Bill Donohue Is Sticking His Feet In His Mouth

Last week I pointed out that Bill Donohue, president of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights, is not a journalist per se and as a layman has no particular unction to ferret out the misdeeds of the Catholic clergy.  By the same token, though, he has no particular expertise to besmirch the work done by the State of Pennsylvania in putting out the report to which I linked yesterday.  But that is what Donohue seems to be doing in this post on the League site.  Fortunately it's not a long piece so it won't be too much trouble to dissect and rebut.

First, let's look at the title: "PA Grand Jury Report Based On Accusations".  So what?  Of course it is!  That is the nature and purpose of grand juries: to decide if the available evidence constitutes cause for criminal indictment.  It usually is the body that actually brings the indictment to court.  Donohue states that plain fact in such a way to cast doubt on the grand jury's integrity.  It is true that this report shines the light on misdeeds of clergy now deceased or now out of reach because of the statute of limitations.  However, some instances are somewhat recent and can be brought to trial.  It also shines the light on prelates who willfully concealed the crimes of their underlings and might make some ripe for prosecution.

"When the dust settles, what counts are the facts".  Has he looked at the report?  There are multiple testimonies regarding the same clerics.  There are photocopies of letters and other documentation.  There are money trails.  Bring on the facts!

"Many of those named are not priests: the list includes lay persons, deacons, and seminarians".  He forgot to add "bishops".  The point is that all accused were operating in church-related scenarios, under the authority of the hierarchy when they committed their crimes.  But let's look again at Donohue's curious omission of the word "bishops" in that sentence.  One key feature of this grand jury report is that it details the nefarious roles played by prelates either in the commission of the crimes themselves and/or by concealment of the crimes of their underlings and refusal to bring dangerous underlings to heel.

"Even among the living, most have not had opportunity to rebut the accusations".  Excuse me, but what's to stop them from doing so now?  Let them do so - if they can.

"In most cases there has been no attempt by the dioceses or the grand jury to verify the accusations.  This is what happens when an investigation extends back to World War II."  Again, the purpose of a grand jury is to bring forth accusations, not conduct the actual trial.  As far as the dioceses goes, many have been doing everything in their power to stymie any real investigation; they are interested only in silencing the victims and "damage control".  The latest evidence of that can be seen in my post from yesterday.  As far as the "world war 2" quip goes, that is necessary because there was no investigation of the crimes that occurred back then.

Then there's this: "Those awaiting a grand jury report on the sexual abuse of minors in the public schools, or among the clergy of other religions, shouldn’t hold their breath. It will never happen."  Talk about an irrelevant straw man!  As far as the crimes go that have been committed by clergy - including bishops, what happens outside the church is irrelevant.  At least these public school teachers and protestants aren't committing sacrilege against the Sacrament of Holy Orders and vows of celibacy.

Then in this tome Donohue says that the "bishops strike the right tone".  We're not concerned about "tone".  We're concerned about truth.  Any bishop who concealed any pervert clergy - even if that pervert is a fellow bishop - should resign.

Do Lay Journalists Share Blame For McCarrick's Misdeeds?

Long-time readers of this blog know that I started it, and its precessor website, precisely because of the misbehaviors of Cardinal McCarrick.  Often have I striven to shine the light on his hobnobbing with pro-aborts (such as John Sweeney and Ted Kennedy), rubbing elbows with dissidents like Sister Carol Keehan, turning a blind eye toward the fetal tissue research at Georgetown, and his enthusing about Islam.   In light of the recent revelations about McCarrick, you might recall that I said nothing about the allegations of homosexual conduct that even then were swirling about the rumor mill.  Why, you might ask?

The reason is quite simple.  At the time the allegations were merely rumors.  Until several weeks ago, there was no credible allegation that passed legal muster.  Until several weeks ago, none of his victims stepped forth into the public to levy charges against him.  Now more victims are stepping out of the shadows.  But while the victims remained in the shadows, the rumors of homosexual crimes were precisely that - rumors, and unsubstantiated ones at that.  I will put nothing on this blog that hasn't been substantiated with facts.

I was a bit troubled to see this piece from Church Militant yesterday, basically taking Catholic League President Bill Donohue to task for knowing but doing nothing.  They did quote Donohue's statement.  A very relevant piece of it is: "Everyone heard rumors about what was going on down in Sea Girt, on the New Jersey shore.  I couldn't verify anything.  Who am I?  You hear rumors.  A lot of rumors are untrue.  These rumors turned out to be true."  The CM article, towards the end, states that Donohue's "well-placed friends could have verified it for him".  Perhaps, but what if Donohue asked and they didn't?  How are they so all-fired certain that Donohue didn't try?

None of us would have known a thing had that allegation not been proven credible, with the accusor going public.  None of us would dare shine the spotlight on this matter - not so much for fear of legal ramifications but because as Catholics we cannot go about rumor-mongering.  I didn't give vent to the rumors for that reason.  Donohue, for all his faults (yes, his praise of Wuerl's self-policing idea is, at best, laughable), should not be excoriated for his previous silence.  If he tries to defend either Wuerl or McCarrick now that facts are coming forth, then I'd agree he might suffer from myopia - just as those who refuse to hold the pope accountable for his ever-increasing threats to the faith (ahem!).

On the Facebook wall of one of the CM staff, I and another blogger pointed out the pointlessness of accusing Donohue of anything, given that no one had come forth with hard data until the past two months.  She tried to contradict us by saying that the site bishopaccountability.org reported on it, as well as Richard Sipe and Rob Drehr.  Here''s what I saw on bishopaccountability.  You'll have to scroll quite a bit to get to McCarrick.  Notice how all the sources are within the past two months?

Regarding Richard Sipe, I see on the site traditioninaction an "open letter" that he wrote to Pope Benedict XVI detailing his concerns about McCarrick's antics.  Well, he might indeed have supplied the details to Pope Benedict, but unless we were made privy to them, how on earth were we supposed to act?  Without access to facts, we had no choice but to consider the allegations as rumors.

In that discussion I opined that the adult victims who remained silent shared some of the responsibility for allowing McCarrick to continue his rampage unimpeded.  I still do.  Silence is one of the nine ways that one can cooperate with sin.  To those men: you have a moral duty to come forward and report your incidents to the public.  While McCarrick himself may be out of circulation, perhaps your story will encourge victims of other pervert clergy to come forward so that those errant priests will be prevented from harming others in the future.

We need to be praying our rosaries for the Church and her ministers.

Michael Voris Takes On Bill Donohue

And I say "good for Michael"!  Bill Donohue is not the only one who is trying to justify Cardinal Dolan's abysmal lack of judgment.  Some Patheos-oriented blogs are doing the same; because the bloggers thereon are rewarded for the number of times they are clicked, I will not link to them.

As you watch, notice how Voris makes reference to a news article about the meeting between the Pope and Nancy Pelosi (between the 7:00 and 7:40 marks).  The link is here.  And here is the petition asking Cardinal Dolan to rescind the invitation to Obama.

Click here if you can't see embedded video.  As one of the so-called "piety police", that is, one of the non-elite, I thank Mr. Voris for one again serving notice that we will not be silent while our Church (with millions of souls) is being sold down the river.  I am glad to be a Peasant Catholic and am glad that this blog can play a small part in giving voice to so many.

Bill Donohue Sings Holiday Carols!

The president of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights will now serenade us with politically-correct holiday diddies!  Click here if you can't see embedded video!



Merry Christmas to all!