My Photo

Insight Scoop

Catholic World News Top Headlines (

The Curt Jester


Poor Box

Render Unto Us

Tip Jar
Blog powered by Typepad

« Saddam Hussein's Final Days | Main | Cardinal Seán P. O'Malley On Democrats »

Wednesday, November 14, 2007


Atlanta Catholic


It will be interesting to see if Bishop Brown has to travel or send any future cases to Canada for medical help.

How informative is it, that there are no local hospitals or institutions in the U.S. to help depressed people? Why didn't Bishop Brown send the victims who had been raped and molested to Canada? Didn't Bishop Brown want them to receive the best?

Bishop Brown says that he respects the law but his conscience guided him to send this tormented priest to Canada. Canada is the best place for treatment.

How come the victims were not treated to this superior clinic? Why were the victims not given the chance to heal in this Canadian facility?

I guess that Bishop Tod D. Brown's conscience was not honed in on the intense suffering of the victims. Bishop Brown's conscience only peeked clarity for a person who threw parties for molesters and attended these parties.

Bishop Tod Brown's attorney is posturing up for the upcoming "Contempt of Court Hearing!"

What is really contemptible is this load of baloney that his attorney is trying to feed us with. Some words of advice to Bishop Tod Brown are....

#1 Get a new attorney, this one is following in the same footsteps as the P.R. firm that convinced you that the Covenant with the Faithful was a good plan. How much are we paying him with our money?

#2 Show the faithful in O.C. that your conscience wants every victim of sexual abuse to receive the Canadian treatment that you felt was the only route to go for Monsignor Urell. What's good for the molester protector should be as good for the molested victim.


Your headline diluted the message that: "Bishop Tob Brown remains corrupt!"

A lawyer earns his living by ferreting out possibilities or avenues to defend or exhonerate his client. The lawyer's client approves or REJECTS the legal advice and in this case the strategy.

Bishop Brown is corrupt and remains so. That is the message and I believe it is ONE of the problems which would be cured when the pope (hopefully the incumbent) DISMISSES ALL HOMOSEXUALS from our Roman Catholic clergy.

The popes and bishops brought homosexuals into our clergy SECRETIVELY.

By their obvious and predictable actions borne of their serious mental illness these homosexual males (NOT "men") have made themselves known, while they worked to destroy our Faith, our dogmas, our families and our children, and to create a huge easily co-opted "victim class" that being the female half of the population, in order to use those blithering girls to promote "sexual rights" which work to destroy our Judeo-Christian western civilization.

The pope is our primary corrupt bishop, in his lifelong actions to exchange Truth for his lying desires-dilusions about humanity. Bishop Brown is merely one of this pope's (and John Paul II's) willing demonic accomplices.


From what I’ve read about Msgr. Urell, he presents a strange dichotomy. He was tough and callous in his dealings with the victims of abuse, and he was insensitive enough to actually party with the molesters. He coldly participated in moving molesters around like chess pieces and seemed concerned only with getting the best deal for the diocese, not justice for the victims. Yet, while being deposed, he’s suddenly transformed into this fragile, vulnerable, quivering mass of emotions for whom we’re supposed to feel such intense sympathy — a sympathy that was clearly never given by the diocese to the abuse victims, and still hasn’t, regardless of the public relations rhetoric contained in the bishop’s transparently insincere “Covenant With the Faithful.”

In the Catholic Church, those who want healing go to confession, receive absolution, repent and resolve to sin no more. For that reason, most Catholics who take advantage of the sacrament have little need of shrinks and therapists. Msgr. Urell would probably be better off to unburden himself to his confessor and spend some time in prayer and penance, as opposed to receiving “treatment” in a Canadian sanatorium. Once he has resolved to sin no more, he should come forward and tell all of what he knows about what went on in the Diocese of Orange, and then there can be closure and healing for all.

Fr. Chris

I am willing to believe Msgr. Urell's personal physician who said John needed medical attention immediately. I am also willing to believe that the facility in Canada was the only place with an immediate opening.
Yes, the decision to send Urell there looked bad, but delaying his medical treatment until someplace in the US was available would have placed Urell in danger.
The Diocese of Orange has paid for a lot of treatment for victims. Do you have reason to believe it was sub-standard, Atlanta? If so, show the proof; if not, your comment is cynical and mean. The comment from Joseph is just raving gibberish that doesn't deserve comment. And Crusader, I've been a priest for 20 years and have known Urell for longer than that and I have never seen the callous, tough, cold, insensitive jerk you think he is.
You're all ready to believe anything negative printed in secular papers, and accept no explanations from Church sources. You have grown so skeptical of Church officials that none of them are trustworthy. You insist they answer to you, then refuse to accept anything they say. In all these postings I fail to see any sign of goodwill or presumption of innocense on your parts. The negativity has gotten really stale.
As a priest in this diocese I want information; I want to know the diocese's side of things because all I ever get is the plaintiffs' lawyers prosecuting their cases in the press, and you all eat it up.
I'm not going to look at this blog anymore. I'm just trying to be a good priest in bad times, and you're not making it any easier.

Michael  Teissere

Fr. Chris, I haven't trusted Bishop Tod Brown since he tricked my wife and I to sign a secret oath to hide evil immoral acts of my cousin Rod Stephens supposed former priest/liturgical director of the Orange Diocese. Actually I didn't trust him from the the first meeting we had with him. he pounded his fist on the table we were sitting at and Fr. Mckierrean his priest secretary at the time lunged toward my wife in anger! All because we just wanted a letter of appology to our family from Bishop Brown. I have everything documented and two lawyers who witnessed it all! Iam refering to the part of the secret oath meeting. Because the first two meetings Bishop Brown didn't allow our attorney to be present. We even informed the Vatican congregation for the Clergy and recieved a strange letter back from them on how "they" support Bishop Browns handling of the situtation regarding Rod Stephens. Intresting! now since of late one secretary in this same Congregation has been suspended for homosexual harrasment that was made public on Italian TV. So My wife and I don't trust many clerics in the Church. We have pretty thick skin though and are aware that some are the offspring of Judas!! Iam not calling you the offspring of Judas. So when I read about Bishop Browns handling of all the "sex abuse" scandals I can't believe anything he Bishop Brown is saying or claimming! Bishop Brown also refuses to send us a letter of documentation regarding the offical status of Fr. Rod Stephens even at the request of The Los Angeles Archdiocese. What is Bishop Tod Brown hidding? I believe I know . I also some laity whos heads are burried in quick sand don't want to hear it. Fr. Chris you are not alone in trying to be a good priest in bad times. My wife and I are trying to live holy lives something the saints would be proud of and I am not saying this in a superior sorta way. I want to be heaven some day and I want my wife and children and family members there as well. These are very rough times! I have completely lost relationships and have not so great relationships with family members because of my moral stand against homosexual lifestyles . We support good priests like you Fr. Chris. We pray for Holy Bishops and priests who will be real manly fathers and protect the sheep from the wolves. We know what happens in the end but it is the trial in between that must be fought! I wished it wasn't that way but I wake up each day and it wasn't a bad nightmare .It is real as real can be! So Fr. Chris don't be mad at us laity who have questioned or doubts and in my case and others who truely have experienced the wrath of his excellency Bishop Tod Brown. Pray and support us as we pray and support you we truely need one another!


Father Chris –

While I respect your right to your opinion, my skepticism regarding Bishop Tod Brown has been formed empirically. It’s pretty hard for a parishioner at St. Mary’s by the Sea in Huntington Beach to be as credulous as you are.

I’ve heard that Msgr. John Urell has a charming, affable side, and in fact a group of his loyal apologists felt so strongly that they actually took out a full-page ad in the newspaper defending him. On the other hand, I also know some long-time priests in this diocese who are privately anything but pollyannish about the leadership of this diocese from the bishop on down.

My feeling is, quite frankly, that only a naïf could look at the recent history of the Diocese of Orange and still be calling for Bishop Brown and his minions to be given the benefit of the doubt. If you can hear stories like the one told by Michael Teissere and, with a straight face, tell me you think we have a good bishop, then I scarcely know what to say. I don’t know how much more proof you need if you’ve been a regular reader of this blog. Thomistic always cites multiple sources to buttress every fact.

I will say this, however: I’m very grateful for the 20 year of your life that you have given in service to God as a priest, and I pray for you. I’m doubly glad because we need good priests, such as I am sure you are, but I’m also glad that the Holy Spirit did not lead you into a field like police work or investigative journalism, where being ingenuous is not exactly a prized attribute.

Atlanta Catholic

Father Chris,

How sad that you have to spend your time defending people who allowed children to be harmed. Have you read the depositions? Have you read the reports where Msgr. Urell arranged and attended a party for another priest who had molested many boys. Msgr. Urell was strong enough to sing "For he's a jolly good fellow" about a molester. Now you are angry and fed up with the laity who refuse to agree with your experience of Msgr Urell. Why was Msgr. Urell strong enough to associate with these deviants? Why was he strong enough to write down a note that his phony explanation to the mother of a molested victim seemed to work? He was very strong and clever when it came to protecting bad priests.

I realize that many people have only seen the good and kind things about Msgr. Urell. You are obviously one of those people.

Don't call us mean and cynical. Arranginging a party with Fr. Pecarich, another molester, for someone (Father Michael Harris) who destroyed many lives and souls is what is mean and cynical. How strong a person it must take to turn a cold and blind eye to this action. A friend of mine who saw the pornographic images on the computer of another priest was stalled for over two years when he sought an answer from this Diocese. This friend was traumatized by the images of very young boys. It took two years of nagging and begging for some resolve. Finally there was a little bone thrown to shut him up. He was asked by Father Michael McKiernan if he would like some counseling to help him with the images. This man did not want the priest to remain at a school with small children. He was sad for over two years and no one cared until they were forced. No one offered to send my friend to Canada for immediate relief.

We are all in this mess together Father Chris. We only wanted to trust and believe in the good of our clergy. Some of them have ruined this for many. We will never blindly trust clergy just because they are clergy. You are suffering also because you are sad that your family of brother priests are being discussed. Too bad that these people did not share the same loyalty that you are showing. They were loyal to the laws of convenience, not the laws of the Church. The people who behave this way will eventually run into a wall and they sure did. The laws of convenience lead to a huge moral collapse.

Father Chris, I would have liked you to have witnessed the almost unbearable sadness and soul searching done by Father Johnson when he found out that this Bishop was trying to destroy good works. Trust me when I say that Father Johnson could have used the Canadian benefit of concern. No one cared and Father Johnson survived because he was strong in his priesthood.

Bishop Brown is not in step with the Mind of the Church. The Pope just let you and the whole world know this. You want us to trust in leadership that is disloyal to the Church? Go ahead and defend them Father Chris. I will not criticize you for being loyal to them. I believe it is a blinded loyalty which will assist you in your culpability. Criticizing the unacceptable actions and reactions of this leadership as a whole is the result of many injustices. We only wished that they had been loyal to their promises to God. They are in this mess because they cultivated this.

How can you even begin to be upset with the laity who have experienced grave and immoral injustices from our so called shepherds. I am sorry Father but there is something not right about your inability to see and accept that these are the fruits of bad decisions and actions.

Would you be interested in meeting with victims who experienced lies and deceit from this Diocese? Please let me know. Take a good look at the mess Father Chris. Please ask yourself if the reminder of..."You will know them by their fruits", applies to this leadership?

There cannot be healing until the infection is removed. Cynical and mean? Are those the nuanced adjectives for the laity who refuse to be spiritual morons to the obvious? Well I guess we will prefer the name calling to supporting a leadership that tries to pull the wool over the innocent sheep.


Very powerful post, Atlanta Catholic, and one that should make it harder for the deniers to plead ignorance. We’re kind of down to two types of Catholics in the Diocese of Orange: Those who know about Bishop Tod Brown and his activities, and the Know-Nothings.

Those who know have seen the victims and how they are bullied or ignored, and how perverts are coddled. They have seen liturgical abominations and foot-dragging when it comes to following the pope’s edicts. Even as this bishop disobeys the pope, he is the first to cry “mortal sin” if Catholics kneel before our Lord against his bizarre wishes. The story of Brown’s tantrum over kneeling at St. Mary’s by the Sea was heard and read around the globe, so it’s hard not to know about that. Those who know have seen Brown’s hatchet men threaten little old ladies with hell for kneeling, and have seen Brown attempt to boot an 80-year-old priest (Father Mackin, an authentic Catholic priest at St. Mary’s by the Sea) out into the streets. Those who know are aware of the funny business with big homes in gated communities given to priests who are fellow travelers or perhaps know too much about the West Coast Lavender Mafia. Those who know have sat across the table in meetings with Brown and seen his almost unhinged fury at lay people who have the temerity to hold him to Church teaching. Those who know have seen Brown’s obsessive and unnatural preoccupation with homosexual rights even as the rights of kids to be free from sexual abuse are given short shrift. Those who know saw through the self-serving and transparently insincere “Covenant With the Faithful” from the very day Brown nailed it to the church door in a PR stunt reminiscent of another infamous dissenter, Martin Luther.

Do I need to go on? …because I certainly could.

Those who know have internalized this history and have decided that enough is enough. This includes many good priests and many, many God-fearing members of the laity. They recognize a cancer growing in our Church and want it rooted out.

Then there are what I call the Know-Nothings. This runs the gamut from Catholics who really don’t know much about anything and don’t care about much to the head-in-the-sand ostriches who are in deep denial. Some of these are nominal Catholics or those who remember that they were “raised Catholic” only around the time that the white smoke rises above the Sistine Chapel. Others attend Mass many Sundays, but doze or think about where they’re going to brunch after Mass and then leave early. Still others know better or have no excuse not to know better. Some prefer to pretend to be child-like innocents and others are pathological deniers. Both of these last types remind me of the German civilians who, after the end of World War II, told Allied liberators that they had no idea what was going on in those camps at the end of the railroad tracks.

Some of the ostriches who come on this blog are actually flunkies and toadies, carrying water for a bad bishop — hoping to curry favor at Marywood — and they will be held accountable for that one day. Others will say, “I know Monsignor Urell — I even shook his hand once after Mass — certainly, he couldn’t be the cold, calculating beast you describe. He was just so nice!” And with that experience, they refuse to hear of any wrongdoing, saying Urell needs to be given the benefit of the doubt.

I have news for them: John Dillinger was also known to be very charming and personable, and was very popular among some segments of the populace. He has defenders to this day who deny that he was a cold-blooded killer and a terrible criminal. There was a front page article in the Los Angeles Times about a Dillinger defender just a week ago. This particular defender is a distant relative who wants to turn a buck on the name so, of course, he is a motivated defender.

I’m not saying Urell is a criminal like John Dillinger, or even that he molested kids himself. But he was an enabler, according to reports, and has good reason to be guilt-stricken. And it certainly is possible for Urell to appear nice in person but still be culpable for the actions of the diocese in hiding and protecting molesters. In fact, I suspect it is the fact that he is a nice man on some levels that has him so confused and twisted into a pretzel psychologically, and presently curled up in a fetal position on the floor of a padded room in Canada. It must be a terrible burden for a man who, at heart, really wants to be nice.

(Remember, though, that there is no sin too great for Christ’s ocean of Divine Mercy. If he is a man of good will, I urge Monsignor Urell to take advantage of the sacrament of penance — if it is healing and recovery that he seeks — and then come forward and tell what he knows so that we can clean up the filth in this diocese. Then he will have peace like no shrink or therapist can give.)

So there you have it: The Big Diocesan Divide. There are Catholics who have eyes that can see and ears that can hear, and there are Catholics who bury their heads in the sand, either because ignorance is bliss or they have ulterior motives for playing dumb.

Christopher H.

Is this you and Monsignor Baird having cocktails?

Well, if you are the same Fr. Chris that owns the blog with the above picture with Monsignor Baird, then you sir are the part of the problem as far as I am concerned.

You are a wolf in priest's clothing.

So everytime you make your pathetic point I can only whince at your ignorance. You are wrong. I know for a fact. Maybe you know too, but perhaps your just doing what you gotta do to get that promotion.

"Brown"noser takes on a whole new meaning.


Very interesting, Christopher H. It kind of looks like the good Fr. Chris puts himself in the "playing dumb with ulterior motive" category, i.e., "Brown-noser."

The ones doing the most criticizing of what they see as mean-spiritedness on this blog end up being the diocesan toadies and flunkies who are dispatched to defend Bishop Brown. They destroy all shreds of credibility they may have enjoyed.

Christopher H.

Fr. Chris,

Mona Alona

Dear Christopher H.,

I'm so sorry your mother went through that horrible experience. Do you have any news articles you could link?

Christopher H.


here you go..

From the LA TIMES via Abusetracker

Mona Alona

Thank you Christopher.

Atlanta Catholic

Christopher H.,

I am also sorry for the suffering and pain that your mother and you have endured. Many people who respect Msgr. Baird and have no knowledge or awareness of the truth were troubled by his lawsuit against your mother. This was very troubling that a Catholic priest would not accept the cross he had been handed. Yes, it would be an unbearably difficult cross if you were innocent. Yet, the victims who trusted the priests and were betrayed have had to live with unbearable suffering and memories. Their trial of internal suffering must be horrific. Why does everyone think that some magical counseling can undo the damage? Only God can help them heal.

Our faith and knowledge that many of the saints were also accused and eventually the truth was known, should have been enough to sustain Msgr. Baird.

The retaliation against your mother was a counter Catholic action. This has bothered many Catholics. This is not an example of following the path of the saints.

If innocent, a person knows the truth and his strong faith and trust in God should help him carry this cross. The fact that a Roman Catholic priest, counter-sued a victim is opposite everything that the gospel teaches. Why is it that our priests have expected that victims should be robot resilient, yet they crumble when they are tested. There will be no healing in this Diocese until every stone is unturned and exposed.

For those who will complain and say that Msgr. Urell had a right to sue back....they are wrong. That is the reaction of the secular, corporate world. Why did Msgr. Baird feel that he was entitled to retaliate if #1, he was innocent and #2, he truly believed that "No servant is greater than the Master"! His reaction caused more harm and doubts than any newspaper article.

Mona Alona

Dear Christopher H.,

Has any other people come forward accusing Msgr. Baird of sexual abuse?

Christopher H.

Yes, there was another person who came forward, but were scared away by threat of a lawsuit. The lawyers all know of this other person.

My mother never accused him of sexual abuse, (and he wasnt "counter suing" Atlanta Catholic)

Urell and Baird remained "unNamed" in her civil suit. "Why didnt you ever tell anyone" was the big question of the day by everyone. My mom said she did, she told two people and when she named those people, and explained the two very different responses she got sued, not counter sued.

Christopher H.

after Lenihan and Urell, I think by the time she met with Baird, freaky priests were just par for the course.

The only question I have that hasn't been answered is.. did my mother try to get help from Urell and Baird before or after the abortion. As her oldest son, I would like to know that.


Are all you out there who blindly defend Urell reading this? This is some shocking stuff. As I wrote earlier, Urell seems to have good reason to be guilt-stricken!


Father Chris said..."I'm not going to look at this blog anymore. I'm just trying to be a good priest in bad times, and you're not making it any easier." Well, Fr. Chris, there is alot here to digest and I hope that you can comment, while I'm sure you can't...these are powerful comments by all the posts and they transcend the need to be loyal to individuals. Be faithful and loyal to the Church, but admit, these priests and the Bishop you are supporting are reprehensible. I will pray for their repentance.

Atlanta Catholic

Christopher H.,

Thank you for your courage. You have helped people see the terrible consequences that have hurt many people and destroyed many lives. Your mother was betrayed by the very people that should have helped her. Many Catholics continue to be mystified by the selective blindness for compassion in this Diocese and many others. The problem will continue until the entire truth is exposed.


Fr. Chris -

You are not returning to read this follow up question, so it will be merely rhetorical.

If I got my request that the pope should DISMISS all homosexuals from the Roman Catholic clergy, would you be out?

Christopher H.


around this time of the month, Fr. Chris has a meltdown, and stomps off and threatens to never come back again. Sept. 14 tantrum link so this is the part where we all say that we value his opinion and wish he would get off and come back to us to share his unique perspective that we all have the right to have in the good ol' USofA son.

"Sometimes you gotta listen to yer heart like its yer head."


“My mother never accused him of sexual abuse, (and he wasnt [sic] "counter suing" Atlanta Catholic)”

Christopher – she is accusing him of sexual abuse. If she is saying he grabbed her kissed her and rubbed up against her that is an accusation of sexual abuse. I would call that sexual abuse if it happened to me or to my daughter.

“The only question I have that hasn't been answered is.. did my mother try to get help from Urell and Baird before or after the abortion. As her oldest son, I would like to know that.”
Did you ask your mother? I’m sure it’s a delicate matter to try to discuss with her but she seems to be the only source of information on the matter so if you want to know it sounds like you will have to ask her.

I’m perplexed by this accusation of Msr. Baird. How could he sue her if she passed a lie detector test? What was the result of his suit against her?

Christopher H.

ok carolg,you are right. what I ment was, she didnt file a lawsuit against his inappropriate conduct.

And no, she wont talk about it with me. My mom an I are on opposite sides of a lot of issues and we dont talk about it.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Pope Benedict XVI Homilies & Statements

Codex of Catholic Blogs

Orthodox Blogs

Blogs From People We Wish Were Catholic