www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News Possible Source of Priest Scandal

Here is a book review of a recent publication regarding the source of the scandals rocking the Catholic Church. We are familiar with the results, but are we familiar with the sources? I present this review for an honest discussion:

- - - - - - -

Book Review:
Boston Globe Gives One-Sided View of Priest Scandal

By Geraldine Hawkins
March 14, 2003

"Goodbye! Good Men" by Michael S. Rose.

The Boston Globe put what has come to be known as "The Priest Scandal" on its front page for 100 consecutive days, but if they really wanted their readers to know what precipitated this appalling series of events, they would run an ad for Michael S. Rose's shocking book Goodbye! Good Men.

For generations, if a man aspiring to the Roman Catholic priesthood confessed to a tendency toward homosexuality, the Church would not ordain him. After the Second Vatican Council in the mid-1960s, the Church revised its position with the rationale that this marginalized group could take the burden of a homosexual orientation and offer it to God like any other burden. In so doing, they would find themselves that much farther along the road to holiness. There is little doubt that many men have done precisely this.

However, there have been many�yes, many�who have flouted the Church's longstanding celibacy rule. In fact, this has been widespread and flagrant enough to have created "a gay subculture" within the priesthood. This phenomenon was vividly described by Stanley Kurtz in a stunning article in The National Review entitled, "Gay Priests, Gay Marriage." It is further illustrated, largely through anecdotal evidence, in Goodbye! Good Men.

"The problem in vocation offices and seminaries is a profound spiritual problem, a sickness of untold proportions," writes Rose. "Boston's story is simply a repeat of other heinous scandals exacerbated by Catholic officials across the U.S. and in other countries as well. What happened in Boston is routine in many other dioceses. � The root of this problem goes back to the very place where vocations to the priesthood germinate. Too often men who support the teachings of the church, especially the teachings on sexual morality, are dismissed for being 'rigid and uncharitable homophobes' while those seminarians who reject the Church's teaching or 'come out' as gays to their superiors are wined and dined, given preferential treatment, and then ordained to the Catholic priesthood. � A protective network starts in many seminaries where gay seminarians are encouraged to 'act out' or 'explore their sexuality' in highly inappropriate ways."

Straight Priests Soon Leave

This has had the effect of scaring off a lot of heterosexual men, since normal men generally would rather not be surrounded by obvious homosexuals. Rose quotes Donald B. Cozzens, author of The Changing Face of the Priesthood, that there has not only been a "heterosexual exodus from the priesthood," but that the "overwhelmingly gay clergy culture will have an effect on how the laity views the priesthood and it will have an effect on incoming vocations. Potential candidates for the priesthood who are heterosexual will be intimidated from joining an institution where the ethos is primarily that of gay culture."

- - - - - - -

The rest of the book review can be read here:
http://www.massnews.com/2003_Editions/3_March/031403_mn_boston_globe_one-sided_review.shtml


Here is another website with more on the book by Michael Rose. This here is an interesting blurb on the issue:

- - - - - - -

The real truth behind the current scandal rocking the Catholic Church...

How did the American Catholic priesthood go from an image of wise, strong men like Spencer Tracy in Boys Town and Bing Crosby in Going My Way, to an image of "pedophile priests"?

In Goodbye, Good Men, investigative reporter Michael S. Rose provides the shocking answer � an answer the mainstream news media has missed.

He uncovers how radical liberalism, like that found on many college campuses, has infiltrated the Catholic Church and tried to overthrow her traditional beliefs, standards, and disciplines � especially Church teachings on sexuality. In bringing the "sexual revolution" into the Church, liberals have welcomed � even preferred � radicalized active homosexuals to orthodox seminarians in the name of "diversity" and "tolerance." That "tolerance" has now been exposed as a toleration of criminal acts.

- - - - - - -

The rest of the text can be found here:

http://www.goodbyegoodmen.com/

The graph near the bottom of the page is interesting.

Back in the early 80's as a seminarian at a Latin seminary, I remember discussing homosexuality with a vocation director (affectionately known to us as VD's) from a diocese I will refrain from naming. I was shocked when I was specifically told by this VD that it was "totally alright for a mand to genitally touch another man as a valid expression of love." I quickly filed a complaint with this man's bishop where it was soon disregarded and laughed away.

Comments? Has anyone read Rose's book?

Joe Thur

Joe, I have read almost everything about the clergy scandal in Boston. I'm a Bostonian, born and bred, educated there, etc. I know a number of the men involved both in the accusations (more than are really guilty) as well as the craziness precipitated by the money-grubbers - and I know at least two of them personally. And I have a shit-load of family still living and worshipping in the churches of the Archdiocese. And they're good people.

To be honest, and I am more than appreciative of the veracity and stimulating nature of many of your posts, I think that this current thing is little less than scandalizing and scandal-mongering. The folks in Boston have more than enough crap to deal with. But it is THEIR issue and bringing it into a Byzantine Forum appears to me to be National Enquirer-ism.

Please. For the sake of my family members and my erstwhile seminary brethren, give it a rest.

Blessings!

Dr. John,

There is more to the issue than just Boston and your family. Many of us have been affected by this in other areas. The Catholic Church DOES exist outside Boston.

I have lately been reflecting on the goings ons with the Episcopalians and the election of a gay bishop. How does this affect your family and friends in Boston? Should we cease from discussing timely issues because Dr. John is exhausted? Others have participated in a lively discussion of these topics. you don't have to participate. You can simply refrain from responding.

Aside from your friends and family members in the Boston diocese, others DO have family and friends in the Episcopal Church who are struggling with these issues. It becomes OUR ISSUE when WE are approached by those directly dealing with it in their churches. Comments and the lengthy discussions held on these forums have proven to be of good help.

If your neighbor's pre-teen daughter constantly approached you to tell you that her daddy was touching her inappropriately, would you tell her bluntly, "It isn't my problem. Give it a rest." ? People in the Byzantine Church ARE approached by their neighbors and their co-workers to get feedback. Many want to hear orthodoxy at its best, not some pop-psycho explanation with all the warm and fuzzies. It would be terribly wroing to slam our church doors shut when they are approached by non-Byzantines. I think we DO have something to offer, something to say, something to shed light on a difficult and timely issue.

The issue dealing with the promotion of homosexuality in the seminaries by vocation directors is also not merely a Boston issue. How did we get to this point in history? Gay priests, pedophiles, gay bishops, gay networking, challenges to the Defense of Marriage Act of 1999? How did 2,000 years of Christian tradition about marriage between a man and a woman get so challenged?

We must reflect on the root(s) of the problem(s). Many of us can sympathize with John Hitchcock when he writes on the St. Sebastian's Web scandal from awhile back:

"St. Sebastian�s Web priests ... gave direct empirical evidence that, as has long been suspected, there exists a network of homosexual clergy who protect, support, and even promote one another. The priests on the web made references to their contacts around the country, including chancery officials and others in important positions, and confirmed the suspicion that in some religious orders vocation directors vigorously, even exclusively, recruit homosexuals.

There are many theories as to why Church authorities do not act boldly to root out this pathology, the existence of the clerical homosexual network being itself the most likely explanation. So too is a kind of pre-conciliar clericalism, the instinct to protect one�s own, so that parents whose children have been molested by a priest sometimes find that the bishop almost seems to think the offender is the victim. Endless �compassion� and �help� have been extended to priests who have abused their office for the most pernicious purposes."

The entire article can be found at

http://www.catholic.net

BTW, is there a reason for using vulgar language?

Joe

Nope, but my concern is that folks who are marginally concerned are going to start fires that will burn other folks. Including innocent other folks.

While it is certainly appropriate to be concerned with the Church as a whole, commenting on particular issues, without being actually and intimately involved with them, is a potential problem.

I was involved with the Archdiocese of Boston all my life. Was baptized, eucharisted and confirmed there. I was in Catholic Grammar school and Jesuit High school there, and did my religious formation within its auspices. My high school buddies and classmates became candidates and priest for the Archdiocese. Went to Boston College High School as well as Theological School in Cambridge, ALL within the Archdiocese. And ALL of my family except for me lives there.

So, pardon me if I get a bit defensive when folks from elsewhere start making statements about what has been or is now happening there, especially when they have no direct connection with the realities.

To be blunt: why is it that whenever there is a "scandal" or "immorality" or "causa", it is you who initiates the posting? In this particular case, the Archdiocese of Boston is involved. And as an erstwhile subject of the Metropolitan/Archbishop of Boston, I feel put upon to respond to accusations against both the Archdiocese as well as the regular folks who live within its boundaries.

If one has specific issues with the Boston RC Archdiocese, then please freely present them. But to use this forum to denigrate and castigate the clergy and people of the Boston Archdiocese as a sop to one's antipathy for specific actions or sins, is to usurp the forum for one's own purposes.

Any Catholic or Orthodox or other sentient person is more than aware of the problems that have surfaced in the Metro Boston area, but unless there is a specific reason to bring it up in this Forum, it seems to me to be at best scandal-mongering and at worst to be an excuse for defamation or self-righteous defamation of the clergy of the Archdiocese.

Indeed, there have been priests with problems and horrible acting-out. But the vast majority of the priests and deacons are incredibly self-effacing servants of the Lord. And the people of the Archdiocese have been made victims not only of abusive clergy, but also of National-Enquirer-esque attention getters.

And I, for one, cannot allow anyone to denigrate the Archdiocese, its clergy nor its people.

I apologize for being so vehement in my defense of the Archdiocese, and I acknowledge the falsehoods of some of the administration, but for the peole and the regular clergy of the Archdiocese, once again I ask for forebearance and a voluntary withdrawal of what I perceive to be an attack on some good and simple Christian people for the purposes of feeding a media frenzy based upon their suffering.

Blessings and compassion!

//Nope, but my concern is that folks who are marginally concerned are going to start fires that will burn other folks. Including innocent other folks.//

You don't make sense.

//While it is certainly appropriate to be concerned with the Church as a whole, commenting on particular issues, without being actually and intimately involved with them, is a potential problem.//

According to that standard, we can�t comment on anything. The above post was not only at issue with the examples in Boston, but everywhere. Read it again, my friend. The author wasn�t talking about you.

//So, pardon me if I get a bit defensive when folks from elsewhere start making statements about what has been or is now happening there, especially when they have no direct connection with the realities.//

Rose writes:

�The problem in vocation offices and seminaries is a profound spiritual problem, a sickness of untold proportions," writes Rose. "Boston's story is simply a repeat of other heinous scandals exacerbated by Catholic officials ACROSS THE U.S. [emphasis mine] and IN OTHER COUNTRIES [emphasis mine] as well. What happened in Boston is routine in MANY OTHER DIOCESES [emphasis mine].�

So, again, the review only gave Boston as an example because the book was published during the media�s 100+ day frenzy. The review also challenged the Boston Globe�s one-sidedness to the priest scandal.

The article also mentions Fr. Donald B. Cozzens' book "The Changing Face of the Priesthood." He was rector of a seminary just a few blocks down the street from my home in the CLEVELAND RC DIOCESE. Now, he is teaching at my school's religious studies department. Any public talk of his packs the crowd in. I hate trying to find parking then.

As a former seminarian back in the early 80's, I knew quite well the "realities" of other RC dioceses, especially when my school had forty of them represented there;)

//To be blunt: why is it that whenever there is a "scandal" or "immorality" or "causa", it is you who initiates the posting?//

Because I am tired of Filioque debates and longwinded discussions on lengths of beards. What is happening with the Episcopal Church, Dr. John, was not my doings. I cannot turn the TV on or read the paper or surf the Internet without it jumping into my face. I don't think the Filioque and beard lengths will ever make headlines again in ANY paper;)

//If one has specific issues with the Boston RC Archdiocese, then please freely present them. But to use this forum to denigrate and castigate the clergy and people of the Boston Archdiocese as a sop to one's antipathy for specific actions or sins, is to usurp the forum for one's own purposes.//

I believe it is you who has usurped the book review�s discussion regarding the Boston RC Archdioce. Notice my thread�s title, �Possible Source of Priest Scandal.� The topic was about the �source� of priestly scandals, especially pedophilia and homosexuality. The finger-pointing by Rose points towards the vocation directors in many jurisdictions. It was you who made it into a Boston issue.

//And I, for one, cannot allow anyone to denigrate the Archdiocese, its clergy nor its people.//

I don�t have to.

//I apologize for being so vehement in my defense of the Archdiocese, and I acknowledge the falsehoods of some of the administration, but for the peole and the regular clergy of the Archdiocese, once again I ask for forebearance and a voluntary withdrawal of what I perceive to be an attack on some good and simple Christian people for the purposes of feeding a media frenzy based upon their suffering.//

The topic was about vocation directors as the possible source of the priest scandal and the 'network.' Get a grip, young man. As I stated/questioned before: we had/have this problem. How did it originate? Where did it come from? Who let the dogs in?

Joe

I find it very interesting that most of the experts that I have read say that child abuse really has nothing to do with homoseculatiy or being celebate. If that was the case why are more cases reported that happen in the family.

It is not as simmple as gay men being in the priesthood. The author of this book is a former seminarian who was thrown out of the seminary for reasons that he chooses not to share with the reader.

Peter

Peter,

This sounds like an ad hominem attack on the author. There are others who left AFTER serving as priests. They said almost the same things. I would like to point out the recent book, "On the other side of the altar" by Paul Dinter.

See:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0374299668/002-5516847-4508039?v=glance

Joe

We don't need a book to show us what has been going on. Look around. Its obvious, and this IS an issue.

The Church has lost major credibility here. In a society where organized religion is slowly going down the tubes, I don't believe they can afford to shove their heads in the sand any longer. Nor can they continue to speak out of both sides of their mouth.

The Vatican is speaking out against gay marriages but who is seriously listening? The attitude seems to be "We aren't Catholic so its none of your business" or "Clean off your own doorstep" which it refuses to do.

As for Boston getting a bad rap- this story goes on across the US. There are numerous bishops and clergy involved that have been named publicly arrested, resigned, left the country, etc. from Maine to California. It IS a Catholic issue and it IS a Byzantine Catholic issue. Like I said, look around!

Sam

Dear Sam:

You are absolutely correct.

Many (inlcuding some professors at Catholic universities) surmise that the Catholic Church lost credibility with many people when it came out with Humanae Vitae.

The homosexuality issue has just made the credibility problem worse.

Yours,

kl

Sam and Kyros Leader,

Yes. We don't really need a book to tell us what is going on around us. The book I refer to is one that investigates WHY we ended up this way from past policies. The outcry against Humanae Vitae came at a time when culture or people were staunch enough to tell others, especially the Church, not to have their morality pushed on them. So, in turn, they spent the next few decades pushing their im-morality on us.

Joe

Joe,

I agree, and we are driven into the ground when we speak against these things because it isn't PC to stand up for Truth anymore!

Sam

From 'new oxford review notes':

"Rose has put his finger on the primary source of the Great Sex Scandals of 2002 & Beyond, namely, most of our seminaries and the failure of certain bishops to keep them on the straight-and-narrow. It is in seminaries where the dissent and homosexuality germinate and go on to infect the rest of the Church. The immediate culprits are certain vocations directors, certain seminary formation teams, and the psychologists whom they employ to do the dirty work of rooting out candidates and seminarians who are manifestly orthodox or pious or manly or all three."

"Rod Dreher interviewed A.W. Richard Sipe, a laicized priest and psychotherapist who has treated scores of sexually abusive priests over several decades, and Sipe believes that half of homosexual priests are sexually active (largely with adults). Moreover, Sipe firmly believes that there is a Lavender Mafia among priests, seminary professors, and bishops. Says Sipe: "It is very clear that you can trace [the Lavender Mafia], one person to another, through a sequence of appointments, the sequence of who follows whom in what position, and how they got there." Sipe also says: "This is a system�. You have many good people covering it up. There is a network of power. A lot of seminary rectors and teachers are part of it, and they move to chancery-office positions, and on to bishoprics. It's part of the ladder of success." Dreher comments: "A typical pattern involves a priest becoming sexually involved with a seminarian or younger cleric, and then the junior man following his elder up the diocesan hierarchy. Sipe and others interviewed say this `bond of secrecy' introduces the possibility of blackmail: Those in positions of authority are prevented from acting against others because they themselves are compromised." (National Review, Feb. 11, 2002 and April 22, 2002)."

Lavender Mafia? Sounds like a phrase from Fr. Andrew Greeley.

From Catholic Citizens of Illinois:

"The liberal sociologist Father Andrew Greeley has called them the �Lavender Mafia�-a clique of homosexual dilettantes, acting in concert with liberal faculty members who are determined to change the doctrines, disciplines, and mission of the Catholic Church from within. Through the seminaries, this �Lavender Mafia� has brought a moral meltdown into the Catholic priesthood."

Is it all a Lavender Mafia plot?

What do you call it when a bishop and the rector of his Cathedral have been assigned "together" for decades, and everyone knows why, etc.? Such a situation is right under noses, but nobody bats an eyelash. Where is the correction from the Christians?

Gentpersons:

I am a V.D. investigartor by trade (local H.D.) and as such have come into contact with many sexually active people who are without benifit of marriage.

Yes, there are Sexually active "Gay" priests BUT there also sexually active "Straight" priests (botrDiocese is still looking for a former Priest who has at lesat 3 women with whom he was inappropriately involved. He appears to have left for the interior of Mexico.)There are many more priests who are faithful to their vows.

I wish to remind all that for every person I saw in the HIV testing clinic, there are many many more whom I never saw due to the fact they kept their vows in marriage or ordination, or because it is the "right "thing to do.

Yes there are bad apples in the barrel (remember Judis?). BUT there are many more honest and faithful people out there.

YES there is a problem, but the problem seems to be adminstrative, not with the the Priest at local levels (NB. generality admitted).

If we wish to discuss how we should reclaim our rightful heritage as members of Christs Church, let us do so. Let us not chastise innocent people for wrong doing.

Please excuse any typos and/or errors, I am not a typest, just a "PEST".

Your Brother in Christ, Jesus.

St8aro

Rose's theories are no less than rubbish. The problem has nothing to do with 'orthodoxy'. That is proved by the fact that many of the prev priests were quite 'orthodox' in their theology, if anything they tended slightly to the conservative side.

The problem was and sadly still is clericalism and secrecy.

Axios