CathInfo.com

While this week, District Superior, Father Wegner declared the ICA sex-scandal over, imitating the pedaphile cover-ups of his Consiliar diocesan fratres, can anyone explain how ICA suffered such a severe management failure?

There were seven priest at the watch, and still the chapel and school suffered the major pervert assaults of Sloniker and Populous.

Is it safe to assume the French, Fr. Vassal and Fr. Bergez were the dominant personalities running the operation?  


Fr. Vassal


Fr. Bergez

The latter, with his outdoor Catholic young-men's program, should have put him in close understanding of the boys.



And what about the four young priests?   Were they all out-to-lunch too ?

They had to be in close communication with the children?
 

Fr. James Carlisle


Fr. Charles Deister


Fr. Thomas Duncan


Fr. Stephen Reid

Is this the new, lax breed of neo-trad priests?


And finally, where was the wise elder?  


Fr. Dellalo

What the heck was he doing?



When a disaster happens, it is natural to analyze the key management members and their roles and errors to avoid another occurrence.

Has this happened?


I suppose only Fr. Wegner knows?

I can personally attest to moral laxity on the part of Fr. Carlisle.  Several years ago my son was invited to a "bonfire/party" at the home of ICA student whose parents were out of town on vacation.  Fr. Carlisle was chaperoning a co-ed party of several dozen teens.  I played the badguy and denied my son permission to go despite his pointing out that a priest would be present.  Indeed.   :scratchchin:  The person who invited my son was a female so that shows you how modest the young maidens of ICC really are.

BTW, Fr Carlisle is Fr Hewko's nephew.  It must run in the family.

Let me advance one more observation. I do this with a great deal of trepidation, and with no desire to add to the scandal, or add to any wrong information. I'm not dealing in names, but only to allow good and right minded people to arrive at some some kind of clarity that will protect their children and save their faith.

As far back as the 1970s 9 priests were released from the SSPX because of sedevacantist declarations and refusal of obedience to liturgical direction.  There was no hint of moral turpitude.

However, it subsequently became booted about that at least two of these 9 had some smoke arising of a ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ nature, and a third priest has items published in newspapers of  blatant heterosɛҳuąƖ inappropriateness and also problems with alcohol.

So we have the added worry that these problems are not recent, but might go back into the very inception of the organization.

How could smart people fail so obviously in their duties of careful selection and scrupulous formation? Unless it wasn't a major concern, and was quietly accepted?