Saturday, December 6, 2014

Dramatic increase in number of child molesting priests in 1950's

From comments at
I am afraid that the record of Cardinal Murphy O’Connor when Bishop of Arundel and Brighton was not a good one concerning priests who had committed sexual rapes upon children, and at least one notorious offender was given another job where he had easy access to children – with the obvious results. The Cardinal said, in his defence, ” we did not know what to do, in those days” but any school would have told him exactly how to deal with these appalling men – it is not to “recycle” them so they can rape other innocent children. The Catholic Church in England has not faced up to the problem of sex abuse, as a recent article in the admirable “Christian Order” makes clear. Nor has the new pope said much about these sexual attacks on the innocent – although Our Blessed Lord said that for those who harmed children it would be preferable to be at the bottom of the sea with a millstone round the neck. For some Catholics, the crime of sexual attacks by priests on children makes this age not the “greatest age in the history of the Church” but the worst and most shameful. Sexual abuse has emptied the Catholic churches of Ireland and reduced ordinations to almost zero. I have heard it said that this corruption of children by the clergy (the very ones who should be protecting them) has always gone on. I know of no evidence that this happened on any scale before the 1960s. The great enemies of the Church – Rousseau, Voltaire, Proudhon, et al, told many stories of the “evils” of the Catholic Church, (Nuns carrying on with priests, etc) but none of these, to my knowledge, accused the Church of the sexual abuse of children.
  • Benedict Carter
    Chrysostom, the dating of the appearance of this scourge is precisely known: it was in the middle 1950′s when the Servants of the Paraclete, an American Order set up by its holy founder specifically to give residence and spiritual help to priests in trouble (drunks, affairs with women etc.), noted in his letters (hair-raising they are too, and available online) to Bishops that he was seeing for the first time ever homosexual priests and predatory homosexual attacks on children. He warned Bishop after Bishop. He warned Paul VI, who I believe tightened up Canon Law as a result of the warnings given by this Fr. Fitzgerald. It was exactly these provisions of Canon Law that the American, Irish and British Bishops entirely ignored which facilitated the movement of these devils from one parish to another.
    Mid 1950′s. The problem appeared not to have existed before then. closed/not closed by bishop

Bishop Michael Campbell effectively closes Protect the Pope

It is with sorrow that I am writing to let you know that Bishop Campbell, the Bishop of Lancaster, has refused Nick’s request to resume news posting on Protect the Pope.  Bishop Campbell has also stated that he does not want anyone posting on Protect the Pope on Nick’s behalf.
Although I have been news posting on my own behalf on the site, I now feel unable to continue.
Protect the Pope will close as a news service on Sunday 4th May, the Feast of the English Martyrs to allow a short period for readers of Protect the Pope to say goodbye to each other.
Thank you (on my own behalf) for all the prayers, support and help we have received.
Please continue to pray for our Bishop.

Statement by the Right Rev Michael Campbell OSA Bishop of Lancaster

“Bishop Campbell did not close down Protect the Pope
‘Back in 2010 Deacon Nick Donnelly set up the Protect the Pope website/blog, as a direct response to the campaign of hostility and ridicule from sections of the media and lobby groups against Pope (Emeritus) Benedict XVI’s historic visit to the UK in September of that year.
Protect the Pope was particularly successful at this time in articulating a strong defence of the Petrine Office, the Catholic Church, and its teachings against certain secularist and anti-Catholic activists. In the last couple of years, however, Protect the Pope appears to have shifted its objective from a defence of Church teaching from those outside the Church to alleged internal dissent within the Church. With this shift, Protect the Pope has come to see itself as a ‘doctrinal watchdog’ over the writings and sayings of individuals, that is, of bishops, clergy and theologians in England & Wales and throughout the Catholic world.
Protect the Pope makes it clear that the site is a private initiative and is in no way officially affiliated with the Diocese of Lancaster. The fact, however, that its creator and author is a permanent deacon of the Diocese of Lancaster and holding some responsibility here fosters in the minds of some people that Deacon Nick Donnelly is somehow reporting the views of the Diocese.
It is my view that bishops, priests and deacons of the Church – ordained and ‘public’ persons – are free to express themselves and their personal views, but never in a way that divides the community of the Church i.e. throughad hominem and personal challenges. Increasingly I have felt that Protect the Pope, authored as it is by a public person holding ecclesiastical office (an ordained deacon), has, at times, taken this approach its own posts – but has also allowed for this by facilitating those who comment online.
I note that Cardinal Timothy Dolan of New York, speaking at a media conference in Rome on 29 April, said: “We adhere to the best and highest standards”—indicating that this doesn’t only pertain to the latest in technological advancements which are “critically important,” but also to “the way we use that technology,” because “how we say something is just as important as what we say.”
Cardinal Dolan also noted the importance of never caricaturing or stereotyping those who oppose the Magisterium. He exhorted that even when confronted with those who attempt to distort what the Church says, or who issue “mean, vicious, and outward attacks,” we must “always respond in charity and love.”
On several occasions, I asked Deacon Nick, through my staff, for Protect the Pope to continue its good work in promoting and teaching the Catholic Faith, but to be careful not to take on individuals in the Church of opposing views through ad hominem and personal challenges. Unfortunately, this was not taken on board. Consequently, as a last resort, on 3 March 2014 and in a personal meeting with Deacon Nick Donnelly, I requested, as his Diocesan Ordinary, that Deacon Nick ‘pause’ all posting on the Protect the Pope website so as to allow for a period of prayer and reflection upon his position as an ordained cleric with regards to Protect the Pope and his own duties towards unity, truth and charity. The fact that this decision and our personal dialogue was made public on the Protect the Pope site and then misinterpreted by third parties is a matter of great regret. In fact, new posts continued on the site after this date – the site being handed over and administered/moderated in this period by Deacon Nick’s wife Martina.
On 13 April 2014 Deacon Nick requested in writing that he be allowed to resume posting again from the date: Monday 21 April 2014. I did not accept this request as the period of discernment had not yet concluded. Again, the fact that this decision was forced, misinterpreted and then released publicly on the site – and miscommunicated by certain media outlets and blogs – claiming that I had effectively ‘closed’, ‘supressed’ or ‘gagged’ Protect the Pope was regrettable and does not represent the truth of this situation. To be clear: I have not closed down Protect the Pope.
I am certainly aware of the need of the Church and the Diocese of Lancaster to engage positively with the new media, social media, blogs, and the internet for the sake of spreading the Gospel to the people of our age. Indeed, our Diocese has a good track record of such engagement in reaching out to a much wider audience through our active use of the new communication technologies. I have a weekly blog myself.
I am, of course, also conscious, that no bishop can ever ‘close down’ or supress blogs and websites – such a claim would be absurd. Bishops can and must, however, be faithful to their apostolic duty to preserve the unity of the Church in the service of the Truth. They must ensure that ordained clergy under their care serve that unity in close communion with them and through the gift of their public office: preaching the Truth always – but always in love.’
There will be no further comment from the Diocese of Lancaster on this matter.
+Michael G Campbell OSA
Bishop of Lancaster 2 May 2014
Diocesan Website:
Diocesan Twitter Account: @LancasterDioces
Diocesan Facebook Account:
Bishop’s Blog:”

Tuesday, November 4, 2014

1932 Catholic German Vote

Here's an interesting pair of maps. The first is colored in where the percentage of Catholics was highest in 1932. The second is colored in where the Nazi vote was highest in 1932, when Hitler maneuvered his way to power.

The German Catholic population:

And then the Nazi vote.

Source: Erik Maria Ritter von Kuehnelt-Leddihn ""Liberty or Equality".

Reproduced in Scholder Die Kirchen und das Dritte Reich. Bd. 1 und 2: Vorgeschichte und Zeit der Illusionen, 1918 - 1934 (The Churches and the Third Reich, vol. 1: Case History and Time of Illusions). Berlin 1977

Sunday, October 12, 2014

A Jesuit comments on our Jesuit Pope

The good news is that Francis is no fan of the Tridentine Mass. Yes, he did say Mass in Latin in Korea, but that was because he did not know Korean, and they did not know Italian or Spanish. As archbishop of Buenos Aries, Argentina, he forbade the Tridentine Mass in his archdiocese until Pope Benedict mandated that it be available throughout the universal church whether bishops wanted it or not. Francis has never celebrated it (he was ordained in 1969) and never will. He hopes it will fade away.

Nor is he happy with the push for literal translations, including translating pro multis as "for many" rather than "for all." As a result, the Vatican push for new Italian, German, and other translations has been put on hold.

From the "National Catholic Reporter"