“ Another issue is the “special nature” of the relationship between a seminarian or priest and his bishop. Very different from that of an employee and an employer, a seminarian or priest owes his bishop both reverence and obedience, the authors note.
Then there is the issue of homosexuality. This, the authors argue, has a “important relevance for understanding the McCarrick case.”
“Not least, there is clear potential for mutually compromised networks of homosexually active (or once-active) priests, such as McCarrick appears to have cultivated among his ‘nephews,’” they write.
“The existence of ‘homosexual subcultures’ within U.S. Catholic seminaries or diocesan power structures, while understandably a sensitive topic, is well-established in the academic literature, as too are the disproportionately high numbers of same sex-attracted seminarians and clergy in the first place.”
The authors observe that given a number of factors in the relationship between homosexuality and the Church, and the potential for subordinates’ exploitation by bishops, the risk of “other McCarrick-esque cases” is real.”
Excellent visual of the web of absolute deceit & abuse. Where does your bishop fit?
“ The scholars next designed an “ego-network” or “personal community” for Cardinal McCarrick, showing bishops who were within two degrees of separation from him. It included 43 bishops, many of whom are significant influencers in their own right, like Bishop Nicholas DiMarzio of Brooklyn, Archbishop John Myers of Newark, Cardinal Kevin Farrell, and Cardinal Wuerl.”
Where does your bishop fit in the web?