Author Topic: Michael Voris Publishes Article on SSPX Abuse (Read 34811 times)

Struthio · « **Reply #75 on:** April 24, 2020, 01:48:01 PM »

Quote from: Last Tradhican on April 24, 2020, 12:14:05 PM

I was chasing bikini clad girls on the beach till I was 42, at which time I came back to the Church and changed my life completely. During those wild years, girls threw themselves at me all the time because I was popular, and when I moved on from them, they were sometimes very spiteful. They could have easily accused me of sɛҳuąƖ assault many times by today's standards, just to punish me out of spite. Anyhow, what Fr. Duverger is accused of is not anywhere comparable with the actions of the sodomites.

Jassy Jacas says that Duverger abused the confessional.

If true, and he doesn't repent, I'd guess that his punishment will be worse than that of Sodom and Gomorrah.

Who will be going to confess at an SSPX chapel, after learning that the SSPX does nothing to protect the sacrament?

Sam Smith · « **Reply #76 on:** April 24, 2020, 01:48:20 PM »

Michael Voris gave a good response to the SSPX:

One day after Church Militant's groundbreaking exposé detailing decades-long history of abuse and cover-up in the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX), the SSPX has issued an official response, which contains a number of evasions, half-truths and inaccuracies that require a response. Most telling is not so much what the SSPX says, but rather its silence on so much of what Church Militant reported in our exposé.
Ad Hominem
The SSPX attempts to justify its stonewalling, silence and lack of transparency as a refusal to be "baited" by Church Militant, which it dismisses as "tabloid journalism" whose only purpose in reporting on the SSPX is to "generate web-clicks and revenue while hoping to stoke the fires of public controversy."
Church Militant has been at the forefront of exposing corruption, abuse and cover-up at all levels of the Church, with a strong track record of serious investigative journalism exposing the grave misdeeds of predator clergy and their protectors. The McCarrick revelations, the Pennsylvania grand jury report, the resignation of Cdl. Donald Wuerl, the bombshell testimony of Abp. Carlo Maria Viganò revealing a "corrupt gαy mafia" strangling the Church — in short, the Summer of Shame vindicated everything Church Militant has been saying — often a lone voice in the wilderness — for years.
No serious Catholic with integrity would dismiss our work as merely clickbait in order to generate revenue. Thus the SSPX's dismissal of Church Militant's reportage can only be seen as a pathetic attempt at further evasion and subterfuge, more typical of the tactics of liberal, cover-up bishops we've encountered, who shoot the messenger rather than answer difficult questions about their role in protecting predator priests. We are all too familiar with such maneuvers.
'Prudence'
The SSPX's claim that it wouldn't answer Church Militant's questions as a matter of "prudence" in order to avoid a "public war of words" is also disproven by their deeply embarrassing leaked emails, exposing leadership's strategizing on how to prevent Church Militant from knowing too much about Fr. Pierre Duverger's case — a case Vogel admits would be viewed as "bizarre" by the public because he's allowed to run a school while the subject of multiple sɛҳuąƖ assault allegations — allegations known for at least two years that Fr. Wegner admitted directly to Jassy Jacas the SSPX never investigated.
The SSPX emails reveal one motive alone: how best to hide the truth from the public. James Vogel's admission about "ugly cases in France" (cases that involved the intervention of two superiors general — Franz Schmidberger and Bernard Fellay — to shuffle a pederast to another congregation, or lift his ban so as to allow him to be around children) as well as his admission that Church Militant would find a "gold mine" in Jassy's allegations suffice to expose their agenda.
It is thus laughable that the SSPX would charge Church Militant with a supposed "gross lack of ethics" for publishing the emails, when their strategizing to cover up the truth is the very definition of a "gross lack of ethics."
The Society's claim that it "cooperates with all police or other official investigations" is also demonstrably false. The Kansas Bureau of Investigation revealed to Church Militant that the SSPX stonewalled their investigation, dragging its feet in response to a subpoena inquisition the KBI submitted in November. It took months for the SSPX to respond with the docuмents, when the subpoena could have easily been responded to in a matter of two weeks or less — the expected response time for subpoena inquisitions of that nature.
The Criminal Investigation
The SSPX statement also attempts to cast doubt on the existence of a criminal investigation against multiple SSPX clergy — another false statement, as the KBI confirmed directly with Church Militant that this criminal investigation has been ongoing for approximately a year, and that it involves multiple clergy. In an email to Church Militant, Fr. Wegner himself admits there is a criminal investigation of SSPX clergy. While the name of Fr. Pierre Duverger has already been made public (thanks to the whistleblowing of Jassy Jacas), other SSPX clergy under investigation may not necessarily be known to the SSPX, and we are not at liberty to disclose their names so as not to compromise the investigation.
As to Fr. Jurgen Wegner's transfer to Austria, the assignment was announced in the middle of the criminal investigation, and comes at a highly convenient time. In spite of whatever treaties exist between the United States and Austria, the SSPX is fully aware that investigations are made infinitely more difficult when a priest is moved across state lines, cutting off investigators' access to the subject under investigation.
Church Militant has learned, however, that this is standard operating procedure for the SSPX, shuffling predator clergy — and those who cover for them — from one country to another, never informing their new flock of their priests' past misdeeds, in the hopes others will not find out. This makes the SSPX no different from "Novus Ordo" cover-up bishops who transferred guilty clergy from one place to another, never warning the flock about the priest's crimes.
The SSPX admits there have been "serious and tragic individual cases of abuse" by their own clergy — including those Church Militant exposed in our report:

As we said in our report, this is only the tip of the iceberg. Church Militant did not touch on the protection of gαy pederast Fr. Carlos Urrutigoity by then-Fr. Alfonso de Galarreta when he was district superior of the SSPX in Argentina. Galarreta was made known of multiple charges of ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ predation by Urrutigoity, who was a seminarian at the time, yet did nothing, leading to such exasperation by others at the seminary that a dossier of Urrutigoity's misconduct and Galarreta's failure to act was sent to Abp. Marcel Lefebvre.
There is much, much more. Church Militant is well aware of multiple other SSPX clergy and brothers all over the world who have sɛҳuąƖly groomed, assaulted and raped victims, in some cases fathering illegitimate children with them while forcing the victims to remain silent and then abandoning the children — all with the knowledge of SSPX leadership.
Church Militant has confirmed that these priests still minister in various SSPX chapels to this very day.
With regard to the SSPX's so-called cooperation with Belgian authorities in the criminal trial of Fr. Abbet, the SSPX fails to mention that Bp. Fellay (as we exposed in our report) personally sent his private secretary, Fr. Raphael Granges (a lawyer), to accompany Abbet to the courthouse daily. Granges dressed in lay clothes in order to escape notice.
The SSPX also fails to mention that an SSPX tribunal cleared Abbet of guilt years earlier when other sex abuse allegations came to light — allegations brought by distraught parents when they discovered their child had been abused by the priest. The SSPX leadership assured the parents they would handle the matter, asking that they not go public with their allegations — only for the SSPX to set up a tribunal to formally clear Abbet of guilt. It would take a secular court to deliver the justice the SSPX canonical court refused to serve.
'Lack of Infrastructure'
It's also laughable that the SSPX blames its failure to report known abusers to police on a "lack of infrastructure." As if a "lack of infrastructure" is what prompted Fellay to lift a ban on gαy pederast Fr. Philippe Peignot (found guilty of abusing an 11-year-old boy, among others), allowing him to be around more young boys.
As if "lack of infrastructure" is what prompted Schmidberger to sit on the allegations against Peignot for a year — before transferring him to another congregation, where he would go on to abuse more boys.
As if "lack of infrastructure" is what prompted Lefebvre to ordain a known ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ predator who had earlier been kicked out of the SSPX seminary for his sɛҳuąƖ propositioning of a seminarian.
As if lack of infrastructure is what prompted Fellay to limit rapist Fr. Roisnel's punishment to two years of prayer and penance in a monastery before letting him loose. Thanks be to God the police found him and delivered him to justice, rather than waiting on the soft "justice" of the SSPX.
Was it that "lack of infrastructure" that led three SSPX priests to counsel Kyle White not to report child rapist Peter Palmeri to police?
Was it that "lack of infrastructure" that prompted Fellay to move pederast Fr. Abbet to live in a priory right next door to a school, where he abused three boys and now languishes in prison for his crimes? We could go on, but the point is clear.
This "lack of infrastructure"is the exact same excuse we've heard before from so many cover-up bishops to justify their failure to report predators to police in times past, instead sending them off to do prayer and penance or go to rehab centers before placing them back in active ministry, where they often abused again.
The SSPX claims to be fully "committed to transparency." That is yet to be seen, proven by its latest statement full of evasions and deceptions, only lending further weight to our report exposing the SSPX as a bastion of cover-up and corruption, carrying on its work under the cloak of piety and traditionalism. Because of their promotion of orthodoxy and a reverent liturgy, their betrayal can rightly be viewed as far greater than that of other clergy.
Victims and witnesses of abuse by the SSPX or other clergy can contact the Kansas Bureau of Investigation at clergyabuse@kbi.ks.gov or they can call 1 (800) KS-Crime (1-800-572-7463).

Ladislaus · « **Reply #77 on:** April 24, 2020, 01:55:42 PM »

Quote from: Struthio on April 24, 2020, 01:48:01 PM

Jassy Jacas says that Duverger abused the confessional.

It's unclear what this actually entailed. From what I saw, he proposed spiritual direction to her in the Confessional. Then in spiritual direction, he asked a lot of very detailed question about prior abuse she had suffered.

Sam Smith · « **Reply #78 on:** April 24, 2020, 01:57:15 PM »

Quote

"Truth is the most important thing. A society built on lies and cover-ups deserves to fall, so it can rebuild on the foundation of truth. This is not the first time SSPX has been accused of harboring sex abusers. In 2017, a Swedish docuмentary hit the society pretty hard on this front. If what Christine Niles and her sources say happened really did happen, then it needs to come out. All of it. Everything. The moral and spiritual credibility of the SSPX is on the line here. It especially needs to come out because there are people who even at this late date, hold the belief that sex abuse is a problem of liberal churches, and liberal theology. In fact, theological orthodoxy is no guarantee of moral decency."

Rod Dreher, The American Conservative

https://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/sspx-scandal-sex-abuse-michael-gonzalez/

Struthio · « **Reply #79 on:** April 24, 2020, 02:03:20 PM »

Quote from: Ladislaus on April 24, 2020, 01:55:42 PM

It's unclear what this actually entailed. From what I saw, he proposed spiritual direction to her in the Confessional. Then in spiritual direction, he asked a lot of very detailed question about prior abuse she had suffered.

From what she said, I don't think that "spiritual direction" is the appropriate term.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #80 on:** April 24, 2020, 02:12:58 PM »

Quote from: Sam Smith on April 24, 2020, 01:47:21 PM

True.

However, the other priests in question are legitimately in trouble with the law. Fr. Novak is not.

That does not excuse the slander and ruining of Father's good name.

Cera · « **Reply #81 on:** April 24, 2020, 02:15:21 PM »

Quote from: Ascetik on April 22, 2020, 11:04:58 AM

Voris refuses to engage in any debate on the Society and he is shilling for what his largest donor wants ChurchMilitant to do and publish. He should not be taken seriously.

He should be putting pressure on bishops and priests to re-open their Churches to the faithful, instead he's writing stupid hit pieces against the SSPX which has no spiritual benefit whatsoever.

Do you know who his largest donor is?

Ladislaus · « **Reply #82 on:** April 24, 2020, 02:15:56 PM »

Quote from: Sam Smith on April 24, 2020, 01:48:20 PM

Michael Voris gave a good response to the SSPX:

There are some valid points on both sides, and the good points made by CM and Voris are actually undermined by the layers of spin, insinuations (without evidence), and downright slander. They actually undermine their credibility by having the true factual information submerged in layers of nonsense. This was a hit piece where Voris and the presenter could not hide their disdain for Tradition, constantly making snide remarks about how Traditional Catholics think they're better than the Novus Ordo, that it's just about the Liturgy, etc.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #83 on:** April 24, 2020, 02:21:03 PM »

I hope that Father Ken Novak sues CM and Voris out of existence.

I was actually a close friend of the Novak family. I went to Loyola Chicago and met the Novak family at the SSPX mission there, for which they were the coordinators; at the time they were at a hotel and had no church. So they took me in like one of their own as a young college student, and even came to visit up at Winona when I received tonsure. I led the Rosary on Sundays at their mission. Dr. Novak (Father Ken's dad) was my confirmation sponsor when I received conditional Confirmation. As a seminarian, I regularly stayed at their home. When Fr. Ken Novak was ordained, I gave him a small (compact) Latin Tridentine Missal that he had noticed and remarked about as a gift. Father Ken Novak is a good man, and so is his brother Lawrence. I've never found any HINT of impropriety from any of the Novaks. In the one episode reported in the video, that Father Ken met during the night in the choir loft to discuss the accused perpetrator, it's admitted that he stated the man should be reported because those types "don't change". I'm guessing he was torn out of a sense of obedience to his superiors who had told him not to discuss the issue with the accuser.

BeatusRusticus · « **Reply #84 on:** April 24, 2020, 02:26:58 PM »

Quote from: Sam Smith on April 24, 2020, 01:47:21 PM

True.

However, the other priests in question are legitimately in trouble with the law. Fr. Novak is not.

The fact that the article even mentions this, speaks volumes as to the true aims of CM TV. The author of the article sounds very sincere and truth-seeking in her interview with Miss Jacas. Her written article/video transcription says otherwise, which is pretty standard fare for an “investigative reporter.”

Jassy sounds sincere, too. Perhaps a little unrealistic, in expecting a bunch of European priests to remove a fellow priest from all public duties, because he’s alleged to have committed sins with women. Is it right? Of course not. It’s a sin and a scandal. When she threatens to “go public,” of course the organization is going to go into damage control mode. Human nature.

apollo · « **Reply #85 on:** April 24, 2020, 02:27:34 PM »

Quote from: Sam Smith on April 24, 2020, 01:48:20 PM

Michael Voris gave a good response to the SSPX:

One day after Church Militant's groundbreaking exposé detailing decades-long history of abuse and cover-up in the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX), the SSPX has issued an official response, which contains a number of evasions, half-truths and inaccuracies that require a response. Most telling is not so much what the SSPX says, but rather its silence on so much of what Church Militant reported in our exposé.

Sam (Samantha or whatever), where do you go to Church ?
Since you want the whole SSPX wiped out completely, I guess,
you don't need the Latin Mass, right?

PAT317 · « **Reply #86 on:** April 24, 2020, 02:28:01 PM »

Quote from: Sam Smith on April 24, 2020, 01:48:20 PM

Michael Voris gave a good response to the SSPX:

...Was it that "lack of infrastructure" that led three SSPX priests to counsel Kyle White not to report child rapist Peter Palmeri to police?

.
Just one example already mentioned before: The article says that Fr. Novak (one of those "three priests") counseled White to report it. So the above statement is inaccurate, as pointed out earlier in this thread.

Quote

Kyle White: "Father Novak ... agreed that Peter Palmeri needed to be turned in ..."

apollo · « **Reply #87 on:** April 24, 2020, 02:37:26 PM »

.
It's time for a reminder of a SAINT who dealt with this problem many years ago.
Did she go to the journalists who hate the Catholic Church and tell her story to
destroy the Catholic Church? NO.
.
I'm talking about SAINT MARIA GORETTI. She will not be popular with the Church
Militant crowd leaving replies here.
.
She prayed for the man who stabbed her 13 times and killed her.
But that was then and this is the SSPX, which needs to be taken down,
because they criticize the Novus Ordo Mass and Vatican II (or used to).
.
Why does Church Militant ALWAYS get off topic and throw in the LIES about
Archbishop Lefebvre excommunicating himself and the SSPX (the break-away group)
is in schism.
.
Do you see an ulterior motive here. A hidden agenda?

Tradman · « **Reply #88 on:** April 24, 2020, 02:40:13 PM »

Fr Novak and Fr Cooper seem unjustly involved and for that Voris should take responsibility, reaching too far in his zeal to accuse.
He only has hearsay on them. As for the rest,
there is clearly a problem. This interview with the victim is earth shattering.

https://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/exclusive-interview-jassy-jacas

Mr G · « **Reply #89 on:** April 24, 2020, 02:42:45 PM »

Quote from: PAT317 on April 24, 2020, 02:28:01 PM

.
Just one example already mentioned before: The article says that Fr. Novak (one of those "three priests") counseled White to report it. So the above statement is inaccurate, as pointed out earlier in this thread.

Kyle should have been the one to report the crime, he is the negligent one as he had the closest relationship to the victim.

Author Topic: Michael Voris Publishes Article on SSPX Abuse (Read 34811 times)

Struthio

Re: Michael Voris Publishes Article on SSPX Abuse

Sam Smith

Re: Michael Voris Publishes Article on SSPX Abuse

Ladislaus

Re: Michael Voris Publishes Article on SSPX Abuse

Sam Smith

Re: Michael Voris Publishes Article on SSPX Abuse

Struthio

Re: Michael Voris Publishes Article on SSPX Abuse

Ladislaus

Re: Michael Voris Publishes Article on SSPX Abuse

Cera

Re: Michael Voris Publishes Article on SSPX Abuse

Ladislaus

Re: Michael Voris Publishes Article on SSPX Abuse

Ladislaus

Re: Michael Voris Publishes Article on SSPX Abuse

BeatusRusticus

Re: Michael Voris Publishes Article on SSPX Abuse

apollo

Re: Michael Voris Publishes Article on SSPX Abuse

PAT317

Re: Michael Voris Publishes Article on SSPX Abuse

apollo

Re: Michael Voris Publishes Article on SSPX Abuse

Tradman

Re: Michael Voris Publishes Article on SSPX Abuse

Mr G

Re: Michael Voris Publishes Article on SSPX Abuse