Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Predator Priest Let Loose on the Public: Father Mahan Diagnosed as Sociopath,Threat,Predator;Liar
Boston Herald ^ | 5/17/02 | Eric Convey and Tom Mashberg

Posted on 05/17/2002 5:43:08 AM PDT by Dr. Scarpetta

The Archdiocese of Boston turned former priest Paul J. Mahan loose on the public in the mid-1990s after he had been diagnosed as a ``sociopath'' and a ``threat to adolescent males,'' according to documents released yesterday.

In a sign of just how sick therpists deemed Mahan, doctors at St. Luke Institute in Suitland, Md., expelled him as hopeless in 1995 - kicking him out of a hospital that has specialized in treating clergy with severe sexual disorders.

At least one plaintiff alleges he was raped by Mahan at a home on the North Shore soon after the priest was discharged by the archdiocese without a warning to civil authorities or former parishioners.

``They released a sexual predator into the Marblehead community and did not warn a soul,'' said Joseph G. Abromovitz, a lawyer suing the church and Mahan on behalf of two of the ex-priest's nephews, both of whom claim he raped them from 1993 to 1995. ``My clients were told Mahan was on a routine sabbatical when he was in fact being treated for incurable pedophilia,'' Abromovitz said.

Mitchell Garabedian, the lawyer who won the release of Mahan's personnel file, and represents 11 of his accusers, made two of the documents available yesterday after Superior Court Judge Constance M. Sweeney ordered that the archdiocese hand over the records.

Garabedian said he would review the full file before commenting in detail, but added: ``These psychiatric characteristics obviously are of some concern.''

The latest documents unveiled in the Roman Catholic Church abuse scandal include a summer 1995 evaluation from the Southdown treatment center in Ontario, Canada, a facility where now-defrocked pedophile John J. Geoghan was also shipped by the church.

The Southdown report states that Mahan's ``behavior has been aggressive and intrusive and in some instances predatory.'' Therapist Michael John Sy wrote Mahan acknowledged his ``high risk for re-offending'' against children.

But more damning information is contained in a September 1995 letter, also released yesterday, in which the Rev. Brian M. Flatley, then a top archdiocesan official handling sexual abuse matters, argued that Mahan should be dismissed from the priesthood. There had been eight sexual misconduct allegations against Mahan, ``a number of them involving more than one child,'' Flatley wrote.

Flatley cites an incendiary series of evaluations from St. Luke covering Mahan's two separate visits there - one in 1994, a second that spanned late 1994 and early 1995 - that made clear he was a predator.

Upon being discharged after his first 1994 visit, Flatley wrote, Mahan ``immediately lapsed into his pattern of predatory behavior.''

A therapist there concluded ``there was a real question about Father Mahan's ability to tell the truth,'' Flatey's letter states.

After Mahan was sent back to St. Luke for a second time, Flatley wrote, Mahan's therapist telephoned to say he was recommending the priest leave the facility.

``It was his judgment that Father Mahan was not able to be helped at St. Luke Institute and perhaps not anywhere,'' Flatley wrote in a letter to Rev. Richard G. Lennon, one of Bernard Cardinal Law's top aides. The therapist ``is convinced that Father Mahan is exhibiting the symptoms of a sociopath,'' Flatley continued. ``He is a dangerous person. He is a threat to adolescent males.''

In addition to being a chronic liar in therapy - ``he has a lapse of memory whenever there is a victim involved'' - Mahan also misled therapists by saying he had stopped drinking when in fact he had not, Flatley wrote.

At the very time church officials were exchanging the damning assessments, they stood by as Mahan ended his priestly career and moved unfettered to Marblehead.

Mahan later relocated to Arlington, Va., where he worked at a Radio Shack near two elementary schools until earlier this year.

Repeated efforts by the Herald to reach Mahan, including visiting his Virginia apartment building in March, were unsuccessful.

His lawyer, Martin Cosgrove, had fought to keep the psychiatric data away from Garabedian and other plaintiffs' lawyers. Attorneys for the Boston Herald and other media argued in court that the Mahan papers, like the Geoghan files, should be publicly filed.

Flatley concluded his 1995 letter by writing that Mahan should be allowed to leave the priesthood, lest he ``be a source of scandal to the people.'' Garabedian's plaintiffs, including William and Paul Oberle of Boston, allege they were abused by Mahan between 1969 and 1982 at St. Ann's in Dorchester and St. Joseph's in Needham.


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: catholic
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140141-142 next last
To: Matchett-PI
STOP! What is your point? Nobody has time to read all of your lengthy posts.
121 posted on 05/17/2002 2:54:49 PM PDT by Dr. Scarpetta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Scarpetta; Matchett-PI
Growing up in the Northeast, I never encountered this kind of mind-numbing obsession with attacking Catholicism until I was in the Army. One has to be pretty insecure in one's faith to have to bolster it by attacking someone else's. JMO.
122 posted on 05/17/2002 2:54:49 PM PDT by eastsider
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: Matchett-PI
I think the links you have provided are sufficient. You may want to slow down on the posting of each one individually except for specific discussion of that reason. They are spamming the thread.
123 posted on 05/17/2002 2:56:41 PM PDT by Admin Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: CatoRenasci
"The question you don't seem to want to get to is whether the very docrine that the Church is infallible on matters of faith and morals is a doctrine introduced for the convenience of a corrupt hierarchy."

Con't... from #119:

Ten Reasons Why Christians And Catholics Do Not Agree by Dr. Robert A. Morey

5- Statues

C.P. "Sacred images in our churches and homes are intended to awaken and nourish our faith in the mystery of Christ. Through the icon of Christ and his works of salvation, it is he whom we adore. Through sacred images of the holy mother of God, of the angels and of the saints, we venerate the persons represented." p.307,#1192

B.P. "Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth, Thou shall not bow down thyself to them...” Exodus 20:4,5

"Neither shall thou set thee up any image which the LORD thy God hateth.” Deuteronomy 16:22

"But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater... with such an one do not eat.” 1 Corinthians 5:11

“Do I mean then that a sacrifice offered to an idol is anything, or that an idol is anything? No, but the sacrifices of pagans are offered to demons, not to God, and I do not want you to be participants with demons.” 1 Cor. 10:19-20

"For this ye know, that no whore monger, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.” Ephesians 5:5

Remarks:

Idolatry is demonology in God's eyes, plain and simple. Yet, some Catholics suggest that God himself allowed images of cherubim to be placed at the ark of the covenant and the solomonic temple without this being considered idolatry. (c.f. Ex. 25:1-22; 1 Kg. 6:23-38) Unfortunately for those who expound such arguments, whereas God commissioned both Moses and Solomon to make such images, God has never commissioned the church to design any image whatsoever. Furthermore, unlike the Catholic church, the Jews never bowed down in homage to these images.

Finally, at one point Roman tradition itself was against idols or image worship. At the Council of Frankfurt we read,

“It is not to be found in any of the patriarchs, and prophets or fathers, to worship images, but the pictures cry out to worship God, and Him alone to adore and glorify, and the Fathers of the primitive church did forbid the worshipping of images as it appears by Epiphanius and Augustine, who reckon the worshippers of images amongst Sidonians and Carcration heretics.”

Reason #6- Confessing Sins to a Priest Con't ... to next post.

124 posted on 05/17/2002 2:56:48 PM PDT by Matchett-PI
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: Admin Moderator
You got it!
125 posted on 05/17/2002 2:57:59 PM PDT by Matchett-PI
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: Admin Moderator
Thank you.
126 posted on 05/17/2002 3:01:02 PM PDT by eastsider
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: yendu bwam
That was an insightful answer and I thank you for it. Much to runimate on there.

some are actually actively encouraging kids to engage in homosexual sex.

Apart from those few, predatory priests, nothing like this is being encouraged in any catholic group I've encountered. Catholic groups like Dignity (which isn't approved) - and maybe I've got the wrong label - there are two homosexual groups, one promoting chastity and one promoting acceptance of the active homosexual lifestyle.

What is cradle Catholic family life like? My family ties are protestant and although there weren't many brothers, there were definitely some good role models. I don't know of any homosexuality in my protestant contacts.

In my recent family tree, there are several males who never married. If they were homosexual, they were probably closeted.

127 posted on 05/17/2002 3:04:17 PM PDT by Aliska
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: ArrogantBustard
I have a copy and have read "Ungodly Rage", but it's been awhile so I can't remember any details.

Chalking it off to demonic activity might be too simplistic but you have a point. If you have any kind of grounding in solid Christian faith, even non-Catholic, these people are pretty easy to spot.

I was such an arch-conservative that I'm kind of in a transition to a more realistic, possibly liberal view, of some things that have been considered traditional in the church. It came from reading about many of the saints who today would probably be considered suffering from various forms of mental illness. From that I concluded that the oppression of women, living in convents, the times, contributed to pathology. That's not to say that they were not heroic in their suffering, but hardly what a modern person would want to model their spiritual life after.

128 posted on 05/17/2002 3:10:36 PM PDT by Aliska
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

Comment #129 Removed by Moderator

Comment #130 Removed by Moderator

Comment #131 Removed by Moderator

Comment #132 Removed by Moderator

To: Matchett-PI
There are quite a number of theological differences between Catholics and Protestants. But we should try to remember that there is by far much more in common than not.
133 posted on 05/17/2002 5:08:54 PM PDT by yendu bwam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: AKA Elena
You were blessed with excellent, objective teachers. In the Diocese of Brooklyn, NY, Church History was sanitized for us, lest we take scandal from it.

To counteract this narrow viewpoint, as a teen, I got myself a copy of the Index of Forbidden Books, and made it a point to read all of them. ;)

134 posted on 05/17/2002 5:54:17 PM PDT by Palladin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: CatoRenasci
Ah, but what is the Church? Is it the communion of all believers? Or, is it the institutional Church. That we are all sinners is no excuse for tolerating rampant corruption and moral putrescence in the institutional Church. If the institutional Church cannot cleanse itself, then perhaps the Church Universal should not be held to reside in the institutional Church. These are not easy questions, and there are no easy answers, just as there were no easy answers during the Reformation.

I'm beginning to think some questions don't have answers. I know I'll get blasted for this and I don't mean to be difficult but just exactly who and what is the whore of babylon? I have read protestant and catholic references about it. The catholics get all upset, but the protestants do have some valid charges imo. The problem with the protestants is that they don't have a valid Eucharist as far as I know and they are wrong on some other points.

How can anyone in good conscience remain in a church which seems to have perversions, mafia elements, corruption, luxurious living at the expense of whomever . . .

The really nice holy people are the ones who work their tails off in the belief that they are truly serving God. They are the ones who make the church appear holy.

135 posted on 05/17/2002 6:00:49 PM PDT by Aliska
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Aliska
The Whore of Babylon reference comes from the 17th Chapter of Revelation in which an angel shows St. John the Divine the "judgement of the great whore that sitteth upon many waters .... upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH..." with all sorts of further nastiness about her drenched with the "blood of the saints and the blood of the martyrs of Jesus" ... and allusions to the seven hills of Rome and ending "And the woman which thou sawest is that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth." (from the King James Bible)-- at that time, Rome.

Protestants, following Luther, have traditionally identified the Pope (whom they refer to often as Bishop of Rome) as the Whore of Babylon, representing corruption of the Church Universal. Hence, Roman Catholics usually react very strongly to references to the Whore of Babylon.

136 posted on 05/17/2002 6:50:45 PM PDT by CatoRenasci
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

To: Aliska
How can anyone in good conscience remain in a church which seems to have perversions, mafia elements, corruption, luxurious living at the expense of whomever . .

That sentiment pretty much includes all churches.

137 posted on 05/17/2002 6:58:35 PM PDT by sinkspur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Scarpetta
Some of them (high officials like bishops and cardinals) have risen because they "could be trusted", i.e. they were known to be perverted themselves, thus were "safe" to be advanced. IMO people subjected to the "attentions" of sodomites get a whole new understaning of "sexual harassment." Cronyism on steroids for those who submit.
138 posted on 05/17/2002 7:30:27 PM PDT by 185JHP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: medlarebil
A very thoughtful and informed post. Of course, you will be savaged by the "true believers" and those who cringe in fear of an afterlife and are sadistic enough to hope that non believers will suffer eternal torment. Such bitterness, such hostility. So much for Christian charity and forbearance.
139 posted on 05/17/2002 7:39:13 PM PDT by Barset
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: CatoRenasci
Protestants, following Luther, have traditionally identified the Pope (whom they refer to often as Bishop of Rome) as the Whore of Babylon, representing corruption of the Church Universal. Hence, Roman Catholics usually react very strongly to references to the Whore of Babylon.

A few days ago I read, reread and reread that passage. I know they react strongly and I don't blame them for that. It's usually thrown at them as a taunt. But if you sit back and think about it, the shoe seems to fit in some ways.

There is nothing in there to refer to any false teaching; it seems to refer to luxury, arrogance, well, that's enough. It also refers to blasphemy and I don't see anything that really fits there.

The footnote in my catholic bible refers to it as in the past as Babylon-Rome.

Catholics have noted correctly that once a group breaks away, they divide and subdivide into innumerable sects. I look around and I don't see any church I would want to align with. Either they have the incorrect teaching about the Eucharist, which I believe Catholics have right if ancient documents on the internet are authentic, or they are too permissive about sexual morality (marriage and divorce).

There are some things that the Catholic church has retained that totally square with scripture while those who claim to be following scripture, ignore the parts they don't like or can't interpret correctly.

If you write up something that expresses your views more fully, I would be interested in reading it. Just between you and me, I look at the Eastern Orthodox and wonder if they might have something there. I'm getting too old to make any more big changes and I think if I were Eastern, I wouldn't be very comfortable with their over-ritualizing everything just like the Catholic church has tended to do.

140 posted on 05/17/2002 7:39:33 PM PDT by Aliska
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140141-142 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson