Out Of The Woodwork (CCR)

“You have become a Johnny One-Note. Are there no other topics? Move on. These people come out of the woodwork.”
That one got to me, salted the moral ache that festers. The meaning was clear. “These people come out of the woodwork.” Mistrust of motivation. Blaming the victims. Protecting the abusers by saying that the woodwork people worm out to join the bandwagon.

In defense of this person, there are no TVs, newspapers or news magazines in the home. Current events are the day-to-day drama of over fifty seniors, age 62 plus, living in an apartment building. The outside world is too filled with bad news to allow in–so ignore and pretend it doesn’t exist.

It does exist. It is real. The abuse tolerated, perhaps allowed in the belief that the church required that depth of protection. The cover-up hid the truth and gave permission for abuse to continue.

Mike Hunter of Kansas City is the volunteer director of the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests. David Clohessy of St. Louis is the executive director of SNAPNetwork.org, the same organization. Hunter and Clohessy co-authored As I See It, an opinion piece for the Kansas city Star Newspaper. The final paragraph of their piece offers the only solution that holds promise.
“That’s why we’re desperately hoping police and prosecutors will step up. While our justice system isn’t perfect, it can often unearth the truth in such situations and punish the guilty, thus deterring recklessness, callousness and deceit in the future.”


The Swill Thickens (CCR)

Kansas City Star, Thursday, June 9, 2011 Front page headline:
Once-accused priest now leads church inquiries
Opening sentence: “The Catholic official who oversees sex abuse complaints against priests in Kansas City-St. Joseph Diocese has himself been accused of past sexual improprieties.”

With any due respect, with awareness that an accusation is not a conviction, with further awareness that I am not privy to the workings of the Catholic Church protocols when dealing with priests who sexually or physically abuse children I submit that an accused fox guarding the chicken house is not a good strategy for garnering credibility.

Opinion Page, A 17 Headline: ROME FIDDLES WHILE CHURCH BURNS, commentary by Maureen Dowd

Tell me again, please, that the Catholic Church believes their own propaganda that the incidents of abuse are isolated and definitely not handled through deceit and cover-up. In Dowd’s piece she recounts Ireland’s Archbishop Martin’s tearful account of an abusing Irish priest who built a swimming pool, allowing only boys of certain looks and age to enter the garden. Depraved…”and Dickensian treatment of children in the care of the Irish Catholic Church–a fifth circle of hell hidden for decades by church and police officials–the Irish are still angry and appalled.”

Martin, according to Dowd, has been ostracized by fellow bishops and snubbed by the Holy See. Martin’s crime? Speaking out against pedophiles, publishing his findings and begging forgiveness from God and from the victims while praising the victims for the courage to come forward. In Martin’s words: “Nobody could have read what I have read and not did what I did. If I didn’t react to the stories I heard, there would be something wrong.”

There is something so terribly wrong that the mind cannot comprehend the depth of this wrong. How can a church, spewing out its belief in the Jesus philosophy go so deep into the bowels of hell?

The Catholic Church is burning by its own actions, by the depravity of believing in the preservation of the institution, the safety and structure as created by the men of Rome, over any of the teachings of Jesus. It is a Jesus quote about vomiting that comes to mind..

Troubled? The Bishop Was Troubled? (CCR)

If you, Gentle Reader, have children or grandchildren the abuse scandal is that bull’s-eye painted on the essence of those children.   Look at the beauty of your young ones and decide if the reaction to abuse would be a horrible bastardized-Jesus-forgiveness or a rage to remove.

Playing the scripture card to justify a plea for forgiveness is ignoring the fact that the story says the temple was  off-limits to the money changers.  Even your Jesus, a man of peace and justice, had limits of acceptance.  If you believe in the hell created for sinners, do you remotely harbor a belief that Jesus/God forgives those in hell?  Loves the sinner, hates the sin kind of rhetoric…loves those in eternal flames?

The Kansas City Star, Saturday, May 21, 2011, front page article by Laura Bauer and Glenn Rice

“One day after prosecutors charged a Roman Catholic priest with possession of child pornography, Bishop Robert Finn said he knew about the ‘very troubling’ images months ago but was told they weren’t pornography.”

Bishop Finn contacted a police officer and described one or more of the images.  Remember, the Bishop was very troubled by the images but decided to describe one or more to a police officer so that the officer could make the judgment as to just how troubling, how close to pornography, how much the diocese would have to reveal and justify.

Bishop Finn also admits that Ratigan was not honoring the restrictions put on him by the bishop.  Ratigan continued to ignore the restrictions.  The bishop continued to admonish him not to ignore the restrictions.  The bishop put Ratigan in a private priest residence and Ratigan continued to celebrate Mass.   Mass.  The Bishop allowed Ratigan to celebrate Mass.

On Wednesday, May 18, the Star reported on the study commissioned by Roman Catholic bishops citing reasons why priests physically and sexually abused children.  One of those reasons was priests were poorly monitored.

The Bishop confesses to being troubled but made the decision to keep his concerns in-house, to ignore the need to contact civil authorities.  The Bishop placed restrictions and Ratigan ignored the restrictions.

Again, I know that Ratigan is legally innocent until proven guilty.  Ratigan, trained and monitored by the church (that church which covered his actions) was allowed to continue under the presumption of innocence?

Maybe there are those who would go so far as to say that the church is innocent until proven guilty.  The burden of proof weighs heavily, to the breaking point.

There are those who would take the guilt off the church (where it belongs) and use the comedic line “The devil made me do it.”

Self-protection, denial, justification and dishonor continue to allow this obscene scandal.

What Are We Suppose to Forgive? (CCR)

“Toleration is amongst the most despicable  fault, as it involves a conscious act of dishonor.

My friend, Two Names, responded to my recent blogs with the words in red.   He chose the blood color, maybe as a visual of the ugliness of the dishonor?
  • His email was a response to my outrage over the nonsense of the Treatise of Excuse:  insufficient preparation, insufficient monitoring and the tumult of the 1960’s and 70’s.  Two-Names cut out the heart of the nonsense with his phrase “A conscious act of dishonor”.  (See the blog titled:  Reasons?  The Church Is Giving Reasons? May 18, 2011)
  •      The Catholic Church consciously dishonored the victims by the cover-up.
  •      The Catholic Church consciously dishonored every good man who happens to be a priest as the Church put resources into  the cover-up , to tolerating men who sexually and physically abused children.
  •      The Catholic Church consciously dishonored every member of that Church as it perpetrated the culture of toleration of gross and obscene dishonor.
  •      What part of this warrants forgiveness?

Reasons? The Church Is Giving Reasons?

May 18, Kansas City Star story by Laurie Goodstein of the New York Times.


Reasons cited for priest sex abuse:  Study commissioned by Roman Catholic bishops blames sexual revolution of the 1960’s and ’70’s

The last 15 days have been work days, cleaning and clearing attic, basement, barn and sheds.   First light fills the bedroom and starts thoughts of blogging but the physical work needs doing and blogging has been back burner.  Now?  Now I am ready to rant.

Now it is time.

The five-year study commissioned by the Catholic bishops determines that abuse happened because:

1.  Priests had been poorly prepared.  By whom? The same church that is now excusing?  Where is the fault here?

2. Priests were poorly monitored.  Again,  by whom? Where is the responsibility/fault ?

3.  Priests were under stress and influenced by the turmoil of the 60’s and 70’s.

Lord.  Earlier abuse of children in the 1940’s and ’50’s will get another set of reasons, right?  One of these days I intend to blog a story of abuse that happened prior to the poor priests suffering stress and turmoil during those turbulent 1960’s and ’70’s.

Reading Ms. Goodstein’s well written article was difficult.  My stomach could not handle yet another justification of taking better care of perpetrators than of victims.  I want to rip it apart paragraph by paragraph, sentence by sentence.

Imagine saying this:  “..it was not possible for the church, or for anyone, to identify abusive priests in advance.”  How does this ‘advance notice’ thing  have any relevance to covering up after the abuse took place?

Actually, Gentle Reader, I should not have started this.  My anger is off my chart.  Tomorrow I will try again for rational discourse.  This makes me sick.

Spinning The Sins (CCR)

“Isn’t it time you backed off, time you let the church handle the situation.  You don’t help solve the issue by harping on it in your blog.  You should be protecting the church instead of trying to force harmful disclosures.”

You, Gentle Reader, know that as a ping speaking to the obscenity of abuse by priests,  I cannot force anything.  It does sometimes take a bit of personal force to add another blog, another plea, another ping to the growing volumes of evidence concerning abuse by clergy and the church sanctioned cover-up.  In truth and in fact, institutional cover-up of sexual and physical abuse of children by ordained clergy is not simply an issueIssue spins the sin to the level of  the issue of opulence in the church–ugly, visible, archaic but not a deal breaker.   Institutional cover-up of sexual and physical abuse is, or should be, a deal breaker.

On Friday, February 11, 2011, The Kansas City Star headline read:  Netherlands sexual abuse crisis worsens.

Stephen Castle, The New York Times, wrote the report regarding Brussels, Belgium and detailing a senior church figure’s shielding of a pedophile priest. In his piece Castle  speaks of Cardinal Adrianus Simonis’ testimony in a legal action by almost 2,000 people claiming to be victims of abuse.

Last March, in a television interview, Simonis was asked about the abuse and cover-up by the church.  He answered in German and not in Dutch:  “Wir haben es nicht gewusst.”   We know nothing about it.”

Castle’s piece reminds the reader that the phrase is associated with Nazi excuses after World War II.