Posted on 05/19/2011 8:17:28 AM PDT by GonzoII
Come on, what do you expect from the Catholic church except for a huge CYA?
This is a group that killed off competeing sects, ran the church like a mafia (literally in many cases) and threw out whole books from the bible simply because they didn’t fit their version of events (God forbid we empower women, Mary, cough) and demonized the Jews even though they are God’s chosen people.
Don’t get me started.
So, a vow celibacy does not attract one who identifies homosexual urges in himself as ungodly and wishes deny them, so they never result in physical action? And that denial is an effective means of containing a compulsion?
You cranked yourself up.
??? I think you're confusing us with someone else.
The rest of your screed demonstrates that anti-Catholic bigotry is alive and well.
If you want change in the catholic church convict and sentence a few archbishops and cardinals for conspiracy to obstruct justice....just a few will do.....the rest will get the message.
you certainly seem to have hit the nail on the head to me, but what do I know.
This is a somewhat misleading article.
It is perfectly true that two of the major causes of abuse, which almost all took place several decades ago, were the “sexual permissiveness” of the 60s and poor seminary training—i.e., seminaries that had been infected by the culture of the 1960s.
Both those points are perfectly true.
The third point, that homosexuality was mainly responsible, should have been added. I would imagine that it may have been left out because the bishops are still afraid of offending the liberal establishment and being accused of homophobia.
Donohue make the essential points; that it was almost all in the past, and it was largely homosexual in nature. Why did it suddenly erupt in the 60s and 70s, and not earlier? Thats because there were fewer gay priests then, Donohue argued.
In other words, one solution is to keep gay men, even if they promise to be celibate, out of the seminaries, if possible.
I expect we’ll see more of the Catholic haters on this thread, but it might be a good idea to consider rationally where the bishops’ report is sound, and where it goes astray. It is sound in what it says, but it goes astray in not making that third point more openly.
But the Vatican has already said that gay men should not be admitted to the seminaries. The most prominent gay bishops such as Rembert Weakland have already been weeded out. It was not known at the time they were appointed that they were gay, or at least it was all kept in the closet—unlike the Episcopal and other mainline Protestant churches, where gay bishops were deliberately and openly appointed. Still, the Church has to deal with the problem, and in fact has proceeded to do so, to the point where sexual abuse by priests is now extremely rare.
Unlike the public schools, where it is increasingly common, and where gay teachers are said to be a good thing, and where small schoolchildren are being taught to be gay.
St. Peter, the rock upon whom the church was built, was married, but what do I know.
Heads up. The Church did not write the study and it did not draw and release any conclusions from the study. That (pay attention now) was the John Jay College of Criminal Justice. You would know that if you read the article.
You are misinformed leading you to write an erroneous statement. Please name the books of the Bible that were thrown out by the Catholic Church. If you mean nonsense such as the Gospel of Thomas or other such Gnostic rot be aware that no Christian sect views those as being in anyway Canonical and indeed are viewed as heretical by Reformed sects as well.
One obvious glaring example of ignoring the elephant in the room is that the sexual hedonism of the ‘60’s included a growing tolerance and acceptance even encouragement of homosexual behavior.
“I expect well see more of the Catholic haters on this thread, but it might be a good idea to consider rationally where the bishops report is sound, and where it goes astray. It is sound in what it says, but it goes astray in not making that third point more openly.”
The instances of abuse have decreased very sharply since the late 70s early 80s. I think part of that is also due to the homosexualists not having a reason to turn to the priesthood in order to hide as it became more acceptable to be an open homosexualist in general society, especially in a group that officially teaches what they do is a sin. Heck, they can get married in several states, many companies give benefits and have strict anti-discrimation policies, there are gay cruises and gay days at theme parks.
Freegards
“And that denial is an effective means of containing a compulsion?”
One, anyone who has that compulsion is unfit for the priesthood.
Two, everyone has desires that they deny themselves. Are you suggesting that it’s healthy to act on your compulsions?
I think it has more to do with the fact that the Church indentifies them as homosexuals before they are ordained and rejects them.
That could be true too, I hear that some bishops have started following the Vatican’s mandates on that more closely. But do you see my point that there is less reason to even try to join an organization today that officially condemns their actions while the rest of society pretty much embraces all that is gay, like it didn’t 40 years ago?
Freegards
Yeah, that’s the problem.
Quite the opposite. Look at what’s happening to the Episcopalians, Lutherans and now the Presbyterians.
I don’t understand, homosexualists are now welcomed and accepted in parts of those groups; they don’t have to hide what they do, like they would have to do as a priest in the Catholic Church. They can have open partners in “relationships” in those groups, that is never going to happen in the Catholic Church.
Freegards
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.