Bishop Foys to Covington Students: Shut Up

Share on facebook
Facebook 0
Share on twitter
Share on linkedin
LinkedIn 0
Share on reddit
Reddit 0
Share on delicious
Share on digg
Share on stumbleupon
StumbleUpon 0
Share on whatsapp
Share on email
Share on print

Bishop Roger Foys still hasn’t apologized to the Covington students, but he is swinging into action:


According to a source at the school, the Bishop of Covington has told the school administration that he doesn’t want the kids doing any more interviews. The school faculty is also reportedly worried about the students’ safety.

The warning reportedly came after two Covington students appeared on Fox & Friends, where they defended their conduct in D.C. following the March for Life on Friday. Fox & Friends co-host Steve Doocy stated on-air that the kids, falsely accused of taunting  Native American activist Nathan Phillips based on selectively clipped video footage, had been exonerated by longer videos of the incident.

The faculty did not specify to the students that they would be punished if they continued to defend themselves in the media, but the students reportedly wish to cooperate nonetheless.

Go here to read the rest.  When it comes to our Bishops, I suspect Robert Conquest’s Third Law of Politics is fully applicable:


The simplest way to explain the behavior of any bureaucratic organization is to assume that it is controlled by a cabal of its enemies.

More to explorer

Even Satan Hates the Press

An Easter Egg from those brilliantly twisted folks at The Lutheran Satire.  Added bonus:  

Saint of the Day Quote: Saint Anselm

Come now, insignificant man, fly for a moment from your affairs, escape for a little while from the tumult of your thoughts.


  1. Nearly all Bishops are Democrat Party operatives. Their master is not God but Nancy Pelosi, etc. And Donald Trump is the devil himself.

  2. You defend this BISHOP FOYS??? over young teenagers.
    I thought you once said “Our hearts must remain open, like Christ’s” you said that when you had to hear the heartbreak of thousands of boys that were molested by Priests. But yet, you make a decision about these boys BEFORE you saw the entire story………that is NOT the Catholic Religion I was taught!!!!!!

  3. Why do you defend this? Young boys continue to fall victim to the Catholic Church. The lives that were ruined over pedophilia and now this!

  4. Serious question, because I’ve been wondering about this: How much deference or obedience do the Covington students and/or their parents, other family members, owe to the Bishop and school officials here?

    I’m trying to imagine what I would do I were directly concerned in this mess.

  5. It’s too bad that Bishop Foys was unable to apply his own rule of not speaking to himself.

    Had that been the case, all would have been better off.

    Oh well. I guess there’s no fool like an old fool.

  6. The bishop here and in Lexington seem constitutionally incapable of protecting boys. No matter they are in their respective positions. “Woe to those who call good evil and evil good.” Christ will not long abide this perversion.

  7. The Bishop and the principal OWE a PUBLIC APOLOGY to the boys. The following is DIRECTLY from the Catechism of the Catholic Church (Available for free on the Vatican website):

    2477 Respect for the reputation of persons forbids every attitude and word likely to cause them unjust injury. He becomes guilty:

    – of rash judgment who, even tacitly, assumes as true, without sufficient foundation, the moral fault of a neighbor;

    – of detraction who, without objectively valid reason, discloses another’s faults and failings to persons who did not know them;

    – of calumny who, by remarks contrary to the truth, harms the reputation of others and gives occasion for false judgments concerning them.

    2478 To avoid rash judgment, everyone should be careful to interpret insofar as possible his neighbor’s thoughts, words, and deeds in a favorable way:

    Every good Christian ought to be more ready to give a favorable interpretation to another’s statement than to condemn it. But if he cannot do so, let him ask how the other understands it. And if the latter understands it badly, let the former correct him with love. If that does not suffice, let the Christian try all suitable ways to bring the other to a correct interpretation so that he may be saved.280

    2487 Every offense committed against justice and truth entails the duty of reparation, even if its author has been forgiven. When it is impossible publicly to make reparation for a wrong, it must be made secretly. If someone who has suffered harm cannot be directly compensated, he must be given moral satisfaction in the name of charity. This duty of reparation also concerns offenses against another’s reputation. This reparation, moral and sometimes material, must be evaluated in terms of the extent of the damage inflicted. It obliges in conscience.

Comments are closed.