Why it is hard to take the Catholic Church seriously

They would rather cover up the buggering of little boys than atone for their sins.

Lawyers for the church and priests say they cannot comment because of a judge’s order. But William Donohue, president of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights, a church advocacy group in New York, said targeting the network was justified because “SNAP is a menace to the Catholic Church.”

Mr. Donohue said leading bishops he knew had resolved to fight back more aggressively against the group: “The bishops have come together collectively. I can’t give you the names, but there’s a growing consensus on the part of the bishops that they had better toughen up and go out and buy some good lawyers to get tough. We don’t need altar boys.”

He said bishops were also rethinking their approach of paying large settlements to groups of victims. “The church has been too quick to write a check, and I think they’ve realized it would be a lot less expensive in the long run if we fought them one by one,” Mr. Donohue said.

The Catholic Church hierarchy should be aware that buggering of little boys is totally abhorrent to most god fearing people in the community, and plenty of others too. It is doubly abhorrent when the church tries to cover it up.


THANK YOU for being a subscriber. Because of you Whaleoil is going from strength to strength. It is a little known fact that Whaleoil subscribers are better in bed, good looking and highly intelligent. Sometimes all at once! Please Click Here Now to subscribe to an ad-free Whaleoil.

  • gabriel’s horn

    pass me the brass-bound buggery box  –  this boy has split.

  • politically unstable

    The Catholic Church would have to be the largest pedophile network in the world?

    • Blokeintakapaun

      certainly the most wealthiest, wiht the most connections in a tax free haven…

      ALmost as rotten to the core as unions / Labour Party… at least the church has a prayer though…

      • Kosh103

        So you are saying that child abuse is more acceptable than workers striking? Interesting.

    • Peter Wilson

      Apart from white middle class men you mean?

      • Bunswalla

        Every catholic priest is a white middle class man, so yes

      • Gazzaw

        Bollocks Buns. I believe that the Catholic church is alive and well in the Philippines, former French African colonies & most South American countries.
        I would venture to say that Catholic priests there are neither white nor middle class. You may know better than me whether pedophilia amongst the clergy is prevalent there. I don’t know.

        Capill was white & middle class wasn’t he? I don’t believe that the Catholic church has a monopoly on the pedophile industry. Witness the purge in NSW – right across the demographic board if I recall correctly. I’m not sticking up for the Catholic church but they appear to be an easy target here. You may as well profile teachers, choirmasters and scout leaders. Equally fallacious. 

      • Bunswalla

        @ea91275d146dd69f674c75b2aa3d9366:disqus I don’t disagree m8, I was disingenuously using a stereotype to counter PW’s identical tactic. You’re right of course, the catholic church has a very far reach and I don’t know if those in Phillippines, Sth America etc have the same predilection. We don’t hear s much about those areas but there could be lots of reasons why not.

        I do think most priests are more middle class than any other though, at least in the countries where the catholic kiddy-fiddling is most prevalent.

        Also, with regard to choirmasters and scout leaders, shurely you mean fellatious?

      • Gazzaw

        Yes Buns, as I was typing that word I thought that there could be a swift riposte!!

  • Guestosterone


    they’re a church

    • Brian Smaller

       I don’t take any born again “admit Jesus into my life” churches seriously either.  They are all tarred by the spectre of Westboro.

  • Brian Smaller

    Whale’s attack the Catholic church post of the day. Yawn. And I am an atheist. Have you ever thought that some of the accusations are possibly opportunistic? Plenty of scout leaders molested kids as well, but Scouts doesn;t have the money to make suing them worthwhile.

    • tspoon

      I’d tend to agree on some aspects. Nobody ever blogs about the minister for education bearing a moral responsibility for the acts of those in the employ of that department. But they haven’t actually done a hell of a lot in the way of changing the environment children are in. Dare I say it, the gender of the perps these days in schools isn’t the one we love to hate…

  • ConwayCaptain

    The Vatican City is now being investigated AGAIN for money laundering

    • Kosh103

      How do you investigate a sovereign nation?

      • tspoon

        I thjink if you started investigating sovereign nations for dodgy money deals, the vatican would look quite shiny, of course only in comparison.

      • Kosh103

        SO true. as an indpt country the VC can deal with money any way it likes.

      • Bunswalla

        So countries can do anything they want, can they?

      •  For anyone’s enlightenment on Vatican finances – this went on when I was heavily involved in motorsport and they sponsored an F1 Team. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banco_Ambrosiano

      • Chrish4

        Neil – are you confusing Robert Calvi with this – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franco_Ambrosio Where Franco Ambrosio sponsored the Shadow and Arrows teams before going under in a fraud scandal??

      • Kosh103

        Where have you been Buns? Explain to me why one country can tell another what to do with its money?

        I am not condoning what the VC does, but I am simply asking what gives one country the right to demand another do what the first wants?

      • ScarabDrowner

        @Kosh103: What gives one country the right to demand another do what the first wants? Superior military strength. :)

    • Gazzaw

      And I wonder where Mugabe is tucking his billions away? Squeaky clean Switzerland perchance alongside a gold bar or two from Auschwitz. VC doesn’t have it on its own. 

  • @BoJangles

    Too much HOCKus & POCKus

  • kowtow

    There is no excuse for the cover ups and non for the actual abusers in the Catholic Church.

    However the widespread abuse is not exclusive to the church. what about NZ?

    Too easy to attack Catholics.

  • George

    As I spent most of my school years under the tutelage of catholic clergy, can I sue them for discrimination as I was never molested?

    Looking at the newspapers you would think they were all vile ravagers of youth.

    Looking back I can only see fine dedicated men. 

  • Urban Redneck

    Indeed kowtow. And one has to overlook the fact that a disproportionate amount of sexual abuse against minors is perpetrated by homosexuals. The PC excuse, of course, is that sexual abuse by adult males against boys is just about “power”. Look at the problems Scouting NZ has had with homosexuals and their unsublimated sexual urges. Stephen Roberts, Ian Clark, Roland Harding, Andrew Pybus, Nigel Fenemore and John Cootes among many others in the last 15 years or so.

    • jay cee

      in that case we had better have a right wing (pc) purge of the girl guides as well.women can be sexual predators as well,believe me.

      • Peter Wilson

        Unfortunately, I’ve never met any.

  • Shaun McC

    If the church hadnt been infiltrated  by gay men there wouldnt be a problem.
    Likewise if the church had shown less tolerance to gays in their ranks the problem wouldnt have been as bad.
    Intolerance should be encouraged.

    • Kosh103

      And the homophobic lies begin.

    • Peter Wilson

      Still sweeping things under the carpet Shaun?

      The church should have been encouraging gays to confront their insecurities and fears about their own heterosexuality rather than running away.

  • titanuranus



    Just maybe people would think more of them if they owned the problem that existed in their faith,rather then trying to sweep it under the mat.

  • Jos B

    OK, I don’t get it. There are supposed victims who are accusing the Church of child abuse, the Church wants records to prove it, but SNAP will not supply the records so the Church is trying to subpoena them to supply them? it sounds like the Church just wants proof before it “writes out a check”. And what is so wrong about that? From the article – 

    Mr. Clohessy received a subpoena in October at his St. Louis home, where he works, regarding the case John Doe B.P. v. the Rev. Michael Tierney and the Diocese of Kansas City-St. Joseph.Four plaintiffs are accusing Father Tierney of sexually abusing them years ago. The cases would be outside the statute of limitations in Missouri, but the plaintiffs contend they recovered their memories of abuse only recently.

    How convenient…

    The subpoena asked that Mr. Clohessy turn over all documents in the last 23 years that mention repressed memory, any current or former priest in Kansas City, the diocese, Father Tierney, John Doe or Rebecca Randles, the attorney for the plaintiffs.The church’s lawyers say they need to see SNAP’s records to investigate whether Ms. Randles violated a gag order by giving the group information about one of the Tierney cases before it was filed, which the group then included in a news release.

    Again, I can’t see what is wrong with getting the facts. isn’t that what law and justice is all about? Why should the Church take their word for it, when SNAP allegedly have documents to prove it one way or another, and if they do have documents, why won’t they provide them? 

    What are they afraid of?

  • Jos B

    ps, here is part of an article from Spiked by Brendan O’Neill – I do not think he is a religious, but he takes the liars to task – 

    Did Catholic priests really rape 10,000 children over the past 50 years, as respectable media outlets claim? No, they didn’t.But how true is this ugly truth? Were 10,000 children in America and
    thousands more in Ireland really raped by Catholic priests? In a word,
    no. Instead, what has happened is that in the increasingly caliginous,
    almost Inquisitorial mindset of sections of the New Atheist anti-pope
    lobby, every allegation of abuse against a Catholic priest – whether it
    involved sex talk or fondling or actual penile penetration – has been
    lumped together under the heading of ‘rape’, and every allegation has
    been described as an actual proven ‘rape’ regardless of whether it
    resulted in a legal trial, never mind a conviction.

    The term ‘paedophile priest’ has become such a part of everyday
    cultural lingo that most people, when they read in last week’s
    relatively respectable UK Independent that ‘over 10,000 children
    have come forward to say they were raped [by Catholic priests]’, would
    probably think, ‘Yeah, that’s possible’. But it isn’t true. The Independent was referring to a study commissioned in 2002 by the US Conference of Catholic Bishops, which was published in 2004
    under the heading ‘The Nature and Scope of the Problem of Sexual Abuse
    of Minors by Catholic Priests and Deacons in the United States’. This
    study covered the period of 1950 to 2002, and it did indeed find that
    10,000 individuals in the US – 10,667, to be precise – had made
    allegations of sexual abuse against priests (against 4,392 priests in
    total, around four per cent of the 109,694 Catholic priests active in
    the US between 1950 and 2002). But this doesn’t mean that these 10,000
    ‘[came] forward to say they were raped’.

    The 10,667 made various allegations, ranging from verbal abuse (being
    forced to indulge in sex talk) to being shown pornography to being
    touched by a priest over or under their clothing. Then there were the
    more serious allegations, which included being coerced into mutual
    masturbation, oral sex and, in some instances, rape. Yet where 3,553 of
    the individuals claimed to have been touched over their clothing and
    3,981 to have been touched under their clothing, a smaller number
    claimed to have been subjected to what is described in the report as
    ‘penile penetration or attempted penile penetration’, that is rape or
    attempted rape; 990 boys and 213 girls made this allegation – a total of
    1,203 individuals, not 10,000.

    Moreover, if we are serious about such Enlightened ideals as justice
    and equality before the law, then we have to accept the fact that not
    all of these allegations were ultimately proven to be true. Out of the
    10,000-plus allegations made against priests in America, 3,300 were not
    investigated at all because they were made after the accused priest had
    died (surely even the most riled anti-pope commentator accepts that a
    man who is no longer around to defend himself cannot be convicted of a
    crime). Of the 4,392 priests in America who were accused of sexual abuse
    in the period of 1950 to 2002, 1,021 were investigated by the police,
    and of these, 384 were charged, of whom 252 were convicted. So around
    six per cent of all American priests who had allegations made against
    them were finally convicted. (Of course there are many reasons for this
    relatively tiny number of convictions: some alleged victims were
    pressured to keep quiet; some (25 per cent in the US) didn’t make their
    allegations for more than 30 years after the alleged incident occurred;
    and in some instances there was just a lack of evidence.)

    So nothing like 10,000 individuals in America ‘say they were raped’
    by Catholic priests. In truth, 1,203 made this allegation. And not all
    of them resulted in a conviction. Every allegation of rape should be
    treated seriously, of course, but what happened to the idea of innocent
    until proven guilty? How did a complex US report about all manner of
    allegations against priests come to be translated in the words of the Independent
    into the idea that ‘over 10,000 people have come forward to say they
    were raped [by priests]’? Because in the outlook of certain sections of
    the intolerant New Atheist lobby, everything from sex talk to fondling
    to being shown a porn flick is ‘rape’ – if it’s done by a priest, that
    is – and every priest is guilty of what he is accused of despite the
    question of whether or not he was convicted in a court of law.


  • Anonymous

    Corruption camouflaged behind religion is ageless. The Catholic Church merely one media example. The Church’s reaction is instinctive: the perpetuation and preservation of power. Catholic credibility is an oxymoron currently being exposed in light of victim litigation. Credibility that is only moderated by independent investigative agencies, two edged swords, with authority to prosecute. “Hard to take the catholic church seriously,”- the catholic church should be taken seriously. Rather ask not what the poor, ignorant and used can do for the Catholic Church but what the Catholic Church can do in policing their own personnel. The answer is painfully obvious.