Kooks and gadflys: (l to r) Ex-diocesan employee Siobhan O'Connor,
ex-seminarian Matthew Bojanowski, and alleged TV reporter Charlie Specht
The way the media would have you believe, Buffalo-area Catholics are in a frenzy and demading the head of Bishop Richard Malone on a platter because he has grossly mishandled cases regarding abusive clergy.
But is what the media telling you actually true? First, not a single priest in Buffalo whose accusations of abuse of a minor have even been substantiated remains in active ministry. Second, here are three essential facts that the media won't tell you:
Gay mafioso priest:
Buffalo's Fr. Ryszard Biernat
This past week, the media fell over themselves to report that the personal assistant to Bishop Malone, Rev. Ryszard Biernat, secretly recorded his boss in order to try and incriminate him and detract attention from his own sexual misconduct by jumping on the anti-Malone bandwagon.
What the media has failed to tell the public is that Biernat was caught in 2016 writing a steamy, homosexual love letter to a young seminarian named Matthew Bojanowski. And just last year, the two dudes bought a house together.
The Crux web site obtained a copy of the letter and published text from the romantic missive. It reads (and this is a Catholic priest, mind you) as follows:
"Remember? The library of the bishop's house? I hesitated at first in saying that I trully [sic] love you. What I have been feeling for you is something totally new and different from all the other feelings of love I have experienced.
"Now, I have no hesitations in saying that I love you (in private and in public) and I will always love you more than yesterday …
"I am afraid that all that you know about me may compromise your freedom to love or to leave."
Buffalo's lying TV reporter Charlie Specht dishonestly characterized the letter as merely "platonic," while the sleazy Buffalo News newspaper called it only an "expression of friendship."
[**EXCLUSIVE UPDATE, 9/11/19**: Click to read the entire steamy love letter for yourself]
2. Reporters in Buffalo have flat-out lied when reporting about the Church and Bishop Malone's handling of abuse cases.
As we have already previously reported, TV reporter Charlie Specht has outright lied to his viewers in his coverage of the Church. He has aired at least one impossible abuse claim and then lied about it. He has also taken remarks from a priest grossly out of context in order to portray the cleric as a "predator."
Specht has deliberately thrown all honesty and journalistic standards out the window for the sake of headlines and attention and save his ratings-challenged station.
And if there were still any question as to the lengths that the media will go, when there was a so-called "rally" outside Malone's residence a few weeks ago and only three people showed up, Charlie Specht's struggling station still made it the lead story on its evening newscast.
3. "Whistleblowers" are only egomaniacs and protectors of actively gay clergy.
Media outlets have gone out of their way to portray former employees of the Diocese of Buffalo as "whistleblowers" whose only concern is the protection of parishioners.
However, like Don Juan Fr. Biernat, we have also realized that another former employee of the diocese, Siobhan O'Connor, is not the "devout Catholic" that the media claims her to be.
Despite knowing that Biernat and Bojanowski were involved in an illicit sexual relationship, O'Connor has publicly stood by these men and openly supported them. She is even asserting on her blog that Biernat's above lustful gay love letter isn't even a love letter!
"Faithful Catholic"? Not even close.
Stay tuned, everyone. There's more to come.
As the media's obsession with the Catholic Church ages, the storyline stretches to absurdity and the players get even kookier.
I have gained much knowledge about the Church and it's hierarchy from these stories and joining in the conversation here in the last few years. From what I've learned, I would say that the Church has quite a future in promoting smut. Maybe they could make up for the loss of parishioners and their cash cow by starting their own reality show or soap opera. From the content of trash I've seen advertised on TV or at the movies lately, I would say they have a pretty good chance of delivering something just as bad or even worse. servant of the Truth
Dan, Joining in the conversation?? lol. You call coming on here and spewing satanic hate joining in the conversation? Please. haha.
Two guys buying a house together and being in love. Oh the horror! Unheard of! Next thing you know gay people will be getting married.
Jesus never said one word against or even about us gay people. So try following your savior's example.
And who was Jesus' "Beloved"? Anybody? Bueller? Bueller? No. it was St. John.
Jesus answered, "Have you not read that from the beginning the Creator made them male and female?" and said, 'For this reason a man will leave his mother and father and be united to his wife.' So they are no longer two, but one flesh." Matthew 19:4-6
How about you following the Savior's example?
Jim, The quotes I've given from Revelations 21:8 and 22:15, against any kind of sexual immorality were Christ's revelations to John, his beloved. Quit making something nasty out of Christ's relationship with John. They weren't catholic hierarchy.
All of the Bible is God's inspired word, so it wouldn't matter if Paul wrote it or they were Jesus's words. All the words are from God. When Paul was knocked off his horse it was the Lord, through the Holy Spirit, who taught Paul what to speak or write. Even Peter suggested we listen to the teachings of Paul. Romans 1:18-32 Idolatry leading to sexual depravity.
In Romans 1:26-28, Paul speaks against homosexuality, plain as day.
JR,
For once, Dan has correctly quoted from Scriptures, so nothing more is needed here. Except for the “They weren't catholic hierarchy” part, it is. Since Jesus established the Catholic Church, John and the other Disciples were also Catholic. Including Judas, Dan. Every Church has one. I wonder who’s the one in yours… but I digress.
I would like to add that nobody forced Mr. Biernat to become a priest. If really he couldn’t live without giving in to his same-sex temptations, he shouldn’t have accepted the orders. As the Church teaches, having temptations is not in itself sinful. Yielding to them is, with good peace of Mr. Wilde.
As MH has correctly stated, there are multiple levels of love, and not all of them require or even allow for sexual activity.
As for the so-called gay marriage, it’s a contradiction in terms (unless by gay you mean happy – which all marriages should be, as much as possible). Marriage is by definition and by practice a union between man and woman, so any other variation, including one between individuals of the same sex, is not a marriage.
Dan, finally, this goes to your trite refrain that the Church is not following her own procedures towards individuals who have been accused in a credible manner: “First, not a single priest in Buffalo whose accusations of abuse of a minor have even been substantiated remains in active ministry”.
Have a blessed day, brothers.
Dan,
"I have gained much knowledge about the Church…" = factually incorrect, as promptly shown by the ensuing statements.
"I would say that the Church has quite a future in promoting smut" = it is really interesting how all your posts seem to point at the general direction of sex. Julie is definitively correct.
"Maybe they could make up for the loss of parishioners and their cash cow by starting their own reality show or soap opera" = as the adage goes, weak Catholics become Protestant. Strong Protestants become Catholic. Bad Christians join Dan's Church…
"From the content of trash I've seen advertised on TV or at the movies lately" = you really watch too much entertainment. Perhaps that’s why you are trying to compete with the other Dan, Brown. You should try reading Scriptures more.
Now, do you have anything pertinent to say regarding this specific topic?
Have a blessed day, brother Dan.
Just about every article in this TMR forum is dealing or excusing the lust of strange flesh by your hierarchy, but you think it's me pointing in the "general direction of sex". Can you be more deceiving, accusing or hypocritical?
I would prefer being labeled a "bad Christian" than a so-called good catholic.
Not really anything pertinent one could say in regards to the filth and smut of your Church, other than the fact that it's disgustingly putrid to myself and any other decent Christian. Is that pertinent enough for you? These crimes should have never taken place among leaders of your so-called religion. Nasty and morally sick men.
"Have nothing to do with the fruitless deeds of darkness, but rather expose them. For it is shameful even to mention what the disobedient do in secret. But everything exposed by the light becomes visible." Eph 5:11-13
So am I supposed to listen to what God tells me to expose or what deceiving denying catholics think I mention to often? Bet you catholics think I should obey you. What a joke!
LLC says to me, "you really watch too much entertainment." Really? Is there anything else you feel worthy to judge regarding me, hypocrite? I haven't gone to movies for 26 years. I watch nature and documentaries and sometimes way too much EWTN, when I need a good laugh. You have some problem with that? I read or listen to the Word daily. How about you, heathen accuser? Maybe you should pay a little more attention to the Bible instead of spreading gossip that you know nothing about. MYOB? You might want to give that a try, Baka.
Dan,
"From the content of trash I've seen advertised on TV or at the movies lately" and "I haven't gone to movies for 26 years. I watch nature and documentaries…" = which one is it?
Have a blessed day, brother.
LLC,
The key word is "advertised". I've seen advertisements on TV for other shows or ads for upcoming movies. I also see movie posters in my neighborhood attached to the complex of a Cinema. Smut, garbage and violence. Do you think you can catch me contradicting myself? When you try to always tell the truth, it's harder to be caught in lies. Good try, anyway.
Dan,
The expression “at the movies” implies actually going into a movie theater and watching the show.
Regardless, let’s assume that you are telling the truth. What you are saying is that you judge movies from their ad posters or previews, not their actual content. In other words, you decide what’s worth watching a priori (or, in lay terms, you have prejudices). In some cases, it’s a good policy; most of the times is not, as Scriptures teach.
As for “Do you think you can catch me contradicting myself?”, I do not need to try. You do that splendidly by yourself, as demonstrated by your very first sentence of the very first post in this blog.
Have a blessed day, brother Dan.
Why do you insist on stirring the pot? Now I "have predjudices" because I have no desire to pay money to go see fiction or garbage? Are you kidding? Is there anything else that you feel the need to judge me on? Maybe you should try telling the truth and it will set you free. Until then you seem stuck in a deceiving catholic prison of your own making. servant of the Truth
Dan,
"…I have no desire to pay money to go see fiction or garbage?" = there is a lot of fictional work out there that is highly educational and/or inspiring. The Narnia movies and the LOTR movies are a good example; likewise, the movies produced by Sherwood Pictures are inspirational (Flywheel is a favorite in our household), or the recent hard-to-watch, but powerful Hacksaw Ridge. Even movies with no apparent spiritual content can be inspirational and thought-provoking (The Green Book). But it's your money and, consequently, your choice.
As for "garbage", this is exactly my point. You assume that a movie may be garbage a priori; Scriptures warn us against prejudices (John 7:24, for example), although sometimes it is clear that a movie (book, song, magazine, web page) doesn't contain anything good, so avoiding them is a good idea. Mine was a neutral comment (hence my “In some cases, it’s a good policy; most of the times is not”), so I am not “stirring the pot”. Incidentally, your prejudices against the Church are palpable in your posts.
"Is there anything else that you feel the need to judge me on?" = again, I am not. You are bringing judgement upon yourself.
Have a blessed day, brother.
I think that Pope Francis recently said …. 'men with homosexual inclinations are not suitable candidates for the priesthood'. Perhaps the above story helps to bring his concerns into clearer focus. As for the comments of JR about love….well bonds of friendship between men can sometimes be expressed as love, but it doesn't follow that it involves sexual desires.
Let me know when you all pull your heads out of the sand of the Dark ages and Reformation.
Pope Francis like every pope and religious "leader"/dictator ever is full o'sh……vinegar. a large chunk of the time.
Our version of human has been around for tens of thousands of years and we evolved before and during those tens of thousands of years but you think God showed up 2000 years ago to redeem us from "sin and pain of Hell"?
If you hadn't been told this nonsense in childhood and were presented the "info" as lterate adults would you swallow it? Just on another human telling you the rules with no Empirical evidence what so ever to back them up? You know you wouldn't.
As far as the "Creator" making us male and female? Gosh I never knew that. Thanks for the 411. I shall alert the media.
Ever have sex for pleasure and not for reproduction? I'm sure you have. Well him without sin cast the first stone.
And John was Jesus' beloved. Nobody else, including his mom, was ever mentioned with the word "love" except in "love your neighbor as you love yourself . Us they told you to love. You don't think Jesus didn't know Gay people existed yet he said nothing about us (himself?)?
Stop being silly and grow up and quit casting stones. You are not worthy.
JR,
“Let me know…” = considered yourself alerted, from the Church that developed the scientific method (oversimplified, and yet so true).
“Pope Francis…” = non sequitur, factually incorrect and completely irrelevant
“…you think God showed up 2000 years ago…” = correct, if you mean He became incarnate.
“If you hadn't been told this nonsense in childhood…” = factually incorrect, as demonstrated by the countless adult conversions (are you familiar with Saint Augustine, for example?)
“I shall alert the media” = no need for. They are all aware of it, but simply choose not to believe it (and you talk about evidence…)
“Ever have sex…” = the latter doesn’t necessarily preclude the former, and vice-versa
“Nobody else…” = factually incorrect; see Mark 10:21, or John 11:5. Furthermore, the Greek words used to describe Jesus’ affection for John are agape and philia, not eros (not present in Scriptures).
“You are not worthy” = again, factually incorrect; see Mark 10:31
Have a blessed day, brother.
Jim, Truth and honesty can be some of the best virtues of "love" or caring for another person. After Christ kept them from throwing stones, he asked the woman to go and sin no more. The problem with the homosexual community is that they wish to make their sin totally acceptable practice, along with gay marriage. Jesus said the man and his wife become one flesh, not the man amd man or woman and woman. Even the movement goes so far as to call it "Gay Pride". The Bible states,
"Pride goes before destruction, a haughty spirit before a fall." Proverbs 16:18
And that goes for all pride, but none of us should have pride in our sins. I can appreciate your sarcasm and no one is worthy to cast stones at you. Like I've mentioned, Jesus never condoned or promoted violence. Take Care, Jim
P.S. I left catholicism in my teens, went back in my twenties for two weeks and then gave many other religions a try and found them all to come up short. I made an adult choice to choose life over death. It was never some "silly" or immature decision done in ignorance. That's insulting.
Dan,
well said (except for the last paragraph, but still well said).
JR, I misunderstood your "worthy" comment. Dan has addressed it correctly.
Have a blessed day, brothers.