Media Coverup: Hiding the Homosexuality of Sex Abuse Perpetrators

The concerted media attempt to attack the Church and the pope in particular has been interesting in one specific way. The mainstream media goes out of its way to hide the homosexuality of most of the abusers. They use the word "pedophile" because pedophiles are notoriously sex nonspecific in their attacks. Girls, boys: it's all the same to a pedophile who targets pre-pubescent children whose bodies (at least with clothing) look pretty much the same.

But who were the abusers in the priest abuse cases? Over 80 percent attacked adolescent boys, young men, post-pubescent young men. The cases were largely homosexual assaults. But you wouldn't know that from the mainstream media.

Daniel Oliver has a fascinating article about the New York Times' coverage of priestly sex abuse, specifically the case of Fr. Hullermann in Germany and what and when Cardinal Ratzinger knew whatever he did know.

The Times, Oliver said, omitted an imporant fact: Hullermann's homosexuality. Here's what he writes:

Here are four possible interpretations of the Times's curious omission of Hullermann's homosexuality. One, that the Times reporter didn't know that Hullermann was a homosexual -- and wasn't curious enough to find out. Two, the editors of the Times assumed all its readers would assume Hullermann was a homosexual. Three, the people at the New York Times thought the fact irrelevant. And four, the people at the Times are in thrall to the homosexual community and didn't want to disparage it.

One and two are implausible. If you could figure out Hullermann was a homosexual, so could a reporter for the New York Times. And since when did the newspaper of record omit an important fact just because many readers would know it anyway? Three is absurd: clearly the homosexuality of the offender would be one of the most important parts of the story.

Leaving the fourth reason: the Times made a choice to speak no ill of homosexuals....

There is almost surely a cover-up here. But it's a cover-up by the New York Times of a group of people whose lifestyle the Times celebrates. The Times seems to be more interested in protecting its friends in the homosexual community than the youngsters in churches -- and in any other institutions where they might fall victim to predatory homosexuals.

Exactly! The media, accusing the pope of a coverup have been providing cover for homosexuals for years. They will attack the priests as priests, but NEVER criticize their homosexuality. Even in the case of serial murderers like Jeffrey Dahmer, the homosexual nature of his attacks was swept under the rug.

Which leads one to apply this observation about doctors to the reporters at the Times and other mainstream media outlets.  "Physician, heal thyself." Reporters, examine your own biases.

Unfortunately, Church leaders have engaged in the same charade. Look at VIRTUS and their insistance that homosexuals are less of a threat to children than heterosexuals. The so-called "safe touch" programs have been part of the coverup which unfortunately continues.

Why would you trust the bishops with your money?

Diocese to pay $4M for abuse

Many bishops covered for abuser priests resulting in millions of dollars in judgments against dioceses. Several have declared bankruptcy. Money collected from the people of God for the work of the Church is going to huge payouts because of the bisops' irresponsibility.

But a priest who revealed the danger of homosexual men in the priesthood is dismissed for giving Bishop Loverde the bad news about his porn-addicted and acting out priests. Homosexuals can't be trusted in the priesthood and they can never be trusted with children. Fr. Haley knew it and exposed it. No thanks to enabling bishops, some of the abusers finally received justice for their crimes. But what kind of justice has Fr. Haley seen? How many other priests will be willing to expose the truth about homosexuals embezzling from the collection basket after seeing the treatment of whistleblowing priests?

If you think the bishops' safe touch program solves the problem, you live in a dream world. The bishops just shifted reponsibility to the volunteers making them mandatory reporters. So if an abuse happens on your watch, playground mom, be prepared for a personal lawsuit.

Exposing this Horror is What Got Fr. Haley Kicked out of the Diocese! And the Injustice Goes On...and on...and on...

What did Bishop Lori Know and When Did He Know It?

Lawsuit, deposition allege diocese played hardball with whistleblower priest, accountant

A few years ago Fr. Michael Madden and the parish bookkeeper hired a private eye to investigate the behavior of the pastor who was using parish money to fund his lavish homosexual lifestyle with his boyfriend who had the run of the rectory and the parish office. In the course of the scandal it was clear that the associate had tried to get the chancery to do something for FOUR YEARS! Here's what I ran in the Les Femmes newsletter at the time:

***More New England madness: Fr. Michael Jude Fay pastored one of Darien Connecticut’s wealthy parishes, St. John’s. During his tenure he stole church funds to finance a lifestyle that included: a New York Apartment, a condo in Florida, fancy clothes, expensive jewelry, fine furniture, dining at expensive restaurants, tickets to Broadway shows, etc. He also lavished gifts on friends and family especially his gay partner, Cliff Fantini (aka Cliff Martell), a wedding consultant. In 2005 they took a cruise together, requesting that a queen bed replace the twins in their cabin. Fr. Fay was so bold he frequently entertained Fantini at the parish rectory. [Did he require a background check?] The scandalous situation at St. John’s only came to light when Church bookkeeper, Beth D'Erario, and associate pastor, Fr. Michael Madden, hired an investigator and took the results to the cops. Bishop William Lori made Madden parish administrator until the young priest made some imprudent statements in a homily about his four years of “living hell” and the foot-dragging of the diocese. Subsequently he was removed and forced to apologize. What will happen to him in the future remains to be seen, but the scenario is typical: Homosexual priest engages in sodomite relationship and steals from parish to fund lifestyle. Associate pastor blows the whistle. Diocese only takes action after scandal becomes public. Retribution against the whistleblower follows. [We’ll be watching to see what happens to Fr. Madden whom we consider a hero in the matter.]

This is one of those cases where one has to make a judgment call about who's telling the truth. Frankly, my money is on Fr. Madden and the bookkeeper. I didn't trust Bishop Lori when he was in D.C. and the tactics the diocese is using are the same ones used by bishops during the sex abuse scandals. Attack the accusers and stonewall. In 2002 Bishop Lori assigned homosexual priest Fr. Jude Fay as the lone priest on the diocesan 11-member Sexual Misconduct Review Board. Of course, the claim is no one in the chancery had ANY inkling that the big spending homosexual embezzler was doing something wrong. Perish the thought!

Hogwash! The evidence from the sex abuse scandals makes it clear that the bishops knew exactly what they were doing when they covered up for the abusers. Bishop Lori appears to be playing the same game now.

My prophecy is that the diocese will continue to claim innocence and do everything they can to stonewall the depositions. In they end they will settle out of court with the settlement sealed. Hey, it's like the government bailout -- it's only the pewsitters' money.

The Scandals Continue....

Pope accepts Uruguayan bishop's resignation after he's caught engaging in homosexual sodomy. And how many are there in the United States just like him? We all know about Rembert Weakland. Why hasn't he faced censure after his scandalous tell-all book? Does retirement excuse his depravity and public dissent from Church teaching? I have yet to see a high-placed cleric say one word about this pathetic excuse for a disciple of Christ. If we all just close our eyes and ears we can pretend the elephant isn't in the living room.