Dershowitz makes some valid points, not excusing the perpetrators or the coverups, but analyzing the background influences, as well as advocating that due process rules be followed.When even Alan Dershowitz is defending the Pope and Church, I think it’s a fair sign that things have gotten a little out of hand.
frontpagemag.com/2010/04/13/in-defense-of-the-pope/
(I did a search and didn’t see this posted - if it has been, my apologies for the repeat.)
It isn’t this simple. For example, when I entered seminary, I underwent a psych eval. The psychologist told me, “If openness were height, you’d be eight feet tall.” I’m very open-minded but a) my theology was orthodox and b) I wasn’t promiscuous. There is a vast difference between open minded and being licentious!And seminaries wanted applicants who were more ‘open’ and ‘tolerant’ and not too rigid or excessively hung up on sexual matters. They got them. <<<<<
Wow - we are blessed that someone like yourself is considering the priesthood.And seminaries wanted applicants who were more ‘open’ and ‘tolerant’ and not too rigid or excessively hung up on sexual matters. They got them. <<<<<
My prayers are with you!
So, maybe they were looking for more than open-mindedness? Something like less than 100% orthodox and willing to experiment?And seminaries wanted applicants who were more ‘open’ and ‘tolerant’ and not too rigid or excessively hung up on sexual matters. They got them. <<<<<
I think open-mindedness is misunderstood. For example, some people who are reflexively UNorthodox think of themselves as open minded but they are not. They are quite rigid. But they call themselves “open-minded” and many people think “having an open mind” means “not believing anything.”So, maybe they were looking for more than open-mindedness? Something like less than 100% orthodox and willing to experiment?
Some very going points in here regard the genesis of the situation, Jim. But I also believe that homosexual behavior is seriously disordered and that those who suffer from such a sexual disorientation are more prone to other, similar sexual disorders, like ephebophilia and pedophilia.Dershowitz makes some valid points, not excusing the perpetrators or the coverups, but analyzing the background influences, as well as advocating that due process rules be followed.
I really think that the sexual permissiveness that arose in the 1960’s and '70’s had a great deal to do with the abuse. It was not so much a homosexual problem as an adoption of the belief in some seminaries that a vow of celibacy was strictly limited to its primary meaning of “don’t get married.” Some believed that just because one promised to forego marriage didn’t meant that he wasn’t entitled to sexual satisfaction of some sort. So same- sex encounters didn’t really ‘count.’ Nor did having girlfriends, although that would have possibly led to marriage, which would have been against their vows.
A great many priests during this period did, in fact, abandon their vows and left the priesthood to get married. At the same time a great many laity were abandoning marriage in favor of shacking up. And the culture began to teach that any kind of sex was OK, just be sure to take the pill and use a condom.
And seminaries wanted applicants who were more ‘open’ and ‘tolerant’ and not too rigid or excessively hung up on sexual matters. They got them.
None of this excuses sexual predation in any way. But it may help to explain why it began to become prevalent in those particular decades.
My experience has been very similar regarding the seemingly overwhelming urge of many priests to be seen as a “wonderful guy”, first and foremost. Understandable, but very problematic for the man who is supposed to be a spiritual “father.”I think many priests think that they should ruffle no feathers, that they should be forever agreeable and hurt no ones feelings (-save, perhaps, for those of the relentlessly orthodox). These are the priests, for example, who will never preach about abortion or contraception. They just don’t want to ‘upset’ anyone. It is not that they reject the dogma—though I know some who do—but because they can’t bring themselves to preach about such things. There is a wimpiness about many priests that is sometimes mistaken for homosexuality but they are not the same thing at all. They are all ‘nice guys’ but for my money they are bad priests because they think it is a priest’s job to be Mr. Congeniality.
Unfortunately, I am learning that it doesn’t matter who comes to the defense of the Pope. I think if Jesus Christ was on this Earth and defended him, there would still be people calling for the Pope’s head.When even Alan Dershowitz is defending the Pope and Church, I think it’s a fair sign that things have gotten a little out of hand.
frontpagemag.com/2010/04/13/in-defense-of-the-pope/
(I did a search and didn’t see this posted - if it has been, my apologies for the repeat.)
I CAN’T believe Jesus would ever defend the Pope or the Church.Unfortunately, I am learning that it doesn’t matter who comes to the defense of the Pope. I think if Jesus Christ was on this Earth and defended him, there would still be people calling for the Pope’s head.