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

Thursday, April 29, 2010

Lesbian Bishop To Be Consecrated on May 15

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: Save the date! The Episcopal Diocese of Los Angeles is set to consecrate as bishop Mary Glasspool, an active and partnered lesbian. This comes six years after the consecration of Bishop Gene Robinson in New Hampshire. Robinson is also an active and partnered homosexual. Both Glasspool and Robinson are open about their homosexuality and see no problem with it conflicting with their professed Christian faith. The Episcopal Church seems to have no problem with it either, and in fact there is a good chance that another homosexual will soon be elected bishop in the Episcopal Diocese of Nevada. I've heard rumors there is even another potential somewhere in the Old South (Dixie).

It will be interesting to see how conservatives within the Anglican Communion will react to this. They have already threatened to disassociate from The Episcopal Church completely.

In light of all this The Catholic Knight has just one question for our Episcopalian brothers and sisters in Christ. How's that whole "Protestant Reformation" thing working you for you?

Wednesday, April 28, 2010

The UK Is Anti-Catholic

( – In a televised debate last week, all three leaders of the major British political parties accused Pope Benedict XVI of failing sufficiently to recognize and deal with the sex abuse scandals in the Catholic Church.

With Britain’s next general election looming and the country gearing up for an official papal visit, the televised debate featured the leaders of Britain’s political class scolding Pope Benedict for upholding Catholic teaching on homosexuality, contraception and abortion, and for what was alleged to be his inaction on the sexual abuse of minors by priests....

read full story here
THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: Their answers were in response to what was clearly a loaded question from a member of the audience. Still, the fact that not a single candidate dared to even question the accusation against our pope demonstrates once again, beyond the shadow of a doubt, that after 500 years, the UK is still an overwhelmingly anti-Catholic country.

This comes on the heels of an embarrassing memo leaked to the press in which members of the British government circulated an anti-Catholic "joke" that mocked the pope and the teachings of the Catholic Church. The British government has since apologized to the Vatican over this.

In this latest anti-Catholic scandal, we now have clear evidence that the leaders of all three British political parties are anti-Catholic. This is demonstrated by their willingness to presume guilt on the pope without sufficient evidence against him. Of course this is the very definition of prejudice in a legal sense.

British anti-Catholicism has a long history going back five centuries and reaching the highest levels of British government. It began in the early 16th century when King Henry VIII failed to receive an annulment from the Vatican and subsequently broke English Christianity away from the pope and declared himself the absolute spiritual ruler of the Church of England. He then proceeded on a campaign to persecute and murder all who opposed his personal claim to the "English papacy." Things only went downhill from there. In subsequent generations the throne passed between Catholic and Protestant heirs, each persecuting their political enemies. The final result came under Queen Elizabeth I which settled England as a Protestant country. In the following centuries, England became the leading herald of anti-Catholic propaganda around the world, as the British crown persecuted Irish Catholics and waged war against the Catholic kingdoms of France and Spain.

Anti-Catholicism took firm root in all of England's colonies, especially the thirteen American colonies. This is how the United States came to be so anti-Catholic. The venom was inherited from it's British colonial past and continues even today in the form of radical Fundamentalism and leftist Liberalism.

Sadly, the more things change the more they stay the same. The world may have moved into the 21st century, but British politics is still locked in the 16th century. To date Catholics are still forbidden from the British royal family. Government officials still mock the pope and the Church behind closed doors. Leading party officials not only refuse to defend the pope's right of innocence until proven guilty, but actually participate in promoting anti-Catholic presumption. Way to go England! Thanks for reminding the world just how little you've progressed in five centuries. Just brilliant! Jolly good show!

The Shroud of Christ Explained

(WorldNetDaily) - The shroud, therefore, they concluded, was not created by paint soaking through the linen or by a photographic image printing through to the reverse side, because the front and back facial images are not identical and the center fibers show no image creation whatsoever.

Fanti and Maggiolo concluded the shroud image was created by a "corona discharge," understood as a radiant burst of light and energy that scorched the body image of the crucified man on the topmost fibers of the shroud's front and back sides, without producing any image on the centermost of its linen fibers....

read full story here
THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: This is one historical relic about which 'The Catholic Knight' has no doubt. As far as I'm concerned, this IS a legitimate artifact of Jesus Christ, and the image above is indeed the face of our Lord at the moment of his resurrection.

Monday, April 26, 2010

How Anti-Catholicism Became A Liberal Trademark

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: Are you a Liberal? Well then you must be an Anti-Catholic. At least that's the new expectation of your buddies on the Left. "Catholic-baiting is the anti-Semitism of the liberals." So wrote the poet Peter Viereck. In truth it probably is the last remaining acceptable prejudice. Of course, it wasn't always that way.

Once upon a time Liberals could be counted on as the defenders of Catholic minorities in predominately Protestant countries, like the USA for example. Not so anymore. Today, Liberals are expected to despise the Catholic Church, it's leaders, and everything it represents. "The only good Catholic is a bad Catholic." So says the Liberal Left today, as it showers with praise Catholic dissenters like Senator Ted Kennedy, John Kerry and Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi. While it simultaneously scorns faithful Catholics such as Chief Justice John Roberts, Justice Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas. Catholics who oppose Church teaching are considered "enlightened" and "sophisticated," while those who defend Church teaching are called "bigoted" and "fundamentalist" as well as "down right dangerous." You see the trend here? This is the new status quo. It's been this way for a long time. While not everyone who self-identifies as "liberal" automatically displays such blatant anti-Catholicism, it is the expected norm on the Left, and those Liberals who do not march in lock-step are the exception to the rule.

So how did it happen? How could a movement (Liberalism or "Progressivism"), which once identified with poor Catholic immigrants, turn into such a hate filled and intolerant anti-Catholic machine? The answer can best be found in modern Liberalism's embrace of moral relativism. It began sometime early in the last century, and by the 1960s it had firmly taken root. This has inevitably led to the Left's bitter turn against the Catholic Church and anyone who would defend her (even those poor Catholic immigrants the Left once supported). Why? Because in a time when the Left has embraced moral relativism, nothing is more offensive than a religion that says not all "truths" are equal, that not all religions are equally true, and that not all morality is relative.

You see in an age of moral relativism, embraced by the Liberal Left, an interesting dichotomy has developed. Relativism claims to treat all moral views equally. However, that does not hold true toward those moral views that reject relativism. In this case, Relativism demands retribution, and that its opposition be crushed. So as Pope Benedict XVI pointed out, while he was still Cardinal Ratzinger, Relativism has become a sort of "dictatorship" of the worst kind, one which demands that all be treated equally, with Relativism as the unquestionable absolute final authority. One can question any religion, any politics, any societal norm, but not Relativism. Relativism is above question, and those who dare to question it must be put down at all cost.

It's an illogical contradiction you see. The Liberal, having embraced moral relativism, says there are no moral absolutes, EXCEPT of course the absolute moral statement that there are no moral absolutes. To say there is no real morality is of course a moral statement, and the irony is that those who make such statements do so within the social framework of a Christian civilization that gave them the freedom and safety to make such statements in the first place. For to say there are no moral absolutes is to say "thou shalt not murder" is not always true. It is to say that certain addendum could easily be added depending on the situation. "Thou shalt not murder - without a good reason" could be one such example. Thus the same moral relativism espoused by Liberals could easily be used to justify killing them in the name of relativism. Why not? If it's all relative, who's to say it's wrong?

Of course The Catholic Knight does say it's wrong, because The Catholic Knight is NOT a moral relativist. Such an argument is pure insanity, but that is the nature of moral relativism itself. Let me be perfectly clear, lest some fool accuse me of advocating murder, the killing of a human being (outside of self defense) is ALWAYS WRONG, at ALL TIMES, and WITHOUT EXCEPTION. That is moral absolutism, and thankfully for Liberals, that is what The Catholic Knight espouses, along with the Catholic Church, Christianity in general, and many of the world's organized religions. So thanks to the pope, his supporters, and others like him, Left-wing Liberal Relativists are free to make such ridiculous assertions as "there are no moral absolutes" without fear of their own idiocy being used against them in some violent way. (Of course, that may all change once Islam takes over western civilization in about 50 years.)

So as Liberals espouse moral relativism within the framework of a Christian civilization, that still protects them from the inevitable conclusions of their own ideology, their hatred toward anyone who would espouse moral absolutism intensifies. This is coupled with a nagging question that plagues them. "Since the sexual revolution of the 1960s and 70s has given us a society where marriage is no longer necessary, and sexual morality is virtually a thing of the past, why have we not yet attained Nirvana?" A similar question could be posed about many other things as well, such as the redistribution of wealth for example. Of course, no Liberal is going to ask this out loud, but the question must be nagging them at least at a subconscious level. What do people do in uncertain times like these, when their own ideology is above question? They scapegoat of course, and since they view everything that came before their relativism as anathema, and the Catholic Church espouses such antiquated ideas, then of course the Catholic Church must be the problem. So it is scapegoated, just like the Jews have been scapegoated throughout history. Is it the least bit surprising to see that history demonstrates a recurring theme of anti-Catholicism linked to anti-Semitism at the same periods of time when the future looks bleak and uncertain? That would indeed seem to be the case, for whenever societies start to attack the Jews they simultaneously attack the Catholic Church. The attacks are often different, and the people involved are sometimes different, as it would seem that different socioeconomic classes seem to attack different groups in different ways. One thing that remains constant however is scapegoating. Anti-Semitism is currently on the rise in Europe, and this comes at a time when active participation in the Catholic religion is at an all time historic low. Of course now with the excessive and disproportionate media coverage of clerical sex abuse, the Catholic Church itself is becoming the scapegoat.

This scapegoating of the Catholic Church however fits the template of moral relativism all the more. Not only does it provide an easy answer (or excuse) for why our Liberal society has not achieved the Nirvana that was expected, but the morally absolute teachings of the Catholic Church are also conveniently offensive to anyone who holds a morally relativistic point of view.

Left-wing Liberals began adopting moral relativism sometime in the early 20th century, and the concept became synonymous with Liberalism (or "Progressivism") by the 1960s. It was at this time their attitudes toward the Catholic Church began to change and became increasingly hostile. Today we are steadily moving toward a point when Liberalism and anti-Catholicism are practically one in the same.

Sunday, April 25, 2010

Pope May Cancel Trip to UK Due to Anti-Catholic Government Memo

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: A recent British internal government memo indicates what many of us have known for a very long time. Elements within the British government still harbor deep anti-Catholic bigotry. That should be no big surprise to any of us. The English government has been anti-Catholic for nearly five centuries now, and the more things change the more they stay the same. Granted, the focus of British anti-Catholicism has changed a bit. Doctrinal issues on matters of faith once took center stage in the Anglo-Catholic divide. Now that has shifted to moral issues, particularly in the realm of sexuality, but one thing that has not changed is the bitter animosity. We Americans can thank our British ancestry for the rampant anti-Catholicism that has blighted our land. (Lord knows we didn't get it from the French or the Spanish.)

Now as the backlash to this anti-Catholic memo reaches the Vatican, there are hints the pope may cancel his trip to the UK all together. In all frankness I doubt this will happen. The pope is far more likely to ignore it and proceed with the trip anyway. However, I almost hope this doesn't get glossed over. I almost hope the Vatican uses this as a way to kill two birds with one stone. First, to spare the Holy Father the humiliation of having to get off the plane in England and immediately be greeted by rabid anti-papal protesters. Second, to teach the British government (through their own humiliation) that this kind of bigotry by government officials has got to stop. Come on folks, it's been five-hundred years now. Don't you think it's time to grow up?

Nevertheless this is what I think will happen. The pope will visit the UK. He will remain there for most of his planned four day visit. When he steps off the plane there will be the faint sound of protesters jeering in the distance, drowned by the overwhelming cheers of supporters nearby. Of course the media will focus on the protestors almost exclusively, as we would expect of such anti-Catholic gœbbels. In time however, as the protests continue in the distance, the media, the government, and especially the queen, will be shocked to see the overwhelming numbers that will come to see him, cheer him on, and chant his nickname "B16! B16! B16!". It will be quite the phenomenon you see, and when he leaves the so-called elites of the British isles will be left scratching their heads and wondering what just happened.

Followup 4/26/2010....
Vatican announces pope will visit UK in spite of bigoted memo.

BREAKING: Pope To Apologize For Sex-Abuse Cover-Up Scandal

(The Independent) - Vatican sources said the Pope considers the jamboree with the priests in June an appropriate occasion for him to lead the whole church in a "Day of Request for Pardon" of the victims and their families for the wrong done by a small percentage of priests in abusing children and minors in many countries, and the wrong done by bishops in covering up that abuse or protecting the predators.
The meeting would be appropriate for a day of fasting as well as penance, they say. On the papal flight last week-end Benedict made a second allusion to the abuse scandal, and its devastating effect on the moral authority of the church and its pastors, describing the church as the body of Jesus Christ "wounded by our sins".
The respected Vatican watcher added: "It is clear that Benedict has been reflecting and seeking to understand the abuse scandal with the eyes of faith. He seems to be developing a theological and spiritual frame for reading and dealing with this shameful and humbling reality in the life of the church in the 21st century and discerning an exit strategy from it."

read full story here
THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: I think this is the right thing to do, along with a clear Vatican mandate on how to deal with this problem in the future. However, to be quite honest, I don't believe any act by this pope, no matter how sincere and reforming, will be enough to satisfy those blood thirsty Goebbels in the mainstream news media.

Friday, April 23, 2010

BREAKING: Media Campaign Against Pope Engineered By Nazis

“There are cases of sexual abuse that come to light every day against a large number of members of the Catholic clergy. Unfortunately it’s not a matter of individual cases, but a collective moral crisis that perhaps the cultural history of humanity has never before known with such a frightening and disconcerting dimension. Numerous priests and religious have confessed. There’s no doubt that the thousands of cases which have come to the attention of the justice system represent only a small fraction of the true total, given that many molesters have been covered and hidden by the hierarchy.”

An editorial from a great secular newspaper in 2010? No: It’s a speech of May 28, 1937, by Joseph Goebbels (1897-1945), Minister of Propaganda for the Third Reich. This speech, which had a large international echo, was the apex of a campaign launched by the Nazi regime to discredit the Catholic Church by involving it in a scandal of pedophile priests.

Two hundred and seventy-six religious and forty-nine diocesan priests were arrested in 1937. The arrests took place in all the German dioceses, in order to keep the scandals on the front pages of the newspapers.

On March 10, 1937, with the encyclical Mit brennender Sorge, Pope Pius XI (1857-1939) condemned the Nazi ideology. At the end of the same month, the Nazi Ministry of Propaganda headed by Goebbels launched a campaign against the sexual abuses of priests. The design and administration of this campaign are known to historians thanks to documents which tell a story worthy of the best spy novels...

read full story here
THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: Leave it to the liberal neo-socialists in the biased mainstream news media to execute a plan carefully crafted by their forerunners in Germany's National-Socialist (Nazi) Party. I wish I could say I am shocked, but I can't. This is exactly the kind of playbook I would expect the mainstream news media to get their strategy from.

Once again, The Catholic Knight will cite the facts because we all know the Nazi (ahem! I mean "Liberal") mainstream news media never will.

1) It is a statistical fact that sexual-abuse and cover-up only accounts for less than 5% of the clergy and involves less than 0.1% of underage minors in the Catholic Church.

2) It is a statistical fact that over 80% of all sexual abuse cases in the Catholic Church involve male victims between the ages of 11 and 17 years in what is clearly a predator homosexual relationship.

3) Insurance companies report that cases of sexual abuse and cover-up are slightly higher in Protestant churches.

4) According to a US government survey, sexual abuse and cover-up is literally 100 times higher in America's public schools than in the US Catholic Church.

5) All of the records and data available to date indicate that no other person in the Vatican has done more to stop sexual abuse and cover-up than Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, currently Pope Benedict XVI.

That's the news you'll never hear or see from our liberally biased mainstream news media. Instead what we'll hear, see and read is Nazi hype, blown way out of proportion, while much bigger problems in the public schools are swept under the rug. Yes, I'm talking about ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN and even FoxNews to some degree. I'm talking about the New York Times, Washington Post, and other liberal rags of the same ilk. They employ the tactics of Nazis, one and all, is there any reason we should refrain from calling them what they are?

Now please don't misunderstand. We shouldn't fault them just for reporting the news. After all that is their job. Rather we should fault them for the way they report it. They are careless, innacurate and grossly disproportionate. It goes well beyond incompetence. This is intentional! Let's not forget the elephant in the living room. This pope is remarkably "conservative," and he's been doing some very "conservative" things lately, if we can use that term in reference to religion. (Some might prefer the term "orthodox.") While the mainstream news media is remarkably "not conservative," and frankly there are many reasons why they would dislike him because of that. So like the Nazis before them, they raise the phantom menace of sexual abuse, blow it way out of proportion, creating an alternate reality to brainwash the population against him and the religion he represents.

We shouldn't be surprised though. After all, they're only parroting those German national-socialists who went before them. Sieg - Heil!

Wednesday, April 21, 2010

Novena For The Pope - Spread The Word

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: My fellow crusaders, war has been declared. The battle is before us. The time has now come to get on your knees and fight like men...
(ICKSP) - The Institute of Christ the King Sovereign Priest, a Society of Apostolic Life of Pontifical Right which celebrates the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite as an integral part of its charism, is preparing to offer a spiritual bouquet to the Holy Father, that God may continue to grant him an abundance of spiritual wisdom and strength to guide the Barque of Peter through the difficult waters of our times. To participate in this spiritual bouquet, go here to indicate the number and types of prayers that you will offer up for the sake of the His Holiness.
Prayers and sacrifices are especially encouraged during a special Novena beginning on Saturday, April 24, the fifth anniversary of the inauguration of Pope Benedict XVI, through May 2, which is the first Sunday of the month of Mary, Mother of the Church.
I encourage all readers of The Anglo-Catholic to participate in this beautiful act of filial support and gratitude for the courageous ministry of our Holy Father.

BREAKING: Traditional Latin Mass WILL BE celebrated at the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception


In consultation with His Eminence, Dario Cardinal Castrillon Hoyos, The Paulus Institute has agreed to seek another celebrant for the Pontifical Solemn High Mass taking place on April 24th. This action will help maintain the solemnity, reverence and beauty of the Mass.

The Paulus Institute was formed for the propagation of sacred liturgy. The Traditional Latin Mass planned for April 24th honoring Pope Benedict on his five-year inauguration anniversary is a liturgical event much bigger than the individual celebrant. Cardinal Castrillon was approached to celebrate the Mass early in what has been a three-year effort because of his special experience in celebrating this form of Mass and his efforts under Pope John-Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI in encouraging the traditional form of the Mass, full liturgy and sacraments.

We are in the process of seeking another Bishop to celebrate a Pontifical Solemn Mass on Saturday and are confident that one will agree. However, in any event, a beautiful, dignified Traditional Latin Mass will be celebrated at the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception on Saturday at 1PM and will be the first time in nearly a half century this has occurred. All Catholic faithful are encouraged to attend.

The Paulus Institute regards all sexual abuse as tragic and a heinous sin and supports Pope Benedict’s fight to rid this disease from the Church. It stands on the side of every victim of clerical sexual abuse and earnestly desires to bind up the wounds done to their human dignity, to vindicate their civil and canonical rights, and to help them in the restoration in Christ of all they have lost.

To that end, The Paulus Institute supports the directives by the Supreme Roman Pontiff and the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops that all bishops should report crimes of sexual abuse to the police in accordance with the requirements of civil law. However, the Paulus Institute is not competent, nor does it have the facts, to form an opinion about the about recent media reports concerning Cardinal Castrillon.

The Paulus Institute requests respect for the human dignity and civil rights of all who participate in this sacred liturgy and observance for the tranquility and good order of the celebration.

Hat tip to Pete Frey.

New Secularism Has Nothing Positive To Offer

(CathNews) - The New Atheist campaign to have Pope Benedict XVI arrested when he visits Britain later this year exposes the deeply disturbing, authoritarian and even Inquisitorial side to today's campaigning secularism, writes Brendan O'Neill in Sp!ked.
There is nothing remotely positive in the demand that British cops lock up the Pope and then drag him to some international court on charges of "crimes against humanity".

Instead it springs from an increasingly desperate and discombobulated secularism, one that, unable to assert itself positively through enlightening society and celebrating the achievements of mankind, asserts itself negatively, even repressively, through ridiculing the religious.

read full story here
THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: What has modern Secularism given to the world that is new other than excessive authoritarianism in the name of "enlightenment"?

Monday, April 19, 2010

The Anti-Catholic Mainstream News Media

A nasty anti-Catholic cartoon published by Harper's Weekly on May 8, 1875.

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: It has been said that anti-Catholicism is the last acceptable prejudice. Of this every Catholic can be sure, because never in recent memory has it been so plainly on display in the mainstream news media's coverage of the sex abuse scandal in the Catholic Church.

Though such scandal is unacceptable for any religious institution, it is nevertheless a statistical FACT that this type of scandal is no more prevalent in the Catholic Church than in any other Christian denomination. Nor is it any more prevalent in Christianity than in any other religion. In fact, the truth be told, statistical evidence clearly indicates that sexual abuse and cover up is exponentially higher in non-religious institutions, particularly those run by government programs. In the United States alone, an independent government survey of it's own public school system revealed that public school children are over 100 times more likely to be molested by a school employee, before they graduate high school, than a Catholic child is likely to be molested within the Catholic Church. This is more than a shocking statistic. It's an indictment! So that being the case, does the mainstream news media give at least 100 times more press coverage to the greater scandal within America's public schools? No. Of course not. That type of bad press is reserved exclusively for the Catholic Church.

The latest target of this media smear is none other than the pope himself - Benedict XVI - formerly Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger. The records tell the actual story and the press tells another. The records indicate that at least one official within the Vatican (Cardinal Darío Castrillón Hoyos) did apparently encourage cover up of sexual scandal, or at least it would seem that way. However, they also indicate that no prelate was more active in uprooting this kind of corruption than Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger. Ratzinger was appointed prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (or "CDF") in 1981. Though he was given only limited authority over issues related to sexual abuse, Ratzinger went to work exploiting every ounce of the limited power he was given. As a result, within 20 years, he was able to reduce the occurrence of sexual abuse within the Church down to pre-1950 levels. This was done during a time when sexual abuse of minors was increasing in non-religious (secular) society. That's quite an accomplishment for a man with limited power over this issue. In fact the late Pope John Paul II was so pleased with the results, that in 2001 he transferred full authority to defrock abusive priest away from Cardinal Hoyos over to Cardinal Ratzinger.

In spite of this overwhelming evidence, not only clearing Ratzinger of any blame, but actually demonstrating he was a hero in fighting sexual abuse, the media instead focuses it's attack on him like a laser beam. Why is this? Well, it's simple really, and it's nothing personal against Ratzinger. You see the mainstream news media is run by anti-Catholics. These are liberal Secularists, Atheists, non-practicing Jews and lapsed Catholics who have always had an ax to grind against the Vatican for it's strong stand against homosexuality and abortion - the two "sacraments" of modern liberalism.

Their unwarranted attack against this pope is predictable. Strike the shepherd and the sheep will scatter. That's how the strategy works - right? While they try to cloak their intolerant hatred in the veneer of "non-biased objective" reporting, we have to remember that their bias is not detected so much in what they say, but in what they don't say. Important pieces of the story are intentionally left out. The information that lands on the cutting room floor in news media outlets around the world (particularly in English-speaking countries) is what would exonerate the pope and turn him into a hero. This is the news that will NEVER be reported because it doesn't fit the anti-Catholic template of those who run our major news outlets. Occasionally however, their true anti-Catholic feelings are leaked to the public, usually in the form of op-ed articles that the general editor approves for print. From these we can get a glimpse of what's really going on in the minds of those who report the news to us...
(ABC) -- No-one has yet suggested bombing the Vatican and pursuing the Pope through the sewers of Europe till he is caught and riddled with bullets in order to stop priests buggering choirboys in Boston, Chicago, Dublin and Sydney...

read full story here
Now unlike many mainstream media news outlets, The Catholic Knight will cite the context of this excerpt. The article itself is an anti-war piece. It's an attack on the way the west battles terrorism. However, in the article, the author reveals a little about himself and those he associates with in the mainstream news media. From this article we learn that they make no distinction between Pope Benedict XVI and Osama Bin Laden. From this we learn that they make no distinction between a man who fights to stop sexual abuse, and a man who plots the bombing of innocent people. From this we learn that the media has been lying so much that it's actually starting to believe it's own lies about the pope, but it's nothing personal you see. It's all just business. The mainstream news media is in the business of attacking and tearing down anything that is good and wholesome, particularly religion, and the Catholic Church you see just happens to be the largest target. To destroy the Church they must first destroy it's shepherd, and that my friends is the ONLY thing that explains their blatant disregard for the facts in their unrelenting attack against the Holy Father. This isn't the first time the American press has displayed a blatant hostility toward the Catholic Church. It's been going on for nearly two centuries. Yes it's true, the more things change, the more they stay the same. Anti-Catholicism truly is the last remaining acceptable prejudice, especially in the mainstream news media.

A nasty anti-Catholic cartoon published by the Philadelphia Inquirer on February 21, 2010

Friday, April 16, 2010

BREAKING: Vatican Sex Abuse Cover Up Revealed

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: New evidence seems to suggest there was sex abuse cover up at the Vatican after all, but as it looks right now, it appears to be localized to a certain office. The highest prelate implicated is none other than Cardinal Dario Castrillón Hoyos. This is what the evidence appears to suggest anyway. Cardinal Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict XVI) was not involved, and appears to be the one who took corrective measures to fix the problem AFTER the cover up was revealed.

Internal conflict within the Vatican is believed to be the source of many problems that have developed in the Catholic Church over the last thirty years. Ratzinger was known to be at odds with more than a few prelates over how the Vatican handled various issues including sexual abuse. At times he was vocal about this, and used all of the limited power at his disposal to effect change and counter his opponents in the Vatican. For this he earned the epitaph of "God's Rottweiler." Ironically, the man the mainstream news media has now focused it's most fierce criticism on, Cardinal Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict XVI), was the one prelate in the Vatican doing the most to fight sex abuse cover up and reform the system....
(NC Register) - Late Thursday evening Rome time, the Vatican released a statement in response to media reports in France about a September 2001 letter from Colombian Cardinal Dario Castrillón Hoyos, at the time the prefect of the Vatican's Congregation for Clergy, congratulating a French bishop for not reporting an abuser priest to the police....

read full story here
The revelation concerns a letter of support, allegedly written by Cardinal Hoyos, in which the cardinal praised a French bishop for failing to report a sexually abusive priest to the authorities. The incident happened a few years prior, while Hoyos was overseeing the discipline of clergy, including those accused of sexual abuse.

While the letter itself carried no canonical authority or instruction it does give insight into the attitude of this high ranking Vatican prelate towards reporting sexual abuse to civil authorities. Since Hoyos was in charge of clerical discipline for the whole Church, we can begin to see where some bishops would get the idea that they ought not report abuse. Apparently, this was an attitude not shared by Cardinal Ratzinger, prefect of the CDF, who's congregation encouraged bishops to report abuse to authorities immediately. At the time, however, Ratzinger and Hoyos had approximately equal ranking in the Vatican, and it could be argued that in some ways Hoyos had even more pull than Ratzinger under the pontificate of John Paul II.

The letter was dated just months after Pope John Paul II changed Church law to allow Ratzinger more control over such cases. After learning about Hoyos' letter we can begin to understand why the late pope made this change.

It would appear the truth is finally starting to be revealed, but don't expect the mainstream news media to pick up on it. This is one story I'm sure they will do everything they can to avoid. Why? Because it exposes the truth about what really happened and exonerates Pope Benedict XVI. That, according to the yellow journalism of the mainstream news media, will just never do. If the news of this event reaches a crescendo, and the media is forced to report it, then they will spin it, telling only half the story you'll find here, to maintain their fierce criticism of the pope. It's yet one more reason why people are turning to Internet blogs (like this one) for news that doesn't fit the anti-Catholic politically correct template.

Tuesday, April 13, 2010

ATTENTION All Gay Catholics...

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: Attention all Gay Catholics, please help get this message out. Forward it to everyone you know.

For those of you who struggle with homosexual temptations, 'The Catholic Knight' offers his sympathy. We do not choose our temptations in life, and it is well known that sexual temptations (of any kind) are some of the most difficult to resist. To those of you who have used the disciplines of Catholicism to resist and overcome your temptations, 'The Catholic Knight' congratulates you and admires your courage. To those of you who are still struggling, and find yourselves falling back into homosexual sin from time to time, 'The Catholic Knight' wishes to offer his encouragement to keep trying, reminding you that victory only belongs to those who refuse to quit, and that continued efforts to resist homosexual temptations will eventually be rewarded. (If you're experiencing homosexual temptations, you can find help here.)

'The Catholic Knight' also wishes to remind you that homosexual temptation, in and of itself, does not make you a "bad person" because temptation, in and of itself, is not a sin. If Jesus Christ (God incarnate) himself could be tempted by the devil, then none of us are above temptation. Our temptations do not define us. Our temptations do not determine who or what we are. Our temptations are nothing more than that - just temptations. Rather, we are defined by our choices in life. Sin is always the result of choice, not temptation, and it is our choices, not our temptations, that define who and what we are.

For decades it has been in vogue to make the Catholic seminaries a place for men with homosexual temptations. At first it was believed that this was just an American problem. However, recent revelations would seem to indicate the problem was universal. We do not know the reasons why, but perhaps some people mistakenly believed the priesthood would be best for such people because of the celibacy rule in the Roman rite. Perhaps it was mistakenly believed that men who struggle with homosexual temptations will never overcome them. Perhaps it was mistakenly believed that such men could never have a normal life - a wife and a family. Perhaps it was mistakenly believed that homosexual temptations were intrinsic to one's personality, that it defined who they were, and it could never be outgrown or corrected. So of course, these people mistakenly thought a normal life was impossible for them, and they should be put away in the priesthood, where they would be forced to live in celibacy.

Likewise, as this was going on, there were some men, also having homosexual temptations, who recognized in the seminaries a place of ample opportunity to act out their homosexual temptations with other men who may be struggling to overcome the same temptations. Such men became predators in the seminary, seeking to take advantage of those men who were attempting to use the celibacy discipline as a way to overcome. Many of these predators went on to become priests and were assigned parishes. Many of these same predators sought out young impressionable teenage boys (between 11 - 17) to act out their homosexual temptations. As a result 80% of all sexual abuse in the Catholic Church was the result of such predatory homosexual priests. This is a statistical fact. It cannot be denied. This is what happened. It is also true much of the cover-up that occurred in the Catholic Church was the result of homosexual blackmail, as some bishops, and their assistants, were threatened to be "outed" from their days in the seminaries should they report the abuse. These predators made victims not only out of those teenagers they abused, but also their fellow priests, who at one time or another struggled with homosexual temptations. Now this does not excuse their cover-up, by any stretch of the imagination, but it does help to explain some of the reasons why it happened.

That was then and this is now. Times have changed and so has the Catholic Church. The vast majority of abuse cases happened in the 1960s through 1980s. Since then the number of abuse cases has dropped rapidly, starting in 1981, and as of today that number is at a pre-1950's level. There is a reason for this. In 1981 Pope John Paul II appointed Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF). Ratzinger promoted a zero tolerance policy toward homosexuality in the priesthood, consistent with the historic tradition of the ancient Church. The result of Ratzinger's efforts were so successful that in 2001, Pope John Paul II delegated the ecclesiastical appeals of all sex-abuse cases to the CDF of which Ratzinger was head. According to canon lawyers this was a breath of fresh air as such cases immediately thereafter were handled with speed and efficiency. Then in 2005, after Ratzinger was elected Pope Benedict XVI many of his reforms were written into Church law including zero tolerance of homosexuality in the seminaries - which includes faculty, students and other staff. Under Pope Benedict the seminaries have effectively become "no gay zones." The only way a homosexual can get into a seminary now is to LIE about his homosexuality, thus basing his entire priestly vocation on a falsehood. No, this is not ever going to change, certainly not after all that has happened. The statistical facts are undeniable and open for all the world to see. When homosexuality was tolerated in the priesthood, incidences of sexual-abuse and cover-up skyrocketed. Once the Church returned to it's ancient policy of zero tolerance, cases of sexual-abuse and cover-up plummeted even faster than they rose. The numbers don't lie, and they tell the whole story.

The message that needs to be understood in the homosexual community is that the Catholic Church has become a zero tolerance organization when it comes to homosexuals in their leadership. Of course that doesn't mean that gays can't be closeted, but it does mean if they ever come out of the closet, they're done! Their career in the Catholic Church is over and they can go find a job somewhere else. This is how it is now. The Catholic Church has been permanently wounded by it's unofficial experiment in homosexual leniency and it has learned a painful lesson. It will not change it's zero tolerance policy now, not after everything that has happened. If this seems wrong than blame the mainstream news media, for no other organization, religious or otherwise, has ever been so heavily criticized by the press for this problem than the Roman Catholic Church. Such heavy criticism has made any form of continued leniency impossible.

People who struggle with homosexual temptations will always be encouraged to resist and overcome them in the Catholic Church. Likewise the Catholic Church will always stand ready to assist them in their struggle to resist and overcome those temptations. This however does not include putting them in positions of leadership where they can be unfairly tempted and/or blackmailed.

There are those men who struggle with this problem who also have an overwhelming desire to become priests. Now that the Catholic Church has returned to it's ancient policy of zero tolerance, it will no longer be a hospitable career choice for such persons. Those who insist on becoming priests will have to look elsewhere, like The Episcopal Church for example, where homosexuality is not only tolerated but celebrated. Other mainline Protestant churches are following this trend as well, such as the Lutherans and Methodists, and we are even seeing the early signs of this trend developing in some of the Evangelical, Baptist and Pentecostal churches.

The message that needs to get out is as follows. Because of everything that has happened in the Catholic Church, particularly the sex-abuse cover-up scandal and all the unprecedented media attention, the Catholic priesthood is no longer a hospitable environment (nor has it ever been) for men struggling with homosexual temptations. In fact, if you happen to be one, and you seek Catholic holy orders, you may even run the risk of being labeled as a sexual predator, even if you aren't one. As sad and "unfair" as that may be, it is the present reality, and after everything that has happened, it is not likely to change anytime in the foreseeable future. The long and short of it is this. If you have homosexual temptations, and you feel like you MUST be a priest, then the Catholic Church is not for you. Please seek a priestly vocation elsewhere, somewhere where they will not only tolerate but celebrate your homosexuality.

Monday, April 12, 2010


Dear Holy Father,

We, the undersigned, want you to know that you are not alone in your pledge to fight injustice and the ailments in the Church. We want you to know that we trust you in your role as the leader of the Church. We want you to know that we forgive the sins of other members of the Church as we are forgiven. We are praying for you; for your courage, conviction, perseverance, and resolve.

We love you Papa Benedicto XVI!


Saturday, April 10, 2010

First Novena For The Pope

This novena may begin on The First Sunday after Easter (Divine Mercy Sunday), April 11th, and conclude on Monday, April 19th, the fifth anniversary of the Holy Father’s election.

O God, who art the Pastor and Governor of them that put their trust in thee; look down in mercy on thy servant Benedict, whom thou has chosen to be pastor and ruler of thy Church. Grant unto him, we beseech thee, a spirit of courage and right judgement, that he and all thy whole Church may be preserved and strengthened against every adversity; through Jesus Christ thy Son our Lord, who liveth and reigneth with thee, in the unity of the Holy Ghost ever, one God, world without end. Amen.

V. Let us pray for the Holy Father, Pope Benedict.
R. May the Lord preserve him, give him a long life, make him blessed upon the earth, and not hand him over to the power of his enemies.

V. May thy hand, O Lord, be upon thy servant;
R. Whom thou hast anointed, to be a priest forever after the order of Melchisedek.

Our Father… Hail Mary… Glory Be…

Thursday, April 8, 2010

Why Every Catholic Should Detest The New York Times

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: If you read no other article this weekend, read this one...
(The American Spectator) - The children of Diderot at the New York Times understand the secularist Enlightenment project very well. Its executive editor, Bill Keller, telegraphed this in a 2002 column.

Since he wrote the column before he was promoted to editor, he didn't bother to hide his anti-Catholic bigotry with circumspect throat-clearing. He described himself as a "collapsed Catholic" -- "well beyond lapsed." He affected a false modesty about this, saying that for this reason he claims "no voice in whom the church ordains or how it prays or what it chooses to call a sin." But of course he does claim that voice -- and thinks all should obey it.

He made it clear that he was rooting for "reforms" that would reduce Catholicism to a captive of modern liberalism: "…the struggle within the church is interesting as part of a larger struggle within the human race, between the forces of tolerance and absolutism....

read full story here
The New York Times campaign against the pope (and the Catholic Church in general) is well documented here, here and here.

There is no justifiable reason for anyone claiming the name "Catholic" to subscribe to this blatantly anti-Catholic rag of intolerance and hate toward the Catholic Church and anyone who loves their Catholic Christian faith. I've never had a subscription to The New York Times, but if I did I would cancel it immediately, and publicly burn every paper I continued to receive until the deliveries are finally stopped. I would also tell every Catholic soul I know to do the same.

Catholics ought to cancel their subscriptions to local newspapers as well, if they reprint New York Times articles.

Please pass this message on to every Catholic you know. Here is the link:

Wednesday, April 7, 2010


(USA Today) - "Ecce homo," "Behold the man!" These were the words spoken by Pontius Pilate when he presented a scourged Jesus Christ to a hostile mob shortly before his crucifixion. The same words aptly apply today to Pope Benedict XVI, as he is being held up to unprecedented ridicule and scorn by a hateful press and a world so out of touch with its spiritual nature and moral being.

One can almost hear Jesus saying to the peaceful and benevolent pope: "If the world hates you, remember that it hated me first" (John 15:18). Contrary to his critics, the pope, like Jesus, is completely innocent and is doing everything in his power to weed out those priests guilty of sexual abuse and to justly compensate victims for their suffering.

In fact, he is the one who has tackled these things head on. Remember that even Jesus had his Judas. But the world wants to see the death of the church because it knows the church is the mother of all saints.

It knows that the Catholic Church is the last bastion of hope against a materialistic world that craves immorality at every step, including homosexuality, same-sex marriage, easy divorce, abortion, radical feminism, contraception, embryonic stem cell research and cloning. Benedict will be remembered not for the scandals of a few priests but for his intense suffering in protecting the faith from wolves in sheep's clothing. He will be known as one of the greatest of Catholic martyrs.

read full story here
THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: The sexual abuse of minors in the Catholic Church reached it's peak in 1981, and that year marks one of the darkest periods in all of Church history. (On May 13th of that same year Pope John Paul II was nearly assassinated in St. Peter's Square.) The crime of sexual abuse of minors was exacerbated by the intentional cover-up by some misguided leaders in the Church who sought to protect the Church's reputation more than protect the victims and seek the justice they deserved. There is no excuse for this. There can never be. It is a crime against God, nature, Christianity, the Catholic Church and of course the victims themselves. Everybody suffers for this crime. Let me make this perfectly clear, The Catholic Knight desires to have every sexually abusive priest removed from ministry, defrocked, excommunicated and handed over to the civil authorities. Every church official who engaged in cover-up should be removed from office too, and yes, that would include the pope himself if he were to blame. (This article will show however, that he is not guilty.) The Catholic Knight also advocates reasonable financial restitution for all victims, when there is credible evidence that Church leaders were negligent, as well as Church reimbursement for medical and psychological care. Furthermore, The Catholic Knight suggests that a series of masses be offered for the intention of healing and justice for the victims of sexual abuse, by various bishops all around the world, including the Bishop of Rome himself, to address the profound spiritual dynamic of this criminal offense against God, his Church and his children. I think this should be done publicly for a period of one year, but this is just a suggestion.

Before we go any further a few things need to be defined here. First and foremost, the mainstream news media has done a real number on public perception. The term "pedophile priest" was invented by the mainstream media to briefly describe the kind of sexual abuse perpetrated by some priests. The only problem is that the term is inaccurate. Pedophilia only involved a small fraction of the cases. The overwhelming vast majority (80%) of all sex-abuse cases in the Catholic Church involved male victims between the ages of 11 and 17. This is not pedophilia! The American Psychiatric Association defines pedophilia as sexual urges or behaviors toward a prepubescent child (roughly age 10 or younger) by someone who is over age 16. While this sort of thing did happen in the Catholic Church (as with every other organization on the planet) it was extremely rare. What did happen overwhelmingly was post-pubescent molestation. So what we have in the Catholic Church was an overwhelming case of predatory homosexual behavior of vulnerable adolescent boys starting to become young men. Make no mistake about it. This was a homosexual problem.

Of course there are those who will immediately object to this candid assessment and point to endless studies suggesting that homosexual men are no more likely to molest children then heterosexual men. That may be true, but we're not talking about child molestation here are we. Pedophilia is not the topic. I think I just established that above. We're talking about the sexual abuse of adolescent boys. That's different. So the "studies" on pedophile homosexuals are irrelevant. It seems to me there is a focused effort by some to distort the facts and muddy the waters when it comes to WHO actually was doing the overwhelming vast majority of abuse in the Catholic Church. This particular cover-up doesn't come from within the Catholic Church. It comes from the outside, specifically from the mainstream news media and homosexual advocacy groups. I wonder why? One would think they would be even more interested in rooting out the problem. Instead they cite irrelevant statistics to cover the identity (and orientation) of the real perpetrators.

Again, a few may object, saying there is no evidence that homosexuals abuse adolescent boys anymore than heterosexuals do. I would observe that as a laughable claim once you stop and think about what the objectors are really saying here. Heterosexual men molest teenage BOYS just as much as homosexual men? Come on, that doesn't even make sense! One would think heterosexual abusers would be more interest in teenage GIRLS.

So we've established who the abusers where - homosexual predators - now we must ask why this was so profound in the Catholic Church. Again, I must point out that sex-abuse and cover-up is no higher in the Catholic Church than it is in any Protestant organization. That again is a statistical fact backed by the insurance agencies that underwrite churches for liability. Furthermore, it deserves mention that sexual-abuse and cover-up is far more common in the public school systems, where according to one government report, a child is over 100 times more likely to be molested in a public school than in a Catholic Church. The facts need to be said, often and loudly, because this helps us get to the heart of the problem. This is because the same statistics also show that while sexual-abuse as a whole is actually lower in the Catholic Church than other institutions, they also show that per capita, homosexual abuse of adolescent boys is disproportionately higher in the Catholic Church. Why is that?

The answer is obvious. Who sexually abuses adolescent boys? Is it heterosexual predators? I think not. We do see a lot of those in the Protestant churches going after adolescent girls. No, the only people who would go after adolescent boys are homosexual predators. So we must ask ourselves the painful question. Why are there so many homosexual predators in the Catholic Church?

Before we go on we owe it to the innocent that another statistical fact be pointed out. Less than 5% of all priests serving between 1950 and 2002 ever had credible allegations of sexual molestation made against them. That's less than 5% total - of all allegations - homosexual, heterosexual and pedophile. That means over 95% of all Catholic clergy never had any allegations made against them, lived quiet and holy lives, dedicating their entire existence to the service of God and their fellow man. Let us NEVER FORGET that! Let us not allow the actions of a tiny minority of perverts to stain the reputation of these good men. Let us always REMEMBER that over 95% of Catholic priests who served between 1950 and 2002 were never accused. Granted, they were human, and nobody ever said they were perfect, but they served well and do not deserve to be defamed and humiliated by the mainstream news media every night for something only a tiny fraction of their brother priests did.

Now let us get back to the homosexual predator problem in the Catholic Church. So why on earth would the Catholic Church have a disproportionate number of homosexuals in the priesthood to begin with? Granted, not all homosexuals are predators, and it would be unfair to label them as such. Nevertheless, logic dictates that in order to get a disproportionately high number of homosexual predators in an organization, you must first have an even higher disproportionate number of homosexuals in general in that same organization. Some studies seem to confirm that as many as 15% (or higher) of Catholic priests serving in the western world are homosexuals (either active or inactive). Why is that? And why the sudden spike in homosexuals (and homosexual abuse cases) during the 1950s through 70s?

The answer is western Liberalism of course. During the 1950s through 70s it became fashionable in liberal Catholic circles to encourage young Catholic men, who displayed tendencies toward homosexuality, to join the priesthood. It was assumed by these liberal "geniuses" that the celibacy rule was the best thing for them, and who better to keep an eye on them than a bunch of holy Catholic priests. Right? Of course, few of these homosexual men objected, because after all it gave them opportunity to be with a lot of other attractive young men in the seminaries. Some of them of course felt remorseful for their homosexual history and indeed used the disciplines of the priesthood to reign in their homosexual temptations. They should be commended of course. Some of them however, did not take advantage of clerical disciplines and continued to engage in homosexual behavior with other similarly inclined seminarians and adult male parishioners once they became parish priests. A small handful of them started preying on adolescent boys.

The notion of putting gay Catholic men in the seminaries was not viewed favorably by some high ranking officials in the Vatican, most notably Pope John Paul II and Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger who headed the 'Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith' or CDF. Ratzinger advocated a zero tolerance policy, not just for abusers within the priesthood, but for homosexuals in general. He saw no place for homosexuality of any kind in the priesthood - controlled or uncontrolled. Pope John Paul II generally agreed with him, but preferred to deal with this matter using a pastoral approach, encouraging bishops to purge their own seminaries of homosexuals without forcing them through Church law. Later when Ratzinger became Pope Benedict XVI in 2005 his view was not only put into practice, but actually written into Church law. So as it stands right now, it is a violation of Church law for a homosexual man to even step foot in or near a Catholic seminary. Not even the seminary employees may be homosexuals, and homosexuals are certainly not allowed to teach or offer counseling services. Furthermore, candidates for the priesthood are more thoroughly checked to make sure there is no history of homosexual behavior. If homosexual behavior is displayed among seminarians, they are expelled from the program.

Naturally this has raised the ire of western Liberals and homosexual advocacy groups. They view this latest pope's actions as "intolerant and homophobic." Never mind the fact that they are orthodox and consistent with Christian disciplines going back 2,000 years. It's important to remember that the mainstream news media is overwhelmingly controlled by western Liberals and is increasingly influenced by homosexual advocacy groups. Remember that, it plays an important role in the rest of this story.

With that the focus now turns to the man who is Pope Benedict XVI. Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger was elected to the papacy in 2005 after the death of Pope John Paul II. He served as Prefect of the 'Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith' (or CDF) for 24 of John Paul II's 27 year pontificate. He was appointed to the CDF in 1981, the same year Pope John Paul II was nearly assassinated and the number of sexual abuse cases had reached it's peak. It is believed that John Paul II appointed Ratzinger specifically because of his hawkish record against Church abuse in all it's forms, but especially because of his zero tolerance of homosexuality in the priesthood. Of course this infuriated liberal Catholics, and liberals in general, earning Ratzinger the epitaph of "God's Rottweiler." For years many of Ratzinger's attempted reforms were blocked by liberals in the Vatican. Nevertheless, he was still able to get through enough reforms to drop the annual clerical sex abuse rate down to pre-1950s levels by the turn of the century...

Sex-Abuse Statistics

In 2001 Pope John Paul II saw the fruit of Ratzinger's efforts and immediately turned over to the CDF the authority to deal with all sexual abuse cases directly, instead of going through the Roman Rota (a tribunal authority within the Vatican), as was the previous policy. Clerical judges of Church tribunals inform us that once this happened, cases of sex abuse were handled much more efficiently and with greater speed, bringing sexual abusers to Church justice within a much shorter period of time.

When Ratzinger took over the direct handling of sex-abuse cases in 2001, he issued a letter in which he instructed how evidence was to be handled within the Church so as to provide a fair trial to those accused. These were standard legal procedures, which applied exclusively to the Church and had nothing to do with civil authority. Clerics were instructed to handle evidence with care and discretion, to make sure the accused were not subject to idle gossip and preconceived judgment before the evidence could be heard by the CDF. Again, this was an ecclesiastical letter, dealing with ecclesiastical instruction, specifically for ecclesiastical trials. Church law already mandated that local bishops report all allegations of sexual abuse to local authorities. This is important to note because some incompetent clerics who failed to report abuse to authorities have claimed the 2001 letter instructed them to maintain secrecy (even from the civil authorities). This is of course a bogus claim, made by desperate men seeking to avoid criminal prosecution for negligence and conspiracy. Virtually all canon lawyers in the Church agree that the 2001 letter can in no way imply such a thing. However, the civil courts are unfamiliar with how Church law works for now, and so that explains why these incompetent clerics are using it as their defense in civil court. Of course the mainstream news media latches on to this as well, reporting the 2001 letter as casting a "cloud of suspicion" over Ratzinger. Never mind the fact that all of the cases of abuse in question happened before 1990, long before the letter was ever written. The claim that the 2001 letter had anything to do with abuse, and the failure to report abuse, in the decades prior to it's release will probably go down in history as one of the most lame legal defenses ever. How can a letter prevent someone from reporting abuse to civil authorities when in fact the letter had not been written yet, and would not be written for years (even decades!), after the abuse and failure to report occurred? Sadly, virtually nobody in the mainstream news media is asking this question. I wonder why?

Instead the media has chosen to focus it's attention on two isolated incidences that happened in the late 20th century. Neither of them involve Ratzinger directly, but both happen within his close proximity, so by the rationale of the liberal 'geniuses' in the mainstream news media, they MUST be connected. Right? Well let's examine the facts, since we now know that's something the mainstream news media will never do.

The first isolated case deals with the transfer of an abusive priest while Ratzinger was the Archbishop of Munich in 1980. In this case the transfer occurred without his knowledge or permission and was authorized by his vicar general, Father Gerhard Gruber, who has publicly admitted full responsibility for authorizing the transfer without the future pope's knowledge or consent. This however doesn't seem to matter to many within the mainstream news media who continue to report that the transfer happened under Ratzinger's watch and that he "must have known." Some especially irresponsible news media have falsely reported that Ratzinger himself made the transfer! These claims are made without any evidence to support them, and with plenty of evidence to the contrary.

The second case involves anti-Catholic libel by the New York Times. Please understand 'The Catholic Knight' does not state this opinion lightly. The evidence against the New York Times is plentiful and damning. The Times, which has been fighting bankruptcy for at least two years now, has been running negative stories against the Catholic Church for much longer, with or without sufficient evidence to back their claims. In this particular case the Times, using a faulty computer translation of Italian documents, ran a story that specifically slandered Pope Benedict XVI while he was Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger of the Vatican CDF. The Times story asserted that Cardinal Ratzinger failed to discipline a known sexually abusive priest in the United States back in 1997. The case involves a horrible episode of a priest (Father Lawrence Murphy) who apparently molested some 200 boys at a deaf school back during the 1960s. The case was brought to the attention of the Archdiocese of Milwaukee in the 1970s. At that time the archdiocese failed to defrock Father Murphy, which was solely the responsibility of the archbishop himself, Rembert G. Weakland. Thankfully, the case was reported to authorities but unfortunately the statute of limitations had already expired and Father Murphy could not be prosecuted. Weakland, who became archbishop in 1977, apparently did not write to Rome until 1996. Cardinal Ratzinger doesn't enter the scene until the middle 1997, a full two decades after the archdiocese handled the case. It was then reported that the ecclesiastical trial of Murphy was stopped after the accused priest sent a letter to Ratzinger begging mercy since he was in frail health and near death. No response was received from Cardinal Ratzinger. However the case was put on hold by the order of Cardinal Burtone. (Remember, in 1997 the jurisdiction to hear these cases was not directly under the jurisdiction of the CDF. The Congregation of which Ratzinger was head would not take direct responsibility for these cases until 2001.) The claim is made that Father Murphy sent a letter to Cardinal Ratzinger, which may be true, but there is no evidence that Ratzinger ever received it, nor is there any evidence that he did anything about it even if he did receive it. The Catholic Knight speculates Father Murphy's alleged letter may have been redirected to Cardinal Burtone's office once it reached the Vatican, and it would appear it was Burtone (not Ratzinger) who moved to put the trial on hold (not dismiss it) shortly thereafter. Father Murphy did eventually die within days after the trial had been suspended. He has gone on to receive his eternal reward, whatever that may be. So where was Cardinal Ratzinger's involvement with any of this? We don't know. His name does not seem to appear on anything. All we have is an alleged letter begging for mercy that was allegedly addressed to him, with no evidence that he ever received it, and even if he did we have no evidence that he did anything about it (one way or another). From this the New York Times implied the future pope knew everything and intentionally failed to discipline an abusive priest? Give me a break!
(The American Conservative) - By the time Cardinal Ratzinger was commissioned by John Paul II to clean out the stable, Murphy had been dead for three years.

Yet here is Times columnist Maureen Dowd’s summation of the case:
“Now we learn the sickening news that Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, nicknamed ‘God’s Rotweiler,’ when he was the church’s enforcer on matters of faith and sin, ignored repeated warnings and looked away in the case of the Rev. Lawrence C. Murphy, a Wisconsin priest who molested as many as 200 deaf boys.”
In Goodstein’s piece, Weakland is a prelate who acted too slowly. The controversy over his clouded departure from the Milwaukee archdiocese is mentioned and passed over at the bottom of the story. It belonged higher.

For Weakland was a homosexual who confessed in a 1980 letter he was in “deep love” with a male paramour who shook down the archbishop for $450,000 in church funds as hush money to keep his lover’s mouth shut about their squalid affair.

According to Rod Dreher, Weakland moved Father William Effinger, who would die in prison, from parish to parish, knowing Effinger was a serial pederast.

When one of Effinger’s victims sued the archdiocese but lost because of a statute of limitations, Weakland counter-sued and extracted $4,000 from the victim of his predator priest.

Dreher describes Weakland’s tenure thus:
“He directed Catholic schools … to teach kids how to use condoms as part of AIDS education and approved a graphic sex-education program for parochial-school kids that taught ‘there is no right and wrong’ on the issues of abortion, contraception and premarital sex. He has advocated for gay rights and female ordination, bitterly attacked Pope John Paul II, denounced pro-lifers as ‘fundamentalist’ and declared that one could be both pro-choice and a Catholic in good standing.”
Speaking of sex-abuse victims in 1988, Weakland was quoted: “Not all adolescent victims are so innocent. Some can be sexually very active and aggressive and often streetwise.”

Just the kind of priest the Times loves, and just the kind of source on whom the Times relies when savaging the pope and bashing the church.

As the Catholic League’s Bill Donahue relates, 80 percent of the victims of priestly abuse have been males and “most of the molesters gays.”

And as the Times‘ Richard Berke blurted to the Gay and Lesbian Journalists Association 10 years ago, often, “three-quarters of the people deciding what’s on the front page are not-so-closeted homosexuals....

read full story here
About a week after the Times article was released the ecclesiastical judge that presided over the Murphy case, Father Thomas T. Brundage, came forward in an Internet blog revealing that neither the New York Times, nor anyone from the news media, made contact with him regarding the matter, even though the Times saw fit to "quote" him in their hit-n-run article on the pope. Furthermore he revealed that alleged "quotes" attributed to him in the Times were from hand written sources without his signature. (It would seem the Times is unable and apparently unwilling to verify them.) Furthermore, Father Brundage continued to reveal some of the details of the Murphy case so as to set the record straight. He informed us of the antics of Father Murphy and that the trial was merely suspended (not dismissed) due to Murphy's failing health. Murphy died before the trial could be resumed. We should take note here that clerical discipline was already underway at the Vatican (as soon as the Vatican knew about it). It's not as if the Vatican was ignoring the case. It is however unfortunate that it took the Archbishop of Milwaukee two decades to get the ball rolling.

Now as a side note, The Catholic Knight wouldn't mind seeing Father Murphy's rotting skeleton dug up and placed in the witness chair so that the trial may go forward, but I'm sure that violates some sort of canon law and perhaps a few civil health and safety codes as well. That being the case, it looks like the trial will be suspended indefinitely. Where does Ratzinger fit into this? Well based on all the evidence available, he apparently does not. So where does the New York Times get off implying that he does? This question is probably best answered by a Wall Street Journal article, just recently published, pointing out that the lawyer quoted in the Times piece has a conflict of interest. He is one in the same lawyer who has been suing the U.S. Catholic Church for billions of dollars.

This, combined with many other stories published by the Times, leads The Catholic Knight to conclude the New York Times has become nothing more than a libel and slanderous anti-Catholic tabloid on par with Jack T. Chick tracts. Why any good Catholic would ever want to subscribe to such a hate-filled sacrilegious rag is beyond me.

Once the Times story was published however, the media feeding frenzy began. Like a school of piranha, crazed with the scent of blood, the gnashing, ripping and tearing began. The Times story reverberated through the Associated Press and then other media outlets, until finally just about every major news organization from national to local was carrying the story. Never mind that the story was false. Never mind that the information given was inaccurate. Never mind that the most important figure in the whole scoop (the ecclesiastical judge) was never even contacted or interviewed. Never mind any of this. Sex and scandal had finally hit the Vatican (or so it seemed) and the man at the center (or so it was made to appear) was none other than the pope himself! Story after story surfaced. Each one repeating, regurgitating and rehashing what was written in the Times article. Virtually none bothered to do investigative reporting on their own. It wasn't long before the pope's approval rating plummeted in the general public. As far as the liberal mainstream news media was concerned, it was mission accomplished. In fact, the anti-Catholic bias in the western media has gotten so bad in this case, that even the former communist newspaper Pravda has taken notice and come to the defense of the pope.

“Anti-Catholicism is the anti-Semitism of the intellectual.”
- Arthur Schlesinger Sr.

Such a statement couldn't be more true, for the sectarian anti-Catholicism of centuries past pales in comparison to the new anti-Catholicism that arises from the Marxist intellectuals running the western mainstream media, popular universities and various branches of western government. Never underestimate the connection between the press and politics. No sooner than the mainstream news media outlets in Europe and America began their unwarranted assault on the pope the protesters began to appear, wearing makeshift clerical outfits and prefab signs calling for the pope's resignation, the ordination of women and the acceptance of homosexuality in the Church. In the United States a federal court ruled that the pope could be subpoenaed for questioning and even held liable for damages. In England lawyers began debating if the pope's diplomatic immunity really applied in cases involving alleged cover-up. Of course the question on everyone's mind in England right now is will the pope be arrested by police just as soon as he sets foot on British soil this September? Personally, I imagine that to be very unlikely, but it does underscore just how bad things have gotten, all because of yellow journalism.
(AP) - The Vatican heatedly defended Pope Benedict XVI on Tuesday, claiming accusations that he helped cover up the actions of pedophile priests are part of an anti-Catholic "hate" campaign targeting the pope for his opposition to abortion and same-sex marriage.

Vatican Radio broadcast comments by two senior cardinals explaining "the motive for these attacks" on the pope....

read full story here
Indeed, that appears to be EXACTLY what is going on, but the pushers of this kind of hate-filled and intolerant anti-Catholic propaganda should beware of getting what they want. Already hate-filled violence is surfacing in Europe against Catholic clergy because of this media driven propaganda campaign. The senseless beating and/or murder of a few priests and bishops may escape the scorn of the general Catholic population. Should the violence spread however, to include high ranking Vatican officials, especially the pope, it will be the mainstream news media that will be held accountable. The blood of the martyrs will be on their hands.