The report details “a tragic page in the recent history of Catholicism, a painful story from which the entire Church has learned,” writes Vatican editorial director, Andrea Tornielli.
St Basil, d. 379, was an influential theologian who fought against Arianism. St Basil was also a father of communal monasticism and greatly influenced St Benedict and thus western monasticism; at that time and in later times he was known for his MODERATION and his opposition to the more austere practices which were previously characteristic of monastic life.....YET St Basil wrote:
“Any cleric or monk who seduces young men or boys, or who is apprehended in kissing or in any shameful situation, shall be publicly flogged and shall lose his clerical tonsure. Thus shorn, he shall be disgraced by spitting in his face, bound in iron chains, wasted by 6 months of close confinement, and for 3 days each week put on barley bread given him toward evening. Following this period, he shall spend a further 6 months living in a small segregated courtyard in custody of a spiritual elder, kept busy with manual labor and prayer, and he shall be subjected to vigils and prayers, forced to walk at all times in the company of two spiritual brothers and never again allowed to associate with young me.”.
In the late 4th century, and following centuries, the above was regarded as “moderate” punishment for an unchaste cleric or monk! How much things have changed since then. In our era, a priest or bishop known to “shamefully seduce young men” can, unpunished, rise in the Church to be a powerful and influential Cardinal.
If I have this right, it was way back in 1999 (1999!) that Cardinal John O’Connor wrote to the Vatican’s envoy that McCarrick was known to share his bed with adult seminarians; that a priest had accused McCarrick of having sexual relations with another priest and that anonymous letters had accused McCarrick of having sexual relations with male minors YET St John Paul II, knowing this, was happy for McCarrick to become Archbishop of Washington, DC and a cardinal. What were JP2, and certain top Vatican prelates “in the know” about this, THINKING back then? (And what were Benedict and Francis thinking later?) Did they reflect at all on the damage McCarrick had done and would continue to do - in terms of the young Catholic men he was corrupting - and all the dioceses where this took place? Or what it could do to the credibility of the Church if the whole world, Catholic and non-Catholic, would or could eventually learn that being a promiscuous, sexually active gay man is no impediment in a priest’s career as he rises from priest to bishop to Cardinal, while the Church was still officially teaching that homosexual acts were sinful?
All this brings back memories of Keith O'Brien, 1938-2018, who became a Scottish archbishop in 1985 and was made a cardinal in 2003. O'Brien said all the right things calling abortion a "social evil"; and he clearly and repeatedly condemned homosexuality as a "moral degradation" and spoke of homosexuals as "captives of sexual aberrations" and stated "same sex relationships are demonstrably harmful to the medical, emotional and spiritual well being of those involved". However, Cardinal O'Brien resigned in 2013 after it was revealed that since the early 1980s he was involved in predatory sexual activity with seminarians as young as 19; and had often over many years abused his position of power for sexual gratification with subordinates.
This led me to remember a quote of Hilaire Belloc:
" The Catholic Church is an institution I am bound to hold as divine but for unbelievers a proof of its divinity might be found in the fact that no merely human institution conducted with such knavish imbecility would have lasted a fortnight."
Anonymous said.....In our era, a priest or bishop known to “shamefully seduce young men” can, unpunished, rise in the Church to be a powerful and influential Cardinal.
Well that's because we didn't realize that Sodom and Gomorrah was about the lack of hospitality and not about sexual immorality.....
7 comments:
St Basil, d. 379, was an influential theologian who fought against Arianism. St Basil was also a father of communal monasticism and greatly influenced St Benedict and thus western monasticism; at that time and in later times he was known for his MODERATION and his opposition to the more austere practices which were previously characteristic of monastic life.....YET St Basil wrote:
“Any cleric or monk who seduces young men or boys, or who is apprehended in kissing or in any shameful situation, shall be publicly flogged and shall lose his clerical tonsure. Thus shorn, he shall be disgraced by spitting in his face, bound in iron chains, wasted by 6 months of close confinement, and for 3 days each week put on barley bread given him toward evening. Following this period, he shall spend a further 6 months living in a small segregated courtyard in custody of a spiritual elder, kept busy with manual labor and prayer, and he shall be subjected to vigils and prayers, forced to walk at all times in the company of two spiritual brothers and never again allowed to associate with young me.”.
In the late 4th century, and following centuries, the above was regarded as “moderate” punishment for an unchaste cleric or monk!
How much things have changed since then. In our era, a priest or bishop known to “shamefully seduce young men” can, unpunished, rise in the Church to be a powerful and influential Cardinal.
If I have this right, it was way back in 1999 (1999!) that Cardinal John O’Connor wrote to the Vatican’s envoy that McCarrick was known to share his bed with adult seminarians; that a priest had accused McCarrick of having sexual relations with another priest and that anonymous letters had accused McCarrick of having sexual relations with male minors YET St John Paul II, knowing this, was happy for McCarrick to become Archbishop of Washington, DC and a cardinal.
What were JP2, and certain top Vatican prelates “in the know” about this, THINKING back then? (And what were Benedict and Francis thinking later?) Did they reflect at all on the damage McCarrick had done and would continue to do - in terms of the young Catholic men he was corrupting - and all the dioceses where this took place? Or what it could do to the credibility of the Church if the whole world, Catholic and non-Catholic, would or could eventually learn that being a promiscuous, sexually active gay man is no impediment in a priest’s career as he rises from priest to bishop to Cardinal, while the Church was still officially teaching that homosexual acts were sinful?
All this brings back memories of Keith O'Brien, 1938-2018, who became a Scottish archbishop in 1985 and was made a cardinal in 2003.
O'Brien said all the right things calling abortion a "social evil"; and he clearly and repeatedly condemned homosexuality as a "moral degradation" and spoke of homosexuals as "captives of sexual aberrations" and stated "same sex relationships are demonstrably harmful to the medical, emotional and spiritual well being of those involved".
However, Cardinal O'Brien resigned in 2013 after it was revealed that since the early 1980s he was involved in predatory sexual activity with seminarians as young as 19; and had often over many years abused his position of power for sexual gratification with subordinates.
This led me to remember a quote of Hilaire Belloc:
" The Catholic Church is an institution I am bound to hold as divine but for unbelievers a proof of its divinity might be found in the fact that no merely human institution conducted with such knavish imbecility would have lasted a fortnight."
“The Catholic Church is a perpetually defeated thing that always outlives her conquerors.”
Hilaire Belloc.
Cardinal O’Connor’s intervention is detailed in the report which is quite detailed.
Anonymous said.....In our era, a priest or bishop known to “shamefully seduce young men” can, unpunished, rise in the Church to be a powerful and influential Cardinal.
Well that's because we didn't realize that Sodom and Gomorrah was about the lack of hospitality and not about sexual immorality.....
Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...O’Connor’s intervention is detailed in the report which is quite detailed.
And the current Cardinal of New York blames it on 'clericalism'.....
Post a Comment