In this Sept. 23, 2015, file photo, Pope Francis reaches out to hug Cardinal Archbishop emeritus Theodore McCarrick after the Midday Prayer of the Divine with more than 300 U.S. bishops at the Cathedral of St. Matthew the Apostle in Washington. Seton Hall University has begun an investigation into potential sexual abuse at two seminaries it hosts after misconduct allegations against McCarrick and other priests. (Jonathan Newton/The Washington Post via AP, Pool, File)

Letter: Vatican knew about disgraced archbishop's behavior

DUBLIN (AP) — The Vatican's retired ambassador to the United States accused senior Vatican officials of knowing as early as 2000 that the disgraced former archbishop of Washington, Theodore McCarrick, regularly invited seminarians into his bed but was made a cardinal regardless.

The letter, an extraordinary allegation from a onetime Holy See diplomat, also accuses Pope Francis of knowing about McCarrick's behavior in 2013 but rehabilitating him — a claim of cover-up against the pontiff himself.

The National Catholic Register and another conservative site, LifeSiteNews, published the letter attributed to Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò on Sunday (Aug. 26) as the pope wrapped up a two-day visit to Ireland dominated by the clerical sex abuse scandal.

Viganò, 77, a conservative whose hard-line anti-gay views are well-known, urged the reformist pope to resign over the issue and what he called the "conspiracy of silence" about McCarrick. He and the pope have long been on opposite ideological sides, with the pope more a pastor and Viganò more a cultural warrior.

The Vatican did not immediately comment. The document's authenticity was confirmed to The Associated Press by an Italian journalist, Marco Tosatti, who said he was with Viganò when the archbishop wrote it Wednesday.

"He was very emotional and upset at the end the effort," Tosatti told AP, adding that Viganò left Tosatti's home afterward without saying where he was going.

In the letter, Viganò accused the former Vatican secretaries of state under the previous two popes of ignoring detailed denunciations against McCarrick for years. He said Pope Benedict XVI eventually sanctioned McCarrick in 2009 or 2010 to a lifetime of penance and prayer.

Francis accepted McCarrick's resignation as cardinal last month, after a U.S. church investigation determined that an accusation he had sexually abused a minor was credible.

Since then, another man has come forward to say McCarrick began molesting him starting when he was 11, and several former seminarians have said McCarrick abused and harassed them when they were in seminary. The accusations have created a crisis of confidence in the U.S. hierarchy, because it was apparently an open secret that McCarrick regularly invited seminarians to his New Jersey beach house, and into his bed.

Coupled with the devastating allegations of sex abuse and cover-up in a recent Pennsylvania grand jury report — which found that 300 priests had abused more than 1,000 children over 70 years in six dioceses — the scandal has led to calls for heads to roll and for a full Vatican investigation into who knew what and when about McCarrick.

Viganò apparently sought to answer some of those questions. His letter identifies by name the Vatican cardinals and archbishops who were informed about the McCarrick affair, an unthinkable expose for a Vatican diplomat to make. He said documents backing up his version of events are in Vatican archives.

The Vatican's ambassador to the U.S. from 2011 to 2016, Viganò said his two immediate predecessors "did not fail" to inform the Holy See about accusations against McCarrick, starting in 2000.

He said Francis asked him about McCarrick when they met on June 23, 2013, at the Vatican's Santa Marta hotel where the pope lives, three months after Francis was elected pope.

Viganò wrote that he told Francis: "Holy Father, I don't know if you know Cardinal McCarrick, but if you ask the Congregation of Bishops, there is a dossier this thick about him. He corrupted generations of seminarians and priests, and Pope Benedict ordered him to withdraw to a life of prayer and penance."

Soon thereafter, Viganò wrote, he was surprised to find that McCarrick had started traveling on missions on behalf of the church, including to China. McCarrick was also one of the Vatican's intermediaries in the U.S.-Cuba talks in 2014.

Viganò's claim that McCarrick had been ordered by Benedict to stay out of public ministry and retire to a lifetime of prayer is somewhat disputed, given that McCarrick enjoyed a fairly public retirement. Viganò provides no evidence that such sanctions were imposed by Benedict in any official capacity, saying only that he was told they were.

The letter also contains a lengthy diatribe about homosexuals and liberals in the Catholic church. It often reads like an ideological manifesto, naming all of Francis' known supporters in the U.S. hierarchy as being complicit in a cover-up of McCarrick's misdeeds.

"Now that the corruption has reached the very top of the church's hierarchy, my conscience dictates that I reveal those truths regarding the heart-breaking case of the archbishop emeritus of Washington," Viganò wrote.

Viganò, however, also has had his own problems with allegations of cover-up, and he and Francis had a major dust-up during Francis' 2015 visit to the U.S., which Viganò organized.

In that incident, a leading U.S. opponent of gay marriage, Kim Davis, was among those invited to meet with the pope at Viganò's Washington residence. Francis was so enraged that Davis' supporters had leaked word of the meeting that the Vatican subsequently insisted he only held one private audience while there: with one of his former students, a gay man and his partner.

The cover-up accusation, which Viganò denied, concerned allegations that he tried to quash an investigation into the former archbishop of St. Paul-Minneapolis, Minn., John Nienstedt, who was accused of misconduct with adult seminarians.

In 2016, the National Catholic Reporter said Viganò allegedly ordered the investigation wrapped up and a piece of evidence destroyed. The report cited a 2014 memo from a diocesan official that was unsealed after the conclusion of a criminal investigation into the archdiocese. No charges were filed.

In a statement provided to the AP Sunday about the Nienstedt case, Viganò said a Vatican investigation of the allegation found no wrongdoing on his part.

He said the allegation that he destroyed evidence was false and that his efforts to have the archdiocese correct the record have been met with silence.

Nienstedt was forced to resign in 2015 over complaints about his handling of sex abuse cases.

Viganò's name also made headlines during the 2012 "Vatileaks" scandal, when some of his letters were published. In them, he begged not to be transferred to the Vatican Embassy in Washington from the administration of the Vatican City State.

He claimed he was being punished for having exposed corruption in the Vatican. The letters showed a clash with Benedict's No. 2, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, who is also a target of Viganò's McCarrick missive.


  1. Can a Church hierarchy that everyday looks more and more like a malevolent version of the Keystone Kops really solve anything?

  2. If Vigano had evidence of McCarrick’s misdeeds prior to Pope Francis’ election and alerted Pope Benedict, why didn’t he call on Pope Benedict to resign after Benedict failed to act? Since he himself is credibly accused of putting the kibosh on the investigation into the wrongdoings of archconservative Minneapolis archbishop John Nienstedt this is looking more and more like he has a conservative ax to grind against Pope Francis than anything else. His smug accusations ring hollow since he could have sounded the alarm about McCarrick at least five years ago but for whatever reason chose not to.

  3. I’m puzzled: can someone remind me who appointed McCarrick archbishop of D.C. and made him a cardinal? Was it Francis?

    If my memory serves me correctly, a different pope — perhaps the one who protected Marcial Macie made McCarrick an archbishop and a cardinal? That pope was the same now-canonized pope who was pope in 2000 when Fr. Boniface Ramsey sent a letter to the Vatican before that pope made McCarrick a cardinal, blowing the whistle on McCarrick.

    Francis is somehow now responsible for all of this, for Saint John Paul the Great elevating McCarrick to the status of cardinal AFTER the Vatican had been informed about who McCarrick was and what McCarrick was doing?

    Do the people peddling this lie imagine we’re all stupid enough to swallow it?

    Was it Francis who protected the notorious child rapist Marcial Maciel? Or was it Saint John Paul the Great, whose papacy constantly attacked LGBTQ people and singled out gay priests as the source of the abuse problem — even as that saint was making McCarrick a cardinal and shielding Maciel?

    Vigano’s attack on Francis is accompanied by a vicious anti-LGBTQ screed that gives away his game. He’s the man who set up the meeting between Francis and Kim Davis, and who has consistently supported the annual anti-LGBTQ marches of the Catholic hate group National Organization for Marriage. Vigano et al. are engaging in the same kind of scare tactics and attempts to sow hatred in society in which Trump and his followers engage. They’re classical fascist tactics, and are being used in many places to enrage people vs. immigrants, LGBTQ folks, etc.

    This feeding of social hatreds and attempts to make vulnerable minority groups even more vulnerable are deeply reprehensible on the part of people who claim to follow Jesus Christ.

  4. Even predatory priests need a patron saint. And who is more qualified that Saint John Paul II the Great, the Patron Saint of Predatory Priests.

  5. They have a better chance than you do of solving anything, unfailinglyflummoxed.

  6. I’m looking for the patron saint of folks who use vicious ad hominem attacks to divert meaningful discussion of religious issues — and who accompany those vicious ad hominem attacks with brazen lies. Because, lacking integrity and intelligence, all they have going for them are vicious, immature personal attacks against their perceived enemies ,and lies….

    I suspect that St. Josemaría Escrivá, the manly man founder of Opus Dei, might fit the bill nicely — given the tactics used by some of his followers to promote the “kingdom of ‘God.'”

  7. These are unholy men who have betrayed Christ, the church and the faithful. They have forgotten that they are to serve the church and the faithful; yet they only served their perverted selves and then covered it up.
    Pray for the church and for holy priests.

  8. No, you’re not puzzled. You’re dissembling.

    You’re quite aware that the Holy Father didn’t know Theodore McCarrick from Bugsy Siegel. McCarrick was processed, packaged, and peddled like goods in a supermarket by the interlocking cartel in the USCCB by the likes of Mahony, Bernardin, and Weakland over his career.

    “… Fr. Boniface Ramsey sent a letter to the Vatican before that pope made McCarrick a cardinal, blowing the whistle on McCarrick.” which, like Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger’s letter to McCarrick in 2004 about politicians supporting abortion which McCarrick buried, was buried by the usual phalanx of bureacrats surrounding the Holy Father.

    “Do the people peddling this lie imagine we’re all stupid enough to swallow it?”

    Every time I read your stuff that is exactly what goes through my mind.

    “… Saint John Paul the Great, whose papacy constantly attacked LGBTQ people …” or more accurately emphasized Catholic teaching.

    Yes, I am sure after all the grooming and propagandizing it is quite unsettling to have the entire mess point towards the wisdom of not ordaining homosexuals, but that’s what it does.

    And it is not anyone’s fault but the people who perpetrated it, all of whom were heterodox in both belief and action.

  9. I will bet a bishop’s mitre that you won’t have to look too hard to find a whole lot of candidates.

  10. No, some are close at hand, I suspect, always — buzzing like little gnats who imagine they are big, manly gnats in these RNS discussions. It’s a certain kind of personality disorder (and I wonder what model of holiness produces or props it up?) — this belief that we make ourselves into big manly men by belittling and attacking others, and this belief that such activity is holy.

    It’s like being forever stuck in 7th grade, for some of these little buzzing gnats.

  11. It’s amazing the number of times you used the adjective “manly” when describing those you assess negatively:

    “who imagine they are big, manly gnats”

    It’s not even Freudian, it’s blatant.

  12. Awwwww…

    Vigano is just upset becuase he got canned.

  13. Holy priests?

    holy mackerel! You underlined the problem exactly.

  14. Do the people peddling this think we’re stupid? Of course they do. Vigano is just confirming what I have said many times on these very pages. As much as they want to blame this little problem of
    N gay men, it is really a catholic problem.

    Here comes The Mouth of Bob to tell us exactly how stupid we are. And I didn’t even need to see his name before knowing he would be here.

    Thanks, Bob.

  15. Ya think? 🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔😬😬😬😬😬😉😉😉😉😉

  16. And on cue comes the Mouth of Ben to inform us about Catholicism, sexual perversion, and morality.

  17. Pope Francis is not the problem. Most priests and bishops are good people. Hierarchy is not the problem. Homosexuality is not the problem. Celibacy is not the problem. Clericalism is just one symptom of the problem. Ecclesiastical PATRIARCHY is the problem!

    The road to hell is paved with good intentions, and we keep traveling on that road as long as the church hierarchy is an ecclesiastical patriarchy.

    The sexual abuse crisis is a symptom of gender imbalance and the consequent abuse of power rooted in original sin (Genesis 3:16). Evidence is mounting that gender imbalance in the church hierarchy exacerbates the abuse of power, including sexual abuse of minors and women.

    The only way to mitigate this tragedy is to discard the patriarchal “binary” as enshrined in the code of canon law (#1024) and ordain women to the priesthood and the episcopate. Contrary to what the Vatican has been saying for decades, there is no dogmatic impediment.

    For the redemption, and the sacramental economy, the masculinity of Jesus is as incidental as the color of his eyes. Jesus is the bread of life, not the male of life. What matters is that God became flesh, not male. The substance of the Eucharist is flesh, not accidentals such as XX or XY chromosomes.

    Before the redemption, under the Old Law, it made sense for Jesus to call 12 males to represent the patriarchs of the 12 tribes of Israel. After the redemption, under the New Law, it no longer makes sense because male sacrifice is no better than female sacrifice. Would Jesus today call 12 males to represent the patriarchs of the 12 tribes of Israel?

    The Catechism of the Catholic Church, section 1577, is a doctrinal fabrication to rationalize the patriarchal priesthood and defend what is no longer defensible. Section 1598 declares that the exclusively male priesthood is a choice (first sentence, note the word “only”) and who can make the choice (second sentence, note the word “alone”).

    Patriarchy is a disordered attachment to the supremacy of masculinity. If the entire ecclesiastical patriarchy re signs, and is replaced by another ecclesiastical patriarchy, in a few years we are going to be back to the same mess.

    As long as this systemic issue is not resolved, any institutional pretension of reform is an exercise in futility. It is time for the Vatican to stop messing around and allow Christ to call women to the priesthood and the episcopate. It is time for the Vatican to discard the patriarchal scaffolding that is obscuring the Catholic faith!

  18. I think Cardinal Burke was the first prominent member of the hierarchy to advocate some years back the importance of being “manly”. Maybe the dubia folk will proclaim Burke pope. It’s been a long time since the Church has had competing papacies. It would be a great strategy to distract attention from the cover-up disaster.

  19. Well, dear, I keep trying to inform you, but you refuse to listen, claiming you have refuted what I have to say simply by saying “you’re a big poopy head who disagrees with the Sainted Bobbob.”

    BTW, I do love your other identity. He says what you would never say on These Very Pages last someome figure out what’s really going on with you.

  20. It isn’t just one thing. It’s a lot of things.

  21. Well, sport, you couldn’t inform someone of the time of day in the town square at high noon with the bells ringing.

    I have no other “other identity”.

    And as to “a big poopy head”, well …. some things never change, and stupid never gets smart.

  22. Re: “Since he himself is credibly accused of putting the kibosh on the investigation into the wrongdoings of archconservative Minneapolis archbishop John Nienstedt this is looking more and more like a sour grapes ax to grind against Pope Francis than a genuine call to action.” 

    Exactly what came to my mind, when I saw it was Viganò calling for Francis’s resignation. It may also be a kind of deflection, since the various functionaries’ inaction over the years concerning McCarrick might cause his own association with Nienstedt — and maybe others, for all anyone knows — to get a second look. 

  23. In the interests of enlightenment, rather than snark, I would suggest you find Mark’s article and comments on clericalism at “Catholic and Enjoying It”. It adds a lot to this conversation.

  24. I am enlightened enough.
    You say clericalism.
    I say homosexuality and pedophilia.
    Either way, they betrayed Christ and the church.
    Had they stuck to their vows, focused on the faithful and their souls; and avoided their own perverted, fleshly desires – none of this would have occurred.

  25. “The letter also contains a lengthy diatribe about homosexuals and liberals in the Catholic church. ”

    Dead giveaway there. It was not about assigning blame. It was about avoiding it.

  26. Being manly seems to cause you and some others big problems.

  27. Thank you for the the atheistic uber-liberal AFL-CIO take on the internal matters of the Catholic Church.

    It will get all the attention it deserves.

  28. The text seems to support the conclusion that Benedict acted.

    I assume that’s why.

  29. It was probably a fluke. Maybe he said it for the halibut.

  30. Personally speaking, manliness causes me no such problems. Quite the contrary.

  31. Something fishy in that remark. I barracuda understood it.

  32. And I say perverted people who have never dealt with their sexuality, and a church hirarchythat has covered it up for centuries.

    But thanks for letting me know you have no interest in a complete picture.

  33. Acted? As in, sanctionioning McCarrick to a lifetime of penance and prayer? Yes, I’m sure that was terribly effective. Since this “action” apparently happened 3-4 years before Francis arrived on the scene, one is left wondering why Pope Benedict failed to “act” further, as in contacting appropriate local authorities and stripping McCarrick of his episcopal ring, if not his holy orders? If that “dossier this thick” about McCarrick Viganò claimed to have in his possession the instant Francis was installed as pope, why didn’t HE bring it to the attention of a wider audience himself if his conservative confederate Ratzinger failed to do so? None of it adds up.

  34. It will get all the attention it deserves.


    As some say when they shower with the boys.

  35. It’s hilarious to hear those singling out Francis for attacks in this débacle claim that Benedict “acted” in McCarrick’s case. Is this what they mean by Benedict “acting,” I wonder:

    McCarrick, for example, was seen celebrating numerous public Masses throughout Benedict’s papacy and continued traveling around the world until the announcement in June that the Vatican had ordered his removal from ministry over an accusation of abuse that had been deemed credible.

    Benedict also did not hesitate to act publicly when another cardinal, Scotland’s Keith O’Brien, was accused of improper sexual relationships. In that case, Benedict accepted O’Brien’s resignation and his decision not to attend the 2013 conclave that elected Francis.

    ~ Joshua McElwee,

    Or do they mean this when they say that Benedict “acted” in McCarrick’s case?”

    Vigano’s claim that McCarrick had been ordered by Benedict to stay out of public ministry and retire to a lifetime of prayer is somewhat disputed, given that McCarrick enjoyed a fairly public retirement. Vigano provides no evidence that such sanctions were imposed by Benedict in any official capacity, saying only that he was told they were.

    The letter also contains a lengthy diatribe about homosexuals and liberals in the Catholic church. It often reads like an ideological manifesto, naming all of Francis’ known supporters in the U.S. hierarchy as being complicit in a cover-up of McCarrick’s misdeeds.

    ~ Nicole Winfield,

    There’s also this oh-so-inconvenient set of facts for those trying to pin everything about the abuse cover-up on Francis, with allegations he has caved in to a gay agenda (this is from McElwee’s article linked above):

    Vigano himself has also been accused of covering up sexual misconduct.

    Three months after his departure from Washington, a 2014 memo he had written ordering the quashing of an investigation into alleged homosexual activity on the part of now former St. Paul-Minneapolis Archbishop John Nienstedt was made public at the conclusion of a criminal investigation.

    Vigano had also ordered the destruction of a piece of evidence. Nienstedt resigned from his post in 2015.

  36. Why Bobbie — may I call you Bobbie? — since you apparently need reassurance, I have no doubt in the world that you’re a very manly man. It grieves me that you should have thought otherwise. You’ve done so much to reassure so many of us for years of your preeminent manly-manliness — and in my experience, men who feel the need to do that always turn out to be just as manly as they imagine they are.

  37. Well, sport

    Oh, Bob, you coquettish thing, you.

  38. “Saint” John Paul the Great Enabler of Clerical Sexual Abuse of Children, Episcopal Malfeasance, and Papal Indifference to All the Aforementioned — Pray for Us.

    “Saint”, my @$$.

  39. In my Catholic high school years, the two blatantly gay boys in the class were actively recruited for the priesthood, by the principal / priest. One joined. The argument apparently was that they would find a career track appropriate to their circumstances, let’s call it. This is a common attitude, of “rising above” through faith. That either works, or it doesn’t. Arguing that it should always work, but it’s unresonable to assume it could work specifically with gays, may play into some fantasy about appropriate Constitutive Others, but to the rational person it argues directly against the initial premise, that faith can have any sort of transformative or even moderating effect on one’s life.

    If there are “phalanx of bureacrats [sic]” that have subsumed the authority and leadership of the RCC this isn’t an excuse or even plausible deniability, it is a sign of a greater failing than even the original failure to act. Incompetence is not an excuse in government, and neither is it here, because this *is* government. After countless renditions of this same game of “hide the perverts” have previously come to light and become critical to the perceived authority and responsibility of the RCC from top to bottom, that the hierarchy either turned a blind eye, were conveniently misinformed, or deliberately obscured these rapes. abuses and molestations matters not a whit. They’re all in the same boat.

  40. It was assigning blame – to the homosexuals and pedophiles and their masters who covered it up.

  41. Religious clerics vow. Secular clerics promise.

  42. You’d think there would be a strict hiring policy. It’s time “to step up our already Extreme Vetting Program,” “Being politically correct is fine, but not for this!” /s

  43. And then there’s Michael Sean Winters on how Benedict “acted” and Francis did not — it sounds as if Winters has been reading RNS threads with his scathing analysis of the kind of obsession that makes some people push wild claims about homosexuality, about what they imagine other folks are doing in their bedrooms, about how one has to wonder if they’re really speaking out of their own unacknowledged psychodramas and self-hatred as they attack LGBTQ folks constantly. Winters writes,

    The central focus of this testimony is the claim that Benedict issued sanctions against McCarrick: “the Cardinal was to leave the seminary where he was living, he was forbidden to celebrate [Mass] in public, to participate in public meetings, to give lectures, to travel, with the obligation of dedicating himself to a life of prayer and penance,” Vigano writes.

    During the Benedict papacy, with my own eyes I witnessed McCarrick celebrate Mass in public, participate in meetings, travel, etc. More importantly, so did Pope Benedict! If Benedict imposed these penalties, he certainly did not apply them. He continued to receive McCarrick with the rest of the Papal Foundation, continued to allow him to celebrate Mass publicly at the Vatican, even concelebrating with Benedict at events like consistories. (See photo above taken in 2010.) But, as Vigano tell is, it is all Pope Francis’ fault.

    Vigano is more than a little obsessed with homosexuality and names prelates whom he accuses of supporting efforts at “subverting Catholic doctrine on homosexuality.” Filmmaker Stone was obsessed with the grassy knoll. Back in my seminary days, when one of the seminarians would give evidence of this kind of obsession, making wild claims about homosexuality, its sources and its effects, ignoring the emerging scientific and psychological data, the rest of us would look at each other and someone would say, “I would like to take a look at her dance card.”

    Something similar is playing out all this summer. Bishops and archbishops speak about gay people with such hatred, you ask yourself how a minister of the Gospel could speak so nastily about other human beings and then it hits you: They are not speaking about other human beings. and you’ve got to wonder if what you are watching is self-hatred unfolding.

  44. Hitting on the other posters is in poor taste.

  45. Apparently you have never run into Luis Gutierrez before.

    To him it is one thing and has been for a number of years in dozens of fora.

  46. “Their masters” being the entire church hierarchy going all the way to the Vatican, for centuries. Something which you not only ignore, but let off the hook. All to engage in the usual gay-baiting bigoted nonsense.

  47. Citing Nicole Winfield, an AP hack who sources her stories from whoever is trying to get free publicity or stab someone in back at the moment, is really an act of desperation.

    In any case, we can be glad Theodore McCarrick was exposed for exposing, just as we’re glad Rembert Weakland is gone, Daniel L. Ryan resigned, Patrick Ziemann resigned, Anthony O’Connell resigned, J. Kendrick Williams resigned, and J. Keith Symons resigned.

    Going forward it makes a great deal of sense to ensure the Church’s constant and current prohibition against ordaining homosexuals is fully implemented and enforced.

  48. More desperation: Michael Sean Winters.

    Hesus Marimba, who next?

  49. And have nothing to support it.

    But we do know you consider the Catholic Church your enemy, Christians in general your enemies, are an atheist, and until the last revision of the DSM fell into one of its categories.

    That seems to indicate you will be a resource for anyone interested in “a complete picture”.

  50. In any case, when it is brought to your attention, cease.

  51. Although I’m tempted to dismiss Viganò’s letter, I don’t think we can do so without violating our own demands for transparency. I think Abp. Viganò’s allegations merit investigation and, if they are corroborated, Pope Francis should resign. If the results show he is not telling the truth, Viganò should be dismissed from the clerical state. This is not the time for either false allegations or facile denials.

    In either case, the rumors current in Rome that Francis is not in charge of his own shop appear to be vindicated.

  52. This situation has been reported by the UK based Freethinker website like this:

    [This] “explosive” accusation was made in the US at the weekend by Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, 77.

    In an statement Viganò, who served as apostolic nuncio in Washington DC from 2011-2016, said that Pope Francis knew about strict canonical sanctions imposed on McCarrick by Pope Benedict XVI but chose to repeal them.

    Viganò says he personally spoke with Francis about the gravity of McCarrick’s abuse soon after his election in 2013. But he says that Francis “continued to cover him” .

    Worse still, he made McCarrick “his trusted counselor” who helped him to appoint a number of bishops in the US.

    Viganò said his “conscience dictates” that the truth be known because:

    “The corruption has reached the very top of the Church’s hierarchy.”

    He ended his testimony by calling on Pope Francis and all of those implicated in the cover up of McCarrick’s abuse to quit.

    In comments to LifeSiteNews on August 25, Viganò said:

    “The main reason why I am revealing this news now is because of the tragic situation of the Church, which can be repaired only by the full truth, just as she has been gravely injured by the abuses and cover-ups. I do this to stop the suffering of the victims and to prevent new victims, and to protect the Church: only the truth can make her free.”

    Viganò said the second reason he chose to write his testimony is:

    “To discharge my conscience before God of my responsibilities as bishop of the universal Church. I am an old man and I want to present myself to God with clean conscience.”

    …..Viganò is quoted as saying:

    “He [Pope Francis] knew from at least June 23, 2013 that McCarrick was a serial predator. He knew that he was a corrupt man, he covered for him to the bitter end. It was only when he was forced by the report of the abuse of a minor, again on the basis of media attention, that he took action [regarding McCarrick] to save his image in the media.”

    Also the National Catholic Register:
    and Lifesite News:

    Obviously these are explosive allegations. Monica DeAngelis is right in drawing attention to them here.

  53. From the standpoint of Vigano and his allies, the timing (almost certainly planned in advance) of the letter’s publication is perfect, in terms of the maximum disruption of Francis attempts to deal with the cover-up disaster. As things evolve (or devolve) from here, we may be witnesses to a classic Vatican knife fight, the kind that up to now has taken place behind closed doors.

  54. Whaddaboutism doesn’t cut it.
    Let’s talk about the perpetrators in the here and now.

  55. I can’t help it if you are still sore that I call you out on a frequent mode of bullcrap you like to sling.

    Where is the whataboutism in going after the most culpable culprits? Not the gay baiting scapegoating nonsense you employ to avoid the issue. (and promote further abuse and cover-ups)

    But the system and culture of the church where it acts as if it is above all laws. Where it protects its miscreants by breaking laws and obstructing restitution to those harmed. Something you haven’t said a peep about. Because it doesn’t work well with actually criticizing the church for its wrongdoing and culture of harm. Not the wrongdoing of a fictional cabal you are trying to pretend exists, but the whole damn church.

    You are afraid to talk about the real perpetrators here because you are a lazy bigot going by a conservative religious party. Your posts are useless hateful garbage.

  56. This seems like the reasonable position to take until more information emerges. Take all accusations seriously when it comes to abuse and people who shelter abusers.

  57. I already said; get rid of them all. Sorry that “them” consists of homosexuals and pedophiles; which obviously bothers you.
    Get red of anyone that covered up for them too.
    Again, you’re afraid to place a face with the crime. You’re afraid of what you’ll see.
    Now that the kid is blown off; we’ll see the cabal for what it is.

  58. I knew about McCarrick some 40 yrs ago.

    A priest I know, and first met around 1980 – Fr Larry – was transferred from North Carolina to Central NJ which is where I first met him.

    Some 6 Mo after Larry’s transfer here he told me about McCarrick’s sexual fondness for seminarians, and his inviting them to his home on the Jersey shore.

    Larry heard the story thru the Church grapevine.

    If Larry had heard the story after only 6 Mo, all the hierarchy in NJ knew.

    McCarrick even went so far as to establish an orphanage, for rosy-cheeked boys, near his beach house after he became Bishop of the newly formed Diocese of Metuchen.

    I’ll bet you didn’t hear about that – but I’ll also bet the Vatican knows – and knew.

    To think that this is something the Vatican is only now, after 40 yrs learning about, is laughably-ludicrous.

  59. The Italian press, including papers generally favorable to Francis and others not so much, are suspicious of Viganò’s letter, treating it as the work of a resentful conspiracy theorist with more than one ax to grind. In La Repubblica this morning, Alberto Melloni, professor and an expert on things Roman, writes that “Qualcuno ha fatto di un pollo il Corvo. E nasconde un disegno: saldare i tradizionalisti con la destra religiosa.” (My translation: “Someone is making a crow out of a chicken (mountain out of a mole hill), and concealing his true motive: to forge an alliance between Traditionalists and the religious right.)
    His essay begins “Che un vecchio prelato, furibondo per non avere fatto carriera, covi risentimento verso il Papa è l’abc del cattolicesimo romano.” (That an elderly prelate, enraged at not having been promoted to higher positions, harbors resentment against a pope, these are the ABCs of Catholicism, Roman style.)

    Mariolina Lossa writes in today’s Corriere della Sera: “Viganò ha sempre avuto modalità di denuncia e di «politica» vaticana tutt’altro che «tradizionaliste». Non ci sono colpi segreti, mani che agiscono nell’ombra. Viganò è abituato, alla maniera americana, a diffondere sui mezzi di comunicazione di massa, le sue lettere e i suoi documenti accusatori, con nomi, date e circostanze di riferimento. Punta il dito contro arcivescovi e cardinali a suo dire corrotti ed ha anche partecipato ad incontri pubblici di ultrà cattolici contrari alle aperture di Papa Francesco. Lo fa apertamente, in nome di una «purificazione» della Chiesa ma sembrerebbe che la vera partita in gioco sia tuttavia quella di una sua ascesa all’interno delle gerarchie ecclesiastiche romane.” In brief, she’s treating Viganò as a bitter man because he’s not been promoted and Francis has taken other advice on important issues.

    I’d still like to see an investigation. Too many reports have been dismissed by people who thought they knew better.

  60. The Italian press is the National Enquirer writ large.

    Anyone who tried to blow the whistle over the last half century and is still alive is going to be, and should be, damned upset.

    The clucking and tsk-tsking of the pundits is unseemly.

  61. No Pontiff since at least Pius IX has been in charge of his own shop.

    With 5,500+ bishops worldwide and huge bureaucracies in every country and in the Vatican exerting direct control requires a strong personality and an inherent distrust of the sycophants, neither of which Francis possesses.

  62. I don’t know if you’ve heard, Mr.Lindsey, but you’re pope just recommended that the parents of homosexual children should seek psychiatric care for them!! WHOA!!! 😎😎😎

  63. Tsk, tsk, tsk…Poor Bob.Now that the true nature of the so-called Roman Catholic Church has finally been exposed, I actually feel a little bit sorry for you rank-and-file Catholics.Your emperor has no clothes, people like yourself are stuck in a Stockholm Syndrome pseudo-theological religious system…Where do you go from here, Little Bob? Wake up and smell the Fire-and-Brimstone,my friend. The false, man-centered, bogus religious system called Roman Catholicism is Toast; you’ll never,EVER get out from under this;you’re DONE, and good riddance to the whole childchild-raping lot of you, a putrid, stinking den oUGH!!! 😑😑😑

  64. Hmmmm …. I thought I had blocked you.

    Oh well.

    What’s been exposed is:

    – the sinful nature of mankind

    – the insidious nature and dire effects of trying to “normalize” acts which are intrinsically immoral

    – the fact that good and evil mingle in the church and will until the Second Coming

    – oh, and you’re an anti-Catholic git

    You are blocked now.

  65. Don’t be so quick to judge Ben. I don’t think he sees the Church or Christians in general as his enemy. But ask yourself how you would react if so called christian folk attacked you.

    There is nothing in the past 4 editions of the DSM that would be applicable to Ben–at least not in so far as he has disclosed here.

  66. Ah, but who first introduced the term, Bobbie? I think the lady doth protest too much.

  67. No other identity??? HAHAHAHHAH! Says “Ed Hu” and at least six other names I remember. Either that or you’re a head case that tops Sybil!

  68. Well, among those who used it was Theodore Roosevelt.

    That was in the days when “the manly arts” actually had something to with society, upright behavior, and all that stuff that you and your friends despise.

    It is the same reason why the Romans in describing their enemy Hannibal referred to him as “vir fortis et nobilis”.

    I note you created a new identity this morning on Disqus specifically to let me know your opinion.

  69. No, I am not Ed Hu or six other names you remember.

    And, as your post demonstrates, it is you who appears to be a head case.

  70. No, you lying lazy bigot. You are claiming some fictional big gay cabal is responsible here. In reality it is the longstanding culture of the church doing what it has always done when embarrassed or acted badly. Not just with abuse here, but other misdeeds.

    The reason why apologetic liars like Lifesitenews and The National Catholic Register were so keen for this canned excuse is that it absolves the church heirarchy and typical way of acting by finding scapegoats. Rather than indict the longstanding culture and policies of the church, its pretension of moral authority, and its corrupt ways of acting, you find an “out group” to blame and go about your business. The kind of thing immoral scum do to continue acting immorally.

    You are excusing and covering up for the church which has always covered up and protected its own from scandals of all types rather than face them or pay restitution/justice for their acts. You are nothing more than an enabler for future scandals.

  71. There is tons of photographic evidence of McCarrick celebrating Masses, going on trips, handing out awards, etc. during the period in question. He celebrated Masses at the Vatican and held audiences with Pope Benedict. Even if Benedict was having a tough time enforcing a secret restrictions, you would think that he would have at least been able to prevent McCarrick from attending Vatican events. The whole thing is a hit on Pope Francis.

  72. What have I been reading about over the past six months? Priests impregnating altar girls? Nope. Priests getting caught with the parish secretary? Nope. Priests causing divorce in their parish by inviting female parishioners to the rectory for late night bible study? Nope and nope.
    Priests on boys… yes.
    Priests on other priests…. yep.
    Homosexual friendly hierarchy that condoned, promoted and covered it up? You betcha’.
    Now that people are starting to go public, you will hear more stories about impropriety in the priesthood.

  73. Burke will set up shop in Avignon and put on a grand old show for the tourists.

  74. One caveat is that McCarrick was accused of sexual harassment of adult seminarians up until the NY Times story mentioned the underage family member. Sexual harassment isn’t a crime rather a cause for civil action. There might have been something bordering on assault (i.e. Weinstein), but the victim has to be the one to press charges in this case. The Catholic Church could impose sanctions on McCarrick easily however and should have. Benedict didn’t impose any secret sanctions on McCarrick. McCarrick attended plenty of Vatican events when he was supposed to be living a life of quiet prayer and penance. Benedict did nothing to stop him.

  75. I find it very interesting that the gay-hating, “Jesus-loving” (yeah, right) crowd are determined to overlook all the clergy who abused women and girls, and equally, willing (indeed, highly eager) to overlook A. W. Richard Sipe’s 1990 report to the Vatican about non-celibate clergy.

  76. You are clearly AVOIDING reading about the clergy who ARE involved with women. This is FACT. As is the number of priests who abused young girls.

    I wonder why you’re avoiding that….as I wonder why you seem determined to ignore the difference between homoisexuality and pedophilia, or that other one, epophelia (something like that–sexual interest in pre-adolescents).

  77. Bob, what’s been “exposed” here is the felonious, lying nature of the RCC, and its interest in protecting itself vs its sheeple.

  78. I wonder why you point out the nuances of the three as if the behavior of any one by a priest is acceptable.

  79. 81 percent homosexual abuse, 19 percent opposite-sex abuse, both 2004 & 2011 and in-between.

    Both numbers are equally tragic, and must be genuinely addressed. But the homosexual networks and the homosexual culture can’t get a Free Ride anymore. Burn ’em down!

  80. Absolutely true. But still not exactly the point, is it?

    You have an organization that seems to attract pedophiles, sexual predators, confused and disordered men. When they do bad stuff, the organization protects them, tries to deflect blame on people who aren’t causing the problems, points a lot of fingers in other directions, and in general, tries to avoid the obvious.

    If a bank did that with your money, you would be calling for jail sentences for the perpetrators and the obfuscators. But in this case, it’s all the fault of the Evil Gays. I have never molested a child in my life. If I knew an adult was molesting a child, I would report him to the police. I’ve never force myself on anyone. I have never blame someone else for my misbehavior, not that I’ve had much.

    But if your church does all of that, well, it’s Teh Geyz.

  81. Francis didn’t demote him. EPBenedict signed off on his five year trip to Washington.

  82. The problem I have with you conservative holier than everyone else types is you have an amazing capacity to ignore the same exact behavior in conservative clergy. Whether that is Maciel, or Neinstedt, or Cardinal Groer. Vigano bashes James Martin for being part of the leftist corrupted Jesuits, but leaves out Jesuit Donald McGuire, Mother Theresa’s celebrated spiritual advisor who was given a 25 year sentence for pedophile crimes. As Spuddie is trying to get you to understand, this is not an issue of right vs left, this is an issue of clerical abuse of power on all sides of spectrum. They are all in the same sinking boat and blaming the port side for everything is not going to save the boat.

  83. I happen to think Vigano didn’t bring any of this up earlier for two reasons. The first is McCarrick has his own knowledge of what goes on in the Vatican and who does what. Vigano had to wait until McCarrick was exposed by someone else. The second reason is he is so bitter about his ‘demotion’ to Washington that he is now nothing more than a willing pawn of the Burke crowd….and probably a well paid pawn.

  84. That’s OK, G-D loves you just the same.

  85. You haven’t changed a bit, Bobbie, sweetie.

  86. Apparently the deity loves heterophobes like yourself as well, right up to your last chance to repent.

  87. Point taken.
    You mention the church. Who specifically in the church is responsible?
    Might those who are considered to be disordered men be protected from disordered men a bit higher up the food chain?

  88. This should provide some insight into “manly”:

    “It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.” – Theodore Roosevelt, excerpt from the speech “Citizenship In A Republic”, Excerpt from the speech “Citizenship In A Republic”, delivered at the Sorbonne, in Paris, France on 23 April, 1910

    If it were attributed to William D. Lindsey, or James Martin, S.J., or to you it would stand out like a sore thumb.

    You’re blocked. Bye bye.

  89. Stop blaming homosexuality for your pedophilia problems.

  90. You have nothing better to do than speculate about other people’s genitals all day.

  91. I wonder why you keep trying to blame homosexuality for your pedophilia problems.

  92. “You have an organization that seems to attract pedophiles, sexual predators, confused and disordered men.”

    Just to correct you, we’re not talking about the American Psychological Association, we’re talking about the Catholic Church.

    The Catholic Church, you may recall, was the institution you described as your sworn enemy earlier in 2018.

    So, you were saying about the Catholic Church …..

  93. I keep saying the same thing, and the anti-gay uber Catholics keep whining “NO! NO! NO!. It’s the gays. It’s the gays!”
    What is it about the Church that attracts so many closeted homosexuals, so many predators, so many pedophiles, and so many men that think it is perfectly fine to cover it all up? When you point out that this conspiracy spans generations, and reaches up to the highest levels of the church, indicating a culture that at best accepts and condones evil behavior like this, they keep saying “NO! NO! NO! It’s the geyz”.

  94. Hi, Laurence.
    They think it’s not the true nature of the church, despite the evidence that it is exactly that. Not everyone, not even a majority of the priests. but a significant number of priests.
    But they want to do what the bishops want to do. Call it a problem with The Evil Geyz, and avoid any of the questions that someone not blinded by ideology and bigotry might want to ask.

  95. Not the nienstedt who wasted $400000 on antigay videos while children were starving. Not the Nienstedt who was accused of some unsavory sexual behavior himself.
    Must have been another Nienstedt.

  96. Did you tell Bobobobobob about that when he brought up the whatabout the public schoolteachers nonsense?

  97. Shock. The Vatican knows a lot more than they ever share about everything. The question is really whether or not proper pressure can be brought on them to make the sort of reforms needed to end the harm being done. Priests abusing kids is no different from holy hypocrites sending LGBTQ kids to “straight camp” for emotional torture there. At some point nations have to act responsibly for the benefit of kids and stop organized religion (all forms of organized religion) from abusing kids in the name of deity.

  98. No. Just spud. He says it to me all the time because according to him; anything that happened prior to 2016 doesn’t matter.

  99. Seriously? Don’t you watch the news? Contrary to popular belief, it isn’t all fake! Google your Catholic websites, they’ll show you what was said…

  100. My argument has always been that religion is organized narcissism. Both use guilt, shame, hate, fear, disgust, all the base emotions in the same way: to rally their base and ostracize everyone else, using them as convenient scapegoats on whom to heap projections of their own despicable inner cores. Narcissism is the Ayn Randian zero-sum ends-justify-means philosophy, applied as well to emotional accounting as it is to materialism, and religion is a subjective and entirely transactional opinion (read “faith”) in the primacy of personal emotion. Even people within their tribe are part of their caste system — where ruthlessness is perceived as strength, relentless ruthlessness as moral character. The friends of narcs are other narcs — they simply view each other as tools to be exploited, where they will “win” by being more exploitative. The religious and narcissistic are both devoid of empathy. They occupy a world of semblances and masks and appearances and memes and stereotypes and optics and stagecraft and perceptions meant to obscure reality, deny it, veneer it, with instead a preference for an elaborate fantasy that does not even have internal consistency, but instead offers jolts of narc supply like a drug. They both seem so literally irrational, outside of reason, because they are.

  101. I love when someone hits into Bobbie’s shame, and all he has is “you’re blocked.” Congratulations and welcome to the club. He’s on a slippery slope; eventually he’ll have the whole commentariat blocked: the perfect realm of the Christian bigot, talking to himself while everyone else goes about their business of reality and rational discourse.

  102. Well, do tell us all YOU know about the public school teachers, their rates of abuse, vis a vis the Catholic Church.

    Gor for it.

  103. I particularly like that he made the statement while flying back to Rome, and then retracted it.

  104. heterophobe? Wouldn’t that be you? Don’t worry, G-D still loves you.

  105. I do watch the news. And I read what comes out of Rome. I have not seen anything parents of homosexual children should seek psychiatric care for them. Quite the opposite in fact.

  106. yeah, I know.

    I was being a bit ironic. Yet another prelate caught, apparently, with his hands down the cookie jars pants while railing against people who don’t live their lives in the darkness of the closet, which twists, perverts, and destroys everything it touches.

    Deflect. Deflect. Deflect.

  107. C’mon. Tell me what you REALLY think. 😉

    I do have to disagree, at least in part. I know and have known plenty of religious people who are good people. My oldest friend in the world belongs to a denomination somewhere to the right of Attila the Hun, yet he is one of the kindest, most upright men I have ever known.

    My own assessment is that people use religion just like they use everything else. Maybe it can make a bad man better, but it can also make a good man worse. As I often say, how someone reads their bible very much depends on the kind of person they are, and not the other way around.

  108. Everyone has anecdotal evidence. There are always exceptions. I’m saying that religion and narcissism too often quack the same quack. That one is a psychological defect and the other an ideology that in practice lends itself to the successful exploitation of others, by those with that psychological defect, does offer some differentiation. Capitalism draws, and rewards, its share of narcissists as well. Neither system is irremediable; each would benefit from a larger dose of empathy, and from those with a larger dose of empathy, as I’m sure your friend is an example, having a greater respect and authority. Humility gives us our *best* leaders, it just doesn’t give us our *first* leaders.

  109. Again, the Catholic Church as your enemy.

    If they weren’t, they’d be really quiet and stay inside their churches.

  110. Who is it then? Who in the church do we go after to clear up the mess?
    Saying “the church” doesn’t help any…..
    I want names!
    I want to know who ordered the code red…

  111. As with so many before him — and one assumes, so many more yet to come — Nienstedt has met his enemy: and found it was him

  112. Someone else wrote this, not I. But I think it is applicable, so I saved it.

    An all-male celibate priesthood encourages priests to view themselves as a separate tribe, people closer to God, men to be admired. It instills a sense of entitlement, reinforced by the admiration of parishioners.
    This status offers predators the perfect cover. It also made it easy for church officials to dismiss the complaints of mothers who took their concerns to their pastors, but were not given the attention they deserved. Nearly two decades ago, we learned about Catholic mothers in Boston who reported abuse, only to see the offending priests shunted off to other unsuspecting parishes.
    Lacking power in the church and rebuffed by Vatican officials, women have been unable to advance the policies that would have reduced the potential for abuse.
    Even worse, misogyny has promoted a “band of brothers” ethos, encouraging a culture that values institutional reputation over the protection of children.

  113. Bobbobobbob by definition sees me as the enemy, and would dismiss whatever I say, even “the sky is blue” was what I said. There is nothing worse in his opinion than a gay man who will not accept the place he has assigned to me, nothing worse than an atheist who find plenty to criticize in the behavior of SOME religious people.

    He is antigay to the core, but wants to pretend he isn’t. He is catholic to the core, thinks Frank is a liberal, but wants to pretend he isn’t. He is a narcissist who thinks he alone can have an opinion, though you are welcome to agree with him.

  114. “The second reason is he is so bitter about his ‘demotion’ to Washington
    that he is now nothing more than a willing pawn of the Burke
    crowd….and probably a well paid pawn.”

    You can always tell a Bilgrimage reader … “the Burke crowd”.

    Elsewhere the same folks are called “Catholics”.

  115. The problem I have with you non-conservative holier than everyone else types
    is you have an amazing capacity to ignore the same exact behavior in
    non-conservative clergy.

    Oh, and you have a tendency to write things like “The problem I have with you conservative holier than everyone else types
    is you have an amazing capacity to ignore the same exact behavior in
    conservative clergy.”

    William D. Lindsey is already here.

    Be a voice, not an echo.

  116. You do have the exact same tendency. Remember Cardinal Law? Remember Cardinal Bevilaqua? Remember Cardinal Kroll? Remember Cardinal Groer? Remember Cardinal Ezzati?

    I am not an echo of Bill Lindsey. I am my own voice and he would acknowledge that way before you ever could.

  117. Maybe, but ‘I’ can always tell a Burke fan because they can’t see that they are supporting Cardinals and Popes in the Church who aren’t dealing very well with their own sexuality. Projection is the signature of conservative authoritarian whether they are in politics or the clergy and their followers specialize in it. I expect a reply that disses psychologists and doesn’t address my comment other than to diss psychology.

    I admit if I was talking about the benefits of reparative gay therapy you would be first in line to establish the creds of my psychological opinions.

  118. “I am not an echo of Bill Lindsey.”

    “I am not an echo of Bill Lindsey.”

    “I am not an echo of Bill Lindsey.”

    “I am not an echo of ….”


  119. “Maybe, but ‘I’ can always tell a Burke fan because they can’t see that they are supporting Cardinals and Popes in the Church who aren’t dealing very well with their own sexuality.”

    Ah, long-distance evaluation, a specialty and fits right in at your normal stomping grounds.

    “I expect a reply that disses psychologists and doesn’t address my comment other than to diss psychology.”

    And how does that make you feel?

  120. “An all-male celibate priesthood encourages priests to view themselves as a separate tribe, people closer to God, men to be admired. It instills a sense of entitlement, reinforced by the admiration of parishioners.”

    “Now there is a behavioral concomitant to the anti-idolatry principle: it is the detachment which is urged throughout the Bible and by practically every figure in the great tradition from Irenaeus and Chrysostom to Bernard, John of the Cross, and Thérèse of Lisieux. Detachment is the refusal to make anything less than God the organizing principle or center of one’s life. Anthony de Mello looked at it from the other side and said that ‘an attachment is anything in this world – including your own life – that you are convinced you cannot live without.’ Even as we reverence everything that God has made, we must let go of everything that God has made, precisely for the sake of God. Augustine saw to the bottom of this truth, commenting that creatures are loved better, more authentically, precisely when they are loved in God. This is why, as G.K. Chesterton noted, there is an odd, tensive, and bi-polar quality to Christian life. In accord with its affirmation of the world, the Church loves color, pageantry, music, and rich decoration (as in the liturgy and papal ceremonials), even as, in accord with its detachment from the world, it loves the poverty of St. Francis and the simplicity of Mother Teresa. The same tensiveness governs its attitude toward sex and family. Again in Chesterton’s language, the Church is ‘fiercely for having children’ (through marriage) even as it remains ‘fiercely against having them’ (in religious celibacy). Everything in this world – including sex and intimate friendship – is good, but impermanently so; all finite reality is beautiful, but its beauty, if I can put it in explicitly Catholic terms, is sacramental and not ultimate.”

    Of course to appreciate this the center of your life has to be a bit higher than your groin.

  121. The initial John Jay Report released in 2004 stated that 81 percent of clerical sex abuse victims were male, and almost 90 percent were post-pubescent. The updated report in 2011 had similar findings: 81 percent of victims were male, and 78 percent were post-pubescent.

  122. John Jay Report in 2004 stated that 81 percent of clerical sex abuse victims were male, and almost 90 percent were post-pubescent. The updated report in 2011: 81 percent of victims were male, and 78 percent were post-pubescent.

  123. John Jay Report in 2004: 81 percent of clerical sex abuse victims were male, and almost 90 percent were post-pubescent. The updated report in 2011: 81 percent of victims were male, and 78 percent were post-pubescent.

    That’s were the most significant, evidenced problem lies – men sexually assaulting teenage boys.

  124. You failed to mention the part where the John Jay report also stated that of all the convicted clergy they interviewed the vast majority claimed an adult heterosexual orientation. This is precisely why they stated easy access to altar boys was a major contributing factor.

  125. No, they claimed they didn’t “identify” as having a homosexual desires. There’s a difference.

  126. I had a good laugh. That’s always a good way to start the morning. Thanks.

  127. Because almost all homosexuals are attracted to pubescent boys – they are obsessed with growing old and lust for youth.

  128. Pedophilia, hebephilia and ephebophilia are unfortunate side-effects of “having the gay”.

  129. It doesn’t matter if you block me, Little Bob; you CANNOT block the truth about your wolf-den church. Catholics are learning to stop sacrificing their children to this putrid den of wolves ,snakes,and dogs—-WAKE UP, CATHOLICS!!! 😎😎😎

  130. Good one! The pretend royalty and the pretend pope. The possibilities are almost endless.

  131. Yeah. I am giggling over that. We can have a TV show.

  132. Hey, Ben, how are ya, my friend!! Good to hear from you! Yeah…you know that I am a man of faith, and I try to be fair to friends and foes alike. We Protestants have had our issues over the 500+ duration of our history, but I think i can safely say that it would be difficult to find a religious system/institution with a worse history than Roman Catholicism. It’s not necessarily my intent to pick on my Catholic friends per se, but frankly, it’s pass time for them to lift their heads up out of the pseudo-theological sand they’ve been hiding in for soo long and realize that they’ve been sold a fake bill of goods. Like I told the other poster, face it: the Roman Catholic Church is dead; you will NEVER, EVER get out from under these scandals; your pope is just a 81 year old man in a white suit, there’s NOTHING he can do to turn this around, and HE KNOWS IT. The wanton, vicious, purposeful ravaging of innocent children’s bodies and the murdering of their precious souls…Almighty God won’t stand for that. So…anyway, again, good to hear from you!! 😁 Bless you!

  133. Hmm…It seems that the Vatican has walked back the pope’s remarks about parents of presumably homosexual children submitting said children to psychiatric care…The Roman Catholic Church is imploding, everyone!! It’s 😎😎😎

  134. “Homosexual networks”?

    I wonder why you are so obsessed with homosexuality.

  135. But my post was about priests who were non=-celibate with women. And it would be a big help if you posted citations for the data you cite.

    Bottom line: RCC is doomed. HOORAY! I have the impression that more and more Catholics are leaving; and I suspect there will probably be fewer seminarians & priests in the future.

  136. Hmm …. Joined Aug 27, 2018

    Made three posts.

    All three were upvoted by one signd-in participant, Edd Doerr.

    Nice try, Edd.

Leave a Comment