Pure and unadulterated evil.
Attorney Jeffrey Anderson of Saint Paul, Minnesota, has had success in winning millions of dollars[1] from homosexual pedophile abuse cases against the American Catholic Church over the years.
He has stated many times that he will not be satisfied until he sues the Vatican in federal court with Pope Benedict in tow [2].
“We’re chasing them. We’re taking bites out of their a@#,” said the lawyer. “All the roads lead to Rome. What we’re doing is getting us closer every single day.”
He may have been driven in the past in pursuit of justice for many victims of homosexual pedophiles, but what was a mission to bring justice is apparently now driven by diabolical forces to take down the Catholic Church Herself at all costs and with prejudice.
Jeffrey Anderson, being enticed by the Evil One, is abusing his freedom. He is succumbing to temptation and what he is doing is evil. He still desires to do good, but his nature bears the wound of original sin. He is now inclined to evil and subject to error [3].
Anderson reacted with pleasure to the news that Vatican officials had dismissed the New York Times article [4], which has been widely decried as inaccurate and slanderous, as “gossip.” “When you’re a fugitive from the truth, which I think they are, what you do is run or attack,” Anderson opined, concluding that “they are clueless and that we’re getting to them.”
Reminds me of the Prophet Isaiah when he said Woe to those who draw iniquity with cords of falsehood, who draw sin as with cart ropes, who say: “Let him make haste, let him speed his work that we may see it; let the purpose of the Holy One of Israel draw near, and let it come, that we may know it!” Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter! Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes, and shrewd in their own sight! [5]
Woe indeed for Mister Jeffrey Anderson.
He needs our prayers.
_._
[1] But those who desire to be rich fall into temptation, into a snare, into many senseless and hurtful desires that plunge men into ruin and destruction. For the love of money is the root of all evils; it is through this craving that some have wandered away from the faith and pierced their hearts with many pangs. [The Holy Bible (Revised Standard Version-Catholic Edition), The First Letter of Saint Paul to Saint Timothy 6:9-10]
[2] LifeSiteNews.com, U.S. Clerical Abuse Prosecutor Obsessed with Hunting Down Vatican, Pope by Kathleen Gilbert.
[3] Catechism of the Catholic Church 1707 & Gaudium et Spes 13 #1.
[4] The American Catholic, The New York Times Is Lying About the Pope by Donald R. McClarey.
[5] The Holy Bible (Revised Standard Version-Catholic Edition), Isaiah 5:18-21
I think he’s scummy lawyer but the “face of evil?” Hyperbole is neither prudent nor helpful. Who knows why he has gone on a quest against the Church? Perhaps he was hurt by a Catholic and is seeking revenge.
Of course we should pray for him, but let’s not demonize him.
but the “face of evil?” Hyperbole is neither prudent nor helpful.
Why Michael I am being prudent in calling out evil.
Moral conscience, present at the heart of the person, enjoins him at the appropriate moment to do good and to avoid evil. It also judges particular choices, approving those that are good and denouncing those that are evil. It bears witness to the authority of truth in reference to the supreme Good to which the human person is drawn, and it welcomes the commandments. When he listens to his conscience, the prudent man can hear God speaking (CCC 1777) & (Cf. Romans 1:32)
Your accusation of “Hyperbole” is actually imprudent of you.
I don’t expect you to change your mind Tito but I agree with Michael. If you read the section of the Catechism that you just quoted, it concerns judging particular choices (actions) – not judging a particular person, which I think you would have to say you are doing in this post.
Do you not think in some ways the Church has brought this on itself? I understand a legitimate defense of the Church against calumny, but I think this is a bit extreme.
This man has stated without equivocation and a clear mind he wants to bring the pope to trial.
This is ridiculous and considering his spartan and efficient work ethic he is determined without a doubt to bring this to fruition.
I’m reading the CCC in black and white, not with your nuanced colored glasses.
It is explaining conscious, not action. But I suppose your not interested in this considering your previous comments.
You can denounce someone without calling them the face of evil. Wanting to sue the Vatican out of spite is evil, but “the face of evil?” I think you give him far too much credit and appear to be overreacting.
?
Michael,
If you want to go against the Magisterium so be it.
I’m not going to argue against your conscious.
That is between you and God, not I.
You give Mr. Anderson too much credit Tito. He has made a ton of money by suing the Church. If there was no money to make I can guarantee you he would not be around.
Here is some background on him.
http://www.bishop-accountability.org/news2003_01_06/2003_04_16_Schimke_TrueBeliever.htm
He is not the face of evil, nor is he a crusader for justice. He is a fellow who stumbled into an unexploited area of tort litigation and has reaped a bonanza.
Making much more of him than that is an insult both to great sinners and true crusaders for justice.
Z,
😉
Donald,
We can agree to disagree.
Bringing the pope to a civil trial is hardly the worst threat leveled against the pope or the Church. Arresting him would be more serious, but really a rather pathetic desire. More serious are attempts to kill the pope, bring down the Church, deny the sacraments, etc.
Michael,
I suggest you write to the Vatican your concerns about CCC 1707 and why you disagree with it.
I doubt anyone at the Vatican is reading this post.
One ought to condemn evil There is absolutely nothing in the Magisterium to suggest that the way one must go about that is to by declaring them to be the faces of evil.
The way you are denouncing this man is imprudent and diminishes true evil.
Michael,
You’re arguing semantics.
You’re being imprudent by going against the teaching of the Church with your own personal interpretation.
We are Catholics, not Protestants.
I suggest you write the Vatican about your concerns.
Tito:
The catechism calls the choices as evil, not people. You have entered into the dualist heresy when you call someone pure evil. As St Thomas Aquinas pointed out, not even Satan is pure evil.
Tito, you are not following Catholicism when you engage the dualist heresy and call someone pure evil. St Thomas Aquinas makes it clear, not even Satan is pure evil. It is heresy which you engage — condemned heresy, and through a misapplication of the catechism which talks about choices, not people.
Thank you Zach and Henry.
After rereading CCC 1777 I see where it says choices.
As far as “pure” evil, I can’t vouch for that.
I’m using semantics when I call him evil or the face of the evil.
What he is certainly doing is evil and that is what I am calling evil, his choice in pursuing these lawsuits.
Thanks for the brotherly corrections Zach and Henry.
Tito:
You are now accusing me and are out of control. There is nothing remotely close to supporting your position in 1707 other than that man sins and can be seduced by evil. This is true of every sin. There is no personal interpretation here; quite frankly 1707 is irrelevant. What on earth am I “personally interpreting” different to the Vatican? I quote frankly am totally baffled by your position.
Nothing there suggests that those who are trying to make money or avenge some petty slight ought to be called by Catholics using prudence & charity “the face of evil” and “what evil looks like.”
Michael,
I’m going to ignore your comments from here on out on this post since you’ve gone off the deep end.
Like I said, take it up with the Vatican.
Tito:
I’m saying the same thing as Henry & Zach! How are they doing “brotherly correction” while I’m “off the deep end!”
I do not appreciate being called a Protestant and accused of being opposed to the Vatican when there is no basis for it.
It’s certainly not imprudent to say that someone’s actions are evil. However, I don’t think it’s necessarily prudent to denounce a person as “the face of evil”. That doesn’t mean his actions aren’t evil.
It doesn’t seem to me that Michael is in any way twisting or ignoring the catechism here.
(Maybe everyone’s just spending too much time at the computer today. Personally, I’m going to go mow the lawn, since it’s “work that Americans won’t do”. 🙂 )
Now, let’s explore this further, Tito.
What is your take of St. Catherine of Sienna? She took on a pope — quite strongly; would you have called her pure evil for opposing the actions of a pope? What about popes which attacked their predecessors? Is your argument that no one can offer a complaint against a pope, or that this complaint is what is wrong?
If you think it is possible to launch a legitimate complaint against the pope, what would be necessary for it? If you do not, what do you think of St Catherine and other popes?
Michael,
I’m a Neanderthal Catholic when it comes to reading “into” statements and “nuance”.
If what you were trying to point out was the same as Zach and Henry (I’ll take your word for it), then I to thank you for your brotherly correction.
I appreciate the feedback. Especially when I learn something new everyday.
For the record I have a degree in Marketing and not in Theology, Philosophy, etc.
I read it as it is. Not what I think there is or what I want to read into it.
Thanks Michael, I do appreciate learning from my mistakes!
Tito
Yeah, lots of time on the computer and my girlfriend isn’t happy about that.
So I want to withdraw my comments that Michael is a “Protestant” and is “going against the Magisterium”.
I say it with love!
Thanks guys, anymore comments I will respond to later.
Gotta go jump in the pool and get this extra energy out of my system 🙂 !
Tito
Geez though it is really nice outside.
Although in New England there are about 40,000 mayflies per square foot, which puts a damper on things.
He is not the face of evil, nor is he a crusader for justice. He is a fellow who stumbled into an unexploited area of tort litigation and has reaped a bonanza.
Right. I don’t think he has much of a case on the merits, but this is the type of thing plaintiff’s lawyers do; they drum up publicity and hope for a settlement or a sympathetic judge. If the case was stronger, then he’d be perfectly justified in bringing it. As it is, he’s just acting like a scummy tort attorney trying to make some money. That’s a bad thing, but it’s not ‘pure evil’ – and it’s certainly not as evil as the actions of many priests and bishops in this scandal.
Jesus seemed to consider doing harm to children to be the ugliest sin. If there’s an example of pure evil in the pedophile scandal, it’s the pedophiles.
I am stuck in front of a computer and paper for at least the next two weeks. Darned law exams. 🙁
“Maybe everyone’s just spending too much time at the computer today. Personally, I’m going to go mow the lawn, since it’s “work that Americans won’t do”.”
That is work this American would not do if I wasn’t so cheap! I despise mowing, an activity no doubt that is mandatory in portions of Hell! I have it done by a service at the office, but I and my eldest son do the home lawn. Fortunately it is raining here so I can put it off until tomorrow!
Michael, I still can feel the joy that exploded within my soul when I finished my last final at law school and realized that whatever else awaited me in life I was done with finals! (Of course then there is the bar exam but anyone who can cram can pass that.)
Don:
After the birth of my child, that is the next great true joy I will experience. Alas, that it comes in 2 more years.
The face of evil?
I look in the mirror, and pray.
I heard this guy being interviewed on the radio the other day. The way he spoke didn’t impress me- he sounded like a second degree lawyer attempting to gain notoriety/publicity.
The weather continus to be unseasonally beautiful here in my part of the world – but very little rain over the past couple of months, so the farmers are whingeing – some ares in the North Isalnd and eastern coast in the South Island have been declared drought stricken.
As for mowing lawns, that’s a job my wife does – she claims I’m too lazy to do it, but I know she loves it for the exercise.
(That’s my story, and I’m sticking to it) 🙂
It’s rainy here; a good day for a thorough spring cleaning. I’ve been bopping over the computer in between bouts of scrubbing and dusting. Just put the vaccuum cleaner away, there’s a big pot of spring vegetable soup on the stove and whole wheat bread in the oven and the place smells heavenly. I wish I could all invite you over for soup and homemade bread. You could eat off the floor, although it would be rather tricky with soup. 🙂
Michael, good luck with your exams.
Henry Karlson accusing others of heresy … now THAT’S hilarious!
“As for mowing lawns, that’s a job my wife does – she claims I’m too lazy to do it, but I know she loves it for the exercise.”
Don, I was unable to convince my kids that lawn mowing was fun, although I gave it a good try! As for my wife, she is firmly convinced that mowing the lawn is my job, curse the luck!
“I heard this guy being interviewed on the radio the other day. The way he spoke didn’t impress me- he sounded like a second degree lawyer attempting to gain notoriety/publicity.”
That is basically my opinion also.
Henry,
Nice try.
Comparing Catherine of Siena to this monster is an insult to humanity.
Down the rabbit hole you go.
T. Shaw,
Straw man.
Although I know where you’re coming from, it is prudent to call evil evil.
Yeah, catching up after a dip in the pool.
It’s about 80 degrees here near downtown Houston and not a bit humid (yet).
Simply beautiful!
Jay – er, if you are going to make such a vague statement, at least actually define the heresies you are implying I follow. Otherwise, you would do well to see your confessor. I actually pointed out the heresy involved, and where one can look to see it is indeed rejected.
Not sure who ‘Jay Chambesr’ is – don’t think I’ve seen that commenter before. Either it’s someone using a different handle to hide their identity (which is just lame), or it’s someone who has strong opinions about Henry who has never before expressed them here. In either case, they shouldn’t throw around accusations of ‘heresy’ without some explanation.
Of course, fwiw I think Henry’s rather tone deaf reading of the ‘pure evil’ line above – which is a colloquialism for a very bad person rather than a theological statement – is off too, but at least Henry set forth his reasoning.
I would definitely have to agree – mowing the lawn is a man’s job. My husband is bitterly disappointed that my son is off to college in August!
[…] the increased attacks on Holy Mother Church in the United States and in western Europe, especially on Pope Benedict XVI, to see government officials to exhibit such […]
Hmmmm.
Looks like Kiwi chicks are cut from the same mould as kiwi blokes – mowing lawns is a breeze.
But I’m real glad the chicks have the babies 😉
May I make a statement? Guess what,we are ALL going to die naked and penniless,put into the ground,embalming last aprox.four years,so the worms eventually get to us all.It’s facing God that we need to worry about,the mercy is here on earth,there’s only justice on judgement day.So this fool attorney cannot relly hurt anybody but himself.
I hope you are wrong, Sue. My salvation strategy is heavily dependent on mercy.
[…] most evil man in the world, attorney Jeffrey Anderson, plans to “sue the sh-t out of [the Catholic Church] […]