Posted on 02/05/2014 7:34:23 AM PST by MNDude
The Vatican blasted back at a UN report that accused it of allowing children to be abused by priests and condemned its stances on homosexuality, contraception and abortion, saying the findings were "ideological" and likely driven by critics of the church's "non-negotiable" teachings.
The U.N. Committee on the Rights of the Child, whose members have included such nations as Saudi Arabia, Syria, Uganda and Thailand,accused the Vatican Wednesday of "systematically" adopting policies that allowed priests to rape and molest tens of thousands of children over decades, and urged it to open its files on pedophiles and bishops who concealed their crimes.
The UN report also severely criticized the Holy See for its attitudes toward homosexuality, contraception and abortion and said it should change its own canon law to ensure children's rights and their access to health care are guaranteed.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Now if only the UN would condemn our public schools where the OVERWHELMING majority of child sexual abuse cases occurs these days.
IB4TPWM*A*
[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.
-- from the thread Kneeling Before the World"The Dublin Archdiocese's preoccupations in dealing with cases of child sexual abuse, at least until the mid-1990s, were the maintenance of secrecy, the avoidance of scandal, the protection of the reputation of the church and the preservation of its assets," said the report. "All other considerations, including the welfare of children and justice for victims, were subordinated to these priorities. The archdiocese did not implement its own canon law rules and did its best to avoid any application of the law of the state"....
-- from the thread Pope calls Irish church leaders to Vatican to discuss abuse report
There are not “hundreds of thousands of victims”.
The Church has always taught that men with homosexual tendencies should not be ordained or even admitted to the seminary. And those caught flagrante delicto should be removed from public ministry and placed in a monastery for penance and prayer.
But there has always been an effort by homosexuals to infiltrate the priesthood, because (like other positions such as teacher, scout leader, youth minister) it carries an aura of trust and permits access to children. And in the swingin' sixties and seventies, the "lavender mafia" succeeded in gaining control of some dioceses and seminaries, with predictable results.
The bishops responsible tended to be heterodox "modern" bishops who thought doctrines of sin were old-fashioned and outmoded, and that seminaries were "too strict". In addition, in their defense, the psychiatrists at the time thought that ephebophilia and homosexual tendencies could be "cured" and assured the bishops that the priests in question could be returned to ministry. And of course, medical issues are generally kept confidential by employers. Plus, there's that presumption of innocence thing.
Thankfully, in the U.S. at least the bishops have taken a very proactive stance toward cleaning up the mess. Almost all the ordinaries in question have been retired or removed and replaced with solid bishops.
Of course, the news media and the usual suspects continue to beat up the Church as though nothing has changed since 1960.
And just what "human rights" does the UN want to protect? In a world without G-d human rights don't exist (and neither does right and wrong or good and evil). Rights and moral codes that exist only as constructs within the human mind have no objective reality.
It's time some countries started pulling out of the UN. The US never will (especially under Obama), but surely a conservative Catholic country like Malta or Portugal could do so. Who knows where that would lead?
The Vatican used to play footsie with the UN. Will this finally be the end of that policy?
Amen to that - but that’s not why this was posted.
"Once Again UN Troops Traded Sex For Food With Minors"
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2011/09/once-again-un-troops-accused-of-sexually-abusing-minors/
LOL.
Odd that the UN doesn’t seem to see the conflict between “condemning” the Vatican for “child abuse,” mostly not true pedophilia but gay men going after teenage boys, and at the same time screaming that the Church should accept homosexuality.
“systematically” adopting policies that allowed priests to rape and molest tens of thousands of children over decades. . .”
The Church did not adopt policies permitting this practice. The Church did, however, allow homosexuals to becomes priests. . .provided they could and would control their urges. This was a mistake, as homosexuals define their very being by their behavior and being a priest, having so much control and influence over young boys, it was a homosexual predator’s paradise.
Normal heterosexual men living a Godly life of celibacy do not suddenly change into homosexuals and want molest young boys.
That used to be my argument, but now I realize that the question is about the culture attracting homosexual men to it.
An institution of powerful robe wearing men, all vowing to never know a woman, to never be husbands, boyfriends, or fathers, to devote themselves to the world's most exclusively, global, female excluding all male club. Something like that is bound to attract a lot more than just normal men who agree to celibacy.
I may be the most anti-Catholic poster on this forum, but I've never joined the "Catholic priests are perverts" chorus. There's this thing called human nature that everyone has to struggle with. My problems with the Catholic Church are its liberalism, not its having been infiltrated.
Likewise I see some Fundamentalist Protestants still fighting the old pre-VII church that no longer even exists. There's a lot of things I'm afraid of, but the Catholic Church taking over the world and forcing everyone to join it is nowhere near the list.
Likewise some FP FReepers actually laud Vatican II. That's insane! Do they know what VII taught?
Following Christ involves sacrifice - "Take up thy cross, and follow me." It is precisely the fact that a man who answers God's call to the priesthood makes a tremendous sacrifice. In return he receives tremendous graces.
And of course this is exactly why homosexuals should not be allowed in the priesthood: they aren't giving up anything. No concept of sacrifice - for them it IS just an old boys club. And that's part of the problem.
. . . and you must never have been inside a Catholic parish, there are females all over the place. Just not with collars on.
I would be VERY pleased if everybody adhered to the actual documents of VCII - then once everybody's doing that, we can work on the details.
I think some of the liberalism is just idealistic, naive bishops, although some is certainly doctrinaire Marxism. That crept into the Church along with the lavender mob.
And you are FAR from the most anti-Catholic poster on this forum. At least you THINK and we can have a discussion. I get so tired of the knee-jerk "I hate Catholic" posters, especially when they get in bed with the likes of the U.N. just so they can attack the Church. I don't post a gloating thread every time some evangelical preacher gets caught stealing from the plate or running off with his lady organist . . . don't see the need. But some folks apparently do . . . .
Other than the wise crack directed at me, you didn’t say anything.
Naturally, with the way the Catholic leaders designed their denomination’s leadership and institution, it is going to always be appealing to homosexual men, the homosexual element will always be there, it will surge to the surface, and then be dampened, repeatedly.
All Catholic Priests vow celibacy, so forbidding homosexuals to be a part of the single men who make up the entirety of the global church leadership, doesn’t seem to be an option.
Homosexuals have always tried to get into the clergy. We know this from the writings of the early Church Fathers and from medieval schoolmen and abbots. But they can't succeed in any significant numbers if the rules are followed.
If one sneaks into seminary, he won't last long if the rules are followed. A homosexual man can't live in close proximity to a bunch of other young men without being found out (that is the charitable reason for barring them from the priesthood - their situation is a near occasion of sin for them. Like putting a young college man in charge of a sorority house.)
We had a number of bishops who worshiped the Spirit of the Age instead of following the established law of Christ's Church. That resulted in homosexuals not only in the clergy but in the chancery and in seminaries - along with a gaggle of man-hating female fellow-travellers. Thankfully they are on their way out, but they have done a lot of damage, not the least of which is causing many people to believe the celibate model is a failure.
Sorry you see a mild jest as directed at you personally. It wasn't.
They always will, that is what I was describing a church's leadership culutre that will always attract them, they won't be excluded, what they are required to do is to take a vow of celibacy.
And, as I noted before, the Church leadership is NOT male-only. Parish administrators, teachers, assistants, etc. are frequently (you could say 'usually') female. Chanceries have many females, frequently in leadership positions. In fact, depending on the priest or bishop, the ladies (sometimes quite horrible ladies) may actually be in charge. That is not a good state of affairs, but it is the reality on the ground in a lot of locations.
Anyway, predatory homosexuals could care less about the 'leadership culture'. They care about access to adolescent boys. Like when they asked Willie Sutton why he robbed banks - 'because that's where the money is.'
Factually incorrect. I quote:
Pope John XXIII, Jan 23, 1961: "Advancement to religious vows and ordination should be barred to those who are afflicted with evil tendencies to homosexuality or pederasty, since for them the common life and the priestly ministry would constitute serious dangers."
Pope Benedict XVI, Nov 29, 2005: "The church, while deeply respecting the people in question, cannot admit to the seminary and the sacred orders those who practice homosexuality, present deeply rooted homosexual tendencies or support so-called gay culture.
"Those people find themselves, in fact, in a situation that presents a grave obstacle to a correct relationship with men and women. One cannot ignore the negative consequences that can stem from the ordination of people with deeply rooted homosexual tendencies."
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.