Author Topic: Sodomy Scandal in Post Falls, ID - SSPX Immaculate Conception Academy (Read 226774 times)

Last Tradhican · « **Reply #255 on:** July 27, 2016, 06:17:30 PM »

Quote from: pendulum

It is very true. ... Unfortunately it is most probably worse than what is posted here. ... The affected children of sodomy, molestation, group masturbation are not receiving any help or counselling. These sins are spreading in the homes to the younger siblings. ...

I have spoken to high school parents. They did seek help, their children sought help. They were ill advised and the boys remained on campus. Its my understanding that not one boy ever was suspended for one day for this behavior. So far, it is established that this has spread to 8-9th grade boys this last school year. At least one family has had an older brother affect his younger brother.

...The horrible actions happened on campus over two school years at least. (There was group masturbation, sodomy, molestation). ... parents confirm that it is ongoing and that many boys are participants and victims. 8-15 boys. At this time there's no telling how many [more] boys. There are many large families involved.
Is that understandable?

This really ticks me off. What kind of a priest/managers/employees allow this to happen on their watch?

I have to say that none of it surprises me, the SSPX seminaries have been putting out soft men (lovers of fine cassocks, incense and bells) for at least 15 years now. Unfortunately, I can't met all these priests involved, but of the priest I have seen, none of them would have had a different outcome. Blame the seminary and ultimately the Superior General, that is where the problem begins.

sansebastian16 · « **Reply #256 on:** July 27, 2016, 06:32:11 PM »

My Goodness.
Someone who is on this thread who constantly ask for proof also must not grasp the gravity of any of the situations.
You wont' find all the letters you want from SSPX meeting etc. They may end up in a law suit(or multiple). They won't risk placing too much out there that could go against them later.
That is the same for any injured party. People are not going to place "proofs" that satisfy every individual on this website(there can be 20 version of what constitutes proof). The courts and law will work things out if it comes to that.

Sloniker
Teenage ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity
Mr. Populus
The Neighboring exorcist lady

These are brought up to show concerning patterns that if left untreated can be systemic.
I do not think anyone was trying to connect each event to the other. They were trying to find the common denominator linked back to SSPX practices. Before, during, and after events/issues.
In every instance, we see some distinct patterns with our dear SSPX handling the situations. And they are treated very, very similarly in most chapels. and No, there probably isn't an announcement like that in the weekly bulletin.

Each of these issues just happen to be SSPX and in Post Falls. They can happen anywhere. Sadly enough, many of the same things are happening elsewhere.

Mark 79 · « **Reply #257 on:** July 27, 2016, 06:40:04 PM »

Quote from: wallflower

What you call evidence is hearsay. I "demanded" evidence, I got hearsay. One sided at that. I bet the story would be different among all 20 parents who pulled their boys out and I bet many parents are at odds even among themselves about what really happened.

Now one or two have their versions online and all of a sudden this is the unequivocal objective truth.

Horse droppings! Since October 2015 we have had all we needed to know to sound the alarm: Sloniker's confession and priests (plural) who ignored warnings. Sloniker abused about a dozen children. How many children need be abused before you see the fire? YOU are the type of equivocator in deep denial who made the Novus Ordo fertile ground for serial abusers and enablers. I told you I have been to this 'rodeo' before and I have seen dozens of sanctimonious deniers and enablers like you.

You have played victim, accused others of having reading comprehension problems when you had already admitted you had trouble composing a sentence, you proferred dozens of straw man arguments, "defeating" arguments that NOBODY had advanced, hysterics, distractions, laziness in not even reading the evidence offered.

I can understand honest reticence in acknowledging a series of heinous scandals against children. I do not understand dishonest straw man arguments and playing that you are the victim.

Hmmmm.... deceitful arguments, claiming "hate" in your critics, perpetrators and enablers playing "victim"..... hmmmm... where have we seen that before? It seems that the rabbis' bag of deceits has metastasized into "traditional" circles. http://judaism.is/torah-encourages-lies.html

Alexandria · « **Reply #258 on:** July 27, 2016, 06:45:19 PM »

I've been trying to get the point across that problems at ICC are nothing new. Left with only a "band-aid treatment", they have gone from bad to worse. And the "remedy" they are using for the current ICC crisis is the same one they've used for decades.

wallflower · « **Reply #259 on:** July 27, 2016, 07:04:03 PM »

Quote from: sansebastian16

My Goodness.
Someone who is on this thread who constantly ask for proof also must not grasp the gravity of any of the situations.
You wont' find all the letters you want from SSPX meeting etc. They may end up in a law suit(or multiple). They won't risk placing too much out there that could go against them later.
That is the same for any injured party. People are not going to place "proofs" that satisfy every individual on this website(there can be 20 version of what constitutes proof). The courts and law will work things out if it comes to that.

I am not asking for proof. That is the ever-reasonable Mark's reading comprehension tripping you up. Hence the parentheses in my post. He believes I am "sanctimoniously demanding" evidence. His words, not mine. If you've been reading my posts enough to want to respond then you should know I am one of the few who says we don't have proof, we're not likely to get proof and it is for the better that we don't.

Believing that hearsay of one or two versions of a parish and school-wide scandal does not constitute objective truth, is not equivalent to asking for proof.

Reminding people to be careful what they believe because they have no proof, is not equal to asking for proof.

Believing that it is wrong to repeat and believe wholeheartedly (for example) that Fr. Vassal thinks boys should be exposed to a little pornography -- essentially convicting him in my mind-- just because a parent reports it secondhand, is not the same as asking for proof.

Stating that my mind is open to proof IF it should come to light, is not the same as asking for proof.

That's the biggest problem with this entire thread. People are behaving as though they have indisputable proof when they don't and may not ever. Now what?

I am ok with having a couple of question marks in my mind. It's life, I am getting used to it, as painful as it can be. I do what I can on my side and leave the rest to God.