Author Topic: ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity and the Traditional Clergy (Read 26010 times)

Raoul76 · « **on:** January 28, 2010, 03:14:55 AM »

I once suggested on this website that there might be a problem with ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity among the traditional clergy, and since this might be construed as slander, I want to set the record straight --

I saw no evidence of ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity among the priests at CMRI when I was there.

I had drawn a connection between Schuckardt and Bishop Pivarunas, and from Bishop Pivarunas to Bishop Dolan, who he consecrated, and about whom there are whisperings and innuendos whose nature is hard to ignore ( though many here pretend that they either haven't heard them, or haven't said them ). Some may have thought I was hinting that CMRI are ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs. This is not the case. I just suggested that some kind of ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ infiltration might theoretically be in place, in the same way that we've seen in the Novus Ordo.

This could be superfluous to mention, like saying that "the traditional clergy might have concubines." But I think the chances of ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ infiltration are somewhat greater due to the proofs we already have. There HAS been ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity in the sedevacantist world about which we know, like Francis Schuckardt. This was a situation where a bunch of traditional Catholics willingly went along with a bona fide cult because it was all they had, where children were exposed to a ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ by their families ( I don't think he was a pedophile, but I'll say this much -- he wasn't ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ alone ).

I was trying in what I thought was a subtle way to put people on their guard. I am not telling them to mistrust their priests or keep children away from them as if they were lepers, without any proof of wrongdoing. That would be slander and defamation on my part. But the Schuckardt situation set a very worrying precedent. The bubble-world mentality of the sedes and of SSPX is very strong. People get very attached to their little religious communities which they see as a safe haven from Novus Ordo. They do not want to admit the possibility that the snake has crept into what they think is paradise. Unfortunately, that possibility is always there.

ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity in the clergy is some kind of diabolical phenomenon that can't be ignored, and it already has crept into the traditional underground, even if it is only an isolated phenomenon among a few. The problem is that ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs tend to help other ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs get ahead, to "screen" each other, as we have seen in the Novus Ordo. That is what worries me the most. There is no reason to believe that they'd somehow change tactics as sedevacantists or as SSPX clergy. It would be nice to hope that Schuckardt is just an anomaly and that the problem has been solved. But another sede priest was recently arrested for ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ acts.

That is all I will say on the subject. It's very tricky to talk about because I want people to be aware of a very real possibility without being unfairly suspicious or making snap judgments. But when you hear an SSPX rector boasting about making his students read Brideshead Revisited in seminary, it just sets off all kinds of alarm bells. God wants us to be fair and just, not to be blind. Keep your eyes open, but don't be paranoid or jump to conclusions.

This is mostly irrelevant as far as I'm personally concerned. Since I now believe the entire clergy is heretical on EENS and NFP, at least in this country, I can focus on that without worrying about sɛҳuąƖ orientation.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #1 on:** January 28, 2010, 06:57:13 AM »

I've run into quite a few men with those inclinations against nature in various Traditional circles--diocesan Indult Mass goers, independent chapels, CMRI, and SSPX. Evidently there's a real problem with this also at the Institute of Christ the King. I knew all the Society of St. John priests as well.

Those who ended up having issues in this regard were the ones who were very much into the aesthetics of the Mass. Certain seminarians would be obsessed with their cassocks and surplices and birettas. There were a number of guys at Winona who enjoyed wearing very lacey surplices and a group who were making a statement by wearing extremely long (I mean ankle-length) surplices. Most men are naturally disinclined to these things and prefer the more simple styles. I myself couldn't stand the lace surplices or the really long ones (they looked like dresses).

My basic take on it is that these guys tend to be attracted to the aesthetics of the Traditional Mass and weren't interested so much in doctrine (they tended to be rather liberal theologically--but don't let sedevacantism fool you either). So if there are Traditional priests or clergy who are almost inordinately attached to rubrics and aesthetics, there might be something wrong there. Also, when you see cult-like conditions at a chapel or parish, beware. Sometimes that's a way to set up conditions in which they can operate. Another indicator has in the past been excessive attachment to material things, to fine foods and wine, to various luxuries, and generally appear to lack any sense of self-mortification.

I hate to say these things, but we have to be careful with our children. Parents need to be very cautious and not trust the priests too much just because they appear (or actually are) pious and are Traditional Catholics. Not all of them are overtly effeminate either, so you can't rely on that.

There was the SSJ (former SSPX whom I knew at Winona), issues at the Institute of Christ the King (got very concrete reports from someone who had left there and gone to Winona for precisely that reason), the sedevacantist priest in New York State who was recently arrested, a guy I knew who was a former SSPX seminarian and then teacher at an independent Traditional chapel who was arrested for molesting young boys, another guy I knew at SSPX who left and then ended up living in sin with another man, etc. I cite these only as examples so that parents would keep alert. In other words, the lesson here is not to let your guard down just because someone appears to be a conservative Traditional priest.

Elizabeth · « **Reply #2 on:** January 28, 2010, 10:03:33 AM »

There is hardly anything more sickening than to observe the obsession with controlling, creating a culture of competition as catty as the cheerleading squad ever was among the boys and young men who serve the Latin Mass in some unhappy places.

It starts at the top with priests who are proud and effeminate elitists, hand-picking their special boy. This will be a clever little latent-ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ bully who instinctively knows how to play up to the priests. The type of priest who is so very fond of his reputation for Decorum and endless sermons will unconsciously need this type of boy to run things for him.

Oh Meow! The emphasis on pride,gossip and control-freaks as opposed to true piety and humility. It is so sickeningly effeminate, but as raoul pointed out there is this "bubble world" and many parents of large families cannot afford to travel. Therefore they cannot (and nobody should, anyway) see how sissy the altar serving culture can get.

The insulated, in-bred "bubble world" laypeople out of touch with large metropolitan gαy populations are easily fooled.

Where are the priests who used to punch a kid in the head for making faggy comments to ther boys? And the parents who will put up with anything as long as their boys get to serve, don't get me started. :barf:

008 · « **Reply #3 on:** January 28, 2010, 02:35:26 PM »

Quote

ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity in the clergy is some kind of diabolical phenomenon that can't be ignored, and it already has crept into the traditional underground, even if it is only an isolated phenomenon among a few.

Quote

Then Ladislaus writes

I've run into quite a few men with those inclinations against nature in various Traditional circles--diocesan Indult Mass goers, independent chapels, CMRI, and SSPX. Evidently there's a real problem with this also at the Institute of Christ the King.

Apart from the Society of St. John, no proof is proffered at all. Just baseless innuendo. That (destroying reputations of persons or trad churches) is mortal sin without proof.

Now, having said that, I believe this is a bad time for celibacy ---our is a very sɛҳuąƖly charged age with so much media, technology, etc, etc---and so (non sede) trad priests ought to be allowed to freely petition the vatican to take wives rather than be tempted for trouble very much worse.

The SSPX avoided most of these scandals by employeeing private detectives to follow priests under suspicion. When guilty such priests were summarily dismissed. Sede pastors might follow suit, but who will monitor Sede pastors?

Elizabeth · « **Reply #4 on:** January 28, 2010, 03:02:58 PM »

The sede priests ARE being watched. Shhhh.... :furtive:

And the position against against priestly celibacy isn't at all reasonable. Millions of divorces for infidelity will show you that marraige doesn't cure adultery or any sins against the 6th Commandment. If only.

Further, the Catholic priest cannot work faithfully for the salvation of souls when he is distracted by the needs of his family. A man will place his family first. Nepotism has already caused disaster upon disaster in the history of the Church.

And the priests who support perverts or who are predators are the ones in Mortal Sin. We sin by silence, look it up.