American Cardinal Accused of Sexually Abusing Minor Is Removed From Ministry

  • Thread starter Thread starter Domer90
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I’d be willing to bet it was far more than 3 journalists who knew. Two journalists, both more conservative folks, admitted knowing the allegations but were unable to publish anything since it was all off the record. Apparently a NYT magazine writer knew and worked on a story about it back in 2012, but the editors killed the story. (We haven’t heard from that journalist directly, as far as I know?) How many more journalists knew of the allegations (at least regarding him and seminarians or priests) but didn’t even care to investigate? After all, why would the New York Times or Washington Post or similar media outlets out a Church leader who was homosexual? That’s the kind of thing they like to encourage with a wink.
 
Last edited:
If ‘everybody knew,’ the corruption runs deep.

www.catholicculture.org

If ‘everybody knew’ about Cardinal McCarrick, the corruption runs deep

Now at last the truth about Cardinal McCarrick’s misconduct has become public knowledge. If my email traffic is any indication, many more stories will soon emerge. But Rod Dreher drives right to the central point in his follow-up column, entitled “Cardinal McCarrick: Everybody Knew.” There’s a...
www.catholicculture.org www.catholicculture.org
 
Could it be that journalists didn’t care because it was not pedophilia?
 
Could be. It was homosexual predatory activity directed at seminarians. Had those seminarians been a few years younger the journalists might have been all over it.

What is somewhat remarkable to me just from what I’ve read is that none of the seminarians defended themselves or called the cops on the spot to report sexual assault.
 
My DH guess is that it was a gray area and those who didn’t cooperate were blacklisted. Power…and too afraid of retaliation. Think Hollywood. The Cardinal was in a huge position of power!
 
Oh yes, I understand the power imbalance, and the fear of being kicked out of seminary or of having a priestly career ended. Yet I still find it remarkable that somebody didn’t loudly protest, throw a punch, storm out of the house, say to heck with the career, and call the cops. Or even call the local reporters and give them a story on “why I punched the cardinal.” Yes, physically assaulting a cleric is probably a canonical offense, but what if it is in response to sexual assault?
 
emilysue said:
How many more journalists knew of the allegations (at least regarding him and seminarians or priests) but didn’t even care to investigate? After all, why would the New York Times or Washington Post or similar media outlets out a Church leader who was homosexual? That’s the kind of thing they like to encourage with a wink.
Click to expand...
There are two possibilities that come to mind. Since the journalists like homosexuality then they like someone promoting it on the inside of the Church (and the Cardinal was if only in his actions, but I’m sure it was more). The other is that he was compromised. He was open to blackmail.
JimG said:
What is somewhat remarkable to me just from what I’ve read is that none of the seminarians defended themselves or called the cops on the spot to report sexual assault.
Click to expand...
I don’t quite understand that myself. As widespread as this apparently was I am surprise no one not once stood up.
JimG said:
Yes, physically assaulting a cleric is probably a canonical offense, but what if it is in response to sexual assault?
Click to expand...
It is a serious offense, but stopping a homosexual sexual assault is certainly self defense.
 
JimG . . .
I still find it remarkable that somebody didn’t loudly protest, . . . storm out of the house, say to heck with the career, and call the cops. Or even call the local reporters and give them a story . . . .
Click to expand...
Possibly because when OTHER seminarians had protested against this sort of perverted, abusive behavior, THE whistleblowers are the ones that got vilified.

books.google.com

Goodbye, Good Men

Goodbye, Good Men uncovers how radical liberalism has infiltrated the Catholic Church, overthrowing traditional beliefs, standards, and disciplines.
books.google.com
 
Last edited:
In Catholic school this past year, 2 gay guys hit on my kid. Now, if one of them got fresh with my kid, and my kid defended himself, who do you think would get in trouble (we’re talking no video evidence and he said/she said)?
 
We’ve read said book and others. Sadly, there was a minority who would get bullied. Very sad.
 
Yes, I remember the Michael Rose book. It was originally titled: “Goodbye! Good Men: How Catholic Seminaries Turned Away Two Generations of Vocations From the Priesthood”

I only read excerpts, but the main thesis seems to have been that men who were doctrinally orthodox and accepted Catholic morality especially with regard to sex, were systematically rejected by the seminaries.
 
We have the book and you are spot on. I fear for my son, who wants to be a priest. I feel like we need to move to Poland.
 
Well, my impression is that seminaries have changed since the times that Rose was writing about. I have no personal experience, but I know that my diocese will only send men to certain seminaries which it considers orthodox and has had good experience with.
 
Domer90 said:
Does that mean there are still horrible seminaries out there?
Click to expand...
I really don’t know. But I do know that there are some good ones. If a bishop wishes to provide a good orthodox education for his seminarians, it is possible.
 
I am more surprised he was removed than that he did it. I suspect there is a lot of this about, in various forms. I would also put that in the ‘everybody knows’ category.
 
Last edited:
JimG said:
Well, my impression is that seminaries have changed since the times that Rose was writing about. I have no personal experience, but I know that my diocese will only send men to certain seminaries which it considers orthodox and has had good experience with.
Click to expand...
Good to hear.
 
FollowChrist34 said:
I am more surprised he was removed than that he did it. I suspect there is a lot of this about, in various forms. I would also put that in the ‘everybody knows’ category.
Click to expand...
I wonder if Pope Francis is “cleaning house”. If he is, then all I can say is it’s about time, and in fact way overdue.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top