CNS provides us with a story that allows us to see that while our church is quite diverse in terms of liturgical preferences (e.g. Latin mass vs. post-Vatican II liturgy), that we can all unite over our response to one sad event in our church’s history: The sexual abuse scandal.

WASHINGTON (CNS) — The group organizing the first pontifical solemn high Mass at the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception in Washington in 45 years announced it was replacing as the main celebrant a cardinal criticized for his handling of a clergy sex abuse case.

Colombian Cardinal Dario Castrillon Hoyos, who was scheduled to celebrate the April 24 Mass, made international headlines when a letter he wrote years earlier surfaced, in which he praised a French bishop for refusing to report an accused pedophile priest to police, even though French law required him to do so.

The Maryland-based Paulus Institute for the Propagation of Sacred Liturgy did not list a specific reason for choosing a different celebrant for the Mass honoring Pope Benedict XVI’s fifth anniversary as pope.

However, the announcement came a day after a Chicago-based group of survivors of clergy sexual abuse had called on the Vatican, Pope Benedict XVI and Washington Archbishop Donald W. Wuerl to stop Cardinal Castrillon, the retired head of the Vatican’s Congregation for Clergy, from celebrating the Mass.

“This action will help maintain the solemnity, reverence and beauty of the Mass,” the Paulus Institute said in a statement issued April 21. “We are in the process of seeking another bishop to celebrate a Pontifical Solemn Mass on Saturday and are confident that one will agree. However, in any event, a beautiful, dignified traditional Latin Mass will be celebrated.”

Indeed. I almost want to go to this and I actually will be in DC on that day at a wedding.

0 thoughts on “Latin Mass Crowd Ousts Cardinal”
  1. The “latin mass crowd” as you the so eloquently put it, did not “oust” (again eloquent) Cardinal Dario Castrillon Hoyos. It was the victim network SNAP that requested the change. Get the story straight before you add to the HYPE. You sound like the MSM! Stop adding to the insanity.

  2. Well, the reality is that the Cardinal will not be the presider as planned, regardless of who or how that happened.

    THAT is happened is important.

    We are all responsible for our behavior, me, Mike Hayes (both of whom blog, write and comment under our own names) and of course, Cardinal Hoyos. As a result, we must accept the outcomes.

    Is that hype?

    And while SNAP may have its issues, let us not ever forget the pain of those who have been first victimized and then marginalized by our Church. God have mercy on all of us for that.

  3. Greg–

    SNAP may have requested the change but Paulus didn’t have to listen to them–but smartly they did otherwise it would have been a disaster.

    And if I sound like the MSM, good. That’s a compliment to me and I worked in radio for 10 years, so I guess I haven’t lost my touch.

    Lastly, if I write “Paulus Ousts Cardinal at SNAP’s Request” almost nobody understands the headline and therefore nobody reads it. The headline even got you to read it so as Sheldon from the Big Bang Theory would say “Bazanga!”

    Regardless, I got the story right. As Fran says “SNAP may have their issues” but this is an issue that goes beyond mere church politics–especially for average Catholics, who may never have heard of Cardinal Castrillion.

  4. I was impressed with the Paulus inclusion in its statement of this: “The Paulus Institute regards all sexual abuse as tragic and a heinous sin and supports Pope Benedict’s fight to rid this disease from the Church. It stands on the side of every victim of clerical sexual abuse and earnestly desires to bind up the wounds done to their human dignity, to vindicate their civil and canonical rights, and to help them in the restoration in Christ of all they have lost. To that end, the Paulus Institute supports the directives by the Supreme Roman Pontiff and the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops that all bishops should report crimes of sexual abuse to the police in accordance with the requirements of civil law. However, the Paulus Institute is not competent, nor does it have the facts, to form an opinion about the about recent media reports concerning Cardinal Castrillon.” Surely the Paulus interaction with SNAP helped craft that commentary, rather than “the media is anti-Catholic” or “the devil is afoot.” Would that every parish would welcome in this gracious way those who have been so hurt by the abuse.

  5. Via Facebook

    From Mike Young It has to be done. The paper shufflers are getting burned while the abusers go to “camp cupcake” for therapy.

    The “once a priest, always a priest” thinking has to end. In the eyes of God, A Priest is no longer a priest when he abuses a child.

    Having the Bishop own all parishes and taking the Laity out of the decision of choosing a parish priest breeds this kind of scandal. It also creates “deep pockets” that tort lawyers love. Easier to sue a Diocese than a poor church in the barrio.

  6. Via Facebook

    From David Dawson @Mike Young-

    I disagree with your last paragraph. When you want to get rid of weeds, you go for the roots, not the stalk. The roots in this case are the people that are being allowed to become priests. There needs to be more in depth psych analysis before admitting one into the seminary.

    There also needs to be more oversight in the seminaries to weed out (no pun intended) those that are showing signs of questionable behavior.
    If you allow a parish to become involved with who they want as their priest, then they will always pick someone who fits them best. How then can they grow spiritually if they never get anyone who challenges them? I believe the Holy Spirit will work and give a parish the type of priest they need.

    They might not like who they get at first, but that is usually because it puts them out of their comfort zone. We all need to be out of our comfort zone so we can grow and learn spiritually.

  7. Via Facebook

    From Mike Young

    100% agree, David. many seminaries are now screening their applicants. Episcopal churches choose their priests via a lay parish council, not an assignment from the Cathedral.

    But, many Parishes in Boston were sold to pay off lawsuits. Cardinal Law is in Rome while Faithful Catholics in the south-side see their churches torn down for Condo buildings.

    If a parish council had a chance to review the credentials and background check of applicant priests, this would be less of an occurrence. Time to get rid of the Altar Rail separating the Clergy from the Laity.

  8. Via Facebook

    From Larry Rice

    Hello? Reality check? This bishop went through a seminary 50 years ago. Most of the abusers were also trained under in that time, with the admission standards of that day.

    Today the admission standards are much tougher, and include extensive psych evaluations.

  9. Via Facebook

    From David Dawson

    I agree with your analysis of today’s admission standards, Larry. I have gone through the current psych analysis administered to priests as a requirement for me to begin formation as a deacon. They are intense and last all day.

    I was talking to a priest friend of mine and without writing a complete dissertation, his analysis holds water.
    He believes it was how they were formed in the seminary, particularly with the high school seminaries. Everything they read, saw, did, listened to, was controlled. Everything. This also includes sexual repression as well. Long story short, when they get into a parish, they are still in the 13 year old sexual mentality. I do not have a psych degree but I can see how this could be the case in some of the circumstances.
    This next comment is not meant to be offensive to men that enter into the seminary straight out of high school (I do not lump them all in the same boat), but I think as the avg age of the seminarian increases (right now it is approx 35) we will see these horrible abuses diminish. Solely due to a more psychological development in the world, life experiences, etc….plus, one who is willing to give everything to become a priest at an older age, I believe has more resources available to discern this decision.
    A psychologist I know who has done some psych profiles for priests and deacons told me he has found that the deacons (solely due to their older age) are more comfortable with themselves sexually than the young young guys entering the seminary. No shock there.

  10. David—I agree wholeheartedly about the “late Vocation” guys. Perhaps we need to realize that most vocations indeed come after the extended adolescence that occurs these days.

  11. David–

    It also may be that ephebophiles are “stuck” at that age sexually and perhaps the “culture” of the early seminaries that did in fact hold a lot of control just served to reinforce that.

  12. Might I add that it is essential to remember that the majority of abuse happens in and around people that kids know – often in their families.

    I say that because there is no psychological testing for parenthood, nor should there be. What I am saying is to apply some wisdom.

    As for someone not being a priest when they abuse someone? If only it were that simple. I can’t agree with that. Jesus hung among the thieves.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *