It is about time someone states the obvious.By Hilary WhiteGENEVA, September 29, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The sexual abuse crisis in the Catholic Church in the US and abroad was a matter of homosexuals preying on adolescent boys, not one of pedophilia, said the Vatican’s representative at the UN in Geneva, Switzerland. It is "more…
Full article…
This has been known by anyone who was (1) paying attention and (2) not out to crucify the Church. However, I would not say this is good, only that it is a little less bad. (Just a general comment. I’m not directing it at anyone.)By Hilary WhiteGENEVA, September 29, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The sexual abuse crisis in the Catholic Church in the US and abroad was a matter of homosexuals preying on adolescent boys, not one of pedophilia, said the Vatican’s representative at the UN in Geneva, Switzerland. It is "more…
Full article…
They are Homosexual "chickenhawks’Google it.Or ask a homosexual what it means.Why do you think that no Homosexual organization EVER attacked the Church for Paedophelia-because THEY knew what was really going on.It was obviously a homosexual predator problem, originating in certain seminaries and certain seminary ordination classes. And yet the Virtus training program that was initiated to deal with sexual abuse seems to entirely ignore that fact.
Yup! :yup: The John Jay Report shows homosexuality to be huge. It also shows that there were prosecutions.Isn’t it possible Virtus is simply trying to address and prevent ALL forms of child molestation instead of reactively focusing on just ONE potential form of that abuse?
The John Jay report cleary shows that over 80% of the abuse that occurred CANNOT rationally be called pedophila (by anybody with a dictionary, anyways). It was abuse of pubescent boys, i.e. 13-15.
Taking the wholistic prevention approach also helps to avoid “Smear the Queer” type scapegoating that might otherwise occur here. Human nature finds it ALL too easy to make the kinds of sins that YOU don’t personally experience a temptation towards much worse than the kind that you DO. To me, this is the only rational explanation for why people get more worked up about homosexual sex than they do about hetero adultery. BOTH are abominations, but one strikes a little closer to home than the other…
So I’ve stopped wondering why nobody mentions that most of the abuse was homosexual in nature and started being thankful that the Church has (finally) taken the higher road and chosen to address ALL potential abuse rather than pointing to the handy scapegoat.
Yes it is, and that is just what the Virtus training does–it is directed at abuse of both sexes by both sexes. Still, when I attended the sessions, it did seem rather startling that the elephant in the room was largely ignored. It was homosexual predation which provided the impetus for the program in the first place, yet little emphasis was given to that particular issue.Isn’t it possible Virtus is simply trying to address and prevent ALL forms of child molestation instead of reactively focusing on just ONE potential form of that abuse?
I too had a problem with this. I as a Father of 4 living children was offended.I also heard some resentment stated from some other parishioners. Everyone who was in any way involved with children in any ministry had to attend the program. One person said to me, “why do I have to go?–it wasn’t* me* that was molesting kids.” In other words, we had a problem caused by a certain group of clergy, so all the laity had to get training!
The family hides too. 50 years ago it was hardly ever reported. It was settled in the family. The same was expected of the Church. We did not seek nor depend on the legal system.A few points:
- A child is statisticly most likely to be molested by a family member. But following that would be coaches, teachers, ministers, etc., i.e. other people of trust. Everything the laity go through the priests also go through (BCI checks, trainning, etc.)
- Calling this a “homosexual problem” is partly right and partly wrong. Its not a pedophile problem since pedophilia refers to attraction to children before puberty. But there were also a number of cases that involved priests molesting/sexually assaulting girls. I wouldn’t call that a “heterosexual problem.” There are homosexual and heterosexual predators who form a distinct group from the regular homosexuals and heterosexuals who seeking out other adults. The problem is that the priesthood is unique in allowing predatory homosexuals to hide.
I couldn’t agree with you more.
- Calling this a “homosexual problem” is partly right and partly wrong. Its not a pedophile problem since pedophilia refers to attraction to children before puberty. But there were also a number of cases that involved priests molesting/sexually assaulting girls. I wouldn’t call that a “heterosexual problem.” There are homosexual and heterosexual predators who form a distinct group from the regular homosexuals and heterosexuals who seeking out other adults. The problem is that the priesthood is unique in allowing predatory homosexuals to hide.
I agree, we need to recognize that “predators come in every ‘sexuality’ out there.” Why then, if 80% of the Church’s history of child sexual abuse involved homosexual males and post-pubescent males, did not any of the Virtus training cover this type of danger. There were **no **examples on the video or in the work book material that reflected this type of predator problem. If Virtus truly wants to address ALL forms of abuse, why ignore one of the biggest risks?I don’t think Virtus training spent a ton of time focused on the “elephant in the room” because the subject matter is child sexual abuse, not homosexuality. Heterosexuals don’t prey on children. Homosexuals don’t prey on children. **Child predators **prey on children, and those predators come in every “sexuality” out there. I am totally surprised by the people irritated that they had to go through Virtus training. Sure, you might not need the training but the guy sitting next to you might.
Hi Corki. I can understand your thinking, but I don’t understand what Virtus should teach adult leaders in the Church to do differently with “this type” of predator problem? If we see an adult acting suspiciously around a child do we approach and ask the adult if they’re homosexual? And if they say no do we let our guard down? Do we keep a much bigger eye on protecting the post-pubescent boys and allow those working with girls to get away with more? Do you see what I mean? Regardless of ANY statistics, I personally believe how we protect children shouldn’t change. We keep an eye on ALL children, regardless of sex, age, stage of puberty, etc… And we keep an eye on ALL adults, regardless of sex, age, sexual orientation, etc…I agree, we need to recognize that “predators come in every ‘sexuality’ out there.” Why then, if 80% of the Church’s history of child sexual abuse involved homosexual males and post-pubescent males, did not any of the Virtus training cover this type of danger. There were **no **examples on the video or in the work book material that reflected this type of predator problem. If Virtus truly wants to address ALL forms of abuse, why ignore one of the biggest risks?
No, I am saying we should keep an eye out for ALL kinds of predators. But if you used Virtus as your guide, homosexual predators who prey on teen-age boys are not included. That demographic was conspicuously missing from the training in spite of the evidence that it was a big problem. This demographic needs special mention, not only because of the statistics but because teen-age boys, stretching thier wings, are allowed to be more independant by their parents and less supervised.Hi Corki. I can understand your thinking, but I don’t understand what Virtus should teach adult leaders in the Church to do differently with “this type” of predator problem? If we see an adult acting suspiciously around a child do we approach and ask the adult if they’re homosexual? And if they say no do we let our guard down? Do we keep a much bigger eye on protecting the post-pubescent boys and allow those working with girls to get away with more? Do you see what I mean? Regardless of ANY statistics, I personally believe how we protect children shouldn’t change. We keep an eye on ALL children, regardless of sex, age, stage of puberty, etc… And we keep an eye on ALL adults, regardless of sex, age, sexual orientation, etc…
Peace,
Kolbe
I’m sorry, but I have to completely disagree. It is sin and the inflated “ego” that allows predatory homosexuals hide, and it is the devil’s ways that encourage people to use the priesthood to hide their sins. The priesthood is a vocation instituted by Christ and His Bride. The authority of priesthood and within the ecclesiastical hierarchy all the more places greater responsibility on those who act as shepherds, especially with regard to their responsibility toward Christ’s flocks, and does not allow predators a place to hide.The problem is that the priesthood is unique in allowing predatory homosexuals to hide.
Gotcha, I see what you are saying now. And I agree, all democraphics should be scrutinized when it comes to sexual abuse.I am not saying that we should treat that group *differently *at all. I am saying that that demographic should be included along with the others as needing scrutiny.
Homosexuality is a sexual perversion. Pedaphilia is a sexual perversion. So, the two are equivalent in this regard. Sometimes the truth is painful to hear.I don’t think Virtus training spent a ton of time focused on the “elephant in the room” because the subject matter is child sexual abuse, not homosexuality. Heterosexuals don’t prey on children. Homosexuals don’t prey on children. **Child predators **prey on children, and those predators come in every “sexuality” out there. I am totally surprised by the people irritated that they had to go through Virtus training. Sure, you might not need the training but the guy sitting next to you might.
I know I am a total minority in this thought but I see child sexual abuse as a horrifying predator problem. Period. Does it surprise me that emphasis is being placed almost entirely on the “homosexual orientation”? Not even remotely, epecially when you see the direct result of that emphasis here when someone says, “I would not say that this is good, only that it is a little less bad.” I’m sure many feel better that homosexuals are banned from becoming priests. The Church has taken a stand against it’s homosexual problem. On behalf of the girls and pre-pubescent children abused, I’d like to ask what the Church is going to do to rid itself of the pedophiles and heterosexuals who abuse. Or do we forget about that 15 to 20%?
I am amazed at how the general perception (not the dictionary’s definition) of what a pedophile is changes dramatically as soon as you enter the Catholic circle. 99% of the men seen on NBC’s To Catch a Predator are there to meet with with 13-15 yr old girls. Where is society’s outcry to admit that it isn’t a pedophile problem but a heterosexual problem? For that matter, where is the Catholic outcry to stop blaming it on pedophiles and focus on the real problem: heterosexuals? And I am so curious as to what those who are so adamant about this not being a pedophilia problem would do if their post-pubescent 13yr old daughter was molested. I could be wrong, but I bet they wouldn’t be arguing for people to stop calling the perpetrator a pedophile when he’s obviously just a heterosexual. In fact, I bet they’d be on the pedophile wagon so fast their head would spin.
Unfortunately, the reason the number of abused in the Church is so horrifyingly high is because the hierarchy decided to sweep so much under the rug. The bishops, cardinals, etc. who turned a blind eye carry so much of the blame, in my opinion. What has the church done about them? Next to nothing. The entire thing is a travesty.
Peace,
Kolbe