Cardinal Raymond Burke: ‘Feminized’ church and altar girls caused priest shortage

[SuperLuigi]

Yeah, that’s it…the feminization

of the Catholic Church (what the heck does that even mean?) and girl alter servers are causing the shortage of priests.

There is a priest shortage, he is absolutely right. But I think that he’s just looking for a convenient scapegoat. It’s easy to blame young girls serving in the church. But wouldn’t it make more sense to look at society as a whole and consider how much religious affiliation and participation has dropped in the last few decades? Or how about considering that even amongst believers, the importance that religion plays in the lives of westerners has also dropped significantly in the same time frame.

Well, I wouldn’t question his motives, but blaming it on altar girls is too one-dimensional. Starting around 1900 and definitively in the 1930s through the 1950s, vocations in the USA soared. Combined with secularization, fairly decent and consistent standards of living in the late 20th Century and more or less through today, and smaller, more fragmented families, the drop in North America and Europe isn’t surprising.

But the numbers are growing in Africa and Asia.

The only caveat is that I think the Lincoln diocese, which still has an altar girl ban, doesn’t have an issue recruiting priests.

And then there are the economic concerns. Student loan debt is OUTRAGEOUS in this country. And debt is a major barrier to the priesthood and religious life. Many people are turned away because of their financial situation. Something tells me that 1/3 of applicants being turned away from the start because of their debt has more to do with the shortage than 12 year old girls serving at the alter.

 

[Zzyzx_Road]

Student loan debt is not dischargeable under any ordinary means that are usually available to other types of debtors. Under some circumstances, student loan debts can be and sometimes are foisted on others associated with the debtor. Hence while I think it’s a tragedy that they have to do so, I can’t say I blame the seminaries, dioceses, orders and communities that want nothing to do with that debt. Many of these entities have enough financial issues of their own, they don’t need to be taking on those of their potential incoming members.

Just as an aside, that should give all another view as to just how insidiously bad student loan debt is: it not only retards family formation, it also retards the follow on real estate and educational markets, future charitable giving to churches and other 501(c)3 entities and now we have yet another example of what it’s holding back: new religious vocations. So sure there may be an organization somewhere that is set up to help the young with this debt so they can pursue their religious vocations, but again, that is yet another diversion of resources that really shouldn’t be happening.

 

[pnewton]

I have commented before about how many priests give off effeminate vibes that make men uncomfortable around them. But even when they are not giving off these vibes, they are still beholden to the women in their parishes. Men will lay down their lives if there is honor in it. But when they can’t get that from their own parish priest or the women running their parish, there’s something very wrong there. I’ve attended Mass in at least 50 parishes around the country since my return to Catholicism and I can tell you there are not nearly enough strong men in the priesthood. Maybe 8 or 10 parishes had a strong priest.

I do not know if I can but the argument that most priests are “girly men”, to use a nicer term. It seems rather insulting. Besides, strength and masculinity are not measured by the amount of bass in the voice or the testosterone level.

 

[MarcoPolo]

Are men no longer pursuing law or medicine because those professions are now populated by many women?

They haven’t bailed altogether, but it’s no secret that women get the majority of undergrad degrees and doctoral degrees anymore.

 

[Mulligan2]

Most of the victims were not CHILDREN with no secondary sexual characteristics. The majority were at least 14 and were already into puberty. Although the media delighted in using the term pedophile in reality almost none of predatory priests had victims in the 10 & under cohort which is the real definition of that term.A better term is pederasty and the definition of that group is ages 12 to 17…the exact group preyed upon by the majority of abusive priests.

I hope you’re not trying to mitigate the severity of this issue. The abuse scandals have been among the most damaging events in the history of our Church.

 

[InSearchofGrace]

So you share Mr. Keating’s belief that 9-year-olds are post-pubescent? Because 14% of abused victims were 10 or under and 65% were 14 and under.

Personally, I wouldn’t even remotely consider the beliefs of someone who believed 8 and 9-year-olds, let alone 12-14 year-olds were “post-pubescent.”

Yes, I believe as he does that homosexual rather than pedophile priests were more the problem in the priest sex abuse of minors. When males have sex with postpubescent males, it is called homosexuality.

At least, this time you did not call him a blatant liar as you did the last time I posted the same Catholic Answers blog piece (it was not surprising that the moderator removed your offensive post).

The majority of the clerical sex-abuse scandals that came to light did not involve pedophilia. Rather, it can be more accurately classified as ephebophilia, the term which you yourself used, which is homosexual attraction to adolescent boys, same as homosexual pederasty. Nobody is defending the wrongdoing of abusing priests, though. It is still abuse, abuse of minors.

You seem invested in the idea that there are no homosexuals who may be and are attracted to adolescent boys.
,

 

[LisaA]

I hope you’re not trying to mitigate the severity of this issue. The abuse scandals have been among the most damaging events in the history of our Church.

Not at all. I agree this has been a cancer that has infested the Church, discouraged vocations, sent many Catholics fleeing for the hills, bankrupted many parishes, ruined the lives of innocent priests who were presumed guilty. As I think Pope Emeritus Benedict stated, this is FILTH.

That being said, as I mentioned the media is no friend of the Church and often erroneously used the term pedophile priest as the general public didn’t know any difference and the term was far more pejorative than saying “A small but destructive homosexual element preyed upon adolescent males.” It doesn’t make the evil any less but for purposes of the media, it was far more sensational and demeaning to claim pedophilia than pedastry which most people couldn’t define anyway. Further the role of homosexuality was downplayed both by the media and also the various reports. Was it an attempt to be PC or ignorance? I suspect the former. The homosexual activists are very powerful.

 

[Zzyzx_Road]

I do not know if I can but the argument that most priests are “girly men”, to use a nicer term. It seems rather insulting. Besides, strength and masculinity are not measured by the amount of bass in the voice or the testosterone level.

You read me too narrowly. Strength is in the ability of the priest to lead the women in the parish rather than be led by them. Strength is in the ability of the priest to set a strong positive male example for boys so that more of them may be inspired to follow him into religious vocations when they grow up. Strength is in the ability of the priest to speak uncomfortable truths to the parish and to the community at large, to make it clear that Christianity isn’t all about the sweet and light, it is about inspiring others to follow the hard, narrow path that Jesus spoke of. Many priests are not necessarily effeminate, but they are still milquetoasts. There is a place for milquetoasts, God bless them, but the Church already has plenty of those, what the Church needs is more strong men who can lead and are not afraid to exercise their leadership for Christ.

Look around you, check out the parishes in your cities, we have too few of these men. Read that article by Msgr. Pope that I cited a few posts back.

 

[pnewton]

Look around you, check out the parishes in your cities, we have too few of these men. Read that article by Msgr. Pope that I cited a few posts back.

I have known several priests and none of them do I see fitting Msgr. Pope’s description, but I note he did not expand this issue to priests, as did you. The Church as I know it is not “feminized” in any sense, except as a pronoun. Now we all have our own perspective based on our own narrow experience of the Church. The sensum fidei is based on the Church as a whole. When one finds themselves standing alone, it may not be Satan in the servers, but our own institutionalized prejudice.

Maybe a single person, or a handful of people, are a brave few standing against some tide of time that is evil. Maybe they are like Saul prior to conversion and slow to listen to Jesus.

BTW - It was a good article, but more limited in scope than applied here.

 

[Zzyzx_Road]

Not at all. I agree this has been a cancer that has infested the Church, discouraged vocations, sent many Catholics fleeing for the hills, bankrupted many parishes, ruined the lives of innocent priests who were presumed guilty. As I think Pope Emeritus Benedict stated, this is FILTH.

That being said, as I mentioned the media is no friend of the Church and often erroneously used the term pedophile priest as the general public didn’t know any difference and the term was far more pejorative than saying “A small but destructive homosexual element preyed upon adolescent males.” It doesn’t make the evil any less but for purposes of the media, it was far more sensational and demeaning to claim pedophilia than pedastry which most people couldn’t define anyway. Further the role of homosexuality was downplayed both by the media and also the various reports. Was it an attempt to be PC or ignorance? I suspect the former. The homosexual activists are very powerful.

I fully agree with the characterization of the abuse as a cancer that infested the Church. At the same time, Lisa does bring up an interesting point I hadn’t thought of before: it was important tag all abuse as pedophilia for that attracted attention to the small number of actually accused priests and distracted attention from the presence of active homosexuals and their enablers within the clergy.

To expand on this point: the active homosexuals who preyed on the underage were small in actual numbers, but there must have been more priests who were active homosexuals but never went after the underage males, they instead solicited sexual contact with adult men in or out of the priesthood. We only heard about them in the rare case that one of these solicited for gay conduct in public space. And more priests who while homosexual in orientation, still led a chaste life, yet looked the other way at the unchaste conduct in their ranks. That along with the straights who were told from the seminary on to look the other way as well. That well explains the culture of silence that burst in the 80’s. Yet even as it burst, the overall presence of homosexuals in the clergy had to be minimized. But the nature of the hierarchy got exposed by the suits and the payouts and then the subsequent exposure of the files. So the pro-homosexual media focused on using the word pedophilia to describe the issue and then they could say it was just a few rogue priests who spoiled it for everyone else rather than be forced to say there was a pro-homosexual culture within the Church that enabled this filthy conduct as that would reflect poorly on homosexuals everywhere.

As I said before, I have heard about changes in the vetting of young men for the priesthood and I surely hope that helps, but the reality is it will take a couple of generations of these new priests to greatly reduce the influence of the homosexuals in the upper hierarchies.

 

[oldcelt]

Not at all. I agree this has been a cancer that has infested the Church, discouraged vocations, sent many Catholics fleeing for the hills, bankrupted many parishes, ruined the lives of innocent priests who were presumed guilty. As I think Pope Emeritus Benedict stated, this is FILTH.

That being said, as I mentioned the media is no friend of the Church and often erroneously used the term pedophile priest as the general public didn’t know any difference and the term was far more pejorative than saying “A small but destructive homosexual element preyed upon adolescent males.” It doesn’t make the evil any less but for purposes of the media, it was far more sensational and demeaning to claim pedophilia than pedastry which most people couldn’t define anyway. Further the role of homosexuality was downplayed both by the media and also the various reports. Was it an attempt to be PC or ignorance? I suspect the former. The homosexual activists are very powerful.

If you want to see unfriendly coverage, everyone should watch the Frontline report on the Vatican. It utilizes the testimony of insiders and is extremely damning of the Curia. It also blames the scandals for the resignation of Benedict XVI. It is shockingly solid and in no way sensationalizes anything IMHO. Pope Francis really has his hands full with a plethora of issues.

John

 

[Zzyzx_Road]

I have known several priests and none of them do I see fitting Msgr. Pope’s description, but I note he did not expand this issue to priests, as did you. The Church as I know it is not “feminized” in any sense, except as a pronoun. Now we all have our own perspective based on our own narrow experience of the Church. The sensum fidei is based on the Church as a whole. When one finds themselves standing alone, it may not be Satan in the servers, but our own institutionalized prejudice.

Maybe a single person, or a handful of people, are a brave few standing against some tide of time that is evil. Maybe they are like Saul prior to conversion and slow to listen to Jesus.

BTW - It was a good article, but more limited in scope than applied here.

Agree to disagree. I don’t think you’ve seen anywhere near as many parishes as I have. But God bless you for your faith anyway.

 

[Zzyzx_Road]

I have known several priests and none of them do I see fitting Msgr. Pope’s description, but I note he did not expand this issue to priests, as did you. The Church as I know it is not “feminized” in any sense, except as a pronoun.

Cardinal Burke does expand “feminized” to priests: to quote from the article:

. . . for there was a period of time when men who were feminized and confused about their own sexual identity had entered the priesthood; sadly some of these disordered men sexually abused minors; a terrible tragedy for which the Church mourns.

To expand on my points about a priest’s presentation, Burke says this in the very next paragraph about men in general, which must also apply to men in the priesthood:

We have to be very clear with men about purity, chastity, modesty and even the way men dress and present themselves. Men’s behaviors and dress matter, for it affects how they relate to the world and it affects the culture. Men need to dress and act like men in a way that is respectful to themselves, to women and to children.

And then this one hits home for me:

Men don’t go in for this kind of corny approach to the Mass when it becomes some kind of feel-good session, or where there is irreverence. Men are there to receive Jesus Christ. They need to see Him, to see His presence reflected in the reverent manner of the priest.

Burke sees what I have seen around the country. His advice for priests touches on cultivating their spiritual values as men:

First of all, be manly yourself. In other words, cultivate your own manly qualities, because the priest is first and foremost the spiritual father; he is a man. You need to have manly qualities of selflessness, chivalry and discipline to avoid situations improper for a priest. A priest must have the manly confidence and credibility to be a spiritual father to his flock, giving clear firm guidance with kindness and charity.

 

[pnewton]

Cardinal Burke does expand “feminized” to priests: to quote from the article:

I didn’t say he did. That was your post that criticized the majority of priest.

Burke sees what I have seen around the country.

An interesting statement. Do you travel in the same circles or do you base this on what he has said? You already mentioned, " I’ve attended Mass in at least 50 parishes around the country since my return to Catholicism and I can tell you there are not nearly enough strong men in the priesthood. Maybe 8 or 10 parishes had a strong priest. In that light, it shouldn’t surprise many that a lot of men aren’t interested in being led by somebody like one of the other 40 or so."

I have to go back to what I said about being in the minority and two of the reasons that may be. I am glad that Cardinal Burke is there for people who need his message. But if one thing the history of evangelization teaches is, not all people are the same and need the same approach. The very root of prejudice is the stereotype, in which all people (or men) are viewed as a monolithic group, all the same, all needing the same thing, the same way. It is God who calls holy priests as he needs them. I would be slow to gainsay his calling in the majority of His priest.

 

[Tomdstone]

Those priests didn’t molest children because they were gay …

What is your proof of this?

 

[Tomdstone]

I know two excellent men who would have been great priests except for the tolerance of homosexual harassment in their seminaries, which was tolerated.

Why do the Catholic authorities allow this?

 

[Tomdstone]

The John Jay report actually explicitly states that there is no link between homosexuality and priestly abuse.

What is the proof that the JJ report is correct? If homosexuality had nothing to do with abuse, wouldn’t it be expected that there would not be a disproportion between males abused versus females abused?

 

[Tomdstone]

Absolutely. And lets add to that we should remove women’s religious orders. Lets oust the nuns even further.

I would be opposed to ousting nuns. There are many good traditional Catholic nuns who are doing great work.

 

[SMGS127]

What is the proof that the JJ report is correct? If homosexuality had nothing to do with abuse, wouldn’t it be expected that there would not be a disproportion between males abused versus females abused?

No. Priests did not have anywhere remotely near as much access to young women as they did to young men. There are other, much more simpler reasons for the priest scandal. As the John Jay Report said, homosexuality/homosexual priests was/were not, in any way whatsoever, a contributing factor to the priestly abuse scandal.

 

[Gorgias]

I’m not suggesting “retaliation.” The cardinal is suggesting that girls’ participation in serving at the altar is somehow responsible for the decline in vocations due to boys not wanting to participate in “girl” activities. If the Church should become more masculine, then the huge number of activities primarily performed by women, some of which I referenced, should perhaps be undertaken by men. And, apparently, that involves women stepping aside so that men feel more comfortable.

Interesting segue. Since young boys might feel uncomfortable “participating in ‘girl’ activities”, you suggest that an appropriate response is that “women should step aside so that men feel more comfortable.”

Tell me… do you really think that men are uncomfortable around women? Or, perhaps, it’s more accurate to conclude that you equate the emotional states of boys with those of men? On the face of it, that’s an assertion that’s completely illogical; one might, instead, conclude that your assertions proceed from something other than rationality…