THE ELEPHANT IN THE CHURCH a Catholic priest speaks out against homosexual priests

[Scout]

Brad:

Oh, I get it. So you are willing to toss around terms like “homophobic” and not define them and then call us haters and intolerants because we disagree with your opinion.

That makes you “others-righteous” or does it just make you at least equally as self-righteous but just with a different opinion?

Okay, fine. I believe homophobic is anyone that is afraid of homosexuals as a group, for whatever reason. From what I’ve read on this thread, that is exactly what I think is going on here.

And I am not young, so please don’t attribute my ideas to my youth. My opinions are from years and years of personal experience and also personal study. You wanna disagree with me? Fine, but don’t disagree with me, pat me on the head, and tell me I’ll know better when I’m older.

I wanted to stop posting here because everytime I looked at it, it just made me more angry.

Scout :tiphat:

 

[Scout]

Lisa N:

You sound very young. I hope you someday understand that your opinions are just that, opinions. Stating facts such as the percentage of homosexuals involved in our priest sex abuse scandal is not “hatred.” Posting the percentage of victims by age groups is not hatred even if it tends to demonstrate that your opinion is ill founded.

But since anger is such an unpleasant feeling whether rational or not, I agree it may be best to avoid these kind of discussions. When you have some evidence that would substantiate your opinion maybe you would have a more compelling argument and thus people would be more likely to be persuaded to your line of thinking.

Lisa N

You’ve decided your opinion on the situation, and so have I. Nobody posting on this thread is going to change their minds about the situation, no matter what evidence is being given. I know I’m not going to change my mind because I don’t trust your evidence, and you’re not going to trust mind, so what difference does it make?

Scout :tiphat:

 

[Lisa_N]

Scout:

Okay, fine. I believe homophobic is anyone that is afraid of homosexuals as a group, for whatever reason. From what I’ve read on this thread, that is exactly what I think is going on here.

I don’t see any fear of homosexuals as a group but fear that given the opportunity, they may engage in deviant behavior.

Scout:

And I am not young, so please don’t attribute my ideas to my youth. My opinions are from years and years of personal experience and also personal study.

Well you’ve obviously ignored the Jay report, the Bishop’s report, and virtually every single book or article about the priest sex abuse scandal. It is mostly a result of predatory homosexuals. Please provide the fruits of your years of study that would indicate otherwise.

Scout:

You wanna disagree with me? Fine, but don’t disagree with me, pat me on the head, and tell me I’ll know better when I’m older.

I wanted to stop posting here because everytime I looked at it, it just made me more angry.

Scout :tiphat:

Too bad because we might learn something from you since you claim to have evidence that would tend to support your opinion. So far all of the information posted is in disagreement. I for one would like to see what you have that provides evidence this was not mostly a problem of predatory homosexuals.

Lisa N

 

[Lisa_N]

Scout:

You’ve decided your opinion on the situation, and so have I. Nobody posting on this thread is going to change their minds about the situation, no matter what evidence is being given. I know I’m not going to change my mind because I don’t trust your evidence, and you’re not going to trust mind, so what difference does it make?

Scout :tiphat:

I trust EVIDENCE Scout, not your opinion. Please post your EVIDENCE. Thanks

Lisa N

 

[katherine2]

Lisa N:

I I for one would like to see what you have that provides evidence this was not mostly a problem of predatory homosexuals.

Lisa N

The point is “mostly” doesnt’ cut it. To the girls who wer abused, it is evil to say, well, don’t complain, dont’ expect us to do much, after all, ‘mostly’ it wasn’t your gender being abused.

And playing statistics is a bad game. It was “mostly” men and not women; it was “mostly” clergy and not laity. So what? The point is to protect children, not play some political games.

 

[HumbleSinner]

Quote from The Elephant in the Church

"The people are asking, “When will it end?” It won’t! As long as we ignore the “elephant in the room”, as long as we prefer the comfort of false charity and absolutely refuse to deal with the truth, the scandal and the destruction of faith will continue. It will, in fact, get much worse! The “vocation crisis” is due in large part to the rise of the homosexual subculture in the Church. They have such power that Fr. Andrew Greeley has labeled them the “Lavender Mafia”! (A very appropriate term since the RICO laws are now being used against the Bishops of the Church!) Many young men who have stood up against the homosexual agenda in the seminaries have been labeled “homophobes” and “rigid” and treated as though they are the sick ones. If they somehow manage to get ordained and then discover the truth, they experience terrible frustration. They realize that they have no place to go to get it “fixed”! It does no good to go to the bishop when the bishop is the problem! The chancery staff, the Monsignori, were appointed by him. "

**This what we have to deal with in the Diocese of Orange.:banghead: **

The roots of the Catholics’ scandal

June 9, 2002

By Steven Greenhut
The Orange County Register

---

Quote from article

"•The July 2000 Wanderer reported allegations about a local priest responsible for sanctuary design throughout the diocese: “For Bishop Brown, the fact that almost every informed Catholic in the Diocese of Orange knows - and has known for years - that [Fr. Rod] Stephens is living what appears to be a scandalous and open homosexual lifestyle, does not appear to be a matter of any import.” The article, by Paul Likoudis, referred to a $10,000-plus per-person luxury cruise Fr. Stephens took with his “longtime companion,” and reprinted a joint Christmas-Chanukah card Fr. Stephens and his alleged companion sent out, with the phrase, “From our digs to yours.”
Fr. Michael McKiernan, the assistant to Bishop Brown who handles personnel matters, told me this month that Fr. Stephens lives in a rectory and that Fr. Stephens assured the diocese he is celibate. Fr. McKiernan refused to comment on whether Fr. Stephens was spoken to over the allegations. (Fr. Stephens is leaving his official diocese post in July, Fr. McKiernan said, for reasons unrelated to the allegations from the Wanderer article.)

When I asked Fr. McKiernan about the facts of the Wanderer article, he replied: What facts? That he took a trip?

Relatives of Fr. Stephens told me they have met with the bishop and Fr. McKiernan to discuss their concerns about Fr. Stephens’ alleged improprieties, and said they faced an astounding lack of interest. "

Please read article by clicking on link
ocregister.com/commentary/greenhut/greenhut60902.shtml

“Lavender Mafia”! :banghead:

 

[Scout]

Lisa N:

I don’t see any fear of homosexuals as a group but fear that given the opportunity, they may engage in deviant behavior.
Lisa N

THAT IS HOMOPHOBIA! You’re judging a group of people based upon what they MIGHT DO! That’s the same thing as telling the whole Africa-American community that they’re not trusted around whites because one of them MIGHT attack a white woman. You’re judging the entire group of people on the mistakes of the few. THAT IS WRONG!

I’m not conding the morals of gays and lesbians. I’m not saying that their lifestyle is Godly or should be accepted. What I’m saying is that you can’t label all homosexuals are potential pedophiles. Some may be, but you can’t say that all of them are. People can’t say that all homosexuals are mentally and emotionally unbalanced. Some may be, but don’t use a blanket statement and say that all of them are because it simply isn’t true.

Let me divulge some personal information here, in the hopes that some of you may understand my point of view.

I consider myself a “recovering bisexual”. This was the lifestyle I chose while in high school and college. I’ve repented since then, gotten married and have three children now. Do I still struggle with it sometimes? Yes, but I know that God has forgiven me and I choose to live my life in honor of God.

Based on most of what I’ve read on this thread, the opinions here would have me believe that I should have never had children because I would be a potential risk to them and that I should never work with children because I would be a potential risk to them. That is flat-out, blatantly not true and the idea makes me sick.

It’s the blanket statements that have been posted on this thread that make me angry. It’s the “all homosexuals are potential pedophiles and sex offenders and rapists”, “all homosexuals can’t be trusted with our children,” “all homosexuals are mentally and emotionally unbalanced” that I detest. Feel free to say that some of them are, but don’t say that all of them are.

Scout :tiphat:

 

[Fergal]

GOSPEL: Luke 6:36-38

Jesus said to his disciples: ’Be compassionate as your Father is compassionate. Do not judge, and you will not be judged yourselves; do not condemn, and you will not be condemned yourselves; grant pardon, and you will be pardoned. Give, and there will be gifts for you: a full measure, pressed down, shaken together, and running over, will be poured into your lap; because the amount you measure out is the amount you will be given back.

Today’s Gospel reading is a welcome teaching at this stage in the thread.

 

[Fiat]

katherine2:

The point is “mostly” doesnt’ cut it. To the girls who wer abused, it is evil to say, well, don’t complain, dont’ expect us to do much, after all, ‘mostly’ it wasn’t your gender being abused.

And playing statistics is a bad game. It was “mostly” men and not women; it was “mostly” clergy and not laity. So what? The point is to protect children, not play some political games.

K2:
Do I understand you to imply that predatory homosexuality should not be a concern of ours? Only predatory heterosexuality? Also, why do you think statistics are a “bad game” to play? Is it as bad a game as, say, turning a blind eye?

Fiat

 

[fix]

Scout:

THAT IS HOMOPHOBIA! You’re judging a group of people based upon what they MIGHT DO! That’s the same thing as telling the whole Africa-American community that they’re not trusted around whites because one of them MIGHT attack a white woman. You’re judging the entire group of people on the mistakes of the few. THAT IS WRONG!

I’m not conding the morals of gays and lesbians. I’m not saying that their lifestyle is Godly or should be accepted. What I’m saying is that you can’t label all homosexuals are potential pedophiles. Some may be, but you can’t say that all of them are. People can’t say that all homosexuals are mentally and emotionally unbalanced. Some may be, but don’t use a blanket statement and say that all of them are because it simply isn’t true.

Let me divulge some personal information here, in the hopes that some of you may understand my point of view.

I consider myself a “recovering bisexual”. This was the lifestyle I chose while in high school and college. I’ve repented since then, gotten married and have three children now. Do I still struggle with it sometimes? Yes, but I know that God has forgiven me and I choose to live my life in honor of God.

Based on most of what I’ve read on this thread, the opinions here would have me believe that I should have never had children because I would be a potential risk to them and that I should never work with children because I would be a potential risk to them. That is flat-out, blatantly not true and the idea makes me sick.

It’s the blanket statements that have been posted on this thread that make me angry. It’s the “all homosexuals are potential pedophiles and sex offenders and rapists”, “all homosexuals can’t be trusted with our children,” “all homosexuals are mentally and emotionally unbalanced” that I detest. Feel free to say that some of them are, but don’t say that all of them are.

Scout :tiphat:

Active homosexuals are mentally balanced? Is homosexuality just like race or gender? Perhaps it is like eye color? Some blue, some brown? Some like the opposite sex, some like the same sex?

Most here would agree those with SSAD deserve authentic mental health help and compassion. However, when we look at the number of homosexual men in the clergy and the numbers involved with teenage boys, one must see a problem.

 

[Lisa_N]

Scout, one more time with FEELING, I did NOT say all homosexuals are pedophiles. I DID say that the problem in the Catholic church was not caused by pedophiles but by a group of predatory homosexuals. They are not the same thing. It is naive to pretend that the vast majority of cases are based on heterosexual encounters. The response to the problem must be based on reality, not on feelings or opinions.

I am glad you were able to overcome your inclinations to bi-sexuality. You obviously know it is a very difficult temptation to overcome.

Lisa N

 

[swampfox]

Lisa N:

Scout, one more time with FEELING, I did NOT say all homosexuals are pedophiles. I DID say that the problem in the Catholic church was not caused by pedophiles but by a group of predatory homosexuals. They are not the same thing. It is naive to pretend that the vast majority of cases are based on heterosexual encounters. The response to the problem must be based on reality, not on feelings or opinions.

I am glad you were able to overcome your inclinations to bi-sexuality. You obviously know it is a very difficult temptation to overcome.

Lisa N

I admire your perseverance and patience.

 

[Scout]

Lisa N:

Scout, one more time with FEELING, I did NOT say all homosexuals are pedophiles. I DID say that the problem in the Catholic church was not caused by pedophiles but by a group of predatory homosexuals. They are not the same thing. It is naive to pretend that the vast majority of cases are based on heterosexual encounters. The response to the problem must be based on reality, not on feelings or opinions.
Lisa N

And I’m saying that the majority wasn’t predatory homosexuals, but pedophiles. They were grown men attacking adolescent and younger boys. That’s pedophilia.

Scout :tiphat:

 

[swampfox]

Scout:

And I’m saying that the majority wasn’t predatory homosexuals, but pedophiles. They were grown me attacking adolescent and younger boys. That’s pedophilia.

Scout :tiphat:

What you are saying and what the facts are are two different things. Frankly, most of the incidents involved pederasty, i.e., adolescent and post adolescent boys.

 

[fix]

Scout:

And I’m saying that the majority wasn’t predatory homosexuals, but pedophiles. They were grown me attacking adolescent and younger boys. That’s pedophilia.

Scout :tiphat:

No, that is not accurate. The males abused were not prepubescent. They were adolescent males. That is not pedophelia. Is having sex with a 16 or 17 year old pedophelia? What if it is a day before they turn 18? Still pedophelia?

 

[sbcoral]

It’s really amazing that people on this board can turn an utter tragedy like the child-abuse scandal into fuel for their own homophobic bigotry. That scandal was a tragedy for the abused and a tragedy for our Church, and it should not be used as a basis for promoting hatred of a whole class of people. For shame, for shame.

 

[Brad]

Scout:

Okay, fine. I believe homophobic is anyone that is afraid of homosexuals as a group, for whatever reason. From what I’ve read on this thread, that is exactly what I think is going on here.

And I am not young, so please don’t attribute my ideas to my youth. My opinions are from years and years of personal experience and also personal study. You wanna disagree with me? Fine, but don’t disagree with me, pat me on the head, and tell me I’ll know better when I’m older.

I wanted to stop posting here because everytime I looked at it, it just made me more angry.

Scout :tiphat:

I didn’t say you were young so please direct your complaints accordingly to the proper source.

Thanks for providing your definition of “homophobic”. I wanted to let you know that I am vigorously opposed to homosexuality in the priesthood and that doens’t make me 1 single bit afraid of homosexuals. So you may want to come up with a different term to describe people such as myself.

If you are getting angry every time you look at a post, it is probably a good idea to take a break. Not good to get angry all the time.

 

[Brad]

katherine2:

The point is “mostly” doesnt’ cut it. To the girls who wer abused, it is evil to say, well, don’t complain, dont’ expect us to do much, after all, ‘mostly’ it wasn’t your gender being abused.

And playing statistics is a bad game. It was “mostly” men and not women; it was “mostly” clergy and not laity. So what? The point is to protect children, not play some political games.

And to focus on the minority of cases while ignoring the majority of cases does nothing to solve the problem.

Homosexuals in the prieshood cause a problem in the Church as large as an elephant and it must be addressed.

Female child abuse by priests is a problem too - just as it is a problem in every other profession that involves adult and children and this also should be addressed.

2 different problems. 2 different solutions. A liberal tactic is to lump 2 problems together so as not to address the most glaring and obvious problem.

If you come up with and agree with a solution on the homosexual problem, I will consider your concern and solutions regarding child sexual abuse as more legitimate.

 

[swampfox]

sbcoral:

It’s really amazing that people on this board can turn an utter tragedy like the child-abuse scandal into fuel for their own homophobic bigotry. That scandal was a tragedy for the abused and a tragedy for our Church, and it should not be used as a basis for promoting hatred of a whole class of people. For shame, for shame.

You are the one who is resorting to mean spirited name calling.

 

[Scout]

Lisa N:

You sound very young. I hope you someday understand that your opinions are just that, opinions.
Lisa N

What would you call that, besides being patronizing?

Scout :tiphat: