!!!!
We make men without chests and expect from them virtue and enterprise. We laugh at honor and are shocked to find traitors in our midst.
—C. S. Lewis from The Abolition of Man.
The Forgotten Vice in Seminary Formation
(This article originally appeared in the May 2006 print edition of HPR.)
This is an article that I wrote during my years of seminary formation, but I was advised to wait to have it published until after my priestly ordination. With the bishop’s seminary visitation on the way, it seemed like a good time to resurrect it from my files. It deals with a touchy subject, that will offend many involved in the work of seminary formation, but with the current atmosphere of scandals, and talk of a more thorough screening process for seminarians, I believe it is a topic that must be dealt with.
Sioux Falls is a rural farming diocese that is having great success in vocations with both numbers and quality. In the past, a consistent complaint or difficulty our new seminarians have had in adjusting to seminary life is the issue of effeminacy. The fact of the matter is that they are not used to, and are uncomfortable with, living in an environment that is often effeminate. I remember when one of our seminarians from a farm family was embarrassed to say that he would not want his brother to visit his dorm because of the way the men acted on his floor. While not, perhaps, stating it in the most precise manner it was understood by all when he said that many seminarians on his floor, “acted like a bunch of women.”
St. Thomas Aquinas includes effeminacy under the vices opposed to perseverance. It is from the Latin mollities, which literally means “softness.” Mollities is the verb used in 1 Corinthians 6:9 which deals with the sexual sin of sodomy. It involves being inordinately passive or receptive. What St. Thomas means by persevering is when “a man does not forsake a good on account of long endurance or difficulties and toils.” An “effeminate man is one who withdraws from good on account of sorrows caused by lack of pleasures, yielding as it were to a weak motion.”
Thomas states that this effeminacy is caused in two ways. First, by custom, where a man is accustomed to enjoy pleasures and it is, therefore, more difficult for him to endure the lack of them. Second, by natural disposition, less persevering through frailty of temperament, and this is where Thomas compares men with women, and also mentions the homosexual act of sodomy, and the receiver in this act as being effeminate or like a woman. The vice of delicacy for Thomas considers those who cannot endure toils, or anything that diminishes pleasure, and thus delicacy is a kind of effeminacy. Thomas quotes from Deuteronomy 28:56, “The tender and delicate woman, that could not go upon the ground, nor set down her foot for softness.” It may be true that some cultural prejudices are being revealed here with this comparison because a vice is a vice, whether it is found in a man or a woman, but it is also true that some vices are more perverse or disordered when found specifically in men or women. Effeminacy is more pronounced in a man than a woman because women are more susceptible to this vice. Just as the vice of drunkenness is more pronounced or perverse when found in a woman than a man.
I have five sisters, and all are feminine, but I would describe none of them as effeminate or soft. They are women; yet, they do not exhibit this particular vice. So, it must be understood, I am not putting down women or speaking on homosexuality, (though effeminacy is often a sign of this sexual disorder) but rather on acting in an inappropriate manner that is often prevalent in seminaries.
When I was giving a retreat to some of Mother Teresa’s sisters in Washington, D.C., I briefly mentioned this vice, and after the conference, the regional superior asked if I could give a more thorough conference on the matter. I told her that this type of softness was certainly not something that I observed with the Missionaries of Charity, but she insisted on the topic. I decided to use the example of St. Teresa of Avilla who when she went about with her reforms she immediately began to address this type of softness. The Carmelites had become a soft group of social elites who would sit around and gossip in the parlor. She told her sisters we need to be “con pantoloni” (with pants). Many modern religious have taken a completely literal translation to these words, but she meant that they needed to roll up their sleeves, and get to work. They could not be soft, delicate Southern belles but feminine women able to finish a job. St. Teresa of Avila, observing the group of virgins around her stated:
What shall I do with them? Ah, I shall employ them to destroy heresy, to bring forth Doctors of the Church, to make reparation for sins, to convert souls. They will be solid walls, armed ramparts. They will be living fountains of light and faith…
There is nothing soft about such a call.
St. Thomas also speaks on modesty concerning the outward movements of the body. Here, he quotes Saint Ambrose in stating that, “Beauty of conduct consists in becoming behavior towards others, according to their sex and person.” Thomas states that, “Outward movements are a sign of the inward disposition” and quotes Ecclesiastics 19:29-30, “You can tell a person by his appearance … the way a person dresses, the way he laughs, the way he walks, tell you what he is.” St. Ambrose adds that, “The habit of mind is seen in the gesture of the body,” and that “the body’s movement is an index of the soul.” Ambrose goes on to say, “Let nature guide the movement: if nature fail in any respect, surely effort will supply the defect.” This effort is lacking in most seminary formation. Such things should be noticed and discussed by seminary faculty in both external and internal formation, as they can often be signs of deeper issues.
St. Thomas, moreover, asserts the truth that it is often from our outward movements that other men form their judgment about us. Thomas encourages us to study our outward movements so that if they are inordinate in any way, they may be corrected. Such things need to be addressed in formation because they have a definite effect on our ability to be, and to bring, Christ to others. Does the seminary deal with a seminarian that sways when he walks, who has limp wrists, who acts like a drama queen, or who lisps? It must. This is not about a witch hunt, but about being honest enough to admit that such external behavior affects our ability to share Christ. I knew a seminarian that spoke in a very effeminate manner, and to his credit he recognized this impediment to his future preaching the Gospel, and on his own sought help from a speech instructor. However, the seminary did not see this glaring problem, nor move this man to get assistance. That is the problem.
When we are at the altar, or preaching the Gospel, we are Jesus Christ, and must do our best to image him to our people. Anything we do that takes people’s attention away from this reality must be addressed. Over dramatic movements, purposeful lisps, swaying—in short, effeminate behavior— removes attention from Christ and his word, and puts it on the priest. This is not just distracting to other men, but I know my sisters will roll their eyes when the Liberace-like priest celebrates himself while celebrating the Mass.
St. Thomas also speaks on modesty of outward apparel. Moderation, of course, is the rule; and here he warns that the lack of moderation may arise from an inordinate attachment to clothes, with the result being that a man sometimes takes too much pleasure in them. In describing a friend as a “man’s man,” G. K. Chesterton said it best when he stated, “He was not in any case a dandy; but insofar as he did dress well, he was totally indifferent to how other men who were his friends might dress, which is another mark of purely masculine companionship.” The three guiding virtues in dress are humility, contentment, and simplicity. Here, one must always consider the appropriateness of a situation, and the personal motivation behind wearing certain apparel. This is not a new problem, as St. John Chrysostom addressed it in the fourth century in his writing on The Learning of Temperance, when he speaks of the folly of over-adorning oneself with jewels. He states:
I, for my part, expect that in the process of time, the young men among us will wear even women’s shoes, and not be ashamed. And what is more grievous; men’s fathers seeing these things are not much displeased, but do even account it an indifferent manner. Do you want me to add what is still more grievous; that these things are done even when there are many poor?” … “What can be worse than this unseemliness, this absurdity? For, this marks a soul, in the first place effeminate, then unfeeling cruel, then curious and idly busy.
Chrysostom goes on to say:
You may indeed laugh at hearing this, but I am inclined to weep for these men’s madness and their earnest care about these matters, for in truth, they would rather stain their body with mud than those pieces of leather.
Now, I would hope that no one in seminary formation is going around in women’s shoes, but the general point is to watch our attachment to such things. Is it in line with being a man? With being a priest of Jesus Christ? I remember in my first year of seminary how I was shocked when I came across a first year priest in the seminary who was wearing a gold ankle bracelet, and matching gold earring. These are not proper adornments for a priest or a seminarian, and this should be seen as a formation issue.
In the book, The Church Impotent, Leon Podles asks why men in the Christian West are so little interested in religion, and that men who are interested often do not follow the general pattern of masculinity. Fr. Tom Forrest, a priest active in international evangelization, points out that only 25 percent of the participants in Catholic gatherings he has attended are men. The fact is that women dominate daily Masses, church staff and volunteers, and church groups. Why are we not attracting men when the Orthodox seem to have a balance, and Islam and Judaism have predominately male membership? The author goes on to state that something seems to be creating a barrier between Western Christianity and men.
Podles observes:
Because Christianity is now seen as a part of the sphere of life proper to women rather than to men, it sometimes attracts men whose masculinity is somewhat doubtful. By this I do not mean homosexuals, although a certain type of homosexual is included. Rather, religion is seen as a safe field, a refuge from the challenges of life and, therefore, attracts men who are fearful of making the break with the secure world dominated by women. These are men who have problems following the path of masculinity.
I am not a psychologist, and I cannot speak on an over-attachment to the feminine, but there is a truth that masculinity, as a needed virtue in the seminary, is something that is generally ignored in formation. This may be one of the problems with why the church has a difficult time attracting men to Mass, and serving the Church.
What is it that draws soft or effeminate men to the seminary, and why is this not dealt with in formation? Podles offers the prior explanation for the former question, but the latter can only be understood if it is admitted that there are many bishops, faculty, and priests, who suffer under this vice and are, therefore, unwilling or unable to recognize it, or address it. All seminaries are not equal: some relish in their softness, others have select faculty that will privately admit to the problem, but for fear of offending colleagues and bishops, refuse to speak out on it. In my years of seminary formation, the most controversial conference was given by my former Bishop, Robert Carlson, on the vice of effeminacy. Some faculty and students were offended—the truth always stings—and felt my bishop either somehow lacked compassion, or was mean-spirited in discussing such an issue. This must end, and as with all problems, its solution begins only with admitting its existence, and the reality that many seminaries breed an effeminate culture.
In a study by Lewis Terman and Catherine Cox, involving a masculinity-femininity test, Catholic seminarians scored at a point far less masculine than any other male group of their age. Right next to them, though, were the Protestant male seminarians, which the authors of the study stated ruled out celibacy, or sexual deviance, as a cause for connection to this lack of masculinity. It also must be pointed out that this is not particular to the Catholic faith, but to all of the western Christian faiths. As the study commented: “Some liberal Presbyterian or Methodist congregations are practically bereft of men.”
In a parish, it will be helpful if you can talk on sports in order to relate to men. If you have an easier time, or even prefer interacting with women to the exclusion of men, this will cause problems in your parish, and affect your ministry to men. I remember a seminarian from my dorm who, even though he was not athletically gifted, used to go out and practice basketball and softball with one of his classmates. He did this not so much for the exercise, but because he felt it would help him minister to the kids in the grade schools and high schools where he would serve as a priest. This man recognized the importance of sports in our culture, and the fact that it could be used to draw the young, especially boys, to the Church, and to Christ.
The question, then, is what can be done in helping form and ordain more manly priests? First, seminaries and bishops must recognize effeminacy as a formation issue. In choosing faculty to teach and form our future priests, the question must be asked: Does the candidate exhibit manly or effeminate qualities? Also, bishops need to realize that just because a priest requests an assignment, this does not automatically make him the right man for the job. This is especially true if the priest desires to work in liturgy, campus ministry, teaching, or seminary work where a manly model of priesthood is most needed and, unfortunately, often most often missing. Bishops need to take an active role in knowing and forming their priestly candidates. It is, perhaps, not only his most important decision, but also the decision for which he will be held most accountable. Bishop Carlson is one of the few, if not only, bishops in our country who has every seminarian live at least a summer in his residence. He knows the men he will ordain. He recounts a story of a seminarian he inherited who had already been through five years of formation, and was extremely effeminate. In working with this seminarian, he asked him about his sexual orientation. The seminarian responded he did not know. At that time, he was two years away from being ordained, and neither the rector, nor seminary faculty, saw this as a problem. This is the problem.
We need to consider Mt. 19:11-12 when the church discerns whether the seminarian actually has a priestly vocation:
Not all can accept this word, but only those to whom that is granted. Some are incapable of marriage because they were born so; some, because they were made so by others; some because they have renounced marriage for the sake of the kingdom of heaven.
This third and last category is the only one, true call to celibacy, and the priesthood. Hebrews 5:4 reminds us that, “No one takes this honor upon himself but only when called by God, just as Aaron was.” Bishops, rectors, and seminary faculty must use these scriptures verses as guides in truly discerning if Jesus Christ is calling this seminarian to the priesthood. The number’s game, and pressure to fill parishes, cannot be used as the standard in making such decisions. This is one of the reasons why we are in the mess we are today. Certainly, it is not always an easy decision, but it must always be asked if this seminarian has an alternative motive to the priesthood, other than God’s call. Also, necessarily, there must be men who are not blinded by similar vices to be able to see and makes this decision.
We need to take this time of scandal as an opportunity to take a good hard look at how our seminaries and vocation offices are run and staffed. As a seminarian, I could not have said such things publicly without jeopardizing the review all seminarians must receive from the faculty staff to move onto ordination. I am now a priest, and a vocations director, and so I have a duty to raise such concerns in the hope that such things will be addressed in forming priests for the third millennium who most fully image the source of priesthood: Our Lord Jesus Christ.
About Fr. James MasonFather Mason is a priest from the Diocese of Sioux Falls, S.D., on loan to the Archdiocese of St. Louis with the permission of his bishop, the Most Reverend Paul J. Swain, to serve as Rector and President of Kenrick-Glennon Seminary effective July 1, 2015. Father currently serves as the Dean of Students and Director of Spiritual Formation at the seminary. He was ordained in 2001, and has served as a pastor, Director of Vocations, Vice-Chancellor, and Medical Moral Advisor for the Catholic Diocese of Sioux Falls, as well as serving as Director of Broom Tree Retreat Center. Father Mason joined the staff of Kenrick-Glennon Seminary in August 2014. Father Mason attended the North American College and received his STB from the Pontifical University of St. Thomas – Angelicum, Rome. He received his JD from the University of Minnesota Law School. Prior to entering the seminary, Father Mason was the Director of Catholic Charities, legal counsel, and lobbyist for the Diocese of Sioux Falls, and worked as a prosecutor in Minneapolis, Minnesota. Father Mason has traveled the world, giving many retreats for priests and for the Missionaries of Charity. He directs a 30 day Silent Ignatian Retreat at Broom Tree Retreat Center and has also taught a course on the Spirituality of the Diocesan Priesthood at the Institute of Priestly Formation (IPF) Summer Program.
ABYSSUS ABYSSUM INVOCAT / DEEP CALLS TO DEEP 
Excellent article. I was in religious life for 8 years as a religious brother within an apostolate of care for the elderly and infirm men. When I entered I did notice a very small number of effeminate men. And of course the question of homosexuality was always in the air.The one or two that were more pronounced in feminine movements eventually left or were asked to leave.
In discerning my vocation I felt moved toward priesthood and entered my former diocese. My last year of college I finished in a non seminary college. During that time I met with my classmates now and then who were at a minor seminary. I was really shocked when I stayed a weekend at their place. Many effeminate students with and without lisps and effeminate movements. I really thought the place was a breeding ground for future homosexuals. I was so shocked that I was going to leave but my formation director talked me out of that and after that year I spent at a regular 4 year Catholic College I moved on to major seminary.
It was in major seminary that I too was thinking in line with your article. While effeminacy wasn’t in the extreme as in that college seminary there were a several as well as a few priests. My classmates while only seven some though not effeminate in actions or speech there were certain phrases used that started to become a headache but did not cause any problem. I remember many times saying to myself why do some act so girly. Never received a good answer until now. I think a course on your topic both in minor and major seminaries is seriously needed especially as you say that the majority of ministry these future priests will be involved in will be toward and among women in the Church. I was ordained a Deacon and served a year in a parish in a rectory with 4 priests( won’t see that today unless they are retired). Mt. 19:11-12 and Hebrews 5:4 are excellent sources for dialogue.
Great article!
Puts me in mind of a book from about 15 years ago addressing the same problem — ‘Goodbye Good Men’. The ‘feminization’ of so many of the Church’s processes and training mirrored(s) the feminization of society in general. ‘Acting like a man’ is actively being stamped out in all areas of today’s society. Things as simple as not keeping score, avoiding winners and losers, not assigning responsibility, encouraging crying as a response to disappointment, the rise of the ‘wimp’, ‘Pajama Boy’ in 2012 Democratic ads, etc. etc.
Years ago I had to move where we sat in church because of the way that mothers encouraged the kissing, hugging, and caressing of themselves by their young boys and the fathers totally ignored it. I used to say that, based on the characteristics of their husbands, these mothers would never have married their own sons.
‘Men without chests’, indeed.
Thank you for sharing this excellent write up. I am encouraged by it and by the fact that you are now responsible priestly formation. Deo gratias!
Wow! Never thought I would see this! For the last 20 years, I have been wondering about the effeminate appearance of many priests and of men who are active in parish affairs, especially liturgical music directors. I never dared discuss it with anyone except my mother and one of my best friends. Thank-you! It has been an eye-opener!
I wonder if our television sitcoms promote this model of behavior among the youth of our time.
Excellent article.
Unfortunately, for the most part, too too many priests I meet today are not models of manhood, have wimpy handshakes, and seem incapable of “standing” against (preaching against) the culture of death.
This is a very serious concern.
Thanks for raising it.
There are some cardinals & bishops who are not effeminate, but should be kicked to the moon because of their secret homo preferences. They are wicked, spiritually dead and intimidating. Please pray.
Finally, someone has come out and said it.
kelso says:
Thanks for writing this.
Thank you so much for this article — it raises several points I wish I had time to discuss more fully. We have in our parish two priests — and only two, the third left over a year ago “for vocational discernment” and hasn’t been heard from, at least by us in the pews, since then — and both have that problem of effeminate self-projection. Although I don’t think for a minute they are actively homosexual, and they are theologically orthodox, the effeminacy is disquieting. I can’t help wondering if it got to the third priest, because he wasn’t that way at all. But there is also the fact that he (the third priest) was badly treated because he had once refused Communion to a public sinner at Mass and the bishop had it in for him. Some years ago our diocese’s vocations director was dismissed because he refused to admit a man with a homosexual background to formation. If you’re thinking it’s the bishop, as well as the seminary instructors, that sets the tone for the diocese — yes, I am thinking that too. But even with a bishop like we had at the time, you didn’t dare publish this until you were ordained … which tells me it’s everywhere!
Fr Mason mentions the concerns of his then-bishop Robert Carlson of Sioux Falls about the issue of priestly manliness. The first time I met Carlson, about 20 years ago, we had a brief but intense conversation about my chosen profession, forestry. He expressed his wish that seminarians could be mentored in outdoor / hunting and fishing / wildlife or forestry activities, and how that would help contribute to their overall formation and specifically their ability to relate to the men in the pews. Jesus himself was a carpenter who hung out with fishermen and did a lot of hiking. Seems like Carlson was on to something. So is Bishop Robert Gruss of Rapid City, my current bishop, as he engages his seminarians with fishing, golf and Harley riding. Spot on for priestly formation and a way to round out our future priests’ formative years.
I am tired of hearing of sports as the way to relate to men. Part of the problem is the juvenile sports culture that men are stuck in. Not to mention the current highly sexualized atmosphere currently surrounding professional sports. There are a lot of flakey, commitment-phobic men who love sports. I know so many men who won’t get involved or volunteer at our parish because they are “too busy” but yet they find time to watch and attend sports events regularly. What does that say to their sons? It says there are some things more important than religion – like enjoying yourself. Actions speak louder than words. I am so proud of my husband who besides working a full-time job, also is involved in our community and parish. He is definitely the religious leader of our home, and has a good, strong relationship with our children. They look to him for advice and guidance (as well as a good joke). He’s not the least interested in sports, but he is not effeminate. Our sons have not played sports, but we encourage them to master their bodies in other ways: caring for farm animals, chopping wood, learning to hunt and fish, hiking, learning the skills needed to maintain property, and a lot of chores. We also encourage the development of their minds by excellent reading (even poetry!) and discussion. We make sure they learn to play musical instruments, and learn to sing, so they don’t become Philistines. They definitely don’t play video games, or spend their days on computers or phones. They can’t relate to the typical American male, but they have a rich life. A man doesn’t need to play sports to become manly (history bears this out).
Wonderful Kate. You and your husband are blessed. In so few words you have said so much. You and your husband ought to write a book, a short one. Great wisdom. I would like to quote you in some of things we publish on our website. I would just say anonymous. ??? Can we do that?
I agree with Kate, as the culture continues to spiral downward, sports culture is profiling immoral and homosexual athletes with greater accolades apart from athletic performance. Most professional athletes immoral activities are widely ignored by the general public while they are celebrated as examples of masculinity. This is disordered. Organizations such as Fellowship of Christian Athletes or Focus Varsity are working towards using athetics as a means to evangelization, but it appears that this is not going to cross the new boundaries placed by popular culture as religious liberties are threatened and dismantled. Sports culture is part of the problem and not the solution.
A very necessary and overall useful post, but a few observations, if I may.
1. I enjoy outdoor activities, especially hiking and camping, but organized sports bore me beyond my ability to describe. Recreation in moderation is all very well, but the time, attention and money devoted to spectator sports by most American males is, to be blunt, scandalous, a neglect of duty and poor stewardship of their time and resources. An interest in sports that extends to the obsessive is evidence of arrested development and unmanliness every bit as much as effeminacy.
2. If you want a masculine clergy, promote Romanitas, especially in the liturgy, and within the liturgy, promote the Extraordinary form in both Mass and Liturgy of the Hours. The Ordinary form is inherently feminized, and as typically encountered in America, even more so. The traditional Latin liturgy is structured, logical, orderly, hierarchical, uniform, unspontaneous, well-endowed with silence, and utterly unconcerned with gratuitous display. Yes, it is a bit remote and not easily approached, but that too is a manly trait. Those who call for stripped, impoverished liturgies are advocating an unmanly niggardliness towards God, not to mention a very unmanly lack of interest in gear.
I understand your point Romulus. But sports have been supported by several Popes, including Pius XII. Don Bosco used sports to bolster discipline. Nothing wrong with that, I hope. Saint Paul uses the sports analogy. The deification of sports in our time is another thing. I agree with you. Sitting in front of a TV all weekend is not a manly thing to do, quite the opposite, as you well note.
A couple of tangential points:
1) In 1990 I was commissioned a Second Lieutenant in the USAF. On the way home I stopped at a Radio Shack to buy some batteries. The clerk was delighted to tell me about his exploits in the Air Force of 1970. This included many tips on barracks life, where to score drugs at Wheeler AB (in Libya) and many other “hints” that were completely irrelevant to military life in 1990. Although Fr Mason is certainly not guilty of this, when many of the faithful think of seminaries, they think of the seminaries of the early 70’s. The seminary of 1975 has almost nothing in common with seminary life in 2005, and certainly not in 2015. As an example of the difference, in 2006 our Rector reprimanded the seminarians for too many cat-calls and lewd comments when the cheerleaders were on the screen during college/NFL games. And yes I mean female cheerleaders. The only seminarian I thought might be homosexual is now married with 3 kids.
2) I believe it is critical for every seminarian to have the ability to connect with men in his parish assignment. For some, this is at the gym. For others, it might be at the volunteer fire department, or hunting. If nothing else, spending time at a restaurant can be fruitful. I have a friend who brought 15 people back/into the Church by spending a couple of nights a week at a local pizzeria. Women will take care of themselves. A parish priest must have the ability to engage with men outside of the Church.
3) Today, a seminarian would be better off learning Madden 16 to engage with school kids as opposed to actual sports
This is a great article. Effeminacy among priests is a very dangerous problem. If effeminate men are allowed to become priests and bishops, they form a clique of effeminacy. In spite of all their dainty ways, they become extremely vicious when they see manhood in the priesthood. For them, manhood is considered a psychological problem and a formation issue. They also have no problem lying in order to bring down a manly priest. Effeminate, vicious, mendacious. [emphasis by Abyssum]
I have seen first-hand that effeminate priests have a vicious hatred toward the Catechism, the Extraordinary Form, the Oath of Fidelity, JP2 and B16.
Thank you for your article. Hopefully everyone in formation reads it.
OK. I am a convert. I have brought my wife and adult children to the Catholic faith. That isn’t easy coming from an anti-Catholic Protestant past with a Protestant degree in theology and missionary experience and being from a line of Protestant ministers. I came to the faith after a life of studying the Scriptures and reading the Fathers and the documents of the faith and it is obvious that the Catholic faith is the only true faith if you just are honest about it.
Then I came to the modern US Catholic Church and what I see simply doesn’t gibe for the most part with what I’ve read and what I know about the faith that existed in history. I am pretty much disgusted and embarrassed. Notice I did not say I doubt. I am disgusted. That’s different. In the Middle Ages it seems, Priests that erred seemed to err with women. Every faithful and loyal husband I know including myself can at least relate to that temptation. When was the last time we heard of a Priest getting caught with a woman? My Dad was a conservative Methodist minister and a man. Yeah, a real, honest, man. He taught me to serve and to love women but not to be a f##. He kicked my butt when I needed it. He guided me. He taught me to love and to fight if need be and to speak the truth and to put God first. So did my Mom. This guy who wrote this article I do not know but he is OK. He isn’t afraid to address an issue that is obvious to the rest of us. Father, you are a good egg.
Thank God for the FSSP Chapel I can escape to as often as possible. Thank God for my African Priest who wasn’t afraid to get dirty. God save the Church and Father, thank you for being a “guy” and noticing the 900 pound gorilla in the living room that everybody else thinks only exists in the zoo.
I attended a major seminary for 4 years and was shocked by the anti-intellectual attitude and the rampant displays of effeminacy displayed by some of the diocesan students. while they didn’t wear women’s shoes, they did wear bunny slippers to class, and would dance down the hallways arm in arm doing the can-can with their bunny slippers.
Where are the modern priests who run a boxing club in the parish?
Interesting that we think sports or other “manly” occupations would help form masculine men. My father is very masculine and is not a hunter or outdoorsmen or a sports fan. He is a mechanic, an engineer, an intellectual. So is Pope Benedict. Pretty sad that little Joseph Ratzinger would get pigeon holed as a fem, bullied to think he were gay if he lived in present day America.
You hinted to the point, but your point should capitalize on the fact that real men finish things, have passions and follow through on missions. I see a lot, and mean A LOT of men that are really boys, because they are obsessed with hunting or sports instead of thinking of the family at home. I understand the feminine man shtick is a problem, but so is anesthetizing oneself is so called manly hobbies. As a woman I admire my dad who doesn’t bully people by shooting off his mouth with his opinions, but finds the right time to teach and gently lead. Servant leadership.
Amen. Manly men are LEADERS.
As a psychotherapist, I appreciate your courage and the depth of your theological research on this important topic, and your prudence in waiting til you were ordained to publish.
Effeminacy is a grievous disability for a man trying to live a celibate vocation. The hardships are many–but a culture of strong brotherly support and courage in facing a tough job can make it joyful. As long as priests seem sad and withdrawn, few young men will be drawn to imitate them.
Yes, so true Father. My brother dropped out of Seton Hall Divinity School in the late 60s because of effeminates. I was in a “conservative” seminary (also studied at the Angelicum, Father — for a year in 1974) and there were effeminates in that seminary. I remember some Italians whistling at them because they walked the walk. I was clueless. I had my own sins, far worse, but of the opposite type. In any event, seminaries were infiltrated in my time, no question. I wanted to be a Capuchin. When I went to one of their houses to take a psychological exam, written, multiple-choice, I refused after reading the Freudian questions. I mean sick questions like “Would you wear pink underwear”. I kid you not. I refused to check any boxes and was rejected because, as the vocation director informed me, the order is looking for “stable” religious. I was unstable because I agreed to take the test then changed my mind. Padre Pio must be turning in his grave.. Things are probably better now.
A very interesting and important article. I must say I am pleased that its author is in a position to actually enact some of the actions that are suggested in seminary formation. I would also agree with Chris that being effeminate is not the only problem that some adult men in the United States have that needs to be addressed in formation. The lack of maturity, what was once called the Peter Pan syndrome, also effects many young men in America. This is also a problem. It is one reason that so many young men in certain parts of the country are choosing not to marry. They do not forgo marriage out of spiritual discernment or in response to Providence, but because they are incapable of the kinds of giving sacrifice that is the core of all relationships built on true love, as are both Christian marriage and priestly or religious celibacy.
I belong to a very good parish where I work with teens. Often we find more young males at our events than females. I put that down to the very strong representation of men in ministry there. Not just fathers, but also young men, both still single and just married, and older men whose sons and daughters have progressed beyond the teen years.
So one thing that seminarians should be exposed to is the concept that men in the parish should be expect to be as involved in parish life as their wives, daughters and female friends. At all stages of life. This is very important for the spiritual formation of boys and young men. Father can’t make it happen by himself. But he can easily create an atmosphere where it won’t happen. And he can deliberately seek to bring such men into ministry at the parish.
“why men in the Christian West are so little interested in religion, and that men who are interested often do not follow the general pattern of masculinity.”
I think Ann Barnhardt stated the reason well:
“Western men stopped going to Mass because heterosexual men naturally and rightly find faggotry to be utterly repulsive and repellant, and want nothing to do with it, and the priesthood was consciously infiltrated and populated with sodomite men and men who were conditioned to act like sodomites, after WWII.”
http://www.barnhardt.biz/2015/04/12/why-men-stopped-going-to-mass/
A great article with many insightful comments. From my own experience, all of these comments are valid. I would simply add my belief that the greatest missionaries will be men in the image of Jesus — and that this would exclude effeminate men but certainly not sensitive, caring men. I hope that some or all of the suggestions in this article are implemented in the seminaries and in priestly formation. We need more men in the pews who appeal to others with their strength in body and spirit.
Fr Mason, thank you for your articulate, dispassionate and courageous article. Effeminacy among priests causes great scandal among my non Catholic friends. Everything they “think” they know about the Church is confirmed by seeing one effeminate priest. The devilish thing is, there is absolutely no way to refute it — unlike other objections to the Church, it cannot be addressed by using reason, an appeal to natural law, or Catholic teaching. It is what it is. Unless the Church courageously addresses this — as you have done — God help us all.
Fr., I was a seminarian during the 70s and 80s in Southern California. I was 18 and confused by what i saw. This vice was present and there was a promiscuity problem with both men/men and men/women. i did not want to understand at the time. I saw but did not analyze what I saw. I was too confused and afraid. I didn’t want to know because I wanted to become a priest and not a rebeller against the status quo. Later on my fears were confirmed. We need manly priests.
Great article!!!! Great courage! It is off putting to have an effeminant priest. Makes you wonder….
I recently completed six years of seminary training and was ordained a priest. Going into seminary in my mid-20′s, I was a bit concerned about this issue, whether there would be a dominant effeminate or possibly gay culture there. However this never ended up being a major issue at either of the two places in which I studied. Yes, there were some seminarians who could fit this criteria, but it was not a large percentage or the dominant culture of the seminary. I have noticed it among some faculty and middle aged priests more so than those of my generation and have heard plenty of stories from past years about other people’s seminary formation in the past. I think manly and orthodox seminarians are much more now the norm than they were in previous decades. Being effeminate does not necessarily make one a bad priest or seminarian but I agree with the author that it can be a distraction in ministry and should be treated in formation along with the many other issues that a person may have to work on.
Thank you for this very excellent article. I think you should go all the way and say, the reason there are so many sexually deviant seminarians and priests is because for upwards of 55 years now, the seminaries have been actively recruiting and selecting them, and rejecting very many normal males. I recall watching a documentary on PBS a few years ago about the sex abuse scandal–the now-adult victim did a thorough investigation of the 1960 graduating class from his abuser’s seminary in Massachusetts. He showed a class photograph with the priests who had been convicted of chid sex abuse and/or had left the priesthood due to child sexual abuse–well over 10% of the class!
One of the received truths of our age, unfortunately promoted by Cardinal Francis George of all people, in that infamous report, is that homosexuals are not child sex abusers. Nonsense! The “gay” movement has always had a large wing which is into “intergenerational” sex, i.e., adult males with minor males. NAMBLA was founded in part by sexually active, child sexually abusing Catholic priests, in fact, one of their mottos is “sex by 8 or it’s too late!”
Here in the Archdiocese of Chicago, about 10-15 years ago, a very highly regarded priest reported in the Chicago Sun-Times that when he was in seminary in the late 1960′s and very early 1970′s, his priest-professors at Mundelein Seminary would regularly recruit seminarians to sleep with visiting professors who were needless to say Catholic priests in good standing. He was careful to say no one was ever forced to do this, but that if you did not go along to get along, you would definitely pay the price.
A few years after that article came out, the priests at St. John Cantius parish in Chicago started announcing from the pulpit during Sunday Mass that Mundelein Seminary had now been “cleaned up” and it now safe to allow your sons to go there. It is a crying shame that no one can talk about this.
The Church has consistently taught, and Pope Benedict XVI reaffirmed, that while persons suffering from same-sex attraction are to be shown every consideration, they are in no way to be admitted to ministry. Unfortunately, the received wisdom is that it is somehow un-Christian to talk about this sort of thing. I say it is most un-Christian to pretend the problem does not exist, as it permits the problem to grow and fester completely unchecked.
My junior year of college I walked into a vocation director’s office and told him that I wanted to be a priest. But, I said that I did not want to attend a seminary with a gay culture. It was hard for me to bring up the issue. He politely told me that he didn’t think that I would be a good fit at that time. Sounds like he saved me a lot of misery.
The manly cultivation of Christian virtues ought to be an all-around top priority during seminary life, as the author suggests.
I highly recommend that every diocesan and religious seminarian read thoroughly, at least one time, the spiritual masterpiece of Fr. Alphonsus Rogriguez, originally published in Spanish in 1609, translated into English directly from the Spanish by Fr. Joseph Rickaby in 1929. The entire text is freely accessible via the Internet Archive:
Practice of Perfection and Christian Virtues
https://archive.org/details/PPCV-Manresa
https://archive.org/download/PPCV-Manresa/PPCV-Manresa.pdf
A fruitful half-hour of mental prayer can be made from the material on almost every page in this neglected classic.
As a man currently in religious formation in the United States for four years, I say this article speaks nothing but the truth as I have likewise experienced it.
Don’t weaken! May God give you courage and perseverance. My prayers are with you. God bless.
Coddled since childhood, adored by the aunts, never really in the world – today’s average American-born seminarian is missing the fatherly/manly qualification. I’d rather have half the priests we now have than to keep getting a diet of effeminate ones.
This is an excellent article by Fr. Mason which touches on one of the most troubling aspects of priesthood in the modern world. I have been a priest for fourteen years and I came through the formation system of the 1990s, where the effeminate gay culture was systemic, and to challenge it in anyway could end the seminary career of a good orthodox seminarian. I, and many others, survived the system by playing by the rules and keeping our heads down below the radar only to encounter its effects on Diocesan structures among bishops and priests. In my experience, there is a large gay culture that functions in the Catholic Church of the United States which expresses itself in the preaching of the popular culture, rather than what the Church holds true in faith and morals. When I was ordained, I took an oath, as all priests do, to be faithful to the teaching Magisterium of the Catholic Church. I take this oath very seriously because, by virtue of my role as a priest and teacher, I am responsible for the souls of those whom I minister to. This effeminate gay culture within the Church is putting many souls at-risk, and needs to be taken seriously as a danger to the Church, and be addressed. Thanks again for this timely article.
Very good article, with an accurate premise. Having attended a seminary for many years and keeping tabs on seminaries, Fr. Mason is spot on. I am a clutz as a mechanic, along with inherited lack of athletic ability; but even in the 78-86 when I attended, recognized a need to give a firm handshake, among other manly attributes. At the same time, the same weakness not addressed leaves our good priests and deacons with a feminine mindset that unintentionally lets good Catholic men avoid proper challenge to be Godly men. For instance, in the men’s group, while the thanks is needed and appreciated, we tend to leave it at a few charitable works of mercy as being the pinnacle of our Catholic faith. Especially in this day and age, men as a rule still react to proper expression of emotions as anathema; and, in part because of effeminancy in attitude and atmosphere of liturgy and parish life overall, often confusing their spiritual role of leader, husband and father with avoiding emotions all together. In other words the improper, inadequate expression of faith they see being projected is used as an excuse not to grow spiritually intro warriors for the Lord with the appropriate use of manly emotions and passions–thus avoiding an active prayer life, growth in actually reading Sacred Scripture, Catechism and the wealth the Church as to provide, confusing the “good ole boy” syndrome as being all they need to get by. Either that or they leave all together.
There are many positive signs. In our area we have programs such as Alpha, Cursillo being revived, and other moves. However, we are still in the mindset of not actually truly addressing the male ego and it’s needs.. Until we recognize how inadequately we are addressing the male ego, in particular with areas such as the role of man a spiritual leader, (including finally seriously addressing a long term issue of the male role in contraception), we have to ask ourselves if we are ultimately promoting an atmosphere of maintenance.
Would that we could break free of the often confused “peace and justice” mentality and equip our men to pursue true Catholic spirit of social justice, starting with our families. Would that we can break free of the effeminate rendering of Isaiah 2.4, “and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and there spears into pruning hooks”. Would that we could balance the truth of the peace of the Lord Jesus God becoming man expressed in the passage with the reality we are in this world, while not of it, for St. Paul tells us in Ephesians 6.11-12: “Put on the whole armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. For we are not contending against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against the powers, against the world rulers of this present darkness, against the spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places.” Would that we can say today is a day and age for men as expressed in Joel 3.9-10: “Proclaim this among the nations: Prepare war, stir up the mighty men. Let all the men of war draw near, let them come up, Beat your plowshares into swords, and your pruning hooks into spears; let the weak say, ‘I am a warrior.”
The male role in contraception and abortion are HUGE and largely unaddressed issues! Wimps and bastards are procreating and running away like a bunch of over-estrogenised sissies; most of the rest are contracepting and sitting back and letting the women deal with it. This is the real MAMMOTH in the room! This brings SHAME on men and weakens society in general.
What happened to self-control?
I appreciate your courage in putting a name to something that is slowly eating away at the power of true manhood, that along with strong womanhood, can redeem our broken world. I would like to make known that Bishop Carlson is not the only one taking steps to get to know his dioceses seminarians well. Bishop Choby, the bishop of the diocese of Nashville is the vocations director and accepts each of them into the seminary personally and has the opportunity to develop a relationship with each one. And his efforts have paid off, last year was a record year around the country for priestly ordinations and many people in the parishes with the newly ordained priests are very impressed. What you prescribe in a Bishop’s presence among seminarians is making a difference in Nashville.
Excellent article. Long overdue.
Thank you!
(A former seminarian)
Bravo Father, you hit the nail right on the head.
Yes, having experienced a gay priest I will tell you that many left the Church. I moved away.