G. K. Chesterton (1874-1936) was both insightful and prophetic when he predicted that the next great heresy would be a "cult of sex." In an article by E. J. Oliver in the Chesterton Review (Feb.1987, p. 48), the author writes of Chesterton's predictions: "In one of his last radio talks, he said, that unless there was a change of policy, Europe would be in ruins in fifteen years. This prophecy was an understatement for the destruction was less than ten years away.

"He further forecast that the next great heresy would be a cult of sex, long before anybody had suspected this post-war development. At the end of The Ball and the Cross, he showed how psychiatry could be abused to incarcerate enemies of the regime, as in Russia today, while in The Flying Inn he prophesied the advance of Islam and the setting up of mosques in the center of London."

Chesterton was so right as he foretold the War and the rise of Islam. But not even Chesterton could have foreseen that his predicted "Cult of Sex" would invade the Church to Her very core and that the bishops would be at the forefront of what would become a psycho-sexual war against children. Classroom sex education mandated by bishops, homosexuals welcomed into the seminaries by bishops, sexual molestation of children by priests ignored by bishops, abortion and contraception winked at or cooperatively accommodated by bishops are clearly understood when seen in the light of the Cult of Sex heresy. It was the American bishops who in 1968 established the so-called Family Life Office that became the springboard for sex instruction in the Catholic school. (These were also the years when sex instruction was making entry into public schools and it was the bishops who also became instrumental in promoting sex instruction in the public schools.)

The bishops rejected the ongoing moral teaching of the Church on purity, modesty and decency, the common sense virtues that are healthy for society as a whole. Instead, bishops replaced the wisdom of 2000 years of Christ's Church with experts at Planned Parenthood and SIECUS (Sex Information and Education Council of the U. S.) who were not only promoting "sexual freedom" but who launched the use of psychological techniques in workshops and classrooms to introduce their revolutionary sexual "values."

The Bishops now tell Catholics to view themselves as "sexual beings," no longer spiritual beings as the Church teaches. The bishops' policy insists sex instruction should be "lifelong."(See the Bishops most recent document, Human Sexuality: A Catholic Perspective in Education and Lifelong Learning, 1991) Early on, diocesan workshops for teachers, clergy and laity, led by Planned Parenthood ideologues, poked fun at sexual reserve taught by the Church, especially when talking to children, and espoused openness and comfort with one's sexuality. American bishops had ideologically joined with Planned Parenthood as the bishops' new instructive motto taught the "need for sex." In the blink of an eye decency, purity, and sin were gone.

The indulgence in the Cult of Sex heresy began through the then Family Life Office, a very powerful division under the bishops' control. That office would negatively impact the morality of both children and adults. For instance, the Family Life Office was the source of Pre-Cana instruction. Since such instruction, Catholic couples learn more about contraception and controlling births through "natural" family planning than the teaching of the Church on marriage.

Also from the Family Life Office came sex education beginning early on in Catholic high schools where Planned Parenthood was invited in to demonstrate their wares and services and to introduce the birth control mentality. (Bishops will have a lot to answer to God for!) When legalized abortion followed on the heels of sex instruction, the silence of the bishops was deafening. Schools teach what is legal, Catholic schools included, so abortion along with birth control was standard fare in the classroom. Legalized abortion gave rise to abortion mills across the country to "control" the "consequences" of failed or unused contraception (killing unborn babies was always disguised in euphemistic terms).

The bishops' Family Life Office (now reshuffled and dealt new names) continues to perpetuate the Cult of Sex heresy with its sex programs which now begin in kindergarten or younger. It also keeps a stranglehold on the pro-life movement. Over the past decades of killings, the most innocent rarely got more than a few non-public token words from the bishops, usually in the confines of pro-life conferences, just enough to keep pro-lifers fooled.

This year 2006 marked 33 years of legalized abortion, the same number of years Jesus walked the earth. Many pro-life organizations have been under the neutralizing thumb of the bishops. Perhaps it is time for pro-lifers to organize and surround the diocesan offices with prayers and signs reminding bishops of how little they are doing in defense of the unborn and how much they have done to foster the Cult of Sex heresy. The bishops, seem only too willing to speak up for the lives of death row criminals, and politically correct seamless garment issues, not babies.

Fanning the flames of the Cult of Sex heresy has been the bishops' seminaries that abandoned celibacy as part of the Sacrificial Cross of Christ. The bishops all but closed the doors of the seminaries to pure living young men, paying no mind to homosexual activity within the walls. That resulted in the unleashing of hordes of roman-collared perverts into dioceses throughout the country to spiritually, psychologically, and physically rape untold numbers of children.

With bishop-approved school texts going so far as to promote homosexuality and bisexuality, how can one expect that bishops would see the vile and dirty acts of sexual molestations as abuse? As the ugliness of the rape of innocent children continues to unfold, bishops look everywhere to lay blame, even laying blame on children as being seducers. Seeing the bishops becoming so self-serving that they think of themselves as victims easily leads one to surmise that an untold number of bishops are homosexuals themselves.

Since the bishops embraced sex as religion many are getting caught acting as "sexual beings" they espouse that all people are. They create policy and programs to further their cult of sex. By their example in recent years of protecting sinful sexual perverts, their actions add another dimension to protecting all forms of sinfully corrupt sexual activity. The bishops have lost all sense of sin.

Sexualized priests became sexualized hierarchy who continue to perpetuate and expand the Cult of Sex heresy while chipping away at all things Catholic. The bishops' liturgical changes turned the Eucharistic Sacrifice of the Mass into a social event. Thus many of the Faithful today do not understand or believe in the Miracle of Transubstantiation that defines the True Church of Our Lord. Without an understanding of the Sacrifice of Christ, how will young Catholics understand the meaning of sacrifice in their own lives?

Perhaps somewhere in the U. S. a bishop will have the courage to begin to combat the Cult of Sex heresy and perhaps others will also find the needed courage. The bishops desperately need our prayers. Now and then we hear of a bishop who is willing to make a few little waves but we need tsunami-sized waves to wash away all the filth.

Dear readers, as you continue to go through this newsletter and read what is so difficult for Mothers' Watch to have to report, you will see that it is incumbent upon us, the laity, to recognize the fact that the Catholic Church in America is in the midst of a Cult of Sex heresy in America that has already spiritually crippled two generations. The Catholic Church, with its' bishops and priests, was highly regarded as the source of Truth, a respected moral leader, and the human dimension speaking up for right and condemning wrong. Having abandoned that most important work, the bishops and priests scandalized the Church by becoming part of the Cult of Sex, and have left society (communities, schools, government, and media), as a whole, without a moral footing.

The hope for the Church and society is dependent upon prayers for our bishops that they will once again embrace Our Blessed Lord above all and re-establish the True teachings of the Church here in America.

The Bishops' Dirty Big Secrets
Protecting Homosexual Molesters at the Expense of Children

Since it has become obvious that the molestation of children by priests is actually homosexual priests raping adolescent boys, the media is having little to say on the issue. The bishops continue to dance around the homosexual scandal storm always working to shift blame to everyone but homosexuals. They appoint committees, write and rewrite charters, spend money on lawsuits and to avoid lawsuits, they blame their negligence on bad advice from their own commissioned so-called "experts." They hide these child rapists at their "fairy farms" until the scandal dies down and they can reassign the criminal priest. The bishops' actions continue to be no more than a huge organized cover-up.

The recent Philadelphia Grand Jury has made it very clear that the American bishops have been hell-bent on protecting themselves and their homosexual clergy all along. The grand jury was summoned by the District Attorney to investigate the sexual molestation of children over several decades within the Philadelphia Archdiocese. It is all spelled out in their Philadelphia Grand Jury Report (philadelphiadistrictattorney.com). It is noteworthy that the Report covers the archdiocese while under Cardinals Krol and Bevilaqua, both considered by many Catholics as "pro-life" and "conservative." The jurists also made it clear that they believed that these bishops should have been able to be charged with aiding and abetting the criminal molesters of children. Instead these crimes were allowed to flourish because of the actions and inactions of the Cardinals, vague laws, and the statute of limitations in place at that time.

The present bishop of Philadelphia, Cardinal Rigali, has recommended that the Catholics of Philadelphia not read the Grand Jury Report, hoping to continue keeping Catholics in the dark. While most details are too sordid to repeat in this newsletter, Mothers' Watch cannot stress strongly enough how important it is for Catholics to read and become aware of the depths to which the Bishops in our country have sunk and how deceptive they continue to be. They have obstinately protected themselves, their clergy, and criminally sinful homosexuality at the expense of the hearts and souls of countless children. This tragedy, perpetuated by the bishops and their Cult of Sex, has been repeated in diocese after diocese across the country. How horribly blasphemous it is that children are being sexually molested by the same hands that consecrate the Body and Blood of Christ!

Just imagine a child seduced, molested, raped again and again by, of all people, a trusted priest. Then imagine a bishop, the "shepherd of souls," reacting with obstinate contempt when informed. The Bishops act as if children are dispensable.

While reading the Philadelphia Grand Jury Report may bring one to tears and sicken them, it is so important to understand the monstrous scope of the heretical homosexual problem that is devouring the children and destroying the Faith. The sadness felt by the writers of the Grand Jury Report about this absolutely avoidable criminal tragedy is evident in the tone of their expose. As difficult as it is to recognize that such scandal has erupted in our Church, the Church teaches that the problem is not fixed by hiding it. Mothers' Watch and all Catholics should be grateful to the Philadelphia District Attorney's Office for the courage and hard work in their clear unbiased expose. Hopefully this will help bring an end to the hush money.

The Philadelphia Grand Jury Report on child sexual molestations is over 400-pages plus an appendix. These bishops and their minions are callous and wimpy men interested only in their own creature comforts and safety while allowing child molestation crimes to flourish, either brazenly by their own doing, or by their silence. These disgracefully wicked men have made all clergy suspect by their actions and have brought the worst shame and scandal ever in the history of the Church. May God save our children from these deceitful, self­serving bishops and cardinals! Keep in mind that the Philadelphia Report covers just that one diocese. It does not include similar crimes in numerous other dioceses, something the grand jury called a "national phenomenon."

The following is taken directly from the Philadelphia Grand Jury Report. The bolded and italic emphasis is in the original.

Introduction to the Grand Jury Report

This report contains the findings of the Grand Jury: how dozens of priests sexually abused hundreds of children; how Philadelphia Archdiocese officials – including Cardinal Bevilacqua and Cardinal Krol – excused and enabled the abuse; and how the law must be changed so that it doesn't happen again. Some may be tempted to describe these events as tragic. Tragedies such as tidal waves, however, are outside human control. What we found were not acts of God, but of men who acted in His Name and defiled it.

But the biggest crime of all is that it worked. The abuser priests, by choosing children as targets and trafficking on their trust, were able to prevent or delay reports of their sexual assaults, to the point where applicable statutes of limitations expired. And Archdiocese officials, by burying those reports they did receive and covering up the conduct, similarly managed to outlast any statutes of limitation. As a result, these priests and officials will necessarily escape criminal prosecution. We surely would have charged them if we could have done so.

But the consequences are even worse than the avoidance of criminal penalties. Sexually abusive priests were either left quietly in place or "recycled" to unsuspecting new parishes – vastly expanding the number of children who were abused. It didn't have to be this way. Prompt action and a climate of compassion for the child victims could have significantly limited the damage done. But the archdiocese chose a different path. Those choices went all the way up to the top – to Cardinal Bevilaqua and Cardinal Krol.

Despite the dimensions and depth of the sex abuse scandal, this Grand Jury was not conducting an investigation of the Catholic religion or the Catholic Church. Many of us are Catholic. We have the greatest respect for the faith, and for the good works of the Church. But the moral principles, on which it is based, as well as the rules of civil law under which we operate, demanded that the truth be told.

Here is a short description for each of the sections that follow this introduction.

Overview of the Sexual Abuse by Archdiocesan Priests

The Grand Jury was able to document child sexual abuse by at least 63 different priests in the Archdiocese of Philadelphia. We have no doubt that there were many more. The evidence also revealed hundreds of child victims of these sexual offenders. Again we have no doubt there were many more. Because much of the abuse goes back several decades, however, and because many victims were unnamed, unavailable, or unable to come forward, we could not present a comprehensive history of all sexual abuse that may have occurred in the Philadelphia Archdiocese. What we did learn was enough to convey the nature of the abuse that took place and was tolerated here.

We should begin by making one thing clear. When we say abuse; we don't just mean `inappropriate touching' (as the Archdiocese often chose to refer to it). We mean rape. Boys who were raped orally, boys who were raped anally, girls who were raped vaginally. But even those victims whose physical abuse did not include actual rape – those who were subjected to fondling, to masturbation, or pornography – suffered psychological abuse that scarred their lives and sapped the faith on which they had been raised. [This section ended with ten examples, many of which were just far too offensively graphic to print.]

Overview of the Cover-up by Archdiocesan Officials

The behavior of Archdiocese officials was perhaps not so lurid as that of the individual priest sex abusers. But in its callous, calculating manner, the Archdiocese's "handling" of the abuse scandal was at least as immoral as the abuse itself. The evidence before us established that Archdiocese officials at the highest levels received reports of abuse; that they chose not to conduct any meaningful investigation of those reports; that they left dangerous priests in place or transferred them to different parishes as a means of concealment; that they never alerted parents of the dangers posed by these offenders (who typically went out of their way to be friendly and helpful, especially with children); that they intimidated and retaliated against victims and witnesses who came forward about abuse; that they manipulated "treatment" efforts in order to create a false impression of action; and that they did many of these things in a conscious effort simply to avoid civil liability.

In short, as abuse reports grew, the Archdiocese chose to call in the lawyers rather than confront the abusers. Indeed Cardinal Bevilacqua himself was a lawyer, with degrees from both a canon law school and an American law school. Documents and testimony left us with no doubt that he and Cardinal Krol were personally informed of almost all of the allegations of sexual abuse by priests, and personally decided or approved of how to handle those allegations.

Here are some incidents that exemplify the manner in which the Archdiocese responded to the sexual abuse of its most vulnerable parishioners.

• The Archdiocese official in charge of abuse investigations described one abusive priest as `one of the sickest people I ever knew.' Yet Cardinal Bevilacqua allowed him to continue in ministry, with full access to children – until the priest scandal broke in 2002.

• One abusive priest was transferred so many times that, according to the Archdiocese's own records, they were running out of places to send him where he would not already be known.

• On at least "one occasion Cardinal Bevilacqua agreed to harbor a known abuser" from another diocese, giving him a cover story and a neighborhood parish here because the priest's arrest for child abuse had aroused too much controversy there. Officials referred to this sort of practice as "bishops helping bishops."

• A nun who complained about a priest who was still ministering to children even after he was convicted of receiving child pornography – was fired from her position as director of religious education.

• A seminarian studying for the priesthood who revealed that he himself had been abused as an altar boy was accused of homosexuality – and was dismissed from the diocese. He was able to become a priest only by relocating to another area.

• When the Archdiocese did purport to seek psychological evaluation of a priest, the primary tool for diagnosis was "self reporting" – in other words, whether the abuser was willing to admit that he was a pedophile. Absent such a "diagnosis," the Archdiocese declined to treat any priest as a pedophile, no matter how compelling the evidence.

• Even when admitted, the abuse was excused: an Archdiocese official comforted one sexually abusive priest by suggesting that the priest had been "seduced" by his 11­year-old victim.

• An Archdiocese official explained that the church could not discipline one especially egregious abuser because, as the official put it, he was not a "pure pedophile" – that is, he not only abused little boys, he also slept with women.

• When one priest showed signs of seeking penance from his victims, the church-run "treatment" facility urged Archdiocese officials to move him to another assignment away from the victims – in other words, transfer him before he apologizes again.

Such cynicism toward priest sexual abuse may not have started in Philadelphia; indeed media reports have revealed strikingly similar tactics throughout the country. Bishops in other dioceses also shuttled abusive priests from parish to parish, until there was no place left to go, ignored repeated reports of abuse, absent a direct confession or "diagnosis" of pedophilia, and looked to legalisms, at the expense of decency... They knew what they were doing.

Legal Analysis and Recommendations

The notion of prosecuting a priest – let alone a high Church official or even the Archdiocese itself – may seem shocking to some. But our oath required us to explore any criminal statute whose terms might fit the conduct we discovered. By the same token, we were obligated not to recommend criminal charges against priests or church leaders merely because of our moral outrage at what they did, over and over again. What we found was that many offenses applied to the evidence before us, but were barred by statutes of limitation, while many others narrowly failed to apply because of what we believe are unintended or unwise limitations in the law.

With regard to priest offenders, any number of sexual offenses were readily made out by the evidence of rape, involuntary deviate sexual intercourse, statutory sexual assault, indecent assault, endangering welfare of children, corruption of minors. In every case, however, our information was simply too old. As we learned from experts in the field, it takes many years – often decades – before most victims of child sexual abuse are able to come forward. By then it is simply too late to prosecute, at least under current Pennsylvania law. We are convinced that more recent victims exist, and perhaps in the future they will be able to give testimony. For now we were able to document many assaults, but none still prosecutable.

With regard to the leaders of the Archdiocese, we explored a variety of possible charges. These included endangering the welfare of children, corruption of minors, victim/witness intimidation, hindering apprehension, and obstruction of justice. All, however, are currently defined in ways that would allow church superiors to escape criminal sanction, or have relatively short statutes of limitation that would bar prosecution in any event.

With regard to the Archdiocese itself, Pennsylvania law does establish the possibility of corporate criminal liability for the kind of ongoing, institutional misconduct that we discovered here. The Archdiocese, however, has chosen not to organize itself as a legal corporation, thus immunizing itself from such liability. Current Pennsylvania law concerning criminal conduct by unincorporated associations like the Archdiocese is much more limited and cannot form the basis of a prosecution against the archdiocese as an entity.

We are left, then, with what we consider a travesty of justice a multitude of crimes for which no one can be held criminally accountable ....

Overview of the Sexual Abuse by Archdiocese Priests

It is hard to think of a crime more heinous, or more deserving of strict penalties and an unlimited statute of limitations, than the sexual abuse of children. This is especially so when the perpetrators are priests – men who exploit the clergy's authority and access to minors, as well as the trust of faithful families, to prey on children in order to gratify perverted urges. After reviewing thousands of documents from Archdioceses files and hearing statements and testimony from over a hundred witnesses – including Archdiocese managers, priests, abuse victims, and experts on the Church and child abuse – we, the Grand Jurors, were taken aback by the extent of sexual exploitation within the Philadelphia Archdiocese. We were saddened to discover the magnitude of the calamity in terms of the abuse itself. The suffering it has caused, and the numbers of victims and priests involved.

The Jurors heard testimony that will stay with us for a very long time, probably forever. We heard of Philadelphia – area priests committing countless acts of sexual depravity against children entrusted to their care through the Archdiocese's parishes and schools. The abuses ranged from glancing touches of genitals under the guise of innocent wrestling to sadomasochistic rituals and relentless anal, oral, and vaginal rapes. We found that no matter what physical form the abuse took, or how often it was repeated, the damage to these children's psyches was devastating. Not only were the victims betrayed by a loved and revered father figure, but they also faced lifelong guilt and shame, isolation from family and peers, and torments that typically included alcoholism, addictions, marital difficulties, and sometimes thoughts of suicide. In many cases, we discovered, the victims believed God had abandoned them.

For any who might want to believe that the abuse problem in the Philadelphia area was limited in scope, this Report will disabuse them of that impression. The Jurors heard from some victims who were sexually abused once or twice, and from many more who were abused week after week for years. Many of the priests whose cases we examined had more than 10 victims; some abused multiple victims simultaneously. Indeed the evidence arising from the Philadelphia Archdiocese reveals criminality against minors on a widespread scale – sparing no geographic sector, no income level, no ethnic group. We heard testimony about priests molesting and raping children in rectory bedrooms, in church sacristies, in parked cars, in swimming pools, at Saint Charles Borromeo Seminary, at the priests' vacation houses in the Poconos and the Jersey Shore, in the children's schools and even in their own homes.

From all the documents and testimony put before us, we have received a tragic education – about the nature of child abuse, for example how predators manipulate their prey, why the abuse so often goes unreported, how its impact on victims and their families remains lifelong. Even so, we find it hard to comprehend or absorb the full extent of the malevolence and suffering visited on this community, under cover of the clerical collar, by powerful, respected, and rapacious priests.

Priests who abuse minors usually have many victims

Another thing we learned about sexual abuse of minors is that the offenders typically have numerous victims... [T]he compulsion that drives some priests to molest or rape children is not curable, that treatment and supervision need to be intense and lifelong, and that the recidivism rate is extremely high. In the files of the Philadelphia Archdiocese priests that we obtained by subpoena, we saw what must have been crystal clear as well to Cardinals Krol and Bevilacqua and their aides, that many, many priests each have had many, many victims, often spanning decades.

The experts told us that, given the nature of the crime, victims who report their abuse represent merely the tip of the iceberg, and that abusive priests likely have preyed on many more victims who have not come forward.

Thus Mothers' Watch has given you much of what is contained in just the Introduction to the Grand Jury Report. However, again we urge you to read the rest available at: philadelphiadistrictattorney.com.

Sodomy is a Sin that "Cries to Heaven for Vengeance"

The Grand Jury members understood the complicity of the cardinals' actions in concealing and facilitating the rape of children. The Catechism of the Catholic Church spells out how to recognize sin and its effects, how it begins with one's individual act, and when unchecked, spreads to entrap others in the clutches of sin until it reaches into society.

Sin is a personal act. Moreover, we have a responsibility for the sins committed by others when we cooperate in them:
–by participating directly and voluntarily in them;
–by ordering, advising, praising, or approving them;
–by not disclosing or not hindering them when we have an obligation to do so;
–by protecting evil-doers. [No. 1868]

Thus sin makes men accomplices of one another and causes concupiscence, violence, and injustice to reign among them. Sins give rise to social situations and institutions that are contrary to the Divine Goodness. "Structures of sin" are the expression and effect of personal sins. They lead their victims to do evil in their turn... [No. 1868]

The Bishops' Conference

For many years, the bishops have safely sequestered themselves in the bowels of the Hyatt for their annual conference held in Washington D. C. During that week of November 12^th 2005 when the bishops were meeting, Mothers' Watch put a quarter-page ad in the Washington Times spotlighting the Philadelphia Grand Jury Report which appeared in a wonderful location on the editorial pages. (Ad appears on page 12 of newsletter). Mothers' Watch had the newspapers delivered directly to each of the bishop's rooms at the Hyatt Regency Hotel on Capitol Hill. Mothers' Watch moms also went to the hotel and tried to talk with any Bishop who would listen.

Mothers' Watch moms approached the few bishops that ventured into the lobby and handed them copies of the ad to test their reaction to this exposure of the Grand Jury Report. What Mothers' Watch moms witnessed was such an air of unconcern for anyone beyond themselves and a sense of being somehow above the law.

They have built themselves an impenetrable wall of deceit so big and long to hide behind that they are convinced that they are the victims, not the children who have suffered molestation and rape, not the countless Catholics who have lost their Faith, and not the Church that has been wounded by their actions.

That the Bishops are overly self-absorbed with their own safety, above all, was so obvious during the conference where they even have their own USCCB guards stationed at the tops of the escalator and at the elevator to keep everyone but their own away. After more than 30 years of inviting homosexual seminarians to become priests and ignoring child rape by their diocesan priests what callous indifference these bishops are flaunting. Aren't those guards misplaced? Instead, shouldn't they have been stationed in rectories, sacristies, and schools protecting children from homosexual Bishops and priests?

Bishops Banish Moms

We did manage to get the ear of a few Bishops. Many just did their best to avoid us. All were, at least, disappointing!

One of the Bishops considered "conservative," at first, seemed like he was showing genuine concern about the Philadelphia Report scandal as he stood poised and listening. When Mothers' Watch moms brought up the homosexual problem, he suddenly became enraged, grabbing hold of our arms and shaking them. We thought he was angry that priests and bishops could be so cruel, but our hopes were immediately dashed when he told us that he was "angry" that such revelations were made public. He continued to rant, making a fist and pounding it into his hand, as he continued in a tirade against the District Attorney's Office who summoned the investigation. How protective he was of his fellow Bishops and priests, and how incomprehensible that he voiced no emotional concern for the molested children.

In the face of these horrendous crimes against children allowed to perpetuate to such a staggering degree, one would think that there would be some expression of remorse or shame in the faces of these bishops, especially when approached by parents, but no!

Most of the Bishops treated us with an attitude of pompous aloofness and appeared annoyed that outsiders would crash their conference. These white-haired men, approaching ages where they will soon face God, didn't seem to care. If there were any change in their reaction from previous years, it would be that these Bishops seemed angrier.

Not surprising, after a couple hours, we moms got escorted out of the hotel by security. Not to be discouraged, Mothers' Watch moms made up signs and picketed outside the hotel for two more hours. It ended up being well worth the effort.

One Pro-Homosexual Priest Protestor

As we moms left the hotel lobby, we couldn't help but notice the one lonely homosexual priest protestor standing on the sidewalk as close to the front door as legally allowed. His rigid stance made him appear one with his sign, an octagon-shaped one like the Planned-Parenthood-types—the expensive professionally made kind. He wore a T-shirt with the word "dignity" and various pins and the rainbow ribbon so everyone would know what he stood for. When we questioned him regarding the city of Sodom in the Bible, he gave the canned homosexual response that the Bible was about "love." When asked about the raping of little boys and whether he raped little boys, he got very silent and stood like a statue staring straight ahead without any more comment.

Whether he was there because the homosexual priest community is feeling the backlash of their priest comrades who got caught openly going after boys makes one wonder. This homosexual was representing 23-named priests from Chicago, Illinois and the surrounding areas by his presence. Before he knew who we were, he handed us a bright yellow paper titled "An Open Letter to the Hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church Regarding the Pastoral Care of Gay and Lesbian Persons." The letter began: "As Catholic pastors, we have become increasingly disturbed by the tone and, in some cases, content of documents and statements from the Vatican, bishops' conferences and individual bishops on issues categorized under the heading of `homosexual' or `gay/lesbian'. . . .As priests and pastors we are speaking out to make clear that our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters are all members of God's family ... deserving of the same dignity and respect owed any human being."

The 2-page paper went on to say how homosexuals are finding the Church "abusive" towards them. Oh course, nothing was written about how abusive those homosexuals are who rape children. Instead it said, "We recognize the blessings of countless homosexuals in a variety of relationships" (emphasis ours).

Enough said!

Kleenex in the Purse – Poster Board in the Trunk

Moms and Grandmoms are always prepared for perceived needs. With kids, that's Kleenex in the purse. At the Bishops' Conference, it is poster board in the trunk. Having been banished to the sidewalk in front of the hotel, we headed to our car for the poster board and magic markers. We quickly made three signs, and spent several more hours walking up and down the sidewalk in front of the hotel. The signs read:

• When a man rapes a woman, he gets 25 years. When a priest rapes a boy, he gets a new parish!
  
  
• Homosexual bishops and priests put children at risk,
  
  
• To learn the horrors of homosexual rape of children, go to   www.philadelphiadistrictattorney.com

As we walked back and forth, many people responded With either a thumbs up, or vocally, "You are right," or "Thank you," or "There should be many more with you." People seemed to know and recognize the problem of homosexual priests and the grave dangers that homosexuals have been causing and will continue to cause if not rooted out.

One fellow who came out of the hotel said to us without breaking his stride, "You are making the bishops awful nervous in there.        Keep it up!"

Little has changed since the scandal. Bishops are not demanding or discussing purity for priests. The unspoken attitude of bishops inside seems one of don't get caught and limit yourself to boys over 18.

And the Associated Press Reported

While the bishops' posted agenda for the conference listed a variety of subjects including the bishops' retirement, the laity, death penalty, migration, budget and finance, only one small segment had any relation to the homosexual predators except for a short session on St. Luke's (a questionable "fairy farm" in Maryland where "problem" priests are "treated"). However, the Associated Press reported that "America's Roman Catholic bishops spent half of Tuesday [Moms got there at 11 AM on Tuesday] and all yesterday [Wednesday] in unusual private discussions." (Baltimore Sun, 11/17/05, p. l 0A)

The paper reported that the bishops are going to spend more money to "study" the abuse problem. The costly sidestepping by the bishops only shows that these bishops are more interested in protecting their assets.

Perhaps these are just more of their stalling tactics hoping to protect recent perverts until the statute of limitations runs out. Could it be that the bishops are hindering legal processes any way they can because so many of them are homosexuals themselves? Any bishop who has protected homosexual child rapists should just resign and if one reads the papers that means most of them.

For more than 30 years the laws in the United States have been very cruel to children. Thirty-three years ago abortion legislation gave rise to untold millions of innocent babies murdered in the womb. In the 1980's child abuse legislation became the "seamless garment" in defining the severity of crimes against children. Child abuse legislation lumped together verbal (yelling at one's child) and spanking, with truly hurtful criminal acts of physical assault and perverted sexual acts against children. Whether a child is yelled at or raped, it is merely "abuse."

However, when it is a man who rapes a woman, he often get 25 years in prison plus for each count because rape is a "criminal" offense. Yet when it comes to sexual "abuse" against children, again and again, there are cases where a child rapist gets little more than a slap on the wrist. The notorious Fr. Paul Shanley from Boston served only seven months. In two recent cases, one in Vermont and one in Ohio where child predators raped children over a period of years, the punishment was little to nothing.

Furthermore, only in cases of sexual "abuse" can there be settlements. What other crime in American law allows the perpetrator a "get out of jail free card" by paying off the victim except child molestation cases?

Child molestation and rape is a horrendous crime and should not be diminished by labeling it "abuse."

Philadelphia Grand Jury Exposes Years of Catholic Clergy Abuse

The Grand Jury Report on the Archdiocese of Philadelphia is a heart-breakingly frank expose of years of wretched, criminal and overwhelmingly homosexual molestations by trusted priests against vulnerable children. We quote from that nauseating report:

"We should begin by making one thing clear. When we say abuse, we don't just mean `inappropriate touching' (as the Archdiocese often chose to refer to it) we mean rape. Boys who were raped orally, boys who were raped anally, girls who were raped vaginally. But even those victims whose abuse did not include rape—those who were subject to fondling, to masturbation, to pornography—suffered psychological abuse that scarred their lives and sapped their faith in which they had been raised." (p. 2)

"In concealing the crimes of sexually abusive priests while keeping them in ministry, the Cardinal and his aides did not merely fail to protect children from terrible danger. They increased the danger and the harm to Archdiocesan children. When Cardinals Krol and Bevilacqua promoted and celebrated known abusers – rapists and molesters of children – and left them in positions as pastors, parish priests, and teachers, they in effect vouched for their holiness and trustworthiness and encouraged parents to entrust their children to them.... [and] greatly increased the numbers of potential victims" (p. 55).

"...the Grand Jurors believe ...that the abuses that Cardinal Bevilaqua and his aides allowed children to suffer ....were made possible by purposeful decisions, carefully implemented policies, and calculated indifference." (p. 55). The Report shows Cardinals and their aides deliberately concealed the criminal acts of clerics in secret archives until the statute of limitations had passed. Of the 171 priest sexual abuse allegations in the secret archives file in the Philadelphia diocese (p. 77) only one could be prosecuted (p. 59).

The Grand Jurors "reviewed newspaper articles from dioceses around the country describing procedures so identical to those employed in Philadelphia that the similarities could not be coincidental" (p. 56). They called the actions ... a "national phenomenon" (p.56). and quoted a "Dallas Morning News survey that found 111 American bishops, including all eight cardinals who led U. S. dioceses" (p. 57) to have done the same thing.

The above is just a minute sampling. To get the full scope of the most shocking testimony, read the entire Philadelphia Grand Jury Report at: www.philadelphiadistrictattomey.com/pages/l/index.htm

WHAT ARE BISHOPS DOING NOW? The Bishops have reacted to criminal child molestations with new "get tough" policies and charters to fool the public and redirect attention away from the clergy abusers, who by the Bishops own investigation, are primarily homosexual. Bishops are mandating more classroom sex programs calling them "safe environment." Program titles include: Veritas, Child Lures, Talking about Touching and Good Touch-Bad Touch, which under the guise of protecting children deceitfully target parents as abusers. Even parent volunteers must be fingerprinted. Are those priests hidden in "secret archives" fingerprinted or listed in the national sex offender's registry?

If Bishops want to end sexual child molestations, they will oust all homosexuals from the priesthood. As long as there are homosexuals in the priesthood and seminaries, children are at risk.

Mothers' Watch, P. O. Box 1029, Frederick, MD 21702-0029

Mothers' Watch moms are faithful Catholics who love children and the Church. Our newsletter reflects our belief that the only way to fix a problem is to first recognize it.

I conclude that you, Mr. MacRae remain an extremely dangerous and high-risk sexual offender. The compulsiveness and repetitiveness of your sexual assault against young boys, documented from 1979 to 1988, the selection and grooming of vulnerable boys and families, the deceitful use of both the authority of a Catholic priest and the corresponding spiritual power that the religion represents, the evidence of your solicitation and prostitution of young men and the gratification of yourself and others of your ilk, the evidence of child pornography and multiple victims, your complete lack of remorse, your aggressive denial of wrongdoing, your merciless attack on the character of the victims who confronted you, the ruthless application of your intelligence, education and experience as a counselor to undermine these children and their families and your total lack of compassion for your victims and the friends you continued to mislead, I considered all of these things in deciding your sentence for the attacks on [these children]. And I find that the prospects for your rehabilitation are very poor. There is no credible evidence that you have responded to the treatment that you have received. Throughout these proceedings, I have listened to your witnesses and I have watched you closely. I detect nothing in you at this time that gives me a reasonable basis for releasing you into the community ever.

Wow! If this perverted pretty boy is the poster priest for so-called fraudulent claims, Donohue in making the likes of MacRae defendable, is diminishing the horror of child molestation. Kiss-up Catholics should know that when a bishop or priest is in any way involved in the molestation of the child, whether as a participant in the crime or protecting the criminal, that is "millstone" serious.

The bishops' protectors speak of the number of molesters as a tiny minority, claiming as low as one percent. If that were so, then why are dioceses going bankrupt? If the numbers were so few swift arrests and convictions would have put a quick end to these criminal assaults.

In his zest to defend bishops and clergy, Donohue, in his 2004 "Executive Summary" states he has done research on the child sexual molestation issue. He tried to lessen the clergy abuse scandals by stating that molestations of minors were occurring in other religions, too, as if that should make a difference. They do not have the power to change bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Our Lord.

According to Donohue, his "research" makes it "clear" that most abuse is among family members that includes family acquaintances? Donohue's "research" seems to have come from the same source as the bishops elementary school sexology-based texts that have been redefining the family to include "family acquaintances" for two decades. Our Lord's Catholic Church describes family as mother, father and children. Family "acquaintances" are not family members.

If Donohue had really done his homework, he would have learned that redefining family is tied to children's rights (to be sexual). This movement is using child abuse legislation to subversively target the family in an effort to destroy the family. The bishops also have been using the same tactic all along, but now targeting the family redirects the blame from themselves. Shame on the Catholic League for having done such poor research!

In fact, William Donohue and his Catholic League are all over the place in defending the indefensible. He showed skewed sympathy toward Rembert Weakland, one of the most liberal and evilly perverted bishops, calling him "a victim of sexual McCarthyism" even though he must have known that Weakland openly blamed children for being sexual aggressors. Weakland played Sugar Daddy to his much younger male lover stealing $450K from Church funds to pay for his silence. Donohue downplays Weakland's sexual activities calling them "past indiscretions" and in his seemingly attempt to justify such "indiscretions" says we expect a priest to "restrain his libido while everyone else is free to throw constraint to the wind." Mr. Donohue, no one is free to throw constraint to the wind!

Not only Donohue's Catholic League, but other groups too, have been circling the wagons to protect the miscreant bishops. Perhaps they find that a much easier route than facing the systemic homosexual problem in our Church.  

Bishops Diminish Sin and Crime

Many bishops employ subversive semantics to diminish the sin and crime of homosexual molesters and rapists among them and their priests. The bishops want to avoid admitting that the problem priests are homosexual pedophiles when they molest a child under the age of 18. They want to classify only the molesters of children under the age of ten as pedophiles and label only them "untreatable." For those who choose to molest children above the age of 10, the bishops want to use the label ephebophile (which is a lesser known classification for pedophiles who molests adolescents). The result is an outrageous attempt to further protect homosexuals by using cunning language so that if a child is criminally raped and that child is over the age of 10, the rapist is protected. The bishops would call the offending clergy's actions just an "attraction" and as such "treatable."

It appears that the direction the bishops are taking with priests is not one of a return to purity, but instead, one of limiting homosexual activity to those over 18. The bishops' silence on homosexual sex in the seminaries speaks volumes.

Gumbleton's Admission

Gumbleton's recent admission of being sexually abused by a priest when he was in ninth grade at seminary school, if believable, brings up two separate unmentioned issues. Gumbleton's long-standing record of promoting homosexuality, i.e. homosexuals in the military, homosexual marriage, and his association with groups that promote homosexuality shows that he has homosexual leanings. It certainly demonstrates, in this case and perhaps most cases, that homosexuals beget homosexuals, not by passing on certain genes, but by destroying the innocence of young adolescent boys while they are at a very vulnerable and formative stage in their lives.

Second, Gumbleton's position supporting lawsuits against the dioceses with regard to abuse does not appear to be a benevolent action toward those who have been molested as much as one of keeping the heat off homosexuals in the dioceses. If the complainants simply sue the dioceses, the criminal homosexual abusers get off the hook. If the dioceses pay up, the abusing criminal cleric may never go to jail or even be fingerprinted. And last, but by no means least, is that the bishop accomplices who have protected the homosexual criminal rapists will also be able to remain under the radar and within the "safe environment" of the chancery.

Broke-Moral Bishops

In 1936 when Bishops were Bishops, Pope Pius XI wrote an Encyclical Letter on Motion Pictures in which he expressed "gratitude to the Hierarchy of the United States of America and to the faithful who cooperated with them for the important results already achieved under their direction and guidance by the `Legion of Decency"' crusade. Millions of Americans pledged "not to attend any motion picture offensive to Catholic moral principles or proper standards of living." By 1930 when talking pictures were new, the direction films were taking regarding morals and ideals being portrayed were already a concern. The Encyclical first stated its concerns about movies: "Now then, it is a certainty which can readily be verified that the more marvelous the progress of the motion picture art and industry, the more pernicious and deadly has it shown itself to morality and to religion and even to the very decencies of human society."

That was then—this is now! The homosexual movie about queer cowboys titled, Brokeback Mountain, has received all sorts of accolades from the pro-homosexual establishment within the Church. Bishop George Niederauer, the newly appointed archbishop of San Francisco saw the movie and dubbed it "very powerful." Incredibly, he saw no problem with the homosexual filth and violence, and commented only that the "lesson of the film is the destructiveness of not being honest with yourself and not honest with other people and not being faithful, trying to live a double life." Fr. Tom Condon, OP, a prominent Dominican, thinks it is a "film that will touch anyone who has ever been in love."

The bishops' initial USCCB review sounded more like it came from a "gay" newspaper than from the Catholic hierarchy with the review's accolades toward the actors and its sympathy toward homosexuality.

As if stargazed by all the "love" romping, the USCCB reviewer called the performances "superb" gushing that one of the actors "may be the one to beat at Oscar time, as his repressed manly stoicism masking great vulnerability is heartbreaking." The other queer cowboy, "the more demonstrative of the pair," is "no less accomplished" according to the USCCB.

Prompting sympathy and acceptance toward homosexuality the USCCB reviewer continued:

Looked at from the point of view of the need for love which everyone feels but few people can articulate, the plight of these guys is easy to understand while their way of dealing with it is likely to surprise and shock an audience.

Except for the initial sex scene, and brief bedroom encounters between the men and their (bare breasted) wives, there's no sexually related nudity. Some outdoor shots of the men washing themselves and skinny-dipping are side-view, long-shot or out­of-focus images.

Compare the above with the Christian movie reviewer, Tead Behr, who zeros in on just how disgusting the film is. He says that there are "about 58 obscenities (including many "f" words) ...references to urinating... bloody violence including a shot of a castrated man... and homosexual sodomy and scene plays almost like a homosexual rape... sexual content includes depicted homosexual and heterosexual sodomy (with a hint of sadomasochism during one or more homosexual scenes) depicted homosexual kissing and groping..."

Thus, after public outcry against the Bishops' outrageous "L" for "Limited" rating, they had to change the rating to "O" for "morally offensive." However, the film is still described as a "love" story between homosexuals.

This review shows how far too many of today's bishops' brazenly accept of the sin of lust, as love. It also attributes an unhealthy air of normalcy to homosexuality and shows an unwillingness to condemn in strong terms what is "pernicious and deadly ... to morality and to religion and to the very decencies of human society." The ongoing filthy and foul direction motion pictures and television is a result of the complete abandonment of moral responsibility by bishops who at one time were listened to as notable moral leaders.

Mothers' Watch Editorial Staff :
Judith Ammenheuser (410) 761-7437 / (Fax 410) 761-4233
Anne Polcha (540) 822-3875 www.motherswatch.org

Spring 2006 - Mothers' Watch - Post Office Box 1029, Frederick, MD 21702-0029

Mothers' Watch is a non-profit, tax-deductible organization. Please send a contribution to receive our newsletter. Photocopy Permission: Permission is granted by Mothers' Watch to those wishing to copy and distribute all or part of this newsletter. However, we must insist that articles be reprinted without changes and with credit given to Mothers' Watch. If articles appear in other publications, Mothers' Watch would appreciate a copy.

QUESTIONS:

What is the probability that these cardinals would not see to it that one of their own is appointed to the highest of all offices in the Catholic Church?

Satanic Abuse   Cardinal Bernardin   Satanic Symbols

---

Suffering in Hell               Relating to God               God is Love
Entry Page       HOME       Site Map       E-MAIL: Editor

---

Copyright © 1993-2006 by Father David C. Trosch - All Rights Reserved
Permissions granted for non-profit purposes.
http://www.trosch.org

This web site is produced and provided as a service by Life Enterprises Unlimited.
Contents may be reproduced ?unchanged? provided source, with link, is noted.

Please help us to continue this service.  Mail tax deductible contributions to:


LIFE ENTERPRISES UNLIMITED
           (A 501-c-3 Non-Profit Organization)
    P. O. Box 850307
    Mobile, AL  36685        U. S. A.