In
this April 24, 2002 file photo, Cardinal James Francis Stafford, left,
Pontifical Council for the Laity at the Vatican, Cardinal Theodore Edgar
McCarrick of Washington, D.C., center, and United States Catholic
Bishops' Conference President Wilton Gregory of Belleville, Ill., attend
a news conference at the Vatican concluding a two-day meeting between
Pope John Paul II and US cardinals at the Vatican. After an
extraordinary meeting sparked by a sex abuse scandal, (Credit: Crux, Pier
Paolo Cito/AP.)
Over at Crux, there is an article that blames clericalism, the sin of clericalism. Is there any such sin???? Any way, this is what Cardinal Dolan is quoted as saying in the Crux article:
Cardinal Timothy Dolan, archbishop of New York, said on his radio show that McCarrick himself is the only person that deserves more blame than the totality of the culture that existed.
“The real villain here, there’s only one. That’s Ted McCarrick,” Dolan said to Father Dave Dwyer on Conversation with Cardinal Dolan Tuesday afternoon. “The second villain here is, I’m afraid we have to say, a climate that held priests above the law, that gave priests special privileges, that said you need to be accountable to no one and we call that the sin of clericalism.”
Clericalism is too nebulous to lay blame at its feet. Let's blame three or four bishops in New Jersey, all now deceased, who did nothing about McCarrick when seminarians and priests told them what McCarrick did. Let's blame their callousness, their inhuman response to sexual abuse, abuse of authority and down right corruption. Don't call clericalism a sin, but the sinners, the mortal sinners, who enabled McCarrick to continue in his high places doing what he was doing. Let's include Popes John Paul II, Benedict and Francis. Pope Francis only acted once adults who as kids were sexually abused/raped by McCarrick came forward, the media got a hold of it and there was no way to contain the scandal through silence and denial. This scandal was enabled by mortal sinners in the hierarchy and elsewhere and they have names as does their mortal sins.
Let's blame the laxity in sexual morality that evolved since Vatican II and with what is call it's new morality. Let's blame post-Vatican II moral theologians, Charles Curran and Phillip Keene, and bishops and priests, who to this day and to include Pope Francis wanted, to redefine the 6th commandment to accompany mortal sinners by confirming "civil union/partnerships", those in adulterous second marriages marriages and compromises with other sexual sins which are mortal sins such as disordered homosexual sex acts, when these break the 6th commandment as taught by the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
We are talking about psychologically, sexually disordered men who were allowed into the seminary even when their disorders were known and the desire was to make the seminary a therapeutic community to heal them. That is being charitable. Known homosexuals were allowed to enter the seminary and often for nefarious reasons from vocation directors, to bishops to seminary personnel.
Let's talk too, about non-professional relationships bishops and priests have with seminarians and other priests under their authority and no professional standards to call that out. I am talking about way too casual and hoochy coochy relationships which seminarians and young priests find seductive if it contributes to their rise in the seminary, diocese and broader Church! In some cases, with adult priests and seminarians, one wonders if they aren't prostituting themselves to corrupt bishops for personal gain and favors, either sexual, financial or for career purposes.
I doubt that it was known in the pre-Vatican II seminary system that McCarrick was a corrupt pedophile with a homosexual orientation in his adult desires and with a compulsion toward both. He is a compulsive liar with a winning personality and a psychosis hidden by that personality.But after Vatican II when it became abundantly clear that he was both a pedophile and a homosexual in his adult abuse, he was given a pass or his behavior ignored. Even McCarrick told his adult seminarians and priests that he abused that it was common for priests to have sex with each other and there was nothing wrong with it.
Was this McCarrick's liberal formation, post Vatican II and following corrupt theologians who thought that disordered sex opposed to the 6th commandment and natural law could be rehabilitated and seen as a positive thing? Just think of Jesuit priest James Martin and the enablement he allows through his corrupt ideology. Think of how these ideologies promoted in high places, by priests like Martin, enables compromised seminaries/seminarians (the now closed Christ the King Seminary in Buffalo comes to mind) and a loose lifestyle in these institutions, especially if bishops are involved in the mortal sins, to occur and have occurred.
And think of Amoris Laetitia's foot note that allows for adultery in adulterous civil unions/partnerships as a process of accompaniment and allowing them to receive Holy Communion and how this impacts seminaries and the lifestyle there that can evolve if no sexual sin is considered a mortal or venial sin, that celibacy is redefined as there was an attempt to do in the late 60's and 70's and by the Jesuits as I recall.
While we are blaming the perpetrators and clericalism, let us also blame post-Vatican II laxity when it comes to sexual/personal morality and a homosexual culture in the hierarchy and priesthood that is a part of this clericalism, that of compromised men who want the compromise to be the norm. Compromised men, especially homosexual men and clericalism is a deadly mixture as we now see.
Homosexual clericalism needs to be named as the villain, not just the general term, clericalism. The problem in the hierarchy isn't heterosexual clericalism as it concerns giving a pass to heterosexual men in the seminary to have sex with women and in the seminary and bishops and priests enabled to have heterosexual sex without consequences.
I think the attempt at a "code of professional standards" for the clergy, including bishops, is helpful and programs like "Virtus" that train both the clergy and laity to understand and notice what could be improper and abusive behavior, like adults taking young adults, teenagers or children to sleep overs and striving to be alone with them, as red flags that need to be reported to the religious and civil authorities.
And if a child, teenager or adult tells someone they were sexually abused or raped by a member of the clergy, be it a bishop, priest or deacon--go to the civil authorities first and secondly inform the Church authorities.
If we had had Virtus type training since the 1960's, could McCarrick have gone on as long as he did?
Who knows?
29 comments:
I think you mean "Virtus"---not the St. Vitus dance!
Or it could be both! I fixed it. Thanks
Fr M,
I agree with almost everything you wrote above. But, I disagree when you label McCarrick as “psychotic”. The word psychotic, when properly understood, refers to an individual totally out of touch with reality, eg- as an individual can be while hallucinating while suffering from schizophrenia or completely delusional, paranoid and or grandiose, while suffering from a severe episode of bipolar mania.
Psychosis is often a very disabling condition; often a person who experiences psychosis is unable to hold down a job or fulfil the duties of a parent and so on.
I would guess McCarrick and someone or anyone who for decades acted like McCarrick would much more likely have “cluster B” personality disorder traits - this includes antisocial, borderline, histrionic and narcissistic personality traits.
If an individual has a big enough dose of antisocial personality disorder traits he or she could be regarded as “sociopathic” but would rarely be psychotic - as defined above. By the way, some studies estimate as many as 3.8% of Americans would meet the diagnostic criteria to be regarded as having an antisocial personality disorder - the level or degree of sociopathy would vary within that 3.8%.
The best quick and easy description and or definition of a person with an antisocial personality disorder I have read is a person who is quite deceitful and impulsive and often ignores responsibilities and, in the worst cases, has no conscience.
I think any adult who for decades and repeatedly can use a position of power and trust (priest, pastor, teacher or counsellor etc) to use much younger adults for sexual gratification, and even sexually abuse minors, with total disregard for the well being of those used and abused young adults and indifferent to the suffering of sexually abused minors, must clearly be in the approximately 3.8% of any population who has an antisocial personality disorder and would be clearly a sociopathic person; in fact, the worst sort of sociopath, in my opinion.
Apparently, virtually all psychopaths are antisocial, but not all antisocials have psychopathy.
The harm some sociopaths can do is greatly reduced because they often appear to be as disturbed and unhinged as they actually are -
While often the worst psychopaths can be extremely cold and calculating while appearing to many as a very pleasant and even charming person......which reminds one of.....?
But that person would be psychopathic not psychotic.
I think the right words and language really matter.
From: The Rite of Sodomy, published in 2005 A.D. (updated in 2012 A.D.)
The 1,318-page text contains over 3000 endnotes, a bibliography of over 350 books, is fully indexed...
file:///C:/Users/radis/Downloads/The%20Rite%20of%20Sodomy_%20Homosexual%20-%20Engel,%20Randy_4783.pdf
The above is searchable.
"Randy Engel, one of the nation’s top investigative reporters, began her journalistic career shortly after her graduation from the University of New York at Cortland, in 1961.
"...in the mid-1960s, Randy Engel developed an intense interest in pro-life issues..."
========================================================================================
Randy Engel's claims years ago about then-Cardinal McCarrick's status as a sexual molester proved true.
Her book documented the following in regard to then-Cardinal McCarrick, and the issue of sodomy, page 762:
"The charge that Cardinal McCarrick is a homosexual prelate who preys on seminarians was made public by whistleblower Father James Haley in December 2005, shortly after The Rite of Sodomy went to press.
"See Matt C. Abbott, “Priest accuses U.S. cardinal of abuse of power,” 2 December 2005 at
http://www.michnews.com/artman/publish/article_10585.shtml.
"Several years later, author Richard Sipe confirmed McCarrick’s homosexual proclivities on his web site at http://www.richardsipe.com.
“The Archdiocese of Newark September 2009 — Questions About the Status of Clergy Abuse Schulte/Gillen; Sita; & McCarrick,” and “The Cardinal McCarrick Syndrome” are two articles by Sipe which further substantiate the charge of homosexual exploitation of clergy and seminarians by the cardinal.
"According to Sipe, McCarrick’s homosexuality was known at the time of his installation as the first bishop of Metuchen. This was on January 31, 1982. The New Jersey diocese was erected especially for him by Pope John Paul II on November 19, 1981.
"Readers will recall that McCarrick was ordained a priest for the Archdiocese of New York by homosexual Francis Cardinal Spellman, and later served as secretary to Spellman’s successor Terence James Cardinal Cooke, also a homosexual."
"New York insiders glibly refer to McCarrick by his feminine name “Blanche” and Vatican officials have long been aware of his penchant for young handsome seminarians.
"McCarrick has ordained at least three homosexual bishops."
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Mark,
Thanks very much for that. I am pretty sure I could not get through 1,300 plus pages on this subject but later today I will definitely read some reviews of that text by Randy Engel.
On a slightly personal note, I’d like to add that I at times do not like the criticisms and even insults you have received on this blog. I wish more people here were capable of disagreeing with you without the insults. It stands out clearly to me and my family and friends that you are a man with a great love of God and a great love and loyalty to His Church. At times what you contribute here I find both interesting and helpful.
All the best, Mark.
Gerard and Melissa + 5.
An excellent letter you wrote Father ! I agree the words clericalism and psychosis could be replaced with narcissism. I think while you mention who they let in, you ignored who these seminaries excluded. Many people like McCarrick "built" seminaries to benefit people like him, for that scheme to work he had to guarantee certain people were excluded. Cardinal Dolan should be challenged on his use of the word clericalism, if only to determine the truth.
Typical Bureaucratic response: mistakes were made but no one made them. What I want to know is: what are the consequences. McCarrick's successors in New Jersey shoulder a huge amount of the blame. They are, conveniently for the bureaucrats, all dead, but what are the consequences? Do their names get pulled off of the high schools and auditoriums named after them in NJ? Same with the rest of them in other dioceses. The bishops in this report are essentially amoral men incapable of comprehending that there's something perverted about a bishop cuddling with his seminarians. And based on what's happened in Cincinnati and New Orleans, that condition isn't restricted to the North East. Until a few Bishops get their honors removed, I imagine the rest of them won't bother to learn what's moral behavior and what's not.
The next time Father Dave Dwyer has a "Conversation with Cardinal Dolan," he should ask the good cardinal what he knows about similar McCarrick activities with Cardinal Dolan's predecessor in Milwaukee, Archbishop Weakland and his auxiliary, Bishop Sklba.
And to think, to reflect!, on the fact that it was Cardinal George Pell, who especially from 1996 to 2017, fought so hard as archbishop and then Cardinal, to root out the worst moral and financial corruption in the Church.....HE was the ONE to face repeated false allegations, repeated appearances before Kangaroo courts and suffered public disgrace and downfall and sat for over a year in a cell in a Victorian maximum security prison......and he could have died there had Australia’s highest court refused to hear his last appeal, as they very mostly do in criminal matters.....
The headline in today’s “The Australian” re all this is: “Molester Cardinal fools Two Popes”. That is JP2 and Benedict, The article ends with stating: the 450 page report largely absolves Pope Francis. This article also suggests that JP2 and Benedict were fooled by either regarding McCarrick as a friend, or McCarrick’s repeated denials, ie McCarrick swore on his oath as a bishop that all the allegations were lies and that he had never had sexual relations with anyone and had never abused anyone.
To end, this article reports the group SNAP and others are calling for the expulsion and punishment of all those still alive who knew about McCarrick’s sins and criminal behaviours but did nothing to stop them.......(in the US Catholic Church, and in Rome, how many hundreds of clerics, bishops and lay people would that be?)
I am too worn out and tired today for a variety of reasons to write much here, but having read this blog and others about this unholy mess I wanted to contribute this: Evelyn Waugh, d. 1966, a number of times said and wrote he believed God gave each person, especially each Catholic, one special important duty or task to fulfil in their life, this side of the grave, and each person was free to complete that particular task or duty, or not complete it......I have never till now had the thought I am about to attempt to articulate - is it possible the Enemy possesses his perverted version of this? Could it be possible some people, including Catholic bishops, have been set one evil task, by the evil one, to complete, or one evil duty to fulfil, and with full knowledge and awareness or not, some such individuals, with a probably weak, clouded intellect and will, have completed, with a devastating impact on millions, the task set for them by the Enemy?
I will soon turn 60, and until this year, I have rarely thought of the ways Satan can both trick and influence people.
At the beginning of his pontificate Pope Francis said we should not focus so much on abortion and homosexuality. McCarrick must have been happy to hear that. Or maybe he inspired it?
Anonymous @ 12.45pm,
You made a great point there I had never considered; that is: WHY it was important, very important, for some seminarians to be excluded, to never become priests. Those who might have the integrity to speak out about what was probably painfully obvious, to many insiders.....When I read that book “Farewell (or Goodbye?) Good Men” by Michael Rose, I naively thought only in terms of “liberal and progressive” priests and nun excluding orthodox, conservative young men from the priesthood because, even though wrong, they honestly thought that was best for the future of the Church, for what they genuinely believed, or genuinely wanted to believe, the Church was becoming. That is, even though wrong, their intentions were “good” given their theological outlook.
Does that make any sense?
KPK.
I am so glad I “tuned in” here (sometimes I admit I’m not) and read Anon 11:16. Excellent explanation/coverage of this very complicated issue. We need to be so careful how we throw out knee-jerk diagnoses. Thank you.
Anon 11:16
A very good post. I recently spoke with our diocesan vocations director (VD), who I think is a very grounded, holy, and intelligent man, about the process of determining the suitability of candidates for seminary today. I entered seminary 39 (!) years ago, so I imagined that the process is much more rigorous and, we hope, effective today.
What he told me was very encouraging, especially concerning how the seminaries have developed their own protocols for assessing the formation - human, academic, spiritual, and social - of the students in their schools. I got the impression from what our VD said that, as has been done with general practice medicine over the last 20 or 30 years, formation in seminaries has taken a much more "holistic," if you will, approach to a man's formation.
A bright, pious student, but one who cannot get along with others in friendships or who shirks responsibility, can become a problematic priest. The "Friend to All" who is not able to maintain suitable academic standing might be encouraged to seek another path. The "loner" who fulfills all the obligations and follows the rules perfectly is someone who may need more scrutiny.
The candidate should be a "whole" person in the best sense, even if there are some relatively minor weaknesses in his makeup.
I don't envy the VD's their jobs or the seminary staff and faculty theirs. I was encouraged by what our man said, and it challenged me to be more attentive to praying for him and the seminary folks!
Pope Francis has become irrelevant to me. I will follow the binding teachings of the church, but ignore pretty much everything else that comes from Rome and the bishops.
I have 8 children, with the 9th on the way. This started for me with Francis' statement that Catholic families "don't have to breed like rabbits." What a disgusting statement. It continued with his constant injection of confusion into this highly confused society regarding homosexuality and gender theology and the roles of mothers and fathers. It continues with his statements on climate change and economics, which belie a gross lack of understanding (and, after all, he has no authority to speak decisively on those issues). Now, the report on one of the most heinous sexual predators of our time (abusing a person he baptized - simply repulsive) in which the blame is squarely layed on saint John Paul II, his secretary, Pope Benedict and, above all, Vigano - who was a key whistle blower. The Vatican and Pope Francis have no moral authority, whatsoever. They are now irrelevant.
The USCCB is also losing credibility with me. This is especially true given the latest letter from the USCCB congratulating the "Catholic" and president elect, Joe Biden. A 9th grade civics student knows he is not the president elect, at least not yet. And you don't have to be Thomas Aquinas or Augustine to know he's not Catholic.
I will always follow the Church's binding teachings, but her hierarchy is becoming completely irrelevant to me otherwise. And that breaks my heart.
Considering the number of children sexually abused by the clergy, I would say that homosexuality is not the problem- it is that there are dangerous pedophiles within the clergy. Homosexuals do not typically abuse helpless victims but are more likely to have consensual relationships. Is is a terrible scar on the church that pedophilia was allowed to continue for so long- even moving priests from one parish to another. Human sexuality is a complex thing and maybe it is time for the church to once again allow married priests as they did before the middle ages.
The world must be coming to an end--I actually agree with Mark Thomas about something.
Randy Engel's book is solid, but it is also tedious and painful to read. Ironically, the largest single group to purchase her book has been attorneys--for obvious reasons.
The book really SHOULD be read however, by any Catholic who seriously wants to understand the mess we are in. It traces the "geneaology" of the current crisis back to its origins. A lot of those "holy priests and bishops" we revered so strongly didn't deserve our naive adulation.
Betty, McCarrick is definitely a homosexual and more than likely an ephebofile, meaning he gravitated to post-pubescent kids rather than pre-pubescent. It may seem like splitting hairs, but in the priesthood, the predominant abuse isn’t toward pre-pubescent kids, although it does happen and a true pedophile if he has unlimited access to children can have hundreds of children. With the miniiscule number of priests who are pedophiles , you are correct that they are not the type to abduct a child, abuse the child or murder the child. Some kind of relationship is present.
In terms of McCarrick, yes he presumed he was in a loving relationship with a sexual component with teenagers and young adults. The power differential is a very grave matter too.
But beyond all of that the culprits are those in authority who knew and did not stop it and enabled him over the years. That is the true scandal and raises questions about those who did it and whether or not they have any sense of empathy for victims and future victims. Perhaps they thought is consensual especially when it was someone 18 years and older. I think that could be possible but not usually.
I am a priest whose journey through the seminary took much longer than most. I entered college seminary in the late 1990s, left after two years in a California seminary in 2003 and only returned to formation in 2014. I was ordained a priest in 2016.
While I think that things have improved in some respects, there are still problems. At my last seminary, there was a group of seminarians who some of us suspected as being homosexual. One of the members of this clique was dismissed from the seminary during my deacon year and ultimately laicised. He was actively homosexual. Other members of this group, who though they did go on to ordination, did manage to cause scandal and at least one is probably going to be dismissed from priestly ministry for sending inappropriate images of himself to a teenage boy.
The task that faces seminary formators is not unlike that of Sisyphus. They must remain vigilant. Otherwise, we are going to see more stories like this.
As for our Church leadership, I have full confidence in my diocesan bishop who has been paternal and encouraging all throughout my priesthood and whose judgment I trust without question. I wish I could say the same for the Bishop of Rome.
The McCarrick Report is a whitewash. Doesn't Pope Francis realise that he has precious little credibility left?
Thank you, Fr McDonald for your reply. You are correct in everything you said. God bless you.
Besides clericalism and homosexuality, it's also the money.
McCarricker gained his influence by passing out large sums. Where did the money come from? How much did he dispense in his long career? To whom? What did he get in return? Who might still be indebted to him? Do all cardinals and bishops have hundreds of thousands of dollars to pass around to promote personal agendas or protect reputations? If so, why is this allowed to happen?
As Deep Throat said during Watergate, "Follow the money." Maybe The Boston Globe should go back to work on this story.
Good point Jean J Florida.....do a search for Bishop Bransfield, another homosexual, and how he used money as 'gifts'.
Nobody seems to realize the activity of the Freemasons in all this! I have had a copy of their letter to freemason bishops for years now in which their plan is revealed. It was exposed at the Lord's request by Debra of Australia and contains their full plan to destroy the Church from within. The Lord also said that Freemasonry was more rampant in Australia than anywhere else, so it is not surprising they had a go at Pell at the behest of the international organization. It also explains the antipathy of some Australian clergy to Debra's messages. Our Lady has exposed the freemasons in and out of the Church in her messages to Fr Gobi. The tendency of most Catholics to reject anybody with divine messages is also a devilish deception. St Paul said to EXAMINE prophecy; he did not say to reject all, yet this is what we do. For those who are not up to speed on Freemasonry, Our Lady said that the dragon alluded to in Scripture stands for Satan, the black beast is Freemasonry, the second beast alias the false prophet is Freemasonry in the Church - it takes its orders from the first beast. This is backed up by revelations through Debra and Vassula. Discrediting the Pope, or one scandal in the Church cost thousands of souls and Jesus has said recently that those who attack his Vicar cannot be His disciple. People who think that discrediting the Pope, by falling for misinterpretations accredited to him are doing a holy and pious deed, are falling for Satan's deceptions and end up promoting the devil's work. Oh, how deceitful and subtle he is! We are so quick to accept human versions and so slow to hear the Lord. I can send you a copy of the Plan if you email me on gailramplen@gmail.com . Lastly, the American and other bishops who commend Biden are knowingly or not guilty of gutless acquiescence in scandalous apostasy that is costing Jesus probably millions of souls. Catholics, it is time to wake up and fight for Jesus.
By the way, Jesus also gave us a heads-up in one of His messages when he pointed out that it is as hard for a good man to believe evil of someone as it is hard for an evil one to believe good of another. Wise words.
Debra of Australia?
Debbie of Dallas?
Who is to be believed?
Queensland’s notorious cult leader (Debra of Australia) accused of being a fraud.
Our international investigation into a woman who calls herself Princess, and tells followers she has a hotline to heaven.
After battles with Australian authorities, she’s vanished; but A Current Affair has now tracked her down living the high-life overseas.
Prior to 1976 Homosexuality was listed as a mental illness by the American Psychiatric Association. By means of politics a homosexual group forcibly assisted the Association in deleting the diagnosis from the source book used. The diagnosis remains today in 2020 in the International Classification of diseases. A homosexual lobby group has been successful in inserting the concept of normality into the culture since 1976.
Homosexual behvior remains a sin. Confession and repentance is the answer offered by our Creator. And .... no - you were nor born that way.
Jean J from Florida. Yes, the money. Throughout the report, McCarrick always mentioned that he never took a salary. I could live without a salary as well, if I had everything I needed paid for. And again, while McCarrick may have been good at fundraising, how much did he keep for himself? Then he would be able to give these gifts. As with Bransfield and Maciel and others, it would be interesting to see the list of recipients.
Where is my gift? Oh, I'm not a bishop or cardinal nor am I a mosnignor.
Thank you, Anonymous. No salary? Mr. McCarrick certainly lived well and traveled extravagantly for someone with no paycheck. His Wikipedia biography doesn't indicate a large family inheritance, so where did the money come from? I realize that diocesan priests don't take a vow of poverty ... but a beach house? Well, God is good. Still, as you say: Ubi est mea?
"Gerard and Melissa + 5. November 11, 2020 at 12:17 PM"
Thank you for your kind words.
Peace and good health to you and your family.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
"Healthy families are essential to society. It provides us with consolation and hope to see so many large families who welcome children as a gift from God. They know that every child is a blessing."
— His Holiness, Pope Francis
Post a Comment