Posted on 06/27/2004 9:27:55 PM PDT by MegaSilver
After spending over two years interviewing ex-seminarians and ordained priests about the homosexual subculture dominating Catholic seminaries in the United States, Michael Rose could not have picked a better time to release Goodbye, Good Men (Regnery Publishing, 2002).
Some may say his timing is providential. Whatever you call it, this book is a "must-read" for Catholics who want the real story of how homosexual predators have become so notorious in the Catholic clergy and how liberal Catholicism brought corruption into the Catholic Church.
Trained as an architect, Rose gained a reputation as a thorough and insightful author of several successful books dealing with the deplorable state of modernist Catholic Church architecture. His new book on the priesthood is a shocking documentation of the homosexual infiltration of the American Catholic hierarchy, and accurately identifies widespread dissent from core Catholic teaching by the Catholic clergy in the seminaries as the root of the so-called vocation crisis.
Ironically, the Catholic media have been pretty rough on Rose. Critics have faulted him for the use of fictitious names; they have nit-picked petty details, and accused him of bad journalism. While many of Rose's sources have chosen to remain anonymous to protect themselves from retaliation, the consistency of the testimony, coupled with the sad stories of men who go by their real names, results in a highly credible and accurate account of the situation. One wonders whether the Catholic media's negative responses are an effort to save face because they remained silent while they were aware of the homosexual corruption in the seminaries.
Rose documents the bizarre exams administered by admitted anti-Catholic psychologists, the feminist nuns in charge of diocesan recruitment programs, and the openly homosexual formation advisors and faculty at the seminaries, all of whom systematically identified orthodox, truly Catholic young men and drove them away from the priesthood. Catholics will find the seminarians' stories -- Rose documents dozens of them occurring all over the country -- to be infuriating in light of the growing shortage of priests in America.
Some orthodox men left the seminary of their own accord after suffering sexual harassment by homosexual faculty and students. Others, who admitted to being against homosexuality or women priests, were drummed out as being "too rigid", for having a "lack of openness to new ideas", or for being "unaccepting of others as they are", often after they had completed years of study and sacrifice.
Those who survived the initial weeding out process often did so by posing as liberals. Having survived the first cut, the orthodox seminary student was then subjected to mandatory classes that included homoerotic films, pornography, heterodoxy in theology, and in some cases, outright heresy. Rose documents the case of one student who actually sued a seminary for falsely advertising they were Catholic, when the theology classes were openly hostile to well established Catholic teachings. To avoid the lawsuit, the heterodox theology professor involved was dismissed.
Because most seminaries continue to be overrun by dissenters and homosexuals, particularly in the area of formation and recruitment, it should come as no surprise that finding "straight" males willing to endure years of being cloistered in such an environment is nearly impossible. Rose provides a mountain of evidence that the shortage of priests has been effectively self-imposed by a liberal, feminist, and disproportionately homosexual clique dominating church administration.
My only criticism of Rose's outstanding book is that he fails to acknowledge any culpability or complicity on the part of Rome for the debacle in the church. The mess in the seminaries didn't just happen unnoticed or overnight. Since Vatican II, complaints to Rome about homosexual priests and bishops, sexually perverse seminaries, heterodox or heretical clerics, and the scandal of liturgical and sacramental abuses have been virtually ignored. In my own experience over the last 5 years, none of my letters regarding abuses in the church addressed to Rome or the Papal Nuncio have been acknowledged. I know too many other concerned Catholics who have had the identical experience, from Rochester, New York, to Oakland, California. When the Vatican finally did respond to the decades of complaints of rampant and unchecked homosexuality in U.S. seminaries, the process of investigation and the outcomes were highly suspect.
Rose identifies the fact that so-called Vatican investigations of the American seminaries during the 1980's (the Marshall report) were conducted by American Catholic Church insiders, who were treated to 'Potemkin village' tours of seminaries, and submitted their largely misleading, milk toast reports back to Rome. He quotes Notre Dame Professor Ralph McInerny, "Here indeed was a failure, and by churchmen, who had to make a determined effort not to acquaint themselves with the facts they were supposed to be investigating". To make matters worse, the homosexual infiltration of the Catholic Church does not stop in America. Veteran Catholic commentators have indicated a distinct possibility that there were highly influential homosexuals in Rome who helped to suppress the real story.
Part of the problem lies in the re-organized conciliar Catholic Church, in which the Vatican has effectively ceded away much of its authority to administer, regulate and discipline to regional councils like the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. These conferences are often part of the process of recommending candidates to the Vatican when episcopal vacancies occur. Typically, the Vatican accepts these recommendations, trusting that local prelates are in a better position to find "the right man for the job". But this system is also open to abuse, and abused it has been.
Rose stops short of saying so, but I doubt he would object if the Vatican began to assert itself in a more authoritative way regarding open dissent and disobedience by American clerics. In the absence of such discipline, the Catholic laity are left with the obvious impression that the refusal to accept certain Catholic doctrines is acceptable behavior. If the local priests and bishops can dissent from Church teachings and get away with it, what incentives are there for the laity to abide by the Catholic doctrines they object to?
Rose concludes with an upbeat assessment of how orthodox seminaries are succeeding in attracting vocations, and producing good priests. The crisis having reached a high water mark, Rose speculates things are turning around; good priests will emerge in greater numbers and the dissenting sub-culture in the Church will become extinct. It's true that seminaries like Mundelein, Illinois are not as bad as they were before, but there's a long road ahead for many seminaries before they begin to look Catholic inside and out.
Though the seminaries may be improving, the broader problem is the sorry state of the Catholic population in America. The most tragic consequence of dissent and this scandal has been has been the declining influence of Catholicism in the lives of American Catholics over the past 40 years. Mass attendance is now down to 20% of registered parishioners, and churches are being shuttered for lack of funds and parishioners; the sacrament of Penance is ignored, and not for lack of sinning; Catholic divorce and abortion rates are at the same levels as the general population. "Goodbye, Good Catholic Parents", is my suggestion for a Rose follow-up to his well timed, and much needed, "Goodbye, Good Men", which will hopefully spark reform now that it has caught the attention of the nation.
narses,What do run for the Catholic church.
???
Makes no sence to me too but I thought I made a point-let me rethread please,thank you .
narses,I have no idea what my point was .Sorry.
A man writes a book showing that gays have taken over the seminaries in America, that good, devout, straight young men are being deliberately weeded out--and the National Catholic Register has a hizzy fit because Rose got a few of his facts wrong? Excuse me, but that's sick--and that rag is part of the problem. They should have been yelling for heads to roll.
narses,Ok ,You are saying there was an investigation that whitewashed the lavender mafia..What is the lavender mafia.
sense
I don't even have to scroll down to see who will, doubtlessly, jump to this thread to defend the gentle special bishops, priests and deacons of the lavender mafia. The objections will surely take the form of attacks on Rose himself.
Some things are just so obvious.
The sodomites who by blackmail, perversion and secrecy control too many seminaries and diocesan offices.
He got more than a few facts wrong, and he deliberately mischaracterized some of what even his interviewees said.
I read his book. It, like many "objective" books, comes to a conclusion, then goes out in search of something to back up that conclusion.
If Rose's new tome is HALF as informative as Fr. Rueda's was back in the late '70's (?), it will be extremely useful.
"He got more than a few facts wrong, and he deliberately mischaracterized some of what even his interviewees said."
Interesting, if true. I don't suppose your fear of litigation will stop you from actually DOCUMENTING the errors so that we can judge how material they are. Or can you?
"I read his book. It, like many "objective" books, comes to a conclusion, then goes out in search of something to back up that conclusion."
You're ordained, a former seminarian, is the CONCLUSION in error?
I can, but I won't.
If you're interested, just back and read some of the articles from the Register, Our Sunday Visitor, the comments of the rector from Louvain, and Fr. Rob Johanssen's website.
Or just type in "Goodbye Good Men" in the search feature of FR, and you'll find plenty to keep you busy.
Yes. But Rose's book is not a good place to get the facts to back that conclusion up.
All,
This is how I understand what happened with Rose's critics of his book. Disclaimer: I am not infallible, so cut me some slack.
First, Our Sunday Visitor apologized to Rose for "going after" him. This is a fact.
Second, the Register went after him not for "distorting facts" but for calling out the Vocations Recruiter for the Archdiocese of Providence because he was using diocesan funds to recruit men to the priesthood with spots on MTV. Mr. ROse did not attack the recruiter's orthodoxy. Even the editor of This Rock said recruiting men for the priesthood via MTV is like "fishing in a cesspool".
Third, Crisis went after him because Mr. Rose exposed the American College at Louvain as a problem place for homosexual behavior (even Dr. Alice von Hildebrand has done that recently-----do a search engine folks). Rose reported later that there is a benefactor (of what means we do not know) who not only gives $$$$s to ACL, but ALSO Crisis magazine. Hmmmm.
Crisis reported in its pages that Rose's publisher, Regnery (sp?) was going to delete the pages from GBGM which focused on a particular seminarian who was at the ACL who spoke with Mr. Rose about the goings on at ACL. According to Rose this did NOT happen.
As for Fr. Johansen's claims, I have not read any rebuttals by Mr. Rose to him. We can only come to our own conclusions there.
I have spoken with some priests about this book. Young and old alike told me that the "details are sketchy" but for the most part it is true. Good enough for me.
Also, if you want to read the reviews of Rose's book, here they are via Amazon. Many of these speak for themselves and lend credence to Rose's book.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0967637112/ref=cm_cr_dp_2_1/103-0257252-2091829?v=glance&s=books&vi=customer-reviews&me=ATVPDKIKX0DER
And, FWIW, Abp. Dolan of Milwaukee has hired the priest from Louvain for a Seminary position here. One could conclude that Dolan does not believe the account given by Rose's interviewee.
I cannot agree that Rose '...had a conclusion and then went to find the facts...'
As you yourself have testified, (and as many others have, but not on FR), there was a BIG problem with queers in Sem--in administration, on the faculties, and as students.
Such is proven by the problems, later on, which surfaced with queer attacks on young boys.
One hardly needs to "draw a conclusion" faced with the overwhelming evidence. The conclusion was already written--filling in the cracks was what Rose did.
Rose: There is nothing in Goodbye, Good Men that accuses Fr. Taillon of offenses against orthodoxy. The section in the book mentioning Fr. Taillon deals exclusively with the vocations recruitment media campaign, including paid commercials on MTV. Nothing is ever said about the personal integrity of Fr. Taillon.
Register: "As a journalist, I’m irritated by how hastily the escalating bombardment was carried out, with so little regard for the facts."
Rose: It is Pearson’s article that is hastily carried out with so little regard for the truth, especially since Pearson admits to not having read Goodbye, Good Men. "Escalating bombardment" is quite the exaggeration.
I admit it has been awhile since I read the book Good bye, Good Men but my recollection is as Michael Rose states. There was no attack on Fr. Taillon's orthodoxy, more shock that he would be so foolish as to be invoved in recruiting priests on MTV, but I could be wrong so I guess I should re-read the book.
The last thing I will be able to say about Rose's book is that he describes what I have experienced and heard here in Detroit concerning St. John's Provincial Seminary which no longer exists. He also mention Sacred Heart in Detroit which has, fortunately, gotten much better since the mid-1990s. I do not necessarily fault the rector from the mid-90s, now Bishop Neinstedt. He was faced with a difficult task and did the best he could. His replacement, Bishop Vigneran, was much more successful partly because of the work of Neinstedt but also because Vigneran is just a real "tough cookie" and very good with the seminarians.
What Michael Rose writes about Notre Dame in New Orleans is actually mild in comparison to what I personally know went on there as far as the homosexual abuses is concerned. Many of the young men who wanted to be priests in the 1970s were recuited actively into the homosexual life-style because they were being taught that homosexuality was not against celebacy. I guess the jokers who were telling them this nonesense forgot about chastity.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.