outpatient clinic

2011-11-16T21:02:00.000-05:00

As far as I can tell there is no difference between JoePa and JoePope. Both were kings of their worlds. Both turned a blind eye to sexual abuse of children to protect their records and their brand. As well as make a boatload of money.
Let's go through the timeline. According to CNN:
1977 - Jerry Sandusky founds the Second Mile, a charity to help troubled youth.
1998 - He is accused and admits to showering with a boy and says he sorry. The DA does not go forward with the charges and advises the Campus Police to drop the case.
Hmm, the police, the DA all investigate. Do we think JoePa (the king of Penn State) knew?
Maybe not.
1999 - Sandusky retires from Penn State football, but stays on as a "volunteer" and has full access to the campus and facilities.
A year later he retires from his job at one of the most successful college football programs in the country? Why would he do that? Is it really possible JoePa did know. Maybe.
2000 - A Janitor sees Sandusky performing oral sex on a boy in the shower and reports it to his supervisor. Who does not report it to the police. And this point I'm guessing it has been reported to JoePa, just to protect his program and brand.
I think we are seeing a trend here. It looks pretty familiar to me.
2002 - McQueary sees the now famous shower rape scene and tells his father, who is not a police officer. Because if he were it would have made sense. They tell JoePa the next day. Second Mile is told.
And...nothing.
2004 - 2008 He abuses another boy while volunteering to help a wrestling coach. Wrestling. How convenient. He can quickly claim that his sexual contact is wrestling or horseplay.
And on. And on.
To digress for a moment, when Sandusky's narcissistic sociopathic side decided to phone in his interview with Bob Costas, he claimed it was horseplay.
"I could say that I have done some of those things. I have horsed around with kids. I have showered after workouts. I have hugged them, and I have touched their legs without intent of sexual contact," said Sandusky.
He went on to describe turning on all the showers and sliding across the floor as part of the horsing around. And that may be odd, but not sexual abuse of a child.
He is right. It is called grooming.
He is preparing the child for sexual contact by making it fun and safe to play around with a grown and naked man.
It would probably happen a few times without any intimate contact at all. Then slide on the floor through my legs. Accidentally touch. And you can imagine the rest.
And I hope you do. You need to think about how awful this is.
In 1970 a young Tom Teczar was in seminary studying to be a priest. He was kicked out twice and Bishop Flanagan from the Diocese of Worcester Massachusetts, wrote in response to an inquiry from Catholic University's dean, of Teczar's "predilection for intimate and rather exclusive companionship with young boys."
He noted that because in the mid-60's Teczar was fired from the Nazareth Home for Boys (a home for trouble youth - sound familiar?) for "inappropriately touching" a 10 year old boy.
So they ordain him and send him to Saint Mary's in Uxbridge Massachusetts where he has been known to have "allegedly" abused at least five boys. I was "allegedly" one.
Caught, is bounced around from parish to parish until in 1988 he was moved all the way to Fort Worth Texas. Where Bishop Delaney took him, even though he was well aware of Teczar's history.
Finally in 2002 he is arrested in Texas where he is now serving a 25 year sentence.
Can you imagine if someone had called the police in the mid-60's with that 10 year old boy?
Can you imagine if the DA had prosecuted Sandusky in 1998?
JoePa and JoePope couldn't.
But I wish they had.

2011-09-27T00:08:00.000-04:00

I don't normally use this blog to promote any of my work. It is usually a place for me to poke the bag of Catholic with a stick. It is when I am irritated enough by the news of the day that I tend to sit down and write one of these. I haven't done that in awhile.
It's not that I haven't been irritated. I have. But I've been busy trying to promote my little short horror film called "Microcinema." But more on that later.
Today I want to talk about Sinead O'Connor. Apparently some people are upset that she tweeted "That there'd be a fucking bloodbath. Me meet the fucker off the plane myself" if Pope Benedict visited Ireland. In another tweet she talked about pulling the trigger.
And people are calling her crazy. Really? Have you looked at the Pope while he parades out another group of clergy sexual abuse survivors in Germany and apologizes. Just like he did in D.C. to people that I actually know.
He uses them as a PR tool, is humbled, promises change then leaves after the photo op to change nothing and continue to allow abuse through the old cover up game plan of move 'em and don't report. Which ultimately re-traumatizes the people he just humbly posed with.
How is that not infuriating? Last year I shot a short called "Putting on Its Shoes," which you can watch if you follow the link. It's free. It was shot in roughly the same place I shot "Microcinema." But more on that later. And it is .99 cents. The Best Horror for Under a Dollar.
Hey, an artist has to eat.
In "Putting on Its Shoes" I estimate that there are roughly 1,200,000 victims/survivors of clergy sexual abuse worldwide. And I'm guessing these numbers are low. These numbers are staggering. The stuff that rises to the level of crimes against humanity.
The U.N. has sent in troops to countries for humanitarian purposes to stop such crimes. And the Holy Sea is a sovereign nation, so... Is Sinead that far off base? Not from where I'm sitting.
But I'm guessing the highly paid spokesperson for The Catholic League, Mr Bill Donohue will have a different take on Sinead.
Look at what he said about a recent Rolling Stone article by Sabrina Rubin Erdely about the Archdiocese of Philadelphia.
"She treats the Rolling Stone readers to some of the most salacious renderings imaginable, drawing from the grand jury testimony of "Billy," a man who claims he was worked over by two priests and one lay teacher, beginning when he was 10."
The Irish Central then reports he smears "Billy" that would not dignify by quoting.
Why would a highly paid spokesperson for the Catholic Church say such a thing?
Because it is what Jesus would do.
Jesus Hitler, Adolf's older and meaner brother.
How does this stuff not drive people to the brink, like Sinead?
Which brings me to "Microcinema"
My horror short is about a highly educated, young man of means who passively watches snuff films. He even uses the phrase "passive observance" to describe his behavior. He decides to take it to the next level and produce his very own short.
When he finally decides to take action it isn't to stop it, but to participate. Because there is very little difference.
It reminds me of my favorite Walt Whitman poem "I Sit and Look Out" which ends with the lines:
All these-All the meanness and agony without end, I sitting, look out upon,
See, hear, and am silent.
If you are not doing anything to stop it, you might as well be doing it.
It is the same for everyone who remains a passive observer of this criminal behavior by men posing as conduits to God. Pass the basket please.
Good Lord! If the DA's and Federal Prosecutors won't get it done for me, like Sinead I'm shooting something to get justice. I shoot a camera. My revenge is the horror short "Microcinema"
Suffice it to say, the cinematic justice I served up seems to have struck a nerve with the reviewers as you can see below.
If horror is your thing, with metaphors that run way beyond the Catholic Church, drop the .99 cents for "Microcinema" already. Halloween is coming.

Reviews:

"I figured I was in for one of three things: a really solid work, a bite size film that left me feeling nothing, or one of those that makes me want to substitute rat poison for the salt on my dinner table. Those are the three categories all art falls into for me, always. Yet, when it was all said and done, Shea's vignette carved a whole new icky slot out just for itself. 9 out of 10 Stars" - The Conduit Speaks
"Brilliant. 8.5 out of 10 Stars" - The Gruesome Hurtzogg Horror Movie Review Podcast.
"Skip Shea is an adept director with equal ability to write, his short film gets more across than most full length films. Microcinema is available here for a very worth it $0.99, (it's worth more, in my opinion). 4 out of 5 Stars" - The Bleeding Dead Film Reviews.
"What I find particularly interesting about Microcinema is its plot and how it seems to blend together torture, voyeurism, and a lot of other really weird horrific topics like snuff films." - Horror Society
"Microcinema Doesn't Disappoint" - Victor Infante, The Worcester Telergram & Gazette
"You will not be expecting to see the events that unfold in this shocking short film." - The Horror Spot
"The new indie horror romp Microcinema and it is a dozy." - Truly Disturbing Horror
Unicornsblud Horror Review Stamp of Majestic Approval.

2011-05-19T09:55:00.002-04:00

It looks like the church has figured out the cause of the sexual abuse scandal. According to the 2 million dollar John Jay Report, the cause was the sexual and cultural revolution of the 60's and 70's. Apparently listening to songs like "Young Girl" by Gary Puckett and the Union Gap makes priests lose impulse control and forces them to, well, force themselves on children.
According to the report - "The rise in abuse cases in the 1960s and 1970s was influenced by social factors in American society generally. This increase in abusive behavior is consistent with the rise in other types of ‘deviant’ behavior, such as drug use and crime, as well as changes in social behavior, such as an increase in premarital sexual behavior and divorce."
American society generally? Did the church export American society to Ireland and every other country where reports of the scandal have exploded?
That's right, they can't blame the 60's for the abuse in Ireland as reports say the epidemic of abuse there started in the 30's. John, Paul, George and Ringo weren't even born yet.
But did it really start in the 60's here? Well, not according to a blog I wrote in 2009. Hey, if Norman Mailer can quote himself why can't I? I know I've used that joke before, but I figured what the heck, I'm repeating myself anyway.
According to a New York Times article in 2009, "From the 1940’s through the 1960’s, bishops and superiors of religious orders sent their problem priests to Father Fitzgerald to be healed." In 1947 Rev. Gerald M. C. Fitzgerald founded of the order, Servants of the Paraclete, a treatment center for priests, including pedophiles, in Jemez Springs, N.M.
According to the article he wrote in a letter in 1957, “We are amazed to find how often a man who would be behind bars if he were not a priest is entrusted with the cura animarum,” meaning, the care of souls.
He even went so far as to put a five thousand deposit on a Caribbean Island where he planned to build an isolated retreat to sequester priests who were sexual predators.
Fitzgerald finally met the Pope in 1963 to explain that there was an epidemic in the church. Which, as history has shown, only got worse.
All before a child of God was walking along the road, on the way to Woodstock.

2011-01-21T10:08:00.000-05:00

After what appeared to be a relatively quiet spell, Catholic news has been like a blizzard. Fresh off the heels of the announcement of the beatification of John Paul II sparking requests for vials of his blood comes the discovery of a letter to the Irish Bishops during John Paul II's reign.
The 1997 letter is a response to a letter from the Irish Bishop's discussion of mandatory reporting of sexualabuse to civil authorities.

The letter, signed by the late Archbishop Luciano Storero, Pope John Paul II's envoy to Ireland, it instructs bishops that their new policy of making the reporting of suspected crimes mandatory "gives rise to serious reservations of both a moral and canonical nature"
The letter also says reporting such abuse would be embarrassing. I bet.
Yet the Vatican and groups like the Catholic League are saying this was merely a suggestion that they meticulously follow the Code of Cannon Law. This didn't mean they couldn't report the abuse. It just meant they shouldn't. Isn't that better?
Bill Donohue, spokesperson for the Catholic League, defended the letter by saying:

"Last month, several media outlets ran a story on how a rabbinical court in Brooklyn ordered its 10,000 members not to report crimes to the police. Not among those reporting on it was the New York Times...
So who wants mandatory reporting for everyone? The Catholic bishops want it—it's the liberal media and liberal activist groups who don't."
What? Maybe it is because I haven't had a cup of coffee yet but I have no idea what The New York Times has to do with the behavior of the Catholic Church.
As for the Jews, well the Catholic League also thinks they need to re-examine the role of Pope Pius XII and the Holocaust.  Right. I wonder if he was the one who suggested Sarah Palin use the term "Blood Libel."
Did you know his salary is close to $400K?
So according to the well paid Mr. Donohue the Catholic Bishops want mandatory reporting. That's curious.
Let's look at a letter written in 1984 by Silvio Angelo Pio Cardinal Oddi, who was from 1979 to 1986 Prefect of the Vatican's Congregation for the Clergy - that is, the Curia, which is, together with the Pope, the governing body of the Catholic Church.  The Pope still being near saint John Paul II.
The letter addressed to Bishop Moreno of Tuscon says there isn't "any need for engaging in the so called "due process" procedures," and "The files of a Bishop concerning his priests are altogether private; their forced acquisition by civil authority would be an intolerable attack upon the free exercise of religion in the United States."
I've got to hand it to Donohue, he may be right. The Bishops may want mandatory reporting. It is the vatican who doesn't. Along with the New York Times.
But what about the Cardinals?
Boston attorney Mitchell Garabedian released on his Web page the names of 117 priests, deacons and lay members that he claims abused 750 children over half a century. He released the names in order to prompt the Boston Archdiocese to release the names for sake of public safety. Of the 117 names, 19 were new. Never before reported.
Of the 19 new names 12 are now deceased. Spokesperson Kelly Lynch for the Boston Archdiocese said  “Since all of the new names are deceased men, clearly no child was put at risk because these names were not in the public domain.”
And?
On December 21st Pope Benedict said in reference to the abuse scandal, "We must ask ourselves what we can do to repair as much as possible the injustice that has occurred."
Okay, instead of asking yourselves why not ask me? I would suggest releasing all of the names, including the ones who are deceased so a person who may have been abused by that dead priest may start to get the help they need to cope with the abuse and try to lead a normal life.
Or are you afraid they might just lawyer up to help repair the injustice and handing over files is just too intolerable?
Full disclosure can repair as much as possible the injustice that has occurred. So would a Congressional Hearing into what appears to be an organized cover up. Or a federal prosecutor with some balls.

2010-12-22T21:52:00.000-05:00

Maybe the Pope finally gets it. In his traditional end of the year address, held on December 21st - The Winter Solstice - Benedict said revelations of abuse in 2010 reached "an unimaginable dimension" that required the church to accept the "humiliation" as a call for renewal.
It is about time. He continued.
"In the 1970s, pedophilia was theorized as something fully in conformity with man and even with children," the pope said. "It was maintained — even within the realm of Catholic theology — that there is no such thing as evil in itself or good in itself. There is only a 'better than' and a 'worse than.' Nothing is good or bad in itself."
What?
In the realm of Catholic Theology, in the 1970's the church believed that pedophilia was normal?
Why am I not surprised?
Maybe because they have believed that behavior was normal for quite some time. Sister Mary MacKillop, from Australia who was excommunicated from the church in 1871 after making charges against a pedophile priest. I guess protecting the pedophiles has been the policy of the church for a very long time.
And why not? According to the theology of the church, as the Pope said, it is normal behavior.
Unless the Pope misspoke and meant to say the 1870s it was considered normal and not the 1970s.
Not that 100 years makes a huge difference to the church. It took them over 350 years to officially pardon Galileo.
But I digress. Still I'm baffled at how the church could come to this conclusion.
In Mark 9:42 Jesus says:
“If anyone causes one of these little ones—those who believe in me—to stumble, it would be better for them if a large millstone were hung around their neck and they were thrown into the sea"
Translation: Don't screw around with kids. Literally.
Which makes me wonder, who the heck is in charge of PR at the Holy See. Seriously.
Why would you encourage the Pope to say it was "normal" publicly?
Just recently released from the PR department, the Pope said it was okay for male prostitutes to use condoms to prevent the spread of aids.
And why not?
I'm imagining that if the church believed - as late as the 1970s - that it was okay for a man to have sex with a child, that it isn't too much of a leap to believe it is okay for two consenting adults to have sex without the risk of spreading disease.
Unless, of course, they are the same sex, then it is evil.
Unlike pedophilia in the 1970s. And earlier.

The Catholic Church, the gift that keeps.
Merry Christmas Folks. Thanks for reading.
I will leave you with a Holiday Celebration from the Vatican.

2010-10-27T10:03:00.001-04:00

As part of a multi-million dollar settlement, the Diocese of San Diego was forced to release personnel files of sexually abusive priests. Attorney Anthony DeMarco said "These documents demonstrate years and years and decades of concerted action that has allowed this community's children to be victimized, and it is not until the community looks at these documents that this cycle is ever going to be ended."
What concerted action?
Apparently the Diocese had a habit of moving abusive priests from parish to parish without notifying the police. Once again, I'm guessing, I'm sure the Pope is shocked and saddened.
Who knew? Outside of folks in Boston, Ireland, Australia, etc where everyone knew, it is safe to say the Bishop in your Diocese might have known too.
Heck, even the Pope knew how to do this when he was a Bishop in Germany when he shipped a pedophile from Esson to Munich for engaging in oral sex with an eleven year old.
Yet most still believe him when he says he is shocked and saddened. Even with such an enormous paper trail.
Which brings me back the the 10th Congressional District in Massachusetts and candidate Jeff Perry.
At a recent debate he claimed that if he knew Officer Flanagan was assaulting a fourteen year old girl,
“I would have locked him up myself.”
However, just like the church, there is a paper trail.
Two civil suits were filed. One surrounding the assault of a 16 year old girl in 1992 and one on the assault of the 14 year old girl in 1991.
The suits named Flanagan and Perry as defendants, along with the Town of Wareham. The one filed by the 16 year old girl's family went to trial and and they won the verdict saying Perry and the town acted with deliberate indifference.
That doesn't quite sound the same as locking someone up.
In fact, in this case Perry didn't really show indifference. He was quite active. Even though he wasn't present (this time) during Flanagan's assault he went the the girl's house the night of the crime, claiming to have been with Flanagan telling her parents they found what might have been marijuana on their daughter's possession.
Perry tried to facilitate a cover-up. Unfortunately for him, he didn't quite have the expertise in this area like the church.
The family called the Wareham Police the next day.
After the verdict in this case they decided to settle with the 14 year old out of court.
Yet pundits for the right, filling the role of the Catholic League, will claim Perry did nothing wrong.
Ignoring the actual paper trail.
For the complete breakdown of the Perry and Flanagan relationship, just follow this link.

2010-10-22T12:15:00.000-04:00

Excuse me for a moment while I scream. The recent circumstances surrounding the candidacy of Jeff Perry for the US Congress has my head spinning.
In 1991 a 14 year old girl was illegally strip-searched...Okay nice euphemism but she was actually sexually assaulted... by Scott Flanagan, a Wareham police officer while Police Sergeant Jeff Perry stood by, as close as ten feet away and did nothing to stop it and then tried to cover it up.
Flanagan forced the girl to lift her shirt and bra, as he stuck his hand down her pants. She screamed for help.
These facts are indisputable. The State Police Report puts him there.
In 1992 Flanagan again assaulted a 16 year old girl in Wareham. Perry wasn't present this time, however later that evening he accompanied Flanagan to the victims house and threatened her parents.
He only reported his awareness of the assault, after the girls parents came forward to report it.
Yet Jeff Perry has consistently denied any wrong doing. Excuse me, I feel the scream coming on.
Can some one tell me the difference between this man's badge and a Bishop's ring? Can someone tell me the difference between Jeff Perry's behavior and Cardinal Law's?
He was a man in power who allowed the abuse of children and actively covered up. It is simple, if Perry had stopped the assault in 1991 and reported Flanagan, the 1992 assault never would have happened.
No difference between Law protecting and moving a Father Geoghan. None.
Now, Flanagan's first victim steps forward to hold Perry accountable to the truth, as he is running to become a United States Congressman. I know there are plenty of punch-lines to write about accountable congressman, but I'm not in a joking mood.
The assault from the right on this victim for coming forward is frightening. The comments posted by people on the Herald and Globes are horrifying. Most blaming the victim while blaming liberals for being soft on crime. What?
The hypocrisy makes me scream. Because it shows the basic truth, that conservatives want to stop the sexual assault and abuse of children, as long as it makes liberals look bad. Otherwise we will stand with our own.
Don't make the mistake that I only attack conservatives on this point. I have pointed out Martha Coakley's free pass given to Geoghan while she was a DA. And I'm always horrified by the Democrats support of Rep. Fagan.
But it is the right who consistently claims that the left, with their buddies in the ACLU, who don't go to proper lengths to hold criminals accountable.
But now they are throwing their support behind Cardinal Law for Congress.
I will repeat, if Perry had stopped the assault in 1991 and reported Flanagan, the 1992 assault never would have happened.
Just look at Charlie Baker running to stand by Perry's side. He says that Perry has done a good job explaining the 1991 incident. Clearly the reports show Perry has done the opposite. In the same story, Senator Scott Brown is reported as saying that Perry has "run an honest campaign."
I've been trying to help a group, CORSAL, for years to eliminate the statutes of limitation of sexual abuse of children. Eliminate it. The right points to, rightfully so, the Democrat Eugene O'Flaherty has been our biggest obstacle. He co-chairs the Joint Judiciary Committee and refuses to release it from committee for a vote.
But when they talk about Perry, they say, well this happened almost twenty years ago, as a way to minimize the abuse.
Judged by Charlie Baker's response, I can only guess that he is in O'Flaherty's corner.
Because, at the risk of being redundant, if Perry had stopped the assault in 1991 and reported Flanagan, the 1992 assault never would have happened.
I really wish I could fine more people who stop viewing the sexual abuse of children a left or right issue and simply see it as wrong. And do everything they can to stop it.

2010-10-09T16:46:00.001-04:00

I just shot a video today using shoes that were donated for an art installation I am hoping to show at some point in the future. My goal was and still is to collect 1000 shoes making each shoe represent 1200 victims of clergy sexual abuse. That's right, that means there are around 1,200,000 victims of clergy sexual abuse worldwide.

How did I arrive at that number?

Bishops Accountability has concluded that there are roughly 50,000 victims in the United States. The US represents 6% of the world's Catholic population so that would figure over 3/4 of a million victims worldwide.

Father Andrew Greeley estimated that there were 100,000 victims in the US. That would make it a whopping 1,650,000 worldwide.

I averaged the two and came out to 1,200,000. So far I have collected 180 shoes. I seriously thought it was a lot more but this was what I had to work with today.

Which was kind of creepy once I did the math. Each shoe represents 6,666 victims worldwide. Hmmmm.

The name of the short video and future art installation is "Putting On Its Shoes," named after the Mark Twain Quote - "A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is still putting on its shoes."
What's the lie?

That the abuse is something new. It has been going on for a long time.

The song in the video is Ave Maria sung by Alessandro Moreschi, the last famous castrito who sang in the choir at the bascillica in Rome. He was castrated when he was a little boy so he could sing like that for the Pope. The song was recorded in 1904 when he was 46 years old.
I'm going to say that castrating a kid as late as the in the 1860's or 70's is abuse.
Come to think of it, it always was abuse!

Speaking of 1870, Mother Mary MacKillop was excommunicated from the church for reporting Fr Keating for sexually abusing children. Now she is about to become the patron Saint for the sexually abused.
Did I mention this was all in 1870?

And they are still shocked and saddened by the abuse they have been covering up for centuries.
Yep, the lie.

It is time to put on our shoes.

2010-04-14T10:11:00.001-04:00

Diversions

The Vatican has finally decided to forgive The Beatles for their satanic messages in such songs like "All You Need is Love." An ungrateful Ringo said "...they've got more to talk about than the Beatles." Doesn't he realize that it took the Vatican 359 years to pardon Galileo? Comparably The Beatles were fast tracked.

But Ringo may be onto something. This could be a diversion from discussing the cover-up of the sexual abuse scandal reaching the Pope's door. I think some other topics are also diversions.

Celibacy

Some have suggested that celibacy is the problem for the clergy sexual abuse of children. So are the proponents of this theory suggesting that if a man does not get laid for ten years, one day he will wake up and say, "Gee, I think I'll boink a kid"? Haven't they heard of craigslist?

I can't even begin to connect these dots. I worry about those who do. I think we need to create a registry for people who come to this conclusion. The creepy logic registry.

Allow Priests to Marry

Some are suggesting, as an offshoot from the celibacy argument, that allowing priests to marry will stop the sexual abuse of children. Because we all know married men never sexually abuse children.

Okay maybe they do.

The notorious serial abuser from the Fall River Diocese, Father James Porter, was married after he left the priesthood. As a priest he has admitted to abusing over 100 kids. He was arrested and prosecuted for abusing his kids babysitter.

I guess his marriage didn't protect children.

Gays

Recently the Vatican has been saying that gay priests are the reasons for the sexual abuse of children.

Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone said "Many psychologists, many psychiatrists have demonstrated there exists no relationship between celibacy and pedophilia." So far so good.

"But many others have demonstrated, and have told me recently, that there is a link between homosexuality and pedophilia. This is true, this is the problem."

As it is with the celibacy argument, if a gay man wants to have sex he doesn't need to go to college, get accepted to seminary school and get ordained as a priest to do so. He can use craigslist. A pedophile would take the other route.

And how does the gay argument explain female victims? It seems to me the Vatican only seems to think sexually abusing little boys is the problem. But little girls?

Suddenly they become Maurice Chevalier singing "Thank Heaven for Little Girls"

The sexual abuse of little girls by priests still seems to be a secret. Or tolerated.

Prayer

One of the best solutions the Vatican and Catholics seem to be offering is prayer. It seems as if they pray hard enough, priests will stop abusing children.

The Knights of Columbus are even sponsoring a Novena.

V/ Let us pray for Benedict, the pope.R/ May the Lord preserve him, give him a long life,
make him blessed upon the earth,
and not hand him over to the power of his enemies.
V/ May your hand be upon your holy servant.
R/ And upon your son, whom you have anointed.

Uh oh. I think I'm the enemy.

And all I'm suggesting we do is prosecute criminals. Including the Pope.

A kind of secular solution.

2010-04-01T12:28:00.004-04:00

Recently I've been feeling this heavy weight on my back and I couldn't quite figure it out. Until I received an email from Voice of the Faithful saying they were having Vigils of Sorrow on Good Friday to "stand in solidarity with victims of clergy abuse."

Really? They want to stand with us again? Why it seems like only yesterday that we were standing on the streets of Providence, in the rain, as they held their convention without much concern for the victims, on whose backs they built their organization.

Heck, because of all of the news about the Pope, VOTF's President Dan Bartley has even appeared on CNN. That should help raise some money for them.

I know I sound a little cynical. I do understand that this is reflective of the organization on the national scale. I also know that there are many local affiliates of Voice of the Faithful with integrity.

Apparently these vigils will be held at major cathedrals in Boston, New York and Washington D.C. I'm not sure I see this as the right PR move. It is Good Friday and the church will be discussing nothing but forgiveness. That is what the church is all about.

Unless you are the New York Times. Bishop Nicholas DiMarzio of Brooklyn has gone as far to say, "I might even suggest canceling our subscriptions to The New York Times, but we need to know what the enemy is saying." That's not very forgiving.

Let alone the likes of our friend Bill Donohue at the Catholic League. When he forgives Larry David, Bill Maher and Kathy Griffin, then I will start to believe the church is about forgiveness.

They used to go willingly and humbly to the lions to profess their faith, now they can't even take a joke.

Is forgiveness what we are looking for anyway? How about justice first?

If you want to protest, why not start with the offices of federal prosecutors, attorneys general and local DAs? They are the only agents who can promote real change. Resignations won't solve anything, but prosecution will.

The question "Will the Pope resign?" is irrelevant.

From Boston to Australia to Ireland to Germany and everywhere in between, the handling of clergy sexual abuse worldwide has been the same. We should be looking at why.

The abuse is reported to the Bishop, and he either sends the priest to another Diocese or to a "treatment center" and then reassigns him, without ever notifying the authorities. Are we to believe this is all a coincidence? That they have acted individually and independently from each other? Not likely.

Let's look at how the Dioceses of Worcester and Fort Worth handled Fr. Tom Teczar. He served for a little while at St. Mary's in Uxbridge prior to this. That's where he got to know me.

Here is an article written by Richard Nagle from the Worcester Telegram, April 21, 2003.

In a letter:
Monsignor Raymond J. Page, vicar general of the Worcester diocese, wrote to Bishop Reilly, then in charge of the diocese serving Norwich, Conn., "Father Teczar is a priest of this diocese. Bishop Harrington has granted him a leave of absence with the suggestion that he seek a benevolent bishop.

"Tom's difficulties came to a head two years ago when a 16-year-old boy accused Tom of soliciting him," the letter continued.

Monsignor Page also wrote Bishop Reilly that "Bishop Harrington says there has long been a cloud of suspicion over Tom. Bishop Harrington knows a trail of damaged youngsters he left in one town. The police there were far from pleased. In that town, the police threatened to find a reason to arrest him if he returned there." Bishop Reilly declined to take on Rev. Teczar, and the Worcester diocese began to focus on Fort Worth.

With the knowledge of this risk, Bishop Delaney of Fort Worth still wanted Tom to serve in his Diocese. In a letter to the Worcester Diocese he wrote:

The letter went on, "Bishop Rueger sent me a copy of the letter you received from Mr. James Reardon, the diocesan attorney, with his opinion that Father Teczar should be excardinated from the Diocese of Worcester immediately. While respecting Mr. Reardon's expertise in civil law, I want to raise with you other questions about this matter involving both justice and charity."

Bishop Delaney said he believed Rev. Teczar would perform well for the Fort Worth diocese. "Let me be clear about the three-year wait," he wrote. "It is not due to concern about Tom's past problem. If I had serious concern in that regard I would not be dealing with the matter at all! ... In Tom's case there is the past problem that you and he have fully shared with me. But that is not the reason for the wait. If I had any fear that the problem would ever arise again I could not and would not accept him at all for any length of time. "

You told me both times we talked that you believe Tom can do effective priestly work and that you do not want to see him laicized. I can offer him that chance ... I am willing to provide the Diocese of Worcester with a document absolving you of any responsibility for Father Teczar's conduct during this time."

That document absolving Worcester cost Fort Worth $4.15 million in settlements. It ultimately gave Teczar a 50-year prison sentence. Not to mention the children that were abused.

There was full disclosure between these two Bishops. It is time for the full disclosure of the policy of the cover.

It is clear they knew what they were doing. Just like they did Germany and everywhere else. I wish I could say April Fools, but I can't. This is no joke.

The only fools are those who believe the Catholic Church will police themselves.

2010-03-29T12:23:00.002-04:00

Archbishop Dolan of New York's assertion that Pope Benedict is like Jesus should be considered miraculous. What else could possibly explain the transformation of one person from Hitler Youth to the King of the Jews?

Alright, that's an unfair joke. He was only 16 years old when he went into military service for the Nazi's. Clearly that doesn't count. Just like my Uncle Vinny who lied about his age and joined the US Navy at the age of 16. He was there when they captured the only German submarine in WWII, the U-505. That doesn't count either.

I can understand the Church's unease with discussions around Nazi's as Pope Pius XII reputation and record during that period is a little suspect. In particular, letting the likes of Dr. Josef Mengele to escape justice by fleeing Europe down the ratline, which went through the Vatican.

That's not good for PR. Although all of this bad press does keep the likes of Catholic League President Bill Donohue employed. As silly as he sometimes may be. Like his response that Cardinal Ratzinger may have seen a memo about the transfer of pedophile priest Peter Hullermann.

Donohue said "So what? Wasn't that what he expected to happen?” Yes, but he wasn't supposed to get caught transferring him.

It is actually called the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights. They spend their time fighting against those who suppress their civil rights, like Larry David, while minimizing sexual abuse by priests by blaming the parents.

Now that's not very civil, is it? Who would he blame for the escape of Mengele? Defending Genocide might be a little more difficult for him.

And that may be next. According to a column by Martin Kimani in the Guardian UK:

"To you, Catholic survivor of genocide in Rwanda, the Vatican says that those priests, those bishops, those nuns, those archbishops who planned and killed were not acting under the instruction of the church. But moral responsibility changes dramatically if you are a European or US Catholic. To the priests of the Irish church who abused children, the pope has this to say: "You must answer for it before almighty God and before properly constituted tribunals. You have forfeited the esteem of the people of Ireland and brought shame and dishonour upon your confreres."

"The losses of Rwanda had received no such consideration. Some of the nuns and priests who have been convicted by Belgian courts and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, respectively, enjoyed refuge in Catholic churches in Europe while on the run from prosecutors."

Hey, it worked with Mengele.

I'm coming to understand why they call the Vatican the Holy See. Because no matter how hard they might try to compare themselves to Jesus, the only thing I See are Holes.

2010-03-21T20:46:00.000-04:00

In spite of the recent bad publicity, the Catholic Church is still flexing it's moral muscle. No not that one. Apparently the US Bishops are telling the faithful to press their Congressmen to vote against the Senate Health Care bill because of Federal Funding of abortions. It's nice that the church wants to use a woman's Constitutional Right as a bargaining chip.

Why do we call it a Constitutional Right anyway? Does that make it less somehow? Like it isn't inalienable but a right that can only be granted by the government. Women, apparently, aren't born with certain rights.

Speaking of born...

If the church believes that life begins at conception, then why do they teach we are "born" with original sin and not conceived with it? They seem to be making some distinction between the two themselves. It's as if they are making this up as they go along.

Speaking of making things up...

It looks like the Vatican sent out a form letter of apology to Ireland yesterday. In it the Vatican apologized to the Irish, but in a statement said it could be read as applying to other countries. It's their new green policy. Saving trees and money. They are going to need it for legal fees.

In the letter the Pope describes the Bishops' response to the abuse as "botched." Obviously. They got caught. Just like he botched things in Germany.

It should be clear to everyone now that the Bishops worldwide used the same MO with the abusers. Keep them in ministry, move them to another parish and don't report the crime to authorities. They could not have been acting individually and independently from each other. They were behaving as directed.

From people like the Pope.

So, with all of this, the church still thinks it has the moral authority to tell our representatives how to vote. That is just plain silly.

Giving the church any moral authority at all now, would be like publishing a cook book by Jeffrey Dahmer.

2010-03-13T15:48:00.003-05:00

Today's New York Times has an article by Nicholas Kulish and Rachel Donadio titled Abuse Scandal in Germany Edges Closer to Pope. It begins:

BERLIN — A widening child sexual abuse inquiry in Europe has landed at the doorstep of Pope Benedict XVI, as a senior church official acknowledged Friday that a German archdiocese made “serious mistakes” in handling an abuse case while the pope served as its archbishop.

The archdiocese said that a priest accused of molesting boys was given therapy in 1980 and later allowed to resume pastoral duties, before committing further abuses and being prosecuted. Pope Benedict, who at the time headed the Archdiocese of Munich and Freising, approved the priest’s transfer for therapy. A subordinate took full responsibility for allowing the priest to later resume pastoral work, the archdiocese said in a statement.

And somehow people are shocked. Not Captain Louis Renault shocked, but actually shocked.

I'm beginning to understand the last thirty seconds of Congressman Patrick Kennedy's recent rant directed at the media. Prompting this response as reported in the Boston Herald:

...Larry Sabato, director of the center for politics at the University of Virginia, said Patrick’s outburst was ill-conceived, no matter the motivation. “You can understand and sympathize with someone, but that doesn’t justify the behavior,” he said. “It was a temper tantrum.”

Sometimes ill-conceived outbursts can make a lot of money. Just ask Joe Wilson who raised 4 million dollars after calling President Obama a liar. But Mr. Sabato won't mention that, because his Center for Politics received over seven million dollars in earmarked money from Republican Congressman Virgil Goode.

That's a nice little cottage industry. So few opinion makers and so much money.

I once wrote a haiku:

Glen Beck, Michael Moore
With Moral Indignation
Fuck Off and Go Home

Two very rich men who know what is best for you. Please. They have created two of the most successful cottage industries - themselves - and will do anything to promote and protect it.

Which brings me back to the mainstream media and the Catholic Church. Remember them? That's what I was writing about. And it is one hell of a successful cottage industry. The Granddaddy of them all.

No one in the mainstream media is connetcing the dots with the worldwide sexual abuse scandal. It's to the point where Anderson Cooper actually interviews a priest on the adoption scandal in Haiti.

What, was he looking for advice as to the proper way to exploit children?

They all reported on Cardinal Law. The Globe even won a Pulitzer. But they've kind of glossed over the Murphy Report, which lays out the horrific abuse in Ireland. It is quite a read. It even explains how a crucifix can be used as a sex toy.

Which makes me wonder, does the Bishop consider it foreplay when you kiss his ring?

Now we have the stories from Germany. The Pope's homeland. And cover-ups.

Why am I not surprised? Let's connect some dots. As I have written in a previous blog, in 1962, "Crimen Solicitationis," a confidential document from the Vatican was sent to every Bishop in the world instructing them how to cover up clergy sexual abuse.

I know, I'm quoting myself, but hey, it worked for Norman Mailer didn't it?

Which means Archbishop Ratzinger's job was to folow the rule of that document. We are now finding out, he obviously did. But he went beyond that. In 2001, while Cardinal Ratzinger was Pope John Paul II's right hand man...John Paul II, remember him? They are going to make him a Saint...Ratzinger sent a letter to all of the Bishops and Cardinals, reminding them of Crimen Solicitationis and even went beyond its scope in covering up these crimes against children.

Pope Benedict is the author of the modern day cover-up. So today's story comes as no surprise.

And those within the walls of the Vatican know it. Just ask Father Gabriele Amorth, the Holy See's chief exorcist. He says, according to the Times UK, that the sex abuse scandals in the Roman Catholic Church are proof that that "the Devil is at work inside the Vatican"

Yes, and he wears Prada.

2010-01-14T09:44:00.002-05:00

I'm still struck that, on NECN with Jim Braude, Massachusetts US Senate candidate Scott Brown said he is inspired to "live every day like it's my last," because the late JFK Jr. and Princess Diana were "powerful, handsome, rich" people who can no longer make a difference in the world as he wants to do. What?

Does Scott Brown believe he is one of the beautiful people?

I think his, er, spread in Cosmopolitan answers that question.

To be able to relate to the less attractive, he has been running ads showing the public that, like the common man, he drives a pickup truck. Of course, unlike the common man, as an elected official in Massachusetts, the taxpayers pay for his gas. He'd be doing us all a favor if he drove a Prius.

I wonder if he remembers that Noble Peace Prize winner Mother Teresa died the same day as Princess Di. She was one of the greatest humanitarians and advocate for the poor and helpless of the last century.

I don't know of anyone in my life time who deserves Sainthood more that her. I can't think of anything more miraculous than a woman running a ministry in the Catholic Church.

Still, she was old, poor and, well, unattractive. How can that be inspiring?

2010-01-09T09:18:00.000-05:00

Last July, Ben Stein wrote a column for the American Spectator, We Figured Him Out, taking on the ultra-leftist president we elected and his socialist health-care reform. Since then it has been circulated in an email and yesterday, it came to me.

Ben says -

Why is President Barack Obama in such a hurry to get his socialized medicine bill passed?

Because he and his cunning circle realize some basic truths:

The American people in their unimaginable kindness and trust voted for a pig in a poke in 2008. They wanted so much to believe Barack Obama was somehow better and different from other ultra-leftists that they simply took him on faith.

They ignored his anti-white writings in his books. They ignored his quiet acceptance of hysterical anti-American diatribes by his minister, Jeremiah Wright...

I thought this was about Health Care reform?

Wait a minute, wasn't Ben Stein a speechwriter and lawyer for Richard Nixon?

Doesn't he remember that on February 6, 1974, Nixon introduced the Comprehensive Health Insurance Act? Nixon’s plan would have mandated employers to purchase health insurance for their employees, and in addition provided a federal health plan like Medicaid that any American could join by paying on a sliding scale based on income.

Anyway, I interrupted Ben, sorry, what were you saying?

Ben...Ben?

Bueller?

2009-12-17T21:56:00.008-05:00

Cardinal Sean O'Malley is holding a healing Mass for abuse survivors, Sunday December 20th, 2009 at 3:30 pm at the Bethany Chapel, 66 Brooks Drive, Braintree, MA.

All in attendance will receive this Advent Booklet, showing one of the the actual reasons for the Mass in the first place.

I once was in the position of the Magnificent Advent Companion too. They saw great potential in me at a very early age. I was heavily recruited for the position.

It didn't last though. Once I reached the age of consent, I was retired.

Survivor: Cardnial Sean, do you know how to heal survivors?
Cardinal Sean: I don't know, can you hum a few bars?

2009-09-30T17:40:00.005-04:00

If I get any more news like this, I think my head will explode. First on the list is an article on how the Vatican is responding to the UN about sexual abuse accusations. They start off by saying, "In a defiant and provocative statement, issued after a meeting of the UN human rights council in Geneva, the Holy See said most of the Catholic clergy who committed such acts were not pedophiles but homosexuals attracted to sex with adolescent males." Try telling that to the female victims. They make up around 40% of the victims. I guessing this must have happened because they were heterosexuals attracted to sex with adolescent females, right? If the Holy See decides to ban homosexuals to protect little boys, it would stand to reason that they should ban heterosexuals to protect little girls. Perhaps they should just ban anyone with a penis from the priesthood. Let the women run the church. It would be a smooth transition. They already have the dresses. The Holy See tried to deflect their responsibility by noting that "...most US churches being hit by child sex abuse allegations were Protestant" In most Protestant churches the members hire their ministers. They are not appointed by the Bishop, who may be playing a shell game with a person who is attracted to sex with an adolescent. And I can't think of one protestant church that is actually a sovereign nation. Hence the UN's involvement. Which is the good news. Speaking of the hierarchy of the church, a Roman Catholic bishop from Nova Scotia faces child porn charges. Raymond Lahey has been charged with possessing and importing child pornography. "Lahey once oversaw a $15-million settlement with people who said they had been sexually abused by priests in the diocese, in a case dating back to 1950." So that is who is minding the store. My only question, though, is was it child porn porn? Which brings me to Roman Polanski. The rush to protect a convicted rapist of a 13 year old girl is staggering. 100 filmmakers signed a petition demanding Polanski's release. Among them Martin Scorsese, who once studied at the seminary and flirted with becoming a priest. I have no doubt he would have become a celebrated Bishop. And, of course, Woody Allen. What else needs to be said?That is a two for one, truth and punchline in the same sentence. It would be funny except we are talking about the rape of a 13 year old girl. This is how it works for the successful predator, either a priest or celebrity. The communities back the predator because it is too much to fathom that they have loved and been touched by the work, of a person who commits monstrous deeds. Better to rely on denial than face that. I'm a fan of both Scorsese and Allen's films. I'm even in Scorsese's new film Shutter Island. You can see me in the trailer. That's me being dragged on lawn. And I got the part of a mental patient because I actually have a diagnosis, PTSD, because of clergy sexual abuse. Can I separate the art and the artist, or is that just another form of denial? Perhaps Whoopi can tell me if it is denial denial. Yesterday I went to St Mary's in Uxbridge, the place of my abuse, to support a friend, a brother in arms, at a funeral. The church has a history of hosting more predator priests in the Worcester Diocese than any other parish. Six priests to be exact. We had coffee after the funeral in the new, and quite expensive, community center. All funds raised by the thriving parish. I would say it's just plain denial.

2009-04-12T08:04:00.000-04:00

1963 was a year of contrasts. It was both light and dark. President John F. Kennedy was assassinated and The Beatles released their first record, "Please Please Me." It was similarly a year if contrasts for Catholics. The big news that year was the passing of Pope John XXIII, the Pope of radical change who called the Second Vatican Council. Things were also radically changing on a quieter front in the Catholic Church. The Rev. Gerald M. C. Fitzgerald founder of the order, Servants of the Paraclete, a treatment center for priests and Brothers visited Rome in 1963 to warn Pope Paul VI of the immense problem of clergy sexual abuse. A forceful warning he had been trying to deliver since 1952. As the article in the New York Times reports a year earlier in 1962, Fitzgerald went to Rome and met with Vatican officials to discuss this issue. The same year a document entitled "Crimen Solicitationies," a confidential document from the Vatican was sent to every Bishop in the world instructing them how to cover up clergy sexual abuse. The document was signed with the seal of Pope John XXIII. Radical indeed. The coincidence of Fitzgerald's visit to Rome the same year this document is secretly released is hard to dismiss as nothing more. The church was warned. And they took action. Cover it up. By the time of the 1963 meeting, the wheels were already in motion. The bearer of truth and light, Rev. Gerald M. C. Fitzgerald, would meet with Pope Paul VI who would oversee the modern chapter of the darkness of clergy sexual abuse. It would be hard not to conclude that had the church listened to Fitzgerald and taken appropriate action, a substantial amount of victims since 1962 would have been spared.