Catholic Church Priest Abuse And A Thousand Charges Coming Forth In Michigan For Those Who Participated

Last year when a grand jury investigation found that the Catholic Church in Pennsylvania covered up decades of sexual abuse by over three hundred priest the fallout would spill across the country.

'Men of God hid it all': Church protected more than 300 'predator priests' in Pa., grand jury says

Church leaders protected more than 300 "predator priests" in six Roman Catholic dioceses across Pennsylvania for >decades because they were more interested in safeguarding the church and the abusers than tending to their victims, >says a scathing grand jury report released Tuesday.

More than 1,000 young victims were identifiable from the church's own records, the report says.

“The main thing was not to help children, but to avoid scandal,” the report says. "Priests were raping little boys and >girls and the men of God who were responsible for them not only did nothing: They hid it all.

I guess it should have come as no surprise then when our local news station ran a three part series last week entitled "After The Fall" documenting how the fall out from the cases in Pennsylvania had an effect here. Some of the clergy accused in Pennsylvania was moved here in Michigan after being accused of sexual abuse by parishioners in Pennsylvania. This led our states attorney general to start investigating Catholic priest abuse here and our local news station to start digging for survivors of abuse.

West Michigan priest sex abuse by the numbers

Since the late 1950s, 14 priests in the Roman Catholic Diocese of Grand Rapids have sexually molested at least 33 girls >and boys, according to Target 8 research.

Dennis Wagner was the only one defrocked, and Rev. Shauman Beas was the only one who was convicted of a sex >crime. Beas was later deported.

Target 8 investigators pieced together the information after interviewing survivors and digging through archives at >WOOD TV8 and the Grand Rapids Public Library, as well as online records, court records and police reports. Here’s >how it all breaks down.

The first part of the series went on to identify priest who had abused children, how they ended up being located here after being moved from other parishes after accusations were leveled against them and what the status of those priest are and where they are located now.

The second part of the series dwell in how the church has chose to treat these priest better than they do those who were abused by them. Those that have abused have never faced any repercussions criminally and most live in retirement with full pensions and benefits from the church.

Survivors: Catholic Church helping abusers more than abused

To this day, survivors of pedophile priests accuse the church of treating the abusers better than the abused. They >question why they've had to fight for money for counseling while the church continues to support some of the >offenders with pensions, which the diocese says it’s legally obligated to provide. They also get medical and dental >benefits and car insurance.

"To be able to be out there living healthy lives, receiving healthy pensions and still no recourse, it just doesn't seem >right," survivor Chris Burri said. "It doesn't seem fair; it doesn't seem right. It doesn't seem logical to me that they >hold the value of these folks up more than they hold the value of the victims."

The third part of the series got into the horrific detailed repeated abuse by two of west Michigans worst offenders and the profound effect it had on their survivors.

After the Fall: The legacies of Grand Rapids' two most notorious priests

Years and even decades after the abuse, survivors in West Michigan are still working through the aftermath: the loss of >trust, faith and innocence, and the betrayal by the church they loved.

Target 8 identified 14 priests who molested at least 33 boys and girls in the Grand Rapids diocese since the late 1950s. >Five of the abusers are still living in West Michigan, most collecting pensions and health benefits.

"They're so powerful and we were worth nothing. We weren't worth anything," Heinemann said.

Grand Rapids' two most notorious priests abused their victims nearly three decades apart. Father John Thomas >Sullivan sexually assaulted young girls in the late 1950s; Father Dennis Wagner molested young boys in the early >1980s. Between the two, they abused as many as 15 children.

Out of the reporting came the frightening assertion by the state's attorney general that this isn't going to be the end here in W. Michigan, the AG has fielded over 270 complaints since the former AG started the investigation last year after it was found that priest from Pennsylvania were transferred here, The new incoming AG states it should come as no surprise to find charges coming forth after these investigations have been completed. They are though going one step further, they will also bring forth charges against any member of the Catholic clergy who was complicit in allowing the abuse by knowingly transferring priest around from parish to parish.

AG: Priests, church leaders could face criminal charges

"It's not just unethical, but I believe that is criminal behavior, and you can bet if we're able to use our state laws to >charge people who've been involved in that kind of activity, we will do so," she said.

She said her office will pursue criminal charges for any sexual abuse against children since 1995, as far back as it can >go under the statute of limitations. It will also pursue any diocesan officials who shuffled pedophile priests from >church to church, diocese to diocese or state to state, she said.

"That is something that needs to be explored: If people knowingly allowed an individual they knew was conducting >acts of pedophilia and transferred them to another location which enabled them to continue to commit those >criminal acts, certainly that's something that we're going to have to look into," Nessel said.

This past weekend I sat down to post this series for discussion on another site with the intention of making a post here about it. While doing so I ran across an article about Theodore McCarrick, a US Cardinal that had been deflocked by the Pope after Vatican officials found him guilty of having sex with minors and others in the seminary. Others, as in, "yes" taking advantage of young priest entering priesthood. This added a whole new twist to the revelations of abuse, a priest who wasn't just deflocking his flock but also abusing his power to deflock the flock entering the seminary. This was the highest laicizing of a church officials to date. This is the second highest step before elevation into the process to be considered a pope. Just think about that for a minute. How can it imaginably be that someone within the churches hierarchy reach such a status after perpetrating decades long abuse. I started wondering about the times when the Catholic Church was desperate for recruits and considered at one point to allow priest to marry to bring more into the priesthood. Think about the implications of sexually assaulting seminarians and the effects that had on recruitment when these deeply held secrets circulated among recruits. You would literally have to be a gay man to even want to consider the consequences of what could happen to you entering the seminary and be able to accept that as being all right because that was a lifestyle choice you felt comfortable with. (Not the coerced or raped version of it though) A chance to enter a secret society that not only embodied your lifestyle choice but one that gained you access by power to control those under you by the mere fear they would feel out of questioning authority. It's just mind boggling. This wasn't lost on me by any means when the abuse allegations first came out, I often told people who wouldn't find it odd that men who would make a rule that they couldn't get married wouldn't make one suspicious of such a group, the magnitude to which I was right just blows me away. More confirmation would have to come forth to prove my assertion though.

First one has to, as the above article indicates, have people willing to stand up and ask how just is it that the Pope didn't know or that any prior popes didn't know. For this we go to a interview done with Richard Snipes, Snipes is an expert in clergy abuse, he had studied hundreds of clergy sex abuse cases. In the interview Snipes was quoted as saying:

One disturbing facet of this willingness to overlook serious sexual sin, say a number of priests and seminarians, is the >existence of a discreet but powerful homosexual network within seminaries and chanceries. A. W. Richard Sipe, a >psychiatrist and former Benedictine monk who has treated scores of sexually abusive priests and has written >extensively about the phenomenon, says that the reality of the gay network is well known to clerics and others closely >familiar with the workings of the Catholic Church, though difficult to prove from public sources.

“I’ve reviewed over 100 cases of sexual abuse by priests. In there you get the documentation, which unfortunately >often gets sealed by the Church after they settle the cases,” says Sipe, who is an expert witness in abuse cases. “It’s >very clear that you can trace [the network], one person to another, through a sequence of appointments, the >sequence of who follows whom in what position, and how they got there. It is a fact, and nobody can sincerely deny >it.” A typical pattern involves a priest becoming sexually involved with a seminarian or younger cleric, and then the >junior man following his elder up the diocesan hierarchy. Sipe and others interviewed say this “bond of secrecy” >introduces the possibility of blackmail: Those in positions of authority are prevented from acting against others >because they themselves are compromised. It’s a form of mutually assured destruction.

Richard Snipes is saying there is a gay networking within the church. There are a lot of priest within the system that don't abuse minors or adolescents, even among straight heterosexual priest who are sexually active, they have secrets, and they learn to keep their mouths quiet as part of an informal system of self preservation.

Records of McCarricks abuse and settlements involved in cases brought against him go all the way back to 1986, these cases are filed on record in Rome.

There is documentation that records McCarrick’s sexual activity and sleeping arrangements with seminarians and >young priests even when he served as the first bishop of Metuchen after serving as an auxiliary bishop in New York. >On file are the unsealed “MEDIATION DOCUMENTATION FOR FR. G.” that involved McCarrick, the dioceses of Metuchen >and Newark, NJ. (2006) A financial settlement was reached. The case was sent to the Congregation for the Doctrine of >the Faith in Rome, but it has not yet responded. Documents include the history of McCarrick’s initial sexual gesture >and approach to the victim then a seminarian, in the bishop’s Metuchen residence in 1986.

Documentation includes hand written correspondence (letters and cards) from McCarrick postmarked between 1987 >and 2005. Many of the letters are signed “Uncle Ted.” The names of other priests who were either seen having sex with >McCarrick or witnessed McCarrick having sex with another priest are also included in the file. One of the priests is still >in active ministry another left the ministry and was assisted by the church and McCarrick to re-educate for another >profession. The names of other sexually active priests are also in the reports. Records of McCarrick’s activities with >these priests are also included in medical evaluations and records all reviewed by Bishop Hughes of Metuchen >already in 1995.

Now if we go back to the question of if there was complicity in the knowledge of abuse we can take what has just been acknowledge and the career of McCarrick to see if there may be a means to answer the question or to at least lead us to our own individuals paths to determine whether the highest of the hierarchy of the Catholic Church deliberately and willfully engaged in or covered of the abuses. During McCarricks career there were three popes who would play into this. The least culprit-able but not totally excused would be Pope Benedict XVI.

He was the Pope between John Paul II and the current Pope Francis. During his reign as Pope Richard Snipes wrote him a letter. In his letter he was quite clear about the abuses of McCarrick. In the opening of the letter Snipes informs Pope Benedict that this plague of abuse goes far beyond what is happening with the sex offenses to minors but is also a systemic abuse within the system of the church itself.

Your Holiness, I, Richard Sipe, approach you reluctantly to speak about the problem of sexual abuse by priests and >bishops in the United States, but I am encouraged and prompted by the directive of Vatican II, Lumen Gentium, >Chapter IV, No. 37. “By reason of knowledge, competence…the laity are empowered—indeed sometimes obliged—to >manifest their opinion on those things that pertain to the good of the Church.” And also moved by your heartfelt >demonstration of concern for victims on your recent visit to the United States I bring to your attention a dimension of >the crisis not yet addressed. It is closer to the systemic center of the problem and one most difficult for you to >address.

As the crisis of sexual abuse of our children and vulnerable adults by priests and bishops in the United States is >unfolding, the dynamics of this dysfunction are becoming painfully clear.

This sexual aberration is not generated from the bottom up - that is only from unsuitable candidates - but from the >top down - that is from the sexual behaviors of superiors, even bishops and cardinals.

The problem facing us in the American church is systemic. I will present Your Holiness with only a few examples:

In response Pope Benedict tries unsuccessfully to force McCarrick into retirement but he bucks his options the Pope lays out for him. This isn't particularly surprising considering that Snipes has informed us, as indicted above, that this systemic network within the church leaves the church susceptible to blackmail. From the book "The Day Of Judgement":

Tornielli and Valente report that it was in 2007—not 2009, as Viganò has claimed—that Pope Benedict XVI issued his >“instructions” to McCarrick, who replied with a letter to the cardinal prefect of the Vatican Congregation for Bishops, >Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re. In his reply, McCarrick refused to accept the instructions from the Vatican that he move >into either a monastery or a retirement home; and he had the audacity to propose four alternatives: a residence for >retired priests, a parish in D.C., an apartment in the Vatican (which he would pay for himself), or a Catholic university >somewhere in the United States. McCarrick’s situation became easier when Nuncio Pietro Sambi died unexpectedly in >July 2011 and was succeeded by Carlo Maria Viganò, who proved less eager to enforce Benedict XVI’s instructions to >McCarrick.

Pope Benedict sidelining McCarrick from the spotlight would seem to indicate that he was not a participant of the gay network inside the Vatican but it does not absolve him from the cover up of the activities within and outside of the church. So we can pretty much conclude that Pope Benedict hindered McCarricks continued rise he was not interested in accelerating it.

What has arisen inside the Vatican now is pretty much a blame game with one side blaming John Paul II for the rise of McCarrick and the other side blaming Francis. One side claims it was the personal secretary of John Paul II who was so crafty in getting John Paul II to advance McCarrick into the hierarchy without John Paul II knowledge of the many offenses committed by McCarrick, many saying during that period of time John Paul was to ill to be fully aware of what was going on, but others have laid forth proof that John Paul was still very much active during the rise of McCarrick.
Others blaming Francis because it was Francis who brought McCarrick back into the public arena after Pope Benedict banished him from site. It has been well established that Francis was fully aware of McCarricks sexual indiscretions upon doing so. Many claim Francis has to save face and thus has set forth a plan to place all the blame on John Paul.

So what conclusion can we draw from all this, which believe me was no easy task for a non religious person to decipher over the last few days, my personal opinion, honest opinion, is that both Pope John Paul II and Pope Francis were both part of the gay network inside the Vatican hierarchy. With the length of time McCarrick spent on behalf of both men, with the wide spread rumors and accusations made by other clergy that went ignored or not acknowledged, and from the legal documentation hidden behind the Vatican walls of the lawsuits filed and settled from McCarricks behavior there really isn't much more of a conclusion that one can come to.

I also have a suspicion that some so far failed attempts to have Pope Francis removed over the last couple of years has been over his decision to finally admit openly or let be openly admitted that their does indeed exist inside the Vatican a network of gay priest who lobby to bring up the chain of command those who are complicit to that network. For it is within this secret society of gay men who have spawned a pattern of abuse not just against each other but those who innocently put their trust in these men. Moving forward we can only hope that this repentance will lead to changes.

The only vial of skepticism I grant Pope Francis in all of this is his suggested push to allow priest to marry and his engagement with the argument of the increasing number of annulments (Catholic divorce) and how can they deal with that issue if no one within the hierarchy can stand forth as an example to the strong bonds of marriage by being forbid to marry. In that regard is what gives me my only pause but I cannot help but contemplate while looking at the issues he has brought forth that this would then basically equate to internal forces battling against each other inside the church, but maybe again Pope Francis has an internal force fighting inside himself, maybe he to at one time was a victim. This may be a battle he may finds that heals not only him but can heal the church moving forward if the right decisions are finally made.

When I started to do this post I had no idea it would get so complicated, there were so many questions that led to other questions, in some instances you are just left with food for thought, I guess everyone will have to look at it the same way. There is an urgency though for whatever direction they take it finally be the right one, the damage is unfolding, the truth must come forth, there are to many suffering over the consequences, this has been going on for way to long. It currently is a system so prevalent and abusive that our AG made another announcement before I could even finish this post that it is looking at over one thousand charges against priest here and those who were complicit in the knowledge of abuse.

AG: Age won't stop prosecution of abusive priests

Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel said the number of kids sexually assaulted by Catholic priests in the state >over the decades could top 1,000.

It's the first time anyone has publicly quantified the possible sweep of the abuse at the hands of priests in the state >and, if true, would rival last year's findings in Pennsylvania, which rocked the church and shocked the nation.

There's no time to waste, let's end the abuse.