Amy and the rest of us saw the exhibit today in Cincinnati. Very nice, interesting, informative to a degree. Set in a tone to offer an apologetic for the role of the papacy as founded by Christ...taking one from the tomb of St. Peter to the cast "hand" of Pope John Paul II (which viewers are encouraged to touch).
Sunday, February 29, 2004
Gay priests in a Barely Closed Closet
From the sounds of this piece from the Springfield, Mass. paper there are priests up there openly living an active gay lifestyle. They name names... this is in a state where the church must take a strong stand against gay marriage?
From Gay priests in a barely closed closet:
"In the magazine the Catholic World Report, Jesuit Paul Shaughnessey in 2000 wrote 'the ugly and indisputable facts: a disproportionately high percentage of priests is gay; a disproportionately high percentage of gay priests routinely engages in sodomy; this sodomy is frequently ignored, often tolerated and sometimes abetted by bishops and superiors.'
One of two men who accused former Bishop Thomas L. Dupre of sexual abuse said he was moved to come forward only after reading of Dupre's preachings against gay marriage. The man, who is gay, said he was angered by the hypocrisy.
A statement issued by the man's lawyer read, 'He believed that Bishop Dupre's comments reflected his disapproval of our client's lifestyle. ... (As a result) he began to see his relationship with Bishop Dupre in a different light and he contacted our office.'
At The Pub, the priest has been a regular for years, according to staff there.
'And he's not the only priest who comes in either,' said Pub bartender Thomas Martin, who is also a plaintiff in a clergy abuse suit.
The priest didn't return a call from The Republican, but others have acknowledged or been accused of engaging in a gay lifestyle.
The Rev. James A. Sipitkowski was living a homosexual lifestyle while assigned to Holy Family Parish in Springfield several years ago, according to a sworn statement by the Rev. Paul E. Manship, who found pictures of Sipitkowski dressed in women's clothing with other scantily clad men. The statement was included in a suit charging Holy Family Parish and a church deacon with a variety of employment violations, including sexual harassment. Sipitkowski is not a defendant in the suit.
About four years ago Sipitkowski was transferred to Sacred Heart Parish in Easthampton, where he currently works. He refused to comment on his situation, referring a call to his lawyer, who also had no comment.
Last week a Springfield man's obituary in The Republican revealed his 25-year relationship with his male partner, a period which included the last three years he served as a priest in the Springfield Diocese.
When Chicopee native and Springfield diocesan priest the Rev. Robert L. Arpin was on loan to the Diocese of San Francisco in the 1980s, he announced from the pulpit that he was gay and had AIDS. In doing so, he became the first American priest to openly discuss his sexual orientation and the illness that eventually claimed his life at age 48 in 1995.
Two other priests working in the Springfield Diocese have close ties with the gay community. They include a once high-ranking priest who performed publicly at an AIDS benefit.
In an attempt to place the abuse scandal in historical context last week, Monsignor Richard S. Sniezyk, the acting administrator in the Springfield Diocese, said some priests in the past thought it was all right to have sex with young men. He later clarified his comments, adding that sexual misconduct in any context is never acceptable, and apologized if his comments offended anyone.
The idea that there are gay priests may be as shocking to some Catholics as it was to a former Springfield resident who was enrolled in a seminary high school in the 1970s. At the time, he said, he was trying to decide whether to become a priest while simultaneously struggling with his own sexual identity. "
From Gay priests in a barely closed closet:
"In the magazine the Catholic World Report, Jesuit Paul Shaughnessey in 2000 wrote 'the ugly and indisputable facts: a disproportionately high percentage of priests is gay; a disproportionately high percentage of gay priests routinely engages in sodomy; this sodomy is frequently ignored, often tolerated and sometimes abetted by bishops and superiors.'
One of two men who accused former Bishop Thomas L. Dupre of sexual abuse said he was moved to come forward only after reading of Dupre's preachings against gay marriage. The man, who is gay, said he was angered by the hypocrisy.
A statement issued by the man's lawyer read, 'He believed that Bishop Dupre's comments reflected his disapproval of our client's lifestyle. ... (As a result) he began to see his relationship with Bishop Dupre in a different light and he contacted our office.'
At The Pub, the priest has been a regular for years, according to staff there.
'And he's not the only priest who comes in either,' said Pub bartender Thomas Martin, who is also a plaintiff in a clergy abuse suit.
The priest didn't return a call from The Republican, but others have acknowledged or been accused of engaging in a gay lifestyle.
The Rev. James A. Sipitkowski was living a homosexual lifestyle while assigned to Holy Family Parish in Springfield several years ago, according to a sworn statement by the Rev. Paul E. Manship, who found pictures of Sipitkowski dressed in women's clothing with other scantily clad men. The statement was included in a suit charging Holy Family Parish and a church deacon with a variety of employment violations, including sexual harassment. Sipitkowski is not a defendant in the suit.
About four years ago Sipitkowski was transferred to Sacred Heart Parish in Easthampton, where he currently works. He refused to comment on his situation, referring a call to his lawyer, who also had no comment.
Last week a Springfield man's obituary in The Republican revealed his 25-year relationship with his male partner, a period which included the last three years he served as a priest in the Springfield Diocese.
When Chicopee native and Springfield diocesan priest the Rev. Robert L. Arpin was on loan to the Diocese of San Francisco in the 1980s, he announced from the pulpit that he was gay and had AIDS. In doing so, he became the first American priest to openly discuss his sexual orientation and the illness that eventually claimed his life at age 48 in 1995.
Two other priests working in the Springfield Diocese have close ties with the gay community. They include a once high-ranking priest who performed publicly at an AIDS benefit.
In an attempt to place the abuse scandal in historical context last week, Monsignor Richard S. Sniezyk, the acting administrator in the Springfield Diocese, said some priests in the past thought it was all right to have sex with young men. He later clarified his comments, adding that sexual misconduct in any context is never acceptable, and apologized if his comments offended anyone.
The idea that there are gay priests may be as shocking to some Catholics as it was to a former Springfield resident who was enrolled in a seminary high school in the 1970s. At the time, he said, he was trying to decide whether to become a priest while simultaneously struggling with his own sexual identity. "
Friday, February 27, 2004
Conserve Latin in Church
Catholic World News (CWN):
"A new document on the use of Latin in the Church, and the teaching of Latin in seminaries, is expected sometime this year.
Cardinal Zenon Grocholewski, the prefect of the Congregation for Catholic Education, has confirmed that he hopes the document being prepared by that Congregation will be published in 2004.
'In order not to mutilate herself, the Church cannot fail to conserve her tradition and patrimony written in Latin,' the Polish cardinal remarked during a February 25 meeting in Rome. He pointed out that Latin remains the official language of the Roman Church, and the official documents of the magisterium are written in that language.
Therefore, he concluded, the Church needs priests who are familiar with the language, in order to ensure that they fully understand Catholic teachings. "
"A new document on the use of Latin in the Church, and the teaching of Latin in seminaries, is expected sometime this year.
Cardinal Zenon Grocholewski, the prefect of the Congregation for Catholic Education, has confirmed that he hopes the document being prepared by that Congregation will be published in 2004.
'In order not to mutilate herself, the Church cannot fail to conserve her tradition and patrimony written in Latin,' the Polish cardinal remarked during a February 25 meeting in Rome. He pointed out that Latin remains the official language of the Roman Church, and the official documents of the magisterium are written in that language.
Therefore, he concluded, the Church needs priests who are familiar with the language, in order to ensure that they fully understand Catholic teachings. "
A Comment
This was still being mouthed by professors in the 1980's...
From Catholic Review Board | Report 01: A Report on the Causes and Context of the Current Crisis in the Catholic Church.:
"In addition, in the 1960s and 1970s, there was an expectation among many that the Vatican was contemplating modifying Church doctrine on sexuality and perhaps even abolishing the discipline of celibacy for priests. As one bishop stated when discussing seminaries of the late 1960s and 1970s, 'You had professors who were saying, 'Don't worry; they're going to change the celibacy rule any day, and you will be able to get married.' So guys were going through thinking that they . . . could get married after ordination.'"
From Catholic Review Board | Report 01: A Report on the Causes and Context of the Current Crisis in the Catholic Church.:
"In addition, in the 1960s and 1970s, there was an expectation among many that the Vatican was contemplating modifying Church doctrine on sexuality and perhaps even abolishing the discipline of celibacy for priests. As one bishop stated when discussing seminaries of the late 1960s and 1970s, 'You had professors who were saying, 'Don't worry; they're going to change the celibacy rule any day, and you will be able to get married.' So guys were going through thinking that they . . . could get married after ordination.'"
Two Dioceses / Two Cardinals Singled Out in Report
Cardinal Egan and Cardinal Mahony...mentioned as "problems" in The Catholic Review Board Report:
Although this was an ambitious agenda, the Ad Hoc Committee did not have as great an impact as some of the bishops had hoped it would have. One bishop claimed that this was owing to the fact that the committee "had no teeth" and was not supported by some influential bishops, out of concern that it was an intrusion on a bishop's authority and it would increase litigation against the Church.20
Problems continued to fester in other dioceses. Litigation was filed against the Diocese of Bridgeport and then-Bishop Egan in 1993 alleging that the diocese had been aware of complaints against certain priests since at least 1982 but had failed to take actions to remove the priests from ministry. For example, according to published reports, a 1990 diocesan memorandum indicated that there was a "developing pattern of accusations" that Father Charles Carr had abused young boys. (Significantly, Carr had been admitted into a seminary years earlier despite the fact that a priest who had known him for years reportedly had recommended against his admission, asserting that he lacked the emotional maturity required for the priesthood.) Nevertheless, Carr was not suspended until 1995. Indeed, Carr was actually reinstated in 1999 and served as a chaplain in a nursing home until Bishop Egan's successor, Bishop Lori, removed him in December 2002 and instituted laicization proceedings. Shortly after Bishop Egan left Bridgeport and was installed as Archbishop of New York, Bishop Lori settled pending litigation against the diocese for more than $12 million.
Another troubled diocese was the Archdiocese of Los Angeles. After allegations were made that Cardinal Mahony, the Archbishop of Los Angeles, had allowed numerous predator priests to remain in ministry, the Archdiocese engaged in a very public spat with law enforcement authorities who questioned his level of cooperation in the criminal investigation of sexual molestation charges. The Archdiocese resisted grand jury subpoenas seeking priest personnel files by arguing that communications between a priest and his bishop were privileged. This argument did little to enhance the reputation of the Church in the United States for transparency and cooperation.
Although this was an ambitious agenda, the Ad Hoc Committee did not have as great an impact as some of the bishops had hoped it would have. One bishop claimed that this was owing to the fact that the committee "had no teeth" and was not supported by some influential bishops, out of concern that it was an intrusion on a bishop's authority and it would increase litigation against the Church.20
Problems continued to fester in other dioceses. Litigation was filed against the Diocese of Bridgeport and then-Bishop Egan in 1993 alleging that the diocese had been aware of complaints against certain priests since at least 1982 but had failed to take actions to remove the priests from ministry. For example, according to published reports, a 1990 diocesan memorandum indicated that there was a "developing pattern of accusations" that Father Charles Carr had abused young boys. (Significantly, Carr had been admitted into a seminary years earlier despite the fact that a priest who had known him for years reportedly had recommended against his admission, asserting that he lacked the emotional maturity required for the priesthood.) Nevertheless, Carr was not suspended until 1995. Indeed, Carr was actually reinstated in 1999 and served as a chaplain in a nursing home until Bishop Egan's successor, Bishop Lori, removed him in December 2002 and instituted laicization proceedings. Shortly after Bishop Egan left Bridgeport and was installed as Archbishop of New York, Bishop Lori settled pending litigation against the diocese for more than $12 million.
Another troubled diocese was the Archdiocese of Los Angeles. After allegations were made that Cardinal Mahony, the Archbishop of Los Angeles, had allowed numerous predator priests to remain in ministry, the Archdiocese engaged in a very public spat with law enforcement authorities who questioned his level of cooperation in the criminal investigation of sexual molestation charges. The Archdiocese resisted grand jury subpoenas seeking priest personnel files by arguing that communications between a priest and his bishop were privileged. This argument did little to enhance the reputation of the Church in the United States for transparency and cooperation.
The Catholic Review Board Report
A research study conducted by the John Jay College of Criminal Justice...Catholic Review Board | Reports:
Why did so many priests sexually abuse minors?
Although it is not possible to pinpoint any one "cause" of the problem of sexual abuse of minors by priests, there were two overarching contributing factors:
Dioceses and orders did not screen candidates for the priest¬hood properly. As a result, many sexually dysfunctional and immature men were admitted into seminaries and later ordained into the priesthood.
Seminaries did not form candidates for the priesthood adequately. As a result, seminarians were not prepared for the challenges of the priesthood, particularly the challenge of living a chaste, celibate life.
In addition, although neither the presence of homosexually-oriented priests nor the discipline of celibacy caused the crisis, an understanding of the crisis is not possible without reference to these issues. There are, no doubt, many outstand¬ing priests of a homosexual orientation who live chaste, celibate lives, but any evaluation of the causes and context of the current crisis must be cognizant of the fact that more than eighty percent of the abuse at issue was of a homosexual nature. Likewise, celibacy does not cause sexual abuse; but the Church did an inadequate job both of screening out those individuals who were destined to fail in meeting the demands of the priesthood, and of forming others to meet those demands, including the rigors of a celibate life.
Why did so many priests sexually abuse minors?
Although it is not possible to pinpoint any one "cause" of the problem of sexual abuse of minors by priests, there were two overarching contributing factors:
Dioceses and orders did not screen candidates for the priest¬hood properly. As a result, many sexually dysfunctional and immature men were admitted into seminaries and later ordained into the priesthood.
Seminaries did not form candidates for the priesthood adequately. As a result, seminarians were not prepared for the challenges of the priesthood, particularly the challenge of living a chaste, celibate life.
In addition, although neither the presence of homosexually-oriented priests nor the discipline of celibacy caused the crisis, an understanding of the crisis is not possible without reference to these issues. There are, no doubt, many outstand¬ing priests of a homosexual orientation who live chaste, celibate lives, but any evaluation of the causes and context of the current crisis must be cognizant of the fact that more than eighty percent of the abuse at issue was of a homosexual nature. Likewise, celibacy does not cause sexual abuse; but the Church did an inadequate job both of screening out those individuals who were destined to fail in meeting the demands of the priesthood, and of forming others to meet those demands, including the rigors of a celibate life.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)