He’s wearing a cassock, so he must be one of those rigid types that hides all kinds of corruption below it. But he studied at St. Meinrad Seminary which is not known for being rigid in its formation. Maybe he’s a rigid progressive????
I suspect he comes from a charismatic Catholic background where the laity in some of these communities practice “headship and submission” as well as “deliverance from evil spirits” both of which laity are not allowed to practice since laity are equal in rank in the Church and cannot require headship and submission from another lay person nor can they practice exorcisms, minor or major! But, hey, in today’s Church, do your own thing! Evidently this priest was able to do his own thing in his diocese without any rebuke?
At any rate it is tragic on many levels:
The canonical case against Fr. Alex Crow
How will the Mobile archdiocese canonically prosecute a priest who moved to Europe with a teenager?
27 comments:
He sounds almost childlike. You wonder about the vetting process. As an aside, if the girl had been a boy, the Archdiocese would have wired him funds, promised him a promotion upon his return and offered to accompany them and bless their union!
O one in seminary or his archdiocese noticed any of this until the letters appeared? That’s like lighting your own hair for a rescue signal. Our hierarchy is in shambles.
TJM, immaturity is certainly the case and possibly a pathology of some kind manifested in a religious way.
Father McDonald said: "I suspect he comes from a charismatic Catholic background where the laity in some of these communities practice 'headship and submission' as well as 'deliverance from evil spirits'...”
"Crow, a professional musician and popular performer around the Gulf Coast, experienced a dramatic conversion to Catholicism after going to confession at the age of 21.
"The young musician, who was baptized an Episcopalian and later joined the conservative Presbyterian Church of America, quit his band after he felt called to the priesthood."
https://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/trad-priest-fired-after-leaving-with-18-year-old
Father McDonald,
I suspect due to a dearth of vocations, this sort gets through. It is tragic, for the Church and him.
This is just sounding worse. So the Church is so desperate for priests that they left guys like this into seminary. Maybe they were relieved that he is not gay.
Reverends AJM and MJK, and companions of this blog,
Here’s what I said on Facebook about this in a post on one of my favourite Deacon’s postings, Dcn Greg Kandra:
“ Greg Kandra wow. This is something really. I’ll address a few points here.
1) Yes this guy could be is truly mentally I’ll, and in one of the worst ways of being a psycho/sociopath. Those types are the worst and highly skilled at social manipulation. However, …
2) If this guy was truly ok before recent, AND the stuff of him being an exorcist is true, AND the Spain exorcism is true, AND didn’t work or Fr wasn’t doing it properly, it’s possible Satan/his demon(s) possessed Fr in the process, claiming more than one victim.
3) as to your main question about seminaries letting him through, wake up Deacon. Seminaries, for a start, are some of the worst environments for forming the faithful. You put a bunch of men together, who have various needs as well as pasts, AND you isolate them from family and friends for most of their days until they do their pastoral year or are ordained, so much can happen.
As for the wake up part, seminary recruitment IS dependent who the heck runs the place And/or the Pope’s mindset at the time. I know this for a fact as a friend of mine was rejected after being admitted to seminary in my diocese for being too “inward and conservative” and he’s a great person. Just because he wasn’t Mr social he didn’t deserve to be kicked out. And don’t get me started on the “lavender mafia” part of it. If you get liberals/“labvender mafia” supporters as faculty or rectors of seminaries they WILL reject good candidates in favour of those they prefer. Which leads me to …
4) not doing proper screening AND or turning a blind eye to certain malformations in candidates. If it’s a conservative seminary they will prefer their own. You have a “closet” or sympathizing “lavender mafia” rector they’ll prefer their own.”
Agree with TJM.
Vetting cannot likely be relied upon as full-proof.
It seems there are issues here much greater than spiritual welfare. This individual seems to be conflating an unrealistic infatuation with the spiritual. This sounds supremely unhealthy and will only be destructive to both this individual and, particularly, the girl. I do hope the former priest gets the assistance he needs and the girl is separated from this individual so she can resume a normal life with normal interactions, friendships and relationships.
Wouldn't a life of supervised prayer and repentance perhaps as a non-priest monastic be productive in some way? To return this individual to a lay state out in society could, potentially, make possible the victimization of others. Perhaps that's not the Church's role, to imprison persons to protect society from them, but, at the same time, society might be endangered by such an individual roaming freely as well.
ByzRus,
You posed a very sensible and potentially viable solution. Of course, he would have to consent to it, but perhaps he would. I like that better than turning him loose into society in his present mental state.
From the Mobile Archdiocese website:
"When it became clear that Alex Crow had intended to abandon his assignment, Archbishop Rodi removed the faculties of Alex Crow."
"He has also ordered him, under his promise of obedience, to return home immediately."
As obedience is not unconditional supposedly, then in regard to Father Crow: Archbishop Thomas J. Rodi's order to Father Crow — linked to Father Crow's promise of obedience — is hollow.
Father Crow, would stand on solid ground supposedly should he decide to disobey Archbishop Rodi's order in question.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
The Archdiocese of Mobile has reported that they have generated their share of vocations. I doubt that they were desperate to have ordained Father Crow. Therefore, I would not think that the Archdiocese, out of desperation, had overlooked "red flags" in regard to Father Crow.
Perhaps Father Crow's actions are the result of recent events within his life. Such as his belief that Jesus had spoken to him recently.
News reports have stated:
-- Former Alabama priest Alex Crow wrote that Jesus told him to flee with 18-year-old
"Letters written by a defrocked priest who “abandoned” his duties to the Archdiocese of Mobile indicate he believes he and the 18-year-old female who accompanied him to Europe were told by Jesus to leave Mobile."
Pax.
Mark Thomas
A very, very sad case for all involved. These sorts of stories are rare, but not unknown by any means. The Archdiocese of Portland and local police there have been looking for one of their priests who absconded eight years ago to the Philippines after it was discovered he had placed cameras in bathrooms. The Savannah diocese has had one or two cases since I was ordained of priests who took off into the night after some inappropriate behavior - non sexual - was discovered.
Regarding who gets "let into seminary," the "vetting process," and "what anyone in the seminary notices":
I agree with Byz - vetting isn't, and can't be, foolproof. And to suggest Crow's advancement could be blamed on the "lavender mafia" is nonsense.
Most any priest could tell you that he had classmates who were a bit odd or eccentric and that some of these have gone on to carry out marvelous ministry over the years. We've also stories of classmates who, when their terrible behavior is discovered, we say, "Never in a million years did we think he was that kind of person! No one knew!"
Regarding the "monastic" model of formation, I think it should be reconsidered as Servimus notes. While guys should be in an environment where they can develop the disciplines needed to function as a priest in a healthy and holy way, I wonder if this might not be better accomplished in a less isolated setting.
At my seminary, Mt. St. Mary's, although were were located on the campus of a small (around 2,000 students) university, we were very much isolated. We studied separately, ate separately, prayed separately. Since I was ordained the rules have become even more restrictive. We could, if we wanted, travel on a weekend to a friend's home parish or, as I did, attend Sunday mass at a local parish. I found Our Lady of Mt. Carmel parish, a precious little country church in Thurmont, MD, seven miles from the seminary. I just needed a break from the "monastic" environment. Now, leaving the seminary for a weekend or attending mass in a nearby parish is verboten.
After a guy leaves seminary, his environment changes almost immediately. He doesn't live in a community with structured/enforced prayer times. He will almost always be praying with a community that has crying babies, fidgety toddlers, people who will complain that the church is too cold or too hot, etc. The "monastic" seminary is a comfortable womb that, in many ways, may not be the best preparation for parish life.
Many years ago Fr. Donald Senior, CP, who was president of the Catholic Theological Union in Chicago, wrote about what he called "The Urban Seminary." Guys would live in houses of formation but study in a university setting with non-seminarians. They were encouraged to form healthy relationships with other students. Rather than being isolated they were integrated into a community life that, in many ways was much more similar to what the world looked like.
I wonder as to whether the following applies to Father Crow? Has Father Crow's connection to the TLM led to the awful state of events into which he has fallen?
I reject the following claim from several leading traditionalists: When priests have embraced the TLM, many have then questioned the Council, as well as the Holy Mass of Pope Saint Paul VI. (That has not applied to just priests.) The notion is that the TLM is the "True Mass" that promotes the "True Faith."
The "True Mass," as well as, "True Faith," are incompatible supposedly with the Council, as well as the Holy Mass of Pope Saint Paul VI (not to mention ecumenism, interreligious dialogue, etc.
Those who embrace the TLM will recognize, then resist, the above. That message is preached by such leading traditionalists as the SSPX, Peter Kwasniewski, New Catholic (Rorate Caeli), The Remnant, etc.
Example: Father Don Davide Pagliarani, Superior General of the Society of Saint Pius X, declared:
"With Summorum Pontificum, the Tridentine Mass was then granted a much wider right. This allowed a certain number of priests to discover it; and by celebrating it – it must be acknowledged – many priests began to question their priesthood, and to question the Council and the New Mass."
The holy TLM did not do that. Instead, certain folks have misrepresented, as well as weaponized, Summorum Pontifium/TLM against the Church.
I wonder as to whether Father Crow is on the road to that type of radicalization?
Pax.
Mark Thomas
To me, the following, provided by Fr. MJK makes a lot of sense and would help mitigate against some failed vocations. To be sure, many vocations are successful leading to happy, healthy and well-adjusted priesthoods in increasingly challenging circumstances.
"After a guy leaves seminary, his environment changes almost immediately. He doesn't live in a community with structured/enforced prayer times. He will almost always be praying with a community that has crying babies, fidgety toddlers, people who will complain that the church is too cold or too hot, etc. The "monastic" seminary is a comfortable womb that, in many ways, may not be the best preparation for parish life.
Many years ago Fr. Donald Senior, CP, who was president of the Catholic Theological Union in Chicago, wrote about what he called "The Urban Seminary." Guys would live in houses of formation but study in a university setting with non-seminarians. They were encouraged to form healthy relationships with other students. Rather than being isolated they were integrated into a community life that, in many ways was much more similar to what the world looked like."
Mark, the TLM explains all those priests who molested minors, most around 1974 and Cardinal McCarrick and Pope Francis’ one time Jesuit friend Fr. Rupnick. Oh and the first bishop Pope Francis appointed, his friend Bishop Zanchetta now serving prison time.
Father McDonald,
As I noted, according to many leading traditionalists, the "TLM explains" supposedly that the Council, as well as the Holy Mass of Pope Saint Paul VI, are spiritual poisons that must be destroyed.
The TLM, of course, does not "explain" that. Those who have misrepresented and weaponized Summorum Pontificum/TLM have "explained" that. I hope that Father Crow has not embraced the TLM in that destructive manner.
I pray that Father Crow will embrace Pope Benedict XVI's holy example of unconditional reverence and obedience. Should he do that, then Father Crow will return to his Archdiocese in obedience to Archbishop Rodi.
Pope Benedict XVI is calling Father Crow to embrace the Catholic Way of unconditional obedience. Unfortunately, Satan has Father Crow's ear. Therefore, many prayers for Father Crow.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Father Crow is in dire need to make the following his own:
DECREE ON THE MINISTRY AND LIFE OF PRIESTS. PRESBYTERORUM ORDINIS. PROMULGATED BY HIS HOLINESS, POPE PAUL VI ON DECEMBER 7, 1965
"Priests, never losing sight of the fullness of the priesthood which the bishops enjoy, must respect in them the authority of Christ, the Supreme Shepherd. They must therefore stand by their bishops in sincere charity and obedience."
"This priestly obedience, imbued with a spirit of cooperation is based on the very sharing in the episcopal ministry which is conferred on priests both through the Sacrament of Orders and the canonical mission."
"However, the priestly ministry, since it is the ministry of the Church itself, can only function in the hierarchical union of the whole body. Pastoral charity, therefore, urges priests, as they operate in the framework of this union..."
"In a great spirit of faith, let them receive and execute whatever orders the holy father, their own bishop, or other superiors give or recommend."
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Mark Thomas you are beneath contempt. Crawl back under the rock from whence you came. Your routine rantings here would cause me to believe you are engaging in classic projection.
Now ET's brother M, has waded in the matter seems to be closed. Except it cannot be because: todos, todos, todos.
I think what FRMJK writes makes sense for the most part. Most of us priests don’t want to be suspicious of our brother priests especially as it concerns the possible abuse of minors in whatever form. Virtus training has helped to overcome that to a certain extent but not entirely. Crow looks normal, nice looking, so one would hope he is normal, but evidently not or he wasn’t able to have impulse control in terms of his attractions. A 30 year old man marring an 18 year old is not unheard of. That would mean some dating when the girl was a bit younger, no? And in South Carolina, within my lifetime, 13 year old girls could marry older men with their parent’s approval. As it concern a priest, what complicates it is his position of power and he has made a promise of celibacy, so there is a scandal aspect. But in those relgious traditions where clergy can marry once ordained many found their spouses in the congregations they served.
Screening of candidates isn’t fool proof. Some dioceses do it better than others. I see a couple of problems. The seminary is a community centered on the Liturgy of the Hours, class and meals together as well as recreation. It is a wonderful support system for the seminarian and the promises he will make at ordination but should be living while preparing for ordination. Seminary can be a cocoon. Once ordained, rectory life, especially post-Vatican II rectory life, can be horrible or good depending on the pastor. Today there is no full time housekeeper, everyone is on his own as it concerns meals, and many priests take the path of least residence in buy fast food and junk food and their figure and health suffers. But they psychology state suffers too from loneliness and a lack of a true priestly community in the rectory.
Some of us a loners and enjoy solicitude and a hermit-like life. If that means one has no pastoral skills while thriving being a bachelor, that isn’t good either.
Then there is no really supervision and evaluation of priest after ordination or throughout their priesthood. I’m not sure how that could be done, but I think a priest who is in private practice with little or no supervision or rebukes from an authority higher than him is part of the problem too.
I remember the glory days before Vatican Disaster II. Our parish had 5 priests in the rectory ranging in age from their late 20s into their 70s. Some were WW II vets who saw action in the European and Pacific theaters. On parish grounds they wore the cassock and prayed the office often while walking on parish grounds. Some of them golfed or fished together and generally took their meals together prepared by the housekeeper. There was a family like atmosphere at the rectory. Unfortunately those days are gone, perhaps never to return. The laity can help by inviting Father to dinner or an outing or planning an event at the rectory. Most priests I have known have welcomed socializing with their parishioners. Pray for them too! It is not an easy life
TJM is correct.
Philadelphia parishes (assuming the same in other cities) had upper and lower churches, massive rectories that sometimes housed 8 priests and masses occurring simultaneously just to deal with volume - it was a very different world.
Fast forward, one poor priest is residing and eating his beanie weenie in a massive rectory that could need repair, massive churches are more empty than not and could need repair, the priest cringes when acreage of parking lot blacktop starts to crack and the weeds come up and the remaining overwhelming majority seem to worship at Sts. Pillow and Mattress on any given weekend.
Just another vacuum cleaner salesman who found another line to peddle, this in reference to my above seminary comment.
Fr's.
I've been thinking about this.
Screening aside, do seminaries teach candidates the difference between love and infatuation, appropriate vs. inappropriate?
Similar to what TJM said, this priest sounds like someone in grade school / junior high having his first crush. At his age, and with his training, I would think he should have been able to distinguish between the aforementioned, in addition to what's appropriate and inappropriate.
The Church can't mitigate/prevent everything despite best efforts. No large institution can. I'm just wondering how this individual has such a flawed understanding of what constitutes an appropriate relationship and then, he had to have known the demands of his vocation vis-a-vis celibacy. Again, this might just be a bad apple in the bin that took longer than most to really begin to rot.
ByzRus,
Well said. I imagine there is a lot of variation from seminary to seminary. Even mature candidates go off the rails sometime.
Byz, I don't recall hearing anything at Seminary about the difference between love and infatuation. I think the presumption was that by the time you reach major theology you have a proper understanding of that. There are always going to be some who don't, but I don't know if the Seminary program can be adjusted or aimed at those few who have areas where serious maturation is still necessary. Seminaries aren't therapy centers.
TJM and Fr. MJK,
Agree with you both. Thanks!
Post a Comment