Goodbye, Good Men: How Progressive Bishops Sabotage Vocations

Two studies show that major ideological differences between bishops and their priests and seminarians are destructive of vocations to priesthood and religious life.

June 4, 2025 by Father Gordon MacRae

On June 5, 2025, the day after this is posted, I mark forty-three years of priesthood. Thirty one of those years have been spent in wrongful imprisonment, and the last sixteen of them have been lived out in your presence through this blog. Reflecting on priesthood in these circumstances has always been a challenge. Even as I offered Mass alone in my cell last Sunday night, I was struck by the absolute absence of anything or anyone around me that supports even the idea of priesthood. But yet, here I am. I reached into an older post with elements that may sound a little familiar by their repetition, but it is important that I uphold them. I do not want my life as a priest to go the way of my favorite Willie Nelson song about the things I should have said and done.

Not long ago, I was surprised to be bestowed with the honor of membership in The Catholic Writers Guild. One of my first thoughts as I plugged in my typewriter today is that this might be the post that gets me kicked out. We are in one of the strangest times in the life of the Church and in the ministry of bishops and priests that we have seen in many centuries. There have been times almost as strange, but the difference is that you were kept from knowing about them.

My priesthood ordination took place on June 5, 1982 at St. John the Evangelist Church in Hudson, New Hampshire. It did not start off well. There was another candidate for ordination that year, but he fled just days before. Someone then scrambled to revise and reprint the program for the Mass of Ordination. It was presided over by The Most Reverend Odore Gendron, Bishop of Manchester. That was four bishops ago.

Like most Catholic priests in America, I was ordained on a Saturday afternoon. Unlike most, I was ordained alone. Such a thing became a more prevalent phenomenon, however, as the signs of the times began to reflect the sins of the times. In the 1970s and 1980s, fewer men found the courage for such a counter-cultural commitment as the Catholic priesthood, a response I will be presenting in a special restored post for Pentecost this week. That post will describe the story behind the story of the gathering of the Apostles at Pentecost. The Acts of the Apostles (1:13) reports that the Eleven — Judas had come to ruin — came to Jerusalem in the company of Mary, Mother of the Resurrected Jesus, to mark the Pilgrimage Feast of Weeks fifty days after the spring celebration described in the Book of Leviticus (23:15-16). Among the Greek-speaking Jews of the New Testament, it came to be called Pentecost for “fiftieth day.”

Pentecost had long been a Jewish festival but it became a Christian feast when the Holy Spirit came upon the Apostles in Jerusalem in the form of a mighty wind and tongues of fire. Immediately after, the newborn Church saw its first scandal as Peter rose to defend the Apostles against a false accusation that they were all intoxicated at 9:00 in the morning (Acts 2:15).

One of my most vivid memories of my ordination is lying prostrate alone on the floor before the altar while a choir intoned for a packed church the Litany of Saints. I had a moment of terror on that floor as I imagined my sister shouting at me from a pew several feet away, “Get up, you fool! Flee!” I later asked my sister if she actually had such a thought. “Yup, that was me.”

Thirty-one years later in 2013 Dorothy Rabinowitz was writing “The Trials of Father MacRae,” her third in a series for The Wall Street Journal. She interviewed my sister who spoke candidly with a comment that never made its way into the articles. “The Catholic Church took my brother,” my sister said, “And now look what they have done to him.”

I have written of this in past Ordination Anniversary posts, but many people have since asked me The Big Question. If I knew then what I know now, would I have joined John, the man who was to be ordained with me, in flight from this fate?

The Signs of the Times

Back in 2012, Anne Hendershott penned a research study for The Catholic World Report entitled, “Called by Name.” There were some interesting statistics analyzed in the study. In 2010 in the Diocese of El Paso, Texas, a region that is 79-percent Catholic, there were no priesthood ordinations.

In the same year in the Diocese of Lincoln, Nebraska, a region that is only 17-percent Catholic, there were seven ordinations to the priesthood. In Portland, Oregon, the population of which is only 16-percent Catholic, there were nine ordinations in 2010. Researchers suggested that areas with large Latino populations may have fewer candidates for priesthood.

That turned out to be untrue. In the Diocese of Corpus Christi, Texas in 2010 there were seven priesthood ordinations and most were Latino. But across the nation in 2010, the number of priesthood ordinations and their ratio to the Catholic population varied greatly. Something less obvious was driving this.

In 1996, then Omaha, Nebraska Archbishop Elden Curtis penned an article entitled “Crisis in Vocations? What Crisis?” He theorized with some compelling data to back it up, that the attitudes and strength of fidelity in Church leadership is the number one causal factor in reduced numbers of viable candidates for priesthood. Archbishop Curtis wrote:

“When dioceses and religious communities are unambiguous about the ordained priesthood and vowed religious life as the Church defines these calls; when there is strong support for vocations, and a minimum of dissent about the male celibate priesthood and religious life; when there is loyalty to the Magisterium; when the bishops, priests, religious and lay people are united in vocation ministry — then there are documented increases in vocations. Young people do not want to commit themselves to dioceses or communities that permit or simply ignore dissent from Church doctrine”

— Archbishop Elden Curtis

In her article for The Catholic World Report  cited above, Anne Hendershott analyzed a study by Andrew Yuengert, a Pepperdine University sociologist, who tried to quantify the observations of Archbishop Curtis about the connection between priesthood vocations and the attitudes and fidelity of Church leaders. He discovered some fascinating corollaries.

Andrew Yuengert found that dioceses with bishops ordained in the 1970s had significantly lower numbers of priesthood vocations than those with bishops ordained before or later. He found that corollary to be most prominent in the ordination statistics of bishops who were characterized as orthodox or progressive. Of interest, he discovered that bishops who regularly published articles in America magazine — considered to be more liberal — fostered fewer vocations than bishops who were more likely to publish articles in The Catholic Answer, considered to be more orthodox.

There was another interesting corollary in the Yuengert study. You may remember the great controversy at the University of Notre Dame in 2009 when then-President Barack Obama was invited to give the Commencement Address and was bestowed with an honorary degree.

At the time, eighty-three U.S. bishops signed a formal statement disapproving of the University administration’s decision to bestow an honorary degree on the openly pro-abortion President Obama who worked to expand access to abortion throughout the U.S. and the world. Yuengert discovered in this another unexpected corollary: Many of the 83 bishops who signed that statement led dioceses with the highest percentages of priesthood ordinations in the country.

The Sins of the Times

I have heard many horror stories from priests ordained in the 1970s and 1980s that the seminaries they were sent to were anything but loyal to the Magisterium and supportive of priestly vocations. I have a horror story of my own that I wrote about a decade ago. It is worth repeating because it was typical of the sins of the times in the 1970s and 1980s, the era in which the decline of priesthood was set in motion.

Following my 1978 graduation from St. Anselm College in New Hampshire, I was making a transition from religious life as a Capuchin to study for diocesan priesthood. I had requested to study at St. John’s Seminary in the Archdiocese of Boston which was where I grew up. I was sent instead to Baltimore. This story took place in the fall of 1979 in my second year of graduate theological studies at St. Mary’s Seminary and University in Baltimore. St. Mary’s was at the time considered to be the most academically challenging and most theologically liberal of U.S. seminaries. It was called “The Harvard of seminaries,” but it also had a reputation for fostering — even demanding — dissent.

There were about 160 seminarians from some 40 U.S. dioceses studying for priesthood at St. Mary’s then. It had a capacity for more than twice that number, a reality that created an atmosphere of competition between national seminaries (as opposed to local seminaries like St. John’s in Boston). Though St. Mary’s has undergone a complete revision of its direction since then, in the 1970s and 1980s it was known among priests as a birthplace of theological dissent.

The atmosphere reflected that. Seminarians never wore any form of clerical attire, and would have been laughed out the door if they did. The beautiful main chapel was used for Mass only once per week — on Wednesday nights where a weekly seminary-wide liturgy took place, often hosting clown masses, experimental music (“Dust in the Wind” by Kansas was once the Communion hymn).

There were many liturgical abuses, and any refutation earned the commenter a notation of “theologically rigid” in his file. Other weekday masses were held in small groups in faculty quarters. On Sundays, seminarians were on their own, encouraged to attend Mass at one of several Baltimore parishes. Some rarely ever attended Mass at all.

In 1979, a rift of sorts formed between the seminary rector and those planning for a U.S. visit by Pope John Paul II at the end of the first year of his pontificate. In October, 1979, Pope John Paul II spent six eventful days in the United States, visiting Boston, New York City, Philadelphia, Iowa, Chicago, and Washington, D.C.

One of the highlights of the visit was Pope John Paul’s address to the United Nations General Assembly on October 2, 1979. He stressed the theme of human rights and the dignity of the person, deploring violations of religious freedoms. However, most of the 67 addresses given by Pope John Paul II during his visit were directed to Catholics and stressed their responsibilities as believing members of the Church.

The messages were conservative in tone and contained unqualified condemnations of abortion, artificial birth control, homosexual practice, and premarital and extramarital sex. The Pope reminded priests of the permanency of their ordination vows and also ruled out the possibility of ordination for women, bringing protests from a number of misguided Catholic activists.

Little of Pope John Paul’s vision for the Church in the modern world was received with any enthusiasm by the administration and faculty of St. Mary’s Seminary in Baltimore. It was in the weeks before this momentous visit that all hell broke loose at St. Mary’s. The seminary rector, Father Leonard Foisy, now deceased, was a priest of my diocese and a member of the Congregation of St. Sulpice — aka The Sulpicians — which ran the nation’s oldest seminary since its founding some 200 years earlier.

Just weeks before Pope John Paul’s planned visit, it was somehow learned that all seminarians from several major seminaries in the region were invited by the Holy Father to take part in a Mass for seminarians on the National Mall in Washington, DC. Upwards of a thousand seminarians were to have special seating with an expected crowd of 100,000.

Seminarians at St. Mary’s in Baltimore, one hour from Washington, DC, however, were never told of the invitation, nor were we told that the Seminary Rector had declined it on our behalf for reasons that he refused to divulge. The resultant furor was shocking; not only for the majority liberal seminarians, but for the administration and faculty who just assumed that we would disdain the theology and vision of Pope John Paul II just as much as they did. A line had been crossed that threatened to sever our identity as future priests.

A letter of protest was quickly drafted and signed by more than half of the 160 seminarians representing some forty dioceses across the land. I was one of the signatories of that letter, a fact that the Rector took very personally because we represented the same diocese, the Diocese of Manchester, New Hampshire. As a result, I was labeled a disobedient rebel.

A seminary-wide meeting was held, and the Rector doubled down on his rejection of the papal invitation. He warned that anyone who attempted to attend the Pope’s Mass one hour away in Washington would not receive permission to do so, and would receive failing grades for any course work assigned for that day. He also said that several crucial exams would be held that day and failing grades would be reported back to the diocese of each seminarian along with a report of disobedience to his legitimate authority.

Needless to say, we went anyway. No one has a vocation to the seminary.

The Priest Who Kicked the Hornet’s Nest

The graphic above is not a real book, so please don’t try to order it from Amazon. It was created by the BTSW editor in response to a post of mine that stirred an uproar when first posted in November, 2013.

That post publicly refuted another priest who published a letter in Our Sunday Visitor calling for expanded use of the death penalty in the United States. As a prisoner-priest, I wrote in favor of mercy. But it was I, and not he, who kicked the hornet’s nest.

Back to the seminary: One factor that struck me at St. Mary’s in the 1970s was the unwillingness of some bishops to become involved in — or even aware of — the training of their future priests. Formal complaints from seminarians about the blatant disregard for Pope John Paul II by seminary administration were ignored by most of the bishops who received them.

Some of the more traditional seminarians survived only because they were academically brilliant. They became the priests who kicked the hornet’s nest merely for refusing to either bend in their fidelity or be driven out as candidates for priesthood.

In the years since my ordination, I have heard many stories from priests whose priestly spirits were wounded in a kind of spiritual abuse that characterized their seminary years. Perhaps some will comment here.

In January 2023, I wrote and posted “Priests in Crisis: The Catholic University of America Study.” It is a most important document that especially needs the Church’s attention at this time of great transition in Rome. A good deal of pressure had been placed by the previous pontificate upon those who have come to express their devotion and find spiritual solace in the Traditional Latin Mass. The Catholic University of American Study examines what has been happening in the breech between more liberal bishops and younger more conservative priests. The absolutism of disdain from upper levels for more conservative and traditional expressions of Catholicism has had the effect of driving people toward Tradition, and not from it. In more recent times some bishops have reacted to this by edict and fiat rather than by leadership. One newly appointed bishop in an East-coast diocese has created a great stir by forcing any observants of the Traditional Latin Mass into the rural hinterlands in his diocese. The previous bishop there had opened a seminary which has attracted a significant number of candidates for priesthood. It remains to be seen what becomes of them, but they should henceforth be treated as a treasure of the Church and not as an experiment. Anything less is to repeat a grave mistake from the 1970s captured in the book, Goodbye, Good Men.

When you think about it rationally, the Traditional Mass, which at one time was the only Mass, seems a very strange place for any bishop to plant his flag on a hill of battle with the People of God. As I pointed out in these pages one week ago, “Jesus Christ is the same, yesterday, today, and forever.” (Hebrews 13:8)

+ + +

Note from Father Gordon MacRae: Thank you for reading and sharing this post. Sharing this, along with one or two of the timely posts below, just may be a Corporal Work of Mercy for someone else:

Did Leo XIV Bring a Catholic Awakening Or Was It the Other Way Around?

In the Absence of Fathers: A Story of Elephants and Men

Priests in crisis: The Catholic University of America Study

Convicted for Cash: An American Grand Scam

The Eucharistic Adoration Chapel established by Saint Maximilian Kolbe was inaugurated at the outbreak of World War II. It was restored as a Chapel of Adoration in September, 2018, the commemoration of the date that the war began. It is now part of the World Center of Prayer for Peace. The live internet feed of the Adoration Chapel at Niepokalanow — sponsored by EWTN — was established just a few weeks before we discovered it and began to include in at Beyond These Stone Walls. Click “Watch on YouTube” in the lower left corner to see how many people around the world are present there with you. The number appears below the symbol for EWTN.

Click or tap here to proceed to the Adoration Chapel.

The following is a translation from the Polish in the image above: “Eighth Star in the Crown of Mary Queen of Peace” “Chapel of Perpetual Adoration of the Blessed Sacrament at Niepokalanow. World Center of Prayer for Peace.” “On September 1, 2018, the World Center of Prayer for Peace in Niepokalanow was opened. It would be difficult to find a more expressive reference to the need for constant prayer for peace than the anniversary of the outbreak of World War II.”

For the Catholic theology behind this image, visit my post, “The Ark of the Covenant and the Mother of God.”

Did Leo XIV Bring a Catholic Awakening Or Was It the Other Way Around?

Cancel Culture was canceled after the 2024 election. A Catholic awakening began with the 2025 Conclave. Did Pope Leo XIV bring it, or did it bring us Pope Leo XIV?

May 28, 2025 by Father Gordon MacRae

On Sunday, May 18, 2025, I watched much of the Inaugural Mass for Pope Leo XIV broadcast by EWTN from St. Peter’s Square. Like many, I was amazed not only by the size of the crowd — estimated by The Wall Street Journal to be about 200,000 — but also by the makeup of that crowd. Jubilant young men and women, thousands of young families, priests, seminarians, religious sisters, energetic Catholic youth, and men and women of all ages celebrated the moment with brilliant smiles and deep respect. Not since the papacy of John Paul II have I witnessed such an outpouring of energy and exuberance in a Catholic setting.

I wrote a post back in 2018 entitled, “The Once and Future Catholic Church.” It began with a troubling but truthful account from the early days of Islam in the Seventh Century AD. It told a story that has since been spun into acceptability and normalcy across once-Catholic Europe. The brief story and its aftermath are historically important. We will link to that post again at the end of this one.

That post also profiled a fine article entitled “The Catholic Crisis” by Sohrab Ahmari in the May, 2018 issue of Commentary magazine. It was a review of the book, To Change the Church: Pope Francis and the Future of Catholicism by Ross Douthat. At the time of his review, Sohrab Ahmari was a recent and celebrated convert to the Catholic faith. He was also the London editor for The Wall Street Journal. His Review and Douthat’s book were written during the papacy of Pope Francis. Here is an excerpt describing their experience and that of many before the Conclave of 2025:

“There is reason to worry that lately a spirit of relativism has entered the Roman Church that threatens to undermine its unity and catholicity. That should concern Catholics and non-Catholics, because the Church is the living bedrock of the West and one of the last bastions of the principle that moral truth is moral truth yesterday, today, a thousand years from now.”

That sacred trust, which the Church must hold and defend, calls to mind for me one of the basic tenets of Scriptural faith that is too often overlooked in any quest to abandon yesterday in anticipation of tomorrow: “Jesus Christ is the same, yesterday, today, and forever” (Hebrews 13:8).

During the 12-year pontificate of Pope Francis, both of the Catholic writers cited above experienced a papacy that “thrived in ambiguity.” Among their list of perplexing notions was a media-hyped comment by Pope Francis that called into question the existence of hell. Defenders of the Pope excused the incident as a misreading of the Pope’s remarks by left-leaning atheist journalist, Eugenio Scalfari. However, as Mr. Ahmari pointed out it was the fifth interview Pope Francis had granted to that particular journalist.

At the same time, Pope Francis was unresponsive to requests for dialogue and clarification in a series of Dubia posed by Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke and other conservative prelates. The Pope, according to Ahmari, “first ignored and then ridiculed them.”

Sorab Ahmari also reported on Douthat’s “fascinating speculation” on the projected future of liberal Catholicism:

“Liberals simply don’t have the numbers … . Theological liberalism is in demographic decline, and liberal orders struggle to attract vocations. Church coffers may be full, but the pews are empty. The leading lights of theological liberalism are octogenarians, and there are no successors in the wings. Conservatives and traditionalists, meanwhile, have the numbers, the intellects and the energy. Orders that prize orthodoxy are thriving worldwide.”

The Conservative Rise

It is important to acknowledge where we have been. Two weeks before the Conclave and the election of a new pope, The Wall Street Journal published a most interesting Front Page analysis entitled, “Conservative U.S. Catholics Gain Sway” by Joshua Chaffin and Aaron Zitner (WSJ, April 22, 2025). It was published on the day after the death of Pope Francis implying that much of its research and content was written prior to that development. The authors described that their analysis “focused attention on the Vatican’s fraught relationship with an American flock undergoing cultural and theological changes … .”

Consulting a number of Vatican observers and insiders, the authors presented keen insights on what they expected from the Conclave. The result, however, was entirely unexpected. The Conclave completed its mission just one day after it commenced. The Journal authors had cited a brief final meeting between Vice President JD Vance and Pope Francis on the day before the Pope’s death:

“For Francis, it was a final encounter with the conservative wing of American Catholicism that is flourishing and increasingly assertive at a time when the Church, more broadly, is struggling.”

Of interest, a companion article in the days before the Conclave, “Who Are the Frontrunners for the Papacy?” by Marcus Walker (WSJ, April 22, 2025) presented ten cardinals seen as “front-runners,” a misleading term that suggests a political campaign. Despite the secrecy of a conclave, it is by no means certain that any of the names proposed were “running” for the office. The one ultimately elected, Cardinal Robert Francis Prevost, was presented in the Journal article as a “dark horse.”

However, one of the commentators made a prescient statement before the Conclave began. In a lecture on the growth of Catholic conservatism, theologian David Deane spoke of JD Vance and his brief meeting with Pope Francis on the day before his death: “Vance is one of a legion of young people who have followed the path from atheism to radical suspicion and rejection of liberal culture to a form of Augustine-inspired Christianity … . Seminaries are increasingly populated by young men who think like this.”

This was followed in the Chaffin and Zitner article in the Journal by a reflection from Timothy Gray, President of the Augustine Institute, a Catholic graduate school of theology outside St. Louis, MO that “emphasizes a return to the rigors of Scripture and Tradition”:

“A lot of progressives think that if the Church could just accommodate the modern world, it will stop its decline. But everywhere the Church has embraced the modern world and its contemporary values, it has died.”

Such comments may have been prophetic. The Conclave commenced just ten days later. After deliberating for only four voting sessions in less than two days, the Conclave elected “the dark horse,” Cardinal Robert Francis Prevost, formerly Superior General of the Order of Saint Augustine.

The Catholic Project

In 2022, The Catholic Project, a research initiative of Catholic University in Washington, DC published the striking results of a survey of 3,500 U.S. Catholic priests. It found that among those ordained after 2010, 80 percent identify as conservative or orthodox while those who identify as liberal or progressives have faced a virtual collapse. Stephen P. White, Executive Director of The Catholic Project, called this “a massive shift among priests,” adding that this trend is rapidly spreading not only in the United States, but throughout much of the Western world.

A separate research project on Catholic priests by the Augustine Institute documented that younger priests tend to be much more conservative and traditional that older priests. This bears out from observations in comments and emails from our readers who find this distinction to be a positive development. Writing at the time for The Wall Street Journal, Vatican correspondent Francis X. Rocca reported on the strains of this trend in “Catholic Ideological Split Widens” (WSJ, Dec. 19, 2022):

“U.S. Catholic bishops elected conservative leaders (in 2022) continuing to resist a push from Pope Francis to put issues such as climate change and poverty on par with the bishops’ declared priority of opposing abortion.”

The bishops appointed by Pope Francis tended to mirror his priorities. His elevation of San Diego Archbishop Robert McElroy, a leading liberal among U.S. bishops, to the College of Cardinals and then as Cardinal Archbishop of Washington, DC, is an example. That appointment was preceded two years earlier by the sudden, highly controversial removal of popular conservative Bishop Joseph Strickland from the Diocese of Tyler, Texas leaving many in that diocese and among conservatives throughout the United States reeling from the loss.

According to a WSJ article, Pope Francis had expressed his own discontent with some leaders in the U.S. Church. In 2023, he cited a “very strong, organized reactionary attitude” against him by conservatives in the U.S. Church, adding: “I would like to remind these people that backwardness is useless.” Seemingly in response, he removed Bishop Strickland from his post stirring up a reaction, manifested in distrust, among a majority of conservative U.S. Catholics.

There is thus a growing disparity in liberal versus conservative views as newly appointed bishops are more liberal while priests emerging from U.S. seminaries over the last few decades are more conservative and traditional. When seminarians and younger priests do not have their views of the Church and Catholic practice affirmed, stress and disillusionment develop and increase.

Since the 1980s, successive annual priesthood ordinations have grown more conservative. Each successive 10-year grouping in the ordained priesthood supports Church teaching on moral and theological issues more strongly than in the decade before. Those ordained after 2010, as a whole, are the most conservative. Younger priests represent a generation disillusioned with the ideas of progressive religious pluralism.

This had left an ever widening chasm between Pope Francis, his Episcopal appointments, and younger priests in the United States. The Catholic Project Study also revealed that 80 percent of U.S. priests ordained before 1980 approved strongly of Pope Francis, while only 20 percent of those ordained after 2010 shared that high approval.

According to the most recent Pew Research Center survey, 19 percent of Americans report that they identify as Catholic. That dropped from 24 percent in a 2007 survey. In the 1970s, in excess of 50 percent of U.S. Catholics participated in Mass weekly. Today that has dropped to 25 percent. Catholic voters in 2020 were virtually split between left and right politically. In 2024 they turned sharply for Donald Trump increasing Catholic vote support for him by an 11 point margin.

Pope Leo XIV has been widely presented in the media as “the first American Pope.” In actuality, however, he has served the Church as a citizen of the world. Is all this priestly interest in respect for orthodoxy a plague upon the Church? Or is it the whispering of the Holy Spirit, a whispering that also placed Leo XIV in the Chair of Peter? Ponder for a moment the massive crowd in St. Peter’s Square in the Inauguration Mass for His Holiness Leo XIV for your answer. Perhaps there is something to be said for a pope to be in the world but not of it.

+ + +

Note from Father Gordon MacRae: Thank you for reading and sharing this post. You may also like these related posts from Beyond These Stone Walls:

The Once and Future Catholic Church

Pope Francis Had a Challenge for the Prodigal Son’s Older Brother

The Vatican Today: Cardinal George Pell’s Last Gift to the Church

Priests in Crisis: The Catholic University of America Study

Pray for the papacy of Pope Leo XIV

The Eucharistic Adoration Chapel established by Saint Maximilian Kolbe was inaugurated at the outbreak of World War II. It was restored as a Chapel of Adoration in September, 2018, the commemoration of the date that the war began. It is now part of the World Center of Prayer for Peace. The live internet feed of the Adoration Chapel at Niepokalanow — sponsored by EWTN — was established just a few weeks before we discovered it and began to include in at Beyond These Stone Walls. Click “Watch on YouTube” in the lower left corner to see how many people around the world are present there with you. The number appears below the symbol for EWTN.

Click or tap here to proceed to the Adoration Chapel.

The following is a translation from the Polish in the image above: “Eighth Star in the Crown of Mary Queen of Peace” “Chapel of Perpetual Adoration of the Blessed Sacrament at Niepokalanow. World Center of Prayer for Peace.” “On September 1, 2018, the World Center of Prayer for Peace in Niepokalanow was opened. It would be difficult to find a more expressive reference to the need for constant prayer for peace than the anniversary of the outbreak of World War II.”

For the Catholic theology behind this image, visit my post, “The Ark of the Covenant and the Mother of God.”

Pope Leo XIV Defamed by the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests

In 2018 this exposé of SNAP’s shady tactics to increase settlements over accused priests was widely ignored. After the Conclave of 2025 it exploded on the Internet.

May 21, 2025 by Father Gordon MacRae

It did not take long. In the weeks leading up to the Conclave of 2025, Pope Leo XIV was accused by SNAP — the U.S.-based Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests — of negligently investigating and then covering up a decades-old account of alleged clergy sexual abuse. Lifted out of all context, the story is missing its most important element: the simple truth. To its great credit last week, the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights responded to this story by providing the truth and context that the story lacks. I am grateful to the Catholic League for having the Holy Father’s back, not to mention my own.

At about the same time, an article that I wrote in 2018 about SNAP’s deceptions and destructive malfeasance suddenly went viral after the Conclave of 2025. The Catholic League pounced on that as well, and courageously republished it anew under the title, Father Gordon J. Macrae On SNAP’s Deception.

That fact alone conveyed to me the urgency of this account of how and when SNAP activists terrorized the Church and priesthood for two decades.

So here it is again, apparently by popular demand of SNAP itself by raising the same tired old story with a new target: Pope Leo XIV. The papacy of Pope Leo XIV should not be tainted by a repeat of the dishonest rhetoric from this shady and morally compromised anti-Catholic activist network. SNAP can no longer mask the truth revealed in these pages.

Please read and share, as so many in Europe have done:

Abused by the Survivors Network of those abused by Priests

If there exists a Catholic priest still in denial about the agenda of SNAP, it’s because he has lived with his head in the sand blind to the threat lying in wait for him.

In 2009, at the same time I began writing for Beyond These Stone Walls, Catholic League President Bill Donohue invited me to write a feature article for the Catholic League Journal, Catalyst. My article, “Due Process for Accused Priests,” began by describing an important phenomenon.

In 2002, just as the national story of Catholic priests and sexual abuse emerged out of Boston to sweep the country, psychologist Daniel Kahneman was awarded the Nobel Prize in Economics for his work on a phenomenon called “availability bias.” It revealed the power of the media to not just report the news, but to reshape it to fit media bias, to cultivate it, to take a story’s small microphone and turn it into a megaphone.

Activist organizations have trained people to harness this force to sway what others adopt as a bias. It is not new, just newly analyzed. One of the most potent deployments of “availability bias” is one I have quoted before in these pages. It comes from Mein Kampf, the 1926 book by Adolf Hitler that gave rise to the Nazi party in Germany:

“The great mass of people will more easily fall prey to a big lie than to a small one.”

After my 2009 Catalyst article was published, I was subjected to an open assault by David Clohessy, Executive Director of the activist organization, SNAP, the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests. Matt Abbott at Renew America forwarded my article to Mr. Clohessy and invited a response posted at Renew America entitled, “Imprisoned Priest, Sex Abuse Victim Clash.”

David Clohessy was obviously perturbed by what I exposed about the lawsuit settlement process and how it is advanced and cultivated by “self-serving contingency lawyers and various agenda-driven groups using scandal for their own ends.” Mr. Clohessy had long derided Church officials for entering into secrecy agreements to keep settlement amounts from public view.

On January 17, 2017, former SNAP employee Gretchen Rachel Hammond filed a lawsuit against SNAP in the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois. Ms. Hammond had been SNAP’s Director of Development before leaving the organization and filing her lawsuit. The named parties in the suit included David Clohessy, SNAP’s Executive Director, and Barbara Blaine, SNAP’s founder and president, and a member of SNAP’s board of directors.

Ms. Hammond’s lawsuit alleged that she was a victim of retaliatory discharge for questioning the allegedly corrupt practices of this organization. These included claims that SNAP and its leaders received substantial kickbacks in the form of “donations” from attorneys to whom SNAP officials referred clients or potential clients.

The lawsuit exposed that lawyers in California, Chicago, Seattle, and Delaware made major “donations,” some of them in six-figure amounts, and that SNAP leaders “concocted a scheme to have other attorneys make donations to a front foundation” to mask “attorneys’ kickbacks” to the organization.

The lawsuit also alleged a pattern of collusion between SNAP officials and plaintiff lawyers to maximize publicity for the purpose of fueling bigger payouts. It accused SNAP officials of callous disregard for the real interests of real sexual abuse survivors. Among the lawsuit’s other allegations were these:

• SNAP engaged in a commercial enterprise motivated by its directors’ and officers’ personal and ideological animus against the Catholic Church.

• SNAP conducted business premised on farming out abuse survivors as clients for specific attorneys who file lawsuits and collect settlements from the Catholic Church.

• Attorneys routinely gave SNAP confidential plaintiff claims and other privileged information in order for SNAP to maximize payouts with sensational press releases.

• SNAP claimed that it existed to provide support for survivors of clergy sexual abuse, however at all relevant times, SNAP did not have a single grief counselor or rape counselor on its payroll. SNAP would ignore survivors who reached out to SNAP for legitimate counseling.

• Ms. Hammond alleged that she was told by SNAP official Barbara Dorris to ignore calls from survivors who were seeking only counseling.

• Despite accepting funds for counseling and aiding survivors of sexual abuse, SNAP squandered those funds to advance its own interests and those of its leadership.

• SNAP set out to deliberately jeopardize the ability of accused priests to receive due process and fair trials.

• In 2011, SNAP oversaw fundraising for a charge brought against Pope Benedict XVI at the International Court at The Hague; however SNAP used the funds to pay for lavish hotels and other extravagant travel expenses for its leadership.

The Fallout

When the lawsuit became public, David Clohessy resigned as Executive Director, and SNAP founder and president, Barbara Blaine also resigned. They have since settled the lawsuit by a secrecy clause just like the ones for which Mr. Clohessy had railed against Catholic bishops over the last two decades.

After the settlement, others among SNAP’s more notorious leaders also resigned as reported by David F. Pierre, Jr. at The Media Report in “SNAP R.I.P.” Barbara Dorris, who replaced David Clohessy as Executive Director, and Regional Director Joelle Casteix both resigned. Among the revelations uncovered by David Pierre was that SNAP published the email addresses and personal phone numbers of accused priests to generate harassment.

Ms. Hammond’s lawsuit was only one of several brought against SNAP, but it was the one that appeared to finally expose what had long been suspected of SNAP and its leaders. Simultaneously in 2017, Father Joseph Jiang, a priest of the Archdiocese of St. Louis, filed a defamation lawsuit against SNAP.

Charges brought against Father Jiang were heavily promoted by SNAP leaders who, as they do whenever a priest is accused, issued a public call for anyone else who wants to accuse the priest. When Father Jiang passed a polygraph test [ I did, too, by the way, twice ] the charges were dismissed in 2015.

In 2016 a federal judge ruled that SNAP made false statements against Father Jiang “negligently and with reckless disregard for the truth.” SNAP and the parents of the minor who had falsely accused him settled the lawsuit.

As part of its settlement, SNAP issued a public apology, but the ever complicit news media failed to mention that SNAP was forced to do so in the wake of a false claim and lawsuit. SNAP’s apology, written by its legal counsel, included this statement:

“The SNAP defendants never want to see anyone falsely accused of a crime. Admittedly, false reports of clergy sexual abuse do occur. SNAP apologizes for false or inaccurate statements… its representatives made which in any way disparaged Father Joseph Jiang.”

In reporting this story, some Catholic media outlets continued to refer to SNAP as “a victims’ support group” or “a victim advocacy group.” It’s a bad habit that blindly gives legitimacy of purpose to SNAP which it does not have, and has never had.

Pope Benedict’s “Crimes Against Humanity”

The most important and visible source exposing SNAP’s corruption and reckless disregard for truth is a document by Catholic League President Bill Donohue entitled, “SNAP Implodes.” It provides a comprehensive and compelling account of the path of destruction SNAP and its leaders have left in the Church and priesthood under the false guise of advocating for real victims.

Among the most manipulative of David Clohessy’s “advocacy” was an instruction to accusers to attend SNAP press conferences. To play on the emotions of reporters, Clohessy urged those awaiting settlements to “display holy childhood photos” before the news cameras, and… “If you don’t have compelling holy childhood photos we can provide you with photos of other kids that can be held up for the cameras.”

If that doesn’t infuriate Catholics who have any regard left for truth, then what would? SNAP had a much worse perversion of justice than was first hyped, and then covered up, by the news media. It was the most destructive publicity stunt SNAP and its leaders have devised or condoned to date.

Both Bill Donohue and the Hammond lawsuit cited this one (see the final bullet point in Ms. Hammond’s lawsuit above). What they do not reveal is that SNAP used the false case against me to help bring it about.

David F. Pierre, Jr., moderator of The Media Report exposed this SNAP media stunt in “The Hague Tosses SNAP’s Nutty Lawsuit Against the Vatican, SNAP’s Latest P.R. Stunt Exposed.” That was before I even knew that I was a part of this story. In 2011, SNAP and the Center for Constitutional Rights — located at 666 Broadway in Manhattan — jointly filed a “crimes against humanity” charge against Pope Benedict XVI at the International Criminal Court.

The ICC is an independent judicial institution with the power to hold trials and impose sentences for the most serious crimes of international concern: genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. The ICC was approved by international treaty in 1998 and officially came into being on July 1, 2002, after 60 countries ratified the treaty.

The court is headquartered in The Hague, The Netherlands. Of interest, in May of 2002, President George Bush declined to sign the treaty and refused to allow the ICC to have jurisdiction over United States cases. So SNAP’s target was not U.S. Catholic priests and bishops, but the Pope himself.

SNAP duped the left-leaning Center for Constitutional Rights to compose and file the briefs with information provided by SNAP in collaboration with plaintiff lawyers hoping for a precedent to tap Vatican assets in their never-ending quest for big bucks. I first learned of my involvement in this story from an article by journalist JoAnn Wypijewski, in “Spotlight Oscar Hangover: Why ‘Spotlight’ Is a Terrible Film.” Here is an excerpt:

“The Center for Constitutional Rights [CCR] . . . joined with SNAP to file a grotesque brief to the International Criminal Court demanding ‘investigation and prosecution’ of the Vatican for crimes against humanity… To CCR’s shame, Father [Gordon] MacRae is specifically mentioned in that brief with respect to allegations… which prosecutors threw in at sentencing but for which there is no evidence according to the lead detective in the case [as] cited by [Dorothy] Rabinowitz.”

SNAP, apparently in retaliation for my Catalyst articles calling for independent investigation of dubious claims, fed information to the Center for Constitutional Rights that would fuel a case against the Vatican. They made no attempt to contact me or my defense, nor did they contact Dorothy Rabinowitz at The Wall Street Journal who researched and published extensively on the same story, but with polar opposite conclusions.

And SNAP did this without attempting to contact James Abbott, the former FBI Special Agent who spent three years investigating this case before dismissing it as a fraud. (Agent Abbott’s affidavit is cited at the end of Ryan A. MacDonald’s recent post, “#MeToo and #HimToo: Jonathan Grover and Father Gordon MacRae” which also lays out the fraud behind this story).

In the end, to its great credit, the International Criminal Court declined to accept jurisdiction or the crimes against humanity charge against Pope Benedict XVI, but that was no surprise. Everyone involved knew that this fiasco would go nowhere, and it was never really SNAP’s goal. It was merely a publicity stunt for David Clohessy and SNAP to heighten pressure for quick and lucrative financial settlements.

The people who terrorized American Catholic priests for the last quarter century are gone now. Their fraud is exposed. Their coffers are empty. Their leaders have fled. In “SNAP Implodes,” Catholic League President Bill Donohue summed up what I had come to know at a very personal level in this moral panic that SNAP promoted and extorted for profit over the last 25 years:

“SNAP officials function as borderline gangsters out to destroy innocent persons. It is motivated by hate and exploits the very people it claims to serve. Justice demands that it be shut down by the authorities before it does any more harm.”

+ + +

Note from Father Gordon MacRae: Once again, you would serve the cause of truth and justice if you share this post and ask your contacts to do the same. Eyes may also be opened by these related posts from Beyond These Stone Walls:

• David Clohessy Resigns SNAP in Alleged Kickback Scheme

• Betrayed by Victims’ Advocates

• To Fleece the Flock: Meet the Trauma-Informed Consultants

• The Catholic League: SNAP Implodes

The Eucharistic Adoration Chapel established by Saint Maximilian Kolbe was inaugurated at the outbreak of World War II. It was restored as a Chapel of Adoration in September, 2018, the commemoration of the date that the war began. It is now part of the World Center of Prayer for Peace. The live internet feed of the Adoration Chapel at Niepokalanow — sponsored by EWTN — was established just a few weeks before we discovered it and began to include in at Beyond These Stone Walls. Click “Watch on YouTube” in the lower left corner to see how many people around the world are present there with you. The number appears below the symbol for EWTN.

Click or tap here to proceed to the Adoration Chapel.

The following is a translation from the Polish in the image above: “Eighth Star in the Crown of Mary Queen of Peace” “Chapel of Perpetual Adoration of the Blessed Sacrament at Niepokalanow. World Center of Prayer for Peace.” “On September 1, 2018, the World Center of Prayer for Peace in Niepokalanow was opened. It would be difficult to find a more expressive reference to the need for constant prayer for peace than the anniversary of the outbreak of World War II.”

For the Catholic theology behind this image, visit my post, “The Ark of the Covenant and the Mother of God.”

“Peter Lives in Rome Again”

In March, 2010 when Beyond These Stone Walls was a newborn blog, a post about Vatican scandal went viral. Fifteen years later it is still widely read and spread.

May 14, 2025 by Father Gordon MacRae

We have already published a post this week, though four days earlier than our usual. It has a rather blunt title, but if you missed it, you should at least indulge me. That post was, “Pope Leo XIV Is Certainly No Clone of Pope Francis.”

If you search in any search engine the term “scandal at the Vatican,” using quotes, you will immediately come across a post that technically gave birth to this blog. It was written in March, 2010 when Beyond These Stone Walls was literally nine months along. Its title is “Michelangelo and the Hand of God: Scandal at the Vatican.” I had no idea when I wrote it that “Scandal at the Vatican” would become one of the most common searches on the Internet in regard to Catholic affairs thus making my post top the charts at various points along the way.

Vatican scandal was not at all what I had in mind when I wrote that post. It tells a fascinating story about overlapping layers of art history and we will link to it again at the end of this post.

Just days ago, worldwide attention was focused on the Sistine Chapel, the site at which Pope Leo XIV was recently elected. My post from fifteen years ago was focused upon that very same place but for different reasons. I am always a bit nervous when that post surfaces widely into view again as it did during and after the recent conclave. My post was about art, and Michelangelo, and a little-known event of art history. Rome is home to some of the world's most accomplished artists and art historians. I sometimes worry about whether and how something I wrote might measure up to their scrutiny. But the post in question has been making waves on the Internet for at least the last fifteen years. No one has yet complained or challenged my artistic interpretation. I won’t repeat that entire story here. You may read it for yourself linked again at the end of this post. Despite the fact that I wrote it, it is indeed an amazing story.

Landmarks

Among the vast media sources of published commentary about the results of the recent Vatican papal conclave, some have stood out far above the rest. One of these was published in The Wall Street Journal by Canadian priest and author of some reknown, Father Raymond de Souza entitled “Catholics Welcome an American Pope” (WSJ, May 9, 2025). I found a few of its paragraphs to be especially fascinating and moving. They gave me my title for this post:

“Twenty years ago, at the election of Pope Benedict XVI, Cardinal Francis George, Archbishop of Chicago, stood on the balcony of St. Peter’s and was caught staring off into the distance. He confessed later that he was marveling that the Church had elected yet another man to succeed Peter, while the great imperial Rome, the caput mundi, which put Peter to death on the Vatican hill, was no longer. Only ruins remained.

“In 1586, Pope Sixtus V had moved one of these ruins, a 350-ton granite obelisk, to the center of St. Peter’s Square, where it stands to this day. That obelisk could have been among the last landmarks St. Peter looked upon as he was crucified. It is the first thing a new pope sees when he lookes out over the assembled masses in the square below.

“On the top of that obelisk is a bronze cross, and place therein is a relic of the true Cross of Christ. There is in the Catholic calendar a feast of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross. It falls on September 14 — the new Pope Leo XIV’s birthday.”

“Peter lives in Rome again.”

+ + +

Note from Father Gordon MacRae: Thank you for reading and sharing this post, and our post about Pope Leo XIV for whom we hold high hopes which, if you saw the faces of the immense crowd in St. Peter’s Square last week, seemed to be contagious.

Please also read and share these related posts cited herein:

Michelangelo and the Hand of God: Scandal at the Vatican

Conclave: Amid the Wind and the Waves, a Successor of Peter

Pope Leo XIV is No Clone of Pope Francis

+ + +

The Eucharistic Adoration Chapel established by Saint Maximilian Kolbe was inaugurated at the outbreak of World War II. It was restored as a Chapel of Adoration in September, 2018, the commemoration of the date that the war began. It is now part of the World Center of Prayer for Peace. The live internet feed of the Adoration Chapel at Niepokalanow — sponsored by EWTN — was established just a few weeks before we discovered it and began to include in at Beyond These Stone Walls. Click “Watch on YouTube” in the lower left corner to see how many people around the world are present there with you. The number appears below the symbol for EWTN.

Click or tap here to proceed to the Adoration Chapel.

The following is a translation from the Polish in the image above: “Eighth Star in the Crown of Mary Queen of Peace” “Chapel of Perpetual Adoration of the Blessed Sacrament at Niepokalanow. World Center of Prayer for Peace.” “On September 1, 2018, the World Center of Prayer for Peace in Niepokalanow was opened. It would be difficult to find a more expressive reference to the need for constant prayer for peace than the anniversary of the outbreak of World War II.”

For the Catholic theology behind this image, visit my post, “The Ark of the Covenant and the Mother of God.”

Pope Leo XIV Is Certainly No Clone of Pope Francis

Pope Leo XIV, the first pope with American roots, is profiled by some as being in solidarity with the progressivism of Pope Francis, but a closer look is required.

May 10, 2025 by Father Gordon MacRae

We are posting this days before our usual Wednesday post day, but we did not want to wait. On Thursday, May 8, 2025 Robert Francis Cardinal Prevost became the 267th Pontiff of the Catholic Church, and the first in Church history to assume the Chair of Peter from America. One priest I called on that day described him as “a clone of Francis.” I gasped at the thought, but it is too much of a knee-jerk reaction. Since then, several voices from the left have spread the notion that he is our latest “woke pope.” That is nonsense, little more than propaganda, and there is lots of information to discredit it.

That was an otherwise interesting day for me. The Conclave began on Wednesday, May 7, 2025. I wrote about our expectations here in “Conclave: Amid the Wind and the Waves, a Successor of Peter.”

You could probably tell by that post that I expected a slightly more prolonged conclave, predicting that it might end with white smoke no sooner than Friday, May 9. I followed it intensely from the first procession into the Sistine Chapel. It was just a coincidence that my work was cancelled on Thursday afternoon. So at 1 PM, I was in my cell staring at the Sistine Chapel stove pipe while busy writing some notes. I looked away for just a minute and when I looked back and there were puffs of white smoke billowing out of the pipe. The silence was deafening, but the bells left no doubt.

I was off by a full day. I had ascertained that the 1978 election of John Paul II took eight votes. The 2005 election of Benedict XVI took three, and the 2013 election of Francis took five. So in my mind I calculated the average of all three votes to take 5.33 voting sessions. I therefore predicted that the conclave would end in the afternoon of Friday. The longest conclave in Church history lasted 1,006 days many centuries ago. None of us has the nerve to survive such a thing. But now, a day early there it was, white smoke at 1 PM (EST). Before the new pope was even introduced to the world, I quickly telephoned our editor, Dilia, in New York. Most of us about to witness monumental events wish not to witness them alone. So while Dilia was tuned in to EWTN, I watched Fox News and we compared notes. We were both stunned to meet Cardinal Robert Prevost, a native of Chicago, who was presented to the world as Pope Leo XIV. I imagine that every reporter on earth scrambled to discover what they could about the relative unknown.

Pundits immediately compared him to the late Pope Francis, claiming that they shared the same worldview and progressive mindset. There might even be some truth to that. We will all find out going forward. But what my eyes saw there on that balcony told a very different story. There, standing before the world, was an obviously humble man overwhelmed by the roaring crowds of Saint Peter’s Square. The roaring crowd was evidence of something in its own right. There were thousands of young men and women shouting in triumph in support not only of this man, but of this moment. When did we become, seemingly overnight, a Church filled with young and vibrant true believers?

I was struck by the presentation of Pope Leo XIV. Unlike his predecessor he chose to be bedecked in all the traditional garb of the Roman Pontiff. That is a sign, read with a bullhorn of what we may expect from this pope. These signs and wonders were all of his personal choice. So was the papal name he chose. It was that alone which filled me with hope.

We have a lot yet to learn about Pope Leo XIV. His chosen namesake, Pope Leo XIII who reigned from 1878 to 1903, can tell us volumes about the nature and person of the man who now occupies the Chair of Peter. The pontificate of Pope Leo XIII began the modern age of Roman Catholicism. He was known as “a social justice warrior,” a title that may bring shivers to some. But theologically, and in affairs of the Church and our life of faith, that Leo was certainly no liberal. His letters echoed the emphases of Pius IX Syllabus of Errors, and he endorsed the stance about concience, worship, and separation of Church and State by Pope Gregory XVI. Pope Leo XIII wrote the encyclical letters, Aeterni Patris (Eternal Father) which urged a revival of the work of Saint Thomas Aquinas as the basis of political and social renewal. Pope Leo was also the author of the encyclical, Rerum Novarum, which advocated for just wages earning him the title of “The Worker’s Pope.”

It seems that Leo XIV sees the Church and the world, at least in part, through the eyes of Leo XIII. And they were eyes never deluded about the true nature of this world and the Church which works for salvation within it.

I was thrilled by this knowledge. Pope Leo XIII and I shared a common vision about this world and the dangers it poses for the Church. After a night of terror, Pope Leo XIII wrote the following prayer, which I can only hope will also be prayed by his successor and namesake. We must also pray that prayer for him:

Prayer to Saint Michael the Archangel by Pope Leo XIII

O Glorious Prince of the heavenly host, St. Michael the Archangel, defend us in the battle and in the terrible warfare that we are waging against the principalities and powers, against the rulers of this world of darkness, against the evil spirits. Come to the aid of man, whom Almighty God created immortal, made in His own image and likeness, and redeemed at a great price from the tyranny of Satan.

Fight this day the battle of the Lord, together with the holy angels, as already thou hast fought the leader of the proud angels, Lucifer, and his apostate host, who were powerless to resist thee, nor was there place for them any longer in Heaven.  That cruel, ancient serpent, who is called the devil or Satan who seduces the whole world, was cast into the abyss with his angels.  Behold, this primeval enemy and slayer of men has taken courage.  Transformed into an angel of light, he wanders about with all the multitude of wicked spirits, invading the earth in order to blot out the name of God and of His Christ, to seize upon, slay and cast into eternal perdition souls destined for the crown of eternal glory.  This wicked dragon pours out, as a most impure flood, the venom of his malice on men of depraved mind and corrupt heart, the spirit of lying, of impiety, of blasphemy, and the pestilent breath of impurity, and of every vice and iniquity.

These most crafty enemies have filled and inebriated with gall and bitterness the Church, the spouse of the immaculate Lamb, and have laid impious hands on her most sacred possessions.  In the Holy Place itself, where the See of Holy Peter and the Chair of Truth has been set up as the light of the world, they have raised the throne of their abominable impiety, with the iniquitous design that when the Pastor has been struck, the sheep may be scattered.

Arise then, O invincible Prince, bring help against the attacks of the lost spirits to the people of God, and give them the victory.  They venerate thee as their protector and patron; in thee holy Church glories as her defense against the malicious power of hell; to thee has God entrusted the souls of men to be established in heavenly beatitude.  Oh, pray to the God of peace that He may put Satan under our feet, so far conquered that he may no longer be able to hold men in captivity and harm the Church.  Offer our prayers in the sight of the Most High, so that they may quickly find mercy in the sight of the Lord; and vanquishing the dragon, the ancient serpent, who is the devil and Satan, do thou again make him captive in the abyss, that he may no longer seduce the nations.  Amen.

Our Holy Father Pope Leo XIV has an immense task before him. Let us pave that way with the support of our prayers and good intentions.

+ + +

Note from Fr Gordon MacRae: Thank you for reading this post. You can help stem the tide of misinformation by sharing it. We can no longer share to Facebook, but you can do so in our stead. You may also follow Beyond These Stone Walls on X and at gloria.tv.

You may also like these related posts:

Saint Michael the Archangel Contends with Satan Still

Conclave: Amid the Wind and the Waves, a Successor of Peter

Cardinal George Pell’s Last Gift to the Church

The Eucharistic Adoration Chapel established by Saint Maximilian Kolbe was inaugurated at the outbreak of World War II. It was restored as a Chapel of Adoration in September, 2018, the commemoration of the date that the war began. It is now part of the World Center of Prayer for Peace. The live internet feed of the Adoration Chapel at Niepokalanow — sponsored by EWTN — was established just a few weeks before we discovered it and began to include in at Beyond These Stone Walls. Click “Watch on YouTube” in the lower left corner to see how many people around the world are present there with you. The number appears below the symbol for EWTN.

Click or tap here to proceed to the Adoration Chapel.

The following is a translation from the Polish in the image above: “Eighth Star in the Crown of Mary Queen of Peace” “Chapel of Perpetual Adoration of the Blessed Sacrament at Niepokalanow. World Center of Prayer for Peace.” “On September 1, 2018, the World Center of Prayer for Peace in Niepokalanow was opened. It would be difficult to find a more expressive reference to the need for constant prayer for peace than the anniversary of the outbreak of World War II.”

For the Catholic theology behind this image, visit my post, “The Ark of the Covenant and the Mother of God.”