Posted on 05/30/2014 8:58:12 AM PDT by Dr. Thorne
Pope Francis told reporters on Tuesday that “three bishops are under investigation” for misdeeds related to the sexual abuse of minors and that “one has already been condemned and his penalty is being studied.”
The Pope’s statement during the news conference aboard his flight from Israel back to Italy came after he was asked what he would do if a bishop did not observe church norms regarding a moral, and often legal, obligation to report allegations of sexual abuse against a member of the clergy.
(Excerpt) Read more at catholicherald.co.uk ...
Mostly priest/homosexuals. I know "pedophile" sounds worse and this is probably the first time you've heard this but it's important to be accurate.
Even church leaders feel the powerful draw of female sexuality, some are bound to fail in willing themselves to overcome what are the natural and normal biological parts of the male obsession with the female, and nature’s biological imperative to reproduce.
Named later in the article are Auxiliary Bishop Charles Scicluna (Malta), and Archbishop Jozef Wesolowski.
[Faithful Departed author Philip] Lawler points out that while less than five percent of American priests have been accused of sexual abuse, some two-thirds of our bishops were apparently complicit in cover-ups. The real scandal isn't the sick excesses of a few dozen pedophiles, or even the hundreds of priests who had affairs with teenage boys -- the bulk of abuse cases. No, according to Lawler, it is the malfeasance of wealthy, powerful, and evidently worldly men who fill the thrones -- but not the shoes -- of the apostles. In case after case, we read in their correspondence, in the records of their soulless, bureaucratic responses to victims of psychic torture and spiritual betrayal, these bishops' prime concern was to save the infrastructure, the bricks and mortar and mortgages. Ironically, their lack of a supernatural concern for souls is precisely what cost them so much money in the end.
-- Excerpt from the thread Kneeling Before the World"....One aspect of the John Jay report she found particularly helpful was the language it used to describe different ways bishops have responded to reports of abuse in their dioceses -- either as "innovators" or "laggards." The report describes innovators as those who "understood the harmfulness of the (abuse) acts and moved to implement policies to reduce abuse and remove abusers early on." It conversely notes that the response of other bishops "lagged behind, thus creating an image that the church generally was not responsive to victims." The report said the media "often focused on these 'laggards,' further perpetuating the image that the bishops as a group were not responding to the problem of sexual abuse of minors."
The actual report names five categories of bishops: innovators, early adopters, early majority, later majority, and laggards. Very odd that no category is given for bishops like Milwaukee's Rembert Weakland, a category that might be called something like "perpetrators"
. -- Excerpt from, and personal comments made on the thread John Jay report not just about mistakes in 1960s, says sex abuse expert
For what it's worth, these are standard terms from the study of diffusion of innovations. They go back to the 1940s, and maybe even earlier. They originated in the study of how farmers adopt new agricultural technology. I'm surprised to find them used in this context, but they do help explain the history of the behavior of the bishops.
Very poorly written article. The way the story is headed, anyone NOT reading the article except the banner would think Auxiliary Bishop Charles Scicluna (Malta), was one of those being investigated when he is the one doing the investigation.
The most important thing to stress is that they are sexually preying on minors. Homosexuality is bad. Adults with minors is much, much worse. Both are wound the victims here at the same time in different ways.
Yeah, but homosexuals seducing teenage boys doesn't sound nearly as bad as the mislabel, "pedophile", so let's call them that.
I am not terribly upset if anyone thinks a bigger portion of their victims were pre adolescent. Some victims were btw.
I don’t find it important to give a complete breakdown of ages and sexes when discussing the topic, and not one of the idiots who insist on such hair splitting when the topic comes up has any more concern for the victims here than the Boston Diocese showed.
Bloviating about the minutiae doesn’t demonstrate any great insight.
It does make a difference. I personally think homosexuals who seduce teenage boys should be castrated, while actual pedophiles should be publicly disemboweled.
But getting to the issue at hand: By mislabeling them (90%homo/teenage) pedophiles , the Libertine Left can simultaneously discredit Christian teaching while promoting sodomy. If the dirty little secret of homosexual lust for boys were generally known, sodomite approval would drop.
Another advantage to calling them pedophiles is found by non-Catholic Christians, because it makes the hated Catholic Church seem truly filthy. I can think of no other reason why Christians who are fully aware of the homosexual/teenager nature of the scandal would continue to call them pedophiles, can you?
Your hedonistic assertion that disparaging adults having sex with children damages the church fails to fly. And no, opposition to grownups getting their jollies with people too young to be out supporting themselves is not a leftist tenet, so can the “morality equals leftist meme.”
Only perverts get upset over that, and only perverts consider opposition of adults having see with minors to be a negative.
So no, it doesn’t damage the church in the eyes of the general population, and public opinion is a tertiary issue anyway.
No biblically grounded person asserts that homosexuality and sex with minors can not be opposed at the same time. You are promoting a libertine position using seminar talking points derived from a poorly conceived Hegelian construct.
Your hedonistic assertion that disparaging adults having sex with children damages the church fails to fly. And no, opposition to grownups getting their jollies with people too young to be out supporting themselves is not a leftist tenet, so can the “morality equals leftist meme.”
Only perverts get upset over that, and only perverts consider opposition of adults having see with minors to be a negative.
So no, it doesn’t damage the church in the eyes of the general population, and public opinion is a tertiary issue anyway.
No biblically grounded person asserts that homosexuality and sex with minors can not be opposed at the same time. You are promoting a libertine position using seminar talking points derived from a poorly conceived Hegelian construct.
No, I am correctly identifying a disgusting scandal for what it is, rather than identifying it as different disgusting scandal, thereby preventing the scandal from being hijacked and used to further an agenda.
The Church became infested with disgusting homosexual perverts who did what sodomites do and seduced innocent teenage boys. They were then protected by an informal cabal of feckless cowards and/or fellow-traveling sodomites in the Opiscopate.
The entire creepy mess was a direct result of acceptance of homosexuals into positions of propinquity to boys. Until that fact is squarely faced, sodomite predators will be able to operate with impunity in all sorts of organizations, from the public schools to the Boy Scouts.
I know that's not as much fun as changing the narrative in order to whack the Church, but it's important, just as it's important for a doctor to know what disease he is dealing with so as not to go treating the wrong one.
So what do you call it when these perverts hit on 12-14 year old kids??? You got a polite name for the perverts???
See post #13.
If the problem is people breaking into houses you call it burglary, not bank robbing. Those 12-14 year olds were boys. The predator priests are not pedophiles, they are faggots. Calling them pedophiles is a smoke screen intended to protect the homosexual agenda.
This has been discussed ad nauseum on this forum, so the only people who know they are homosexuals yet continue to call them pedophiles are probably themselves . . . I'd better not say it.
The infiltration of homosexuals into the seminaries decades just before and after Vatican II. Clearly Frances isn’t going to fix that problem.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.