On July 16th the New York Times published an article that details the sexual abuse that many seminarians endured at the hands of Cardinal McCarrick. It also makes clear that higher-ups in Church leadership did absolutely nothing when complaints about Cardinal McCarrick were lodged with them. LifeSiteNews links to the article, with helpful commentary of their own. By the way - this article links to another that details McCarrick's role in procuring the pontificate for Cardinal Bergoglio. McCarrick himself admitted it in the video embedded here.
The latest issue of the Catholic Standard published statements about McCarrick's mess. Frankly, given their absolute silence regarding the Archdiocese's treatment of Father Guarnizo in 2012, a situation that literally made world-wide news, I was wondering if they were going to try the "mum" routine again. They probably realized that they wouldn't get away with it this time, so they tried some "damage control"; either that, or they (and the New York Times) are participating in a wide-scale ruse. What do I mean by "ruse"? As I said in previous posts, I wonder if it's possible that McCarrick is simply taking "one for the team" to appease those of us who are tired of predators in roman collars roaming freely throughout the church. At his age, he hasn't that much to lose, and could easily be placed somewhere to live his remaining years rather comfortably.
Anyway, the Standard published McCarrick's statement, available here. I commented on the part where he said he "had no recollection" of the abuse. However, he also said "I am sorry for the pain the person who brought the charge has gone through.." Pain? What pain? If pain is present, what caused that pain? And why would McCarrick think it appropriate to say he's sorry for the pain? Freudian slip much?
Also on the 16th Renew American published a piece by Matt Abbott in which he discloses what one of McCarrick's victims told him about twelve years ago. The now-ex-priest's name is Bart Aslin So far he, Ciolek, and Father Boniface Ramsey (LSN article) are the only ones (to my knowledge) that have gone on record to detail My blogging colleague Vox Cantoris opines that all bishops today at least knew of McCarrick's sordid activities and yet remained silent. I agree but I think the conspiracy of silence goes much further than that. There are many priests who either were targeted by the Cardinal or knew of the targeting of their brother priests and seminarians. Mr. Aslin wrote that many of them chose silence to protect their chances of ordination. However, they were taught (or should have been taught) in their moral theology classes that the ends do not justify evil means. Yes, their silence was and is evil. By their silence they made it easier for the abuse to continue unabated. I reiterate my call for them to come forth and join Aslin and Ciolek to ensure that McCarrick has no more access to young boys.
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query McCarrick. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query McCarrick. Sort by date Show all posts
Tuesday, July 17, 2018
Saturday, January 5, 2019
Pope Francis: McCarrick's Atrocities Not That Bad
You might recall from the November USCCB meeting this past November that not only did the pope forbid action on the episcopal sex abuse crisis, but the convened bishops voted against asking the Vatican to share its documents pertaining to disgraced Bishop McCarrick. Think about it. At the beginning of the meeting, at least some bishops moved to take action on the sex abuse crisis. Towards the end, they voted to continue the de facto cover-up for McCarrick. Doesn't that seem like a drastic change in their stances? What - or who - was behind such an extreme swing in collective attitudes?
But even Cupich and Wuerl were taking their queues from higher-ups. The main higher-up appears to be Pope Francis himself. Church Militant has discovered that the Vatican's so-called "investigation" into McCarrick's crimes of perversion is turning into a smear campaign against his former victims, now accusers. They are actually trying to say that because 1) the boy may have been 16 at the time and not a minor and 2) the sex may have been "consensual", that somehow McCarrick's culpability and guilt may be mitigated.
Of course that theory is shot full of holes. If you look at the Church Militant link, you'll notice another link at "Taylor Marshall". It is to a video wherein Marshall interviews James Grein, who was molested by McCarrick starting at age 11. Was the Vatican referring to yet another boy? Even if so, that makes not one whit of diffference. The Vatican, in its statement, seems intent on conflating civil law with moral and Church law. It is the latter two laws, both higher than the first, that is the Vatican's only concern.
Some are expressing shock, and rightly so; I'm not sure about their reasons. They state correctly that McCarrick took a vow of celibacy, but celibacy has nothing to do with these crimes. The laity do not take vows of celibacy, but still the actions that McCarrick took are mortally sinful for them as well. Homosexual acts are mortal sins, whether committed by lay or celibates. As far as consensual, I would wager that a cleric holds much sway over a young person, particulary a vulnerable person. Any solicitation to sin would be coercive in that context. If the victim were female, no one would contest that statutory rape occurred. Why the contest in this case? Answer - to deflect culpability from McCarrick. The lengths to which the Vatican is going to defend McCarrick indicate that 1) they don't want any continuing investigation to be directed at them, and/or 2) McCarrick has a lot of dirt on them and is forcing this ludicrous attempt.
But the Vatican is also doing all it can to have themselves held harmless. The Catholic Standard published an article that essentially tried to shift moral responsibility for the pope's delay order onto the bishops themselves, In other words, the Standard is in cahoots with the cover-up. Nice try, guys, but no cigar! Yes, the US bishops have plenty of guilt owing to their ongoing coverup attempts, but much blame for this mess lies with the Vatican and Pope Francis himself.
By the way - I mentioned Taylor Marshall's interview with James Grein. Please take the time to watch the entire thing. It is very informative regarding McCarrick's early years, as he got his start in undermining the Church.
Please be discussing these matters with your friends at Church. Please make sure not to contribute to any archdiocesan collections, particularly those headed by dissident bishops. Now we must also urge boycotts of the Peter's Pence collections. Simply contribute directly to worthwhile charities and the more tradition-minded religious orders.
But even Cupich and Wuerl were taking their queues from higher-ups. The main higher-up appears to be Pope Francis himself. Church Militant has discovered that the Vatican's so-called "investigation" into McCarrick's crimes of perversion is turning into a smear campaign against his former victims, now accusers. They are actually trying to say that because 1) the boy may have been 16 at the time and not a minor and 2) the sex may have been "consensual", that somehow McCarrick's culpability and guilt may be mitigated.
Of course that theory is shot full of holes. If you look at the Church Militant link, you'll notice another link at "Taylor Marshall". It is to a video wherein Marshall interviews James Grein, who was molested by McCarrick starting at age 11. Was the Vatican referring to yet another boy? Even if so, that makes not one whit of diffference. The Vatican, in its statement, seems intent on conflating civil law with moral and Church law. It is the latter two laws, both higher than the first, that is the Vatican's only concern.
Some are expressing shock, and rightly so; I'm not sure about their reasons. They state correctly that McCarrick took a vow of celibacy, but celibacy has nothing to do with these crimes. The laity do not take vows of celibacy, but still the actions that McCarrick took are mortally sinful for them as well. Homosexual acts are mortal sins, whether committed by lay or celibates. As far as consensual, I would wager that a cleric holds much sway over a young person, particulary a vulnerable person. Any solicitation to sin would be coercive in that context. If the victim were female, no one would contest that statutory rape occurred. Why the contest in this case? Answer - to deflect culpability from McCarrick. The lengths to which the Vatican is going to defend McCarrick indicate that 1) they don't want any continuing investigation to be directed at them, and/or 2) McCarrick has a lot of dirt on them and is forcing this ludicrous attempt.
But the Vatican is also doing all it can to have themselves held harmless. The Catholic Standard published an article that essentially tried to shift moral responsibility for the pope's delay order onto the bishops themselves, In other words, the Standard is in cahoots with the cover-up. Nice try, guys, but no cigar! Yes, the US bishops have plenty of guilt owing to their ongoing coverup attempts, but much blame for this mess lies with the Vatican and Pope Francis himself.
By the way - I mentioned Taylor Marshall's interview with James Grein. Please take the time to watch the entire thing. It is very informative regarding McCarrick's early years, as he got his start in undermining the Church.
Please be discussing these matters with your friends at Church. Please make sure not to contribute to any archdiocesan collections, particularly those headed by dissident bishops. Now we must also urge boycotts of the Peter's Pence collections. Simply contribute directly to worthwhile charities and the more tradition-minded religious orders.
Monday, June 3, 2019
Vigano Vindicated - Pope, Wuerl, McCarrick Lied
Owing to other matters that required attention (e.g., the Rob Schenck betrayal, Bishop Tobin's heroism and subsequent cowardice), I haven't given this latest development its due. I trust that other sources have filled in some gaps, but will now add my commentary, as Wuerl and McCarrick were, at one time, my bishops.
Msgr Anthony Figueiredo, a former aide to then Archbishop McCarrick while in New Jersey, published details of correspondence that confirms the revelations by Archbishop Vigano. As you'll read, McCarrick acknowledged the restrictions placed on him in 2008.
I will now digress into an important aside. Readers of my blog in June of 2010, shortly after Sr. Carol Keehan influenced the passage of the Obama Hell Bill, will recall that we picketed her appearance at the commencement exercises of Gonzaga High School in DC. I took video of that picket. I ask you to watch the confrontation between one of my colleagues and ... Cardinal McCarrick!. This event happened in 2010, well after he was informed that he was not permitted to make such public appearances! At that time we had no idea that he was under those sanctions. Only now do we know that not only was his appearance with Keehan its own scandal, but it was also an act of direct disobedience to Pope Benedict XVI!
Now let's get back to the current situation. In the correspondence, we see that McCarrick knew he had to change residences. He mentioned that Wuerl was assisting him in that matter. So Wuerl knew of the restrictions and allowed McCarrick to gallivant wherever he pleased. He joined in the defiance against Pope Benedict XVI.
George Weigel related how Vigano informed him on several occasions, going back to 2013, that he told Pope Francis about McCarrick and his abuse of young men, seminarians and priests. In the wake of the pope's denials of these conversations, Weigel said he didn't believe that Vigano was making it up. This comes several days after which the pope flat-out denied knowing anything about McCarrick - a claim that Vigano calls a lie. Now for other commentary...
Msgr Anthony Figueiredo, a former aide to then Archbishop McCarrick while in New Jersey, published details of correspondence that confirms the revelations by Archbishop Vigano. As you'll read, McCarrick acknowledged the restrictions placed on him in 2008.
I will now digress into an important aside. Readers of my blog in June of 2010, shortly after Sr. Carol Keehan influenced the passage of the Obama Hell Bill, will recall that we picketed her appearance at the commencement exercises of Gonzaga High School in DC. I took video of that picket. I ask you to watch the confrontation between one of my colleagues and ... Cardinal McCarrick!. This event happened in 2010, well after he was informed that he was not permitted to make such public appearances! At that time we had no idea that he was under those sanctions. Only now do we know that not only was his appearance with Keehan its own scandal, but it was also an act of direct disobedience to Pope Benedict XVI!
Now let's get back to the current situation. In the correspondence, we see that McCarrick knew he had to change residences. He mentioned that Wuerl was assisting him in that matter. So Wuerl knew of the restrictions and allowed McCarrick to gallivant wherever he pleased. He joined in the defiance against Pope Benedict XVI.
George Weigel related how Vigano informed him on several occasions, going back to 2013, that he told Pope Francis about McCarrick and his abuse of young men, seminarians and priests. In the wake of the pope's denials of these conversations, Weigel said he didn't believe that Vigano was making it up. This comes several days after which the pope flat-out denied knowing anything about McCarrick - a claim that Vigano calls a lie. Now for other commentary...
Wednesday, June 20, 2018
BREAKING - Cardinal McCarrick Removed From Ministry After "Credible" Abuse Allegations - Updated
From LifeSiteNews. I'll have more to say on this later when time allows, and will add to this post. Suffice it now to say that I'm not the least bit surprised.
UPDATE:
As promised, I will add my two cents worth now that I have some time. As a reminder, I have lived in the Archdiocese of Washington since early childhood - about 54 years. That means I endured the reign of Cardinal McCarrick and his ever-increasing progressive pandering. At one time, faithful Catholics could make their displeasure known via the Catholic Standard's "letters to the editor". Once McCarrick made known his disdain for Canon 915, the Standard ceased their "letters to the editor" because they were hearing from thousands of faithful Catholics (including me). To date the Standard has not resumed that feature. Hence I started the site restore-dc-catholicism.com website and a few years later, this blog, to give some voice to faithful Catholics and to help coordinate some activism to clean up the Church. When McCarrick had retired and Wuerl succeeded him, we had hopes for some improvement. We know what became of those hopes.
In his retirement, McCarrick had not kept any silence. Put the word "McCarrick" in the search box in the top left to see how he, in his retirement, continued to trash the credibility of the Church. We haven't heard from him too much lately and I assume he's just slowing down due to his advanced age. So much for this background.
Let's look closely at his statement as quoted by LifeSiteNews. As he commented on the report of the allegation, he said. "while I have absolutely no recollection of this reported abuse". That's quite the Freudian slip. If someone were to allege that I had robbed a bank, murdered a person, committed arson, etc, my statement wouldn't indicate that "I have no recollection" for I know damned well that I didn't commit those crimes, I'd denounce the allegation vehemently and I'd take the person who made the allegations to court for slander, defamation of character, you name it. Now McCarrick has alwasy been quite slippery with his words. Might he have meant that he had no recollection of that particular incident simply because there were so many over the years that he lost track of them all?
It's no secret that Pope Francis himself is quite sympathetic to sodomites. The interim relatio at the 2014 Extraordinary Synod on the Family made that painfully obvious, as did other incidents detailed in various blogposts. So why, oh why, did McCarrick get sacked? Did he somehow run afoul of that Bergoglio-led mafia in the Vatican? Maybe, but maybe not. We faithful Catholics have been turning up the heat on the Vatican for some time. Maybe they decided to toss to us a little bone. The Cardinal has been removed from public ministry. So what? Just how much "public ministry" is an 87-year-old doing anyway? Perhaps he's being secretly rewarded for being a "fall-guy".
It's difficult to guess the motives behind the removal of McCarrick from ministry. Suffice it to say that the Vatican is most likely operating from less-than-honorable motives. At least some sort of justice has been served, even if only meagerly. Let us pray for more cleansing of the Church's clergy.
UPDATE:
As promised, I will add my two cents worth now that I have some time. As a reminder, I have lived in the Archdiocese of Washington since early childhood - about 54 years. That means I endured the reign of Cardinal McCarrick and his ever-increasing progressive pandering. At one time, faithful Catholics could make their displeasure known via the Catholic Standard's "letters to the editor". Once McCarrick made known his disdain for Canon 915, the Standard ceased their "letters to the editor" because they were hearing from thousands of faithful Catholics (including me). To date the Standard has not resumed that feature. Hence I started the site restore-dc-catholicism.com website and a few years later, this blog, to give some voice to faithful Catholics and to help coordinate some activism to clean up the Church. When McCarrick had retired and Wuerl succeeded him, we had hopes for some improvement. We know what became of those hopes.
In his retirement, McCarrick had not kept any silence. Put the word "McCarrick" in the search box in the top left to see how he, in his retirement, continued to trash the credibility of the Church. We haven't heard from him too much lately and I assume he's just slowing down due to his advanced age. So much for this background.
Let's look closely at his statement as quoted by LifeSiteNews. As he commented on the report of the allegation, he said. "while I have absolutely no recollection of this reported abuse". That's quite the Freudian slip. If someone were to allege that I had robbed a bank, murdered a person, committed arson, etc, my statement wouldn't indicate that "I have no recollection" for I know damned well that I didn't commit those crimes, I'd denounce the allegation vehemently and I'd take the person who made the allegations to court for slander, defamation of character, you name it. Now McCarrick has alwasy been quite slippery with his words. Might he have meant that he had no recollection of that particular incident simply because there were so many over the years that he lost track of them all?
It's no secret that Pope Francis himself is quite sympathetic to sodomites. The interim relatio at the 2014 Extraordinary Synod on the Family made that painfully obvious, as did other incidents detailed in various blogposts. So why, oh why, did McCarrick get sacked? Did he somehow run afoul of that Bergoglio-led mafia in the Vatican? Maybe, but maybe not. We faithful Catholics have been turning up the heat on the Vatican for some time. Maybe they decided to toss to us a little bone. The Cardinal has been removed from public ministry. So what? Just how much "public ministry" is an 87-year-old doing anyway? Perhaps he's being secretly rewarded for being a "fall-guy".
It's difficult to guess the motives behind the removal of McCarrick from ministry. Suffice it to say that the Vatican is most likely operating from less-than-honorable motives. At least some sort of justice has been served, even if only meagerly. Let us pray for more cleansing of the Church's clergy.
Tuesday, January 7, 2020
Kansas' Gain Is Florida's Loss
LifeSiteNews announced that Theodore McCarrick moved from the friary in Kansas to what they called an "undisclosed location". They stated that the move was voluntary on McCarrick's part and is being done to deal with the increased scrutiny under which McCarrick finds himself, owing to his decades of homosexual predations on young men.
The account of this event is somewhat confusing. James Grein was one of McCarrick's first victims. It was his testimony that set into motion the events that culminated in McCarrick's dismissal from the clerical state. He said to LifeSiteNews of their account, "this is news to me." However, George Neumayr stated in a tweet that Grein told him that McCarrick had moved to a priests' retirement community within the Diocese of St Augustine (FL). That would be this place. So first Grein doesn't know, but then he tells Neumayr where McCarrick went??
At any rate, notice that this place only has six apartments. I would think that demand for these apartments would be high. So assuming that McCarrick did move there, who moved the necessary mountains to make that possible? Church Militant's piece suggests that McCarrick will be able to come and go at will, as does the St. Michael's site. Isn't that convenient, given that Jacksonville International Airport is just 30 miles away from his new residence? What with all that scrutiny and such, the new digs might come in handy. Hmmm...
The account of this event is somewhat confusing. James Grein was one of McCarrick's first victims. It was his testimony that set into motion the events that culminated in McCarrick's dismissal from the clerical state. He said to LifeSiteNews of their account, "this is news to me." However, George Neumayr stated in a tweet that Grein told him that McCarrick had moved to a priests' retirement community within the Diocese of St Augustine (FL). That would be this place. So first Grein doesn't know, but then he tells Neumayr where McCarrick went??
At any rate, notice that this place only has six apartments. I would think that demand for these apartments would be high. So assuming that McCarrick did move there, who moved the necessary mountains to make that possible? Church Militant's piece suggests that McCarrick will be able to come and go at will, as does the St. Michael's site. Isn't that convenient, given that Jacksonville International Airport is just 30 miles away from his new residence? What with all that scrutiny and such, the new digs might come in handy. Hmmm...
Wednesday, August 8, 2018
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.
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.
Wednesday, July 18, 2018
More On McCarrick - With A Trip Down Memory Lane
Christopher Manion, a Catholic journalist, wrote a piece in which he calls for the resignations of all bishops who knew of Cardinal McCarrick's abuses and did nothing to stop it. One Peter Five has commentary on that and I need not elaborate on that. I would only add that priests be added to that clarion call. Even if they were victims, even if their vocations were on the line, they still had a moral duty to come forth, yet they shirked it.
Today Church Militant published the account of John DeFilippis, a former seminarian who had his own harrowing experience with Cardinal McCarrick. However, even he doesn't name names. Clearly the priest who told him that McCarrick might want to share his bed was complicit. He should be named.
From the moment he arrived in Washington, Cardinal McCarrick was always prone to embroil himself in squalid associations, be they with Ted Kennedy, John Sweeney, Sr. Carol Keehan, etc. Over the years I've been involved with four pickets to protest his joint appearances with these pro-aborts. It appears that there will be no others from him - at least I hope so. Below I post a video from the last of these encounters. This occasion was the graduating ceremony of students from Gonzaga High, in June of 2010. The Obama Hell-Bill had just been signed, with the connivance of Sister Carol Keehan of the Pen of Perfidy. Guess who the commencement speaker was? Yes, the aforementioned Keehan! Guess who gave the invocation? Yes, Cardinal McCarrick! We were on hand to protest the debacle and Cardinal McCarrick received some well-deserved rebuke. Observe (please watch till the end).
Cardinal McCarrick's years are winding down. He hasn't much time left. Please pray that he repents - that he makes a good confession, and very soon. Else his eternal prospects look mighty dim.
Today Church Militant published the account of John DeFilippis, a former seminarian who had his own harrowing experience with Cardinal McCarrick. However, even he doesn't name names. Clearly the priest who told him that McCarrick might want to share his bed was complicit. He should be named.
From the moment he arrived in Washington, Cardinal McCarrick was always prone to embroil himself in squalid associations, be they with Ted Kennedy, John Sweeney, Sr. Carol Keehan, etc. Over the years I've been involved with four pickets to protest his joint appearances with these pro-aborts. It appears that there will be no others from him - at least I hope so. Below I post a video from the last of these encounters. This occasion was the graduating ceremony of students from Gonzaga High, in June of 2010. The Obama Hell-Bill had just been signed, with the connivance of Sister Carol Keehan of the Pen of Perfidy. Guess who the commencement speaker was? Yes, the aforementioned Keehan! Guess who gave the invocation? Yes, Cardinal McCarrick! We were on hand to protest the debacle and Cardinal McCarrick received some well-deserved rebuke. Observe (please watch till the end).
Cardinal McCarrick's years are winding down. He hasn't much time left. Please pray that he repents - that he makes a good confession, and very soon. Else his eternal prospects look mighty dim.
Friday, November 22, 2024
Olga Fairfax - Requiescat In Pace
On Thursday November 21, 2024, between 5:30 - 6:30pm, a massive fire started suddenly in the Wheaton MD home of Olga Fairfax, a long-time indefatigable pro-life activist. She was trapped inside and herself caught fire. She managed to stagger outside where first responders tried to assist her. However, she soon succumbed to her injuries and passed away.
I've known Olga through many years of being with her in front of abortuaries, in various pickets and in other pro-life events. However, she was active in the pro-life movement long before I was. Her parents were Christian but not Catholic. In her early adulthood, she was an ordained Methodist minister, but soon found herself at odds with that church hierarchy, for they were officially embracing both abortion and the various homosexual perversions. In 1978, she resigned her post as associate pastor of Glenmont Methodist Church in Wheaton.
She did start a pro-life group within the Methodist church. While researching material for this post, I discovered that while still a leader of Methodists for Life, she helped 30 women, seeking abortions at Columbia Hospital, to choose life for her children. This I learned from a Washington Post article in 1985, approximately 39 years ago.
As I said earlier, I worked with her most frequently in front of abortion mills, particularly in front of the Planned Parenthood (now closed) on Spring Street in Silver Spring. She was not at all shy or demure about chiding the deathscorts or pro-abortion passers-by. I can still hear her saying to them, "only big babies are pro-choice!" or "why don't you pick on someone your own size?"
 |
| Olga, with Jack Ames, giving a talk |
She was not at all shy about confronting clergy who were not-so-secretly pro-abortion, or, at best, indifferent to it. She told me of an encounter with the now-disgraced ex-cardinal Theodore McCarrick, when the latter offered a Saturday evening Mass at St. Catherine Laboure in Wheaton. I forget now just what the topic of Olga's complaint was, but after Mass, she waited until McCarrick left the church and headed for the rectory. The parish priest saw her and tried to usher McCarrick quickly to the rectory to avoid Olga, but to no avail. Olga walked right along with them, trying to get a reply from McCarrick, chasing him to the rectory door.
In June 2010, several of us protested the commencement ceremony where Sr Carol Keehan gave the convocation address. She is a supposed sister who was instrumental in convincing several Catholic congressmen to vote for Obamacare. We saw that McCarrick was there to offer the Mass. Olga again let McCarrick hear some truth. That was caught on this video. By the way - we found out, years later, that in 2010 McCarrick was under orders by the now-deceased Pope Benedict XVI not to make any public appearances. So not only was he honoring a pro-abort nun, he was thumbing his nose at the reigning pontiff at the time. To get to Olga's rebuke to McCarrick, you can advance to the 3:15 mark.
She still continued to maintain a presence at abortuaries, even after she was assaulted in July 2023. Her last appearance, as far as I know, was her participation in the 2024 Face the Truth Tour sponsored by Defend Life.
Let us pray for her eternal repose, and consolation for her family. Let us all emulate her tenacity. She, no doubt, is praying for us.
Saturday, July 28, 2018
McCarrick Is Gone, But This Is NOT Over By A Longshot
Today the USCCB announced that Cardinal McCarrick submitted to the pope his resignation from the College of Cardinals; the pope accepted that resignation and directed that the now ex-cardinal spend his life in prayer and penance in seclusion.
While this news is welcome, it is not altogether unexpected. When the story broke on June 20 that he had been removed from public ministry, I and others speculated that he might well be the designated "fall guy", taking "one for the team" and being handsomely rewarded for it. They were perhaps hoping that after the removal, that the public's admittedly fickle attention would be diverted elsewhere and McCarrick's situation fall off the communal radar. However, the media, both secular and the faithful Catholic outlets did not let it die. In fact, we started to ask questions about the network that kept McCarrick and others in office for decades while these crimes were occurring.
It was probably our interest in a large-scale boycott of all diocesan collections (and the USCCB ones) that really caused them to adopt more intensive damage-control measures - hence today's announcement. They probably fear not only the loss of revenues but the prospect of us probing into their skullduggary and exposing the cancer that they unleashed upon Holy Mother Church.
So now McCarrick is removed. We don't know how voluntary that resignation was, but at this point it doesn't matter. I suspect there will be no real change in his lifestyle. At his age he wasn't engaged in that much public ministry anyway. I believe he'll live in relative comfort. They won't do too much to him because they realize that he may well have dirt on many of them. We certainly must pray that he does repent and make a good confession before it's time for him to stand before God, as we all must.
Let the USCCB and the Vatican understand that while we are pleased at this first step, by no means are we satisfied. We will not be mollified by one prelate's removal, when there is an entire network of evil infesting the Church. We intend to keep probing, and yes, we will exercise our "power of the purse strings". The glare of public attention will not abate, although our donations certainly will.
Certainly we can say that no more will the donations of hard-working faithful Catholics go towards legal settlements occasioned by the debauched romps and orgies of faithless and perverted prelates. Case in point: the diocese of Great Falls - Billings Montana has to cough up $20 million to pay off several victims of perverted clergy. They had the unmitigated gall to go to their parishioners and tell them that 1) each parish would have to fork over 10% of their savings accounts (money from the laity) and 2) each family was expected to "donate" $1,000.00. My hope and prayer is that the Montana laity will tell Bishop Warfel to take his extortion demand and "shove it where the sun don't shine". Warfel's shakedown is nothing short of an outrage.
McCarrick should never have received that red hat. When that bestowal was announced, some went to Rome to advise Pope John Paul II of his crimes. Sadly, the pope ignored them. Those unnamed individuals are now justified. But there is the whole network that helped McCarrick move up the ladder to his former positions of influence. There are the prelates who most likely knew of his crimes. Let's shine the spotlight on them as we both pray our Rosaries and withhold our donations.
Below is a panel discussion that aired last night before news of McCarrick's removal broke this morning. Listen to get a flavor of the outrage that needs to continue to purge our Church of the filth and vermin within her halls.
While this news is welcome, it is not altogether unexpected. When the story broke on June 20 that he had been removed from public ministry, I and others speculated that he might well be the designated "fall guy", taking "one for the team" and being handsomely rewarded for it. They were perhaps hoping that after the removal, that the public's admittedly fickle attention would be diverted elsewhere and McCarrick's situation fall off the communal radar. However, the media, both secular and the faithful Catholic outlets did not let it die. In fact, we started to ask questions about the network that kept McCarrick and others in office for decades while these crimes were occurring.
It was probably our interest in a large-scale boycott of all diocesan collections (and the USCCB ones) that really caused them to adopt more intensive damage-control measures - hence today's announcement. They probably fear not only the loss of revenues but the prospect of us probing into their skullduggary and exposing the cancer that they unleashed upon Holy Mother Church.
So now McCarrick is removed. We don't know how voluntary that resignation was, but at this point it doesn't matter. I suspect there will be no real change in his lifestyle. At his age he wasn't engaged in that much public ministry anyway. I believe he'll live in relative comfort. They won't do too much to him because they realize that he may well have dirt on many of them. We certainly must pray that he does repent and make a good confession before it's time for him to stand before God, as we all must.
Let the USCCB and the Vatican understand that while we are pleased at this first step, by no means are we satisfied. We will not be mollified by one prelate's removal, when there is an entire network of evil infesting the Church. We intend to keep probing, and yes, we will exercise our "power of the purse strings". The glare of public attention will not abate, although our donations certainly will.
Certainly we can say that no more will the donations of hard-working faithful Catholics go towards legal settlements occasioned by the debauched romps and orgies of faithless and perverted prelates. Case in point: the diocese of Great Falls - Billings Montana has to cough up $20 million to pay off several victims of perverted clergy. They had the unmitigated gall to go to their parishioners and tell them that 1) each parish would have to fork over 10% of their savings accounts (money from the laity) and 2) each family was expected to "donate" $1,000.00. My hope and prayer is that the Montana laity will tell Bishop Warfel to take his extortion demand and "shove it where the sun don't shine". Warfel's shakedown is nothing short of an outrage.
McCarrick should never have received that red hat. When that bestowal was announced, some went to Rome to advise Pope John Paul II of his crimes. Sadly, the pope ignored them. Those unnamed individuals are now justified. But there is the whole network that helped McCarrick move up the ladder to his former positions of influence. There are the prelates who most likely knew of his crimes. Let's shine the spotlight on them as we both pray our Rosaries and withhold our donations.
Below is a panel discussion that aired last night before news of McCarrick's removal broke this morning. Listen to get a flavor of the outrage that needs to continue to purge our Church of the filth and vermin within her halls.
Friday, April 4, 2025
Theodore McCarrick Dead - God Have Mercy On His Soul
Earlier today, Friday April 4, disgraced ex-prelate Theodore McCarrick went to his eternal reward, such as it may be. No one who has two brain synapses firing can be unaware of the devastation that he wreaked upon the Church, not to mention the lives of the boys and young men that he raped over his chequered tenure in the Church hierarcy.
This blog and its sister website were inspired by this man, but not because he was a paragon of virtue. I did so to bring this man's evil deeds into the limelight so that others could see him for what he was. He could be a charming guy, but such charm is deadly and seductive. Lord knows the Catholic Standard wouldn't do so, since it functioned as McCarrick's mouthpiece. When controversy arose because of McCarrick's stance on giving Holy Communion to adulterers, the Catholic Standard ceased its "letters to the editor" column and has never resumed it. This blog attempted to fill that void.
At that time though, I was unaware of the depths of his depravity. Oh, there were rumors swilling about, regarding his abuse of young men and seminarians. However, since no victim came forward, I could not in good conscience promulgate those rumors lest I myself sin against honesty.
The testimony of James Grein changed that, however. Once he relayed the horrific nightmare inflicted upon him by McCarrick, others came forward. Finally the Vatican had to take action, if only to save its own sorry face. Francis, himself of like mind with McCarrick on a great many matters, reduced him to the clerical state. Oh, I'm sure that there were considerations given to McCarrick. He never served jail time, did he?
McCarrick was known as a "king-maker". He was influential in appointing many like-minded guys (I have trouble calling them "men") into high places in the Church. I speak of fellows like Blaise Cupich, Kevin Farrell, and of course, the current prelate of the Archdiocese of Washington. He was instrumental in selling out faithful Catholics in red China to their virulently corrupt Communist government. There are so many ways in which he besmirched Holy Mother Church. Time prevents me from rehashing all that in this post, so please read what I wrote previously over the years.
Let's pray that he made a good confession, or that he at least made a perfect act of contrition before he drew his last breath.
Thursday, June 21, 2018
McCarrick's Nephews Must Come Forth And Come Clean
About 18 months ago I posted a video detailing the nine ways that one can be an accessory to the mortal sin of another, thereby incurring the guilt of his/her own mortal sin. I now post that and ask you to review, then I'll continue my comments below the video.
I now link to an article by Rob Dreher about the removal of Cardinal McCarrick. He goes into rather graphic detail about the alleged abuses by Cardinal McCarrick. This is not the first time that I've heard of these scenarios. Notice that in this article, McCarrick is depicted as molesting seminarians that were in his charge. McCarrick is removed due to an incident with a minor, but seminarians are not minors. They were young men at the time, but full grown and quite capable of fending off an older man - but they didn't!
As you heard in the video, two of the ways that one shares the guilt of another's mortal sin are by concealment and silence. That's exactly the grievous fault of these young men. A careful read of the article makes clear that some of them pretended not to notice as McCarrick was molesting one of their fellow seminarians a few feet from him. One gets a hint as to the motivation behind the silence - that they didn't want to jeopardize their chances at being ordained. But what really did they do? Did they in fact not compromise their own priesthoods by such (I'll say it) cowardice? In some cases they displayed despicable lack of charity in failing to come to the aid of their brother seminarians. Surely at the time of these incidents they had some knowledge that what was going on was morally repugnant. Would they have looked the other way while a young child was being so raped? Only they can answer that question, but given what they did I shudder to ponder the answer to that question.
This matter is now under investigation. I now call upon those who may have been molested by the Cardinal to come forth and lend their names and testimony to the investigation. They are morally obliged to do so. In their previous silence they not only endangered themselves but the seminarians who came after them under McCarrick's control. They now have the opportunity to make some sort of amends. They now have the opportunity to send messages to other perverts that the days of free access to youths without consequences are over.
I now link to an article by Rob Dreher about the removal of Cardinal McCarrick. He goes into rather graphic detail about the alleged abuses by Cardinal McCarrick. This is not the first time that I've heard of these scenarios. Notice that in this article, McCarrick is depicted as molesting seminarians that were in his charge. McCarrick is removed due to an incident with a minor, but seminarians are not minors. They were young men at the time, but full grown and quite capable of fending off an older man - but they didn't!
As you heard in the video, two of the ways that one shares the guilt of another's mortal sin are by concealment and silence. That's exactly the grievous fault of these young men. A careful read of the article makes clear that some of them pretended not to notice as McCarrick was molesting one of their fellow seminarians a few feet from him. One gets a hint as to the motivation behind the silence - that they didn't want to jeopardize their chances at being ordained. But what really did they do? Did they in fact not compromise their own priesthoods by such (I'll say it) cowardice? In some cases they displayed despicable lack of charity in failing to come to the aid of their brother seminarians. Surely at the time of these incidents they had some knowledge that what was going on was morally repugnant. Would they have looked the other way while a young child was being so raped? Only they can answer that question, but given what they did I shudder to ponder the answer to that question.
This matter is now under investigation. I now call upon those who may have been molested by the Cardinal to come forth and lend their names and testimony to the investigation. They are morally obliged to do so. In their previous silence they not only endangered themselves but the seminarians who came after them under McCarrick's control. They now have the opportunity to make some sort of amends. They now have the opportunity to send messages to other perverts that the days of free access to youths without consequences are over.
Tuesday, July 21, 2020
Let's Not Lose Sight Of McCarrick And The Evils That He Wrought
Amidst all the turmoil regarding the corona virus, draconian governmental shutdowns, the thuggish behaviors of Antifa and "Black Lives Matter", it is easy to lose sight of how McCarrick made a mockery of the Church. Indeed, we can probably lay at his feet the blame for the Church's wimpy and heretical responses to the above-named plagues.
One big matter that is slipping from the minds of many (and perhaps this is a goal of the progressive prelates) is the report on McCarrick that was supposed to have been released months ago. It still remains under lock and key - whether that of the Vatican or the USCCB I don't know, but I'm fairly certain they are in cahoots.
I post below two relevant videos, but still have some remarks to make. Taylor Marshall alludes to the election of Francis to the papacy. Shortly after he was elected, some anomalies came to light and I posted about them here and here. In the second link, I posted a video of an address given by then-cardinal McCarrick, in which he alludes to being asked to influence the election for then-Cardinal Bergoglio. Marshall made mention of that. In the two posts, I made known my concerns regarding the validity of the resignation of Pope Benedict XVI; my concerns remain unaddressed and therefore I must admit his resignation may have been invalid and that he still remains the true pope.
Marshall mentioned the Lifesitenews summary of the study of McCarrick's network of accomplices. Here is the link to that summary.
The Vortex below, also from a few days ago, looks at the McCarrick situation from other angles, particularly regarding the literal sell-off of the Catholic Church in China.
When I first started blogging, McCarrick was still archbishop of my diocese. I started writing because I knew he and others posed problems for the Church. At that time, the Catholic Standard had been ordered to cease publishing "letters to the editor" after he made allowances for pro-aborts to receive Holy Communion sacrilegiously. However, at that time, I was not aware of the extent of evil perpetrated by that man. I consider it an act of Divine Mercy that he was laicized. However, the wheels of evil that he set in motion still continue to churn, and we see some of that in burned cities, ruined livelihood, vandalized churches, governmental tyrants run amok.
In addition to the Rosary that Marshall mentioned, we've got to act. Getting in front of the USCCB meeting might be a good idea. We have also got to get behind President Trump this coming November. He has demonstrated that he is at least friendly to traditional western civilization, unlike the Democrats who are rabidly pro-abortion and anti-God.
Please spread this post and the videos around.
One big matter that is slipping from the minds of many (and perhaps this is a goal of the progressive prelates) is the report on McCarrick that was supposed to have been released months ago. It still remains under lock and key - whether that of the Vatican or the USCCB I don't know, but I'm fairly certain they are in cahoots.
I post below two relevant videos, but still have some remarks to make. Taylor Marshall alludes to the election of Francis to the papacy. Shortly after he was elected, some anomalies came to light and I posted about them here and here. In the second link, I posted a video of an address given by then-cardinal McCarrick, in which he alludes to being asked to influence the election for then-Cardinal Bergoglio. Marshall made mention of that. In the two posts, I made known my concerns regarding the validity of the resignation of Pope Benedict XVI; my concerns remain unaddressed and therefore I must admit his resignation may have been invalid and that he still remains the true pope.
Marshall mentioned the Lifesitenews summary of the study of McCarrick's network of accomplices. Here is the link to that summary.
The Vortex below, also from a few days ago, looks at the McCarrick situation from other angles, particularly regarding the literal sell-off of the Catholic Church in China.
When I first started blogging, McCarrick was still archbishop of my diocese. I started writing because I knew he and others posed problems for the Church. At that time, the Catholic Standard had been ordered to cease publishing "letters to the editor" after he made allowances for pro-aborts to receive Holy Communion sacrilegiously. However, at that time, I was not aware of the extent of evil perpetrated by that man. I consider it an act of Divine Mercy that he was laicized. However, the wheels of evil that he set in motion still continue to churn, and we see some of that in burned cities, ruined livelihood, vandalized churches, governmental tyrants run amok.
In addition to the Rosary that Marshall mentioned, we've got to act. Getting in front of the USCCB meeting might be a good idea. We have also got to get behind President Trump this coming November. He has demonstrated that he is at least friendly to traditional western civilization, unlike the Democrats who are rabidly pro-abortion and anti-God.
Please spread this post and the videos around.
Saturday, November 24, 2018
What's Happening With McCarrick?
With all the events surrounding the joke of a bishops' meeting in Baltimore, and now the prospect of yet another synodical farce this coming February, the fate of Theodore McCarrick seems to have fallen from the radar screens. Or so some prelates might have hoped.
The Washington Post seems to have noticed that, and has remarked about that. Normally I'm not a fan of the Post but in this case I respect their determination not to let this matter fall by the wayside. They ask questions that deserve answers.
Well, maybe there are answers. This LifeSiteNews article details how McCarrick was quite the effficient errand boy for Pope Francis in his various progressive endeavors. I need not rehash all the mess here. Suffice it to say that there is plenty of reason why Pope Francis would like to keep the spotlight off McCarrick. Perhaps he would one day like to spirit McCarrick off to some posh resort in Europe - for prayer and penance, of course! Or perhaps they are waiting for nature to run its course; McCarrick is getting on in years and the day of his eventual passing from this life is drawing near.
Speaking of that inevitable event, please keep him in prayer, that he would come to real repentance and make a good confession before he dies. Else, his eternal prospects look rather dim.
The Washington Post seems to have noticed that, and has remarked about that. Normally I'm not a fan of the Post but in this case I respect their determination not to let this matter fall by the wayside. They ask questions that deserve answers.
Well, maybe there are answers. This LifeSiteNews article details how McCarrick was quite the effficient errand boy for Pope Francis in his various progressive endeavors. I need not rehash all the mess here. Suffice it to say that there is plenty of reason why Pope Francis would like to keep the spotlight off McCarrick. Perhaps he would one day like to spirit McCarrick off to some posh resort in Europe - for prayer and penance, of course! Or perhaps they are waiting for nature to run its course; McCarrick is getting on in years and the day of his eventual passing from this life is drawing near.
Speaking of that inevitable event, please keep him in prayer, that he would come to real repentance and make a good confession before he dies. Else, his eternal prospects look rather dim.
Sunday, July 1, 2018
McCarrick Matter Puts Past Situations In New Light
Both LifeSiteNews and National Catholic Register raise a very serious question. That is, "In light of what they knew regarding Cardinal McCarrick's crimes of perversion, why did his brother bishops say nothing, essentially allowing McCarrick to carry on unfettered?" We even know that when Pope John Paul II was considering the bestowal of the "red hat" on then-Archbishop McCarrick, a group of seminarians (some prior targets) went to Rome to advise against this appointment; the were ignored.
I now link to an article written a few days ago by Eric Sammons. It appears on the One Peter Five site and is entitled "Who Watches The Watchmen? The Fatal Flaw Of The Dallas Charter". He, like I, resided in the Archdiocese of Washington at the time and we experienced in our different ways the damage control mechanisms of the DC chancery when the Boston Globe first broke the story regarding the rampant abuse of minors by clerics. He relates his experiences as a parent of being treated as a potential abuser when he challenged the fatal flaws of Virtus.
My experience of the damage control was different but still quite revealing. In the wake of the scandals, the chancery decided to have discussion panels at various parishes to detail to concerned Catholics "what they were doing to address the problem". I realized very soon after the first and only session at St Raphael's in Rockville that its purposes was to quell our questioning and displeasure.
The room at St Raphael's was packed. The panel of so-called "experts" from the Archdiocese first tried to tell us that nationwide only about 10% of pedophile cases are homosexual in nature. That didn't work when we pointed out that we were not concerned with pedophilia as it occurs in the general population but that which is perpetrated by Catholic clergy, and that indeed is over 90% homosexual. For the rest of the evening, the "experts" adopted "deer-in-headlight" facial expressions as they tried to suffer through and end their torture quickly. This first of these sessions turned out to be the last as well. Clearly these "experts" were instructed to brainwash us into disregarding the homosexual component. Now they probably had no idea that their boss Cardinal McCarrick was one of those abusers, and we certainly didn't. However, last week's news puts my St Raphael's experience in a new light.
Also put in a new light is the situation that occurred at my parish over six years ago, when Father Marcel Guarnizo was expelled from the Archdiocese for denying Holy Communion to a flagrant lesbian. I needn't go through these details, including the ADW's despicable conduct towards Father, but when you consider that another pervert, albeit retired, still wielded much influence in the chancery, we get a bit more insight into the mindsets of ADW leaders.
Some of my colleagues voice optimism that this revelation might signal a paradigm shift in attitudes of church leaders towards gay sex abuse among their clergy. I remain cautious for leopards don't change their spots overnight. I voiced a possibility that Cardinal McCarrick, since he is already of advanced age, might simply be "taking one for the team", and if our attention is diverted to other matters, he might simply be left alone to be quietly rewarded. But I may happily be proven wrong. God does work miracles.
I now link to an article written a few days ago by Eric Sammons. It appears on the One Peter Five site and is entitled "Who Watches The Watchmen? The Fatal Flaw Of The Dallas Charter". He, like I, resided in the Archdiocese of Washington at the time and we experienced in our different ways the damage control mechanisms of the DC chancery when the Boston Globe first broke the story regarding the rampant abuse of minors by clerics. He relates his experiences as a parent of being treated as a potential abuser when he challenged the fatal flaws of Virtus.
My experience of the damage control was different but still quite revealing. In the wake of the scandals, the chancery decided to have discussion panels at various parishes to detail to concerned Catholics "what they were doing to address the problem". I realized very soon after the first and only session at St Raphael's in Rockville that its purposes was to quell our questioning and displeasure.
The room at St Raphael's was packed. The panel of so-called "experts" from the Archdiocese first tried to tell us that nationwide only about 10% of pedophile cases are homosexual in nature. That didn't work when we pointed out that we were not concerned with pedophilia as it occurs in the general population but that which is perpetrated by Catholic clergy, and that indeed is over 90% homosexual. For the rest of the evening, the "experts" adopted "deer-in-headlight" facial expressions as they tried to suffer through and end their torture quickly. This first of these sessions turned out to be the last as well. Clearly these "experts" were instructed to brainwash us into disregarding the homosexual component. Now they probably had no idea that their boss Cardinal McCarrick was one of those abusers, and we certainly didn't. However, last week's news puts my St Raphael's experience in a new light.
Also put in a new light is the situation that occurred at my parish over six years ago, when Father Marcel Guarnizo was expelled from the Archdiocese for denying Holy Communion to a flagrant lesbian. I needn't go through these details, including the ADW's despicable conduct towards Father, but when you consider that another pervert, albeit retired, still wielded much influence in the chancery, we get a bit more insight into the mindsets of ADW leaders.
Some of my colleagues voice optimism that this revelation might signal a paradigm shift in attitudes of church leaders towards gay sex abuse among their clergy. I remain cautious for leopards don't change their spots overnight. I voiced a possibility that Cardinal McCarrick, since he is already of advanced age, might simply be "taking one for the team", and if our attention is diverted to other matters, he might simply be left alone to be quietly rewarded. But I may happily be proven wrong. God does work miracles.
Friday, May 24, 2013
Cardinal McCarrick Praises Culture Of Death Icon Father Hesburgh
Father Theodore Hesburgh, president of Notre Dame University for thirty-five years, used his influence and position to severely compromise Catholicism in the United States (maybe the entire western world) and to promote the Culture of Death. Part and parcel of the Culture of Death is socialism. This blog and a number of others have documented his rather putrid career. He has:
- Played a pivotal role in creating and promulgating the heretical Land O' Lakes Statement, that declared de facto rebellion of Catholic colleges against the Magisterium.
- Gave aid and comfort to Alinsky-disciple Msgr Jack Egan (when the latter was evicted from his diocese), allowing Notre Dame to be used as a base to create the Catholic Campaign for Human Development
- Chaired the Rockefeller Foundation, advocates for "population control"
- Go to this link to see how Notre Dame University has done tremendous insult to Christianity. The 2009 commencement was just the most notorious example. I've no doubt that this list is not exhaustive.
I think it's fair to say that if it weren't for Fr Hesburgh's influence, Catholic institutes of higher learning would not be polluting the minds of their students. The CCHD may not have gained the footholds in so many chanceries that it now has. And yes, Obama may well not be president.
Two days ago in the US Capitol Building, some Catholic (using "Catholic" loosely) politicians hosted a birthday party for Father Hesburgh. We can guess why there was no screeching and howling from the "separation of church and state" crowd over this - because their champion was being honored! Among the "usual suspects" in attendance were Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi: two CINO pro-aborts who enjoy their positions of influence due in no small part to Fr Hesburgh.
One of the other attendees called Father Hesburgh "one of four great Americans", the other three being George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and Abraham Lincoln. For the profuse amount of slobbering, kissing-up and toadying that oozed from such a stupid statement, this attendee made an utter fool of himself. And who was that who stuck both feet in his mouth? Cardinal McCarrick!
Today was not at all the first time that Fr Hesburgh and Cardinal McCarrick met. Thanks to a colleague in the Catholic Media Coalition, I was informed that Cardinal McCarrick is a signer of the Land O' Lakes Statement. Go to the link to the statement and scroll down. Sure enough, his name is there. He stood "lock, stock and barrel" with those who deliberately introduced dissension and heresy into our Catholic schools!
This past Sunday, Pentecost Sunday, Cardinal McCarrick was the main celebrant at the 9:30 Mass at St John Neumann Church in Gaithersburg, MD. I was in attendance and recorded his homily; I link to it here. Take note of the homily between 4:50 and 5:10. He says that "once we leave the teaching of the Apostles...then Islam comes.." While that statement is true enough, I was aghast when I heard it for I remembered other times when he affirmed Islam. As you continue to listen him praise (rightly so) the "purity of doctrine", recall how he helped adulterate that same purity with his affirmation of the poisonous Land O' Lakes Statement and his squalid associations with Sister Carol Keehan, Ted Kennedy, John Sweeney, etc.
In his Pentecost homily, Cardinal McCarrick deplored the confusion that his ongoing actions create! His celebration of Father Hesburgh just a few days ago after that homily is merely the latest in the litany of contradictory messages that he sends. Holy Mother Church is suffering through want of fidelity of action on the part of her shepherds. Pray that God would send these to us quickly.
Thursday, July 26, 2018
Call To Action For Catholics Of The Archdiocese Of Washington
Unless one is deliberately oblivious and clueless they cannot help but notice the revelations about Cardinal McCarrick and his sexual abuse of young men. Actually, most of us have known this "open secret" but now all pretenses of secrecy have been jettisoned.
Ann Barnhardt has some plausible theories regarding the archdiocese' current prelate. Whatever else Wuerl might or might not be, he certainly was an enabler for McCarrick. And no, we are not such dunces as to believe that Cardinal Wuerl (or J Tobin or Farrell) were innocently unaware of what was transpiring under their noses.
I link now to a LifeSiteNews article written by a psychiatrist who has dealt with clergy sex abuse. Here are two paragraphs that caught my eye.
In my clinical experience, bishops or those on their staff who are sexual heretics attempt to laicize loyal priests who did not abuse minors or adults and whose psychological conflicts can be resolved. They also support or generate false accusations of abuse against loyal priests whom they then try to laicize. As with Cardinal McCarrick, other bishops are aware of their hostile, passive-aggressive activities against loyal priests and the Church.
Loyal priests are often told by their pastors or pressured by their bishops through his staff not to preach on contraception, sexual morality, marriage, fornication, homosexuality or adultery. Those who do not remain silent on these subjects are often victims of false accusations. Tragically, a ‘critical mass’ of homosexually inclined clergy has tipped the balance and the clergy who are faithful on sexual ethics are in danger of being falsely accused.
This very accurately describes the treatment meted out to Father Guarnizo at my parish just over six years ago. Prior to his encounter with the lesbian who tried to take Communion from him, he was preaching on the evils of homosexuality during the weekday Masses. Several guilty noses were thrown out of joint and they were looking for the opportunity to take him down. When the Post picked up on the situation with the lesbian (My! Didn't that happen with all speed?), they removed his faculties with barely the pretense of any due process. I've no doubt that they would have laicized him, if he weren't actually incardinated in another diocese.
I absolutely agree that all who enabled McCarrick over the years should immediately resign. That might mean an empty DC chancery, but that really would be no great loss.
Michael Voris has issued a call to action. Part of that entails the boycott of any and all diocesan collections. Obviously that is doubly incumbent upon us who reside in McCarrick's home diocese. Let us start by boycotting the CCHD collection that will occur during the weekend of Aug 4-5. We shouldn't be contributing one penny to that Alinskyian cash cow anyway. However, we have a way to send a message to the chancery. Don't just throw your envelopes away. Inside your envelope, place a note in it and drop that in the collection basket. Here is some suggested language for the note.
"I will not contribute one red cent to a fund that funnels money to anti-God and anti-life organizations. Furthermore, I will never contribute again to any diocesan collection unless Cardinal McCarrick and his enablers atone for their crimes against young men, nature, and the God whom they pledged to serve."
Please pass this on to your fellow Catholics, especially within the Archdiocese of Washington.
Ann Barnhardt has some plausible theories regarding the archdiocese' current prelate. Whatever else Wuerl might or might not be, he certainly was an enabler for McCarrick. And no, we are not such dunces as to believe that Cardinal Wuerl (or J Tobin or Farrell) were innocently unaware of what was transpiring under their noses.
I link now to a LifeSiteNews article written by a psychiatrist who has dealt with clergy sex abuse. Here are two paragraphs that caught my eye.
In my clinical experience, bishops or those on their staff who are sexual heretics attempt to laicize loyal priests who did not abuse minors or adults and whose psychological conflicts can be resolved. They also support or generate false accusations of abuse against loyal priests whom they then try to laicize. As with Cardinal McCarrick, other bishops are aware of their hostile, passive-aggressive activities against loyal priests and the Church.
Loyal priests are often told by their pastors or pressured by their bishops through his staff not to preach on contraception, sexual morality, marriage, fornication, homosexuality or adultery. Those who do not remain silent on these subjects are often victims of false accusations. Tragically, a ‘critical mass’ of homosexually inclined clergy has tipped the balance and the clergy who are faithful on sexual ethics are in danger of being falsely accused.
This very accurately describes the treatment meted out to Father Guarnizo at my parish just over six years ago. Prior to his encounter with the lesbian who tried to take Communion from him, he was preaching on the evils of homosexuality during the weekday Masses. Several guilty noses were thrown out of joint and they were looking for the opportunity to take him down. When the Post picked up on the situation with the lesbian (My! Didn't that happen with all speed?), they removed his faculties with barely the pretense of any due process. I've no doubt that they would have laicized him, if he weren't actually incardinated in another diocese.
I absolutely agree that all who enabled McCarrick over the years should immediately resign. That might mean an empty DC chancery, but that really would be no great loss.
Michael Voris has issued a call to action. Part of that entails the boycott of any and all diocesan collections. Obviously that is doubly incumbent upon us who reside in McCarrick's home diocese. Let us start by boycotting the CCHD collection that will occur during the weekend of Aug 4-5. We shouldn't be contributing one penny to that Alinskyian cash cow anyway. However, we have a way to send a message to the chancery. Don't just throw your envelopes away. Inside your envelope, place a note in it and drop that in the collection basket. Here is some suggested language for the note.
"I will not contribute one red cent to a fund that funnels money to anti-God and anti-life organizations. Furthermore, I will never contribute again to any diocesan collection unless Cardinal McCarrick and his enablers atone for their crimes against young men, nature, and the God whom they pledged to serve."
Please pass this on to your fellow Catholics, especially within the Archdiocese of Washington.
Friday, September 12, 2014
Cardinal McCarrick Channels His Inner Imam - Again!
Nine years ago, Cardinal McCarrick addressed some Jordanian dignitaries at the Catholic University of America. In his prayer incantation, he invoked "allah" (as though it were a true deity) three times! Guess how many times he invoked Jesus Christ? Zero-zip-nada! Read it from this blog's sister site here http://www.restore-dc-catholicism.com/McCarrick%20watch.htm and scroll all the way to the bottom. Please read the text of the complete address. Here are more incredible McCarrick gaffes relating to Islam. Two days ago he added yet another.
Two days ago at a press conference in Washington - arranged by the Muslim Public Affairs Council, he again offered islamic-sounding incantations (I will not call that idolatrous screed "prayer"!), saying less-than-edifying pronouncements:
Two days ago at a press conference in Washington - arranged by the Muslim Public Affairs Council, he again offered islamic-sounding incantations (I will not call that idolatrous screed "prayer"!), saying less-than-edifying pronouncements:
- "In the name of God, the Merciful and Compassionate" - an islamic invocation, roughly analogous to the Sign of the Cross for Catholics
- "Mohammed the prophet, peace upon him" - again, another nod to the islamic heresy - never mind that Mohammed was a pedophile who murdered anyone standing in the way of his false creed
I see no sign that the Cardinal invoked the name of Jesus Christ at least once - just as happened nine years ago at Catholic University of America. Please read that entire article as it points out the horrid ways that McCarrick contradicted historical fact.
I am so grateful that McCarrick has retired and can no longer vote in papal conclaves. He still manages to make a mockery of the Faith - with the permission if not approval of Cardinal Wuerl. Lately the Vortex has been focusing on the evil that progressive bishops have been wreaking on the faith. Here is yet one more sad example. I'm sure another will appear in a matter of weeks if not days.
Friday, February 15, 2019
Farrell To Be Papal Camerlengo - What Could Possibly Go Right?
I've written a good bit about Cardinal Farrell in the past. Some might recall that before he made himself infamous, he was pastor of a local parish in Washington DC. He was unimpressive then so we knew he'd be a problem when he was named a cardinal.
Among many of his problems is his close association with now ex-cardinal McCarrick. Farrell lived with McCarrick for six years, yet he claims to have known nothing regarding McCarrick's perverted assaults on young men.
Now that McCarrick is on the verge of being laicized (unless he weasels his way out of this), we find it odd that the pope has appointed a close McCarrick associate as camerlengo. This official wields much influence after the death of a pope, essentially managing Vatican and Church affairs until a new pope is elected.
So we have Farrell as camerlengo and Cupich running the abuse summit in a few weeks. As they say, personnel is policy, so again we have clear evidence of current policies at the Vatican.
Among many of his problems is his close association with now ex-cardinal McCarrick. Farrell lived with McCarrick for six years, yet he claims to have known nothing regarding McCarrick's perverted assaults on young men.
Now that McCarrick is on the verge of being laicized (unless he weasels his way out of this), we find it odd that the pope has appointed a close McCarrick associate as camerlengo. This official wields much influence after the death of a pope, essentially managing Vatican and Church affairs until a new pope is elected.
So we have Farrell as camerlengo and Cupich running the abuse summit in a few weeks. As they say, personnel is policy, so again we have clear evidence of current policies at the Vatican.
Friday, September 28, 2018
McCarrick's New Digs, Thanks To The Octopus
Today the Archdiocese of Washington put out a statement regarding Archbishop Emeritus McCarrick's new location in Victoria, Kansas. They are rather nondescript about the place. The last sentence is basically telling Catholics not to stage any protests there. For that there may be reasons that the ADW declines to divulge.
From LifeSiteNews we have more details. This friary in which McCarrick is staying is next door to an elementary school. Please note the location on the map. Just a few blocks away is a high school. Was this just a gross oversight - or is the octopus simply catering to McCarrick's, uhhh. "preferences"? That's a fair question, given that Cardinal Wuerl made the arrangements, per the statement of Bishop Gerald Vincke of Salina, the local diocese. Notice in that statement that he seems to be reassuring the local Catholics that "our diocese is not incurring any costs in this arrangement". So who is picking up the tab? Are we of the Archdiocese of Washington getting stuck with this bill? If so, this is yet another reason to starve our local octopus of any funds; refer to this post for a strategy to stop doing so.
By the way - if you know anyone in that locality in Kansas, or even in a broader radius, let them know that there is now a clear and present danger to their children and that they might wish to consider taking action, even to the point of withholding their own donations and conducting their own pickets.
Interesting update, from George Neumayr:
From LifeSiteNews we have more details. This friary in which McCarrick is staying is next door to an elementary school. Please note the location on the map. Just a few blocks away is a high school. Was this just a gross oversight - or is the octopus simply catering to McCarrick's, uhhh. "preferences"? That's a fair question, given that Cardinal Wuerl made the arrangements, per the statement of Bishop Gerald Vincke of Salina, the local diocese. Notice in that statement that he seems to be reassuring the local Catholics that "our diocese is not incurring any costs in this arrangement". So who is picking up the tab? Are we of the Archdiocese of Washington getting stuck with this bill? If so, this is yet another reason to starve our local octopus of any funds; refer to this post for a strategy to stop doing so.
By the way - if you know anyone in that locality in Kansas, or even in a broader radius, let them know that there is now a clear and present danger to their children and that they might wish to consider taking action, even to the point of withholding their own donations and conducting their own pickets.
Interesting update, from George Neumayr:
Here is a scoop: I have a well-placed Kansas source who informs me that "the real reason" why Wuerl disclosed McCarrick's new home is that the news had already leaked out to "locals upset that a rapist would be at a monastery which holds teen retreats." More to come... https://t.co/5EiA9NoiJf— George Neumayr (@george_neumayr) September 29, 2018
Sunday, July 29, 2018
A Suggested Plan Of Action To Cripple The Gay Apparatus In The US Church
In light of the significant development in the McCarrick situation yesterday, that is, his ouster from the College of Cardinals and subsequent taking up of a life of secluded prayer and penance, I would have expected some sort of statement from the DC chancery to be read at Mass, as one was when he was first ordered to cease public ministry. Instead we heard - nothing! Zero-zip-nada! Crickets!
How disingenuous! Does the chancery really take faithful Catholics to be naive simpletons? I've no doubt that one big reason behind their silence is that they hope McCarrick's removal will satisfy us and that they no longer have to worry about the consequences of their aiding and abetting McCarrick throughout the years. This is pure damage control.
For those of you who believe that the poor dears in the chancery simply didn't have enough time to craft a decent statement, may I present this open letter regarding the situation that was released by Bishop Michael Olson of the Diocese of Fort Worth (TX)? In all honesty, I've had issues with Olson in the past few years as the Texas bishops seemed hell-bent on electing RINOs to offices as opposed to real pro-life people, but I appreciate his alacrity in addressing his congregation about this matter. By contrast we see how disingenuous the DC chancery really is.
If the chancery thought their silence would cause our attention and resolve to dissipate, they are sorely mistaken. We are NOT going to relax our vigilance and we will NOT cease our prayers and actions until the vile cabal that aided and abetted McCarrick throughout the years is dismantled and those members be forced to atone for their own sins in this matter. Let's be clear that many of these are in the DC chancery, as well as the USCCB.
So what do we do? First, we make sure we ourselves pray and remain in the state of grace. Under no circumstances do we contemplate abandoning the Barque of Peter' that is the mortal sin of apostasy. But there are other actions we must take, and these actions are predicated on the understanding that these bishops only understand one language from us, and that language is money.
How disingenuous! Does the chancery really take faithful Catholics to be naive simpletons? I've no doubt that one big reason behind their silence is that they hope McCarrick's removal will satisfy us and that they no longer have to worry about the consequences of their aiding and abetting McCarrick throughout the years. This is pure damage control.
For those of you who believe that the poor dears in the chancery simply didn't have enough time to craft a decent statement, may I present this open letter regarding the situation that was released by Bishop Michael Olson of the Diocese of Fort Worth (TX)? In all honesty, I've had issues with Olson in the past few years as the Texas bishops seemed hell-bent on electing RINOs to offices as opposed to real pro-life people, but I appreciate his alacrity in addressing his congregation about this matter. By contrast we see how disingenuous the DC chancery really is.
If the chancery thought their silence would cause our attention and resolve to dissipate, they are sorely mistaken. We are NOT going to relax our vigilance and we will NOT cease our prayers and actions until the vile cabal that aided and abetted McCarrick throughout the years is dismantled and those members be forced to atone for their own sins in this matter. Let's be clear that many of these are in the DC chancery, as well as the USCCB.
So what do we do? First, we make sure we ourselves pray and remain in the state of grace. Under no circumstances do we contemplate abandoning the Barque of Peter' that is the mortal sin of apostasy. But there are other actions we must take, and these actions are predicated on the understanding that these bishops only understand one language from us, and that language is money.
- We must cease contributing to any diocesan collections. That includes the Cardinal's Appeal. It means that we boycott the CCHD collection next week if we aren't already doing so. We should be boycotting it anyway, for those monies are used to fund various anti-God leftwing organizations. For those collection envelopes, my post from a few days ago had some suggested language. Alternatively, you might want to use the envelope stuffer at the bottom.
- The Archdiocese of Washington skims 10% off the regular weekly collection at Mass. Two collections are exempted from the assessment: Christmas and Easter. Consider cessation of the weekly donations and instead put those funds into the Christmas and/or Easter collection. While it's true that this might make for uneven cash flow, it will actually mean more money for the parish as they will keep 100% of it. Recall that McCarrick abused seminarians at his beach house. With what money was this beach house funded? Our donation dollars!
- For other localities, circumstances may vary, such as what collections are exempt, etc. Please do your own research and act accordingly.
We must financially starve these behemoths that condone and even facilitate such horrid crimes. As I've described above for the DC area, there are most likely ways to do so without detriment to decent parishes. Let's get going.
The envelope stuffer mentioned above:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
