2/3 of Roman Catholic Churches in Baltimore to close

[Judas Maccabeus]

The post from Jay is based upon hearsay off of the internet 20+ years ago. The records of the men who became priests as chaplains and converts are in the records of the Archdiocese and the seminary. As to whether Jay is reliable and I am reliable is up to God and the Vatican, not anyone's opinion. Opinions are not helpful. Facts are.

No it actually is up to the judgement of the courts of the state of Maryland.

https://www.marylandattorneygeneral.gov ... _Abuse.pdf

They declared bankruptcy to avoid all of the civil judgments they would have to pay.

Ultimately, because they failed to judge themselves rightly, Caesar (the civil rulers) will judge them. He does not carry the sword in vain.

The Catholic Church sex abuse scandals in Baltimore (and elsewhere) wasn’t really about gay priests or liberal priests.

What it was actually about was the Catholic Church leadership in the Baltimore Archdiocese and many other jurisdictions failing to address the problem of sex abuse of minors for decades from the 1960s up through the early 2000s and beyond. So this is a time period starting with Pope Paul VI and spanning the entire papacies of John Paul and Benedict and culminating with Francis at the very tail end. Essentially it was the Baltimore Archdiocese that recycled pedophiles for decades in and out of different jurisdictions to hide them from public view and avoid any accountability that would reflect poorly on the church. Much of the Baltimore scandal falls at the feed of Cardinal Sheehan and his successor Archbishop Borders who both notoriously recycled pedophile priests for decades and took every effort to cover up every report of abuse.

It was a complete and total failure of leadership from the pope on down.

The overwhelming majority of molestations you will find in this report are male adolescents. Since the priests are male, they are thus homosexual pedophiles and predators. Interestingly enough, my brother, who still considers himself catholic, will state with no hesitation, that every priest he knows is gay.

It is not just Baltimore. The diocese of Washington is challenging Marylands modification of the statute of limitations, claiming it is an ex-post facto law. That is a stall, and will just buy some time. They will declare bankruptcy as well, assuming the court of appeals rules with consistence to the other rulings that have been made. Changing the statue of limitations does not change the underlying law, only modify the limitation of time one can bring an action.

How many priests do you know? My guess is your wife is catholic.

Don't forget Keeler. He is arm deep in it too. Down in DC there is McCarrick and Wuerl. What do you make of them?

[Ken]

No it actually is up to the judgement of the courts of the state of Maryland.

https://www.marylandattorneygeneral.gov ... _Abuse.pdf

They declared bankruptcy to avoid all of the civil judgments they would have to pay.

Ultimately, because they failed to judge themselves rightly, Caesar (the civil rulers) will judge them. He does not carry the sword in vain.

The Catholic Church sex abuse scandals in Baltimore (and elsewhere) wasn’t really about gay priests or liberal priests.

What it was actually about was the Catholic Church leadership in the Baltimore Archdiocese and many other jurisdictions failing to address the problem of sex abuse of minors for decades from the 1960s up through the early 2000s and beyond. So this is a time period starting with Pope Paul VI and spanning the entire papacies of John Paul and Benedict and culminating with Francis at the very tail end. Essentially it was the Baltimore Archdiocese that recycled pedophiles for decades in and out of different jurisdictions to hide them from public view and avoid any accountability that would reflect poorly on the church. Much of the Baltimore scandal falls at the feed of Cardinal Sheehan and his successor Archbishop Borders who both notoriously recycled pedophile priests for decades and took every effort to cover up every report of abuse.

It was a complete and total failure of leadership from the pope on down.

The overwhelming majority of molestations you will find in this report are male adolescents. Since the priests are male, they are thus homosexual pedophiles and predators. Interestingly enough, my brother, who still considers himself catholic, will state with no hesitation, that every priest he knows is gay.

It is not just Baltimore. The diocese of Washington is challenging Marylands modification of the statute of limitations, claiming it is an ex-post facto law. That is a stall, and will just buy some time. They will declare bankruptcy as well, assuming the court of appeals rules with consistence to the other rulings that have been made. Changing the statue of limitations does not change the underlying law, only modify the limitation of time one can bring an action.

How many priests do you know? My guess is your wife is catholic.

Don't forget Keeler. He is arm deep in it too. Down in DC there is McCarrick and Wuerl. What do you make of them?

My point is not to argue about individual cases of abuse. Those were all crimes and should have been punished as they happened by the criminal justice system. It would not surprise me that many are gay. That is the obvious consequence of a celibate priesthood. A gay priest is going to welcome joining a society of nothing but men. A straight priest? Not so much.

My point is that the “scandal” part of it is the failure of leadership. Or the efforts of leadership to cover it all up for decades. They could have nipped it in the bud and weeded out the pedophile priests many decades ago had they acted properly.

As for knowing individual priests? The priest who was supposed to marry us in Alaska turned out to have been one of the recycled pedophile priests and he skipped town right in the middle of the process leaving the parish without a priest. We found that out reading the local newspaper. They were bringing in one from another town for services but not for things like marriages. That was my wife’s final straw with the Catholic Church which she had grown up with, gone to Catholic school, attended Catholic university, etc.

The Catholic Church decries “moral relativism”. But this this entire saga has been nothing but.

[Judas Maccabeus]

The Catholic Church sex abuse scandals in Baltimore (and elsewhere) wasn’t really about gay priests or liberal priests.

What it was actually about was the Catholic Church leadership in the Baltimore Archdiocese and many other jurisdictions failing to address the problem of sex abuse of minors for decades from the 1960s up through the early 2000s and beyond. So this is a time period starting with Pope Paul VI and spanning the entire papacies of John Paul and Benedict and culminating with Francis at the very tail end. Essentially it was the Baltimore Archdiocese that recycled pedophiles for decades in and out of different jurisdictions to hide them from public view and avoid any accountability that would reflect poorly on the church. Much of the Baltimore scandal falls at the feed of Cardinal Sheehan and his successor Archbishop Borders who both notoriously recycled pedophile priests for decades and took every effort to cover up every report of abuse.

It was a complete and total failure of leadership from the pope on down.

The overwhelming majority of molestations you will find in this report are male adolescents. Since the priests are male, they are thus homosexual pedophiles and predators. Interestingly enough, my brother, who still considers himself catholic, will state with no hesitation, that every priest he knows is gay.

It is not just Baltimore. The diocese of Washington is challenging Marylands modification of the statute of limitations, claiming it is an ex-post facto law. That is a stall, and will just buy some time. They will declare bankruptcy as well, assuming the court of appeals rules with consistence to the other rulings that have been made. Changing the statue of limitations does not change the underlying law, only modify the limitation of time one can bring an action.

How many priests do you know? My guess is your wife is catholic.

Don't forget Keeler. He is arm deep in it too. Down in DC there is McCarrick and Wuerl. What do you make of them?

My point is not to argue about individual cases of abuse. Those were all crimes and should have been punished as they happened by the criminal justice system. It would not surprise me that many are gay. That is the obvious consequence of a celibate priesthood. A gay priest is going to welcome joining a society of nothing but men. A straight priest? Not so much.

My point is that the “scandal” part of it is the failure of leadership. Or the efforts of leadership to cover it all up for decades. They could have nipped it in the bud and weeded out the pedophile priests many decades ago had they acted properly.

As for knowing individual priests? The priest who was supposed to marry us in Alaska turned out to have been one of the recycled pedophile priests and he skipped town right in the middle of the process leaving the parish without a priest. We found that out reading the local newspaper. They were bringing in one from another town for services but not for things like marriages. That was my wife’s final straw with the Catholic Church which she had grown up with, gone to Catholic school, attended Catholic university, etc.

The Catholic Church decries “moral relativism”. But this this entire saga has been nothing but.

That is fair. No matter which way you look at it, leadership was steering the ship, and is ultimately responsible. Their misstearing makes the Dali look like small change.

[Josh]

Organisations tend to become ends into preserving themselves in the short term, and then become ends into preserving the salaries and short term prospects of their officers. This is known as the “principal-agent problem”.

[RZehr]

Organisations tend to become ends into preserving themselves in the short term, and then become ends into preserving the salaries and short term prospects of their officers. This is known as the “principal-agent problem”.

''It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.''
Upton Sinclair

[Ken]

Organisations tend to become ends into preserving themselves in the short term, and then become ends into preserving the salaries and short term prospects of their officers. This is known as the “principal-agent problem”.

''It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.''
Upton Sinclair

This very much came into play with the Catholic abuse scandal. I can remember when the scandal really first broke into the national consciousness about 2 decades ago in what if I remember correctly was Boston. Abusive priests have been around forever, but that was about when the scope of the problem and the role of the hierarchy in covering it up first really began to be understood.

My wife and I were watching news coverage of it. I don't remember which show but it was a 60-minutes type of in-depth report. And the archbishop they were interviewing kept saying was something of the following: "In the past we didn't fully understand the nature of this problem and that led to us making mistakes in how we addressed it (treating child sex abuse as a sin that any one of us might slip up and do, as opposed to a crime). And that today the church has a better understanding of the nature of this problem.

Listening to that my wife was as livid as I've ever seen her. Convenient how the Catholic church got all into moral relativity when it suited their purposes. But the fact of the matter is that we have understood that raping children is a crime going all the way back to Genesis. In Genesis 34, for example, an entire village is slaughtered by a group of brothers because their sister was raped. In Leviticus and Deuteronomy the punishment for rape can be death by stoning. In fact, there is no point in human history where the rape of children has been considered anything but a crime.

"We didn't fully understand the nature of the problem"

Right.

Although I will allow that the fact that priests don't have children of their own (or aren't supposed to). Might in fact, make it harder for them to empathize and prioritize the problem.

[Judas Maccabeus]

Organisations tend to become ends into preserving themselves in the short term, and then become ends into preserving the salaries and short term prospects of their officers. This is known as the “principal-agent problem”.

''It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.''
Upton Sinclair

This very much came into play with the Catholic abuse scandal. I can remember when the scandal really first broke into the national consciousness about 2 decades ago in what if I remember correctly was Boston. Abusive priests have been around forever, but that was about when the scope of the problem and the role of the hierarchy in covering it up first really began to be understood.

My wife and I were watching news coverage of it. I don't remember which show but it was a 60-minutes type of in-depth report. And the archbishop they were interviewing kept saying was something of the following: "In the past we didn't fully understand the nature of this problem and that led to us making mistakes in how we addressed it (treating child sex abuse as a sin that any one of us might slip up and do, as opposed to a crime). And that today the church has a better understanding of the nature of this problem.

Listening to that my wife was as livid as I've ever seen her. Convenient how the Catholic church got all into moral relativity when it suited their purposes. But the fact of the matter is that we have understood that raping children is a crime going all the way back to Genesis. In Genesis 34, for example, an entire village is slaughtered by a group of brothers because their sister was raped. In Leviticus and Deuteronomy the punishment for rape can be death by stoning. In fact, there is no point in human history where the rape of children has been considered anything but a crime.

"We didn't fully understand the nature of the problem"

Right.

Although I will allow that the fact that priests don't have children of their own (or aren't supposed to). Might in fact, make it harder for them to empathize and prioritize the problem.

It is likely that the core of the problem may well be the fact that the seminaries emptied post World War II with the introduction of the GI bill, and a path to an education appeared for the middle class that did not involve a lifetime pledge of celibacy. This reduced the selectivity of their seminaries, and forced them to take some less than desirable candidates. The shortage of priests into the 60s forced them to hold onto these individuals at all costs.

My grandfather would have considered himself blessed to have one of the priests over for Sunday afternoon dinner. My father never would have invited one if he could. The prestige of the priesthood diminished from the early 60s forward.

The job became far less attractive, and therefore the quality of candidates went downhill. The response was simply a way to keep pulpits full at all costs. It backfired incredibly.

[Josh]

The obvious blame is on the seminary system itself. A healthy congregation produces its own leaders.

[Judas Maccabeus]

The obvious blame is on the seminary system itself. A healthy congregation produces its own leaders.

I think you are entirely correct there. Most of my friends that went off to "Bible College" from high school came home wrecks. Some tried to "correct" the leadership when they came home for Thanksgiving break." Do not get me started about Bob Jones or Hyles-Anderson. The ones who seemed to do best were the ones that stayed home and commuted. I know at least two of those.

I think that is the best model is the one we use. Educate everyone in a systematic manner. I sometimes tell the Sunday school teachers that they may be educating their next pastor.

[Ken]

The obvious blame is on the seminary system itself. A healthy congregation produces its own leaders.

I have attended quite a number of Catholic churches over the years. I don't recall ever attending a single one where the priest was even from the same region let alone same country as the congregants. Working backwards:

Here in SW Washington the local priest of the church we take my mother-in-law to when she is in town is a recent transplant from India.

Back in Waco there were two Catholic churches we sometimes attended when family was in town. One had a Polish priest, the other was from India as well.

In Juneau Alaska the priest who was supposed to marry us turned out to be a recycled pedophile priest that had been relocated to Juneau from somewhere in the east coast. Maybe Boston? Until he was discovered and then he fled in the middle of the night, reportedly to Arizona and then points south.

The priest at the church in Santiago Chile where my mother-in-law attends is from Italy

The priest in the town where I lived in Guatemala was from upstate New York.

etc., etc., etc.

That has to be deliberate policy on the part of the Catholic church. It brings to mind how the army operated in Guatemala in the 1980s when I was working down there. The Guatemalan army was almost 100% focused on maintaining internal order and fighting internal insurgencies. There was frankly no thought or planning for war against Mexico, El Salvador, or Honduras. During the 1980s there was some idle right-wing political talk of Guatemala reclaiming Belize which was a former Guatemalan province in the 19th Century. Mostly because the military government wanted a patriotic distraction from what they were doing at home. But the British response to Argentina mostly put an end to that talk. Even so, Guatemalan maps published at that time showed Belize as a province of Guatemala. And the British had a battalion of British marines stationed in Belize as more or less a tripwire to prevent any Guatemalan adventurism.

Anyway, there were Army bases scattered across Guatemala that were inwardly focused on patrolling the district in which they were located. So the practice was that the local army base was responsible for recruitment in that region (often brutally by simply kidnapping kids off the street and hauling them back to the base. But once enlisted they would ALWAYS ALWAYS be sent to a region across the country. The army wanted no soldiers working in their home province where they might speak the local language and have local family in the local villages where they might be patrolling (and committing atrocities). They wanted their soldiers to be as foreign to the area they were stationed as possible. The better to maintain discipline and such.

I have wondered if the Catholics are operating on some sort of similar mindset. Where they can't have priests who are too vested in a local community actually serve in that community because they might be more loyal to the local congregation than to Rome. It is the only explanation that actually makes sense.