Columns Mark Silk: Spiritual Politics

The charge against Viganò must now be investigated

In this March 9, 2012, file photo, Archbishop John C. Nienstedt of St. Paul and Minneapolis, center, and other bishops from Minnesota, North Dakota and South Dakota concelebrate Mass at the Altar of the Tomb in the crypt of St. Peter's Basilica at the Vatican. Photo by Paul Haring/Catholic News Service

(RNS) — As everyone not living in a total news blackout knows by now, the former papal nuncio to the United States, Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, has issued a call for Pope Francis to resign his office, on the grounds that the pontiff knew (because Viganò says he told him) about the sexual sins of Cardinal Theodore McCarrick and did nothing about it (until he did).

The call came in the form of a long letter accusing an array of high-ranking prelates (mostly but not exclusively progressives associated with Francis) of protecting clerical abusers and covering up evidence of their wrongdoing.

Viganò is a well-known traditionalist ideologue and Francis critic, but that in itself is not sufficient reason for calling his credibility into question.

Sufficient reason would be if in 2014 Viganò himself, as nuncio, put a stop to the investigation of the then-archbishop of St. Paul and Minneapolis, John Nienstedt, who had been credibly accused of sexual abuse. On Sunday, Viganò issued a statement denying that he did anything of the sort.

The basis for the charge against him is a July 7, 2014 memorandum on the Nienstedt investigation written by Dan Griffith, a priest and lawyer who managed the investigation as the archdiocese’s delegate for a safe environment. The 11-page, single-spaced document was sent to the archdiocese’s two auxiliary bishops — Lee A. Piché, who had overall responsibility for the investigation, and Andrew Cozzens — shortly after the two lawyers hired to investigate Nienstedt’s behavior tendered their resignations.

Griffith, profoundly upset, tells the story of how the investigation was shut down. Briefly, the lawyers had come up with a large amount of compelling evidence that Nienstedt had been abusing seminarians and engaging in flamboyant sexual activity for many years. The two auxiliary bishops and other clergy involved in the investigation reached a consensus that Nienstedt would have to resign.

Piché and Cozzens then flew to Washington with Nienstedt to meet with the nuncio to reach a “pastoral resolution”; i.e. a smooth resignation. Although they called Griffith after the meeting to say that such a resolution was in the offing, a subsequent one-on-one between Nienstedt and Viganò led to the nuncio’s telling the bishops that he didn’t think the allegations were that serious, and that the investigation should be halted.

Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò listens to remarks at the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops’ annual fall meeting on Nov. 16, 2015, in Baltimore. (AP Photo/Patrick Semansky)

The bishops immediately responded by writing Viganò a letter in which they “disagreed with his decision to shut down the investigation, noting that this would rightly be seen as a cover-up.” The nuncio, in response, told the bishops to get rid of their letter. Indeed, he admitted doing so in his statement on Sunday:

I did instruct one of the auxiliary bishops, Lee A. Piché, to remove from the computer and the archdiocesan archives the letter falsely asserting that I had suggested the investigation be halted. I insisted on this not only to protect my name, but also that of the Nunciature and the Holy Father who would be unnecessarily harmed by having a false statement used against the Church.

If you believe that this was about anything more than Viganò protecting himself from criticism, then you have to believe that Piché and Cozzens not only misunderstood Viganò but also, after receiving the instruction to correct the misunderstanding, shut down the investigation anyway, thereby leading to the resignation of the lawyers.

This is, quite simply, incredible.

The fact of the matter is that the investigation had proved beyond question that Nienstedt was guilty of abuse and sexual misconduct. Take a look at the evidence in the dossier of affidavits Viganò was presented with, and that ultimately did lead to Nienstedt’s resignation.

Viganò, by the way, also says in his statement that, a year and a half ago, he asked the current nuncio, Christophe Pierre, and also the archbishop of St. Paul and Minneapolis, Bernard Hebda, to make public corrections to the Griffith memo, but that “(i)n spite of repeated emails and phone calls, I never heard back from them.”

Over at the American Conservative, Rod Dreher finds Viganò “credible.” LifeSite News finds Griffith’s actions to be “suspect.” I say it’s time to investigate exactly what happened.

Cozzens remains at his post in the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis while Piché retired in 2015; perhaps one retains the letter they wrote protesting what they understood to be Viganò’s decision. Griffith pastors Our Lady of Lourdes Catholic Church in Minneapolis and serves as a faculty fellow and chaplain at the Terrence J. Murphy Institute for Catholic Thought, Law, and Public Policy at the University of St. Thomas in Minneapolis. The investigation shouldn’t take long.

In the meantime, it’s worth quoting from the conclusion of Griffith’s impassioned memo:

In one of my recent meetings with Bishop Cozzens I told him that his generation of bishops must work hard to hold their brother bishops accountable. This is an area that needs serious reform throughout the Catholic Church. There is an ugly clericalism on full display in this present matter, the type of which Pope Francis is trying to purge from the Church. Our bishops must be held accountable for their decisions, their behavior, and their performance. Our Catholic faithful deserve better and will demand better in the coming years.

Those years have arrived.

(Mark Silk writes the Spiritual Politics column for RNS. The views expressed in this commentary do not necessarily reflect those of Religion News Service.)

About the author

Mark Silk

Mark Silk is Professor of Religion in Public Life at Trinity College and director of the college's Leonard E. Greenberg Center for the Study of Religion in Public Life. He is a Contributing Editor of the Religion News Service

391 Comments

Click here to post a comment

  • I’m sorry. I don’t care how much Viganò maybe stretching the truth. Every charge gets investigated now. Every one. No one gets a free pass anymore.

  • And people wonder why no one would speak up about McCarrick. Mark Silk joins the cover-up brigade telling would-be whistleblowers that if you accuse the wrong people, we are going to destroy you. Way to be an enforcer for the culture of silence.

    I don’t know if what Vigano says is true or not. I do know that Silk is a shameful disgrace for attacking him.

  • If you got past her commercial photo avatar, and her abstract art from Eduard Fleminsky at her new website, and gandered the reality behind “monicadeangelis”, you’d realize how ridiculous that suggestion is.

  • I never said it was not.

    I merely said that the reality would dispel your even making the comment.

  • “Bob, if I didn’t know better I’d swear you were jealous.” invited a response.

    I am glad you did not like it.

  • An abuse survivor speaks out about what Viganò is doing:

    “As Juan Carlos Cruz, a survivor of sexual abuse by a priest in Chile, put it in a tweet on Monday, Pope Francis has work to do when it comes to holding priests and bishops accountable.

    But, he asks, “where was Viganò when it came to do something for victims? He is just a fanatic who blames gays and represents ultra conservatives who want power and use survivors as their way to get it.”

    ~ Michael J. O’Loughlin, “Papal Wrongdoing, or Palace Intrigue?”

    https://newrepublic.com/article/150935/papal-wrongdoing-palace-intrigue

  • The people calling for every claim to be investigated (a reasonable and good suggestion on the face of it) on the basis of the tissue of lies and allegations in Viganò’s letter must not remember the Satanic baby-killers panic of the 1980s — which swept through conservative Christian circles with the same wildfire force with which the gay-conspiracy rumors are now sweeping through the Catholic right and right-wing evangelicals circles allied with the Catholic right

    Fred Clark has a good rundown of that toxic nonsense and the harm it did to good people: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/slacktivist/2013/03/18/satanic-baby-killers-what-the-devil-happened-in-arkansas/

  • That may be the best way to suck the liberals into a “fire sack”. Do it.

    Welcome the investigation…AND THE DISCOVERY.

  • Excuse me? “In the meantime, it’s worth quoting from the conclusion of Griffith’s impassioned memo:

    “In one of my recent meetings with Bishop Cozzens I told him that his generation of bishops must work hard to hold their brother bishops accountable. This is an area that needs serious reform throughout the Catholic Church. There is an ugly clericalism on the full display in this present matter, the type of which Pope Francis is trying to purge from the Church. Our bishops must be held accountable for their decisions, their behavior, and their performance. Our Catholic faithful deserve better and will demand better in the coming years.”

    Quoting a memo from a priest totally involved in the original Neinstedt investigation is Mark Silk being part of the cover up brigade? I think my head is spinning to fast for my own good.

  • I’d like to suggest a distinction. If commenters want to discuss the Church’s teaching that homosexual behavior is sinful, that is a perfectly valid discussion for Catholics to have. It would be healthy to air our views instead of our biases, and to listen to people who know what they’re talking about. I don’t know that we would reach agreement, but we might have an opportunity to listen to people who know more about the subject than we do.
    If, on the other hand, commenters want to blame homosexuals, gay priests, or an alleged gay cabal for the sexual abuse crisis, that requires evidence, and simply quoting someone who “says so” is not evidence. Essays published in peer-reviewed journals are evidence. Deliberately misinterpreting the John Jay Report is not evidence; it’s bias.
    So far, there is a disgusting abundance of evidence that priests have sexually abused minors for more than fifteen hundred years. The John Jay Report is one of several that says those priests were overwhelmingly heterosexual. So if someone has real evidence that the Report is wrong, or that homosexual priests are largely to blame for this crisis, put it on the table. I would certainly be willing to take any evidence seriously. If someone has actual evidence of a cabal of any kind, let them put it out there, showing how the dots can be connected to disclose a conspiracy. So far I haven’t seen any; all I’ve seen is speculation by people who want their prejudice taken seriously.
    I’m not an apologist for the LGBT community, nor would they want me as one. I want this crisis to end, now. Anyone and everyone responsible should be gone for good.
    So if you have hard evidence of crimes, whip it out.

  • Excuse me if I am naïve, but how and why does a heterosexual priest abuse boys? If history is any teacher, heterosexuals abuse girls if they are available, not boys. To claim heterosexuals abuse boys, not girls, smacks of an effort to substitute celibacy as the issue, not sexual orientation. And that amounts to another cover up.

  • Simple solution to finding out if Vigano is lying: investigate the charges against the Pope. The charge that Vigano’s accusations are questionable because, in part, he claims the Pope did not know of McCarrick’s conduct until he told him, is ridiculous. Benedict put sanctions on McCarrick and Francis lifted them. He had to know what Benedict’s investigations revealed, and he still lifted them. So the focus is not on Vigano, except by those who want to excuse Francis and sweep the homosexual subculture in the church under the rug. The Pope’s actions, his words, his choices all suggest someone who is posing as orthodox but in reality is a revolutionary, supportive of gays and left wing theology.

  • I published an interview La Repubblica conducted on my blogsite this morning. Here’s a quick translation:

    VATICAN CITY – Three days after the publication of the dossier against Francesco the former nuncio to Washington Carlo Maria Viganò spoke on the blog of the Vatican vocalist Aldo Maria Valli: “I am not the crow and I do not act for revenge. I just want the truth to emerge “.

    Monsignor, how are you?
    “Thank God very well, with great serenity and peace of conscience: it is the prize of truth. Light always wins over darkness, it can not be suppressed, especially for those who have faith. Therefore I have a lot of trust and hope for the Church “.

    How do you judge the reactions to the publication of your memorial?
    “As you know, the reactions are opposed. There are those who no longer know where to draw poison to destroy my credibility. Someone even wrote that I was hospitalized twice with compulsory treatment (TSO) for drug use; there are those who imagine conspiracies, political plots, plots of all kinds, etc., but there are also many articles of appreciation and I have seen messages of priests and faithful thanking me, because my testimony was for them a flicker of new hope for the Church “.

    What is your answer to those who in these hours object that you would have reasons of personal rancor against the Pope and for this reason he would have decided to write?
    “Perhaps because I am naive and always think about the good for people, but above all I recognize that it is a gift that the Lord has given me, I have never had feelings of revenge or resentment in all these years when I was tested by so many slanders and falsehoods on my account.
    As I wrote at the beginning of my testimony, I had always believed that the hierarchy of the Church would find in itself the resources to heal so much corruption. I also wrote it in my letter to the three cardinals instructed by Pope Benedict to investigate the Vatileaks case, a letter that accompanied the report I gave them: “‘Many of you – I wrote – you knew, but you kept silent. At least now that you have had this task from Benedict, have the courage to report with fidelity what has been revealed to you of so many situations of corruption “.

    Why did you decide to have your testimony published and distributed?
    “I spoke because now corruption has reached the top of the Church hierarchy. I appeal to journalists: why do not they ask what happened to the case of documents that, we have all seen, was delivered to Castelgandolfo by Pope Benedict to Pope Francis? Everything was useless? It would have been sufficient to follow my report and the report that was made on my deposition before the three cardinals in charge of the investigation of the Vatileaks case (Julian Herranz, Jozef Tomko and Salvatore De Giorgi) to start doing some cleaning in the Curia. But do you know what Cardinal Herranz replied to me when I called him from Washington, given that it had been a long time since this Commission was appointed by Pope Benedict without ever being contacted? I said: “Do not you think I have something to say about the question of my letters, published without my knowledge?”. He replied: ‘Ah, if you really want to.’ ‘

    How do you respond to those who claim that you were the “crow”, or one of the “crows”, at the origin of the Vatileaks case?
    “I was the crow? As you saw with my testimony, I usually do things in the sunlight! I had been in Washington for some time and I certainly had other things to think about. On the other hand, it has always been my habit to immerse myself completely in my new mission. So I did when I was sent to Nigeria, I did not read the Italian news anymore. So much so that when, after six years, I was called back to the Secretariat of State by St. John Paul II, it took me a few months to realize where I had fallen back, even though I had been in the Secretariat of State for eleven years from 1978 to 1989 “

    What do you say to those who say that you were have been removed from the Governorate and that this also causes feelings of rancor and a desire for revenge?
    “As I have already said, rancor and revenge are feelings that do not belong to me. My resistance to leaving my job at the Governorate was motivated by a deep sense of injustice for a decision that I knew did not correspond to the will that Pope Benedict himself had manifested to me. Cardinal Bertone, in order to get away from me, had committed a series of serious abuses of authority: he had dissolved a first commission of three cardinals that Pope Benedict had appointed to investigate the serious accusations made by me as secretary general and by the vice-secretary general, monsignor Giorgio Corbellini. abuses committed by Monsignor Paolo Nicolini; in place of this commission, he had created a disciplinary commission altering in its composition the institutional one of the Governorate; before even creating this commission, he had summoned me to tell me that the Holy Father had appointed me nuncio to Washington; considering that despite all the aforementioned disciplinary committee had decided on July 16, 2011 the dismissal of Monsignor Paolo Nicolini had abusively annulled said decision preventing it from being published. In doing so, he had prevented me from continuing the work of reorganizing corruption in the management of the Governorate “.

    How do you respond to those who say you were determined to become a cardinal and claim that you now attack the pope who has denied you the purple?
    “I can say with all sincerity before God that I have actually renounced being a cardinal. After my first letter to Cardinal Bertone, whom I sent to the Pope to do what he thought best, Pope Benedict called me and received me at the audience on April 4, 2011 and he immediately told me these words: “I believe that the task in which you could best serve the Holy See is as president of the Prefecture for economic affairs instead of Cardinal Velasio De Paolis. I thanked the Pope for the trust he showed me and added: “Holy Father, why do not you wait six months or a year? Because, if you promote me now, the team that has trusted me to heal the situation at the Governorate will be immediately dispersed and persecuted (as indeed happened). I also added another topic. Since Cardinal De Paolis had recently been appointed to heal the delicate situation of the Legionaries of Christ (Cardinal De Paolis had consulted me before accepting this assignment), I told the Pope that it was better for him to continue to hold an institutional position that gave greater authority to his person and his action with the Legionaries.
    At the end of the audience the pope told me again: “However, I remain of the opinion that the place where you can best serve the Holy See is as president of the Prefecture for economic affairs”. Cardinal Re can confirm this news. So I then renounced the cardinalate for the good of the Church “.

    What do you say to the rumors of bad blood between yourself and your brother because of an inheritance?
    “On March 20, 2013, my brothers had prepared a press release, which I then opposed in order to avoid involving the whole family. Because now we continue to repeat the accusation of my brother Don Lorenzo, namely that I would have lied to Pope Benedict writing of my concern to leave because I had to take care of my sick brother, I decided to make public now the statement. From his reading it becomes evident that I felt the serious moral responsibility to take care of and protect my brother.”

  • There is an important difference between same-sex abuse and homosexual orientation. The John Jay Report, and others, concluded that most of the offenders were heterosexuals who, like some men in prison, had same-sex experiences.

  • On the topic of sick, inserting your father and “manly man” into that context as a response was positively Freudian.

  • You’ve been corrected on this so many times by so many people there is no excuse to continue misrepresenting the John Jay Report.

    The original report attributed nothing at all to orientation, it simply provided the data that 80+% of the offenses were male-on-male, that is homosexual.

    Years later at the urging of, among others, Theodore McCarrick that was supplemented by an addendum which went through some of the POSSIBLE orientations of offenders. It did NOT tie the offenders in the original report to anything.

    ONE of the possible explanations, and this material came from a cited FBI report, was that they were heterosexuals.

    There is NOTHING in the John Jay Report supporting “… John Jay Report, and others, concluded that most of the offenders were heterosexuals who, like some men in prison, had same-sex experiences.”

    You first laid this nonsense out at the former NCR Comments, and repeating it over and over is not making it any truer.

  • “If, on the other hand, commenters want to blame homosexuals, gay priests, or an alleged gay cabal for the sexual abuse crisis, that requires evidence, and simply quoting someone who ‘says so’ is not evidence.”

    Evidence has been presented.

    You just don’t happen to like it.

    In response you make statements like “The John Jay Report is one of several that says those priests were overwhelmingly heterosexual.” which are demonstrably false.

    Many folks have pointed that out, most recently Floyd Lee and myself, and still you persist.

    Now that you have your own website, and burned your bridges at First Things, you can concentrate on controlling that one.

  • I see you still haven’t apologized to Monica for calling her an “ignorant b*tch” yesterday after it was proven that she was right and you were wrong on another post. Man up, do the right thing – apologize for being a d*ck.

  • Viganò has already responded on the Neinstedt investigation, including providing copies of relative documents.

    The cover-up brigade appears to involve Francis, McCarrick, and others but not the folks you happen to dislike.

    Francis, the German bishops, et al appear to be toast, or on their way to becoming toast.

  • This is your second “suggestion” to me.

    I was working on response to your first while doing some other things.

    If I get a third, I’ll stop working on that and your “suggestion” completely.

    Capisci?

  • As soon as I read an apology for “Old Bob”, “turds”, “trolls”, and “Ed’s a pest”.

    https://disqus.com/home/discussion/www-aggiornamento-net/scuopa_nuova_scuopa_bene/#comment-4065431304

    Btw, “ignorant b*tch” was not in the post at http://www.aggiornamento.net, which I posted in full right from the Disqus archive. In fact you will not find it at all.

    Since we both understand that the intensely passive-agrressive “monicadeangelis” would rather die than admit she erred, as her demise at First Things which follows illustrates, I am certain this wraps it up permanently.

    https://disqus.com/home/discussion/firstthingsmag/the_house_of_god_will_not_be_closed_benedict_kiely_first_things/#comment-4055556120

    Have a nice day.

  • Btw, “ignorant b*tch” was not in the post at http://www.aggiornamento.net, which I posted in full right from the Disqus archive.

    No, you posted that part here and then later edited it out. I knew you couldn’t bring yourself to apologize because you’re not man enough. You’re just a d*ck.

  • No, I have no intention of enabling someone’s neurosis.

    “Monicadeangelis” need for control, and inability to play well in the sandbox with others, has led her after bad experiences at NCR, here, and First Things to set up a website where she is Queen every day, much like Bill Lindsey did with Bilgrimage.

    My intrusion there was inadvertent, her response was intemperate at best, and planting it here in a post to you to let me know was characteristic of her abrasive passive-aggressive approach.

    I laid the facts out next to her planting.

    If you wish to be her sycophant, be my guest.

  • The priesthood is a homosocial environment in which priests had easy access to altar boys. Homosexual activity in homosocial environments is common and doesn’t necessarily reflect one’s true orientation. The other thing not to ever forget is that the motivation for abuse is not sexual release per se, it’s establishing power over others using sex as the tool.

  • Then let’s start with decanonizing JP II, subpeonaing B16, removing Francis, and collapsing the church. Then the online alternate magisterium can take over, restore Christendom, and appoint Steve Bannon as pope. None of which will help survivors or heal the Body of Christ. But boy, we’ll all have a lot of fun tweeting about it.

  • I want to get to the truth of Vigano’s statement. He carries his own baggage, and plenty of it. The discrepancies concerning his handling of the Neinstedt case is part of his baggage and also needs to be investigated. At this point I have zero reason to extend any more credibility to Vigano than those he accuses…..and believe me in the cases of Sodano and Bertone, my biased default position is to believe Vigano.

  • “Monicadeangelis” need for control, and inability to play well in the sandbox with others.

    Pot, meet kettle. As for her alleged “bad experiences” at NCR, I can attest that what you say is wholly inaccurate. She was one of the most respected commenters there for years. You’re just upset that’s she’s intruded on your territory.

  • Evidently, during his long and distinguished career, the good Monsignor has mastered about every pious platitude known to man.

  • The vile gossip so prevalent at http://bilgrimage.blogspot.com/ is going to get somewhat less play in these discussions.

    There is not a player in the episcopate, cardinalate, or these discussions that don’t carry their own baggage.

    What we’re watching is the agenda which Francis carried water for, and whose proponents lobbied for his election, sink like a rock.

    Thus those who hoped Francis was going to lead to Catholic Church II styled after the Church of England are getting a bit testy, as Mark Silk’s attempt being commented on here illustrates.

  • According to the “Francis the reformer” crowd, Vigano and the Burkites are dishonest corruptors of the Church and are destroying it. According to the “Francis the apostate” crowd, Francis and his allies are dishonest corruptors of the Church and are destroying it. The RC hierarchy being what it is, it is entirely possible (even likely) that both crowds are right. Perhaps between them, they will destroy the Church. It will not be the first time that God has decided to start over again.

  • Hmmm….Ganswein is also head of Pope Francis’ household, so…..I don’t know how much weight to give this.

  • Your url links to an article that says “… Pope Benedict XVI’s personal secretary … some of the claims …. ‘fake news.'”

    So scratch “… Pope Benedict is now calling Vigano’s accusations ‘fake news.'”

    That’s what I make of it reading what is actually there rather than what I was wish were there.

  • Can Benedict be taken at his word? Or do we need written documentation contemporary with the alleged events to establish what really did or did not happen and a timeline for what did happen, if something actually did happen? To borrow the old joke about politicians. How do we know that an RC hierarch is lying? Look at his mouth, and if it is open he is lying.

  • Of course there is no actual data on the abuse that took place other than noting that in excess of 80% was male on male.

    But that is a nice spin if propping up the homosexual agenda is the goal.

  • Did you even bother to read the very first sentence?

    ” Retired Pope Benedict XVI’s personal secretary says that reports the ex-pontiff confirmed some of the claims in a former Vatican ambassador’s statement alleging a widespread cover-up of ex-cardinal Theodore McCarrick’s abuse of seminarians are “fake news.”

  • Did you read this part?

    “In his interview Aug. 28, Gänswein said that that any reports that Benedict had confirmed parts of Viganò’s statement “lack any foundation.”

  • No. But in this digital age we have access to information that allows us to find out what goes on in there.

  • Briefly, the lawyers had come up with a large amount of compelling evidence that Nienstedt had been abusing seminarians and engaging in flamboyant sexual activity for many years.

    Yep, no homosexual activity here your honor….

  • “Decanonization” is not possible.

    Who might subpoena Benedict XVI?

    Who and by what authority could remove Francis?

  • ‘to play well in the sandbox with others”

    Monica is probably under the mistaken impression that a comment section is for adults, but a sandbox is for children. But you know otherwise. Now ask your caretaker for that special thing that helps you play nice, Bobbob, bless you precious little heart.

  • I don’t know what you mean, so in case you misunderstood /s means I was being sarcastic. This coup is about politics and power and taking down Francis, not helping the survivors or healing the church.

  • I see we’re back to “Bobbob, bless you precious little heart”, consistentlystumped. Apparently you find that pose amusing, which does say a lot … about you.

    Let’s see how “Monica” deals like an adult with comments:

    https://disqus.com/home/discussion/firstthingsmag/the_house_of_god_will_not_be_closed_benedict_kiely_first_things/#comment-4055556120

    My, my. And she handled the criticism so very well.

    Oh, and this:

    https://disqus.com/home/discussion/religionnews/archbishops_accusations_of_coverup_and_francis_response/#comment-4065459399

    You appear to be a complete id-ot.

  • Vatican police raided a drug-fueled gay-sex party at an apartment belonging to an aide of one of Pope Francis’ key advisers, according to a new report.

    The Holy Father is “enraged,” since the home, inhabited by Francesco Cardinal Coccopalmerio’s secretary, belongs to the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith — the arm charged with tackling clerical sex abuse, the Italian paper Il Fatto Quotidiano reported.

    Cops raided the apartment in late June after neighbors voiced concern about multiple people acting strangely while streaming in and out of the residence, the newspaper reported Wednesday.

    Once police were inside the apartment, they said they found multiple men engaged in rampant drug use and homosexual activity.

    Not here either judge….

  • From Vanity Fair your judgeship…

    Naked but for the towel around his waist, a man of a certain age sat by himself, bent slightly forward as if praying, in a corner of the sauna at a gym in central Rome. I had not met this man before, but as I entered the sauna, I thought I recognized him from photographs. He looked like a priest with whom I’d corresponded after mutual friends put us in touch, a man I had wanted to consult about gay clerics in the Vatican Curia. My friends told me that this priest was gay, politically savvy, and well connected to the gay Church hierarchy in Rome.

  • Huffington Post…

    An Italian cardinal has decided to send Vatican officials a 1,200-page dossier that claims to identify 40 actively gay Catholic priests and seminarians in Italy.

    Cardinal Cresenzio Sepe of Naples announced Thursday that he is forwarding a list compiled by male escort Francesco Mangiacapra to Vatican authorities. Mangiacapra’s dossier reportedly contains WhatsApp texts and photos that offer evidence that Catholic clergy members were interested in gay sex.

  • And again your honorship….

    In Naples, Italy, handsome young Francesco Mangiacapra is a self-identified “marchettaro,” a male prostitute servicing gay men. The Cardinal Archbishop of Naples is 74 year-old Crescenzio Sepe, who was made a Cardinal by Pope Saint John Paul II, and had a terrific Vatican career before his star crashed when he was farmed out to Naples by Pope Benedict XVI under a cloud of financial corruption.

    Mangiacapra and Sepe are two typical players in the everyday drama that is Naples, a city guided by its patron Saint Gennaro whose blood has, for the last six centuries, liquefied on his feast day, Sept. 19, to indicate good things, or, remained dust to indicate his disapproval of something.

    Recently, Mangiacapra sent Sepe a personal 1,200 page dossier exposing 40 Italian priests as his clients, Sepe did not bother to consult with Saint Gennaro. Instead, he forwarded the dossier to Pope Francis, who may have it on his nightstand, on top of “The DaVinci Code.”

  • n Naples, Italy, handsome young Francesco Mangiacapra is a self-identified “marchettaro,” a male prostitute servicing gay men. The Cardinal Archbishop of Naples is 74 year-old Crescenzio Sepe, who was made a Cardinal by Pope Saint John Paul II, and had a terrific Vatican career before his star crashed when he was farmed out to Naples by Pope Benedict XVI under a cloud of financial corruption.

    Mangiacapra and Sepe are two typical players in the everyday drama that is Naples, a city guided by its patron Saint Gennaro whose blood has, for the last six centuries, liquefied on his feast day, Sept. 19, to indicate good things, or, remained dust to indicate his disapproval of something.

    Recently, Mangiacapra sent Sepe a personal 1,200 page dossier exposing 40 Italian priests as his clients, Sepe did not bother to consult with Saint Gennaro. Instead, he forwarded the dossier to Pope Francis, who may have it on his nightstand, on top of “The DaVinci Code.”

  • Vatican police raided a drug-fueled gay-sex party at an apartment belonging to an aide of one of Pope Francis’ key advisers, according to a new report.

    The Holy Father is “enraged,” since the home, inhabited by Francesco Cardinal Coccopalmerio’s secretary, belongs to the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith — the arm charged with tackling clerical sex abuse, the Italian paper Il Fatto Quotidiano reported.

    Cops raided the apartment in late June after neighbors voiced concern about multiple people acting strangely while streaming in and out of the residence, the newspaper reported Wednesday.

    Once police were inside the apartment, they said they found multiple men engaged in rampant drug use and homosexual activity.

  • Oh Monica, what a clever, apologist you are… framing the issue and directing the course of conversation. I can google all day and find the examples you say don’t exist.
    Salve..

  • You are providing examples of homosexual activity. We all know there are homosexual priests. You have not provided evidence that the priests who molested children were homosexuals, except in the case of Abp Nienstedt, whose resignation Francis accepted shortly after reports were made.

  • Yes, I thought it was a little light on facts as well, but I thought it was something folks might want to have.

  • Viganó isjust doing what everyone else in the church is doing…

    “Look over there! bad pope! SQUIRREL!”

    “Look over there! GAY SQUIRRELS!”

    “Look over there! SQUIREL BISHOPS!”

    “Look over there! SQUIRREL history for centuries!”

    “Look over there. secular SQUIRRELS!”

    And so on.

  • How does it happen? by deliberately avoiding looking at facts, nuance, and general understanding, of course. Which you are happy to do.

    Let’s bring this up again, for the thousandth time.

    Jerry Sandusky was heterosexually married. He was known in his community, his church, his family, his school for being a heterosexual man. And yet there he was, molesting boys.

    The Boy Scouts had a molestation problem for decades, while at the same time having a no gay anything policy. Theirscoutmasters were generally heterosexually married.

    50% of molestation, boys and girls, is perpetrated by the father or stepfather in the Holy Heterosexual Family. I knew two men who were molested by their holy heterosexual fathers, one raped repeatedly until he was big enough to fight his heterosexual father off.

    Yes, please feel free to claim those men are not truly heterosexual. But then, you will also have to admit that the 4% figure for gay people is wrong, and refers ONLY to out, proud, and non self hating GAY PEOPLE. the figure for the identified-as-hetero-but-ain’t is much closer to 40%.

    Whoopsie.

  • He went to his father’s home at Ophrah, and there, on one STONE, they killed all seventy of his half brothers, the sons of Gideon.b But the youngest brother, Jotham, escaped and hid. Then all the leading citizens of Shechem and Beth-millo called a meeting under the oak beside the pillar at Shechem and made Abimelech their king.

    When Jotham heard about this, he climbed to the top of Mount Gerizim and shouted,
    “Listen to me, citizens of Shechem!
    Listen to me if you want God to listen to you!
    Once upon a time the trees decided to choose a king.
    First they said to the olive tree,
    ‘Be our king!’
    But the olive tree refused, saying,
    ‘Should I quit producing the olive oil
    that blesses both God and people,
    just to wave back and forth over the trees?’
    “Then they said to the fig tree,
    ‘You be our king!’
    But the fig tree also refused, saying,
    ‘Should I quit producing my sweet fruit
    just to wave back and forth over the trees?’
    “Then they said to the grapevine,
    ‘You be our king!’
    But the grapevine also refused, saying,
    ‘Should I quit producing the wine
    that cheers both God and people,
    just to wave back and forth over the trees?’
    “Then all the trees finally turned to the thornbush and said,
    ‘Come, you be our king!’
    And the thornbush replied to the trees,
    ‘If you truly want to make me your king,
    come and take shelter in my shade.
    If not, let fire come out from me
    and devour the cedars of Lebanon.’”
    (Book of Judges, chapter 9)

    All wood, straw and stubble, not the righteousness of Christ in gold.

  • Vatican police raided a drug-fueled gay-sex party at an apartment belonging to an aide of one of Pope Francis’ key advisers, according to a new report.

    The Holy Father is “enraged,” since the home, inhabited by Francesco Cardinal Coccopalmerio’s secretary, belongs to the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith — the arm charged with tackling clerical sex abuse, the Italian paper Il Fatto Quotidiano reported.

    Cops raided the apartment in late June after neighbors voiced concern about multiple people acting strangely while streaming in and out of the residence, the newspaper reported Wednesday.

    Once police were inside the apartment, they said they found multiple men engaged in rampant drug use and homosexual activity.

  • ITALY, March 9, 2018 (LifeSiteNews) – A scandal now sending shockwaves through the Catholic Church erupted last week when a gay male prostitute produced a massive dossier outing scores of priests who allegedly lead a double life of both ordained minister and homosexual sex-fiend. The dossier included seminarians as well.

    The author of the dossier, gay “escort” Francesco Mangiacapra, said he wrote the report because he could no longer stand the “hypocrisy” of the many priests he serviced.

  • Let’s focus on abuse and the high probability of a coverup, perhaps involving now Pope Francis, and not the whistleblower.

  • Nienstedt was a coverup, too. He’s the worst kind of closet case. You might know something about that.

  • When the implicated simply raise their voicesaying “can’t we get back to the environment and immigration” …then we know Vigano is on to something.

  • Update yourself. Vigano countered that with documents. He was ready for the haters, which you’re part of.

  • Vigano is probably as guilty as any bishop in coverups. They’re ALL dirty. The allegations against Nienstedt were long-running. There is good reason he “resigned”.

  • Thanks. I read this yesterday. I read everything Tornielli writes. Like John Allen, Andrea seems to have sources everywhere. It’s rumored that the monsignori of the Vatican check the bathroom stalls before saying anything he might overhear.

    Let me put that differently….

    Anyway, here’s what Allen says this afternoon: “In essence, the pope took the “no comment” option, though he said more than enough to suggest he doesn’t find the document credible. However, he did not engage the heart of the matter, which is what he knew about McCarrick and when he knew it.

    Let’s be clear: This is an accusation that a pope was personally involved in a sex abuse cover-up, from a former Vatican official who was in a position to know. If anyone thinks media outlets around the world aren’t going to pursue that story with maximum aggressiveness – knowing that bringing down a pope would be infinitely bigger than what the Boston Globe did in 2003 by bringing down Cardinal Bernard Law, winning a Pulitzer Prize and inspiring a Hollywood movie in the process – they’re delusional.

    At some point, pressure to give an accounting will almost certainly become irresistible. From the Vatican’s point of view, therefore, getting ready for that accounting now might be a wise use of time.

  • Re: “None of which will help survivors …” 

    Justice isn’t entirely about “helping survivors.” It’s about holding people accountable for what they do. “Helping survivors” can certainly be a component of justice, but it’s not the whole thing … in fact, in a lot of cases it isn’t even close. When, for example, a murderer is prosecuted, that isn’t about “helping survivors,” because once a murder happens, that’s it. A person is murdered. There is no restoration and, aside from possible financial compensation, no way to “help survivors.” No, murderers are prosecuted because that’s what justice is about

    You’re right that functionaries’ resignations won’t necessarily “help survivors,” but that’s not relevant here. What’s relevant is accountability. There can be no accountability, though, if there are no consequences. That is … if all these people just stay in their offices and just keep on doing whatever they were doing, nothing will change and there will be no justice. 

    These people are all grown men, and therefore are more than capable of handling whatever consequences they’ve earned, based on what they did. They don’t need you protecting them from being held to account for that based solely on whether or not it will “help survivors” to force them to face the consequences of their actions. 

  • “Benedict’s order does not become public and is transmitted orally by the
    Holy See to the nuncio in Washington (Sambi) so that he may communicate
    it to the person concerned. Indulgence for a cardinal by now old and
    retired to whom one wants to spare the shame of the public sanction?”

    This is tommyrot.

    It would be unusual IF the order became public.

    The only time that is done is when the public needs to be informed, such as the excommunication of Marcel Lefebvre to protect the faithful, otherwise disciplines are kept secret.

    The sudden proliferation of Italian and other silly vile gossip is appalling.

    Thomas A has the right idea: let’s investigate.

  • Except in the 80+% of the cases in the John Jay Report.

    But there are more.

    Since you have set shields at maximum, nothing will get through which is why Floyd Lee, I, and others have stopped trying.

  • From the comments made here on a regular basis, it seems many people have never received more than a basic, outdated introduction to human sexuality as binary: everyone is either male or female, gay or straight, and — for at least some of our commenters — it’s possible to tell which are which by looking at them. It has been a long time since that’s been the taken-for-granted paradigm of human sexuality.

    As I read Abp’s Viganò’s interview in La Repubblica this morning, as well as his comments to other press sources, it sounds as if he is working with the same binary understanding, which is perhaps not surprising, but is certainly disappointing for someone who rose to the rank of papal nuncio. But then, it’s hard to argue that Francis himself is not working with the same understanding, albeit from a more pastoral perspective.

    Personally, I have struggled with the whole gender binary discussion, so I can understand if others do as well. But even if I don’t accept some of what is current in that discussion, it’s important to be conversant with its issues if I want to carry on a conversation with other adults.

  • I’m passing along this top comment to Ross Douthat’s current op-ed piece in the New York Times about the Viganò letter because it is both the readers’ top pick and also that of the editors, something which rarely happens.

    NCSense
    NC Aug. 28

    The traditionalists in the Catholic Church were in full control in the decades most of the abuse occurred and systematically covered up. Vigano and other Catholic conservatives complicit in those coverups have no ideas for reforming the church and the priesthood. More strident homophobia clearly isn’t the answer. Vigano isn’t trying to clean up the church, he is attempting a conservative coup against a Pope the conservatives hate for other reasons altogether — including the Pope’s efforts to make the church more welcoming to gay people; to reach out to the divorced; and generally put a greater emphasis on Christian love than judgment.

  • The “traditionalists” have not been in full control of the Catholic Church since the mid-1960s.

    The writer, unless he has telepathy, has no idea at all what Vigano is trying to do.

    Under the guise of ” generally put a greater emphasis on Christian love than judgment” bishops were providing counseling for offenders and then putting them back into ministries where they re-offended.

    That is exactly how we got into this mess.

    Let’s all cut the cr-p and begin by enforcing the rules today and going forward.

    They are good rules, and if they had been followed there would be few problems.

    Let’s also all admit that both sides call for “generally put a greater emphasis on Christian love than judgment” when it’s side getting gored and “hang’em high” when it’s the other side that is accused.

  • The Catholic News Agency is an institution of EWTN, which also owns the National Catholic Register.

    In the secular world that would be like Rupert Murdoch merging with Sinclair to form one enormous right-wing media conglomerate. Imagine the possibilities if that were ever to happen? One single conservative voice, blaring like a trumpet, and all without the annoyance of competing entities muddying things up. How nice for conservative Catholicism that it does not have to deal with such annoying inconvenience.

  • “From the comments made here on a regular basis, it seems many people have never received more than a basic, outdated introduction to human sexuality as binary: everyone is either male or female, gay or straight, and — for at least some of our commenters — it’s possible to tell which are which by looking at them. It has been a long time since that’s been the taken-for-granted paradigm of human sexuality.”

    Of course in this discussion the Christians are using the biblical and Catholic theological notion that “God made them man and woman”.

    And of course Archbishop Viganò and Pope Francis share that perspective as successors to the Apostles.

    Exploring the updated not-taken-for-granted paradigm of human sexuality sounds like a project you might to undertake at http://www.aggiornamento.net which you founded specifically for that sort of thing.

  • Basically you don’t care for orthodox Catholic sources, facts that is.

    How nice for your fringe position in Christianity that you do not have to deal with inconveniences such as facts and opinions contrary to your own.

    Vile gossip, of course, is great fun if you’re in that position.

  • I find that “orthodox” always lends such a aura of respectability when so often times what’s considered orthodox is really just partisan polemic masquerading as “right worship.”

  • “alleged gay cabal ”

    this is why the CC is a sewer – Catholics hate to face reality even when there is article after article, and books, and other other testimonies exposing the gay mafia.

    “Alleged” nothing, there is only your cowardice to face how evil LGBTs are, inside and outside the church.

  • If you have actual proof, put it here for everyone to see. Otherwise your statements and those of the authors you mention are just allegations.
    If you also have proof that LGBT people are evil, that would be interesting, too. As opposed to the Kardashians, and of course, the Catholics who smear other people on this site.

  • The best thing in this scandal is exposing even more clearly how evil LGBTs are, how they have thoroughly corrupted the Church, just like any other institution where they gain power.

    The second point is that until people demand to have complete transparency to how ever penny is spent by any Catholic body/clergy/Vatican person at any level, the rot will remain in place, and the Church will continue to think and behave like the criminal mafia that it is.

  • If the proof is out there (meaning accessible on the Internet), I don’t need to copy it “here” for everyone to see. Anyone who doesn’t have a corrupt mind like yourself can and has been reading it.
    It’s your inability to face reality that is the issue. And it’s exactly people who refuse to read the articles, the books, and the reports like you who ensure more abuse and more impunity for the LGBT mafia.

  • I thought not. You’ve got nothing but more hearsay by people who can’t find evidence to support their prejudice. Just books and articles that claim there are books and articles “out there” somewhere. Put them on the table and let’s see if they hold up. You don’t seem to want to. You seem to want to believe in a gay mafia, whatever that is, even if it only exists in your mind.

  • If you had something to say, you’d cite one or more errors you’ve found in the sources you dislike recently or over the years.

    You don’t.

    That puts your comments in the “partisan polemic” category.

  • On the contrary, you’re just a sad and corrupt homo-agenda troll, nothing more. Your schtick here is scream “hearsay” to sustain your collusion with the homo mafia. I dare you to prove every single article, book, and testimony out there on this issue wrong.
    BTW, it takes more than screaming “hearsay” to prove them wrong.

  • “Quashed”?…read the article. He had no authority to stop anything…the investigators were hired by a 3rd party attorney…

    He fairly said “you’re taking a prosecutorial approach..ask Neinstedt first”.

  • You’ve been posting hearsay by people who can’t support their assertions with evidence on the Vigano matter for days, much of it from the Italian Press, known world-wide for a loose relationship with facts.

    You’ve been posting nonsense about what the John Jay Report said about heterosexuals committing homosexual abused for months, despite being corrected repeatedly.

    You’re entitled to opinions.

    You’re NOT entitled to demand that others meets standards you yourself don’t meet.

  • My point is that this coup is politically motivated, orchestrated by power elites who don’t give a shit about accountability, healing, restoration or the faith. They want to take down a pope is actually addressing, albeit too slowly, sexual abuse and actually removing the church princes from office. Vigano was angry because he was removed from power and forced out of his posh apartment.

    Accountability is more than pitchfork and torch populism, which is what is happening online. Pope Francis is the best chance we have to move toward accountability. Those who want to force him out have no interest in a transparent church or supporting survivors. If they did, they wouldn’t fight so hard against removing statue of limitations requirements.

    Uninformed anger is not a helpful response if one truly wants accountability.

  • Let’s open it up:

    https://www.catholicculture.org/commentary/otn.cfm?id=1295

    https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/bishops-letter-on-sexual-identity-prompts-lgbt-counter-lobbying-22776

    https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/catholics-respond-to-cdl.-cupich-clerical-sex-abuse-has-everything-to-do-wi

    https://www.vanityfair.com/culture/2013/12/gay-clergy-catholic-church-vatican

    Let’s also suggest that trying to foist the National Catholic Reporter line on orthodox and/or middle-of-the-road Catholics is going to result in some pushback.

    As one the Catholic who smear other people on this and other sites, you’re hardly in a position to complain about “the Catholics who smear other people on this site”.

  • Or, correctly, your suggestion/feeling/belief is that this brouhaha is politically motivated, orchestrated by
    power elites who don’t give a shit about accountability, healing,
    restoration or the faith.

    If Pope Francis is the best chance we have to move toward accountability, accountability will not be happening in this papacy.

  • Re: “Accountability is more than pitchfork and torch populism, which is what is happening online.” 

    Accountability begins with deciding that the people who’ve done things they shouldn’t, need to be punished for having done them. It doesn’t mean looking away from them and doing nothing because that might appear to be “pitchfork and torch populism.” 

    Re: “Pope Francis is the best chance we have to move toward accountability.” 

    That may or may not be the case. I don’t see him doing much about it, to be honest. That doesn’t mean he never will. What I have seen him do, a lot, is to vacillate: He created a commission to look into the matter but then let it die on the vine; he accused a bunch of abuse survivors in Chile of slander, then decided maybe they had a point; and on and on it goes with him. 

    In any event, I’m not saying I agree Francis specifically has to resign. What I said, pretty clearly, is that anyone who was involved abusing kids or in covering that abuse up, needs to be held accountable for their actions. That may or may not include Francis. 

    Re: “Uninformed anger is not a helpful response if one truly wants accountability.” 

    Not taking any action against wrongdoers, solely so as not to appear to give in to “uninformed anger” is — quite simply — foolish. And it’s what sociopaths want people to do. 

  • There appears to a somewhat organized effort to turn the RNS discussions into “National Catholic Reporter Comments II” based on the sudden influx of NCRC Groupies.

    I agree with you.

    Under the Canon Law in force since before anyone living was born NO clerics with a homosexual orientation should have been ordained.

    The quiet but constant drumbeat of complaints about the situation in seminaries, rectories, parishes, chanceries, and even parts of the Curia have led to nothing but what we’re reading here – denials, obfuscations, and tapdances.

  • Viewing the church from the outside, Francis seems the same than any other cleric. Seen from the inside, there is a big difference. But I do get that observers can’t see it.

  • Ah, Fred Clark:

    http://www.patheos.com/blogs/slacktivist/

    Among the differences are that there were no satanic baby killers, but there has been abuse, and there were no satanists harming children, but there actually have been apparently thousands of homosexual acts perpetrated upon minors.

    And now the rumors are sweeping through the Catholic left and left-wing Christian and Jewish circles allied with the Catholic left.

  • 40%??!! That’s a comforting number if you want to argue for normalcy but assumes that an act, even if done more than once, permanently defines a person. That assumption would mean every adulterer is a serial adulterer, every child who lies about being sick to stay home is a slacker, congenital liar, and never to be believed. The 4% number might be about right and is not changed by notorious exceptions or anecdotal stories.

    But to get to the main point, it is dishonest for church leaders to suggest that these were heterosexual men abusing the children. To admit there are many homosexuals in the pastorate may be difficult for those leaders but would be more honest. It would not alter the proportion of gay and straight men in the culture but would suggest they have created a welcoming environment to gays.

  • Benedict’s former personal secretary is making the “fake news” claim but says Benedict won’t comment. Why not? Also the guy now works as Francis’ head of household. Not a source I would trust. Let these Popes deal with these issues openly instead of ducking and dodging.

  • It is dishonest to ignore the entirety of the facts surrounding the sexual abuse of children, the sexual abuse of adults, and the church’s role for centuries in covering all of that up.

    It is dishonest to claim you know anything about the realities of sexual orientation, when you clearly don’t.

    It is way dishonest to say that an act doesn’t define anyone, and then to claim in the next sentence that it certainly does.

    And of course there is always the denial that god calls pedophiles and abusers to the priesthood, knowing they will be pedophiles and abusers, but that somehow, free will is a get out of hell card for the church.

    But you are you. I don’t expect anything better.

  • There is nothing dishonest about noting that 80+% of the abuse was male-on-minor male.

    There is noting dishonest about noting that abuse was contrary to the Church teaching and discipline, and therefore calling it “the church’s role” is dishonest.

    It is dishonest as a huckster for the LBGT position to cliam tha others don’t know the realities of sexual orientation.

    It is inherently dishonest, and part of your anti-religious, anti-Christian, and particularly anti-Catholic agenda knowing that the abuse was contrary to the Church teaching and discipline involves “god (calling) pedophiles and abusers to the priesthood, knowing they will be pedophiles and abusers”. It is actually a conscious vile slander.

    But you are you and no one expects anything better.

  • So, in the entire country you have 1,000 people listening to him, with an unknown percentage agreeing with him and 16,000 people signing a petition not to give him a venue.

    Again, whatever you need to tell yourself, Bill.

  • Sure, it’s gay people that have corrupted the church. Every single child abusing, vow breaking, conspiring to cover up priest, Bishop, and cardinal must be homosexual.

    I see it as quite the reverse.

    But sure. Enjoy your belief that god cares nothing about your church. Because that is the logical conclusion.

  • This outsider just keeps seeing a lot of thin-skinned defensiveness, and a ton of excuse-making. In fact, I’ve cataloged quite a few of the latter: https://www.agnostic-library.com/ma/roman-catholicisms-excuse-making-a-review/

    Also, real change, and real accountability, should be discernible by everyone — Catholic insiders, as well as outside observers like myself. If reforms and accountability aren’t objectively apparent, how can anyone say they’ve been imposed at all? 

  • To see change, you have to pay attention to real information, not simply chest thump based on comboxes.

    Here’s a report from CARA showing change in abuse rates since 2002 Charter. http://nineteensixty-four.blogspot.com/2018/08/pain-never-disappears-from-unhealed.html?m=1

    Maybe this will be received as just an excuse. But the PA report, for all it’s horror and neglect, shows that the majority of abuse and cover up took place before 2002. So the Charter made change. Implementing it worldwide would make more change. Bishop accountability panels run by lay professionals, more change. Shouting in comboxes, not so much.

  • Awwww, I decided to repost this, just for YOU, dear.

    As I read the comments below, all I can say is…

    Yeah. Sure. Keep calling this a “homosexual” problem, with the implications that it was somehow ordered by Gay Central multiple times over the past 1000 years…

    Yeah. Sure. Keep pretending that there is a lavender mafia that controls the Vatican, and not a faction of twisted perverts, some of whom happen to be same-sex attracted, but most of whom seem to have the morality and empathy of a sociopath…

    Let’s NOT talk about Faithless, dishonorable, dishonest, lying sacks-of-scheiss, Who make vows to a god they obviously don’t really believe in, let alone their assurances to themselves that this god will send men like ME to burn in hell forever for my alleged sin, but is happy to anoint them with the oil of sanctimony…

    that out and proud gay men like myself, who are horrified about this abuse, and even more horrified that one more time, WE are being reviled and slandered with the same modern (and quite ancient) version of the blood libel, formerly applied to The Jews (capitalization intentional), really just ought to accept this vile slander and reviling…

    That one more time, a deliberate conflation of my quite boring, not abusive, not dangerous, consensual, Harming no one sexuality is being made with lying, dishonorable, abusive, child molesting priests, and a whole bunch of other priests, bishops, and cardinals who see nothing “wrong”, in the famous words of a Belgian Archbishop, in “taking comfort with children”…

    That one more time, an actual cabal of homo hating homos, and their enablers, who infest the church like maggots, working their harm on people like me to exorcise their own demons and deflect attention from themselves…

    And all of this is being done, both to “protect” the church and protect the perpetrators, while using it as a pretext to attack a pope whose biggest sin is that he is only slightly to the left of Attila the Hun, instead of miles to the right…

    And to attack gay people who have simply had enough of being demonized for the problems of heterosexual society and the heterosexual majority, and wish to live our lives free of the hate hiding behind so-called faith.

    There is indeed a nest of vipers in your church. But this has nothing to do with me, or with any other self respecting gay person.

    In fact, it’s a slander on vipers.

  • Of course you say it from a strident gay position, a declared enemy of Catholicism, and someone unable to articulate a moral system beyond “I know it when I see it”.

    That is hardly the curriculum vitae to win anyone over.

  • The usual suspects keep dragging out the talking heads who are circling the wagon and trying to spread confusion.

    It illustrates how McCarrick was able to duck and dodge for so many years.

    In fact some of the people spreading confusion are the same ones that covered for him.

  • Re: “To see change, you have to pay attention to real information, not simply chest thump based on comboxes.” 

    To understand what I’m telling you, you first have to stop bellyaching that I’m saying anything, and stop accusing me of being driven by anger. I am not — no matter how ardently you may believe otherwise. 

    Re: “Here’s a report from CARA showing change in abuse rates since 2002 Charter.” 

    That abuse rates have fallen since 2002 does not mean priests and hierarchs shouldn’t be held accountable for abuse that happened before then or for having covered it up. 

    Re: “Maybe this will be received as just an excuse.” 

    It is, if you think the passage of enough time means no accountability is appropriate. 

    Re: “But the PA report, for all it’s horror and neglect, shows that the majority of abuse and cover up took place before 2002.” 

    Again, you seem to be using the “it’s-all-in-the-past” excuse for not disciplining anyone for abuse that happened in the past. I don’t buy that — at all. No way. 

    Re: “Implementing it worldwide would make more change.” 

    More priests being prosecuted for their abuse and hierarchs being prosecuted for obstruction of justice, would create even more change — and provide justice for the abuse and the cover-ups. 

    Re: “Bishop accountability panels run by lay professionals, more change.” 

    Which isn’t enough, if the bishops themselves keep records of the abuse under lock and key held only by themselves. (See e.g. the PA grand jury report.) 

    Re: “Shouting in comboxes, not so much.” 

    Who’s “shouting”? I’m not. I’m asking for only one thing: Accountability. Why do you think Catholic clergy should not be held accountable for their actions? Do you take the position that they’re above the law? If so, please explain the rationale for that. If you don’t, why do you object to holding them accountable for what they did? Is it solely because you say I’m “shouting” about it? That’s no reason not to hold people accountable for stuff. That’s just you being a crybaby Catholic apologist. 

  • It is actually more than the “homosexual agenda”.

    What we are looking at is a Modernist Apostasy dating to at least the 1950s, which infiltrated the very highest levels of the Church, including a component of the episcopacy.

    James Martin is just an errand boy for a small part of it.

  • I get that you want to dismiss what I say as motivated by my “insolence” and “anger.” You see, that’s the convenient solution for you. You don’t have to respond to me at all, you see, because “PsiCop is insolent and … hiss! … angry!” 

    But that’s illogical. It doesn’t matter how much “anger” or “insolence” you may perceive in me. What I am telling you, remains true: Wrongdoers should be held accountable for what they did. Justice demands it. It is never wrong to hold people accountable for their actions … not even if doing so appears to be giving in to someone’s “anger.” 

    In fact, the opposite is true: Purposely allowing wrongdoers to skate is inherently unjust. Why would any good Catholic like yourself promote an unjust position? 

    Inquiring minds want to know … ! 😉 

  • Thinking I want perpetrators to skate is your asuumption based on nothing I said. I was working in a parish outside Boston in 2002 and witnessed first hand survivor suffering and the malice of cover up. I quit my job in disgust but continued as a victim advocate.

    As I said, I get it that as an observer you want crimes punished and can’t comprehend the desire for healing, deeper and ultimately more restorative than punishment alone.

  • “From the comments made here on a regular basis, it seems many people have never received more than a basic, outdated introduction to human sexuality as binary: everyone is either male or female …. It has been a long time since that’s been the taken-for-granted paradigm of human sexuality.”

    Has anyone updated God yet?

  • Re: “As I said, I get it that as an observer you want crimes punished and can’t comprehend the desire for healing …” 

    I see you missed my initial point about justice having nothing to do with “healing,” or whatever other irrelevant dreck you want to use to prevent priests and hierarchs from being held accountable for what they did. 

  • No you don’t. Not at all. Not even close. You have absolutely no comprehension of what I said. You’re just a whiney knee-jerk Catholic apologist who can’t handle the fact that your own hierarchs have engaged in criminal behavior. You’re promoting injustice, and defending the indefensible. You can keep bellyaching about me all you want … but you’ve just revealed your character, and you have none. “Faithful” Catholics like you are the reason I’m proud to be an apostate from the Church. 

  • Is the report trustworthy? Men in prison do not have access to women: hence same sex sex. Priests have ample access to women and girls. Don’t see logic.

  • I’m not trying to prop up the ‘homosexual agenda’. I work in mental health and I’m trying to prop up the truth. Adult orientation does not predict sexual gender abuse in children. It’s access. This is why so much abuse happens in families. I don’t ever hope to get through to you, but maybe open minded people reading our discussions will take a minute to think. Ephebophilia may or may not be a different story, but at the moment it seems to be a question of sexually maturity stunted in adolescence and that’s true for women as well as men. Then of course, no one in a theological system based in binary definitions, ever deals with bi-sexuality because it doesn’t fit the binary logic.

  • No we are not watching which agenda Francis carries water for. What we are watching is the dismantling of the clerical system which had it parts fueled by quid pro quo or outright blackmail. That you can overlook Maciel’s influence on the people around JPII, including Sodano and Dzwitz, says far more about your agenda than it does Francis’s. The abuse and cover up is endemic to both liberal and conservative clergy. It’s scary to think, but illicit sex might be the one issue that kept them all on the same page in terms of their ‘spiritual authority’ and lock step allegiance. I’m perfectly will to go there, you can’t seem to wrap your head around that fact.

  • Whatever. I suspect I am far more familiar with Freudian thinking than you will ever be.

    During the depression, my dad turned down professional contracts with both the Detroit Tigers and Red Wings. He carried a two handicap in golf. He was well over six feet and well built. He was in Burke’s definition, a manly man who put his family obligations above his own personal successes…..and his opinionsn were based on listening to others arguments. He once told me the only thing he was afraid of ‘was a little man with a gun.’ He supported limiting gun access even though he himself owned three.

  • You simply love to make statements like ” I suspect I am far more familiar with Freudian thinking than you will ever be.”

    It has always struck me as odd.

    I have no idea why you’ve decided to illuminate this discussion group on your father.

  • I’ve been reading the Bilgrimage tralala about Francis, Maciel, Burke, and so on and so on for years.

    If you’re perfectly willing to “go there”, you can leave me out.

    The vile gossip is just that.

    The overall issue is over a half century of Modernist Apostasy, most which the denizens at your normal stomping grounds greeted with two thumbs up – right up until it became apparent the whirlwind is going to take this papacy with it.

  • The sentence “I work in mental health and I’m trying to prop up the truth.” contains a bit of a self-contradiction.

    The “binary logic”, of course, is the notion of good and evil, right and wrong.

    Psychology is the theology of scientism.

  • Because McCarrick was already retired, was leading nothing, and had no followers (or at least was thought not to).

  • Even Jesus said some things that don’t fit the binary even though he used binary language to say them, such as ‘turn the cheek 70×7’, love one another as you love yourselves, or the poor shall inherit the earth. The entire Sermon on the Mount is binaries that transcend the usual binary thinking and should make one think. We certainly are expected to believe in a Trinity that does not fit the binary.

  • ” ‘turn the cheek 70×7′” as you so quaintly put it is binary.

    It’s actually a spin on a rabbinical interpretation.

    “ove one another as you love yourselves, or the poor shall inherit the earth” are also binary – there is a right, there is a wrong.

    The Trinity is similarly binary.

    Theology really is not your shtick.

  • Nice rebuttal. It’s almost believable, except for the fact Maciel was more less forced to step down in 2005, officially retired in January of 2006, and finally censured by Benedict five months later.

  • Right – he was *forced* and the censure was announced with a public apology and changes in his former organization.

    I have always found the bizarre takes on Maciel, Burke, and others at Bilgrimage …. well bizarre.

    Rembert Weakland? Who was he?

    Daniel L. Ryan? Never heard of him.

    Patrick Ziemann? Nope, a blank.

    Well, I see it’s just before 8 there and much later here, and frankly I’m not reading anything interesting, so a pleasant evening to you.

  • You too, but you are totally ignoring the comment in which I said I was perfectly willing to hand in the liberals in the mix because there were also an abundance of conservatives and it has nothing to do with theological positions and everything to do with protecting the privileges of the clerical caste. I give you your Francis, Weakland, McCarrick and Mahoney, you can’t give me your Maciel or Groer or Law or Bevilaqua or any other conservative who covered for abuse and that includes Benedict and JPII. This is not an ‘either or’ situation…..So have a good night.

  • Only the horribly naive and thoroughly brainwashed seek the ” TRUTH ” about Vigano.

    The entire RCC ” edifice ” is structurally ” rotted ” from an infestation of deadly metastasizing ” mold “.

    The argument as to whether the ” mold ” is type A or type B is irrelevant.

    The entire edifice poses a danger to humanity.

    Too late for remediation –

    Burn the whole GD thing down !

    .

  • I published on my blog this morning a translation of the following article from last night’s Corriere della Sera:

    THE DENUNCIATION
    Pope Francis, new accusations of Viganò, who is seen in a video applauding Cardinal molester McCarrick
    In a 2012 video relaunched by the US press, Carlo Maria Viganò publicly praises Cardinal McCarrick, whom Viganò today used to criticize the Pope
    by Luigi Accattoli

    VATICAN CITY: Revival day on Wednesday for the pedophilia scandal and for the attack on the Pope on Sunday by the former apostolic nuncio to the United States, Carlo Maria Viganò: Francis at the hearing in St Peter’s Square reaffirmed the decision to to go all the way to the “purification” of the Church from those “crimes”; but also his opponent – who had asked him to resign accusing him of being an alliance with the abusers – renewed his assault.

    With reference to the visit to Ireland on Saturday and Sunday, Francis recalled that it was also marked “by the pain and bitterness” for those abuses for which he “asked for forgiveness” and acknowledged that “the ecclesiastical authorities in the past have not always been able to adequately deal with these crimes “.

    The renewal of Viganò’s attack took place in an interview with Aldo Maria Valli, a journalist of Tg1, one of the five journalists who had published his memorial. Speaking from a place he does not reveal, where he would take refuge so as not to be reached by the media, the former nuncio in the US rejects the criticisms that have been addressed to him, in particular that of having acted in revenge against the Pope for the lack of promotion to cardinal, and claims to have spoken only “so that the truth emerges”, or the truth of the coverage of the abuses of the clergy: “Because now corruption has reached the top of the hierarchy of the Church”.

    In the phone call – reported by Valli in his blog – Viganò states that he is not “the crow” and that he has no resentment. He assured that he had renounced on his own initiative the cardinalate, which was offered to him by Benedict XVI. Finally, he calls slanderous re-enactments by the media of his conflicts with a brother and a sister for reasons of inheritance: it would be “poison to destroy my credibility”.

    But a twist – whether small or big we shall see in the next few days – arrived yesterday from America: the Catholic News Service, the multimedia portal of the American Catholic Church, has documented in film the attitude of public praise given by Viganò to Cardinal McCarrick, now undermined by Francis as a full-blown abuser: it happened on May 2, 2012, when Benedict was still pope, and six months after Viganò had been sent the order that Cardinal McCarrick was not appear in public. On that day at a gala dinner Viganò gave a speech at the opening of which he greeted with emphasis “his eminence Cardinal McCarrick, whom we all love very well”.

    In the memorial, Viganò had charged Francis with having dropped the “secret” sanctions placed at MCarrick by Pope Benedict, allowing him to return to appear in public, while the video shows that the cardinal also appeared with him.

    The only Vatican representative who has commented up to now on the attack of Viganò is Cardinal Becciu, who told the newspaper Nuova Sardegna yesterday that it is a “sad affair” that makes him feel “even closer to Francis” . As for the merit of the matter, Becciu makes his own the words spoken by the Pope on the plane: “The communiqué (of the former nuncio) speaks for itself”.

  • The summary “it has nothing to do with theological positions and everything to do with protecting the privileges of the clerical caste” simply reflects the a priori assumptions you bring to the matter. It is the warp, woof, meat, and potatoes of Bilgrimage.

    The Church is, by its nature, hierarchical with an ordained priesthood. There is no “caste” as founded. The Pontiff should be the Servant of Servants.

    Human beings by their nature are prone to selfishness and susceptible to evil.

    There is no surprise, then, that what you call “liberals” and “conservatives” are represented in the category of those who perform bad deeds.

    The remedy to both, of course, is the Gospel. When the Good News becomes the Good Living disaster follows. When the Church becomes a political sparring ground, disaster follows.

    1 Corinthians 1:11 My brothers and sisters, some from Chloe’s household have informed me that there are quarrels among you. 12 What I mean is this: One of you says, “I follow Paul”; another, “I follow Apollos”; another, “I follow Cephas”; still another, “I follow Christ.”

    13 Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Were you baptized in the name of Paul?

    History becomes clearer in hindsight, but one cannot fairly applaud Hans Küng and then feign shock at Theodore McCarrick. One cannot give the Church the one finger salute on homosexual physical congress for four decades and then feign surprise that clerics violate their vows.

    As the old parental admonition goes, it is great fun until somebody gets hurt.

    Well, several somebodies got hurt, and this vile gossip, rooting for parties, and finger pointing needs to cease – now.

  • You do have spend some time actually familiarizing yourself with the theology of what, after all, is a mystery.

    NO WAY to argue with that.

    If you’re working on that project, you’re talking to the wrong person.

  • This is right out of the Lavender Mafia playbook. One of my contacts at the Vatican (who broke this story on my Facebook feed) said that there would be a concerted effort to damage Vigano’s name. So here it is, with one of their media lapdogs.

    Of you have evidence of wrongdoing on the part of Vigano, please come up with someone who will testify.

  • People conflate pre-pubescent children with what the legal definition of “children” is (which can include almost adults). Not to put a gross spin on it, but 80% of those in the Jay report (and 79% of those in Pennsylvania) were post-pubescent teenagers. This makes it a homosexual problem, not a pedophilia problem (though I’m sure you can find young children or girls in the report.)

    A huge problem is admitting homosexuals to the seminary which is a near occasion to sin. It would be like admitting a heterosexual man to a convent. Most sisters would keep their vows. But some sisters wouldn’t give a crap about their vows. Other sisters would try and stay chaste and fail. It would be a recipe for disaster (which admitting homosexuals to the seminary has become).

  • Not all Muslims are terrorists, but an overwhelming preponderance of terrorists are Muslim. Not all homosexuals have sex with teenage boys, but the overwhelming preponderance of abuse in the Church was homosexual.

    And your use of the term “LGBT” rather than “sexually disordered” say a lot.

  • This has to be carefully investigated. One of the tactics of the lavender mafia is to bear false witness against their accusers, and even plant evidence against holy priests who speak out against them.

  • Again, sir, the fact that 80% of the molestation was male-male means that it was same-sex, not necessarily that the priests involved were homosexual. It’s an important distinction. The John Jay Report states that the majority of priest offenders were heterosexual.

  • Oh please.

    When a Catholic teaches his or her children the Catholic Faith, that’s “indoctrination”.

    When you post “The John Jay Report states that the majority of priest offenders were heterosexual.”, which it does not, that’s the result of “education”.

    No, it’s the result of an attitude that scoffs, which holds the personal intellect out to be much more important than it is, in short a pose – NOT education.

  • A good observation.

    So good, in fact, that, predictably, the usual suspects are criticizing you.

  • Why just the pope? Look at the church as a whole. Look at its conduct in every diocese around the globe.

    Every bishop protects the church no matter how many children are raped. They protect the church no matter how many women are enslaved in Laundries. They protect the church no matter how many children are tortured in orphanages.

    Never have catholic bishops stood up against systematic abuse or protected victims. Ever. Anywhere on the globe. Only with outside exposure and disgust do,bishops take action, and still the focus is the reputation of the not the care of victims.

    On what possible basis do you conclude that any Catholic bishop, arch bishop, cardinal or pope has clean hands?

    Francis is corrupt. Vogano is corrupt. Because no priest could be promoted beyond the local parish without playing the game.

  • If the catholic church forbade all priests from eating or writing with their right hand, this would decrease the number of right handed people who want to be priests.

    When priests were exposed as serial rapists, ignorant peiole could blame the overwhelming number of left handed priests. But that would be ignorant.

    A. The church has created an environment where children are taught to be obedient and silent and abusive priests are protected.

    B. They also created an environment where people who want to be in a relationship with a woman don’t sign up.

    B is not the problem. A is.

  • A. The Church has created an environment where children and adults are taught to be obedient to lawful authority.

    B. The opponents of the Church within its bosom created an environment where people who pointed out the opponents did bad things were silenced.

    A is not the problem. B is.

  • overwhelming preponderance of terrorists are Muslim.

    False.

    Timothy McVeigh
    Ku Klux Klan
    Bombings of abortion clinics and murder of abortion doctors
    Eric Robert Rudolph
    Anders Breivik, Norway
    Peter James Knight, Australia
    Anti balaka groups, Africa
    Several christian terrorist groups in India
    Decades of bombings by the Irish Republican Army
    Attacks on mosques and Muslim schools and Muslim refugees all over the globe, includung Indonesia, Lebanon, several Afrucan countries, etc.

  • “Never have catholic bishops stood up against systematic abuse or protected victims. Ever. Anywhere on the globe.”

    Complete utter fiction.

  • While you’re doing what you’ve always done: commenced being part of the problem, not part of the solution.

  • Perhaps “overwhelming preponderance of terrorists” means “the exceptions which prove the rule” to you?

  • Okay, then the seminaries should not admit men who would consider having sex with another man, whatever you prefer to call them.

  • Actually, it shows that you do not subscribed to the revealed Truth as taught by the Catholic Church. Why are you here? Are you a troll?

  • “It is crucial whether or not a person normalizes his attractions. Doing this, he suppresses his reason and conscience, for the inner perception that homosexual activities are contra naturam is inborn and universal. Starting thus to lie to himself, he must suppress his awareness of the normality of man-woman love and of normal marriage with its fertility, and is forced to cling desperately to rationalizations that justify his choice to see himself as normal, healthy, and morally good. Thus he alienates himself from reality, locks himself up in wishful thinking and, not willing to seek the truth about himself, wants to change the natural feelings and opinions about homosexuality of 98% of mankind which he feels as hostile to him. In reality, it is not society, culture, or religion that persecute him but his own conscience.”

    https://onepeterfive.com/homosexuality-in-the-church-cardinal-mccarrick-and-the-internal-ecclesial-attack-on-humanae-vitae/

  • Exactly….since the top matters most..we start at the top.

    Let’s examine today’s news about why Muller (and earlier his 3 priest assistants) were removed hastily from the CDF, with no reason given by our normally talkative pope!

    They had recommended AGAINST the restoration of faculties to an abusive priest, even though “mercy happy” Francis had wanted to (restore)…Francis restored the faculties of this priest who was later rolled up in the gay/cocaine issue in a Vatican apartment (who Francis himself approved him getting that apartment)!

    Francis’s fingerprints are all over this gay/coverup/promote mess. Sorry. It’s the reality we have to face now.

  • Reading comprehension course strongly recommend.

    All my examples are within the last 100 years, give or take.

  • Don’t be sorry. We agree, except I would change your previous comment as follows:

    Let’s focus on abuse and the high probability of a coverup, perhaps involving now Pope Francis, and not including the whistleblower.

  • I’m guessing the whistle blower will do just fine under a real scrutiny.

    Papa Francesco’s saccharine joy is gone as his gay friends are rolled up in scandal.

  • Hey, yourself. Even though we disagree on some issues, that still will not stop me from complimenting you (or anyone) who makes a good point.

  • No. If you are Catholic, you believe everything the Catholic Church has revealed to be true. You don’t.

  • Heh. There is a culture of male on male predation in the seminaries. Oh, it’s getting better now, but the… ummm… “excesses” of the late 70’s and early 80’s are coming back to haunt us. This is the result of the “sexual revolution”.

  • There is a culture of male on male sex in the seminaries. Absolutely. I know two men who left the seminary because of it. They were gay, by the way. But all that tells me is that you have a bunch of men in the seminary–semenary?– that not only don’t take their vows seriously, but don’t take theology seriously. That sounds to me like a catholic problem, not a male on male problem– and for a lot of reasons you can search my comment history to read about.
    But that isn’t the same thing as male on male predation, though clearly, with McCarrick, you have THAT as well. That also sounds like a Catholic problem.
    And NEITHER of those things is the same as the mythical lavender mafia, which, if it actually existed would be yet another Catholic problem.

  • Any cleric who in orders under the Canon Law and requirements in force longer than any cleric is alive who was homosexual at the time of ordination was either hiding it or a higher up violated the law.

  • Since you’re an anti-Catholic, atheist, raised Jewish (sort of) who has made clear in multiple posts your knowledge of Catholicism is how to spell “Catholic”, who is avowed homosexual and pro-LBGT agenda voice, why would any Catholic take you at all seriously?

    Seriously.

  • Sex without consent is rape. Children cannot consent. Priests are raping children with impunity, and the church will not take any action to stop it.

    You can take your word games and stick them where the sun don’t shine.

  • She was cutting quite the rug at National Reporter Comments until they pulled the plug. She now runs http://www.aggiornamento.net/ for those with “21st Century Faith” (the word “Catholic” is absent) where she posts things along these lines and leftward:

    https://disqus.com/home/discussion/religionnews/the_charge_against_vigano_must_now_be_investigated/#comment-4067028848

    “From the comments made here on a regular basis, it seems many people have never received more than a basic, outdated introduction to human sexuality as binary: everyone is either male or female, gay or straight, and — for at least some of our commenters — it’s possible to tell which are which by looking at them. It has been a long time since that’s been the taken-for-granted paradigm of human sexuality.”

    “…. Personally, I have struggled with the whole gender binary discussion, so I can understand if others do as well. But even if I don’t accept some of what is current in that discussion, it’s important to be conversant with its issues if I want to carry on a conversation with other adults.”

    Apparently God made them, male, female, inscrutable, and convertible.

  • The statement “Priests are raping children with impunity, and the church will not take any action to stop it.” happens to be a complete and total falsehood.

  • We understand. The world is passing you by. The Church has changed, too. Pope John Paul is gone. Benedict is gone, and Pope Francis is proclaiming the gospel so the world can hear it. We understand it’s hard for some folks. But perhaps you can find something better to do with your life than sit at a computer and tell other people you’re Catholic and they’re not. Because there was never a time when that was Catholic teaching.

  • ” Not to put a gross spin on it, but…”

    So, your “spin” is not “gross”. It’s just a “spin”. Got it. Thank you.

    “The [John Jay] report concludes that the vast majority of clergy sex offenders are not pedophiles at all but were situational generalists violating whoever they had access to. Pedophiles, by definition, seek sexual gratification from pre-pubescent children of one gender and target this age and gender group (especially while under stress). Clergy sexual offenders in the Church were more likely to be targeting whoever was around them (and they had unsupervised access to) regardless of age and gender.

    “The researchers conclude that there is no causative relationship between either celibacy or homosexuality and the sexual victimization of children in the Church. Therefore, being celibate or being gay did not increase the risk of violating children. So, blaming the clergy abuse crisis in the Catholic Church on gay men or celibacy is unfounded” (https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/do-the-right-thing/201105/the-new-john-jay-report-clergy-abuse-in-the-catholic-church).

  • Who is this “we” you keep talking about?

    What tells other people you’re Catholic or not is what say and do.

    Do you recognize:

    “I agree that the Church’s decision to follow Augie’s influence resulted
    in an extremely twisted understanding of human sexuality.”?

    May we take “Augie” to be St. Augustine? And YOU know more than he, a saint, a Church Father, a Doctor of the Church, did?

    “If you are Catholic, you believe everything the Catholic Church has revealed to be true.” may be clumsily worded, but it is the Church’s position.

    Catholics know that. Faux Catholics do not.

  • Your comments show that your bigotry influences your interpretation of information. They also demonstrate that you confuse doctrine with facts. Not recommended.

  • “Nothing. You’ve got nothing. Just as we thought.”

    So when I challenged you to prove a single article, book, or testimony wrong, you showed you have nothing. Nothing!

    troll!

  • It’s unquestionable at this point that a significant number of the vile criminals in the CC are homosexuals. What any heterosexual does in the CC doesn’t change in the least the vileness of these homosexual men and women corrupting and destroying the CC.

    That is the significant different between the CC and other churches. It’s so much more putrid because of its gay mafia.

  • 80% of CC abuse victims are male teenagers, and the cover-up was significantly carried out by the gay mafia; most of the sexual harassment in the CC was against adult males, all because of the homosexual scum in the CC. Homosexuals like you will always lie about abuse and crimes committed by LGBTs – due to your own homosexual perversion, your agenda is always to lie and cover up.
    But scandal after scandal is proving just how much you lie. You’re just upset the truth is getting out.

  • Homo-agenda people like yourself are always denying crimes by LGBTs… while they are harassing and abusing kids and adults, you tell yourself none of it is happening

    Disgusting

  • That is part of of it.

    The major part of it, however, is that once she posts something, it is never retracted, ever, or corected, ever.

    That is some of a problem in these sorts of discussions.

  • Why should she ‘retract or correct’ her comments?
    The honest thing is to stand by ones comments.
    Rather than your own practice of changing your comments after you have posted them.

  • Seems to me that healthy young men giving up their sexuality is far more “disordered” than gay people.

    RCC has some nerve talking about “sexual disorders” when it has opposed sex for most of its history.

  • It’s funny that it doesn’t occur to them what it says about them and their church. 1000 years at least of molestation and sexual abuse, all at the hands of priests called to the church by god, and certified by the church as such. Not to mention the enablers, conspirators, cover-uppers, liars, formicators, Look-the-other Wayers, and all kinds of supportive behaviors.

    Sounds like a real nest of vipers to me, if what this bigot is saying is true. (Of course, it isn’t). A lot of sociopathic, psychopathic, dangerous people, all working under the same roof, convincing other people to give them money and support, which they are more than happy to do.

    Well, bigots irretrievably poisoned by hate! What can you say? They sure to like to project, don’t they?

  • Just like no tales trolls like you seriously “Bob” or whatever you call yourself today. 🤣🤣🤣. Still laughing at you!

  • I had written:

    “The remedy to both, of course, is the Gospel. When the Good News becomes the Good Living disaster follows. When the Church becomes a political sparring ground, disaster follows.”

    “1 Corinthians 1:11 My brothers and sisters, some from Chloe’s household have informed me that there are quarrels among you. 12 What I mean is this: One of you says, ‘I follow Paul’; another, ‘I follow Apollos’; another, ‘I follow Cephas’; still another, ‘I follow Christ.’”

    “13 Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Were you baptized in the name of Paul?”

    The first thing I read at your favorite watering hole this morning:

    https://disqus.com/home/discussion/bilgrimage/bilgrimage_buy_viganos_attack_on_francis_and_youre_buying_a_vicious_orchestrated_anti_lgbtq_attack/#comment-4070474625

    William D. Lindsey > colkoch

    “Yes, they’re his war machine, and practically the only one he has left — except for the super-rich, who have always been pulling the puppet strings of these right-wing religionists, who are just tools to them. Michael Sean Winters has an essay at NCR today (just saw it after I had posted my posting this morning) entitled something like “The EWTN Schism,” in which he makes very clear the overlap between Vigano’s supporters and Trump supporters, especially in the U.S. Catholic episcopal club. He minces no words.”

    White hats, black hats, conspiracies, yada, yada, yada.

  • Doesn’t say much good about your church or yours god’s proprietary interest in it, does it?

    That”truth” has been getting out for hundreds of years. Only right wing Christians like yourself, consumed byhate and fear and despite and ignorance, buy it any more

    But sure, dearie. Keep slandering and reviling away. It makes the baby jesus cry when you do it, and will damn you to the hell I don’t believe in, but what the hey! You’ll continue to drive a stake through the heart of your church as you drive good Catholics away from the church. You’ll satisfy your own hate filled agenda while calling me names that have nothing to do with reality. And of course, you will insure that This Most Catholic Problem just continues, while good men, Many of whom happen to be gay, will avoid the church like a plague, feeding your church shortage of priests.

    It’s a win win for everyone.

    .

  • “That ‘truth’ has been getting out for hundreds of years.”

    That doesn’t really address the 80+% statistic, does it?

    “But sure, dearie. Keep slandering and reviling away.”

    That doesn’t really address the 80+% statistic, does it?

    “It makes the baby jesus cry when you do it, and will damn you to the hell I don’t believe in, but what the hey! You’ll continue to drive a stake through the heart of your church as you drive good Catholics away from the church.”

    You wouldn’t know a good Catholic if she or he stood in front of you, made introductions, and shook your hand.

    “You’ll satisfy your own hate filled agenda ….”.

    Held by Jews, Christians, and Muslims for centuries.

    “This Most Catholic Problem”

    Except, of course, for every place that has the same problem and worse – public schools for an example.

    Your occasional rants don’t seem to have much to do with any facts.

  • Bobobobobobobobobob! Bob!
    I’ve never tried avoiding the 80% figure, but then, I’m not boblivious to the nuances of sexual abuse and behavior. Nor am I trying bobfuscate the actual issues because I am boblivious to facts, and have a vested interest– not to mention a bunch of bobvious issues– in ignoring the bobvious.
    Nor am I trying to change the bobject of my disaffections by saying, yet one more time, as if it had anything to do with This Most Catholic Prboblem, except to actually prove the points I’ve been trying to make repeatedly, despite the bobjections of someone constantly saying, “Bobut what abobout them public School teachers, eh? What abobout THEM?”
    someday dearie, but not today, you will actually have something to say that is not an lame put down, a lamer insult, or the lamest possible excuse for the behavior of your church.
    As for “held by Jews, Christians and muslims for centuries”? The lamest excuse of all. No longer, at least among the civilized ones. And nothing so lame as an appeal to tradition. For centuries, they were killing each other with glee, a kind of religious detergent– get them jewspots and muzzispots out!!! And centuries of tradition to argue for it. Centuries, I tell you! There’s TRADITION for you.
    And in fact, they still are. And gay people when they had the power to do so. Bobviously, if people like you had your way, so would you.
    some of us grow up. Bobviously, you will never do so.
    Meanwhile… WHAT ABOUT THOSE PUBLIC SCHOOL TEACHERS?!?!?!? AT LEAST CATHOLIC PRIESTS ARE NOT AS BAD AS THE PUBLIC SCHOOL TEACHERS!!!!! As if THAT weren’t damning enough.
    And at least, public school teachers don’t claim they represent god and holiness.

  • First, Politico is my favorite watering hole. Second, MSW was entirely correct. Third, the conservative rightwing has most certainly treated Pope Francis as if he is an illegitimate pope. Fourth, the Sainthood for JPII was just a bit premature and Vigano is not helping JPII one little bit. All the Cardinals and archbishops Vigano attacks for the McCarrick cover up were all JPII appointees. Fifth, the only pope who publicly did anything about McCarrick was Francis. If Benedict did issue the sanctions Vigano claims he did, EPBenedict did not enforce or follow them, and Archbishop Ganswein has not validated Vigano one little bit. Which all leads me to wonder, just who is the ‘gay cabal’ Benedict was really referencing?

  • I would not be surprised. I’m reminded of a basic psychological truth: To love others, one must first love oneself. Everything starts within. If I do not satisfy my own needs, I cannot help others meet their needs. The opposite of love is indifference. “R.A. Bob” is not indifferent on issues of sexual orientation. To hate others (however expressed), one must first hate oneself. To love oneself requires one to accept one’s weaknesses as well as strengths, one’s sins as well as goodness. Folks like “R.A. Bob” tend to focus on — and condemn — others. I can’t help but conclude that he and like-minded people are afraid to examine themselves. Sad.

  • That “…. the conservative rightwing has most certainly treated Pope Francis as if he is an illegitimate pope” only occurred when he opened his mouth. When he was elected no one questioned it.

    When I read the stuff you’re discussing I am reminded of the Daily Racing Form. Handicappers of race horses get a copy, peruse it, and pick their favorites. It’s a great hobby.

    If one is addicted to bilgrimage.blogspot.com, http://www.ncronline.org, http://www.aggiornamento.net, remnantnewspaper.com, or any of the other “man the barricades” type sources, it’s another Daily Racing Form.

    When “Archbishop Viganò Speaks, the Neo-Catholics Panic”, I am reading precisely what Paul was speaking of.

    None of this “hobby” is contributing an iota to the welfare of Catholics or the Church.

    None of it builds anything, none of it solves anything.

    It is, in fact, vile gossip.

  • Your rants are getting less and less connected to reality.

    I do read your rants at some new Catholic watering holes where you have found fresh meat.

    Your spiel, such as it is, has one and only one purpose: you hate the Catholic Church and want to damage it as much as possible.

    The further back in your posts one looks, the less disguised that is.

    It opposed things you wanted. It teaches sexual morality. It speaks in the public square.

    You also want to put a couple coats of paint over the impact of LBGT on society since the reality and the propaganda do not mesh.

    What you’re not interested in abuse in general.

    What you’re not interested in doing something for the abused.

    Continue to be shrill.

    It works for your opponents.

  • hardly a total falsehood . we are now in the stage of attempting to find the answers to the question of who knew of it and when did they know it .

  • the statement that you are attempting to sexualize is that seminaries should not consider admitting men who are not fully committed to celibacy and are capable to persevering in that commitment for a lifetime . it matters not if they are hetero or homosexual . no sex as in celibacy is a clear line .

  • spin that happens to be true . the prison analogy is quite appropriate . people of immature sexuality or are people who prey will act in the narrow confines of their environment .

  • priests do not generally have access to young girls . they are generally expected to interact with and guide young boys .

  • so one must not pay attention to additions to reports that clarify . especially if they contradict the conclusions that Bob comes to ?

  • Nice of you to address at least one point in my comment. At least in a Daily Racing Form, the horses will eventually race and people do put money where there mouth is.

  • “…a welcoming environment to gays.”

    if there are a large number of men told that they, as gays, must as catholics be chaste [ “catholic catechism, 2359 : Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the
    virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support
    of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and
    should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.” ] , the question of course rises why not put one’s energies into the profession that demands chastity anyway ?

  • Bobobobobobobobob! Bob!

    Can I call you bob?

    “Your rants are getting less and less connected to reality.” So you say. Maybe reality for you is calling people “big poopy heads”, which is 99% of your intelligent comments.

    “I do read your rants at some new Catholic watering holes where you have found fresh meat.” Just like I have said repeatedly. You follow me around obsessing over me.

    “Your spiel, such as it is, has one and only one purpose: you hate the Catholic Church and want to damage it as much as possible.” Nah, not really. I just don’t like your Holy Church molesting kids, and trying to blame me for it. But as you keep saying, “WHAT ABOUT THE PUBLIC SCHOOL TEACHERS! WHAT ABOUT THEM!?!?!?!” Here’s the question for your: “we’re the Catholic Church. Get to know us! And when it comes to molesting kids, WE’RE NOT AS BAD AS THE PUBLIC SCHOOLTEACHERS!” Is that really the hill you want to die on?

    “The further back in your posts one looks, the less disguised that is.” Just what I said. You obsess about me no end. I don’t even read 95% of what you post. Research it? Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.

    “It opposed things you wanted.” Yes it does. Like, I want an end to child molestation. It prefers to cover it up.

    “It teaches sexual morality.” Sure it does. Here’s Martin Luther on the Catholic Church. Maybe you can post endless on his blog how much he hates the church. “These things are clearer than the light to all men; and the Church of Rome, formerly the most holy of all Churches, has become the most lawless den of thieves, the most shameless of all brothels, the very kingdom of sin, death, and hell; so that not even antichrist, if he were to come, could devise any addition to its wickedness.” I suppose you could accuse Luther of hating the church.

    “It speaks in the public square.” More and more people don’t wish to listen to it.

    “You also want to put a couple coats of paint over the impact of LBGT on society since the reality and the propaganda do not mesh.” That impact is crap you and your fellow travelers keep making up. If my marriage impacts your marriage, your marriage was in trouble long before I came around. The molestation scandals are at least 1000 years old. Let’s talk about THAT, shall we?

    “What you’re not interested in abuse in general.” Crap you keep making up.

    “What you’re not interested in doing something for the abused.” Crap you keep making up.

    “Continue to be shrill. It works for your opponents. ” in your little right wing echo chamber, for sure. You should get out more.

    Bobobobobobobobob! Bob! Can I call you bob?

    Lobbing continual insults, invective, and grade school “poopy head” comments is not an argument. With the grownups, it will rarely even start one. Occasionally, you do have something to say. Yet, I have seen it a number of times where you provide a citation you obvious either didn’t read or didn’t understand. When that gets pointed out to you, it’s right back to …”big poopy head.”

    But the majority of your comments are simply how much you despise everyone who doesn’t agree with you, and how certain you are that you are right. You claim you are smart, but You block people who disagree with you, or at least threaten to— another Good indication of your intellectual fragility. You are clearly an Uber Alles catholic, but claim you have”never” disclosed your religious identity. Right. Walking down the street in a one person parade screaming “I’m a catholic” will never convince a soul.

    Honey, you are just not as smart as you claim to be, much less as you think you are.

    Now really! please! Do find yourself something to do without constantly following me around. Block me, dearie! That’s it! block me! Then you can go around callingeveryone else a big poopy head! think of how much time and energy it will save you!

    It will probably improve both of our lives.

  • You’re quite correct.
    Viganò’s Letter is vile gossip.
    It builds nothing; solves nothing; contributes nothing to the welfare of Catholics; and contributes nothing to the welfare of the Church.

  • More ranting, more desperation, less and less connected to reality.

    “But the majority of your comments are simply how much you despise everyone who doesn’t agree with you, and how certain you are that you are right.”

    Apparently you were looking in a mirror while composing that.

    You’re a garden variety anti-Catholic packaged in the gay agenda with an atheist ribbon.

    Beyond that … nada.

  • The Bilgrimage crowd, the http://www.aggiornamento.net crowd, and based on the response to which I am responding yourself, are highly interested in handicapping, very little interested in acquainting yourselves with the Church’s teachings, and zero interested in fixing anything.

    There really did not appear to be anything to “address” in your posts beyond the Francis comment.

  • as is yours if propping up the anti-gay agenda is the goal .

    anyone interested in a real conversation based on respect for the other ?

  • I made a note to get back to this. You may find this little “cheat sheet” helpful:

    https://www.ewtn.com/library/curia/cdfadtu.htm

    which was issued coincident with the promulgation of “Ad tuendam fidem”.

    The Professio fidei restatef the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed and added three propositions to better distinguish the order of the truths to which the believer adheres.

    Your correspondent believes that a number of Catholic truths are open for discussion: homosexual physical congress, the nature of the sexes, the Bible, the origin of the Church itself.

    As in common with the “modern” approach, revelation is judged in the light of psychology, sociology, economics, and various secular and changeable disciplines and theories.

    This is precisely what the Church predicted:

    http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10415a.htm

    This approach links with “scientism”, and pretends to be “Catholic” (“I’m at least as Catholic as you are. Perhaps more.”).

    I have found arguing with its proponents to be a waste of time relative to the adherents, but going through the logical problems, factual problems, theological problems, and so on does provide other people ammunition to use in future discussions, here or elsewhere.

  • not alone . and generally not without nuns around .

    the only time a priest would have time alone with a woman is when she is a woman, above the age of consent and marriage .

  • “Are you a troll?”

    You must be new. Monica is not a “troll”. If her previous blogging is any indication, I suspect she could “run circles” around you — and me, too!

  • Sorry, but such criticisms are both meaningless and stupid. I’m surprised to see such tactics (“you’re a homophobe”, “you’re a closet case”) still being used after all these years

    The idea behind those silly phrases is to skip any rational, evidence-based discussion regarding homosexuality or homosexuals, and simply try to intimidate the target into silence. Perhaps it works on some people.

    But on OTHER folks, umm, it never works at all. Better watch out for those OTHER posters Mwahahaha!

  • 81 percent homosexual (same-sex), 19 percent opposite sex. Aimed at postpubescent boys. The offenders were gay priests, not heterosexual priests. The numbers and targets remained the same in both 2004 and 2011.

  • 81 percent homosexual, 19 percent opposite sex. Gay priests going after boys, mostly.

    Plus the McCarrick case (adult seminarians, all male), and he wasn’t the only guy going after seminarians.

  • Then how do you explain that these priests had access to both teenage boys and teenage girls yet chose the teenage boys?

    (The prison analogy is not going to wash here.)

  • I can tell you that you are espousing heresy. That is a fact. And admonishing the sinner and teaching the ignorant are spiritual acts of mercy.

  • That is just so silly.

    First, I am not trolling. And second, what, exactly, do you mean by :”anti-Catholic”? It is certainly true that I have deep suspicions about the Roman Catholic Church *qua institution*. But certainly not about individual Catholics–almost every one of whom I know, is vastly more sensible than Catholic clergy.

    But more to the point, that was simply shorthand. What method of saying “Roman Catholic Church” should I use?

  • It’s not a “Catholic” problem, because the perpetrators are behaving in a way that is contrary to the teachings of Jesus. It’s a hierarchy problem. It is a “smoke of Satan” problem.

    When men who are active homosexuals or homosexual activists enter the priesthood and rise through the ranks becoming rectors of seminaries and becoming the gatekeepers of who gets admitted and makes it through. Then this sort of thing blossoms.

    These gay rectors try and discourage masculine men from entering the seminary or God-forbid for them, making it through.

    This has mostly been cleaned up in the seminaries. That’s why you’re not seeing a lot of new abuses. You’re seeing the abuses in the late 70’s and early 80’s coming to light.

  • Yeah. Sure. Keep calling this a “homosexual” problem, with the implications that it was somehow ordered by Gay Central multiple times over the past 1000 years…

    Up until very recently, homosexuals were closeted. Not more so than in the middle ages. There were very few “jobs” that a homosexual could enter where their family and friends would wonder why they weren’t dating women and getting married.

    Being a priest was most likely the only one.

    Maybe they thought that a holy lifestyle could help them avoid the intrinsic evil of homosexual acts. Maybe the wanted to rely on the grace of God to help them. Maybe they were atheists like you who didn’t really believe but decided to fake their way in, and then they had free rein to pray on young men while using the power of the office to intimidate them into silence if their shame was not enough.

    So now most homosexuals are “out and proud” so they’re easy to identify and eliminate from consideration for admission to the seminaries. We’ll see in about 20 years or so how that worked out.

    Until then we’ll still have the fallout of the gay 70’s and 80’s to work our way through.

  • Sure, it’s gay people that have corrupted the church. Every single child abusing, vow breaking, conspiring to cover up priest, Bishop, and cardinal must be homosexual

    Nope, but 80% are.

  • So Benedict never confirmed. This doesn’t mean the accusation is fake. Standard Fishwrap™ lying.

  • Also not true. but I am losing my desire to educate people who NEED to believe that this is a homosexual problem. Educate yourself, or don’t.

  • Yup, you need to believe that this is all a nefarious plot by the evil homosexuals, instead of a culture of abuse and coverups that has existed for 1000 years.

  • Murdering heretics, murdering Protestants, murdering witches, vast and fabulous wealth, are also contrary to the teachings of Jesus. It never stopped them before.

    It’s a a hierarchy problem— absolutely. That’s why ITS A CATHOLIC PROBLEM, among a lot of other reasons.

  • If you were a Catholic, you’d understand the meaning of the word “heresy.” The fact that you don’t means you’re just another old guy pretending to be holier than everyone else.

  • Considering your pose with the middle finger of one hand in the air to the Church’s teachings, you’re probably in a poor position to have written “I’m at least as Catholic as you are. Perhaps more.”, let alone the snarky “you’re just another old guy”.

  • Heresy:

    Here is the relevant Canon Law on the delict of heresy:

    Canon 751 Heresy is the obstinate denial or obstinate doubt after the reception of baptism of some truth which is to be believed by divine and Catholic faith; apostasy is the total repudiation of the Christian faith; schism is the refusal of submission to the Supreme Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him.

    Canon 752 Although not an assent of faith, a religious submission of the intellect and will must be given to a doctrine which the Supreme Pontiff or the college of bishops declares concerning faith or morals when they exercise the authentic magisterium, even if they do not intend to proclaim it by definitive act; therefore, the Christian faithful are to take care to avoid those things which do not agree with it.

    Canon 753 Although the bishops who are in communion with the head and members of the college, whether individually or joined together in conferences of bishops or in particular councils, do not possess infallibility in teaching, they are authentic teachers and instructors of the faith for the Christian faithful entrusted to their care; the Christian faithful are bound to adhere with religious submission of mind to the authentic magisterium of their bishops.

    Canon 754 All the Christian faithful are obliged to observe the constitutions and decrees which the legitimate authority of the Church issues in order to propose doctrine and to proscribe erroneous opinions, particularly those which the Roman Pontiff or the college of bishops puts forth.

    ***

    In addition a person may not be guilty of the delict of heresy but may be in material heresy by making statements contrary to the Catholic faith but not being obstinate in denial or doubt because she has not been called by the competent authority to cease denial or expressing doubt.

    For example:

    “The underlying logic was that men and women needed each other to survive and have families, which they needed to take care of them as they aged. Over time, the Jewish people developed a theology to ascribe marriage to divine command, but in most parts of the ancient world, it was a division-of-labor survival structure.”

    would be, were the writer a Catholic, material heresy.

    The Catechism of the Catholic Church states

    1603 “The intimate community of life and love which constitutes the married state has been established by the Creator and endowed by him with its own proper laws. . . . God himself is the author of marriage.”87 The vocation to marriage is written in the very nature of man and woman as they came from the hand of the Creator. Marriage is not a purely human institution despite the many variations it may have undergone through the centuries in different cultures, social structures, and spiritual attitudes. These differences should not cause us to forget its common and permanent characteristics. Although the dignity of this institution is not transparent everywhere with the same clarity,88 some sense of the greatness of the matrimonial union exists in all cultures. “The well-being of the individual person and of both human and Christian society is closely bound up with the healthy state of conjugal and family life.89 “

    87 Gaudium et spes 48 § 1.

    88 Cf. Gaudium et spes 47 § 2.

    89 Gaudium et spes 47 § 1.

  • I place as much credibility in the NOR as I do in ChurchMilitant. The Church of Rome may have a good number of gay clerics (and bishops), but to describe their overall presence in the church as a “Mafia” is inappropriate. Just more gay-bashing. (And I’m “straight”.)

  • From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debate_on_the_causes_of_clerical_child_abuse :

    “Rome’s Congregation for Catholic Education issued an official document, the Instruction Concerning the Criteria for the Discernment of Vocations with regard to Persons with Homosexual Tendencies in view of their Admission to the Seminary and to Holy Orders (2005). The document has attracted criticism based on an interpretation that the document implies that homosexuality is associated with pedophilia and ephebophilia.[16]

    “In a statement, read out by Archbishop Silvano Maria Tomasi in 2009, the Holy See stated that the majority of Catholic clergy who had committed acts of sexual abuse against under 18 year olds should not be viewed as pedophiles, but as homosexuals.[17] The statement said that rather than pedophilia, ‘it would be more correct to speak of ephebophilia; being a homosexual attraction to adolescent males'[18] The move angered many gay rights organizations and sex abuse victims groups, who claimed it was an attempt by the Vatican to redefine the Church’s past problems with pedophilia as problems with homosexuality.[19]

    “According to the John Jay Report 80.9% of the alleged abuse victims in the United States were male.[20] This fact led Catholic League’s William Donohue, to opine: ‘The conventional wisdom maintains there is a pedophilia crisis in the Catholic Church; I maintain it has been a homosexual crisis all along.'[21] Margaret Smith, a John Jay College criminologist who worked on the report, pointed out that it is ‘an unwarranted conclusion’ to assert that the majority of priests who abused male victims are gay. Though ‘the majority of the abusive acts were homosexual in nature […] participation in homosexual acts is not the same as sexual identity as a gay man.’ She further stated that ‘the idea of sexual identity [should] be separated from the problem of sexual abuse…[A]t this point, we do not find a connection between homosexual identity and the increased likelihood of subsequent abuse from the data that we have right now.'[22]

    “Another researcher, Louis Schlesinger, argued that the main problem was pedophilia or ephebophilia, not sexual orientation and claimed that some men who are married to adult women are attracted to adolescent males.[23]

    “’It’s important to separate the sexual identity and the behavior,’ said Karen Terry, a second researcher. ‘Someone can commit sexual acts that might be of a homosexual nature but not have a homosexual identity.’ Terry said factors such as greater access to boys is one reason for the skewed ratio. Smith also raised the analogy of prison populations where homosexual behavior is common even though the prisoners are not necessarily homosexuals, or cultures where men are rigidly segregated from women until adulthood, and homosexual activity is accepted and then ceases after marriage.[22]

    “Analyzing a number of studies, Gregory M. Herek, a psychology professor at the University of California at Davis, concluded: ‘The empirical research does not show that gay or bisexual men are any more likely than heterosexual men to molest children. This is not to argue that homosexual and bisexual men never molest children. But there is no scientific basis for asserting that they are more likely than heterosexual men to do so… Many child molesters cannot be characterized as having an adult sexual orientation at all; they are fixated on children.”[24]

    “In an interview with CNN, James Cantor, Editor-in-Chief of Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment said, ‘It’s quite solidly shown in the scientific literature that there is absolutely no association between being a gay man and being a pedophile.'[25]

    “Michael S. Rose, in his Goodbye, Good Men![26] book on the contrived shortage of Catholic priests, is the leading advocate of the theory that heterosexual seminarians are preferentially denied acceptance to seminary than homosexual ones and that this has set up a gay culture in some parts of the Catholic Church which in turn leads to clerical ephebophilia. This is counter to research that proves otherwise. All victims in the John Jay report were minors, the ‘vast majority’ age 13 or younger, considered pre-pubescent by the American Psychiatric Association.[27] Research on pedophilia in general shows a majority of abusers identify themselves as heterosexual.[28][29][self-published source] Additionally the John Jay report noted that ‘the abuse decreased as more gay priests began serving the church.'”[30]

    You ask, “Then how do you explain that these priests had access to both teenage boys and teenage girls yet chose the teenage boys?” Apparently, greater access to boys than girls.

    You state, “(The prison analogy is not going to wash here.)” So be it, if you insist. I’ll trust the conclusions of the John Jay and other professional researchers who have studied the phenomenon.

  • ‘Someone can commit sexual acts that might be of a homosexual nature but not have a homosexual identity.’

    So if they don’t “identify” as homosexual, then you don’t count them as homosexual.

    If you are attracted to post-pubescent children, you are not heterosexual. You are homosexual or at least bisexual.

    If you claim that someone who is heterosexual can choose to have sex with boys because they are available, why are we claiming that orientation is set? Homosexuals can just choose to have sex with women if they are available.

  • Well, it’s much easier to use the word “Mafia” than “criminal conspiracy”. And I am no more indicting all those suffering from same sex attraction (there is no place for “gays” in the priesthood) than I’m indicting all Italians.

  • Fair enough. I must add, however, that “all those suffering from same sex attraction” are suffering from homophobic attitudes directed their way.

  • And why should someone like you — an apostate feminist — be the arbiter of heresy, toots ?

  • You call yourself a theologian ? The essensce of Catholicism is telling others what is and is NOT necessary for Salvation. It’s radical feminists like you who are to the Body of Christ what cancer is to the human body.

    The Church needs chemo !!

  • No, it means you paid a bunch of like-minded idiots tens of thousands of Euros/Dollars to agree with you and give you a piece of paper.

  • But I thought people couldn’t change their sexual preference — which is it ?

    The JJ Report was slanted to avoid what we all know: that 90% or more of the offenses involved homosexual activity.

  • The Social Justice leftists and pedophile promoters are rallying around Francis.

    Which are you ?

  • No, we know it exists. Why do you think B16 resigned — he wanted to play golf and watch soap operas ? The Lavender Mafia is real and the Pedophile Protectors (like Daneels) are also real.

    How stupid can you possibly be ? Oh right, you’re a feminist who thinks she’s a Catholic theologian, a dangerous combination.

  • The Globe went after Law because he was conservative. They said NOTHING about who put those pedo priests in Boston: Cushing (Kennedy ass-kisser), Mederios (busing ass-kisser), or the Jesuits (social justice ass-kissers and Kennedy apologists).

    Mahoney cost LA 8X as much as Law but got off scott-free.

    Francis will get off because the media loves him: he invites abortionists and pedophiles to the Vatican and embraces them.

    Francis is irrelevant; the Leftists and Sodomite Promoters are going down faster than a $10 hooker.

  • How about the conclusions in Boston that got Law in trouble ?

    How many nuns molested little boys ? Or even little girls ?

    More brilliant feminist logic. I think your birth control pills have warped your brain.

  • No, I’m saying I really do rely on the findings of professional researchers. Hence, I do know.

    Learn to read what is presented rather than what you prefer to be presented.

  • He exemplifies perfectly the words on his own profile page:- “There is none so deaf as he who does not wish to hear”.

  • That’s your opinion with which I disagree. (We also disagree on what homosexuality is. It’s not mentioned in the Bible.)

  • Yes, it is mentioned in the bible. It’s not an opinion. It’s a sin. Homosexuality is not welcome in the Church.

    You spit in Christ’s face, and your only saving grace is that you know nothing about the scriptures or the true faith.

  • No, homosexuality is not at all mentioned in the Bible. Jesus, of course, says nothing about it, much less anything about a male having sex with another male (regrettably a behavior identified per se as the sexual orientation known as ‘homosexuality’).

    “You spit in Christ’s face…blah, blah, blah.”

    Pull-eeze, don’t embarrass yourself with the display of ignorance on this subject.

  • You are a liar and a deceiver, and you have no truth in you.

    Homosexuality is an abomination to the Lord.

    You either crucify your evil desires, like everyone else, or you don’t believe in the cross, and you have no place in the Church.

  • I’m not lying, and you’re not demonstrating knowledge of human sexual orientation. For example (if you’re a male), if you were in prison and forced to engage in sex with another male, would that mean you are a homosexual? To rephrase, does man-on-man sexual relations *alone* indicate that one or both participants are gay?

    Contrary to your unfounded viewpoint, homosexuality — like heterosexuality — is not “an abomination to the Lord.” God created it. God loves God’s creation.

    I embrace Jesus as my Lord and Savior. Perhaps, if you’ll give me the name and location of your church, I can shake hands with you sometime before/after worship. You know — a sinner shaking hands with a fellow sinner?

    “While [Jesus] was at table in [Levi’s] house, many tax collectors and sinners sat with Jesus and his disciples; for there were many who followed him. Some scribes who were Pharisees saw that he was eating with sinners and tax collectors and said to his disciples, ‘Why does he eat with tax collectors and sinners?’ Jesus heard this and said to them, ‘Those who are well do not need a physician, but the sick do. I did not come to call the righteous but sinners’” (Mark 2:15-17).

    Are you not just ignorant but arrogant, too?

  • Nail your passions to the cross if you want to be a follower of Jesus Christ’s. Indulging yourself in your sin will lead you straight to hell.

    Your passions are no more special than anyone else’s and they deserve the same death. You are deceiving yourself, scandalizing others, and your conscience is dying. With it goes your soul.

    Homosexuality was not created by God. It is not creation at all, it is destruction, and it is of the devil.

    The door is narrow.

    You will be judged more harshly for scandalizing others than for destroying yourself. You are very selfish.

  • How do you know anybody is in hell??? Been there? Bring back any souvenirs? Any messages from hell’s residents to friends and family up here? Fact is, the oldest Western Christian church has never declared anybody to be in hell.

    “Your passions are no more special than anyone else’s…” I never claimed they are “more special”, did I? (ANSWER: No.)

    “Homosexuality was not created by God.” It most certainly was “created by God”. The Good Lord gave each of us a brain and expects us to use it. My advice to you? Use your brain to figure things out. Do you endorse vaccination of children against various diseases? The Bible is not a science text. It reflects cultural understandings of storytellers and writers of various times and places. You may be a literalist; I am not. I respect the proper role of religious belief; I also accept the proper role of the natural and social sciences. Perhaps you don’t (such seems to be the case here).

    “You are very selfish.” Only in your wildest imagination.

  • So what you are saying is you don’t believe anything the Church believes. You are not a Christian. You just want to try to destroy it because you actually hate everything she teaches.

    Typical deviant.

  • “So what you are saying is you don’t believe anything the Church believes.”

    Is that what I wrote? No, it’s not. I wrote that “the oldest Western Christian church has never declared anybody to be in hell.” For your information, the “oldest Western Christian church” is the Catholic Church. Among all Western Christian churches and communities, the Catholic Church is the oldest. The Church of Rome (my preferred term) has never condemned the doctrine of universal salvation, which holds that all the deceased will be saved by God. Luke 15, Matthew 5:43-48 (with a parallel at Luke 6:36), and Matthew 18:21-22 demonstrate the unconditional love and mercy of God. God, contrary to your implied belief, is not a hypocrite. God will do as God asks of us.

    “You are not a Christian.” You are not qualified to make such an assertion. Therefore, I’ll attribute your comment to your sense of anger and frustration dealing with someone who *demonstrates* a better understanding of Christian doctrine than do you.

    “Typical deviant.” There’s nothing “deviant” about my presentation of Christian doctrine. It is supported by a faithful application of Jesus’ teaching in the Gospel.

    You’re upset: It shows.

    Not recommended.

  • Do you believe in the cross? Do you believe in the Virgin birth? Do you believe in the resurrection? Do you believe in the Holy Trinity? Do you believe in the Sacraments?

    There is no indication of Universal salvation.

    We have to work to be saved.

    The Christian life is not one of self indulgence. The Christian life is one of repentance and metanoia.

    Homosexuality is deviant, destructive, and it is a sin. If you are indulging in it or rationalizing it you are deceiving yourself and others.

    Homosexuality is soul destroying.

  • By paragraph:

    + Yes to all. I construe “in the cross” to refer to life’s moral challenges.

    + Yes, there is. The doctrine is not the same as that of *apokatastasis* (look it up).

    + No, we do not. We’ve already been saved. “Jesus” means “God saves”; no conditions attached.

    + Agree. Agree: God makes repentance possible in the first place. Metanoia is a lifelong goal.

    + No, it is not. Open-minded, educated, informed heterosexual. Therefore, no deception on my part.

    + No, it is not. Dangerous attempts to “change” sexual orientation are “soul destroying”.

  • The cross is salvation. You must die to your passions. Homosexuality is a passion. It’s a feeling. It’s a desire. The “orientation” of a fallen man is not salvific; it’s fallen.

    No, we have not already been saved. Salvation requires our participation. It is an ongoing process. There are conditions for salvation. There are not conditions for God’s love to flow. When we sin, we deliberately separate ourselves from God’s love and his work on the cross.

    Jesus Christ is the same today, yesterday, and forever.

    Homosexuality is a passion, a sickness of the soul, a rebellion against God, a sin against your own body, the body of another, and against the community which scandalizes all. There is no love in this.

    Your body is not your own. Deny yourself. This is the first step to picking up your cross.

    You can fall and get up again. This is God’s mercy. But you cannot rewrite the law.

  • “It is impossible not to often fall into sin unless you have a hatred of it implanted in your heart. Self-love must be eradicated. Every sin comes from the love of self. Sin always appears, or feigns to be, to wish us well, promising us plenteousness and ease. ‘The tree was good for food, and it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise.’ (Genesis 3:6) This is how sin always appears to us.” –St. John of Kronstadt

  • Thanks for the quote, which acknowledges the human tendency to sin (only God, after all, cannot sin). I disagree with the notion that “[e]very sin comes from the love of self.” Why? Because it is necessary to love oneself in order to love others. Everything begins from within. If I hate others, it’s because I hate myself. If I am indifferent to the needs of others, it’s because I am indifferent to my own needs. The opposite of love is indifference. If I love myself by meeting my own needs, I can love others to help them. It would appear the good saint (or a translator) used the word “love” as a synonym for “selfishness”. If so, I would agree with Saint John of Kronstadt’s observation.

  • Yes, he doesn’t mean the good kind of self love, which is only possible because we recognize God made us.

2019 NewsMatch Campaign: This Story Can't Wait! Donate.

ADVERTISEMENTs