Posted on 06/06/2004 6:29:13 PM PDT by ninenot
The following is a recent e-mail letter sent by attorney Sheila Schreiber-Parkhill of Bismarck, North Dakota, to sociologist and author Father Andrew Greeley (I wrote a commentary on this very subject some time back; but Sheila has acquired a few additional details that I find very interesting.):
Dear Father Greeley:
I have followed your career and writings for many years now, reading the many stories you've written about the sexual abuse crisis in our Church, the problems, the solutions, stories you have written denouncing the bishops and their cover-ups. "Are the bishops sorry at all?", you asked 8/3/2003. They all sound so right, so self-righteous and yet, when it comes to your personal life, doing the right thing yourself, your silence is deafening!
I had to laugh when I read that Bishop Wilton Gregory said: "I can assure you, known offenders are not in the ministry." Yet you and I both know that is not true. We both know of at least six. While I do not yet have the proof in my hands, you do.
For over a year now I have been investigating the Boys Club in Chicago.
In light of the arrest of Father Gerald Robinson of Toledo (see http://www.wtol.com/Global/story.asp?S=1891776), isn't it time you do something about the Chicago Boys Club, including the priest, now bishop, whose name has been included with it? They are still in the ministry, active in parishes. Some of those parishes have schools. They have not yet been exposed. You have made it clear to all that you know who they are. Knowingly allowing evil conduct to evade justice is to cooperate with evil.
In your autobiographical books, 'Confessions of a Parish Priest' and 'Furthermore! Memories of a Parish Priest,' you clearly acknowledge that you know who they are:
".....But even in Chicago, the ring of predators about whom I wrote in the paperback edition of 'Confessions' remains untouched. There is no evidence against them because no one has complained about them and none of their fellow priests have denounced them. Those who have been removed are for the most part lone offenders who lacked the skill to cover their tracks. The ring is much more clever. Perhaps they always will be. But should they slip, should they get caught, the previous scandals will seem trivial...."
That statement remains as true today as when you wrote it, because we are talking, not only about sexual encounters with children. [That is] truly evil. But we are also talking about ritualistic and satanic abuse of children, the ultimate evil, murder, and credit card theft and fraud.
You say:
"There is no evidence against them because no one has complained about them and none of their fellow priests have denounced them."
You are one of their fellow priests. You were in Chicago at the time. You know who they are.
If you don't denounce them, do you think you are any different from the bishops you denounce? Are you not even worse because you hide the proof of evil predators' guilt in safekeeping? Who is being kept safe? You? Remember these are satanic ritual abusers. Do you not think about the potential for other victims, children whose violation you have the power to prevent? As for those who have already been violated, you have the power to bring these predators to justice.
You announce to anyone and everyone who reads your books: "They are a dangerous group. There is reason to believe that they are responsible for at least one murder, and may perhaps have been involved in the murder of the murderer. Am I afraid of them? Not particularly. They know that I have in safekeeping information which would implicate them. I am more of a threat to them dead than alive."
I know that some of the information you obtained came from connections with the Chicago police department....and some from the priest who wrote the letter to [the late Joseph] Cardinal Bernardin about the group and their activities. I know that you worked closely with that priest and that he gave you some of that information because he lived with one of them and found out what was going on. I believe you have a copy of that letter which contains the names of the perpetrators, among other things, in safekeeping.
I know that you knew at least one of those murder victims, Frank Pellegrini from the University. I know the police talked with you during the investigation. One of them told me you wouldn't give them any information. I know that you know that Pellegrini wrote a letter to Vicar of Priests Tom Ventura revealing the sexual conduct and his plan to go to the authorities with the information. But before he could do that, he was found murdered — a satanic murder. (It has been reported that Father Ventura left the priesthood in 2002.)
You trumpet the fact that you have in safekeeping information which would implicate the members of the Boys Club! Why don't you, and Father M, shall we call him, give it to the bishops. Give it to Rome. To [Joseph] Cardinal Ratzinger [of the Vatican Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith]. Give it to the police in Chicago and in Tucson. Give it to the FBI Task Force before it appears in the newspapers, along with the fact that you knew and did nothing except brag that you knew! If you do the right thing, you will be protected! You will be a hero! Stories will be written about you and your courage, that you stood up against true evil.
It will all come out in the end, you know, as it has in the case of Father Gerald Robinson. Because too many people know about the case and one of us will keep digging and digging until the truth comes out. Even as recently as March 4th in the United States CatholicCitizens.org there was a story about Bernardin and Hubbard which included you:
"Bernardin's 'Gay-Friendly' Ghost"
http://catholiccitizens.org/press/pressview.asp?c=12748
and in Europe, February 28, 2004, the Irish Examiner carried a story about the Pellegrini murder which included you:
"Clerical abuse in US compounded by crimes and cover-ups"
http://archives.tcm.ie/irishexaminer/2004/02/28/story759782519.asp
If you do not come forward and expose these predators yourself, when it does come out, will you be charged as a co-conspirator, an accomplice after the fact, withholding state's evidence, obstructing justice? The statute of limitations doesn't apply. "There is reason to believe that they are responsible for at least one murder, and may perhaps been involved in the murder of the murderer."
Yes, you are right, "the previous scandals" certainly "will seem trivial," but more than that, the scandalous fact that you knew, you know, and don't expose them yourself will crowd all else out! Your own words in your own books will be damning evidence against you. In the end this will ruin your life, your reputation and all that you have been able to accomplish. It will shame your family.
But even more important is your answer to this question: Do you believe? Remember what He said about the children and the millstone? You have it within your power to protect other children from abuse! To bring the offenders to justice for those who have already been abused! Release the information that you have!
I look forward to your response. In the meantime, I will pray for you.
(To date, there has been no response from Father Greeley. Sheila Schreiber-Parkhill can be reached at
Here's an interesting approach--put that Smug Sociologist under the gun with the possibility of criminal indictment!
Some REAL interesting details here, for all of us conspiracy-theory people.
Personally, I think Greeley should send the list to the police department which is investigating the Fr. Al Kunz murder.
Thanks to Bettnet for making this available!!!
Gem # 1.
Neighborhood Watch people: look up that name!!
Turns out it was written by someone else.
Phil, tell Matt to attribute his sources. Plaigarism is a sin.
Wonder if this attorney knows more than has been printed so far in Toledo?
I dunno, Sink. The COLUMN was written by Abbott, but clearly he attributes the letter.
I inadvertently cut off the email address of the attorney in this posting. If you want it, go to the source URL and you'll find it at the very end of the article.
Whatever.
Friday, June 04, 2004
The Long Black Line
Did you wonder (rhetorical question, of course) why there was such a flood of scandalous accusations against priests all at one time, even though the alleged actions took place over four decades? Wouldn't it have made more sense for these things to have come out as they happened?
There are many reasons why, all of them shameful. The conspiracy of silence between diocesan officials and the police and lawyers played a big part in keeping a lid on things -- and, as a result, continuing the problem. And nobody today, looking at the payouts that were made way back when and the confidentiality clauses that complainants signed to get their checks, can deny that selfishness, pure and simple, aided and abetted these perverts in continuing to damage the people of God.
But there's one huge elephant in the middle of the room, and very few are adverting to it. The elephant? The willingness of otherwise innocent priests to keep silent about the sins of their brethren.
When James Porter's case brought all this to the fore, we were absolutely horrified to read about priests in his rectory having witnessed his depravity, about others barging in upon him while he savaged youngsters -- and saying nothing. Nothing. It stunned most everybody I've ever spoken with about the Porter case.
I hate to say it, but it didn't stun me.
Maybe it's because I didn't grow up in a clerical culture, maybe for some other reason, I never heard it. Clearly everybody else knew (by osmosis?) that while one might kvetch to one's priest friends about the excesses or depravities of a rectory-mate, one NEVER reported these issues up the chain of command.
I found out about this dictum the hard way, I'm afraid. I reported a guy in seminary who was an active sodomite -- as I and every other seminarian had been instructed to do if we were the subject of an advance. I discovered after the fact, however, that we were supposed to do what they did, rather than what they said to do. If you've read Michael Rose's book, you can imagine the consequences I discovered. Suffice it to say, answering the call to ordination was not a cake walk the rest of the way!
I've found, post-ordination, that this same dictum is applied more rigorously than canon law. One of my confreres is reported to have said (about me, after I turned in a pastor for disobeying diocesan regulations by having a 19-year old boy living with him in the rectory), "Nobody will ever take him as an associate if he turns people in!"
The "long black line," like the fabled solidarity of cops and soldiers, does serve a legitimate purpose. There should be solidarity in the priesthood. There should be a sense of commonality, an esprit de corps that always binds together those who put their lives on the line for the good of society. But when it becomes counterproductive, when it serves to sheild those who despoil the very nature of the comraderie, it must be broken, it must be dissolved.
posted by FatherElijah
"Whatever"
No, not "whatever." You were so eager to find some accusation that you didn't even check to see of you had an a priori case.
Shameful.
That is a fact.
That could be Bishop Gerald Kicanas of Tucson; Leftist, previously worked in Chicago, ordained by Bernardin.
"That could be Bishop Gerald Kicanas of Tucson; Leftist, previously worked in Chicago, ordained by Bernardin."
There are lots of leftist, previously worked in Chicago bishops out there consecrated by Bernardin. They include our archbishop (Vlazny). Not all of them are satanic pedophiles.
I have read this article elsewhere. Fr. Malachi Martin wrote extensively about this subject - specificly in Chicago - in his last book Windswept House. While he cloaked the true names, dates and places (thinly) in fiction, it was based upon this reality of organized clerical satanic pedophilia. Very nasty stuff, but apparantly true. Greely and Martin both correctly point out that there have been murders to cover up such information, and a wall of silence in both the poice and diocesan offices. And he is justifyable fearful of comeing foward and telling all that he knows. However, if he (or anyone)were to do this it would be a great step foward to a thorough cleasing of the house that Bernadin built. How many more like the good Fr. Kunz have to die to protect the guilty? Kunz was a consultant to Martin on this book. Martin himself may have been offed, as he asserted on his death bed that "he was pushed". But at least he was brave enough to tell the story the best way he could.
"as he asserted on his death bed that "he was pushed"."
Got a source on that?
But I simply cannot understand a grown man apparently content with the playground taunt of "I know something you don't know! I know something you don't know!" Any ideas?
At this point, solidarity aside, it's time to expose the ring and get them out of the priesthood. I don't care who they are. There is such a thing as an anonymous tip. I would imagine the big fear is that every priest who tries to help expose this group ends up dead. Then they can't help at all.
The only reason so many people KNOW there is such a ring is because people like Greeley say there is. Okay, fine. Who are they? Based on what I've seen coming out of Chicago, I have no doubt they are there, but who are they?
I cannot imagine why Greeley is playing this game, unless he does NOT have any information and is using bravado, or the information includes some close personal friend(s) whom he does not wish to betray.
But I think a prosecutor could have some fun here. It's well known that you can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich. Surely one can pull an 'obstruction' charge against a Smug Sociologist...
But then why say anything? He wants the attention? That sounds like a dangerous game. Why doesn't he put up or shut up?
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.