Return to Platform
The hard-ball legal tactics used by diocesan attorneys and attorneys for insurance companies holding diocesan liability policies were meant to occlude the precepts of both charity and justice.
2/17/2004 11:00:00 PM by Thomas A. Droleskey - Seattle Catholic
It was nearly seven years ago that the courageous Stephen G. Brady, President of Roman Catholic Faithful, Inc., held a press conference in Springfield, Illinois, to demand the resignation of the Most Reverend Daniel Ryan, then the Ordinary of the Diocese of Springfield in Illinois. Brady accused Ryan of having sexually harassed and molested at least two of his priests. Subsequent investigations revealed Ryan's affinity for male prostitutes. Bishop Daniel Ryan stonewalled Brady and the few journalists who wanted to follow up on the allegations. Indeed, although he was forced into an early retirement in late 1999-and even though the diocese itself removed Ryan from active priestly ministry in late 2002, Ryan's communications director, Mrs. Kathie Sass, still stonewalls the media about Ryan's behavior and her own complicity in it by denouncing the allegations against Ryan as baseless and his accusers as misled, ignorant people. The Remnant will publish a retrospective on this notorious Bishop Ryan within a few months. [This writer is still waiting for Mrs. Sass to answer questions posed to her in February of 2003. She is as condemnatory now of Stephen Brady, who had the facts nailed cold from the outset, as she was in 1997.]
Well, another Bishop Ryan, the Most Reverend Sylvester Ryan, the Bishop of Monterey, California, is apparently stonewalling a set of questions. These questions deal with Ryan's support for a measure, Proposition Q, that proposed to raise the sales tax by half a cent in Monterey County to support services provided by Natividad Medical Center in Salinas, California, to indigent patients. Overlooked in Bishop Sylvester Ryan's newspaper column urging Catholics to support Proposition Q was the fact that Natividad Medical Center dispenses contraceptives and kills innocent preborn babies. These are among the "services" provided to indigent patients there. Ryan's omission of these facts was the basis of an article, "Omissions of Fact Meant to Mislead the Faithful," that was published on the Seattle Catholic website in late December of 2003.
Information was provided to this writer from inside the Diocese of Monterey after that aforementioned article had been published that indicated the situation was even worse than I had known. Specifically, my informant told me that a Dr. Marc Tunzi, who heads a family practice residency program at Natividad Medical Center that evidently trains medical residents how to kill babies, serves on the Diocese of Monterey's "sexual abuse advisory panel." Membership on the panel is supposed to be secret. However, this particular bit of information was leaked to me in an effort to discover the truth.
An e-mail was sent to Dr. Tunzi on January 5, 2004. As I had not heard from him as of January 8, 2004, I sent him a second e-mail. That was followed up with a telephone call. He took the call, telling me that he had never received the January 5 e-mail. He was very terse with me, saying only that my information was "partly correct" and "partly grossly incorrect." He would not specify which part was correct and which was "grossly incorrect," noting that he had been told by the Diocese of Monterey to direct me to Mr. Kevin Drabinski, the diocesan Communications Director, who would answer my questions. I considered this odd as my first two questions had to do with Tunzi's own support for abortion and for the agenda of Planned Parenthood. Why would I need to ask anyone from the diocese about Tunzi's own positions?
Nevertheless, I contacted Mr. Drabinski via telephone on January 8, 2004, leaving him a voice message. That was followed up with an e-mail on January 9, 2004, including the questions listed below, and an e-mail on January 10, 2004, which corrected the source of a statement made by a medical resident about Natividad Medical Center's family practice residency program. The source was not Natividad's own website but one that analyzed such programs across the nation. I said that I needed to have an answer to my questions by Monday, January 12, 2004.
Mr. Drabinski telephoned me on Monday, January 12, 2004, asking for more time. He said that Bishop Ryan had just returned from a time away from the office. I told him that I could wait until Wednesday, January 14, 2004. He was thankful for my understanding.
Well, I waited until the early afternoon of January 15, 2004. No answer had been forthcoming from the Diocese of Monterey. Thus, another e-mail was sent that afternoon to Mr. Drabinski, informing him that I would have to assume that a lack of a response by the end of business that day meant that there was going to be no response at all. I informed him that the questions would thus be posted on The Remnant website as they had been presented to him, including the correction of the source of statement about Natividad Medical Center's residency program by a first year medical resident.
One question, dealing with an alleged payment made by the Diocese of Monterey in the case of a priest-predator, has been omitted from the questions below as it turned out the monies in question were paid by the Diocese of Tucson to victims of a Monsignor Robert Trupia there who had close ties to a Monsignor Charles Fatooh. Fatooh, who had known Trupia since the early 1970s, had been Vicar General and Moderator of the Curia for the Diocese of Monterey until it was discovered in early 2003 by the Arizona Star that Trupia, who had done "consulting" work for the Diocese of Monterey between 1995 and 2001, was living in a condominium in Maryland that he rented from Fatooh. However, as no monies were paid out by the Diocese of Monterey in this case, the question I posed to Mr. Drabinski is hereby omitted from the ones listed below.
A brief commentary on all of is provided at the end of the list of. These questions are being printed at present in light of their relevance to the recent commemoration of the thirty-first anniversary of the decision of the United States Supreme Court in the case of Roe v. Wade. For it is indeed the case that the American slaughter of the unborn continues unabated in no small measure because many of the world's Catholic bishops have helped to aid and abet the careers of Catholics in public life who support and promote this crime that cries out to Heaven for vengenance.
Herewith are the questions, prefaced by my January 9, 2004, e-mail to Mr. Kevin Drabinksi:
Mr. Kevin Drabinski Director of Communications Diocese of Monterey Monterey, California
Dear Mr. Drabinski:
This e-mail is by way of following up on a telephone message I left with your office yesterday. I was told to contact you by Dr. Marc Tunzi, the head of the family practice residency program at Natividad Medical Center in Salinas, California. As I have not heard from you as of this hour, 11:00 a.m., on Friday, January 9, 2004, I am composing this e-mail to pose a line of questions concerning the kiling of innocent babies at Natividad Medical Center, Dr. Tunzi's involvement with same, the latter's association with the Diocese of Monterey, and Bishop Sylvester Ryan's efforts to oppose the American holocaust of the innocent unborn.
An initial e-mail was sent to Dr. Tunzi on Monday, January 5, 2004. As I had not heard back from him as of yesterday, January 8, 2004, I wrote him a second e-mail, following that up with a telephone call yesterday afternoon around 3:30 p.m. Pacific Standard Time. In that telephone conversation, Dr. Tunzi said that my information was partly correct and partly "grossly incorrect." He told me to direct all questions to you in your capacity as Director of Communications for the Diocese of Monterey. As my first two questions dealt with Dr. Tunzi's obvious support for the killing of innocent human beings in their mothers' wombs, I do not see why those questions, which Dr. Tunzi did not answer in his terse e-mail to me of yesterday, January 8, 2004, are to be answered by you. It is because you have been designated as the one to answer those questions that this e-mail is being directed to you.
I need your response, therefore, to the following questions: [Question 1 was rephrased on January 10, 2004.]
1) Does Dr. Marc Tunzi, the head of the family practice residency program, either perform, supervise, or support the killing of innocent human beings in their mothers' wombs by means of abortion? The evidence is rather clear, as is discernible from a website describing Natividad Medical Center's family practice residency program.
[I provided Mr. Drabinski with the following comment, posted by first year resident in that program on August 19, 2002, who described the program Dr. Tunzi directs as follows: "I'm just starting out at this program, but they seem very open and supportive of giving TAb training to those who seek it out. D&C is built into the curriculum but those who want to do TAb have to look for it and can go through local Planned Parenthoods. But it is very easy to find FP doctors here who do them and are good at and like to train other FPs. I'm doing my first D&C tomorrow, and I'll keep this site posted as I go through my 3 years as to what it is like here in terms of abortion training." The abbreviation T A b refers to "therapeutic abortions."]
2) Does Dr. Marc Tunzi support the agenda of Planned Parenthood and/or have any contact with the officials of Planned Parenthood in the City of Salinas and Monterey County?
3) Based upon unimpeachable information that I have received from within the Diocese of Monterey, it appears as though Dr. Marc Tunzi serves on the Diocese of Monterey's "sexual abuse advisory panel." Although I understand that this information is supposed to be confidential, it has surfaced. As Leon Panetta, who was militantly pro-abortion during his years as a member of the United States House of Representatives and his tenure as Director of the Office of Management and Budget and White House Chief of Staff during the pro-abortion administration of President William Jefferson Clinton, serves on the American bishop's national advisory council, it is therefore quite plausible that a medical doctor who supports abortion would serve on Bishop Ryan's panel. Do you confirm or deny that Dr. Tunzi has been in the past, which is meant to include the time frame before and up to your receipt of this e-mail, and/or is now a member of the Diocese of Monterey's sexual absue advisory panel?
Further questions deal with Bishop Ryan's support of Natividad Medical Center:
4) Bishop Sylvester Ryan wrote an article in the diocesan newspaper to urge Catholics in Monterey County to support a referendum seeking voting approval for a half cent county sales tax increase, the proceeds of which would benefit programs offered to the poor by Natividad Medical Center in Salinas. Bishop Ryan called this a matter of fundamental social justice. Why did not Bishop Ryan inform his readers that Natividad Medical Center dispenses contraceptive and kills babies, among the other "services" it provides to the poor and others?
5) Does Bishop Ryan believe that taxpayers should ignore the evils done at Natividad Medical Center? Why did not he inform voters that Natividad Medial Center received over $1 million in 1998 from the Reproductive Health Cartel?
6) Has Bishop Ryan ever publicly criticized Natividad Medical Center for its dispensing of contaceptives and its killing of the innocent unborn? Did he seek any assurances from Natividad Medical Center that the monies raised by the half-cent tax increase would not be used to dispense contraceptives or kill babies?
7) Has Bishop Ryan ever partipated in or encouraged the prayerful recitation of Our Lady's Most Holy Rosary outside of Natividad Medical Center to make reparation for the evils done there and to pray for the conversion of those who are committed to evil?
8) Has Bishop Ryan ever preached against the evils of contraceptive during his episcopal ministry as the Ordinary of the Diocese of Monterey?
9) Has Bishop Ryan ever participated in a prayer vigil outside of Planned Parenthood's headquarters or spoken or written against its agenda?
10) Are those who support contraception and abortion permitted to teach in the schools of the Diocese of Monterey?
11) What is Bishop Ryan's relationship, professional and personal, with Dr. Marc Tunzi?
12) Is Dr. Tunzi considered to be a Catholic in good standing despite his apparent complicity in the execution of innocent preborn human beings under cover of law?
13) Has Bishop Ryan ever warned, either publicly or privately, a pro-abortion Catholic politician within his jurisidiction that he is risking the salvation of his soul and that he should refrain from the reception of Holy Communion because he has placed himself outside of the Church by his public support for one of the four sins that cry out to Heaven for vengeance?
14) Does the aforementioned Mr. Panetta, who hears Holy Mass at the Basilica of St. Charles Boromeo in Carmel, California, remain a Catholic in good standing in the Diocese of Monterey despite his unabashed support for the killing of the preborn under cover of law under various slogans?
15) Does Bishop Ryan agree with the actions taken by Bishop Raymond Leo Burke, the outgoing ordinary of the Diocese of La Crosse and the Archbishop-designated of the Archdiocese of St. Louis, to bar all pro-abortion Catholic public officials from the reception of Holy Communion?
Your prompt attention to these questions will be greatly appreciated. The answers to these questions will be published in The Remnant and online at the Seattle Catholic website. They will also be offered to the American Life League for publication on its website. If the questions remain unanswered, the questions will be published as I have posed them to you above with the notation that you or Bishop Ryan refused to answer them.
Looking forward to hearing from you, I am,
Sincerely yours in Christ the King and Mary our Immaculate Queen,
Thomas A. Droleskey, Ph.D.
As of February 6, 2004, no response has been received from the Diocese of Monterey. This is not surprising, though. Bishop Ryan and his apparatchiks know that Rome will do nothing to them if it is indeed the case that Dr. Tunzi is an abortionist who has close ties to the diocese and serves on the diocesan "sexual abuse advisory board." Ryan knows that Rome will not rebuke him for his support of a hospital that kills babies by means of surgical abortion and chemically by means of contraceptives. Ryan knows that Rome will not chastise him for refusing to publicly warn an unapologetic defender of Roe v. Wade, Leon Panetta, and for holding his being considered a parishioner in good standing at the Basilica of Saint Charles Borromeo in Carmel, California. Ryan knows that the relationship between Monsignor Charles Fatooh and Monsignor Robert Trupia, to say nothing of the sums of money the Diocese of Monetery paid to Trupia for his "consulting" work after public allegations surfaced about him in the late 1990s, will never be investigated nor even mentioned to him by any curial official or the Holy Father when he makes his next ad limina apostolorum visit to the Holy See.
Thus, as I noted on this site in "Time for Plain Talk" nearly two years ago, the ultimate responsibility for these scandals and outrages rests with Pope John Paul II himself. Bad, irresponsible bishops know that the Holy Father is a prisoner of the collegiality he helped to promote at the Second Vatican Council and has praised during his pontificate. It took a veritable revolution on the part of committed lay people in France ten years ago to effect the ouster of a diocesan ordinary who openly supported the human pesticide, RU-486. The bishop was not removed until January of 1995. The novelty of episcopal collegiality, an outgrowth of the egalitarian spirit of the Protestant Revolt, has spread like a cancer, destroying the Faith, swallowing up souls, and emboldening those who in the hierarchy who are personally engaged in acts of unrepentant evil or who countenance the same in others.
The Holy See and the world's bishops never learn. Stonewalling reports of the sodomite crisis in the Church, which began to surface in The Wanderer in the 1980s and thereafter, did not prevent these scandals from festering and then exploding in the secular media, which relished the opportunity to attack the Church for a self-made crisis. The stonewalling by chancery officials in the wake of the complaints lodged by earnest parents and relatives of victims did much to alienate people from the practice of the true Faith. The hard-ball legal tactics used by diocesan attorneys and attorneys for insurance companies holding diocesan liability policies were meant to occlude the precepts of both charity and justice. Stonewalling has failed the Church over and over again. As long as the Pope himself, though, refuses to govern the Church and to discipline and remove bad bishops, the stonewalling of men like Bishop Sylvester Ryan and his minions will continue unabated.
While praying that men who believe that their arrogance for truth and their contempt of the binding nature of the Faith in all circumstances will repent into order to be ready for the moment of their own Particular Judgments, it is nevertheless true that those who persist in stonewalling to the point of their dying breath in this life will find it of no use in the next.
Our Lady, Queen of Apostles, pray for our bishops, starting with the Vicar of Christ, to govern only according to the mind of your Divine Son, Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, for the sake of the right ordering of the Church Militant on earth so that each of us erring sinners can have know the blessedness of an unending Easter Sunday of glory in Paradise.
Return to Platform