It's official. The Catholic Knight is retired.  I'm hanging up the helmet and passing the torch. There will be no more articles, no more commentaries, no more calls to action. THIS BLOG IS CLOSED. I've spent a very long time thinking about this, I believe the time has come, and is a bit overdue.  I want to thank my readers for everything, but most especially for your encouragement and your willingness to go out there and fight the good fight. So, that being the case, I've spend the last several weeks looking for bloggers who are fairly active, and best represent something akin to the way I think and what I believe.  I recommend the following blogs for my readers to bookmark and check on regularly. Pick one as your favourite, or pick them all. They are all great..... In His Majesty's Service, THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT

Friday, March 26, 2010

Pope To Be Crucified This Easter

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: Above we have a depiction of what the liberal mainstream news media would metaphorically like to do to Pope Benedict XVI this Easter. Lord knows they certainly are trying with everything they've got. However, it's not as if something like this has never happened before.

For the record, the pope is innocent of any wrong doing. Every attempted smear story they throw at him falls short. All you have to do is read the details. For example; in Munich we're talking about one case, wherein somebody beneath Ratzinger (currently Pope Benedict XVI) transferred an accused priest without Ratzinger's knowledge or consent. Then in the case of Milwaukee, again we are talking about one accused priest, who could not be prosecuted by civil authorities and the charges were dropped. Then while the Archbishop was the one and only man who could have done anything, he decided to punt the case to the Vatican instead, where it was delayed for months. Finally, when a response was given, it was given not by Cardinal Ratzinger (currently Pope Benedict XVI), but by somebody completely different, recommending the trial be canceled since the accused priest was dying, the Archbishop of Milwaukee had not defrocked him, and criminal charges had already been dropped by civil authorities. The accused priest died four months later. Once again, the responsibility lay at the Archbishop of Milwaukee's feet, because he alone was the only one who had evidence to defrock the accused priest, and yet he tried to pass the buck to Cardinal Ratzinger's office at the Vatican instead.

That's it! That's all the liberal mainstream media has! That is their whole case! Yet with that, they are trying to implicate the pope in some sort of trial by newspaper in which they alone play the judge, jury and executioner.

Since the mainstream news media refuses to do their jobs, let us in the blogosphere once again do it for them. Here are the facts..
FACT #1
The Catholic Church has ALWAYS taught that sexual abuse of minors is a damnable sin, of the worst kind, in which Jesus Christ himself said it would be better for someone who does this to tie a millstone around his neck and be thrown into the deepest part of the sea. Catholics involved in sexual abuse have not only failed in morality, but they have also failed in Catholicism, in that they are not practicing the Catholic Christian faith at all.

FACT #2
The total number of all priests accused of sexual abuse of minors from 1950 to 2002 is less than 5% of all Catholic clergy. That means more than 95% of Catholic clergy have never been accused and are doing their jobs correctly, living quiet and holy lives in service to their parishes.

FACT #3
In spite of what people say about clerical celibacy being a "cause" of these problems, actual statistics indicate that the majority of sex-abuse of minors is perpetrated by married men; step-fathers, uncles, cousins and live-in boyfriends. Statistically speaking, being a celibate man in the Catholic priesthood actually REDUCES your odds of sexually abusing minors. That's just a matter of statistical FACT. (learn more here)

FACT #4
In the overwhelming vast majority of cases where sexual abuse was reported in the Catholic Church, the alleged victim was a male between the ages of 12 and 18. Victims younger than 12 were almost never reported, and sexual abuse of females was also rare. This is not the clinical definition of pedophilia. It is however a type of predatory homosexuality that seeks to take advantage of underage young men. Therefore the term "pedophile priests" is a misnomer and not based on hard statistical data. A more accurate term should be "predatory homosexual priests."

FACT #5
Homosexual men are not allowed to become priests in the Catholic Church. In order for a homosexual to become a priest he must lie about his homosexuality just to get into seminary and remain "in the closet" indefinitely. If he is ever discovered to be gay, he would be fired and laicized (defrocked).

FACT #6
Sexual abuse of minors is slightly higher in Protestant churches according to data released by insurance agencies that underwrite them. (learn more here)

FACT #7
Sexual abuse of minors is significantly higher in non-religious institutions that deal with children, particularly public schools, where according to a U.S. government report, a child is literally over 100 times more likely to be molested in a public school than in a Catholic church. (learn more here)

FACT #8
The reforms implemented in the US Catholic Church after the sex-abuse scandal of 2002-2003 have been hailed by child protective services as the most comprehensive ever seen in a public institution and have been cited as a model for other institutions to follow.

FACT #9
No other person in the Vatican has done more to defrock abusive priests and curb sexual abuse in general than Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict XVI). He was a hawk on clerical discipline and hunting down predators. When he became pope he instituted a zero tolerance policy not only against abusive clerics but against homosexual priests in general. So it's ironic that this pope would find himself under media scrutiny for this reason.
Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger was appointed Prefect of the Vatican Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in 1981, three years after John Paul II's election to the papacy in 1978. As you can see by the graph above, sexual allegations against priests had reached it's highest point the year Ratzinger was appointed. It had never been any higher, with nearly 9 out of every 1,000 priests being accused (almost 1%). Ratzinger went into action and quickly earned the nickname "God's Rottweiler" for his tough approach against all forms of ecclesiastical misconduct - most especially sexual abuse by clerics. Within twenty years, Ratzinger was able to reduce sex abuse allegations to a pre-1950's level with less than 1 out of every 1,000 priests being accused (less than 0.1%). This is especially remarkable when we consider that during the same time period sexual abuse of minors was on the rise in European and North American society in general. Ratzinger was able to implement this massive reform with a zero tolerance policy for homosexuality in the priesthood and by defrocking priests himself when he was canonically capable of doing so. However, Ratzinger did have limitations imposed on him while he was Prefect for the Congregation, and he was not allowed to implement all of the reforms he desired. After becoming pope in 2005, Ratzinger was able to write many of his reforms into Church law and remove many of the obstacles he encountered during his tenure as Prefect to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

Now careful examination of the graph above reveals that sexual allegations against priests started to rise dramatically in the middle 1950's through 1981 (the year of Ratzinger's appointment). Who were the popes during those time periods? That would be Pope Pius XII, Pope John XXIII, Pope Paul VI and Pope John Paul I (who reigned for less than a month). Pope John Paul II reigned only during the last three years of this time period before the numbers began to drop. So logically, which pontiffs should receive the most scrutiny? That would be Pius XII, John XXIII and Paul VI. The most dramatic rise came under the papacies of John XXIII and Paul VI. Why does the media not go after them? What was happening during their pontificates that might explain their lack of action and failure to deal with the problem?
In going after the pope like this the mainstream media swallows the camel to strain a gnat as it ignores 99% of sex-abuse and coverup in the public schools to go after less than 1% in the Catholic Church, which happens to be less than what exists in other religious institutions. Since the mainstream media will not report the fact that the problem in the Catholic Church is only a tiny fraction of the problem that exists in public schools, we are once again left to ask the nagging question: WHY is the mainstream news media seeking to coverup and PROTECT child sex abusers by hiding the statistics of where they do the most damage?

Wednesday, March 24, 2010

Why Secular Western Civilization Will Fall - VERY SOON!


THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: The words of Pope John Paul II echo in our minds no longer as a warning, but now as a prophecy being fulfilled before our eyes. This is why Western Civilization (Europe, North and South America, Australia and even Russia) will not survive the next forty years. It's all going to come crashing down very quickly - slowly at first - but increasing with intensity until it's over....
If the promotion of the self is understood in terms of absolute autonomy, people inevitably reach the point of rejecting one another. Everyone else is considered an enemy from whom one has to defend oneself. Thus society becomes a mass of individuals placed side by side, but without any mutual bonds. Each one wishes to assert himself independently of the other and in fact intends to make his own interests prevail. Still, in the face of other people's analogous interests, some kind of compromise must be found, if one wants a society in which the maximum possible freedom is guaranteed to each individual. In this way, any reference to common values and to a truth absolutely binding on everyone is lost, and social life ventures on to the shifting sands of complete relativism. At that point, everything is negotiable, everything is open to bargaining: even the first of the fundamental rights, the right to life.

This is what is happening also at the level of politics and government: the original and inalienable right to life is questioned or denied on the basis of a parliamentary vote or the will of one part of the people-even if it is the majority. This is the sinister result of a relativism which reigns unopposed: the "right" ceases to be such, because it is no longer firmly founded on the inviolable dignity of the person, but is made subject to the will of the stronger part.

In this way democracy, contradicting its own principles, effectively moves towards a form of totalitarianism. The State is no longer the "common home" where all can live together on the basis of principles of fundamental equality, but is transformed into a tyrant State, which arrogates to itself the right to dispose of the life of the weakest and most defenceless members, from the unborn child to the elderly, in the name of a public interest which is really nothing but the interest of one part. The appearance of the strictest respect for legality is maintained, at least when the laws permitting abortion and euthanasia are the result of a ballot in accordance with what are generally seen as the rules of democracy. Really, what we have here is only the tragic caricature of legality; the democratic ideal, which is only truly such when it acknowledges and safeguards the dignity of every human person, is betrayed in its very foundations: "How is it still possible to speak of the dignity of every human person when the killing of the weakest and most innocent is permitted? In the name of what justice is the most unjust of discriminations practised: some individuals are held to be deserving of defence and others are denied that dignity?" When this happens, the process leading to the breakdown of a genuinely human co-existence and the disintegration of the State itself has already begun.

To claim the right to abortion, infanticide and euthanasia, and to recognize that right in law, means to attribute to human freedom a perverse and evil significance: that of an absolute power over others and against others. This is the death of true freedom: "Truly, truly, I say to you, every one who commits sin is a slave to sin" (Jn 8:34).

John Paul II
Evangelium Vitae
Mark my words, Western Civilization will not last another forty years under Secularism. Before 2050 Western Secularism will have imploded, giving way to a new theocratic system in it's place. The only thing that remains to be seen is this. Which type of theocratic system will ultimately take over? Will it be a revived form of Christendom? Or shall we look forward to prayer rugs, burkas and mosques? It's going to happen people. The only questions now are when and how.

The Catholic Bishops' Epic Failure On Healthcare Reform

(The New Ledger) - At the most basic possible level, the Catholic Bishops — the men I hold as a matter of faith to be in the direct line of Apostolic Succession — have enabled scandal, and it has finally flowered in full. A bishop has plenary discretion in the manner in which he brings his wayward sheep back into the fold, but by any measure, to put this politely, the American bishops’ exercise of their discretion has been a total embarrassment. Scandal is the act of teaching, from a position of authority, by word or deed, that what is evil is actually good. For essentially my entire lifetime, the Democratic Party has made as one of its governing planks that women have an inherent right to murder their children. Catholic Democrats have not, with a tiny handful of exceptions, bothered to even murmur a protest; the most prominent among them have taken up that position as their own — some without even bothering to run for the Presidency first.

The roster of names is so long that its recitation would be a total rebuke to the authority of any American Catholic bishop now living and many dead. Kennedy, Leahy, Kucinich, Drinan, Durbin, Pelosi, Casey (Jr.), Mitchell, Sebelius, Cuomo, I could go on. These are men and women who have made it the goal of their careers to advocate the abortion license, to preserve it and expand it. The leaders in the fight to keep public funding of abortion were overwhelmingly self-professed Catholics. Last night, they succeeded.

They teach by word and act that abortion is, at worst, an unfortunately necessary convenience, and is more often a good. They create scandal. They do so as Catholics...

read full story here
THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: The problem is there is nothing in the article I can argue with. Sadly, it's all true. The USCCB is an epic failure on just about every front, and this of course carries on to many individual American bishops. Not all bishop have failed, but many have, and as a result the USCCB (a left-leaning bureaucratic body anyway) is pushed into the realm of extreme Left on economic issues, dabbling into various forms of outright Marxism.

The problem here is centered around Subsidiarity, the Catholic principle of Social Justice which explicitly states that it is immoral for higher governing agencies to take over jobs that should be done by lower governing agencies. It's a bottom-up grassroots approach to government that is the complete antithesis of various forms of collectivism - Marxism, socialism, fascism and communism. The American constitutional ideal of federalism closely relates to Subsidiarity. Experts on Catholic Social Justice have called this the "hinge" upon which all of Catholic Social Justice turns, and without it there can be no Catholic Social Justice.

For something as important as Subsidiarity one would think the U.S. Catholic bishops would cover it in their official Catechism for U.S. Catholics. Instead, this all important principle of Subsidiarity gets barely a single line of mention. That is revealing. It tells a lot about where the priority of the USCCB is.

So when the Democratic controlled Congress introduced a healthcare reform bill that essentially set the stage for an eventual government takeover of the whole healthcare industry, the USCCB, along with many individual bishops, didn't see a problem with that. Instead they tried to negotiate the issue of abortion, as if it were some minor detail that had to be ironed out before this "wonderful" (yes, that's how one bishop described it) piece of legislation could be passed into law. Of course, once the extreme Left-wing Pro-Abortion Democrats in Congress and the Whitehouse realized the USCCB was willing to play footsie with them, they went to work on the backroom deals and language modification necessary to woo the Catholic votes needed and confuse the issue as much as possible. IT WORKED!

Because the USCCB was unwilling to take a clear stand for life over the years, by formerly excommunicating high profile Catholic politicians that voted for abortion, their last minute effort to throw the bill under the bus didn't work. Supposedly "Pro-Life" Catholic Democrats knew they were safe from any consequences of voting for a blatantly pro-abortion bill, so long as the President gave them the verbal promise of an executive order banning federal funding of abortion. After all, if the Catholic bishops never excommunicated the likes of Ted Kennedy and Nancy Pelosi, how could they possibly chastise them? As for Subsidiarity - what's that? Obviously Catholic Democrats had never heard of it before, certainly not from the US Catholics Bishops. So obviously that was never a problem to begin with.

Yes, the USCCB is a miserable failure, and they had better be men enough to take the blame. It was in large part their fault and I do hope they'll own up to it. However, we certainly cannot lump all American bishops in together with them. There are quite a few who have individually stood for Life and Subsidiarity without reservation and without budging. To them "The Catholic Knight" tips his helmet, but sadly in the United States they are few and far in between.

Catholic Sex Abuse Scandal and Cover-Up Fully Exposed and Explained

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: I dare anyone reading this article to PROVE to me, using real hard data, that sexual abuse and cover up is any higher, per capita, in the Catholic Church than in any other religion. Go ahead, I dare you...

WORCESTER, MA. A former pastor Andrew J. Bierkan, 54, at the First Congregational Church of Sutton who now heads a church in Ohio has been indicted here on charges of unnatural rape of a child and posing a child in a state of nudity. He is now pastor of St. Paul United Church of Christ in Cincinnati, according to Worcester District Attorney John J. Conte. (Worcester Telegram & Gazette, August 13, 2003)
Ex-Sutton pastor charged with rape of girl from church

Eddie Thomas, pastor of St. Luke Baptist Church in Ringgold, LA., is arrested and charged with indecent behavior with a juvenile, aggravated incest and pornography involving a juvenile. (the Shreveport Times, July 17, 2003)
Police seize videotape alleged to show sex with child

South Austrailia, AUS. A South Australian police task force into child sex abuse within the Anglican Church had identified 217 victims and 48 possible offenders, police said today. However the number of victims could rise to more than 400 as investigations continued, Police Commissioner Mal Hyde said. Mr Hyde today likened the scale of police investigations into child sex abuse to those for the infamous Snowtown bodies-in-the-barrels murders in 1999. (The Age, July 16 2003)
Major sex abuse uncovered in Anglican Church

Lake Wales, FL. The pastor at the Church of the Nazarene has been charged with sexually assaulting a male 17-year-old youth leader three times in 2001. The Rev. Gene Francis, 52, of Lake Wales, was arrested Tuesday and charged with unlawful sexual activity with a minor. (Sarasota Herald-Tribune, June 4, 2003)
Lake Wales minister arrested in sexual assault case

Tuscon, AZ. The Rev. David Valencia, 47, assistant pastor of a Pentecostal church is expected in court Wednesday on rape charges issued by Pennsylvania authorities. In Pennsylvania, Valencia was an assistant pastor at Christ Church at Grove Farm, an interdenominational church that uses Anglican liturgy. The pastor of Christ Church, the Rev. John Guest, told the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette that Valencia was dismissed in late 2001 because he was found to have pornography on an office computer after he was warned about a similar incident months earlier. (Tucson Citizen, May 31, 2003)
Rev. David Valencia allegedly had sex with a 17-year-old girl he was counseling

READ HUNDREDS OF SIMILAR STORIES HERE
Now was that shocking? Yes. It should have been. Was it scandalous? Yes. It most certainly was. Was it Catholic? NO! Not a single story listed above, or in the link to hundreds of similar stories, involved the Catholic Church in any way. So what is the lesson to be learned from this? The lesson to be learned here is that shocking sex-abuse of minors is not exclusively a Catholic problem. Yes, there is a cover-up going on, and it has nothing to do with the Catholic Church...
(Telegraph) - Child abuse has gone unchecked in the Church of England for decades amid a cover up by bishops, secret papers have revealed.

Information that could have prevented abuse has been "lost or damaged", concerns about individuals have been ignored and allegations have not been recorded. It means that the Church has no idea how many paedophiles are in its midst.

Lawyers warned last night that the Church faces a crisis as catastrophic as the one that engulfed the Roman Catholic Church and cost it millions of pounds in damages.

Richard Scorer, a solicitor who has specialised in child abuse cases, said that the Church of England's mistakes amounted to "an appalling, shocking level of negligence" that is likely to leave it open to claims from victims who have been too afraid to speak out in the past. The Church is to launch an urgent investigation on an unprecedented scale.

It will look at the records of thousands of clergy – including those who have retired – church employees, lay workers and volunteers dating back decades in an attempt to expose those who have previously escaped prosecution and identify those who pose "current risks".

Dioceses will appoint independent reviewers with access to all of their personnel files. These are due to be examined over an 18-month period.

However, the internal Church documents – leaked to The Sunday Telegraph – show that even if churchwardens, who are lay officials, are found to have previous allegations against them, the Church has no power to suspend them...

read full story here
However, it's not just the Church of England. There are others, many others....
DALLAS (ABP) -- A recent sex scandal involving two North Texas pastors and the women who accused them of molestation is unusual because the victims -- by now beyond the statute of limitations for sex-abuse cases -- urged authorities and media to publish their names in conjunction with the case.

Typically, the names of sex-abuse victims are not publicized in an effort to spare the victim more emotional trauma. But Katherine Roush and Debbie Vasquez agreed to be identified in order to call attention to an increasingly prominent scathe of clergy sex-abuse cases in Baptist churches.

Larry Reynolds of Southmont Baptist Church in Denton, Texas, and Dale Amyx of Bolivar Baptist Church in Sanger, Texas, were accused in separate civil lawsuits of molesting Roush and Vasquez, respectively, during counseling sessions when the girls were 14 years old. The abuse continued for several years, according to charges.

Had the women, now adults, reported the molestation at the time of the crime, each man could have faced first-degree felony charges. In juvenile cases, victims can report a crime until 10 years after their 18th birthday.

Instead of the possible life sentence that would have gone with his felony charge, Reynolds issued an apology at a church Thanksgiving banquet as part of a settlement agreement. His suit was settled out of court. Vasquez's lawsuit has yet to be resolved.

Sex-abuse charges like the ones in North Texas have become increasingly common, with cases in Missouri, Kentucky and Florida making regional and national news. And some experts have said Baptist churches may be particularly vulnerable to this kind of abuse.

Inappropriate behavior by clergy cuts across all denominational ties and theological positions, ethicist Joe Trull said. But he says a case can be made that "nondenominational churches and Baptist churches who have autonomous church government are more vulnerable and susceptible" to instances of sexual abuse....

read full story here
These are not just isolated cases mind you. There is ample evidence from non-biased third parties (particularly insurance companies who underwrite churches) that the problem of sexual abuse of minors and church cover-up spans all denominations and sects...
(Chicago Sun Times): The three companies that insure the majority of Protestant churches in America say they typically receive upward of 260 reports each year of young people under 18 being sexually abused by clergy, church staff, volunteers or congregation members.

The figures offer a glimpse into what has long been an extremely difficult phenomenon to pin down -- the frequency of sex abuse in Protestant congregations.

read full story here

----------

(The Guardian) - The Vatican has lashed out at criticism over its handling of its paedophilia crisis by saying the Catholic church was "busy cleaning its own house" and that the problems with clerical sex abuse in other churches were as big, if not bigger.

In a defiant and provocative statement, issued following a meeting of the UN human rights council in Geneva, the Holy See said the majority of Catholic clergy who committed such acts were not paedophiles but homosexuals attracted to sex with adolescent males.

The statement, read out by Archbishop Silvano Tomasi, the Vatican's permanent observer to the UN, defended its record by claiming that "available research" showed that only 1.5%-5% of Catholic clergy were involved in child sex abuse.

He also quoted statistics from the Christian Scientist Monitor newspaper to show that most US churches being hit by child sex abuse allegations were Protestant and that sexual abuse within Jewish communities was common.

He added that sexual abuse was far more likely to be committed by family members, babysitters, friends, relatives or neighbours, and male children were quite often guilty of sexual molestation of other children.

Nor did The statement said that rather than paedophilia, it would "be more correct" to speak of ephebophilia, a homosexual attraction to adolescent males.

"Of all priests involved in the abuses, 80 to 90% belong to this sexual orientation minority which is sexually engaged with adolescent boys between the ages of 11 and 17."

The statement concluded: "As the Catholic church has been busy cleaning its own house, it would be good if other institutions and authorities, where the major part of abuses are reported, could do the same and inform the media about it."

The Holy See launched its counter–attack after an international representative of the International Humanist and Ethical Union, Keith Porteous Wood, accused it of covering up child abuse and being in breach of several articles under the Convention on the Rights of the Child...

read full story here
The statistics for Protestant sexual abuse of minors is actually a higher than what is found in the Catholic Church. A similar trend can be found in other non-Christian religions as well. Now please don't misunderstand. I'm not trying to attack our Protestant brethren on this issue. Sexual-abuse is no more their fault for being Protestant than it is the Catholic Church's fault for being Catholic. The problem is widespread, and in actuality, it has NOTHING to do with religion....
(CBS NEWS) - Any institution that has allowed children to be harmed by predators deserves to be taken to task for it. No institution should get a pass. And no profession should get a pass. Not preachers, not priests — not even teachers.

Especially not teachers. And yet …

Consider the statistics: In accordance with a requirement of President Bush’s No Child Left Behind Act, in 2002 the Department of Education carried out a study of sexual abuse in the school system.

Hofstra University researcher Charol Shakeshaft looked into the problem, and the first thing that came to her mind when Education Week reported on the study were the daily headlines about the Catholic Church.

“[T]hink the Catholic Church has a problem?” she said. “The physical sexual abuse of students in schools is likely more than 100 times the abuse by priests.”

So, in order to better protect children, did media outlets start hounding the worse menace of the school systems, with headlines about a “Nationwide Teacher Molestation Cover-up” and by asking “Are Ed Schools Producing Pedophiles?”

No, they didn’t. That treatment was reserved for the Catholic Church, while the greater problem in the schools was ignored altogether.

As the National Catholic Register’s reporter Wayne Laugesen points out, the federal report said 422,000 California public-school students would be victims before graduation — a number that dwarfs the state’s entire Catholic-school enrollment of 143,000.

Yet, during the first half of 2002, the 61 largest newspapers in California ran nearly 2,000 stories about sexual abuse in Catholic institutions, mostly concerning past allegations. During the same period, those newspapers ran four stories about the federal government’s discovery of the much larger — and ongoing — abuse scandal in public schools....

read full story here
Yes indeed! There is a cover-up going on, and the one I'm talking about is not in the Catholic Church, nor in the Protestant churches, nor even in the public schools which have an exponentially high level of sex-abuse. No, this cover-up is in the mainstream news media.

That's right! The mainstream news media is INTENTIONALLY covering up the actual statistics of sexual abuse in society and secular institutions. This is yet another reason why the mainstream media is no longer trusted by the general public. This is yet another reason why more and more people are getting their news and information off Internet blogs (like this one), independent news sources and talk radio. More and more the mainstream news media both in North America and Europe are demonstrating not only their complete incompetence in handling the news, but also an inherent anti-religious bias in the way they report it. Of course here in the United States we've known this for a long time. Only now are Europeans just starting to figure it out. Since the mainstream news media simply REFUSES to do their job on this topic, it looks like 'The Catholic Knight' blog will once again have to do it for them...
FACT #1
The Catholic Church has ALWAYS taught that sexual abuse of minors is a damnable sin, of the worst kind, in which Jesus Christ himself said it would be better for someone who does this to tie a millstone around his neck and be thrown into the deepest part of the sea. Catholics involved in sexual abuse have not only failed in morality, but they have also failed in Catholicism, in that they are not practicing the Catholic Christian faith at all.

FACT #2
The total number of all priests accused of sexual abuse of minors is less than 5% of all Catholic clergy. That means more than 95% of Catholic clergy have never been accused and are doing their jobs correctly, living quiet and holy lives in service to their parishes.

FACT #3
In spite of what people say about clerical celibacy being a "cause" of these problems, actual statistics indicate that the majority of sex-abuse of minors is perpetrated by married men; step-fathers, uncles, cousins and live-in boyfriends. Statistically speaking, being a celibate man in the Catholic priesthood actually REDUCES your odds of sexually abusing minors. That's just a matter of statistical FACT. (learn more here)

FACT #4
In the overwhelming vast majority of cases (more than 80%), the alleged victim was a male between the ages of 11 and 17. Victims younger than 11 were almost never reported, and sexual abuse of females was also rare. This is not the clinical definition of pedophilia. It is however a type of predatory homosexuality that seeks to take advantage of underage young men. Therefore the term "pedophile priests" is a misnomer and not based on hard statistical data. A more accurate term should be "predatory homosexual priests."

FACT #5
Homosexual men are not allowed to become priests in the Catholic Church. In order for a homosexual to become a priest he must lie about his homosexuality just to get into seminary and remain "in the closet" indefinitely. If he is ever discovered to be gay, he would be fired and laicized (defrocked).

FACT #6
Sexual abuse of minors is slightly higher in Protestant churches according to data released by insurance agencies that underwrite them.

FACT #7
Sexual abuse of minors is significantly higher in non-religious institutions that deal with children, particularly public schools, where according to a U.S. government report, a child is literally over 100 times more likely to be molested in a public school than in a Catholic church. (learn more here)

FACT #8
The reforms implemented in the US Catholic Church after the sex-abuse scandal of 2002-2003 have been hailed by child protective services as the most comprehensive ever seen in a public institution and have been cited as a model for other institutions to follow.

FACT #9
No other person in the Vatican has done more to defrock abusive priests and curb sexual abuse in general than Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict XVI). He was a hawk on clerical discipline and hunting down predators. When he became pope he instituted a zero tolerance policy not only against abusive clerics but against homosexual priests in general. So it's ironic that this pope would find himself under media scrutiny for this reason.


Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger was appointed Prefect of the Vatican Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in 1981, three years after John Paul II's election to the papacy in 1978. As you can see by the graph above, sexual allegations against priests had reached it's highest point the year Ratzinger was appointed. It had never been any higher, with nearly 9 out of every 1,000 priests being accused (almost 1%). Ratzinger went into action and quickly earned the nickname "God's Rottweiler" for his tough approach against all forms of ecclesiastical misconduct - most especially sexual abuse by clerics. Within twenty years, Ratzinger was able to reduce sex abuse allegations to a pre-1950's level with less than 1 out of every 1,000 priests being accused (less than 0.1%). This is especially remarkable when we consider that during the same time period sexual abuse of minors was on the rise in European and North American society in general. Ratzinger was able to implement this massive reform with a zero tolerance policy for homosexuality in the priesthood and by defrocking priests himself when he was canonically capable of doing so. However, Ratzinger did have limitations imposed on him while he was Prefect for the Congregation, and he was not allowed to implement all of the reforms he desired. After becoming pope in 2005, Ratzinger was able to write many of his reforms into Church law and remove many of the obstacles he encountered during his tenure as Prefect to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

Now careful examination of the graph above reveals that sexual allegations against priests started to rise dramatically in the middle 1950's through 1981 (the year of Ratzinger's appointment). Who were the popes during those time periods? That would be Pope Pius XII, Pope John XXIII, Pope Paul VI and Pope John Paul I (who reigned for less than a month). Pope John Paul II reigned only during the last three years of this time period before the numbers began to drop. So logically, which pontiffs should receive the most scrutiny? That would be Pius XII, John XXIII and Paul VI. The most dramatic rise came under the papacies of John XXIII and Paul VI. Why does the media not go after them? What was happening during their pontificates that might explain their lack of action and failure to deal with the problem?
These are the facts. This is the REAL NEWS, not that nonsense you see on the television or read in the newspapers. Sadly there really is a cover-up going on here, and it's a cover-up of statistical facts. What we have in the European media today is a deliberate attempt to hide the facts and smear the reputation of the Catholic Church, particularly the pope if they can get to him.

Why is this? Well, part of it has to do with the nature of the media itself. There are two sayings in the news business.

Saying # 1 "If it bleeds it leads."
Meaning if the story involves gross violence, mayhem or some kind of sadistic abuse, it will almost always find itself on the front page of the newspaper, as well as the leading story in almost every news broadcast. If it's not actually the first story, then it will be very close to the first story. This is because violence, mayhem and abuse sells newspapers and gets people to watch news broadcasts. What the news media is doing is capitalizing on strange aspect of human nature that deals with morbid curiosity. There is some kind of strange subconscious characteristic in human beings that likes to see blood, gore and torture. I don't know why that is, but it is, and the mainstream news media has learned how to take advantage of it for marketing purposes.

Saying # 2 "Sex sells"
This isn't just a news media term, it's a universal term for all advertising and marketing. People are naturally attracted toward sexual stories and topics. That's why so many end table magazines are filled with articles about sex. That's why commercials and advertisements usually feature a scantily clad young attractive woman, or a handsome and physically fit shirtless man. It works! It gets people to look, and it gets them to buy. In the newspaper and television news business this kind of advertisement is a little more tricky. They can't just market sex for sex's sake. They have to package it in a story, and quite often this involves some kind of tawdry sex scandal. So when any kind of news comes out about a religious sex scandal you would think the media would be all over it, and indeed they are, but in this case they do it in a very disproportionate way.

Outside of the normal violent and sexual nature of the mainstream news media there is another component to this whole thing. BIAS! Yes, that's right, and in this case it's a particular anti-Catholic bias that is generated by a deep seated anti-Catholic prejudice or form of bigotry. This comes from newspaper editors, reporters, as well as television newsroom producers. Most of them are secular atheists or agnostics. Some of them are liberal Protestants and even a few are liberal Catholics who have an ax to grind against the generally conservative policies of the Catholic Church. This is the ONLY realistic explanation for the disproportionate media attention on the Catholic Church, when it is a statistical fact that Protestant churches have a slightly higher incidence of sexual abuse of minors and cover-up. This is the ONLY realistic explanation for the disproportionate media attention on the Catholic Church, when it is a statistical fact that non-religious institutions (such a public schools) have a sexual abuse rate of minors that is literally over 100 times higher than any religious institution, including the Catholic Church. One would think there would be at least 100 time more media coverage on sexual abuse in public schools. That is not the case at all. Instead the Catholic Church gets virtually ALL the negative media attention, while hardly a single news story can be found on the overwhelming sexual abuse going on in public schools. Curious? No. BIAS! Perhaps even bigotry! (Just calling it like I see it folks.)

Is there a cover-up going on here? YOU BET THERE IS! It's in the mainstream news media, which actively seeks to tear down the Catholic Church at every opportunity possible, and simultaneously seeks to protect a much higher number of abusers in non-religious institutions, by hiding the data related to them, and refusing to cover their sex-abuse stories with even one-hundredth of the media attention. So the question everybody should be asking is this. WHY is the mainstream news media seeking to PROTECT child sex abusers by hiding the statistics of where they do the most damage?

Tuesday, March 23, 2010

The Century of Darkness


THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: As conservative Americans lament the socializing of the U.S. economy under President Barack Obama and the Democratic Congress, it would be helpful for Catholic Americans to step back and put the whole thing into historical and prophetic context.

The Russian Bolshevik Revolution occurred in October - November of 1917, immediately following the miracle of the sun at Fatima in October of that same year. Our Lady warned us of what was to come. The secrets of Fatima were as follows...
  1. A greater war would follow World War I after the "strange light" in the night sky (fulfilled in January of 1938 and immediately followed by World War II).
  2. Then Russia would spread it's [Marxist] errors all over the world and entire nations would disappear (fulfilled in 1945 through present).
  3. The Holy Father (the pope) would suffer martyrdom and the Catholic Church would be left in ruins (currently waiting on fulfillment, though John Paul II believed the prophecy applied to him).
Personally, I believe the assassination attempt on Pope John Paul II was just a foretaste of what is to come. This is because John Paul II survived and there are multiple prophecies from other approved Catholic seers who likewise predict an actual assassination of the pope.

Pope Leo XIII himself gave a prophecy concerning a century of darkness that was to come. Based on this message, followed by the message and timing of the Fatima visions, in conjunction with the prophecies of Anne Catherine Emmerich and many other approved Catholic mystics, it is reasonable to conclude that the century of darkness began immediately after the close of the Fatima visitations in 1917. This coincides with the Bolshevik Revolution in October-November of that same year. Ever since then, the world has been hopelessly under the influence of Marxism.

Marxism

Marxism is the political and economic philosophy of Karl Marx in which the concept of class struggle plays a central role in understanding society's allegedly inevitable development from capitalism to a socialist and ultimately classless society. From Marxism comes the concepts of implementation ranging from extreme to moderate: communism, socialism, fascism, and liberalism (or what some call "soft marxism").

Now, nearly one-hundred years after the Bolshevik Revolution, virtually every nation on the earth as succumbed to the ideology of Karl Marx in one way or another. Of course many Americans are fond of the notion that the United States stood squarely against Marxism throughout the twentieth century. This is a fanciful notion, but a very incorrect one. In fact, the United States of America fully embraced the theories of Karl Marx, it just disagreed with Russia (and the Soviet Union) as to how it should be implemented. The Russians preferred a fast and immediate transition via force - communism. While the Americans preferred a more slow and gradual transition - liberalism. For the United States it began with the graduated income tax and the creation of the Federal Reserve in 1913. These seemingly benign policies would lay the foundation for America's Marxist transition later on. Then with the election of President Franklin Roosevelt in 1930, the United States wholly embraced the slow and steady transition to a Marxist economy. Later, under President Lyndon Johnson in the 1960s, that transition took the next step. Small steps continued under presidents Carter, Clinton and George W. Bush. Finally, with the presidency of Barack Obama, the United States took a major leap toward implementing the Marxist agenda. Legislation was signed into law starting the process toward socialized medicine. This followed the government takeover of many insurance agencies, financial institutions, banks and one automobile manufacturing giant. It is estimated that after the full implementation of the healthcare legislation, nearly 1/2 of the United States economy will be owned and operated by the federal government - the very definition of a socialist nation.

If we are correct in assuming that 1917 marks the beginning of the century of darkness foretold by Pope Leo XIII and others, then we can take comfort in the knowledge that Satan's reign of terror is soon coming to a close. However, that does not mean he will relinquish power quickly. There may be years of struggle to follow as the world is slowly turned back over to a more Christian way of governance. Many prophecies predict terrible wars, accompanied by disruptions in the Church, the assassination of the pope, and even a divine intervention in the form of a terrible celestial event.

Now here is the bad news. The speculative timing of these events may be off. There is a good school of thought which suggests that the date of the century of darkness actually began in January of 1938. This is because all of the prophecies of Our Lady of Fatima were conditional up to that point (the beginning of the Second World War), and then the prophecies seemed to become more unconditional thereafter. IF this school of thought is correct, then the century of darkness will not end until 2038, and there are two prophecies from approved Catholic sources that seem to confirm this. IF they are correct, then we have about another 28 years of pure socialism to look forward to before it finally reaches it's inevitable violent end.

So what we are watching for in the years to come is a sign. Does our suffering under Marxism begin to end in 2017, or must we wait until 2038? That is the prophetic question of our time. The sign will be war - specifically - another war in Europe. When the fighting begins, know the century of darkness is rapidly coming to an end.

Monday, March 22, 2010

Immigration Reform = God's Chastisement On America

(AP) - Frustrated with the lack of action to overhaul the country's immigration system, tens of thousands of demonstrators rallied on the National Mall and marched through the streets of the capital Sunday, waving American flags and holding homemade signs in English and Spanish.

Supporters traveled from around the country in hopes the rally would re-energize Congress to take up the volatile issue. Some lawmakers oppose any attempt to help an estimated 12 million illegal immigrants become U.S. citizens while others insist on stronger border controls first...

read full story here
THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: This is going to be a tough pill for my readers to swallow, but I actually support the Democrats on this. However, it's not for the typical reasons you might think. Please read on, and feel free to criticize my views in the comments below. As a conservative patriotic American, I sympathize with your frustration and dissent, and provided it's clean I'll give you an open forum to voice it here.

I don't support immigration reform because I'm a bleeding heart liberal, nor is it because I have some misplaced sense of "social justice." I don't support it because the USCCB told me to, nor do I support it because the Vatican encourages compassion. I don't support it because I'm a "free-trader" nor because I want "open-borders." I am not a supporter of NAFTA nor the emerging "North American Union" (NAU). I admit my reasons for supporting this are peculiar which is why I believe my readers deserve a full explanation. My reasons are as follows...

Reason # 1
The United States of America is under the chastisement of God. We must embrace it, not resist it. The chastisement comes mainly for one reason, and that is the wholesale slaughter of the unborn children through abortion and embryonic stem-cell research. It is also because of the countless souls that have never even been conceived do to the massive use of artificial birth-control, in addition to widespread sexual perversion in the form of fornication, adultery and homosexuality. All of this together has resulted in a birthrate decline that is unsustainable. We have already dropped below the threshold of what is historically reversible. Therefore with a native population that is in decline, it must be replaced, in earnest and as quickly as possible, by people who are more likely to follow God's laws. While Mexicans are not perfect, and they too are just as prone to sin as we are, they have so far demonstrated a general willingness to avoid abortion, artificial birth-control, and maintain God's model for a traditional family most of the time. While not all of them are Catholic, the majority of them are, and so this also puts them in greater favor with God than the general (liberal or dispensationalist) Protestant population of the United States. God is giving this land over to those people who are more likely to follow his laws, and we as Catholic Christians MUST NOT resist the chastisement of God Almighty.

Reason # 2
As pointed out in reason # 1, the native population of the United States is in serious decline that is unsustainable. The social security safety net will collapse without sufficient tax revenue if the number of wage earners is declining. Therefore, the federal government must import wage earners, in earnest, to shore up it's financial obligations or else it will face a bloody revolution! Europe and Canada have also faced a similar situation with their declining native populations, and therefore have been forced to import as many new taxpayers as possible to shore up their social security systems. Unfortunately for them, they have not had a Catholic third-world nation directly to the south already sending potential taxpayers to them by the truckload. They've been forced to seek immigrants from around the world, and also unfortunately for them, the only people ready and willing to come are African and Middle Eastern Muslims. For this reason, Europe and Canada are quickly importing massive numbers of Muslim immigrants who reproduce several times faster than native Europeans and Canadians with an average of 4 to 8 children per household. Naturally, over a period of just a few decades this will result in a dramatic population shift in these countries to a growing Islamic influence. This is why many demographic experts have predicted that Europe (and possibly even Canada) will be Islamic nations by 2050. The United States is in the EXACT SAME BOAT, with the exception that we have Mexican Catholics clamoring to get into this country from a nation immediately to our south and don't require a plane ticket to get here. Importing Mexican Catholic taxpayers into the American economy, as opposed to African and Asian Islamic taxpayers, makes logical sense and spares us the fate that will soon come upon Europe and Canada once Muslims have a large enough demographic to transform those countries into Islamic nations.

Reason # 3
Protestantism has failed in America. Likewise, American-style Liberal Catholicism has failed as well. "Americanism," which has always been condemned by the popes, has now failed America. The idea of a secular government, that maintains a "wall of separation" between religion and government has resulted in the mess we currently endure. It does not work, and it will continue to fail. America needs to become a Catholic nation, at least socially, with a government that is subservient to the will of a Catholic majority. When I say Catholic majority, however, I do not mean the liberal American-style of Catholicism that has been the status quo in the United States for the last fifty years. What America needs is a vibrant and dynamic new Catholicism that is rooted in tradition. Some Catholic Americans are already working on this, as we see developing on EWTN and in the Old Southern states. Mexican Catholics have a lot to offer to this, but it must be a convergence between the two that will transform America into what it needs to be. We must not forget that the religious pluralism, with a Protestant majority, has totally and completely failed the United States. Liberal American-style Catholicism has been no help at all. There needs to be a social shake-up of our religious demographic mix if we ever hope to prepare for Islamic majorities in Europe and Canada.

Reason # 4
The current situation with illegal aliens in the United States is entirely the fault of the United States government, and not the fault of those who took advantage of the situation. For about three decades now, the U.S. feds have been practically ENCOURAGING Mexican nationals to illegally enter this country. Likewise, the Mexican government has been supporting it as well. One would almost think there is a backroom conspiracy going on between the two governments. I suspect this is probably because of the demographics issue. Our government knows the current rate of native depopulation is unsustainable, but at the same time refuses to explain this to Americans. Why? I'm not sure. Maybe it's because forces within our government are trying to depopulate the nation of natives? Who knows? Whatever the case, the policy of near zero enforcement of our nations immigration laws has been in place for decades, and the result has been an illegal population of about 20+ million people. YOU CANNOT DEPORT TWENTY-MILLION PEOPLE!!! Sorry, that's not possible. It would be a humanitarian crisis. You cannot incarcerate twenty-million people either. The cost would be more than it's worth. The best thing to do is fix the problem that led to it - which is open borders. Then we must give Mexico a favored immigration policy, and get these people legal as quickly as possible so we can start taxing them.

Reason # 5
The current system is set up to victimize both Mexican illegals and the American blue collar working class. By allowing illegals to stay illegal, the government collects some revenue off them through the payroll tax. That's because private businesses that hire illegals would much rather pay the INS fines if they get caught, then get busted by the IRS for tax evasion if they fail to report the pyroll tax. So the government already gets a little revenue off them with no fear of ever having to pay out government entitlement benefits. However, by staying illegal the business benefits too, because it neither has to pay job benefits nor minimum wage. This hurts the Mexican illegal of coarse because he works for sub-standard pay, has no benefits, and no legal recourse for anything. However it also hurts the American blue collar class who get squeezed out of work because of illegals who will do it cheaper. By legalizing the 20+ million illegals in this country everybody will benefit. First the governemnt will get more revenue because it will finally be able to tax these people directly. Second, Mexican illegals will finally get full American pay and benefits, as well as legal recourse. This will give them a reason to pursue full citizenship and fully integrate with American culture. Third, the American blue collar working class will no longer have to compete with unfair competition. At long last it will cost an employer the exact same amount of money to higher an American as it would to higher a Mexican. With cost being exactly the same, Mexican nationals will no longer have the advantage of unfair competition, and employers will no longer have any advantage to discriminating against the American blue collar working class.


Sunday, March 21, 2010

OFFICIAL: USA Is Now A Socialist Nation

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: It's official. As of today, Sunday March 21, 2010, the United States of America officially became a socialist nation. If we really wanted to be honest with ourselves we should rename the country to the United Socialist States of America (USSA).

By this I mean the federal government already controls Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, welfare, food stamps, many once private banking and lending institutions, General Moters, and other formerly private sector companies. Now the federal government is in the process (a process that CANNOT be stopped I might add) of taking over the entire healthcare industry, of which this most recent legislation passed by the House of Representatives is only the start. It is the first in a long chain of bills and executive orders that will slowly transfer the ownership of private medicine over to the federal government. Mark my words, it's a process of relentless incrementalism that cannot be stopped.

When you include all of the direct and hidden taxes Americans are forced to pay, the average wage earner in this country already pays about half of his gross income to the federal government. This is a marginal taxes rate, which if it were honest and open, would be comparable to Sweden - a socialist monarchy.

Now I know this is a hard pill to swallow, but rest assured the American people (as a whole) are getting exactly what we deserve. Why? Because (as a whole) we elected this president and this congress knowing EXACTLY what they stood for. There is nobody in this country who can claim ignorance. The truth about this president and this congress was already laid out before the American people long before the 2006 and 2008 elections. Americans knew these people were socialists and yet they elected them anyway. Now we're just collectively getting what we all collectively asked for. Maybe you yourself, individually didn't ask for it, but collectively we did when we collectively elected Barack Obama by popular vote.

All the wrong financial moves have now been made. There will be no economic recovery. Between the financial bailouts and this latest healthcare scheme, there can be no recovery. It's impossible! Start preparing now for the financial crash of 2010. The United States will soon suffer greatly for it's sins, and God will bring our national chastisement upon us through the very "leaders" we've elected. In short, we are getting, and will continue to get, EXACTLY what we deserve.

Sadly, the group of people who will suffer the most from this legislation is the one group that bears no responsibility for it at all. It is the unborn, many more of whom will be aborted with our tax dollars, as a ongoing sacrifice of martyrdom for the sins of our perverted society.

Wednesday, March 17, 2010

OFFICIAL: US Episcopal Church To Consecrate ANOTHER Gay Bishop

Bishop Gene Robinson (Left) and Bishop-Elect Mary Glasspool (Right)
Both openly gay clergy now represent the "face" of the U.S. Episcopal Church
(Episcopal News Service) - Diocese of Los Angeles Bishop-elect Mary Douglas Glasspool has received the required number of consents from diocesan standing committees and bishops with jurisdiction to her ordination and consecration as a bishop, the presiding bishop's office confirmed in a March 17 announcement.

Glasspool was elected on Dec. 5, 2009, the second of two bishops suffragan elected at the 114th annual convention in the Diocese of Los Angeles. In an unofficial tally, the diocese had announced on March 10 that Glasspool had received 61 consents, five more than the 56 required, from the church's diocesan standing committees.

Her consecration, along with that of the Rev. Canon Diane Jardine Bruce, who was elected a day earlier, are planned for May 15. Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori will be the chief consecrator...

read full story here
THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: Of course this was predictable, in fact, I did predict it HERE. It's official, the U.S. Episcopal Church has now become nothing more than a homosexual lobbyist group. So what does the Anglican Communion now offer (other than gay clergy, gay marriages and priestesses) that will not be found in the Anglican ordinariates within the Catholic Church? The answer is NOTHING! The Anglican Communion has nothing to offer, that is unique, other than gay clergy, blessing of same-sex marriages and priestesses.

Seriously, just think about it for a moment. The Anglican Communion has an assortment of parishes around the world ranging from Evangelical to Anglo-Catholic. What's so special about Anglican Evangelicalism? Can we not find the exact same thing among other Evangelicals? What's so special about Anglo-Catholicism? Will we not find the exact same thing in the emerging Anglican ordinariates? Perhaps the Communion will attempt to boast of it's diverse unity - a unity that is now falling apart. Maybe it can boast that it has no strict authority structure, which of course has now led to its demise. Ah, but of course we have the boast that Anglicanism is the via media ("middle way") between Catholicism and Protestantism, but then, wouldn't that designation more aptly describe the emerging Anglican ordinariates, which actually fulfill the vision of the Oxford Movement? What does Anglicanism have to offer anyway? I mean what does it have to offer other than gay clergy, gay marriages and priestesses?

TOTAL REBELLION Among US Catholic Nuns

(AP) - Catholic nuns are urging Congress to pass President Barack Obama's health care plan, in an unusual public break with bishops who say it would subsidize abortion.

Some 60 leaders of religious orders representing 59,000 Catholic nuns Wednesday sent lawmakers a letter urging them to pass the Senate health care bill. It contains restrictions on abortion funding that the bishops say don't go far enough.

The letter says that "despite false claims to the contrary, the Senate bill will not provide taxpayer funding for elective abortions." The letter says the legislation also will help support pregnant women and "this is the real pro-life stance."

source

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: Now the rebels are coming out of the woodwork as everybody's true colors are beginning to show. The US Catholic Church is already in schism. It just hasn't been formalized yet.

UPDATE: 3/18/2010
Good News! It appears this organization that is claiming to represent 60,000 nuns has spoke out of turn, misrepresented itself, and at best only represents one-tenth that number, if even that. Religious orders are now releasing press statements affirming the US Bishop's recent stand against the legislation. It it the opinion of 'The Catholic Knight' that this liberal organization that are urging Congress to pass "Obamacare" is being made to appear as if they represent tens of thousands of nuns, but in reality they probably only represent a few hundred.

Tuesday, March 16, 2010

Pope Rids The Church of Filth

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: Before reading the story below, let me first state some facts....

FACT #1
The Catholic Church has ALWAYS taught that sexual abuse of minors is a damnable sin, of the worst kind, in which Jesus Christ himself said it would be better for someone who does this to tie a millstone around his neck and be thrown into the deepest part of the sea.

FACT #2
The total number of all priests accused of sexual abuse of minors is less than 5% of all Catholic clergy. That means 95% of Catholic clergy have never been accused and are doing their jobs correctly.

FACT #3
In spite of what people say about clerical celibacy being a "cause" of these problems, actual statistics indicate that the majority of sex-abuse of minors is perpetrated by married men. Statistically speaking, being a celibate man actually REDUCES your odds of sexually abusing minors.

FACT #4
In the overwhelming vast majority of cases where sexual abuse was reported, the alleged victim was a male between the ages of 12 and 18. Victims younger than 12 were almost never reported, and sexual abuse of females was also rare. This is not the clinical definition of pedophilia. It is however a type of predatory homosexuality that seeks to take advantage of underage young men.

FACT #5
Homosexual men are not allowed to become priests in the Catholic Church. In order for a homosexual to become a priest he must lie about his homosexuality just to get into seminary and remain "in the closet" indefinitely. If he is ever discovered to be gay, he could be fired and laicized (defrocked).

FACT #6
Sexual abuse of minors is slightly higher in Protestant churches according to data released by insurance agencies that underwrite them.

FACT #7
Sexual abuse of minors is significantly higher in non-religious institutions that deal with children, particularly public schools, where according to a U.S. government report, a child is literally 100 times more likely to be molested in a public school than in a Catholic church.

FACT #8
The reforms implemented in the US Catholic Church after the sex-abuse scandal of 2003 have been hailed by child protective services as the most comprehensive ever seen in a public institution and have been cited as a model for other institutions to follow.

FACT #9
The mainstream media continues to report sexual-abuse cases in the Catholic Church disproportionally to sexual-abuse cases in Protestant churches and the public schools. In spite of actual sexual-abuse statistics being lower in the Catholic Church than in Protestant churches and the public schools, the media continues to focus on Catholicism like a laser beam, while higher numbers of sexual abuse cases in other churches and institutions are almost systematically ignored.
(Zenit.org).- First as the prefect for the Church's doctrinal congregation, and now as Pope, Benedict XVI has made a decisive contribution to the Church's battle against the sexual abuse of minors, according to an Italian bishop specialized in canon law.

Bishop Giuseppe Versaldi of Alessandria, Italy, defended the Holy Father's "rigor" in the effort to stop abuse in the Church. His reflection was published in Sunday's edition of L'Osservatore Romano.

The prelate noted that the Church -- "contrary to the deformed image that is presented -- is the institution that has engaged in the most decided battle against the sexual abuse of minors, beginning from within." In this effort, Bishop Versaldi said, Benedict XVI has made a "decisive impulse."

Recalling the future Pope's 20 years at the helm of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the prelate affirmed that "precisely from that observatory, Cardinal Ratzinger had the possibility to follow cases of abuse that were denounced and he fostered a more rigorous reform, including legislative, in this matter....

read full story here

Monday, March 15, 2010

Is The New York Times Anti-Catholic?

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: As if their newspaper sales were not bad enough, now the New York Times seeks to drive away every Catholic subscriber it can possibly offend.

From the Catholic League...
NEW YORK TIMES GUNNING FOR THE POPE?

March 15, 2010

Catholic League president Bill Donohue takes on the New York Times:

On March 10, the New York Times ran an article on sex abuse in the Catholic Church stating that in Austria a priest abused a boy 40 years ago. Yesterday, readers learned of a German case where a man says he was abused in 1979. But when Rabbi Baruch Lebovits was found guilty last week on eight counts of sexually abusing a Brooklyn boy, the Times failed to report it. This is not an accident—it is deliberate.

Worse, on Saturday, the Times ran a front-page story saying that in 2002, when the sex abuse scandal in Boston hit, the pope—then Cardinal Ratzinger—"made statements that minimized the problem." No quotes or evidence of any kind were given. "Minimize the problem." Interesting phrase. In 2005, the Times reported that in 2002, Ratzinger believed that "less than 1 percent of priests are guilty" of sex abuse (it was later found that 4 percent was a more accurate figure). The Times characterized his remark by saying he "appeared to minimize the problem." Looks like they got their talking points down just fine.

What the Times could have said over the weekend was that on January 9, 2002, three days after the Boston Globe broke the story on sex abuse, it ran a story reporting that Ratzinger had sent a letter to the bishops worldwide saying that "even a hint" of the sexual abuse of minors merited an investigation. But to do so would have compromised the conclusion it sought to reach.

If the Times were truly interested in eradicating sex abuse, it not only would report on cases like Rabbi Lebovits, it would not seek to protect the public school establishment. But it does. Here's the proof. Last year, there were two bills being debated in Albany on the subject of sex abuse: one targeted only private institutions like the Catholic Church, giving the public schools a pass; the other covered both private and public. The Times endorsed the former.

Contact NYT Public Editor Clark Hoyt: public@nytimes.com

Sunday, March 14, 2010

Zionism Prepares To Trump Christianity


(WND) - The International Temple Mount Awareness Day is being planned by a coalition of Jewish groups, including The Temple Institute, the Organization for the Renewal of the Temple (ORT), Women in Green, the Temple Mount Heritage Foundation and Israel National Radio.

"We call on Jews and Gentiles around the world to mark March 16th as a day of solidarity with the Temple Mount and the prophetic vision of 'a house of prayer for all nations,'" reads a statement from the organizers of the event...

read full story here

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: This is how it's being sold to us. Christians are being told it's a human rights issue, and that it's not just about the Jews. We're being told the Temple Mount is for all of us, and that everyone (particularly Jews and Christian) should be able to pray there 24 hours a day and 7 days a week. We're being told that it's "unfair" that Muslims are allowed to pray there almost 24/7 and people of other religions are not.

What we're not being told is that it is the Israeli government that has made this arrangement, that it is the Israeli government that backs it, and it is the Israeli government that helps to enforce it. The policy that is so "unfair" to the Jews is in fact put upon them by their own supposed "Jewish" government. True, the Israeli Supreme Court ruled that Israeli police must make provision for public Jewish prayer on the site. However, the policy of banning all non-Muslims from the site on certain days originally came out of the Ariel Sharon administration. Israeli police continue to refuse to abide by the Supreme Court ruling due to safety concerns. Notice however, the Supreme Court ruling doesn't necessarily deal with Christian or adherents of other religions. Rather, it deals specifically with Jews and their supposed "right" to organize public prayer on the Temple Mount site.

What we have here is a covert attempt by certain Zionists to co-opt Christians (and others) into pressuring their own government into implementing a Supreme Court ruling that primarily deals with not only letting Jews onto the Temple Mount 24/7 but also organize public prayer there. One of the reasons why Palestinian Muslims are so hostile toward letting non-Muslims (particularly Jews) pray on the Temple Mount during Jewish holy days (Sabbath, Passover, Pentecost, Trumpets, Atonement, Tabernacles, Hanukkah, etc.) is the fear that over time the Jews will co-opt the site and pave the way for the rebuilding of the Temple itself. Of course Muslims don't want this for fear of how that might interfere with Islamic worship on the site, and how it further stakes the Jewish claim on the Temple Mount, Jerusalem and the Palestinian West Bank. What the Muslims see in this, coupled with expanded Jewish settlements in the Palestinian West Bank, is a Zionist strategy of relentless incrementalism.

Now 'The Catholic Knight' is not taking the side of the Muslims here. I could care less about their silly mosque on that arid hilltop and what goes on inside there. It is built on the site that God judged and destroyed nearly 2,000 years ago, using a Pagan Roman army as punishment upon the Jewish leaders of that time, for the rejection of their Messiah, HIS Only Begotten Son, and the gospel preached by his apostles. Upon the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ the Temple ceased to be a place of authentic worship of God. While the Jews of that time attempted to worship God in that Temple, God himself was actually hanging on a cross outside the city walls - despised and rejected. God gave the Jewish leaders forty years (one Biblical generation) to repent of this. They failed to do so. Instead they rebelled against their Roman occupiers demanding independence. Convinced that God would rise up to help them as he did for the Maccabeans centuries before, they believed themselves capable of defeating the Roman army. God rose up all right, on the side of the Pagan Romans, and revisited his people once again in the form of judgment and destruction. The purpose was to put an end, once and for all, to the sacrificial system set up under the Old Covenant, so as to chide future generations of Jews into accepting the permenant sacrifice of Jesus Christ.

Rebuilding the Temple Mount into another symbol of rejection of the true Messiah has always been the goal of many Jewish leaders throughout history, and history tells us they have been willing to collaborate with literally ANYONE to make it happen. Perhaps one of their greatest allies was the Pagan Roman emperor "Julian the Apostate." In AD 363, Julian agreed to help the Jews rebuild the Temple because he (as a Pagan) understood how it's very presence undermined the Christian gospel message, and created confusion about the legitimacy of Jesus Christ's claim to be the Jewish Messiah - and therefore by extension anybody's Messiah! Interestingly enough, God had other plans. As work on the foundation began, strange "balls of fire" (probably methane gas eruptions from seismic activity) continually burst forth from the rocks, scorching workers and bringing construction to a stand still. Eventually the work was abandoned. Some 1,500 years later another emperor, Napoleon Bonaparte, agreed to help the Jews rebuild their Temple for similar reasons as Julian the Apostate. However, a little military defeat at the Battle of Waterloo in June of 1815 put an end to that plan. Of course the rabbis have a saying that "coincidence is not a kosher word" and for Christians there ought to be a lesson in these historical events. What is that lesson? It's simple really. God DOES NOT want the Jewish Temple rebuilt! God knows it will be used as a means to undermine the Gospel message and ultimately create a false religion that claims to worship HIM, but in reality rejects HIS Only Begotten Son, and therefore rejects HIM by extension.

In the video above, and the story cited as well, please pay special attention to the pitch line. Worship on the Temple Mount, and later of course the rebuilt Temple itself, is not just a "Jewish thing." According to the Zionist pitch men, it's for ALL PEOPLE - everyone - to become a central place a worship and a conduit if you will, between the human and the divine. Stop and think about that for a second. Exactly what are they saying? They're saying the Temple Mount and their rebuilt Temple (not Jesus Christ) is to become the conduit (or mediator) between God and man. Is this not the ultimate heresy for a Christian? Can this be anything else but apostasy?

As if that were not bad enough, there is more. Already the ancient Jewish Sanhedrin has been reformed (learn more here), and with it a new extension of Judaism has been created for Gentiles called Noahidism (learn more here). It's based on the Biblical account of the covenant between God and Noah after the Great Flood. The gist of this new religion is simple. Noahidism is for Gentiles, while Judaism is for Jews. Of course Jews have the more difficult covenant to keep with 613 commandments. While Gentiles (under Noahidism) need only keep 7 commandments. Of course, this makes it easier for Gentiles to be accepted and categorized in a purely Jewish context. Under Noahidism, a Muslim could theoretically be accepted as a Noahide. The same could be said for Deists or Theists, which is what most non-religious Westerners espouse as their most common belief in divinity. Of course Noahidism would also be very compatible with Freemasonry. However, a doctrinally orthodox Christian could not be accepted as a Noahide because of his belief in the Trinity, which allegedly violates the Noahide command to worship only God, and of course God is defined by the rabbinical Talmud. Theoretically, a Jehovah's Witness could be a Noahide, but not a Catholic or a Protestant. All that aside, what is really interesting is how this plays out once the Temple is rebuilt, because you see there would have to be different courtyards on the Temple Mount separating Jews from Noahides. Can you see a religious caste system developing here? It's similar to what existed during Jesus' time, and in the centuries before, wherein practicing Jews held a more privileged position in the Temple than God fearing Gentiles, no matter how devout they were.

Christian prophecy makes it clear that the Jewish Temple will not be successfully rebuilt until the last days of the end times just before the bodily Return of Jesus Christ. Historically speaking, every previous attempt to rebuild the Temple has resulted in disaster, postponement or cancellation for various reasons. Christian prophecy also indicates that when the Temple is rebuilt, it will be used by the final Antichrist (a Jewish messianic figure) to lead the world into total rejection of Jesus Christ and outright rebellion against God's plan. Unless we are to believe the coming of Antichrist is right around the corner, we can only conclude that this latest Zionist attempt, to reclaim the Temple Mount and rebuild the Temple, will only result in disaster. While we may now have the framework for the final last days scenario, there are still some key end times prophecies that must be fulfilled first...
  1. The world's economic and political power base must shift to the middle east.
  2. The Gospel must be preached to every corner of the world and made widely available for anyone to accept. Nations all over the whole world must be converted.
  3. Sometime after this, there must be a worldwide apostasy of Gentile Christians. (What we have right now is only a regional apostasy in the western world, as Christian missionary work in Africa and Asia is booming!)
For this reason, 'The Catholic Knight' believes we are not yet in the time of the last days, even though we have been living in the end times for centuries. Rather, what we can expect to befall the Zionists is the same thing that befell others who tried to rebuild the Temple. At the very least this is a delay or cancellation due to political reasons. Or else we can expect calamity to befall those who live in Israel. In fact, based on current political and regional news, it's probably safe to assume that Israel will soon be plunged into massive war. I'm guessing that Jerusalem as we know it will be destroyed, and perhaps even the Dome of the Rock as well. Don't assume however that the destruction of the Dome of the Rock will automatically spell the rebuilding of the Temple. As I said, this WILL NOT happen until God is ready to close the book on human history.

So we should keep in mind that ANY Christian cooperation with Jews on the Temple Mount project will only result in cooperating with an anti-Christian agenda. Right now the Zionists are preparing to fool the world into believing the situation on Jerusalem is a human rights issue that affects people of all religions. It does not. There is no religious reason for Christians to worship on the Temple Mount on any day of the year. Likewise, the rabbis have created a religious system in the Talmud that allows Judaism to function as a religion even without the Temple Mount, or even the Temple itself. Their innability to worship there when they want to is not our problem, nor is it any kind of priority for Christians to get involved in. The Israeli Jews are contending with THEIR OWN government on this issue. In other words, it's an internal problem within the Jewish world, and Christians should stay out of it.

As a general rule of thumb, Christians should avoid all matters relating to Zionism, as it is by definition a movement against the Spirit of God. Evangelical Protestants in the United States are quick to point to Israeli military victories, such as the Six-Day War an the Yom Kippur War, as "signs" of God's blessing on the Israeli state and an indication that God wants Christians to support Zionism. However, they fail to point out that Israel has been in a state of perpetual war against Muslim regimes and sects for almost the entire duration of it's existence, and did not have such golden success in the Israeli-Lebanon War in recent years. To claim that military victory is tantamount to God's blessing is arrogant and stupid. So was God blessing the Pagan Roman Empire when he allowed it to destroy the Jewish nation in 70 AD? Was God blessing Russia when he allowed it victory over the tiny nation of Georgia recently? Was God blessing Germany when he allowed it to take over Bravaria? Was God blessing England when he allowed it to take over Northern Ireland? Was God blessing Vietnam when he allowed the Communists to defeat the Americans? Was God blessig North Korea when he allowed the Communists to keep American forces in the South? The list goes on and on, and I think I've made my point. Military victory does not equate God's blessing on a regime. What it means is that God has allowed that regime to survive for now (either to his liking or not) for reasons related to this providencial plan.

Zionism, in all it's forms, leads to an anti-Christian gospel, because it's ultimate design is to rebuild a Jewish nation and the Jewish Temple against the will of God. If you're a Christian, especially a Catholic Christian, then you're supposed to believe salvation comes through Jesus Christ for all people, especially the Jews. If you're a Christian, especially a Catholic Christian, then you should understand why God has been dealing with his people (the Jews) the way he has for the last 2000 years. He is trying to chide them into understanding that Jesus of Nazereth is their Messiah. If you're a Christian, especially a Catholic Christian, then you should understand that any effort to restore the ancient Temple and it's ceremonies is counterproductive to that end. If you're a Christian, especially a Catholic Christian, then you should know that if the Zionists are successful in obtainig their goals, it will only serve to confuse many Christians regarding the nature of Christ's sacrifice, and will become a counterpoint to Christian missionary work if potential converts think their is another (seemingly simplier) way of approaching the God of Israel through Noahidism and the restored Temple. If you're a Christian, especially a Catholic Christian, then you must understand that any support of Zionist goals is counterproductive to the missionary work of the Church and may possibly be a mortal sin.

So what should be the Christian attitude toward Zionism, the Temple Mount campaigns, and the Nation of Israel itself? Well, probably the best thing Christians can do is just be Christians. We should be indifferent toward Zionist political goals, and Muslim counter resistence to them. Rather we should simply recognize that the gospel of Jesus Christ is the ONLY real solution to all of these problems, and we should show love and respect toward both Muslims and Jews without endorsing or supporting their political agendas.

Thursday, March 11, 2010

Sex Abuse Scandal Revisited

(AP) - The Vatican spokesman, the Rev. Federico Lombardi, issued a statement late Friday noting that the Munich vicar-general who approved the priest's transfer had taken "full responsibility" for the decision, seeking to remove any question about the pontiff's potential responsibility as archbishop at the time.

Victims advocates weren't persuaded.

"We find it extraordinarily hard to believe that Ratzinger didn't reassign the predator, or know about the reassignment," said Barbara Blaine, president and founder of SNAP, Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests.

The pope, meanwhile, continues to be under fire for a 2001 Vatican letter he sent to all bishops advising them that all cases of sexual abuse of minors must be forwarded to his then-office, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, and that the cases were to be subject to pontifical secret.

Germany's justice minister, Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger, has cited the document as evidence that the Vatican created a "wall of silence" around abuse cases that prevented prosecution. Irish bishops have said the document had been "widely misunderstood" by the bishops themselves to mean they shouldn't go to police. And lawyers for abuse victims in the United States have cited the document in arguing that the Catholic Church tried to obstruct justice.

But canon lawyers insisted Friday that there was nothing in the document that would preclude bishops from fulfilling their moral and civic duties of going to police when confronted with a case of child abuse.

They stressed that the document merely concerned procedures for handling the church trial of an accused priest, and that the secrecy required by Rome for that hearing by no means extended to a ban on reporting such crimes to civil authorities.

"Canon law concerning grave crimes ... doesn't in any way interfere with or diminish the obligations of the faithful to civil laws," said Monsignor Davide Cito, a professor of canon law at Rome's Santa Croce University....

read full story here
THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: The pope is innocent, plain and simple. That is the fact. If SNAP really cared about getting justice for the victims they claim to represent, they would go after the abuser and the man who has ALREADY ADMITTED to transferring the pervert priest without Archbishop Ratzinger's knowledge. The problem surrounding Archbishop Ratzinger was similar (but in this case much smaller) to the problem surrounding Cardinal Law and many others, wherein underlings made executive decisions without the bishop's knowledge in a misguided attempt to shield the bishop from scandal and perhaps even protect the abuser in the process.

As for the Vatican document requiring secrecy, any layman with a novice understanding of canon law knows these laws apply to activities WITHIN the CHURCH. They do not extend to civil law. It's not rocket science people. For any member of the clergy to claim that he thought Cardinal Ratzinger's letter extended to anything more than conduct WITHIN the Church is an insult and a lame excuse. It's lame because there is no way any member of the clergy could honestly believe that - unless he's an idiot. It's an insult because he dares to expect others to believe it.

As news unfolds about the growing sex-abuse scandal in the Catholic Church in Europe let us keep in mind the lessons learned from the Catholic sex-abuse scandal in the Anglophone world, particularly in the United States.

First, the media salivates over things like this, and frequently uses bad news for selfish reasons. They're notorious for hyping and pumping these stories to increase their ratings. Sex sells, as they say in the advertising world, and it's no different in the news media. Sexual scandals mean money - lots of money - for those who report them, and it is in their interest to make the scandal appear as large as possible, and as far-reaching as possible, because that's what sells newspapers and gets people to watch news broadcasts. It's a money thing and we should not forget that. This is why you will almost never hear or read about the actual statistics of those involved in sex-abuse scandals, because if the actual ratio were reported it would quickly be discovered that sex-abuse is actually much higher in non-religious institutions.

Second, once the dust settles, the media hype is over, and the damage to public image is done, the actual numerical statistics will start to come in. What they will find in Europe will probably be similar to what was found in the United States and the rest of the Anglophone world. The actual number of sex-abusing perverts (and those who protect them) is around 5% or less of all clerics in the Church. This means two things. The statistical number of perverts in the Church is almost half of the statistical number found in other public service sectors. For example, the statistical number of perverts in the United States public school systems is around 10%. The same goes for the daycare industry as well as public clubs such as boyscouts and various sports. So in actuality, while there is always room for improvement, the Church is actually doing a better job filtering out perverts than the secular world. Don't expect to hear this reported by the news media though. That wouldn't sell many papers. The second thing this means, and we must never forget this, if about 5% or less of the clergy are involved in this disgusting activity, then that simultaneously means 95% or more of the clergy are not involved in it. These are your good priests, bishops and clerics of all sorts who are doing their jobs correctly. They cannot be made to suffer for the crimes of the tiny minority. Statistically speaking there is at the very least a 95% chance that the average parish priest is a good priest. That's the story typically lost in these scandals.

Third, while it is true the Church needs to do a lot more to filter out the perverts and report them once they're known, the same could be said of any religious organization, and even more so for non-religious organizations.

Fourth and finally, these types of scandals tend to bring out the worst kinds of anti-Catholics. First you have the opportunists. These are those who see an opportunity to make some easy money. They may be alleged abuse victims, or lawyers working on their behalf, or organizations claiming to represent their interests. Then of course there are those who would like to use the government to persecute the Church by stripping her of her rights. Then finally there are those who already hate the Church, for one reason or another, and will endlessly use this latest scandal in their arsenal of negative propaganda to dish out against Catholics at every opportunity they get.

What's important to remember are the facts. Sexual abuse is a problem that effects all of western civilization, not just the Church. This includes cover-up. Both sex-abuse and cover-up are actually much higher in non-religious institutions, especially the public schools. Sorry that's just a statistical FACT. Look it up. People can try to scapegoat the Catholic Church all they want, and of course they will, because it's been going on ever since the Church's founder (Jesus Christ) was scapegoated for every social problem that plagued Judea two-thousand years ago. It's human nature to scapegoat, but it does nothing to solve the underlying problem. What's important for Catholics to remember is that sex-abuse and cover-up is a civilization wide social problem. It affects all social institutions of which the Church is no exception. Simultaneously the Church is NOT the source of the problem either. It's a problem that all institutions must look into, and while the Church does tend to do a better job filtering out the perverts than non-religious institutions, everyone needs to work harder.