Magisterial Fidelity
A Roman Catholic Mom from Boston

Send help.
Carol M. McKinley

Saturday, November 19, 2005 :::

This is the reason why I reject the schismatics, hysterics and mentally disturbed when they come around with accusations and allegations.

The agreement, the first in the nation between a Catholic diocese and a federal prosecutor, settles an allegation by US Attorney Michael J. Sullivan that in 1999 the administration of Cardinal Bernard F. Law misled the federal government about the background of a priest of the archdiocese who had been hired as a military chaplain. The federal government says the priest was an accused child abuser; the archdiocese disputes that description.

Yeah, because "the description" is asinine...given the material facts.

Beyond asinine.

But the settlement marks a significant concession by the church, which is protected by the US Constitution from most forms of government oversight, in agreeing to give federal officials a say in how the archdiocese trains its employees and in requiring the archdiocese to report publicly assessments of its programs.

How precious.

The godless government has taken the reigns.

Of course, anyone who is informed on the diocescan Kinsey Experiment knew this was the deal for a long, long time.

I resent the fact that the reputation of an innocent man had to be exploited and raped to accomodate them all.

The archdiocese said it was pleased to have avoided criminal or civil charges. ''The archdiocese has consistently maintained that there was no basis for a criminal prosecution," the archdiocese said in a statement.

The man was innocent - and Sullivan had to have known that too - because I've read in every detail the same records Sullivan has.

It was a sham.

A scam.

His secret archdiocesan personnel file included a note with an anonymous allegation that the priest had ''fooled around with kids" while working at a home for troubled adolescent boys and an evaluation from an intern at a psychiatric facility who said Scanlan had become infatuated with a boy at the home.

That is a complete mischaracterization of the facts.

I'll concede to the fact that he "fools around with kids"...nobody who knows him would ever dispute that...he's a clown.

He's like Uncle Buck....a dry sense of humor, a caring man - who goes above and beyond the call of duty. He's funny, blunt and has emotions. In other words, he's normal. That's all mystifying to the folks who are emotionally vacant.

The notation "fooled around with kids" was written on a cocktail napkin and stuck in his personell file. "Who" wrote it has never been found. Nobody has ever owned up to it near as I know....and "what" they meant by it therefore, gave them all a great opportunity to spin the hysteria.

Interesting that Paulson says it's a priest. He knows more than the prosecutors apparently and the defense attorneys.

The characterization that he was "infatuated" with a boy is an out and out lie.

The psychiatrist from the facility who reviewed the "intern" report - - and examined Fr. Scanlan in great detail completely vindicated him of any sort of attraction that could be construed as such. He was the "intern's" supervisor and he discredited the "intern". The report says Fr. Scanlan is not homosexually oriented, he is a heterosexual and the characterization of the "intern" was an gross error in judgment of the facts.

If Sullivan were acting in good faith - why wouldn't he present those facts?

Fr. Scanlan is the kind of a priest who when other priests sit in front of the boob tube and deny your dying mother the sacraments - he gets off his butt and drives sick to administer them.

To priests who are removed from their vocation - - that kind of a dedication - requires a psychiatric evaluation. Must be something wrong with a fellow who look the other way - right?

He's the kind of a priest - who when working with the kids and they fall back into the drugs and booze...he shakes his booty, gets in his car and pulls them from the corner to save them from the people pushing drugs into them.

It's heroic when somebody from DSS does it...but...when a priest does it...suddenly, it's spun as an "infatuation" with the individual you have taken under your wing...into your life...into your heart.

It's very hard for me - knowing the facts - to believe that Sullivan is acting in good faith.

Knowing the facts - - it sure seems like a sleezy way to spin this into the press to bring about their end of bringing in the sexually depraved programs to "protect the children" - giving them control over training employees to train our children about sex.

I'm sure the mistrust we all have effected his judgment...but this goes beyond making excuses as simple as that.

"We did not have any evidence to indicate Cardinal Law had committed any crime during the period in which we were investigating,"

So much for the schismatics, the liars, the accusers and the sociopaths who claim otherwise.

The End.

The federal government will have the right to review and approve the archdiocese's proposed program for training employees to report federal crimes, according to the agreement.

In addition, the archdiocese agreed to continue to audit parishes and schools for implementation of child protection programs and to finance a committee of specialists to study the effectiveness of child protection programs. The archdiocese will be required to report publicly on its efforts to improve child protection policies every six months for three years, starting in May.

We'll get the spin on how the Walter Cuenin sexual schismatics are teaching the children of disenfranchised parents to touch the kid in the chair next them and how mothers and fathers are not to be trusted regarding sexual matters every six months.

Thank God my days of entering diocescan properties have come, been and gone! Though, there are several here and there that will continue to refuse to do it...and will be safe parishes - I'm not one to take any chances on this kind of hysteria. I have a son and I'd like to keep him free of the whack jobs.

With people like Peter Santos around - - I'd be afraid to let my kids out of my site. I'd sooner be in the company of Parise. I'm dead serious.

People like Santos take the facts and distort them, (as he did with my statements about the police in front of the Cathedral and the abortion clinics - etc - and twist them to make to allegate I must have been in trouble with the police) and the next thing you know - - one of their hysterical hallucinations may be reported to the DA. At least you know Parise is just going to distort the Bible and when you get in the car you can correct the situation on the ride home. I'm sure he's doing harm to himself, harm to the discernment of the community - - - ah - come to think of it - -they're both about the same level of threat to me.

If you have your kids enrolled in CCD or in Catholic schools - good luck to you and the Red Sox!!!

As for me - I've invited Fr. Scanlan to Thanksgiving dinner with our family - - not out of the realm of reality because my children consider him part of our extended family.

I'm going to buy special cocktail napkins with Turkeys on them and - and perhaps make a new Thanksgiving tradition of writing things on them - and sending them up to the Chancery for everyones personell files.

If they sold toilet paper with turkeys on them - that would be even more appropriate to jot down our thoughts and send them up for filing.

::: posted by prolife pundits at 7:24 AM




Powered by Blogger