The Vatican is investigating the gay ministry in the Northern Mexico diocese of Saltillo. Maybe there’s hope they will still investigate the Rainbow Ministry at St. Cecilia’s in Boston. A lot of what’s going on with the Saltillo gay ministry sounds vaguely familiar.
From LifeSiteNews: Mexican bishop under Vatican investigation for supporting homosexualist organization:
SALTILLO, Mexico, July 29, 2011 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Raul Vera, the Catholic bishop of Saltillo, Mexico, is under investigation by the Vatican over his sponsorship of an organization that condones sodomy, according to Mexican press sources.
The Saint Aelred group, which professes to be Catholic, teaches members that they may engage in homosexual relations, but encourages them to do so with a single partner. It also holds film festivals featuring productions that condone homosexual behavior.
Bishop Vera has publicly affiliated his diocese with the group and has promoted its activities, including sponsoring its film festivals, according to reports in the Mexican media. The organization is also involved in a number of diocesan parishes.
From Catholic News Agency: Mexican bishop confirms Vatican inquiry into his support for homosexual group:
Lima, Peru, Jul 28, 2011 / 06:04 pm (CNA).- Bishop Raul Vera Lopez of Saltillo, Mexico has told a Mexican newspaper he has received “a series of questions” from the Vatican about his support for the San Elredo community, which holds positions on homosexuality that are contrary to Church teaching.
“There has been a call from the Vatican and I am ready to clear things up … I have to respond to a series of questions that Vatican City has sent me about my work with homosexuals,” Bishop Vera told the newspaper Zocalo.
Bishop Vera told the newspaper, “In the Diocese of Saltillo, we have very clear objectives. We work with (the gay community) to help them recover their human dignity, which is frequently attacked at home and in society…”
“I am not against the magisterium of the Church, nor do I promote dishonesty. It would go against my principles to promote depravity and immorality,” he said.
In March of this year, Bishop Vera published a statement on the diocesan website expressing support for the “sexual, family and religious diversity forum.” The event was aimed at “eradicating what some sectors of the Church believe about homosexuality” — especially the belief “that homosexual actions are contrary to God.”
Father Robert Coogan, the American priest who founded San Elredo, maintained that the group’s work is not contrary to the teachings of the Church. He added: “How can a person with same-sex attraction have a fulfilling life? And the only answer the Catechism gives is to tell them to be celibate, and that is not enough.”
From Hispanically Speaking News: Mexican Diocese’s Gay Ministry Comes Under Vatican Scrutiny:
The bishop defended the diocesan ministry, saying it was based in the Gospel and meant to promote expanded human rights protection while helping gay people develop a sense of belonging especially because they are not always made to feel welcome by the church as a whole.
The ministry, he explained, “is based in personal attention, in spiritual attention … to see that they have a place in the church, that they’re treated as dignified people.”
The group sponsors a monthly Mass and has promoted a film festival, sexual diversity forum and lobbied for a same-sex civil partnership law, which was approved in the state of Coahuila, where Saltillo is located, in 2007.
There’s a lot here that sounds familiar from St. Cecilias and their Rainbow Ministry.
- St. Cecilia’s sponsored speakers who worked against the Catholic Church and supported legalizing “gay marriage”
- There’s no evidence that St. Cecilia’s Rainbow Ministry teaches that homosexual activity is immoral
- St. Cecilia’s Rainbow Ministry promoted a Mass to “celebrate Boston Pride Month,” rescheduled and rebranded as a Mass showing St. Cecilia’s was a place of welcome to the gay/lesbian/bisexual/transsexual (GLBT) community
- St. Cecilia’s Rainbow Ministry sponsors trips to see the Gay Mens Chorus
- A leader of St. Cecilia’s Rainbow Ministry publicly encouraged teens confused about their sexual identity to “come out” to get new energy and life.
- St. Cecilia’s Rainbow Ministry has financially supported the Waltham House, a home for ”GLBT youth” aged 14-18 confused about their sexual identity. St. Cecilia’s Rainbow Ministry plans to continue working with the house, which offers services including: “Mentoring relationships, tutoring and vocational training with GLBT adults, Opportunites to connect GLBTQ youth with each other in the community, and Transgender education/support.” Waltham House is a private entity that receives some state funding. They do not have any affiliation with the Catholic Church and there’s no indication they teach anything remotely related to Catholic teachings on sexual morality such as abstinence and chastity for those who have same-sex attractions.
I’ll post more about the Waltham House in the very near future. With this news that the Vatican is investigating the gay ministry in Saltillo, Mexico, we’ll probably need to give the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and the Congregation for Bishops a little prod again shortly to remind them they should also investigate St. Cecilia’s in Boston.
All that is needed for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing. Keep up the good work.
In light of the information published in the bulletin of St. Cecilia Parish regarding “St. Cecilia Rainbow Ministry” which states, with open pride in the St. Cecilia Rainbow Ministry, that the parish “welcomes lesbian,gay,bisexual, and transgendered (LGBT) Catholics to worship God and to speak openly and safely, and to embrace Jesus’ call to unconditional love,We help JGBT Catholics seek reconciliation with the Church in order to enrich a spirit-filled life.”(Apr.3,2011), is it possible that Cardinal O’Malley thinks that the Rainbow Ministry is engaged in the same work as the Holy See endorsed Courage organization ? The work of Courage is ,that those engaging in same-sex sex behaviors are ,” to be called to give witness to chastity,avoiding, with God’s grace,behavior that is wrong for them.”…and to come to understand that “homosexual acts are immoral and do not lead to a deeper life in Christ.”(Courge/Encourage Goals) . Is it possible that Cardinal O’Malley thinks that the way of the St. Cecilia Rainbow Ministry is exactly the same as the way of Courage? Otherwise it makes no sense for Cardinal O’Malley to publicly advocate for the other pastors in the Boston Archdiocese to look up to and follow the lead of St. Cecilia’s pastor,Fr. John Unni, as the cardinal certainly did in his June 9,2011 statement in which he stated:”St. Cecilia’s is a wonderful example of the exceptional parishes in the Archdiocese which seek to serve the Catholic faithful with grace,dignity,respect and compassion and love and being devoted to the Gospel and the Church’s saving ministry.”
It could be possible that Cardinal O’Malley has never actually seen the way in which the Rainbow Ministry website, http://www.the rainbowtimesmass.com ,
interprets the way to come closer to Christ. Chuck Colbert, a spokesperson for the Rainbow Ministry, reported the intent of Fr. Unni for celebrating the Mass on june 10,2011, as follows:”The last part of “jesus’ agenda”,Unni said,”and I dare say the cardinal’s agenda” is to be supportive of all.” “And Unni left no doubt about what he meant.”"you are welcome here,gay,straight,rich or poor,
black or white,”he said,”Here you all can say,”I can worship the God who made me as i am.”(The Rainbow Times,June 14,2011).
According to Chuck Colbert words: “and I daresay, the cardinal’s agenda”, are intended to have us believe that Cardinal O’Malley believes that God made those people who are engaging in same-sex sex acts, bisexual acts, transgendered behavior to be born into the world to act in those sexual ways.
I wish someone would ask Cardinal O’Malley if that is what he honestly believes. Does Fr. Unni honestly think that this is what Cardinal O’Malley believes? I wonder how many other people agree that this is what Cardinal O’Malley believes? If Chuck Colbert is right in thinking that Fr.Unni believes that Cardinal O’Malley agrees with him, then someone needs to find out exactly what the cardinal meant. If it is true, then he certainly is not endorsing the way of Courage which calls people to live according to the teachings of the Catholic Church regarding sexual matters. But, I find it hard to believe that Cardinal O’Malley meant what Chuck Colbert states that he meant. Chuck Colbert has been trying to pressure Catholic leaders to cave in to his GLBT agenda for many,many years.
Alice said: But, I find it hard to believe that Cardinal O’Malley meant what Chuck Colbert states that he meant.
Well Alice. It really is a challenging question. Cardinal O’Malley says one thing and then contradicts himself all of the time. It appears either he is crazy OR he is being manipulated. He is against same-sex “marriage” and asked all lawyers to fight against it. Lawyers who did as they were told reported back to the cardinal to explain their findings and … the Cardinal would not give them the time of day. He said he was in behind Fr. Rafferty in Hingham who courageously prevented the gay agenda from entering ST. Paul’s school. ANd then he totally undermines Fr. Rafferty by throwing him under the bus and finding the gay family a “Catholic” school for the child to attend.
What O’Malley says and does are endlessly contradictory. I hope he is not crazy. And if he is being manipulated, there are plenty of good, decent Catholics who could courageously expose that situation. Where are they?
Michael, I have a strong suspicion that one of them will soon take over the office of Vicar General…
Well that is comforting … we have to wait for a Catholic with courage to come from Rome to stand up and expose the truth. Where are the Catholics with courage?
Alice, I am not a “spokesperson for the Rainbow Ministry.” I am a journalist who writes often on the intersection of faith and homosexuality. My three pieces have simply reported on the developments at St. Cecilia.
To Chuck: You can call it “journalism”, but there are many people who have read your articles and consider them nothing more than propaganda supporting the promotion of same-sex sex activities.
Alice, And there are many other people, no doubt, who appreciate my efforts and find the reporting and commentary to be helpful. And when you say “propaganda supporting the promotion of same-sex activities,” what does that mean?
Chuck, those words means promoting the false belief that the genital acts that are involved in the sex acts of 2 men engaging in sex acts with each other, or 2 women who are engaging in sex acts with each other, are good acts, and in fact, are natural acts that should be encouraged. These acts are acts that are called “homosexual” acts, as you well know.
As also you well know , the teaching of the Catholic Church clearly states in the Catechism of the Catholic Church #2357: “Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity,tradition has always declared that “homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.” They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.”
From reading many of your articles, it is clear that you are promoting the false belief that these same-sex sex acts are good and should be encouraged. You are dismissing the teaching of the Catholic Church regarding #2357 as quoted above. Instead, you are promoting a belief contrary to the teaching of the Catholic Church in a way that meets the definition of “propaganda”,namely:”the spreading of ideas or information to further or damage a cause”,(Webster American English Dictionary). The cause you are damaging is a truth regarding chastity that is held by the Catholic Church.
Please don’t tell me that you never learned about this teaching of the Catholic Church in your many courses at the Weston Jesuit School of Theology! I know that many of the teachers there teach Proportionalism and Consequentionalism but .as you certainly must have been informed, Pope John Paul II addressed the errors of those twists of truth in the encyclical Veritatis Splendor.,p.p.90-104,where The Moral Act is addressed and the falsehood of the teachings of those who” maintain that it is never possible to formulate an absolute prohibition of particular kinds of behavior which would be in conflict,in every culture, with those values.” is addressed.
I trust that someone at the Weston jesuit School of Theology was familiar with the encyclical The Splendor of the Truth(Veritatis Splendor). Hopefully they didn’t deprive you of this remarkable truth!
Grammatical error above- the 4th word should have been “mean”, not “means” . I apologize for the mistake!
It seems to me that the difference between the San Elredo (Saint Aelred) community and the Rainbow Ministry is that according to these reports the San Elredo group explicitly contradicts Catholic doctrine on homosexual activity, whereas, from what I’ve seen, the Rainbow Ministry studiously avoids any explicit rejection of Catholic teaching on sexual acts.
Hey chuck … how many other “journalists” interrupt a Catholic mass by standing and yelling in order to push some agenda? Journalist … yeah right.
Michael, I did not yell. After the vile, scurrilous, and slanderous video was over, I simply stood up and spoke the truth, that I mean no one harm and that I had studied the issue of same-sex marriage theologically. That video was an embarrassment to the RCC, as well as an offense against truth and charity. It was ugly propaganda, spreading falsehoods about homosexuality and gay and lesbian people. I did not go to the Mass to interrupt it. But I could not remain silent in the face of such an ugly and evil presentation. Perhaps you now understand better. The video had no place in Mass. Did you know that shortly after the mainstream media began to show clips from it, the video got pulled off the web pretty quickly!
Alice, I am well aware of what you call Church “teaching.” How could I not be when people like you use it to club gay people over the head all the time? I hope you are aware that more and more Catholics are coming to realize that what the church says simply does not speak to the reality of gay and lesbian life, our love and our families. It’s in the meeting and encountering of gay people that more and more Catholics and non-Catholics realize the Rome simply has this one wrong — as has been the case before with usury, slavery and women, let alone Galileo. The Church has even changed its mind about marriage. Rather than hurl your dogma, I urge you to get out and meet some gay men and lesbians. It would help, too, if you did not lecture me.
Chuck, I think it’s appropriate for readers to know that you aren’t a Catholic any more and you’re now a Jew-by-choice in the Reform movement.
I for one, and many readers here have limited patience for non-Catholics or former Catholics opining to orthodox Catholics about what the Catholic Church should or shouldn’t believe. We don’t tell you in your Jewish faith what you should believe. You’re abandoned the Catholic faith, so please respect us and our faith by not telling us what you think we should believe. If you continue at that, your comments here will be unwelcome.
Chuck … you admit you interrupted the Mass. Who do you think you are?
Also, you lied about the contents of the video and you lied because the video was never “pulled” from the web. It was available on the web for several years — probably still is available on the web today.
The truths exposed in the video could only be considered evil by someone incapable of seeing truth. Nothing in the video was false or evil.
Woe to him who calls evil good and good evil.
.
Chuck, I’ve probably met more people who have experienced same-sex sex attraction than you have ever met! Through meeting men and women who have become free of this addiction through the work of Courage/EnCourage, I have come to know that God’s grace really works!! You can access the cds and the dvds from their recent conference at Mundelein,IL last weekend at
http://www.couragerc.net if you really want to learn more than you already know about people who have had same-sex sex attraction but are now free from under its “net”. But you have to have the desire to learn!!
Joe, My conversion to Judaism is hardly a secret. It is in fact widely know, as I have written about it. Even as a Jew, I have high regard for the Catholic sacramental imagination. And as a Notre Dame, Georgetown, and Weston Jesuit (now part of Boston College) alumnus, I not only respect Catholic higher education and the Church, but am indebted to it. The Mass, too, is a wonderful and beautiful liturgical celebration, that even as a Jew I can appreciate.
And Joe, your readers should also know that I hold an M.Div. and STL degrees from Weston Jesuit. I’d say I have spent a fair amount of time studying and understanding Roman Catholic theology. Surely, that must count for something. And that I wrote my STL thesis on a Catholic Case for Same-Sex Marriage. Yes, there is one.
I understand that you hold your faith sincerely and seriously. And I respect that. But what Rome says about gay people just does not ring true to me and many other Catholics and non-Catholics alike. As a matter of integrity, we must speak out. Even the natural law tradition requires that real life experience be taken into account.
If you only consider the matter for the pathological perspective — and the sin identity point of view — then a big piece of the human experience is left out. That does not make good theology, let alone sensitive and true pastoral care.
Your readers should also know that I am in correspondence with both Father Landry and Dale O’Learly. That seems to me to indicate a capability to engage in constructive dialogue.
Alice, again, you label it same-sex attraction as some kind of illness and worse yet addiction. But many of us don’t see it that way or experience our gay identity in that manner. My question to you was how many gay and lesbian people who do not see themselves as sick or immoral do you know? Furthermore, I interviewed the late Father Harvey some time ago and am well aware of Courage/Encourage. Finally, I am happy that you have found God’s grace. So have I.
sacramental imagination…that’s rich. Thank God the sacrifice of Calvary is real. Oh, I mean a Catholic “reality”.
Chuck, your conversion might be known elsewhere, but it may not be known to readers here who read your comments.
The topic of your thesis, “Catholic Case for Same-Sex Marriage” at Weston Jesuit is like fingernails on a chalkboard. That supposedly “Catholic” Weston Jesuit would allow a faculty member to advise a thesis on a topic like that is enough for any orthodox Catholic to dismiss any Weston Jesuit “credentials.”
What the Catholic Church teachs about the true presence of Jesus in the Eucharist doesn’t ring true to some people, or about the Immaculate Conception. What Rome says about abortion doesn’t ring true to some people. Just because certain Catholic teachings don’t “ring true” to you or others doesn’t make them wrong.
If you don’t like what Rome says about gay people, that’s fine.You’ve left the Catholic Church already, presumably because you objected to those teachings. In this country we have freedom of religion. No one here is telling you how to practice as a Jew, so why do you, as a non-Catholic, feel compelled to keep trying to influence a matter of Catholic dogma?
It’s great that you’re in correspondence with both Fr. Landry and Dale O’Leary. I have great respect for both individuals. Would you care to share what you’re learning from them?
Hear! Hear!
oops — O”Leary!
O’Leary!
Dear Mr. Colbert:
Respectfully speaking…you need some lecturing.
What is the truth of reality of which you speak? Is or is not the reality of same sex practice (sodomy, masturbation) sinful? Of course, same sex attracted folks love each other–we’re created in the image of God, a loving God. But, is this the love of a true covenant marriage btwn. one man and one woman–no!
The “lecturing” as you perjoratively label it comes in b/c you are defiant and unrepentent–and you are proclaiming your equivocations to an orthodox Catholic audience, or at least to those who know what being an orthodox RC entails…following DOGMA.
We are all called to be obediently chaste in our sexual relations and ,yes, some of us in certain points/stations/vocations of life must also be obediently celibate. THIS is true love and should be in the holy context of a marriage btwn one man and one woman, no matter what the MA SJC ruled.
I could be wrong but don’t think rushing to meet folks who celebrate and practice ssa is going to change Alice Slattery’s (or my) beliefs in the truth of Church dogma. Personally, I have many friends and family who are ssa–some are Catholic. We are all no longer close, though we definitely love each other. It’s a sad situation, but I can’t sacrifice the truth and my eternal soul for sentimentality.
I converted to RC ten years ago.. Is it or is it not true that if we say we are Catholic, then we must BE Catholic? The latter actualizes the former? I don’t see how I can be authentic in my beliefs and at the same time a relativist. As you say, Mr. Colbert,many RC’s are duped into agreeing with and condoning sinful behavior.
Journalistic note: must expect criticism.
Very well expressed!
Chuck, those people who had experienced same-sex attraction, some who described their attraction as being an addiction, do not see themselves as “sick” or “immoral” since they see themselves as having been given the grace to be redeemed and forgiven of their sins. They feel free and tremendously loved. Like Oscar Wilde, they knew in their heart that what they were doing was wrong, and ,like Oscar Wilde*, they now have repented of their sinful behavior, asked and received the mercy of God and the hope of salvation.
* The Unmasking of Oscar Wilde by Joseph Pearce(Harper Collins Pub.,2001)
Chuck,
The video played at our Catholic Mass simply repeated the teachings of the Catholic Church on gay marriage to the Catholics in the pews. That you find Catholic teaching ‘vile’ would be consistent with rejecting truth, given your life as an active homosexual.
Let’s cut to the chase:
“I understand that you hold your faith sincerely and seriously. And I respect that. But what Rome says about gay people just does not ring true to me and many other Catholics and non-Catholics alike. As a matter of integrity, we must speak out. Even the natural law tradition requires that real life experience be taken into account.
If you only consider the matter for the pathological perspective — and the sin identity point of view — then a big piece of the human experience is left out. ”
This is captivating.
You like the pleasurable sensations of homosexuality and so the reality of the sins involved are thereby discredited to you and many others.
You credit the illumination of your mind to this profound piece of wisdom to the blam-blams at the Weston School of Theology and you are here trying to convince lucid Catholics to see sins from outside the sin point of view.
This is what your ‘studying’ and degree from the Jesuits got you?
Do tell us. Is this just for homosexuals or does is this matrix across the board for any impulsive and sinful act when we have our eyes on some arm candy?
Does it work for those of us who’d like to put a sock in the mouths of Catholics and non-Catholics spreading errors in our pews and Sanctuaries? I could get into that.
It isn’t a matter of ‘integrity’ that you disrupted a Catholic Liturgy, it was a violation of constitutional law. You were fortunate that there was not a man with enough testosterone to silence and escort you to the curb. The odds of that happening again are low. We’ve had enough of the bullying by non-Catholics and gays inside of our Church.
If you want to sit in the pews, knock yourselves out but your rejections of Church teaching will not manifest itself in any way, shape or form without being railroaded out, as it was at St. Cecilia’s.
Shalom brother.
Anna said to Chuck: “You were fortunate that there was not a man with enough testosterone to silence and escort you to the curb.”
Anna … the one thing Chuck is certain of is that men in America … especially church-going “nice” men have lost their balls. Just look at the “Knights” of Columbus. They are no longer “Knights” but rather they have become the Withering Cowards of Columbus.
Very few Catholic men know what it means to be a man. To stand up for truth. To protect the Church. To be chivalrous. To risk embarrassment, scorn, and probably a well funded gay agenda-driven lawsuit.
Honestly, because of the effeminization of America … I think it is truly an impossible dream … to find a Catholic man at Mass willing to stand up for God.
To dream the impossible dream
To fight the unbeatable foe
To bear with unbearable sorrow
To run where the brave dare not go
To right the unrightable wrong
To love pure and chaste from afar
To try when your arms are too weary
To reach the unreachable star
This is my quest
To follow that star
No matter how hopeless
No matter how far
To fight for the right
Without question or pause
To be willing to march into Hell
For a heavenly cause
And I know if I’ll only be true
To this glorious quest
That my heart will lie peaceful and calm
When I’m laid to my rest
And the world will be better for this
That one man, scorned and covered with scars
Still strove with his last ounce of courage
To reach the unreachable star
Why do you see the speck that is in your brother’s eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? Matthew 7:3
Michael, Bravo. You are exactly right and your spirit is one of a good father, husband and soul nurtured by the Sacraments. There are few of you but your witness gives others courage.
Ollie, You’ve got it backwards.
The Catholic Church is the institution of repentance. This is a war between the people who want to see their sins and the people who don’t. Chuck is on the team who wants the Catholic Church to be a place to blind people from their sins. The people who oppose Chuck are the people who see and want to continue to see our sins.
Stay tuned Ollie. We are all sitting on the edge of our seats waiting to hear what the Jesuits taught Chuck about seeing sins outside of their sinful nature and how to focus instead on the pleasurable sensations to the body.
You read that right. The Jesuits gave him a degree in it. We’re waiting to find out whether this only applies to homosexuals or if heterosexuals can take a dip in any orifice in town too.
Chuck is going to give us the low down on the matrix which may even wipe out all of the Commandments. Grab your crack pipe and sit tight.
Anna,
Did you see the video? Were you at Mass that day?
Since when is the teaching of the Catholic Church that same-sex marriage would take health care benefits away from the seniors, using a shot of a lesbian couple and a quick flash to an elderly woman lying in a hospital bed on a ventilator to make the point?
That was just one frame in the vile video.
Since when does the Catholic Church “teach” that same-sex marriage will bring the end of civilization, using dinosaur bones to illustrate the point? That was another frame of the scurrilous propaganda in the-eight minute video.
It went on and on like that. A comparative, to me at least, would be Nazi propaganda against Jews, such as clips of rats running around and then morphing them into shots of Orthodox Jews with black hats and side locks. Vile! Slanderous!
The Catholic liturgy was disturbed by the showing of that video, not by me.
In a word, the video was full of misinformation, bearing false witness against gay men and lesbians. Scare tactics and fear mongering that good Catholics should be ashamed of.
Anna, Do I know you? How could you presume to make a comment about my life as “an active homosexual?” I would be happy to meet with you in person or speak over the phone.
Anna et al, You seem so concerned about the pelvic zone, reducing gay life and love and families to sexual activity. Why is that? Why all this obsession about sex, the pelvic zone and gay sin to exclusion of all other sin? There is plenty of heterosexual sexual sin out there, yet that seems to have escaped your radar. All of this harping on sex — where does that come from?
I am sure that local officials and the chancery were not going to make a big deal out of my witness at the Mass. Why? Because the very video would have been, its entire contents, made a matter of public record and probably shown on local TV stations, something no one at Lake Street wanted.
Surely, you are aware there are plenty of Catholic moral theologians who think Rome has not quite got it right on human sexuality.
And Joe, Just because the Roman Catholic Church teaches something, does not necessarily make it the truth. Rome has been wrong before. Why does the Church seem to have all the answers but has no questions?
My correspondence with Dale and Roger has just begun. You may want to ask them what they are learning from me! Actually, I am learning a lot from these blog postings.
But I am bothered at times by the language used to describe gay persons, more often that not in terms of sexual activity and bodily pleasures, sinful nature, addictions, inclinations. It’s as if you see us all, all the time, as sex fiends. Where does this holier than thou and judgmental hard line originate?
Michael, I did not lie. The video was pulled from the web. Its contents did not play well with state lawmakers at the time, either. There is no need to attack my integrity here. I do not make things up.
Joe, You are indeed free to believe and hold sacred what you wish to. But when lobbyists from the Catholic Church step into the public square and insist that secular law and civil marriage should be governed and influenced by Roman dogma — and use videos like the one in Canton — that is where I would draw the line. Same-sex civil marriage does not threaten Catholic sacramental marriage. No priest will have to marry anyone.
The attack on Weston Jesuit and the Jesuits is uncalled for.
Alice, I appreciate your change in tone. Thank you. I’d be happy to meet you, too.
Mr. Adams, your note and “lecture” do not come across to me as respectful.
And last but not least, my point about getting to know real life gay people, especially couples with children is this: I would hope that seeing the love those parents have for their children might soften even the hardest of hearts. Does anyone really believe that gay and lesbian parents are doing “violence” to their children as Rome alleges?
Chuck,
I warned you that you were making yourself unwelcome, and you’ve continued to do so. For thousands of years, marriage was defined across every culture and religious persuasion as the union of the two biologically opposite genders that are–according to immutable natural law–capable of reproducing the human race. Secular law and civil law were governed according to natural law. Natural law hasn’t changed. People of all faiths and religions, and indeed of no particular faith, wanted simply to protect secular law and the definition of marriage as it’s existed for many thousands of years according to natural law. Your claim that Catholic Church lobbyists stepped into the public square and insisted marrige be governed and influenced according to Roman dogma is so off the reservation, it casts a humongous shadow over every other thing you say.
Chuck, your comments and emails are no longer welcome here and will be blocked or removed to the best of our ability. I’ll pray for you and your conversion.
Chuck you claim you do not make things up but … pretending that there is something normal … something natural … about homosexuality is all about making things up. Your every waking breath depends on you continuing this lie … Your own identity depends on you making things up about the disordered behavior you promote. It is a total lie … designed to convince the sheeple to believe the lie and designed to justify your life.
Chuck … are homosexual acts, acts of grave depravity? Yes or no? [We all know your answer to this question.] Do you disagree with the Bible and Catholic Church teaching on the answer to this question? [We all know your answer to this question.] When you promote gravely depraved acts as normal and natural (ones to be “proud” of and ones to celebrate) you are lying.
Chuck … are homosexual acts intrinsically disordered? Yes or no? [We all know your answer to this question.] Do you disagree with the Bible and Catholic Church teaching on the answer to this question? [We all know your answer to this question.] When you promote intrinsically disordered behavior as normal and natural (behavior to be “proud” of and to celebrate) you are lying.
Chuck … is the inclination to homosexuality disordered? Yes or no? [We all know your answer to this question.] Do you disagree with the Bible and Catholic Church teaching on the answer to this question? [We all know your answer to these questions.] When you promote an intrinsically disordered inclination as normal and natural (an inclination to be “proud” of and to celebrate) you are lying.
Chuck … you claim you don’t make things up but you state that the video’s “contents did not play well with state lawmakers at the time, either.” What do you have — your thumb on the pulse of “state lawmakers?” Or did you just make that up? And how could you claim to know what “state lawmakers” felt as a group about a video unless you are trying to use some anecdotal evidence you have to create a false impression that ALL (or a substantial majority of) state lawmakers agree with your claim? This is classic propaganda … i.e., completely made up.
Contrary to your assertion that there is no need to attack your integrity, there is a need to identify your lack of integrity and point out that you certainly do make things up.
If you disagree with the Bible and the Catholic Church teaching on each of these three points (above), and if the Bible is the WORD OF GOD – i.e., the Truth — then Chuck YOU MAKE THINGS UP. Contradicting the Truth by definition is a lie.
Michael, That pretty much debunks “the son of the ten commandments”.
The video was NOT ‘pulled from the internet’! It was well-received by Catholics. Very well received.
How can Chuck be a Jew when the Old Testament is so clear that homosexuality is depraved? Have the Jews not heard of the destruction of the depraved society of Sodom?
Maybe we should find out where Chuck goes to Temple, sit in the pews and stand up and let them know the truth about the citations in Old Testament regarding homosexuality and God’s destruction of Sodom.
By the way, even Fr. Unni’s homily at St. Caligula’s connected homosexuality to addictions. That must have went right over his head?
Chuck,
I admire your honesty, and nothing else you represent.
Your connection to Weston and the Jesuits is nothing short of frightening.
It was not long ago that the gay life was a life in the shadows of drug abuse, violence and disease. Now that it has become mainstream in our post -christian culture there is likely to be some tension and cultural lag. Historically the Church has tried to teach humans that
‘normal’ sexual relations is designed by God as a pro-creative act. Science confirmed this less than two hundred years ago.
Our culture and obviously you, believe that sex is nothing more than naked recreation. The Katholic school of thought that includes many clergy including Bryan Hehir concur. The trouble that has been pointed out very ineffectively by the V2 church in America is that this belief has lead to 50,000,000 abortions, AIDS, and the near extinction of the family (the kind Jesus was born into) among other fruits…fruits of the fruits if you will.
So, enjoy your notoriety and the sexual deviance of your liking and I will struggle not to enjoy the thought of you and your kind (enemies of the church) grinding your teeth in a lake of fire for eternity.
Anna, Your comment about the Ten Commandments — please. I am a bar mitzvah. In other words, a son of the commandments. I do no advocate wiping them out.
Joe, hurray. A big huge hurray for putting a muzzle on his assaults against Christianity, honesty, morality, natural law and human sexuality.
His chicanery is breathtaking.
Let us pray for the children of the Jews
Dear TLCIB: I truly appreciated your thoughts to Mr. Colbert. When Mr. C HAD to rattle off that I was disrespectful to him or to his subject or object or whatever, I had to smile and laugh out loud. I truly and personally don’t care to hear his hyper-irrational rantings that are, at this point, reminding me of some caricature like the Wicked Witch of the West melting under Dorothy’s house…and nothing visible yet the ruby slippers.
The Lord’s mercy and the power of the Holy Spirit are awesome and mysterious that Mr. Colbert admits that he is learning things from reading this blog. I am ashamed for him. He must have a large, enthusiastic cabaret following somewhere.
That’s MS. Shawn Adams to YOU Mr. C!
Speaking of enemies of the Church within. The Cristero War of the early 20th century in Mexico is well documented as an attack on The Church orchestrated by its enemies, of course it has been virtually scrubbed from US history. Has anybody picked up on the fact that the church in Mexico has been consistently attacked and dominated by free masonry? Is this embracing of the deviant ‘gay’ life style simply another manifestation of techniques used by Church enemies within in order to destroy? (with degrees of conscious complicity nearly impossible to nail down? With proud demons like Chuck occasionally unable to resist the temptation to pop their heads up out of their snake hole, giving confirmation of the existence of a ‘conspiracy’?)
Was the scuffle at St. Cecelia’s simply about supporting a persecuted minority as folks like Chuck would have us believe? How is it that the supporters in positions of power easily toss cluster bombs on the collective of anybody who does not think that: heaven forbid, Gay marriage in not a particular Catholic notion?
As a practical matter at the very basic level is it even loosely plausible that offering a gay ministry will – help build the church? Or instead is it simply another technique of the Modernists to create the ‘New Church they Envision’ –
Family – Husband, wife, child – kind – is the vehicle in which Christ travels through time. Orthodoxy is the manner in which His revealed truth is carried by family through time. Is there any doubt that ‘out’ homosexuals cripple these two pillars of Catholic culture? And further, is there any doubt that ‘greater’ minds like Chuck and Hehir fully understand this, perpetuated the destruction and hide in broad day light?
May the light of Truth continue to bring exposure to the enemies within.
TLCIB — No, the Church is the vehicle in which Christ travels through time, and orthodoxy is not the manner in which the truth is carried by the Church, but the expression of the truth itself.
To amplify my previous comment:
We are not Christians and Catholics because we were born into a Catholic family or descended from generations of faithful Catholic Christians. We are Christians and Catholics because we were baptized into the Catholic Church. It is baptism, not family, that counts.
naturgestz, I think that the remarks of TLCIB regarding “Family-husband, wife, child—” reflect the reasoning that is integral to Blessed Pope John Paul II’s work in The Theology of the Body. I may be wrong about TLBC’s intent. but,nonetheless, it is vitally important that The Theology of the Body be read and understood in order for us to have a much clearer understanding of God’s plan for human love. It was written with the intention of elaborating on Humanae Vitae. As you well know, so many people cast aside Humanae Vitae, and, as a result of this rejection, we have witnessed the mushrooming of the secular humanistic sexual immorality movement which ,now, with even same-sex sex being held up as “good”, is tearing asunder the belief integral to “Family-husband,wife,child..”. The Theology of the Body ,while not yet declared a dogma of the Church, is certainly essential to helping Catholics understand God’s plan for human love in order to give witness against the falsehoods of those who are promoting the secular humanistic immoral sexual agenda.
Alice Slattery, I certainly do not deny the importance of the family — father, mother, and children — both in the natural order and in the supernatural, where husband and wife become the image and likeness of God in a pre-eminent way (as Bl. John Paul II explained) in the marital act which fulfills the command to be fruitful and multiply and thereby also becomes an image of Christ and the Church producing sons and daughters spiritually as parents transmit life naturally.
Not only does TOB elaborate on HV (IMO it does a much better job explaining why HV is right than Paul VI did — but then JPII had the time and space to develop the reasoning which could only be briefly summarized in the encyclical), but by explaining the place of sex in God’s plan from the beginning, it also shows, as a necessary consequence, why homosexual sex is contrary to God’s plan. We already knew that, of course, but TOB expresses it so beautifully — not merely as “Thou shalt not,” but as one element of God’s loving gift to us. We can and must use the valid arguments from natural law when we are arguing for sound public policy in our secular republic; but in forming the faithful, we need TOB to form consciences strong enough to resist the humanistic immorality of the age, both in their personal conduct and in their role as citizens.
The Theology of the Body should be an integral part of our work of Christian formation from the religious education of children through seminary, marriage preparation, and adult faith formation.
Amen to the above!!!!!
Alice,
Not so fast. Do not jump on this jesters band wagon.
He said …”God’s plan from the beginning, it also shows, as a necessary consequence, why homosexual sex is contrary to God’s plan. (BUT) We already knew that, of course, but TOB expresses it so beautifully — not merely as “Thou shalt not,” but as one element of God’s loving gift to us.”
…one element of God’s loving gift to us…? Homosexual sex?
…”we need TOB to form consciences strong enough to resist the humanistic immorality of the age” Ya, like a whole in the head.
Thou Shalt not served western civilization for 5,000(?) years, now the modernists need a new document to “Deal with the Age”
Absolutely classic modernism.
naturgesetz, you are a bore.
TLCIB,
If we are permitted to insult each other, as you just did by calling me a bore, I would tell you that you are an illiterate. Someone who understands written English would have realized that what I said is “one element of God’s loving gift to us” is that “homosexual sex is contrary to God’s plan.” (He would also have known that as the possessive of “jester” takes an apostrophe before the “s,” and that the phrase he wanted to use is “hole in the head,” not “whole in the head.”) But rather than return insult for insult, I’ll merely tell you that you have misunderstood what I wrote.
The Decalogue was given between 1,250 and 1,500 years ago.
And I’ll take Blessed John Paul II over you any day.
Thanks,
I type wicked fast and sum tyms Im not overly concerned with spelling.
The ten commandments were given to Moses around 500 A.D?
You mean Saint Patrick pre-dates Moses? Somebody should tell the Jews this.
I read it again – the object of the second sentence was not clear.
Was it Sex or homosexual sex? I am sorry but there is a school of thought
here in Boston that believes homosexual sex is a gift from God. Sorry if I put you in that camp so cavalierly. You should perhaps write with more precision structurally.
I’m not going to touch your other comments on my poor writing skills found in parenthesis.
I will offer that I think you are a turd and probably throw like a girl.
But I like you anyway.
TOB was published because JPII wrote it. You’d have to be a world class bore to spend more than a half hour on it. Or perhaps a cleric who is very impressed with himself and his advanced degrees, and ever ready red pen to make correction…I digress.
I’d ski the alps with Karol Wojtyła but I’d skip the Wednesday nights and the quicky canonization. I think he’d understand.
TCIB,
You got me on the dating of Moses. I should have said 1,250 to 1,500 years B.C., which puts him 3,250 to 3,500 years ago. I guess I’m not infallible, after all.
God’s loving gift, in this context, is sex. One part of that gift is that it is to be used only by husband and wife — which, in turn, means that t is not to be used in same-sex activity.
As for JP II’s Theology of the Body, the original is written in language that makes it nearly incomprehensible to anyone but a trained theologian. Fortunately, people have written paraphrases which put it in terms that are understandable for a general audience, and those are what I use. But the first time I heard a talk about it, I was overjoyed because it seemed to me that JPII had given an explanation of sexual morality which could speak to people who had absorbed the errors of this age, and show them where the errors lie.
Perhaps the Scholastic method of drawing all morality from the Decalogue should be sufficient. It satisfied me when I was in school, and has continued to do so. But when we are faced with millions who don’t see the connection between “Thou shalt not commit adultery,” and “Each and every marital act must remain open to the transmission of life,” it seems to me that a reflection on Scripture which shows that the openness to life is part of the will of God as manifested “from the beginning,” gives us the hope of reaching those whom Paul VI failed to persuade — and reaching them not only with respect to contraception but also with respect to homosexual conduct and in vitro fertilization.
The mission of the Church is to spread the Kingdom of God by proclaiming the timeless truths of salvation in ways that will persuade the people of each generation in which she lives. IMO, JPII has given us a valuable tool for doing that.
Naturgesetz,
I’m sure glad about the Moses thing, I would have hated to be the guy to write THAT press release, although I probably wouldn’t be selected for the job.
Thank you for noting that TOB (the original) was incomprehensible, as for theologians appreciating it, to me it was akin to art critics at an opening of a famous artist. Ooh and Awes over an esoteric inane piece of great size and effort. Time will tell.
Christopher West’s TOB light was worse than weak. The first to jump on the TOB bandwagon in order to make a living, he remains a proponent of an odd subculture of Catholicism. The premise of a papal document of 1000+ pages on essentially; sex, pushes me toward sedavacantism, certainly not sanctity.
– But when we are faced with millions who don’t see the connection between “Thou shalt not commit adultery,” and “Each and every marital act must remain open to the transmission of life,”-
Millions? Connection? Its the Concupiscence stupid. The problem was the rejection of H.V. by clergy who wanted to be hip. The document it self was weak with the ever murky ‘grave’ reason arguments. The modernists played it like a fiddle, and here we are; 98% of Catholics use birth control. And please spare me the foolish NFP walk of mucus.
Ah, to persuade. The great salvation sale. This must be part of the New evangilization I hear so much about. If we could only convince them! Christ should have called merchants. Yes! Make a marketing plan and ‘sell’ this idea of Christianity.
Christ called us to be fishers of men. Cast the net of truth and see who you catch. When the V2 church bent down in an effort to meet sinners ‘where they were’ it failed to stand tall as the pillar of truth. Many of us seriously wonder if it completely fell over into the great apostasy foretold by many Saints.
Thanks for tolerance of my style.
Naturgesetz,
I find your opinions to be from within the failed paradigm of V2 and important. As yet another historic day for the diocese unfolds: The Hit list of priest buggery. This absurd false self flagellation that includes a list of dead accused priests. What role does such a list play in the ‘new evangilization’? Are we the church neurotic or self-destruction? As a layman in the pew did I play a role in the criminal activity of screwball priests anymore than I played a role in the crimes of Attila the Hun? I have no culpability in the matter yet my Cardinal continues the mea culpa’s ad nauseum, speaking as ‘we’ and ‘us’ as if the Church itself was the problem.
All the chatter on protecting children and…98% of Catholics use birth control. For clarification; that means that those Catholics who use the Pill (most) are chemically aborting their own children.
Theology of the Body?
How about; Theology of the Baby.
The Nativity, Incarnation and how it connects us to the sanctity of human life.
TLCIB,
It has been pointed out, correctly I think, that it was not just priests and bishops who wanted to avoid publicity about sexual misconduct by priests. Police were loath to arrest, district attorneys were loath to prosecute, and ordinary laymen were loath to have the facts bandied about in any public forum. This does not amount to personal culpability on the part of ordinary laypeople, but it’s not as if the laity were trying to blow the lid off and only the hierarchy were keeping the lid on.
I think it is important for the effectiveness of our preaching ad extra for us to respond to criticism and concerns. I think the whole sexual abuse crisis could have been lessened if Cardinal Law had decided to respond vigorously rather than trying to remain “above the fray.” If people had been made aware back then that he had so greatly reduced the numbers of incidents taking place that it would be fair to say he solved the problem, not only would he have saved himself his terrible reputation, but people would realize that the Church is not generally protecting predators.
I think contraception is a separate issue — granted, in terms of the number of souls involved it’s much bigger than clerical abuse of minors or homosexuality.
Joe, thanks for letting this go on a bit…
Naturgesetz,
Are you baiting me? My impression is that you are a ‘company man’ ordained sometime between 64 and 74. – cler·i·cal·ism (kl r-k-l z m) n. A policy of supporting the power and influence of the clergy in political or secular matters. Please note the name of this blog…
My keyboard is covered with the hair I just pulled out. You are absolutely positively wrong in your assessment of the so-called crisis of 2002. It is truly astounding that such a myth would still be perpetuated. Again – this whole idea of paradigm shift seems spot on.
You said;
“…but it’s not as if the laity were trying to blow the lid off and only the hierarchy were keeping the lid on.”
THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED.
Law enforcement folks were trying to be discreet and the diocese kept blowing them off (pardon the expression) Cardinal Law (A Freemason?) was whisked off in order to avoid a grand jury indictment.
“I think the whole sexual abuse crisis could have been lessened if Cardinal Law had decided to respond vigorously rather than trying to remain “above the fray.”” Gag. Clericalism, Gag again.
I guess – if you consider rape of children to be a ‘fray’ of sorts. Ya, I can see how a less than vigorous response would be justifiable, not. What was he still taking advice on sexual matters from Paul Shanley?
“…not only would he have saved himself his terrible reputation, but people would realize that the Church is not generally protecting predators.”
I saw a great film in Rome a few years back. It was an event sponsored by the Legionaries of Christ and Marcial Marciel and you can see Cardinal Law in the front row at his new Rome assignment with an ear to ear grin. It is not The Church, it is a evil earthly forces within it.
You dear Naturgesetz need to understand the deeper darker side of Bryan Hehir Exposed. There is a carefully orchestrated campaign to destroy The Church. Haven’t you heard? The Church Christ established needs a NEW vision.
I don’t know what role you are called to play here but I’d suggest stepping far outside your comfort zone at this point. Those who brought the church contraception are the same ones who bring celebrate sodomy. These are enemies within. If you are not firmly against them, then you are with them.
Too black and white?
Start with the 4 last things.
TLCIB,
*sighs*
I was talking about pre-2002, when I said the authorities and laity were content with keeping quiet about abuse. (It may have been the child day care hysteria that changed the mindset of the general public and law enforcement on these things.)
“Cardinal Law … was whisked off in order to avoid a grand jury indictment.” That is absolutely FALSE. In the first place, grand juries can indict anybody anywhere in the world. The subject does not have to be in the territory for which the grand jury sits. And the fact is that Attorney General Reilly empanelled a grand jury, and Cardinal Law appeared before it. Ultimately, in July 2003, the grand jury returned a “no bill,” which means it found nothing to indict anybody for. (This is remarkable because the proverb is that a district attorney dominates the grand jury so thoroughly that he “could indict a ham sandwich” if he wanted.
Not only did the grand jury find no grounds for indicting Cardinal Law, but there was a table appended to their report. It told when all the acts of clerical child abuse reported up to then had occurred, in yearly averages for four different periods. In the time before Cardinal Law arrived in Boston in 1985, there were about 28 incidents per year. In Cardinal Law’s first 8 years — 1985-1992 — there were about 10 per year. In the years 1993-2000 there were about 4 per year. After 2000 until the report was issued there were 0 incidents reported per year. In other words, child abuse by clergy was stopped in the Archdiocese of Boston while Cardinal Law was archbishop.
Those first 8 years under Cardinal Law were the years when it was policy to send known abusers for psychological treatment and to return them to ministry only if the psychologist said it would be safe to do so. After 1992, Cardinal Law had a review board, with lay participation, which recommended the course of action for each abuser; and the Cardinal followed their recommendations every time except one,in which he was stricter than their recommendation. (I have the information in this paragraph from the deacon who researched the files for the diocese.)
You are the best!
The legal details I guess are debatable but is there any doubt that if Law had not left town things for the church would have gotten far far worse?
indictments are political in nature; See Clericalism
“…pre-2002, when I said the authorities and laity were content with keeping quiet about abuse.”
My friend Jerry has documented very well on this blog how the Church dealt with abuse historically.
Is it just me? Men I know, most whom are fallen away and won’t take their families to that ‘queer church’ would slit the throat of a man who raped their son or daughter. Based on this real world impression; when exactly were the laity content with keeping abuse quiet? The old ladies who cook for you maybe but the laity in general? If anything the laity where in denial that creeps like Shanley, Geogan and Tony Laurano actually were allowed to prowl for decades.
It still boggles the mind.
Fact; When Jack the diddler was in Hingham, the Hingham PD had one of their own with the same malady. The Boy Scouts and law enforcement ran him out of town – all laity. circa 1971?
Laurano raped a retarded gentleman in my neighborhood in 2006 and was still apparently informally active in his career at St. Ann’s Hull. You remember Tony? He raped a seminarian in 1972 and it was labeled as ‘consensual’ the young man left Boston, was eventually ordained in another diocese and still maintains that YES he was raped in The Boston Pink palace.
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2006/04/27/priest_in_rape_case_accused_of_molesting_disabled_neighbor/
“In other words, child abuse by clergy was stopped in the Archdiocese of Boston while Cardinal Law was archbishop.”
I’m thinking fantasy Island. Unless of course you think that consensual homosexual sex between a priest and a confused 17 or 18 year young man is not sexual abuse.
It is pretty clear you fancy yourself a well cared for ‘insider’. I’d suggest they bought your allegiance so long ago you are having great difficultly understanding the beast. A paradigm is defined by the strength in which an alternative view is rejected.
“…pre-2002, when I said the authorities and laity were content with keeping quiet about abuse.” This is a pre-conceived notion you absorbed. The cool-aid, if you will. It is not based on reality but on a manufactured perspective with a specific strategy in mind. Please read your own words again.
“sighs”
Joe,
My comments above ‘awaiting moderation’ are positively accurate.
I have no problem with you editing it as you see fit.
Email me if you have a question on what I claim.
TLCIB,
I’ve been thinking some more about Card. Law and the Grand Jury and I realize that I don’t know that he testified before it. I was remembering a photo in the papers of Card. Law in a courthouse corridor or elevator lobby on his way to testify, but that could have been in a civil case. There was also at one point a report in the papers of his testimony. That cannot have been before the Grand Jury, since their proceedings are secret. So I know that he testified in the civil case, and I know that a Grand Jury returned a “no bill” with respect to him, and I know that there was a table that showed that incidents of alleged child abuse by clerics declined as I indicated while he was archbishop; but I don’t know that he testified before the Grand Jury.
…and?
1. There was a true conspiracy of silence. 2. It was recognized by the civil authorities. 3. The Vatican in its prudent wisdom brought Law home rather than watch true scandal increase. – If we can ‘t agree on these points there is little reason to continue the dialogue.
TLCIB,
A while back you made a guess about my status. Like many of the things you come up with, you were wrong. I mention this because you continue to spin out your fantasies about me based on your wrongheaded guess. If you continue to make guesses about who or what I am, I will not keep telling you that you are wrong (even though you almost certainly will be) because like the monkeys at typewriters, given infinite time, you could come up with Shakespeare. After all, there is a limited number of people in the Archdiocese of Boston. But if I have denied your many wrong guesses, then if I don’t deny a correct one that you luck into, you’ll know you’ve got Shakespeare. So all I’ll say, at most, in future is that it’s just your guess.
“Men I know, most whom are fallen away and won’t take their families to that ‘queer church’ would slit the throat of a man who raped their son or daughter.”
Ah, but the actual fathers didn’t slit anybody’s throat, did they?
“Based on this real world impression; when exactly were the laity content with keeping abuse quiet? The old ladies who cook for you maybe but the laity in general?” You call this your “real world impression,” but it’s really just your lurid imagination, not reality, since there were no throats slit. Yes, it was the laity in general, including reporters, police, and prosecutors, up until 2002, with few exceptions. If they had not generally been content to keep it quiet, it would have become known way earlier. There were a couple of well-publicized cases, like Porter in Fall River, but they were thought to be the exception, because those who could have gone public about all the others were content to keep it quiet.
“Fact; When Jack the diddler was in Hingham, the Hingham PD had one of their own with the same malady. The Boy Scouts and law enforcement ran him out of town – all laity. circa 1971?” This illustrates my point. The people who ran the police officer out of town, didn’t run all the rapist priests out of the diocese.
“’In other words, child abuse by clergy was stopped in the Archdiocese of Boston while Cardinal Law was archbishop.’ I’m thinking fantasy Island.” How far below zero rapes per year would the number have to go for you to admit that it was stopped?
I’ll get to your later post, the one with your three theses, later.
Perhaps your perspective on ‘the priest of the woods’ of June 2010 is that he is simply a jilted lover. I consider him a predator and an enemy of the Church within. If that makes me The Last Catholic in Boston who sees it that way, so be it. I’m in good company with millions of Catholics worldwide.