Why the Sordid Case of Dominique Strauss-Kahn Matters to Catholics
. . . Actually, what fell apart was the credibility of DSK's accuser. Writing for The Wall Street Journal Editorial Pages ("The DSK Lesson," July 5, 2011) columnist Bret Stephens chastised his own industry, the news media, for the sheer delight it took in the DSK charges. He wrote of how disappointed reporters were at news that the accuser had squandered her credibility on previous false claims and her recorded expectations of a financial windfall in the DSK case. Bret Stephens described the central problem with the news media's build-up of the DSK case, and what he wrote is something Catholics should pay attention to: "The media has too often been guilty of looking only for the evidence that fits a pre-existing story line. It doesn't help that in journalism you can usually find the story you're looking for . . .” Such writing is exactly why I subscribe to The Wall Street Journal, and I believe it's why the Journal is the sole American newspaper to actually expand its readership over the last few years while other papers are dying. It takes courage to take on big stories like the rape case of Dominique Strauss-Kahn or sexual abuse by Catholic priests. But it takes even greater courage to police your own industry, and to challenge your peers when the story they want takes precedence over the truth. . . .
The High Cost of Father Marcial Maciel, and Why I Resent Paying It!
. . . I can only conclude that there were agendas at work that went far beyond simply telling the truth about Father Maciel. I hope I'm not the only person to notice that all the evidence against him seemed to surface just in time to attempt to derail the Beatification of Pope John Paul II who presumed - just as he should have done - Maciel's innocence absent proof of his guilt or an admission of guilt. There was neither. But for my purposes, the cost of Father Maciel is clear. The Constitution and Church law notwithstanding, the true cost of Father Maciel is to rob any accused Catholic priest of a presumption of innocence. It is the worst possible example of the Catholic Church in America caving into the prejudices of pop culture. I witness the cost of Father Maciel every day. A number of prominent Catholics who once openly supported my defense have been silenced since post-mortem evidence surfaced of Fr. Maciel's bizarre double life and lifestyle. Some Catholics who held out a presumption of his innocence, without solid evidence to the contrary, have been burned by the stinging rebukes they've received from all corners in the Catholic media once that evidence began to surface. . . .
As The Year of the Priest Ends, Are Civil Liberties for Priests Intact?
. . . Some people actually get angry with me when they hear of my 2002 statement to my Bishop. Some feel that I was foolish to make such an overture. "What if he took you up on it?" My response is simple. I was accused falsely, and in the context of being a Roman Catholic priest. If I was not a priest, I would not have been accused. To pretend that somehow the claims against me are not related to the context of my priesthood is false. This is something that most Church officials long recognized. but many have put aside the rights of priests in open disregard of Church law. . . .
Breaking News: I Got Stoned with the Pope!
. . . Perhaps NBC sensed the line of decency was breached a few weeks ago when it apologized to The Catholic League and the world for a scandalous and libelous smear against Pope Benedict XVI on its affiliate news channel, MSNBC. We owe a debt of gratitude to Bill Donohue and The Catholic League for not letting this one pass. It is also no coincidence that the lurid stories of priestly sex abuse and papal complicity rose to a frenzy in the U.S. in the same weeks that tax-payer funded abortion was being argued in the Obama health care bill. Writer and art historian Elizabeth Lev made this same point in a brilliant essay on PoliticsDaily.com entitled "In Defense of Catholic Clergy (Or Do We Want Another Reign of Terror?)" Ms. Lev cited English statesman, Edmund Burke's 1790 commentary on Catholic witch hunts during the French Revolution: "What would Edmund Burke make of the headlines of the past few weeks …? In 1790, Burke answered ... 'It is not with much credulity I listen to any when they speak evil of those they are going to plunder.' What would he think of the insistent attempt to tie [a] sexual abuser to the Roman pontiff himself through the most tenuous of links … as the present sales of Church property to pay settlements swell the coffers of contingent-fee lawyers and real estate speculators …?" . . .
The Eighth Commandment
. . . Last month, a Massachusetts high school teacher was exonerated after facing a nearly identical plight. A 14-year-old student accused him of sexual assault. Months later, his life in near ruins, the teacher was exonerated at trial when it was learned that the girl made up the story because the teacher had reprimanded her in class. Here in prison, men often joke about how easy it is to set someone up in this way. Some have openly asked me for the names of priests who might have been present in their childhood communities so they can bring an accusation for money. (See "Sex Abuse and Signs of Fraud.").A few months ago, a self-described member of Voice of the Faithful wrote a scathing message to me. The writer, a retired teacher, declared that any effort to revisit the case against me is "nothing but a misguided right-wing conspiracy."The man's criticism was responded to by a friend who asked him what makes him feel so immune in an arena in which anyone can be accused by anyone, from decades ago, and with no evidence whatsoever. His blustering response was, "I have absolutely no fear of EVER being accused of such a thing." Well, neither did Michael Gallagher. Neither did I until it happened. . . .