After a lengthy investigation, the authorities have charged Gray with first-degree larceny, which could carry a 20-year sentence if he's eventually convicted. Apparently for the past seven years Gray has been spending church money to fund trips to New York and pay for sessions with male escorts, and he also racked up $200,000 in restaurant bills including a large tab at Tavern on the Green.
But while it's a terrible thing he's been bilking money from his congregation (and also lied and told his congregation that he had cancer), at least there's one priest behind bars who isn't in trouble for touching his parishioners.
According to reports Gray was a well-respected Catholic priest (oxymoron?) and former leader of several city parishes.
At least he's not a pedophile. Stealing all that money (from the poor?) that's mainstream. Just goes to show you religious people can behave as badly as anyone. Why does the gay lifestyle have to be that expensive?
ReplyDeleteAsk Elliot Spitzer what he thinks. He spent even more money on female prostitutes, expensive restaurants, gifts and hotels and ruined his career doing it. Who knows what drives people to do these things. But it is clear it is not about gay or straight but human nature.
ReplyDeleteIt was a rhetorical question. I don't think the priest spent 1.3 million because he was gay. I thought the article implied the priest stole money to support his secret gay lifestyle. I agree this is not about being gay or straight. It's not about being a priest either. It's the combination of betrayal of the public trust, secret sex, and in this case stealing a lot of money.
ReplyDeleteThe question remains, why the reoccurring theme? What is it about this particular institution (the Catholic Church) that permits such a theme to continue? "There is something seriously messed up with the Catholic Church and with male Priests." I think this is a fair statement. Generalization aside, it does no good to be "pc" when there exists such a consistent and long-standing pattern. But by suggesting that the answer involves "fixing the priests," over-looks the fact that the Catholic Church is not the only infrastructure to find itself in the media time and again with scandals of sex, money and public betrayal. What do Eliot Spitzer and the the priest have in common? (My question is not rhetorical). I think its worth looking at. Anybody?
ReplyDeleteI agree with you Dale. There is something very wrong with an institution that continually has its leaders commiting crimes. If this was a business it would be closed. Start putting people in jail and stop supporting a criminal enterprise.
ReplyDeleteThe church has done a lot worse: the Inquisition, the killing of heretics, the anti-semitism that led to the holocaust, support of religious wars, etc. But what Spitzer and this priest have in common is a desire for attention and pleasure regardless of the risk. Religious faith is the problem, not the answer.
ReplyDeleteThe catholic church is the biggest closet ever created. Sadly, some people still believe the shit the church shovels and then make judgements in modern times based on pure myth! It is the oldest of cults. It is based on fear and hate.
ReplyDeleteSure some churches do good in the name of god. Why not just be part of community groups that do good for mankind just because that is the right thing to do? Why would one be so childish to need to be part of groups who play dress up in royal garb, sit in thrones and play pretend games of " eating the body of christ." It is not a metaphor. To be a true christian, the faith literally believes the eucharist turns to flesh. It is called trans-substantiation.
Both Spitzer and the priest were products of their environment. In this case, the environments are the religious and political infrastructures. Is it just me, or does anyone else get the sense that for too long, both of these institutions have lost their vision of what their purpose or role is in society: that being service? What they share in common is the propensity towards hypocrisy, secrecy and abuse of power.
ReplyDeleteI'm sure many will not agree with what I am about to say, but these institutions are only a reflection of ourselves. Do we support criminal behavior? Of course not. But we're only now, it seems, beginning to wake up to the fact that these long-standing structures have been built on a paradigm that no longer seems to fit our present experience or our present state of consciousness. I feel like we (post-modern industrialized world) have grown up, and these out-dated structures no longer fit. But it seems that too many people are still afraid to either throw away what no longer serves them, or to make an overhaul. So then, I agree, faith in religion is a problem. It always has been. Religion itself is quite neutral. So the question then is, where do we choose to place our faith. Certainly we find placing it various political parties or leaders just as disappointing. The political system may have more checks in place, but can anyone honestly say that they want to place their faith in the government? I realize I'm spreading myself a bit thin here, but my intention is not to argue a position but to see if there is anyone having similar thoughts.
Excellent points Dale. I agree and it is reflected partly in the Tea-Party movement - not the fiscal conservative aspects, but those which "want their America back." These people are afraid and feel comfort in an utopian idea of how things "use to be" so great. Change can be scary and many retreat to the things which they know best from the past, whether or not these things are to their benefit or not.
ReplyDeleteTo be clear then, are you saying that those in the TP movement represent the sense I have of a growing dissatisfaction among society with outdated paradigms and the institutions that rest on them, OR or you saying they represent a society that is fearful of progressive changes in government and are fighting to maintain older ideas?
ReplyDeleteThe only problem with this is that with government, its really hard to say whether or not what the TP movement is pushing against IS IN FACT a representation of new consciousness. I would contend that it is not. IN other words, I do think that many of the tenets of Obama's platform do include ideas of evolved consciousness, those who oppose him are in fact opposing Liberalism in part, but mostly simply doing what most American's love to do: bitch and complain while blaming every societal ill on someone, anyone, outside of themselves (this quality is however, more of a human condition than simply American).
It seems quite clear Sean Thibodeau is saying, " The TP movement represent a certain segment of society that is fearful of progressive changes in government and are fighting to maintain older ideas." They want their old America back. The one where a black man could never be president. The TP movement is diseased with racism, fear and hate.
ReplyDeleteIt is clear through much of Thibodeau's writings that he believes
Obama's platform DOES include ideas of evolved consciousness.