Monday, 13 August 2018

Rosica says - who needs Jesus, we have Bergoglio!

Gosh, I need to take another shower.

I wonder if he realizes that nobody noticed this diatribe until it was on Zenit. I mean, it's been on the Salt + Light web page since July 31. It shows you that nobody reads it.


"Pope Francis breaks Catholic traditions whenever he wants, because he is “free from disordered attachments.” Our Church has indeed entered a new phase: with the advent of this first Jesuit pope, it is openly ruled by an individual rather than by the authority of Scripture alone or even its own dictates of tradition plus Scripture." Thomas J. Rosica, CSB


Original: http://saltandlighttv.org/blogfeed/getpost.php?id=72516

Oh, and a warning to my old friend. Don't even dare to interfere again. 


Got it?

Just in case it goes down ...


The Ignatian Qualities of the Petrine Ministry of Pope Francis

July 31, 2018

The Ignatian Qualities of the Petrine Ministry of Pope Francis
Reflection on the Feast of the Founder of the Society of Jesus
July 31, 2018

For the July 31st Feast Day of St. Ignatius of Loyola, founder of the Society of Jesus, I offer you the following reflections about this great saint and how his vision for the Church and for Christians has found a home in the life and witness of Pope Francis. One of the main themes permeating the thought of St. Ignatius of Loyola is his exhortation “Sentire cum ecclesia” or “think with the Church.” “Sentire cum ecclesia” also means to feel with the Church and to love the Church.  It is necessary to cultivate this communion of shared devotion, affection, and purpose in a very disciplined way, for not all aspects of the Church are lovable, just as we are not always lovable as individuals. The structures of the Church cannot exist without human mediation, with all its gifts and defects of the persons present in the Church. Such thoughts are vitally important, especially in the midst of current crises facing the Church, Catholics and Christians around the world.
ignatius-of-loyola-amdgIgnatius of Loyola founded the society after being wounded in battle and experiencing a religious conversion. He composed the Spiritual Exercises to help others follow the teachings of Jesus Christ. In 1534, Ignatius and six other young men, including Francis Xavier and Peter Faber, gathered and professed vows of poverty, chastity, and later obedience, including a special vow of obedience to the pope in matters of mission direction and assignment. Ignatius' plan of the order's organization was approved by Pope Paul III in 1540 by a bull containing the "Formula of the Institute".
The Society of Jesus is present today in education, schools, colleges, universities and seminaries, intellectual research, and cultural pursuits. Jesuits also give retreats, minister in hospitals, parishes, university chaplaincies, and promote social justice and ecumenical dialogue. One of them with a longstanding Jesuit identity happens to be leading the Catholic Church at this moment in history. Francis of Argentina is the first pope from the Society of Jesus – this religious congregation whose worldly, wise intellectuals are as famous as its missionaries and martyrs. It's this all-encompassing personal and professional Jesuit identity and definition that the former Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio brought with him from Buenos Aires to Rome, and one that continues to shape almost everything he does as Pope Francis. From his passion for social justice and his missionary zeal to his focus on engaging the wider world and his preference for collaboration over immediate action without reflection, Pope Francis is a Jesuit through and through.

What kind of a Jesuit is Francis?

Jorge Mario Bergoglio fully embraced the Jesuits' radical turn to championing the poor; though he was seen as an enemy of liberation theology by many Jesuits, others in the order were devoted to him. He turned away from devotional traditionalism but was viewed by others as still far too orthodox. Critics labeled him a collaborator with the Argentine military junta even though biographies now clearly show that he worked carefully and clandestinely to save many lives. None of that ended the intrigue against Bergoglio within the Jesuits, and in the early 1990s, he was effectively exiled from Buenos Aires to an outlying city, “a time of great interior crisis,” as he himself described it. As a good, obedient Jesuit, Bergoglio complied with the society's demands and sought to find God's will in it all. His virtual estrangement from the Jesuits encouraged then-Cardinal Antonio Quarracino of Buenos Aires to appoint Bergoglio as auxiliary bishop in 1992.
In 1998, Bergoglio succeeded Quarracino as Archbishop. In 2001, John Paul II made Bergoglio a cardinal, one of only two Jesuits in the 120-member College of Cardinals at that moment in history. The other Jesuit cardinal was Carlo Maria Martini of Milan.
We all know what happened to Cardinal Bergoglio on March 13, 2013, when his brother Cardinals elected him Bishop of Rome and Successor of Peter during the Conclave that followed the historic resignation of Pope Benedict XVI from the papacy.

The Pope among his brother Jesuits

On Monday, October 24, 2016, Pope Francis went to the General Congregation of the Jesuits – their general chapter underway in Rome – with a message. His whole address was characterized by an openness to what lies ahead, a call to go further, a support for caminar, the way of journeying that allows Jesuits to go toward others and to walk with them on their own journey.
francis-ihs-vestmentFrancis began his address to his Jesuit confrères quoting St. Ignatius and reminding them that a Jesuit is called to converse and thereby to bring life to birth “in every part of the world where a greater service of God and help for souls is expected.” Precisely for this reason, the Jesuits must go forward, taking advantage of the situations in which they find themselves, always to serve more and better. This implies a way of doing things that aims for harmony in the contexts of tension that are normal in a world with diverse persons and missions. The pope mentioned explicitly the tensions between contemplation and action, between faith and justice, between charism and institution, between community and mission.
The Holy Father detailed three areas of the Society’s path, yet these areas are not only for his religious family, but for the universal Church. The first is to “ask insistently for consolation.” It is proper to the Society of Jesus to know how to console, to bring consolation and real joy; Jesuits must put themselves at the service of joy, for the Good News cannot be announced in sadness. Then, departing from his text, he insisted that joy “must always be accompanied by humour,” and with a big smile on his face, he remarked, “as I see it, the human attitude that is closest to divine grace is a sense of humour.
Next, Francis invited the Society to “allow yourselves to be moved by the Lord on the cross.” The Jesuits must get close to the vast majority of men and women who suffer, and, in this context, it must offer various services of mercy in various forms. The Pope underlined certain elements that he had already had occasion to present throughout the Jubilee Year of Mercy. Those who have been touched by mercy must feel themselves sent to present this same mercy in an effective way.
Finally, the Holy Father invited the Society to go forward under the influence of the “good spirit.” This implies always discerning, which is more than simply reflecting, how to act in communion with the Church. The Jesuits must be not “clerical” but “ecclesial.” They are “men for others” who live in the midst of all peoples, trying to touch the heart of each person, contributing in this way to establishing a Church in which all have their place, in which the Gospel is inculturated, and in which each culture is evangelized.
These three key words of the pope’s address are graces for which each Jesuit and the whole Society must always ask: consolation, compassion, and discernment. But Francis has not only reminded his own religious family of these three important gifts that are at the core of Jesuit spirituality, he has also offered them to the universal Church, especially through the recent Synods of Bishops on the Family. As Pope Francis goes about his daily work and slowly implements the reform that he was commissioned to bring about in the Church by his brother Cardinals, it has become clear that his aim is to make the Church the Church of Jesus Christ, welcoming to all, and appealing and attractive because it shows its care for all people.

Discernment

Over the past five years, Pope Francis has stressed that quintessential quality of Ignatius of Loyola: discernment.  Discernment is a constant effort to be open to the Word of God that can illuminate the concrete reality of everyday life. A clear example of this discernment emerged at the 2015 Synod of Bishops on the Family and in the Synod’s Apostolic Exhortation, Amoris Laetitia. It was a very Ignatian principle that illustrates the Church’s great respect for the consciences of the faithful as well as the necessity of formation of consciences:
“We have long thought that simply by stressing doctrinal, bioethical and moral issues, without encouraging openness to grace, we were providing sufficient support to families, strengthening the marriage bond and giving meaning to marital life. We find it difficult to present marriage more as a dynamic path to personal development and fulfilment than as a lifelong burden. We also find it hard to make room for the consciences of the faithful, who very often respond as best they can to the Gospel amid their limitations, and are capable of carrying out their own discernment in complex situations. We have been called to form consciences, not to replace them.” (37)
The Church does not exist to take over people's conscience but to stand in humility before faithful men and women who have discerned prayerfully and often painfully before God the reality of their lives and situations. Discernment and the formation of conscience can never be separated from the Gospel demands of truth and the search for charity and truth, and the tradition of the Church.
In keeping with his own Jesuit formation, Pope Francis is a man of discernment, and, at times, that discernment results in freeing him from the confinement of doing something in a certain way because it was ever thus. In paragraph 33 of his Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii GaudiumFrancis writes:
“Pastoral ministry in a missionary key seeks to abandon the complacent attitude that says: “We have always done it this way”. I invite everyone to be bold and creative in this task of rethinking the goals, structures, style and methods of evangelization in their respective communities. A proposal of goals without an adequate communal search for the means of achieving them will inevitably prove illusory.”
The first Jesuits were “a holiness movement,” inviting everyone to lead a holy life. Francis of Assisi was committed to a literal imitation of the poor Christ. Ignatius was inspired by that poverty and originally planned that Jesuits would follow the same route. But as the renowned American Jesuit historian Fr. John O’Malley has indicated, just as Ignatius learned to set aside his early austerities to make himself more approachable, he later moderated the Society’s poverty to make it possible to evangelize more people especially through educational institutions. Even evangelical poverty was a relative value in relation to the good of souls and their progress in holiness. That same apostolic reasoning is found in Pope Francis’ instructions to priests around the world about their ministries.

An inclusive, listening Church

The spirit of openness is foundational to the Jesuit way of proceeding. Jesuit parishes are known for their inclusiveness and Jesuit confessors for their understanding and compassion. Ignatius insisted in favour of the goodness of everyone we encounter and a prescription for a style of encounter that makes condemnation of those in error a last resort. Early in his Pontificate when Pope Francis made his controversial statement about even atheists having a chance to get into heaven, he was following the teaching of Vatican II, but he was also following a very Ignatian approach to the good of souls.

Care of those most in need

Ignatius of Loyola’s recommended style of ministry anticipates the positive pastoral approach Pope Francis has taken to evangelization. Pope Francis’ attention to refugees, the abandoned elderly, and unemployed youth exhibit the same concern as the first Jesuits for the lowliest and neediest people in society. Ignatius’ twin criteria for choice of ministries were serving those in greatest need and advancing the more universal good. The Jesuit Refugee Service and creative Jesuit projects in education, like the Nativity and Cristo Rey schools, are contemporary embodiments of the same spirit of evangelical care for the neediest. These apostolates are part of the post-conciliar renewal of the Society of Jesus, but they have deep, formative roots in Jesuit history and spirituality as well. In the mind and heart of Pope Francis, even elite Jesuit institutions can combine the intellectual apostolate with service to the poor in the spirit of Ignatius.

Humility and clerical reform

Pope Francis’ humility has impressed many people around the entire world. His style has truly become substance.  It is the most radically evangelical aspect of his spiritual reform of the papacy, and he has invited all Catholics, but especially the clergy, to reject success, wealth, and power. Humility is a key virtue in the Spiritual Exercises. One of its key meditations focuses on the Three Degrees of Humility. In Ignatius’ eyes, humility is the virtue that brings us closest to Christ, and Pope Francis appears to be guiding the Church and educating the clergy in that fundamental truth. Reform through spiritual renewal begins with the rejection of wealth, honours, and power, and it reaches its summit in the willingness to suffer humiliation with Christ. Humility is the most difficult part of the Ignatian papal reform, but it is essential for the Church’s purification from clericalism, the source of so many ills in the contemporary church.

How can we characterize Francis’ leadership and how is that leadership “Ignatian”?

Ignatius did not use the word “leadership” as we commonly do today. Jesuit or Ignatian spirituality and Jesuit traditions lend themselves well to manifesting leadership in one’s life and work. Someone whose style of leadership is inspired by the Ignatian tradition will particularly emphasize certain habits or priorities as a leader, in ways that distinguish him/her from the way leadership is generally taught and practiced. Those habits or priorities include the importance of formation – not just learning to do technical tasks (like strategic planning) but also commitment to lifelong self-development; the importance of deep self-awareness (of coming to know oneself, for example, as happens in the Spiritual Exercises); becoming a skilled decision-maker, as happens through the discernment tools of the Exercises; committing oneself to purposes bigger than self, to a mission of ultimate meaning (Jesuits often refer to this commitment by the expression of “magis”); deep respect for others, “finding God in all things.” Yet the difference between the worldly style of leadership and that traced by Ignatius is that the Jesuit style of leadership always points to God, the ultimate source of meaning. Great Jesuit figures like Peter Faber, Francis Xavier, Matteo Ricci, or Alberto Hurtado were able to accomplish the feats they did not simply because they had some good leadership skills but because they were inspired by love of God.

What does a Jesuit pope mean for the church?

The Jesuit pope is well versed in the Spiritual Exercises, so able to spread the knowledge and practice of this counterfeit way of conversion – a way that does not use the Bible and the Gospel of Jesus Christ to simply convict his hearers of sin, righteousness, and the judgment to come but invites people to experience Jesus, his mercy, his love, his goodness, and his invitation to sinners to draw closer to him. Ignatius’ Spiritual Exercises invites people to imagine the gory details of hell, the warm embrace of the prodigal father, and the presence of Jesus walking with people on the highways and byways of life. Ignatius learned this way of meditation from his reading of the lives of the saints and mystics, but it is not necessarily the way of Scripture that can at times be devoid of imagination. Pope Francis follows Ignatius’ imaginative method in a remarkable and vivid way. He reminds us day in and day out that Jesuit spirituality is not only mystical, but it is ethical and can help us in our daily living.
jesuit-ihs-symbolThe whole concept of setting up committees, consulting widely, convening smart people around you is how Jesuit superiors usually function. Then they make the decision. This sort of discernment – listening to all and contemplating everything before acting – is a cardinal virtue of the Ignatian spirituality that is at the core of Francis' being and his commitment to a "conversion" of the papacy as well as the entire church.  It’s hard to predict what will come next. Francis is shrewd, and he has repeatedly praised the Jesuit trait of "holy cunning" – that Christians should be "wise as serpents but innocent as doves," as Jesus put it. The pope's openness, however, also a signature of his Jesuit training and development, means that not even he is sure where the spirit will lead. He has said: "I don't have all the answers. I don't even have all the questions. I always think of new questions, and there are always new questions coming forward."
Pope Francis breaks Catholic traditions whenever he wants because he is “free from disordered attachments.” Our Church has indeed entered a new phase: with the advent of this first Jesuit pope, it is openly ruled by an individual rather than by the authority of Scripture alone or even its own dictates of tradition plus Scripture. Pope Francis has brought to the Petrine office a Jesuit intellectualism. By choosing the name Francis, he is also affirming the power of humility and simplicity. Pope Francis, the Argentine Jesuit, is not simply attesting to the complementarity of the Ignatian and Franciscan paths. He is pointing each day to how the mind and heart meet in the love of God and the love of neighbour. And most of all, he reminds us each day how much we need Jesus, and also how much we need one another along the journey.

No parents, you should not let your boys sit on Bishop Stika's lap - or anyone's!

The list of those who have blocked Vox Cantoris on Twitter grows. Rosica, Spadaro, Ivereigh, Napier, Tobin, Rocco Palmo and more. To this list can now be added Bishop Rick Stika of the Diocese of Knoxville. What these silly willies don't get is that it means nothing; one can simply use a browser not logged in to Twitter and still read and take screenshots. 

So what is up with Rick Stika?

Until a few hours ago, I had not heard of him. But he sure has made a name for himself on Twitter in the last 24 hours. It seems that Rick has no problem with homosexuals in the priesthood and that, as we know, not all men with same-sex attraction are abusive or sexual predators, though they are deviant. Rick doesn't seem to understand that all those who preyed upon boys, mostly teenaged boys were homosexuals. Rick also likes to deflect, -- that there is more abuse in the home or by people in other professions.

What a pathetic thing to believe and write. One is too many.

One wonders what is up with Rick Stika and what he knew about McCarrick and the nephews and when he knew it.

What else is in Rick's closet?



Oh, Rick thinks a boy sitting on his lap wearing his mitre is promoting vocations.

Sure it is.

But what kind?

He has not restricted access to his page.

Image may contain: one or more people and text

Saturday, 11 August 2018

Peter McLeod - an alleged priest in Bras d`Or, Cape Breton comes out as a homosexualist

Poor old Antigonish and what is left of its Catholic faithful continue to be abuse by its Bishop and its priests.

What did the Catholics of Cape Breton do to deserve this?

More homosexual predation.

More on Antigonish.

More on Bishop Dunn.

https://voxcantor.blogspot.com/2016/04/brian-joseph-dunn-bishop-of-antigonish.html

https://voxcantor.blogspot.com/2012/11/alinsky-in-antigonish.html

https://voxcantor.blogspot.com/2012/11/dunns-cap-needed-for-sour-cream-of.html


Different kind of church pride in Little Bras d'Or

Father Peter McLeod stands outside St. Joseph’s Parish in Little Bras d’Or, the Catholic church he has presided over for the past 12 years. Behind him is the Pride flag, flying in support of the LGBTQ community. It was put up by two congregation members who asked to have the flag flying. McLeod said it is primarily a sign that this church is “open” and “welcoming” to all.
Father Peter McLeod stands outside St. Joseph’s Parish in Little Bras d’Or, the Catholic church he has presided over for the past 12 years. Behind him is the Pride flag, flying in support of the LGBTQ community. It was put up by two congregation members who asked to have the flag flying. McLeod said it is primarily a sign that this church is “open” and “welcoming” to all. - Nikki Sullivan

Priest allows congregation members to fly Pride flag outside church


LITTLE BRAS D’OR. N.S. — St. Joseph’s Parish in Little Bras d’Or is showing a different kind of pride in its church these days.
There is a Pride flag raised in front of the Catholic church, something Father Peter McLeod, who has presided over the church for 12 years, said is a way to show people it is a church that is “a welcoming community to all people” and it “accepts all members of faith.”
There was a time one kid said to me, ‘why does the church hate gay people?’ When you hear something like that it hits you to the core,” said McNeil, who has been a priest for 27 years.
“You get these people who profess to be the real Christians and what they are saying (about the LGBTQ community) is anything but Christian … change can happen when people speak up.”
The idea to fly the flag came from two congregation members who asked McLeod if they could do so. He agreed to allow them to do and they put it up.
“(One of them) said she thought it was a time to move forward. She even told me if you have any issues over this that she would deal with them,” he said, laughing, but also pointing out he hasn’t had any negative comments yet.
It seems McLeod is a priest who is open to moving forward. He told the Post during a phone interview he has brought up acceptance and inclusion in some of his homilies. These are sermons base on scriptural readings.
“(In the Bible) there are many examples of Jesus breaking down boundaries of people being excluded, being there for them,” he said, adding that in society there are many times when the LGBTQ are the excluded.
But it isn’t just the LGBTQ community that is affected by being excluded and hearing negative comments. It is also the people who love them that can be hurt.
“I get a lot of people saying, ‘my daughter,’ or ‘my brother,’ — they are giving examples of people they love. Every time they hear something negative, it hurts them too. That isn’t part of the gospel.”
McLeod pointed to other things that are against the Catholic church’s teachings, such as having sexual relations before marriage or getting divorced instead of having the marriage annulled, which seem more accepted these days.
“Nobody seems to say anything about those, but they do seem to say things about the LGBTQ community. That’s a form of discrimination that needs to be addressed,” said McLeod, who is also the priest at St. Anne Parish in Alder Point and St. Joachim in Boularderie.
In the past, while presiding over other congregations, the Beaver Cove native said he had asked people of faith in the LGBTQ community why they stayed with the church when some of them treated them badly.
“Their response, which always inspired me, was ‘It’s my church too,’” said McLeod, who thinks the church can make positive changes.
“Being out there, creating bridges, showing inclusion and respect. We can start there.”
nicole.sullivan@cbpost.com
St. Joseph’s Parish
Built: 1912
Where: Church Road, Little Bras d’Or
Saturday service: 6 p.m.
Sunday service: 10:30 a.m.
Name: Father Peter McLeod
Grew up: Beaver Cove
At St. Joseph’s: 12 years
Priest: 27 years
Also at: St. Anne Parish, St. Joachim Parish

Richard Sipe, may he Rest in Peace - Affirms that Bergoglio`s San Diego Bishop Robert McElroy knew about the pervert predator Theodore McCarrick

Richard Sipe has passed away. The therapist and one-time priest wrote about the homosexual predator Theodore McCarrick years ago. 

May he rest in peace.

Recently, he published a letter which he sent to Robert W. McElroy, Bishop of San Diego. McElroy is one of Bergoglio's leftists, Marxist, homosexualist bishops along with Cupich, Farrell and Tobin.

We must conclude that these Christ-hating prelates, these treasonous priests are not priests of Jesus Christ but of Satan. 

McElroy knew they all knew.

Bergoglio wears this. He did this. The Church is in crisis, a crisis brought about by the infiltration of homosexuals.

Out them all.


Image result for bishop mcelroy



A.W.Richard Sipe
2825 Ridgegate Row /La Jolla /CA 92037
July 28,2016
Bishop McElroy:
I received your note postmarked July 19.
I
It was clear to me during our last meeting in your office, although cordial,
that you had no interest in any further personal contact. It was only after
that I sent you a letter copied to my contacts in DC and Rome.
The new Nuncio, Archbishop Pierre, told my colleague he is interested in
the care of and reaction to victims of clergy assault: and I am assured that
the Papal Commission for the Prevention of Abuse is also dedicated to this
aspect of the crisis.
I will as I was asked, put my observations in the form of a report. Your
office made it clear that you have no time in your schedule either now or “in
the foreseeable future” to have the meeting that they suggested.
Bishop, I have been at the study and research of the problem of clergy
abuse since 1960. In 1986 I wrote to Archbishop Daniel Pilarczyk,
president of the USCCB at the time, with my preliminary conclusions. His
response was negligible, although he passed the substance onto the
USCCB office who gave my figures to a NEWSWEEK reporter.
In 1990 before my study A Secret World; Sexuality and the Search for
Celibacy was published I agreed to meet with the entire staff at their DC
offices.
Institutional resistance is understandable, if surprising to me. So much of
my work has been validated and in many quarters now taken for granted.
2
The number of priests and bishops having sex with minors was not the
primary or central focus of the study. But my calculation of 6% (six percent)
clergy abusers as a base line has held up very well. [ the most recent
validation is between 6 ½ and 9% in the U.S. Some dioceses have
registered 23%. Some religious houses have recorded 25%.]
Sexual violation within the RC clergy is systemic. I say that on the basis of
observation and scientific conclusion. And I say that with empathy and
concern.
Now that aspect of the sexual crisis is well known around the world. The
crisis behind the scandal will be the next phase of reality with which to
come to terms: Namely: the broad range and frequency of sexual behaviors
registered in the clerical system. “At any one time no more than 50% of
priests are practicing celibacy.”
That was the hypothesis and thrust of A Secret World (1990) and repeated
in Celibacy in Crisis (2003)
In May 1993 at the Vatican International Conference on Celibacy in Rome
Cardinal Jose Sanchez then Chairman of the Dicastery on Clergy fielded
questions about my study and conclusions and a similar sociological
statistical report by Fr. Victor Kotze of South Africa. Father Kotze concluded
that in any three-year period only 45% of priests were practicing celibacy.
When asked directly by reporter Mark Dowd, and a reporter recording for
the BBC TV what the Cardinal thought of those studies he said, “I have no
reason to doubt the accuracy of those figures”.
II
During the first National Survivors Conference in Chicago, October 1992, I
addressed the group with these words: “The crisis we are facing today—
sexual abuse of minors by Catholic clergy—is the tip of an iceberg. And if
we follow it to its foundations it will lead to the highest corridors of the
Vatican.”
3
Sooner or later it will become broadly obvious that there is a systemic
connection between the sexual activity by, among and between clerics in
positions of authority and control, and the abuse of children.
When men in authority—cardinals, bishops, rectors, abbots, confessors,
professors—are having or have had an unacknowledged-secret-active-sexlife
under the guise of celibacy an atmosphere of tolerance of behaviors
within the system is made operative.
Many of the sexual patterns are set up during seminary years or in early
years after ordination when sexual experimentation is initiated or sustained.
The 2009 Vatican Report (in English) on American seminaries invented a
new term—transitional homosexuality. I believe this is due to the
awareness of the frequent activity in the homosocial structure of seminary
and religious life.
I was on the staff of three major seminaries, one Pontifical, from 1967 to
1984. I served as a consultant for seminaries from 1966 to 1996. That gave
me a broad contact with several other seminaries, their Rectors and staffs.
I was aware, from information shared by their partners, that a number of
rectors (at least three) and also some staff members, were having periodic
sex with students.
At one seminary fully one-fourth of the professors had ongoing sexual
contacts with men or women in more or less consensual arrangements.
It is credibly established that thirty percent (30%) of U.S. bishops have a
homosexual orientation. This is not a condemnation nor an allegation of
malfeasance. The list of homosexual Popes and saints is long and
illustrious. [This is obviously false.  Homosexuality, even the inclination, is diametrically opposed to sanctity in every sense. -AB]
A serious conflict arises when bishops who have had or are having sexually
active lives with men or women defend their behavior with denial, cover up,
and public pronouncements against those same behaviors in others.
Their own behavior threatens scandal of exposure when they try to curtail
or discipline other clerics about their behavior even when it is criminal as in
the case with rape and abuse of minors, rape, or power plays against the
4
vulnerable. (Archbishops Harry Flynn, Eugene Marino, Robert Sanchez,
Manuel Moreno, Francis Green, etc.)
III
I will record instances that demonstrate the systemic dynamic that forms
and fosters sexual violations among the clerical culture. All of this
information is culled from records (civil or church). In addition, I have 50
years’ participation or contact with the clerical culture of the RCC.
I have reviewed several hundred thousands of pages of records of clerical
sexual activity and been involved as a consultant or expert witness in 250
civil legal actions against clergy offenders.
None of the following information is secret. It is reviewed here in an effort to
demonstrate how the sexual system works in the clerical culture.
Archbishop John Neinstedt (1947—) I reviewed the 138-page report of
the Ramsay County MN Attorney’s report on the sexual activity of
Neinstedt.
I have interviewed priests from the Detroit Archdiocese who had personal
contact there with Neinstedt and had first-hand knowledge of his presence
at gay bars. The affidavits in the report speak for themselves.
Bishop Thomas Lyons (1923-88) priest of Baltimore and auxiliary bishop
of Washington, D.C. I have personally interviewed adult men who claim that
they were sexually abused by Lyons when he was a priest in Baltimore and
a monsignor and pastor in D.C.
One of the reporters was on probation for abusing minor members of his
own family. He claimed that Lyons abused him from the time he was seven
to seventeen years old. Also Lyons himself said that this happened to him
(by a priest) when he was growing up and that “it was natural.”
One important element in this behavior is the three generational pattern of
sexual abuse of minors involved: Priest abuser of child who becomes a
priest and child abuser. Behavior is justified as natural. This is a pattern
seen often and termed the genealogy of clerical sexual abuse.
5
Bishop Raymond J. Boland (1932-2014) was a priest and pastor also in
Washington, D.C. until 1988 when he was appointed bishop of Birmingham
AL, and subsequently, in1993 bishop of Kansas City-St. Joseph.
I was involved for several years in advocating for several victims that
Boland violated when he was a pastor. The accounts of the victims are
among the most horrendous from the point of view that exemplifies how
deeply sex even with minors is integrated within the clerical culture.
Cardinal James Hickey and bishop William Lori fought with particular fury
the allegations that ended in the suspension of several priests and a
financial settlement with some victims.
The victim quoted here from his report to the Archdiocese refused the
settlement offered by the Archdiocese. The whole process from 1994 to
2004 spanned the reigns of Hickey, Mc Carrick and Wuerl.
Fr. Frank Swift (+1974) and Fr. Aldo PetrinI (+late 1980s) were named as
abusers.
Msgr. Paul Lavin was named as an abuser of several minor victims and
was finally removed from the ministry by Cardinal McCarrick in 2002.
These D.C. priests formed a coterie of sexually active clerics from the
seminary to connections with officials in Vatican offices.
Some of the victims were assaulted together. Two victims refused financial
settlements. Others were constricted by confidentiality clauses.
This tangle of clerical sexual abusers demonstrates the operation that
infests the systemic operation of sexual activity from top to bottom.
Many more facts about this group are on record.
Following are quotes from the reports in files submitted to the offices of the
D.C. Archbishops and their lawyers:
A 10-year-old boy at Mount Calvary Catholic Church in Forestville, MD in
1967 was sodomized by Fr. Raymond J. Boland and then deacon Paul
Levin.
6
The boy asked Boland why they were doing this and he responded, “God
makes special boys and girls for pleasure, and you are certainly one of
them.” When he saw the erect penises of his abusers he was told, “See
what you have done”.
They said they were going to make him a “big boy” and show him how
much God loved him. And breathlessly told him that it was, “the ultimate
sign of love when a man ‘came’ with a special boy; that gave him, “the seed
of life”.
Lavin said, “when I was 12-years-old that I would be taken on retreats were
spiritual bonding between older men and younger boys took place.”
They assured him the pain would go away, gave warnings to keep secret
and delivered threats of dire consequences if he told anyone. (He did tell
his mother who slapped him and told him never to talk that way about a
priest or nun.)
He made a first suicide attempt with aspirin.
Three weeks after the assault by Boland this boy contacted a priest in his
home parish—Fr. Perkinson. (who was ultimately a patient at St. Luke’s
Institute Suitland, MD.)
When he told the priest his name Fr. Perkinson said, “Oh, you’re the
special little boy Fr. Boland told me about.” He said he had been in the
military and “sex between two guys was normal”.
The priest then proceeded to expose his penis and forced it into the boy’s
mouth. “He told me to lick it like a popsicle and swallow the precious gift he
was going to give me.” He added later how special a boy I was and
encouraged me to swallow the semen that was “the seed of Christ and the
source of all life-—and a sin” to refuse. “God loves you and so do I.”
[This victim spent several years in the major seminary where he
experienced and recorded the sexual connections between seminary,
parish priests, chancery and Rome. The string of abusers was reported to
Cardinal Hickey. Some were retired or left the area.]
7
While this assault was in progress the pastor opened the door, simply
looked and closed it. (this behavior by other priests is reported in other
instances—e.g. Gaboury, litigated in Fall River, MA; in a case litigated in
D.C. the pastor seeing the boy bound and being sodomized simply said,
“you will have to repair that wall”. (The victim had punched a hole in the
wall while bound and thrashing around.)
Boland’s victim made a second suicidal attempt and was treated in a
hospital.
This is by no means the most horrendous of the records I have reviewed,
but its elements of seduction, assault, sexualizing spirituality, and selfjustification
under a “celibate” mantle and cover up are paradigmatic of a
system of behaviors in the Catholic clerical culture.
The record of one priest abuser relates how he anointed the foreheads of
his boy victims with his semen.
Another priest who was having sex with a13-yer-old of girl touched her
genitals with what he said was a consecrated host to show her “how much
God loves you”.
The credibility of the documents is unquestionable and recorded in church
and legal documents. The reporter in Boland’s case is a respected
professor.
Cardinal Theodore McCarrick has been reported by numerous
seminarians and priests of sexual advances and activity. A settlement with
one priest was effected by Stephen Rubino, Esq.
In that record the operation of McCarrick in sexual activity with three priests
is described. Correspondence from “Uncle Ted” as he asked to be called, is
included. One of the principals is now a lawyer who left the priesthood, two
men remain in the priesthood, but refuse to speak publicly despite the fact
that the settlement document is open. One priest was told by the chancery
office, “if you speak with the press we will crush you”.
Priests or seminarians who speak up about a sexually active superior are
threatened with the loss of everything—employment, status, etc. Those
8
who report are greeted with disbelief or even derision if they know but were
not personally involved. If they were a partner in the sexual activity and
“come out” they become a pariah and labeled a traitor.
I have interviewed twelve seminarians and priests who attest to
propositions, harassment, or sex with McCarrick, who has stated, “I do not
like to sleep alone”.
One priest incardinated in McCarrick’s Archdiocese of Newark was taken to
bed for sex and was told, “this is how priests do it in the U.S.”. None so far
has found the ability to speak openly at the risk of reputation and
retaliation.
The system protects its impenetrability with intimidation, secrecy and
threat. Clergy and laity are complicit.
Abbot John Eidenschink, O.S.B. (1914-2004) I knew John Eidenschink
from the time I was a student in Prep school (1946) until the time of his
death. He served me as a theology professor, confessor for six years,
superior, and traveling companion in Europe (summer 1956), and principal
speaker at my first mass in 1959. I served with him as an assistant master
of ceremonies.
It was only in 1970 that monks and former monks came forward to tell me
about how Fr. John, under the guise of offering instructions how to make
them more comfortable with their body, and that during spiritual guidance,
had them stretch out nude on his bed while he touched them; he
penetrated some.
At least two of these men sought legal advice and received substantial
financial settlements from the abbey. At least five men reported this
behavior. Others who remained in the monastery did not publicize their
encounters.
I have heard this manner and mode of relationship described in other
religious houses and seminaries.
Like many other members of dioceses and religious communities I was
blind to these and other sexual activities among the group. This is not an
excuse. Lack of vigilance, adequate sexual education and simple ignorance
9
contributed to the blindness instilled by institutional absorption and
dependency.
On record maintained by a former victim of the system recorded sixty
members of the St. John’s community who were sexual violators and 260
“known victims”. (Patrick Marker [Behindthepinecurtin.com])
John Eidenschink was a prominent and productive member of the
community. He influenced every segment of this large institution. His
sexual conditioning was formed and fostered in the two years of his
novitiate under the tutelage of Fr. Basil Stegmann, O.S.B. who repeatedly
took novice John on his lap while instructing him.
John was an orphan and lived with relatives near the campus of the abbey.
His sexual identity and his remarkable talents were conditioned and
fostered by the total institution. The homosocial structure of the abbey and
schools influenced his adjustment.
The homoerotic component in Roman Catholic theology and in the social
construct of training and in the power associations fosters sexual
expression as “natural” in ordinary male relationships. This is in direct
contradiction to the official teaching that homosexuality is “unnatural” and
“intrinsically disordered”.
I observed similar constructs in Vatican contacts with confreres when I was
a student in Rome. I could only register facts that I could not put together at
the time.
Students with some ambition would make contact with secretaries of
various Vatican officials, usually a Monsignore. This could assure them an
invitation to “tea” or some reception. Those who made the cut had social
access to a certain group of minor officials with prospects of wider and
more exalted contacts. (The book I Millinari written by 5 Vatican officials
also records variations on this pattern.)
Sexual liaisons become common for men conditioned to homosexually in
the system when women become available for social contact usually after
ordination. The Vatican term “transitional homosexuality” (2009) I
believe is based on the observation that a portion of priests pass through a
10
phase of sexual bonding with men (or even boys) before setting into
heterosexual behaviors.
Bishop Robert H. Brom: I have talked with the man who made allegations
of misconduct against Brom and with whom he made a $120,000
settlement. The history is well recorded by several responsible reporters.
(http://www.awrsipe.com/brom/bishop_brom.htm)
Significant here is the operation of the National Conference of Bishops who
in their 2002 Dallas Charter made provision for “zero tolerance” of clergy
abusing minors but neglected to address violations by bishops. Instead
they appointed Brom, when allegations were known, to make “Fraternal
Correction” to other bishops accused.
This type of operation is typical of the pattern of cover up from the top of
the institution. (Reflected in the destruction of documents by the Papal
Nuncio in the Neinstedt case. Cf. Documentation provided by the Ramsey
County District Attorney)
Cardinal Roger Mahony. I have served as an expert witness in a sufficient
number of abuse cases in the LA Archdiocese to conclude it is not
outlandish to ask if Cardinal Roger Mahony of Los Angeles is a criminal for
“knowingly endangering the children he was supposed to defend.”
There is ample evidence already in the public forum that Mahony has
known of priests who abused minors, reassigned them and allowed them to
minister only to abuse other minors. He has not informed parishioners or
even parish staffs, that the priests he was assigning had a record of abuse.
Mahony who has a Masters in Social Work did not report known priest
abusers to social services even though he was obligated to do so by civil
law and by reason of the profession’s Code of Ethics. All of this vast
evidence is recorded in countless depositions on record from litigations1 of
abuse cases and from Mahony’s own testimony under oath.2
1 Depositions by Bishop Curry and Judge Byrne are illustrative of how priests were assigned and the
oversight board operated.
2 Mahony depositions, January 25, 2010; November 23, 2004; also Cf. Mahony trial testimony Fresno,
CA March 17, 2009.
11
I received reports from two men about Mahony’s sexual life and orientation;
one a former (St. John, Camarillo) seminarian who was dying of HIV
related complications; the other a long time LA church employee. The men
were credible reporters unwilling to go public or draw on corroboration.
I have served as an expert on a number of cases of confirmed sexual
abuse by priests of the LA Archdiocese from 2002 onward. Several are
remarkable: (i.e. the case of Lopez y Lopez and the controversy between
Mahony and the Cardinal of Mexico City. One of the principals in the latter
had to be lying.)
Judge Jim Byrne touted by the cardinal as a poster boy for the integrity of
the sexual abuse review board said in deposition that in all the years he
served on the Board he “never thought” of helping the victims.
Lawyer, Larry Drivon, who has litigated many California cases of clergy
abuse stated that there was sufficient evidence to charge Mahony with
perjury after letters he signed when he was bishop of Stockton, were
produced in his 2004 deposition and showed—black on white—that he had
clear knowledge of events that he denied under oath in deposition and on
the witness stand in the 1998 trial of Fr. Oliver O’Grady.3
I attended the Nov. 2004 deposition of Mahony and know the history of the
O’Grady trial. I saw Mahony’s signed letters. As a layperson I witnessed the
cardinal lying. His lawyer claimed, as did the cardinal that “he forgot.” (in 2
depositions and on the witness stand)
Three Los Angeles Grand Juries have been impaneled over nine years to
determine the real picture of abusing priests in the Archdiocese of Los
Angeles. Their problem is not the lack of evidence, but the monumental
legal impediments and roadblocks the cardinal has sponsored to obstruct
the investigation and the release of documents needed to pinpoint facts of
the cardinal’s knowledge and involvement in complicity and obstruction.
California law does not allow Grand Jury reports to be made public unless
indictments result.
3 Don Lattin. December 11, 2004. The San Francisco Chronicle.
12
Mahony claimed that communications between him and his priests have a
special privilege, not unlike that of confessional secrets. His claim was
included as the central argument advanced by his attorneys for refusing to
disclose files ordered by the courts. His arguments were rejected by the
appeal court, the California Supreme Court. Not deterred he had his
lawyers even try to have the case reversed by the United States Supreme
Court. The highest court in the land could not swallow his theory. His
obstructionism seems unbounded.
He claimed that he was a member of the therapeutic team treating priest
abusers and therefore documents involving him enjoyed a privilege of
medical confidentiality. In actuality he was never a member of any
therapeutic teams for several reasons not the least of which is the fact that
he is not qualified.
It has not yet been revealed how many millions the cardinal spent in
pursuing facetious claims. He has employed for his defense not merely
several lawyers but several law firms as well as Sitrick and Company, a
public relation firm used by Enron, the Tobacco industry and the Keating
Savings and Loan scandal of the 1980’s. Fortune magazine called the
company’s founder “one of the most accomplished practitioners of the
dark arts of public relations. The Financial Times called him, “The spin
doctor’s spin doctor.” Should any Catholic entity much less an
archdiocese take any pride in resorting to the services of such an
organization? Truth and transparency seem secondary if important at all.
These and myriad other stories are to be told from documents and records.
These records show Mahony’s, and other bishops pattern and practice that
reflect institutional defenses of its ministers’ sexual behaviors.
I will not belabor the more than 250 abuse cases of clergy abuse I have
served on as an expert witness or consultant.
I served the Attorney General of Massachusetts in the formation of their
Grand Jury investigation of clergy abuse in that State (2002). And I was an
expert witness to the first of three Grand Juries empaneled in Philadelphia
and I reviewed 135 clergy abuse files then. Since that time I have been
able to follow the working and operation of the Archdiocesan offices’
13
dealing with victims of clergy abuse. That is a paradigm of the malfunction
of the American church in response to clergy.
You are well aware that your diocese has settled with many victims (144 in
2007 alone).
I have tried to help the Church understand and heal the wounds of sexual
abuse by clergy. My services have not been welcomed.
My appeal to you has been for pastoral attention to victims of abuse and
the long term consequences of that violation. This includes the effects of
suicidal attempts.
Only a bishop can minister to these wounds.
Enclosed you will find a list of bishops who have been found wanting in
their duties to the people of God.
Respectfully
A.W.Richard Sipe
August 30, 2016

(Hand Delivered)