New pope failed to expunge child rapists.

Quick hit post #2: with 70% of Catholics saying that dealing with the child abuse scandal is the most important thing on the new pope’s plate, stories are beginning to surface that Bergoglio didn’t exactly meet the minimum standard before becoming pope.

Father Julio Cesar Grassi was a celebrity in the Archdiocese of Buenos Aires. The young, dynamic, media-savvy priest networked with wealthy Argentines to fund an array of schools, orphanages and job training programs for poor and abandoned youths, winning praise from Argentine politicians and his superior, Archbishop Jorge Mario Bergoglio.

Grassi called his foundation Felices los Niños, “Happy Children.”

Yet in the years after Grassi’s conviction, Bergoglio—now Pope Francis—has declined to meet with the victim of the priest’s crimes or the victims of other predations by clergy under his leadership. He did not offer personal apologies or financial restitution, even in cases in which the crimes were denounced by other members of the church and the offending priests were sent to jail.

Grassi, the proprietor of the creepily-named “Happy Children” foundation was reportedly close to Bergoglio, according to the Post, and “was not expelled from the priesthood after the guilty verdict.

Oh good.  He’s homophobic, committed to dogma, and unmoved by the victims of the clergy.  I’d say he’s set to continue Ratzinger’s legacy.

Tons of Catholics will bow to this man while being certain that atheists have no moral compass.  In fact, they’ll even come to this blog chastising us for our anger, as if complacence in the face of Bergoglio’s moral failures is what good people would do.

About JT Eberhard

When not defending the planet from inevitable apocalypse at the rotting hands of the undead, JT is a writer and public speaker about atheism, gay rights, and more. He spent two and a half years with the Secular Student Alliance as their first high school organizer. During that time he built the SSA’s high school program and oversaw the development of groups nationwide. JT is also the co-founder of the popular Skepticon conference and served as the events lead organizer during its first three years.

  • Katherine Lorraine, Tortue du Désert avec un Coupe-Boulon

    Oh how can you be so angry, JT?! Geeze, it’s like they always say, Athiests have no morals!

    (Just kidding of course XD)

  • Ken

    “…homophobic, committed to dogma, and unmoved by the victims of the clergy.”

    Hey! No fair. You plagiarized that from the Vatican job description for the job title of Pope.

  • John Keel

    With all the news of the retirement of the old pope and the new pope, I’ve been reminded of Leah Libresco a lot. Has there ever been any further exchange between you 2? In a post a while ago – – she did answer all of one of your preliminary questions. Have you read it and was there any communication afterward?

    • JohnM

      Actually, she doesn’t even answer the question. The question asks what is her logical proof of some sort for a moral lawgiver. Her post is a bunch of handwaving. This is the first paragraph of her response:

      No, I definitely don’t have a modus tollens, modus ponens style justification for my new position. I didn’t have one for my old position, and I doubt JT’s got one for his metaphysics. As the name suggests, metaphysics are hard to test.

      She then wrote that she “approaching the problem from both end”, looking “for things I’m really confident in or that I’m willing to presuppose “. She called these things her first principles. She only gave a few of them and none of them conflicted with an atheistic position.

      She then spent the rest of the post talking about trying to create a moral map. At no point does she attempt to explain how/why this moral mapping lead her to Catholicism.

      • Michael Busch

        JT has metaphysics?

        • previously-chrisj

          Nah; he used to, but he sold them on ebay and spent the proceeds on computer games.

  • Glodson

    Oh good. He’s homophobic, committed to dogma, and unmoved by the victims of the clergy.

    He would give up the hat before he gave up any of this.

    • M

      To be fair, it is a pretty fancy hat. I mean, hell, I could probably live for at least a year off the gold and gems in the hat alone!

      • Glodson

        Yup, and the church loves to teach the value of poverty. They are so good that they protect us form all their money!

      • Michael Busch

        _Which_ hat?

        The current hats are tame as compared to their predecessor, the papal tiara. The various versions of the papal tiara have all been sitting in museums and vaults for decades or longer (Pope Paul VI was the most recent pope to actually wear one, and his stopping led to some Traditionalist Catholics declaring him a false pope).
        The least expensive of the papal tiaras now extant has a replacement cost of about $40,000. The most expensive would probably sell for something like ten million dollars on the art market.

  • Joan Dawson

    Is there any reason why Patheos continues to allow this vitriole from the Atheist Channel? Of course, anything the Catholic Church does is trashed here. These are non-believers. They discount any God or god.

    • Nate Frein

      Has anything stated here been false?

    • Glodson

      Let’s see…. we have an organization that wants to suppress a woman’s bodily autonomy with anti-choice garabage and restricting access to contraception, that wants to force these views by buying up hospitals so that even non-believers will have to deal with this nonsense, that has a bigoted view on the LGBT community, and has a long history of protecting child rapists.

      And when the leaders have a chance to fix this, they elect a man who also failed to protect children, and may have been party to war crimes, and will continue these horrible policies.

      Yea… but it is more important to call us out when we dare criticize these “holy” groups which actively harm humanity.

    • Michael Busch

      I note a logical disconnect in your statements.

      “Of course, anything the Catholic Church does is trashed here. ”
      “These are non-believers. They discount any God or god.”

      The first does not follow from the second and it is also untrue. The Church does do some good things, and individual Catholics do many good things. But the Church also does many bad things. Those are what are called out here. And as long as what has been said here is true, it does not count as vitriol.

    • phantomreader42

      Is there any reason the catholic cult keeps raping children and lying about it?

  • Stephen M. Bauer

    This blog entry is offensive, hate-filled slander.

    • iknklast

      Slander is a lack of truth, not just something you don’t want to hear. JT links to his sources, so you can check them out. Perhaps you should do the same. Demonstrate that this is, in fact, slander and not simply calling attention to something unpleasant.

    • Glodson

      What’s the lie?

    • The evil midnight lurker what lurks at midnight

      Edited to be slightly more truthful, given Stevie’s lack of specifics:

      “This blog entry is offensive, *anger*-filled criticism.”

      There we go. That’s a better description.”

      And you should be offended.

      You should be offended as Hell (C wut I did there?) that your spiritual (assuming you’re indeed Catholic) and, I assume, moral leader is following the lead of his spineless, selfish, self-centered predecessors by shoving his head in the sand.

      Why shouldn’t people be angry that such a tremendously rich and powerful organization is more obsessed about the *APPEARANCE* of morality than its actual substance? That an organization that has had uncountable and unknowable opportunities to actually do the right damn thing so determined, so convinced, that they are RIGHT and PURE that they’d pretend these victims are not there, that these crimes did not happen, or they were exaggerated, or that they aren’t actually crimes?

      Or is JT lying? Hmm? If he is not, then WHY are you angry at HIM instead of the corrupt? Are you so goddamned frightened of the possibility that papal infallibility might be crap, that your Church is full of humans that can do stupid evil things and perpetuate stupid evil things like any other humans, instead of the Divinely Inspired and Led, that you lash out at anyone who points out the truth you fear?

      Or perhaps you honestly believe that if the Church does something, it’s good, or that good will come of it, because the Church speaks for God? That you can turn a blind eye to something that’s horrible if you’ve been promised it must be happening because someone who tells you “it’s ok because God wouldn’t let his Church not be good,” even if YOU KNOW it’s a horrible and, dare I say it, evil thing to do?

      So what is it, Mr. Bauer? Is JT a liar? Are you a coward? Or are you a hypocrite?

      Step on up, slap us down with facts. We may be angry, but we sure as shootin’ aren’t scared.

      • nakedanthropologist

        I hope you don’t mind, but I’m saving your reply to my “that’s awesome, thanks universe!” folder. You elocuted my thoughts exactly. Thank you!

      • Zinc Avenger (Sarcasm Tags 3.0 Compliant)

        In the terse but commendably concise parlance of the age in which we live, “+1″.