Boston's cardinal, Seán O'Malley — America's senior cardinal — is still heading a diocese.
What a waste.
You'll recall that he was brought in by Pope John Paul II in 2003 to fix Boston after The Boston Globe's news ripped across headlines — that homosexual priests had been raping altar boys (and former-cardinal Bernard Law had covered it all up).
Of course, it took about a minute before the entire scope of the horror became clear — that Boston was only the beginning of the evil being revealed. Law quickly got out of Dodge, and O'Malley took over.
So when O'Malley came to Boston, you could say he had a mandate to fix things, to clean things up. Only in the most narrow of senses could one conclude he did.
In a recent interview with an Argentine newspaper, published on Friday, O'Malley waxed on about affairs in the Church, seemingly unaware that he himself has been a major contributor to this state of affairs. Now, understand, before he came to Boston to fix the homopredator problem there, he already had a reputation of being a "fixer" of this same problem in previous assignments (in Fall River, Massachusetts, in 1992 and then again in Palm Springs, Florida, in 2002).
Note both those dates. First, 1992, a full 10 years before the Boston Globe exposé, and then, 2002, just as the Boston news was breaking. In fact, it was precisely because of his behind-the-scenes "handling" of the homopredator sex abuse that John Paul sent him to Boston. This was a man with loads of experience dealing with all this, knowing about it all.
Yet, in the interview with the Argentine reporter, he said the following about sex abuse in the Church: "There is nothing more important in the Church at this time because if we do not solve the problem of sexual abuse and the protection of minors, how are we going to carry out evangelization? People will not trust us."
This is more true than he realizes. People do not trust you — any of the bishops. And frankly, why should they? Trust is earned, even for successors of the Apostles. And when lost, it is quite the fall from grace, and never really recovered from, at least not among faithful Catholics.
And to be certain, we aren't talking of a misstep here or there or some occasional mistake or lack of prudential judgment. We're talking about a career-long active denial of the real problem, and, on this score, O'Malley shares a lot in common with his fellow prelates.
Think about this for a moment: This man has been actively engaged in the issue of sex abuse of minors in the Church by clergy for 30 years. That's a long time — more than half his entire priestly life (he was ordained in 1970). And yet, given all he knows from his behind-the-scenes activities, he says (and maybe even believes) the most pressing issue in the Church, the most important issue, is the sexual abuse of minors?
Seriously? Excuse us, Your Eminence, but you're either delusional or lying or (in some weird way) deflecting. The most serious issue is not the actual abuse, but the conditions that give rise to it, conditions you yourself have helped foment.
More than four out of every five victims of sex abuse by priests is a physically mature teenage boy who is first hunted by a deviant priest, groomed and — eventually — raped. But you've been doing this work for 30 years now, so I don't have to tell you that. You know it. And what's more, you know it in spades.
Yet, just like all your other lying, deceptive "brother" bishops, not one of you will call out the issue. The few who are content to put on a big show about victims and abuse artfully sidestep by never breathing a word about it. They (and you) will diagnose the symptom of abuse (as though that's some incredible act of charity or spectacular insight on your part, even though everyone already knows it), but when it comes to the actual disease — not a word.
And this is why faithful Catholics will not, and cannot, trust you. All of you lie by your silence. It is a deliberate and willful choice to deceive the laity and cover up the real issue, which is homosexuality in your own ranks.
O'Malley handed in his retirement letter two years ago, when he turned 75. The pope just hasn't replaced him yet, but for all intents and purposes, O'Malley's career is over. The only remaining possibility is that he would be elected pope sometime in the next couple of years, before he turns 80 — but aside from that, he's done.
So that begs the question: What does he have to lose by opening his mouth and spilling the beans about all the gay stuff in the clergy? And yet, here he is, one foot in the grave and the other on a banana peel, still pretending that the symptom is the disease.
Is it possible that he is one of the dumbest men on earth (in fact, in history) — that he does not know after 30 years of being up close and personal on all this filth? Is it possible that a lightbulb never went off, that no one ever made a passing mention to him that the common thread through all of this is homosexuality?
No. It's not possible.
In fact, wondering about this very question, Church Militant staff (as well as I) actually walked up to him in person and asked him this question to his face, point blank: "Eminence, when are you going to do something about homosexuality in the clergy and episcopate?" Both times (separate occasions), we were all met with that soulless stare, that "nobody's home" expression that they teach these men in bishops' school for when they are confronted with a truth bomb. Look totally dumb, unplugged, and get away as fast as possible.
That's what he did — not once, but twice. Why? Why won't bishops talk about this, ever?
The clergy is perhaps the most gossipy crowd you will ever meet. They all know everything about each other and speak about it all quite openly among themselves. But why will not one of them (mind you now, not a single one) ever breathe a word about any of it? And especially someone like O'Malley, who has nothing to lose — and we mean nothing. At this point, he's just waiting for his "buyout package."
The answer to all this is simple.
He's a company man. Period. They all are, to a man. No exceptions. Some may be a little more forthright than others about some stuff going on in the Church, but, at the end of the day, they each know that a large percentage of those ordained and consecrated are active homosexuals, and they think that if they say that out loud, it will somehow cause a scandal.
Newsflash, bishops: Everyone on the planet already knows your ranks are infested with homosexuality. The scandal is your ongoing willful refusal to address it. Perhaps your guilty consciences have paralyzed your tongues. After all, every bit of this became dominant during your time at the helm. You are the ones who steered the Church into its current storm.
Like Allen Vigneron in Detroit — who watched the entire gay clerical drama unfold right before his eyes, who was vice rector and rector of the Detroit seminary as it was all going on — knows several of his priests, not to mention his former music director (busted by Church Militant on camera). Vigneron knows it all. We mention Vigneron because (A) we know a lot about him, and (B) he's next in line to be president of the bishops' conference.
That's why you always see him in the Skype video of the bishops' meeting at the command table, right alongside Gómez of Los Angeles. Gómez, recall, took over from Roger Mahony — an episcopal lover of all things gay and sex abuse, if there ever was one.
During his reign of heresy over Los Angeles, homosexuality in the priesthood blossomed, along with the always-accompanying dissent. Scores of priests, like in so many other dioceses around the country, shacked up left and right with each other and with strangers in gay bathhouses — and some of them raped altar boys, in addition to having consensual gay sex with others.
Yet, O'Malley, Gómez, Vigneron and the entire rest of the leadership of the U.S. Church refuse to talk about any of it, boiling it down to only the most barebones issue that everyone already knows — sex abuse of minors.
It runs much deeper than that, and they all know it. O'Malley is only the most senior of the episcopal scoundrels, who will have to stand in front of Our Lord in the very near future and give an account of why he lied to cover up the real issue. And here's the problem: Yes, of course, sexual abuse of minors is horrific. Such men should never see the light of day again.
But — and this is the key — the homosexual men operating within the clerical ranks commit spiritual crimes far worse than physical abuse. They lie about the Son of God Himself. They pervert what He taught. They mislead the faithful, and they drag others to Hell with them.
Homosexual men in the clergy is the problem. Some of them rape altar boys, but all of them lie, deceive and destroy. And those who aren't actually homosexual cover up for them. Church Militant has said it before: The hierarchy is an international gay-crime syndicate. Period.
O'Malley, you would think, would come to his senses before he dies and give an interview that says that — not continue his cover-up. This is precisely why Hell is everlasting — because if the damned were to be given, say, a couple of thousand years of life on this earth, they would still not repent. They would remain frozen in their sin.
Well, when they enter eternity, they do remain forever locked in their sin. Almighty God knows they would never have repented, changed course, acted correctly on feelings of remorse. He already gave them thousands (likely millions) of chances, and, in the case of the ordained, the grace of office. And still they would not repent and embrace the truth.
As He said to the Pharisees, "How can any of you escape damnation?" The truth will set you free — but the cover-up will chain you in Hell.