by GEORGE NEUMAYR The American Spectator

Monsignor Walter Rossi is “on retreat,” said the celebrant at a recent Mass held at the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception, where Rossi continues to serve as rector in spite of an investigation into his misconduct by the archdiocese of Washington, D.C., and the diocese of Scranton, Pennsylvania.

At that very moment, according to a Church insider, Rossi was vacationing in Italy with Fr. Andrew Hvozdovic, the co-owner of Rossi’s posh beach condo in gay-friendly Fort Lauderdale. Nicknamed by Scranton priests “Randy Andy” for his open homosexuality — he decorated one of his residences with a statue of a crucified Jesus with an erection — Hvozdovic graduated from the same seminary class as Rossi. In Italy, they celebrated the anniversary of their ordinations.

I am told that the investigation into Rossi’s misconduct has fallen into the hands of a former FBI agent turned private investigator named Greg Auld. My call to Auld was not returned.

According to Scranton sources, Auld is working for a white-shoe law firm in the Philadelphia area that represents Scranton Bishop Joseph Bambera. The sources with whom I spoke said Auld seemed more interested in Rossi’s financial improprieties than his sexual scandals. Auld has insinuated to at least one of his interviewees that Rossi pays himself a fat salary to run the Shrine.

Incidentally, Rossi has sold off one of his luxurious beach condos since I reported on them last year. According to Christine Niles at Church Militant, Rossi has unloaded his condo near Atlantic City — a revealing move, given that that condo is where he stashed Matthew Riedlinger, the defrocked priest ensnared by an underage sex sting for whom Rossi has been accused of serving as a kind of pimp.

Catholic University students preyed upon by Riedlinger say that Rossi introduced them to him.
If Auld doesn’t speak with Riedlinger’s victims — I am told they number in the double digits — then we’ll know his investigation is a crock. Imagine how quickly Catholic University would drop from its board a heterosexual priest who introduced a gaggle of women to a buddy who then pawed them. He would be gone in a second.

But the slippery Catholic University of America president John Garvey has still not opened an investigation into Rossi, who sits on CUA’s board. My call to Garvey was not returned, of course. The last time I tried to ask him about Rossi he quickly walked away.

At least one bishop, however, has called for the suspension of Rossi while he is under investigation. Bishop Joseph Strickland of Tyler,
Texas, tweeted out this last week that Rossi’s active status as rector is “contrary to canon law” and that a “canonical Preliminary investigation is called for and Msgr. Rossi should be on administrative leave.”

It appears that Bambera, who is angling to succeed the soon-to-retire Archbishop Charles Chaput in Philadelphia, has more at stake in this investigation than Archbishop Wilton Gregory. I was told by a Church insider that Rossi had a meeting with Gregory and Bambera after the announcement of the joint investigation. Gregory assured Rossi the investigation wouldn’t take long. Bambera dissented, saying, “I wouldn’t be so sure about that.”

Auld has mountains of material to examine, some of it going back to Rossi’s days as a disciple of the utterly corrupt Michael Bransfield, the former Shrine rector who was bounced from his position as bishop of Wheeling, West Virginia, after it came out that he had preyed upon male subordinates and spent millions on needless renovations, among other misdeeds.

Rossi is cut from the same cloth as his mentor, whose nickname was “Bunny,” according to a letter shared with me. Written by a long-time Rossi observer, the letter says that Bransfield kept a beach house, à la Theodore McCarrick, where he hit on seminarians and let other priests hit on them. Around this time, according to the letter, Rossi, who served as Bransfield’s “Director of Pilgrimages,” was similarly corrupting the young: “a group of seminarians known to party with Rossi was expelled from the Catholic University of America when they were caught at a gay bar.”

Rossi, the letter added, terrorized Basilica staff with his “sexual favoritism.” He protected his alleged lovers, such as Matthew Riedlinger, and punished those who objected to Riedlinger’s predatory behavior.

Emboldened by the open misconduct of Bransfield and McCarrick, Rossi at times flaunted his debauchery. “At the Basilica, Rossi has had relationships with various men. Stories have circulated that Rossi sometimes brings his conquests to the Basilica’s sacristy the next morning to show off,” according to the letter.

Rossi isn’t so much “on retreat” as he is in retreat. I have been told by a Shrine source that The American Spectator’s coverage, the Archbishop Viganò testimony against Rossi, and now the investigation have “sent Rossi into hiding and caused chaos, demoralization, and finger-pointing among his lackeys at the Basilica.” They know, he added, that the “end is near.”

Let’s hope so. Much will turn on whether Auld investigates the Rossi scandal thoroughly and honestly — and whether the laity can spur Gregory and Bambera into finally cutting this powerful but depraved priest loose.


What kind of priest decorates his home with a crucifix depicting Christ with an erection.

Such a priest cannot be a true believer and is more likely to be Satanist than a Christian.

There are so many complete sexual predators in today’s priest – of of the homosexual persuasion.

People like McCarrick and Rossi are not only sexual predators but they are truly destroyers of the young seminarians and priests they target.

And there are not only in the USA.

They are in Ireland and the UK too.

They are ruining places like Maynooth, The Irish College, Allen Hall, Oscott and Wornesh.



Pat I Spent two nights in St Johns wonersh visiting a friend who left a two years ago. It’s a weird place, felt I was being watched all the time and I was a guest at the time. I could say loads about the experience but
Il mention two things. They have open shared showers for guests and seminarians, I’m happily married but shared showers with these men. It was very obvious to me that these men enjoyed watching other men showering so I have to admit I put on a show for them. In the five bar they get you drunk so that when you are getting a night tour of the place when they bump into you in the dark you don’t mind we’ll that’s what they think. These men are sexually frustrated and the staff are too. I can email if you want


11.40: Are you a weirdo, a frustrated married man, probably loving every moment of your fantasy trip around the dark corridors hoping for a good embrace and all that you desire? I think you’re very description suggests you too are a sexually frustrated idiot. Go back to your wife.


I do not agree with you. The comment came over to me as quite balanced and from someone who knew what he was dealing with.


Bp Pat, I imagine there would be a marked decline in revenue from paying guests visiting or on retreat if the urinals and communal showers were replaced with private bathrooms. The shared… well, let just say, “facilities” are probably part of the attraction.


on the Irish bishops website it says that Eamonn Martin is ”Archbishop of Armagh, Apostolic Administrator of Armagh, Primate of All Ireland and President of the Irish Catholic Bishops’ Conference”
what does Apostolic Admin mean?


I suppose it means the archdiocese of Armagh is administered following the teachings of the twelve apostles who followed Christ, or something along these lines.


Pat, thank you for associating catholic pervert priests with satanists – I am sure they will love you for that.
My I say I have met many Satanists, Lucifer worshippers, Pagans, Wiccans – and all of them have better moral values and ethics than catholic cardinals, bishops, priests and dare I say it – popes.
Please name me Satanists, Wiccans, Pagans who sexually abused young boys and girls in their care?
There are no hypocrisy with them, and to lump this hypocritical scumbag of a priest along with them is unfair.


1.25am: What a crazy, unintelligent comment! You are very confused. Have you ever witnessed any person possessed by an evil spirit? I have and let me assure you, it is a most terrifying experience. Satanism is responsible for much pain, confusion, destruction and evil in the lives of many. Get real..


Anon@8:29: You ask; “Have you ever witnessed any person possessed by an evil spirit….etc?”
May I ask you if you have any experience of witnessing the more extreme manifestations of acute psychiatric illness? I have, and witnessed extremes of disturbed behaviour on occasions in the past when called upon to “section” patients suffering this acute phase requiring their compulsory detention in a psychiatric ward for their own safety and/or treatment. Such extremes of behaviour were all to unfortunately attributed by the naive, untrained, and gullible to that old shibboleth and ‘fall guy’, Satan as a facile explanation.
I believe that such “explanations” were rife in earlier ages before the advent of modern psychiatric understanding.


Lol @ 8:25. I have seen many people who personified evil, had no conscience and thought nothing of abusing others. They were all Catholic priests or religious.
Did you know the Church of Satan doesn’t believe in Satan?
Another thing is there is a common belief in all the groups mentioned in reincarnation (the belief entered via theosophy). They also don’t have a mechanism to wipe away what they have done, and these two things together inspire strongly moral behaviour, since there isn’t the dangerous weakness of Christianity where you get forgiven for anything you do.
There has never been a conviction for ‘Satanic’ ritual abuse, because it doesn’t happen. The claims made about it, such as buried babies, would now be proved by forensic evidence. There has never been this evidence because it doesn’t happen. The beliefs are explained as common delusional beliefs or hysteria or even beliefs implanted by actual abusers who want to divert police attention.
I suggest before you go around telling people they are unintelligent you make an effort to meet some actual satanists, witches and pagans. They are incredibly cultured people and frankly I would rate them better company in every way than sneering bigots like yourself.


The question remains unanswered: Why are men like Rossi and Bransfield (not to mention James Robinson) attracted to Roman Catholic priesthood? It makes absolutely no sense. The attraction suggests that there is something intrinsically disordered about this institution, and the lifestyles of those in it tends to prove my point.

I do not agree with the view that these men entered this priesthood with ideals of serving God, which were subsequently dissipated: this would contradict the reason for their attraction in the first place.

There is moral rotteness in this institution, and it appeals to such men, while honing their self-conceit, their lust for power and status, and their sexual deviancy.

There is more than one form of lust, and Roman Catholic priesthood brings out the worst in men, because it appeals to the worst in men.


A very pertinent question, Magna. One answer might be in the grotesquely inflated view of priesthood, as expressed on Sunday 29th September in St Peter’s by Cardinal Robert Sarah. If priests truly believe they are ontologically changed by ordination to become not merely “another Christ” but “Christ himself” under the special protection of the Virgin Mary, it is no wonder they think they can act with impunity. The sense of power and privilege is what attracts them in the first place. Only look at the insufferably pompous portrait of the Monsignor in his ridiculous cummerbund.



I was not as informed then, nor intellectually and spiritually aware, as I am now. Remember much (very much) was hidden. Today we know why.

The pretense of holiness in Roman Catholic priesthood, in stark and shocking contrast to the reality of it, was necessarily protected, at all costs (even the well-being of children), to preserve the illusion of clerical moral authority.

I was drawn, as a teenager, to the pretense, not to the reality. But some (men like Rossi, Bransfield, Robinson, and so many others), instinctively aware of the reality of priesthood, were drawn by this. How could it have been otherwise, since their behaviour remained unchanged? And this because their impious ambitions were paramount.

I thought that Roman Catholic priesthood offered opportunity for personal holiness, but I was wrong. And my growing awareness of this was quickened by the fact that I should have to promise obedience not to the one I wanted to serve, Christ, but to a largely man-made, and worldly, institution through a bishop.I knew that this might force the suppression or compromising of my conscience at some point.

So you are wrong. My attraction to priesthood made perfect sense, when it is known to whom, rather than to what, I was attracted.

I did not go forward for ordination, even though my dean was highly impressed with me, both spiritually and academically; he hoped that I would reconsider. I never did. And I am glad of it, for I should feel nothing but personal shame and disgust that I belonged to an institution so manifestly self-regarding, self-corrupting, and destructive of human hopes, aspirations, and peace.


Elsie is on the phone to Treanor telling him to take action against you Pat .
Can not see what he can do ?


9.58 What a load of rubbish. As if Vincent is bothered by this blog. Which seems to have a load of fantasists commenting and talking crap (just like you).


9.58: Would you go and find something useful and worthwhile to do. What a pathetic concern for you to have! Get a life. Grow up. Go out and do your pastoral work. Your gosdip, innuendo and lies are sinful, Father…..leave the priesthood or go and renew yourself in Christ.


Magna @ 11:47: Your comment is well measured and insightful. Thank you. Irrespective of who disagrees with or disbelieves what you say such balanced comments are welcome.


Thank you, MMM.

You have been fair towards me: praising when warranted, criticising when justified.


Ooh Father’s feeling a little waspish today!
Small – minded gossips are exactly what is wanted in the modern priesthood, to carry out their bishops’ mandate of managed decline. You yourself have time to come on here snapping at other people, so priest or not, you should take your own advice… Or at least go away anywhere other than here.


1.52: What may be the reason Rev. Fr. for your waspishness? My spoken truth earlier???? TRUTH hurts sometimes.


12.40: You obviously din’t mix in many different social or professional groups. To suggest that Satanists are the most moral people you have met is silly and untrue. The extremes of satanic experimentation has brought great distress to many individuals. Fact. All human beings seek to live by a moral orvethical belief system, influenced by religious belief, humanism or atheism. There are flaws in every belief system. It is wrong to classify all clerics as morally deficient on account of the crimes of some. I have witnessed great evil in communities – horrific acts committed by people who were dangerous, unstable human beings. Christianity offers forgiveness for wrong done in the commitment of making amends and promising never to commit the same wrong again. Christianity encourages and invites people to live to the highest ideals of Christ and his message. It is not a religion of compromise on personal conscience, moral or ethical integrity but seeks to inspire us to be the best human being we can be.


Typical MMM blowing up his own importance! Surely your job was just to make sure the patient got to hospital AFTER being sectioned by the medics.


11.47: Magna, you seem to have a habit of rewriting personal history. Your story about you having the awareness as a seminarian that the institution was corrupted and that you intuited that your integrity of conscience would be compromised if you continued on to ordination is retrospective “insighting”. You were NOT allowed to continue your formation. I was there as were others who comment on this blog. So, let you speak the truth. You can attribute all kinds of analysis and reasons as to why some clerics turn out far from Christ, delusional, dishonest and despicable in their behaviour but you cannot say that of all priests. I certainly didn’t sell my loyalty to anyone on my ordination day other than to Christ. My parents and grandparents, thank God, taught me to put CHRIST first and foremost in my life. I have tried to do that. Your continued aversion to and intense dislike of catholic clergy has its roots, not only in the scandals but in a more serious, deep personal, on-going dysfunctionality. So, Magna, look to your own HEART. Welcome back…..!!


Mercy me? Aren’t you the strange one altogether. Slaming my face on the floor (with a made-up Magna history) and then, er, welcoming me back (with double exclamation marks?).😕
There is one way to settle this. Are you ready?


4.44: Magna and Pat. Please do not allow a return to or an encouragement of the awful tit for tat, ugly, vulgar commentary between Magna himself and his enemies. It was vicious, unnecessary, a turn off and way beyond what was acceptable. It was inevitable that if and when Magna returned, the same ritual of slaying one another would recur. Please, Please, spare us the horror. Pat, delete the aggressive comments which tempt Magna into his old vicious trolling. We’ve had a couple of weeks without this rancour and nasty, awful commentary and it was so refreshing. Now, don’t allow your blog to yet again be controlled by Magna.


This comment could be used in relationship workshops as an example of passive aggressive communication.
The writer also assumes
A) he knows who Magna is
B) what passed between seminary authorities and Magna
C) what Magna was thinking!
Welcome back, Magna! Your good sense and honest introspection is always welcome.


4.48: The meaning of the word introspection: the examination of one’s own mental and emotional processes. Do you seriously believe that Magna engages with truthful introspection in light of his past vicious and poisonous commentary? I don’t believe so. Anyone in touch with their own true state of emotional, mental and spiritual well being and who seemed to be a holistic person does not engage in hate speech or encourage bigotry and prejudice.



Excuse me.

Vicious trolling by me on this page? Where?

Extreme and serious (and extremely and seriously wrong) accusations against me were made at 4.32, and I answered them by requesting proof from the poster. Where is there viciousness here by me?

Where is there trolling?

I didn’t ask that poster to comment in such a way about me. Yet, you refer mainly to me.

Would you deny me the opportunity to address such comments? Because there are readers here who would have taken malicious delight in reading into my silence proof that the accusations were correct.

You need to have a word with yourself : I was never in control of this blog, nor do I wish to be, since I seek to censor no one.

You, on the other hand…


8.29: Magna, I was of course referring to past commentary (if you read my comnent cirrectly), and making the legitimate 8bservatiin that you elicited horrible tit for tat nasty comnentary which bordered on hate speech. You were challenged by many bloggers and realised the truthfulness of the accusations that you threw a hissy fit and promised to never return to this blog, even taking a nasty swipe at Pat. So, my dear Magna, your memory seems affected too. Your comments today are moderate. But it won’t be long till you are back into your own inimitable style. God help us.


Bishop Pat at 8.11

If I might suggest that you refuse to publish such comments about me when posted without proof. These accusations have appeared on your blog before, more than once, and even though I have repeatedly denied them, you continue to publish them. This is morally wrong, and defamatory, and for this you must take responsibity, since the decision to publish is yours alone. The accusations are utterly untrue.

If these people have evidence for their accusations against me, then let them either put up, or shut up.

I, too, am entitled to fair play.



I don’t know what to say to you that will dissuade you from such a bigoted position, but I shall say it anyhow: you are wrong.



Of course you were.

You singled me out for particular criticism, even though I had merely responded to serious accusations against me that are categorically untrue, and which I had repeatedly denied. In fact, in an incredibly bizarre leap, you went as far as accusing me of trying to take over this blog.

It’s a pity you lack the personal integrity and couage to perform the most important of the three virtues Pope Francis has listed as consistent with Christian living: Saying please; expressing thanks; and saying ‘SORRY’.


I mix in a huge range of social and professional groups. And will reiterate that forgiveness is dangerous, because it gives dangerous people the idea they can have another go. We have all seen this forgiveness in action in the protection of clerical abusers, and will reiterate that if you have no way of having your actions wiped off the slate it is a major behaviour-changing incentive.
In your first comment you equate a number of new religious movements with evil, which is hatred and ignorance pure and simple.
You haven’t actually met a modern witch, have you?


Anon@3:07: Does your “surely ” come from a position of informed knowledge, or just instinctive derision for what you don’t understand?
The then applicable legislation in UK, (now much updated), was the 1959 Mental Health Act from which “sectioning” referred to S. 25 & S. 29 ie the relevant sections for compulsory admission to hospital. The legal basis for admission was a signed application by a ‘duly authorised mental welfare officer’ relying on and producing the signed medical recommendation of medical practitioners: (one medic for an emergency 72 hour max: two medics for a max 28 day admission, one of whom had to be qualified in psychiatric medicine) Note that the medics made recommendations: the mental welfare officer then had to determine whether compulsion was necessary as an urgency and only way to safeguard the patient’s safety/wellbeing.
This consideration regularly led to tension with otherwise well meaning GPs on basis of their own sole recommendation seeking emergency 72 hour compulsion for patients they considered disruptive or uncooperative. (Very understandable especially under pressure from distraught family of the patient) While ill/confused and uncooperative patients were regularly found not a danger to themselves or others, and as the legal effects of being sectioned (could invalidate a will for example, which medics didn’t appreciate ) , the application was not something made lightly and certainly not simply for medical convenience.
I have no knowledge of the current UK or Ireland legislation.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s