Bill Donohue defended Father Groeschel concerning lack of clarity during an interview on the National Catholic Register website (hosted by EWTN), an interview about sexual abuse of teenagers. I had reposted Bill’s comments on this HSH blog. I then noticed that an apology from Father Groeschel and a denunciation of him by his own community replaced the interview in question. A denunciation from the editor in chief was also added. After that, Joe Zwilling made a similar denunciation. Joe, mind you, is the spokesman for the Archdiocese of New York. And then… and then… EWTN removed every last shred of anything that Father Groeschel had ever done for them from its own website.
“Dang it!” thought I: “There must be some facts missing with all this.” I took down my reposting of Bill Donohue’s article in favor of finding out more about the whole story.
As the days went by, comments only got more horrific in the news media, that is, with the exception of Father Gordon MacRae (about) in his most excellent post. Father Groeschel has virtually entered These Stone Walls. Father Gordon is pretty tough, and can think things through more quickly than yours truly. Stories like this dig a knife into my soul, and it takes me a while to come up with a response.
My response is to analyze the statement everyone has condemned. Here’s the kernel of that statement:
Suppose you have a man having a nervous breakdown, and a youngster comes after him. A lot of the cases, the youngster — 14, 16, 18 — is the seducer.
Everyone says that the priest is always guilty, no matter what. That was what Father Groeschel also said in his apology. That’s all true, all things being equal.
But what did Father originally comment about? On a situation in which all things were equal, that is, in which both parties had use of their faculties? No?
Did he speak of someone totally out of his mind, that is, not someone who’s had a nervous breakdown, but who is presently having a nervous breakdown? Yes?
I’ve known someone in the United States, who, not long after having a breakdown, described it to me. This was just after he returned from the hospital. He said that his mind was totally fragmented, that he didn’t know which fragment to act within. He said that he was frantic, scared, literally climbing the walls. There was no escape. Picture that for a moment. Footprints on the walls. Bookcases tumbling down. Not realizing this is happening. Get it?
I’ve known someone in Rome, who was in the midst of a nervous breakdown. We got him down to the street where an ambulance took him away. He was entirely incapable of thinking in any coherent manner, or even thinking at all. It tooks months for him to get out of the hospital. Months. Get it?
That’s what Father Groeschel was talking about. An extreme case. A “lot” of cases simply means a number more than one would expect. So, that’s some cases, right? Moreover, we’re only talking about those cases in which the adult would be totally insane. And that’s not many cases, is it? No? Analysis of statements helps, doesn’t it? Yes, it does.
But Father! But Father! He said that the victim was the seducer. You’re bad and evil too!
O.K. Let’s just break this down a bit, shall we? It’s easier for people like Joe Zwilling and Jeanette R. De Melo, and the leadership of the Franciscans of the Renewal and EWTN (not to mention the author of an article from the Catholic News Agency, an article nicely republished by EWTN).
Let’s talk about this in two stages: (1) Can a teenager be sexually aggressive? (2) Can a teenager be guilty of attempting to seduce a priest?
(1) Yes, a teenager can be sexually aggressive. If you don’t know, public schools have made sure to sexualize youngsters from pre-school onwards, so that by the time they get to puberty, they know more about contraception than anyone else ever did when they were in college. They’ve already had multiple school field trips to Planned Parenthood to see where they “need” to go to have an abortion in case they’ve not had “safe sex.” They’ve been taught to have sex with themselves, with those of the same sex, with those of the opposite sex. They’ve been taught that there is no such thing as gender, that sexual identity is evil, that doing “it” with anyone and everyone, anywhere at any time is to be praised. And, yes, there are those who have had very many relationships and also a number of abortions before they graduate from High School. Those are the facts.
(2) A teenager can surely decide to attempt to seduce a priest. You would be an imbecile to think that this would be impossible for a teenager. Really. However, a priest in his right mind is always guilty of letting any attempted seduction proceed. Let’s repeat that: the priest in his right mind is responsible for stopping any misbehavior. However, such a priest in his right mind is not what Father Groeschel was talking about. He was talking about someone who was literally crazy, insane, incapable of any responsibility for anything whatsoever. Both civil and Church law have recognized that insanity mitigates a person’s responsibility, right? I mean, if you can’t see that, you really are risking going straight to hell.
O.K., now, I have some questions.
Why is it that people don’t see this? Are they having nervous breakdowns?
If not, what kind of betrayal is it that we see at the National Catholic Register, at EWTN, at CNA, at Father Groeschel’s own community? Is this The Judas Crisis widening? Political correctness with no regard for the truth? Or is this just ignorance running scared. A lack of ability to do a little analysis. Perhaps all these editors have been in car accidents and have had multiple strokes, etc…
Will I get a letter or two from various media giants telling me to just shut up for having defended Father Groeschel? Maybe. It’s worth it. The lights are going out everywhere, and it is a good thing to try to keep a light shining in the darkness. So, I say to EWTN: Put Father Groeschel’s stuff back up on line. Honestly!
One last comment. I thought it was particularly nefarious of the Catholic News Agency to put these two sentences together, one coming at the beginning of the interview, one coming at the end:
Fr. Groeschel suggested that a minor is “the seducer” in “a lot” of sexual abuse cases. He said he was inclined to think that abusers on their first offense should not go to jail “because their intention was not committing a crime.”
To juxtapose these sentences like this gives the impression that the offenders in the first sentence (who are totally insane in the context of that sentence) are the same as the offenders in the last sentence (who are not totally insane). Again, the context of “a lot” is the insanity of the adult. So, not many cases to begin with. The CNA crowd (and EWTN which ran their story) are now scrambling, making damn sure that Father Groeschel is damned by all and stays that way.
Well, all I have to say about that to Father Groeschel himself is THIS!
God bless you, Father Benedict!
Accompany me, Father George David Byers, S.S.L., S.T.D., as I begin life as a Catholic Priest-Hermit by choice. Holy Souls Hermitage is dedicated to the sanctification of my fellow priests, bishops, deacons & seminarians going through the purgatory of this life or the next. Prayer and sacrifice go up, of course, for both Benedict XVI and the next Successor of Saint Peter. 
Thank you, Father, for being a light that refuses to go out.
Thank you, Father. I’m just shaking my head.
Thank you Father for speaking up for Father Groeschel. His words seem to have been completely (and quite probably deliberately) distorted. He has always seemed such a loving and wise Priest, and many comments on articles are from people he has helped. I learned so much from him from watching EWTN, as much if not more from his gentle manner and self- sacrifice than his words. Even though he is so frail, I read that he has been working 12 hour days. I’m sure he would urge us to forgive those who have betrayed him and to pray for them as much as we are praying for him.
Dear Father
I commend you, I have always thought Fr. Groshel was a very specially gifted and “holy” priest. I do not believe he meant it the way it was taken and you have explained it quite well in your comments. I am very, very disappointed at EWTN, extremely as a matter of fact, that they ran like that w/his dismissal from their program schedules.
I feel so bad for Fr. Groshel! thank you Father for your defense of his comments. This “stuff” gets more and more unbelievable.
I was and am heavy hearted over Fr. Groshel’s statements. I believe that in open statements, the surest way to know the personal truth of the individual, is to listen to the personal internal dictionary of the individual which he employs when he speaks freely. This is what Fr. Groshel did. He answered freely, initially, without self editing. Sadly, his words speak for him – we can not read between lines if we really want to know the truth. The Church has suffered greatly and partly as a result of good people putting their heads in the sand when the truth is revealed about “Hero” or “Celebrity” priests.
Just read his words. Employ the rules of english grammar.
Hello natstelle: I’m all for priests following Jesus, The Priest. It would be irrational to defend someone just because they are heroes or celebrities. I agree with you on that. Having said that, I’d like you to refute my points, point by point. Also, take note that, as he speaks, he moves from topic to topic to topic, trying to say too much for the time given, having much in his heart about so many things but knowing his great difficulty in approaching any of those topics. He skips from one to the next. His mind is not young and agile. He’s had brain damage with the strokes and his health was severly curtailed by his accident. All I’m saying is that you can’t mash the entire interview together as if it were one sentence, as did CNA and others. For him, what he says at the beginning of that interview must seem hours away from what he said toward the end. Since I’ve posted on the two most controversial sentences, refute what I’ve said about them. I’m open to correction. This is important.
As a regular viewer of Fr. Groeschel’s Sunday evening program on EWTN, it was obvious that sometimes the words that came out didn’t match the thoughts. He had that terrible accident, his brain is aging; even if the secular media has no respect for Fr. Benedict, we as Catholics have a higher calling to respect him for himself.
Grace comes to us through the strangest circumstances. In this case, because of affection and support for poor Fr. Benedict in this situation, I picked one of his books off my bookshelf and read it. Not sure if I’d read it a number of years before or not, but it was a wonderful and consoling book, called “Healing the Original Wound”.
Perhaps the best way we can show our solidarity for him is by buying and reading more of his books now, and by encouraging EWTN to stop running scared and at least put re-runs of Fr. Benedict’s shows on air.
Considering his age and injuries from the accident, retiring from the live show makes a lot of sense. He’s certainly earned the chance to rest a bit by now!
I trust very little of what is written in the media, including CNA. Therefore, I hold back judgment until I can research something of interest more thoroughly. The thumping Father Benedict has received is unwarranted because there has been (I believe) a deliberate misrepresentation of his words through various schemes and techniques. Rash judgment all over the place. For the purpose of starting a controversy to gain readers and play on the sensationalism of the sex scandals in the priesthood.
May Father grow in humility for being trashed by EWTN, CNA, and all his other attackers. If I were he, that CNA interview would be the last any media would get from me. I believe Father is deeply interested in the job of saving souls and I see nothing wrong with what he said in his interview. He, in fact, raised issues that ought to be raised but which are politically anathema to discuss. Shame on EWTN, CNA, and all the rest including his religious community. He spoke the TRUTH.
Thank God for your courage and wisdom in shedding light regarding our beloved Father Groeschel.
Blessed Mother, behold your son Father Benedict Groeschel. Strenghten him and through his suffering united with Jesus, obtain mercy for those who betray Jesus again especially in His holy priests. Mary, Mother of Mercy, pray for us.
I’m curious. interviews are typically edited, for length and for comment. The edited version is typically reviewed by both parties for correctness. Did the interviewer intentionally want Fr. Groeschel to get in trouble? Did nobody review this and say “perhaps we shouldn’t include this part” or “perhaps we shoudl ask Fr. Groeschel to clarify this part”?
Hello Mike: I was surprised at the famous priests getting into trouble statement from the interviewer. They said that it bypassed normal editorial checking, however, the editor in chief’s comment was ridiculous.
It’s open season on priests. Taking advantage of an old man really makes me mad – them considering that he is also a priest – it is unconscionable. I guess that makes it about par for nowdays. We need to pray the roasry!
The media lays in wait for priests and other clerics to do anything that either puts them in a bad light or that can be twisted to make it appear that way. They are humiliated and besmirched by the enemies of the Church at every opportunity; Especially those who are less liberal. I would not be surprised if there weren’t already ambulance-chasers beating the bushes for accusers of Fr. G after this publicity. It saddens me to hear of him being treated so callously, especially by his order.
In my thirty years as a tour guide I have had several middle-school boys (from 11 years old to 14) and at least two minor girls approach me in a sexual way. I’ve reported each and every one to the teachers and/or parents on the trip. I’ve stopped being involved in bed checks and if a student sits down besides me, and there isn’t any other adult around, I get up and excuse myself. Many of these children are not virgins and are sexually active with their schoolmates etc. We also have to protect the bus drivers as they are regularly approached by students. It is disgusting and disconcerting.
But it is up to the adult to avoid, repel, and reproach these advances; I’m not sure ‘nervous breakdown’ is the correct term. ‘Vulnerable’, ‘fragile’, and ‘weak in spirit’ would be more like it.
I am going to be received soon and it took some years of praying to reconcile that this horrendous scandal is wide-spread to even universities and wholesome boys’ organizations; it has created more victims than just the unfortunate young people who have been violated. Fr. Groeschel’s name is now added to that list.
Here is the broader context of the assertion that abusers should not go to jail on their first strike: “At this point, any priest, any clergyman, any social worker, any teacher, any responsible person in society would become involved in a single sexual act — not necessarily intercourse — they’re done. And I’m inclined to think, on their first offense, they should not go to jail because their intention was not committing a crime.”
(The statements about teen seduction occurred much earlier in the interview.) To my mind this is actually the far more inflammatory statement because it reads as an quasi-endorsement of Church practice and policy prior to the Dallas Charter.
Hello Dave N.: As Father Gordon pointed out, Father Groeschel always followed the hard line on priests never going back into ministry, one strike and you’re out. This would also apply to this statement. Even if the person didn’t go to jail, they would be totally barred from anything to do with children. The severity of punishment beyond removal from having anything to do with children is a matter that can be put to question, as you have. O.K. That’s you’re opinion. He has his. There are surely as many opinions as there are people. What he’s NOT saying is that nothing should be done at all. In fact, way the other way around in regard to priests. His statement is only inflammatory to you, or reads to you like a negation of the Dallas Charter, becuase that’s what you want to see. But it’s not there.
Father Gordon MacRae sent in this comment via email:
EWTN is growing into another media outlet walking on eggshells trying at any cost to avoid criticism from the politically correct mentality of a secular culture. Has EWTN’s removal of all of Fr. Groeschel’s books and tapes from their religious catalog been done because this material might in content be a danger to faithful Catholics? If that is the case, then why has EWTN associated itself for so many years with Fr. Groeschel? What other material remaining in their catalog may now also be considered of questionable content? No, EWTN’s response was obviously related solely to their own perceived self-preservation. Christian self preservation that operates in fear from a secular culture is in essence one that will ironically not be preserved at all.
I understand what Fr. Groeschel meant. Thank you for standing up for him. His books have helped me (and so many others) so much!
Concerning Fr. Benedict Groshel, I understand about his failing health issues, age etc. However, every topic he discusses is very informative, which is what we really need in todays world. He is very smart, so instead put all his re-runs back on the air. The same goes for Fr. Corapi, even though he has left the priesthood. Both priest have very great and beneficial messages for our redemption in todays godless times. Don’t be politically correct, be CHRIST correct.