Crookston, Minn., Sep 26, 2018 / 04:00 am (CNA).- In 1971, when Ron Vasek was 16 years old, a priest invited him to take a trip. The priest, Fr. Roger Grundhaus, was a family friend, and Ron’s parents supported the idea.
Fr. Grundhaus, a priest of the Diocese of Crookston, Minnesota, was going to a canon law convention in Columbus, Ohio. He said he wanted Vasek to come along to help with the drive.
Vasek had looked forward to the trip. “I’d never been off the farm, basically,” he told CNA.
Vasek said that on the first day of the trip, Grundhaus bought him a beer, and continued to buy him alcohol during the trip.
On the second day of the trip, Vasek recalled, Grundhaus attended meetings in the morning, and then spent time drinking with friends. He and Grundhaus went to dinner together in the hotel’s restaurant, where the priest continued to drink as they ate their meal.
After dinner, Vasek said, the priest sexually assaulted him in their hotel room.
Vasek told CNA he fought the priest off, and then “I just kinda stared at him and then he moved back away and never said anything, didn’t do a thing. And then a little later we went to bed and it was kind of uncomfortable, but I just didn’t know what to think of it.”
“I was 16 years old, off the farm, I didn’t have a clue what was going on,” he said.
“We left there, and we drove home like nothing happened, and he never, ever, ever, said anything to me about it, for a long time, and I kinda just buried it in the back of my head. I just didn’t know what to do.”
“I never said anything to my parents,” Vasek told CNA. “Ever.”
The next year Grundhaus invited him to attend another convention, and his parents, who knew nothing about the abuse, “thought it was a great idea.”
A blizzard stopped them along the way. There were no hotel rooms in the small town where they were stopped, but an armory had been opened as a makeshift shelter to accommodate stranded travelers. They spent the night in the armory along with families and other motorists stopped by the snow.
“So that was– I guess God was watching out for me.”
Grundhaus took him on one more trip, again with encouragement from his parents. The priest tried to get him to drink scotch, he said, but he refused, and was uncomfortable being there, although he said he was not assaulted on that trip.
A few years later, when Vasek’s brother died, Grundhaus grew closer to his family. “He became really an instrumental part of the family, because he counseled mom and dad. He was there all the time.”
Vasek told CNA that he never raised the issue of his assault with his family, although he saw Grundhaus frequently as he became an adult, as they often worked together on retreat teams and other ministry initiatives.
He told CNA the abuse took a heavy toll on his life. He said that he drank often, and struggled in other areas of his life.
“I didn’t know how much that abuse affected me until I can look back on it now with a clear mind.”
Vasek said that even while the abuse had a serious impact on him, he tried not to think about it often. In fact, he told CNA, “I just kind of quit thinking about it until one day, probably ten years ago.”
Vasek was in a parish sacristy during a retreat he was leading in 2008 when Grundhaus approached him, he told CNA.
He said that Grundhaus “said he wanted to apologize for what he did in Columbus, Ohio. And he said he went to confession for it. But he said, ‘if you need any help with anything, if you made bad business decisions or if you’re struggling with anything,’ he said, ‘I have money, I can help pay for therapy or I can help you out.’”
“You know, he kind of shocked me,” Vasek said. He didn’t understand why, after decades, “all of the sudden he’s apologizing. I just said ‘Ok, I accept your apology,’ and kind of just left it at that.”
Vasek said a few days later he went to the priest’s office, asking him to swear there had been no other victims. He said Grundhaus told him he hadn’t abused anyone else.
“And then he tells me, ‘if this ever comes up, I’ll always deny it.’”
Vasek had no idea how to respond to what Grundhaus told him. “I really struggled with that, but I didn’t say anything because of the family stuff.”
__
In 2010, Vasek decided to say something. At the time, he had applied to become a deacon in the Diocese of Crookston, where he still lived. His son had just become a priest in the diocese.
He said he first told a priest in the neighboring Diocese of Fargo. That diocese forwared the allegation to Bishop Michael Hoeppner, Crookston’s bishop. Hoeppner then asked Vasek for an appointment.
(Vasek said this meeting took place in 2010, while the Diocese of Crookston claims it took place in 2011.)
“When I went into the bishop’s office, there was nobody there, it was just him and I.”
“So the bishop, he just kind of, he just chews on me for five minutes,” Vasek told CNA, saying that the bishop told him that Grundhaus was a great priest, and that a “claim” about the matter could be very expensive. After a while, Vasek recalled, the bishop asked him if he intended to make a formal complaint.
“By this time,” Vasek said, “I didn’t know what the hell to think. I just put my hands up and I said ‘I just want to know if I can get through the diaconate program, knowing this information.”
Vasek said that Hoeppner told him he believed the story, adding that he shouldn’t say anything about the matter.
Vasek told CNA he agreed to keep silent. “That was the first time I had revealed my abuse in 40 years, so I was still kind of numb.”
He began the diaconal program in the diocese soon after. He said his allegation did not come up again until October 2015.
__
On Oct. 21, 2015, Vasek said he was summoned to meet with Bishop Hoeppner at the bishop’s home. There, he told CNA, Hoeppner told him to sign a letter recanting his allegation against Grundhaus.
He said the bishop explained that the Fargo diocese had inquired about Vasek’s 2010 allegation against Grundhaus, and intended to forbid the priest from exercising ministry within its territory.
“We want to have Grundhaus be able to do ministry,” Vasek said Hoeppner told him, “so we need to have you sign a letter recanting your allegation.”
The letter had already been printed on diocesan stationary.
Vasek said that Hoeppner asked him, “If news of the scandal of Grundhaus gets out, how could I ordain you? Who would want you? Where would I put you? And besides, it would be very difficult on your son.”
“When he said that, I knew exactly what he meant,” Vasek told CNA. “I was sickened. Absolutely sickened.”
Vasek signed the letter.
It read: “I, Ron Vasek, regarding a trip I was on when I was 16 years old, and on which a priest of the Diocese of Crookston was also participating, clearly and freely state that I have no desire to nor do I make any accusation of sexual impropriety by the priest toward me.”
In August of that year, months before that meeting, the diocese had been ordered by a court to release the names of all priests alleged to have abused children prior to 1985. A priest of the diocese told CNA that he believes Hoeppner asked Vasek to retract his claim in order to avoid naming Grundhaus on that list.
Vasek told CNA he was stunned.
He couldn’t believe what he had experienced. He had struggled for decades to grapple with the abuse he experienced. When he told his bishop about it, he was ordered to keep silent. And now he was being asked to deny it had ever happened.
It felt, he said, “like being abused all over again.”
He thought of words he says Hoeppner said to him in 2010: “This is a cross you’re just going to have to carry.”
__
For two years, Vasek did not mention the letter to his wife or family.
In February 2017 Vasek’s pastor, Fr. Xavier Ilango, recommended him for ordination as a deacon. Vasek was measured for vestments. The Diocese of Crookston mailed invitations for its upcoming diaconal ordination; Vasek’s name was listed among those who would be ordained on June 10, 2017.
But in March 2017, Vasek told CNA, he was abruptly told that his ordination might be delayed by at least a year. With almost everything prepared, he was told his pastor had raised previously unmentioned concerns, and that even though he had already been approved, he might not be ordained with his class.
CNA has obtained a copy of a letter reportedly from Vasek’s pastor, which suggested that Vasek had strained relationships with some parishioners and needed to learn to take direction better. The letter, unsigned and undated, suggested that Vasek’s ordination could be delayed a year.
CNA attempted to contact Ilango, but was told by the Diocese of Crookston that he is on sabbatical. His parish bulletin reports that he traveled to India on July 1.
On April 6, 2017, Vasek and his wife met with Hoeppner, who told them he would give more thought to the possibility of Vasek’s ordination. He seemed non-committal.
Vasek told CNA he believed his ordination was being threatened as a reminder to keep silent about the abuse he had endured, and the letter he had signed.
Vasek decided he had had enough. He decided that he could not trust Hoeppner, and could not promise to be obedient to him, which would be required at the time of his ordination. He told his story to two priests of the diocese, Fr. Robert Schreiner and Msgr. David Baumgartner.
Schreiner told CNA that he remembers Vasek saying to him, “I’ve been abused for 41 years, and now I’m still being abused.”
Schreiner and Vasek had been friends for decades. He described Vasek as a man of “integrity and honesty.” Although he was director of the diocesan diaconal program, and had previously been Hoeppner’s chancellor, he resolved to help.
Baumgartner, a canon lawyer who had previously been Hoeppner’s vicar general- the chief advisor to the bishop- also decided that he would do whatever he could to help Vasek.
Both priests told CNA they believed that Hoeppner had forced Vasek to sign the 2015 letter, and both believed that the bishop was unjustly punishing and threatening Vasek in 2017.
“I believed him,” Schreiner told Minnesota Public Radio in 2017.
“As the account unfolded with each horrifying revelation and event and name, my heart would sink lower and my mind would flinch, not wanting to believe it. But at no point during his testament that night, nor since, did my intuition click with the thought that ‘that doesn’t ring true’ or ‘that just doesn’t sound right.'”
In fact, CNA spoke with several priests and former diocesan employees in the Diocese of Crookston; none questioned the integrity of Vasek’s story.
“This was bad on so many levels,” Schreiner told CNA.
__
Baumgartner told CNA that Vasek wanted to address Hoeppner’s conduct with Church authorities. Vasek hoped he could still be ordained a deacon.
But Baumgartner, Schreiner, and Vasek were uncertain how to make a complaint against their own bishop. After prayer, they decided to try the apostolic nunciature- the Vatican embassy in Washington, DC.
Baumgartner told CNA that he called the apostolic nunciature in March 2017, asking for direction about how to proceed. He said that initially, the nuncio’s office seemed “eager to get to the know the story,” and promised to provide him soon with further instructions.
He said that after weeks passed with no response, he called the nunciature again in early April, and was surprised when a staffer told him that he should not make any accusation unless he had “solid proof.”
“The attitude of the nunciature changed,” Baumgartner said. “They went from being eager to help to saying that we can’t do anything unless we had proof.”
After that conversation, Baumgartner told CNA, he decided the Vatican was unlikely to respond quickly.
“Ron’s ordination was pending. I presumed that the fact that this was a man called to orders mattered, and that the Holy See would respond appropriately, given the timeline that we found ourselves in. That expectation was completely unfounded on my part.”
“We don’t have proof,” Baumgartner added. “We have a story. But we wanted the Church to investigate that story.”
Baumgartner sent a letter to the nunciature explaining the allegation against Hoeppner on April 11, 2017. He asked for advice about how to proceed. Then he waited for a response.
In the meantime, Vasek sent a letter directly to Hoeppner, on April 29, 2017.
“It is my deepest desire to serve in the Diocese of Crookston as a deacon,” Vasek wrote.
“In October of 2015, you asked me to sign a letter to renounce my accusation of sexual abuse against Msgr. Roger Grundhaus….Before I signed it I declared to you that the letter was a lie, and you determined that I should sign it.”
“I renounce that letter as a lie,” Vasek added.
“In another conversation, you asked if I intended to file a law suit regarding my sexual abuse. I would like you to know that I retain the right to seek justice in this matter by legal and canonical means.”
Vasek doubted that he would ever be ordained a deacon in Crookston after that letter was sent. But he wanted the truth to come out.
On May 13, 2017, Baumgartner sent packets to several Vatican offices, including the Congregation for Bishops and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, formally alleging misconduct on the part of Hoeppner. He reports that he received a response to those complaints in late June of that year, when the nunciature wrote to him, saying that his complaint to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith had been forwarded to the Congregation for Clergy. The letter offered no other information.
“Msgr. Baumgartner sent letters to four offices of the Vatican,” Vasek told CNA.
“The only that happened was that the nuncio told Bishop Hoeppner to investigate Grundhaus,” Vasek said, adding that there was no acknowledgement of the complaint about Hoeppner.
Vasek was looking for justice. By the time the Vatican responded to say his complaint had been transferred from one office to another, Vasek had already begun a different process.
__
On May 9, Vasek sued Bishop Hoeppner and the Diocese of Crookston. On the same day, Grundhaus was suspended from ministry.
If he’d felt that Church authorities would work toward justice, Vasek would not have sued, several sources told CNA.
“Our preference was to have the Church respond,” Baumgartner said. But when the nunciature did not seem willing to respond quickly, they decided to proceed with a lawsuit.
The lawsuit is a controversial matter for many sources CNA spoke with. Vasek’s lawyer is Jeffrey Anderson, a Minnesota attorney who has led litigation against dioceses in several states, and advocated for changes to statutes of limitation for clergy sexual abuse victims. Critics have called Anderson an opportunist, and argued that his tactics have aimed to bankrupt the Church even when dioceses are willing to help victims of sexual abuse, all while he has collected attorney’s fees for his work.
Anderson has also been accused of paying kickbacks to victims’ advocacy groups that refer potential clients to him, although he denies that allegation.
Vasek was unsure about Anderson. So were his friends. The priests had worked in the curia while Anderson sued their own diocese. But they said that no other qualified lawyer would take their case.
CNA attempted to contact two law firms Vasek says he approached. One said it would not comment on clients or potential clients, and the other did not respond to requests for comment.
Schreiner said Vasek reluctantly went to Anderson, and was clear from the beginning that he did not want his lawsuit to harm the Church. He said Vasek insisted he wanted justice, and for the truth to come out.
Some aspects of the lawsuit have been settled. The letter Vasek signed was returned to him, after being recovered from the diocese by Crookston police.
Vasek also reached a financial settlement with the diocese, the amount of which is undisclosed. He told CNA the settlement was modest, and that he would save it for his retirement.
Other parts of the lawsuit continue, some of which pertain to Grundhaus himself, and the abuse Vasek alleges took place in 1971. Some have to do with the diocesan response to abuse.
The goal of the lawsuit, Vasek emphasized, “is to get to the truth.”
“The money means crap to me,” he said. “I want the truth to come out.”
“To expose these guys for covering up an abuse that happened. The bishop has admitted breaking the rules that Pope Francis laid down,” Vasek said.
“And just to clean up the diocese, period.”
“The homosexual subculture of the priesthood is well and vibrant in this diocese and has been for years,” Vasek said. “That culture has been in our diocese for a long time.”
__
Vasek and his supporters told CNA they hoped that Church authorities would intervene to help with the situation, even after the lawsuit was underway.
On March 28, 2018, a year after Ron Vasek’s ordination was delayed, his son Fr. Craig Vasek, sent a letter to the president of the Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors, Cardinal Sean O’Malley.
CNA obtained a copy of that letter.
Fr. Vasek, who declined to be interviewed for this story, wrote that Hoeppner was “prepared to do anything…to avoid addressing this matter.”
“All we want is the truth,” Fr. Vasek wrote, adding that “if you give me the chance, you can be the judge of our situation.”
“To be fair, we are pursuing the regular course of action, but the systems in place are not going to help,” he wrote.
“I am writing to you because you are good, trustworthy, and just. And we are in grave need, now.”
The priest asked O’Malley for a brief meeting, offering to fly to Boston, or arrange a phone call or video conference.
On May 2, 2018, the Archdiocese of Boston sent Fr. Vasek a reply to his letter.
“We are sorry to know of the difficulties currently presented to you, your family, and the Diocese of Crookston. Although the Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors, of which Cardinal O’Malley serves as President, does not have oversights or jurisdiction for any allegations or cases concerning sexual abuse by clergy, we are aware that these are very difficult matters.”
“Thank you for understanding that with regard to any matters concerning clergy personnel in the Diocese of Crookston or any civil or canonical complaints concerning the diocese, we must necessarily respect the jurisdiction and oversight of the Diocesan Bishop and those diocesan officials appointed to assist with such matters. We hope that this information may be helpful for you.”
The letter, which concluded with a promise of prayers, was signed by Fr. Robert Kickham, secretary to Cardinal O’Malley.
On Aug. 20, after reports surfaced about a 2015 letter sent to him by Fr. Boniface Ramsey, a priest concerned with the behavior of now-disgraced Archbishop Theodore McCarrick, O’Malley issued a public apology for failing to personally review Ramsey’s letter, and pledged to modify the procedures of his office.
A source in the Archdiocese of Boston told CNA that the cardinal’s office contacted Fr. Vasek shortly after that apology was issued, inviting the priest to meet with O’Malley.
__
CNA requested to interview Hoeppner, but the Diocese of Crookston declined that request. Instead, CNA was referred to four statements released by the diocese.
The first statement, issued May 9, 2017, said that “Bishop Hoeppner categorically denies that he in any way forced, coerced or encouraged Mr. Vasek not to pursue his allegations regarding Msgr. Grundhaus.”
“Msgr. Vasek’s allegations of abuse regarding Msgr. Grundhaus were reported to law enforcement in 2011.” Multiple sources told CNA that it was the Fargo diocese, and not the Diocese of Crookston, that reported the allegations to law enforcement in that year.
The next statement, a May 14, 2017 letter addressed to Catholics in the Diocese of Crookston, reiterated Hoopner’s denial, adding that “there are two sides to every story and there is another, a very different side to the story reported last week.”
CNA supplied specific questions to the Diocese of Crookston, asking for the other side of the story, but the diocese declined to answer those questions.
The third statement, issued September 20, 2017, after the first aspects of the lawsuit were settled, said that the settlement reached “avoids costly attorney fees and a drawn out legal process. The settlement agreement does not constitute any admission of unlawful conduct or wrong doing by Bishop Hoeppner. No diocesan funds were used to pay the settlement. The Diocese is now seeking dismissal of the remaining claims related to this matter.”
The fourth statement, issued September 27, 2017, in Hoeppner’s name, said that the bishop “did not pressure Mr. Vasek to remain quiet when we met in 2011 or when we met again in 2015. Mr. Vasek had indicated to me that he wanted the alleged incident to remain confidential. I attempted to abide by his wishes.”
“I was willing to ordain Mr. Vasek as a permanent deacon. He attended the final deacon formation weekend in late April, along with the other deacon candidates. Mr. Vasek chose not to be ordained for diaconal ministry. I respect his decision.”
“Looking back and knowing what I do now, I believe I would have handled my conversations with Mr. Vasek differently. However, please know that I did not pressure Mr. Vasek into making any decision with which he was not comfortable,” Hoeppner’s statement added.
“I continue to pray for all those involved in this matter. No one should ever be subject to inappropriate sexual conduct. I ask all Catholics and people of good will to pray for healing for all those who have suffered abuse.”
CNA was unable to reach Grundhaus.
__
Hoeppner, 69, was ordained a priest by Pope Paul VI in 1975, after studies at the Pontifical North American College. After earning a licentiate in canon law, and serving as a teacher, educational administrator, and director of vocations, he became the Diocese of Winona’s judicial vicar in 1988, and the vicar general of that diocese in 1997.
He was appointed Bishop of Crookston Sept. 28, 2007.
On Aug. 22, after the release of a Pennsylvania grand jury report detailing sexual abuse in six dioceses of that state, Hoeppner wrote in a pastoral letter that “All victims are owed sincere apologies for what those entrusted with leadership in the Church have done and have failed to do.”
“It is important that we promise to continue, with renewed effort, our commitment to build in the Church, as Pope Francis puts it, ‘a culture of care that says `never again’ to any form of abuse.’”
“Changes are necessary so that sins and failures of the past are not repeated,” he added.
CNA contacted the press office of the Holy See for comment on the status of any canonical investigation against Hoeppner, but received no response before press time.
__
Vasek told CNA that, through everything he has experienced, his faith has not been shaken.
“I know that these men are not what Christ envisioned for his Church. Judas betrayed the Lord. People will betray the Lord all the time. I know what the Church teaches.”
“I encourage people to keep going to Church,” Vasek added.
“I tell everybody, don’t leave the Church because of these rotten men. That’s just what the devil wants. The devil wants to destroy from within. I say keep going to Church. Keep up with the sacraments. Keep praying. Because Christ’s Church is good. Some of the men in it aren’t.”
“I know who Christ is. He hasn’t done anything to me, other than give me hope.”
[…]
By 
I fully admit that whether or not the clergy should be celibate is beyond my payscale, but if a married (former) Protestant can become a Catholic priest, why can’t a married Catholic? My best friend is an Orthodox priest. He’s a husband, a father, and a grandfather. He tells me that he understands all the reasons for opposing a married priesthood, but he feels that the benefits far outweigh them. (And believe me: I have no iron in this fire. Though married, I feel not so much as a whisper, let alone a call, to the priesthood.)
Married men can be ordained as deacons in both the Roman and Eastern Rites.
In the Byzantine Catholic Church, as well as the other various Eastern Catholic Churches, it’s not against tradition to admit married men to the priesthood, whereas in the Roman Church, priestly celibacy is viewed as a discipline. Many of the early Church fathers were married.
I’m in full support of a married Roman priesthood as an option.
Two of the best Byzantine priests I know are married, and they are very good in confession, because they have experienced the ups and downs of marriage.
There is no controversy with the prospect of a married priesthood.
Once they become a priest, they have to be celibate, married or not.
They do? Huh. News to me. As a longtime Eastern Catholic, I know quite a few married priests who have children and who are continuing to have children.
I think she means if their wife should die. I think that is the norm but may be dispensed.
Never heard of that rule…
No, we had an Episcopal priest who grew up in our hometown converted and became a Catholic priest. It seemed to work out fine
I agree with your friend that there are real struggles in having a celibate priest stood, but I believe the benefits far outweigh the difficulties. A celibate man better images and conforms too the image of a celibate Christ, who is totally wet to his bride the church and lays down his life for her and not his own will see Ephesians 5 and Matthew 19. Additionally living a life, totally committed to God now without the mediation of a wife is more a kin to, and is a sign of the heavenly reality where everybody will be totally devoted to God without mediation. The celibate is offered graces to do that now. I encourage you to make friends with happy celibate clergymen who can tell you of the grace of the sacraments and the way that prayer and a relationship with Mary has transformed and sustained him.
Since the article by Professor Spinello, The Second Vatican Council: A Guiding Star for the Church? is not available I wish to post a comment here on the Vatican II controversy.
Or a death star? A snare for large contingents of the progressive and traditional Church. Spinello apparently alludes to the multitude of progressive carpetbaggers who misused the Counsel’s documents to promote their new paradigm.
Reaction to the new paradigmers by traditionalists is that they, the radical left, are drawn into the alluring glitter of the death star only to be gripped by the devil. Whereas new paradigmers will contend it is the traditionalists who have closed their ears to the voice of the Spirit of the Council.
Ironically, Vat II has unfairly become a cause for distancing within the Church. Both reject what the Council actually teaches, injuring their faith in obedience to the Magisterium. Taking themselves to extremes that freeze compassion and Christian brotherhood.
For a test of manifest devotion to Christ present in the Holy Eucharist turn around at the consecration and note how very few are looking directly at the Eucharist, and are rather looking down piously or at a missalette. This is a hangover from the TLM. So the NO was intended to engage the parishioner in what is actually occurring before their eyes. To engage and participate, to learn what is being taught through the liturgy.
Professor Spinello analyzes all the pertinent Council documents to clearly demonstrate, one would wish once and for all, that both are out in Left Field. That if read properly sans a preconceived agenda will find the Council is indeed a Guiding Star.
If you are going to accuse people of rejecting what the Council teaches, perhaps you should include a quote of what that teaching is, and some evidence of rejection besides behavior. Sin is not generally evidence of heresy, and the direction of one’s gaze does not even amount to sin. Nor does it necessarily indicate what a person’s mind is on.
His argument subverts itself. He says the NO was intended to engage the parishioner in what is actually occurring before their [sic] eyes. And he now, as a practitionre of the NO, observes that few look.
Yesterday, a Dominican priest homilied on what “active participation” per Aquinas intends. One’s senses are not necessarily engaged. One’s spirit IS participating in sanctifying grace. One gains grace is through reconciliation and receipt. Reconciliation and receipt of Holy Eucharist are spiritually mindful, not sense-based acts.
One would have hoped that a doctorpriest would, late in life, have come across such notions.
“This is a hangover from the TLM.”
The stunningly arrogant bias and assumption by one human-mind led me to gasp. Have you been ill, Fr. Dr.? One who cares nothing for Who He Is will level such thoughtless uncharity to another of His Own.
Other persons adore the Eucharist at His Elevation within UA rubrics since that is the first time during the Mass the parishioner may view The Presence of the King. He is elevated. Not manhandled.
The premise underlying the changes to the Mass was to present the liturgy as a means to engage and instruct the faith. Few persons understood was was occurring at the altar, except for a few like yourselves who made the effort.
I don’t accuse you, although I accept your insults as a blessing.
Few persons understood [what] was occurring at the altar. A miracle of love to be adored. If laity continue to disregard the immense beauty of Christ’s real presence it’s in part due to those who condemn Vatican II and attempts to promote the Novus Ordo as a means of fulfilling the ancient dictum, ut legem credendi lex statuat. To allow what Benedict XVI envisioned as a parallel embellishment of the two liturgical forms.
If there’s sin, is may be in vilification. Examine your consciences before the Blessed Sacrament.
Seems odd that a married non Catholic can become a priest while denied to a life time Catholic. All the while we have a shortage of priests. Does not make any sense when you consider that we have always recognized the non celibate priesthood of the many Eastern Rite Churches. Since we now have severe financial problems in the Church and many congregations are struggling to afford a priest, it seems to me that new ways need to be found to solve these problems. A married priest with a family does not necessarily put a greater financial burden on a church. I have known many Protestant ministers who were self supporting by working at secular jobs. Another possibility would to look at the “worker priest model “ movement experimented with in post Vatican II France. The idea was that priests would take secular jobs in order to evangelize in the secular work place. This would also allow them to say masses on Sunday. Lay people could easily be employed to run the every day nut and bolt operations of the church- maintenance, business management etc. married deacons could also handle many of the sacraments as allowed. What I am trying to say is that we must be creative in trying new ways of meeting needs as they present themselves. Some of our traditions can be broken without damaging our faith. The life of the diocesan priest is becoming harder and harder as more and more have to live alone in their parsonages. Many also have to do their own cooking and housekeeping. This causes loneliness extra burdens and opens them to many needless temptations. Perhaps religious order priests living together and serving several nearby parishes would be another consideration. I think that it is becoming increasingly apparent that the old ways of doing things are no longer working and we must change.
Brilliant reply. You are so right. It makes no sense at all. Unfortunately, what you say here just continues to fall on deaf ears. Things will just have to get worse before they begin to consider more prudent alternatives.
I concur.
What bothers me MUCH MORE is that singular “right” of a priest to withhold the confession of a crime–no matter how heinous–from the authorities. How CONVENIENT: and no wonder so many boys were violated again and again! No womN of any faith would allow this outrage to continue, year after year after year. Seems God cannot protect the violated as long as the RC protects the violators!
Would you apply the same standard to a doctor/patient relationship or a lawyer/client relationship. If I was accused of sexually abusing a minor and retained legal council, should my attorney report my guilt to authorities?
A good chunk of the reason for repeat offenders was that a bunch of bishops decided to ignore their obligations under canon law and instead follow the advice of psychologists (who claimed they had cured the priests). It’s not like the only evidence they had was obtained in Confession.
Our legislators seem to also want to believe it can be easily solved in a few years too, judging by the typical penalties for child molesting.
The Catholic views on marriage for priests is incredibly short cited! Also denial of communion to CHRISTIANS of other faiths is DENIED!!! Now this former Baptist pastor can receive and GICE COMMUNION TO OTHERS BECAUSE WHY????
What’s changed?? Some Man priest said it’s okay now???? Surely God is amused by the teachings of the CATHOLIC RELIGION….
Ms Brechtel:
God is not amused by the teachings of the Catholic religion. God IS the founder of the Catholic religion.
Catholic priests are not allowed to marry after ordination, no matter whether they are Roman or Eastern.
Married men are admitted to the priesthood, even those who were formerly Roman, but underwent a formal change of rites, which transfers their canonical status from Roman (or Latin) to Eastern (Byzantine, Alexandrian, Maronite, etc) but again, most married men who are admitted to the priesthood are in the Byzantine Churches, or other Eastern-Rite branches of the Catholic Church.
Denial of Holy Communion to non-catholic Christians is a long standing law that will not change. Communion is for those who are in good standing with the Catholic Church, and who truly believe and profess that the Eucharist is the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ. How can someone who rejects the True Presence of Christ in the Eucharist receive Him in Holy Communion? They can’t, and you know it.
From the tone of your posted comment, I’m guessing that you are either a non-catholic, or someone who doesn’t like those who are.
Connie: I’m curious. Are you Catholic?
What changed is that he converted and then was ordained
In what way is Fr. Moger’s journey unique?
Fr Moger didn’t know there was a pathway for him to become a priest after converting.
Either way, even if it’s not unique to you, it is to him as a convert. If you’re a cradle Catholic like myself, it’s often harder to see the uniqueness of someone’s conversion.
In general, a typical Baptist believer is regenerated and saved according to the Bible. Christ lives in them and they have a relationship with God. A typical catholic is not regenerated, not saved, and has religion,which is void of a normal loving relationship with God. Therefore, this person never knew God and regressed to religion where there is no God. Pity
JF Acosta: Say what????
I am a trad. Catholic my whole life and always look up at the Eucharist during the Consecration and the 3x: Lord, I am not worthy. It is all about the presence of Jesus, of course.
Unfortunately many of Catholics do not believe in the Transubstantiation which is why so Sadly many Catholics drifted
Miss Connie , Christ may be amused or saddened sometimes by our actions but He founded the Catholic Church.
If you believe in Catholic teaching, especially about the Eucharist,and wish to be received into the Church the door is open. There’s a process though. You don’t just show up at the Communion rail.
Jesus Christ was celibate. Vatican II Council unequivocally endorsed priestly celibacy.
From Fr. John Hardon (Servant of God):
“If anyone asks me, and I have been asked more than once, what positive good has come from the Second Council of the Vatican, I could give a dozen answers. But somewhere near the top is its unmistakable support for priestly celibacy. As the following statement of the Council makes clear:
‘Based on the mystery of Christ and its mission, celibacy, which at first was recommended to priests, was afterwards on the Latin Church imposed by law on all who were to be promoted to Holy Orders. This Sacred Council approves and confirms this legislation. (Presbyterorum Ordinis, 16).'”
See: https://www.therealpresence.org/archive/archives/Priesthood/Priesthood_010.htm
Didn’t Think So above (8:16 p.m.) –
What I was getting at is that Fr. Moger is not the first Protestant pastor/minister/priest to become a Catholic priest.
Fr. Dwight Longenecker, e.g.
Maybe Fr. Moger is the first (American) Baptist pastor to make the trek?
Cleo
It almost seemed slightly downplaying to me.
I’m sorry for my snappy response.
Fr Moger could be the first American baptist minister to be ordained as a Catholic priest. As you said, many Lutheran and Anglican ministers have been ordained.
Fr. Longnenecker is a former Anglican priest. He became a Catholic priest under a special provision made by the Holy See for Anglican priests. Fr. Moger was given a dispensation from celibacy by Pope Francis to be ordained a Catholic priest in the Latin rite. These circumstances are not the norm in the Latin rite. The discipline of celibacy remains in the Church, that to be ordained a priest in the Latin rite one takes a vow of celibacy, which the Church teaches is a higher calling because Christ, himself, was celibate.
I bet that there are married, permanent Deacons who would be good priests.