Tuesday, July 28, 2009

The Mad Priest Coverup. Part Three

Now, to the heart of the matter. I want to be fair. I am almost sure that the original negative comments were made by "Wormwood Doxy" and "Tracie the Red" There is a small, very small, chance, that another was involved, but the important point is the comments came from the "community."

Let me correct some possible misconceptions.

One. One of the above stated that my son had come to the MP blog without checking it out. This is totally false. My son, at my suggestion, had checked out the blog. Before he ask his question he requested several times if this blog might give imput on his question. He was encouraged to do so. This is clearly shown in the MP archives.

Two. My son ask a question for a just turned 20 friend of his. This was not my son's intended question. Now much ridicule has been made by "doxy" and "the red" that rather than use the word masturbation the term "touching yourself" was used. I have noted several times on my blog that my son had been sujected to severe physical abuse when young for masturbating. Indeed causing later medical problems. His young friend was raised a Baptist and was living with a Catholic family. Although the Catholic family made it clear they did no consider masturbation anything bad, the young friend of my son wanted to know what other religions might think. I then encouraged them to go to MP's blog since it advertised itself as dealing with "God and sex and rock and roll."

Three. After being encouraged by a "community" member to ask his young friend's question, "wormwood doxy" and "Tracie the red" came down on my son with full force.

Four. "Wormwood" I'm certain stated something to the effect that my son had no right to ask a question on this blog, because he had not checked it out. To repeat that is totally false.

Five. I am almost certain the "Wormwood" said something to the effect that my son was like a stranger pushing, uninvited, her door open, putting his feet on a table of hers and asking for a drink, indicating how outrageous my son had been.

Six. One of the two ladies refered to my son and his friend as 'spoiled rich brats.'

Seven. One of the two ladies, or both. refered to the young men as members of "the small penis society."

I am certain of the above. But the two ladies might say what provoked them to such rhetoric. Yes, a rather ugly exchange took place. For what it is worth, there can be NO question that one of the ladies cast the first stone. In a later post "Wormwood" said they were called "bitch." Yes that may be true, AFTER the first putdowns by the "community." "Wormwood" also said my son said something about someone having sex with another while standing in the communion line. I strongly deny this was said.

These are the basic facts as I know them. If they are not correct in essence, then they should be easy to refute by MP.

So, why do members of the "community" refuse to discuss this situation. Maybe they think it is not imporant. A definite possibility. But maybe they know they have not acted in the Christian way they proclaim. A definite possibility.

I will have a couple of more post on this matter.


  1. Seeing that I stuck my nose in "IT" Jack and for what "IT" is worth, my suggestion now would be to forget all about "IT" and concentrate on Christ by visiting some good Catholic blogs who choose not to discuss such matters in the first place.

    Whatever you decide, I'll still be praying for you and the boys.


    God Bless

  2. Victor, I'm not really that bent out of shape, but I do want the "community" to be told they have acted like asses(sp?)

    I go to Catholic blogs but have a hard time getting along. Someday I'll post about my Catholicism. I go along with most, but find the Church's position on sexual matters totally absurd. But you can't have everything.

    My son is actually one of three young men my wife and I help. I used to explain why and how we help them, but it gets 'old' always telling the details. Jack