Tag Archives: catholic

Bombshell Secret Comes Out During Priest’s Trial for Alleged Sexual Assault

Bombshell Secret Comes Out During Priest’s Trial for Alleged Sexual Assault
Billy Hallowell

Father William Finnegan is on trial for alleged sexual assault of a teenage girl in England. But that’s not the only trouble he’s in. The Roman Catholic faith leader has a massive, earth-shattering secret — one that came out in court as officials were exploring the abuse case this week. He’s married.

According to multiple news reports, it was announced to jurors that Finnegan, 59, secretly wedded in 1999. After the woman’s previous marriage fell apart, she married the priest and the two told only those close to them about their matrimony.

Finnegan’s wife, whom his lawyer, Jeremy Hill-Baker, identified as Beverley Dawson, subsequently testified in court about how the couple are “deeply in love.”

Finnegan and Dawson, 48, apparently married when they were abroad. And, as the Daily Mail reports, after the wedding the priest would go home to his wife — a former parishioner – every Sunday, returning back to his parish, St. Clare’s Roman Catholic Church in Fagley, Bradford, England, each Tuesday.

The secretive wedding and marriage were obviously bombshell admissions, considering that Catholic priests are required to take a vow of celibacy. Thus, it was acknowledged in court that, regardless of the sex assault court outcome, his days as a priest are over.
Catholic Priest Father William Finnegan Reveals: He Was Secretly Married for 13 Years

Photo Credit: ShutterStock.com

The Daily Mail partially transcribed a portion of Hill-Baker’s words before the court — the very statements that brought the secretive marriage to light:

“You may be thinking that he is only human, that Father Bill, as a Catholic priest, has taken a vow of celibacy, condemning himself to a single and lonely life filled with perhaps an underlying sexual frustration because, let’s face it, it is not a natural state for a human to be in.

It would be understandable for you to be thinking, ‘Well, perhaps it just got the best of him with that 17-year-old.’

Mr Hill-Baker then dropped the bombshell that Finnegan married Mrs Dawson, a mother of two, in Cyprus in September 1999.

No, you didn’t mishear me. So deeply in love was he that he was prepared to ignore the Catholic Church’s ban on marriage, a secret which has been kept from almost everyone until now.”

The allegation against him in court is that he forcibly kissed and inappropriately touched a 17-year-old girl last Easter Sunday. Finnegan denies these accusations. While the girl’s family claims he went to the home two days after the alleged incident unfolded and told the young woman he had sexual feelings for her, the priest’s story is radically different.

Finnegan maintains that it was the teenager who kissed him and that he forcefully pushed her away and explained that such interaction was not appropriate. His wife testified that he called her later that day and expressed his dismay at the young girl’s actions.

A verdict in the case could come today.SOURCE

Catholics, contraceptives and John Locke

Catholics, contraceptives and John Locke

By Michael Gerson

It is extraordinary how far some will go to knit the random scraps and patches of events into the quilt of a narrative. So the Susan B. Komen controversy, resistance to the administration’s contraceptive mandate, a stag-party joke by Foster Friess and a cruel epithet from Rush Limbaugh somehow add up to a Republican war on women, sure to provoke the political backlash of an entire gender.

American women haven’t behaved as predicted or demanded. President Obama’s job approval has risen or, more recently, fallen independently of the chromosomal status of voters. Men and women, it turns out, resent dipping into their retirement savings to drive to work.

Recent opinion surveys on the contraceptive mandate, in particular, have shown women to be an independent-minded lot. In coverage of its own recent poll, the New York Times conceded that the views of women on this topic are “split.” By a plurality of 46 percent to 44 percent, women believe that employers should be able to “opt out” of providing birth-control coverage for religious reasons. But opinion is not really “split” on the question of whether “religiously affiliated employers, such as a hospital and university” should be able to opt out of offering coverage. Women support this proposition by 53 percent to 38 percent.

How is this possible? Americans overwhelmingly endorse contraception and regularly practice what they preach. Most believe — myself included — that child spacing and preventing the spread of sexually transmitted diseases are public goods. Why not impose this social consensus on all private institutions?

The answer depends on your view, not of contraception, but of pluralism and religious freedom.

One tradition of religious liberty contends that freedom of conscience is protected and advanced by the autonomy of religious groups. In this view, government should honor an institutional pluralism — the ability of people to associate, live and act in accordance with their religious beliefs, limited only by the clear requirements of public order. So Roger Williams welcomed Catholics and Quakers to the Rhode Island colony, arguing that a “Church or company of worshippers (whether true or false) .?.?. may dissent, divide, breake into Schismes and Factions, sue and implead each other at the Law, yea wholly breake up and dissolve into pieces and nothing, and yet the peace of the Citie not be in the least measure impaired or disturbed.”

There is another form of modern liberalism that defines freedom of conscience in purely personal terms. Only the individual and the state are real, at least when it comes to the law. And the state must often intervene to protect the individual from the oppression of illiberal social institutions, particularly religious ones.

This is the guiding philosophy of the American Civil Liberties Union. But as Yuval Levin, editor of National Affairs, pointed out to me, this approach has roots in the Anglo American tradition of political philosophy. John Locke’s “Letter Concerning Toleration” urges legal respect for individual conscience because “everyone is orthodox to himself.” But Locke offered no tolerance for the institution of the Catholic Church: “That Church can have no right to be tolerated by the magistrate which is constituted upon such a bottom that all those who enter into it do thereby ipso facto deliver themselves up to the protection and service of another prince.” In Locke’s view, Catholics can worship as they wish as individuals, but their institution is a danger to the liberal order.

In American history, the treatment of the Catholic Church has often been the measure of institutional religious tolerance. It is amazing how Lockean (unconsciously, one assumes) recent actions by the Obama administration have been. Catholics individuals are free to worship. Catholic institutions must be forced to reflect liberal ideals and values.

On a variety of issues, balancing individual and institutional rights isn’t easy. But the contraceptive mandate is a particularly revealing test case. One side of the controversy argues that the autonomy of religious institutions is essential to the expression of individual conscience and important to the common good. The other side believes that the moral and health choices of individuals need to be protected by government against oppressive religious groups such as the Catholic bishops. So it is not enough for contraceptives to be legal and generally available; they must be provided (directly or indirectly) by Catholic institutions to their employees.

This is the real debate on the contraceptive mandate — and the administration has not won it.

Barack Obama to America’s Catholics – Thous Shalt Have No Other G-d Before Me

Barack Obama to America’s Catholics – I Am Your God Now…

Custom Search

by Ulsterman

The nation’s considerable Catholic population is stunned at the dramatic over-reach exhibited by the Obama administration in its declaration that Catholics are to ignore religious conviction and First Amendment rights in favor of governmental authority.

For a president who so often cites his concern over the health and well being of Americans to attack an institution so vital to the care of the nation’s indigent is both troubling and from a political viewpoint – downright confusing. Either the administration is once again displaying a near all consuming inability to govern with measured competence, or it has immersed itself entirely in the waters of its own arrogant self-importance. How else do you explain their decision to mandate to American Catholics to suspend religious belief regarding contraception and sterilization and simply “follow orders”.

Even MSNBC’s notoriously left-leaning political pundit Mika Brzezinski admitted President Obama had “overstepped” his authority. Catholic leaders throughout America are now slamming the administration – and calling upon the millions of Catholics in the country to do the same. Peggy Noonan wrote in a weekend Wall Street Journal column that Obama has now initiated a battle he has no way of winning – that the administration’s seeming attack on Catholic charities was far worse then GOP rival Mitt Romney’s somewhat out-of-context statement that he was not so concerned about America’s “very poor” but rather its middle class.

Noonan is right of course, but the liberal-dominated weekend news cycle saw the Obama vs Catholics subject underplayed and the Romney commentary very much overplayed. While that may work momentarily to distract from the administration’s attack on a very powerful and influential religious segment of America, that distraction is already proving short lived. Catholics are unhappy, and at this very moment, mobilizing against the administration – particularly within the Hispanic-American community, a population that takes its devotion to the church very seriously. For Hispanics, the Catholic Church is an integral component of their daily lives, and as President Obama attacks the church, so too does he attack Hispanics.
Read more in News
« The Best Super Bowl Ad Ever
Has Obama Awakened America’s Righteous Indignation? »

As American Bishop Robert Morlino put it, the Obama administration’s edict is secondary to that of God. Bishop Morlino states the matter is one of conscience and Catholics can’t violate their consciences because “our salvation is at stake.” And while it is no secret that American Catholics have long engaged in the use of contraception despite the requirements of the Church, that choice has been theirs to make, and the source of that contraception has been acquired outside of the church itself. To have the American government now attempting to forcibly reform the Catholic Church from Washington D.C. will not set well with even the more casual Catholic practitioner.

Critics of Barack Obama have often pointed to his too often easy willingness to portray himself as not a mere politician – but rather a figure of almost divine nature. Now the president has revealed to America’s Catholics that such portrayals are perhaps more than just show. Barack Obama is indicating his administration’s will supersedes even the will of the Almighty.

Catholics and others of faith in America would do well to realize that according to President Obama – he is their God now…


Christians Have as Many Abortions as Everyone Else, Catholics Have More

Christians Have as Many Abortions as Everyone Else, Catholics Have More

Edward T. Babinski

San Francisco, Calif. — With over one million abortions being performed in the US each year, this issue has dominated the political landscape. In recent years the rhetoric has escalated, with the pro-life movement becoming a flagship for Christian morality and ethics. The prevailing Christian doctrine–that abortion is murder–has polarized the issue, firmly placing the vast majority of Christians on the pro-life side of the debate.

Incendiary comments by some of the more outspoken Christian figureheads have sought to portray abortion as an “evil” perpetrated by the non-Christian left. In response to this, The Center For Reason, a private research group, undertook a study to test the premise: “Christians have fewer abortions than non-Christians”. The results disproved the premise.

The study, available as a downloadable report, reveals that Christians have just as many abortions as non-Christians. Data analyzed for all fifty states show that the rate of abortion is the same in the most-Christian segments of the population as it is in the least-Christian. The most-Catholic segments, on the other hand, showed significantly higher abortion rates.

All data sources used in the study are publicly available, and are referenced in the report. All raw data and calculated values are tabulated in the report, to allow full verification of the results.

This research was undertaken to test the premise: “Christians have fewer abortions than non-Christians”. This topic was chosen in response to the very-public stance of certain far-right Christian groups, who assert that abortion is an evil perpetrated by the non-Christian left.

The results disproved the premise. It transpires that Christians have just as many abortions as their non-Christian counterparts. The study concludes that in the year 2000, Christians had approximately 570,000 abortions. Within the Christian segment, Catholics were found to have abortion rates significantly higher than the national average.