[Polycarp]

Thanks for the heads up. I just sent this to them. These are my thoughts and "findings" so far. (There may be bitter conservatives here, but I know none that would propagate a hoax such as this):



I'd like to provide a few background details on the "Priests Federation of Altoona-Johnstown" (PFAJ) letter. I must say up front that I'm not unbiased, because I'm one of the individuals named who the "priests" are urging Bishop Adamec to sue.

We do not know who wrote this letter, but we certainly suspect it was not a group of "26 clergy."

However, there was a private/secret, by-invitation-only meeting April 1, 2002 of 32 members of the diocesan clergy. In talking to a priest who was present, it appears that concepts were floated at that meeting that were vaguely similar to those expressed in the PFAJ letter. The priest with whom I spoke was not receptive to the idea of a "priests' union" nor to the idea of uniting against the bishop. However, he did agree that the priests needed to offer each other mutual support and fellowship, especially in spiritual formation, something sorely missing from this diocese. He was not subsequently contacted regarding this current letter, and no mention of an actual "Priests Federation of Altoona-Johnstown" was made.

We are assuming that priests who were sympathetic to the concepts floated at that meeting subsequently met and formed this group. We have no solid evidence, however.

There were a few errors in the letter that are intriguing if this came from an active priest. Dr. David Brown (mentioned in Michael Rose's book, "Goodbye, good men) was never suspended from the diocese as an independant contractor who performed intake psychological exams for seminarians.

Nor was he ever suspended from the diocesan permanent dioconate formation program. However, "Talibanic" is a term Dr. Brown coined and used in letters to ed of local papers in describing the Catholic activism of George Foster, Brian Barcaro (webmaster at www.diocesereport.com), myself, and Fr. James Foster (who the authors of the letter demand be suspended.)

Furthermore, very few priests and no laity were aware of the "very negative psychological report" against "the present candidate for ordination to the priesthood" (a transitional deacon who will receive Holy Orders next month.)

This "very negative psychological report" was written by a mental health professional who had never met the transitional deacon, at the request of a very liberal pastor under whom the deacon served in a parish of the diocese for several months. It should be noted that the deacon is very conservative/orthodox and the paster who requested this psychological report, based solely on his hearsay, is one of the most liberal priests in the diocese.

Finally, several priests who were known homosexual molesters were quietly removed either for "medical leave" or "early retirement" over the last 18 months. This was at least in part a direct result of Catholic activism, including newspaper reports of evidence we uncovered in our own investigation of this diocese as well as information posted at www.diocesereport.com and www.freerepublic.com.

These priests were serving in comfortable positions on regular priestly incomes in this diocese, and now are living on comparatively meager retirement funds. A large portion of those prematurely and quietly retired priests are now living at Dimitri Manor, which the letter specifically demands to be upgraded. Please note the emphasis in the letter on retirement pay and conditions at Dimitri Manor. Also note their perceived "persecution" by Bishop Adamec.

So it appears this letter originates with:

1) some retired priests (forced into retirement by the exposure by lay activists of their history of homosexual molestation) are working in conjunction with

2) some active priests (the liberal paster who obtained the "very negative psychological report" based on hearsay from a friend in the medical health field, other priests for whom we have proof of homosexual behavior and/or participation in internet homosexual chat rooms) and

3) feminist individuals/nuns in the diocesan education office who have been under scrutiny for inviting heterodox speakers such as New age nun Sister Jose Hobday and Humanae Vitae dissident/CTA speaker Kathy Coffee.

Kathy Coffe's appearance was cancelled due to the outcry by local Catholics, and the Hobday talk was publicly protested.

Incidentally, the other priest who this letter demands be suspended, Fr. John Nesbella, lead the laity in fighting the diocesan education office's invitation of these two dissident speakers. It should also be noted that both Fr. James Foster and Fr. John Nesbella as well as the transitional deacon are ardent defenders of the Culture of Life, and both preach the truth about homosexuality from the pulpit and engage the subject in frequent letters to the editor and guest columns in our local newspapers.

Of course, everything I state here is purely conjecture on my own part, and I speak only for myself. I do not speak for any of the other individuals named in the letter.

If you would like further information, please feel free to contact me.

Sincerely,
Brian J. Kopp, DPM

bjkdig@floodcity.net

[american colleen]

Thanks for the clarifications.

I too have my doubts about the veracity of the letter. I find it very difficult to believe that a letter so full of errors and making no bones about where they stand regarding honosexuality would make its way to a newspaper and therefore be widely circulated. It almost sounds like a parody because it includes almost every bogeyman us orthodox loathe.

This "battle" we are engaged in can be so dangerous spiritually - it is easy to get off track and lose your soul and make oneself believe that the means justify the ends. I don't mean you here at all, but I have seen it happen and I read it all the time on the threads.