Church Militant Report on SSPX Abuse Allegations

  • Thread starter Thread starter Maximian
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Couldn’t agree more. As I said earlier I totally believe he was reacting to the twitter war between Marshall and Gordon, which he participated. He had to create the dirtiest story he could think of against the SSPX.
 
I’m not a fan of Voris. He often relies on cheap theatrics and sensationalism for clicks. I also tend to defend the SSPX, though I don’t attend their Masses. All of that said, I don’t know how it’s possible to say the SSPX hierarchy wasn’t complicit in cover-ups. The emails that Church Militant was accidentally sent seem pretty damning to me. For example:
“We cannot issue a blanket denunciation of the accusers and say he [Duverger] is innocent of everything. Church Militant has already dug into some of our ugly cases in France; what if they find out the history here?”
Click to expand...
 
MagdalenaRita said:
Couldn’t agree more. As I said earlier I totally believe he was reacting to the twitter war between Marshall and Gordon, which he participated. He had to create the dirtiest story he could think of against the SSPX.
Click to expand...
Did he participate in that? I must have missed it.
 
He had a couple tweets and Marshall mentioned him in his last SSPX video
 
sloancaprice said:
40.png
gracepoole:
My question is this: if the sexual predation that’s been exposed in the post-VII church over the past 20 years was a result of homosexuals being allowed in seminaries, dogmas of the church being ignored, etc. (all popular theories), how then can there be predation that occurred in the FSSPX, which presumably was free of these errors?
Click to expand...
Because Vatican II didn’t cause the sexual abuse crisis and it is just an excuse for those that don’t like the reforms to have a boogeyman to attack.
Click to expand...
I agree that VII didn’t cause the crisis. I’d love to hear from someone who still believes it did, though.
 
I’m not saying I believe VII caused it but VII or more the spirit of VII was the explosion of what was brewing for years
 
David55 said:
All it did
Click to expand...
Much, but not all. These are the points that deserve attention:
  • The dishonest correpondence about how to react to Church Militant
  • The soft treatment of Fr Duverger
  • The enabling behaviour towards a major benefactor
 
There are always TWO problems: The Abuse; and The Coverup.

What is disgusting about the 2018 revelations is the discovery that bishops and Cardinals cover up for abusers because they have been sexually compromised themselves.

What is disgusting here is the cover up for rwasons which seem to be connected to money and a love of public approval.
 
Maximian said:
You may not like CM but give an example of them reporting something that wasn’t true
Click to expand...
I have done that so often over the year, I have no desire to throw more pearls. If you believe them, more power to you.
 
Ok you know the priests, so do I, but do you know the victims? Have you ever heard any of this from the victims? Because I sure have. I can’t speak for the entire article but I do know at least 5 of the cases to be 100% legitimate, they most definitely happened. The cases that I know about firsthand had been reported many times to the SSPX superiors over the course of YEARS, they did nothing. The SSPX had numerous opportunities to handle this themselves, they chose not to so. Honestly even if the article does have some bias to it that’s karma at this point, had they done the right thing and handled these situations the right way from the get go they would not be in the predicament that they are now being exposed in a “biased” article.
 
The fact that you are stating ‘victims’ is exactly what is wrong with this entire situation, why don’t you believe them? I’m sitting here telling you this is nothing new and has been going on for awhile, that at least 5 of these cases are confirmed but you still have the audacity to make it out like it isn’t true? As if they somehow got manipulated by being in a “vulnerable mental state” into doing this article? No. I spoke with one of the victims of one of the cases that I first was made aware of 8 years ago last night, her story in this article and the one told all those years ago completely match up, this poor individual is beside herself that still no one wants to hear the truth and instead is turning on her for promoting slander rather than coming to her with compassion. How have so many become so brainwashed to the extent that they are giving the benefit of the doubt to the abuser and not the victims? This is unbelievable.
 
Last edited:
StudentMI said:
I hate to say it, and I hope these comments don’t offend but I’ll risk it:

Homosexuality has always existed among men as far as we know. I myself, having same sex attraction, know how ingrained it is, and I’ve expressed my struggles many times in confession. One priest I knew, God rest his soul and to anyone who would claim he wasn’t orthodox in beliefs I’ll argue til I run out of breath, told me his own opinion that there have probably been saints who struggled with the same issue.

That said, I think the priesthood once it became strictly for single men always attracted those with same sex attraction. It also attracted many heterosexual men of course, but I think it was a natural option for many who struggled. Why else would Dante have written of monks and priests in the circle of sodomites? It’s always been an issue. Even an article I read from a far left magazine quoted a priest who gave a talk at the height of the sex abuse scandals who said if you think the abuse began in the 50s you’re dead wrong.

In closing, homosexuality has always existed, I believe many priests and religious in the past experienced those attractions, and I don’t think the abuse issue just suddenly appeared in the 50s.
Click to expand...
And add to that that homosexuality is not related to pedophilia which is a mental disorder. Some pedophiles are attracted to the same sex, opposite sex, or either sex.

Those are simply wrong who desire to blame gay men for the sex abuse crisis.
 
David55 said:
Again as I said: " Michael Voris is not the superior or judge of those clergy. God did not give him that role or right. - It is not for us to air the dirty laundry of the clergy for the world to see. There are proper channels for such things.
Click to expand...
I noticed in the article that they said they couldn’t say certain things because the police were still investigating. CM should have waited and let them complete all investigations and all sides heard before publishing this.
 
The problem is that, unlike heterosexual priests, homosexual priests can be attracted to each other and if this happens they can form emotional attachments which lead them to cover up each other’s failings. Example: priest A has a consensual relationship with priest B. Unfortunately priest B is not just homosexual but also an abuser. Priest B gets complained about and it happens that priest A is in a position to help him because he is now a bishop or advises the bishop.

You see how the cover up problem is magnified among homosexuals? That is why 80 percent of church abuse is homosexual, when in the secular world it is no more likely to be homosexual than heterosexual.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top