Techniques used by the Catholic League to suppress criticism of the Catholic Church
Editor’s note: The following has been adapted from Chapter 15 of N4CM Chairman Dr Stephen D Mumford’s seminal book, The Life and Death of NSSM 200: How the Destruction of Political Will Doomed a U.S. Population Policy (1996).
The Catholic League was founded in 1973 by Jesuit priest Virgil Blum. William Donohue assumed leadership in July 1993. Since then, the membership has grown from 27,000 to 200,000. According to Donohue, the League has “won the support of all of the U.S. Cardinals and many of the Bishops as well…We are here to defend the Church from the scurrilous assaults that have been mounted against it, and we definitely need the support of the hierarchy if we are to get the job done.” Thus it can be considered an arm of the Church. It supplements or replaces priest-controlled organizations of the past described by Paul Blanshard and George Seldes. The League apparently has a single mission: suppression of all mainstream criticism of the Roman Catholic Church.
According to Donohue, it is fortunate that, “the Catholic Church is there to provide a heady antidote to today’s mindless ideas of freedom.” He is a strong advocate of the Church’s positions on restriction of the freedoms guaranteed by the American Constitution and condemned by popes for nearly two centuries, especially those regarding the press and speech. He informs us that: “the Catholic League is there to defend the Church against its adversaries.”
There are many recognizable principles governing the behavior of the League. One is revealed in a vicious 1994 attack against the New London newspaper, The Day, for an editorial critical of the Catholic Church: “What is truly ‘beyond understanding’ is not the Catholic Church’s position, it is the fact that a secular newspaper has the audacity to stick it’s nose in where it doesn’t belong. It is nobody’s business what the Catholic Church does.”
A second basic premise is the League’s commitment to canon 1369 of the Code of Canon Law: “A person is to be punished with a just penalty, who, at a public event or assembly, or in a published writing, or by otherwise using the means of social communication, utters blasphemy, or gravely harms public morals, or rails at or excites hatred of or contempt for religion or the Church.” Canon law is the law of the Catholic Church. All criticism of the pope or the Church is in violation of this law in one way or another. This chapter will make clear that the League follows this canon to the letter and demands that all others conform—or pay the price for their violation.
Another principle is aggressive action. Says Donohue, “I defy anyone to name a single organization that has more rabid members than the Catholic League. Our members are generous, loyal and extremely active. When we ask them to sign petitions, write to offending parties and the like, they respond with a vigor that is unparalleled…We aim to win. Obviously, we don’t win them all, but our record of victories is impressive.” To justify this stance, he identifies with Patrick Buchanan’s resistance to the “Culture War” against the Catholic Church: “We didn’t start this culture war against the Catholic Church, we simply want to stop it.”
Donohue also justifies the League’s aggressive behavior by claiming that it is culturally unacceptable for nonCatholics to criticize the Catholic Church. “Perhaps the most cogent remark of the day,” he asserts, “came from the former Mayor of New York, Ed Koch, who politely remarked that his mother always advised him not to speak ill of other religions. It is a lesson that apparently few have learned….Non-Catholics would do well to follow the advice of Ed Koch’s mom and just give it a rest. Their crankiness is wearing thin.” This cultural norm is widely accepted in America, to the enormous benefit of the Vatican. What role, one wonders, did the Catholic Church play in its adoption? Certainly, in the case of population growth control, its consequence has been catastrophic.
The Catholic League strongly discourages criticism of the Church, especially attacks by the press. Says Donohue, “It does no good complaining about Catholic bashing if all we do is wait until the other side strikes.” Prevention of such publications is of the essence. Yet Donohue is convinced that this is not censorship: “The press and the radio talk shows asked me if the Catholic League was engaging in censorship by responding the way we did. As always, I informed them that only the government has the power to censor anything.” This is patently untrue.
Another tenet enunciated by Donohue:
“I think it is a gross mistake to give elevation to fringe groups. Our basic rule of thumb is this: the more mainstream the source of anti-Catholicism, the more likely it is that the Catholic League will respond….The mainstream media, after all, have the credibility and influence that the fringe lacks, and they are therefore much more likely to do real damage.”
“When major universities, TV networks and government officials engage in Catholic-baiting, it is a far more dangerous situation than the venom that emanates from certifiably fringe organizations.”
“When an establishment newspaper such as the Sun-Sentinel [Fort Lauderdale] offends, it cannot be ignored.”
Donohue goes on to explain the Sun-Sentinel example. On February 9, 1995, it ran an ad, paid for by a Seventh Day Adventist group, which claimed that the Catholic Church is seeking to create a New World Order to take command of the world and that the Pope and the Catholic Church were in a league with Satan.
“Accordingly, the Catholic League contacted the radio and television stations in the area, the opposition newspaper, and the nation’s major media outlets registering its outrage and its demands. We demanded nothing less than ‘an apology to Catholics and a pledge that no such ads will ever be accepted again.’ We added that ‘If this is not forthcoming, the Catholic League will launch a public ad campaign on its own, one that will directly target the Sun-Sentinel.’”
“What exactly did we have in mind? We were prepared to take out ads in the opposition newspaper, registering our charge of anti-Catholic bigotry. We were prepared to pay for radio spots making our charge. We were prepared to buy billboard space along the majority arteries surrounding the Fort Lauderdale community. Why not? After all, …we are in a position to make such threats….This is the way it works: if the source of bigotry wants to deal with lousy publicity, it can elect to do so. Or it can come to its senses and knock it off. In the event the anti-Catholic bigots want to bite the bullet and stay the course, we’ll do everything we can within the law to make sure that they pay a very high price for doing so.” It goes without saying that anyone critical of the Vatican, or the hierarchy, or the Roman Catholic Church is, by definition, an anti-Catholic bigot—including Catholics themselves.
One final element makes clear the objective of the Catholic League—protection of the papacy against all criticism. Writes Donohue, “It is the conviction of the Catholic League that an attack on the Church is an attack on Catholics.” He offers no rationale to support this theory. Obviously, millions of liberal American Catholics would disagree outright, for it is they who have been attacking the Church.
“Throughout American history, the job of combating anti-Catholicism fell to the clergy, and especially to the Archbishops. But times have changed….The type of anti-Catholicism that exists in American society today is fundamentally different from the genre that marked this country’s history from the outset. From colonial times to the election of John F. Kennedy as President of the United States, anti-Catholicism was vented against both individual Catholics and against the Catholic Church itself. But over the past 30 years, it has become evident that most of the Catholic-bashing centers on the institution of the Church…”
The hierarchy cannot be effective against criticism of the institution because they are the institution. Thus, the hierarchy has had to call on the laity to protect the institution in this way. In 1971, the League’s founder pointed out, “If a group is to be politically effective, issues rather than institutions must be at stake.” In other words, the laity, if left to their own devices, will not defend the institution but they will defend their interests as individuals. Hence, the League has adopted this principle and has convinced its members that “an attack on the Church is an attack on Catholics.” In this way, the institution is successfully using individual lay Catholics to shield it from all criticism.
The Church and Its Image
The Catholic Church in America has good reason to be intensely concerned about its image and any criticism. Donohue cites a 1995 study, “Taking America’s Pulse,” undertaken by the National Conference (formerly known as the National Conference of Christians and Jews). Despite the almost complete suppression of all criticism of the Catholic Church in America, a majority of non-Catholic Americans (55%) believe that Catholics “want to impose their own ideas of morality on the larger society.” The survey also found that 38% of non-Catholics believe that Catholics are “narrow-minded because they are too much controlled by their Church.” Obviously, there is a highly receptive audience in this country for any justified criticisms of the Catholic Church. If the floodgates ever opened, it is unlikely that the Church would be able to close them again. Only too well understood by the hierarchy, and the Catholic League, this perhaps explains their unmitigated intolerance for criticism.
Methods of the League
Donohue has cited many of the methods used by the League, including some we have already mentioned. “We specialize in public embarrassment of public figures who have earned our wrath and that is why we are able to win so many battles: no person or organization wants to be publicly embarrassed, and that is why we specialize in doing exactly that…” Elsewhere he writes, “The threat of a lawsuit is the only language that some people understand. The specter of public humiliation is another weapon that must be used. Petitions and boycotts are helpful. The use of the bully pulpit—via the airwaves—is a most effective strategy. Press conferences can be used to enlighten or, alternatively, to embarrass.” “Ads taken out in prominent national newspapers are quite effective.”
But probably the most effective means of suppressing criticism of the Catholic Church through the press is a constant “in your face” attack of local newspapers. In a 1995 report on the Massachusetts Chapter of the Catholic League, it is noted that the president and the executive director had been on the attack, “appearing in the media more than 600 times” in the previous five years. In a single state, 600 times in five years! It is no wonder that newspapers in Massachusetts are very reluctant to print any criticism of the Catholic Church, no matter how justified, given this constant barrage of punishment.
Intimidation of the media leadership and of our government by the League is achieved through the wide distribution of frequent news releases, its monthly newsletter and an annual report. Individual attacks are often announced through widely distributed press releases which are bound to capture the attention of members of the press.
Success of the League
The Catholic League has been remarkably successful in achieving its goals. Donohue rightfully gloats: “One of the major reasons why people are giving [donations] is the success the Catholic League has had.” As noted earlier, membership grew from 27,000 to 200,000 in the first two years after Donohue took control. He continues, “We have had a string of victories and we have also had an unprecedented degree of media coverage. We don’t win every fight but our overall record is quite good. Our presence on radio and TV, combined with coverage in newspapers and magazines—both religious and secular—is excellent.” “We’ve been featured on the television program ‘Entertainment Tonight’ and received front page coverage from national newspapers including the Wall Street Journal and The New York Times.” The number of apologies and promises it extracts from the nation’s newspapers, TV networks and stations and programs, radio stations, activist organizations, commercial establishments, educational institutions and governments is most impressive.
The suppression of all criticism of the Catholic Church and its hierarchy is the goal of the Catholic League. The visit of the pope to the U.S. in October 1995 was a major media event. Given all the gravely serious problems faced by the Church and the enormous amount of dissent by American Catholics, as well as the growing hostility from non-Catholics as a result of the Church’s interference in American policy making, one would expect wide coverage of these realities in the media during his visit. Instead, it was treated as a triumphant return.
The Catholic League believes that it played a major role in this great public relations success—and with good reason. In August 1994, it launched a campaign to intimidate the press in an astounding advance warning to media professionals preparing for the pope’s visit to New York in late October. A letter signed by Donohue announced a press conference to be held just prior to the pope’s visit that will present “10′s of thousands of petitions from active Catholics” that have been collected over the past year. What else but intimidation of the press is the intent of this campaign?
The November 1995 issue of the League’s journal, Catalyst, is headlined, “Media Treat Pope Fairly; Protesters Fail to Score.” Donohue writes, “By all accounts, the visit of Pope John Paul II to the United States was a smashing success. Media treatment of the papal visit was, with few exceptions, very fair. Protesters were few in number and without impact. From beginning to end, this papal visit proved to be the most triumphant of them all.” A month later he writes, “The relatively few cheap shots that were taken at the Pope by the media in October is testimony to a change in the culture.” And of course the desired “change in the culture” is the elimination of criticism of the pope and his hierarchy. The Catholic League is succeeding on a grand scale far beyond what all but a handful of Americans realize.
Intimidation Prevents Criticism
It is clear from Donohue’s own words that prevention of any criticism is the goal of the League and that intimidation is its means of achieving this end. In a fund-raising letter mailed in December of 1995, Donohue appeals for funds to hire more staff: “We could have done more….We could have tackled other issues, thereby adding to the number of people who will think twice before crossing Catholics again.” From the League’s 1995 Annual Report: “It is hoped that by …[attacking critics], potential offenders will think twice before launching their assaults on Roman Catholicism.” This statement also makes it clear that it is the protection of the institution that is the goal, not protection of individual Catholics.
It appears that the most aggressive and extensive attack in League history was one directed at Disney for its release of the movie, “Priest.” In an editorial, Donohue forthrightly says that the purpose of the intensive attack on Disney is the prevention of the production of such critical movies in the future: “Our sights were set on what might be coming down the road, not on what had already happened.”
The advice given by Ed Koch’s mother—do not speak ill of other religions—has been a national ethic for nearly all of this century. This ethic, inherent in our culture, has served to suppress nearly all criticism of the Catholic Church. As a result, until its political activities were unveiled with the implementation of the bishops’ Pastoral Plan for Pro-life Activities in 1975, the Church had been relatively immune from mainstream criticism. Because this ethic has served the Catholic Church so well, the Church may very well have played a major role in its inculcation into our culture. With its political activity becoming increasingly evident, critics are more than ever convinced of the need for public criticism of the Catholic Church.
However, this ethic does not protect the Church from dissent within its confines which has been growing since Vatican Council II in the 1960s, and most remarkably in recent years. The American media, to avoid flying in the face of American culture by ignoring this dearly held belief, have occasionally provided a forum for this protest. The dissenters have been a significant source of criticism. The Catholic League has not overlooked this problem—indeed, it takes it very seriously. All criticism is targeted from whatever source, including members of the Church.
For example, on January 22, 1995, CBS’s “60 Minutes” broadcast a segment by Mike Wallace on the Catholic dissident group Call to Action. The Catholic hierarchy did agree to appear but dictated terms that were unacceptable to CBS. Then, according to Donohue, the Catholic League sent two letters to executive producer Barry Lando and issued the following press release on January 25:
“The entire Call to Action segment was, from beginning to end, an exercise in intellectual dishonesty and journalistic malpractice. The decision to give high profile to the Catholic Church’s radical fringe was pure politics, and nothing short of outrageous….Allowing extremists an uncontested opportunity to rail against the Catholic Church distorts the sentiments of most Catholics and provides succor for bigots. There is a difference between reporting dissent, and promoting it….‘60 Minutes’ made clear its preference, extending to the disaffected a platform that they have never earned within the Catholic community….This is propaganda at work, not journalism.”
This press release, of course, was received across America as a powerful warning to others to steer clear of Catholic dissidents. The Catholic League then launched a national postcard mailing campaign directed at Lando personally: “…we are angered over the way you continue to present the Catholic Church….We are tired of having our Church viewed from the perspective of the disaffected.”
In another example, the League attacked the October 5, 1995 edition of “NBC Nightly News” with Tom Brokaw for providing a platform for Catholics for a Free Choice and Dignity. The League’s press release included the following:
“The media do a great disservice to Catholics and non-Catholics alike when Catholics for a Free Choice and Dignity are presented as though they were genuine voices in the Catholic community. The effect of such misrepresentation is to promote dissent rather than to record it. As such, it is irresponsible for the media to allow itself to become willing accomplices to public deception.”
The continuous intimidation is bound to have its desired effect. The April 22, 1996 issue of the New Republic magazine criticizes the League’s annual report as indicative of the League’s “paranoia.” The New Republic completely misses the point. One need only look at the language used in the League’s attacks. It is not defense. It is intimidating language. The report is an offensive weapon used to silence critics of the Catholic Church.
The Catholic League focuses it attention on five types of institutions: media, activist organizations, commercial establishments, educational institutions and governments. Donohue attributes the League’s success, in part, to its ability to stay focused. The League’s 1994 and 1995 annual reports alone offer 350 examples of League attacks.
As one surveys its material, it becomes evident that all criticism of the Church or anything that places the Church in a negative light is deemed anti-Catholic, despicable and impermissible. The Church is simply above all criticism. The Catholic League obviously rejects America because it rejects what America stands for, including the freedoms of speech, expression and the press. This stand taken by the Catholic League is consistent with nearly two centuries of Catholic teaching on these matters and we should expect nothing different.
Intimidation by Catholic institutions over the past hundred years, has resulted in a populace woefully ignorant of the threat to American democracy and security posed by the Church. This intimidation has made it possible for the Church to go unchallenged.
Dr Stephen D Mumford is the founder and president of the North Carolina-based The Center for Research on Population and Security. His principal research interest is the relationship between world population growth and national and global security. This interest, pursued for over four decades, first developed during a tour of military duty in Asia, where he first recognized the linkage between political stability and population pressures. He obtained his master’s in public health and his doctorate in population studies from the University of Texas. Using church policy documents and writings of the Vatican elite, Dr Mumford has introduced research showing the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church as the principal power behind efforts to block the availability of contraceptive services worldwide.
End Of The Catholic League?: Conservative Host Interviews, Decimates Bill Donohue
That was October 2004. By January, 2005, “Crossfire” was fired. Canceled. Kaput. Gone. Dead. In large part because of Stewart.
This week, Catholic League president Bill Donohue penned a disgusting statement in response to the terrorists who slaughtered 12 people in Paris, mostly members of the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo. In his commentary, Donohue blamed the editor-in-chief, for his own death.
NCRM attacked Donohue for the gross and ugly attack, as did several others.
Yesterday, Donohue was interviewed by longtime conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt. For those unfamiliar with him, he is a law professor at the same school as the Chairman of the National Organization For Marriage, and has frequently had NOM Chair John Eastman on his show. Hewitt is a very conservative Roman Catholic, and has a strong social media following.
Donohue no doubt assumed he was walking into friendly territory.
He was not.
“Bill, I’ve often agreed with you over the years, because like you, I’m an orthodox Catholic, went to confession on Saturday, Mass on Saturday night,” Hewitt, about a minute into the interview, told Donohue. “I don’t believe, except maybe perhaps vis-à-vis Dennis Prager, I’ve committed any mortal sins in the interim, so I think I’m in good standing with the Church right now. And I have to say I’m appalled, and I’m embarrassed, and I’m urging you to rethink this.”
And then it really went south.
“You blamed the victim before their bodies were cold,” Hewitt accused. “Everyone listening to this show believes that you are blaming the victim before their bodies were cold. It’s deeply embarrassing to me as a Catholic.”
Hewitt also accused Donohue of being a “bully,” of “lying,” of being an “embarrassment” to Catholics. He said Donohue’s comments on the attack on Charlie Hebdo are a “scandal on the church.”
The entire 23-minute audio is below. You may think you won’t listen to it all, but you will. It’s like a train wreck, a car wreck – you can’t help but listen because it’s just so bad, for Donohue.
Is this the end of the Catholic League? No. But it’s likely the beginning of the end.
Just as when a better journalist, Jon Stewart, destroyed “Crossfire,” the better Catholic, Hewitt, has destroyed the Catholic League. He has exposed it as very un-Catholic, un-Christian, and nothing more than a money-making charade. And it’s about time.
Lies, Damn Lies, and Catholic Church Funded Statistics Part II
It was encouraging to learn today that German researchers working with catholic officials to produce the latest, supposedly independent, supposedly research based support for Vatican lies about endemic child rape by catholic religious have had enough and pulled the plug on the project.
The German Bishops’ Conference confirmed that it has ended cooperation with the Criminological Research Institute of Lower Saxony (KFN) which had been investigating sexual abuse cases committed by employees of the Catholic Church, citing the lack of trust.
“The relationship of mutual trust between the bishops and the head of the institute has been destroyed,” the Bishop of Trier, Stephan Ackermann, explained on Wednesday morning, saying that constructive cooperation had become impossible.
“Trust is vital for such an extensive project dealing with such a sensitive issue.”
In an interview with public broadcaster “Deutschlandfunk,” Christian Pfeiffer, the head of the KFN institute accused Church officials of hampering his team’s research efforts by continually attempting to intervene in and control the investigation. In an interview with the Süddeutsche Zeitung newspaper he spoke of censorship.
In 2011, the German Bishops’ Conference had authorized the KFN to launch an investigation into sexual abuse cases. This followed reports of abuse at several Catholic schools across Germany, claiming that children had repeatedly been abused.
The team of experts around Christian Pfeiffer consisted of retired prosecutors and judges and was allowed access to personnel records on Church employees going back more than a decade.
The investigation was to determine how such abuses came about, how the Church had dealt with them in the past, and what conclusions could be drawn to prevent new cases.
This followed a spate of allegations in 2010 of abuse of children by priests and other Church employees and the subsequent criticism of the Church’s slow response.
The Catholic Church officially apologized to the victims in March of 2010, and offered victims 5,000 euros ($6,546) each in compensation. During a visit to Germany, Pope Benedict XVI – who was the Cardinal of Munich from 1977 to 1982 – met with victims of abuse as a step towards reconciliation.
Only recently German bishops were crowing about a new self study posing as proper research, whose methodology sounded frighteningly similar to the seriously flawed and misleading John Jay study from the US. I searched fruitlessly for additional details about this German study, or even a copy of the research itself, but there was nothing to be found beyond a media release.
Know we know why.
Sticking to the successful Vatican mind games as trialled on the largely unsuspecting US public, parishoners and politicians, German bishops were clearly intending to buy and then exploit another expensive work of deception to smear and undermine victims and those telling the truth about this important issue.
Unfortunately the German researchers the bishops hoped to buy, the Criminological Research Institute of Lower Saxony (KFN), were either smarter or have more professional integrity than the John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York.
Or perhaps they simply have more humanity.
After all we are talking about prostituting their ability and expertise to protect dangerous, sanctimonious criminals who consider themselves entitled to rape and sexually exploit as many defenceless children as they can get their grubby hands on. At the same time protecting the equally abhorrent criminals who enable and coverup these crimes.
It is entirely possible that bishops misled both the John Jay College and the KFN about their intentions for the work they were commissioning. Catholic bishops find it almost impossible to speak directly or clearly, or to be honest about what they are really up to. They cannot be up front on any topic, far less one as threatening to what is most dear to them – their own careers, and the power, wealth and influence of the institutional church – as the child rape epidemic they can no longer hide.
Avoiding nasty details, sticking to inspiring sounding cliches which are the opposite of reality, impenetrable vagueness, circular reasoning, euphemisms and mental reservation are all so ingrained that most bishops would struggle to communicate clearly if their life depended upon it.
Their stock in trade is saying a lot, while conveying little, and committing to nothing.
Except when blaming others or listing where others have gone wrong and how everything will be so much better if only everyone would blindly obey instructions from the pope and bishops.
It is entirely possible that, when commissioning this work, the bishops claimed they would be completely open and transparent. That they did not intend to hold anything back or hide any details. That they would “co-operate fully”, a favourite claim. And that they were truly interested in finding out the truth and would not try to manipulate or edit the final report to produce a desired result.
If they did claim any of these things, and they have made these claims so often in relation to law enforcement, judicial inquiries, and court proceedings, then, as has happened consistently in all those situations, they lied.
But inevitably, whether misled, naive, or somewhat complicit, at some stage the researchers, both in the US and Germany, would have realised just how little the bishops meant any claims to reveal all details or to want truth, instead of support for their excuses and distractions.
The John Jay College produced not one but two reports based on flawed and incomplete data, which have been consistently misused as representing incidence of abuse. That misrepresentation has been allowed to spread widely, uncorrected, leading the more outrageous apologists, and even bishops, to claim that catholic churches are the safest places around for children. Nothing could be further from the truth.
The second report, based on the same data as the first report, took full flight into cloud cuckoo land. It blamed the Woodstock generation for a sudden flowering of abuse, despite the fact child rape has actually been rampant in the catholic church for two millennia. This report also claimed there is no discernible difference between abuser priests and non abuser priests, despite the significant and deliberate underreporting of known abuse by bishops trying to coverup the problem. There was no difference between abuser and non abuser populations because so many abusers were included in the reportedly non abuser population. The second report also arbitrarily diverged from the official, widely used definition of paedophilia, lowering the age range significantly in order to claim the majority of priests were not in fact paedophiles. And perhaps the most dangerous fiction of all was that the abuse is all in the past, based on a tapering off of reports in recent years. This claim directly contradicts the original report, which noted that only a minority of abuse is reported within a short time frame, and the majority of victims take decades to report, making it impossible to draw reliable conclusions about current abuse rates at this time.
Clearly the German bishops have finally revealed enough of their deception and their dangerously evil intentions that the German researchers have decided they cannot be a party to the report the bishops wish to buy.
It is common practice for research to be commissioned by commercial interests specifically in order to mislead. To give them an advantage against competing messages. Bias, in all its forms, can be used to frame questions that deliver required responses, and data can be carefully selected to exclude information that does not meet the client’s needs. Biased research can usually be easily spotted based on its methodology. But we must assume the bishops went further than just bias.
That they wanted KFN to put the appearance of truth on lies.
Lies that subvert efforts to improve child protection. Lies that keep child rapists out of jail and free to re-offend.
It seems that the researchers at KFN, unlike those at John Jay College, are not prepared to prostitute themselves for the church’s thirty pieces of silver.
Not when children’s safety is at stake.
I sincerely hope Australia’s Royal Commissioners, when appointed, read about this sorry episode.
So they can know what they are up against in the search for the truth of this issue.
Just Like in Hunger Games, the Church is killing our children
The catholic church, when faced with the choice of protecting itself or preventing children from being raped, has consistently chosen to sacrifice the children.
Usually without a second thought.
This is not a claim without evidence.
There is ample proof.
In recent years there have been official, properly investigated judicial reports proving this to be the case in diocese after diocese, country after country.
And when innocent children dare to speak out about the atrocities inflicted on them by the unquestionably “holy” representatives of this most “compassionate” church, how are they treated?
In the most abhorrently vicious manner possible.
In the manner most likely to exponentially compound their distress and their harm.
In the manner chosen specifically to bully them into silence.
There is even a church law which expressly forbids them or anyone else ever saying anything publicly about what happened to them.
Too bad if speaking out and acknowledging the harm done to them is necessary to their recovery.
In fact, everything the catholic church imposes on victims of their carefully protected rapist colleagues could have been calculated to harm us, to deny us healing and recovery, to silence us and to drive us to an early grave.
Australia’s highest ranking church official gloats in private about “getting rid” of victims, while publicly pretending to be “doing everything possible” to help us.
It is no surprise to survivors of the Church of Child Rape that the numbers of innocent children who could not stand both their original abuse and the constant re-abuse by church officials are horrifyingly high. If this matter were ever properly investigated by more than a single police detective in one small area of one state, we all know the numbers of children killed by the catholic church would not stop at dozens. It would not stop at hundreds.
The catholic church hierarchy are happy when child sexual abuse victims put an end to our worthless lives.
This is the perfect solution for them.
The evidence is buried with our abused bodies, and everyone scratches their head over what could have caused such a senseless waste of a valuable human life and its boundless potential.
But now a Victorian police detective has unearthed details of at least 40 suicides from a handful of rapist priests, with just two of them responsible for more than 20 deaths.
I’ll tell you what caused the death of those 40 innocents, and the countless others who have been successfully covered up.
The catholic church killed them.
And the Victorian Government is currently considering a clear recommendation from their own inquiry which makes it perfectly clear that the only reasonable, humane, just, civilised thing to do would be to properly investigate the cause of these deaths, and the treatment of all victims of child sexual abuse by this most self serving organisation.
To not hold a Royal Commission is to say, we care about kids who die from drowning (around 50 per year nationally), we care about kids who die from traffic accidents (more people die from suicide than from traffic accidents each year, and most of them are kids or young adults), but we could not give a damn about child sexual abuse victims, because that would involve uncovering some very unpalatable truths about a very powerful and wealthy organisation which pulls the strings on most political puppets in Australia.
So Premier Baillieu and Attorney General Clark, are you human beings or puppets of the Church of Child Rape?
CLERGY SEX ABUSE TRANSPARENCY ACCORDING TO CARDINAL GEORGE
January 20, 2014
The leadership of the Archdiocese of Chicago has a mediocre to poor track record in responding to reports of clergy sexual abuse and their honesty with the public. Cardinal George’s recent statement to the archdiocese (January 12, 2014 in The Catholic New World) does nothing to change this pattern. This statement was issued to prepare the archdiocese for the release of the files of thirty priests confirmed as sexual abusers. His statement is defensive, misleading and insulting in addition to the fact that it does not reflect the reality of the key issues. A significant part of the statement is devoted to the defense of his mishandling of the Dan McCormack case. The McCormack files are not among those released!
In 1982 the parents of a minor boy reported that former Fr. Bob Mayer had sexually abused their teenaged son. This was under Cardinal Cody’s watch. They reported the abuse to the archdiocese and in return were intimidated and even threatened with excommunication by the chancellor at the time, Fr. J. Richard Keating, who later became the bishop of Arlington VA. In 1988 they finally settled for a measly $10,000.00 that didn’t even cover their legal costs. The boy’s mother was not about to succumb to the scare tactics nor was she buying any of the dishonest mumbo-jumbo served up as excuses for their deliberate neglect. She went on to found the Linkup which quickly became one of the two most influential victim support organizations in the world.
Knowing about Mayer’s track record Cardinal Bernardin who had by then succeeded Cardinal Cody, gave him two more assignments as a parish associate and in 1990 made him pastor of a parish in Berwyn IL. During this period the archdiocese received other allegations and ordered Mayer not to be alone with anyone under 21. The infinite wisdom of the archdiocese in imposing this restriction was apparently not infinite enough.
In 1991 Mayer was charged with sexual abuse of a minor girl. When confronted by the angry parishioners, the auxiliary bishop dispatched to deal with the incident lied to them about Mayer’s background. In 1992 Mayer was sentenced to three years in prison. He has since been laicized.
Cardinal Bernardin died in 1996 and Cardinal George replaced him in April 1997. He was ordained bishop in 1990 and served first as bishop of Yakima WA and then as archbishop of Portland OR. Both Portland and Yakima had their share of sexual abuse problems during George’s time. Equally important, he was a member of the U.S. bishops Conference during the years they started to at least talk about clerical sexual abuse. During those years George and his fellow bishops received numerous documents from the conference headquarters that provided detailed information about clergy sexual abuse and the serious risks it posed the Church. He was also present, at least presumably, when a variety of outside experts addressed the assembled bishops on the very serious nature of sexual abuse of children. These included Fr. Canice Connors, at the time President of St. Luke Institute; Dr. Fred Berlin, Johns Hopkins University, on diagnostic concepts, treatment and ethical considerations; Dr. Frank Valcour, psychiatrist at St. Luke Institute on expectations of treatment; Bishop Harry Flynn on care of victims; Jesuit psychiatrist James Gill on priests, sex and power and Fr. Steve Rossetti on the parish as victim. During this period Pope John Paul II addressed his first public communication of clergy sex abuse to the U.S. bishops and that same year, 1993, the bishops established their first committee to deal with the problem. The claim voiced by the Cardinal and his auxiliary, Francis Kane, that “had they known then what they know now they would have handled the allegations differently,”has become a mantra for bishops when they are confronted with their disastrous actions. It’s also so worn out that one would think the conference spin-doctors would come up with a fresh excuse.
If Cardinal George read any of the numerous documents sent by the conference and if he was awake for even part of the lectures given at their annual meetings he would certainly have known the serious nature of clergy sexual abuse. So what is it they did not know “then” that they know now? It’s fairly obvious.
They did not know that their duplicitous defenses and paper-thin excuses would gain them no traction. They did not know that the deference and unquestioned credibility they had taken for granted had eroded. They didn’t know that the victims and their attorneys would not be intimidated or put off by the endless legal delaying tactics. In short, they didn’t know they’d be caught! That’s what they didn’t know then that they surely know now.
The Cardinal has apparently not learned that the excuses from the bishops’ playbook have gone moldy. He invokes clericalism but applies it to the offending priests, claiming that it causes them to try to avoid accountability for their actions. That’s not clericalism, its just plain fear. The cardinal is smart enough to know that the truly egregious examples of clericalism are not provided by the perpetrating priests but by the arrogant bishops and cardinals who insist they are above accountability and entitled to twist the truth to suit their own purposes.
The next excuse, deemed not only historically and sociologically invalid, but actually ludicrous, is borrowed from the second John Jay Report. He tries to shift the blame to the social and cultural trends of the seventies and eighties as if these trends cause sexual dysfunction or hierarchical arrogance.
The Cardinal’s statement really breaks down and falls apart when he gets to his version of the Dan McCormack story. He claims the plaintiff’s attorneys “fashioned” the story and distorted facts that would “mitigate the charge of archdiocesan neglect.” The lawyers didn’t have to do anything to demonstrate archdiocesan, i.e., the Cardinal’s negligence. His documented actions do a sufficient job of doing that without any outside help.
McCormack was first arrested in September 2005. It’s true that the police questioned him but what the cardinal does not tell his readers is that his priest-personnel representative, who was called by McCormack from the police station, was also a civil attorney who told McCormack not to cooperate with the police investigators. He was released but if his ministry was restricted and if he was put under monitoring, this existed only in the Cardinal’s imagination.
The archdiocesan review board eventually received the results of the internal investigation, which came up with sufficient information to allow the board to make a solid recommendation to the Cardinal that McCormack be removed from the parish for the protection of children and not be put back in pastoral ministry. The Cardinal says, “no one involved in investigating the allegation, not even the review board that struggled with their justified concerns, told me they thought he was guilty.” This is nonsense. It was no one’s job to assess guilt or innocence especially the review board. The sole issue was suitability for pastoral ministry and probability that the allegation was true. On that the board members were clear. Guilt or innocence would be determined later.
Against the review board’s urging Cardinal George retained McCormack as pastor. He also kept him on as a regional dean. On January 20, 2006, he was again arrested and it was determined that more children were harmed, primarily because of Cardinal George’s arrogance and willful negligence.
On January 28, 2006 the review board sent the Cardinal a letter. Portions of it tell the real story. “The media statements that the board was unable to reach a decision because they did not have access to the alleged victim or his mother (Sun Times, January 25, 2006), and ‘after the family made the accusation in August, the Archdiocese’s Office of Professional responsibility referred the allegation to the Independent Review Board (Tribune, January 24, 2006), imply that we as a board chose not to act. Clearly this is not the case.”
Contrary to what the Cardinal would like people to believe, the review board made clear recommendations: “These included removing Rev. McCormack from St. Agatha’s and suspending him from ministry pending further criminal investigation.”
The board presented their recommendation to the Cardinal on October 17, 2005. Instead of heeding them he returned McCormack to his pastorate. When questioned about his action at the time of McCormack’s second arrest the Cardinal and the archdiocesan spokesperson came up with a convoluted and obviously misleading story that tried to spread the blame to the archdiocesan process, misunderstandings about national policies and canon law and finally lack of information. In a 2013 deposition he said, concerning the review board, “They gave me that advice, yes, I thought they had not finished the case investigation.” All pure nonsense. The review board’s letter tells what really happened: “Our recommendations were presented to you on October 17, 2005….You chose not to act on them, and now we have a situation that reflects very poorly, and unfairly, on the board.” As to George’s excuse that he thought the investigation was incomplete, the review board saw it much differently: “We resent the media implication that the Professional Review Board did not find Rev. Daniel McCormack to be a threat to the safety of children. These reports do not accurately reflect the situation, and we take offense at the lack of truth telling.”
In the second to last paragraph the Cardinal claims that the money for the multi-million dollars in settlements came from revenue “entirely separate from regular donations or investments.” He then says that the sale of unused properties has provided funds for the settlements. Where exactly does he think the money came from to buy the properties?
Attorney Jeff Anderson knows the detailed history of the Chicago archdiocese’s response better than anyone else. His summary of why things happened the way they did applies to Cardinal George and his predecessors: We see this as a long-standing pattern of top officials of the archdiocese making conscious choices to protect their reputation and to protect the offenders,” he said. “That means conscious choices were made to imperil the children over the years.”
It goes without saying that the Cardinal and the archdiocese would have been much better served had he said nothing. But he didn’t remain silent. The McCormack fiasco was not the result of confusing or bungled procedures, incomplete information. It was the result of the Cardinal’s arrogance, his over-riding concern for his and the Church’s image and worst of all, his disdain for the victims. The attitude that underlies the Cardinal’s statement is not unique to him. This attitude, painfully evident wherever clergy sexual abuse has been reported throughout the Church, shows that the bishops in general have a long, long way to go before their actions began to match up with their promises.
Thousands Abused in Church Institutions, Dutch Report Says
From the link: http://reform-network.net/?p=14008
By ALAN COWELL
Published: December 16, 2011
LONDON — As the repercussions of sexual abuse scandals continue to shake the Roman Catholic Church in Europe and the United States, a report on Friday by an official commission in the Netherlands said church officials had “failed to adequately deal with” with abuse affecting as many as 20,000 Dutch children in Catholic institutions, according to news reports.
The findings showed what some analysts said was one of the highest levels of abuse in a continent that has been forced to confront a steady stream of public disclosures about the behavior priests and church workers toward minors, maintaining pressure on the Vatican. It also said the church’s response to the victims in the Netherlands was not designed to help them but to “prevent scandals.”
The report said the commission had received some 1,800 reports of abuse at Catholic schools, seminaries and orphanages, accusing the church of a “failure of oversight.” The commission then conducted a broader survey, finding that, between 1945 and 1981, between 10,000 and 20,000 children were sexually abused in church institutions, with offenses ranging from inappropriate touching to “several thousand” cases of rape.
The commission identified some 800 clergy and lay church workers named in complaints. Of them, 105 were still alive, but their status within the church was not clear.
The charges offered more testimony to the disturbing imagery of priestly abuse that have spread in recent years across Europe from Belgium to Ireland and Austria as well as in Canada and the United States, forcing Pope Benedict XVI to apologize to victims whose traumas were often hidden by church cover-ups.
Wim Deetman, a Protestant former education minister who led the commission, said the report showed that the extent of abuse could longer be denied. “The idea that people did not know it and administrators did not know it cannot be maintained,” he said, according to Reuters.
The latest accusations came just days after The Irish Times newspaper said the former archbishop of Dublin, John Charles McQuaid — widely regarded as the most powerful Catholic prelate in modern Irish history — stands accused of serial child sexual abuse before his death in 1973.
In March 2010, Pope Benedict apologized directly to victims and their families in Ireland, expressing ’”shame and remorse” for “sinful and criminal’” acts committed by members of the clergy.
Last July, a report by the Irish government said the Roman Catholic Church in Ireland was covering up the sexual abuse of children by priests as recently as 2009, long after it issued guidelines meant to protect children. That report accused the Vatican of tacitly encouraging the cover-up.
At the same time, Germany’s Roman Catholic bishops took new steps to bring previously unreported abuse to light, saying they would allow outside investigators to look for abuse cases in diocesan personnel records dating back at least 10 years, and in some cases all the way to 1945, though there were indications that some crucial records may have already been destroyed.
Record numbers of Catholics left the church in Germany in 2010 after hundreds of cases of previously unreported child abuse came to light, including a case of a priest with a history of molesting boys who was returned to pastoral duties by the archbishop of Munich, Joseph Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict. The priest was later convicted of molesting more boys.
In September, human rights lawyers and victims of clergy sexual abuse filed a complaint in the United States urging the International Criminal Court in The Hague to investigate and prosecute Pope Benedict and three top Vatican officials for crimes against humanity for what they described as abetting and covering up the rape and sexual assault of children by priests.
The formal filing of nearly 80 pages by two American advocacy groups, the Center for Constitutional Rights and the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests, was the most substantive effort yet to hold the pope and the Vatican accountable in an international court for sexual abuse by priests.
The latest report in the Netherlands said that, based on a survey of more than 34,000 people, 10 percent of Dutch children had suffered from some form of abuse. The proportion doubled to 20 percent among children who had spent some of their youth in institutions, irrespective of their affiliation, The Associated Press reported.
The commission was established by the government in 2010 to probe accusations of abuse since 1945, following incidents at one cloister that inspired a series of allegations of priestly abuse at other institutions.
Last month, the Dutch branch of the Roman Catholic Church announced a system to compensate victims with payments of up to $138,000.
Almost one third of the Netherlands’ 16 million people profess Catholicism, making their faith the largest in the country, according to the country’s official statistics for 2008.
More Damning Evidence Vatican Couldn’t Give A Damn About Kids’ Safety
The Netherlands has recently been added to the growing list of countries or local authorities to have conducted official investigations into the catholic church’s cover up of widespread child rape. Just like those in the US and Ireland, Dutch authorities found the actions, or lack of action, by bishops and other church officials disgracefully lacking in ignoring the rights of children not to be raped, and considering only the avoidance of scandal. Just like everywhere else in the world they have a presence, the catholic church in The Netherlands repeatedly and knowingly exposed new children to known rapists in order to protect the interests of the church, with not a moment’s thought for the safety of those children or the devastating effect of such crimes on their entire lives.
In fact, if it were not the obscenely powerful and corruptly influential catholic church being investigated, there is little doubt the words criminal conspiracy would have been used. If we can ignore the threats of retribution from the bullies of the catholic hierarchy for one moment and be perfectly honest, there really is no other way to accurately describe what is going on in front of everyone’s eyes, but which few, even today, are brave enough to correctly label.
What else do you call a consistent worldwide policy to continue to sacrifice many thousands of additional children to the church’s known sexual predators in priests clothing, in order to protect the wealth and influence of the universal church, and the careers and reputations of child sex criminals and those who protect them?
The infallible Vatican denies there is such a policy, but then for many years they also emphatically denied their priests were raping children, despite certain knowledge at the time that the problem was serious, widespread and ongoing.
So any Vatican statements on this subject are hardly trustworthy. As this latest report confirms in common with all previous reports, without hard factual evidence to back them up, Vatican pronouncements about what was, is or is not being done to protect children from their own colleagues cannot be taken as anything other than the latest excuse or diversion. Or in other words, lies.
In fact the Vatican only ceased denying there were rapists preying on children using their status and respect as catholic religious to access victims and avoid discovery, when the volume of evidence that they were lying about this issue was simply too significant to dismiss any longer.
Only one significant internal document has so far managed to escape the veil of deception that the Vatican drapes over their attempts to deal with serious crimes against children in house and in secret. Crimen sollicitationis has provoked many arguments about what it does or does not prove regarding official Vatican policy in dealing with child sex crimes. This organisation has had two millenia of practice in protecting their own interests and wealth, and are not in the habit of making the rookie mistake of being open and honest about their naked self interest. At least not in writing.
But it is simply impossible to deny that crimen sollicitationis proves that telling the truth, by revealing that priests rape children, is treated far more seriously and punished much more severely than the actual child rapes themselves.
Crimen sollicitationis also reveals part of the Vatican policy of re-abuse of victims. Victims are threatened with excommunication if they speak about their abuse. Any trauma recovery specialist can confirm that victims of child sexual abuse remain trapped in a self destructive spiral unless they can face and deal with the crimes committed against them by those they had every right to expect to protect and nurture them. Being bullied into silence by revered authority figures threatening the ultimate punishment, and forcing them to live a lie, condemns innocent victims to self harm in one or more of its many forms, a lifetime of additional suffering, and in far too many cases, direct or indirect suicide.
Unfortunately in Australia there is no political will or moral courage to examine evidence of the catholic church’s crimes against children and their coverup. Or to implement desperately needed changes to protect any more children from being sacrificed by the catholic church or other corrupt and self self serving organisations. Despite barely a handful of brave individuals prepared to fight for our children’s rights to be safe from rape by authority figures, the vast majority of Australian politicians and lawmakers are simply too afraid of the power and influence of the aggressively deceitful local church leaders.
With more than 30 known suicides of victims of just two of the Australian catholic church’s hundreds of expensively protected child rapists, the Victorian Attorney General is nonetheless delaying, with a view to avoiding having to act, calls for a royal commission into this issue. Other states are not even considering the rights of child sex victims to some semblance of justice, despite repeated heartfelt requests for proper investigations over many years.
Thank you Brother….
I have found in my darkest moments, when I no longer want to go on, to just say the hell with it, someone pops into my life, that gives me the strength and courage to keep up the fight.
I want to thank Belligerent Belgarion…a person I just met who happened to see my last posting and talked to me for quite a while last night. Yeah I understand brother…I can’t let these scummy bastards, especially that foul mouthed, one toothed, pig faced, drunk ass Bill Donohue of the Catholic League nor that Clown Prince of Pedophiles, Cardinal Timothy Dolan win nor any of the other disgusting Pedophile Pimps, Pedophile Priests and Psycho Nuns or their supporters and yeah…I gotta keep doing it for those…who blew their brains out…be their voices too.
You did not bitch me out, you did not rag on me Bel. You listened to me and you even understood. You agreed someone has to make an incredibly loud statement to wake the people the fuck up, but torching myself in St Patricks Cathedral in front of Dolan would in fact make one hell of a loud statement…that would still be giving the pedophile loving pricks what they want.
AS PER AGREEMENT…
I hereby give Belligerent Belgarion, also known as The Belligerent ONE..to use any and all items, words, and thoughts, and to cross post to his new upcomming blog, and the right to use such terms I use as Pedophile Pimps, Pedophile Priests and Psycho Nuns and any and all other insults I have thrown at the RCC for their use also from my blog Rape Victims of the Catholic Church and will not sue them for violation of copyright use. I can’t WAIT to see that blog brother…it is gonna be a RIOT!!!!! Also your idea for a line of Patron Saints of Pedophiles Dildos and Vibrators to help keep priests, nuns and other pervs away from our kids? FUCKING OUTSTANDING.
Thanks brother…glad you reached out to me…glad you talked to me, man to man, friend to friend, and brother to brother and did not judge me for my anger, my hate and my pain and suffering. You are what a real brother is all about.
A FEW WORDS TO THAT NASTY, FOUL MOUTHED, DISGUSTING, OUTHOUSE DWELLING, PIG FARM ANIMAL RAPING, P.O.S. BILL PIG FACE DONOHUE OF THE CATHOLIC LEAGUE FOR THE DEFENSE AND PROTECTION OF DISGUSTING PEDOPHILE PIMPS AND PRIESTS OF THE UNHOLY ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH….AND YOU PEDOPHILE PIMPS WHO MOVED THEM AROUND AND ANY OF YOU DEGENERATES OF THE UNHOLY RCC WHO THINK YOU CAN GET AWAY WITH YOUR CRAP?
I CAN’T WAIT TIL YOU MEET THE BELLIGERENT ONE WHO HAS SOME EXCELLENT, MUTUAL IDEAS ABOUT WHAT TO DO TO YOU EVIL, SOUL-LESS, DEMON-FILLED, DISGUSTING SCUMBAGS WHO THINK IT IS YOUR RELIGIOUS RIGHT TO BEAT, RAPE, ABUSE AND HARM CHILDREN AND THEN COVER IT UNDER YOUR RELIGIOUS RULES AND USING THOSE VERY LAWS DESIGNED TO PROTECT CHILDREN…AGAINST THEM…TO DEFEAT THE…IN THE COURTS.
DONOHUE…YOU ARE IN FACT….DISGUSTING, AN OUTHOUSE DWELLER, WHOSE SEWER BREATH IS THE NASTIEST AROUND…BUT WAIT TIL YOU MEET THE BELLIGERENT ONE….
HOLY SHIT DOES HE TAKE IT UP A WHOLE NEW LEVEL…AND HE IS GOING TO TEACH EACH AND EVERY ONE OF YOU WHAT IT IS LIKE TO BE INSULTED….ONLY A WHOLE DIFFERENT WAY.
CLOWN PRINCE OF PEDOPHILES, CARDINAL TIMOTHY DOLAN? YOU WILL IN FACT FEEL SOME SUFFERING AFTER THE BELLIGERENT ONE TAKES YOU DOWN A FEW PEGS AND TRUST ME….YOU ARE NOT GOING TO LIKE HIS STYLE OF TELLING IT LIKE IT IS ABOUT YOUR SORRY ASS.
SO HANG ON LADIES AND GENTLEMEN…
Donohue…Dolan and the rest of you? I think you are about to meet your match.
This will more than likely be my last posting for this blog, Rape Victims of the Catholic Church.
Words have the power to heal, and they have the power to destroy and kill, and all the words thrown at me, by leaders, parishioners and others, for my speaking out about my priest rape, at the hands of Father Leon Gaulin at St Thomas More parish in Durham, and for demanding justice for not only that, but for all the others, who also went through the living hell that I did. For demanding all credibly accused Popes, Cardinals, Bishops and Archbishops who covered up these crimes, be arrested and prosecuted for their crimes, and for all the other victims, who went through such Roman Catholic horrors as their Magdalene and Good Shepherd Laundries, their Industrial Homes, their Women’s and Children Homes, and their Native American Children’s homes, or about all the suicide victims of this evil, about ten thousand of us, have either blown our brains out, hung ourselves, or taken drug overdoses, or killed ourselves in other ways and I dare state that any victim who killed themselves because of this..was in fact murdered by the Church…because if they had NOT been raped and brutalized in the first place, and then treated as the evil ones, the criminals, the seducers of priests et cetera, they would NOT have killed themselves….have finished their job and destroyed me.
I have been threatened with murder, that because I speak out, people want to take me out and murder me for it.
I have been told that I did not try to kill myself too hard and I should keep trying until I finally am successful.
I have been deemed an abomination, a homosexual, because I did not punch Leon Gaulin in the face when he was raping me. Because I did not punch him, that meant I not only wanted to be raped, I loved being raped and I am a homosexual because of it.
I have been told I seduced my rapist priest.
I have been branded a lair, a gold digger out looking for a payday from the Catholic Church.
I have been told I am an Anti-Catholic hater and bigot for speaking out.
When my lawyer, Peter Hutchins and I had our investigative interview with the Manchester Diocese lawyer and investigators, I was again branded as a liar.
I told them a Somersworth Police Officer brought me to the church. I know a police officer brought me there…I know it…I can still see him in my mind, his dark uniform and his rounded hat. I can still see him standing in front of Gaulin in the lobby talking to him. I know it was a cop who brought me there…but because Somersworth Police do not drive over city limits…well then I was a liar.
I told them I had NEVER gone inside of the chapel itself. I was in the lobby first, then we went through a doorway, turned left, and then went down the hall a little ways and turned right into a bedroom. I described the bedroom, the bed, with it’s dark wool blanket, the two dark head and foot boards. I described the dark curtains in front of the window. I told them about the two nightstands and how one of them, on the left, had a small waste basket in front of it. I described the colors of the walls as block painted white. I told them again, when they asked me, if I had ever been inside of the church and I stated again NO. That I had ONLY seen the outside of the church when going by it as a kid and I seem to remeber it was red brick on the outside of the chapel of the church.
I was branded a liar again, being told the chapel was RED TILED!!!
We filed suit against them and they had the suit dismissed through using the Statue of Limitations against us, when we filed a motion for the file of Gaulin and the blueprints of the place.
What was interesting in all of this? My lawyer sent his investigator to talk to Gaulin as he was living in Maine. Not two days after the investigator talked to him, Gaulin disconnected his phone, put his house up for sale and left for Florida with his husband, where they are safe. They have enjoyed their lives. without want, without need. They had roofs over their heads, their bellies full of food, all they could ever hope for apparently, rich from their real estate company.
WHILE I LIVED A LIFE OF LIVING AND COMPLETE HORROR AND HELL. I THOUGHT I WAS THE EVIL ONE, THAT I WAS THE ANTI-CHRIST!!! SO MUCH SO I TOOK THE NAME DAMIEN FROM THE OMEN SERIES AS MY NAME.
I WAS HOMELESS, LIVING EACH DAY, BARELY SURVIVING. LIVING UNDER HOUSES AND BRIDGES AND ABANDONED HOUSES. DIVING INTO DUMPSTERS JUST TO GET FOOD. I WOULD STEAL BECAUSE BY THEN, THAT WAS THE ONLY WAY I KNEW HOW TO SURVIVE AND I ALSO PAID FOR THOSE CRIMES.
I WAS RAPED AGAIN, PICKED UP BY SOME FREAK HITCHIKING, WHO DRUGGED ME AND I WOKE UP TO HIM RAPING ME IN THE BACK OF HIS RV.
I WAS ALMOST RAPED A THIRD TIME…BUT THIS TIME DEFENDING MYSELF AND THEN BEING CHARGED FOR IT, BECAUSE THAT SCUM TOLD THE COPS I TRIED TO ROB HIM!!!
I LOST EVERYTHING BECAUSE OF THIS…EVERYTHING.
YES, WORDS HAVE THE POWER TO HEAL AND THEY HAVE THE POWER TO DESTROY.
WHEN THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH HAD A CHANCE TO DO WHAT WAS RIGHT….THEY DID NOT. THEY AGAIN, MADE FALSE PROMISES, THEY LIED TO THOSE INVESTIGATING THEM AND PROMISED TO ABIDE BY THE LAWS AND CHARTERS SET UP TO AVOID THEIR ARREST AND PROSECUTION, AND THEN ONCE THESE CHARTERS AND LAWS WERE SET UP, THEY BROKE THEM, BECAUSE THEY NEVER HAD ANY INTENTIONS OF KEEPING THEIR WORDS IN THE FIRST PLACE, THEY JUST DID ALL THEY COULD TO AVOID ARREST AND PROSECUTION AND ONCE THEY WERE SAFE…THEY WENT AFTER US ABUSE VICTIMS…USING THAT DISGUSTING BILL DONOHUE OF THE CATHOLIC LEAGUE AS THEIR ATTACK DOG AGAINST US TO USE ADS AND TV TO UTTER VILE, EVIL, DISGUSTING THINGS AGAINST US, TO BLAME US FOR OUR RAPES, TO DO EVERYTHING THEY CAN, TO BLAME US, AND ACCEPT ABSOLUTELY NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR THEIR ACTIONS.
THEY CONDEMNED US..AS LIARS, AS SEDUCERS OF OUR OWN RAPISTS, AS HOMOSEXUALS BECAUSE WE DID NOT PUNCH OUR RAPIST PRIEST IN THE FACE. THEY BRANDED US AS LIARS, GOLD DIGGERS OUT LOOKING FOR A PAYDAY FROM THEIR CHURCH….AND NO ONE REALLY STOOD UP FOR US, NOT EVEN POPE FRANCIS HAS YET TO CALL THEM ON THE CARPET FOR THEIR EVIL, NASTY, DISGUSTING ATTACKS AGAINST US!!!! HE HAS NOT EVEN OFFERED ONE WORD IN DEFENSE OF US AGAINST THESE ATTACKS, BUT REMAINS MUTE AND SILENT ON THEM. HE DOES NOT DEMAND THEY STOP THEIR ATTACKS AGAINST US…NOPE.
BUT WE ARE SUPPOSED TO TRUST HIM? YEAH RIGHT….THAT WOULD BE LIKE A BLACK MAN OR WOMAN TRUSTING THE KKK OR JEWISH MEN OR WOMEN TRUSTING THE NAZI’S…BECAUSE THAT IS THE ONLY COMPARRISON I CAN EVEN THINK OF WHEN THEY DEMAND OF US TO TRUST THEM…
Well I have had it.
But I am not going to go and kill myself in some out of the way place. I am not going to kill myself where my voice will NEVER be heard because of the reason why I killed myself.
Cardinal Timothy Dolan….you cried about YOUR unjust burderns and suffering that would happen to YOU if New York ended their One Year Statue of Limitations with the following:
Dolan also explained that he wanted to keep the statute of limitations for child sex abuse victims to one-year, because if the church gets sued, “The perpetrators don’t suffer. There’s no burden on them. What suffers are the services and the ministries of the apostolates that we’re doing now. Because where does the money come from? So the bishops of 30 years ago that allegedly may have reassigned abusers, they don’t suffer. They’re dead. So the people that suffer are those who are being served right now by the church. We feel that’s a terribly unjust burden.”
Well then Dolan…YOU WILL SEE WHAT REAL TERRIBLE, UNJUST BURDENS I HAVE CARRIED BECAUSE OF YOUR ACTIONS, YOUR WORDS AND THE WORDS OF YOUR ATTACK DOG BILL DONOHUE AGAINST US…OH AND DO NOT WORRY YOU HOLY MAN OF GOD….I HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO INTENTIONS OF HARMING YOU OR DONOHUE…BUT YOU WILL WITNESS THE HARM YOU AND OTHERS OF YOUR CHURCH HAVE DONE TO ME.
SO CARDINAL TIMOTHY DOLAN…YOU WISH FOR ME TO JUST KILL MYSELF SO YOU NEVER HAVE TO HEAR MY VOICE AGAIN? YOUR BUDDY BILL WANTS THE SAME? WELL OK….IF THAT IS WHAT YOU WANT….THEN THAT IS WHAT YOU WILL GET!!
BUT YOU WILL IN FACT WITNESS MY SUICIDE…RIGHT BEFORE YOUR VERY EYES…SO BEFORE I DIE….YOU CAN LOOK INTO THEM…INTO MY EYES…AND WITNESS THE HORROR THERE, TO SEE THE TERRIBLE, UNJUST BURDEN YOUR PRIEST AND YOUR CHURCH HAS DONE TO ME….AND I WANT YOU TO REMEMBER THAT LOOK IN MY EYES…BEFORE I TURN THEM OFF…AND I HOPE THAT STAYS WITH YOU FOR THE REST OF YOUR LIFE….THAT MY EYES, MY DEAD, SOULESS EYES, MY EYES OF PAIN AND SUFFERING, MY EYES OF THAT TERRIBLE UNJUST BURDEN, I HAVE CARRIED FOR OH SO LONG…..WILL HAUNT YOU FOR THE REST OF YOUR LIFE.
SO BE READY CARDINAL TIMOTHY DOLAN….YOU WANT ME TO KILL MYSELF BECAUSE I DARE HAVE THE GUTS TO STAND UP TO YOU AND THE OTHERS AND YOU WANT ME TO SHUT MY MOUTH? WELL SOON, CARDINAL TIMOTHY DOLAN…VERY, VERY SOON….YOU WILL GET YOUR WISH…
I GOT SOME GOODBYES FIRST TO SAY…TO THOSE WHO DID LOVE ME, TO THOSE WHO DID ALL THEY COULD, WITH WORDS OF LOVE AND KINDNESS, TO HELP ME…AND ONCE THAT IS DONE…CARDINAL TIMOTHY DOLAN….YOU WILL SEE ME…BUT FEAR NOT CARDINAL…NO HARM WILL BE BROUGHT TO YOU…I HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO WISH TO HARM YOU PHYSICALLY…I HAVE NO PLANS TO ATTACK YOU…CAUSE CONTRARY TO YOUR OPINION OF ME….I DO NOT GO OUT AND DO WHAT YOU HAVE CLAIMED I AM….
BUT I WANT YOU…TO LOOK INTO MY HORRIFIED EYES…MY EYES THAT CARRY THIS INCREDIBLY EVIL, UJUST BURDEN…RIGHT BEFORE I DIE.