Replies

I'm not a big fan of the SSPX, mainly because I attend an Indult and I dislike them calling people who attend Indults sell-outs and the such, but I believe that you are very VERY wrong on the issue of the Society of Saint John.

The guy who founded it was actually kicked out of 2 different SSPX seminaries very quickly after he joined them. The first one was in Argentina and the second one was the one up in Minnesota.

After he was practically rode out on a rail by the SSPX he setup shop in Scranton and the Bishop had open arms for him even after the SSPX sent an envoy to Scranton warning him about the creep.

It turns out that the Argentine guy was a VERY active Homosexual who not only enjoyed the company of fellow priests, but also that of teenage boys.

When the Bishop of Scranton allowed the SSJV to start their group, the SSJV conned the FSSP into allowing them to use space in one of their Boarding Schools that they run. I don't want to go into details because I find the whole affair quite repulsive, but as it turns out, the degenerate Priest was having numerous sleepovers with the boys at the boarding school. I believe he was also getting them quite drunk before he took advantage of them.

The worst part about the whole situation was that he actually tried to play the whole thing off as a cultural difference, saying that drinking at a young age is more acceptable in Argentina, and that it is also common in Argentina for young children to sleep with older men in some type of Platonic arrangement. Well as it turns out the Diocese bought his story until the whole Priest Sex scandal erupted up in Boston and only then was he dealt with by the Diocese of Scranton.

"The worst part about the whole situation was that he actually tried to play the whole thing off as a cultural difference, saying that drinking at a young age is more acceptable in Argentina, and that it is also common in Argentina for young children to sleep with older men in some type of Platonic arrangement."

Just a few points here:

1) Concerning the underage drinking, there is a legitimate culture difference here, which I think goes back to the Puritain roots of the United States. There is still somewhat of mini-prohibitionalist attitude here when it comes to alcohol. Most other non-Muslim countries have lower legal drinking ages, and don't consider moderate underage drinking too big of a deal. (At most a misdemeanor and a small fine.) So I could understand a cultural difference here...

2) Concerning the sleeping in the same beds. From my South American friends, I understand that there is some difference in custom here, in that people of the same gender will often share the same bed when hospitality requires it, without it being sexual in nature. (Even among non-South Americans, Catherine de Huek, whose cause is now under investigation for beatification, and Dorothy Day were known to share the same bed on many occasions when there was simply no other space available at their respective apostolates.) So there is some truth here.

Nevertheless, I have never heard of this practice among people of unequal age unless they were close family members. Additionally, I have never heard of this practice between a cleric and a non-cleric, and to my knowledge the former code would have prohibited it. Therefore, while I cannot judge what happened, as I simply don't know the details,I do think there was a lack of prudence here.