Monday, October 8, 2018

Rabbit Hole: Cupich Commends Ouellet's Attack on Vigano, Reaffirms "Communion" with Francis

Cardinal Blase Cupich, From the Archdiocese of Chicago Website

In a "statement" posted today on the Archdiocese of Chicago website, Chicago's Cardinal Blase Cupich sided with Prefect for the Congregation of Bishops Cardinal Marc Ouellet who yesterday released a strongly worded letter, criticizing Vatican whistleblower Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò and defending Pope Francis.

Viganò had called on Pope Francis to resign for, among other things, covering up the sexual crimes of Cardinal Theodore McCarrick and rehabilitating him after McCarrick had been quietly sanctioned by Pope Benedict.

Viganò released his 11-page letter on August 25 and then went into hiding.

Cardinal Cupich initially responded to the controversy surrounding Viganò's letter by arguing that looking into the substance of the claims would be to go down a "rabbit hole." In a widely criticized television interviewhe said that the pope has “got to get on with other things, of talking about the environment and protecting migrants and carrying on the work of the Church.”  

Francis has refused to directly address this charge and charges of his involvement in other sex-abuse coverups following in its wake but has made thinly-veiled attacks on Viganò and other critics, going so far as to equate him or them with "Satan."

In turn, Ouellet yesterday called Viganò's accusation "monstrous and unsubstantiated" and part of a "political plot."

Many have commented that Ouellet did not really deny and in fact arguably confirmed the basic substance of Viganò's main charge.

In his original letter Viganò had also claimed that Cupich's elevation to Archbishop of Chicago was recommended by Theodore McCarrick. Others have confirmed that it was supported by Pope Francis over the alternative choices and objections of other bishops, including Cupich's predecessor Cardinal Francis George.

Here is Cardinal Cupich's statement:
Statement of Cardinal Blase J. Cupich, Archbishop of Chicago, on the Open Letter of Cardinal Marc Ouellet, October 8, 2018

In a statement released by the Vatican Press Office on Saturday, October 6, Pope Francis pledged a thorough study of the documentation present in the Archives of the Holy See regarding the former Cardinal, now Archbishop Theodore McCarrick. The Holy Father took the occasion to renew his commitment to address the scourge of abuse within the Church, and to do everything possible to prevent it. In the Vatican declaration, the pope also stated that the Church will not tolerate any cover-ups or accept a different standard for bishops who abuse or cover up, calling this behavior “a form of clericalism that is no longer acceptable.” This clear statement does not come as a surprise to me, for I am convinced that Pope Francis has no hesitation in following a path of accountability. As he remarked during his visit to the United States in 2015: “We will follow the path of truth wherever it may lead.”
The first installment of fulfilling this renewed pledge of openness came the very next day by Cardinal Marc Ouellet, who has served as the Prefect of the Congregation for Bishops since his appointment by Pope Benedict XVI in 2010. In an authoritative and compelling manner, he provided a detailed response to the central charges against Pope Francis regarding the case of Archbishop McCarrick. Cardinal Ouellet made clear that the Holy Father has given him the full freedom to speak in a way that provides information based on his personal experience and the documents of the Congregation for Bishops.
In his capacity as Prefect, Cardinal Ouellet also called to account those attacking or countenancing attacks on the Pope and the Church. In that spirit, I join my voice to those of the Prefect and of the President of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops in urging “all in the Church particularly the bishops to reaffirm our communion with Pope Francis who is the visible guarantor of the communion of the Catholic Church.”

Friday, October 5, 2018

Jeepers, Creepers, Where'd You Get That Stang?


The man they call Pope Francis was roundly mocked for the bizarre ferula he wielded for the opening of the Synod on Youth on Wednesday.

He was Gandalf. It was a slingshot, etc.

Some wag even modified a photograph to use the fork as a "V" for Vigano.

As far as I know, Catholic commentator Ann Barnhardt was the first to identify it as a stang or Wiccan forked staff.

The stang as such seems to have been invented by mid-20th English occultist Robert Cochrane. Cochrane led the life of an English eccentric, though it would end tragically. He founded two covens (the first broke up due to factional infighting), and maintained an ongoing feud with a rival pagan sect leader. Later he got into a tiff with his family over a claim that he came from a long line of magicians. His Wikipedia entry includes this priceless line:
His nephew, Martin Lloyd, has refuted that the family were ever Witches, insisting that they were Methodists.
Cochrane cheated on his witch-wife, who then threatened to hex him. A few months later he committed suicide by ingesting belladonna on Midsummer Eve. He was thirty-five.

But I digress. 

Sarah Anne Lawless, a contemporary self-proclaimed witch, describes the construction of a stang as follows:
Many make a stang according to Cochrane’s instructions – a tall forked piece of Ash wood with an iron nail in the base, two arrows crossed at near the top and a wreath circling them. This is tradition specific, a stang can be made from any type of wood and instead of being naturally forked one could top a staff with a goat or deer skull or bind antlers or bull horns to the top with rawhide to create the fork. A stang can be any height – from three feet to six feet. I use a three-foot three-pronged Hawthorn staff myself. 
To give it an added function, some witches put a candle between the tines or screw a hook into the wood to hang a lantern from. This is practical as well as representing the light of cunning and wisdom.
From Green Witchcraft III: The Manual, Volume 3

The Bergoglio stang incorporates the requisite iron nail as a crosspiece at the top. Perhaps it could be used to hang a lantern from, representing the light of cunning and wisdom.

Where did he get that stang?

Francis claims that it was a gift from "youth" to be used at the Synod on the same.

Miss Barnhardt posted a picture apparently verifying this.



But if you look carefully, there's another interesting detail. The woman on the left (who according to reports is a not so young thirty years of age) is wearing a red string bracelet, which Barnhardt describes "as a very common talisman in witchcraft/Wicca and Kabbalah, which is basically a hybrid of Talmudic Judaism and witchcraft."

Apparently, it's worn by all the youths.


Is Bergoglio a Satanist? I don't know. I mean it's not like he performs religious rituals wielding a stang or anything.

But to be serious, while in the face of this wicked circus, it's often healthy to laugh, it would be foolish to laugh this off. If the Catholic faith is true, and thus Satan and Satanism exists, if heresy and heretical prelates are on the move, and if Satan is ultimately behind this, as the Catholic Church teaches, why wouldn't we now be seeing such a link?

What do you think heretical antipopes do?

Or, more to the point, what does Satan do with them? 

Read the two recent pieces by Ann Barnhardt here and here.

I think she gets it precisely right:
As I have said and written before, one of satan’s most clever moves has been to foment, encourage and push mentally ill and demonically oppressed people to LOUDLY broadcast insane, ridiculous, totally false “conspiracy theories”. We all know the types and categories. Mind control beams, “chem trails”, shape shifting lizards, underground civilizations, flat earthers, the list goes on and on and on. 
What this has done is make it almost impossible to point out, discuss, and warn about ACTUAL sinister goings-on and actual, honest-to-goodness conspiracies that are very real . . . 
I am morally certain that Antipope Bergoglio’s carrying of a Stang with the iron nail so prominently positioned, into the opening of a farce synod whose entire agenda is the ratification of sodomy, is a clear case of manifestation of satanism. 
And if that makes me a conspiracy theorist, so be it. Some conspiracies are real.

Tuesday, October 2, 2018

FULL INTERVIEW: Is Cupich Enforcer Bp. Mark Bartosic Gay? We Asked Him.

Chicago Auxiliary Bishop Mark Bartosic

If you would like to skip the relatively long and arguably tedious background and commentary, scroll down close to the bottom for the text, and all the way to the bottom for the video of the interview.

Last Sunday, September 23rd, after the 8:00 AM Mass at Resurrection Parish, I interviewed new Chicago Auxiliary Bishop Mark Bartosic. Bartosic had been presiding in the absence of Pastor Paul Kalchik who had left the previous day, allegedly under threat of arrest. Fr. Kalchik is now in self-described hiding.

At the beginning of Mass, Bp. Bartosic read a short statement about Kalchik's departure to the relatively small number of parishioners. I assume many if not most of them were already aware of what had happened. The Mass went on as normal, and the parishioners were outwardly quiet and polite.

Bp. Bartosic professed sympathy for, and even friendship with, Fr. Kalchik - "we all want what's best for him", etc. - and even stated that he and Fr. Kalchik had been part of the same book club.

After Mass, outside the main doorway, Bp. Bartosic greeted parishioners and answered some questions. There seemed to be only three media people there - a young reporter from one of the local TV stations, an unidentified man with a recording device and myself. We spoke with Bp. Bartosic and the parishioners relatively informally.

The unidentified man with the recorder asked Bp. Bartosic what books he had read in that book club with Fr. Kalchik. As I recall, Bp. Bartosic claimed not to remember or sort of evaded the question.

One of the most interesting bits of news from a parishioner (which the TV reporter seemed very interested in) was that someone had been placing or tossing little rainbow flags against the wall of the church - items that had been meticulously gathered up and removed by a parishioner or maintenance person.

Someone had also planted small rainbow flags across the street on the sidewalk grass. Catty-corner from the church there was a house that had a full-size rainbow flag hanging from its second story porch.


******

A word on the interview, namely, that part of it where I asked Bp. Bartosic the question -

"Are you a homosexual?"

One might ask, isn't it, well, a bit impolite, just a tad bit, to walk up to a bishop, point a videocamera in his face and ask him whether or not he's gay?

I'll let the reader decide that. But I will say this: in Chicago it's usually redundant.

The Chicago archdiocese is gay.

It's very gay.

It's gayer than a rainbow flag dipped in Chanel Antaeus.

Every Chicago Catholic knows this.

Admittedly, this knowledge is often personal or anecdotal.

So one goes church shopping (a dubious practice, but one I engaged in while in the transitional stage before converting to the Faith), and one discovers in sequence that each pastor is:

Gay.

Gay.

Probably gay.

Straight (perhaps) but acts gay.

Gay.

Straight (what happened?)

Gay.

Flaming.

Admittedly, many parishioners seem perfectly fine with it. He's our sweet Fr. Frump and we love him. Isn't he darling?

And of course we all have our stories: One bumps into one's pastor at a gay bar (no, that's not my story - I just heard about it). Or one's heterosexual pastor is ostracized and denied promotion. Or (this is my story), one's heterosexual catechism instructor tells one that in his first attempt to go through seminary he was hit on repeatedly and then, after he reported it, was labeled a "homophobe" and given mandatory counseling - where he was then hit on by his male psychiatrist!

Then there's the one about the middle-aged pastor who was found dead in his mirror-lined rectory bedroom, naked and hooked up to a sex machine. I think you've heard that one before.

Isn't he darling?

In 2005, incoming Pope Benedict tried to do something about the situation in Chicago and other dioceses. The Congregation for Catholic Education issued an Instruction that included this stipulation:
In the light of such teaching, this Dicastery, in accord with the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, believes it necessary to state clearly that the Church, while profoundly respecting the persons in question, cannot admit to the seminary or to holy orders those who practise homosexuality, present deep-seated homosexual tendencies or support the so-called "gay culture".
Such persons, in fact, find themselves in a situation that gravely hinders them from relating correctly to men and women. One must in no way overlook the negative consequences that can derive from the ordination of persons with deep-seated homosexual tendencies.
It should be pointed out that the Instruction didn't really say anything new but merely reiterated (as it itself references at a number of points in the text) the longstanding position of the Catholic Church.

But as might be expected, just as the longstanding position of the Church had not been taken seriously for many years, the Instruction itself was in practice ignored, at least at suburban Chicago's Mundelein and other similar seminaries. The non-gay seminaries did perhaps attempt to apply it, though of course it wasn't really intended for them - they had been following it anyway.

Interestingly, Pope Francis himself reportedly re-endorsed the Instruction, though this, too, had little practical effect.

There are a few things that shouldn't need to be said but I'll say them.


I know there have been and continue to be some good priests, religious and candidates to the same who are homosexuals, at least as they might define themselves. I am certain of this.

Nevertheless, the "homosexual network" within the Chicago archdiocese has been a plague. This is not because all homosexual clerics are sex-abusers or bad priests, but partly because the mix of loyalty and fear sustained by the network has a tendency to compromise all. That probably 50% plus of seminarians, priests and bishops in Chicago are homosexuals while at the same time the Church officially claims they should not be there (if their condition is deep-seated) and that homosexual attraction is a "disorder" is a frankly untenable position.

Among other things, it pretty much puts at least half of all Chicago priests in silent conflict with the teachings of the current Catholic Church, even the official teachings of the current "FrancisChurch", at least the official teachings.

In fairness, this is why Fr. James Martin and other homosexual and homosexual-friendly prelates want to change those teachings.

Of course a large proportion of Chicago's homosexual priests are sexually active. One of them was sexually active in a car not too long ago.

And homosexuals make up the vast majority of sex-abusing priests as well as a good share of those guilty of covering up for abuse. As for those homosexual priests not in these categories, again, unfortunately the dynamic of the network is such that it in some way compromises all. Are you going to enthusiastically expose the gay sex-abuser who happened to be in your seminary class, the same one who knows your little "secret"?

Bp. Bartosic didn't.

As I reported last week, the fact that the three new auxiliary bishops for Chicago, including Bp. Bartosic, all graduated from the same "Pink Palace" Mundelein Seminary class of 1994 - a time when active homosexual behavior among students was public and pervasive and many good heterosexual candidates were in one way or another driven out of seminary - is extremely troubling. Indeed, Fr. Kalchik himself proposed that their ordinations be put on hold - a claim that was no doubt one factor in Cardinal Cupich's decision to remove him.

Fr. Kalchik wrote in a letter:
Another recent development that needs mention: The three priests slated to be elevated to the rank of bishop this coming month are all from the very same ordination class as former Fr. Daniel McCormack, Chicago's very worst, most notorious gay predator priest. I met Fr. McCormack once in 1995 right after he was ordained, and that very day I reported to seminary officials how off Fr. McCormack was!
At this point in time, it is all a matter of public record, Fr. McCormack was convicted and sent to jail. My question today is how could these three men live with a man like McCormack for four years, day in and day out, and not know or at least be suspicious of his character? Are they not already compromised if they knew or suspected what he was and did not say a thing? To say the least, I have serious reservations about these three classmates of McCormack all being raised to the episcopacy here in Chicago.
Now, just a few days later, one of those classmates permanently kicked Fr. Kalchik out of his parish.

In Chicago, when you bring a letter, they bring a gun.

On the most charitable interpretation, Bp. Bartosic is a nice gay man who loves God and His Church (albeit a God and a Church whose character and commands he may somewhat misunderstand), loves serving his flock (if one interprets "serving" partly as political activism concerning immigration and racism, etc.) and has kept his clerical vows of celibacy.

But this (by assumption) nice gay man has now, willingly or not, found himself in the position of being an enforcer for the Chicago priestly gay mafia.

Or, perhaps, given what happened to Fr. Kalchik, "gay gestapo" is a better term.

I have great sympathy for Fr. Kalchik. I have little for Bp. Bartosic.

And I think many Chicago Catholics are tired of being polite.



******

Here is the interview.

I was one of two or three "media" people asking Bp. Bartosic questions. At first I somewhat continued with the topic at hand, the circumstances of the departure of Fr. Kalchik. This part of the conversation was recorded only in audio:
Mahound's Paradise: You were here yesterday when he left (Fr. Kalchik). Can you tell us about the circumstances of his leaving?
Bishop Bartosic: Uh, he left voluntarily. Uh, I will not...
MP: Did you threaten to call the police if he didn't leave?
B: No.
MP: You didn't?
B: No.
MP: Was there a threat that the police would be called at all by anyone?
B: Uh, not from me.
MP: Did you arrive alone yesterday? What did you tell him when you arrived yesterday?
B: We had a conversation that was...
MP: Can you tell us a bit more about the conversation?
B: Well, we talked about, uh, uh, you know, what was, um, best for the people and best for Paul. And he decided to step away.
I should here note that while Bp. Bartosic's statements pertaining to the alleged threat to call the police seem to be in contradiction to Fr. Kalchik's earlier account, Church Militant later tweeted that the explicit threat was made by two other clerics. Thus, Bp. Bartosic's answer - "Not from me" - may have been technically true.

After a few more questions from another person, I identified myself:
MP: Oakes Spalding from Mahound's Paradise. I'm going to ask you for the record, are you a homosexual?
(Long silence)
B: Who are you?
MP: Oakes Spalding from Mahound's Paradise...
B: From what?
MP: It's a Catholic blog. I think the Cardinal is probably aware of it. [He is, but that was more me being annoying.] Can you answer the question, are you a homosexual?
(Long silence)
B: I can't believe you would ask that.
MP: Well, according to the current rule of Pope Francis. If someone has deep-seated homosexual tendencies, they're not admitted to the priesthood. Now you won't say whether you're a homosexual or not?
(Silence)
MP: Can you just answer the question?
B: I won't answer the question.
MP: Because?
(Silence. At this point I turned on the video recorder.)
MP: Can you answer the question as to whether or not you are a homosexual?
(Silence)
MP: Can you answer why you won't answer the question?
B: Uh... (silence)
MP: Do you think that priests with deep-seated homosexual tendencies, or (rather) seminarians, should be admitted to the priesthood?
B: I'm not going to engage this conversation that you're having with me.
MP: So even though that's the rule of the current Catholic Church, supported by Pope Francis, you're not going to go on the record supporting that?
B: Yeah, I'm, uh, I'm uh . . . I'm not going to talk to you about this.
MP: Are you a supporter of the "rainbow flag"?
B: I'm not going to go here with you. Sorry.
MP: Do you have anything else you want to say to the readers of Mahound's Paradise?
B: No.
MP: Thank you.

Wednesday, September 26, 2018

Brit Designer of Only Underwater Sculpture to Muslim "Migrants" Has Second Installation Destroyed by Muslim Natives

The late Coralarium at The Fairmont, Maldives

Jason deCaires Taylor is a British "eco-artist" who is famous for creating underwater sculptures, most recently on a large scale - installations that have been dubbed "underwater museums" or "sculpture parks."

Here is an excerpt from the Biography on his website:
A prolific sculptor, he became the first of a new generation of artists to shift the concepts of the Land art movement into the realm of the marine environment. He gained international notoriety in 2006 with the creation of the world’s first underwater sculpture park, situated off the west coast of Grenada in the West Indies. Now listed as one of the Top 25 Wonders of the World by National Geographic the park was instrumental in the government declaring the site a National Marine Protected Area. This was followed in 2009 when he co-founded MUSA (Museo Subacuático de Arte), a vast collection of over 500 of his sculptural works, installed between Cancun and Isla Mujeres in Mexico. 
Other major projects include Museo Atlantico (2016), a collection over 300 submerged sculptures and architectural forms in Lanzarote, Spain, the first of its kind in European waters. The Rising Tide (2016 Thames London) and Ocean Atlas a monumental 60-ton single sculpture located in the Bahamas. 
The works are constructed using pH neutral materials to instigate natural growth and the subsequent changes intended to explore the aesthetics of decay, rebirth and metamorphosis. His pioneering public art projects are not only examples of successful marine conservation, but works of art that seek to encourage environmental awareness, instigate social change and lead us to appreciate the breathtaking natural beauty of the underwater world.




As part of the installation in Lanzarote, Spain, he designed “The Raft of Lampedusa,” which, according to PBS News Hour,
shows a group of people huddled in a raft in an homage to French Romantic painter Théodore Géricault’s painting “The Raft of the Medusa.” The piece references Europe’s current refugee crisis, according to a statement on the project.
“The work is not intended as a tribute or memorial to the many lives lost but as a stark reminder of the collective responsibility of our now global community,” Taylor wrote
As far as I know, of the many artistic tributes to "migrants," this is the only one built underwater - 50 feet underwater, to be exact.



One of the ironies of Taylor's work is that for all of his sympathy for marginalized global communities, etc., his sculptures are generally only accessible to wealthy Western tourists who can afford expensive scuba gear or who have the means to stay in pricey beach resorts.

Obviously, I disagree with much of the artist's politics as well as the New Age silliness of his philosophy. 

But all of that said, I also happen to think many of his works are quite interesting.

Or, rather, some of them are dumb, some are ugly, some are silly, a few are beautiful, but many are just, well, fun. 

I highly recommend looking at his website and checking out the photographs of his diverse creations. As I understand it, most of the shots were taken by Taylor himself who is also a skilled underwater photographer. 

One of his most recent works was unveiled in July. It is (or was) the partially submerged box-shaped Coralarium at the Fairmont Hotel Sirru Fen Fushi on the Maldives Islands.

Guests at the resort could swim to the installation and explore it's exposed or underwater parts, the proportion varying according to the tides. Human figures in various poses populated the interior and roof.









Here is one enthusiastic recent review on Trip Advisor:



And here is part of the blurb:


Today is Wednesday, 5:00 PM, Maldives Time. Why is it "Closed Now"?

It turns out that the Coralarium fell afoul of Muslim religious opinion:

Last week, Maldives police boated across to the installation and destroyed it with pickaxes and sledgehammers.

Their little escapade was chronicled by the British tabloid The Sun:





Yes, they literally dragged one statue off by her hair.

Why did they destroy it? There had been no underwater statue of Muhammed, nor, as far as I can tell, were there any completely naked women, etc. Rather, it appears that the work violated the general Muslim rule against artistic depictions of people. The various three-dimensional figures were "idols," according to outgoing Maldives president Abdulla Yameen.

I do not know whether the cage-like superstructure itself was or will be spared. But I hope they leave the stripped down version - with its fun and joy removed - as a monument.

To Islam.

Saturday, September 22, 2018

BREAKING: Fr. Paul Kalchik Leaves For Undisclosed Location After Chicago Archdiocese Threatens Forcible Removal by Police

Fr. Paul Kalchik

Just hours ago, new Chicago Auxiliary Bishop Mark Bartosic arrived unannounced at Resurrection Parish on Chicago's Northwest side and told Pastor Paul Kalchik that he had just minutes to get his belongings together and vacate the premises or the police would be called to arrest him for trespassing.

Fr. Kalchik was about to perform a wedding.

Soon after, Fr. Kalchik left for an undisclosed location, accompanied by his brother who had been visiting the parish.

Bp. Bartosic performed the wedding instead, hastily slipping out the door of the church only seconds after concluding the ceremony.

Fr. Kalchik had been ordered by Cardinal Cupich and the archdiocese to report for psychiatric counseling and perhaps confinement yesterday after controversy broke concerning the exorcism and burning of a "gay rainbow flag" on parish grounds last week.

Fr. Kalchik had also called for Catholics to "boycott" masses celebrated by Cardinal Cupich due to Cupich's alleged involvement in the current clerical sex abuse scandal. 

The flag - a rainbow with a superimposed cross - had been unveiled above the altar by a previous pastor Fr. Daniel Montalbano in 1991 to signal that the parish would be "gay friendly." Later taken down, it was rediscovered only recently by Fr. Kalchik.

Fr. Montalbano, a confidante of Cardinal Bernardin passed away in 1997 at the age of 50.

Fr. Montalbano was found dead in a rectory room behind and above the altar, literally hooked up to a masturbation device.

Today, a small group of parishioners not involved in the wedding but who had heard of the sudden appearance of Bp. Bartosic, stood stunned outside the Church. The group also included two employees who were hastily told by the bishop to report to work as normal on Monday.

One of the parishioners, a Chicago policeman, told me of some of the bizarre events of the last week, including numerous threats of death and rape against Fr. Kalchik, at least two probable attempted break-ins or acts of vandalism, one of which included breaking keys into all the locks in the doors of the church office. And then there was the visit by two Archdiocese representatives, yesterday, ordering Fr. Kalchik to vacate his parish and commit himself into psychiatric confinement.

One of these was Fr. Dennis Lyle, the same prelate who had visited St. John Cantius a few months ago to inform parishioners that their pastor, Fr. Phillips, had been relieved of his position there.

Fr. Kalchik had written of his own psychological trauma after being molested as a boy and as a young adult by two men - one of them a priest - in separate incidents. It is assumed that he will not comply with the order of the archdiocese. He is not now "hospitalized" as some reports have suggested.

The parishioners outside told me that Fr. Kalchik, who has been at Resurrection Parish for eleven years, has the full support of his parish.

Many of them will no doubt only discover what happened, tomorrow, when coming to Mass assuming it will be celebrated by Fr. Paul, will instead encounter Bp. Bartosic.      

Friday, September 21, 2018

Chicago Archdiocese: We Knew Fr. McGrath was Living Next to a School but We Didn't Know He Was an Accused Anal-Rapist Pedophile (Even Though It Was Reported in All the Chicago Papers)

Fr. Richard McGrath (pictures displayed on a board at the April 12th press conference given by Bob Krankvich and his lawyers)

According to my sources, Cardinal Cupich's office follows Mahound's Paradise assiduously.

They don't apparently read the Chicago Sun-Times as carefully, at least when it comes to its reporting on Illinois clerical sex-abuse cases.

In April of this year, Bob Krankvich, a man now in his 30's gave a press conference alleging that he had been groomed, molested and raped over a period of many months in 1995-96 by Fr. Richard McGrath the former principal of Providence Catholic High School in New Lenox, Illinois.

Krankvich was 13-15 at the time.

Fr. McGrath retired and left the school at the end of 2017 amidst a cloud of suspicion in a separate case when a female student reported seeing gay child porn on his cell phone.

The press conference and subsequent developments over the next few months were covered by the Sun-Times and the rest of Chicago media. Unsurprisingly, the New Lenox Patch also ran a number of stories on the case.

It was one of the more lurid clerical sex-abuse stories in Illinois for 2018. Here were some of the headlines:
Providence HS sued as prosecutors weigh charges against former principal (Chicago Sun-Times, April 12)
Ex-Providence Catholic president under investigation for alleged sexual abuse of student, police say (Chicago Tribune, April 12)
Former Providence Catholic High School student sues over sex abuse allegations (ABC7 Chicago, April 12)
Former Catholic school head sued for abusing student (Fox 32 Chicago, April 12)
New Lenox priest under criminal investigation for allegations of sexually abusing student (WGN9 Chicago, April 12)
Fr. McGrath Committed Anal Rape Of Providence Teen: Lawyer (New Lennox Patch, April 12)
Acting president of Providence Catholic officially taking over after predecessor retired amid investigation (Chicago Tribune, April 20)
A few months earlier, the Chicago Tribune had reported on the cell phone porn allegations, which had "stalled" (and then ended) when Fr. McGrath simply refused to hand over his cell phone to police.
Police close investigation into former Providence Catholic president facing criminal charges (Chicago Tribune, February 17, 2018)
Meanwhile, after the press-conference, the Patch continued to report:
Providence's Fr. McGrath Resurfaces In Chicago (New Lennox Patch, July 25)
New Lenox is in the diocese of Joliet, and Fr. McGrath is a member of The Midwest Augustinians. But he had now apparently "resurfaced" in the St. John Stone Friary in Hyde Park on Chicago's Southside, only yards away from both a preschool and a Catholic grade school.

This morning, the Chicago Sun-Times picked up on the story, adding a new piece of information:
Archdiocese didn’t tell schools priest in sex abuse probe was their new neighbor (Chicago Sun-Times, September 21)
Why didn't the archdiocese inform the schools? The answer was purportedly given by Chicago archdiocese spokesperson Paula Waters in an extraordinary statement, according to the Sun-Times. Waters claimed that while the archdiocese knew the former longtime Catholic high school principal was now living in Hyde Park it did not notify the schools because "it wasn’t aware McGrath is under investigation over sexual abuse allegations."

Is this answer credible?

I will withhold comment on that.

But maybe no one in Cupich's office ever saw any of those stories or forgot about them or whatever. They're busy people.

What were they doing on April 12?

I don't know, precisely.

But I do know this. April 12 was the second and final day of testimony in the Review Board investigation of Fr. Frank Phillips of St. John Cantius, the traditionalist priest charged with "improper conduct involving adult males." Fr. Phillips would later be exonerated, according to all credible reports, though the archdiocese would later strip him of his positions and faculties anyway and collaborate in effectively exiling him to St. Louis without any further explanation.

Archdiocese spokesperson Waters was caught making a number of false or questionable statements about that.

Everyone involved knows that the Cardinal and his office were a bit obsessive about the Fr. Phillips case. So maybe the story of a New Lenox High School Principal priest accused of the anal rape of a minor was temporarily a bit off their radar.

We all have our priorities.