New Viganò Letter: "This is a crisis due to the scourge of homosexuality...it has become a plague on the clergy."

Tweet

Archbishop Carlos Maria Viganò and Pope Francis

From his current place in hiding, Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò has just released a third letter for today's Feast of the North American Martyrs. The letter was written partly in response to a recent open letter from Cardinal Marc Ouelett, Prefect of the Congregation of Bishops, highly critical of Viganò and his claims in two earlier letters.

In today's letter, Viganò writes:

Cardinal Ouellet concedes the important claims that I did and do make, and disputes claims I don’t make and never made.

That Ouellet explicitly or implicitly confirmed many of Viganò's original assertions was indeed noted by many at the time, but Viganò includes a useful summary.

Read the full text at LifeSite News here.

Viganò concludes the letter by strongly addressing the crisis of homosexuality in the current Church, which he believes to be the cause of the sex-abuse crisis as well as associated corruption. I'm not sure I have ever seen the subject presented with so much effectiveness or clarity, let alone one written by a leading prelate. And I wouldn't be surprised if this excerpt makes it into the works of future Catholic historians, just as we now read denunciations of the Borgia popes by contemporaries.

Ironically, Viganò's strong words also include some understatement, as when he writes: "Denouncing homosexual corruption and the moral cowardice that allows it to flourish does not meet with congratulation in our times, not even in the highest spheres of the Church."

Fr. Paul Kalchik, who dared to act against the gay gestapo in the Chicago archdiocese, was exiled from his parish under threat of commitment to a psychiatric institution. He is also now in hiding. 

And just yesterday, LifeSite News was temporarily banned from Twitter for a link it put up four years ago where it simply presented facts about the prevalence of STDs among homosexuals. Homosexual lobbyist and Francis supporter Fr. James S. Martin may have been responsible for this, as on Twitter a few days ago he had directed a veiled threat against two news sites supporting Catholic orthodoxy - LifeSite News and Church Militant.

Multiply by 10,000 the number of those who were not met with congratulation.

The current homosexual agenda, at least in this context, is not about doing what you want to do in your own bedroom or wedding chapel. It's about suppressing dissenting opinions and those who utter them by any means necessary.

It's also about using the Catholic Church as a brothel to diddle fellow prelates and rape boys.

From Viganò's letter, On the Feast of the North American Martyrs: 

In the public remonstrances directed at me I have noted two omissions, two dramatic silences. The first silence regards the plight of the victims. The second regards the underlying reason why there are so many victims, namely, the corrupting influence of homosexuality in the priesthood and in the hierarchy. As to the first, it is dismaying that, amid all the scandals and indignation, so little thought should be given to those damaged by the sexual predations of those commissioned as ministers of the gospel. This is not a matter of settling scores or sulking over the vicissitudes of ecclesiastical careers. It is not a matter of politics. It is not a matter of how church historians may evaluate this or that papacy. This is about souls. Many souls have been and are even now imperiled of their eternal salvation. 

As to the second silence, this very grave crisis cannot be properly addressed and resolved unless and until we call things by their true names. This is a crisis due to the scourge of homosexuality, in its agents, in its motives, in its resistance to reform. It is no exaggeration to say that homosexuality has become a plague in the clergy, and it can only be eradicated with spiritual weapons. It is an enormous hypocrisy to condemn the abuse, claim to weep for the victims, and yet refuse to denounce the root cause of so much sexual abuse: homosexuality. It is hypocrisy to refuse to acknowledge that this scourge is due to a serious crisis in the spiritual life of the clergy and to fail to take the steps necessary to remedy it. 

Unquestionably there exist philandering clergy, and unquestionably they too damage their own souls, the souls of those whom they corrupt, and the Church at large. But these violations of priestly celibacy are usually confined to the individuals immediately involved. Philandering clergy usually do not recruit other philanderers, nor work to promote them, nor cover-up their misdeeds -- whereas the evidence for homosexual collusion, with its deep roots that are so difficult to eradicate, is overwhelming. 

It is well established that homosexual predators exploit clerical privilege to their advantage. But to claim the crisis itself to be clericalism is pure sophistry. It is to pretend that a means, an instrument, is in fact the main motive. 

Denouncing homosexual corruption and the moral cowardice that allows it to flourish does not meet with congratulation in our times, not even in the highest spheres of the Church. I am not surprised that in calling attention to these plagues I am charged with disloyalty to the Holy Father and with fomenting an open and scandalous rebellion. Yet rebellion would entail urging others to topple the papacy. I am urging no such thing. I pray every day for Pope Francis -- more than I have ever done for the other popes. I am asking, indeed earnestly begging, the Holy Father to face up to the commitments he himself made in assuming his office as successor of Peter. He took upon himself the mission of confirming his brothers and guiding all souls in following Christ, in the spiritual combat, along the way of the cross. Let him admit his errors, repent, show his willingness to follow the mandate given to Peter and, once converted let him confirm his brothers (Lk 22:32). 

In closing, I wish to repeat my appeal to my brother bishops and priests who know that my statements are true and who can so testify, or who have access to documents that can put the matter beyond doubt. You too are faced with a choice. You can choose to withdraw from the battle, to prop up the conspiracy of silence and avert your eyes from the spreading of corruption. You can make excuses, compromises and justification that put off the day of reckoning. You can console yourselves with the falsehood and the delusion that it will be easier to tell the truth tomorrow, and then the following day, and so on. 

On the other hand, you can choose to speak. You can trust Him who told us, “the truth will set you free.” I do not say it will be easy to decide between silence and speaking. I urge you to consider which choice-- on your deathbed, and then before the just Judge -- you will not regret having made.

+ Carlo Maria Viganò, Arcivescovo tit. di Ulpiana, Nunzio Apostolico 

19 Ottobre 2018, Feast of the North American Martyrs

Rabbit Hole: Cupich Commends Ouellet's Attack on Vigano, Reaffirms "Communion" with Francis

Tweet

Cardinal Blase Cupich, From the Archdiocese of Chicago Website

In a "statement" posted today on the Archdiocese of Chicago website, Chicago's Cardinal Blase Cupich sided with Prefect for the Congregation of Bishops Cardinal Marc Ouellet who yesterday released a strongly worded letter, criticizing Vatican whistleblower Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò and defending Pope Francis.

Viganò had called on Pope Francis to resign for, among other things, covering up the sexual crimes of Cardinal Theodore McCarrick and rehabilitating him after McCarrick had been quietly sanctioned by Pope Benedict.

Viganò released his 11-page letter on August 25 and then went into hiding.

Cardinal Cupich initially responded to the controversy surrounding Viganò's letter by arguing that looking into the substance of the claims would be to go down a "rabbit hole." In a widely criticized television interview, he said that the pope has “got to get on with other things, of talking about the environment and protecting migrants and carrying on the work of the Church.”  

Francis has refused to directly address this charge and charges of his involvement in other sex-abuse coverups following in its wake but has made thinly-veiled attacks on Viganò and other critics, going so far as to equate him or them with "Satan."

In turn, Ouellet yesterday called Viganò's accusation "monstrous and unsubstantiated" and part of a "political plot."

Many have commented that Ouellet did not really deny and in fact arguably confirmed the basic substance of Viganò's main charge.

In his original letter Viganò had also claimed that Cupich's elevation to Archbishop of Chicago was recommended by Theodore McCarrick. Others have confirmed that it was supported by Pope Francis over the alternative choices and objections of other bishops, including Cupich's predecessor Cardinal Francis George.

Here is Cardinal Cupich's statement:

Statement of Cardinal Blase J. Cupich, Archbishop of Chicago, on the Open Letter of Cardinal Marc Ouellet, October 8, 2018

In a statement released by the Vatican Press Office on Saturday, October 6, Pope Francis pledged a thorough study of the documentation present in the Archives of the Holy See regarding the former Cardinal, now Archbishop Theodore McCarrick. The Holy Father took the occasion to renew his commitment to address the scourge of abuse within the Church, and to do everything possible to prevent it. In the Vatican declaration, the pope also stated that the Church will not tolerate any cover-ups or accept a different standard for bishops who abuse or cover up, calling this behavior “a form of clericalism that is no longer acceptable.” This clear statement does not come as a surprise to me, for I am convinced that Pope Francis has no hesitation in following a path of accountability. As he remarked during his visit to the United States in 2015: “We will follow the path of truth wherever it may lead.”

The first installment of fulfilling this renewed pledge of openness came the very next day by Cardinal Marc Ouellet, who has served as the Prefect of the Congregation for Bishops since his appointment by Pope Benedict XVI in 2010. In an authoritative and compelling manner, he provided a detailed response to the central charges against Pope Francis regarding the case of Archbishop McCarrick. Cardinal Ouellet made clear that the Holy Father has given him the full freedom to speak in a way that provides information based on his personal experience and the documents of the Congregation for Bishops.

In his capacity as Prefect, Cardinal Ouellet also called to account those attacking or countenancing attacks on the Pope and the Church. In that spirit, I join my voice to those of the Prefect and of the President of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops in urging “all in the Church particularly the bishops to reaffirm our communion with Pope Francis who is the visible guarantor of the communion of the Catholic Church.”

FULL INTERVIEW: Is Cupich Enforcer Bp. Mark Bartosic Gay? We Asked Him.

Tweet

Chicago Auxiliary Bishop Mark Bartosic

If you would like to skip the relatively long and arguably tedious background and commentary, scroll down close to the bottom for the text, and all the way to the bottom for the video of the interview.

Last Sunday, September 23rd, after the 8:00 AM Mass at Resurrection Parish, I interviewed new Chicago Auxiliary Bishop Mark Bartosic. Bartosic had been presiding in the absence of Pastor Paul Kalchik who had left the previous day, allegedly under threat of arrest. Fr. Kalchik is now in self-described hiding.

At the beginning of Mass, Bp. Bartosic read a short statement about Kalchik's departure to the relatively small number of parishioners. I assume many if not most of them were already aware of what had happened. The Mass went on as normal, and the parishioners were outwardly quiet and polite.

Bp. Bartosic professed sympathy for, and even friendship with, Fr. Kalchik - "we all want what's best for him", etc. - and even stated that he and Fr. Kalchik had been part of the same book club.

After Mass, outside the main doorway, Bp. Bartosic greeted parishioners and answered some questions. There seemed to be only three media people there - a young reporter from one of the local TV stations, an unidentified man with a recording device and myself. We spoke with Bp. Bartosic and the parishioners relatively informally.

The unidentified man with the recorder asked Bp. Bartosic what books he had read in that book club with Fr. Kalchik. As I recall, Bp. Bartosic claimed not to remember or sort of evaded the question.

One of the most interesting bits of news from a parishioner (which the TV reporter seemed very interested in) was that someone had been placing or tossing little rainbow flags against the wall of the church - items that had been meticulously gathered up and removed by a parishioner or maintenance person.

Someone had also planted small rainbow flags across the street on the sidewalk grass. Catty-corner from the church there was a house that had a full-size rainbow flag hanging from its second story porch.

******

A word on the interview, namely, that part of it where I asked Bp. Bartosic the question -

"Are you a homosexual?"

One might ask, isn't it, well, a bit impolite, just a tad bit, to walk up to a bishop, point a videocamera in his face and ask him whether or not he's gay?

I'll let the reader decide that. But I will say this: in Chicago it's usually redundant.

The Chicago archdiocese is gay.

It's very gay.

It's gayer than a rainbow flag dipped in Chanel Antaeus.

Every Chicago Catholic knows this.

Admittedly, this knowledge is often personal or anecdotal.

So one goes church shopping (a dubious practice, but one I engaged in while in the transitional stage before converting to the Faith), and one discovers in sequence that each pastor is:

Gay.

Gay.

Probably gay.

Straight (perhaps) but acts gay.

Gay.

Straight (what happened?)

Gay.

Flaming.

Admittedly, many parishioners seem perfectly fine with it. He's our sweet Fr. Frump and we love him. Isn't he darling?

And of course we all have our stories: One bumps into one's pastor at a gay bar (no, that's not my story - I just heard about it). Or one's heterosexual pastor is ostracized and denied promotion. Or (this is my story), one's heterosexual catechism instructor tells one that in his first attempt to go through seminary he was hit on repeatedly and then, after he reported it, was labeled a "homophobe" and given mandatory counseling - where he was then hit on by his male psychiatrist!

Then there's the one about the middle-aged pastor who was found dead in his mirror-lined rectory bedroom, naked and hooked up to a sex machine. I think you've heard that one before.

Isn't he darling?

In 2005, incoming Pope Benedict tried to do something about the situation in Chicago and other dioceses. The Congregation for Catholic Education issued an Instruction that included this stipulation:

In the light of such teaching, this Dicastery, in accord with the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, believes it necessary to state clearly that the Church, while profoundly respecting the persons in question, cannot admit to the seminary or to holy orders those who practise homosexuality, present deep-seated homosexual tendencies or support the so-called "gay culture".

Such persons, in fact, find themselves in a situation that gravely hinders them from relating correctly to men and women. One must in no way overlook the negative consequences that can derive from the ordination of persons with deep-seated homosexual tendencies.

It should be pointed out that the Instruction didn't really say anything new but merely reiterated (as it itself references at a number of points in the text) the longstanding position of the Catholic Church.

But as might be expected, just as the longstanding position of the Church had not been taken seriously for many years, the Instruction itself was in practice ignored, at least at suburban Chicago's Mundelein and other similar seminaries. The non-gay seminaries did perhaps attempt to apply it, though of course it wasn't really intended for them - they had been following it anyway.

Interestingly, Pope Francis himself reportedly re-endorsed the Instruction, though this, too, had little practical effect.

There are a few things that shouldn't need to be said but I'll say them.

I know there have been and continue to be some good priests, religious and candidates to the same who are homosexuals, at least as they might define themselves. I am certain of this.

Nevertheless, the "homosexual network" within the Chicago archdiocese has been a plague. This is not because all homosexual clerics are sex-abusers or bad priests, but partly because the mix of loyalty and fear sustained by the network has a tendency to compromise all. That probably 50% plus of seminarians, priests and bishops in Chicago are homosexuals while at the same time the Church officially claims they should not be there (if their condition is deep-seated) and that homosexual attraction is a "disorder" is a frankly untenable position.

Among other things, it pretty much puts at least half of all Chicago priests in silent conflict with the teachings of the current Catholic Church, even the official teachings of the current "FrancisChurch", at least the official teachings.

In fairness, this is why Fr. James Martin and other homosexual and homosexual-friendly prelates want to change those teachings.

Of course a large proportion of Chicago's homosexual priests are sexually active. One of them was sexually active in a car not too long ago.

And homosexuals make up the vast majority of sex-abusing priests as well as a good share of those guilty of covering up for abuse. As for those homosexual priests not in these categories, again, unfortunately the dynamic of the network is such that it in some way compromises all. Are you going to enthusiastically expose the gay sex-abuser who happened to be in your seminary class, the same one who knows your little "secret"?

Bp. Bartosic didn't.

As I reported last week, the fact that the three new auxiliary bishops for Chicago, including Bp. Bartosic, all graduated from the same "Pink Palace" Mundelein Seminary class of 1994 - a time when active homosexual behavior among students was public and pervasive and many good heterosexual candidates were in one way or another driven out of seminary - is extremely troubling. Indeed, Fr. Kalchik himself proposed that their ordinations be put on hold - a claim that was no doubt one factor in Cardinal Cupich's decision to remove him.

Fr. Kalchik wrote in a letter:

Another recent development that needs mention: The three priests slated to be elevated to the rank of bishop this coming month are all from the very same ordination class as former Fr. Daniel McCormack, Chicago's very worst, most notorious gay predator priest. I met Fr. McCormack once in 1995 right after he was ordained, and that very day I reported to seminary officials how off Fr. McCormack was!

At this point in time, it is all a matter of public record, Fr. McCormack was convicted and sent to jail. My question today is how could these three men live with a man like McCormack for four years, day in and day out, and not know or at least be suspicious of his character? Are they not already compromised if they knew or suspected what he was and did not say a thing? To say the least, I have serious reservations about these three classmates of McCormack all being raised to the episcopacy here in Chicago.

Now, just a few days later, one of those classmates permanently kicked Fr. Kalchik out of his parish.

In Chicago, when you bring a letter, they bring a gun.

On the most charitable interpretation, Bp. Bartosic is a nice gay man who loves God and His Church (albeit a God and a Church whose character and commands he may somewhat misunderstand), loves serving his flock (if one interprets "serving" partly as political activism concerning immigration and racism, etc.) and has kept his clerical vows of celibacy.

But this (by assumption) nice gay man has now, willingly or not, found himself in the position of being an enforcer for the Chicago priestly gay mafia.

Or, perhaps, given what happened to Fr. Kalchik, "gay gestapo" is a better term.

I have great sympathy for Fr. Kalchik. I have little for Bp. Bartosic.

And I think many Chicago Catholics are tired of being polite.

******

Here is the interview.

I was one of two or three "media" people asking Bp. Bartosic questions. At first I somewhat continued with the topic at hand, the circumstances of the departure of Fr. Kalchik. This part of the conversation was recorded only in audio:

Mahound's Paradise: You were here yesterday when he left (Fr. Kalchik). Can you tell us about the circumstances of his leaving?

Bishop Bartosic: Uh, he left voluntarily. Uh, I will not...

MP: Did you threaten to call the police if he didn't leave?

B: No.

MP: You didn't?

B: No.

MP: Was there a threat that the police would be called at all by anyone?

B: Uh, not from me.

MP: Did you arrive alone yesterday? What did you tell him when you arrived yesterday?

B: We had a conversation that was...

MP: Can you tell us a bit more about the conversation?

B: Well, we talked about, uh, uh, you know, what was, um, best for the people and best for Paul. And he decided to step away.

I should here note that while Bp. Bartosic's statements pertaining to the alleged threat to call the police seem to be in contradiction to Fr. Kalchik's earlier account, Church Militant later tweeted that the explicit threat was made by two other clerics. Thus, Bp. Bartosic's answer - "Not from me" - may have been technically true.

After a few more questions from another person, I identified myself:

MP: Oakes Spalding from Mahound's Paradise. I'm going to ask you for the record, are you a homosexual?

(Long silence)

B: Who are you?

MP: Oakes Spalding from Mahound's Paradise...

B: From what?

MP: It's a Catholic blog. I think the Cardinal is probably aware of it. [He is, but that was more me being annoying.] Can you answer the question, are you a homosexual?

(Long silence)

B: I can't believe you would ask that.

MP: Well, according to the current rule of Pope Francis. If someone has deep-seated homosexual tendencies, they're not admitted to the priesthood. Now you won't say whether you're a homosexual or not?

(Silence)

MP: Can you just answer the question?

B: I won't answer the question.

MP: Because?

(Silence. At this point I turned on the video recorder.)

MP: Can you answer the question as to whether or not you are a homosexual?

(Silence)

MP: Can you answer why you won't answer the question?

B: Uh... (silence)

MP: Do you think that priests with deep-seated homosexual tendencies, or (rather) seminarians, should be admitted to the priesthood?

B: I'm not going to engage this conversation that you're having with me.

MP: So even though that's the rule of the current Catholic Church, supported by Pope Francis, you're not going to go on the record supporting that?

B: Yeah, I'm, uh, I'm uh . . . I'm not going to talk to you about this.

MP: Are you a supporter of the "rainbow flag"?

B: I'm not going to go here with you. Sorry.

MP: Do you have anything else you want to say to the readers of Mahound's Paradise?

B: No.

MP: Thank you.

Chicago Archdiocese: We Knew Fr. McGrath was Living Next to a School but We Didn't Know He Was an Accused Anal-Rapist Pedophile (Even Though It Was Reported in All the Chicago Papers)

Tweet

Fr. Richard McGrath (pictures displayed on a board at the April 12th press conference given by Bob Krankvich and his lawyers)

According to my sources, Cardinal Cupich's office follows Mahound's Paradise assiduously.

They don't apparently read the Chicago Sun-Times as carefully, at least when it comes to its reporting on Illinois clerical sex-abuse cases.

In April of this year, Bob Krankvich, a man now in his 30's gave a press conference alleging that he had been groomed, molested and raped over a period of many months in 1995-96 by Fr. Richard McGrath the former principal of Providence Catholic High School in New Lenox, Illinois.

Krankvich was 13-15 at the time.

Fr. McGrath retired and left the school at the end of 2017 amidst a cloud of suspicion in a separate case when a female student reported seeing gay child porn on his cell phone.

The press conference and subsequent developments over the next few months were covered by the Sun-Times and the rest of Chicago media. Unsurprisingly, the New Lenox Patch also ran a number of stories on the case.

It was one of the more lurid clerical sex-abuse stories in Illinois for 2018. Here were some of the headlines:

Providence HS sued as prosecutors weigh charges against former principal (Chicago Sun-Times, April 12)

Ex-Providence Catholic president under investigation for alleged sexual abuse of student, police say (Chicago Tribune, April 12)

Former Providence Catholic High School student sues over sex abuse allegations (ABC7 Chicago, April 12)

Former Catholic school head sued for abusing student (Fox 32 Chicago, April 12)

New Lenox priest under criminal investigation for allegations of sexually abusing student (WGN9 Chicago, April 12)

Fr. McGrath Committed Anal Rape Of Providence Teen: Lawyer (New Lennox Patch, April 12)

Acting president of Providence Catholic officially taking over after predecessor retired amid investigation (Chicago Tribune, April 20)

A few months earlier, the Chicago Tribune had reported on the cell phone porn allegations, which had "stalled" (and then ended) when Fr. McGrath simply refused to hand over his cell phone to police.

Police close investigation into former Providence Catholic president facing criminal charges (Chicago Tribune, February 17, 2018)

Meanwhile, after the press-conference, the Patch continued to report:

Providence's Fr. McGrath Resurfaces In Chicago (New Lennox Patch, July 25)

New Lenox is in the diocese of Joliet, and Fr. McGrath is a member of The Midwest Augustinians. But he had now apparently "resurfaced" in the St. John Stone Friary in Hyde Park on Chicago's Southside, only yards away from both a preschool and a Catholic grade school.

This morning, the Chicago Sun-Times picked up on the story, adding a new piece of information:

Archdiocese didn’t tell schools priest in sex abuse probe was their new neighbor (Chicago Sun-Times, September 21)

Why didn't the archdiocese inform the schools? The answer was purportedly given by Chicago archdiocese spokesperson Paula Waters in an extraordinary statement, according to the Sun-Times. Waters claimed that while the archdiocese knew the former longtime Catholic high school principal was now living in Hyde Park it did not notify the schools because "it wasn’t aware McGrath is under investigation over sexual abuse allegations."

Is this answer credible?

I will withhold comment on that.

But maybe no one in Cupich's office ever saw any of those stories or forgot about them or whatever. They're busy people.

What were they doing on April 12?

I don't know, precisely.

But I do know this. April 12 was the second and final day of testimony in the Review Board investigation of Fr. Frank Phillips of St. John Cantius, the traditionalist priest charged with "improper conduct involving adult males." Fr. Phillips would later be exonerated, according to all credible reports, though the archdiocese would later strip him of his positions and faculties anyway and collaborate in effectively exiling him to St. Louis without any further explanation.

Archdiocese spokesperson Waters was caught making a number of false or questionable statements about that.

Everyone involved knows that the Cardinal and his office were a bit obsessive about the Fr. Phillips case. So maybe the story of a New Lenox High School Principal priest accused of the anal rape of a minor was temporarily a bit off their radar.

We all have our priorities.

Three New Auxiliary Bishops for Chicago Are All Graduates Of The Same "Pink Palace" Class of 1994

Tweet

Newly ordained Bishops Mark Bartosic, Robert Casey and Ronald Hicks

Yesterday, Cardinal Cupich ordained three new auxiliary bishops for Chicago - Mark Bartosic, Robert Casey and Ronald Hicks.

They have much in common.

All have solid resumes in parish, missionary and organizational work. Bishop Hicks is currently and will remain Vicar General of the Chicago archdiocese.

All are fluent in Spanish and have worked with Hispanic parishes and Hispanic Catholic organizations in the Chicago area.

They all appear to be firmly aligned with the "social justice" wing of the Catholic priesthood, especially and unsurprisingly as it relates to Central America and Hispanic issues in general.

But, most notably, all graduated from St. Mary of the Lake (known simply as "Mundelein") in the same year, 1994.

Yes, this was at the height of the period where Mundelein was regarded as one of the most prominent "gay" seminaries in the country.

It was nicknamed "The Pink Palace."

In Goodbye, Good Men, journalist Michael Rose uses numerous eyewitness accounts to paint a picture of the heavily charged homosexual atmosphere at Mundelein during the 1990's. Here is part of the testimony of then-seminarian Joseph Kellenyi:

"One hall in the seminary dorm," related Kellenyi," is nicknamed the 'Catwalk.' known as the residence of the more fashionable gays." "Catwalk," he explained, was a reference to the runways of fashion models, but also reflected the campy, feline-like personalities of those who lived in this area of the seminary. One member of the formation faculty in particular, he said, was known to take seminarians to high-profile gay events such as a popular gay production in Chicago's Lincoln Park.

According to Kellenyi and several other seminarians who attended Mundelein during the 1990's, one of the big events at the seminary was whenever a seminarian would "come out" as being a homosexually oriented person. The openly gay seminarians-to-be would do so by telling one or two of his closest friends, and, sure enough, the word of another "orientation proclamation," they said, would travel quickly throughout the halls of the seminary, especially to the formation faculty members. Oddly enough, attested Kellenyi, once a seminarian "came out," he would be wined and dined - literally - by certain faculty priests. "In my opinion," he said, "it's highly inappropriate to wine and dine any favorite students, orientation aside." But the special status given to openly gay seminarians, he said, is beyond the pale.

The gay subculture, said former Mundelein seminarians, was the dominant culture at Mundelein (p. 60).

Fr. Mark Bartosic

Kellenyi was a seminarian at Mundelein during the 1998-99 school year (five years after Bartosic, Casey and Hicks had graduated) during the tenure of rector Fr. John Canary. But Rose and others have indicated that the "gay subculture" was at least as prevalent, if not more so, in the early 1990's and before, under previous rector Gerald Kicanas.

Perhaps the most infamous gay child predator priest in the history of the Chicago archdiocese, Daniel McCormack, currently serving an indefinite term in a downstate facility for sex offenders, was also a member of the 1994 graduating class at Mundelein.

This disturbing coincidence of graduation dates was brought to my attention by the Rev. Paul Kalchik, pastor of Resurrection Parish on Chicago's Northwest Side, when I read his open letter to Pope Francis on the clerical sex abuse crisis, subsequently reprinted at the Church Militant website:

Another recent development that needs mention: The three priests slated to be elevated to the rank of bishop this coming month are all from the very same ordination class as former Fr. Daniel McCormack, Chicago's very worst, most notorious gay predator priest. I met Fr. McCormack once in 1995 right after he was ordained, and that very day I reported to seminary officials how off Fr. McCormack was!

At this point in time, it is all a matter of public record, Fr. McCormack was convicted and sent to jail. My question today is how could these three men live with a man like McCormack for four years, day in and day out, and not know or at least be suspicious of his character? Are they not already compromised if they knew or suspected what he was and did not say a thing? To say the least, I have serious reservations about these three classmates of McCormack all being raised to the episcopacy here in Chicago.

Kalchik of course does not directly accuse the bishop then-appointees of being homosexuals, let alone men implicated in child-sex abuse or its coverup. But his claim is that, at the least, a red flag should be raised.

Fr. Robert Casey

Was it possible for an orthodox priest, not part of the homosexual network, to graduate from Mundelein in the 1990's. Apparently it was. According to Rose:

Nonetheless, said seminarians, there does exist an "underground network" of orthodox seminarians at Mundelein, but they keep their prayer life and spiritual direction with orthodox priests in strict confidence. According to Gregory Banks,* "students who are loyal to Church teaching and oppose the gay stranglehold on the seminary trade notes, conference tapes, and spiritual reading. It's not a great system, but without it, very few of us would survive. Second, there are some 'closet-orthodox' members of the faculty who try to offer the truth, although they must often do so surreptitiously (p. 61).

So is this the category in which we should put Bartosic, Casey and Hicks? As seminarians, did these three avoid the gay hookup scene, keep their heads down and exchange clandestine cassette tapes of orthodox homilies to buck themselves up?

It is notable that as far as I know, none of them has ever addressed the topic of "The Pink Palace." If their heads were down, they're still down.

Which of course is not exactly their posture when it comes to "social justice."

Here is Hicks hosting a "wine and cheese" reception at a North Side parish for a "conversation" on that very topic.

And here is Bartosic at a "Catholics praying for racial justice event" in Cicero.

Casey has a perhaps more interesting resume. At one time he was actually the student in charge of the dormitory at Mundelein, according to classmate David Bottner, now vicar general of the Diocese of Knoxville:

Casey stood out early as a leader, serving as prefect of the dormitory, which meant organizing and coordinating activities with his classmates.

“He did a great job with that, and it’s not easy leading your peers.”

Was there a Catwalk in the dorm then?

Casey was also rector of Casa Jesus from 1998-2003, the notorious and now defunct program exposed as a "gay seminarian pipeline" from Latin America to Chicago.

Church Militant recently reported:

After 28 years in operation, Casa Jesus was quietly shut down by Cdl. Blase Cupich in 2016 following multiple homosexual scandals, with three seminarians expelled after being caught going to a gay bar, and the rector himself, Octavio Munoz, arrested for male child porn on his laptop.

Fr. Diego Berrio, the Chicago priest recently arrested for having public sex in Miami was a Casa Jesus graduate.

Church Militant spoke with a priest who was a former seminarian at Casa Jesus in the early 2000s alongside Berrio, who confirmed that Berrio's homosexuality was an open secret at the time.

"The rector knew. Everybody knew," said the priest, who asked to remain anonymous out of concerns for retribution.

At the time, then-Fr. Robert Casey was rector.

Fr. Ronald Hicks

I should point out two more facts, though they are arguably not of major importance:

Four days ago, the archdiocese announced that Casey had been accused but then cleared in a 2008 investigation of sexual misconduct with a child.

If the charge was unfounded (which was the determination of the Illinois Department of Children and Family Services), then I am glad he was cleared.

I'm sure Fr. Phillips, the former pastor of St. John Cantius, is glad as well.

I also recently spoke with a member of a religious order of impeccable orthodox and "anti-homosexual network" credentials who had referred to Casey on social media as a "dear friend." I was interested in his perception of Casey's character from someone who I assumed knew him well. It turns out that the comment was based (it appears, solely based) on the fact that Casey had presided over the funeral of his father, a longtime parishioner at the church where Casey was then pastor:

He [then-Fr. Casey] was amazing. Very personable, very sensitive and spoke very highly of my father and it was greatly appreciated by my family.

*******

Let's now speak plainly. Cardinal Cupich obviously didn't create the homosexual subculture in the Chicago priesthood, nor is he responsible for the clerical abuse crisis that largely followed from it. However, it appears to be the case that the still powerful network of gay priests and those who have collaborated with them form the heart of Cupich's shrinking base of support among Chicago priests and bishops. This is one of the reasons that Cupich has repeatedly rejected the claim that homosexuality has anything to do with the clerical abuse crisis.

It's not all about ideology.

And so, despite all the words about "accountability", "healing" and "change", things appear to be continuing as before.

The elevation of three "Pink Palace" graduates to the bishopric is clear evidence of that.

Is it possible that one or more of these men are good priests and good men? It is possible.

But I think it's much more likely, good or not, that they're in fact part of the problem.