The sex scandal and seminaries

  • Thread starter Thread starter CilladeRoma
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

CilladeRoma

Guest
In his essay, Benedict talks about the homosexual culture in seminaries in the 60’s-80’s. There is also the book, “Goodbye, good men”, which gets touted as an accurate portrayal of some of the shenanigans happening at seminararies during that time.

So, which ones?

If “everybody” knew it was happening, why wasn’t it addressed? Why was it allowed to fester? How could someone like Cardinal Ratzinger who was the Prefect of the CDF, and right hand to JPII not know this was going on? They were the 2 most powerful in the Church at the time.

Benedict’s essay seems to me to be nothing more than hand-wringing and an attempt to gain sympathy and drive a further wedge into the divide the Church already has.

If what he claims about seminary life is true, why is the Church dancing around it?
The only way this wound of the sex scandal will ever heal is if we expose all the rot. How did this essay help that?
 
Last edited:
Hey @CilladeRoma , a long time ago I asked you a question that never got answered - by you or the church. It’s been literally 100 years now, I don’t expect to find any answear or that anyone in the church answers me.

So the “stonewalling” seems well alive for all those who had the misfortune to come across, in their lives, any such unanswered issues - like me.

The “red flag” is the stonewall. That’s when you know you’re on your way to the truth…
 
I’m sorry, but I have no idea what you are taking about. I would never intentially “stonewall” anyone.

As far as the Church stonewalling, that is what got us into this problem to begin with.

If we truly want it fixed, we must demand transparency and accountability all the way to the top.
 
adgloriam said:
through psychiatric interviews to incarcerated offenders that sought to understand the psycho-social and psycho-sexual conditions specific to the formative years of their youth in the seminary).
Click to expand...
How is this even remotely the same thing?! :roll_eyes:🤔
 
CilladeRoma said:
How did this essay help that?
Click to expand...
I thought it was insightful. It probably was to many other people also. I’m guessing it was written specifically with the laity in mind. I appreciate him throwing his two cents in to the discussion.
 
CilladeRoma said:
In his essay, Benedict talks about the homosexual culture in seminaries in the 60’s-80’s.
Click to expand...
@CilladeRoma has there been an official translation of Pope Benedict’s letter ? I am unable to find one .

On another thread yesterday I commented that this letter does not reflect the Pope Benedict I know .

I find in Pope Benedict’s writings a succinct precision which is lacking in this letter .

It makes me wonder . :confused:
 
There was something done. In this country there were two apostolic visitations to investigate seminaries. The worse of the problem was in the 70s and 80s, a lot has changed since then. Didn’t happen overnite, at the end of the day, the local Bishop is responsible.

But we should not claim that the same problems that existed 30 years ago are just as widespread today.
 
CilladeRoma said:
The only way this wound of the sex scandal will ever heal is if we expose all the rot. How did this essay help that?
Click to expand...
Part of the rot resulted from water down of theology, lax discipline, no emphasis on personal devotion and conversion, extreme attachment to the secular media trends.

Just because the pope chose to shine a light on certain issues does not mean he is ignoring others.

Yes, he and JP2 did try to address it. They made some progress but local bishops and religious superiors failed to do their job.

Writing this essay now is important. We have to know what went wrong to avoid this again. While most bad seminaries closed, there are a few where long term, tenured profs resist theological Orthodoxy. Situation ethics is only one of the factors in sex abuse.
 
Last edited:
CNA published the full text here. It is written in a less formal style than Benedict XVI’s official writings, probably because he didn’t intend it to be anything official or thorough, as he writes in the introduction:
Since I myself had served in a position of responsibility as shepherd of the Church at the time of the public outbreak of the crisis, and during the run-up to it, I had to ask myself - even though, as emeritus, I am no longer directly responsible - what I could contribute to a new beginning.
Click to expand...
He’s writing about some observations he had, which I find insightful because of his experience. It’s not written formally and if it lacks the same sharpness of his theological works, some of that is intentional as well as probably due to the fact that he is 91.

Towards the end he thanks Pope Francis for his efforts. Some articles, like one Time article I just read, try to paint a picture that Benedict is undercutting the Pope’s efforts, without actually referring to the essay in any depth. Nowhere does he contradict the Pope or give the slightest hint of criticism. I think that journalist hardly read the essay and only interviewed a couple of people criticizing it because they don’t like how Benedict mentioned the problem of homosexuality in seminaries as connected to the scandal. At least they noted one key quote: “Why did pedophilia reach such proportions? Ultimately, the reason is the absence of God.”
 
Last edited:
“CilladeRoma said:
If “everybody” knew it was happening, why wasn’t it addressed? Why was it allowed to fester?
Click to expand...
Concupiscence - the human condition. A supporting role was most likely played by equally lax, distracted laity. Best to blame oneself first. Then, if blame cannot be placed (and only then) look elsewhere.
 
CilladeRoma said:
If “everybody” knew it was happening, why wasn’t it addressed?
Click to expand...
During the Apostolic Visitations of JPII, the bad seminaries hid everything incriminating. The tore down their Boy George posters, stripped the paint off their toenails, stashed the lingerie, stopped cruising gay bars at night and generally acted like “move along, nothing to see here!”
CilladeRoma said:
Why was it allowed to fester?
Click to expand...
Bad bishops have no reason to end the party. They’re not in it for love of Jesus. They love themselves too much.
CilladeRoma said:
If what he claims about seminary life is true, why is the Church dancing around it?
Click to expand...
The truth is too horrible to be made public and the lavender mafia too powerful to disband without great disruption to the Church.
CilladeRoma said:
The only way this wound of the sex scandal will ever heal is if we expose all the rot. How did this essay help that?
Click to expand...
The rot is being exposed as we speak, and will get worse before it’s over. His letter helps to confirm the root of the problem. It’s not just “clericalism” but the homosexual priests and the homosexual bishops that covered up for them, who used the Church as their own private gay country-club.
Neithan said:
Why did pedophilia reach such proportions?
Click to expand...
One reason is that homosexual child molesters tend to have far, far, more victims than heterosexual perpetrators do.
 
CilladeRoma said:
In his essay, Benedict talks about the homosexual culture in seminaries in the 60’s-80’s. There is also the book, “Goodbye, good men”, which gets touted as an accurate portrayal of some of the shenanigans happening at seminararies during that time.

So, which ones?

If “everybody” knew it was happening, why wasn’t it addressed? Why was it allowed to fester? How could someone like Cardinal Ratzinger who was the Prefect of the CDF, and right hand to JPII not know this was going on? They were the 2 most powerful in the Church at the time.

Benedict’s essay seems to me to be nothing more than hand-wringing and an attempt to gain sympathy and drive a further wedge into the divide the Church already has.

If what he claims about seminary life is true, why is the Church dancing around it?
The only way this wound of the sex scandal will ever heal is if we expose all the rot. How did this essay help that?
Click to expand...
I have problems with BXVI’s letter, as well. But in terms of the “which ones” question, St. Mary’s Seminary in Baltimore has long been called the Pink Palace. I’d post links but some of them contain content that really shouldn’t be linked to here. St. John’s Seminary in Boston has been thought to be a hot bed of homosexual activity, as well.
 
If he had nothing of substance to say he should have remained silent.

There is nothing in this essay that makes me feel any better about the situation, in fact, it casts even more doubts for me for anyone who has been a"Rome insider" for the last 50 years.
 
Last edited:
I did. I often mess up the direct reply function on this forum for some reason.
 
Finn said:
It seemed wholly inadequate, didn’t it?
Click to expand...
No, he adequately addressed one part of the problem. He never said this was the one and only cause. But he chose to address an aspect that the secular media totally denies, and Catholic media gave scant attention to.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top