Left Unsaid..

Now that I'm writing again.. [evil laugh] I do think that I'll also mention those snippets of Mass readings that get skipped over in the Missal. Sometimes, it's really valuable stuff, though might end up being those 'hard sayings' that many pastors try to avoid.

For instance; This Sunday's first reading from Samuel, chapter 3 uses verses 3-10 and then skips out to 19. Here's what we missed:

11 Then the Lord said to Samuel, “See, I am about to do something in Israel that will make both ears of anyone who hears of it tingle. 12 On that day I will fulfill against Eli all that I have spoken concerning his house, from beginning to end. 13 For I have told him that I am about to punish his house forever, for the iniquity that he knew, because his sons were blaspheming God,[b] and he did not restrain them. 14 Therefore I swear to the house of Eli that the iniquity of Eli’s house shall not be expiated by sacrifice or offering forever.”

15 Samuel lay there until morning; then he opened the doors of the house of the Lord. Samuel was afraid to tell the vision to Eli. 16 But Eli called Samuel and said, “Samuel, my son.” He said, “Here I am.” 17 Eli said, “What was it that he told you? Do not hide it from me. May God do so to you and more also, if you hide anything from me of all that he told you.” 18 So Samuel told him everything and hid nothing from him. Then he said, “It is the Lord; let him do what seems good to him.”

So, here we read that God will severely punish those who have profaned the priesthood. This has been painfully relevant these past 17 years, and now, lately, since Cardinal Bernard Law's passing. Law, like ancient priest Eli, knew what his "sons" were doing, but did not restrain them. He shuffled abusive priests to other parishes and diocese without care for the laity. "But, but, but the psychiatrist said.." is a flimsy excuse.


But, in reality, this reading is what we did NOT hear this Sunday. Most folk probably went on to sing "Here I Am, Lord' during the offertory, later, and went about with their day..

Flogging

Yeah, it was another long, long Lent, complete with the media and every detractor against that Church that still draws breath flogging the Church and Pope Benedict. Jesus said "let he who is without sin cast the first stone". The New York Times says "rocks here, hard rocks, get your rocks here.."

Having been molested when I was 8 or 9, I can completely relate to, and still have to fight, the attitude of "string 'em up!" And I thank God that I don't know if my molester was a priest or not, and I try not to imagine it as so. Also, in the intervening years, I've learned some hard lessons about mercy and forgiveness, so I'm less apt to lash out about the issue.

I won't get into an analysis of the sexual abuse, the abusers, the bishops that kept it discrete, the therapists that enabled abuse to continue. I'm not an expert on any of those topics, and neither are most of the Church's current detractors. Most of the Church's fiercest critics are not interested in rooting out all sexual abuse in society, or else they'd be also relentlessly scouring the foster care systems, the public schools, and daycare programs as well.

Detractors' primary interest is the shame the Church by the failings of some of its' members, and to try and change the Church's doctrines and disciplines that they find most offensive to popular sentiments:

- Ordaining women won't eliminate abuse, or else you'd never see female teachers bedding male students.

- Married clergy won't eliminate abuse, or you'd never see married men sexually abusing minors.

- Blessing the use of contraception won't eliminate abuse either, instead it would just encourage already familiar forms of sexual abuse, like the current hook-up culture.

Sexual abuse is a feature of fallen human nature, not a feature of Catholic doctrine or discipline.

Oh, THAT kind of 'Medical Treatment'

From the Saratogan, a story about child pornography and a priest:

A 50-year-old Catholic priest who is a Cohoes native now living in Columbia County could be released on bond as early as today after a federal magistrate on Wednesday agreed to grant the accused bail as he awaits trial on charges he received and possessed computer images of child pornography.

Ahh, swift Justice, swoop in and take the alleged pervert. But wait..

[Prosecutor Thomas Spina] said Ethier faces five to 20 years in prison if convicted, but the criminal process will be delayed by medical treatment the priest will seek in Maryland.

Medical Treatment in Maryland, you say? Wouldn't happen to be St. Luke Institute, by chance?


I still think my monastery idea would be worth looking into.

h/t CWNews

That All ?

From the Omaha World Herald, Group Targets Actions of Bruskewitz:

More than 1,000 Catholics from all corners of the country have signed a petition protesting Lincoln Bishop Fabian Bruskewitz's actions against members of the Lincoln-based Call to Action Nebraska.

One thousand?! That's the best you can do? Heck, our small parish packs that many in on any given Sunday.

"We are not happy with the way Bishop Bruskewitz has been handling things in the diocese and wanted to draw attention to that," said Rachel Pokora, president of Call to Action Nebraska.

Ms. Pokora thinks herself ill-used, excommunicated by the bishop for belonging to an organization that inherently defies catholic teaching and doctrine.

..the petition criticizes Bruskewitz's refusal to allow girls to serve at the altar and his 1996 excommunication of Call to Action Nebraska members.

Having not gotten any sympathy for their heretical views, Call To Action plays the Abuse card:

The petition also included criticism of his refusal to participate in the annual nationwide audit to determine whether churches are compliant with church policies regarding sex abuse.

"We find this to be very disappointing because we feel the children of Lincoln and the diocese are at risk," said Nicole Sotelo, spokeswoman for the Chicago-based Call to Action U.S.A.

Unlike Call To Action, the USCCB is less hysterical about Lincoln's non-participation in the audits:

A spokeswoman for the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops said the Lincoln Diocese's lack of participation in the audit does not mean it isn't adhering to church policies regarding sexual abuse.

"The clergy sexual abuse crisis is a serious issue for all the bishops, and I can't see any bishop not doing all they can to ensure children are safe in their diocese," said Teresa Kettelkamp, executive director of the Office of Child and Youth Protection, which administers the audit.

In a written statement, Bruskewitz affirmed that his diocese is operating in full compliance with all civil and church laws concerning the abuse of minors.

I don't worry much about the children in Lincoln, because the Bishop's policy is clear to the local clergy. I think it's something along the lines of "If you abuse children, I promise I'll visit you in prison."

"The Catholic Church teaches that all homosexual acts and any sexual abuse of minors or others are mortal sins," Bruskewitz said in the statement. "Such sins and heinous crimes should be appropriately punished by the authorities of the church and the state."

He cracks down on heretics as well. It's going to take much more than a pathetic petition to change Bp. Bruskewitz' mind on the Call To Action Nebraska excommunications. Maybe they should try renouncing their heresies and reconciling with the Church. It's been known to work.

MIGHT be Perceived as Sexually Inappropriate?

From the Sarasota Herald-Tribune:

"From his home on the island of Gozo, near Italy, Anthony Mercieca described a series of encounters that he said Foley might perceive as sexually inappropriate.

Among them: massaging Foley while the boy was naked, skinny-dipping together at a secluded lake in Lake Worth and being naked in the same room on overnight trips."

Talk about oblivious. These events are not just perceived as inappropriate, they are inappropriate, and a priest should know that. Unless the priest gig is only active so long as one's clothes are on.

Mercieca, 72, told the Herald-Tribune he and Foley became fast friends when Mercieca moved from Brazil to Florida in 1966 and "loved each other like brothers."

Mercieca said he taught Foley "some wrong things" related to sex, though he wouldn't specify what he meant. He also said they were naked together in a sauna twice.

Mercieca said that, at the time, he considered his relationship with Foley innocent. But he now says he could see how his actions could be labeled inappropriate.

Once again, the disconnection from reality and sound moral judgment is appalling. Are we penitent yet?

Mercieca was adamant that his encounter with Foley was an aberration, and that the Catholic Church never had to send him for counseling during his 38 years in the priesthood in Florida.

"I have been in many parishes, and I have never been" accused, he said.

Never been accused, or never been caught and PUBLICLY accused? Forty years ago, this was unthinkable, and so many abuse tales were relegated to 'Twilight Zone' credibility. Not so anymore.

Is the deference to sin to blame for the Foley episode? Of course not:

One night, when Mercieca says he was in a drug-induced stupor, there was an incident he says he can't clearly remember that might have gone too far.

"I have to confess, I was going through a nervous breakdown," he said. "I was taking pills -- tranquilizers. I used to take them all the time. They affected my mind a little bit."

Substance abuse and depression are the hallmarks of closeted gay men, regardless of vocation. Maybe the reviled "Instruction Concerning the Criteria for the Discernment of Vocations With Regard to Persons With Homosexual Tendencies in View of Their Admission to the Seminary and to Sacred Orders," has some merit, and should be used instead of thrown in a seminary closet, along with the seminarians who persist in deference to the Magisterium.

Casting suspicions

h/t Amy Welborn

The media's casting about for Foley's perp, and they find this fine fellow. When asked about Foley:

"Don't even try to pin that one on me!" he said. "I've been smeared enough. Mark Foley is not in any of those pictures."

But quickly Romero adds he has talked to the man who allegedly abused the future Republican star.

It's a dialog right out of NYPD Blue! Det. Sipowitz has an ex-con in the interview room, and he's putting the screws to him. "Don't even try to pin that one on me", the ex-con says, looking towards the window, wiping his nose. "And who do you think the papers, and the jury pool will believe, eh?" Sipowitz would retort. " Okay, okay. I know this guy," the ex-con squirms as he says it "he was into the same scene, if you know what I mean."

The whole thing reeks, and something tells me it's going to get worse the farther Foley gets into his "healing process."

Meanwhile, while his deviant cruising will be excused, and his deviant sexuality will never be questioned. Sure, older gay men never rarely go cruising for young men.

In other news, Ted Kennedy announces that in 1969, his car was FORCED off the road, and into Poucha Pond, by a drunk driver in another car. He will announce the name of the driver to the Massachusetts DMV.

Naming Names

Foley will give archdiocese name of alleged abuser, says CNN. Wow, I'm sure that Mr. Foley has had ample time to peruse Google, the John Jay report, and any public archdioscesan records for a suitable patsy.

Mark Foley is intending to work with the Archdiocese of Miami and Greater West Palm Beach for the purpose of revealing the name of the particular priest who is involved so the archdiocese can then deal appropriately with the issue," said Gerald Richman, one of Foley's attorneys.

Richman said, however, he will not press criminal charges against the still-unnamed clergyman because of the difficulties the case would face.

It's the perfect cover, as Foley doesn't have to actually prove anything, he just has to name someone who has been accused in the past, and his area was full of them. By telling the Archdiocese, the name will leak out, and the heat will be on someone else.

I must admit, if Mark's story is true, then it is a lamentable crime, and the perp should be tarred as such. But, Mark's a politician, and in a politically untenable situation he's lobbed out this charge of abuse. It makes it really hard to be sympathetic, even for this abuse "survivor" (I've never bought into the whole "abuse survivor" thing, it didn't kill me, and I don't need a medal, thank you).

Oh, well that explains it..

Foley alleges he was abused by clergyman

Oh, alright, we understand then. Why didn't you just say that in the first place. Which diocese should we sue for you? Any particular prelate you want to accuse, while we're at it? Bernardin is conveniently dead, and Weakland would be an easy mark as well.

/ sarcasm.

The whole thing stinks to me, both the timing of the revelations, and the political posturing afterwards. It makes sense that he'd use the Church to try and deflect some of the fecal splatter. Cue Rosie O'Donnell.

A Life of Prayer and Penitence

I've had an idea, mulling in my brain, of what to do with clerical sex-offenders, rather than laicization or giving them the Caveman treatment. Why not establish a monastic order, dedicated to either St. Charles Lwanga, or St. Agnes of Rome, where violators can continue to work out their salvation in fear and trembling, but away from the temptations that they obviously are ill-equipped to resist. This is a long-term solution, not a couple month jaunt to St. Luke's Institute, and then a quiet reassignment. This would be voluntary: Either the violator accepts an obedience to report to the order (after his sentance is served in prison), or he gets laicized and thrown to the legal wolves.

The rule would be severe, the labor plentiful, and the comforts few. Contact with the outside world would be limited, to help the penitents refocus on their spiritual labors. No griping about the life to writers from the National Catholic Reporter, or other such public displays. The monks will farm, build, do special community projects, if needed, to generate some revenue to offset some of the costs to the host diocese(s).

This will NOT be a cloister for deviant religious to practice their deviancy. Medication to correct imbalances should be made available to help the penitent's get on an even keel, as well as real counselling (not just thereputic affirmation) for their psychological and spiritual shortcomings. The doctrine and liturgies will be traditional, with no disregard for rubrics. We don't want to substitute one kind of abuse for another.

This is just a basic idea I've been mulling. Anyone have some constructive additions to make? I'm thinking that if this model would work for violators already in the clergy, it could be widened to include laity as well. Society as a whole is struggling with what to do with sex offenders, and we could try to get them into an environment where their inherant dignity is upheld while keeping society shielded from further relapses. God loves sex offenders too, but society has not found a way to help them. Jail doesn't help their problems, and when they get out, the stigma and legal requirements make a normal life impossible.

Gimme feeback, link the heck out of it. I'd like to see everyone talking about this, if even for 5 minutes. And the discussion shouldn't start with " When can we put (insert name of suspect bishop here) in there?" But bishops would not be above inclusion, should the Pope see a need for it.

Fabian's Local Paper Finally Catches Up with The Story

The Lincoln Journal Star, hometown rag for the Diocese of Lincoln, has finally caught the story about Bishop Bruskewitz's dismissal of the National Review Board.

What took so long, you ask? Maybe it took a while to get Call to Action, too busy with the national press, to return the Journal Star's calls:

Linda Pieczynski, media spokesperson for national Call to Action, said Bruskewitz “has defiantly refused even to self-report for the audit process with no consequences at all.” Ewers’ urging fraternal correction against Bruskewitz, she said, was “an absolutely useless gesture. It is time to ask whether the Charter for the protection of Children and Youth is living up to its promises in the real world, and not just in a report.”

Or maybe it took considerable time to find some local Call to Action people:

“It is unsettling to see a Christian bishop claim that he and his diocese is above correction because he is in keeping with the letter of the civil and ecclesiastical law,” said Jim McShane, a local member of Call to Action.

McShane agreed that the National Review Board and bishops have “no canonical authority to compel anything,” but they do have moral authority. The bishops set up the review board to restore confidence in their care for young people after the sex abuse scandal, he said. For Bruskewitz to reject the process “can only undermine further the confidence the bishops are so anxious to restore,” McShane said.

Getting Call to Action's comments on this story is like polling Iranians on U.S. immigration policy: certainly hostile, and almost entirely irrelevant.

The delay in publishing the story, most likely, was caused by the Bishop's general reluctance to speak with the press. But, nonetheless, Fabian get's his $ 0.02 in:

In response to a question by the Journal Star, Bruskewitz explained the policies and procedures in the Lincoln Diocese to protect children and respond to any allegations of abuse by clergy, teachers, other staff or volunteers.

“The Diocese of Lincoln has in place a very strong program of instruction and training for all priests, religious and lay people in the diocese who are in any way, directly or indirectly, connected with children and youth. There are very careful and thorough background checks done for all people who are employed by the diocese, or by institutions, parishes or agencies which have any connection whatever with the diocese. All people, including all children and youth, are regularly instructed to report any incidents of abuse immediately to law enforcement authorities.”

In addition, any credible allegations of abuse will be presented to the diocese’s own lay review board “and then appropriately acted upon in accordance with the canon law of the Catholic Church,” he said.

Whatever the reason, the story got out. On the on-line edition, a solitary comment was appended to the story:

Viewer Comments:
Rev. Ronald Trojcak, Ph. D. wrote on April 25, 2006 7:54 PM:"I suggest that this bishop's stance, not only on this matter, but on several, provides plausible justification for abandoning the Roman church, in which I have been an active priest in the 43 years since my ordination."

Of course, one cannot add any more comments to the thread, thus leaving the errant priest's comments as the last word on the story. I'm attempting to follow up with Rev. Trojcak for an explanation.

Miserere nobis

Revelations (of the unhappy sort)

I've just read that a former pastor of mine has recently been defrocked, after investigation of a recent, and solitary, complaint, of an offense from over 17 years ago, against him. He's a old man now, accepting a "life of prayer and penitence" at the retirement home where he once said Mass.

I am sad, for the Church, for his victim, of who we'll never know, and for himself. I remember he and my mother having debates on various church-related issues when I was younger, and he was there with Archbishop John Cardinal Krol when I was confimed. We all celebrated his elevation to Monsignor in the new church was built under his command. And we all wondered at his hurried retirement after an impropriety involving real estate, but we were all willing to forgive the priest we knew. I cannot imagine him abusing anyone, and yet, he's been defrocked.

I cannot allow myself to despair for the other priests and pastors I've known, secretly wondering about every one of them. I cannot allow myself to shudder in fear every time I see my son, or other children, hug our parish priests.

Not only has Satan caused the offenders to fall and cause great scandal to the Church, but has poisoned many in the Church to fear their own priests, imagining a presupposed guilt.

Miserere nobis