He's like an American Rupnik. How many complaints from how many orders before the Vatican actually does something? Meanwhile I see priests who haven't been accused of sexual misconduct getting cancelled for much less...
Come, Holy Ghost, burn the rot & corruption—the diabolical culture of indifference & cover-up—out of Your holy Church! Come, Holy Ghost, with Your holy cleansing fire! However painful, O Lord, purify Your Church!
This will be a highly effective prayer (a rising tide lifts all boats, and we are a part of the Church) anytime that we are willing to let Him in to our own selves, knowing that He will sit down and commence refining and purifying one's own self in some way of His own choosing (I do not know the mechanics of how that will translate to *any* improvement in the parts of the Church that are visibly horrifying; it doesn't really make any sense to me although logic demands it and history seems to witness to it, so as an engineer I am going to mentally file it under "higher math".)
Speaking from a lot personal experience with multiple priests in my area, spiritual direction and confession are both very vulnerable places. It’s where I was coached for months on my calling to discern, and coached how to speak/not talk about sexuality with the vocations directors. I think it’s incredibly important we teach young kids and post up in the confessional: “You are encouraged to step out of the confessional if you become uncomfortable.” And practice saying, “Sorry, Father, I am not as ready for the sacrament as I thought.”
When should a penitent say "I'm not ready for the sacrament"? In the situation we're looking at here, the penitent does not seem to be the problem, the wolf wearing the stole is.
That is correct. I think it’s important to carefully avoid casting suspicion on priests, who are often the first and only resort for people in damning situations. But also, I’m just not sensing any sincerity from priests in preventing bad things from happening under concealment. I’ve gotten a lot of “I’m willing to listen and believe victims” but have yet to find interest in preventing abuse.
For me personally, it would be /easier/ to say something like "I'm just not ready" and leave (rather than "Father, you're way out of line" and leave). I think it's helpful to not just tell people they can leave if they're uncomfortable; but give a couple options of actual wording
Catholics should pull their heads out of the sand. Maybe take some initiative and educate themselves regarding the Catholic religion. Only attending Mass is a good way to enable priests to live sordid lives because a demoralized or idol priest is an irresistible target of Satan and his minions. Priests would love to have an engaged flock to serve and to encourage them to greater holiness. Priests don’t need deference; they need zeal.
Ex-nun Karen Armstrong in her book "Through the narrow gate" describes a really creepy conversation with an elderly priest on the mid-1960s when she was in her early twenties. The guy invoked the new spirit of Vatican II as a pretext for going somewhere private to have a truly personal conversation.
She also describes the extreme emphasis on near slavish obedience to her superiors in the Order. And this sacred duty of obedience applied even more in relations with a priest who was far above any nun. She managed to narrowly dodge that bullet. But it looks as if little has changed in 60 years.
A recent Church of England case where the allegations against Mike Pilavachi, a hugely respected evangelist, go back many years looks depressingly similar to many Catholic scandals. As with the appalling Bishop Peter Ball, sexual predators deserve an Oscar for vile ingenuity.
The same demonic, postmodernist ideology that has infected colleges and universities for decades also corrupted seminaries. Any candidates for ordination who opposed the heresy and immorality were rejected on the false premises that they were schismatic traditionalists or had psychological problems. Most other candidates were cowed into fearful ineffectiveness. And the psychopaths who were ordained, even elevated to episcopal and cardinatial status, are finally, occasionally being identified.
It will be a long time before this dark era is properly addressed and remediated.
When we turn these discussions into a battle between ideologies, it belittles and detracts and in some ways inadvertently excuses us from taking bold action to address institutional vice. Because the seminaries are not all the same, nor do they all approach theology and discipline in the same way. With the sincere hope that it’s just the circles I’ve found myself in, when someone complains about a priest making them uncomfortable, I very rarely find a priest that says, “Tell me who!” Instead, the most common reaction is turned toward the penitent, “Let’s talk about your virtue of chastity.” Institutions always learn to protect themselves. And I find the lack of interest in taking bold action misplaced because we have a desire to uphold a happy vision of the Church.
Karen Armstrong did not make a formal complaint about the elderly predator. But when her superior told her that Father Smith had called at the convent and wanted to see her, she hesitated and explained that she thought that Father Smith was too fond of her. Her Superior naturally shifted the blame to her, though Karen was sure that her Superior could see all the horrible implications ahead - having to approach Father Smith's superiors, who were far superior to even a Mother Superior, etc. Eventually Karen left the Order in 1969.
Bastard!! Is there no poor sister he HASN’T tried to use? How is this scoundrel still able to function as a priest? How many more have to public to get this man laicised and turned out on his ear?
Honestly, there needs to be some serious thinking about how to help spiritual directees (religious or otherwise) determine where the line is between legitimate healing needed in matters of sexuality versus whatever sickness this bastard passed off as ‘spiritual direction’.
There is probably no way to write this without looking like a troll, but here goes.
I know this is overly simplistic, but if priests were required to pray the psalms that emphasize the dread judgment of God, is it possible that there might be fewer men whose consciences became so mutilated as to do these things? What about if the lectionary emphasized the objective norms set in the Scriptures for a holy life (by no means limited to chastity, but absolutely including it), or the possibility of wolves in sheep's clothing? Might that prepare the faithful to withstand these attacks?
While this isn't The Reason Trads Exist, and while I understand that there was plenty of sordid business before the Novus Ordo, it seems bitterly ironic that when the liturgy was translated, making all those warnings understandable to the general clergy and laity for the first time in 1000 years or so, the lectionary and breviary were promptly reworked to obscure those themes again. They didn't want people hearing THOSE parts, I guess.
It makes me angry, sure, but also it just makes me really sad.
I kind of disagree that the liturgical changes are responsible for this… I would argue the fact that 1960s norms should be held somewhat apart from the (to my mind unfortunate) timing of Vatican II and those needed liturgical reforms outlined by Sacrosanctum Concilium read properly (as in actually read the words, not pretended to).
The fact that Vatican II called for a spirit of reform in the middle of an age of rebellion against our most hard won social, sexual and spiritual morals is really important to understanding why the ‘reforms’ in the name of Vatican II happened the way they did and how we should move forward now.
Priests treating convents like their personal harems are not anything new sadly. I would like to think that in addition to all our efforts to protect children and minors from such predations, we should have some idea of how mitigate these same patterns of grooming and abuse for close adult communities like convents or lay movements.
> but if priests were required to pray the psalms that emphasize the dread judgment of God
The first question (when the wheels on a priest have evidently fallen off) is "when did you stop praying the breviary", as I understand it. (Here I am setting aside the question of whether we sometimes ordain men who should never have gotten that far.)
That's a fair point, and I've heard a priest say that as well---that "if these priests would just pray their breviaries we wouldn't have half these problems". I certainly notice a difference in my own life when I'm regular with the Office. It's a bit unfair of me to blame it on not praying the imprecatories when they've likely stopped praying any psalms at all.
If we had LAWS in every state that priests and spiritual directors were subject to just like counselors are, when those boundaries are breached, there would be consequences, both legal and canonical. Currently only 13 states have laws that exist for adult clergy abuse. If a counselor loses their license, a priest should suffer a similar (external from the church) consequence. It's excruciatingly clear that the canonical process (when there even is one) is insufficient and as someone else mentioned, until the Church (US, THE LAITY, too!) demands transparency and creates change, it won't happen. Many of the hierarchy are too protected by their teams of lawyers and the doctrine of CYA to even have a conversation with a survivor. Revolting. Jesus would be burning tables, not only turning them over. :(
I would be VERY wary of entrusting the state to be licensing spiritual direction. The US (and other liberal democracies) has a separation for a good reason. Most psychologists and counsellors by law have to have accreditation and licence via a professional body that deals with disputes and ethical code violations. We don’t have an equivalent of a ‘professional spiritual directors body or guild’. We probably should, but at the same time, bureaucracy doesn’t fix
the spiritual sickness. How one would go about doing that and generating a robust enough organsiation that avoids faddish ideological capture is difficult as well as communicating over a very wide and flat organisation like the Church, when someone has been sanctioned or had their licence revoked. It’s hard enough with international medical licensing.
Canon law has PLENTY to say about priests’ sinful misbehaviour with their flock. The issue I see is bishops and religious orders have difficulty taking action, investigating and then enforcing sanctions transparently. Either it’s out of a misguided compassion for the victim (no one one wants to be outed as St Mary Victim), or just genuine ignorance of the possibilities allowed by canon law, or more sinful motives.
For the record, Archbishop Fisher in Sydney clears a day in his calendar once a month to meet with any victim of clerical sexual abuse who wishes to speak to him. He doesn’t advertise it, it’s not on his public calendar, nor is it something he bangs on about it. I know, because I’ve heard his secretary quietly mention it. He does it quietly for the sake of the victims and their healing. The last thing they need is to be publicly used as a prop to say “Look we’ve changed! Aren’t we awesome!”
What is wrong with a man, let alone a priest, who preys on consecrated women (or any woman)?
Rupnik, Nicorgski, priests in Africa and India this just keeps happening.
Do they not fear God?
These guys need to go and go quick.
Shame on the hierarchs and superiors of these perverts.
The OMV’s really are pathetic. Maybe like the Jesuits they’ll just dump Nicorgski like the SJs did with Rupnik and he’ll find some bishop who will take him to continue his sins.
After reading this my godson decided not to discern with the OMVs. He was involved at the student center that is part of St Clement Eucharistic Shrine run by the OMVs.
The OVMs in Boston also do a lot of college/young adult ministry. I had great experiences with them as a student but it's particularly concerning to see them apparently unable to recognize the an abusive power differential when the victim is an adult
I don’t believe they are unable to recognize the abusive power differential. The Sisters of the Little Way addressed the issue of organizational preservation that seems to obstruct justice throughout the Church. I think that is more likely in the case of Nicgorski.
What a great idea! Research and write some and send them in for consideration.
And then maybe remind yourself that the purpose of The Pillar is to report on issues that the mainstream Catholic media largely ignore?
I for one am hugely grateful to The Pillar for airing these stories, because sunlight is the best disinfectant. This kind of stuff needs exposure and and action, because I still meet too many Catholics who don't believe it's going on.
After reminding myself of the Pillar's purpose, it still occurred to me that stories of heroic Priestly virtue are precisely the kind most ignored by mainstream Catholic media. Uplifting stories of heroic Priests and religious, while also seen at The Pillar, seem a bit outnumbered lately, and "I for one" would appreciate more of them.
Then maybe research and write them? My point is that it's easy to criticise from the sidelines, but if you want this content, then why not get out there and generate it?
I had a look at your profile, and the Substack sites you follow must surely have stories to share about good and heroic priests?
Not all of us are called to be longform investigative journalists; Beyond These Stone Walls would be a better place to start than Substack, however, if anyone is discerning a call.
I don't understand! Why the diacastery on Consecrated Life does not move to have this priest removed from the cleircal state...no faculties, no cleical status? . Many other priests have been reduced to that for much the same reasons What are they waiting for?
He's like an American Rupnik. How many complaints from how many orders before the Vatican actually does something? Meanwhile I see priests who haven't been accused of sexual misconduct getting cancelled for much less...
Come, Holy Ghost, burn the rot & corruption—the diabolical culture of indifference & cover-up—out of Your holy Church! Come, Holy Ghost, with Your holy cleansing fire! However painful, O Lord, purify Your Church!
> However painful, O Lord, purify Your Church!
This will be a highly effective prayer (a rising tide lifts all boats, and we are a part of the Church) anytime that we are willing to let Him in to our own selves, knowing that He will sit down and commence refining and purifying one's own self in some way of His own choosing (I do not know the mechanics of how that will translate to *any* improvement in the parts of the Church that are visibly horrifying; it doesn't really make any sense to me although logic demands it and history seems to witness to it, so as an engineer I am going to mentally file it under "higher math".)
[oh my goodness why do I post things like this and expect to have a normal day afterwards? no regrets though. I guess.]
Speaking from a lot personal experience with multiple priests in my area, spiritual direction and confession are both very vulnerable places. It’s where I was coached for months on my calling to discern, and coached how to speak/not talk about sexuality with the vocations directors. I think it’s incredibly important we teach young kids and post up in the confessional: “You are encouraged to step out of the confessional if you become uncomfortable.” And practice saying, “Sorry, Father, I am not as ready for the sacrament as I thought.”
When should a penitent say "I'm not ready for the sacrament"? In the situation we're looking at here, the penitent does not seem to be the problem, the wolf wearing the stole is.
That is correct. I think it’s important to carefully avoid casting suspicion on priests, who are often the first and only resort for people in damning situations. But also, I’m just not sensing any sincerity from priests in preventing bad things from happening under concealment. I’ve gotten a lot of “I’m willing to listen and believe victims” but have yet to find interest in preventing abuse.
For me personally, it would be /easier/ to say something like "I'm just not ready" and leave (rather than "Father, you're way out of line" and leave). I think it's helpful to not just tell people they can leave if they're uncomfortable; but give a couple options of actual wording
Catholics should pull their heads out of the sand. Maybe take some initiative and educate themselves regarding the Catholic religion. Only attending Mass is a good way to enable priests to live sordid lives because a demoralized or idol priest is an irresistible target of Satan and his minions. Priests would love to have an engaged flock to serve and to encourage them to greater holiness. Priests don’t need deference; they need zeal.
Ex-nun Karen Armstrong in her book "Through the narrow gate" describes a really creepy conversation with an elderly priest on the mid-1960s when she was in her early twenties. The guy invoked the new spirit of Vatican II as a pretext for going somewhere private to have a truly personal conversation.
She also describes the extreme emphasis on near slavish obedience to her superiors in the Order. And this sacred duty of obedience applied even more in relations with a priest who was far above any nun. She managed to narrowly dodge that bullet. But it looks as if little has changed in 60 years.
A recent Church of England case where the allegations against Mike Pilavachi, a hugely respected evangelist, go back many years looks depressingly similar to many Catholic scandals. As with the appalling Bishop Peter Ball, sexual predators deserve an Oscar for vile ingenuity.
https://www.christianpost.com/news/church-of-england-concludes-probe-into-soul-surivor-bishop.html
https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/bishop-who-convinced-men-strip-894662
The same demonic, postmodernist ideology that has infected colleges and universities for decades also corrupted seminaries. Any candidates for ordination who opposed the heresy and immorality were rejected on the false premises that they were schismatic traditionalists or had psychological problems. Most other candidates were cowed into fearful ineffectiveness. And the psychopaths who were ordained, even elevated to episcopal and cardinatial status, are finally, occasionally being identified.
It will be a long time before this dark era is properly addressed and remediated.
When we turn these discussions into a battle between ideologies, it belittles and detracts and in some ways inadvertently excuses us from taking bold action to address institutional vice. Because the seminaries are not all the same, nor do they all approach theology and discipline in the same way. With the sincere hope that it’s just the circles I’ve found myself in, when someone complains about a priest making them uncomfortable, I very rarely find a priest that says, “Tell me who!” Instead, the most common reaction is turned toward the penitent, “Let’s talk about your virtue of chastity.” Institutions always learn to protect themselves. And I find the lack of interest in taking bold action misplaced because we have a desire to uphold a happy vision of the Church.
I don't disagree that the Church's members ought to be active, except if they haven't got a grasp of Catholic doctrine and assent to it!
Karen Armstrong did not make a formal complaint about the elderly predator. But when her superior told her that Father Smith had called at the convent and wanted to see her, she hesitated and explained that she thought that Father Smith was too fond of her. Her Superior naturally shifted the blame to her, though Karen was sure that her Superior could see all the horrible implications ahead - having to approach Father Smith's superiors, who were far superior to even a Mother Superior, etc. Eventually Karen left the Order in 1969.
They didn't necessarily prevent the ordination of seminarians who disagreed with them, my brother for instance.
Bastard!! Is there no poor sister he HASN’T tried to use? How is this scoundrel still able to function as a priest? How many more have to public to get this man laicised and turned out on his ear?
Honestly, there needs to be some serious thinking about how to help spiritual directees (religious or otherwise) determine where the line is between legitimate healing needed in matters of sexuality versus whatever sickness this bastard passed off as ‘spiritual direction’.
There is probably no way to write this without looking like a troll, but here goes.
I know this is overly simplistic, but if priests were required to pray the psalms that emphasize the dread judgment of God, is it possible that there might be fewer men whose consciences became so mutilated as to do these things? What about if the lectionary emphasized the objective norms set in the Scriptures for a holy life (by no means limited to chastity, but absolutely including it), or the possibility of wolves in sheep's clothing? Might that prepare the faithful to withstand these attacks?
While this isn't The Reason Trads Exist, and while I understand that there was plenty of sordid business before the Novus Ordo, it seems bitterly ironic that when the liturgy was translated, making all those warnings understandable to the general clergy and laity for the first time in 1000 years or so, the lectionary and breviary were promptly reworked to obscure those themes again. They didn't want people hearing THOSE parts, I guess.
It makes me angry, sure, but also it just makes me really sad.
I kind of disagree that the liturgical changes are responsible for this… I would argue the fact that 1960s norms should be held somewhat apart from the (to my mind unfortunate) timing of Vatican II and those needed liturgical reforms outlined by Sacrosanctum Concilium read properly (as in actually read the words, not pretended to).
The fact that Vatican II called for a spirit of reform in the middle of an age of rebellion against our most hard won social, sexual and spiritual morals is really important to understanding why the ‘reforms’ in the name of Vatican II happened the way they did and how we should move forward now.
Priests treating convents like their personal harems are not anything new sadly. I would like to think that in addition to all our efforts to protect children and minors from such predations, we should have some idea of how mitigate these same patterns of grooming and abuse for close adult communities like convents or lay movements.
> but if priests were required to pray the psalms that emphasize the dread judgment of God
The first question (when the wheels on a priest have evidently fallen off) is "when did you stop praying the breviary", as I understand it. (Here I am setting aside the question of whether we sometimes ordain men who should never have gotten that far.)
That's a fair point, and I've heard a priest say that as well---that "if these priests would just pray their breviaries we wouldn't have half these problems". I certainly notice a difference in my own life when I'm regular with the Office. It's a bit unfair of me to blame it on not praying the imprecatories when they've likely stopped praying any psalms at all.
That's what happened to the Dies Irae also.
If we had LAWS in every state that priests and spiritual directors were subject to just like counselors are, when those boundaries are breached, there would be consequences, both legal and canonical. Currently only 13 states have laws that exist for adult clergy abuse. If a counselor loses their license, a priest should suffer a similar (external from the church) consequence. It's excruciatingly clear that the canonical process (when there even is one) is insufficient and as someone else mentioned, until the Church (US, THE LAITY, too!) demands transparency and creates change, it won't happen. Many of the hierarchy are too protected by their teams of lawyers and the doctrine of CYA to even have a conversation with a survivor. Revolting. Jesus would be burning tables, not only turning them over. :(
I would be VERY wary of entrusting the state to be licensing spiritual direction. The US (and other liberal democracies) has a separation for a good reason. Most psychologists and counsellors by law have to have accreditation and licence via a professional body that deals with disputes and ethical code violations. We don’t have an equivalent of a ‘professional spiritual directors body or guild’. We probably should, but at the same time, bureaucracy doesn’t fix
the spiritual sickness. How one would go about doing that and generating a robust enough organsiation that avoids faddish ideological capture is difficult as well as communicating over a very wide and flat organisation like the Church, when someone has been sanctioned or had their licence revoked. It’s hard enough with international medical licensing.
Canon law has PLENTY to say about priests’ sinful misbehaviour with their flock. The issue I see is bishops and religious orders have difficulty taking action, investigating and then enforcing sanctions transparently. Either it’s out of a misguided compassion for the victim (no one one wants to be outed as St Mary Victim), or just genuine ignorance of the possibilities allowed by canon law, or more sinful motives.
For the record, Archbishop Fisher in Sydney clears a day in his calendar once a month to meet with any victim of clerical sexual abuse who wishes to speak to him. He doesn’t advertise it, it’s not on his public calendar, nor is it something he bangs on about it. I know, because I’ve heard his secretary quietly mention it. He does it quietly for the sake of the victims and their healing. The last thing they need is to be publicly used as a prop to say “Look we’ve changed! Aren’t we awesome!”
What is wrong with a man, let alone a priest, who preys on consecrated women (or any woman)?
Rupnik, Nicorgski, priests in Africa and India this just keeps happening.
Do they not fear God?
These guys need to go and go quick.
Shame on the hierarchs and superiors of these perverts.
The OMV’s really are pathetic. Maybe like the Jesuits they’ll just dump Nicorgski like the SJs did with Rupnik and he’ll find some bishop who will take him to continue his sins.
After reading this my godson decided not to discern with the OMVs. He was involved at the student center that is part of St Clement Eucharistic Shrine run by the OMVs.
What a mess.
Good for your godson! If he is on the East coast me might try to discern with the Dominicans
Todd, great minds think alike, years ago I was in formation with the OPs and think they are great.
The OVMs in Boston also do a lot of college/young adult ministry. I had great experiences with them as a student but it's particularly concerning to see them apparently unable to recognize the an abusive power differential when the victim is an adult
I don’t believe they are unable to recognize the abusive power differential. The Sisters of the Little Way addressed the issue of organizational preservation that seems to obstruct justice throughout the Church. I think that is more likely in the case of Nicgorski.
Perhaps it's time for some Pillar accounts of acts of heroic virtue by our Priests?
What a great idea! Research and write some and send them in for consideration.
And then maybe remind yourself that the purpose of The Pillar is to report on issues that the mainstream Catholic media largely ignore?
I for one am hugely grateful to The Pillar for airing these stories, because sunlight is the best disinfectant. This kind of stuff needs exposure and and action, because I still meet too many Catholics who don't believe it's going on.
Bad night's sleep?
Not at all. I'm up and at 'em at this time every morning.
You?
I'm fine, thanks.
After reminding myself of the Pillar's purpose, it still occurred to me that stories of heroic Priestly virtue are precisely the kind most ignored by mainstream Catholic media. Uplifting stories of heroic Priests and religious, while also seen at The Pillar, seem a bit outnumbered lately, and "I for one" would appreciate more of them.
Cheers!
Then maybe research and write them? My point is that it's easy to criticise from the sidelines, but if you want this content, then why not get out there and generate it?
I had a look at your profile, and the Substack sites you follow must surely have stories to share about good and heroic priests?
Not all of us are called to be longform investigative journalists; Beyond These Stone Walls would be a better place to start than Substack, however, if anyone is discerning a call.
I don't understand! Why the diacastery on Consecrated Life does not move to have this priest removed from the cleircal state...no faculties, no cleical status? . Many other priests have been reduced to that for much the same reasons What are they waiting for?
I wasn’t criticizing.