>>I am not defending the Church on this issue. A lot of terrible things were done and some inexcusable mistakes were made.<<
this is the crux of why we will not agree on this issue.
you seem to think these actions are past tense when, to the best of my intellectual ability (for better or worse), i believe these weren't mistakes at all, rather, a planned course of action to protect the church image and the "good ole boy" network above the safety of children and the sanctity of childhood.
iow, the fundamental problem has NOT changed. the only mistake, from the point of view of these types of self centered people is the bad press and the loss of cash.
sure, they will mouth the words of sorrow about these children, but we KNOW for a FACT that their concern WAS NOT ENOUGH TO LEAD TO ACTIONS THAT WOULD PROTECT CHILDREN. this area is not unknown.
if there is any conformance to a moral and ethical approach going forward, it is only b/c the legal system FORCED them to change their self centered views and their personal financial and bad press pain, as opposed to the pain of child rape in others, is what motivated catholic church management.
cardinal mahoney, TO THIS VERY DAY, is covering up illegal and immoral people in order to protect his child molesting "friends" and i haven't heard a single one of the catholic church's management criticize this child molester aider, abetter and cover up artist.
NOW. THIS VERY INSTANT.
this *IS NOT* a "mistake." it is a conscious choice that these vain, self centered, narcissistic people make every minute of every day until they don't.
when they TAKE ACTION to protecting children AHEAD of protecting evil "good ole boys", THEN i will listen to what they have to say.
again, we *know* their sense of morality was not enough for them to reach this conclusion. hopefully, the BILLIONS in lost dollars will end up protecting the children since catholic church management REFUSED TO on their own.
In a letter to then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger before Ratzinger became pope in April 2005, Mahony said Caffoe had videotaped "partially naked" boys in a state of sexual arousal. The tape was "objective verification that criminal behavior did occur," Mahony wrote, according to papers filed last week in Los Angeles County Superior Court in a lawsuit by four plaintiffs who allege that Caffoe abused them.
In October 2005, in what Mahony told parishioners was the "fullest possible disclosure" about the scandal, he reported that a videotape had been discovered in 1992 in Caffoe's bedroom, depicting "improper behavior" with high school boys. But the cardinal said the boys were "fully clothed" and there was no sexual activity.
professorbainbridge.com
"I felt like he lied to us," said juror Mary Park.
He told Park and other jurors that when he was Bishop of Stockton, he didn't know Father Oliver O'Grady was a molester. Mahony transferred the priest weeks after a police investigation. He claimed he never read the secret file his diocese kept which contained O'Grady's confession.
"We asked each other, 'Did you think he was telling the truth?' And the greatest majority of us felt he wasn't being honest with us, that he was still covering up," said Park.
In 1991, evidence surfaced connecting Mahony and his predecessors to the cover up of the Rita Milla case. When she was a teenager, a priest told her: he had a secret.
"He just leaned over and kissed me," said Milla.
In time, she says Father Santiago Tamayo forced her to have sex with him and other priests.
"It was seven priests. It didn't stop until I got pregnant," she said.
They scared her into keeping their secret and sent her to the Philippines where she almost died giving birth.
"I almost died protecting them. That's the part that woke me up. I went to the archdiocese really, really confident that they were going to listen to me. They were going to be appalled," said Milla.
But, reports CBS News Correspondent Vince Gonzales, when they did nothing she decided to sue. The priests fled and the archdiocese said it didn't know where they went. The story might have ended there, but seven years later, Father Tamayo, plagued by guilt, came back and confessed.
He'd kept letters showing the Church knew he was in the Philippines and paid him to stay there.
"We would ask that you not reveal that you are being paid by the Los Angeles archdiocese unless requested to under oath," the letters read.
"But how's he going to do that if he's hidden?" demanded Milla.
Cardinal Mahony has denied any knowledge of the case, saying -- as he did with O'Grady -- he never read the files.
But when Mahony took over the archdiocese, Father Tamayo wrote directly to him. The cardinal's staff responded, offering the priest more money to stay away because lawsuits would "only open old wounds and further hurt anyone concerned, including the archdiocese."
"Liar. What a liar. I wish I could have him right in front of me and just cram these (documents) in his face and say 'explain this'," said Milla.
Tamayo was defrocked by Mahony, not for sex abuse, but for getting married.
cbsnews.com
On Aug. 18 the Times stated that in 1986 during "a series of summer retreats with about 1,100 archdiocesan priests," the cardinal encouraged "any priest with a history of sexual abuse to step forward." Subsequently Baker met with Mahony, Baker told the Times. "I told Mahony I had a problem," Baker said. "He was very solicitous and understanding. I was glad I brought it up."
sooo understanding... of good ole boy child rapists...
findarticles.com
Roger Cardinal Mahony reportedly warned a priest who was suspected of sexually abusing young people to stay out of California so as to avoid prosecution.
In a letter from more than two decades ago that has been released by SNAP (Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests), Mahony wrote to the priest:
"For the spiritual and pastoral good of the people of the Dioceses of Stockton, please remain over there in Mexico."
romancatholicblog.typepad.com
Also named in the suit is the Catholic church's roster of bishops who lead the country's 194 dioceses. In these dioceses, as part of a "scheme and enterprise to protect molesting priests," church officials kept secret "sub secreto" archival files of priests' sexual misconduct, the lawsuits say.
Not only were these files hidden, accessible only to the bishops and never turned over to law enforcement, the suit says, but they were "fraudulently purged."
sfgate.com
mp3 download - john and ken on mahoney (shock jocks, but focus on the TRUTH in what they say. it is much too easy to hate the messenger when you don't like the message):
a1135.g.akamai.net
again, if you can't see the PURE, UNADULTERATED EVIL that is so obvious to, well, folks that think protecting children is more important than protecting rapists and organizational images, it will take an act of god to open your eyes.
yes, *everyone* in the catholic church that knows about mahoney's actions and supports them or does nothing to combat his EVIL is immoral - and the dude in the white suit isn't exempted. in fact, it can be argued he's more evil than all his minions since he provides such a fertile playground of contempt for morality.
perhaps you are the kind of person who would actually have to have been raped over a course of years and then had the cardinal blow you off BEFORE you get the EVIL of all this. i hope it doesn't happen to anyone you know, but i have little doubt that guy's like mahoney easily quintupled the numbers of children that were raped.
E.V.I.L. |
