A Menace To The Catholic Plutocracy
Those of you who have read these virtual pages over the years know that I don’t believe the Catholic Church was ever a spiritual organization but a political one. It was founded to be the state religion of the Roman empire and was the corrupt king maker in much of Europe until the reformation. With 24/7 instant news it became difficult to hide that corruption when the victims of pedophile priests started coming forward. Now the conservative plutocrats that make up the Catholic hierarchy are fighting back proving once again there is very little spirituality involved but a lot of politics and lust for power.
Turning the tables on an advocacy group that has long supported victims of pedophile priests, lawyers for the Roman Catholic Church and priests accused of sexual abuse in two Missouri cases have gone to court to compel the group to disclose more than two decades of e-mails that could include correspondence with victims, lawyers, whistle-blowers, witnesses, the police, prosecutors and journalists.
The group, the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests, known as SNAP, is neither a plaintiff nor a defendant in the litigation. But the group has been subpoenaed five times in recent months in Kansas City and St. Louis, and its national director, David Clohessy, was questioned by a battery of lawyers for more than six hours this year. A judge in Kansas City ruled that the network must comply because it “almost certainly” had information relevant to the case.
The network and its allies say the legal action is part of a campaign by the church to cripple an organization that has been the most visible defender of victims, and a relentless adversary, for more than two decades. “If there is one group that the higher-ups, the bishops, would like to see silenced,” said Marci A. Hamilton, a law professor at Yeshiva University and an advocate for victims of clergy sex crimes, “it definitely would be SNAP. And that’s what they’re going after. They’re trying to find a way to silence SNAP.”
Of course the very evil Bill Donohue is involved.
Catholic League president Bill Donohue is sick and tired of coddling rape victims. That’s why he supports efforts by lawyers for two Missouri priests accused of sexual abuse to cripple an organization that advocates on behalf of the victims of pedophile priests – Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests (SNAP).
The Roman Catholic Church has been a power hungry plutocracy from the beginning. They have less power today but little else has changed.
Update:
Charles Pierce as usual has a great take.
I spent the afternoon scouring the various versions of the Gospels that we have lying around Blog HQ, and I haven’t found one that renders Christ’s famous admonition as, “Suffer the little children to come unto me, but lawyer up first, and cover your asses with SLAPP suits.”
There’s not much else to say. This is what happens when you don’t put criminals in jail. The sheer audacity of the clan of the red beanie continues to amaze and astound. And their spokesman is decided unscriptural:
Share This
I am beyond speechless at the total tone deafness of these people.
“We don’t need altar boys” drips with irony.
Merkin is quite right, and Donohue is horrible.
Pierce is right. We should have jailed bishops. Lots of bishops. Maybe we still can, but time is running out.
Ron is only partly right, like the fable of 4 blind men examining an elephant. One grabs the leg and says it’s a tree, another the tail and says it’s a rope,…
If Ron refuses to look at the spiritual work of the church, or refuses to look at the charitable work of the church, then he will only see part of the truth.
Although Catholic-bashing and anti-Catholic paranoia had a rich tradition in right-wing circles for centuries, in recent generations it has become far more popular in left-wing and liberal circles (although you still find remnants of it on the Right, especially in Evangelical circles). “Catholic baiting is the anti-Semitism of the liberals,” back in 1960. It was true then and it is still true now.
Historian Philip Jenkins wrote that anti-Catholicism is “the most luxuriant, tenacious tradition of paranoiac agitation in American history,” and he’s entirely correct. It’s as bad as anti-Semitism ever was in this country. We’re fortunately no longer in the days when groups like the KKK enjoyed lynching Catholics, but beyond that not much has changed. The sinister hand of the evil Bishops of the Catholic Church corrupting our politics and threatening our freedom and seeking victims for their power everywhere–it’s a centuries old tale no different than that of the sinister Jews plotting against us.
The Catholic Church can’t just be wrong, they can’t just have occasional problems with corruption and bad people like any other large religious or secular group, they are instead something special and sinister.
The Wikipedia entry is pretty good look at how far back this paranoid religious bigotry goes, and it’s pretty obvious not much has changed.
Anti-Catholicism in the United States is as odious, pernicious, and destructive as anti-Semitism. These days, it’s in some ways worse: Say something that can be seen as misogynistic, homophobic, racist, or anti-semitic and it can haunt you for years. Bash the good old Catholic Church though, and it’s always safe ground. Better yet, when Catholics defend themselves or their Church, there’s even something sinister about that too!
This article, and its related links, demonstrate this vile religious bigotry perfectly. It is not, apparently, enough to accuse Church leaders of acting inappropriately, of being fallible men capable of corruption like any other men, and of holding them accountable for their sins. It is necessary to indict the entire faith, the entire organization.
That’s what bigotry looks like. It’s nothing new.
By the way, I now predict that my accurate description of this article as hatemongering bigotry (because hatemongering, paranoid, ignorant bigotry is what it is) as being an attempt to excuse the sex scandals, when I said no such thing. The sex scandals and efforts by some in the Church to cover them up are not acceptable. It’s the rest that’s going along with it that’s the vile religious bigotry.
This vicious attack on SNAP/victims tells us only one thing.
To all victims who have been sexually abused by clerics, your voices are strong, powerful, and being heard…!..
The church officials can’t shut us up. They can’t shove all the victims back under their control of silence.
The can of worms has been opened, and that is only because very brave victims of clergy sex abuse are speaking up, coming forward, contacting the police, exposing the truth, and trying their hardest to not allow another child to be given the life sentence of harm which they were dealt.
For those who wish to help …On our website – SNAPnetwork.org – are simple suggestions for helping victims beat back this assault against them by top Catholic officials. Please check it out. Thanks.
Judy Jones, SNAP Midwest Associate Director, USA, 636-433-2511
“Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests” and all clergy.
(SNAP, the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests, is the world’s oldest and largest support group for clergy abuse victims.
SNAP was founded in 1988 and has more than 12,000 members. Despite the word “priest” in our title, we have members who were molested by religious figures of all denominations, including nuns, rabbis, bishops, and Protestant ministers and increasingly, victims who were assaulted in a wide range of institutional settings like summer camps, athletic programs, Boy Scouts, etc. Our website is SNAPnetwork.org)
Judy,
Thank you for all the great work SNAP has done. Please keep it up. I wonder if SNAP thinks some bishops should be jailed.
Dean,
Thank you, too. Though you might be overstating the case a bit, I largely agree and am very grateful.
Damn spam filter! Splitting up:
To think that the church should take some responsibility in the systematic rape of thousands of children by their leadership is anti-Catholic bigotry? Wow. That’s the most unbelievable thing I’ve heard you say, and you’re pretty good at saying unbelievable things.
“By the way, I now predict that my accurate description of this article as hatemongering bigotry (because hatemongering, paranoid, ignorant bigotry is what it is) as being an attempt to excuse the sex scandals, when I said no such thing.”
The article you describe as hatemongering is about the sex scandals. You are, most certainly and without any doubt, saying that it is hatemongering to want some justice for the victims of these rapes. YOU ARE EXCUSING THE SEX SCANDALS, Dean. To say you are not is so blatantly untrue I can scarcely beleive you wrote it.
Shorter Dean: “I never said we should ignore or excuse the sex scandal, but if you don’t ignore and excuse the sex scandal, you are a hatemonger and a bigot.”
Not stealing hundreds of thousands from Africa, stacking them in ships and selling those that survived as property to wealthy white land-owners? Not displacing thousands of established native tribes from their land, bringing diseases and guns to kill them, taking their land, forcing them onto reservations a thousand miles from their homes? Not the paranoiac agitation in the last 11 years since 9-11 against Muslims? Really, Dean, anti-Catholicism? As bad as anti-Semitism ever was? Did we ever force all Catholics into ghettos?
I mean, hell, Dean, what world do you live in?
Dean’s rant aside, there are valid justifications for a great many of the criticisms the catholic church has found itself facing in recent times. As an insitution they are out of step (to put it gently) and have much to answer for. Sure, there are are people who are anti-catholic, but you can’t cry bigotry every time there is examination and a call for accountability. One has to wonder just how thrilled the Vatican would be if Jesus were to make an unannounced appearance on the scene? I’m guessing not very.
Sorry roro, mine should have been the warm-up for your post, not the other way around
The article is not ONLY about sex scandals.
The article makes the facile argument that the church can be described by ONLY the scandals that the church “never was a spiritual organization, only a political one.”
That goes far beyond condemning the church for the scandals. It ignores other aspects of the church which are entirely different.
I don’t see anything at all in Dean’s writing to suggest he doesn’t want justice for the victims.
It’s a poor argument that relies on paraphrasing one’s opponent.
zephyr,
You are quite right, there are plenty of legitimate reasons to criticize the church.
Don’s criticism of the church was accurate. On the other hand, it is very wrong to say the scandals are the only definition of the church.
Lawyers have been around a lot longer than the Catholic Church, and there wanting any documentation that may help them advocate for their client is understandable and normal.
However, the cover up, is usually bigger than the alleged crime, as it is with the pedophile issue, and it may be that if the Catholic Church had practiced an ounce of prevention and really policed their club, the anti-Catholic forces would give them more credit for the good things they do.
“…anti-Semitism in this country”
This country never put Jews in ghettos. Read a little closer.
Nor does the historian claim that anti-Catholicism is the worst thing this country has done (and yes, our treatment of native Americans is a genocide we haven’t faced as a nation at all). The historian only claims it’s the worst “paranoiac agitiation”. The recent paranoia about Muslims has been bad in some circles, but it isn’t clearly the worst our country has perpetrated (anti-immigrant fever was widespread in the 19th century, went on for decades, and caused not a few riots and deaths).
dduck, you’re absolutely right. Understandable and normal may not do them well in PR, but, they’re lawyers.
If you think it’s a bit overblown, JDave, to say that the Catholic church was never a spiritual organization, I can agree with that, but it is true that it is also a political organization, and always has been. It owns a country, albeit a small one. It has political clout all over the world. It affects policy in big ways. If you don’t like that one sentence in its extremity, that’s fine and you have every right to disagree. To say that that bigotry is the worst bigotry in our country, that the entire article is bigotry and hatemongering, is unbelievably incorrect.
All of the article, with the exception of the ONE sentence you point out, is about sexual abuse and the church leadership trying to bring down an organization that advocates for the many, many victims of that sexual abuse. That Dean is calling the article “hatemongering, paranoid, ignorant bigotry” is, indeed, excusing the sex scandal. Saying that anti-Catholic sentiment (and that’s really what it is — there are no powerful anti-Catholic groups because Catholics themselves are NOT a block in this country) is the WORST BIGOTRY this country has ever engaged in is so beyond hyperbole that it becomes an offensive lie.
“it is very wrong to say the scandals are the only definition of the church”
Who said that?
I should’ve said “that was another country that was famous for putting Jews in ghettos.” Maybe America did it too on a much smaller scale.
BTW, ‘ghetto’ comes from the Italian for ‘bridge’. I believe it refers to the Venice community of Jews (which Shakespeare knew about with Merchant). I think most ghettos happened freely by an understandable choice to be with familiar people for material and moral support.
Ok roro8o, that’s better.
Yes, I objected to that one sentence in its extremity.
Nobody said it was the only defintion. I don’t like putting words in others mouths. The extremity could easily lead to that wrong conclusion.
“That Dean is calling the article ‘hatemongering, paranoid, ignorant bigotry’ is, indeed, excusing the sex scandal.”
That is a completly false equivalency.
I agree the church is political, and fiercely object to defining it as ONLY political. Attempting to define the church as ONLY political in the context of the sex scandals sure looks like bigotry to me.
I gotta bow out for awhile and will try to check in again this evening.
“That is a completly false equivalency.”
The article, except for one sentence, is about the sex scandal. Dean calls the article hatemongering and bigotry, the worst in this country. Sorry, JDave, but it is most certainly trying to cover up and excuse the sex scandal if you call it bigotry to publish articles about the sex scandal.
I do realize that this is not the only defining thing about the church, JDave. However, I would think that Catholics would be most affected and outraged by this, and the most eager and adamant that proper punishment is given to these abusers. I am an advocate for rape victims, but my children will never be abused by clergy members, because I won’t send my kids into the care of priests, being a non-Catholic. I quite honestly do not understand why Catholics and other religious people don’t find this abuse and the total lack of accountability for it all the way up the line of the heirarchy absolutely outrageous. Those who were responsible for moving known rapists around to keep them out of the eyes of the law are being promoted all the time, to extremely high ranks in the church. It simply boggles me that this can occur, and folks like you want people like me to take Catholic leadership’s political action seriously. I know lots and lots of Catholic individuals whose opinions I do take seriously (even if I agree), but the leadership? I quite simply don’t understand why you think that leadership that will perpetrate this sort of abuse to your own children, on such a massive scale, can have any moral authority to tell me what to do with my children, or with my not wanting to have them in the first place. The disconnect is just baffling to me.
^^”even if I don’t agree. sorry typo
The Catholic Church has done a lot more than institutionalize the rape of boys and cover it up. They wield massive financial and political influence all over the world. The church is the biggest land owner in the world, they have their own nation, of which the pope is a true king in the old world sense of being divinely ordained and the voice of god on earth, and their priests and cardinals in charge of the banking are some of the most powerful financiers in the world.
They do do charitable works, but they accumulate wealth at a far greater rate than they dispense it. Putting forth the charitable side is the cost of doing business. At the street level of the organization you have fine community work being done, people getting together to be nice and all that. But when you get to the core of who’s running things, its gets pretty cynical. This is true about so many major institutions, I don’t reserve my disdain for just the Catholic Church. I live in CA and this place is riddled with megachurches and pastors who make very glassy temples and fleece their congregations while lining their pockets. Its the Catholic Church writ small, and many many times over.
I’m sure Jesus would be proud. When he said cast off your belongings and follow me, he just meant the apostles. Everyone who follows deserves a palace, finery fit for royalty, and a bullet proof conveyance to shield you from the eternal bliss of heaven.
Religions need to adapt and accommodate.
Jehovah’s Witnesses blood transfusion confusion
Jehovahs Witnesses take blood products now in 2012.
They take all fractions of blood.This includes hemoglobin, albumin, clotting factors, cryosupernatant and cryopoor too, and many, many, others.
If one adds up all the blood fractions the JWs takes, it equals a whole unit of blood. Any, many of these fractions are made from thousands upon thousands of units of donated blood.
Jehovah’s Witnesses can take Bovine *cows blood* as long as it is euphemistically called synthetic Hemopure.
Jehovah’s Witnesses now accept every fraction of blood except the membrane of the red blood cell. JWs now accept blood transfusions.
The fact that the JW blood issue is so unclear is downright dangerous in the emergency room.
–
Danny Haszard
only got a few mins…
“…it is most certainly trying to cover up and excuse the sex scandal if you call it bigotry to publish articles about the sex scandal.”
I’d agree with that.
But Dean explicitly condemned the sex abuse – explicitly denied what you are acusing him of.
Every Catholic I know is outraged about the scandal. Many of us would have jailed the bishops.
It is not bigotry to criticize the church harshly over the scandals. It is not bigotry to say the church is political.
It is very wrong to say that the church is ONLY political trying to conserve is power. We know that anti-Catholic bigotry exists and to say something so wrong as that looks a jeck of a lot like bigotry to me.
another thing that’s been bugging me:
“It was founded to be the state religion of the Roman empire…”
Bull-effing-sh**! It was FOUNDED by the apostles and THRIVED for more than 250 yrs often when the Rome was doing its level best to kill them all. Constantine didn’t make Christianity official until well after 312.
“founded to be the state religion” is the kind of misinformation is the stock and trade of any propagandist.
Ron made a lot of good solid criticism, but sprinkled it with certain BS that looks a heck of a lot like bigotry to me.
My guess is that Dean was responding to things like that. I wish he had been more precise. However,
He DID most explicitly condemn the sex scandals.
now I’m very late and must go
I am no more bigoted against the Catholic Church than I am organized religion in general. The Catholic Church simply has the longest history and remains the largest and most powerful.
@Jdave:
True, it may have been a spiritual organization up up 312. Once it became the state religion of the Roman empire it became for the most part a political organization and a corrupt one at that – the fate of all state religions. Are there good Catholics doing good things? Of course. The problem lies with the hierarchy which is made up of politicians and politicians seek above all else power. Even the “good deeds” are often an attempt to get power. We see something similar with the Islamic group Hamas which does many “good deeds” in an attempt to attract supporters. As a student of western civilization I make no apologies for the introductory sentence that has offended some if not most.
Your second sentence was flat out wrong, and inflammatory. If you are are student of civilization you would have known it to be wrong too. Most call that lying.
You make no apologies. Neither does Rush. You seem proud of offending so many. Rush is too.
Here is an example of tolerating inflammatory speech when it comes from people we agree with.
@JDave
My second sentence was without doubt inflammatory but that doesn’t make it wrong. Please show me how history proves that I’m wrong(lying}. Ironically the Catholic Church is probably less corrupt now than it has been for most of it’s history. We have only look at the Vatican inspired Crusades where hundreds of thousands of Jews and Muslims were massacred or the Spanish Inquisition.
It’s obvious you and I never going to agree, I’m an atheist, you’re not. But history is history.
“the Catholic Church is probably less corrupt now than it has been for most of it’s history”
We agree on that, I heartily. You probably agree with me that many bishops should be jailed. We agree that sentence number 2 is inflammatory. I am, by disposition, a lefty (something the nuns taught me), and we probably agree on a great many things.
You said “please” so I will try again…
You said Christianity “was founded to be the state religion of the Roman empire”.
History is history (yet another thing we agree on). Historians will almost unanimously agree that Christianity eventually became a state religion, but only after two and a half centuries, and it was certainly not founded as one. Historians will agree that your second sentence was wrong.
Your second sentence is not just inflammatory – it is factually wrong. Deliberately using falsehoods in an inflammatory way is wrong.
Your picture shows that you, like me, have a few gray hairs. We should both know by now that credibility cannot be earned by insisting that we’re infallible.
Be honorable, admit the error, and apologize.
200 celibate old geezers telling the rest of us how to live while covering their own backsides for decades, all the time knowing there were thousands of children being mauled.
Donohue is a scumbag even amongst scumbags.
Yet don’t throw the laity out with the baptism waters of their filthy-handed leadership. The Conference of Bishops does not speak for every Catholic in the United States.
JD,”Be honorable, admit the error, and apologize.”, you are sounding a bit preachy yourself, do the honorable thing and admit you have a BIG difference of opinion.
I hate being preachy. It was clumsy of me and I apologize.
Ron can despise the church all he wants, and I’ll call it a difference of opinion and not expect an apology. roro, zephyr, slamfu and others all had very harsh things to say about the church, some of which I disagree with, but I’ve no quarrel with them.
Ron admitted to being deliberately inflammatory and he spread proveably false information about the church. Those are not matters of opinion.
For two weeks now all of TMV has rightly been in high moral outrage at Rushbo’s inflammatory lies. Ron’s not the first lefty shock jock to bash the Catholic church with horrible distortions of the truth and unjust broad brushes here on TMV and no one here ever seems to mind.