Is Catholic Clergy Sex Abuse Related to Homosexual Priests?

[_Abyssinia]

On Nov. 2, the Ruth Institute published [a new report](http://www.ruthinstitute.org/clergy-sex-abuse) that dares to ask a question many researchers — and Catholics — have been afraid to ask: What has been the role of active homosexuality and homosexual subcultures in the priesthood and in seminaries on the sex-abuse crisis?
The report — which indicates a very strong correlation between homosexual priests and homosexual subcultures and the incidence of clergy sexual abuse — is in part a response to the two important studies commissioned by the U.S. Bishops in the face of the sex-abuse crisis that were conducted by the John Jay College of Criminal Justice. The 2004 study was entitled, “The Nature and Scope of the Problem of Sexual Abuse of Minors by Catholic Priests and Deacons in the United States,” and the 2011 report was called, “The Causes and Context of Sexual Abuse of Minors by Catholic Priests in the United States, 1950-2010.”

The 2011 report was heavily criticized at the time of its release for its assertion that it found no evidence that homosexual priests were to blame for the abuse crisis, despite the fact that more than 80% of the victims were male and that 78% were postpubescent. Critics claimed that the report bowed to political correctness and fear of a backlash in academia.

http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/is-catholic-clergy-sex-abuse-related-to-homosexual-priests

 

[Carmelite1983]

I doubt it seeing as how the vast majority of sexual abuse in the general public is done by straight men who are already in relationships or married.
(US Bureau of Criminal Apprehension)

 

[Wandile]

Yes it’s a gay problem when over 80% of cases involve a male priest with a male victim… that’s homosexual. The priest meets enough women on a daily basis to have a victim if he were heterosexual. The problem is that these priests, despite being surrounded by women, go out of their way to have sexual encounters with other men. So yes it’s a homosexual problem.

 

[tweedlealice]

Blessings!
Well, one big point you were repeating was: when young boys w sexual tendencies, tempt the gay priest!! You don’t see anything wrong w that? The Victims were young & weren’t having sex on their mind @ that time.
Here’s a heterosexual comparison- a young female teen of 14 yrs, goes into open confession. She is well proportioned. She’s a little precocious. Flirts w priest & he succumbs to her wiles! Is anything wrong w that?
A regular man, approached by precocious teens, will put them down gently & spiritually. Even a lay man. “Um, I’m confused on what is happening here. You are a beautiful, young lady who has years to go to find your husband. You may have a single or religious vocation. Work on your love of God, First! Study & stay in school.” Then, he should take her to her parents, b/c she is curious & needs to be kept busy.
Homosexuality will evolve back to being a perversion. Accepting it as NORMAL, has released a lot of demons. Society has had perversions since the beginning of time. Acceptance has released more. S&M Transgender dysphoria. Transgender Children. Men have had the surgery & life changes. A lot get it reversed. One went to be a psychologist after the surgery. Having done it, he realized it was a mental disease. Orgasms aren’t the same, if felt at all. Men’s hands , feet & football necks can’t be changed. Caitlyn Jenner had money & looks good but look at his hands & feet. He has another transgender girlfriend. So the guy still looks for the girl. Normal(?) adults don’t want to share intimacies w strange situations.
The feelings are real! But, therapy, testimonies of other dysphoric ppl, who changed minds, Hormone therapy, Anti-Depressant therapy, could help. . . .
In Christ’s love
Twe

 

[Feanor2]

Yes, I thought we were past the days of blaming precocious children for “tempting” adults.

 

[Ardent_Fire]

Is sex really regarded as a forbidden fruit in seminaries? If anything, there is a problem in the seminaries and among priests these days where they are allowed to engage in sexual activity and everyone just looks the other way. Some men have entered the seminary but were turned off because of the harassment and gay subcultures in many of these places. I would argue that they lowered the bar in admitting men to seminary and ordaining them despite their struggles with chastity, and they lowered the bar as far as enforcing any adherence to it. If a man is struggling with his sexuality and feels “repressed” then he shouldn’t be a priest.

 

[curious_cath]

Here is what I tried to say:

I hate to play the devil’s advocate, but some of the stories of priests and bishops prompt me to try it. Isn’t there something that we are not talking about? Aren’t these priests and bishops the same kind of people we are? Aren’t they our brothers in faith? So why should we judge them so harshly? Are we thinking of ourselves as God to judge our brothers?

Gay priests have their sexual lives frustrated by formation. They are told sex is a forbidden fruit that they can’t enjoy. Is this right? So we have these chaste lives serving God in the chambers, trying to overcome temptation. What is so wrong with this? Then they meet boys with gay tendencies. They have an eye for it as they are non-practicing gays themselves. They don’t want these boys to see the same misery they are in. So they try to free them up from bondage of social bias, jump start their sexual identity, so they would never be frustrated by who they are. At least this is my understanding of the logic of a recently deceased serial sexual abuser priest who admitted his wrongdoing:

Brouillard’s quiet life is a contrast to Guam allegations

Be advised of some beyond-PG13 graphical details that may shock you.

Many gays flock to the seminaries to be priests or bishops to control their desires. They form their own lobby by recognizing their commonalities in their identity struggle. But sexuality is in the hand of God. I don’t remember the rest of the story. Peace be with you.

 

[MikeInVA]

Gay priests have their sexual lives frustrated by formation.

No man is forced to become a priest. Formation takes many years. If they were unwilling to live a life of chastity they should not have continued in formation.
I think what we see is worse than failed celibates. We are seeing that there is a subculture that willingly ignores their vows, who had no real intention of living chaste, celibate lives…

 

[bullish1]

“Well, the first thing that needs to be done is to stop the denial. We need to recognize that there’s a problem. And the idea that we want to keep from acknowledging that homosexual activity in seminaries or in the priesthood might be related to these kind of harms is really an important first step. The impulse that we don’t want to say anything that might stigmatize homosexual persons is an understandable one. But it has to be weighed against the potential for greater harm for these victims. How many times do we want to go around this block again and keep denying what is becoming increasingly obvious, and taking steps to address it?”

Yes, please stop the denial! We don’t need to go on a homosexual priest witch hunt but we need to change the priesthood environment where an active homosexual lifestyle is accepted and normalized! This is low hanging fruit and the best way to reduce this terrible problem.

 

[utunumsint]

Here is the 2002 LA Times article that the new study used to identify the number of priests self-identifying themselves as gay:

http://articles.latimes.com/2002/oct/20/local/me-gaypriest20

The Times poll of priests asked respondents to characterize their sexual orientation.
A combined 15%

• (9%) identified themselves as homosexual
• (6%) “somewhere in between, but more on the homosexual side” .

But among younger priests – those ordained for 20 years or less – the figure was 23%.
[So that cohort goes back to 1982]

Asked whether a “homosexual subculture” – defined as “a definite group of persons that has its own friendships, social gatherings and vocabulary” – exists in their diocese or religious order,

• 44% said “definitely” (17%) or “probably” (27%) yes
• 52% said no.

Asked if such a subculture existed at the seminary they attended,

• 26% said “definitely” (12%) or “probably” (14%) yes,
• 71% said no.

But 53% of priests who were ordained in the last 20 years said such a subculture existed in the seminary when they attended.

[Key points so far - going back to the 1980s:

*** 53% of priests said there was a gay subculture in the seminaries they attended.**

*** 23% of those priests specifically identified themselves as gay in the survey. ]**

The Ruth institute uses this data to make the following claims, contra the John Jay report:

1. The share of homosexual men in the priesthood rose from twice that of the general population in the 1950s to eight times the general population in the 1980s. This trend was strongly correlated with increasing child sex abuse.
2. A quarter of priests ordained in the late 1960s report the existence of a homosexual subculture in their seminary, rising to over half of priests ordained in the 1980s. This trend was also strongly correlated with increasing child sex abuse.

God bless,
Ut

 

[tweedlealice]

Blessings
Sex is a forbidden fruit for everyone but married couples. So, we all suffer together, unless married.
Are we allowed premarital sex or fornication. OOPS! Nope. Sex is for procreation. After menopause, I hear, it’s still OK! BUT, everyone must recall, in old age, there is a decreasing,in all body activities. Npw, homosexuals shouldn’t feel, we’re picking in them.
No matter how cute or appealing a person is: girl or boy, NO SEX! They are not adults. A BarMitzpha might be recognizing the maturity of a youth. BUT, it’s the Spiritual maturity. Menses May be awakening a young girl to womanhood, BUT her body can get pregnant but dimensions are off for birthing. Plus, her psyche isn’t ready for parenthood. Yes, the Blessed Mother was 14 yo, but they were different times.
Sex has turned into a god. The thoughts of how great the performance, is mind boggling. We all know extended activities can be perversions. S&M. If you need a whole bunch of different things to make it exciting, I think you have a wrong message., Thou shalt not have other gods before me! That’s why sex is restricted. We would make it a god.
We are all sinners saved by grace. Once perversions are learned, it’s hard to get rid of them.
God, we have attitude readjustments that are needed. It’s overwhelming!
We, the church, have a major war to start to get our ppl, Your children, back w You! We can’t do it alone. We can’t agree on how Your gift of sex is to be enjoyed. Just for the wonder of it, virginity should be our choice for marriage. It shouldn’t be, or else, fire & brimstone. Make our hearts on Fire to Live for You. Help us look outside ourselves, & keep finding ppl to help, souls to save. Help us have means to do this.
In Jesus name
Amen

 

[tweedlealice]

Jesus, Jesus, Jesus.
God is the Judge! We are the teachers or exhorters. The scripture is the lesson! It’s main tenants never change. The Bible is not Politically Correct. If ANYONE jeopardizes a soul of the Father’s creation, WHOA! To him.
NOT MY WORDS BUT HIS. HE DOES NOT CARE ABOUT STATISTICS.
THE FATHER, THE SON & THE HOLY GHOST—-JUST SAY “NO!”
God, I fall on my spiritual knees, devastated where we have strayed from where You wanted us to be. Forgive us, pls! And if You can’t forgive, let Your Mercy loose to cover us.
In Jesus name
Amen

 

[ontheway1]

I have posted this elsewhere, but the article and interview are from a credible Catholic source and are both important and disturbing. https://taylormarshall.com/2018/11/...cast.html?ct=t(Regular_Blog_Updates_Campaign)

Very high percentage of the clergy at all levels seems to engaging in the lifestyle. There is evidence that they form a protected class within the church hierarchy and influence church policy.

 

[curious_cath]

if You can’t forgive, let Your Mercy loose to cover us.

A journalist considered one of Pope Francis’ “unofficial spokespeople” claimed in stunning remarks about Archbishop Theodore McCarrick’s alleged sexual abuse of seminarians that the root problem is not homosexuality but clericalism, and also asserted that “No, McCarrick did not have homosexual relations.”

He also "insisted that the problem in the Church is not child abuse but homosexuality. “Is the root, the origin of the problem of abuse really to be found in the homosexuality of priests?” the Italian journalist asked. While Tornielli admits that statistics show “that a large part of the violence against children sees male adolescents as victims” and while he points to the existence of “gay lobbies,” he nevertheless doubts that it is “right to focus it all on homosexuality.”

Pope Francis' unofficial spokesman claims 'McCarrick did not have homosexual relations' - LifeSite

Journalist Andrea Tornielli dismissed the reports on the archbishop's troubling behavior and said clericalism is the issue.

www.lifesitenews.com

Very interesting. If Andrea Tornielli is right, then Archbishop McCarrick needs mercy for abuse of clerical power, but not really for sexual abuse.

 

[13pollitos]

What about the two children (BOYS) he sexually abused? Do they not count?

 

[Weserthy]

Well the statement that he never had “homosexual relations” is patently false based on all of the evidence that is known. McCarrick is a homosexual and there’s no way around that fact, as much as some would like to deny it. Clericalism, whatever that is, may be a problem, but the homosexual abuse of seminarians and boys is a recurring theme in a lot of these cases of so-called “clericalism”. These people are essentially making the case that “he’s not really a homosexual or interested in gay sex, he’s just using that as a method to assert control over people”. And while he was indeed asserting control over people, it was most likely for the purpose of his homosexual urges so he could continue to indulge in them without fear of reprisal. Otherwise then you’re making the case that he was acting as a homosexual by choice, and how often do we hear, “but it’s not a choice!” These people can’t have it both ways.

 

[curious_cath]

While he was indeed asserting control over people, it was most likely for the purpose of his homosexual urges so he could continue to indulge in them without fear of reprisal.

Oh really? If he ate with them a dinner, was it also for the purpose of his urge of hunger? You see, in these situations power and control comes first, all other things are mere consequences. Like in today’s reading, Elijah was hungry so he befriended the widow. The story implies he stayed as a house guest. He controlled her for a year by filling up the jug of floor and the jar of oil.

 

[kyrie03]

Very interesting. If Andrea Tornielli is right, then Archbishop McCarrick needs mercy for abuse of clerical power, but not really for sexual abuse.

It IS very interesting!

New Jersey diocese paid a total of $180,000 in 2004 and 2007 because McCarrick was “clericalizing” priests and seminarians.

New York diocese found “credible” 2 allegations of McCarrick “clericalizing” others in June 2018.

His victim, James, should be relieved: he was “clericalized”, not sexually groomed and abused at age 11.

 

[curious_cath]

This coin truly has two sides. Which side are you on? I am on the side of Pope Francis.

 

[Weserthy]

Weserthy:

While he was indeed asserting control over people, it was most likely for the purpose of his homosexual urges so he could continue to indulge in them without fear of reprisal.

Oh really? If he ate with them a dinner, was it also for the purpose of his urge of hunger? You see, in these situations power and control comes first, all other things are mere consequences. Like in today’s reading, Elijah was hungry so he befriended the widow. The story implies he stayed as a house guest. He controlled her for a year by filling up the jug of floor and the jar of oil.

The difference is that eating dinner with someone does not cause them lifelong trauma and psychological damage. I do not buy into the delusion that he had no interest in homosexual contact with these people and was only using it as a tactic to control them. Even if that was his purpose, it was the sexual abuse that did the truly lasting damage.