Posted on 08/22/2018 9:56:49 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Due to the sensitive nature of this article, it's important that I make some preliminary statements. There will be enough controversy if my words are rightly understood, let alone misunderstood.
First, I am not a Catholic basher. Second, I am not claiming that the Catholic Church has a monopoly on sexual scandals. Third, I believe the vast majority of homosexual men stand with me in denouncing pedophilia and "man-boy love." Fourth, as we focus on predatory priests, we must not forget their victims. Some of the abused have lost faith for life. Others bear their scars in different, significant ways. They must not be forgotten in the midst of our outrage and grief.
The question, then, is simple: Does the Catholic Church have a homosexual problem?
According to Cardinal Raymond Burke, "It was clear after the studies following the 2002 sexual abuse crisis that most of the acts of abuse were in fact homosexual acts committed with adolescent young men.
There was a studied attempt to either overlook or to deny this. Now it seems clear in light of these recent terrible scandals that indeed there is a homosexual culture, not only among the clergy but even within the hierarchy, which needs to be purified at the root. It is of course a tendency that is disordered."
If you're surprised to hear this candid admission, you're not alone. As Cardinal Burke observed, "There was a studied attempt to either overlook or to deny this."
Yes, it was fine to talk about Catholicism's problem with pedophilia. It was fine to discuss sexual scandals in broad terms. But it was basically forbidden to connect them directly to homosexuality. Is it true that homosexual pedophiles are more likely to abuse boys then heterosexual pedophiles are likely to abuse girls?
According to a 2007 Mayo Clinic study, "The percentage of homosexual pedophiles ranges from 9 per cent to 40 per cent, which is approximately four to 20 times higher than the rate of adult men attracted to other adult men (using a prevalence rate of adult homosexuality of 2 per cent to 4 per cent). . . . This finding does not imply that homosexuals are more likely to molest children, just that a larger percentage of pedophiles are homosexual or bisexual in orientation to children."
But even if this study is accurate (I have seen other evidence to support this), I don't believe that pedophilia (in terms of men abusing prepubescent children) is the primary issue within the Catholic sex scandals.
This is confirmed by Bill Donohue, president of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights. (Donohue holds a Ph.D. in Sociology from New York University; in his 11-page report, he seeks to debunk the notion of widespread sexual sin among the clergy.) Pointing to a 2004 study, Donohue notes, "The John Jay study found that 81 percent of the victims were male, 78 percent of whom were postpubescent. Now if 100 percent of the victimizers are male, and most of the victims are postpubescent males, that is a problem called homosexuality. There is no getting around it.
"How many were pedophiles? Less than five percent. That is what the John Jay study found. Studies done in subsequent years—I have read them all—report approximately the same ratio. It's been a homosexual scandal all along."
In the words of blogger Matt Walsh, "the real problem in the Catholic Church isn't pedophilia but gay priests. As the statistics clearly show, the vast majority of predators in the clergy were homosexual and the vast majority were not pedophiles."
What, then, should we conclude from this? That homosexuals are far worse sinners than heterosexuals? Actually, there has been a flood of scandals involving heterosexual female teachers and their underage, heterosexual male students. What does this prove? The vast majority of pornography that is produced is for heterosexual use (since the vast majority of people are heterosexual). What does this prove?
It proves that sexual sin is everywhere. And all of it is ugly, especially when it takes advantage of others. So, my point here is not that homosexuals are more promiscuous than heterosexuals (even though there is evidence to support this). And my point is not that homosexuals are more prone to pedophilia than heterosexuals (although here too, as noted, there is evidence to support that).
My point is simply that the vast majority of devout, heterosexual Catholic men will not want to give up marriage for the priesthood. However, a devout Catholic man who is attracted to the same-sex would be more likely to give up marriage for the priesthood, since he cannot "marry" a same-sex partner and be faithful to Catholicism.
And what do you expect to happen when you have thousands of homosexual men who are single for life, some of whom are fairly young, and who are in intimate environments with teenage men? Read the horrific reports about sexual abuse in the Catholic Church. That's exactly what you would expect.
As Ross Benes explained, "While doing research for my book The Sex Effect, I came across many scholars who suggested that preventing priests from marrying altered the makeup of the priesthood over time, unintentionally providing a shelter for some devout gay men to hide their sexual orientation. By continuing to disqualify women and married men, the priesthood attracts men who desire to forgo sex for the rest of their lives in an attempt to get closer to God. Because the church denounces all gay sex, some devout gay men pursue the celibate priesthood as a self-incentive to avoid sex with men, which can help them circumvent perceived damnation."
This, in turn, has produced what some claim is a gay subculture within the Catholic Church, from the local parish to the seminary and beyond. The sordid results that follow are utterly unsurprising.
From my perspective as a non-Catholic, the clergy should be allowed to marry, while those with the gift of celibacy should refrain from marriage. As for priests (or potential priests) who are same-sex attracted, they should seek out help for their sexual conflicts, not being allowed to serve until they have a clear and persistent track record of holy, disciplined living.
To do anything else is to be unfair to them and, far, far worse, to be unfair to their potential victims.
Likely less than half the number Rome claims.
As examples...
Italy...
is a "Roman Catholic country", but only 1/3 go to church. They are frequently baptized and married in churches, but never go.Belgium ...Population 59,000,000 * 1/3 = Actual practicing Romans 19,000,000
Over 75% of Belgians are Roman Catholic. However, as elsewhere in Northwest Europe, secularisation has hit hard in Belgium; Sunday church attendance has dropped well below 10% as per latest research such as from the "Centrum voor politicologie" of the Catholic University Leuven. Although sources are quoting different figures between 4 and 9%, a church attendance of 6% in 2009 seems to be the most likely figure. (Wiki collected)11,000,000 population * .75 = 8,000,000 likely counted by Rome.
6% of Catholics go to a church service in a year, according to the quote above (Wiki).
This means 495,000 are practicing catholics.
That is just two countries.
The numbers are inflated and bandied about as puffery.
The number of practicing catholics is likely somewhere between 500 million and 750 million... and that is a generous number.
You may well be right if we speak only of the Catholic population now.
But metmom's ire is directed at all Catholics without distinction, past, present and future:
You’ve had 2,000 years to try.Oh. I wonder what the number would be for the Catholic Church through the ages? The word "myriads" comes to mind.
It hasn’t happened yet. You are not fine now and tyou never were.
And you’re not going to be.
It's a pretty comprehensive moral defamation.
And as I said, it's disappointing, coming from a person who usually manifests a more exacting judgment and a greater regard for truth that that.
The Catholic Church has to drum all the queers out of the priesthood. That is a start. Next they should refuse any homosexual men into the semenaries. That is what needs to be done to recover from this mess.
Yes...one verse theology. It always leads to bad theology. As another example the wedding at Cana.....Roman Catholicism has taken one verse out of John and turned Mary into a demi-goddess.
If you read ahead to Acts, you will see how Peter, and the other disciples, exercised this.
37Now when they heard this, they were pierced to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Brethren, what shall we do?” 38Peter said to them, “Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. Acts 2:37-38 NASB
Now tie this back into the passage from Matthew 16.
13Now when Jesus came into the district of Caesarea Philippi, He was asking His disciples, “Who do people say that the Son of Man is?” 14And they said, “Some say John the Baptist; and others, Elijah; but still others, Jeremiah, or one of the prophets.” 15He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” 16Simon Peter answered, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” 17And Jesus said to him, “Blessed are you, Simon Barjona, because flesh and blood did not reveal this to you, but My Father who is in heaven. 18“I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades will not overpower it. 19“I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven.” 20Then He warned the disciples that they should tell no one that He was the Christ. Matthew 16:13-20 NASB
Now, this exchange is also recorded in Mark and Luke.
And He continued by questioning them, “But who do you say that I am?” Peter *answered and *said to Him, “You are the Christ.” Mark 8:29 NASB
And He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” And Peter answered and said, “The Christ of God.” Luke 9:20 NASB
The emphasis of this exchange is Peter's confession.....Jesus is the Christ.
This is the message the church is built upon....Jesus is the Christ.
This is the message Peter and the disciples preached beginning at Pentecost and going forward.
It is the same message Paul preached in his ministries.
It is the same message conveyed by every believer in Christ since the 1st century.
The OT writers understood their salvation was from God and that He was the rock.
It is a clear consistent message from beginning to end.
Why? Because He is the Alpha and the Omega.
The NT is crystal clear....we can only gain Heaven through faith in Christ and Christ alone....no one or no other thing will gain us Heaven.
Any other message that says otherwise is a false gospel and is to be shunned.
Well....what has Roman Catholicism done to stop this??
Nothing.
They've moved priests around...which incidentally would be a violation of some of the earliest "traditons" Rome claims to hold to so dearly.
They've denied it. They've tried to downplay it.
We even see some Roman Catholics on these threads who've tried to minimize this sin!
However, I will commend you in that you've at least written to your leadership on this issue.
((((Sigh)))) I can't say you show exacting judgment and a great regard for truth.
“It’s a pretty comprehensive moral defamation.”
I think she was referring to the Roman religion itself, and not to those trapped in it on the Hamster Wheel of Guilt and Works...
But metmom can speak for herself. She knows the Scriptures and has convictions like granite.
PS - myriads may come to mind, but that is exaggerated.
((((Sigh)))) I can't say you show exacting judgment and a great regard for truth.
((((sigh)))).....Yes, Rome has done this. When I read the Glories of Mary and other writings, which have never been condemned by Rome, this comes through very clearly.
When Mary is accorded titles of Co-redemptrix, mediatrix, auxilatrix, which are feminized versions of titles given to Christ and the Spirit....then yes....Rome has indeed done this.
When Rome allows the wearing of a piece of cloth to save you to stand....then yes...Rome has indeed done this.
The false teachings of the apparition and the scapular:
True devotion to the Blessed Virgin Mary consists in three things: VENERATION, CONFIDENCE AND LOVE. By simply wearing the Scapular, we can tell her every moment of the day that we venerate her, love her and trust in her protection.
The Blessed Virgin of Mount Carmel has promised to save those who wear the scapular from the fires of hell; She will also shorten their stay in purgatory if they should pass from this world still owing some debt of punishment.http://www.sistersofcarmel.com/brown-scapular-information.php
Catholic News Agency pulls off investigative coup in the 'Uncle Ted' McCarrick saga
You may not care to keep up, but I write for the lurkers.
I think the better question would be is how many are truly followers of Christ....and only Christ?
Subtract out all of those who wear the Scapular and/or the Miraculous Medal or who are relying upon Mary for their salvation.
The remaining number would be a very small one.
No. There is no such thing as homosexuality.
It has a homoerotic problem.
It has a pedophile problem.
It has a heresy problem.
It sounds like the rot goes deeeeeeeeeep in Roman Catholicism over just this issue.
It's time for a Second Reformation.
However, it is important to correctly identify the problem, which at present is the infiltration of the church by homosexuals, not pedophiles. Up until now the RCC has not dared to utter the word, homosexual. But it is the crux of the problem; so it is good to identify it accurately.
Although in 2016 many Catholics voted Donald J. Trump in as President.
All of the above.
The sad reality is that some of the other Christian FRpers forget is that the lay Catholics are leading the fight to clean out this corruption bigtime.
And none of them were queers...But when queers did become predominate, God dealt with them...You may have heard of Sodom and Gomorrah...
The gates of hell may not prevail over your Church (and I'm not convinced that it hasn't already happened some time ago) but God's got to be gettin' pretty tired of Catholic overseers raping and perverting his children...And every 'vicar of christ' since who knows when condoning it...
Your foolin' yerself if you think God is ok with what you think are his clergy being involved in this abominable practice that he condemned...
With no New Testament support for this "division" of the church.....not to mention none for purgatory either.
The church is the body of believers....the ekklesia. Paul writes a good deal about it and not once does he break it down as Rome does.
Why?
SCRIPTURE DOES NOT CHANGE.....Roman Catholic "tradition" has, does and will change.
Right now the sound you hear is of wallets and purses closing by fed-up lay Catholics.
We are called to be holy.
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.