Leaving Predators Free To Prey Over and Over Again
by Thomas A. Droleskey
Fear of "bad press."
Fear of losing money.
Fear of litigation.
Fear of losing friends.
Fear of confronting friends for their own spiritual good unto eternity.
Fear of recognizing the truth.
Fear is what has made it possible for countless numbers of clerical predators in the structures of the counterfeit church of conciliarism to walk free for decades in order to prey upon other victims over and over and over again.
Conciliar officials held strategy meetings to protect themselves from "exposure" in lawsuits and from losing face publicly. They conspired with each other to seek to minimize or excuse or deny evil acts, heedless of the simple truth that many victims of clerical predators have been wounded for life and/or lost the Holy Faith altogether. Some victims of clerical predators have committed suicide.
This has meant very little to the conciliar officials, who were intent for decades on attacking and intimidate the courageous Catholics who sought to bring to light grave evils that those officials had suborned and enabled without a care for the spiritual or temporal welfare of the victims and their families.
If all that matters is to protect the "reputation" and "the work" and the property of those whose abusive behavior has brought scandal around their own necks, scandal that has exploded in public view largely because of rank attempts at stonewalling and outright misrepresentation, then how can anyone criticize Monsignor Francis Caldwell, the longtime Director of Priest Personnel for the Diocese of Rockville Centre, when he admitted before a special grand jury convened in 2002 by Suffolk County, New York, District Attorney Thomas Spota, that he personally protected a pastor, Monsignor Charles H. "Bud" Ribaudo (an open supporter of the New Age movement who billed himself as a trained in "Silva Mind Control, "est." and "dream therapy")
known to have engaged in perverted acts of abuse against bodies and souls because the pastor was the best fund-raiser for the late "Bishop" John Raymond McGann's annual "Bishop's Appeal" program and because he wanted to protect the "reputation" of the diocese?
Here are excerpts from District Attorney Spota's grand jury report, including Monsignor Caldwell's own testimony and the grand jury's finding of fact based thereon, starting with Monsignor Caldwell's explanation as to why no action was taken against Monsignor "Bud" Ribaudo in 2001 after diocesan officials were convinced that he was guilty of immoral behavior:
Q: That is a pretty long, pretty substantial period of time when the priorities were that we have to get the new bishop [William F. Murphy, an Opus Dei-friendly auxiliary 'bishop" in the Archdiocese of Boston who had enabled perverted priests and presbyters under the morally bankrupt reign of Bernard "Cardinal" Law] installed rather than we have to address the issue of a sexually abusing priest who is the pastor of a parish where there is a number of schools.
A: Well, it was a confluence of things happening, but it’s true, there was a time gap there, yes…
Q: … was that your decision to wait…
A: That was my decision…
Q: What, under the written policy that is in existence, or was in existence at the time, that is in evidence as Grand Jury Exhibit 144, gives you the authority to do that…?
A: Well, nothing really. There was just so many things happening all at once that, you know, as you ask these questions, I, ou know, it was a mistake...
Q: …you and the Diocese became aware of the fact, by his admissions, he [Priest O] had abused roughly 13 boys; is that right?
A: Around that, yes…
Q: …and yet you took a delay in even accepting him for the initial evaluation, waiting for the installation of the bishop; is that right?
A: Yes…from hindsight, it was not prudent.
Approximately six weeks after the original disclosure, Priest W [Michael Hands] was informed by a high-ranking Diocesan official that Priest O [Charles Ribaudo] admitted abusing him. Priest O was then to be sent for a psychological evaluation Initially, the Diocese wanted to send Priest O to the same facility that was treating Priest W. Upon Priest W’s objection, the Diocese chose a different one. Priest W was also told that the parish was informed that Priest O was having heart problems and needed
treatment for them The Diocese told Priest W that Priest O would be the most heavily evaluated priest ever, and they hoped to reassign him to his parish at a later time.
The Diocese was very concerned that Priest W would disclose the abuse if they reassigned the priest. A high-ranking Diocesan official spoke to Priest W and stressed that the abuse occurred twenty years ago, Priest W was led to believe there were no other victims. 84 Diocesan officials emphasized that Priest O was the pastor of a financially important parish [Saint Dominic's in Oyster Bay, my own home parish between 1965 and 1973 and again from 1980-1983 and 1985-1986]; disclosure of the abuse would ruin the priest’s credibility and be bad for Diocesan public relations and finances. Priest W was also told that that his parents should tell no one of the abuse. If Priest W kept this quiet, the Diocese would continue to help him and pay for his treatment
A Diocesan Official confirmed for the Grand Jury that he indeed told Priest W not to talk about the sexual abuse he suffered at the hands of Priest O. The following colloquy ensued in the Grand Jury:
Q: Did you tell him [Priest W] outright, don’t tell anybody else about this?
A: …um, I said to him, you know, I wouldn’t tell anybody else about this at this time.
Q: Why did you say that to him?
A: Because I just didn’t think it would be good for him to start blabbering that around at that time.
Q: You were very concerned about the adverse publicity that such an allegation would have concerning [Priest O’s] position and the diocese?
A: Yes, of course.
This of course was not true. As set forth in the narrative concerning Priest O, there was an earlier allegation of sexual abuse against him by another student at the same High School.[Holy Trinity Diocesan High School, Hicksville, New York]. Diocesan Officials summarily dismissed the charge as baseless. When Priest O was ultimately evaluated, the charge was found to be true.
Three or four weeks later, another high-ranking Diocesan Official visited Priest W at his treatment facility. Priest W told him about the abuse and its effect on his life. This official could only say about the allegation, “That’s sad…because I hear he’s a very talented man”
In December 2001, Priest W was back in Rockville Centre for a visit. A Diocesan official told him that they knew his mother had told another priest in the Diocese about the abuse. At the same time he reminded Priest W that the Diocese wanted to put Priest O back in his parish assignment. There was a simple quid pro quo: remain silent about the abuse and the Diocese would continue to pay for his continued therapy This official, who knew Priest W’s mother as she had once worked for him, told him to call her and tell her to be quiet. Indeed, Priest O was returned to his assignment before Christmas with the explanation that his heart problems had been treated
Shortly after hearing of Priest O’s return, Priest W was visited again by a high-ranking Diocesan official. He confirmed the reassignment and the importance of remaining quiet. Priest W explained that he would not volunteer the information to the general public but would tell the Court handling his case about it as well as the probation department during his pre-sentence interview. The Diocesan official asked him to limit his disclosure and “…just say I had experienced sexual abuse by a significant adult in my life and not say he was a priest and not say his name” Priest W agreed to try and do so.
About five months later, Diocesan officials spoke with Priest W about a pending article in Newsday that would reveal the abuse he had suffered. They told Priest W that he must call Newsday and deny the truth of the article. They characterized the abuse as not that serious and advised Priest W “you better consult your conscience and call and try to save him [Priest O]
from this” Again, Priest W said he would not volunteer the information but would not deny it if asked.
To appreciate the gravity of the situation, the testimony of Priest W and a high-ranking Diocesan official must be examined together and in conjunction with the psychological evaluations of Priest O. While Priest W clearly has a motive to slant the testimony in his favor, the salient facts were admitted by the Diocese in the Grand Jury. Priest W was, indeed, sexually abused by Priest O; the priest confirmed this to the Diocese and to his evaluators. In fact, Priest O had subsequently admitted to Diocesan officials his sexual abuse of approximately a dozen underage boys while assigned to the High School.
In the Grand Jury, a Diocesan Official admitted that he had implied to Priest W that the Diocese would require his silence in return for continued insurance coverage of his treatment and other benefits. In this regard, the following colloquy took place in the Grand Jury:
A: …I did tell him that, that it would not be a good thing for him to speak with Newsday. I don’t recall specifically saying to him not to, not to mention something…It’s definite that I told him it was not good to speak to Newsday.
Q: Did you tell him the diocese had been very good to him in terms of paying for his therapy, paying for any transitional expenses that he might incur?
Q: So his treatment at St. Luke’s was very expensive, tens of thousands of dollars; was it not?
Q: He’s going to have to start a whole new life and find a whole new career and that’s also going to be very expensive; is it not?
Q: And the diocese would help him with that, under ordinary circumstances. You certainly have done it before?
Q: You certainly have paid many expenses of priests similarly situated before?
Q: Did you imply to [Priest W] that if he spoke to Newsday and told them about his relationship with [Priest O], that perhaps that money would not be there to help him with those transitional expenses?
A: I think I might have implied that, yes…
Q: …did you tell him that if was asked by a Newsday reporter to confirm or deny his, the fact that [Priest O] had sexually abused him…he should deny it?
A: I don’t recall telling him he should deny it because I knew that it was true.
Q: Did you have any similar conversation with…any other priest whose name appeared in Newsday in 2002 that if they talked to Newsday they could lose their benefits?
A: I don’t recall that.
Q: So it’s just [Priest W] that you said that with?
So afraid was the Diocese of bad publicity that even after Priest O was relieved of his priestly faculties after he retired, he was denoted in the parish bulletin of his former parish as Pastor Emeritus. Although now retired and technically entitled to this title, such a designation indicates that a priest is in good standing and possesses his priestly faculties. A Diocesan official conceded that this was misleading and the designation was later removed.
The concern of the Diocesan hierarchy has always been to avoid scandal and the resultant loss of financial revenue. To avoid these disasters, payment of healthcare coverage for Priest W was offered to induce him to remain silent. This was not surprising since the Diocese had been doing this same thing for years with the victims of priest sexual abuse. The Intervention Team offered counseling payments to victims while assuring them that the offending priest would be properly dealt with. All the while, the real goal was to return the priest to ministry despite the nature of the offense or the wishes of the victim. Money to victims bought their silence so this could be accomplished.
Diocesan practice was at odds with official written policy. Priest O was not sent for an immediate evaluation. Weeks passed because of the upcoming installation reception for the new bishop. Priest O was evaluated and returned to ministry within two months, hardly enough time to effectively evaluate and treat his disease.
Parishioners were misled about his absence. Despite his admission that he had abused Priest W and many other boys, his parish was told only that Priest O needed treatment for his heart condition. Only when his victim refused total silence was Priest O sent for further evaluation and, only after this evaluation concluded that he should not be around young males was he required to retire or face removal from his position. Wittingly or not, the psychological evaluation process utilized by the Diocese was clearly ineffective. Reassignment of priests were made upon faulty and incomplete information designed more as a basis to justify reassignment than for the proper treatment of offenders. The Grand Jury finds that the Diocesan practice of evaluating priest/abusers was fatally flawed. The handling of Priest O’s case epitomizes this. (Suffolk County Supreme Court Special Grand Jury Report.)
No big deal. A delay was necessary as the new "bishop" was being installed. Sure, why act with alacrity when the good of souls is at stake? We've got all the time in the world to "mull" things over in order to decide to how to "handle" a scandal for the sake of public consumption and our own reputation, right?
Wrong. Always. In all circumstances. Wrong. Black is black and white is white.
"Not very serious." Anyone who can seek to minimize even one action that is indicative of perverse inclinations as "not that serious" is an enemy of Christ the King and of the souls for whom He shed every single drop of His Most Precious Blood to redeem as hung on the gibbet of the Holy Cross.
When does a "not very serious" act become "serious"? When the final stage of perverse seduction has been accomplished and rationalized? When? Not even after that? When?
Not one compromise with evil. Not one. Ever. Under any circumstance. For any reason. At any time. To please no man out of fear of no earthly reprisal.
"Not very serious"? Every action that is indicative of perverse inclinations is indeed very serious. It is deadly serious. It is a matter of eternal life and death to both the predator and his victims. Such actions are "not very serious" if one has convinced himself that he is not responsible for the harm that will happen to the next victim, believing that it is more important for the "institution" and various persons within it to be "protected" than it is to make sure that an unrepentant predator who shows forth his evil inclinations over and over again to be exposed to the light of public shame and humiliation that they richly deserve.
Remember, the likes of "Bishops" Thomas Daily and William Murphy and Robert Banks and Richard Lennon, among others, in the nest of moral cowards in the chancery office of the Archdiocese of Boston under the thoroughly corrupt and "nuanced" world of Bernard "Cardinal" Law, who was recently feted in Rome on the occasion of his eightieth birthday, where he remains the Archpriest of the Basilica di Santa Maria Maggiore (Basilica of Saint Mary Major) on the Esquiline Hill in Rome. These veritable vipers did not believe that Father Paul Shanley's help to cofound an organization promoting a dreadful form of perversity between men and boys was all that very serious. Shanley was shipped off to California, where he opened up a "bed and breakfast" to cater to those steeped in perverse sins against the Sixth and Ninth Commandments. Over one hundred priests were protected by the "bishops" and the chancery factotums in Boston. The same has been true elsewhere.
What was and remains very serious to the conciliar officials? Public relations and money. The Diocese of Rockville Centre, in the case of "Monsignor" Charles H. "Bud" Ribaudo, cited in the Suffolk County grand jury report, cared about public relations and money. Senior officials there were willing to let priests and presbyters, including Ribaudo, who is a true priest, remain in their pastoral assignments no matter the threats that they posed to the moral well-being of others (it goes without saying that Ribaudo's adherence to the New Age movement made him just as much a threat to souls as the conciliar revolutionaries headquartered at 50 North Park Avenue in Rockville Centre, New York). There was little or no concern for the spiritual or emotional well-being of victims. There was concern only for maintaining La Cosa Nostra's "code of omerta," the code of silence, that is.
The life of the Holy Faith was lost in the souls of many people as a result of the perverted behavior of priests and presbyter and then again as a result of the clericalism exhibited by chancery officials to use the full weight of legal recourses available to them to beat away the sheep and to intimidate them into silence in order to protect themselves is itself a perversion of the Holy Priesthood that Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ instituted at the Last Supper. Priests have not been ordained to protect the reputations of those of their subordinates they know to be guilty of serious moral crimes or to assure themselves a steady flow of income or of 'good press."
Priests have been ordained to serve as "other Christs" as they administer unto us, the sheep entrusted to their pastoral care, the Sacraments that the very One to Whom their immortal souls were figured at the moment of their priestly ordination instituted for our sanctification and salvation. The members of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ's true flock should not have to live in fear of their shepherds when they bring legitimate concerns to their attention to be resolved in a forthright, fair and just manner without at all seeking to indemnify unrepentant, recidivist wrongdoers who have proved themselves to be threats to souls, starting with their very own.
The pattern of silence in the Diocese of Rockville Centre is what characterized the praxis of chancery office after chancery office. The protection of the institution was more important than the protection of souls and the permanent removal of unworthy shepherds, continuing in the counterfeit church conciliarism the sad practices of bishops in the Catholic Church. This pattern of silence to protect the institution has been accompanied in many instances by outright indifference of the horror of the sin of Sodom, which is one of the four sins that cry out to Heaven for vengeance.
Consider, for example, Roger
"The Six Hundred Million Dollar Man" Mahony's answer when asked in a legal deposition if he would consider a priest, Father Oliver O'Grady, who was "attracted" to children unfit for a pastoral assignment:
Q. My question's a little different than that. If if it had come to your attention that Father O'Grady told your Vicar General that he had sexual urges towards a 9 year old or a 10 year old or 13 or an 11 year old, is that cause to remove him from ministry?
A. No.(Deposition of Roger Mahony (11/23/04), Part 2)
It was this same kind of shocking indifference to the horror of perversely sinful inclinations and acts that was demonstrated by conciliar "bishops" and chancery officials as men who had proven themselves to be threats to the bodies and souls of others were simply transferred from parish to parish and/or from diocese to diocese or from country to country.
This shocking indifference to perverse sinful inclinations and actions has infected all quarters of the counterfeit church of conciliarism to such an extent that even the morally corrupt predator named Carlos Urrutigoity, the founder of the Society of Saint John, which was a cesspool of perversity from its very inception, not only remains in "good standing" with conciliar officials who has been under the protection of "Bishop" Rogelio Livares Plano of the Diocese of Ciudad del Este in Paraguay, who belongs to Opus Dei, which is, of course, not the work of God. Urrutigoity and his group of well-groomed practitioners of sins against the Sixth and Ninth Commandments groomed boys as chaplains and part-time teachers at Saint Gregory the Great Academy in Elmhurst, Pennsylvania, in 1998 and 1999, able to do so as authorities there looked the other way.
The authorities of the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Peter, which runs Saint Gregory the Great Academy simply preferred to to look the other at Urrutigoity's perverted behavior as the headmaster there was not terribly disturbed by it, not considering it "very serious." (See the appendix below for an article written by Mrs. Randy Engel, with whom I spoke at length on these matters earlier today, Saturday, November 12, 2012, for a description of how Urrutigoity groomed boys to be steeped in perverse sins and how the authorities at Saint Gregory Academy did not care. It was Mrs. Engel who informed me of Urrutigoity's new "prestige" in the conciliar church.). Franciscan Brother Alexis Bugnolo, who spent a weekend at the academy in 1999, wrote a detailed letter to Stephen Brady of Roman Catholic Faithful, Inc., of his own observations concerning the moral indifference shown by the authorities at the academy despite all of the evidence of perversity that was presented before them, concluding with the following passage about such matters from Saint Anthony Mary Claret:
…the only morally certain solution to
cure such a problem is the disbanding of the faculty and student body,
and the dismissal of the chaplains and confessors from their duties
there; if the institute is to be reconstituted, this may only be done if
there are entirely new faculty, students, and priestly support to do
so; this is so because there are always relationships which will never
be discovered, and if these are present in the new foundation, the
conspiracy will be renewed. Problems like this can be avoided in good
foundations only if confessors and spiritual directors take recidivism
in matters of the 6th and 9th commandments
seriously, and are given authority to expel candidates that do not have
the grace of chastity and continence, without human respect. (As found in Exploiting Traditionalist: Orders The Society of St. John; see the appendix below for the full article, which has graphic content that must not be read by those who no need of such information.)
And even though the counterfeit church of conciliarism is not the Catholic Church, most people in the world believe that it is the true Church, and if people can see officials of what they believe is the Catholic Church act in such a cavalier, dishonest and irresponsibly despicable manner to protect abusers of children and others, why should we be surprised to see college students at Pennsylvania State University in State College, Maryland, riot to protest the firing of longtime head football coach Joseph Paterno for failing to do anything other than report a sanitized version of a serious abuse committed by one of his assistant coaches as the abuse was reported to him by a man who been an eyewitness to that assistant coach's unspeakable crimes?
Officials at Penn State University did what the conciliar officials have done for so long: let a predator continue his predatory activities. In this case, what mattered, once again, was the fear of "bad press," loss of money, a possible decline in student enrollments and harm to the university's vaunted football program which had been headed by Paterno for forty-six years up until Wednesday, November 9, 2011.
This brief passage from an article in yesterday's edition of The New York Times explained that the scandal involving former Penn State assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky was uncovered by the Patriot-News of Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, eight months ago. No one paid any attention:
The Jerry Sandusky scandal went public in March 2011 when The Patriot-News of Harrisburg, Pa., reported an investigation. But nobody wanted to know. The trustees let it fester and Paterno
achieved a record 409th victory, and suddenly a mob of scholars is
overturning a media van out of some inchoate sense of victimization
rather than reading the prosecutor’s presentation about the case. The trustees let journalism do the dirty work. (Paterno at the End: Far From the Coach We Thought We Knew.)
Nobody wanted to know. Nobody wanted to know about Jerry Sandusky because he was so important to the official state religion of State College, Pennsylvania: Nittany Lions football.
Nobody wanted to know about the clerical abuse scandals when they were reported by The Wanderer and the National Catholic Reporter in the 1990s. This writer took a great deal of abuse from Catholics for having written articles about such corrupt figures as "Bishop" Daniel Leo Ryan in the pages of The Wanderer, something that comes with the territory and must be expected when light must be shone of the actions of cowardly, craven men whose only refuge is strike out at those who are holding the light on them for their own eternal good and to make sure that possible victims in the future are forewarned about them and their predatory ways by name.) All of the mocking and criticism was for naught. The scandals broke into full view within the Providence of God, and dioceses and religious communities are still paying out huge sums of money to pay compensatory and punitive damages as a result. Mrs. Randy Engel's Rite of Sodomy, which must not be read by the young or by those who have no need to know the graphic details of the horrors of perverse ways, documents the typical patterns of denial, self-righteouness, outrage and self-justification used to put the blame on accusers and upon those who are seeking to prevent future souls from being harmed by predatory self-seekers who are on the path to Hell itself if the do not repent before they die.
Yes, it is easier to play the fictional Sergeant Hans Schultz and to see and know and hear "noooooothing" than it is to tell predators at the first instant they are caught in anything approaching perverse actions that they are risking the very fires of eternal damnation by seeking to seduce others in their own perverse ways.
As noted yesterday in Tu Es Sacerdos In Aeternum: Avoid Even The Appearance Of Scandal. an examination of our own consciences will reveal that at least some of us have given scandal to others by our public words and actions. The mind does not want fathom the horrible truth that one or more souls might have lost the Faith or have been turned away from any real consideration of converting to It by things we may have said or done to them or in their presence, which is why we need to pray to Saint Mary Magdalene and Saint Augustine and Saint Camillus de Lellis, Saint Mary of Egypt and Saint Margaret of Cortona and even Saint John of God, who had a rough patch in his life, that our prayers and penances and mortifications and sacrifices offered to God through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary will help to win back the souls who we may have scandalized.
It is a terrible, terrible thing to reckon with the fact that one might be responsible for the loss of a single soul. It is thus the case that that while decry the insensitivity to the loss of souls demonstrated by the conciliar "bishops" and others, including the coaches and administrators at Penn State University, we must never lose sight of how we might have demonstrated this insensitivity in our own lives. The loss of the Faith in a single soul is indeed very much a very serious matter to God, and thus it must be for us. This is true for all us, especially for a priest, something that Saint Anthony Mary Claret observed after difficult sea voyage from Navarre to Rome caused him to eat salt-water soaked bread while he gave away gold coins that had been given to him by a benefactor onboard the ship with him to Benedictines, who then used the coins to buy money at the ship's store:
"Perhaps, had they [his fellow shipmates] seen me sitting at table partaking o rich meals, they might have criticized and depreciated me, as I have seen done to others. Virtue, then, is vitally needful to the priest, whom even evil men expect to be good. (Fanchon Royer, The Life of St. Anthony Mary Claret, republished by TAN Books and Publishers, p. 48.)
In this world of such evil in which we have played our own roles on so many occasions, may we continue to live as penitentially as possible as we seek to make reparation for our sins and those of the whole world, including the sins of the conciliarists against the Faith and of anyone in the underground church in this time of apostasy and betrayal who dares to grow righteously indignant when actions that are indeed quite serious to God coming to public light. We cannot minimize sin and get to Heaven. While we must be charitable to our fellow erring sinners, the most charitable thing that can be done for one who gives signs of predatory behavior is to remonstrate with him that he must cease his actions at once lest we become his accomplices in his future sins.
May the Rosaries we pray each day help to bring about the restoration of the Church Militant on earth and of Christendom in the world.
Isn't it time to pray a Rosary now?
Immaculate Heart of Mary, triumph soon.
Viva Cristo Rey! Vivat Christus Rex!
Our Lady of Fatima, pray for us.
Saint Joseph, pray for us.
Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.
Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.
Saint John the Evangelist, pray for us.
Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.
Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.
Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.
Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us.
Saints Caspar, Melchior and Balthasar, pray for us.
Pope Saint Martin I, pray for us.
See also: A Litany of Saints
Beware of Graphic Content
From Mrs. Randy Engel's Exploiting Traditionalist Orders The Society of St. John
The use of the traditional liturgy is a
great good indeed, but it is no good at all to virtue or to the
salvation of one’s soul if having it means turning away from the
revolting systematic abuse of a spiritual office for sexual ends. The
Society of St. John is up to its eyeteeth in that abuse, and as such is
mounting a direct assault on the priesthood of God itself. No genuine
traditionalist would say: ‘We need the traditional Mass, Don’t anger the
bishop—so what if some boys get abused, as long as it is not my son!’
Wherever gross negligence lies in this regard, it must be brought to
justice. The Church of Christ, namely, the holy Catholic Church, and
the traditional movement will be better for it. Speculum Iustitiae, ora pro nobis.
Rev. Richard A. Munkelt, Ph.D.
March 21, 2002, a million dollar civil sexual abuse lawsuit was filed
in U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania naming as
defendants the Society of St. John based in Shohola, Pa., two of its
founding members, Father Carlos Roberto Urrutigoity and Father Eric
Ensey, the Diocese of Scranton, Bishop James C. Timlin, the Priestly
Fraternity of St. Peter headquartered in Elmhurst, Lackawanna County,
Pa. and St. Gregory’s Academy also located in Elmhurst.
Urrutigoity, the founder of the Society of St. John (SSJ) and Father
Ensey, Chancellor for the SSJ are accused of the sexual molestation of
plaintiff John Doe. Ensey is accused of coercing John Doe into homosexual acts including
sodomy while Doe was a minor and a student at St. Gregory’s. Urrutigoity
is charged with “inappropriate homosexual contact” towards the
plaintiff when Doe was staying on the Shohola property and Doe was no
longer a minor. Both SSJ priests were incardinated into the Diocese of
Scranton by Bishop Timlin. They acted as chaplains, part-time teachers,
and spiritual advisors at St. Gregory’s, an all male Catholic boarding
high school operated by the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter.
lawsuit charges Bishop Timlin, the FSSP and St. Gregory’s Academy with
gross negligence in failing to act on information known to them
concerning the predatory homosexual background of Urrutigoity and Ensey,
and failure to protect the plaintiff, a minor, from the two clerical
sexual predators whose positions at the Academy were arranged by the
FSSP with the approval of the Diocesan Ordinary, Bishop Timlin. Charges
against the defendants include assault and battery, negligence,
intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress, invasion of
privacy, and breach of duty.
plaintiff and his parents, Jane Doe and John Doe, Sr. who reside in
North Carolina, are seeking in excess of $75,000 compensatory damages
and $ 1 million as punitive damages. A jury trial has been demanded.
case study on the Society of St. John demonstrates how rapidly the vice
of homosexuality can spread even in a “traditionalist” environment like
that of St. Gregory’s Academy and the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter.
The SSJ and the City of God
Carlos Urrutigoity, the founder and acknowledged leader of the Society
of St. John, claims that the vision for the Society and the City of God
came to him when he was teaching at St. Thomas Aquinas Seminary in
Winona operated by the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX). In May 1997, the
SSPX-ordained priest was expelled from the Winona seminary ostensibly
because he wanted to found a new religious order.
drifting from one diocese to another, the charismatic Fr. Urrutigoity,
Father Ensey and a handful of seminarians from St. Thomas were taken
in by Bishop James Timlin of the Scranton Diocese, and the Society of
St. John (Societas Sancti Ioannis) was born.
May 24, 1998, Bishop Timlin, with the blessing of Rome, gave his
canonical approval to the new society. Six months later he ordained two
new priests to the SSJ, Fr. Basel Sarweh and Fr. Dominic Carey.
September 1999, the SSJ purchased 1025 acres of land in Shohola, Pike
County, in the Pocono Mountains for $2.9 million to construct a
self-contained Catholic city based on the medieval model whereby its
inhabitants would share a common life and common faith. When completed,
the SSJ community was to have included cradle to grave Catholic
educational and formative facilities par excellence.
this end, the SSJ asked Dr. Ronald MacArthur, the founder of St. Thomas
Aquinas College in California to help the SSJ found a similar Catholic
liberal arts college on the Shohola property. Dr. MacArthur asked Dr.
Jeffrey Bond to assist him with the College of St. Justin Martyr
project. MacArthur later withdrew his support for the project after
deciding that the concept of God’s City as envisioned by the SSJ was not
feasible. Acting on the belief that Bishop Timlin was wholeheartedly
committed to the project, Dr. Bond took MacArthur’s place. He initiated a
program to raise money for the St. Justin Martyr’s College/House of
The Canonical Structure of the SSJ
The Society of St. John is not a religious order in the traditional
sense of the word. It is canonically known as a “Public Association of
the Faithful, ” a loose-knit association of diocesan priests with
permission to live together according to a rule of life and to carry out
a certain apostolic mission. In the case of the SSJ, it is the Bishop
of Scranton to whom its priests and religious have promised their
respect and obedience. The Ordinary of the Diocese of Scranton also possesses the power to suppress the SSJ at any time.
official web site of the Society of St. John describes the institute as
“an association of priests, clerics, religious and laity, working under
the leadership of the Pope and bishops of the Church to revive holiness
of life and Catholic civilization in the third millennium.”
following information on the Society of St. John, its special charism,
apostolic mission, structure, and programs was taken from its “Founding
SSJ community consists of three groups. There is a clerical community,
living permanently together a life of worship, study, and apostolate by
which the society hopes to rediscover the full meaning of each minor and
major order. Within the community there is also a religious brotherhood
of men “seeking to become a lay religious institute of diocesan right,”
and who consecrate themselves to God by means of the vows of poverty,
chastity, and obedience. Finally, there is a lay following of Catholic
men and women dedicated to the worship of God and willing to place
themselves (and their assets) at the disposal and direction of the SSJ
and its elite clerical leadership.
charism of the SSJ is said to be fourfold: the solemn use of the
traditional Roman Rite Liturgy, the renewal of priestly life, education,
and the formation of small cities with a true Catholic Culture.
founders of SSJ, we are told, leaned heavily “on institutes of common
life without vows,” as a model and adopted “the basic structures and
regulations provided by law, although with the adaptations required by
the specific goals and unique charisma of the Society of St. John.” They
adopted the love for the Liturgy and clerical excellence in education
from the Order of St. Jerome; the confederated priory system from the
Benedictine Order; the idea of “a series of autonomous associations
working in common under one supreme moderator” as conceived by St.
Martin, Bishop of Tours; and some of the canons of the Rule of St.
Augustine related to “clerics living in common and helping each other in
the fulfillment of their duty of state.”
Founding Document states that the priests of the SSJ are consecrated to
the Sacred Heart of Jesus, the Immaculate Heart of Mary and to St. John
the Evangelist “in consideration of his fidelity and presence at the
Sacrifice of the Cross, where he associated himself with those Blessed
Hearts, and the fullness of his prophetic spirit regarding the end
is a key word in the espoused mission of the Society including
restoration of the Sacred Liturgy, of the spiritual life, of Catholic
wisdom and education, Catholic leadership, communal life, the ascetical
life, the apostolate, the natural Order and so forth. All this traditionalism notwithstanding, however, the SSJ pledges to be open to “the need for a genuine and fruitful aggiornamento.”
a section devoted to “The State of the Catholic Church in Modern
Society,” and “The Crisis of Modern Man,” the SSJ claims it is forming a
“new generation of priests” who will help resolve the current “crisis”
in the Church and in society.”
city on the hill we hope to build is neither to hide from the world nor
to pharisaically condemn it, but rather to witness to it the truths of
the Faith….the possibility of living an integral, corporate Christian
life in today’s world; a light to shine, not to be covered under a
bushel,” the founders explain.
SSJ invites people interested in living in God’s City to contact the
Society and make a donation to building “the new foundation for Catholic
culture” in Shohola and then elsewhere.
only thing wrong with this idyllic picture is that the whole thing is
one gigantic fraud from beginning to end. The SSJ is, as one former SSJ
priest correctly described it, a “homosexual cult and their
accomplices,” and there ain’t no City of God going up in the Pocono
The Corruption of St. Gregory’s Academy
Gregory’s Academy, the flagship of the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter
is an all boys’ high school, operated by the Priestly Fraternity in the
Diocese of Scranton. The promotional literature for the school states
that it is dedicated to Christian education along the lines set down by
Pope Pius XI in his December 31, 1929 encyclical Divini Illius Magistri.
At St. Gregory’s our entire aim is the
formation of Catholic gentlemen. We offer a liberal arts education
following the perennial wisdom of Western civilization. The Academy
forms young men who are strong in faith, hope, and charity, and who
manifest in their lives the moral and intellectual virtues, including
prudence, wisdom, and understanding….Students are given full instruction
in the doctrines and moral teachings of the Church, stressing orthodoxy
and obedience to the Magisterium... The center of life at St. Gregory’s
is Catholic prayer, the heart of which is the Holy Sacrifice of the
Mass, offered daily in the traditional Latin rite by priests of the
Fraternity of St. Peter, with the permission of the bishop of Scranton.
upscale campus is located on 190 acres of beautiful mountain terrain in
Eastern Pennsylvania near the FSSP’s North American District
headquarters in Elmhurst. Although St. Gregory’s, as a matter of policy,
does not accept boys with a history of serious academic or disciplinary
problems, the educational and moral tenor of the school took a nosedive
when the SSJ priests arrived at the Academy.
the fall of 1997, Fr. Arnaud Devillers, the District Superior of the
FSSP with the blessing of Bishop Timlin, permitted the SSJ priests to
take up a temporary residence in an empty wing of the Academy until they
found a new home. The following academic year, the Servants Minor of
St. Francis also joined the SSJ in the guest wing of the Academy.
When the school opened for its 1998-1999 term, Fr. Devillers asked the
SSJ priests to act as chaplains for the Academy as the Priestly
Fraternity of St. Peter was experiencing a shortage of priests. No security check the FSSP or the Scranton Diocese was run on the SSJ priests.
duties of the SSJ included celebrating Mass, hearing confessions,
teaching religion classes and giving spiritual direction to the boys of
St. Gregory’s. For all practical purposes, within a year after their
arrival at the Academy, the SSJ priests were running the facility.
Members of the SSJ also took students from the school on off-campus
outings and trips. After the Society purchased the Shohola property, it
invited St. Gregory’s students and graduates to visit, camp and party at
the new SSJ facilities.
permitting the SSJ to take over the spiritual formation of its
students, the FSSP in effect gave the clerical perverts of SSJ not only
access to the physical bodies of the young men, but access to their
souls as well, which gives an added dimension of the demonic to their
criminal enterprise at St. Gregory’s.
systematic grooming of the boys of St. Gregory’s began with the
introduction of alcohol and tobacco designed to lower the sexual
inhibitions and moral resistance of potential victims.
sworn testimony given by Mr. Jude Huntz, the head dorm father at the
Academy, there was one incident in March 1998 in which he said he
observed three students returning from the SSJ’s residence at St.
Gregory’s in a state of heavy intoxication. Huntz said that the police
were called in and SSJ officials were given a warning against serving
liquor to minors. In court affidavits in connection with the John Doe Case, Mr. Paul
Hornak, a teacher at St. Gregory’s and Mr. Jerry Zienta, a dorm father,
confirmed Huntz’s charge.
Father Paul Carr, the FSSP chaplain at the Academy, disputes Huntz’s
story. Fr. Carr contends that the only time the police were called was
to see if it was alright for parents to give alcohol to their own minor
an addendum to his affidavit, Huntz said that shortly after the arrival
of the SSJ priests at St. Gregory’s, they began inviting boys over to
their quarters for movies and spiritual direction. This practice led to
curfew problems for the dorm fathers as the boys would sometimes return
to their dorms at a very late hour.
Headmaster Alan Hicks, headmaster of the Academy bent the rules to
permit the boys receiving “spiritual direction” from the SSJ priests to
return at a “reasonable hour” (term undefined), the dorm fathers
developed a new system whereby one dorm father checked the boys at night
and the other in the morning.
fact that the SSJ priests kept the students up late led to other
problems for the dorm fathers. The boys were hard to get up the next
morning, were often late for chapel and were lethargic in classes during
after Hicks informed Fr. Urrutigoity that these nocturnal visits were
causing problems, the practice of late night spiritual counseling and
giving boys alcohol and tobacco continued. There were also reports that students were purchasing marijuana off campus and smoking with their schoolmates at the Academy.
The Grooming of the Boys of St. Gregory’s
the SSJ priests were ensconced at St. Gregory’s, reports of homosexual
acting out and other bizarre sexual behavior by the students began to
find their way to Academy staff and officials.
senior prefect at St. Gregory’s was reported to have made a practice of
“freaking out” lower classmen by jumping into their beds at night
naked. There were incidents of young boys imitating [a horrible sin] in the
boys’ dorm facilities. Rumors that Fr. Urrutigoity, was sleeping with some students started to circulate on campus.
February 1999, Paul Hornak, a teacher at St. Gregory’s, took a group of
students on a winter camping expedition along the Appalachian Trail at
the Pennsylvania-New Jersey border. Fr. Urrutigoity volunteered to go
along as a “‘spiritual director.” During the trip, Hornak learned that
the priest had supplied the boys in his tent with cigars and wine and
that two of the boys bragged that they had shared Urrutigoity’s sleeping
bag. When confronted with the charge that he gave minors alcohol and
tobacco and that he slept with boys in his sleeping bag, the priest
defended his actions as a way of fostering “good camaraderie.”
his affidavit for the John Doe Case, Hornak stated that Fr. Urrutigoity
appeared to consider “sleeping with boys to be perfectly natural, and
he evidently had succeeded in convincing the two boys there was nothing
wrong with it.”
noted that during the 1998-1999 school year, “I often heard snatches of
conversation between the boys that left me in no doubt that drinking,
smoking and bed-sharing were standard occurrences.” He said he
“complained openly to anyone who would listen,” but nobody at St.
Gregory’s seemed to care.
the spring of 1999, Hornak gave notice that he would not be returning
to St. Gregory’s in the fall. In his exit interview with Fr. Devillers,
Hornak told Devillers that he “strongly believed that the Society of St.
John had engaged Saint Gregory’s boys in near homosexual activity
throughout the term of their stay at the school.” The nonplused
Devillers told Hornak that the SSJ would change its ways when it left
the school and had to fend for itself. He also said that he believed
that “some of the techniques the Society employed to win the favor of
boys were perhaps intended to make them receptive to God’s word.” Hornak
said he thought Devillers’ statement “preposterous.”
Devillers did not inform Hornak that he was not the first to complain about the unsavory behavior of SSJ priests.
Franciscan Fathers who shared the same wing of the building with the
SSJ priests had also expressed their concerns about the dangerous
influence of Fr. Urrutigoity and his priests over St. Gregory’s boys to
Devillers. They told him that Fr. Daniel Fullerton, a SSJ priest, told
the students that swimming trunks were “optional” when they swam on the
Society’s Shohola property. The friars also said they witnessed
upperclassmen exhibiting violent behavior in the form of hazing toward
younger students, which they believed Fr. Urrutigoity encouraged as a
means of giving the upperclassmen a “stake” in running the school.
of the Franciscan brothers who was asked by Headmaster Hicks to
chaperon a trip to New York City sponsored by Fr. Urrutigoity reported
that on the way the priest stopped to buy cigarettes for the boys and
wined and dined the students during their stay in Manhattan.
friars appeared to be fully aware of the homosexual activity of the SSJ
at the Academy. They reported to Devillers that they often saw boys in
the SSJ’s quarters past curfew and some in their bedclothes in the SSJ’s
bathroom in the early morning. On one occasion they discovered a
student alone in a room smoking and drinking with Fr. Urrutigoity after
midnight. They also reported that for a time Fr. Urrutigoity set up his
bedroom in the bathroom.
testimony to support Hornack’s charge that the SSJ was turning St.
Gregory’s into a pederastic haven was provided by Brother Alexis Bugnolo
who stayed with the Franciscan Fathers in the SSJ wing of the Academy
for a weekend in February 1999.
Bugnolo had acquired knowledge of homosexual behavior as a result of
his work with a prolife group in Boston who conducted a street ministry
in the homosexual sections of the city. He stated that during his stay
at St. Gregory’s he saw students exhibiting non-verbal homosexual
gestures and behaviors that were inconsistent with normal boyhood
affection. One night, after curfew, when he went over to the dorm/chapel
side of the building to make his confession, Bugnolo said he saw two
students kissing and embracing in front of the chapel doors. He also
witnessed one boy carrying another down an adjacent dorm hall shouting,
“Girls, girls, girls, get them while they’re hot!”
going to confession to Fr. Urrutigoity, Bugnolo waited in the chapel
for the priest to come out of the confessional in order to express his
concern about the abnormal sexual behavior he had witnessed. He advised
Father Urrutigoity to alert the superiors of the school and the diocesan
bishop to the problems he had witnessed so that the situation could be
Bugnolo returned to his home in Massachusetts, he wrote Fr. Urrutigoity
about his concerns of possible homosexual activities and violations of
chastity at St. Gregory’s. In a touch of irony, Bugnolo suggested that
Fr. Urrutigoity remove his community from the school to avoid moral
later, Bugnolo recalled that he saw a picture of one of the students
who exhibited inappropriate same-sex touching at St. Gregory’s the
weekend of his visit. The young man was now clothed in a cassock and the
caption indicated he had joined the SSJ. Br. Bugnolo brought his
concerns to Peter Vere, a canon lawyer for the diocese of Scranton and
was advised that there was not sufficient evidence to bring the matter
to the attention of Bishop Timlin. Brother Bugnolo let the matter drop,
January 27, 2002, after Roman Catholic Faithful broke the story on the
SSJ scandal, Bugnolo wrote a detailed letter to RCF president, Steve
Brady, on his experience at St. Gregory’s.
the end of his letter, Bugnolo repeated the advice of Saint Anthony
Marie Claret on action to be taken when a Church institution becomes
engulfed in moral turpitude of the kind afflicting St. Gregory’s
…the only morally certain solution to
cure such a problem is the disbanding of the faculty and student body,
and the dismissal of the chaplains and confessors from their duties
there; if the institute is to be reconstituted, this may only be done if
there are entirely new faculty, students, and priestly support to do
so; this is so because there are always relationships which will never
be discovered, and if these are present in the new foundation, the
conspiracy will be renewed. Problems like this can be avoided in good
foundations only if confessors and spiritual directors take recidivism
in matters of the 6th and 9th commandments
seriously, and are given authority to expel candidates that do not have
the grace of chastity and continence, without human respect.
were other tell-tale incidents that should have indicated to anyone
with eyes to see that St. Gregory’s Academy had been invaded by an alien
moral force in the form of the Society of St. John.
mother of one student learned that a parish priest from her diocese who
had been convicted of the homosexual molestation of young boys visited
St. Gregory’s and engaged her son in a conversation in the hallway. This
incident suggests that the SSJ may have brought other sexual predators
onto the campus.
was also discovered that Headmaster Hicks had allowed boys on the
school’s hockey team to take a trip to Canada with a man known to Hicks
to be both a practicing homosexual and a collector of homosexual
the end of the 1998-99 term when the SSJ priests left St. Gregory’s to
take up residence on their own property, they continued to maintain a
close relationship with the students of St. Gregory’s.
a December 10, 2002 affidavit of Mr. Joseph Sciambra in the John Doe
case, the former postulant of the Society says that in the late spring
or early summer of 2000, a group of young men from St. Gregory’s
Academy, camped-out on the SSJ’s property. Fr. Urrutigoity spent the
night at the campsite and told Sciambra that he had shared a sleeping
bag with one of the young men.
himself witnessed the priest serving alcohol to under-age boys, one of
whom stumbled out of Urrutigoity’s bedroom in a severe state of
intoxication. He said he also saw boys leaving the priest’s bedroom in
their underwear some of whom said that they had slept in the same bed
with the priest.
former SSJ novice who signed an affidavit, but did not want to be
identified publicly by name, said that when he was living at St.
Joseph’s House, used by the SSJ to house postulants and novices, the
overcrowding in the bathroom facilities made it difficult for him to
shower after running. When Fr. Urrutigoity heard of the young man’s
problem, he invited him to use his shower and bathroom facilities at
Drummond House. On each and every occasion the novice took advantage of
Urrutigoity’s offer, he said that the priest would appear naked from the
bathroom, dressed only in his scapular, and shave while the young man
took his shower and dressed.
Urrutigoity never approached the young man in an overtly sexual manner,
it is clear that his exhibitionist posture before a novice under his
spiritual care was a form of homosexual grooming. Happily, the novice
did not wait to find out. He left the SSJ in mid-January 2001 without
completing his novitiate.
a September 2002 affidavit written from Valbonne, France, Mr. Joseph
Girod, a former teacher of Gregorian chant for the SSJ stated that when
he was going through a period of depression, Fr. Urrutigoity referred
him to Mr. Walter Bahn, a fellow musician and psychotherapist for
therapy and spiritual direction. In his first session with Bahn on
“finding one’s self,” Girod was told that homosexuality was genetic and
therefore a permanent state that admitted of no modification. Bahn also
told Girod that he (Bahn) was “gay.” In a later conversation with Girod,
Fr. Urrutigoity took the same position on homosexuality that Bahn had
used with Girod – that “gayness” was a genetic condition.
SSJ priest, Fr. Fullerton, is on record as having told a SSJ seminarian that it was “noble” for a homosexual to become a priest.
doubt these “gay” myths were foisted upon unsuspecting students at the
Academy by SSJ priests in the form of classroom instruction on sexual
morality and in spiritual direction given individually and in the
confessional by Fr. Urrutigoity and his clerical and lay disciples.
Fraser, a St. Gregory’s graduate and later dorm father, who admitted
sleeping with Urrutigoity defended his bed-sharing by citing Plato’s Symposium and Fyodor Dostoevsky’s Brothers Karamazov.
November 10, 2002, Mr. Conal Tanner, a graduate of St. Gregory’s and a
former dorm father informed Bishop Timlin that he knew for a fact that
Fr. Urrutigoity slept with boys in the same bed and that other members
of the Society of St. John were aware of their superior’s actions.
statement to Timlin was also confirmed in an affidavit by Diane Toler
of Cherry Hill, N.J. who stated that Father Dominic Carey, SSJ’s head
fundraiser, told her that it was no secret that Fr. Urrutigoity slept
with young boys and young men on a regular basis. Father Carey defended
the practice stating that for two men to sleep together was not an
occasion of sin, since there is no natural attraction between men.
“Guru-tigoity” Exposed as a Homosexual Predator
February 11, 1999, Bishop Bernard Fellay, Superior General of the
Society of Saint Pius X sent a formal communication to Bishop Timlin
informing him that Father Carlos Urrutigoity had been accused of molesting a seminarian under his spiritual care at the SSPX’s St. Thomas Aquinas Seminary in Winona, Minn.
Fellay also indicated that in 1987, prior to Urrutigoity’s acceptance
by the Winona seminary, Fr. Andres Morello, the rector of Our Lady
Co-Redemptrix Seminary in La Reja, Argentina had accused the priest of
to Fr. Morello, he had intended to expel Urrutigoity from the La Reja
seminary because of his significant pride, his habit of forming
“particular friendships,” his formation of a faction of seminarians
acting under his influence and grave denunciations regarding moral
the accusations brought against Urrutigoity by seminarians and laymen
living at the La Reja seminary were his uninvited nocturnal visits into
the rooms of young men while they were asleep, [engaging in terrible acts of impurity] under the guise of a medical
exam, and the touching of the private parts of a seminarian in a
restroom accompanied by the remark, that the priest adored his “little
round butt.” Urrutigoity was also accused of excessive probing during
confession and spiritual counseling sessions of the sexual temptations
of penitents; and immodest dress (swimming in his underwear) at a summer
camp that he organized for young men from the seminary.
the planned dismissal of Urrutigoity by Fr. Morello never took place as
the seminarian had the support of Bishop Alfonso de Galarreta, the SSPX
District Superior and other influential priests.
of being expelled, Urrutigoity was sent to the Priory of Cordoba
(Argentina) where he received the necessary recommendations that enabled
him to transfer to the SSPX seminary in Winona. By this time Fr.
Morello had been posted to Santiago, Chile, so he was temporarily out
of the picture.
in July 1989, when Fr. Morello heard of Urrutigoity’s imminent
ordination in Winona, he sent a confidential dossier on the candidate to
Rector Richard Williamson at St. Thomas Aquinas Seminary. Fearing this
effort would not be sufficient to stop the ordination, Father Morello
traveled to the seminary in the company of an associate. Upon their
arrival, they were confronted by Williamson with a denial or
“manifestation of conscience,” by Urrutigoity who proclaimed his
innocence of the charges against him. Williamson defended Urrutigoity’s
“humility” and accused Morello and his companion of lying.
few days later, on July 16, 1989, Morello who had been involved in an
internal dispute with the SSPX on matters unrelated to the Urrutigoity
affair, was expelled from the Society.
later claimed that Morello was not believed because he was reported to
be connected to a sedevacantist group in opposition to Bishop de
Galarreta. Nevertheless, Williamson was ordered by his superior,
Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, who had reviewed the Morello dossier to
watch Urrutigoity “like a hawk,” a virtually impossible task given the
secretive life of a homosexual predator like Urrutigoity.
Fr. Urrutigoity had successfully manipulated one traditionalist group against another for his own ends.
Not only was he ordained, but he was also assigned to teach at St. Thomas Aquinas Seminary where he was known as “Guru-tigoity.”
wonder that in his warning letter to Bishop Timlin in February 1999,
Bishop Fellay described Urrutigoity as “dangerous” and noted:
reason why he got into trouble with the Superiors of the Society of St.
Pius X is mainly because we felt he had a strange, abnormal influence
on the seminarians and priests, whom he seemed to attach to his
brilliant, charismatic personality. When he asked me to recognize the
society he intended to found, among the reasons of my refusal, I
explicitly mentioned this strange personal, guru-like attachment between
the disciples and their leader.
Urrutigoity Faces Second Accusation
was not until two years after Fr. Urrutigoity had been dismissed from
St. Thomas Aquinas Seminary in Winona for “subversive activities,”
namely, the secret planning of the Society of St. John, and had settled
into the Diocese of Scranton with temporary quarters at St. Gregory’s
Academy, that a Winona seminarian came forward to accuse the priest of
object of Urrutigoity’s attempts at seduction and forced sexual
attention was a young man named Matthew Selinger who once idolized the
priest. The two men had formed a particular friendship at the seminary
and Urrutigoity served as the seminarian’s spiritual director for two
years before making his move.
Selinger had some strange tales to tell about Fr. Urrutigoity.
said that on one occasion he was constipated and went to Fr.
Urrutigoity to get some Metamucil. The priest offered him a rectal
suppository instead. Never having used one before, the seminarian
thought it was an oral medication and put it in his mouth. The priest
instructed him in its correct use and insisted that the young man insert
it in his presence as an act of “humility.” Selinger reluctantly
resisted the order and went into the bathroom to insert the suppository
all the while rebuking himself for not being spiritually mature enough
to follow Urrutigoity’s orders and crucify his “manly pride.”
On another occasion, Urrutigoity invited Selinger and his friend to swim with him in the nude.
One night, the young seminarian awoke from his sleep to find the priest
[engaged in perverse actions]. Selinger said his first instinct was to punch the priest’s
lights out, but because Fr. Urrutigoity was an Alter Christus, another Christ, he turned over and pretended to go back to sleep while Urrutigoity quietly slipped away into the darkness.
novel use of rectal suppositories as part of Urrutigoity’s grooming
repertoire is reminiscent of the grooming techniques employed by the
early 20th century theosophist/pederast Charles Webster Leadbeater.
promoted [all manner of sins against the Sixth and Ninth Commandments] as a means of
promoting physical, psychic and spiritual (occult) vigor among his
youthful disciples. "This spiritualizing of paederasty
absolves him from the guilt which makes him hate society. …His is no
longer a common human weakness, for he has felt the cleansing fire of
divinity,” related Gregory Tillet, Leadbeater’s biographer.
the time that Selinger informed his superiors at Winona that
Urrutigoity had sexually molested him, the SSJ founder was safely
ensconced as a chaplain at St. Gregory’s Academy selecting his next
victim from a large pool of young men, who like Selinger before he was
molested, worshipped the ground that Urrutigoity walked on.
June 1999, a meeting took place in Winona between Matthew Selinger and
SSPX Rector Williamson, and the pastoral team that the Diocesan Review
Board had assigned to investigate the accusations against Urrutigoity.
The pastoral team consisted of Auxiliary Bishop John Dougherty, a
diocesan priest, and a lawyer from the Diocese of Scranton.
even after reading the Board’s report on Selinger’s testimony and with
the knowledge that this was the second credible accusation of homosexual
seduction and molestation against Urrutigoity, Bishop Timlin decided
that the evidence against the SSJ founder was “inconclusive.” He took no
further action on the matter. A classic cover-up was underway led by the Ordinary of the Diocese of
Scranton with the cooperation of Timlin’s silent partner Fr. Devillers,
Superior of the FSSP.
it not for the courage and determination of Dr. Jeffrey M. Bond,
President of the College of St. Justin Martyr and the moral and legal
support given to Dr. Bond by Washington State attorney James M. Bendell,
the cover-up may well have succeeded.
James and Bond to the Rescue
On August 19, 2001, Dr. Bond received a visit from Alan Hicks, Headmaster of St. Gregory’s Academy.
Hicks informed Bond that Fr. Urrutigoity had the habit of sleeping with
boys, and in fact, had slept with boys from St. Gregory’s when the SSJ
was in residence at the school from 1997 to 1999.
To support his charge Hicks cited the case of Mr. Fred Fraser.
indicated earlier, Mr. Fraser was a graduate of St. Gregory’s. During
the 1998-99 academic year when the SSJ priests served as chaplains at
the school, Fraser was made a dorm father even though he was only a year
or two older than the boys he was supposed to supervise. It appeared
that the SSJ was given carte blanche at the Academy.
admitted to Hicks and later to Bond that he had slept in Fr.
Urrutigoity’s bed in his private chambers. As a true disciple of his
master, Fraser defended the action as part of the priest’s method of
Fraser’s statement contradicts the sworn testimony given by Urrutigoity during his 2003 deposition for the
Doe case in which the priest, when asked under oath if he ever slept in
the same bed or sleeping bag with students of St. Gregory’s or with any
males at the school or on trips, answered, “No.” Later in his
testimony, Urrutigoity admitted that he did sleep with Mr. Fraser when
he was a student at the Academy, but only him.
In a deposition taken by attorney Bendell on November 10, 2003 from
Stephen Fitzpatrick, a student at St. Gregory’s from 1996 to 2000 and a
witness hostile to the plaintiff, Fitzpatrick testified that he had
slept with Urrutigoity. Another former student and supporter of the SSJ
from St. Gregory’s, Patrick McLaughlin, who attended the Academy from
1995 to1999, said he saw a boy sleeping in the priest’s bed after curfew
between the hours of midnight and three in the morning.
Initially, Bond was agreeable to letting Bishop Timlin handle the
matter including the disciplining of the SSJ priests. It was only after
it became clear from talks with Bishop Timlin and Auxiliary Dougherty
that the bishop intended to take no action, that Bond told Hicks and
Assistant Headmaster Howard Clark that they should contact the parents
of any boy who had been exposed to the priest at St. Gregory.
the meantime, Bond began his own investigation of the charges. Almost
all of the information provided in this section on the SSJ is based on
information initially uncovered by Dr. Bond and by James Bendell who is
the lead counsel for John Doe and his parents.
On December 8, 2001, Bishop Timlin was informed that a young man had
reported that he was sexually abused while a student at St. Gregory’s
Academy by Father Eric Ensey. Three days later Hicks and Clark received
the bad news.
These unwelcome public revelations finally prompted the headmasters to
notify all parents of boys at St. Gregory that students were to have no
contact with members of the Society of St. John and that they were also
forbidden to go on the SSJ property. According to Bond, neither man
expressed concern for the young man who had been assaulted, although
they were concerned about retaining their jobs.
October 2001, the Board of Directors of the College of St. Justin
Martyr, a civil corporate entity in its own right, took legal steps to
separate itself completely from the Society of St. John. Despite
opposition from Bishop Timlin, the Board removed Deacon Joseph Levine,
the SSJ representative on the Board, and posted the news of its
separation from the SSJ on its website.
As of late 1999, key lay members of the Board of Advisors of SSJ had resigned over charges of gross fiscal mismanagement.
Timlin was advised that the SSJ property would have to be sold and all
its special projects killed in order to pay off the huge debt that the
SSJ had acquired. True to form, the bishop continued to let the SSJ raise money under fraudulent premises.
In the meantime, Bond went on the warpath against the perverts in the SSJ.
On November 19, 2001, Bond notified the Apostolic Nuncio in the United
States and Cardinal Darío Castrillón Hoyos, Prefect of Clergy in Rome,
of the immoral activities of priests of the Society of St. John.
Bond went public with his accusations of financial malfeasance and
sexual misconduct by the Society, Fr. Urrutigoity threatened Bond with
Bond had latched onto a truth that apparently had escaped Bishop Timlin
and the FSSP - that John Doe was not the only victim of the SSJ
priests. The entire moral, spiritual, intellectual and disciplinary
foundation of St. Gregory’s Academy had been corrupted by the Society of
St. John in the same way that the entire moral, spiritual, intellectual
and disciplinary foundation of a seminary or religious house of studies
is corrupted when the vice of homosexuality gains a stronghold within
Background on Father Eric Ensey
Ensey held the post of Chancellor in the Society of St. John and was
one of Fr. Urrutigoity’s first disciples at the SSPX seminary in Winona.
Born on August 13, 1966 in Upland, California, a suburb northeast of
Los Angeles, Ensey converted to Catholicism in high school. In September
of 1987, he entered the St. Thomas Aquinas Seminary in Winona and was
ordained a priest of the SSPX in 1995. When Fr. Urrutigoity was expelled
from St. Thomas, Ensey followed him to the Scranton Diocese.
During the 1998-1999 school year at St. Gregory’s Academy, Father Ensey
developed a particular friendship with John Doe, a student for whom he
was acting as “spiritual director.” The priest began grooming the minor
for a homosexual relationship by providing him with alcohol and tobacco.
The young man was usually drunk when Ensey and he engaged in homosexual
acts at the school.
During the Thanksgiving break, Ensey accompanied the young man on a
trip to California where the student planned to attend college the
following year. Ensey also took the young man to visit his parents’ home
in Santa Paula. During the visit, John Doe reported that he was
sodomized by Ensey.
After Ensey and Doe returned to St. Gregory’s, Ensey suggested that the
boy should start taking “spiritual direction” from Fr. Urrutigoity, but
assured the lad that they would remain “very close friends”
the fall of 2000, John Doe joined the Society of St. John as a
postulant. In order to avoid Ensey’s continued sexual advances, the
young man sought out alternative sleeping quarters. Fr. Urrutigoity told
him that all the guest rooms were filled, but he could sleep in his
room. Doe accepted. A few nights later Urrutigoity also began to
sexually molest the young man. It was at this point that John Doe moved
out of Urrutigoity’s chambers and took up residence at St. Joseph’s
House, a privately owned home bordering the SSJ property that the
priests had managed to sequester, rent free. Once the owner confirmed
the charges against the SSJ, she kicked them out.
More Bad Apples in SSJ
By early 2002, Bishop Timlin was aware that Fathers Urrutigoity and
Ensey were accused of the sexual molestation. The District Attorney’s
office of Lackawanna County had launched a criminal investigation into
the accusations of sexual misconduct by the two SSJ priests, but was
forced to abandon the case because of the statue of limitations. Time
had run out for the complainant in May 2001. He would have to resort to a
Bishop Timlin immediately suspended Fathers Urrutigoity and Ensey and
brought them to Scranton. Timlin was reported to be considering
Urrutigoity’s request to be transferred to another religious order, when
he learned that the SSJ had other “problem” priests.
Marshall Roberts was another SSJ priest who resided with Urrutigoity
and Ensey at St. Gregory’s Academy from 1997 to 1999.
to the Vice-Rector of Christ the King Institute in Gricigliano, Italy,
in 1993 Roberts was kicked out of the seminary when he formed an
inordinate sexual attachment to a fellow seminarian with whom he had
become infatuated. Within 24 hours of the Vice-Rector being informed of
Roberts’ designs on his classmate, who did not appreciate the attention,
Roberts was looking for new living quarters. Roberts was eventually
ordained by the SSPX and later became a founding members of the SSJ.
at St. Gregory’s, Roberts befriended a young man from the graduating
class of 1999 who later became a postulant in the Society. In a very
irregular arrangement, Roberts and the postulant shared the same room
and bed in a housing unit on the SSJ property.
Christopher Clay was another follower of Urrutigoity although he was
never formally a member of the Society. He was a third possible sexual
abuser of John Doe although his name does not appear in the civil
lawsuit because, according to Doe’s co-counsel James Bendell, the case
of overt sexual abuse was much stronger with Urrutigoity and Ensey.
Bishop Timlin was advised that Clay was accused of also abusing John
Doe, the bishop removed him from his teaching position at Bishop Hafey
High School in Hazle Township, but with no apparent restriction as to
travel. Later, Bishop Timlin offered to reassign Father Clay to St.
Thomas More Church in Lake Ariel, Wayne County, but the priest had taken
a leave of absence and returned to his hometown of Dallas, Texas where
he attempted to recover from the stress of his encounter with the
District Attorney’s office in Pennsylvania.
Father Clay returned to the Dallas area, he hooked up with an old
friend, Father Allan Hawkins of St. Mary the Virgin Church in Arlington.
In 2003, Fr. Hawkins called Bishop Timlin to see if he had any
objection to Clay helping him out with Mass and parish work. Timlin said
he had no objections. According to Hawkins, he was not told of the
accusations of pederasty against Father Clay or that Clay’s case was
still under an internal investigation by the Scranton Diocese.
April 2002, Bishop Joseph Martino, the new Ordinary of Scranton wrote
Clay asking what his plans were for his future ministry.”
to Chancellor Rev. Robert Wilson of the Dallas Diocese, diocesan
officials did not know anything about Father Clay, much less that he was
assisting Father Hawkins at the Arlington parish.
James Early, Chancellor of the Scranton Diocese said that Clay had
advised the diocese that he was working in Texas as a medical insurance
reviewer. If his statement is true, this means that apparently Timlin
kept his own Chancellor in the dark as to Fr. Clay’s pastoral activities
at St. Mary’s.
his part, Timlin defended his actions on the basis that no criminal
charges resulted from John Doe’s accusations (due to the statute of
limitation) and he (Clay) was not named in the subsequent civil lawsuit
filed by John Doe.
One parishioner from St. Mary’s who was interviewed by a reporter for The Dallas Morning News after the Scranton story broke exclaimed that “He’s excellent with the young people. …They feel like they can talk with him.” Hmmmm. Let’s see. A pederast who is good with young people and makes
them feel that they can communicate and confide in him! Absolutely
same Dallas paper also reported that the Congregation for the Doctrine
of the Faith has supposedly authorized an ecclesiastical judicial
process against Urrutigoity, Ensey and Clay. The reporter said that Fr. Urrutigoity had been recently spotted in the
Dallas area. The $64,000 question is whether or not the two accused SSJ
priests will flee the country to South America before their trial
New Victim of SSJ Priests Comes Forward
As of August 2004, the jury trial for the John Doe Case scheduled for September 2004 has been postponed. Both the Diocese of Scranton and Bishop Timlin, and the FSSP and St.
Gregory’s Academy have filed separate motions for summary judgment, that
is, they seek to be dropped as defendants in the case.
John Zoscak is the latest key witness in the trial. He made his
accusation in July 2004. He is the fourth former accuser of Urrutigoity,
the first being the Argentinean seminarian, the second Mr. Selinger,
and the third, Mr. John Doe.
Mr. Zoscak graduated from St. Gregory’s Academy in 1999 and then entered the SSJ as a novice the following September.
his affidavit of July 9, 2004, Zoscak stated that during the winter or
spring of his second year with the SSJ, Fr. Urrutigoity pressured the
youth to sleep in the same bed with him. The priest attempted to remove
the novice’s misgivings by telling him that he held a puritanical
attitude and that this was due to a bad relationship with his father.
For the first months nothing happened, said Zoscak. Then one night, the
priest grabbed his private parts. The boy resisted the priest’s
attentions and Urrutigoity took his hands away.
Zoscak said he only told one member of the SSJ about the incident.
later told Zoscak not to tell anyone what happened and that the
incident was an accident. In the summer of 2004, when Zoscak went to the
District Attorney’s office to report the abuse he was told that
criminal prosecution was barred because of the statute of limitations.
It is significant that in an August 29, 2004 interview with the Scranton Times Tribune,
Bethlehem attorney Joseph Leeson, who represents St. Gregory’s Academy
and the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter’s, stated that aside from the
John Doe complaint, there have been no specific allegations of improper
activity that in any way involved the school. “Nothing happened at the
school and we question whether anything happened at all,” Leeson said.
“This is the only student at the school, as far as we know, who ever
made this allegation.”
Apparently the FSSP and St. Gregory’s are still in denial.
James Bendell did win a victory for his client, Mr. John Doe, when the
Judge John E. Jones ruled that the psychological evaluations on Fathers
Urrutigoity and Ensey from Southdown Institute in Canada, where the two
priests were examined, be handed over to Bendell albeit under strict
rules of confidentiality.
The priests have filed an appeal of the ruling.
Bishop Timlin had ordered the evaluations as part of the standard
procedure regulating priests charged with the sexual abuse of minors, he
later claimed he never actually saw the reports and therefore, under
the law, the documents are protected by doctor-patient privilege. The
priests’ attorney has claimed that the priests never signed release
October 2002, attorney Bendell filed more than 150 pages of Bishop
Timlin’s deposition for the John Doe case that had been taken shortly
before his retirement. Bishop Timlin tried to justify the unjustifiable.
Timlin is still attempting to arrange loans for the Society of St. John
to pay off their huge debt - after all someone has to pay for the
$134,000 worth of luxurious furniture the Society purchased that
included a $6,828 bar, a $2,885 cocktail table, a $7,845 entertainment
center, a $12,995 desk, a $15,000 bedroom set, and a $26,480 dining
table. To date the SSJ has squandered at least $5,000,000 given by
Catholic donors to build God’s City and the College of St. Justin
Martyr. Are Scranton Catholics willing to pick up the SSJ’s expense tab
without a full accounting by Bishop Timlin?
while Bishop Timlin has obviously had difficulty in suppressing the
criminal elements in the Society of St. John, he has nevertheless found
the will and way to suppress the College of St. Justin Martyr even
though its officers were innocent of any wrong doing. At one point, Timlin offered to grant the college canonical status in
the Scranton Diocese if Bond stopped his campaign against the Society of
St. John (an offer made to other witnesses, not Dr. Bond directly).
Timlin has since denied ever making the offer.
his “Sixth Open Letter” to Bishop Timlin sent out on July 27, 2002,
Dr. Jeffrey Bond opened the door to the hereto unasked burning question
that goes to the heart of the SSJ scandal. Is Bishop Timlin himself a
homosexual whose secret vice has opened him up to blackmail by the
Society of St. John? This is a very relevant question given the role
that extortion and blackmail have played in the ecclesiastical career of
other homosexual American bishops and cardinals. Perhaps we will get a
definitive answer to this question when the John Doe Case goes to
Bishop Martino Suppresses SSJ
Bishop James Timlin retired from the Scranton Diocese on July 25, 2003.
was replaced by Joseph Francis Martino, a former Auxiliary Bishop of
Philadelphia, consecrated by Anthony Cardinal Bevilacqua.
November 19, 2004 Bishop Martino issued a canonical decree of
suppression against the Society of St. John. The decision to suppress
the Society was based primarily on financial grounds and the SSJ’s
inability to achieve its stated aim in the six-years of its existence. The decree was published in the diocesan paper, The Catholic Light, on November 25, 2004.
Bishop Martino has since turned the matter over to the Holy See, which will have the last word on the SSJ.
of the Society are currently in Rome attempting to have the decree
overturned. Fr. Urrutigoity has been seen in Rome wearing a cassock even
though he has been suspended from ministry.
Further, the Society sent out a 2004 Christmas financial appeal after the decree of suppression was issued. The appeal letter states that the Society of St. John “is alive and well.”
The Society of St. John fraud continues.
As for the FSSP, it should consider closing down St. Gregory’s Academy.
repeat the warning of St. Anthony Marie Claret, “the only morally
certain solution” to the moral corruption of a religious institute is to
close it down and send the students and staff home. If the institute is
to be reconstituted, it will need “an entirely new faculty, students,
and priestly support to do so; this is so because there are always
relationships which will never be discovered, and if these are present
in the new foundation, the conspiracy will be renewed,” said St. Claret.
final note. Alan Hicks, the former headmaster of St. Gregory’s Academy,
has been hired as the principal of Gateway Academy, a Legionnaires of
Christ school in Chesterfield, Mo., a suburb of St. Louis. His
appointment as head of still another Catholic private boy’s school after
his scandalous performance at St. Gregory’s and his protection of the
criminal pederasts of the Society of St. John, offers a perfect
introduction to the unresolved scandal surrounding the Legionnaires’
founder Father Marcial Maciel.
[Thomas A. Droleskey afterword: This is a classic case of cover-up, one that should serve as a salutary warning to anyone who believes that moral evils of this kind can be minimized in the name of some "greater good." Carlos Urrutigoity had quite a following in the Society of Saint Pius X while he was there. He had such a loyal following that a man who is no longer associated with the Society of Saint Pius X once spoke glowingly of a teacher by name of "Carlos." When questioned as to whether he meant Carlos Urrutigoity, the man applied affirmatively. The former student of Carlos professed to have no real knowledge of Urrutigoity's corrupt moral nature, saying only that he knew that his former professor had a close friend named Matthew. Those who have read this appendix with care will realize that Matthew's full name is Matthew Selinger, who was abused by Urrutigoity
[At the behest of the two the Society of Saint John's board members, I did an investigation of the Society of Saint John's financial profligacy, producing a report that was sent to "Bishop" Timlin in October of 2000. I heard back from Urrutigoity, who accused me of doing the "work of the devil," something that was repeated by Dr. Jeffrey Bond in April of 2001 to a now former friend of mine who is a firm opponent of the Americanist heresy. Dr. Bond, however, humbly admitted to me in an e-mail in October of 2001 that he had been wrong. and that I had been correct in my assessment of the Society of Saint John. I readily forgave him as I never hold grudges for any reason, realizing that my sins caused Our Lord and His Most Blessed Mother to suffer unspeakable pains. I must forgive as I am forgiven in the Sacred Tribunal of Penance. It is never to "hate" someone or to have a "vendetta" against him to criticize positions and/or to redress scandalous behavior that can lead souls into perdition for all eternity.]
 From the March 28, 2002 statement on the SSK scandal by Rev. Richard A. Munkelt. The full text is available at http://www.saintjustinmartyr.org/news/ReverendMunkeltsStatement(1).html.
Fr. Munkelt joined the SSJ as a deacon in September 1999. He was
ordained into the priesthood by Bishop James Timlin of Scranton for
service in the SSJ. He later resigned from the SSJ and is currently a
priest of the Scranton Diocese. Fr. Munkelt was one of the first to
expose the fraudulent nature of the Society’s land development scheme.
He also expressed concern about the particular relationships that
members of the SSJ were developing with young men including graduates of
St. Gregory’s Academy, although he did not make any association between
these actions and homosexual activity until a later date.
 Lawsuit was filed on March 21, 2002 in U.S. District Court in
Pennsylvania, No. 3:CV 02-0444 by attorneys James E. Bendell of
Washington State and Douglas A. Clark of Peckville, Pa.
 The Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter or (FSSP) was erected in 1988 by
the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei. Its founders were originally
members of the Society of St. Pius X or Fraternitas Sacerdotalis Sancti Pii X (SSPX). The Society of St. Pius X is an international Catholic society of Roman Catholic priests founded
on November 1, 1970 by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and approved by the
Vatican on February 18, 1971. The FSSP split from the SSPX occurred
after Lefebvre consecrated four Bishops without permission from the Holy
See. Unlike the Society of St. John that is a “Public Association of
the Faithful,” the FSSP is a Pontifical Association directly responsible
to the Holy Father. Priests of the SSPX, FSSP and the SSJ say the
traditional Latin Mass exclusively. At the time of the alleged abuse of
John Doe, Fr. Arnaud Devillers, was the District Superior of the FSSP
for North America District Headquarters located in Elmhurst (Moscow),
PA, and Fr. Joseph Bisig was the Superior General in Rome. The present
District Superior is Fr. Paul Carr. The FSSP numbers 105 priests and has
two international seminaries and 140 seminarians.
 See Code of Canon Law, 1983, Book II, The People Of God, Chapter II:
Public Associations of Christ’s Faithful, Can. 312- Can. 320 at
 The SSJ “Founding Document” is available at http://www.ssjohn.com/library/founding.html.
 Ibid. The decision was approved by Fr. Joseph Bisig, the FSSP Superior General in Rome and Bishop Timlin.
 Affidavit of Jude A. Huntz signed on Feb. 15, 2002 at: http://www.saintjustinmartyr.org/news/LetterOfAffidavotHuntz.html.
 The English-born Fr. Paul Carr was ordained a FSSP priest in 1992 and
served as a member of the faculty at the FSSP’s Our Lady of Guadeloupe
Seminary and a chaplain at St. Gregory’s Academy. In 2000, Carr became
the District Superior of the North American FSSP.
 See Brief of Plaintiffs in Opposition to the Motion for Summary
Judgement Filed by the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter and St.
Gregory’s Academy filed on July 16, 2004 by James Bendell, Co-counsel
for Plaintiffs. Case No: 3CV 02-0444.
 See Mr. Jeffrey Bond’s Letter of Warning to St. Gregory Parents at:
 See http://www.saintjustinmartyr.org/news/LetterOfAffidavitHornak.html.
 Ibid. Fr. Daniel Fullerton served for a short period as the Superior of
the Society of St. John, but he was only a figure head. The real power
in the order has always been Fr. Urrutigoity.
 See http://www.saintjustinmartyr.org/news/LetterWarningToStGregorysParents.html.
 See brief of Plaintiffs filed July 16, 2004.
 See www.saintjustinmartyr.org/news/LetAffidavitSciambra.html.
 Affidavit of a Former Novice of the SSJ on March 3, 2002 at
 Communication from Dr. Jeffrey Bond to author dated August 24, 2004.
 Letter of Nov. 10, 2002 to Bishop Timlin from Mr. Conal Tanner.
 Affidavit of Diane Toler of Cherry Hill, NJ on May 6, 2002 at
 Terrie Morgan-Sesecker, “Accuser to get reports in priests,” March 24, 2004, Times Leader.
 Deposition of Matthew Selinger in Civil Action No. 02-0444 in Pittsburgh, PA on October 24, 2003.
 See Tillett, The Elder Brother.
 Selinger eventually left the seminary, married and settled in
California to raise a family. When it became known that he would likely
be subpoenaed to testify against Fr. Urrutigoity in the Case of John
Doe, Fr. Eric Ensey who helped found the SSJ and who replaced
Urrutigoity as spiritual advisor for a time at St. Thomas in Winona,
paid a visit to Selinger and attempted to persuade him to leave the
country to prevent him from being called as a witness against
Urrutigoity. He told the former seminarian that Urrutigoity had “a
medical protocol” about the penis. He said that if the priest-founder
went down he would take him (Ensey) and the whole Order down with him.
When these arguments failed to move Selinger, Ensey said that
Urrutigoity’s lawyer had connections to the Mafia – a suggestion that
implied that harm might come to Selinger or his family if he testified
against the priest. Selinger said he had no intention of leaving his
wife and children to escape a subpoena and showed Ensey the door.
 Jeffrey Bond Fourth Open Letter of May 19, 2002 to Bishop Timlin, Diocese of Scranton at:
 Affidavit of Jude A. Huntz.
 Deposition of Fr. Carlos R. Urrutigoity, May 2, 2003 in Scranton,
Federal Doe Case No. 2000 Civil 2961. He was deposed under oath by
attorney Jim Bendell.
 Depositions of Stephen Fitzpatrick and Patrick McLaughlin taken by
Attorney James Bendell on Nov. 10, 2003. See summary comments by Dr.
Jeffrey Bond at
 Jeffrey M. Bond, “An Open letter to Bishop James C. Timlin,” Diocese of
Scranton, January 27, 2002. In addition to calling for the laicization
of Fathers Urrutigoity and Ensey, Bond demanded that there be an
independent investigation of all other members of the Society including
Fathers Daniel Fullerton, Basel Sarweh, Dominic Carey, Dominic O’Connor,
Marshall Roberts, Bernardo Terrere, and Deacons Joseph Levine and James
 See Jeffrey M. Bond, “An Open letter to Bishop James C. Timlin, Diocese of Scranton,” January 27, 2002.
 See Lawsuit March 21, 2002 in U.S. District Court in Pennsylvania.
 St. Joseph’s House and Fatima House were two homes that bordered the
SSJ property. The owners permitted the SSJ to use occupy the homes rent
free. However, when they were informed of the financial and criminal
activities of Urrutigoity, Ensey and other SSJ priests, the owners
evicted the order.
 According to Mark Pazuhanich, former Monroe County District Attorney
who was handling the Clay Case in May 2002, the investigation into the
charges against Clay was continuing. However, the current District
Attorney, E. David Christine, Jr. has reported that the Clay file is
missing from the office (but can be reconstructed if necessary) and his
office had no knowledge of the case. As it turns out, Mark Pazuhanich is
under investigation for sexual molestation. See Bonnie Adams and Mark
Guydish, “Ex-bishop: Priest OK’d for duty,” Times-Leader, 4 July 2004.
 Susan Hogan Albach, “Accused priest led Mass in Arlington,” The Dallas Morning News, 30 June 2004.
 See Lawsuit March 21, 2002 in U.S. District Court in Pennsylvania.
 Brief of Plaintiffs in Opposition to the Motion for Summary Judgement
Filed by the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter and St. Gregory’s Academy
on July 16, 2004 by James Bendell, Co-counsel for Plaintiffs. Case No:
 See online letter dated November 1999 by Fr. Carlos Urrutigoity,
“Dearly Beloved of Our Lady..” on the initiation rites of John Zosack
 A copy of the original Zosack affidavit is available on the PACER website at: www.pacer.psc.uscourts.gov.
 David Singleton, “Society of Silence,” and “Deposition Excerpts,” Sunday Times Tribune, 29 August 29, 2004.
 Mark Guydish, “What does Timlin know? It’s hard to tell,” Times-Leader, 1 July 2004.
 See: http://www.churchcrisis.blogspot.com/ A Second Open Letter to Bishop Joseph F. Martino.
 Bond, “An Open letter to Bishop James C. Timlin, Diocese of Scranton,” January 27, 2002.
 Tom Kane, “Scranton Bishop Suppresses Conservative Group,” River Reporter, 2 December 2004 at http://www.riverreporter.com/issues/04-12-02/head3-stjohn.html.
 A picture of Fr. Carlos Urrutigoity is displayed at the website of PATMOS, a lay corporation of the SSJ formed in 2004. See www.patmos.us. PATMOS markets traditional Catholic items such as prayer books and first communion items. A Child’s Missal shows a photograph of Fr. Urrutigoity offering Mass in a traditional Catholic setting.