Scapegoat of recent scandal?

[goout]

goout:

The problem is still there. Read the news.

Like Redbetta always says
“Give a link or it didn’t happen”
But really the point is that the cases decreased drastically.

You are really going to beg for links to prove the sexual abuse crisis is ongoing.
can you see that this is part of the problem we face?

 

[SeriousQuestion]

Another part of the problem is being extremely vague and failing to point out the specific areas that have issues.

 

[Roseeurekacross]

thanks Joey. I have been to the USA and watched the Orioles play. That was an event!
Very different to footy

 

[Roseeurekacross]

I will keep repeating, thats not the situation here, and that situation was uncovered after a 5 year royal commission. So the stats are solid.

we run the risk of allowing this to happen again, or keep happening, if we put blinkers on and say, oh its only a homosexual abuse crisis.

because that negates all the little girls and teenage girls that were raped by priests religious and laity. It negates the opportunists that just see a child and abuse them for their own gratuitous pleasure.

and my second point is if we say , and we should, homosexuals have no business being priests, religious or nuns,

we must also say, Laity involved in church activities and ministry have no business being homosexual either, so therefore we must extend this mind set to laity too.
So the outcome should be,

no paedophiles, no homosexuals, no people with any disordered issues engaged in church activities that lead to interaction with children.

or we apply solid psychological evaluation to anyone who wants to be involved with any ministry in the church. So we can say, he or she is chaste and homosexual and no risk to anyone. because he or she is not a predator.

 

[Thorolfr]

no paedophiles, no homosexuals, no people with any disordered issues engaged in church activities that lead to interaction with children.

So, would this ban on people with disorders having any involvement with children also include, for example, people with Autism or OCD or ADHD or depression, or are you only concerned about what you would consider to be sexual disorders?

 

[Roseeurekacross]

we are talking sexual sin, if we are going to only implicate those we believe are guilty of sexual sin or the potential of it, and are going to say this is only because of the homosexual element, we have to broaden the brush to all who have been found guilty, otherwise we are just on a ‘lets get em all’ mentality march.

there is such a danger of mob mentality with oh its only or mostly due to the homosexual element.

just sexual disorders.

and to identify if anyone actually has a sexual disorder, I propose any person be they laity or religious , who wishes to enter any ministry, even if its cleaning the church, needs a psychological assessment.

How can we avoid mob mentality over those with SSA who are living a chaste and holy life.

 

[pnewton]

The changes are that the laity is held to a higher standard. Like my wife, who has to be fingerprinted for school job while Uncle Ted is a law unto himself.
The problem is still there. Read the news.

That is by far the only change. I have read the news, but I also know how to read the facts that are in the news from misdirection. I have been doing it my whole life. Even this report from a Pennsylvania politician shows the difference 2002 made, if you read the facts. I will not join his mob, or yours.

The laity is not “held to a higher standard.” Every clergy goes through the same background check.

 

[pnewton]

So, would this ban on people with disorders having any involvement with children also include, for example, people with Autism or OCD or ADHD or depression, or are you only concerned about what you would consider to be sexual disorders?

The problem, in this case, would be sexual disorders. If a person was a compulsive thief, he might be safe around money, but you wouldn’t let him handle the books.

How can we avoid mob mentality over those with SSA who are living a chaste and holy life.

I wish I had an answer to that. Perhaps it would have been prudent to set a time limit on this ban, making it clear that the response was only to provide immediate reduction in this current crisis, while considering how to incorporate celibate men with this one weakness, but who had never acted on it, into the priesthood without danger to either children, or temptation to commit sin in an all-male seminary.

In any case, I think the action could have been presented as a prudent decision a little better.

 

[goout]

Thorolfr:

So, would this ban on people with disorders having any involvement with children also include, for example, people with Autism or OCD or ADHD or depression, or are you only concerned about what you would consider to be sexual disorders?

The problem, in this case, would be sexual disorders. If a person was a compulsive thief, he might be safe around money, but you wouldn’t let him handle the books.

How can we avoid mob mentality over those with SSA who are living a chaste and holy life.

I wish I had an answer to that. Perhaps it would have been prudent to set a time limit on this ban, making it clear that the response was only to provide immediate reduction in this current crisis, while considering how to incorporate celibate men with this one weakness, but who had never acted on it, into the priesthood without danger to either children, or temptation to commit sin in an all-male seminary.

In any case, I think the action could have been presented as a prudent decision a little better.

It’s not the various particular issues in an isolated manner. It’s the combination of them.
It’s the structure of celibacy which doesn’t admit married men, combined with infidelity, combined with all male, combined with easy and authoritative access to minors, combined with secrecy, combined with money and power.
It’s all those factors taken in combined fashion. But it all depends on the opportunity to abuse power. Being gay, in itself, is not causing this problem. It’s a corrupt culture that needs to be overhauled.
We won’t solve this problem by eliminating homosexuality for sure.

 

[ConstantLearner]

Anybody else had the impression that after the recent sexual abuse scandal certain Catholic circles are looking for a scapegoat? I have the impression some people are pushing the equation ssa=abuse of children and young boys and pushing for a purge of people with ssa (even of people living chastely) in priesthood and consecrated life.

I’ve noticed the same thing, and I think it’s uncharitable and ridiculous.

Frim “National Catholic Reporter”:

The idea that gays cannot be good priests is stupid, demeaning, unjust, and contrary to the facts. I know many very good priests who are gay, and I suspect even more good priests I know are gay.

Yes, there are lots of good gay priests

NCR Today: In an era when seminarians are being encouraged to live more healthy emotional lives, they should not be forced to lie about who they are.

www.ncronline.org

 

[ConstantLearner]

One thing is for sure, it is not a pedophilia crisis, it is a homosexual abuse crisis, as the vast majority of cases involve teenage boys and young men and seminarians. Furthermore, the problem are not sinners who are sincerely struggling against sin, but rather sinners who rationalize sin and even work to change Church teaching on homosexuality; such people have no business being in the clergy. It’s one thing to have perverse thoughts, it’s quite another to deny there is anything perverse about them and lobby to subtly change the definition of homosexuality from a disorder to “differently ordered”

How do you explain the fact that many of the abusers were heterosexual? Sexual molesters can be homosexual, bisexual, or heterosexual. None of the priests were married, of course, but there are married, heterosexual child molesters. Child molestation is not a homosexual problem.

 

[ConstantLearner]

No because there is nothing disorderd about heterosexuality.

But, as defined by the Church, certain heterosexual acts can be, and are, disordered. So there is “something” disordered about heterosexuality some of the time.

 

[goout]

Gab123:

One thing is for sure, it is not a pedophilia crisis, it is a homosexual abuse crisis, as the vast majority of cases involve teenage boys and young men and seminarians. Furthermore, the problem are not sinners who are sincerely struggling against sin, but rather sinners who rationalize sin and even work to change Church teaching on homosexuality; such people have no business being in the clergy. It’s one thing to have perverse thoughts, it’s quite another to deny there is anything perverse about them and lobby to subtly change the definition of homosexuality from a disorder to “differently ordered”

How do you explain the fact that many of the abusers were heterosexual? Sexual molesters can be homosexual, bisexual, or heterosexual. None of the priests were married, of course, but there are married, heterosexual child molesters. Child molestation is not a homosexual problem.

81% of the abuse was older male on post pubescent male. Pedophilia is a smaller subset. Male on female a smaller subset.
The culture of abuse is predominantly homosexual.

Can SSA people be good priests? Sure. But no person who has a compulsion to act sexually should be admitted to the priesthood.
And homosexuality carries it’s own specific difficulties because it is disordered. I’m sorry if that offends you, but that is what the Church teaches, and so the priestly formation needs to take that into account.

 

[goout]

Tbrightson:

No because there is nothing disorderd about heterosexuality.

But, as defined by the Church, certain heterosexual acts can be, and are, disordered. So there is “something” disordered about heterosexuality some of the time.

Heterosexuality per se is not disordered. Homosexuality per se is.
Certain hetero acts are disordered when outside married conjugal relations. So we need to be clear that every person makes moral choices about how to act, regardless of sexual orientation, and we are not fully defined as a person by our sexual attractions.
Morality evaluates human acts.

But in the context of sexual integration, heterosexuality is ordered in a way the homosexuality is not.

 

[Joe_5859]

Another part of the problem is being extremely vague and failing to point out the specific areas that have issues.

Indeed.

I understand that emotions are running high. That’s understandable when hearing about such grave evils. But I’m somewhat perplexed at those who are going on as though the situation in the Church right now is no better than it was 30 years ago. That’s simply ignoring the evidence that shows that the incidence of abuse in the Church has been drastically reduced over that time. And allegations get reported to law enforcement.

Not that there aren’t still problems that need to be addressed. Archbishop McCarrick’s situation still needs a thorough investigation of who knew what and when. But people are behaving as though the bishops are currently still ignoring abuse allegations and shuffling predator priests around. That’s simply not true. And I’m confused why people keep talking as though it is.

 

[Jezra]

If the priests had been preying on underage girls, both young children and 16 year old girls, as well as adult women, would the National Catholic Register have had a cover with the words: Sex Scandal, Cover Up, Infidelity, Heterosexuality, Licentiousness? Would “heterosexuality” have been one of the things that was highlighted?

The thing is, there were straight priests preying on girls. According to the Pennsylvania report, one priest impregnated a girl and arranged for her to have an abortion. Another raped girls and collected their urine, pubic hair and menstrual blood.

More than 300 Pennsylvania priests abused 1,000 children over decades, report says

Priests harmed more than 1,000 children according to a grand jury report released by the state supreme court

www.theguardian.com

 

[MikeInVA]

So, would this ban on people with disorders having any involvement with children also include, for example, people with Autism or OCD or ADHD or depression, or are you only concerned about what you would consider to be sexual disorders?

This a generalization, but people with any of these disorders may be wonderful people, but they probably aren’t cut out for the priesthood.

 

[anon64350612]

Why Did So Many Gay Men Enter the Priesthood in the 20th Century?

Here are 10 very important Nota Benes to read before the account of homosexuality in the American Catholic Church: 1. This is not a gay-bashing blog-post. I have good friends who have struggled with same-sex attraction. Most of them were smart enough not to enter seminary or religious life. I...

padreperegrino.org

 

[ConstantLearner]

The thing is, there were straight priests preying on girls. According to the Pennsylvania report, one priest impregnated a girl and arranged for her to have an abortion. Another raped girls and collected their urine, pubic hair and menstrual blood.

You are right, and I don’t think that can be ignored.

This is a child predator problem, not a homosexual problem. Homosexuals were involved, heterosexuals were involved, probably bisexuals were involved, but to focus on sexual orientation leads one astray. This is not a homosexual, heterosexual, or bisexual problem. It is a child abuse and child molestation problem/ And that happens across the board. Some married, heterosexual men abuse their own children. Most priests, no matter what sexual orientation, will not abuse. Never abuse. To scapegoat homosexual priests, most of whom are very good, is ignoring the problem.

 

[ConstantLearner]

This a generalization, but people with any of these disorders may be wonderful people, but they probably aren’t cut out for the priesthood.

I would think someone with OCD or ADHD would find it very difficult to be a priest, wonderful as that person may be.