US Vatican cardinal: "Not once did I even suspect" McCarrick

[KMG]

Homosexual inclinations are gravely disordered, and men with homosexual inclinations have zero business being in the priesthood.

And the vast majority of cases of clerical sexual abuse are homosexual in nature.

 

[exnihilo]

In an open letter Tuesday, a contributor to the conservative Catholic magazine First Things

Since when is First Things a conservative Catholic magazine? Last I knew it had many Catholic authors but also had many Protestants. Also, what exactly makes it conservative? I guess for ABC that label is used because it doesn’t promote SSM, abortion, homosexuality or other abominations. I’d just call that orthodox.

Trust me. McCarrick WAS reported. To many people. From the early 1990s on.

I believe you. I know a priest from Newark and while he has never said anything about this I’d imagine he might have known and reported this monster.

What McCarrick did (provided the allegations are true, of course) is nefarious and reprehensible. And I’m sure he conspired in so far as it was necessary to keep his practices going without being caught. But I’m skeptical of a pervasive “mafia-like” underground.

I’m not. The same people who have warned about the lavender mafia turned out to be right about McCarrick. The people who dismissed them were wrong.

 

[Joe_5859]

And the vast majority of cases of clerical sexual abuse are homosexual in nature.

That is true, but I am a bit confused on why some point that out so frequently. Is it supposed to prove a particular point? I’m honestly asking here, because I feel like I’m missing it.

 

[Joe_5859]

Since when is First Things a conservative Catholic magazine?

I don’t think it’s disparaging to think of it that way. It was founded by a Catholic priest, and it does tend to be conservative. Personally, I like First Things a lot, and that’s how I’ve always categorized it. I know they do make a deliberate effort to be more than just a “Catholic” publication. But I’m not surprised that people label it as such.

I’m not. The same people who have warned about the lavender mafia turned out to be right about McCarrick. The people who dismissed them were wrong.

Well, whatever you want to call it, I hope that any such “network” of clergy that enabled McCarrick to do these things gets discovered and rooted out.

 

[CilladeRoma]

It is used by people who just want to make another blanket statement that gay=bad.

 

[Telstar]

That is true, but I am a bit confused on why some point that out so frequently. Is it supposed to prove a particular point? I’m honestly asking here, because I feel like I’m missing it.

Because, the only reason that this has gone on for so long, is because there is a network of these men who have been covering up for homosexual ‘priests’, ‘deacons’ and ‘seminarians’ for decades. It has been kept hidden behind the closed doors and walls of parishes, chanceries and seminaries for fear that if Catholics in the pews ever found out, they would demand for it to stop, immediately.

They have been living a life of ease, luxury, and debauchery, while at the same time secretly paying off any victims that might come forward looking for “restitution”, without reporting it to the civil authorities (aka blackmail), with the money that we have been putting in the collection baskets and giving to “Bishop’s Funds” and “appeals” for years on end.

This needs to STOP! These men do not even believe in God or in the Faith, but they sure know how to act like they do in front of the people sitting in the pews. We need to tell the Bishops that we will no longer support their constant “appeals” for more money, until they do something to expose these men for what they are. They are predators. They are killing the faith of good Catholics in the Church a little bit at a time. I have so many friends and family members who have completely lost their faith, and left the Church, over these scandals. Most Catholics that remain have assumed that it was all fixed and stopped after the Boston Globe exposé, but, that didn’t even come close to solving the real problem.

I can understand why so many people refuse to believe that this could be going on. I used to be one of those people, too. I didn’t want to believe that this could happen in the Catholic Church. But, the more I saw stories from all over the world about these disgusting things happening, the more I realized that I had been blind. It makes me sick to even think about it.

How much more disgusted do people think Jesus feels about all of this going on in His Own Church? How long does anyone think it will be before He does something about it, Himself? God will not be mocked, especially not in His own house! Maybe some of these Priests, Bishops and Cardinals should rethink their position in light of that possibility. What will they say to Him when He asks, “Where were you while all this was going on? Why didn’t you do something to stop it? Where are all those souls that I placed in your care?”

 

[KMG]

Again, homosexual inclinations are not normal. They are disordered. “Uncle Ted” had no problem ordaining men with this affliction…but I assure you, a man with traditional tendencies…good luck in “Uncle Ted’s” world.

The network looks out for itself (blackmail, etc.).

And once again…the vast majority of abuse cases by clergy = homosexual predators.

 

[Joe_5859]

Because, the only reason that this has gone on for so long, is because there is a network of these men who have been covering up for homosexual ‘priests’, ‘deacons’ and ‘seminarians’ for decades. It has been kept hidden behind the closed doors and walls of parishes, chanceries and seminaries for fear that if Catholics in the pews ever found out, they would demand for it to stop, immediately.

I get all that you are saying here and largely agree, but I still don’t feel like it answers my question. Why do people keep pointing out that these are mostly homosexual cases of abuse as though that makes a difference? Everything you say would apply just as much if the statistics were reversed and it were mostly heterosexual abuse.

I mean, yes it’s descriptive in the sense that it describes what has happened. I feel like the adjective is distracting, though.

Again, maybe I’m missing something. I just feel like when we hammer home the point that this is homosexual abuse, we start to distract ourselves from the main point—stopping all abuse.

 

[KMG]

Because homosexual and heterosexual aren’t just two flavors of ice cream. One is against nature.

 

[KMG]

And one, not surprisingly, counts for the vast majority of cases.

 

[Joe_5859]

Because homosexual and heterosexual aren’t just two flavors of ice cream. One is against nature.

Sure. I’m not trying to say they are the same. I just don’t see the relevance to discussions of abuse. Whether the abuse is same-sex or opposite-sex, it’s still abuse and a scandal.

 

[Telstar]

Again, maybe I’m missing something. I just feel like when we hammer home the point that this is homosexual abuse, we start to distract ourselves from the main point—stopping all abuse.

The main point is the fact that the Catholic Church has always maintained that men with homosexual tendencies are never good candidates for the Priesthood. There should never be any homosexual men ordained, because the problems that they struggle with are in direct contradiction with a vocation to the Priesthood. It is hard enough for anyone that struggles with this kind of attraction to live a celibate life in the world and avoid falling into sin, but when they are placed in a situation where they are constantly surrounded by other men, those temptations can be overwhelming.

They may not always be able to control themselves sufficiently, which can lead to the kinds of situations that apparently happened with the Cardinal. The men that were under his care should have never had to deal with this kind of abuse coming from a man that had so much power over them. It wasn’t just seminarians that he abused, but young boys in his dioceses, that he targeted by luring them to his beach house, or by taking them on outings, etc., where he could control the situation. Even by befriending their families to gain easy access. This kind of “grooming” is a means of building up trust for these types of predators.

In the end, the Church has always maintained that She has good reason for setting up these rules that will automatically eliminate the possibility before it becomes a real problem. There have been times in the past when these things have happened in the Church, which is why these standards were set up. Why take the risk of this type of thing continuing to happen by allowing homosexuals into the seminaries? This kind of scandal kills the faith of the victims, as well as their families and friends, and all of the faithful who hear about it. It causes people to abandon their faith because they trusted the Church to protect them from this kind of situation.

 

[JimG]

That is true, but I am a bit confused on why some point that out so frequently. Is it supposed to prove a particular point? I’m honestly asking here, because I feel like I’m missing it.

I think it is probably because the societal normalization and acceptance of homosexual behavior occurred concurrently with the increasing abuse cases and the rise of the so-called “lavender mafia.” In other words, normalization was not a neutral societal event but had adverse consequences.

 

[FollowChrist34]

I find this so hard to believe - he lived in the same house over an extended period of time. This is a very close knit group of people, I mean clergy, hierarchy, most of whom are also pretty intelligent I would assume. Rumors fly. This statement makes actually a little more nervous…it demonstrates how baked in this all is, what a hard fight it would be to expose any of it, if that is even possible. Circle the wagons.

 

[exnihilo]

Yeah, to claim he didn’t even suspect makes me worried. People want to say something to exonerate themselves. But so often they end up making it worse. He could say he never observed this behavior. He could say no one ever reported this behavior to him. But I don’t believe anyone close to him never suspected it.

 

[Joe_5859]

I find this so hard to believe - he lived in the same house over an extended period of time.

Is it really hard to imagine, though? How many spouses find out that their husband or wife has been living a double life (e.g. having an affair, watching pornography, wracking up credit card debt, etc.) and it comes as a great shock.

They lived in the same building, but there were probably other priests, too. And it’s not like McCarrick and Farrel would be checking in with each other on everything the other did. They both would have had their own schedules and a full plate of responsibilities. I imagine they would sometimes go weeks without even seeing each other.

 

[CilladeRoma]

I have a priest friend who lives in a rectory with 3 other men. They all work at different parishes. They rarley ever see each other, unless they are passing each other in the garage.

So, no, I don’t think it is a stretch either.

 

[FollowChrist34]

Well, I don’t know. People outside of the Church can figure the culture and politics of it out, just from what leaks out, for years now I might add. Anybody in the Church would have to be ‘in the loop’ on this. More likely I think it is sort of an underground, a clique. Nonparticipants on the outside, or let in as they are trusted, proved harmless/supportive. I flat out don’t believe he couldn’t have known this was a possibility. This says a lot though about the power structure and culture of the Church. And I think it’s obviously an entrenched established gay culture; you can’t say that though if they have power over you. Again, many people understand this inside and outside the Church, even the mainstream media who for once have a clearer view on Church politics/culture than some Catholics. I would add that there are precious few gay priests who have outed themselves that would disagree with a word of this - again this is well documented in secular media, for years. Denying any of this is to be an apologist, which is fine as far as that goes.

 

[Joe_5859]

Well, if he’s lying about his knowledge, I hope that comes out. However, as someone who has worked in the Church and known many people who have worked in the Church, it doesn’t surprise me that he wouldn’t have known. Lack of communication is not in short supply.

 

[FollowChrist34]

Right, my frustration with this issue comes entirely from the fact that I am highly doubtful the truth will ever be acknowledged by the powers that be. This is a song and dance in my opinion, through and through, more disheartening as it is basically an exact replica of what happened/didn’t happen 20 years ago. It is about survival plain and simple. I honestly believe it would take something with the force of the Reformation to effect the kind of ‘clearing the swamp’ the laity is looking for, or some of the laity is looking for. My faith is bankrupt on this.