Rezendes Unhinged: ‘Spotlight’ Reporter Now Claims the Church Still ‘Has No Policies’ for Dealing With Abuse By Priests

Michael Rezendes : Boston Globe

Professional anti-Catholic bigot: The Boston Globe's Michael Rezendes

There comes a point when an individual shows such contempt for the truth that one can no longer give him the benefit of the doubt and must conclude that he is an unabashed bigot.

Such is the case with Michael Rezendes, the crack reporter from The Boston Globe's "Spotlight" team, who has recently been repeatedly making the claim in media appearances in recent weeks that the Catholic Church has somehow "not dealt with" the decades-old issue of clergy sex abuse.

Oh, the tangled webs we weave

Thomas J. Nash

Shining the light of truth:
Writer Thomas J. Nash

Rezendes has appeared on various outlets over the past couple months promoting his latest "Spotlight" item in the Boston Globe claiming that Catholic priests have fathered numerous children and that the Church "has never set rules" as to how to deal with this.

Enter writer Thomas J. Nash, who read Rezendes' piece and also saw an interview appearance by Rezendes on CBS This Morning discussing his work.

In a must-see article in Catholic World Report, Nash notes that Rezendes is "seriously mistaken in claiming that the Vatican has failed to establish polices" regarding priests fathering children.

"[W]hat Rezendes asserts is simply not true and not befitting a Pulitzer-Prize-winning journalist. The Code of Canon Law, issued in 1983, and which continues longstanding Church policy, specifically addresses clerical sins regarding the Sixth Commandment, i.e., regarding sexual sins that encompass fathering a child, and conveys such a priest should be suspended from clerical ministry (CIC, canon 1395; cf. canon 277.3)."

But, most troubling, Rezendes, in his interview with CBS, claimed that that "after all these years of having to confront the problem, the Vatican has still not come up with a set of policies for dealing with the problem of clergy sexual abuse."

However, nothing could be further from the truth! As Nash noted, the Vatican has long had protocols in place to deal with abuse by priests, including those embedded in Canon law.

And, as we have discussed numerous times over years, the Catholic Church was tackling the issue within its ranks even before 1985 – over 30 years ago, when cases of clergy sex abuse first began receiving national attention.

"As early as 1982, we saw policies and procedures coming to the attention of the USCCB (the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops) regarding specific child molestation cases," Teresa Kettelkamp, executive director of the Secretariat of Child and Youth Protection for the USCCB, has reported. "By 1983, 157 dioceses had policies in place."

These policies formulated the bishops' "Five Principles" in dealing with allegations of abuse. Bishops first articulated them in 1987 and then publicly pronounced them in 1992.

And since 2002, the USCCB has been conducting and publishing annual audits to ensure that dioceses have complied with safeguarding and reporting policies.

In the end, even though abuse has soiled every organization that works with children, no other organization on the planet even comes close in its efforts to rectify its past and prevent future abuse. Nash concludes (emphasis added):

"Rezendes is guilty of libel, and as a journalist I don't use the term lightly. The U.S. Supreme Court landmark decision in NY Times vs. Sullivan, issued in 1964, established the modern standard for libel of public figures: 'knowing falsity' or 'reckless disregard of the truth.' While Church leaders in Rome presumably won't bring a lawsuit against Rezendes and the Globe, a case could be made …

"[I]t is at least reckless for Rezendes not to know about and report on canon 1395, given the extensive reporting he has also done on priests' fathering children. For an accomplished investigative reporter, there's simply no excuse for the statements Rezendes made to CBS."

Rezendes' bigotry

Indeed, if there were any question as to whether Rezendes' falsehoods were intentional, a recent appearance should put the matter to rest. On a June 29, 2017, appearance on local Boston TV show "Greater Boston," Rezendes recklessly asserted, "The Church has not dealt with this problem, and until the Church deals with the problem head on, we're going to see scandal after scandal after scandal … The Church can't come to grips with this … This is a systemic problem within the Church."

Without a doubt, Rezendes is not only completely unhinged but a professional anti-Catholic bigot if ever there were one.

[See also: "Five Fast Facts About the Media's Catholic Church Sex Abuse Narrative"]

[And: "'This has quietly turned into a MAJOR CRISIS': Turmoil and major production problems at the Boston Globe persist"]

Comments

  1. Adam says:

    I know this is false, see what my Diocese has setup, https://sccatholic.org/policy

    • Dan says:

      Adam, It's not the fact of having a policy, it's living up to that policy, where your church has exhibited just about complete failure in protecting the innocent.

  2. Jim Robertson says:

    The rarity of priests fathering children percentile wise as compared to clerics who have molested children would be lovely to know.

    It would also lovely to know ,percentile comparative between what the church has done for and to priest created families as compares to what it has not done for clerical sex abuse victims.

  3. Jim Robertson says:

    Odd you would call a man, who you believe to be libelous, a "crack reporter".

  4. KenW says:

    ….and Dan and Publion are going to litter this combox in 3….2…..1….

    • Dan says:

      KenW, As long as the deceptions, lies, slander, accusations and corruption continues, then I guess I'll be here to set things straight. I've yet to see you add any great wisdom to this discussion, or are you just the litter box that holds the "litter".

    • Jim Robertson says:

      See what you did KenW. Lol!

  5. Publion says:

    It is what it is that ‘Ken W’ finds the comment-box ‘littered’. Perhaps he was already conversant with all the many topics that have been raised, or perhaps they don’t interest him.

    Perhaps he is simply intently focused on the Catholic Abuse Matter in narrower terms. Fair enough. Has the record of his submissions here demonstrated the fruits of any such intense and informed focus?

    Recently, on the immediately prior thread, I had made some comments on one of the most current aspects of the Catholic Abuse Matter, i.e. the Royal Commission Report in Australia and the Cardinal Pell topic. The record of his comments on that topic is what it is.

  6. Jose Allen says:

    Now that time has passed (and innocents have been sent to slaughter) we are beginning to see that 'The Clergy Sexual Abuse' Saga was but the beginning of a massive anti Catholic campaign .. perhaps the largest and most vicious since the 'Anti popery troubles in England of the 19th century. It has, I suspect been carefull orchestrated for a long while (30 years? Really? Possibly!). Catholics have been told in America that there is no place for them in the Democrat party and in England no less than the exalted personage , The Speake of The House of Commons has likewise said there should not be Catholics in Parliament. Hmm.. The anti Catholic globalist movement which sought to destroy The Austro Hungariian Empire has continued its horrendous agenda ever since. The EU aided and abetted by Ms Clinton and O'Bama has interfered in the politics of Hungary, Estonia and Poland in order to extinguish Catholicism in those countries. Do not mistake the persecution of many innocent priests(and some guilty ones ) for a narrowly limited campaign..it is much wider and more horrible as well as more determined than the prosecution of a few priests. That sadness is, the bishops have rolled over and ditched their priests, paid off the blackmailers and have never bothered to find out who was guilty and who was innocent. Let us pray that the current onslaught on Hungary, Poland and Estonia as well as Catholics in civil life in America and England can withsatnd the latest persecution.

    • Dan says:

      Good try, Jose, Should read, "many guilty priests (and some innocent ones)". More propaganda? Any persecution against your church is more than well deserved. When you're plain guilty, that it isn't persecution, but exposing the filth of a disgusting religion. Any true Christian is required by the Lord to perform such a work.

      "Have no fellowship with the fruitless deeds of darkness, but rather expose them. For it is shameful even to mention what the disobedient do in secret. But everything exposed by the light becomes visible…"  Ephesians 5:11-13  Guess your cult should come out of the closet.

  7. malcolm harris says:

    Michael Rezendes, of the Boston Globe, presents a dubious picture re honesty and competence. Thomas J. Nash says what he has asserted is completely untrue… and it is not befitting a Pulitizer-Prize winning journalist.  Dave Pierre concludes that Rezendes is a unabashed anti-Catholic bigot. Personally what I found  when doing investigative work, (auditing) was that leopards rarely change their spots. Meaning It is hard to fathom that a journalist, revealing such low standards today, could have been possessing high standards in his past.  In order to justify being awarded the most prestigious prize in his profession?. But wait….I just remembered a guy who won that prize in the 1930's…..for a series of supposedly on-the-spot reports about conditions then prevailing in Russia. Overflowing with lavish praise for the new "workers paradise". Turned out it was all utter baloney… and the propaganda  was just fed to him by his Russian minders….as he sat drinking whisky, in his hotel in Moscow. 

     

    • Dan says:

      Malcolm, And you're under the impression that your cult doesn't pour out "propaganda" by the ton or ever "utter baloney". You catholic accusers are an utter joke!

  8. Dan says:

    What is the problem with you catholics? You call those who want to see change in the churches handling of any Sexual Abuse Matters, or any opponent of your church, anti-catholic bigots, haters or on a witch-hunt. All we ever hear from you when confronted with another pervert or pedophile of your church, is denials, excuses, deception and outright lies. Do you believe this to be the proper way a "True Church of God" would respond to the "systemic" and repetitive disgusting crimes against innocent children? This is God's Word in regard to how His True Church would NEVER be involved in any such crimes against chidren.

    "But among you there MUST NOT BE EVEN A HINT of SEXUAL IMMORALITY, or of any kind of IMPURITY, or of GREED, because these are IMPROPER for God's holy people." Eph 5:3

    "Put to death, therefore, the components of your earthly nature: sexual immorality, impurity, lust, evil desires, and greed, which is idolatry." Colossians 3:5

    And for those who insist on the Catholic Bible version (NAB) – "Immorality or ANY impurity or greed must not even be mentioned among you, as is fitting among holy ones." Eph 5:3

    "Be sure of this, that no immoral or impure or greedy person, that is, an idolator, has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God." [PERIOD]  Eph 5:5  UCCSB (NAB)

    Explain to me how you think my presenting you with Biblical Truth makes me this terrible, mentally disturbed or delusional person. The Accuser and compulsive liar of this forum wishes to brainwash and destroy the truth of the Lord's Word, and I refuse to let him. Come out of this corrupt wicked cult while there is still time. Don't allow them to control your mind!

    P.S. If any catholics have a problem understanding the Bible in English, you can find it in the language of your choosing all over the internet. Read the Word and trust God, not man.

  9. Publion says:

    The bunch of ‘Dan’ comments are of a piece, the bottom line being that he merely presumes his presumptions and then professes himself bemused and  cawn’t think why Catholics don’t ‘see’ what he doth see.

    Well, clearly, if nobody can see what ‘Dan’ doth ‘see’, then they must be ignorant or evil or both.  But could it be that what ‘Dan’ doth ‘see’ isn’t actually the only possible thing to see? Might all his pericopes apply to him – in ways he insists cannot be so?

    ‘Dan’ cawn’t allow himself to imagine that possibility; his whole shtick would collapse and his head would explode.

  10. Publion says:

    But the Rezendes gambit – trying to keep things in the time-frame of decades ago – is and must be ‘Dan’s gambit as well.

    Thus (the 15th at 1201AM) ‘Dan’ doth don his favorite Wig and strike his favorite pearl-clutching Pose, once again asking “What is the problem with you catholics?”. And fortified by Rezendes, ‘Dan’ even allows himself to be joined to some “we”.

    Then a passel of pericopes.

    Which – but of course – ‘Dan’ proffers as the one and only “Biblical Truth”. Once again, the pericopes could as easily indict ‘Dan’ and his shtick. (Unless you buy ‘Dan’s carefully calibrated scam: he may be crazy, but he’s “pure”, doncha see? And he’s no ‘idolater’.)

  11. Publion says:

    He then tries to weasel out of the “may be crazy” part by piggybacking his presentation of (his own) “Biblical Truth” with mental health (his own, in its so dubious and damaged state).

    Thus, in sly and deceptive switcheroo, he tries to put this one over: “how … presenting you with Biblical Truth makes [him] this terrible, mentally disturbed or delusional person”.

    First, he’s clearly off the rails in presuming that his take on Biblical Truth is the only possible take on Biblical Truth.

    Second, his own acts and words have gotten him a police and psychiatric record longer than all but a tiny fraction of people, including priests.

    Third, he thinks that simply by waving all that away as “lies” he has somehow not only a) cleared himself of both the “crazy” bits and the presumptive bits about (his take on) Biblical Truth but also b) established himself as the heroic, truthy, “pure” and ever-competent (and speshully-divinely authorized) proponent of (his take on) Biblical Truth.

    • Dan says:

      Let us know when you're through with your compulsive lying and slandering. For the umpteenth time, catholic liars that slandered me had nothing to do with my material. They were blatant liars, like yourself, who seem to derive some sick pleasure from lying about others. Apparently you've yet to understand that there will be a high price to pay for every lying word to spew from your forked tongue, Hypocrite. Crawl back under the mud you slithered out from, Porky Perjuring Pig. I'm done with you wicked lying fools, but most of all the Accusing Perverter of Truth, Publiar. Never forget that "weasels" kill snakes, but you're more of a slimy worm.

      I added none of my own interpretation to the Biblical quotes that I presented on 9/15 @ 12:01am, so they had nothing to do with my "take on Biblical Truth". The Bible quotes described the wickedness of your false catholic cult perfectly, just as the quotes 9/10 @ 11:12pm described the DECEITFUL LIARS that belong to your cult, you being one of the most prolific examples. Must make you one proud hypocrite.

      I happen to notice that when you've got nothing, which is the majority of your ignorance, you revert back to mentioning the catholic lies and false accusations against me or stupidly mocking God, His Word or His Chosen (i.e. speshully-divinely authorized). You're nothing but a lying coward, pursuing the works of your father, Satan, thinking you can lie and slander so much that your accusations become the truth. Nothing but a worthless creep. Any catholic that believes your garbage needs their head examined.  servant of the Lord

  12. Jim Robertson says:

    End of story.

  13. Publion says:

    On the 15th at 757PM, ‘Dan’ again merely waves it all away as “lies” (the variant this time around: “compulsive lying and slandering”). And he riffs on for the rest of that paragraph, hitting some of his now-familiar talking points: God’ll-getcha, “Perjuring” (clearly he does not comprehend the denotation of that term), assorted name-calling, and – once again – the pearl-clutching taking of his leave (“I’m done with you wicked lying fools” … and so on).

    • Dan says:

      STUPIDITY from "Porky Purjuring Pig" - Of course I know the term refers to lying in court. I chose a word fitting to work with your love of lying and Cartoon Time. If you're willing to habitually lie like you do in this forum, do you believe you would be any different than the other catholic liars (priests, nuns, cops), who purjured themselves in court in order to put me through my " legal misadventures", as you sarcastically like to refer.

  14. Publion says:

    Continuing with my comment on ‘Dan’s of the 15th at 757PM:

    Then a nicely obvious gambit: the smarmy (and deceptive) bleat that he hath “added none of [his] own interpretations” … at least to “the Biblical quotes presented on 9/15 at 1201am”.

    First of all: after all this time it is impossible not to presume that any negative pericopes he quotes are to be taken as the Biblical writers’ ‘prophetic’ denunciation of the Church, uniquely and specifically. That’s the gravamen of his “take” on Scripture.

    Second: in the second sentence of the second paragraph specifically makes that connection when he claims that “the Biblical quotes” that he put up “described the wickedness of your false catholic cult perfectly”, and so on.

    The quoted pericopes actually describe a list of frailties and failures which are applicable to any organization comprised of humans, because the list of frailties and failures arise from human nature itself and have been part of humanity’s burden since the Fall of Adam and Eve in the Garden.

    Thus if the pericopes ‘Dan’ quoted describe something “perfectly”, it is the weakness of human nature that is thus so “perfectly” described. (And thus, but of course, apply to ‘Dan’ if for no other reason than he shares the frailty constituting “the crooked timber of humanity”.)

    • Dan says:

      IGNORANCE from publiar – Yes, these sins of sexual immorality, impurity, greed and idolatry are the sins of a fallen "human nature". Problem is that they would not be as prevalant as they are among catholic hierarchy, if it truly was God's One True Holy Church. I must say that your cult puts on one fine display of the "crooked timber of humanity", with all it's repetitive pedophilia, perversions, greed, idolatry, cowardice lying and hypocrisy. And this is why these quotes describe your church "perfectly", for it is a false pagan cult and far from anything Godly, so quit trying to defend it's nastiness and filth, with all your lies and excuses.  servant of God

  15. Publion says:

    Continuing with my comment on ‘Dan’s of the 15th at 757PM:

    Ditto the pericopes in regard to “the deceitful liars” (scream-caps omitted). And here again one might well wonder how those pericopes might not as easily apply to ‘Dan’.

    He then tries another run of his ever-necessary I’m Not/You Are bit: when I’ve “got nothing” I refer back to – had you been waitttingggg forrrr itttttt? – “mentioning the catholic lies and false accusations” and so forth.

    The references to ‘Dan’s preferred narrative about his extensive legal and psychiatric misadventures goes directly to his credibility and his reliability and his capacity to recognize actuality, especially his own. Given his constant insistence that his negative pericopes have only one intended focus (i.e. the Church), then we must take into consideration ‘Dan’s own reliability and accuracy and veracity.

    ‘Dan’ very much doesn’t want anyone hooking his claims to his reliability. Because to do that would expose the utterly essential scam at the core of his entire shtick: that ‘Dan’s stuff and God’s Word are for all practical purposes one and the same, such that you can’t question ‘Dan’ without – had you been waitttinggggg forrrr itttttttttttttt? – “stupidly mocking God” and so on.

    • Dan says:

      More stupidity from the insistent liar – NO, you are one of "THE DECEITFUL LIARS" (scream-caps included), and it would not "easily apply to 'Dan'. Why is that? Well for the reason that I'm not a LIAR, which seems to be the modus operandi of your cult. Lie, deny, deceive, and do whatever necessary to protect the moral integrity of the corrupt, collapsing, immoral pagan catholic cult.

  16. Publion says:

    Continuing with my comment on ‘Dan’s of the 15th at 757PM:

    Thus ‘Dan’ doesn’t “happen to notice” anything; he absolutely has to deceptively derail by any means necessary anything that would expose the gap between ‘Dan’-stuff and God-stuff.

    And the whole thing then riffs on to its conclusion, epithets and so forth.

    “Lying coward”? Was it I who – as an adult – verbally accosted school-children behind a fence in a school-yard with rantings? And then created a ridiculous conspiracy narrative (i.e. that ‘Dan’ just happened to be up to his ears in ‘lying Catholics’ and so forth) to excuse his own queasy and repellent words and actions?

    Who, actually, is – as ‘Dan’ so helpfully provides the thought – a “worthless creep”? And who most surely “needs their head examined”?

    • Dan says:

      To conclude, the lying coward asks, " 'Lying coward'? Was it I…?" Yes it is You. And as proof he repeats, as he has for the last 2 years, the false accusations that I "verbally accosted school-children behind a fence in a school-yard with rantings." Nothing could be further from the truth, and you know it. All you have ever proven is that you're one fine example of a compulsive liar, from a cult with lying leaders having no problem condemning others in order to present their false church as being the epitome of honesty and moral values. Lying hypocrites destined for Hell's Fire, anti-Christian in every sense of the word and Word.   servant of the Almighty

    • Dan says:

      And yes, you are a "worthless" lying "creep".

Leave a Reply to KenW Cancel reply

*