Yet another one of Cardinal Mahony’s auxiliary bishops disgraces the Church.


Former Los Angeles Cardinal Roger Mahony is long retired, but his scandals keep exploding like ticking time bombs around the feet of his successor. The latest eruption was this week’s revelation that Mahony had elevated Monsignor Alexander Salazar to auxiliary bishop in 2004 despite a credible allegation of abuse against Salazar from the 1990s. Mahony’s successor, Archbishop Jose Gomez, announced that Salazar’s resignation flowed from “deep concern for the healing and reconciliation of abuse victims and for the good of the Church’s mission.”
The Church has known about the allegation against Salazar for at least 13 years and in all likelihood much longer, but only got around to forcing Salazar’s resignation this week, presumably out of a PR need to tidy up such cases before Pope Francis’s “abuse summit” next February, and perhaps also out of fear of exposure by approaching investigators.


In anticipation of that gathering in February, Pope Francis vowed in a speech before cardinals this week that abuse cover-ups would “never” happen again, a promise that he can’t even keep in the most obvious case — the ongoing scandal of Theodore McCarrick, who remains holed up in a Kansas friary next to a school and tourist site while his criminal defense attorney issues protestations of innocence to the press in his name. Never happen again? The cover-up is happening right now.
Salazar, by the way, is only the most recent Mahony-era auxiliary bishop to disgrace the Church. Mahony really knew how to pick them: in addition to Salazar, he selected Gabino Zavala, who had a secret family.


And then earlier he selected Patrick Ziemann, a repeatedly accused molester whose ecclesiastical career was punctuated by an affair with an embezzling priest at one of his parishes (the priest also claimed coercion).
In 2004, Salazar was co-consecrated by Mahony and Zavala. Mahony had appointed Zavala to auxiliary bishop in 1994. It came out later that he had sired a couple of children from a mistress residing in another state. He resigned in 2012.
Salazar, Zavala, and Ziemann were Mahony’s kind of bishops — politically and theologically liberal, big on “social justice,” and mired in scandal. Mahony liked to keep bad priests close and the worst ones even closer. He made a molester known to him, Fr. Carl Sutphin, the associate pastor of his cathedral until prosecutors closed in on him.


Through Mahony’s string-pulling, Ziemann ended up a bishop. He went from Los Angeles to the head of the Santa Rosa diocese until ripped-off parishioners demanded his resignation in 1999. The police discovered that Ziemann had outfitted his embezzling priest-boyfriend with a special beeper for spur-of-the-moment sexual demands and had concealed his larceny during the throes of their affair. By the time Ziemann left the Santa Rosa diocese, it was $16 million in debt. Outraged parishioners wanted him prosecuted, but Vatican officials rode to his rescue and whisked him into a safe retirement. He was later hit with multiple molestation charges, dating to his days as dean of studies at a high school seminary in Los Angeles.
Salazar and Zavala might have received their own dioceses too had they managed their affairs a little more discreetly. I found an old story from a Utah paper purring over Salazar as a possible future bishop of Salt Lake City. But it turns out that Salazar, according to the Church’s latest admission, was under “precautionary” measures during his time as an auxiliary bishop, whatever that means. In other words, the Church knew perfectly well that he was a credibly accused molester and decided to let him retain his lofty title anyways. The utterly scandalous arrangement was overseen in part by Cardinal William Levada, an old crony of Mahony’s who conveniently assumed the top position at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith the year after Salazar’s elevation.


Levada, Mahony, and Ziemann all came out of the same rotten 1960s-era seminary in Los Angeles, St. John’s, and had been trading favors for years. Before Pope Benedict XVI inexplicably promoted Levada to the head of his doctrinal office, Levada served as the archbishop of San Francisco, where he too had a molesting priest on his cathedral staff. Out of all these intersecting friendships from seminary days came a golden parachute for Ziemann after he got bounced from Santa Rosa. Levada oversaw Ziemann’s landing far from police in the Arizona desert, where he joined the “artsy party circuit in nearby Tucson” until his death, reported the journalist Ron Russell.
All of this is beyond the grimly satirical imagination of Evelyn Waugh, and the Church hasn’t even hit bottom yet. The news out of Illinois this week — its attorney general says that Illinois dioceses excluded at least 500 cases from their self-accounting of alleged priestly abuse — hints at the many revelations to come from unfolding state investigations across the country.


In the recent resignations of auxiliary bishops from New York (Bishop John Jenik) to Los Angeles (Bishop Salazar), one can already see the effects of that pressure. Both Cardinal Timothy Dolan and Archbishop Gomez knew that grand juries would eventually find out about the abuse allegations against their auxiliaries and apparently urged the Vatican to cut them loose sooner rather than later.
The Vatican has been spinning the abuse scandal as a relic of the “past.” But almost all the figures responsible for it remain highly visible in the present — even Mahony got his chance at the microphone in Baltimore at the fall bishops’ gathering — and they continue to exercise real power. Here and there a derelict bishop drops out, but for the most part the hierarchy stumbles on as a club for the compromised and the corrupt in which yearly membership is earned through mutual complicity in the cover-up.



Everyday the rotten underbelly of the RC hierarchy and clergy is being shown up more and more.

We are seeing it big time in the USA because of how many bishops they have and because of the size and power of the American media.

The RC Church in the USA is more rotten than a ship load of rotting, smelly. weeks old fish.

But that’s not the most serious issue. What is more serious is:

  1. The widespread abuse and sexual assault of children, seminarians, young priests and other adults.
  2. The massive coverup of all this rottenness of the bishops and the Vatican.
  3. The promotion of men to the episcopate on the basis of having done sexual favours to others and being involved in all kinds of corruption.


At this stage we can be 100% sure that what has been happening, and is happening in the USA has been and is happening in Ireland.

The most urgent necessity in Ireland is exposing Irish bishops who have been, or are, involved in sexual misbehaviour and corruption.

This will be exposed. It is simply a matter of time until it happens.

I, for one, am digging hard.


Brilliant! The perfect counterpoint to Frankenpope’s PR exercise you covered yesterday.
And it’s true, this isn’t ending any time soon…


Jeff Anderson is in on the act… The allegation against Salazar looks just as flimsly as those against Pell and Nienstedt. Bishops are juicy targets.


Its amazing how the Irish Hierarchy covered up the David Dysky abuse case. So many seminarians and yes members of the Maynooth seminary Council regime are implicated in the collusion of concealment. This is the second major cover up within the last three years in Maynooth. The allegation of sexual abuse agianst a well known Music organ scholar in Maynooth and secondly the violent gang rape of a young adult David Dysky. The Collusion with the Dysky case is massive. The Dysky case could easily resort to criminal charges.


Don’t forget yr shovel hi if ya want to go to work but. The priority here is Ireland. So where are the names. Th auld records been on for a long time now. It’s starting to get boring so tis.


The problem Fly is FEAR.
FEAR was pommelled into seminarians in Maynooth. Seminarians, correctly, did not trust the bishops and unscrupulous seminary council. Seminarians, who are now good priests, still do not trust their bishops and the prevailing philosophy is to ‘keep your head down’. This was the mantra in Maynooth among the few good men.
This learnt behaviour was habituated over 6/7 years during formation and will be carried through for life unless these priests with a conscience summon the courage to correspond with grace and exercise the virtues of genuine prudence and fortitude.
This cowardly ‘keep your head down’ approach has allowed perverts and bullies to reign supreme in Maynooth and parishes with impunity.


10 31 Yr not wrong so. It is fear. What you say reminds me of some domestic violence victims. Afraid to break out of a vicious circle. The perps thrive on the control. Sure it can’t be any worse on th outside than ‘tis on th inside


Just like the cowardly anonymity of your position allows you to attack those in charge without the necessity of producing corroborating evidence, @10.39.


Dig deep into the corruption in Down and Connor and how the king spendthrift Treanor squanders millions without any comeback. How does he get away with it?


Pat, I think the only way corruption among bishops will be exposed is if someone higher than them in Rome were to offer complete immunity to informers so that they could never be cursed by the local church. Also, can I say that Magna gave a very good answer to the problem of blind obedience to bishops yesterday. It was your blog at it’s best.


There is absolutely NO EXCUSE for “blind obedience” to bishops.
The ordination vow of obedience is not “blind”. It is conditional upon what one is asked to do by a bishop being in keeping with God’s Law.
Any priest, who thinks his vow of obedience to his bishop is “blind”, is a moron. Any bishop who imagines he can command “blind obedience” is certifiably barking mad.
Gospel obedience is not “blind”. Obedience itself MUST be obedient to God’s Word and His Will. And His Word forbids Evil and His Will demands its exposure.
“Magna Carta” is deliberating misrepresenting the vow of obedience out of obdurate malice.
I do believe that there are Irish bishops who are perpetrators. There has to be. Expose them and bring them to book. May it happen soon!


12.03 how about re reading your post? What planet are you on? Once you in conscience disobey a bishop, you are nothing. That’s the storm to weather. You seem to be in denial of that. Magna took a very insightful line and he has exposed something that needs redress. The reality is that there is no comeback for a clergyman if he disobeys his bishop. His life will always be a misery. His bishop will make sure of that.


12:47 absolute rubbish! If you refuse to obey an immoral order of a bishop you are on God’s side against evil. Therefore, you will not be overcome even if you suffer for a time.
All in all, however, a priest’s vow of obedience simply commits him to agree to whatever appointments and missions the bishop asks him to undertake, in the service of the People of God in the diocese. Nothing more and nothing less.
It is a promise to faithfully cooperate and collaborate, with the bishop, in service of the faithful and in carrying out the mission of the Church.
It is NOT a promise to help him cover up evil and crime.
If a bishop attempts to pervert the vow of obedience in that way, the priest before God MUST refuse. Simple!


1.15 you are now talking rubbish. It’s nothing to do with whether you are on god’s side or not. And it’s not about appointments. And it’s not about refusing and it’s not just simple either. A genuine clergyman must stand up in public in the church and point out his bishop’s error. There is no safety should he do this. Everything in the church today tends towards brushing under the carpet and punishing those who speak out.


If this really happened to David Dysky all he needs to do is go to the Garda/authorities.
What is alleged to have happened is a very serious criminal offence and there are many avenues available to David whereby he can pursue justice and make those who hurt him accountable and have them punished.
IF this REALLY HAPPENED, all the Fanny Mullaneys in Christendom won’t be able to hush it up, or contain it, nor protect those who perpetrated it from the law of the land.
And, if Fanny herself has “threatened” David, that will come out too and she could well find herself in ”The Joy” too, along with the alleged gang rapists of David Dysky – IF IT ACTUALLY HAPPENED!!!
Why is David doing nothing about what happened to him?
IF it happened, there should be a moral firestorm that would completely finish “Gaynooth” and all associated with it, including some bishops, including David’s own bishop Fintan Monahan, who would be seen as guilty of dereliction of his duties of pastoral care and support towards one of his seminarians.
IF this story is true, the media would be all over it.
So WHY are none of these things happening???


@11:53, The amount of stuff that has been covered up in Maynooth over the last few decades has been astounding. The seminary council excel in cover-ups and camouflage.

Ledwith raped seminarians; Drury molested a Maynooth priest according to Fr David Marsden; decent seminarians have been kicked out for reporting seminarians being found in bed; seminarians binge drinking and taking narcotics; seminarians being bullied psychologically, verbally and emotionally just because a formator took a disliking to them; etc., etc.


It is now 2018. It is virtually impossible now for them to get away with cover up.

Given the gravity of this alleged offence – the gang rape of a seminarian by some of his fellow seminarians – it would be an explosion impossible for Maynooth to manage.

“David Dysky was secretly threatened by Fr Michael”, it is alleged.

What on this earth could this “Fr Michael” “secretly” threaten DD with, for crying out loud?

It would seem that DD has now left seminary. So how can this Fr Michael threaten him with anything?

If anything, it is this Fr Michael and the perpetrators of the alleged crime who have EVERYTHING to fear from DD going to the police!

None of this adds up. It was also claimed on this blog last month that DD did not suffer the alleged violation and that, having voluntarily left Maynooth, he is, now, in fact, happily “out” as a young gay man.

This seems to be the more credible and likely story concerning DD.


Also @ 11:53, why do you think that seminarians have to resort to issuing anonymous letters? Because of FEAR! Why do you think that all the seminarians who were proactively interrogated with regard to their erections and wet dreams in the incorrect external forum felt that they could only discuss their concerns with other seminarians and not report this intimidating behaviour? Because of FEAR!

Christ said “Be not afraid”! Christ does not rule in Maynooth! It is the Father of Lies, Satan, who rules in Maynooth.


10:39; Likely to be the same/similar patterns (dynamics) in seminaries elsewhere.
Seminaries are the point of inculturation or socialization into Rc institutional church culture.


Pat, I thought king David got an awful doing in the pope’s words over the Christmas. Did the king not repent as soon as the prophet pointed out his error?


@1:01, You have not a clue! Of course Maynooth can still get away with coverups even in 2018!

Did you ever think that Dysky may be afraid that his name would be blackened with scurrilous lies and slander by the unconscionable characters in Maynooth? As they have done before with previous whistle blowers.

Did you ever think that his family may have prevented him from having recourse to the Guards and litigation because of the negative publicity and cost incurred? Did you ever think that he may have himself shyed away from seeking justice because of the emotional energy and stamina required?

No! None of these things obviously did not dawn on your myopic mind!


Have just checked Declan’s. Twitter account. I can’t see anything wrong with it. What am I missing ?


@1:01, You are utterly deluded to think that coverups in Maynooth cannot happen in 2018!
Did you ever think that Dysky is afraid that he will be blackened with scurrilous lies and slander issued by the unconscionable characters in Maynooth? As they have done with previous whistle blowers.
Did you ever think that his family may have prevented him from having recourse to the Guards and litigation because of the negative publicity and financial cost incurred?
Did you ever think that Dysky may not have the required emotional energy and pyschic stamina to undergo such a process subsequent to his traumatic experience?
No! Obviously none of the above dawned on your myopic mind!


2:06pm – less of the histrionics!

If what is said to have happened to DD REALLY DID happen then he can bring the house down round them. He would have tremendous support.

Do you seriously expect us to believe that parents, in this day and age, would try to silence a son who had suffered such an unspeakable trauma and profound violation as gang rape?? In a seminary by seminarians??

I don’t buy any of it. I think great mischief is at work. There are others on this blog who have said this is a false story and that DD left Maynooth because he realised he does not have a priestly vocation. Moreover, he is quite content and happy in his life at present.

I believe that is a much more credible scenario.

Nevertheless, if what is alleged to have happened DID happen, then I hope and pray that all those responsible for such a hideous offence are brought to justice.


You dope 4:02. You obviously were not in Maynooth or are one of the boyos… And you are the one practicing melodrama and detachedness from reality. Wake up to the real world.


Dear 4:02, I personally know a man that was raped and molested as a 7-year old boy. His abuser is still alive, lives in the vicinity with a family and is deemed to be a pillar of the community! The victim, however, will not press charges because of the trauma and negative publicity that will inevitably ensue – and his family fully support and, indeed, encourage his decision. The “Stockholm Syndrome” may also have a part to play in the victim’s mindset.
2:06 speaks much sense.


Exactly 2:06. Clerical sexual abusers know that their victims would have to endure all you have stated in their pursuit of justice. That is why the vast majority of culprits escape scot-free.


Another possibility is that allegations such as those found here are unfounded and at the same time, employed to attack the seminary.


You can talk and speculate about that seminarian until the cows come home. If he was raped, he needs to go to the police. Until he does, NOTHING can be done about it.
If he was raped, and doesn’t go to the police, the rapists will carry on their merry way.


4:05 – You betray a startling deficit in emotional intelligence. I certainly hope that you are not a priest.

You appear to have as much empathy for and understanding of sexual abuse victims as a telegraph pole!


7.26: Commentator at 4.05 is correct. This man whom this blog alleges to have been raped SHOULD go to police. He should be encouraged to do so. If true, the victim must be believed and helped to seek professional help. If unreported the perpetrator will continue his abuse. This blog seems unable to validate the claim. You, 7.26, should learn to discern fact from fiction and not engage in hearsay or gossip.


Must be a really boring day for some reading here today.
Magna is on holiday and they have no one to fire shots at…
What a sad lot today.


@8:21 – If this story is only “hearsay or gossip”, then why does Bishop Monaghan or Maynooth not take legal action against Pat Buckley and this blog?
My hunch is that it is because there is truth in this story and that the bishops and Maynooth do not want a scenario whereby seminarians, former seminarians, formator priests, presidents, vice presidents, priests and bishops would be subpoenaed with all the beans, past and current, being spilled about Maynooth all over the national newspapers.


8.45: How do we know what the then student/seminarian has done or is doing to address his experience? He may be traumatised: we don’t know. It is pointless speculating and using his “experience” to fill spaces on this blog. How can we be certain, if the violence was perpretated, that the dissection of his life here is not a further abuse, pain and hurt? We should never use/abuse the horrific experience of others to push our own agenda. The truth is imperative but not a truth based on unvalidated stories. I hope if this man is deeply traumatised that he will be given support and justice. Let facts be first established before we draw conclusions.


9:32, I am not pushing any agenda. Pat Buckley was given this information by a priest from this former seminarian’s diocese. Are you saying that this priest is a liar?


9:32pm absolutely correct.

There is no substantiation or verification of this story whatsoever.

If it did happen, the young man in question must indeed be suffering greatly at this further violation of the sanctity of his being.

I strongly suspect this story is malicious.


10.24: This “story” is floating around far too long. It’s unconscionable to use his “abuse” experience for malicious agendas. You cannot ever know who is behind the anonymous tip offs to Pat. There are far too many individuals who are mendacious in their behaviour and do huge hurt and injustice to those genuinely abused. When it’s confirmed that there is truth in the original story, then we can process our thoughts. Till then it’s all hearsay. Yes, the “priest” who supposedly told Pat might well be a liar – who is he anyway??


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s