About that Debate

If I hear one more Republican talk about cutting government spending I might just lose it. Republicans have had eight years to do just that they gave us the fastest growth of government spending in history. Likewise if I hear one more rich, over-privileged Democrat engage in the rhetoric of class warfare.

There, that's better. Now about that debate. Palin and Biden both did well. But it is the overall themes in the candidates' performances rather than their specific answers that gives some indication as to what the McCain-Palin and Obama-Biden administrations would be like.

McCain and Palin bill themselves as mavericks. The upside is that they are willing to depart from the culture of vicious and oblivious partisanship that has taken over the Republican and Democratic parties. The risk is that their administration may be an administration without a party, a lame duck from the beginning. Maybe they will be able to hold to and increase the gains (both political and military) in Iraq, and not much else. If the economy really collapses, I don't know that they will be able to do anything about it other than to refrain from vetoing the initiatives of a Democratic Congress.

Obama and Biden enjoy vigorous support from their party (because they are partisan) and will be energetic and effective in pursuing their agenda. The risk is that they will overreach early in their administration, as both Clinton and the younger Bush did in the early years of their administrations. Maybe they will snatch defeat from the jaws of victory in Iraq, and then blunder into Pakistan, destabilizing the Pakistani government even more, causing chaos in which some of the Pakistani nuclear weapons or weapons components go missing, and still fail to capture Bin Laden. Maybe they will lurch too far toward socialism in an attempt to imitate Roosevelt's New Deal as a way of getting out of the worsening recession.

I don't care who won or lost tonight's debate. I care about what we seem to be getting ourselves into. One of these teams will be our next President and Vice President. And that worries me.

House full of Amateurs

Given the seeming inability of the US House of Representatives to act to stem the current panic in the US and world financial markets, I think it fair to make two observations.

There are no term limits on the House. Because of this and unconscionable gerrymandering, many members of the House have been in office for a long time. You would think that this would lead them to act more like professionals than like amateurs. But clearly, when it comes to understanding financial panics, their history, and doing what it takes to mitigate them, we are looking at a House full of amateurs. If the House fails to act, I will vote against my Congressperson, whether he voted for the so-called "Bailout" or not. Because his duty is not just to vote for it, it is to persuade enough others for it to pass. Those of us watching our retirement nest eggs evaporate as the stock market falls and facing layoffs as the credit markets dry up are not amused.

Congress currently enjoys a 10% approval rating, some 20 points lower than even the President. The members of Congress need to realize that they did not get elected because we liked them. They got elected because we felt that we had no other viable choice. They need to quit working so hard to prove to us that we were wrong about that.

Mine, all Mine

Nessa, our 160 pound Great Dane, is sleeping on the chair (and ottoman) formerly owned by Pongo. "Mine," she seems to be thinking, "it's mine now. All mine. This chair. This house. This yard. These people. Mine."

She seems a bit subdued, it's true. But also self-satisfied.

Nobody Believes in Rationalism

The fact is that if you are a thoroughgoing rationalist there is no way anyone can prove to you that it is worth getting up in the morning. The purely rational conclusion is that life is not worth living, so why go on? And yet, the rationalist does get up, driven by non-rational urges to get dressed, to get breakfast, and to start another day. Because, deep down, the rationalist does not entirely believe in rationalism.

Let us therefore admit that rationalism speaks to the "how" and "what" of existence, but not the "why" of it. The why of it is the crisis of our age - the crisis of meaning.

In order to live, we must satisfy our non-rational urge to live meaningful lives. To find meaning, we must (and do) ultimately turn to faith. So, the question is not whether we can have faith. We all of us already have faith to some extent, because we simply must. The question is how can we live simultaneously with the faith we need, and with the scientific rationalism we have fought so hard to achieve?

The necessary synthesis begins by realizing that faith and rationalism begin helping each other by placing limitations on each other. I cannot believe things I can prove false, but I know some things to be true that I cannot prove.

Remembering Pongo

On this Michaelmas and Eve of Rosh Hashanah, we sent our German Shorthaired Pointer Pongo's little soul to walk with our Master. He was almost fifteen. He had had a long struggle with nasal disease, kidney disease, and bowel disease. In his time he overcame epilepsy and two cancers. What we know of his lifetime trophies include two squirrels, two birds, and a vole. It is impossible to tell of his victories over gophers, because we never saw evidence of any in our backyard during his lifetime. He also successfully hunted and destroyed two sprinkler systems (until we learned not to use impact heads), two screen doors (one wood, one metal), two sets of interior wooden shutters, and part of a wooden deck. In his prime, he was known for his speed, his daring, and his obliviousness to the numerous athletic injuries he incurred by doing things like running through barbed wire fences, and pawing at the neighbor's Rottweiler.

He was originally brought in to our pack to take the pressure that our first Great Dane Maya, then a puppy, was putting on our first dog, the then aging Samwise. This he did admirably. When we would come home from work, Maya would stagger in, look at us as if to say, "Take the child," and collapse with exhaustion. Maya could outrun him on the straight stretches, but Pongo could out maneuver her in the corners. The would run back and forth in our yard until Maya had raspberries on both sides of her butt from colliding with the fences. Then they would cuddle together as if they were mother and son.

After Maya passed, Pongo went into emotional decline and tore off his second screen door. We then brought our second Great Dane, Nessa into the pack. Pongo brightened considerably, and did his best to move up to Top Dog, but it was not to be. When your girlfriend grows to outweigh you by a factor of three, you are going to have to learn to toe her line. Still they played together energetically, running at each other from two corners of our yard and colliding in the middle. This lasted until Pongo's back began going out, after which they switched from the equivalent of tackle to touch.

Pongo had a long prime, keeping most of his speed, enthusiasm for life, and strength until the past year. His strength of will never left him. Although he was not intellectual, he had strong opinions, which he advanced with cunning and patience. He seduced our late mother-in-law into letting him cuddle against her legs while she sat in a favorite chair. Over two months he used techniques of operant conditioning, positive reinforcement, and desensitization to move from floor to lap, and from lap to chair, conquering our prohibition concerning pets on furniture and making the chair his own.

Really his own. It smells like him, even to a human. We had fantasies of putting his corpse in the chair, and the chair on a wooden barge on a lake, and burning the lot together in a Viking style funeral. As it is, we will probably get it reupholstered and keep it in memory of him. He is pictured above, having gone from 65 to 46 pounds because of his illnesses, in the chair that he prized so much.

Farewell, little fella. May you be as blessed in the next world as you were a blessing to us in this one.

For those of you in similar need, here is a link to a canine funeral service.

Note added 9/30: And then there was the time he ate the car. For some forgotten reason we had to leave him unattended in our vehicle for a few minutes. He chewed the steering wheel, ate the ends off the gear shift and emergency brake levers, and completely severed a seat belt. Fortunately, we were thinking of trading in the car anyway. Pongo just accelerated the process by a few months.

Nancy Pelosi Proves Herself Unfit to Lead

Get a load of this. Instead of rising to lead the US House of Representatives to a historic vote to shore up the international financial system, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi abused the occasion to do partisan grandstanding. Here is a video.

Look, Ms. Speaker. You are not just the leader of the Democratic Party in the House. You are the leader of the whole House of Representatives. Even if what you said were factually correct (which is debatable), using this moment of international crisis for partisan political grandstanding is inappropriate and inexcusable. It may have resulted in the deal not going through today. Which tables action until Thursday at the earliest, because of the Jewish Holiday of Rosh HaShanah (new year). Two more days for the worldwide financial panic to worsen. You stood up and trashed the deal you yourself negotiated. As far as I'm concerned, you personally owe all of us the fraction of our wealth that is going to disappear over the next two days. And quite frankly, for this wholly inappropriate performance, you owe us your resignation as Speaker. You have proven yourself unable to rise above partisanship in a crisis. You have proven yourself unfit to lead. And by that I mean both the House and the nation as a whole, since your position as Speaker puts you third in line for the Presidency.

If this were a parliamentary system, I would vote NO CONFIDENCE in Speaker Pelosi.

More from the Book of Mormon

Tonight may be the night of the McCain-Obama so-called debate ( I prefer to call it a joint interview), but I need a break, and perhaps you do, too. So, last night I finished reading the Book of Mormon, and I'm going to write about that.

The final editors and writers, Mormon and his son Moroni, mention that the language they are writing in is "Reformed Egyptian," because it is more compact than Hebrew. It must be quite reformed indeed, since Hebrew omits all its vowels, and considerably more compact than standard Egyptian, whose sounds are represented by pictographs rather than more compact alphabetic characters. They also discuss their own ability to express themselves in writing, stating that in their culture people are inspired to speak, not to write. The Lord assures them that despite their weakness in writing compared to speaking, people will still read and believe. This reminds me of the Gospel of Mark, which reads well in translation, but was written badly in Greek.

But who is the audience for their work? Mormon and Moroni witness the complete destruction of their culture and their people. There is literally nothing and no one left when Moroni finally signs out. Yet they write in faith that God will bring out their work to a far future people.

And indeed, looking ahead to Doctrine and Covenants, that far future people consists of Joseph Smith, his companions, and the Church they found, or rather restore upon the earth. This is why Mormons do not subscribe to the Apostle's Creed or the Nicene Creed. These creeds specifically claim apostolic succession for the Christian Church - direct connection of the church leadership from Jesus, Peter and the Apostles in the Holy Land to the present day.

In contrast, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (the LDS or Mormon Church) does not claim this apostolic succession. Rather, church leadership passed from fathers to sons and disciples from 600 years before the coming of Christ, through his birth, life, crucifixion, death, resurrection, his post-resurrection appearances in the New World, to the annihilation of the Nephites after they had finally fallen away from the true faith. When Jesus appeared to the Nephites, he appointed twelve Apostles to carry the Church forward among the Nephites (paralleling the twelve Apostles appointed in the Land of Israel). Hence the LDS Church is the original Christian Church of the Nephites restored after a hiatus of some 1400 years.

And not just restored, but personally handed off by Moroni, appearing as a resurrected being to Joseph Smith and giving him the engraved plates and the means to translate them. That is to say, the person-to-person connection is unbroken, even though a gap of 14 centuries has passed. The LDS church does not subscribe to the standard creeds because it participates in a parallel kind of Apostolic succession, independent of the rest of the Christian Church, and connected to it only through the person of Jesus Christ himself.

That said, there is still the question of what Mormons believe that is different from the rest of the Christian Church. For one thing, the designation "Son of God," is ambiguous in the New Testament. (And I continue to await the fourth volume of A Marginal Jew for an explication and exegesis of it.) In the Book of Mormon, however, it is quite clear. Jesus is God's Son in the same literal sense that I am the son of my human father.

There is also very specific soteriology (theology of salvation) in the Book of Mormon. The sacrificial atonement of Jesus Christ opens the door of salvation, but it is up to the individual to walk through it. This is also the soteriology of much of the Christian Church, but not all of it. In Catholic soteriology, you must partake of the sacraments of the Church. In mainline Protestant soteriology, God calls you to salvation personally and specifically (God elects you) and you respond because God enables you to do so. Your own will is corrupted and unable to comply without God's help. That is to say, through Jesus Christ, God does all the work of salvation, and you do none.

Thus, the LDS ordinances (similar to sacraments) are administered only to those who have shown themselves worthy. In contrast, the individual is assumed to be unworthy in mainline Protestant soteriology, and thus the sacraments are administered because they have the power to make the recipient worthy. In the Catholic church, the sacraments must be administered by a priest, in the Protestant church the sacraments are believed effective regardless of who administers them. In the LDS church, every male adult is a member of the priesthood and can administer certain ordinances.

However, there are levels or orders of priesthood in the LDS church, such as the Aaronic priesthood, and the order of Melchizidek. These orders may have knowledge that is not published to the LDS Church as a whole, much less to the entire world. For example, I note that in the Book of Mormon, Jesus Christ designates that three of the Nephite Apostles he appoints should "tarry," as the "Apostle whom Jesus loved," in the New Testament Gospel of John (presumably John, himself) should tarry. Again, the word "tarry" is an ambiguous concept in the New Testament. In the Book of Mormon it is quite specific - these three and John will remain alive on this earth until the Second Coming of Jesus Christ in power and glory to end the world and judge the living and the dead.Perhaps there is some order of LDS priesthood that knows who they are.

Likewise the unnamed brother of Jared. The Jaredites were a separate people from the Nephites, whose records came into possession of the line of Nephite prophets and were translated by them and abridged by Mormon. The brother of Jared received great prophecies that are alluded to but not revealed in the Book of Mormon. Perhaps some order of LDS priesthood knows the name of the brother of Jared and something of his prophecies.

Finally, I note that according to the Book of Mormon, there is some kind of post-death conscious existence until the day of the Resurrection, when all, saved and sinner alike, are miraculously reunited with their bodies to stand before the judgement seat of Christ. The rest of the Church has varied opinions on what the post-death experience is like, because the description of it in the Bible is so sketchy.

Well, that's it for now. If I have erred it is because I am being lazy and am writing from memory, rather than doing the diligent thing and looking everything up, chapter and verse, in the Book of Mormon. Neither do I see it as my place to opine here on the authenticity of the Book of Mormon. As the Book of Mormon implies, that is between the reader and God. I merely wanted to mention a few things that jumped out at me as theological differences between the LDS Church and the rest of the Christian Church. The differences are not so great, but differences there are.

Now, on to Doctrine and Covenants...

More on Market Instability

Wall Street as we knew it vanished over the weekend. All the investment banks have been bought by banks, or have become banks. The difference? Banks are more strictly regulated than investments banks. But more importantly, banks can value assets based on expected discounted cash flow. By law, Investment banks must use the fair market price of the asset.

Fair market price sounds reasonable, but it makes for instability. In a rising market, your asset will be over-valued, and you can borrow against that asset to buy more over-valued assets, creating a bubble, which could burst. Then, in a falling market, your assets will be undervalued, forcing you to write them off and possibly go into bankruptcy.

All the while, the real value of your asset remains unchanged. The real value is the discounted cash flow you can expect from the asset. To make it concrete, supposed you owned a rental property. It's real value to you is the value of the rent you are receiving discounted by the inflation rate over the years you plan to own it, minus the money you can expect to pay for maintenance, etc.

The discounted cash flow valuation encourages buy-and-hold market behavior - and the market stability that goes with it.

In the meantime, our regulators (including Congress and the Bush administration, now that they are jumping into the act) are proceeding without a coherent theory of market stability. Let's hope they are not proceeding without a clue.

But what will really be intolerable is if any of these clowns hits the campaign trail without doing anything at all.

Blame and Fixin's for the Financial Meltdown

An old Soviet joke goes like this.

Upon becoming Premier of the Soviet Union, Brezhnev finds two envelopes on top of his new desk. The handwriting on them is from his immediate predecessor, Krushchev. On the outside, one envelope says, "Open me during your first crisis." The other says, "OPen me during your second crisis."

In due time, Brezhnev faces his first crisis, opens the first envelope, and unfolds the paper inside. It reads simply, "Blame me." Naturally, Brezhnev takes the advice and weathers the crisis.

When his second crisis occurs, Brezhnev consults the second envelope. Inside it reads, "Prepare two envelopes..."

So now the world is in a deep financial crisis. There is plenty of blame to go around, and I'll let the usual pundits spread it. Here I note that quite a few physicists and mathematicians have got into analyzing the financial markets. They are the ones who invented all kinds of fancy and obscure classes of "derivative" investments, which are a big part of the current mess. They did it because they were being paid by investment houses to figure out how to make more money for them.

But there is something very big and very obvious (to a physicist) that they failed to do. I can prove it to you very simply. All you need do is go to Amazon.com and search inside the contents of Johannes Voit's The Statistical Mechanics of Financial Markets for the word, "stability."

You won't find it, because it's not there. Physicists, the people who can spend lifetimes studying the stability or instability of dynamical systems when perturbed by physical influences large and small, have largely neglected the stability or instability of financial systems.

Why? Because they were paid by investors, not regulators. All the while the investment houses were developing more intricate investments, the regulators were asleep at the wheel.

There are many things that must be done to stabilize the financial markets. Nationalizing parts of them and creating a US sovereign wealth fund may or may not be one of them. But surely, one of those things is for the regulators to hire physicists and mathematicians to understand what makes markets stable or unstable, and to help craft regulations to stabilize them.

Neurobiology of Atheism

I ran into Bernie (not his real name) this weekend. Our talk turned quickly to politics, Sarah Palin, and the evils of religion. I mentioned that politics, not religion, is the opposite of science.

Bernie wasn't convinced. He brought up Creationism as an example of religion directly opposed to science, and of science being obviously right and religion being obviously wrong. I pointed out that the Creation story in Genesis is what a loving God would tell to a wandering semi-civilized people who began to ask 2800 years ago, "Where did we come from?" It is true at the level of explanation that a loving parent would give to a five-year-old child who asks where babies come from. It would be pointless and possibly cruel to burden a child with the mechanical details of human sexuality. It would have been equally pointless and cruel for God to say, "Well you have forty years of wandering to do..., let's start learning calculus, differential equations, and quantum mechanics." The Creationists mistake is to demand that we accept the five-year-old level of explanation as a mature explanation. In so doing, they generate an obvious falsehood and demand that we believe it along with the Gospel, which brings discredit to themselves and also to the Gospel.

Again, Bernie was skeptical. I get the sense that Bernie harbors a permanent anger toward religion, possibly to his having suffered some cruelty in its name. Or maybe simply because Bernie is a scientist, and is simply offended by biblical Literalism.

He began bringing up some of the recent research in neurobiology. "Indeed," I said, "there seems to be a neurobiological basis for religious experience." He gleefully agreed.

"But then you realize that elevates atheism to the level of color-blindness," I added.

RIck Ratowsky

I remember to you my friend and colleague, Rick Ratowsky, who died of cancer this weekend. I remember him as a talented and thorough physicist, insightful and inspired, and a gentle soul. The world is the poorer for his having passed from it so young.

Why America?

On this day after the seventh anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, too many Americans are unclear about why America exists and why they live here. Forthwith, a short refresher:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

This quote from the US Declaration of Independence serves to point out that the founders of this country believed that Human Rights are not endowed by government - any government. Human Rights are endowed by our unspecified Creator, meaning that Human Rights are an integral, inseparable part of being a Human Person. It means that people set up governments to protect their rights. It means that Human Rights precede any government, including democratic government. You still have Rights even if a majority of the people vote to deny them to you.

In other words, the power of legitimate governments over people is limited. There are certain things a legitimate government is simply not allowed to do to you. And whenever this is not the case, the government in question is not legitimate.

It is the furtherance of this idea of limited government (classic liberalism) that is the stated reason the United States exists, and the assent and commitment to this idea is the reason to live in America and to be and American.

Ah, but there is the question of implementation.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

The preamble to the US Constitution is a one-sentence mission statement for a government of a whole nation, for all time. It's drafters intended to found a Republic, a form of representative democracy, in which one's Human Rights were simply assumed. Wise objections soon arose that Human Rights do not "go without saying." In order to secure them, the Founders listed the limitations on the power of the new government over individuals and groups. These are the first 10 amendments to the Constitution, known as the Bill of Rights. Not only do we have Representative Democracy, we have Constitutional Liberal Representative Democracy.

At least, that's how we try to have the benefits of government, while limiting the power of government to coerce or harm us. There may be other ways. But legitimate government is limited government, maintained by consent of the people governed. Any other government is, to an American, not legitimate. At least, not for the indefinite future.

Does the rest of the world go along with us on that? Even the enemies of democracy pay lip-service to democracy by using the word in the names they give themselves, like the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (North Korea). The liberal democratic movement has its enemies, but it has been gradually catching on since 1776, when there was only one such government. Now there are many.

America's mission in the world is to lead, foster, and foment this movement. And to defend it against all enemies.

What the debate in America should be about is how to lead, foster, foment, and defend the spread of liberal democracy. Not whether to do it.

If you put lipstick on a politician...

This is a watershed year for the Republican party and most people don't get it. So I'll lay it out for you quick and plain. Mike Huckabee is not the Republican nominee for President of the United States. I think we can all take this as evidence that the Religious Right can no longer muster a majority in the Republican party. But they are still probably the Republicans' largest minority.

The majority of Republicans chose John McCain, whom the Religious Right and other Social Conservatives consider to be practically a Democrat. By himself, he would be unelectable because the majority of Republicans are not passionate enough to put up signs, make cold calls, raise money, and drive people to the polls on election day. To get elected, he would need to get the Religious Right and other Social Conservatives fired up, because they will do all those things. So he picked Sarah Palin to get the Republican "base" to work for the ticket.

Barack Obama, of course, has the Democratic party "base" fired up all by himself. The most organized part of that base consists of trade unions, who can be quite disciplined about doing what it takes to win elections.

My prediction: it will be close. And no system of voting produces satisfactory results when it's close. Half the country will be jubilant, half the country will be appalled.

And once again we'll muddle through.

More than Just your Money's Worth

My Letter to Bishop Finn

contributed by Kay Goodnow

A company has no limbic structure predisposing it to recognize its own as intrinsically valuable. People who extend fidelity and fealty to a corporate entity - legally a person and biologically a phantom - have been duped into a perilously unilateral contract. — Lewis, Amini and Lannon, A General Theory of Love, p215, 2000

Dear Bishop Finn:

Please know that you have made my life much easier.

My education in understanding the church is complete.

• I understand that victims are business deals.
• I understand that bishops are corporate executives in an institutional church.
• I understand that the institutional church is not a church.
• I understand that the institutional church has no God other than money.
• I understand that the institutional church has policies and procedures.
• I understand that the policies and procedure are more important than people.
• As a victim (business deal) I understand that the policy and procedures used against me as a business deal means that Bishop O’Hara, the corporate executive of the institutional church in the corporate archdiocese of Kansas City / St Joseph in 1954, was doing his job when he transferred a priest who made a “mistake.”

I understand that the priest who made a mistake [that is, seduced me when I was a child] made other mistakes.

I understand that the value of the life of a child is significantly unimportant as respects the monetary values of the corporate institution known as the church.

I understand that the most important interest of the corporate institution is to ban abortion because doing so might prevent other business deals.

I understand that social justice, women’s rights, discrimination and truth are political terms that are not relevant to the corporate institution.

I understand that those Catholics who are interested in moving the corporate institution to parallel the message brought by Christ are to be silenced and or fired by the corporation.

I understand that “Freedom of Religion” does not mean “Freedom FROM Religion.”

I understand that politics are ploys utilized by the corporate institution to enhance benefits paid as “perks” to its stockholders.

I understand that the officers and shareholders have profited financially by removing a god that they have carefully crafted for centuries.

I understand that from pulpits all over the corporate institution known as the Diocese of Kansas City /St. Joseph we business deals were labeled liars in order to protect the value of the corporation.

I understand that your promise to defrock “mistakes” has been withdrawn due to the age and health of those “mistakes.”

I understand why you chose to ignore the business deals from the corporate institutional diocese of Cheyenne, Wyoming, as it would not be proper policy.

I understand that your corporate promise to apologize to KC business deals in person was a promise you had no intention of keeping.

I understand that you have now said that you will write a letter of apology, on behalf of the corporate institution, to any business deal who ASKS (begs) for an apology and explain corporate mistakes. I will apologize to my entire family for considering that proposal. I am an “old business deal.”
Thank you but no, I am not interested in duplicity at this time.

I will always remember you as one of the corporate officers who could have made a difference.
You chose NOT to make the difference so needed to salvage a bleeding church.

And so, with pleasure, I ban you from my world.

In Kay Goodnow's opinion, Bishop Finn "finked out" on the non-monetary commitments of the Settlement Agreement between the Diocese of Kansas City / St. Joseph and the victims of sexual abuse perpetrated by diocesan clergy. In this letter she expresses her anger.

Apparently, she had hoped that representatives of the Church would follow up the money settlement by dealing with the victims face-to-face, soul-to-soul, even though doing so would cost them the personal sacrifice of experiencing the victims' pain and resentment.

Here she expresses her disillusionment over the Church behaving like a corporation, rather than like the earthly manifestation of the Kingdom of God. She is saying to the Church, "God calls you to be worth more than just your money."

Her deposition before the mediator of the settlement is here.

Where have I been?

Apologies to my avid reader(s). I have been engaging in a controlled experiment with my neurologist in trying to reduce what may be neuropathic pain (don't worry, it isn't bad, but I do need to deal with it) by taking medicine that turns my mind into mush in the evenings. This is why I haven't been posting much lately.

That and the prolonged feeding ritual for our 14.5 year old German Shorthaired Pointer, Pongo, who, contrary to all expectations, is still alive and doing reasonably well. In the meantime, his 9 year old girlfriend, Nessa, our Great Dane, has developed laryngeal paralysis, and has difficulty breathing whenever she gets hot, excited, or anxious. Basically, we are doing hospice care for our two geriatric dogs.

And there is so much to think about. Barack Obama and his choice of Joe Biden, a smart guy no doubt, but he can come across as an arrogant a--hole when his dander and his mouth get motored up. John McCain and his choice of Sarah Palin, perhaps a ploy to simultaneously make a bid for the farther right and the disappointed Hillaryites, but also - win, lose, or draw - a move to tee her up to run for President in 2012 or 2016 against HRC herself. The upcoming test of FEMA as hurricane Gustav nears New Orleans. Heck, the upcoming test of whether Ray Nagin has learned anything from Katrina.

But, you know, the two biggest things are money and oil. Our national debt is so huge that whoever wins the presidential election is likely to have their hands tied unless they inflate the dollar to gain some wiggle room. And we really need to develop and export the technologies necessary to get the entire world off burning petroleum products for energy. It's not just good stewardship of the planet - it's a strategic necessity for disempowering regimes that live on unearned wealth. Governments that subsist off taxes have to create and maintain the conditions that enable their citizens to make the money to be taxed. Governments propped up by petrodollars do not. Hence they can be totalitarian, and can foster uncivil societies in which many of the citizens feel the urge to take their frustrations out on the safest target available - us.

Let me give you a hint as to whom I might be referring to. Will all the happy people in Saudi Arabia please stand up?

And the Russian government... Let's see, just as soon as they got back on their economic feet using mostly petrodollars, here they come, right back in our faces. Not because they're Communist (they're not), but because they're Russian. Realistically, we have two ways to confront them - our nuclear deterrent (always a bad idea), or trying to invent the technology that makes oil and natural gas uninteresting as sources of energy (a better idea, which will ultimately make the whole world, including Russia, richer).

Oh well. I expect that the next week or two will consist largely of the press trying to decide how closely Sarah Palin can be compared to Betty Bowers. (Yawn.)

How I was Abused

My deposition to the mediation hearing

contributed by Kay Goodnow

Received in October 2008

But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea. — Matthew 18:6

 

I was invited here today to tell all of you how my seduction by John C. Baskett, a Roman Catholic priest has affected my life. My case dates back to 1953 when I was 14 years old and a student at Notre Dame de Sion, a private Catholic school for girls run by an order of European nuns.

As I understand it, this is a hearing that is comprised of victim Kay Goodnow, the mediator, attorneys for the victim, a priest as a representative of the institutional church.

It is my understanding that this hearing is a business deal initiated by the institutional church known as the Diocese of Kansas City / St. Joseph. As such, it follows that all human beings are fallible and in that respect, all human beings are equal.

It is also my understanding that this hearing will determine the amount of compensation that I will receive, based solely on the degree of sexual abuse. Oral and anal penetration, digital penetration, kissing, fondling, alcohol abuse by either or both parties, ritual abuse, how long the abuse took place, where and when it occurred and how often will all be considered factors as to how much financial compensation each victim will be awarded.

I am not here to describe my sexual experiences as I find doing so both degrading, demeaning and beyond contempt. I have to work within the limits of the law as it stands today, but experts believe there are no ‘degrees’ of sexual abuse because every human being is different. Our present laws reveal ignorance in respect to the damage done to all victims of sexual abuse. In time, Statutes of Limitation laws and the misrepresentation of “Freedom of Religion” will be clearly defined and implemented, with or without the consent of the institutional church and organized religion.

As requested, I completed a very long written form to confirm the extent of my abuse. That form was initiated by my attorneys when the form provided by the institutional church proved inadequate. I understand that my form has been made a part of what will occur here today.

The contents of the form include my educational, medical, sexual, social and economic background along with my employment history. Every word of it is true. That form will stand by itself.
The person you see here today was the victim of a crime. She is also a survivor. She is a wife of 45 years, a mother of three, a grandmother of eight, a sister, an aunt, and friend to many.

Yes, I am a survivor, but I was seduced, not violently raped and sodomized. I was treated to long walks in a park adjacent to where I lived, I was treated to movies and ice cream cones and long talks. I attended concerts, basketball games at other high schools with this priest, and sometimes I went to parties with him, or met him at parties. On one occasion, I was treated to eggnog, which I later learned was laced with rum. I was carefully groomed by this priest. I trusted him and eventually I loved him.

I had never even dated before this man walked into my life. I was 14 years old. He was 33. He told me that God had sent me to him as a gift because he was so alone. He told me that he did not enjoy the company of other priests. He told me that he would always love me. He told me that because he was a man of God, our love would forever have to be kept secret. He was a man of God, how could I not believe the things he told me?

Yes, I am a victim, and there are thousands of victims out there who will never have the opportunity to speak of abuse and the ruination of their lives. Yes, I am a victim but I am not a lemming, I am not a sheep, and I am not a parrot. I have feelings. The institutional church and American lawmakers are apparently unaware that human beings have feelings.

Many victims of the crime of sexual abuse have committed suicide and my heart aches for their parents, siblings and friends. The institutional church makes no comment. Those victims were seriously damaged first by being abused by someone they trusted, and then by their treatment by the institutional church. That callous treatment so demoralized them that they chose to leave this world. Weapons of choice were placed in their hands by sexually immature priest or nun predators and the institutional church that conspired to shelter and protect them. The institutional church lied when it said that “this problem has been resolved” or “Father so-and-so will never be allowed around children again.” Even victims who have had their day in court have committed suicide thanks to the mental abuse inflicted by the institutional church.

Some victims are too traumatized to speak for themselves. Some are under pressure from their families. And there are those who fear the loss of their eternal souls if they speak against the church or darken her image in any way.

I will speak for myself and for them.

Sexual abuse is an insidious cancer. It spreads out like ripples in water. It wreaks havoc, pain and fear not only on its victim, but also on the victim’s family members and friends.
Sexual abuse is a very extensive social problem, so broad in scope that people generally deny it, look the other way or cast their eyes downward. They avoid mentioning it, let alone discussing how to prevent it. They have the right to make moral choices for themselves but at the risk of the lives of their children and grandchildren.

In Bishop Finn’s Letter to Priests on Wednesday, August 20, 2008 (KC Star) he said:

“Over the past five years, our Diocese and a number of our clergy or former clergy have been sued by persons claiming to be victims of sexual abuse or misconduct.”

Yes, all of that is true. The institutional church traditionally uses the phrase “persons claiming to be victims” to cast doubt on the reality that sexual abuse occurs all the way around the world. To deny this undeniable reality is both offensive and disingenuous.

Finn simply failed to mention that over at least the past five years, every effort was made by the diocese to silence, repudiate, malign and re-victimize those who did sue. Many of us reported to the Vicar General and were dismissed as having no case of merit or were merely ignored.

Since my initial contact with SNAP in 1997, the leadership in this institutional diocese has seen multiple vigils held, while countless “good Catholics” screamed at us to “get over it.” We came forward in peace with the intent of protecting children and educating adults. From pulpits all over this diocese, the institutional diocese of Kansas City explained to parishioners that we are “liars.” Had it not been for the inept handling of clergy sexual abuses cases, I would not have had to stand in front of an institutional building with a sign and a candle. I might have been enjoying the life to which I was originally born. Victims do not ask to be abused. They are chosen by skillful predators.

On Wednesday, August 20, 2008, after the TENTATIVE settlement had been announced and before the list of 17 non-monetary demands had been released on August 22, 2008, Bishop Finn said:

“…the church will remain an inviolate sanctuary for healing, for spiritual renewal, and for love.” (Kansas City Star, 08/20/08)

The key word here is REMAIN. The institutional church in this diocese has NEVER been an inviolate sanctuary. Priests, nuns and bishops have violated children and vulnerable adults. If this institution wants to be an inviolate sanctuary for healing, for spiritual renewal and for love it must first tell the truth. It must then keep telling the truth, even when it is inconvenient or costly or uncomfortable, even when it might tarnish the golden image of the roman collar or the pristine purity of a nun’s habit. The institutional church must hold itself accountable to God’s law and to the laws of this nation. Their attempt to bury the damage and recreate history is not truth. It’s so simple. All they have to do is tell the truth.

This institutional “church” is the antithesis of the message brought by Christ. It is a church divided against itself because of men who are fallible, and as leaders of the institutional church, abused their unquestioned power in order “to protect the church.” By “protect the church,” they mean both money and power. Money is power.

Fallible males have believed in the institutional church for so long that they have become the God that they have so carefully crafted for centuries. Religion by fear or by oppression, religion built on smoke and mirrors, religion that requires its’ membership to worship in the church of the almighty dollar, religion that requires total belief in all of its’ fallible dogmas, doctrines, rites, rituals and lies is not a church. It is a cult that abuses all of its members by brainwashing them from birth.
Yes, I am both proud and pleased to have been a part of crafting the original 24 non-monetary commitments. I am even pleased with most of the 17 in the final draft. Finn has chosen not to apologize to victims as individuals. To the best of my knowledge, neither he nor his predecessor has ever spoken with a victim.

Besides, we’ve only been asking for those same commitments for the past six years or so.
On April 15, 2008, Pope Benedict XVI said at a press conference in the United States: "We will do everything possible to ensure that this does not happen in the future. I think we have to act on three levels: the first is the level of justice and secondly the political level. ...then there is the pastoral level.
On April 16, 2008, Pope Benedict XVI said to American Bishops: "It is your God given responsibility as pastors to bind up the wounds caused by every breach of trust, to foster healing, to promote reconciliation and to reach out with loving concern to those so seriously wronged."
On April 16, 2008, Pope Benedict VXI said to American Bishops” "....This scourge is found not only within your dioceses but in every sector of society. It calls for a determined, collective response."

During his recent visit to Australia, Pope Benedict XVI said:

“These misdeeds, which constitute so grave a betrayal of trust, deserve unequivocal condemnation. I ask all of you to support and assist your bishops, and to work together with them in combating this evil. Victims should receive compassion and care, and those responsible for these evils must be brought to justice.”

I ask all involved here today to honor the message brought by Christ along with the pope’s request. I charge all people everywhere to guard and protect their children and grandchildren. What has happened in the past, what is happening in our present, and what will happen in the future depends on our ability to speak our truth without fear of reprisal.

I believe that I have done everything that I can do to call attention to a situation that should never have existed. I will admit to having trusted the church. I admit to being very tired of the lies spoken in God’s name by the corporate, institutional church. For Catholics who continue to believe in the leaders of this travesty of church, you have been warned and the responsibility to make correct choices rests solely with you.

John C. Baskett seduced me because he could do so without fear. He knew that the institutional church would protect him. He knew he would not lose his job, his freedom, or his orders. In 1955, Bishop O’Hara, titular head of the institutional church in this diocese enabled a sexual predator to continue to abuse.

The diocese of Kansas City / St. Joseph owes me for a lifetime of shame, guilt, and fear. It owes me for alcoholism and attempted suicides. It owes me for sexual frigidity. It owes me for ADHD and PTSD. It owes me for obsessive-compulsive behavior disorders. It owes me for my enormous need for approval. It owes me for thousands of dollars spent on psychiatrists as an investment in my sanity. It owes me a personal apology for the demeaning manner in which I was treated by Vicar General Rush from the Boland regime. It owes me and every other victim a personal apology by the bishop, as requested in the original 24 non-monetary demands.

It owes me for 54 of the 72 years I have lived the lie of trying to appear ‘normal’ while knowing that something was very wrong with me.

The child known as Kay will always be Catholic. The child misses the mystical beauty of the music, the art, the stained glass windows, the Latin rituals and the French virgin-martyr tales of her early childhood. The child known as Kay was deliberately brainwashed.

I have lived long enough to know that the pain is so deep that it never goes away. Age, time and professional therapists along with the support of family and friends help. Certainly, survivor organizations have strengthened us on all levels and have helped us find our voices. Without them, I might never have understood that I am a victim and that I am not to blame for what happened to me.
My hands are shaking as I write this on August 22nd, and they will shake again when I am deposed on August 28th.

Kay Goodnow writes of her deposition: 

In March of this year (2008) the Diocese of Kansas City / St. Joseph contacted the law firm that works with victim/survivors in this area. The diocesan lawyers wanted to work out a settlement between victims who had sued the diocese; some of those cases had been wending their way through the court for eight years. The diocese stalled, wrote briefs, etc. etc. ad nauseum. By March of 2008, our law firm had deposed several "higher ups" as well as all of the victims and their families.

I got a call in March, as I have stayed active with SNAP in an attempt to prevent further harm to children and as support for victims. The attorney said that she believed I could be a part of the settlement although my case was well beyond the Statute of Limitations.

So I filed, I did press conferences and the news spread across both Kansas and Missouri, into the Chicago area and eventually to Bishop Accountability in Boston.

Then, on August 17th or so, the lawyers (ours) released the tentative settlement agreement to be shared by 47 victims of 12 area priests. One of those area priests is a retired bishop in Cheyenne, Wyoming.

This was a mediation process and not a lawsuit. I believe it was encouraged by the judge who would have to hear the individual cases as they occurred. All parties agreed to the settlement amount and every one of us 47 victims stated that the non-monetary awards were more important than the money.

Because my case was so old, I figured I would be at the bottom of the heap.

All of this will explain the enclosure, which is what I planned to say when I was deposed. Actually, I did not read it, but my attorney highlighted it and led me through it, which was great. I got everything I wanted to say said, and everyone in the room cried, including the male moderator. Only piggy priest tried to look away, but I caught him and demanded that he listen. He did. He himself had been accused, but not publicly, of soliciting sex and he knew that I had seen both the written accusation and the bishop's written response.

The reason I thought of you is that my lawyer suggested to the mediator that he Google me, and she gave him a copy of what I had written as well. Later, she told me that that evening, the mediator had called to tell her that he had spent quite a lot of time reading my stuff on the internet and he had found the Dogchurch...

The Bishop, whose name is Finn, finked out on the non monetary provisions. In so doing, he irritated me (mild understatement) so I wrote him a letter and mailed it this past Saturday.

Are we stupid or what?

Russia invades Georgia, ostensibly to "rescue" ethnic Russians living in Georgia (colonized there by the former Soviet Union) sort of like the Nazis invading the Sudetenland in Czechoslovakia to "rescue" ethnic Germans who had settled there, a move which began World War II. This could be the Russians beginning the re-conquest of as many of the former Soviet Republics (the "near abroad" in Russian parlance) as they can.

And what are the top headlines in our national media? How Americans are faring in the Beijing Olympics, and what John Edwards has been doing with his d--k.

Are we stupid, or what?

Or is it that our media thinks that news is meant to entertain, or to propagandize, rather than to inform?

Fine, for Now

She is a wreck of her former self, a virtual prisoner of her limited mobility in the home into which she moved over a half century ago. But when I ask her how she is doing, she answers, "Fine!" Given her health and mobility problems, and her fear that she is "losing her marbles," she clings precariously to her life in her own home with ferocious determination. "Fine!"

Fine for now. Just as she ends conversations with "Goodbye for now," meaning that we are parting only for now, not for the last time. And why not. Right now everything is just fine.

It reminds me of the phrase from the Sermon on the Mount, "Take no thought for the morrow. Sufficient unto this day is the evil thereof."

I guess that's how we all get through living with dying. Day by day, moment by moment. Like the fellow who jumps off a 200 story building. Someone on the 150th floor shouts," How's it going?" And he answers, "So far, so good!"

It's going fine. Life is one long rush over the edge of a cliff. The only real choice is to go for it with gusto, and see who catches you when you fall. Live in each moment, like a butterfly feasting on nectar from a purple coneflower. Echinacea to you herbalists out there.

I Accuse!

Contributed by Vinnie Nauheimer

Have you ever felt like the boy who yelled, “The Emperor has no clothes?” Did you ever scream to yourself, “Damn, this is wrong!”? Have you ever seen something so clear and vividly that you wondered, “How come everyone doesn’t see this?” If the same thing happens time and time again, in city after city, in state after state, and in country after country, why do we fail to call it what it is? If the act is a criminal act, perpetrated by members of the same organization, and covered up by the management of said organization, why can’t we just call it organized international crime?

We label those dealing in cocaine, the South American Drug Cartels. We label terrorists with cells in multiple counties with names like Al Qaeda. There is the Golden Triangle that supplies heroin to Southeast Asia and then there is the Illicit Drug Trade that refers to the heroin coming out of Afghanistan. All encompassing multinational criminal enterprises have names like the Mafia, Triad, Cosa Nostra, Yakuza etc. Even stand up institutions like banks have been referred to as Money Launderers. So why haven’t we labeled and pursued the Catholic Church for their worldwide sexual abuse of children?

The crime of clerical sexual abuse committed by Catholic priests has been publicly documented in the following countries around the globe: Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bosnia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Columbia, Croatia, Czech Republic, England, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Mexico, Malta, Netherlands, New Zealand, Philippines, Poland, Slovenia, South Africa, Trinidad and Tobago, United States and Venezuela.¹ This should put an end to the fallacious argument used by the last pope that clergy sexual abuse was strictly an American phenomenon. Sexual abuse reported in 28 countries can hardly be called an American problem.

The United States, because of its size does deserve a special note. Clergy abuse by Catholic priests has been documented in all of 50 of its states. Most of these states, because of land mass and population, could be a country within itself. Several states in the U.S. have more documented cases of sexual abuse by Catholic priests than most other countries. Does that mean it is a solely a problem in the United States as JPII stated? No, it just means that the size and population of the U.S. offered more opportunity.

Why, with its priests committing the same crime (the sexual abuse of children) on a global scale, hasn’t the Roman Catholic Church been named as an international sponsor of child abuse? Why when the hierarchy of the RCC has been compounding sex crimes by aiding and abetting these criminals, hasn’t the hierarchy of the RCC been named as an international criminal organization? The priests committing the rape, sodomization and molestation of children are all members of the religious organization known as the Roman Catholic Church. Before becoming priests these men must all go through a rigorous and lengthy indoctrination period. The guidelines established for their seminary formation come from the hierarchy and the leadership in Rome. The Catholic Church sustains its candidates for the priesthood while they go through their training. The RCC will not ordain them as priests unless they have completed their training. Only Rome may defrock a priest once they’ve been ordained. Therefore, the criminals who have raped, sodomized and molested children are duly trained and ordained priests of the Catholic Church, which is headquartered in the city/state known as the Vatican. These same criminals, who commit vile acts against children, are the responsibility of the RCC headquartered in the Vatican.

If they weren’t, why does the hierarchy of the RCC go out of their way to protect these criminals by silencing victims, shifting predator priests from parish to parish, state to state and country to country? The hierarchy is nothing more than the layers of management between priests and the pope called bishops and cardinals. If management is protecting criminals, what does that make the manager and what does that make the hierarchy?

A criminal organization!

Further proof of the international scope of these criminal activities comes to us in the form of a secret instruction sent to all bishops around the world in 1962. It also cites an 1887 document as seen below. The operative word here is secret. One of the hallmarks of any organized criminal element is their fanatical obsession with secrecy. Why do criminals obsess over secrecy; because it is the key to their ability to operate freely. Mobsters with high public profiles usually wind up with a bullet in their head. Dictators don’t disclose the location of killing fields, Bank heists are never advertised in the local paper. Drug dealers don’t hold press conferences to announce the arrival of drug shipments. Pedophiles don’t wear neon signs proclaiming their proclivity, and the RCC will do everything in their power to keep child sex abuse and the abuser a secret. The instruction Crimen Sollicitationis gives an unprecedented view into the Catholic Church’s obsession with secrecy. If nothing else, Crimen Sollicitationis shows how the Church has conspired to keep crimes against children a secret for well over a century as seen in this excerpt from the English translation,

11. Because, however, what is treated in these cases has to have a greater degree of care and observance so that those same matters be pursued in a most secretive way, and, after they have been defined and given over to execution, they are to be restrained by a perpetual silence (Instruction of the Holy Office, February 20, 1867, n. 14), each and everyone pertaining to the tribunal in any way or admitted to knowledge of the matters because of their office, is to observe the strictest secret, which is commonly regarded as a secret of the Holy Office, in all matters and with all persons, under the penalty of excommunication latae sententiae,²

The penalty for breaking secrets (talking) about a priest involved in the sexual abuse of a child is the worst punishment that could be meted out upon a believer of Catholic Doctrine. Their history is replete with examples of people who have chosen to die rather than forfeit their salvation.

This 1962 instruction, called Crimen Sollicitationis, was signed by the Pope John XXIII. According to Fr. Tom Doyle, noted Canon Lawyer and survivor advocate, it is very similar to an instruction issued in 1922. The 1962 instruction was reaffirmed in 2001 under the signature of the current pope who at the time was the head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger.³ Why one has to ask, is it necessary to say the same thing three times in less than a century? The logical conclusion is that it has been a long recognized problem

Even though the name Crimen Sollicitationis refers to the crime of soliciting in the confessional, the section marked Title V deals with the sexual abuse of children. Title V of Crimen Sollicitationis is subtitled: “The Worst Crime” as seen from this excerpt:⁴

73. To have the worst crime, for the penal effects, one must do the equivalent of the following: any obscene, external act, gravely sinful, perpetrated in any way by a cleric or attempted by him with youths of either sex or with brute animals (bestiality).

74. Against accused clerics for these crimes, if they are exempt religious, and unless there takes place at the same time the crime of solicitation, even the regular superior can proceed, according to the holy canons and their proper constitutions, either in an administrative or a judicial manner. However, they must communicate the judicial decision pronounced as well as the administrative decision in the more serious cases to the Supreme Congregation of the Holy Office.

The wording of Title V is extremely important as it confirms the Vatican’s own knowledge and acceptance of the fact that the sexual abuse of children, regardless of sex, is a crime. The Vatican did not use the words evil, sinful, offensive, lapse of judgment, moment of weakness or illness. They used the word “crime” which is the only word that can adequately describe the act of a priest preying on a child for his own sexual gratification. Therefore, by stating that “the sexual abuse of children is a crime,” the Vatican tacitly acknowledges before God and man that priests who commit the crime of having sex with children, are in fact criminals! They also demand that these criminal acts be reported to their international headquarters, the Vatican.

Criminals commit crimes. Sex with children is a crime under both canon and civil law. Therefore, there can be no doubt that priests who commit the crime of sexual abuse with children are criminals! Ipso facto, those who protect these criminals are themselves guilty of aiding and abetting criminals. The Vatican has known for centuries that the sexual abuse of children is a criminal offense. In that, they are in total agreement with the secular law of just about every country on earth.

Not only is the sexual abuse of children considered a crime by the Vatican, but to add emphasis to the matter, the Vatican chose to label it “The Worst Crime.” Of all the adjectives that are available to describe a crime, the Vatican chose to call the sexual abuse of children “The Worst.” What does that make the men who allow these sexual predators ply their trade unabated? What does this do to the commonly used hierarchal defense, “I didn’t know?” What does it say about the hundreds of bishops in 28 known countries around the world who failed to live up to the Vatican’s standards? What does it say about a Vatican that tolerated these failures?

Crimen Sollicitationis directs the bishops to prosecute crimes of child sexual abuse? Failing to do so makes them all scofflaws! They scoffed at every indecency perpetrated on the bodies of children around the world. Neither bishops nor the Vatican can claim ignorance of the law anymore! Whether it was an internal or external law, they failed to prosecute the rapists, sodomizers and molesters in their midst; by their own account, the criminal element.

Therefore, I accuse!

Due to the global ongoing sexual abuse and cover-up by the hierarchy of the Catholic Church, it is safe to assume that the only part of Crimen Sollicitationis that was adhered to was the demand for secrecy. Up until 2002 almost every settlement involving sexual abuse by a priest came with an enforceable gag order on the victim. The victims were silenced while most offending priests were moved to new hunting grounds.

The logical question to ask is, “Cui Bono” who benefits? Who benefits from the silence? It could be argued that the priest and his accuser benefit from the silence. However, since there were no remedies for the care, compensation or treatment of the victim, it is hard to see how victims benefited from Crimen instruction. There has never been any proof whatsoever of rampant false charges being brought against innocent priests. Therefore innocent priests haven’t benefited. So who are the chief beneficiaries of the document Crimen Sollicitationis? The sexually abusive priest and the Roman Catholic Church are the only beneficiaries.

Therefore, I accuse!

Lest Crimen sidetrack us, the salient points are: 1. The document was sent from the International Headquarters. 2. The document was sent out globally. 3. The document was sent in secrecy. 4. The document demanded secrecy. 5. The penalty for violating secrecy is the harshest penalty the church can mete out: excommunication. 7. It labels the sexual abuse of children as “The Worst Crime” thereby admitting to the world the Vatican’s complete understanding of the vile nature of the act of sexually abusing children.

By their own hand they are condemned.

In the 28 countries we know about, the rape, sodomization, and molestation of children are publicly documented. Why then hasn’t Interpol gotten involved? Interpol states that the protection of children is one of their primary goals. This is the first paragraph taken from Interpol’s page on children:

Children are the most vulnerable individuals in our society; they are also the most precious commodity that the world has and have a right to be protected from all forms of abuse. INTERPOL as an organization is also committed to eradicating the sexual abuse of children and has passed several resolutions making crimes against children one of International policing top priorities.⁵

They tell us that, not preventing, but eradicating (wiping out) sexual abuse is one of their top priorities. How can the sexual abuse of children be a top priority when the chief global culprit, the Roman Catholic Church has not been formerly accused by either the UN or Interpol?

I accuse!

The evidence is abundant for any who would make even a cursory examination of the facts. The Dallas Morning News did an entire series on the international scope of both clergy sexual abuse and its cover-up. Central to the series was the theme of hierarchy moving predator priests internationally in order to save them from being tried for crimes committed or to provide new hunting grounds or both.⁶

The facts accuse!

The need to protect children around the world is a global priority of United Nations. The U.N. through its UNICEF organization has put together “The Convention on the Rights of the Child.” Here are articles nineteen and thirty-four from that convention, which address the sexual abuse of children.

Article 19. 1. States Parties shall take all appropriate legislative, administrative, social and educational measures to protect the child from all forms of physical or mental violence, injury or abuse, neglect or negligent treatment, maltreatment or exploitation, including sexual abuse, while in the care of parent(s), legal guardian(s) or any other person who has the care of the child.

Article 34. States Parties undertake to protect the child from all forms of sexual exploitation and sexual abuse. For these purposes, States Parties shall in particular take all appropriate national, bilateral and multilateral measures to prevent:
  (a) The inducement or coercion of a child to engage in any unlawful sexual activity;

  (b) The exploitative use of children in prostitution or other unlawful sexual practices;

  (c) The exploitative use of children in pornographic performances and materials.⁷

I accuse the RCC of violating the Convention on the Rights of the Child!

The Holy See, which could be a member of the United Nations by virtue of the fact that the Vatican is a city-state, has elected not to become a member of the UN. Rather it has been granted the nomenclature of permanent observer. This means that they enjoy the full rights of every sovereign member except the right to vote. In this way they can lobby for whatever they desire and not have yo go on record as voting for or against an issue.

They chose to not to support The Convention on the Rights of the Child. The Holy See declared that "the application of the Convention should be compatible in practice with the particular nature of the Vatican City State and of the sources of its objective law," in a statement issued when they declined to be a signatory. To date, all members but two have ratified the Convention.⁸

The United Nations through Interpol, its international police agency, and UNICEF, their children’s agency recognize the need to police and prevent the sexual abuse of children throughout the world. They state this is a top priority. The Convention on the Rights of the Child, which has been widely accepted by governments around the world, seeks to end the sexual abuse of children. Why then have the UN, UNICEF, and Interpol chosen to totally ignore the most public, international series of sex crimes and cover-ups against children running from the twentieth into the twenty-first century?

I accuse!

Having established that the sexual abuse of children is accepted by the RCC as being a criminal act, it follows that aiding and abetting criminals is also a crime. The international criminal activity of aiding and abetting sexual predators by the RCC is well documented. The award winning newspaper The Dallas Morning News did an excellent series of articles dealing with the international flight of pedophile priests to escape prosecution entitled "Runaway Priests." The following are excerpts from some of their articles as listed on the website Bishop-accountability.org.

Dr. Navarro-Valls (chief spokesperson for the pope) previously declined to comment on The News' investigation, which found more than 200 accused priests, brothers and other Catholic workers hiding across international borders and living in unsuspecting communities, often with the church's support. About 30 of the men were wanted by law enforcement in another country.⁹

Where is Interpol? Where is the outcry from UNICEF?

Bishop Thomas V. Daily of the Diocese of Brooklyn, in an exchange of correspondence with a Venezuelan bishop in 1991 about allegations against Father Diaz, praised the priest's work in his diocese even as a 60-count indictment was pending against him in Queens on child sexual abuse charges. Later that year, after pleading guilty to three counts of sexual abuse in the case, Father Diaz was deported to Venezuela, where the pattern of victimizing young boys continued unabated.

And so it went throughout Father Diaz's ministry. Moving from country to country, from parish to parish, from victim to victim, he was often held unaccountable by church officials and was treated delicately by some law enforcement authorities, the interviews and documents show.¹⁰

How can the above be anything but an international criminal conspiracy?

His order, the Salesians of Don Bosco, has long moved priests accused of sexual abuse from country to country, away from law enforcement and victims. Indeed, it is how many others in the Catholic Church have dealt with the problem, a yearlong Dallas Morning News investigation has found.¹¹

The crimes committed by the hierarchy of the RCC against the children of the world have been documented many times in many countries. In each country from Poland, to Ireland, to the United States around and down to Australia, the story is the same. Priests who commit criminal acts of sexual abuse against children are shuffled from country to country with no regard for either local or international law. These priests are shuffled by a complicit hierarchy who are guilty of aiding and abetting criminals. Once transferred, these priests are free to prey upon a fresh population of unsuspecting families who revere the priest as God’s representative on earth.

In 2002 Pope John Paul II stated before the world, “There is no room in the priesthood for those who sexually abuse children.”¹² But nothing was done; priests were still being shuffled and names of priestly perpetrators are still a closely guarded secret. In April of 2008, while on the plane over to the United States, Benedict XVI said, “I am deeply ashamed”¹³ while referring to the Clergy Sex Abuse Scandal. On July 19, 2008, in Australia, he said,

“I ask all of you to support and assist your bishops, and to work together with them in combating this evil. Victims should receive compassion and care, and those responsible for these evils must be brought to justice.”¹⁴

“AND THOSE RESPONSIBLE FOR THESE EVILS MUST BE BROUGHT TO JUSTICE!” Strong words from the pope! The pope is an honorable man; bishops and cardinals are all honorable men and they speak well. Yet nothing was said about revoking Crimen Sollicitationis. Did he forget that as Cardinal Ratzinger in 2001, he reaffirmed its validity? He can say one thing publicly, but as long as he still binds everyone with knowledge of clergy abuse to the absolute law of secrecy under the chapter 11, “a secret of the Holy Office,”¹⁵ the pope is only mouthing words. As long as Cardinals, Law, Mahony, George, Egan and Llevada remain in office, he is only mouthing words. As long as bishops, and the leaders of religious orders who shuffled pedophiles from country to country remain in the priesthood, the pope is only mouthing words. The pope is the only one who can start bringing those responsible for these evils to justice!

It is time to put an end to the global scourge of clerical child abuse and put these criminal priests behind bars along with the members of the hierarchy who have purposefully aided them. (It seems that Pope Benedict agrees with me.) These crimes are a violation of God’s law, Church law, Civil law, and International law (all covered in this treatise). As proven in the United States, the only thing that will change the way the RCC harbors their criminals is a courtroom. Interpol must aid in the capture of these international child abusing fugitives and the U.N. must bring charges against the Vatican in the World Court. Only the credible threat of listing the Vatican as a criminal organization, making them stand trial for the abuse of tens of thousands of children and covering-up for thousands of priests will force the much needed changes while making the world a safer place for children. Interpol and the UN had every right to get involved in the clergy abuse scandal because it violates their conventions. Now both the UN and Interpol have an invitation to get involved straight from the pope’s mouth. Pope Benedict XVI has just asked for “aid and assistance” followed up by “those responsible for these evils must be brought to justice.” The Vicar of Christ on earth is asking for help in bringing to justice to those who committed and helped in crimes of sexual abuse against children. What greater invitation can be made?

 

Note: To any lawyers who may represent or have represented survivors of sexual abuse. Crimen Sollicitationis means “crime of solicitation” which refers to crimes of the confessional. Reading this text is extremely difficult because everything up until Title V is about soliciting in the confessional. Title V paragraph 72 states: “Those things that have been stated concerning the crime of solicitation up to this point are also valid, changing only those things necessary to be changed by their very nature, for the worst crime,” Take Crimen Sollicitationis (English version) and put it in a Word document. Then do a find/replace with find Solicitation and replace it with child abuse. You will be amazed at how it clarifies the document giving you a clearer understanding of what Crimen Sollicitationis says about the clergy abuse of children.

Notes

1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Catholic_sex_abuse_cases_by_country, July 9, 2008 and http://www.scribd.com/doc/1021887/SEXUAL-ABUSE-IN-THE-CATHOLIC-CHURCH-2002, July 9, 2008
2. http://www.priestsofdarkness.com/crimen.pdf, July 10, 2008
3. The 1922 Instruction and the 1962 Instruction “Crimen Sollicitationis,” Promulgated by the Vatican: Thomas Doyle, O.P., J.C.D. June 30, 2008
4. http://www.priestsofdarkness.com/crimen.pdf July 10, 2008
5. http://www.interpol.int/Public/Children/Default.asp, July 11, 2008
6. http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/longterm/stories/Runaway_priests_hiding_in_plain_sight.5ee1e9be.html, July 11, 2008
7. http://www.interpol.int/Public/Children/Conventions/unConvCR.asp, July 12, 2008
8. http://www.unicef.org/pon95/chil0008.html, July 12, 2008
9. http://www.bishop-accountability.org/news/2004_09_12_Dunklin_InThe.htm, July 12, 2008
10. http://www.bishop-accountability.org/resources/resource-files/timeline/2002-04-20-Murphy-Diaz.htm, July 13, 2008
11. http://www.bishop-accountability.org/news/2004_06_20_Dunklin_ConvictedSexual.htm, July 13, 2008
12. http://www.poynterextra.org/extra/abusetracker/2002_04_21_archive.htm, July 18, 2008
13. http://aftermathnews.wordpress.com/2008/04/15/pope-says-he-is-deeply-ashamed-of-clergy-abuse-scandal/, July 18, 2008
14. http://www.thewest.com.au/default.aspx?MenuID=2&ContentID=85771, July 19, 2008
15. http://www.priestsofdarkness.com/crimen.pdf, July 10, 2008

While VCBC does not agree with all the characterizations Mr. Nauheimer makes of the Roman Catholic Church, this is posted here in response to the author's email request:

I would ask all of you to please read this document and if you find it worthy, please send it to everyone in your world. I believe the arguments are that powerful.

Of himself, the author writes:

Vinnie Nauheimer has written extensively on the subject of clerical abuse. He has written two books on the subject, one of poetry Silent Screams, and one comprised of selected letters sent over an eight year period on the subject of clergy abuse called Epistles on Clergy Abuse. His art, poetry and writing can be found on websites around the world. Though they don't issue a degree in Clergy Abuse, Mr. Nauheimer successfully survived advanced classes from the School of Intimidation and Slander sponsored by the NY Archdiocese. Both his and his family’s degree of pain were acknowledged by a Grand Jury probing the issue of clergy abuse. His goals are the same as those stated by Pope Benedict XVI in Australia on July 19, 2008: “Victims should receive compassion and care, and those responsible for these evils must be brought to justice.”

Vinnie's passion comes from discovering that his two sons were abused by a priest.

J'accuse ("I accuse") was an open letter published in 1898 in the newspaper L'Aurore by Émile Zola accusing the French government of anti-Semitism in the Alfred Dreyfus case.

Psychological Warfare III: Blacklisting the Torturers

The American Psychological Association seems to be all a-twitter about what some psychologists may or may not be doing for the US Military and Intelligence communities. In some quarters they are trying to run psychologists who work for our country out of the APA. Make sure that if they ever go into private practice they don't get any referrals. No invited talks. No academic appointments. Back when Joe McCarthy was a Senator, they called it blacklisting.

At issue is whether psychologists are helping the DoD and the CIA torture people detained as "illegal combatants" (as defined by the Geneva Convention). Let me point out a few things:

If you are going to torture someone, you do not waste months on sensory deprivation and disorientation. If you are going to torture someone, you do things like what the North Vietnamese did to John McCain. You will notice that he doesn't spend time combing his hair, because his arms won't reach that high.

If you are going to torture someone, you do not need the services of a psychologist. You only spend time and money on psychology if you are NOT going to torture someone, but you need to reduce their resistance to interrogation because you are reasonably sure they know something that could prevent the untimely deaths of your colleagues.

I guess I find it harder than some APA members to choose between making a select few illegal combatants unhappy on the one hand, and tallying the otherwise preventable deaths of our troops and operatives on the other.

I must note that al-Qaeda has its own form of Survival, Evasion, Resistance, Escape (SERE) training, which includes accusing their detainers of torture and inhumane treatment regardless of whether such treatment actually occurred, and regardless of the inhumane treatment that al-Qaeda and sympathizers use on their detainees, such as Daniel Pearl. (Or is cutting someone's throat and posting the video on the internet OK as long as non-Western people do it? Talk about the "bigotry of low expectations.")

I also note that those detained as illegal combatants or terrorists routinely swear to kill their interrogators and the interrogators' families should the detained ever be released. They could be aided by the terrorist cells operating in many Western countries, including the United States. It may feel brave to discuss one's objections to some fellow psychologists' possible activities, but by naming names, one may be fingering them for assassination.

Given the real risks of vilification by their colleagues and death at the hands of released detainees (or those acting for them) it seems to me that the real courage is that of those psychologists and sociologists who help, rather than hinder, our counter-insurgency and counter-terrorism efforts.

Religious Calendar Script

If you would like to have a JavaScript application to show the current day, date, holiday, prayer times, and prayer orientation (e.g., direction and distance to Mecca or Jerusalem) for the Hebrew, Christian (Western, Eastern, or Coptic), Islamic, or Bahai faiths, you can save a copy of the one I wrote for dogchurch.org. Just click here, and use the "Save As" capability of your browser to save a copy to your local desktop. You can use and modify the file under the GNU Public License. If you use the script or a modified form of it, you must acknowledge The Virtual Church of the Blind Chihuahua or dogchurch.org.

No documentation is provided (other than the code itself - and you must know JavaScript to read it), and you use the file at your own risk. We do not assume any responsibility or liability for the correctness of the calculations. In fact, since the Hebrew and Islamic calendars are observational, not calculated, the above referenced script is only an approximation (but based on very good algorithms from Calendrical Calculations by Reingold and Dershowitz, as well as astronomical code from the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration). Rather than ask the user for his or her location, the script uses GeoIP services from MaxMind.com to estimate the latitude and longitude of the user, based on the user's IP address.

At the end of the script are two functions Salutation and Liturgical Salutation that you can call from your HTML to display the calendar information on your page. Examples of the script in action are

VCBC's Former Home Page
VCBC - Christianity
VCBC - Baha'i
VCBC - Islam
VCBC - Judaism

Contact us with errata, suggestions, or questions.

Thoughts for the Nation

I'm back. Just spent the past few weeks refactoring the JavaScript that computes Christian, Hebrew, Islamic and Baha'i calendars for dogchurch.org. The code is now 15% shorter and does more, including computing and displaying holidays, prayer times, and prayer direction for these major religions.

But to the business at hand. Friend Kay G. has sent a link to this 9-minute video from Joe American, on America's pathetic lack of an energy policy.

It's not the only policy we lack. For all its belligerence, the Bush Administration has yet to articulate a policy regarding nuclear weapons. Considering that America is one of the two largest holders of nuclear weapons on the planet, this is a serious omission.

What do we get instead? Mars.

I'm not buying it. Until we can get people and cargo from the ground to Low Earth Orbit (LEO) and back for US $20 per pound, there is nothing up there that will ever be commercially viable. Which means that only governments will dabble in space, without any major impact on the survivability of the human species. Heck, the airlines are charging about $20 per pound, and are struggling to make a profit, because even when the destination is on earth (where we know its worth going) people can scarcely afford that much.

So, I would redirect NASA to research and fund efforts to achieve LEO affordability, and table wider manned space exploration until they succeed. The major national effort I would launch is toward US energy independence in the near term (say 10 years) and petroleum independence in the longer term (say 20 years). What Joe American says is pointing in the right direction, even though the situation in Iraq is more complicated than I think he realizes.

I also have another few radical proposals:

(1) Make peace on the Korean peninsula. It is shameful that the Truce of 1953 has yet to turn into an actual Peace - after 55 years! The major parties to the peace would need to be North and South Korea, of course, with the US and China as mostly silent partners to the negotiations. The goal would be to achieve unhindered movement of people between North and South. Perhaps the Demilitarized Zone could be converted to the world's largest wildlife refuge and made into a major money-making tourist attraction to help fund development of the North. Then, what do you think would happen to North Korea's nuclear weapons program? I doubt it would long survive in actual peacetime.

(2) Try a new solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Instead of two states, how about two states, one capital? Both parties want Jerusalem as a capital for religious reasons, so why not share it? Not only the same city, but the same capitol building complex. That way, if one party gets blown up, so does the other. Kind of like the patient who grabs the dentist by the groin and says, "Now, we aren't going to hurt each other, are we?"

(3) To start on the problem of health care insurance, create an assigned risk pool, state by state, just like we do for auto insurance. Don't let any company write policies in any state unless they contribute their fair share to that state's assigned risk pool. Everyone gets some coverage, and we still have capitalism. What a concept. Better yet, we all need to force Congress to use the same kinds of health insurance and the same kinds of health providers the rest of us get.

(4) Make the federal government delegate power, money, and responsibility back to the state and local governments. Nobody reads all of the federal budget or the funding bills, or most of the new laws enacted, because there are too many of them and they are too long. This is because the federal government has taken on more than it can manage. It has done so by arrogating powers that used to belong to state and local governments, or even to private citizens. The feds have bitten off more than they can chew. They are drowning in, choking on, too much stuff to do. Any business would delegate authority downward so that it could do its job more efficiently. Let's see some delegation. If the government wants to apply the business model to what it funds, let it apply it to itself first and foremost.

Yeah. I know it's a risk. Since there are so many laws and regulations on the books, it is now impossible to live without accidentally falling afoul of one or more of them. All it takes is for some government bureaucrat to capriciously enforce a few of them to get any chosen target. In other words, the principal guarantor of your liberty (if you are an American) is that the government is just too choked up to get to you. But it's our government. According to the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, we own it. Making it delegate back powers is a necessary part of making it work for us rather than just for itself.

Well, that's enough ranting for tonight.