Sociologists have published a paper illustrating social networks between bishops in two national episcopal conferences and around the former cardinal Theodore McCarrick who was laicized over credible allegations of sexually abusing seminarians and priests….
“Power, Preferment, and Patronage: Catholic Bishops, Social Networks, and the Affair(s) of Ex-Cardinal McCarrick” was authored by Professor Stephen Bullivant of St. Mary’s University, London and Research Fellow Giovanni Radhitio Putra Sadewo of the Swinburne University of Technology in Melbourne. It was published online this week by Cornell University….
The authors argue that an examination of relationships, social network analysis, gives insights into cultures where patronage, preferment and reciprocity are important. They believe that, like the Italian mafia and the Chinese political elite, Catholic bishops share this kind of culture.
Bullivant, who is a Catholic theology professor as well as a sociologist, and Sadewo concede that there are theological reasons for episcopal church governance. However, the hierarchical culture also gives rise to problems.
“For example, these might include the potential for ambitious clergy (or seminarians) to actively seek the favour and patronage of their own (and/or other influential) bishops, or indeed for bishops to use the hope – or even promise – of preferment as a means of incentivizing or rewarding loyalty,” the authors write.
“It could result in certain ‘types’ … of priests being favoured and/or formed, in line with the type of their own bishop, and perhaps of a wider episcopal ‘mould’ or ‘culture.’”
This is “intensified” by the fact that priests learn to be bishops “through a process of imitation and socialization” and this can lead to identifiable cliques of bishops bound together by ties of loyalty, similar behaviour, shared protégés, and a sense that if one member goes down, they will all go down.
Another issue is the “special nature” of the relationship between a seminarian or priest and his bishop. Very different from that of an employee and an employer, a seminarian or priest owes his bishop both reverence and obedience, the authors note.
Then there is the issue of homosexuality. This, the authors argue, has a “important relevance for understanding the McCarrick case.”
“Not least, there is clear potential for mutually compromised networks of homosexually active (or once-active) priests, such as McCarrick appears to have cultivated among his ‘nephews,’” they write.
“The existence of ‘homosexual subcultures’ within U.S. Catholic seminaries or diocesan power structures, while understandably a sensitive topic, is well-established in the academic literature, as too are the disproportionately high numbers of same sex-attracted seminarians and clergy in the first place.”
The authors observe that given a number of factors in the relationship between homosexuality and the Church, and the potential for subordinates’ exploitation by bishops, the risk of “other McCarrick-esque cases” is real….
Rising from post to high-profile post, McCarrick became recognized as a “kingmaker” for episcopal appointments in both the United States and Rome. “Serious allegations” about him were known by those “in the highest echelons of the hierarchy” but were merely “dismissed”, “ignored” or “paid-off” by his previous dioceses. McCarrick was simply that influential among bishops….
The above comes from a July 17 story in LifeSiteNews.
The gay weeds are the worst in the Lord’s wheat field.
I guess I should say “thank you” for publishing this painful, yet necessary, article. Tragically, it’s not surprising. Why can’t we, as a Church, lay faithful and clergy alike, simply be honest? Why can’t we ask bishops and seminary rectors if they’re admitting homosexuals into our seminaries and ordaining them? Why can’t Rev. James Martin SJ answer, when asked if he’s “gay?” And, why is that question always considered inappropriate? Anyone can ask me and I will give them an honest answer. The homosexual clergy subculture with its attendant lies, deceit, slander, calumny, corruption and more needs to be dealt with. We should not tolerate the homosexualist priests and bishops (those “gay” as well as those promoting the LGBTQ+ agenda). And, many are open about it, with their rainbow colored stoles (for example). Feel free to ask them about their stoles. I doubt most are recalling the covenant of Noah. For the sake of the Church and the world as well as the salvation of their souls, the lavender mafia has got to go.
(And, no awards for “Catholics” like Biden, who says transgenderism is the civil rights issue of our time, and Mayor Peter Buttigieg.)
Put homosexuality back in the DSM, where it belongs.
I agree. The Lavender Mafia is destroying the church. There needs to be opposition. They need to be called out.
It’s unfortunate that from James Grein’s point of view, there was no distinction between deliveries to ostensibly “conservative” Popes and lower prelates in the Curia, from McCarrick’s money express. So, Benedict XVI cleaned up after Maciel, but it was under an “ideological” ally of his, JPII, that Maciel, himself a free dispenser of donated largesse to Popes, had free reign. (E. Michael Jones opines that JPII came to regret his close association with Americans of, what has developed into the NeoCon stripe.) So the $38 million slush fund that required the caponizing of the Order of Malta, and the $200 million per year bribe from the Chinese Communist Party, are all fodder in the same Augean Stables, which there no envisioned Herculean effort to clean up.
I agree the Catholic hierarchy has certain similarities with the Mafia, at least as it is portrayed in film and TV. However I do not believe the Bishops to offer a ‘contract’ on someone they do not like.
I believe you’re correct. They do not physically kill those they oppose. They kill their vocations. I agree that the hierarchy is not like the Mafia or Chinese Communist leaders in that regard. Yet, their power and other social networks do reflect a similar type of operation. How else could McCarrick have continued to be promoted and rise in influence and power, long after many knew of the allegations against him? (If you read the study, you’ll see that Bishop Barron makes a similar point.) Some want to make this a conservative versus liberal issue. It’s a sin and dissent issue. Saint John Paul was not infallible in his appointment of bishops and handling of allegations against clerics AND Pope Francis should not have put McCarrick back in action after Pope Benedict told McCarrick to go live a quiet life of penance.
With all fraternity, Mike M, (I do not believe the Bishops to offer a ‘contract’ on someone they do not like.), Archbishop Vigano has to be in hiding.
Unfortunately, Holy Orders has been a haven for “gay” men since the ban on clerical marriage in the Latin Church was enforced.
I’m not saying that celibacy is the cause of this situation. I am saying that the priesthood was the perfect place for homosexuals to hide.
St Peter Damian wrote the Book of Gomorrah circa 1051. Homosexuality in the priesthood was a major issue then as it is now.
Until now it was all quietly covered up.
The issue seems more obvious, pressing and greater because we hear about sins of this type constantly, thanks to social media.
One hundred years ago no one would have known how widespread this sin was.
For centuries popes and their young servants, bishops and their “nephews”, priests and their teen proteges have been actively spreading this sin.
It needs to stop, but history constantly repeats itself.
There is nothing new under the sun.
Catholics should not be put off by this situation. It is the result of the communist plot begun by Josef Stalin in the 1930s to try to destroy our Church. Search Bella Dodd for an explanation of this plot. It will not succeed no matter how bad things seem. The Church will be purified and enter a new “seson” of glory.
I thought I would learn something from reading Bella Dodd’s “School of Darkness”, which you can find online for free. But it was not going to be “we sent 1,200 Communists in the Catholic priesthood”, because Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen advised Bella Dodd not to get so specific in public, for reasons I would trust. But “School of Darkness” is very eye-opening in other respects, mostly, that Communism was a true faith, except for official Godlessness, it was held with religious fervor (“secular humanist messianism”), that only lost its lustre when Comintern officials issued cynical reverses of course (first, Hitler & Stalin were best comrades, then, overnight, Hitler was the scum beneath horses’ hooves), and because otherwise erstwhile, while somewhat naive Communists, found that there was no morality, no “honor among thieves”, their own kind were, not just thrown under the bus, but ploughed under the steamroller, at the least whim of the Comintern. “School of Darkness” is well worth the read.
This is a very excellent article on a complex and delicate subject. Besides the usual names, McCarrick, et al., the question remains, WHO within the walls of the Vatican were the protectors and promoters of McCarrick, Bransfield, and others of that ilk and the recipients of their money? One person behind the scenes is an American cardinal formerly close to Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI. He still resides in Rome and should be looked at more closely.
He got away with it because by my estimation, around 80% of US Bishops/Archbishops are either themselves homosexuals or homosexual sympathizers.
Xavier, I agree. Maybe even higher?
Perhaps every bishop in the USA ought to be sent a letter asking him if he is homosexual or not. If no response is given, we should presume that the answer is “yes.” Then publish the names of all bishops who say they are heterosexual. Let’s just assume that bishops will tell the truth. We need to know if this rot in the hierarchy is going to end.
I was studying for a Masters in Theology at the Newark Archdiocesan seminary during McCarricks tenure as archbishop. All I can say is how frustrating it was to hear the painful stories of the “straight” seminarians who were tormented by spiritual directors and formation directors alike who questioned continually the validity of their call. Stories of the Pink Palace and trips to the shore with Uncle Ted sent them running. But not running to their superiors for there was no recourse-no one higher to report to that would listen. No, they ran from their vocations. How many good and holy vocations were lost during those years? Only God Himself knows.
Seminarians should do manual labor during their summers. Work next to men whose families will not eat if they don’t do hard and difficult work. It easy for seminarians to live in a soft and comfortable world. It is easy for priests to only socialize with the well to do, because those are the people whose donations pay the bills. Manual labor is a good reminder of who it is that we are called to serve. I have been a priest for 22 years and it is a constant struggle to not lose sight of the day to day struggles of regular people who are trying to survive.
Bravo,
Thank You, and may God richly bless
you and your priestly ministry
Father Weldon
So much harm was caused to the Church. Now good priests and devout laity have to pay the price including the entire Parochial school system. Money used to pay victims could have gone to educating the children. God help us.