CRUX vs. NY Times on Abusive Cardinal

Cardinal Theodore E. McCarrick has been removed from office and all official duties after being charged with child abuse. The NY Times ran a long article about it (here). CRUX ran an article about the NY Times article: “NY Times talks to men who got settlements after alleged abuse by cardinal.” The differences between the two reports are striking.

There are many notable aspects to this story, but I want to focus on just one. Mainstream media virtually always protects the memory of the sainted Pope John Paul II. But the Times suggested he had a nasty habit of defending pederasts.

Regarding Cardinal McCarrick, they noted that John Paul not only put him on the fast track, but ignored incriminating testimony:

In 2000, Pope John Paul II promoted Archbishop McCarrick to lead the Archdiocese of Washington D.C., one of the most prestigious posts in the Catholic Church in America. He was elevated to cardinal three months later.

At least one priest warned the Vatican against the appointment. The Rev. Boniface Ramsey  … was told by seminarians about Archbishop McCarrick’s sexual abuse at the beach house. When Archbishop McCarrick was appointed to Washington, Father Ramsey spoke by phone with the pope’s representative in the nation’s capital, Archbishop Gabriel Montalvo, the papal nuncio, and at his encouragement sent a letter to the Vatican about Archbishop McCarrick’s history. Father Ramsey … said he never got a response.”

The Times also noted other troublesome facts about John Paul: “John Paul II also disregarded multiple warnings about a different, more notorious sexual predator, the Rev. Marcial Maciel, the founder of the Legion of Christ and another renowned church fund-raiser.” The Times could have cited a number of other cases.

CRUX and John Paul

While CRUX specifically wrote about the Times article, they only discussed evidence against Cardinal McCarrick. They completely suppressed all mention of Pope John Paul. It is inconceivable that they failed to notice it. This is especially noteworthy given other recent evidence regarding John Paul.

Father Thomas Doyle testified in a recent case against Bishop Ferrario for child abuse:

The investigation of Ferrario took place under the papacy of Pope John Paul II. During his papacy reports of sexual abuse of minors perpetrated by other bishops in the U.S. and elsewhere were sent to the Holy See. As long as these reports and the information contained in them remained secret the Holy See did nothing beyond referring the report back to the accused bishop who then responded with a denial. When any of the accusations against bishops became publicly known, the bishop was allowed to retire without any admission of guilt and with the support of the Holy See. No bishop accused of sexual abuse of a minor was ever officially investigated or subjected to canonical prosecution during the papacies of John Paul .II (1978-2005) and Benedict XVI (2005-2013).

Similar problems cropped up in a number of other countries. Pope John Paul had a habit of putting pederasts on a fast track. As far as I know, everyone he put on the fast track not only excelled in suppressing evidence of priestly child abuse, but also in recycling pederast priests from one parish to another.

Conversely, John Paul punished those who discussed Church problems regarding child abuse. Father Doyle was on the fast track before testifying in the 1980s about the Church’s recycling of pederast priests and suppression of evidence. (Later, Father Doyle would also play a key role in Boston’s Spotlight investigation.) Not only was Doyle removed from the fast track, he was unable to find any employment within the Church. He became an Army chaplain.

But you won’t hear any of this from CRUX or other Catholic media. Even non-sectarian religious media like RNS won’t touch it.


Comments powered by CComment