Regarding this past Sunday’s homily (Advent II), I think it’s you who hit a nerve! My experience listening to his homily was that we was trying to guilt whoever the “mole” is in the parish, or any other parishioners who have read your blog. If you notice his wording, he doesn’t discuss “our sins” but for the first part of the homily, he says “you” often when discussing failings. Priests do well when discussing sin to include themselves.My regular correspondent points to a new entry on Dcn Bengry's blog. I notice that he refers to himself again, misleadingly, as "brother", when he is not a consecrated religious. It appears that the fact that "sister" Myrna-Mary Chruschz is Bengry's mother came as a surprise to some Calgary parishioners, as he devotes a great deal of text to placing this relationship in the monastic tradition:
Sts. Benedict and Scholastica were twins. St. Bernard of Clairvaux persuaded thirty of his friends, brothers and relatives to follow him. St. Thérèse of Lisieux lived in community with two of her biological sisters and a cousin in the convent. In more recent years, the Immaculate Conception Monastery in Indiana is apparently home to four sister Sisters! The precedent is very common in the monastic tradition and it makes sense. . .However, all the saints and religious he cites were or are consecrated religious, which, as I've repeatedly explained here, Dcn Bengry, Dcn Beahen, and "Sister" Myrna-Mary Chruschz are not. Dcn Bengry seems to be intentionally misleading visitors to his blog about his status, by calling himself "brother" and placing himself in the company not just of consecrated religious, but saints and two doctors of the Church!
He cites entries in the Catechism regarding respect for privacy -- well and good, but as I pointed out in my first post yesterday, my sources regarding Dcn Bengry and his family are from public records, often from social media posts by Bengry himself. If he's called attention to himself and the young man Tyrell as an "adoptee", "son", or "nephew", often in ambiguous or contradictory ways, in social media posts and in conversation with Calgary parishioners, people are entitled to ask questions, and apparently they are.
The visitor above continues,
What he doesn’t seem to realise is that, by being a deacon and “preparing” to become a Catholic priest, he is a public person. This is one of the first things many seminaries try to instill in their men early on. What they do reflects well or poorly on the seminary, but also on the Diocese which they serve, study in, but also on all Catholics. I don’t understand how he can’t see this. When one is a public figure, one is, rightly, open to public criticism and scrutiny. Discussing things that he has said or done publicly, can be discussed public.
A public offence demands a public remedy/reparation. It isn’t wrong to discuss publicly things he has posted online or can be found on public sources. It seems like he is a fan of threatening lawsuits or hinting at this. He does this because it is intimidating. And it is.
I would say, it might be a good idea if we could come to an agreement with the OCSP that certain sketchy details that are public about Bengry be addressed, so that this behind-the-scenes investigating can, at least publicly, come to an end. If we discover anything else, or that something was faslifled, then go public again. It seems like something like this might be in the best interest of both the Ordinariate and the parishioners, for Bengry (and associates) and for those who have questions about him. Just an idea I had.
My regular correspondent adds,
Perhaps these will lead Mr Bengry to see the merit of confirming that Tyrell is his nephew and Ms Chruschz's grandson. "Community" adoption story actually does him more harm than good.Regarding "community" adoption, a "community" can't adopt under Canadian law, contrary to the implication of Dcn Bengry's statement to parishioners. The precise legal terms of the adoption or guardianship could be pertinent, if Tyrell had been jointly adopted by Dcns Bengry and Beahen, as this could have implications under Canadian law.
Farther down on the page, Bengry implicitly threatens me. All I can say is that this isn't my first rodeo over such things, and legally, bloggers have wide leeway -- Ms Cohen of the Los Feliz Ledger once threatened me with a lawsuit for calling her a "third rate journalist", but, perhaps after speaking with a lawyer, she seems to have calmed down.
So for starters, as I pointed out in my first post yesterday, and as a visitor expands on today, the information I've released is in the public record, often released by Dcn Bengry himself on social media, and it pertains directly to his role as a deacon and a candidate for the Catholic priesthood. But second, as I suggested yesterday, there is a great deal of information that is in the public record that I haven't discussed here concerning Dcn Bengry's other family members, out of due respect for privacy.
However, there's a third category of information that could potentially apply to Dcn Bengry's qualifications but, again observing the teachings of the Church, hasn't yet been fully corroborated. Several people besides me are in fact investigating leads that might be productive and could either be published or referred privately to Fr Perkins.
I would also say that, from information that's already come to light -- Dcn Bengry's own discussion, in a homily published on the web, of questions relating to his own possible public intoxication, which he himself calls being "tipsy", while acknowledging "I like booze" -- should raise serious concern over whether the background check done by Houston has been adequate. There are similar matters that should have come to Houston's attention that apparently did not.
I'm also seriously concerned that Houston appears still to be allowing Dcn Bengry to style himself "brother" and his mother to style herself "sister". This matter goes beyond Dcn Bengry, and serious scandal in Calgary could have unfortunate consequences for Bp Lopes and the OCSP, especially if it appears they did not act to avert it.