend all you time here touting the clergy and it is the clerical caste which has brought shame on our Catholic Church.

Yes, we need priests for the sacraments. Perhaps they'd be more respected if they acted in accord with the dignity of the office.

[yendu bwam]

But against Cardinal Bernadin, it is all allegation and rumor. It is certainly possible that some of the allegations are true. Or all of them. Or none of them.

I don't think I am making a rash judgment. I think I'm drawing a rational (though distressing) conclusion based on quite a bit of circumstantial evidence (the same sort used every day in court). Let's see. Bernadin was twice accused of personal homosexual molestation. Neither accuser ever recanted their allegations - despite what was surely intense pressure from the Church. One was definitely paid a lot of money. The other appears to have been. Certain of the priests that Bernadin trained with and who were his close personal friends became embroiled in multiple homosexual abuse molestation charges involving teenage boys. Bernadin's appointments were virtually all heavily in favor of condoning homosexual activity. Despite all the mass of homosexual molestation charges swirling around those close to Bernadin (and himself), he never managed (like virtually all of the bishops) to clearly and strongly denounce homosexual molestation of teenage boys. To my eyes, he was clearly at the epicenter of one of the rashes of homosexual activity (involving boys) and promotion of homosexual activity in the Church, and likely involved in it himself. No, that doesnt' amount to proof. But it's highly, highly suspicious. It also fits to a T the same fact pattern that surrounds many of the other homosexual ringleaders in the Church (like the two bishops who resigned in Florida - unrepentantly, I might add). Only God knows for sure where Bernadin belongs (in heaven or hell). Let's leave it at that.

[sinkspur]

Agnes states that in the fall of 1957, in Greenville, S.C.,... Bernardin, raped her ...

With her father watching?

Polycarp, there is NOTHING to this story, and the fact that Malachi Martin highlighted it in a book does it no favors.

[sitetest]

Dear yendu bwam,

I read your latest post, and I don't think you've done a good job reasoning to your conclusion.

"Bernadin was twice accused of personal homosexual molestation."

Allegations are not proof. The fact that both accusers backed off indicates that the allegations could just as easily be false. Have you ever been publicly falsely accused of a serious charge? We just had this happen in our Knights of Columbus Council. It is hard for the falsely-accused person to ever get back their reputation.

"Certain of the priests that Bernadin trained with and who were his close personal friends became embroiled in multiple homosexual abuse molestation charges involving teenage boys."

Guilt by association. The fact is, Cardinal Bernadin was a very powerful man in the Church, and knew many, many, many folks. I wouldn't be surprised if he had at least a passing acquaintance with a majority of the 1000 - 2000 priests accused over the past 40 years. I wouldn't be surprised if he had at least a passing acquaintance with a majority of all the priests ordained for the past 40 years.

The world of priests isn't a very big one. You can quite ably do the guilt-by-association thing in such a small community.

I went to school with rapists, murderers, bank robbers, and drug dealers. One of my best friends in 6th grade went to jail for Grand Theft Auto. My former business partner used to snort cocaine. A dear personal friend was once convicted of arson. I could go on like this for some time.

And I don't know a fraction of the people that Cardinal Bernadin knew.

"Bernadin's appointments were virtually all heavily in favor of condoning homosexual activity."

So it is alleged. I would prefer a better statistical analysis of: all the bishops for whom he was a primary mover; all the bishops who endorse or condone homosexual activity. All I see here is some names bandied back and forth, fewer than the hundreds over which Cardinal Bernadin had a great deal of influence in appointing. And of course, there is the confounding variable: what other prominent bishops supported these candidates to the episcopacy at the time?

"Despite all the mass of homosexual molestation charges swirling around those close to Bernadin (and himself), he never managed (like virtually all of the bishops) to clearly and strongly denounce homosexual molestation of teenage boys."

These charges have swirled around a large number of bishops. And an equally large number of bishops also failed to strongly denounce homosexual molestation of teenage boys. Something on the order of TWO-THIRDS of the bishops failed to strongly denounce homosexual molestation of teenage boys. That is awful. And to the degree that Cardinal Bernadin was guilty of that, he must answer before God.

But do you think that TWO-THIRDS of the bishops raped young girls and performed satanic rituals on them?

"To my eyes, he was clearly at the epicenter of one of the rashes of homosexual activity (involving boys) and promotion of homosexual activity in the Church, and likely involved in it himself."

My eyes see that far more of this garbage seemed to be happening in Boston, under Cardinal Law and his predecessors. Do you think that Cardinal Law or his predecessors raped young girls and performed satanic rituals on them?

"No, that doesnt' amount to proof."

Now that wasn't so hard to admit, was it? ;-)

"Only God knows for sure where Bernadin belongs (in heaven or hell). Let's leave it at that."

Gee, that's sort of what I've been saying all along! I'm glad I persuaded you!! ;-)

sitetest

[sitetest]

Dear sinkspur,

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

Thanks.

I was too polite to mention that.

sitetest

[yendu bwam]

But do you think that TWO-THIRDS of the bishops raped young girls and performed satanic rituals on them?

No, and I didn't say that. But a research study by an Arizona newspaper indicated that 2/3 of bishops have knowingly moved molester priests from parish to parish.

[sinkspur]

Only God knows for sure where Bernadin belongs (in heaven or hell).

In your rush to condemn, you're on the verge of consigning a cardinal to eternal perdition based on circumstantial evidence.

It should be our Christian hope that there is no one in hell.

[sitetest]

Dear yendy bwam,

"'But do you think that TWO-THIRDS of the bishops raped young girls and performed satanic rituals on them?' "No, and I didn't say that. But a research study by an Arizona newspaper indicated that 2/3 of bishops have knowingly moved molester priests from parish to parish."

Re-read my post, yendu. I mentioned that fact in what I said. And I said that if Cardinal Bernadin did that, too (which it seems he did), then he is guilty of cover-up, as well, and will answer to God for it.

But in your offer of proof that Cardinal Bernadin raped a young girl and performed satanic rituals on her, you rely on the fact that he didn't denounce homosexual molestation of teen-age boys. It only stands to reason that if that is evidence that Cardinal Bernadin raped a young girl and performed satanic rituals on her, then it is evidence that all the rest of the bishops who failed to denounce homosexual molestation of teen-age boys also must have raped young girls and performed satanic rituals on them.

sitetest

[yendu bwam]

"To my eyes, he was clearly at the epicenter of one of the rashes of homosexual activity (involving boys) and promotion of homosexual activity in the Church, and likely involved in it himself." My eyes see that far more of this garbage seemed to be happening in Boston, under Cardinal Law and his predecessors. Do you think that Cardinal Law or his predecessors raped young girls and performed satanic rituals on them?

To my eyes, (I'm sorry, what you say doesn't convince me otherwise.) both Bernadin and Law were at the center of rashes of homosexual activity in the Church. And why would you think that I think that Cardinal Law raped young girls and performed satanic rituals on them? Is there strong circumstantial evidence supporting that? I don't think there is. I do think there is regarding Bernadin and homosexual activity. - Look - I have been lied to repeatedly and constantly by my own bishop, and every other 'leader' in this Church. The fog of lies and obfuscation from the Cardinals and Bishops could fill a bible length book. Most every single charge subsequently proven to be true in this scandal was repeatedly denied by those who 'lead' our Church prior to its revelation. Do you really believe Law didn't know that Geoghan and Shanley were child molesters? Do you really think Bernadin didn't know what was going on around him? My own bishop, Rodimer, spent summers with his best friend, a fellow priest, at a beach house. A young teenage boy accompanied his friend on these vacations and slept in his bedroom every night. Then it comes out that the boy was serially homoesexually molested by Rodimer's friend - while at the beach house. The offending priest has admitted his crimes and been removed. And Rodimer, of course, says he knew nothing, NOTHING. Given that Rodimer showed not the least concern for homosexually raped boys in the town next to mine (until forced to), I really don't believe him regarding his friend. Are we so gullible as to believe that he didn't know he good friend of many years was homosexual? Didn't it occur to him that having a homosexual friend sleep every night with a teenage boy in his room might not be a good thing? C'mon. I have a homosexual friend who is an organist for a major parish in the Church near here. He tells me that the diocese has been full of active homosexuals for years, and that what he calls 'the immature ones' look for young (often teenage) men in bars, seminaries and even brothels in New York City. There is a difference from facing an out-of-the-blue charge about something, and having a life surrounded by both such charges and close friends being so charged. I personally think you're being naive. I could be wrong, I admit. But I'm not so naive anymore. I am astounded and heartbroken by the proven things which have come out, and extremely suspicious of people like Bernadin and Rodimer. I am tired of being taken for a complete dupe by our Church.

[yendu bwam]

But in your offer of proof that Cardinal Bernadin raped a young girl and performed satanic rituals on her

Dear Sitetest, Please re-read my post. I NEVER made any comment regarding Benradin having raped a young girl, and/or having performed satanic rituals on her. I said I thought there was a great degree of cicumstantial evidence that Bernadin was heavily involved in and knowledgeable about the homosexual activity all around him. I didn't say I 'proved' anything. I said there was a lot of circumstantial evidence, and there is.

[yendu bwam]

Finally, I would say that if the Chruch really wants to do something about this, and if there are some unfounded allegations (which I agree, there inevitably are), it will decide to NEVER let a priest be in the presence of a child or teenager alone. The Boy Scouts has a similar policy and it has reduced (homosexual) molestations dramatically. The Boy Scouts also requires that all children and teens be warned (graphically, I'm afraid) about the dangers of sexual molestation. That would also be sensible policy for a Church whose priests can't keep their hands (and other body parts) away from teenage boys. No access, no credible allegations possible. Only a fool parent would today allow their sons to be alone in the company of a priest.

[yendu bwam]

In your rush to condemn, you're on the verge of consigning a cardinal to eternal perdition based on circumstantial evidence. It should be our Christian hope that there is no one in hell.

Let's see. I pointed out that there was strong circumstantial evidence with regard to Bernadin and (in my opinion, and that of many others) there is. I haven't the tiniest mote of power to consign anyone to hell! That's God's job, with the judgment of Christ. As a Christian, I do hope and pray that the fewest number of people in this world go to hell. But many do. ("Only a few may enter by the narrow gate...") I do truly hope I'm wrong about Bernadin. But if I were a betting man, my bet would not be where my hope lay.

[yendu bwam]

[Neuhaus] is a convert, after all, and it's very hard to see this sort of thing in a Church that he obviously loves.

I think he is heart- and soul-broken, like we all are.

[yendu bwam]

I'm not so sure about the RCF myself, but as a Catholic the fact that priests can mess around with boys AT ALL blows my mind. The fact that the higher-ups cover up and cover up and cover up (LAW!!!!) allowing truly evil people to get away with their crimes makes me very sad. I've almost considered converting to some protestant religion. I could rant for hours, but I won't.

We are being inured to tremendous evil. Now people think it's normal for every diocese in the country to have its own homosexual rape scandal. Well, it is...

[Antoninus]

Willig, died of AIDS after he was exposed as the head of Dignity in Washington, D.C. Willig worked in the NCCB’s finance office, where he had access to all the financial information of America’s Catholic dioceses).

Hmmmm......

[yendu bwam]

In my area there were two priests who were involved with teenaged boys for about six years. Why did the so called victims keep going back to the priests for money $$ twice a week to have dirty things done to them? They kept going back until they were in their twenties. They sound like con-artists-homosexuals.

Even if what you say is true, the priests in question were breaking their holy vows to the Church, actively sinning against God, and engaging young souls in active sin. That's devilish in my book. - - But let me tell you what happened in my area. The pastor of a local Church and head of the Church elementary school targeted six young (innocent) boys over a period of ten years. He became special friends with them and with their families (who greatly valued his friendship and association). The boys, in each case, were allowed to spend oodles of time at the Church and rectory, because the parents deeply trusted the priest (and assumed they were right in so doing). The boys were told, in each instance, that they should put great trust in the priest (because he was a priest), and that the boys should be honored to have the priest's attention. The priest began by showing the boys (singly, and sometimes together) homosexual pornographic movies in his office (with the door locked). He told the boys that it was time for them to 'become real men,' and that what was going to happen was the 'normal' progression that all boys went through in becoming men. He started to engage them in masturbation and mutual masturbation. He told them it was important not to tell anyone what was going on, because this intitiation into manhood was always supposed to be private. He told them all men went through this. The boys believed him. The molestation progressed to oral sodomy and anal rape. One boy described how the priest would have him name all the states on the map on the wall while he was being anally raped. If the priest wasn't finished, he would have to name the states again. This continued for several years with each boy - in multiple instances each week. When this came to the attention of Frank Rodimer, our bishop, he tried to cover it up and to quash it. He marginalized the victims, and even ridiculed a couple of them. Only the action of one brave priest led to this becoming public. This happened around ten years ago. Last month, the offending priest (a multiple, serial teenage boy RAPIST) was defrocked. He has never been punished by the law. Rodimer continues as our 'bishop.' I am ashamed of my sodomaniacal Church.

[Antoninus]

Honestly, I have to give RCF a lot of credit. They are the only group I know of who is actively out there investigating the clandestine corruption among clerics. Granted, some of their info seems like a stretch, but unlike most of our bishops, the have quite a few scalps on their belt thanks to their investigations.

Personally, I have yet to come to a decision on Bernadin. Based on the 'quality' of the priests and bishops he associated with and the current make up of the UCCB today, and his willingness to tolerate all kinds of liturgical and sacremental 'innovation' I have grave doubts about him. Let's not forget that RCF may have more on him than they've posted on their site...

Think about it. If there were four or five more groups out there like RCF -- digging up damning documentary evidence on our corrupt and corrupting bishops and priests -- would we be suffering through such a terrible scandal right now? (hint, hint, hint)