Click here to advertise on CatholicCulture.org

cassocks-only....

By Diogenes (articles ) | Jul 18, 2007

Chris Weinkopf, the editorial-page editor of the Los Angeles Daily News, interviewed Cdl Mahony yesterday,  and logs this gem:

Weinkopf: What about the charge that the problem is a lack of discipline and orthodoxy in the seminaries?

Mahony: Well, first of all that's one of the things that we still are studying. As you know, the bishops are conducting a study of causes.... In our case, many of the priests came out of the "good old days" -- Latin-only, cassocks-only.... Most of our cases did not come out of post-Vatican II, they came out of pre-Vatican II.

Uncle Di's translation: You bet ya Chris! Orthodoxy? couldn’t agree with you more! Most of the perps in my neck of the woods were right up Benedict’s alley, likin bells and smells, "Moto Proprio", and all that stuff.  Breeds perverts, ya know!

An appeal from our founder, Dr. Jeffrey Mirus:

Dear reader: If you found the information on this page helpful in your pursuit of a better Catholic life, please support our work with a donation. Your donation will help us reach seven million Truth-seeking readers worldwide this year. Thank you!

Progress toward our September expenses ($13,688 to go):
$35,000.00 $21,311.73
39% 61%
Sound Off! CatholicCulture.org supporters weigh in.

All comments are moderated. To lighten our editing burden, only current donors are allowed to Sound Off. If you are a donor, log in to see the comment form; otherwise please support our work, and Sound Off!

Show 30 Comments? (Hidden)Hide Comments
  • Posted by: - Jul. 23, 2007 10:37 AM ET USA

    My parish still has real confessionals, Clorox! Even so, I would trust our priests with my life and, if I had children, with theirs too. The problem is simple: Too many gay men got into seminary. Recently Archbishop Pilarczyk wrote a strong article in the archdiocesan newspaper and I recall his quote: "If you are gay then the priesthood is not for you." We need straight manly priests who submit their celibacy to Jesus for His glory and for His Holy Church.

  • Posted by: - Jul. 21, 2007 1:38 PM ET USA

    True, there has rarely been a true education/formation for a positive celibacy in the seminary system. It was/is either ignored or viewed primarily as a "keep it in your pants" thing. Psychologically immature men dumped into unsupervised wide-open environments with an adolescent sexuality started acting like adolescents sexually. The question of why over 85% of such reported incidents involve male-male activity is still often studiously ignored.

  • Posted by: - Jul. 20, 2007 3:49 PM ET USA

    Mahoney is partially accurate: the abusers were pre VII, but the abuse was post VII. Cardinal Cushing's sex advice to graduating seminarians is illustrative of the "cover-up" instructions provided when the seminarians "knocked up" Catholic girls. {"Bring the girls to me, and I will take care of the problem."} Mahoney was also responsible for dumping abusive priests and at least one Bishop on the Santa Rosa Diocese. Sic transit gloria mahoney.

  • Posted by: - Jul. 20, 2007 7:52 AM ET USA

    Why not return to compartmentalized confessionals and get rid of the reconciliation rooms! How's that for a child protection policy? Naaaah. Common sense is pre-Vatican II, too.

  • Posted by: - Jul. 19, 2007 2:27 PM ET USA

    'So lemme get this right', the new 'motu propriu' might undo all the good that the child protection practices introduced in the USA and England & Wales have ensured? Has the Pope been told?

  • Posted by: - Jul. 19, 2007 10:58 AM ET USA

    The rot had set in before Vatican II. In 1964 Father Gerald Fitzgerald, founder of the Paracletes and a good, sincere priest, wrote to a bishop in the Vatican that mutual masturbation has become an accepted practice in some seminaries (he did not name them) and that Fitzgerald could not convince the abusers who were sent to him for treatment that it was wrong. He said the Vatican had to ensure that seminaries taught that this practice was a mortal sin. Did the Vatican ever do that? Lee Podles

  • Posted by: - Jul. 19, 2007 10:02 AM ET USA

    That's an interesting spin on things, Cardinal. It almost sounds like you are trying to deflect the blame from yourself (on whose post-VII watch the evil acts occurred), onto pre-VII bogey-people. It is time for the truth, not spin.

  • Posted by: - Jul. 19, 2007 8:08 AM ET USA

    Sir William has a good point. The threat of evil has been manifest since way before V II. Way before WW2, WW1. The trail of belligerent animosity to the faith can be followd back to enlightenment, the reformation. In fact it can be traced back to the day we left paradise. This is why at all times we need to be awake and educate ourselves and each other. And let ourselves be educated and guided by the Holy Spirit. Never think yesterday was better! It's not coming back anyway.

  • Posted by: - Jul. 19, 2007 7:46 AM ET USA

    and Charlie...There is more sexual abuse by teachers in public schools. That isn't publicized by the media because God did not found the US public school system and there is no divine law that says that the gates of hell shall not prevail against government schools. God purifies what belongs to Him. His Church is now being purified because I think He's fed up with the filth and rot of priests corrupted by satan.

  • Posted by: - Jul. 19, 2007 7:41 AM ET USA

    Charlie - Because the Catholic Church was founded by GOD so that we might know how to live our life and get to Heaven for eternity. Satan tries to destroy the Church in order to win souls for hell. It's a battle for souls. THe way to attack the Church is to attack priests. When priests are weak and do evil, Satan wins souls. There are several good books on this subject but you have to get the right ones in order to get the clear picture.

  • Posted by: - Jul. 19, 2007 7:08 AM ET USA

    Which days did Cardinal Mahoney "come out of"?

  • Posted by: - Jul. 19, 2007 7:08 AM ET USA

    Gee Charlie, because the Catholic Church represses sexuality by not letting priests marry (that's why these predators almost always choose boys), and because it's just a Pharasaical institution. Do you seriously think this is not going on in the Protestant churches and in the public schools, and all sorts of places? You are either very misinformed or perhaps willfully ignorant. That said, abuse by even one priest is too much, since priests have the benefit of the sacraments to help them.

  • Posted by: - Jul. 18, 2007 10:57 PM ET USA

    Why is there so much sexual abuse by priests in the Catholic Church?

  • Posted by: - Jul. 18, 2007 8:32 PM ET USA

    Can we rely on a reporters notes? Here is the second part to put the statement in full context: "Of course today, our screening process, our evaluation process, the fact that we take in older men, we don't take in guys out of high school or even grammar school -- it's a whole different frame of reference for the process of choosing seminarians. There's psychological evaluation, constant monitoring. We do everything we can to make sure that the people being ordained don't have a problem."

  • Posted by: - Jul. 18, 2007 8:15 PM ET USA

    See the LA Times article by Staff Writer Paul Pringle, "Trail of Abuse Leads to Seminary". It points to a disproportionately high number of abusers from Cardinal Mahony's alma mater, St. John's Seminary in Camarillo. "In two classes; 1966 and 1972 a third of the graduates were later accused of molestation."

  • Posted by: - Jul. 18, 2007 8:08 PM ET USA

    An excellent historical explanation notes the massive reorganization (aka, deconstruction) of the philosophy and theology curriculae in the seminaries, as painfully detailed by Fr. Joseph Becker, S. J., in "The Re-Formed Jesuits: A History of Changes in Jesuit Formation During the Decade 1965-1975". Also involves New Age, Gnosticism. Pope Leo XIII was right - can't teach what you ain't got; the result is heresy - yes, especially to appear "with it" to students. Surprise? Minerva

  • Posted by: - Jul. 18, 2007 8:06 PM ET USA

    Why would anyone want Cardinal Mahony's opinion about anything? Is this man's opinion newsworthy? Why am I even responding to this post? May I chainsaw off my fingers for typing his name in this email. (At least I didn't mention the PH person [parishilton]). ...On second thought, maybe she ought to be interviewed. At least her opinion of cassocks would be fashionable. Sorry - that is such a bad pun. But it's more fun than listening to what That Man thinks.

  • Posted by: - Jul. 18, 2007 6:50 PM ET USA

    Let's say for a moment the eminent cardinal is correct in his thinking. Who cares? The real question is: how many of the sodomites and their protectors have a loving devotion to the Blessed Virgin, to the angels and saints, to Our Savior in the Blessed Sacrament? These "fit only for wearing concrete necklaces while swimming" scum are the last people you will find weeping for sinners. That being the case, let them weep alone in their cells at Folsom or San Quentin.

  • Posted by: - Jul. 18, 2007 5:53 PM ET USA

    Is Mahony a liar? You judge. (I extracted this from the John Jay report. I did it in a hurry, so I won't swear to its accuracy, but my personal judegement is that the cardinal is, at best, the Bill Clinton of the Church's clerical ranks and, at worst, a big liar.) The majority of priests with allegations of abuse were ordained 1950 - 1970 with most of those 1960 on. 75% were ordained between the ages of 26 and 30. 62.5% were born after 1930 and about 35% were born after 1940.

  • Posted by: - Jul. 18, 2007 5:28 PM ET USA

    The cardinal said, "Victims are all in a tad different place on their journey." I think the use of such trite language as "journey" to describe the process of healing form the damage caused by sexual abuse is very telling. I think the cardinal has slipped into some fantasy devoid of understanding the reality of psychological and physical damage done to these people. It all sounds disingenuous to me. Every time he speaks another soul is injured.

  • Posted by: - Jul. 18, 2007 5:00 PM ET USA

    There had been a slow, steady decline going on long before 1950's. Slowly "science" began to replace faith and "psychology" began replacing/reconfiguring morality, art glorifing ugliness. Think of Kinsey's fraudulent 'research', the eugenics/contraceptive movements of the 1930's, Freudian evil sexulization of everything good - the perverse arts of Miro, Gill, Picasso, Klee, etc, increasingly suggestive music lyrics. The sadly, it was gulped down by clergy, so as to seem to be 'with it'.

  • Posted by: - Jul. 18, 2007 4:05 PM ET USA

    Forget the money. What about souls? The Cardinal Archbishop is responsible to teaching and leading souls to heaven, not obfuscation and trickery w/ a blind eye to the lavender and abuses without sacral reverence and faith witness. A wolf in sheeps clothing is not a shepherd. The flock needs safe passage to the pasture and away from the treachery croniism, and lies. A return to true teaching for the dignity of humans, life, truth of the Gospel and the dreads of sin and hell are long overdue

  • Posted by: - Jul. 18, 2007 3:47 PM ET USA

    Somebody should actually check out this data to see if he is lying again. In the first place, we know that the overwhelmingly greater part of the crimes were committed in the postVII era. When we see who committed them, it would be interesting statistically to see how many of these weasels were ordained after 1964. I would bet you that the majority of these lowlifes were ordained in the age of Kumbaya!

  • Posted by: - Jul. 18, 2007 3:32 PM ET USA

    "...therefore employees, or priests, if they want, they..." There's a big problem that I see. Even the Cardinal looks at his own priests as employees.

  • Posted by: - Jul. 18, 2007 3:21 PM ET USA

    The problems in the seminaries started before Vatican II as the avant grade, typically in academia, already were "updating their theology." The National Review Board suggested per a bishop and others that "from the mid-1960's to the early 1980's seminaries lost their way." It really happened before that. About half of offending priests were ordained before 1963, but the bulk of offending itself happened between 1960 and 1980, mostly post Vatican II, when moral strictures, broke down.

  • Posted by: - Jul. 18, 2007 2:04 PM ET USA

    CDL. Mahony's statement can be qualified by pointing out that the pre VII clerics areall that he cares to admit. Has he really taken a survey? So cassocks and bells cause pederasty! How about weak bishops who do not take immediate action to eliminate moral violators? The faithful deserve to be protected from both. Retirement is a good option Mahony.

  • Posted by: - Jul. 18, 2007 1:55 PM ET USA

    I am reading "After Asceticism: Sex, Prayer and Deviant priests" by the Linacre Institute. The argument put forward with much documentation is that the break down of traditional ascetic discipline during the crazy post VCII years was in fact a contributing factor to the buggery problem. Some of the perps studied in the seminary before the council but discipline was already breaking down, and all hell broke loose in the sixties and seventies.

  • Posted by: - Jul. 18, 2007 12:31 PM ET USA

    "the bishops are conducting---a multi-million dollar---study of the causes." hey, just get rid of cassocks & the smells and bells & we can save the Church some money! Roger that! (It is reported that Vatican spokesman Fr. Lombardi said, in light of the $660,000,000 LA settlement: "The church is...determined to commit itself in every way to prevent the repetition of such wickedness." --- Get rid of Mahoney. That'd be a great sign of commitment by PBXVI !!!

  • Posted by: - Jul. 18, 2007 12:27 PM ET USA

    Quite true, Eminence. But then they left that "Latin-only, cassocks-only" stultifying environment for the heady air of the "spirit" of Vatican with its emphasis on everything bright, beautiful and touchy-feely. And found themselves serving under bishops who had a predilection for the colors purple and pink and great liturgical choreography among other post-Vatican amenities. And you were there to lead!

  • Posted by: - Jul. 18, 2007 12:22 PM ET USA

    Well there you have it! Cdl Mahoney can be forced to retire now due to what is certainly a severe case of brain damage. I'm actually surprised that he said something so completely stupid. And the bishops are studying this? Gimme a break. How unbiased do we expect that to be? When will this report will be completed and published?

Subscribe for free
Shop Amazon
Click here to advertise on CatholicCulture.org

Recent Catholic Commentary

Eucharistic Adoration, a Sure Sign of Catholic Renewal 12 hours ago
The Mystery of Music, Part II 17 hours ago
Our Spiritual Destiny and the Horror of War September 19
The Islamic roots of terrorism must be addressed September 19
Each of us is destined to marry Jesus Christ September 18

Top Catholic News

Most Important Stories of the Last 30 Days
Cardinals criticize Kasper proposal, escalating debate on remarriage/Communion CWN - September 18