Back in early March of this year Catholic theologian (and
blogger) Dr. Colin Kerr announced
that my blog Contra|Diction had been
banned from his Society of Canadian
Catholic Bloggers. I promptly left a comment on his blog posting and then issued
my own short posting
in response. Colin’s posting generated a good number of interesting comments,
as did mine, and these comments taken as a whole provide both a range of
insight as well as a share of ad
hominem attack. I initially planned to publish a more detailed critique of
Colin’s decision to oust my blog as well as of the confused rationale which he
had expressed in his posting but I soon realized it simply would have consumed
more time and energy than it was worth. It would have been quite unrealistic to
expect that yet more argumentation could override his strong emotional
connections to Archbishop Prendergast particularly, but also to Cardinal
Collins.
Fast forward to last week when Vox Cantoris blog posted Pervert
Priest and the Canadian bishops that covered him up, so-to-speak. The Vox
links to a shocking post
at Sylvia’s Site detailing the cover
up in the 1960`s and 1970`s of infamous sexual predator Father John Sullivan by
a host of Canadian Bishops. Go ahead and read the revolting details in order to
appreciate the depravity and duplicity of the (Best) Bishops involved.
For most of 29 years that man – this wolf in sheep’s clothing, a child
molester – was permitted to hear confessions, offer up the Holy Sacrifice of
the Mass, and continue to prey on innocent young boys.
Is it really possible that several Bishops
participated in such a heinous cover-up? Yes indeed and not only several, but
several very powerful Bishops, those who, at the time, were considered to be
the best of Canada`s Bishops.
Bishop Alexander Carter was one of the influential Gang of Five, a
group of Canadian bishops who, as I once said elsewhere, were fast friends who wielded an inordinate
influence upon their fellow Canadian
bishops and hence upon the face of Roman Catholicism in Canada and indeed upon
the face of the nation period.
Would anyone dispute the claim that a great many good
Catholics of that time period, much like Dr. Colin Kerr today, were delighted
to count these men as exemplary stewards of God? Likely they would have defended
them to the death, not being fully persuaded of the mystery
of iniquity. Yet were these Bishops not deeply infected with an evil that
led to immense suffering for many innocent persons? Imagine the scorn and abuse
that might have been heaped upon the fellow Catholic who had the temerity in
those days to suggest that these Bishops were complicit in protecting a priest
who serial-raped young boys. Perhaps Sylvia’s site can provide us with just
such an illustration?
Bishop Alexander Carter – and others – knew that Carter was a sexual
predator, and, what did he/they do?
Nothing! Well, no, not really
nothing. In truth, the bishop (s)
enabled Sullivan. It was, after all,
thanks to Carter that Sullivan was permitted to continue to masquerade as a
priest and continue his sacrilegious romp from one sanctuary to another, and,
yes, it was thanks to the bishop(s) that parents throughout the diocese were
wilfully deceived, children were wilfully placed at risk, – and Sullivan was
free to rape the souls of countless other young boys. Sad to say, and I would
suggest, not surprisingly, Sullivan did just that. Until 1979!
Read the full posting, see the list of Bishop`s names and do
a little homework. Lo, many of these *best* Bishops were architects and
supporters of the Winnipeg
Statement! History has issued its verdict
on that act of defiance, and now also on the cover-up surrounding Father Sullivan.
Could there be a more a cunning, scandalous, evil and depraved betrayal
of the flock by the shepherds? I am at a
loss for words.
Incidentally, ask yourself, what is worse: the cover up of sexual
abuse or the mass spiritual destruction of souls? (Be sure you answer that
question before leaving this page.) Forty or fifty years ago, Bishops were
covering up the perverse sins of priests; now they find it convenient to cover
up the sins of Catholics who regularly practice intrinsically
evil behaviours, believing and pretending there’s really nothing to see
here. “Let’s move along now folks, nothing to see here.” The common thread though
is a blatant disregard for the welfare of souls, a de facto denial of sin and
evil as well as judgment for personal sin. The scandal extends to pseudo-catholics—like
PM Justin Trudeau—who infect all strata of society and who, like a huge colony
of ants, are busy incrementally dismantling
every moral safeguard of society and the common good. As long as Bishops don’t
expect or require Catholics to live like Catholics our nation will continue to disintegrate
into chaos. Which then is the worse evil?
Bishops who are not actively promoting and defending the
fullness of Catholic truth, along with correcting the grievous and pervasive errors
of the day, are tolerating much greater evils that are not apparent to the
eye. As part of a strategy to cover up for these evils such Bishops downplay or
even ignore the concerns that the faithful bring repeatedly to the fore.
But didn’t these Bishops who enabled Fr. Sullivan appear to
be sincere, dedicated and enthusiastic servants of the Lord? You betcha. Were
they bad, devious, un-Christian people? I doubt anyone would characterize them
as such, even their critics. Were they well loved and respected by many, many
Catholics? Of course they were. Learn then a lesson here: Those who discreetly,
or otherwise, disrespect and undermine the teaching and discipline of the
Church do not come dressed in red costumes with horns and tails but appear
rather as angels of light and servants of righteousness. Blinded by their pride
and arrogance they are not always aware of their own treachery nor do they always
recognize rebellion in their selective silence and omissions.
Would we—should we—pray for the downfall
[scroll to the end of linked posting] of such men, the “best” pastors of the
Church? I imagine the answer depends on whether we can admit to, or rather grasp,
the depth of evil at work in our midst. Souls are being lost, the Faith is
undermined, the nation is reeling, all due to sin and scandal while too many
Bishops veritably preside over the meltdown. Certainly we ought to call
first for the conversion [scroll to the end of linked posting] of such men
so that the Church and our society might be saved from the devil’s worst plans.
But how strongly can we condemn the wayward prelate while at the same time respecting
his office?
St. Paul urged
the Corinthians to judge those in the Church who were guilty of sin, indicating
their responsibility to put away from among themselves the wicked person. He
indicated they must “deliver this man to Satan for the destruction of the flesh,
so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord.” Surely if St. Paul
could counsel the local parish to expel or excommunicate one of the brothers we
may ask St. Joseph to intercede on our behalf, beseeching the Lord to convert
the heart of a renegade or hireling Bishop, finally bringing to bear divine
judgments of many kinds if necessary, or even the removal of said Bishop so
that a worthy replacement might be had.
But shouldn’t we constrain ourselves in our struggle to see
justice and order restored in the Church of Christ? Shouldn’t we come to grips
with the fact that these Bishops—like all men—are not perfect, and that
realistically any replacement is unlikely to be better and quite likely to be
worse? GOD FORBID!! If we cannot envision and work with all our might towards a
Church that is truly purged of known evil and made a holy instrument of God,
then we may as well give up on our own personal call to holiness!
But again, does our condemnation constitute lack of reverence
for these pastors of the Church? Are we
being presumptuous? Would we be guilty of an offense against charity? Would we
be presenting a one-sided negative account of the matter? Would we be rushing
to conclusions? Look at the example
set by Jesus Christ Himself. These were exceedingly strong criticisms of the religious leaders of his day! Do any of the woes pronounced therein apply to the
Bishops who shielded Father Sullivan? Do any of the woes apply to Bishops who
consign millions of souls to hell because they fail
to warn rank and file Catholics of their sinful behaviours and sacrilegious
Communions? Do any of the woes apply to Bishops who neglect
their duty to discipline public sinners who scandalize the faithful and
corrupt the morals of a nation?
No comments:
Post a Comment