UPDATE: VIRTUS® same-sex porn encouragement? That would be right.

UPDATE: This post has prompted a great deal of research in the last couple of days right around the country. Good. Finally. Meanwhile, Father Gordon J. MacRae has sent in a comment which I’d like to give prominence at the beginning of this post:

• Hi Father George. If I could post a comment on your VIRTUS post, it would be this: “This VIRTUS wake-up call by Father George David Byers needs to be shouted from the rooftops. ‘Put not your trust in princes.’ The author of this corrupt process envisioned himself a prince in the making before his other demons caught up with him. It was nice to be quoted in such a fine exposition of truth. I have posted this on Facebook, Twitter, and Linkedin. They sometimes mock us Catholics. We should not be mocking ourselves with a lie like VIRTUS. With fraternal Blessings, Father Gordon MacRae”

---

I write this post prompted by a number of things that “coincidentally” took place all at once.

• One of those is a GALLUP Survey spearheaded by Cardinals Dolan and Gregory that was also sent to yours truly. The questions provided multiple choice answers that could not but be re-interpreted according to the perspective of the analyst. It was about the Church’s response to the abuse crisis. I would write extensively about that, but I suppose I should refrain, lest I have to face litigation. It’s just not worth the effort. Let’s just say we’re in a bad state of affairs.
• Another of those things was the fact that I’ve been pushed into making a critique of TNCRRG’s VIRTUS®. And that’s what this post is about.

I went through the VIRTUS® presentation a while back. As far as I can gather, there are two types of VIRTUS® presentations, one for the laity and another, quite different, for faith leaders. I was subjected to the presentation for faith leaders, specifically for seminarians and priests. I’m guessing that not even catechists are considered faith leaders in this distinction, for I later sat through another VIRTUS® presentation for those at my own parish, many of whom were becoming catechists, and it was, as I say, quite different from the presentation for faith leaders. So, in my experience, the presentation for faith leaders is surely limited to seminarians and priests. The version of VIRTUS® for any of the laity seems to be merely secondarily consequential to the presentation for seminarians and priests, so that the laity are included in such a paradigm so that they might more conveniently be indoctrinated into a certain ideology as time goes on. The laity who are more intensely interested in Child Protection are often law enforcement officers and attorneys, and if the VIRTUS® presentation for seminarians and priests were to be shown to them, they might not be quite so easily compliant. At any rate, I will speaking to the presentation for faith leaders, namely, seminarians and priests, to which I was subjected.

Enter the well known the founder, chair, and visionary of TNCRRG’s VIRTUS®, Edward J. Arsenault, whom I now cite verbatim about himself (he speaks in the third person):

• [He] “Initiated and chaired the development of the VIRTUS risk prevention education platform, including the strategic development and implementation of the “Protecting God’s Children” safe environment program currently used in over 80 [presently in early 2022, down to about 56] Roman Catholic dioceses and dozens of religious institutes in the United States. The PGC program has provided safe environment training for hundreds of thousands of assigned, employed and volunteer ministerial personnel in the Catholic Church in the United States.”

He was “Father” (later Monsignor) Edward J. Arsenault when he wrote that as a CV entry back in 1999. He now, very recently, legally self-presents with a different last name: Bolognini. He changed his name after being convicted on multiple criminal charges, after which he was also imprisoned and then forthwith dismissed from the clerical state (“laicized”) by the Holy Father.

But I somewhat digress. Let’s go back to the VIRTUS® course I sat through, complete with excellent on-campus police fingerprinting and background checks. Again, it was presented specifically for clergy and seminarians (with dozens registered).

During the presentation of many hours, I wrote down a number of objections to the course content. It had immediately come to mind that the many things to which I was objecting were deliberately part of the program used to bait questions. A child-protection course wouldn’t intentionally encourage the rape of minors, would it? So, to give the seminarians a chance, I waited to raise my objections until the very end when people just started to get up to leave. At that point, I was convinced that the objectionable materials were actually intended as positive instructional materials and were not at all planted “mistakes” that were going to be corrected before people departed, you know, to the pedagogical “gotcha” embarrassment of those present. I raised my hand and was called upon. People stayed.

The presenter, a layman and longtime associate of that seminary, publicly thanked me for calling out this VIRTUS® program tailored for seminarians and priests. He afterward approached me, twice, to thank me personally for making the program run more effectively, and for opening his eyes to the objectionable materials. Many of the seminarians and priests also thanked me while I was objecting and afterward.

Here’s an example: A list of questionable behaviors was provided for all of us to review. We were told that it would be wrong for us, having seen just one of these behaviors being exhibited by an individual, to then breathlessly run to report such a singular behavior to the next superior up the ladder for whatever bureaucratic decision may or may not come. We were told that, instead, we had to have at least two of the questionable behaviors attributed to any one person before we might consider that something might just possibly be amiss, so that we could then perhaps proceed to set about seeing that some sort of bureaucratic correction might perhaps be offered at some future date.

One of the listed merely questionable behaviors was showing pornography to minors.

I’m not an attorney, but as far as I know, showing pornography to minors is (at least in North Carolina) a class “I” felony, necessitating a sentence, I think, of 3-12 months and, perhaps, a requirement of being put on a sex-offender registry. While that’s a likely secular criminal judgment, the Church also has penalties. I’m no canon lawyer, but I think this belongs to the “nefas est” category of really disgusting worst-of-all-crimes, following the judgment about this matter by our Lord (Matthew 18:6).

To the point: for VIRTUS®, showing porn to minors was not reckoned to be questionable enough on its own without there being at least one other questionable behavior attributed to that person. Then, maybe, those multiple issues might together be brought up with someone for consideration.

This is my paraphrase of what I said in my objection to this down-playing of showing porn to minors by VIRTUS®: If I were to see some pervert, whether bishop, priest or layman, showing pornography to minors, I wouldn’t wait for any further questionable behavior, but would instantly intervene in the situation myself so as to immobilize that perp with an appropriate level of force until law enforcement officers arrived. That would, of course, be a great learning experience for the minors who were being scandalized. Besides law enforcement, parents or guardians would also instantly be called, as well as anyone else in the immediate environs who could assist. It is always wrong to permit some pervert to continue unimpeded with a session of pornography with minors even if there isn’t any other perhaps questionable behavior that is going on. It seems to me that anyone training (future) leaders of the Church to think otherwise is at risk of being judged with a millstone, only this time it is likely to be a sea of fiery sulfur into which such a one will be tossed.

But people are too innocent to know what showing porn to minors means, right? Listen to Yaron Svoray, the great Nazi hunter above. He was brought to a session of porn in a theater filled with neo-Nazies. Just a few minutes: 21:45 to 28:00. That’s how brutal showing porn to minors also is.

It seems to me that the purpose of that part of that VIRTUS® presentation for seminarians and priests was to make sure that such behavior as porn sessions with minors would continue unimpeded in the future, and would even provide rationalizations for such behavior to any narcissistic sociopaths who might be in attendance. A presentation holding that showing porn to minors might be considered innocent behavior (even if possibly questionable) is itself social engineering, the prestidigitation of consciences, the abuse of the Body of Christ. I’m not saying that this is what anyone intended. I can’t read their souls. I’m just commenting on my opinion of what was externally presented to me.

And one more thing about the those hypothetical sessions of showing pornography to minors: think context. This isn’t just random minors. The statistics are overwhelming. These minors are extremely likely to be (post-)pubescent males. The canard that this was a pedophilia crisis was used for sensationalistic distraction, a cover for what was actually going on, namely the purposed effort to corrupt minors with homosexual aggression, recruiting a percentage of them, surely, for the seminary. We hear of this again and again, truly ad nauseam. Just my opinion.

But this was, in fact, another of my many voiced objections: That particular VIRTUS® presentation for seminarians and priests was not at all lacking in dutifully reporting on some statistics. But there was a major lacuna. Overwhelming statistics seemed to be studiously ignored, stats demonstrating that this was not a pedophilia crisis but rather a crisis of homosexual predation. Is not a purposed cover-up of the real problem an effort to make sure the abuse continues?

Destroy consciences of seminarians and clergy, destroy the Church. As Father Gordon J. MacRae quipped, “It is a testament to the power of reaction formation that an entire institution would prefer the term ‘pedophile scandal’ to ‘homosexual scandal’ even when the facts say otherwise.” I’m sure that such a reference to a reactionary phenomenon is not overlooking that this all has a more foundational, seemingly purposely manipulated availability-bias.

To be succinct for clarity: Regardless of whether this was intended maliciously, that VIRTUS® presentation for seminarians and clergy was an instruction manual on how to ensure continued homosexualist predation victimizing minors.

Have things changed for the better over these last couple of years? With the Synod on Synodality crowd in the Holy See advertising the militantly homosexualist New Ways Ministry and the lesbian Women’s Ordination Conference, I’m guessing that there is no pressure to change things to be more Catholic. Also, for instance, I’ve never been sent an apology for the immoral reeducation attempt I had to endure from VIRTUS®, nor has anyone else among the clergy received any such apology as far as I know. And that speaks volumes. How else, even by way of omission, or values-clarification techniques, is VIRTUS® scandalizing leaders of souls? This is all filthy. Disgusting.

We priests have not been called by the Son of the living God to partner with any criminal, militantly homosexualist mis-educational execration called VIRTUS®. Any insistence that any seminarian or priest be subjected to the same is offensive. Giving credence to VIRTUS® by partnering with them must stop.

My aim is simply to do what is consonant with the constant teaching of the Church “quod ubique, quod semper, quod ab omnibus creditum est,” always, of course, in the spirit of Galatians 2:11 if that’s at all necessary. What I write here is not done to defame or bring hatred upon any ecclesiastic, nor to be divisive. I would like to see everyone in heaven if that’s where they want to be with the Lord. That I am diametrically opposed to various things some ecclesiastics promote is not divisive on my part, but theirs. Unity is not being of one mind and judgment in faith and morals merely with each other, but rather (see 1 Corinthians 1:10) all of us being together with one mind and one judgement with the Eternal Living Truth who is Love, Christ Jesus.

But those promoting porn? Do they not look into the eyes of Mary Immaculate and say: “Don’t worry! A little porn! It’s all good! There’s no such thing as sin!”

And they dare to call it “VIRTUS.”