Did the Last Supper enable the sex abuse scandal?

Ex-priest and Fishwrap beacon of light Eugene Cullen Kennedy, still alive, has a mundivagant piece at said Fishwrap (aka the National Schismatic Reporter) entitled “Did the Council of Trent enable the sex abuse scandal?”

No, really. He went there. He may have even been there, I don’t know.

I would return to the NSR with the following questions:

Did the Last Supper cause the sex abuse scandal?


Jesus knew Judas would betray the Church and sell it out for money and He ordained him anyway.

He knew that Peter, John and James would not be vigilant in the garden, and he ordained them anyway.

He knew that almost all the Apostles would abandon him, and he consecrated them anyway.

He knew Peter would deny him, and He made him Pope anyway.

The Council and Trent and sexual abuse… the mind boggles.

Look.  If you don’t like Trent because you don’t believe anymore that the Mass is a Sacrifice and you are more or less Protestant, and because you don’t like the older form of Holy Mass and are angry that it has been derestricted, then, naturally,  you go to the zoo and link the scandal to Trent and the Fishwrap is happy to publish the result.

Why can’t we just admit that Jesus was terrible at picking bishops and then blame the sex abuse crisis on the Last Supper?


About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in Liberals, The Drill, Throwing a Nutty, You must be joking! and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.


  1. dominic1955 says:

    Problem is, not many of that kind (ex-priests known for expousing heretical or smacks-of-heretical opinions in print) probably think that a) Jesus “ordained” anyone and b) that the Last Supper was any sort of “Mass”. Also, I really doubt he was at the Council of Trent, he probably would have been in Geneva chanting, “Hell no, we won’t go!” after getting the invite…

    In actuality, Jesus, a really cool dude, just got together with his pals and had a meal and did something. I mean, really did something. Profound. Authentic. Real. You know what I’m saying? Like, he really stuck it to the Man that night, power to the people! Now the Man in Rome think they can bogart this groovy night for bread and power. Bummer, man…

  2. Nicholas Shaler says:

    All I can say is, “Wut?”

  3. mrshopey says:

    Since the LCWR group have it all together (doing away with the hierarchical structure) what is their reason for abuse and failure to report abuse?
    Also, what is the reason it is in decline and yet, we still have hierarchical structure?
    If I chop off my head, the headache will go away. No doubt.

  4. OrthodoxChick says:

    I just read the fishwrap article. Talk about spin. Now that a little light is being shone on the existence of the lavender mafia, their clericalism, and their role in the cover up of abuse, this ex-priest comes out with a hit piece on those perceived to lean traditional. He says, “The hierarchical dynamic put everybody in their proper place. That is why, for example, there has been a major move to install altar rails in churches and new regulations to prevent laypeople from handling the sacred vessels while mandating them to bow to the priest before receiving the Eucharist. You can’t make this stuff up, but the hierarchical mind grinds such regulations out in order to get lowly laypeople out of the sanctuary and back where they belong.”

    I can’t believe that this man was once ordained. He sounds like he served in the Diocese of Mars. Or maybe it was Jupiter.

    This man is the poster child of those who do (or did, in his case) seek to destroy the Church from within. I’m glad that he’s now on the outside looking in.

  5. dans0622 says:

    I didn’t read the article, since Fr. Z (it seems) so helpfully did not provide a link. I sincerely thank you, Father. Anyway, Pope Francis just lauded Trent today (session XXIII, apparently), in speaking to the Congregation for Bishops about the residential requirements of bishops.

  6. SimonDodd says:

    Yuo have to remember, you could fire a cannon loaded with grapeshot into the NCR combox and not hit a single person unwilling to forthrightly deny that Jesus ever ordained anyone to anything. It’s hooey, they will tell you, made up by the Council of Trent. They don’t believe it. So this argument isn’t going to work with them for reasons that reveal a far deeper religious malady that affects them. They fundamental question for every Christian born after the Ascension is the question of authority—what are the authoritative sources through which we come to know Jesus Christ, His will, and His Church. And these people don’t accept the Catholic answer to that question. Many of them don’t even believe that scripture has authority. They certainly don’t believe that the Church has any authority. They don’t even believe that a council has authority. They don’t even really believe that the spirit of a council has authority—that’s just pretext for the one and only thing that they actually believe has authority: They themselves.

  7. SimonDodd says:

    Apologies for the typos in the preceding comment…

  8. wmeyer says:

    Trent led to the sex abuse scandal in the same way that breathing is the cause of cancer.

  9. NBW says:

    I think this man needs to take a good LONG look at his own life before pointing his finger at the Council of Trent or any other major council of the Church.

  10. Johnno says:

    Why stop there?

    God created us.

    And God created us knowing that we have the ability to sexually abuse one another.

    Therefore God enabled the sex abuse scandal.

    Ergo, sex abuse could be a good thing.

    So we must honor God by decriminalizing it, celebrate it with pride and throw a lavish public parade for the participants!

  11. Minnesotan from Florida says:

    Orthodox Chick quotes the NCR author as saying, “[B]ow to the priest before receiving the Holy Eucharist,” or similar words. I would have thought that any and everybody could see that the bowing is to the Lord Jesus, there present under the appearance of bread. Or am I so very very wrong in my devotion all these years?

  12. Athelstan says:

    Effectively, Kennedy is saying that at Trent, the Protestants were right, and the Catholics got it wrong. This is not a novel position, obviously, but it is still striking to see it given a place of honor in a publication with the word “Catholic” in its title.

    Of course, Kennedy would part company with Calvin, Luther, Melancthon, et al over their puritanical sexual hang ups. But they were still fighting the power. Not their fault they weren’t as close to the Omega Point as Professor Kennedy.

  13. JonPatrick says:

    I would say that it was Adam and Eve’s disobedience toward God which lead to original sin that caused the sex abuse scandal. But God created Adam and Eve so as Johnno says …

  14. Magash says:

    Remember Athelstan, NCR only has “Catholic” in their name because they were and are disobedient to their bishop who told them to remove it decades ago. Why the institutional Church doesn’t go to the secular courts to sue them for falsely representing themselves as being Catholic I have no idea. Why their bishop doesn’t excommunicate the lot of them I have no idea. Why we (that is lay Catholics) don’t petition the canonical court systems for action on them I also have no idea.

  15. StJude says:

    uh……………say what?

  16. Magash says:

    In the late 1960’s according to Wikipedia and contemporary sources:
    (Diocese of Kansas City Bishop) Helmsing warned that NCR’s writers were likely guilty of heresy and subject to the automatic excommunication that incurs. Because the publication “does not reflect the teaching of the Church, but on the contrary, has openly and deliberately opposed this teaching,” he asked the editors to “drop the term ‘Catholic’ from their masthead,” because “they deceive their Catholic readers and do a great disservice to ecumenism by … watering down Catholic teachings.”

    As recent as last year Bishop Robert Finn of Kansas City has asked for the same thing.

  17. Magash says:

    To continue:
    If I don’t work for Disney I can’t open a Disney store. Starbucks would take me to court if I opened a coffee shop and called it Starbuks. Why should a publication that is not Catholic use the “Catholic” brandname without being brought to court and made to cease and desist? Certainly Michael Voris ceased using the “Catholic” brand when requested by his bishop, which is why he now uses the “Church Militant” title for his channel.
    If the bishop conferences, and indeed the Bishop of Kansas City, had followed up with a real declaration of excommunication then the situation might be different.
    Baring that any adult Catholic has the authority to appeal to the Church’s own legal system to request that action be taken against another Catholic who is flaunting Church law, which does give the local bishop the authority to determine who can call present themselves as Catholic, that is under the authority of the Church and who can not.

  18. Mike says:

    Magash says:

    Why the institutional Church doesn’t go to the secular courts to sue [the self-styled National Catholic Reporter] for falsely representing themselves as being Catholic I have no idea. Why their bishop doesn’t excommunicate the lot of them I have no idea. Why we (that is lay Catholics) don’t petition the canonical court systems for action on them I also have no idea. . . .

    I’d gladly join that petition.

    . . . Certainly Michael Voris ceased using the “Catholic” brand when requested by his bishop, which is why he now uses the “Church Militant” title for his channel.

    Does the Reporter spend anywhere near as much time calling out episcopal and Conference squishiness as Voris does?

  19. Nancy D. says:

    Jesus also knew who would repent and be willing to serve their penance.

Comments are closed.