World says, 'Pope Francis'; New York Times says, 'Sex abuse'
This month's historic trip of Pope Francis to the United States cannot halt the New York Times' relentless obsession with decades-old cases of sex abuse committed by Catholic priests.
Despite the Church's unprecedented corrective measures just in the past dozen years, not to mention nearly $3 billion in settlements and over $85 million in therapy to accusers, one would think it was 1992 all over again in reading the article from Vivian Yee at the New York Times.
Trotting out the tired parade
Yee's article brandishes a weary parade of well-known Church critics who have a long history of bashing the Catholic Church to rehash the story of abusive priests from many decades ago. Included in Yee's article are:
- a 72-year-old man who claims that a priest "groped" him 66 years ago at age 6;
- another man who claims who was abused in the "early 1970s";
- Barbara Blaine, president of the lawyer-funded attack group SNAP (Survivors Network of Those Abused by Priests), who once wrote a letter of support on behalf of a child pornographer;
- Joelle Casteix, SNAP's Southwest Regional director; and
- Terence McKiernan, the cranky president of BishopAccountability.org.
Yee uses her sources to variously claim that the Church and/or Pope Francis have somehow "pummeled" and "intensified the suffering" of victims.
Only until nearly the end of the article does Yee find a single opposing voice to tell the truth. After Yee trumpets the bogus claim from accusers' lawyers that the Archdiocese of Milwaukee has "[kept] under seal the names of at least 100 priests facing accusations," Archdiocese of Milwaukee spokesman Jerry Topczewski reminds readers that not only has his diocese, as most others have, already publicly released the names of all of its publicly accused priests, but "virtually all" of these priests are deceased.
Agenda journalism
As we have repeatedly stated before, it is well known that the New York Times editorial policies stand in heated opposition to the Catholic Church on nearly every hot-button social issue, whether it be gay "marriage," abortion, or birth control.
And in the end, the New York Times is a paper which proudly boasts of its animus for the Catholic Church. It simply uses the issue of decades-old cases of abuse to bludgeon it for not being sufficiently left-wing on issues of sexuality.
Yee's one-sided article on the eve of Pope Francis' visit only reinforces this fact.
Let's not forget the laws your church pushed through the system fighting Gay rights; Women's right to choose. Even the ability to obtain birth control information; and the right to divorce. Let alone your abjectly abysmal failure to protect your own catholic children and their/our right to sue for damages done to us due to your neglect.
Then above all of this was your leadership's choice to protect; hide and transfer pedophile priests at the risk of damaging more innocent catholic children and their families. Your own children! A choice you still haven't paid for. Victims damages fall on the state not on the church who caused the problem; because you still refuse to compensate the vast majority of your injured.
The U.S. is not a religious country as such. Yet your crowd ran the show for centuries here. Costing tens of thousands of lives. Yet you still dare to pretend you are the moral high ground. It's quite to the contrary. Even Ireland has awakened to the fact that you don't love people;.like you say you do. You just miss owning us.
Mind your own business or give up your tax excempt status. The rest of us are tired of paying your way. How much will Franks little visit cost the gay; the Protestant; The feminist; The athiest; The Muslim and the Jewish households. He's your pope you pay for him; and his little tour to promote bigotry. You're not the victim here. You're the abusor; and don't you forget it. The rest of us haven't
Terry McKiernan cranky? As compared to who, Billy Donahue?
TMR is always there with a personal attack for every occasion. (And just why are we to believe you are about love? )
Acting like your faith( I reiterate YOUR faith) is under attack( just because it only gets to run catholic lives now. Rather than all the non-catholic lives it's always enjoys/ed attempting to control,); is very different issue than actually having your faith attacked. No one has said one anti catholic word interferring with your ability to worship as and where you choose to do it. If anyone is attacking anyone it's you..
Believe and worship as you choose. I truely support you in doing so.
But really! Instead of you playing the victim why not help the people you'ved helped to re-victimize, the truely victimized, your own catholic victims of your priest class..
You re-victimize us every time you pretend we aren't here. We are with you; we are present; we may not agree with you but we are still here. We are the neighbor you were commanded to love AS YOURSELF. And we wait for you to quit fuming and start following the god you claim to follow. We wait.
The New York Times latest tirade against the Catholic Church should not escape critical comment.
The analogy that springs to mind is of a ship that has broken free from it's ethical moorings, and is now being swept along by the currents of pragmatism and opportunism. However the situation on board is made worse as the vessel is overloaded by excess debt. The crew is anxious about their own futures, because they have seen scores of co-workers thrown off the ship, The voyage has become perilous…. nevertheless they have manned the pumps and just hope they are just too prestigious to go under.
Whilst they pump furiously they swear and rant and rave…. at anybody or anything that is perceived as a soft target. They know that controversy and sensationalism sells newspapers. So from time to time they take aim at their favourite soft target…the Catholic Church.
The Catholic Church has sadly made itself a soft target because too many of it's adherents think that the founder, Jesus Christ, was talking in absolute terms when he said to forgive enemies, turn the other cheek, give all people the benefit of the doubt, and always hold out an olive branch, ect.
But those who have convinced themselves his words were absolute, in all circumstances… are just choosing to ignore the lessons of history.For example did the Christian armies, under the Polish King, John Sobieski, make themselves a soft target at the battle of Vienna in 1683. No…they fought like tigers and saved Christian Europe from Islamic conquest.
Woweee! Wow! Wow! Malcolm youve done it.
You've told us that we are to take your "God's" word with a grain of salt.
We are to believe Leviticus and Paul about gay people (as an example) verbatem. But Jesus not so much? We are to obey the 10 commandments but, Thou shalt not kill. Not so much. This is why really religious people have walked away from your church. Can you say: Hypocrite?
Islam was in Spain for eight hundred years and they lived with their Christian neighbors in peace. It was a golden age for Spain on many levels. Islam had to be defeated at the gates of Vienna that christianity (Caholicism?) might RULE. It was a fight for power and control by an elite not some saving of civilization. At that time Islam was what became Western Civilization. It was through Islam we got mathmatics and medicine they preserved the ancient philosophies of the Greeks in their libraries while Christians were in the Dark ages.
Are you hate mongers, you fear salesmen never out of product?
David Pierre, You still try an push the notion that the sexual abuse of children is a decades old "problem" but it is crystal clear you refuse to acknowledge REALITY. 1st these are crinminal acts which violate civil law, here in this country and elsewhere. Have you forgotten the recent convictions of Monsignor Lynn in Philadelphia, Archbishop Finn in Kansas City and the pending charges/investigations against the Archdiocese of Minneapolis/St Paul? Will you not admit why Archbishop Finn and Archbishop Nienstedt were finally removed? What about the Newark Archdiocese knowing the wereabouts of a predator priest they allowed not once but most likely twice to escape civil authorities in this country? These are just a few of many recent examples. No the clergy abuse crisis is NOT decades old, it is not over AND most of our church officials have only changed in WORD nothing more.
Oh let's not forget The Vatican envoy who NEVER got to stand trial because 1. after recalling him to Rome from the Dominican Republic overnight, days before the D R police would issue charges against this bishop for the sexual abuse of poor boys, Vatican officials refused to extradite him to either the Dominican Republic or Poland where he was from to stand trial there by civil authorities. Instead the Vatican said they would put him on trial and of course that NEVER happened and he is now dead. That occured 3 weeks ago. So if you still believe this "problem" is decades old, I guess you do not read or intentionally choose to not acknowledge current events.
New York rabbis are permited to suck baby penis after they have sliced off the babies foreskins and that oractice has led to the death of several jewish babies and so New York cut off the practice but the orthodox jews protested and, so now, once again, New York Rabbis are permitted to suck baby penis with impunity.
Now, just imagne if those perps were Priests?
Well if "Amatuer Brain Surgeon" is right, in his comment of September 23, then I am truly amazed. Frankly I have never heard that before…..that Orthodox Jewish Rabbis suck the penis of babies during the circumcision ritual. Am not saying he's wrong…just that it has gone under the radar of the general public.
We get most of our info from the media and entertainment industry, and these people are very human. Meaning they are aware of restraints on what they say and write. So perhaps we have never been informed of this particular religious practice because the media is afraid of being smeared with labels such as being anti-Jewish,ect.
As for his question of…. what would happen if priests did that?…, then I just shudder to think. The present witch-hunt would really begin to look like the Salem witch trials…..and I'm not joking.
https://www.wbur.org/2015/09/22/cardinal-bernard-law Where is Bernard Law now?
Even in Boston. 14 years ago. It was all lies and denial. And attacks against the media, the victims, the whistleblowers,and the police. Only after the lies no longer worked, were they "sorry".
And overnight, it went from being "Anti-Catholic Lies", to "We're soo sorry, and everything, is cleaned up now." "We have reformed."
It's still lies, and coverup. Why were a lieing Archbishop(Nienstedt), and Bishop(Finn), removed years after their crimes were discovered ? Simotaneously, and only because the Pope knew it would be a PR nightmare, a few months before his visit.
And how were they "removed" ? Both are still being paid ? And have their full titles. Neither will be defrocked. And no offical reason was ever given.
The Dallas Charter has been violated, by dozens of American bishops. Dozens of times. Since it was written, 12 years ago. And it has no provisions for enforcement.
Thanks for the important information. What absolutely fascinates is the undisguised hatred of so many rabid posters when one simply points out inconvenient truths, like the President's commision on sex abuse in the public schools finding a problem a hundred times worse. Those who continue to target and castigate the church are ironically providing cover for the ongoing massive sex abuse while virtually none is going on in the Catholic church. And its just hatred. Rather as Christ predicted.
Cheers
Who hates who? We didn't rape your children, your priests did and were enabled to do so by your bishops; cardinals; and popes.
Those are just the facts.
Inventing the church as THE victim in all of this, while you denigrate the real victims, is exactly why your real victims, your own children are angry.
Grow up and be responsible for your actions.
Jim Robertson, on the 29th September, doesn't like being accused of hatred. He has taken a swipe at commentor Tom More for explaining the real motives of rabid posters on this site..
But surely it is hatred that is blinding some people to reality. As children, I and my siblings understood the basics of law and order.. Namely that we all want justice, and in criminal matters we must report the crime to the police. That is the starting point for our system of law and order. The police take a statement from the alleged victim. They then investigate and bring charges against the alleged perp. Courts then decide if the accused is guilty or not guilty. This system applies whether it is a mugging, or a burglary, or a sexual assault,
So how on earth could widespread sexual abuse be covered up by the alleged perpetrators, or their superiors?. If anybody tried to obstruct a criminal investigation then they themselves would have been charged with an offence.
This is a witch-hunt, swept along by hatred, and that hatred blinds people to their own knowledge of law and order.
There's one small problem in your argument Malcolm and that, as usual, is your inability to relate to the victim's POV. The majority of your clerical victims were heterosexual males all under age and in total schock at being touched by a priest, sexually. We children were all taught to obey priests as if they were special to "God". Priests aren't supposed to be doing wrong they are the ones who pretend to instill wrong and right morality in children.
Children always in part wonder what they did that these monsters thought they could do these things to them/us. Grooming the victims; befriending, showing extra affection to victims; rewarding; and or punishing victims were all parts of the perpetrators process.
Those victims who could talk openly with their parents about sexual things had a far better shot at getting adult help to report these crimes. The majority of Catholic children did not have that relationship with their/our parents. It was our word against the spiritual leaders who our parents and neighbors looked up to. A child thinks: Who will they believe me or "Father"? It was our word against theirs. And as good Catholic children we'd never seen anyone ever top the word of a priest nor ever even try to. We were hung out to dry by our own belief system. Just like you are around this issue right now.
How does a child being raped by their priest equate to a hatred of religion? At the moment it's happening to the child, believe me we were praying to God to help us. Save us!
What you hate is that we have told about our rapes later than you would have liked us to.
In my case I reported it at the time and loving the religion above myself believed the adult clerics would do the right thing and protect other children from this man. But no that didn't happen. They transferred him to Hawaii and made him head of a highschool. i only found this out recently when church files were finally released to me as part of my settlement.
Study after study have shown that male victims in particular take a long time incoming to any kind of sane terms with our rapes. Usually in our mid 30's or later. long after criminal statutes have expired. That's what the church has always banked on our own shame hiding their crimes.
And if parents are told by the child, at the time of the rape, what's happened. Church authorities and their legal team would say, "You don't want to put your child in public talking/ testifying about their sexual relations with an adult male. It will re-traumatize the kid".
This is how this horror has "worked" in favor of the church and the perpetrators for eons. Religious hatred isn't what kept us silent. It was actually love of our "religion' ,in part, that kept us silent.
Also as males, of course, the fear of being seen to ourselves and to others as being homosexual because of these acts. That kept us silent in large part and it still does.
I only mention the male victims because I don't know the problems girl victims had to deal with around their rapes. I'm sure they were very similar but I can not speak for them.
Jim Robertson, on the 30th of September, says that it was love of their religion that kept 'victims' silent after being abused. He sure is creative for setting a sympathetic mood……it doesn't take much imagination to hear the violins playing in the background.
Well… I was an altar boy…. and he can save that rubbish for the bleeding hearts. Because if any priest had done, or even said, anything questionable to me… then would have used it as a pretext to escape being an altar boy.. Getting up at 6.00 am on a cold morning was not to my liking. If I had any excuse to bail out I would have used it… in a flash.
Frankly being an altar boy was not due to my love of religion, it was my parent's orders. To accuse a priest of being a 'dirty old man' would have been a perfect excuse. In fact an excuse not to go to any Church…. period..
Also the altar boys would talk to each other….it would have been contrary to human nature to keep such a revelation secret. It would have been all over town,,, very quickly.
But must ask myself about the credibility of JR.?. This is the guy who, even if you believe his story, was just groped by a sicko religious teacher on one occassion. For that he put out his hand for a million bucks in compenstion.. So is he now satisfied? Nope, not enough!…..His hatred has now obsessed him into believing that any accusation against the Catholic Church is OK….sort of what some describe as the "Nobel Lie".
Dave, may I please open my answer to Malcolm with a hearty, (expletive)?
I was majorly abused at my high school: Junipero Serra (Now a frigging saint who whipped the native peoples he "loved" so much) High, Gardena California by my chemistry and home room teacher., a Marianist brother. I was molested over a 2 WEEK period. At least 8 to 10 times. Not once and never was I being groped; but I was being forced to grope and masterbate him. Then him trying to make me blow him. Am I clear enough for you, Malcolm?
I was a top student in grade school and loved religion (out of fear of Hell) I was, like every catholic child, taught to OBEY any religious. And I thought: ( at the time; and to this day thanks to the lovely Malcolm) Who will believe me if I do tell?
I was a deeply religious (read frightend) catholic.
I too was an altar boy and I lived less than a half a block from my church, Ascension. I was always called to fill in when servers failed to show. And though I served on the altar with a very drunken Irish priest many times ( He was a wonderful man with a terrible problem) No priest ever was out of line sexually with me at my church.)
Malcolm knows my abuse history ( I've written it several times here) yet he still ignores the truth, that he might rave about violins that only he hears and then invents (lies) about my abuse and me. How so very like the church. When frustrated by the truth; blame the victim.
Ever hear of the truth, Malcolm? It's supposed to set you free. Not turn you into a liar.
How about telling the "Noble truth"?
I could have had my "hand out" for a settlement when i was 16; but didn't .Because I wanted to forget about my abuse totally. The "problem" was it never went away I suffered consequences from his actions for ever. Up to and including right now. All victims suffer such consequences but your rich and "charitable" church refuses not only to compensate us but it also has created false flagged commitees like SNAP; VOTF; etc. to be our voice about our abuse and how catholics should "help/handle/control" us. The catholic church speaks as our, their victims, voice to the world. So the right words get said (they have to appear legit) but in an off puting way. And actions are taken which have literally never done anything to help victims but only harm and disenfranchise us.
We victims, by our coming out, have allowed you to see your church for what it really is. That's why you hate us so. Your violin-ed wet dreams of perfection have been broken and you hate the people who woke you up.