Bishops' refusal to even suggest homosexuality played any part in the sexual abuse

[rpstpa]

Werner:

If the other male is a kid, you call it pederasty.
If the other male is dead, you call it necrophily.
If the other male is involuntary, you call it rape.
If the other male is a consenting adult, you call it an homosexual act.

Werner

Exactly!

 

[rpstpa]

BibleReader:

I talk about it and damn it whenever I can.

Homosexual promiscuity in the Catholic clergy has GOT to be stomped-out. Nastily.

that is very christian of you bible reader…

 

[HumbleSinner]

Cardinal Roger M. Mahony

. . . Despite claims of transparency and openness, Mahony has resisted the release of accused priests’ names and has employed constitutional challenges to keep documents from prosecutors. . .



Roger M. Mahony
Cardinal, Los Angeles CA Archdiocese

Mahony was born on February 27, 1936 in North Hollywood CA and is a graduate of St. John’s Seminary in Camarillo CA and of the National Catholic School of Social Science at Catholic University in Washington DC. He was ordained in 1962, served as bishop of Fresno CA (1975–80) and Stockton CA (1980–85), and has been the archbishop of Los Angeles since 1985. Mahony became a cardinal in 1991; he is 67.

Despite claims of transparency and openness, Mahony has resisted the release of accused priests’ names and has employed constitutional challenges to keep documents from prosecutors. Los Angeles Deputy District Attorney William Hodgman has charged 9 priests with sexual abuse of minors, and may charge as many as 12 more. In Ventura County, a grand jury has questioned 4 vicars of clergy, past and present, and charged 2 priests. Under a law extending the statute of limitations for one year (subsequently increased), over 400 claims are ongoing against 120 defendants.

Among the accused, Michael Baker confessed to Mahony in 1986, but was transferred to a series of parishes until 2000. Michael Wempe was placed by Mahony in a hospital with access to children, despite a long record of abuse. Like Mahony, Baker and Wempe went to St. John’s Seminary, as did disgraced bishop and Mahony protégé G. Patrick Ziemann. As in Boston and elsewhere, seminary connections appear to have enabled abuse and fostered the cover-up, and the Catholic treatment center network was used to recycle abusive priests. Mahony’s connection with the notorious treatment center in Jemez Springs NM, run by Servants of the Paraclete, is well established.

On June 26, 2003, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled against extending statutes of limitations (see opinion and dissent), and a California judge will soon rule on whether prosecutors can have 2,000 pages of chancery documents. In the July 2003 update to BishopAccountability.org, we will provide full coverage of the Supreme Court decision and its implications.

The mood and methods of the Mahony chancery as the scandal broke in LA can be gauged from the emails among Mahony’s inner circle, leaked to the Los Angeles radio station WKFI in early April 2002. (See resources on this site for two versions.) Even during Holy Week, concern for the victims is nonexistent in this email exchange, and contrition never comes up. Cynical manipulation of the victims, press, police, and even comrades in the chancery seems to be the norm.

Mahony precipitated the resignation on June 16, 2003 of Frank Keating, after Keating criticized Mahony’s orchestration of a boycott by California bishops of the National Review Board’s compliance survey. The face-off had the unintended effect of focusing national attention on collusion among the bishops, days before the June USCCB conference begins.

As prosecutors await the decision on 2,000 pages of documents, they are actively pursuing their investigations. Wempe had been released in the wake of the Stogner decision, but was recently picked up on new charges.

 

[GloriaPatri4]

Related thread click [thread=46246] here [/thread]

 

[bluezone7]

Homosexuality has nothing to do withe the sexual abuse of children. To think being Gay or Lesbian has something to do with the sexual abuse of children is to assume that most homosexuals or more likely to sexually abuse children. When the truth is that homosexuals are less likely than heterosexuals to abuse children. Also celibacy has nothing to do with the scandal either or that would assume that anyone who does not have sex on a fairly regular basis is more likely to sexually abuse children.

 

[fix]

bluezone7:

Homosexuality has nothing to do withe the sexual abuse of children. To think being Gay or Lesbian has something to do with the sexual abuse of children is to assume that most homosexuals or more likely to sexually abuse children. When the truth is that homosexuals are less likely than heterosexuals to abuse children. Also celibacy has nothing to do with the scandal either or that would assume that anyone who does not have sex on a fairly regular basis is more likely to sexually abuse children.

Actually, SSAD has everything to do with abuse of teenage boys. Your assertion that “gays”, a absurd term, are less likely to abuse is contradicted by several studies.

 

[Lisa_N]

bluezone7:

Homosexuality has nothing to do withe the sexual abuse of children. To think being Gay or Lesbian has something to do with the sexual abuse of children is to assume that most homosexuals or more likely to sexually abuse children. When the truth is that homosexuals are less likely than heterosexuals to abuse children.

Sorry do the math. Sure there are fewer homosexuals engaged in sexual abuse of children because there are FEWER OF THEM. IOW if the vast majority of sex abuse is perpetuated by men and 2% of men are homosexual, you’d expect 2% of the abusers to be homosexual. Unfortunately that is not true. I understand that 30% of child sexual abusers are homosexuals not 2% if they abused with the same percentage as they exist in the population. So proportionally there is a vastly larger percentage of homosexuals engaged in abusing children than heterosexuals.

bluezone7:

Also celibacy has nothing to do with the scandal either or that would assume that anyone who does not have sex on a fairly regular basis is more likely to sexually abuse children.

You are correct, celibacy is not the problem. Child sex abuse occurs in higher percentages in many other professions than in the priesthood. Teachers, coaches, youth leaders and sadly pastors and rabbis (all of whom can be and usually are married) abuse children in higher percentages than priests. Unfortunately for our team, the story has taken on a life of its own and people think a large percentage of priests engaged in child sex abuse. They didn’t and those who were involved in the scandal generally didn’t abuse CHILDREN but rather teenagers were the most likely targets.

However you are naive to think that predatory homosexuals were not the problem in the Catholic church. There was very little heterosexual abuse and this did not change over the years while the numbers of homosexual abusers increased dramatically in the 60s and 70s. You should read the “Jay Report” for details.

Lisa N

 

[for_eternity]

just to clarify… I think homosexuality is wrong, and not how God intended us to live.

If people are saying that we need to take this out of the priests conscience and decide for them if they have homosexual tendencies that they will not be able to control them and therefor should not be a priest, then we also need to take this out of the parishioners hands when through their conscience they decide it’s o.k. to recieve communion when they are living in sin through a homosexual relationship and deny them the right to recieve communion.

homosexuality is wrong. Why then are these people who live this lifestyle still allowed to recieve communion? We need to be stricter on both sides. Not turning people away from the priesthood or communion, but in the way that we need to view this life as one in which we need to sacrifice our wants, and needs to Glorify God. So we can follow his narraw path towards an eternity with Him. Homosexuality is a temptation. One that we need to resist. It’s not an option.

 

[Rand_Al_Thor]

homosexuality didnt have anything to do with the abuses. gay men go after other gay men (the key word here being “men”), not young children. the priests who did the abuse were pedophiles. that is a huge difference. it is the same as saying that heterosexuality is to blame for men abusing young girls.

 

[fix]

Rand Al'Thor:

homosexuality didnt have anything to do with the abuses. gay men go after other gay men (the key word here being “men”), not young children. the priests who did the abuse were pedophiles. that is a huge difference. it is the same as saying that heterosexuality is to blame for men abusing young girls.

The abuse crisis is all about “gay” men, not pedophilia. The abuse was of post pubescent males by homosexual men. That is a “gay” issue, not a pedophilia issue.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=54038

 

[Lisa_N]

Rand Al'Thor:

homosexuality didnt have anything to do with the abuses. gay men go after other gay men (the key word here being “men”), not young children. the priests who did the abuse were pedophiles. that is a huge difference. it is the same as saying that heterosexuality is to blame for men abusing young girls.

Please do a bit more research. The Jay report is an excellent source. You will see that the priests did not prey upon children (under 10) as in true pedophelia but focused on teens. There is actually a specific term for that perversion and the focus upon youth is one of the characteristics of the homosexual culture.

You are also incorrect in stating that homosexuals prey upon other homosexuals. They also prey upon those over whom they have control. This is not limited to the Church. You live in the Portland area I see. Maybe you are too young to remember Michael Stoops who was at the time a nationally known advocate for homeless folks. Turned out our Michael spent a lot of time preying upon the youth who were on the streets. They were not homosexuals but they were desperate and traded sexual favors for shelter, food, and drugs. We have a more recent case of a juvenile probation officer who has preyed upon youth in his charge and is now in jail. Another where two ‘married’ homosexual males were using an adopted high schooler to provide his friends for their sexual pleasure. Again, they are not going after CHILDREN. You need to read a definition of pedophelia because that is a very particular deviancy that has very specific characteristics.

What is extremely sad is that many of the young men preyed upon believed they WERE homosexual else they would not have been chosen as a victim of a predatory homosexual. The probation officer’s predation resulted in one young man (late teens NOT a child) committing suicide because he believed he was now ‘marked’ as a homosexual because of that evil creature who used his position to molest him. Again, not pedophiles, just predators.

Lisa N

 

[Rand_Al_Thor]

ok, I was wrong then. I thought the kids were younger than they actually were. Ignore my post.

 

[Nan_S]

Has anyone else been required to take the course “Protecting God’s Children”? In the dioceses of Shreveport and Alexandria, LA, we were all required to complete the course before being allowed to work with children in any way.

The course teaches that men and women from any background can be sexual predators, and gives key indicators to watch for.

I had the nerve to make the observation that while Protestant churches are most frequently plagued by heterosexual abuse, the recent Catholic church scandals are homosexual in origin. The instructor told us she was not in a position to discuss that, and quickly changed the subject. So much for honesty.

 

[Lisa_N]

Nan S:

I had the nerve to make the observation that while Protestant churches are most frequently plagued by heterosexual abuse, the recent Catholic church scandals are homosexual in origin. The instructor told us she was not in a position to discuss that, and quickly changed the subject. So much for honesty.

Interesting observation. You know if you think about it, teacher/student abuse is almost invariably heterosexual as well. Again it’s also not generally pedophelia but male teachers and female teen students although sadly we see more and more female teachers involved but with adolescent boys, not little kids.

It certainly makes me wonder what happened that so many predatory homosexuals were attracted to and protected by the Church.

Lisa N

 

[puzzleannie]

Nan S:

Has anyone else been required to take the course “Protecting God’s Children”? In the dioceses of Shreveport and Alexandria, LA, we were all required to complete the course before being allowed to work with children in any way.

The course teaches that men and women from any background can be sexual predators, and gives key indicators to watch for.
.

whatever the presenter of your course said or did not say, the video clearly presented stories of both heterosexual and homosexual abuse of minors by trusted adults. Note the related post about the NEA protecting molester in its ranks.

 

[JimG]

puzzleannie:

whatever the presenter of your course said or did not say, the video clearly presented stories of both heterosexual and homosexual abuse of minors by trusted adults.

Yes, the course I took also made the point that child molesters may be both heterosexual or homosexual.

However, it still struck me as a little odd–even defensive, perhaps–to so emphasize this point in a program designed specifically as a response to sexual abuse within the Church, where the vast majority of the cases reported were homosexual in nature.

 

[mjdonnelly]

The program is a knee-jerk reaction to what happened. It appears to be geared more towards parents than teachers, coaches, etc.

And, there is another term for an abuser who takes advantage of pubescent children who are under 18, but the abuser is at least 5 years older. I just can’t remember at this time, is was mentioned in the re-certification portion of that program.

 

[LCMS_No_More]

Here’s an idea.

Let’s get the list of all members of Courage, Dr. Niolosi’s patient list, the member lists of all “Gay and Lesbian” ministries, the member lists of all “Gay and Lesbian Centers” and round them all up.

Then, all of you who are holy, pure and completely without any sin whatsoever can stand in a circle and stone each one of these people one by one. After all, they’re all evil, horrible and wicked, even if they are members of the Church repentant and living chastely. They can’t be trusted to control themselves, even with the help of the sacraments since they’re something other than human persons made in the image and likeness of God. God hates them so you should, too. They’re predestined for hell anyway, so why let them go on living? Just kill them all and be rid of them once and for all.

I think that just about sums up some of the vitriol towards all same-sex attracted persons.

(The theme of this post is hyperbole to make a point)

 

[puzzleannie]

ZERO TOLERANCE?

by Stephen Brady, President Roman Catholic Faithful, Inc. [RCF]
Printed in the Catholic Family News (catholictradition.org/cfn-index.htm))

Having spent some time in Dallas during the bishops’ semi-annual meeting [June 12-15], I was able to confirm what many of us had already known: The same U.S. hierarchy that has ignored-----and even persecuted-----faithful Catholics has now made it clear that they have completely embraced the homosexual agenda. The majority of U.S. bishops are arguably anti-Catholic and may for the most part be homosexual themselves. This fact became crystal clear with the bishops’ refusal to even suggest homosexuality played any part in the sexual abuse scandal within the Church.

going back to the original post on this topic, the article quoted comes from a notoriously anti-church site. whatever you feel about the USCCB and their actions or failures to act, (and we could devote an entire forum to that discussion) to leap to a blanket accusation like that which closes the paragraph above is libelous and completely unwarranted by facts. Undeniable some gay bishops have been identified but that in no way justifies such a statement, which rivals anything in the most biased anti-Catholic mainstream media reporting. don’t we have forum rules about posting material from anti-Catholic and schismatic websites?

the author goes on further to claim that Bishop Bruskewitz has publicly criticized the Pope for his so-called failure to discipline or remove errant bishops. I would not accept such an allegation against a bishop who is known to be both orthodox and obedient without proof.

 

[JOHNYJ]

One must keep in mind the Primary Plan of the Bishops.Make sure who ever is blamed in the scandal,IT ISNT THE BISHOPS !
Blaming the Media,didn’t work.Blaming all priests hasn’t worked, so now we go ater any Gay aspects and exaggerate them.
Anyone but us! and when we are caught lie until forced to tell the truth. Than admit,but.Punish no one.