Gay cover-up must end

[manygift1spirit]

Okay. So, the men involved in this scandal were predominantly active homosexual persons. Now, I’m curious about something because it’s always emphasized with such enthusiasm (homosexual problem, not paedophilia problem).

Is this emphasis that the scandal is a homosexual problem vs. paedophilia problem intended for accuracy (with the appropriate qualifiers, i.e., not all homosexual persons are involved or support such behavior and that some condemn this behavior (as I do)) or an attempt to demonize all homosexual persons?

I cannot speak for the motivations of everyone pointing that out, but certainly it is accurate. One would be hard pressed to argue that the stricter norms for entering into the seminary, especially with respect to the candidate’s sexual maturity and inclinations, is not a reflection of this reality. Think about it, with an ongoing shortage of priests the Church is not about to restrict entry to the priesthood for such arbitrary or capricious reasons, if this wasn’t accurate.

A silver lining of the scandal is that seminarians are of much better quality now.

 

[LCMS_No_More]

I cannot speak for the motivations of everyone pointing that out, but certainly it is accurate. One would be hard pressed to argue that the stricter norms for entering into the seminary, especially with respect to the candidate’s sexual maturity and inclinations, is not a reflection of this reality. Think about it, with an ongoing shortage of priests the Church is not about to restrict entry to the priesthood for such arbitrary or capricious reasons, if this wasn’t accurate.

A silver lining of the scandal is that seminarians are of much better quality now.

Granted that it is accurate, but is it complete? I’m curious as to what motivates people into emphasizing this with such enthusiasm.

I hardly hear people who are so enthusiastic to point out that the problem is homosexuality and not paedophilia also emphatically point out that most same-sex attracted people in the Church repudiate these actions.

Without that simple qualification, it appears to be motivated (consciously or not) by a desire to demonize homosexual persons. The wicked behavior on the part of a small number of homosexual Catholics is emphasized (“homosexual priests touched teenage boys,” a great bumper sticker sized headline – sells papers and gets website hits) but the fact that there are also homosexual (or same-sex attracted) Catholics who repudiate the scandalous behavior on the part of some of the leadership of the Church is never headlined with the same emphasis. I’ve tried to think of a time I’ve read anything and I got nothin’.

Actually, I don’t think it’s ever mentioned unless someone like me, who has SSA (diminishing, but there), brings it up.

End of Line.

 

[unafraid]

With all do respect, I have the complete opposite take on the matter. I see the demonization of all those who wear the collar, which was caused by the actions of the homosexual pederasts who invaded the priesthood, to be a lamentable tragedy. Having to accept inconvenient truths, when those truths touch upon aspects of one’s personal experience, must be difficult. But imagine all of those good priests who must carry the burdens these scandals have caused, along with the heavy loads of the responsibilities inherent in their vocations. The righteous priests are the poor souls who are now being vilified…not homosexuals.

 

[LCMS_No_More]

With all do respect, I have the complete opposite take on the matter. I see the demonization of all those who wear the collar, which was caused by the actions of the homosexual pederasts who invaded the priesthood, to be a lamentable tragedy. Having to accept inconvenient truths, when those truths touch upon aspects of one’s personal experience, must be difficult. But imagine all of those good priests who must carry the burdens these scandals have caused, along with the heavy loads of the responsibilities inherent in their vocations. The righteous priests are the poor souls who are now being vilified…not homosexuals.

Yes, you’re right…provisionally. The Catholic Church herself is under attack here. That means we are all under attack. While it is essential to proclaim truth in the area of sexual morality, it is also important to recognize that there are some Catholics who are completely innocent with regard to the scandal (Catholics with SSA who try to live in accord with Church teaching) who are also under attack by other members of the Church. Why are they under attack? Because uninformed people make blanket statements about a whole group of people.

When you have people asking questions as to whether or not for a person with same-sex attractions to even live a celibate/chaste life, that’s a form of attack…or at least it is received that way by some of us with SSA and are trying (I can’t speak for everyone here, just myself and I’m sure I’m not alone). We, too, are scandalized by what was done by these men who committed these wicked acts (here, I dare to speak for everyone). All I’m saying is that we are Catholics, too, and we are just as upset by the scandals as everyone else. Let’s close ranks, not throw spears at others. We’re not scapegoats.

 

[manygift1spirit]

Granted that it is accurate, but is it complete? I’m curious as to what motivates people into emphasizing this with such enthusiasm.

There are without doubt many other reasons, so no it’s not complete or exhaustive. But I can easily think of two specific reasons to emphasize it.

1. The inaccuracy is not only wrong, it is extraordinarily prejudicial. Think about it: the word “pedophilia” evokes about as strong a revulsion as any other word (like the tax collecters and prostitutes of Jesus’ time: the worst of the worst). Such a use of loaded language is called “spin”, and affronts the 8th commandment, even when “factually” correct (which here it is not).
2. The inaccuracy is not only wrong, it is also extraordinarily telling: it says far more about some of the sources of the inaccuracy than about the accused. The point is that look, a lot of the cacophony is nothing more than a proxy battle for credibility between different positions towards homosexualist agendas. There are thus large conflicts of interest there, and the message the emphasizers are getting at is you really cannot always believe everything you hear, so let’s everyone turn their BS meter back on.

I hardly hear people who are so enthusiastic to point out that the problem is homosexuality and not paedophilia also emphatically point out that most same-sex attracted people in the Church repudiate these actions.

Without that simple qualification, it appears to be motivated (consciously or not) by a desire to demonize homosexual persons. The wicked behavior on the part of a small number of homosexual Catholics is emphasized (“homosexual priests touched teenage boys,” a great bumper sticker sized headline – sells papers and gets website hits) but the fact that there are also homosexual (or same-sex attracted) Catholics who repudiate the scandalous behavior on the part of some of the leadership of the Church is never headlined with the same emphasis. I’ve tried to think of a time I’ve read anything and I got nothin’.

Actually, I don’t think it’s ever mentioned unless someone like me, who has SSA (diminishing, but there), brings it up.

I have to agree with the poster above: that description does not jive with my experience at all. Your bumper sticker would indeed be far more accurate, but we don’t see that type of coverage. I have seen plenty of Catholics (and others, but not your point) quoted condemning various parts of Church hierarchy (often to emphasize the source’s deeply misguided opinions of how to prevent further scandals). My experience is quite different than yours.

---

Let’s run a thought experiment: What if the coverage had indeed been phrased that way, that “homosexual priests touched teenage boys” was the template for the coverage in the last few weeks. What discussions would be going on instead? What would the blogosphere be like? Who would be criticizing the coverage? Why? What would their criticisms be? What would people who don’t understand the Church (this would include a fair number of Catholics) be proposing to do to improve the situation? What about those who do understand the Church? Feel free to respond but this is intended as an open question to the whole forum.

 

[unafraid]

se

There are without doubt many other reasons, so no it’s not complete or exhaustive. But I can easily think of two specific reasons to emphasize it.

1. The inaccuracy is not only wrong, it is extraordinarily prejudicial. Think about it: the word “pedophilia” evokes about as strong a revulsion as any other word (like the tax collecters and prostitutes of Jesus’ time: the worst of the worst). Such a use of loaded language is called “spin”, and affronts the 8th commandment, even when “factually” correct (which here it is not).
2. The inaccuracy is not only wrong, it is also extraordinarily telling: it says far more about some of the sources of the inaccuracy than about the accused. The point is that look, a lot of the cacophony is nothing more than a proxy battle for credibility between different positions towards homosexualist agendas. There are thus large conflicts of interest there, and the message the emphasizers are getting at is you really cannot always believe everything you hear, so let’s everyone turn their BS meter back on.

I have to agree with the poster above: that description does not jive with my experience at all. Your bumper sticker would indeed be far more accurate, but we don’t see that type of coverage. I have seen plenty of Catholics (and others, but not your point) quoted condemning various parts of Church hierarchy (often to emphasize the source’s deeply misguided opinions of how to prevent further scandals). My experience is quite different than yours.

---

Let’s run a thought experiment: What if the coverage had indeed been phrased that way, that “homosexual priests touched teenage boys” was the template for the coverage in the last few weeks. What discussions would be going on instead? What would the blogosphere be like? Who would be criticizing the coverage? Why? What would their criticisms be? What would people who don’t understand the Church (this would include a fair number of Catholics) be proposing to do to improve the situation? What about those who do understand the Church? Feel free to respond but this is intended as an open question to the whole forum.

Nicely thought out and reasoned post. I’d like to pick up on the point regarding the sinister use of semantics, especially with regard to overemphasis and repetition.

Language as a weapon is no new concept, in fact, one of our founders, Ben Franklin, informs us that “the pen is mightier than the sword”. Unchallenged slander, with its catchphrases and codewords, when allowed to be promulgated unimpeded, can metastasize and find itself anchored onto the mass psyche.

We must confront this base form of distortion by simply pointing it out as we find it. Those who engage in this low form of behavior like to hide behind the camouflage of subtlety, and if their cover is blown they run and hide. Slanderers are at their root cowards. They shoot from the shadows. Call them out into the light of truth and they become puny, and often apologetic. Unfortunately, propagandists are protean by their very natures, and therefore, very hard to pin down. Put out one fire, another pops up somewhere else. It is a real dilemma…

 

[LCMS_No_More]

se

Nicely thought out and reasoned post. I’d like to pick up on the point regarding the sinister use of semantics, especially with regard to overemphasis and repetition.

Language as a weapon is no new concept, in fact, one of our founders, Ben Franklin, informs us that “the pen is mightier than the sword”. Unchallenged slander, with its catchphrases and codewords, when allowed to be promulgated unimpeded, can metastasize and find itself anchored onto the mass psyche.

We must confront this base form of distortion by simply pointing it out as we find it. Those who engage in this low form of behavior like to hide behind the camouflage of subtlety, and if their cover is blown they run and hide. Slanderers are at their root cowards. They shoot from the shadows. Call them out into the light of truth and they become puny, and often apologetic. Unfortunately, propagandists are protean by their very natures, and therefore, very hard to pin down. Put out one fire, another pops up somewhere else. It is a real dilemma…

I don’t get it.

 

[unafraid]

I don’t get it.

What’s not to get? I believe that homosexuals use another term for this, they call it “hate-speach”. It is the use of an imflammatory word or phrase, over and over again, with the intentional aim of painting an entire group with a broad, derogatory brushstroke. The other poster was pointing out (in one part of the post) that the term “pedophillia (paedophillia)” has become such an inflammatory weapon in the hands of those who seek to wound the entire body of the Church. I was stating my agreement with that assertion.

 

[manualman]

…I hardly hear people who are so enthusiastic to point out that the problem is homosexuality and not paedophilia also emphatically point out that most same-sex attracted people in the Church repudiate these actions.

Without that simple qualification, it appears to be motivated (consciously or not) by a desire to demonize homosexual persons. The wicked behavior on the part of a small number of homosexual Catholics is emphasized (“homosexual priests touched teenage boys,” a great bumper sticker sized headline – sells papers and gets website hits) but the fact that there are also homosexual (or same-sex attracted) Catholics who repudiate the scandalous behavior on the part of some of the leadership of the Church is never headlined with the same emphasis. I’ve tried to think of a time I’ve read anything and I got nothin’.

Actually, I don’t think it’s ever mentioned unless someone like me, who has SSA (diminishing, but there), brings it up.
…

Actually, if you read this thread back a ways, I brought it up first. And I’ve never struggled with SSA.

The John Jay report has been out for YEARS now. I’m personally impressed at how well restrained the bishops have been until now in resisting the temptation to thrust forward a powerful scapegoat. You can’t blame it on gays. The blame lies on the predator priests (many of whom may, in fact, be gay AND pederasts - not the same thing) and the spineless or corrupt bishops who refused to man up and deal with the problem properly.

To claim that the John Jay report demonstrates that the abuse crisis is caused by homosexuality is like claiming that christianity caused the Jim Jones Koolaid tragedy. Non Sequitor.

 

[qui_est_ce]

I don’t get it.

I don’t see the homosexuality problem being announced with glee. These were predators. It doesn’t matter what sexual orientation they were. They abused their power. It would be just as wrong as a heterosexual priest abusing a woman.

It’s important to know what the abuse entails in order to effectively deal with it, even if it’s politically incorrect.

It seems to me the headlines are screaming that the Catholic Church is BLAMING homosexuals, when in fact the Church is admitting it’s had a problem with homosexual predators. I’m sure there are some OSA predators as well as pedophile , but that doesn’t seem to be the main problem.

And for those who say only boys were available because girls weren’t altar servers, some of these abuses were done in the Confessional. Statistically, more females than males use this Sacrament.

PS, I suffer from OSA

 

[Catherine_S]

Okay. So, the men involved in this scandal were predominantly active homosexual persons. Now, I’m curious about something because it’s always emphasized with such enthusiasm (homosexual problem, not paedophilia problem).

Is this emphasis that the scandal is a homosexual problem vs. paedophilia problem intended for accuracy (with the appropriate qualifiers, i.e., not all homosexual persons are involved or support such behavior and that some condemn this behavior (as I do)) or** an attempt to demonize all homosexual persons**?

There have* always*** been men with SSA in the priesthood and they carried their very heavy crosses with dignity for the sake of Christ. They loved the Lord and loved His people. They served Him and His Church with their lives.
There are, however, far* too*** many, at this particular time in history, who have raised havoc, deeply hurt others, including their brothers in the priesthood, and all of the Church. These men need to be taken** OUT** and KEPT OUT of such a sacred position and every effort must be made to KEEP THEM OUT! For they have and will come to serve themselves!
The Church knowes the difference in the chracter of both these types of men. True shepherds** recognize the wolves** among the sheep (and they need to** speak out** more often) because no system of sifting those who would** harm others** from those who** have come to serve**, is** perfectly** foolproof.
In our day, the problem of abuse was (on the whole) due to the acting out of homosexuality desires and this needs to be brought home with clarity and it needs** to be retained**! It** also** needs to be pointed out with clarity and** charity** (for God’s sake) that** all homosexuals are not good, loving, and caring folks, watch any gay parade, work in a medical compacity, or read carefully what some of these priests did to some of these boys and you will find that most of them were and are crude, lustful, decadent and without concern or care for anybody but themselves. Many of them can be likened to a deadly virus to the good health** of the** human family and they will cost any health care system more in the future than can be imagined** at this point in time. When the mistakes of a culture begin** to catch up with it**, it is a terrible day indeed!!
The Church (especially Pope Benedict) **has **done and is doing all that can be done in the USA and Canada to keep these people out of the Church and hopefully this same system of screening for the priesthood will be implemented in other parts of the world. All must be vigilent! Continue to pray for Ireland and all who are, at this time, coming to understand just how wide spread this abuse became over time!! And not in the Catholic Church alone :nope:. Others will soon wake up as well!

 

[Charmian]

Just an observation. What do you guys think?
I think the church didn’t know how to deal with this problem. A straight person is pretty disgusted by rape, but rape of the same sex or a minor - by a **family member **(priest are a royal brotherhood) must be so abhorrent to the normal, average straight priest; that they just didn’t know what to do. And did nothing.
Which was wrong and I don’t think anyone would deny that.

I have a great sympathy for the priests that are good servants of God that are being harrassed now. Some get calls at 3am - and they are answered because it could be a call for last rites - and its abusive. Some of these guys are old men (+75) and really don’t know how to handle this.

Priests are regularly murdered in this country, (because they are men living alone, in a house that has nice stuff in it and always some money); now when perpetrators are caught its always the same - “he sodomised me!” Parisheners are coming out and defending the poor man - but he is none the less dead, and his reputation has been tarnished.

So my question - at last - was it just not being about to understand the abuse that made the church incapable of speaking out against the perps?

 

[qui_est_ce]

There have* always*** been men with SSA in the priesthood and they carried their very heavy crosses with dignity, loved the Lord and loved His people. They served Him and His Church with their very lives. {snip}
The Church* knowes*** the difference in the chracter of both these types of men. True shepherds** recognize the wolves** among the sheep (and they need to** speak out** more often) because no system of sifting those who would** harm others** from those who** have come to serve**, is** perfectly** foolproof.
In our day, the problem of abuse was (on the whole) due to homosexuality and this** needs to be brought home** with clarity and it needs** to be retained**! It** also** needs to be pointed out with clarity and** charity** (for God’s sake) that** all homosexuals are not good, loving, and caring folks, watch any gay parade, work in a medical compacity, or read carefully what some of these priests did to some of these boys and you will find that most of them were and are crude, lustful, decadent and without concern or care for anybody but themselves. Many of them can be likened to a deadly virus to the good health** of the** human family and they will cost any health care system more in the future than can be imagined** at this point in time. When the mistakes of a culture begin** to catch up with it**, it is a terrible day indeed!!
The Church (especially Pope Benedict) **has **done and is doing all that can be done in the USA and Canada to keep these people out of the Church and hopefully this same system of screening for the priesthood will be implemented in other parts of the world. All must be vigilent! Continue to pray for Ireland and all who are, at this time, coming to understand just how wide spread this abuse became over time!! And not in the Catholic Church alone :nope:. Others will soon wake up as well!

Awesome post. There will be many who don’t want to face these facts.

 

[qui_est_ce]

I have a great sympathy for the priests that are good servants of God that are being harrassed now. Some get calls at 3am - and they are answered because it could be a call for last rites - and its abusive. Some of these guys are old men (+75) and really don’t know how to handle this.

Yours is a very charitable post. And much of what you say about priests being harassed is true.

A few years ago, I gave a “rectory shower” for our priests to replenish the linens and needs of the rectory. I got phone calls deriding me for helping those “pedophile priests.” The language and the hate directed at me was astounding. I can’t imagine what kind of calls our priests are getting.

 

[dapper]

Interesting points.

I think one point that should be made is that child molestation is a combination of attraction but also control. When you put a priest with an under-developed sense and knowledge of sexuality into a situation where his motives and actions will not ever be questioned, you set the stage for this kind of behavior. Who would ever believe that a priest would molest a child? Who would ever think to question the motives of a priest? This is the perfect setting for someone who gets off on control and sexual abuse of minors.

I believe that the Church probably did not know how to “treat” this problem in the past but these actions are crimes, plain and simple and they knew that from the beginning. The Church has always had an obsession with hiding scandal and had they just put these priests in jail in the first place (where they belong), this would have gone away years ago. All of the hiding, lying, shifting priests around to other locations, threats of excommunication and the like have only made this problem worse than it already is. Hopefully, the truth will finally come out, the guilty are put in prison, and the Catholic Church can get back to doing good things again.

 

[LCMS_No_More]

What’s not to get? I believe that homosexuals use another term for this, they call it “hate-speach”. It is the use of an imflammatory word or phrase, over and over again, with the intentional aim of painting an entire group with a broad, derogatory brushstroke. The other poster was pointing out (in one part of the post) that the term “pedophillia (paedophillia)” has become such an inflammatory weapon in the hands of those who seek to wound the entire body of the Church. I was stating my agreement with that assertion.

Granted that diddling post-pubescent boys is not the same as paedophilia. Then again, “mainstream” homosexuality (in other words, what most “gay” people are into) is generally about hooking up with people around one’s own age (as a formerly active homo, I can speak to this). Of course, in some cases, you have older men looking for younger men and younger men with daddy complexes looking for older men, but generally, it’s around one’s own age.

I’ve seen pederasty or ephebephilia tossed around. That is certainly much more accurate and would be a better term than making it seem that all homosexual Catholics have some involvement in these scandals because it’s not true.

Unless, of course, the goal is to make all Catholics who have SSA feel so uncomfortable in the Church that they leave. Is that what people are looking for?

 

[qui_est_ce]

and the Catholic Church can get back to doing good things again.

When did the Church stop doing good things?

I’ve seen pederasty or ephebephilia tossed around. That is certainly much more accurate and would be a better term than making it seem that all homosexual Catholics have some involvement in these scandals because it’s not true.

Unless, of course, the goal is to make all Catholics who have SSA feel so uncomfortable in the Church that they leave. ** Is that what people are looking for?**

I would like to think not. I have always been taught that SSA is not a sin. Most OSA’s do not identify themselves as such. I do not speculate on a person’s sexual orientation, and even if I did, it’s not my business to presume that just because someone is single they are fornicating.

It’s interesting how you differentiate between “homosexual” and “SSA.” I’ll keep that in mind.

I truly apologize if you feel uncomfortable. I will keep you in my prayers.

 

[Soutane]

Granted that diddling post-pubescent boys is not the same as paedophilia. Then again, “mainstream” homosexuality (in other words, what most “gay” people are into) is generally about hooking up with people around one’s own age (as a formerly active homo, I can speak to this). Of course, in some cases, you have older men looking for younger men and younger men with daddy complexes looking for older men, but generally, it’s around one’s own age.

I’ve seen pederasty or ephebephilia tossed around. That is certainly much more accurate and would be a better term than making it seem that all homosexual Catholics have some involvement in these scandals because it’s not true.

Unless, of course, the goal is to make all Catholics who have SSA feel so uncomfortable in the Church that they leave. Is that what people are looking for?

Those men and women who suffer from SSA are NOT all pederasts or ephebephiles-to say that is as much a calumny as to say all men are rapists(which I PERSONALLY have heard)or that all heterosexuals are pedophiles.I think that those who struggle with SSA and maintain their chastity are truly heroic as there is not a physical force stronger on earth than one’s sex drive and the desire to be "embraced"by a lover.Sometimes we will fall as that is our nature and Christ will forgive us through the Sacrament of Reconciliation.As a single heterosexual Catholic ,I struggle with Chastity,the Rosary and the supportive prayers of St Maria Goretti help but I stumble on ocassion,but I don’t give up.We cannot become Pharaisical in our condemnation of those who suffer SSA and we CANNOT drive these men and women from the flock.Christ knows the Cross that they bear and we have to Simon of Cyrene and help carry that cross through love and prayer.Those of us who suffer from pedophilia(heteros)and ephebephilia(homos-shortened sense not derogative)shoild be removed from the proximatey of children,pubescent boys,and young men and watched very very closely.If that means humane permanent imprisonment,so be it.

 

[Ecoclimber]

France Condemns Vatican for Blaming Abuse on Gay Priests

www1.voanews.com/english/news/europe/France-Condemns-Vatican-for-Blaming-Abuse-on-Gay-Priests-90850709.html

The French government has condemned remarks by a top Vatican official linking the pedophile scandal in the Catholic Church to homosexuality…

This is a public relations nightmare for the Catholic Church solely in the fact that every bishop and cardinal under the sun is giving his opinion which just exacerbates the problems. From Free Masons, to a Jewish conspiracy, to left wing radicals and other conspiracy theories on and on it goes adding more fuel to this maelstrom.

It is unfortunate that the only person that should be speaking on behalf of the church,IMO, is Pope Benedict XVI while everyone else should have their mouths duct taped. Instead, we have silence to a degree from the leader of the Catholic Church while his subordinates are constantly speaking out in various discordant views adding to all the confusion. Don’t you think that Pope Benedict XVI should tell everyone to keep quiet while he comments directly on all these allegations?

I mean doesn’t the buck stop with him. It’s like having state legislators in this country speaking on behalf the president. I mean all the Pope needs to do is acknowledge the past and current problems and put it in perspective in regards to the number of the faithful clerics that all faithfully serving the Church. Don’t lash out at anyone as Jesus taught. Apologize to everyone that has been abused. Revise and implement aggressive plans to eliminate the problem within the Church and laicize all clergy found guilty and where ever there is an allegation of abuse, immediately remove the cleric to a monastery or such until the allegations are proven one way or the other. Doesn’t this make sense and would eliminate the ad nauseum day to day soap opera we read about?

Personally, I believe that God is purifying His Church as judgment begins at the house of God. We are told that Jesus is coming back for a perfect Bride without spot or blemish and sometimes He uses the world for this perfection as He did during the persecutions of the early church. By the examples of the early church martyrs who showed so much love to their captives while being tortured in the most hideous ways, great numbers were added to the Church because of their witness. We must remember that we are to bless those who curse us in order to receive a blessing and pray for those who mistreat us. Luke 6:28 For in all things we must show love 1 Co13: 1-13

 

[qui_est_ce]

Personally, I believe that **God is purifying His Church as judgment begins at the house of God. **We are told that Jesus is coming back for a perfect Bride without spot or blemish and sometimes He uses the world for this perfection as He did during the persecutions of the early church. By the examples of the early church martyrs who showed so much love to their captives while being tortured in the most hideous ways, great numbers were added to the Church because of their witness. We must remember that we are to bless those who curse us in order to receive a blessing and pray for those who mistreat us. Luke 6:28 For in all things we must show love 1 Co13: 1-13

You might have a point here…Very interesting.