Archbishop Carlson documents his own inaction in the face of child rape.

Archbishop Carlson of St. Louis can’t remember if he knew it was mandatory to report statutory rape.  Just to be clear, even if he didn’t know he was a mandatory reporter of rape, as a cleric and moral authority he had an obligation to past and potential future victims to report rape.  That’s why society has passed laws requiring abuse to be reported.  One need not be Catholic to understand that something is wrong and that a rapist is a danger to children.

But there is in fact a document that says he did know  something and like a certain Diocese of Jefferson City LGBT/Transgender Process document it was confidential at the time.   Here’s the heading:

Memo to:  Archbishop John R. Roach

From: Bishop Carlson

Subject: Father Tom Adamson

In summary Gregory Riedle was serving 13 months in prison for rape but he himself was abused by Father Tom Adamson.  Gregory’s parents were upset that their son was in prison but Father Adamson received no punishment and in fact was still allowed to see their son.  The parents reminded Bishop Carlson (Now Archbishop Carlson of St. Louis) that it was illegal for priests to have sex with 14 year old boys and that the statute of limitations wouldn’t expire for another 2.5 years. Knowing and admitting to each other that a crime was committed, did Bishop Carlson or Archbishop Roach contact police?  No, but they sure documented their own inaction well.  These kind of people are methodical in what they do and if they produce a 17 page document they know what it means even if they want you to think it means something else.

Watch the deposition again knowing about this 1984 rape document, is he really telling the truth there?  Are the leaders of the Diocese of Jefferson City telling the truth?

Guess who played this role in the St. Louis Archdiocese a few years later?

 

Occult Behaviour in the Church.

Occult:       “to shut off from view or exposure :cover, eclipse”

Occult behaviour has crept into the Church in various forms but one form involves covering up crimes of the clergy against children.   People have desired to protect the Church from bad publicity for some time and some Bishops did succeed in covering up awful things for a long time.  The problem was that the cover up of evil meant that evil men weren’t rooted out of the Church and their sins continued to hurt other people.  Evil men like their crimes to be occulted.  After all the damage this has done to the Church, can there still be Catholics who think it’s a good idea to hide evil for some supposed collective good?

The other problem with this occult behavior regarding evil crimes is that it denies innocent wronged individuals justice and protection for the sake of the ephemeral collective good.  The Church teaches that her members are the Body of Christ. Allowing evil to remain hidden and to continue damages the Body of Christ by harming it one member at a time, while often later being revealed anyway. This means that it damages the collective good spiritually while growing worse, eventually doing even more damage to the reputation of the Church than it would have if revealed early on.

One offshoot of this occult attitude is the opinion some people have that the Jefferson City Diocese Transgender process shouldn’t be publicized to the lay faithful or the general public.  The thought here must be that the clerics and the hierarchy are the only ones who have the authority or ability to deal with such things.  In the last 50 years how did that work out with other forms of child abuse?  Since the children in question belong to the lay parents they have the responsibility to form them and protect them.  Parents can’t do that if threats to their children remain occult.  Furthermore, how in the world can the hierarchy alone solve these problems if they originated them?  Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?  “Who will guard the guards themselves?” -Juvenal Satires (Satire VI, lines 347–348).

Occulting a dangerous Process in the Church post 2002 is as Jay Leno said on the Battle of the Jaywalk Allstars:  “So you saw it was wrong and you decided to go with it?”

In fact the State of Missouri has laws punishing the covering up of abuse, https://dss.mo.gov/cd/pdf/guidelines_can_reports.pdf

The Church ought not be outdone by secular laws.

The skeletons in the closet often come out on their own anyway but lets not be occult about it along the way.  skeleton-in-the-closet

Pedophile Priest With HIV who Raped 30 Children Forgiven by Church: A Possible Hoax.

http://www.alternativenewsnetwork.net/pedophile-priest-hiv-raped-30-children-forgiven-church/

That article appears to be a hoax, according to patheos.com

The deposition of Archbishop Carlson and the child rape cases behind it are not a hoax.

The Patheos article makes a good point:  “Maybe the bigger story is how the Church has been so awful with regards to its handling of child abuse cases and rape scandals that the public’s first reaction to hearing about Ataulfo’s alleged acquittal was, “Yeah, it’s probably true. The Church would totally do something like that.” That’s something the Church will have to continue to fix moving forward.”

This is important because what Bishop Gaydos proposes in his process includes child abuse.  http://www.theblaze.com/contributions/matt-walsh-the-lgbt-agenda-is-an-active-threat-to-our-children/

 

 

Archbishop Robert Carlson didn’t know that not reporting sex with children was a crime.*

*And is apparently the only adult alive who doesn’t know, or remember if he knew, the term “Statutory Rape.”  Clergy unaware of the term please see the definition here.

It is important to know who your Church leaders are and why we oppose their radical process.  According to NBC News, with information taken from a video deposition before a sexual abuse trial, Archbishop Carlson doesn’t know if he knew at the time that failure to report priests having sex with children was a crime back in the 80’s when “Carlson’s role at the time was to investigate abuse claims.”  https://www.nbcnews.com/news/religion/st-louis-archbishop-didnt-know-sex-children-was-crime-n127291

Here is the video of a short segment of his deposition where he basically states that he doesn’t know if he knew what statutory rape was or whether or not he was obligated to report it to the police.  Youtube also has the full 3 hour deposition if you can stomach it.   https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=2&v=upW7SHAjSEA

You can’t flunk this quiz:

  1. We can conclude from his deposition that Archbishop Carlson either:

A. Was so incompetent that he didn’t know the law surrounding the statutory rapes he was investigating, or was so clerical as to be completely dismissive of civil laws at the time.  

B. Lied up to 193 times in the deposition

C. Is suffering from long term memory loss or dementia. 

D. Has powerful friends to protect.

E. All of the above.

Any of the above should be disqualifying for the office he holds and the power he wields over schools in each Diocese over which he is the Regional Metropolitan.

So naturally, since he didn’t know it was a crime, he “admitted in his deposition that he never personally went to police, even when a clergy member admitted to inappropriate behavior.*”  We know for a fact that he knew children were raped and molested but we can’t say for sure if he knew that rape was illegal.  Maybe civil law just wasn’t on his radar at the time.

*Priests sexually assaulting children is indeed inappropriate behavior, to put it extremely mildly.

Regardless of his personal piety at this time these responses should throw up a huge red flag.  This is the man that is the direct authority over Bishop John Gaydos and the man who Gaydos stayed with for some time this last May.  That is why it matters not just what the LGBT/Transgender process says but who is behind it and why they are pushing it.  If you support the process you should still be very concerned about who is pushing it and why and what the skeletons in their closets will mean for that agenda.  These aren’t the people you will want to come out of the closet on your side.  Despite the continued media coverage and local pressure the Chancery and the Bishop have not budged on the issue and will not dialogue about it.  We can’t help but wonder just how much filth would have to be revealed to convince them to do the right thing.  These two Bishops control a very large school system and have authority over what happens in their schools and it matters very much what they do and think about the abuse of children.  And as you can see in the deposition it mattered to a lot of abused children what Carlson thought about telling the truth to police, and how dismissive he might have been about civil law.

In the early Church the Roman Martyrs would refuse to offer a pinch of incense to the Emperor.  Some local authorities would allow them not to offer the pinch but rather only let it be written that they did.  These Christians would refuse to even let it be written that they did something that they did not do and they would be tortured to death for their defense of that truth.  These videos show the opposite of that martyrdom, and in this current hierarchy a man is apparently promoted for such coverups.   Reading the lives of the saints is edifying: people courageously undergoing torture for their beliefs.  Out of that courage the Church thrived.  Reading the lives of those involved in this process has quite the opposite affect: it is spiritually corrosive.  Out of their corrosive behavior the Church shrinks.

Despite how severe these posts may seem we have hesitated to make this blog too personal beyond the scope and time of the current process.  We’ve avoided a lot of skeletons that are simply a matter of public record.  But if child abuse is the topic the Diocese wishes to be stubborn on then we can only take their lead.  For the children who were abused things already were very personal.  Four months has been plenty of time for the process leaders to listen to families, yet they will not.  Four months is also plenty of time for people to begin to talk and connect the dots to their own stories.  The more media coverage there is, the more people talk.  The potential spiritual and physical abuse of children should be the final straw for every parent in the Diocese.  It would be better for there to be no Church here than to have a Church that condones and promotes forms of physical and spiritual abuse thereby scandalizing Catholics and others alike so that they wouldn’t consider being Catholic.  The Catholic Church lost entire countries to Protestantism for 500 years partly due to scandals 500 years ago, generations of families.  Large numbers of abused and fallen away Catholics in this Diocese have decided the same over the last few decades.  One thing you will rarely encounter: parents who pull their kids from Catholic schools but then return them and families who leave the Church due to scandal but then return.  When there is scandal and nothing is done about it the problem grows so that when it erupts people are lost to the schools and the Church for good.  That, more than temporarily restricting donations, threatens the existence of the Catholic schools.

 

 

 

How Catholics Can Welcome LGBT Believers

The Wall Street Journal

How Catholics Can Welcome LGBT Believers

It’s possible to stay faithful to the church’s teachings without turning away millions.

By Cardinal Robert Sarah

The Catholic Church has been criticized by many, including some of its own followers, for its pastoral response to the LGBT community. This criticism deserves a reply—not to defend the Church’s practices reflexively, but to determine whether we, as the Lord’s disciples, are reaching out effectively to a group in need. Christians must always strive to follow the new commandment Jesus gave at the Last Supper: “Love one another, even as I have loved you.”

To love someone as Christ loves us means to love that person in the truth. “For this I was born,” Jesus told Pontius Pilate, “to bear witness to the truth.” The Catechism of the Catholic Church reflects this insistence on honesty, stating that the church’s message to the world must “reveal in all clarity the joy and demands of the way of Christ.”

Those who speak on behalf of the church must be faithful to the unchanging teachings of Christ, because only through living in harmony with God’s creative design do people find deep and lasting fulfillment. Jesus described his own message in these terms, saying in the Gospel of John: “These things I have spoken to you, that my joy may be in you, and that your joy may be full.” Catholics believe that, with the guidance of the Holy Spirit, the church draws its teachings upon the truths of Christ’s message.

Among Catholic priests, one of the most outspoken critics of the church’s message with regard to sexuality is Father James Martin, an American Jesuit. In his book “Building a Bridge,” published earlier this year, he repeats the common criticism that Catholics have been harshly critical of homosexuality while neglecting the importance of sexual integrity among all of its followers.

Father Martin is correct to argue that there should not be any double standard with regard to the virtue of chastity, which, challenging as it may be, is part of the good news of Jesus Christ for all Christians. For the unmarried—no matter their attractions—faithful chastity requires abstention from sex.

This might seem a high standard, especially today. Yet it would be contrary to the wisdom and goodness of Christ to require something that cannot be achieved. Jesus calls us to this virtue because he has made our hearts for purity, just as he has made our minds for truth. With God’s grace and our perseverance, chastity is not only possible, but it will also become the source for true freedom.

We do not need to look far to see the sad consequences of the rejection of God’s plan for human intimacy and love. The sexual liberation the world promotes does not deliver its promise. Rather, promiscuity is the cause of so much needless suffering, of broken hearts, of loneliness, and of treatment of others as means for sexual gratification. As a mother, the church seeks to protect her children from the harm of sin, as an expression of her pastoral charity.

In her teaching about homosexuality, the church guides her followers by distinguishing their identities from their attractions and actions. First there are the people themselves, who are always good because they are children of God. Then there are same-sex attractions, which are not sinful if not willed or acted upon but are nevertheless at odds with human nature. And finally there are same-sex relations, which are gravely sinful and harmful to the well-being of those who partake in them. People who identify as members of the LGBT community are owed this truth in charity, especially from clergy who speak on behalf of the church about this complex and difficult topic.

It is my prayer that the world will finally heed the voices of Christians who experience same-sex attractions and who have discovered peace and joy by living the truth of the Gospel. I have been blessed by my encounters with them, and their witness moves me deeply. I wrote the foreword to one such testimony, Daniel Mattson’s book, “Why I Don’t Call Myself Gay: How I Reclaimed My Sexual Reality and Found Peace,” with the hope of making his and similar voices better heard.

These men and women testify to the power of grace, the nobility and resilience of the human heart, and the truth of the church’s teaching on homosexuality. In many cases, they have lived apart from the Gospel for a period but have been reconciled to Christ and his church. Their lives are not easy or without sacrifice. Their same-sex inclinations have not been vanquished. But they have discovered the beauty of chastity and of chaste friendships. Their example deserves respect and attention, because they have much to teach all of us about how to better welcome and accompany our brothers and sisters in authentic pastoral charity.

Cardinal Sarah is prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments.

Appeared in the September 1, 2017, print edition.

Seminarians in a mostly rural Diocese? It’s possible. They’re out there.

Lincoln Seminarians

Do you think the blog has been harsh towards the Bishop and his staff?  How few seminarians and how many closed parishes would warrant a red alert?  Lincoln is truly a “mostly rural” Diocese and it has 42 seminarians.  That is 14 times as many as Jefferson City had over the summer.  As you can see, it is possible for our rural parishes to have priests of their own and for urban parishes to have multiple priests.  Regardless of the reasons our leaders give for handling seminarians the way they do the result ends up being hard on the lay people and the few priests left in regular parishes.  You’ve surely heard the homilies here haranguing the lay people for not giving the Church seminarians.  Who formed the lay people in this Diocese to do what they do, wasn’t it the clergy and the Bishop?  Nevertheless the people probably do raise priests but they probably don’t fit the mold the Diocese is looking for.  In that vein this blog post is very insightful about the differences in generational piety: http://wdtprs.com/blog/2017/08/the-young-want-the-patrimony-of-which-they-have-been-defrauded/

There aren’t Traditional Latin Masses to be found in this Diocese, maybe one somewhere, so you couldn’t say that we have a larger group of “Tradional” Catholics in the Diocese of Jefferson City.  However, those young enough to have been raised after the 60’s are of a different mold than the elderly revolutionaries at the Chancery.  And generally speaking the parents of school aged children are those younger Catholics.  Probably the best line in that post explaining why parents are so upset about the Bishop’s Process is this:

In a 2010 address, Archbishop Augustine DiNoia described the experiences of these young traditionalists. “My sense is that these twenty- and thirty-somethings have been radicalised by their experience … in a way that we were not.” After “God-knows-what kinds of personal and social experiences”, they have come to know “moral chaos, personally and socially, and they want no part of it”. A sense of narrow escape guides their vocations. “It is as if they had gone to the edge of an abyss and pulled back.”

We don’t need more chaos in our lives and we have no obligation to pay the Diocese to create it.  Would the last Jefferson City seminarian please turn out the lights for Fr. Joe Corel?

Joe Corel Picture