Cardinal Bernard Law, Cardinal, John O Connor & Bishop Rene Henry Gracida

Michaud & Aynesworth's "Calling in the Big Guns": Cardinal Bernard Law, Cardinal, John O Connor & Bishop Rene Henry Gracida

Calling in the Big Guns

Gracida read the bishops’ words and actions as nothing less than an attempt, via the attorney general’s lawsuit, to engineer a foundation coup, oust him, and install their own trustees. To counter them, he turned to a trusted friend, the most powerful Catholic in the United States. “I said, ‘John, here are some clippings of what the bishops are saying about me. I need you to silence them. I’m not asking you to interfere in the litigation. Just tell them to shut up. You can do that.’”

O’Connor did that and more. Gracida recalls that the public turmoil did quiet down, but he soon became convinced that O’Connor had more in mind than simply mediating the dispute. “Our attorney flew to New York and met with O’Connor in his living room,” he says. “He came back from that meeting and told me, ‘You’ve got to know who you’re fighting here. He’s going to try to take over the foundation.’” O’Connor died last year, apparently without making any public comments on his role in the Kenedy controversy.

Cardinal O’Connor was named head of a Papal commission charged with mediating the foundation fight before it actually got to court. His two co-mediators were Bernard Cardinal Law of Boston and Bishop Raymond Burke from Wisconsin. Gracida says Burke later told him that O’Connor and Law froze him out of their deliberations, which to the Corpus Christi bishop seemed directed more toward wresting the foundation away from him than exploring a middle ground in the dispute.

O’Connor could not have seized power directly—the law was too plain on that issue—but Gracida surmises that the Cardinal certainly would have enjoyed a great deal of indirect influence on foundation matters had he delivered it into the Texas bishops’ control.

The Cardinal pressured him to capitulate, Gracida says, invoking his extraordinary influence both in the United States and, more importantly, in Rome, but the Corpus Christi bishop would not budge. Gracida also distrusted his co-adjutor and anointed successor as bishop, Roberto Gonzalez (now Archbishop of Puerto Rico), who had risen through the Catholic hierarchy as a protege of both O’Connor and Law. He did not want Gonzalez—or any bishop—succeeding him as president of the foundation, and therefore presented as his non-negotiable demand that there could be no settlement unless the majority of any new Kenedy board were not clerics.

Gracida & Patrick Flores flipped pedophile back & forth to protect the "Pot of Gold"!


The Diocese of Pensacola-Tallhassee, on October 7, 1975. Bishop Rene H. Gracida, auxiliary Bishop of Miami, was appointed by Pope Paul VI to be the founding Diocesan Bishop. This new diocese in the panhandle would be the largest geographically in the state, 14,044 square miles with the smallest Catholic population at 34,000.

Source:
http://www.stpeter.ptdiocese.org/history.html

________________________________________
THIS IS AFTER GRACIDA OF FLORES SENT HIM TO ST PETERSBURG FOR HIS ASSAULTS HERE AT ST. JOSEPH'S IN THE BODY OF CHRIST. THEY KNEW HE WAS A PEDOPHILE.
________________________________________



Upon arriving in Texas, Father Appleby went to a church in the Archdiocese of San Antonio, in the small village of Charlotte. Members of the Gonzalez family insist he has molested at least four members of their family, altar boys and other children attached to small Texas parishes.

"How dare this bishop throw him over here in Texas and not do something there. They should have prosecuted him and thrown him in jail. They could have saved so many boys lives. My sister would have never have met him," said Virginia Gonzalez-Ortiz.



Source:
http://www.28news.com/stories/archive/020517appleby.shtml

THE ABOVE LINK HAS BEEN ERASED!
I WONDER WHO DID THAT?

CHURCH UNIVERSAL????

A Mexican Heir is Blasphemy in South Texas
Posted on April 1, 2005 at 07:33:55 AM by Jaime


Colloquial Adaptation
by Jaime Kenadeno

It is a new story and an old story. The fact that Power Rancher John G Kenedy Jr. engaged in the kind of "hybrid baby making" privately that his wife Elena Suess Kenedy denied publicly is not much of a surprise. After all, she excluded “illegitimates” in her will.

The media coverage around the recent announcement by Anita Matilde that “Johnny” was her biological father has danced rather timidly around some of the more affluent overclass in South Texas. There is no room for a Mexican heir. They are a “different breed of stock”.

Since the rape of non-white women by plantation owners and Southern Ranchers in antebellum days, white men have been able to reconcile their sexual encounters with non-white women with their support of anti-ethnic public policies. That is because discrimination has never been simply about separation of White and Non-White but about the subordination of one group to the will and interests of another.

The sexual exploitation of powerless non-white women by powerful white men was the corollary to the lynching and castration of black men and the murdering and imprisoning of Hispanic men. It was the norm.

Whatever the details, John G Kenedy Jr.’s sexual relationship with a hispanic teenage maid in South Texas in 1925 was a form of sexual exploitation. Was it an "affair," Ann Rowland; Anita Matilde’s mother displayed a love for “Johnny” who resembles her son Ray Fernandez. But, initially did Rowland have a consensual choice? Even though there is no evidence that Johnny intimidated or even threatened Anita Matilde’s mother, there is little chance she could have consented freely.

In 1925, most Non-Whites in the South were disenfranchised and utterly powerless. There were virtually no Hispanic judges, police or politicians, and Non-White citizens were treated as second-class in every respect, with little recourse.

The dictate of the 1857 Dred Scott Supreme Court decision that proclaimed, "black men have no rights that white men are bound to respect," although overturned by Reconstruction, was still very much in place. This applied to Hispanics in South Texas This applied to the women, as well. It was against this social and economic landscape that Ann Rowland entered into a sexual relationship with the young married Kenedy. He had all the power and privilege, and she was at his mercy.

Therefore, could Ann Rowland have said no to her employer'? Yes, in an absolute sense, perhaps she could have, but there would have been dire consequences. In small towns like Sarita, Kingsville and Corpus Christi, everyone knew everyone else. Hispanic servants were fired on a whim, and without a recommendation that she was trustworthy and compliant, who would have hired her? With no financial resources and no education, where would she have gone?

The sexual exploitation of Hispanic domestic workers, especially live-in maids was commonplace up until World War II, when the job market began to change. Until then, they were violated against their will routinely as almost a condition of employment. Ann Rowland, who lived a difficult life, was only one of many such women.

This was not a harmless boyhood antic or a benign "mistake," or something terribly at odds with his avowed marriage. This was an exploitation of a vulnerable Hispanic girl. It had more severe consequences for her life than for his. The baby was taken from her mother to prevent awkward embarrassment for the Kennedy’s, and the young mother lived out her days in shame and silence.

It is important to note that Rowland was only 18 when her child was born and probably 16 when the sexual encounters with “Johnny” began. She was a minor, under the age of consent in most states. Kenedy, who was ?? at the time, was an adult. While his actions speak to a larger pattern of sexual violation, they also seem to represent a case of statutory rape.

This reminds me of Ray Fernandez believing his Grandfather to be ///////// Fernandez and then his grandmother said to him he looks like Johnny. John Kenedy? You mean the president? That is when he questioned his roots. Naively Ray Fernandez asked ??????? ?????? is my Grandfather isnt he?
"Not exactly," his mother replied with hesitation. "Your Grandmother was “taken” by a white man when she was 18, and that's what happened," she blurted out.

The white man was a prominent businessman in town. He provided financial support, I learned later. Remember Anita Matilde’s word: "taken."

Something had happened to Ann Rowland that she and her family had no power to prevent. Life went on, but there were scars -- scars on Hispanic women's bodies and minds.

A scorned Elena left her scars, too.