LA Diocese misses the point - 81% of Scandal was Gay not Pedophile

I dislike this topic in general and avoid it like the plague. But it is amazing that these people still do not get that the "scandal" was about gays in the Priesthood, more than pedophilia.

" Mr. Bennett, a review board member, blamed seminary officials and bishops for not flagging at-risk homosexual seminarians. There are "many outstanding priests of a homosexual orientation who live chaste, celibate lives," Mr. Bennett said, "but ... more than 80 percent of the abuse at issue was of a homosexual nature." "There's an incredibly incongruity of a man of the cloth engaging in this type of conduct. How did they get into the priesthood?" Seminaries, he said, allowed in "many sexually dysfunctional and psychosexually immature men," and did not prepare clergy to survive "particularly in our oversexualized society."

"Said Father Martin. "In the absence of any healthy gay priests for Catholics to reflect on publicly, and with the only examples being notorious pedophiles, the stereotype of the gay priest as child abuser only deepens."

"As I see it, there are very many gay men who are good priests in the church today," declared Father Martin, who estimated the population of gay priests among the clergy as 25 percent. "The vast majority are healthy, hard-working, faithful, loving celibate members of the clergy. That is simply the truth. In order to grow as a people, we need simply to admit that truth."

Dr. Greer Gordon, said "catechists can also help people understand issues related to sexual abuse. "We have to assist individuals in coming into clarity about the pedophilia issue," stated Gordon. "Psychologically we know it's a fact that the majority of pedophiles are not homosexual; they are in fact, heterosexual…. The majority of pedophiles are not Roman Catholic priests."

Gordon urged catechists to use their instincts and be vigilant in protecting children from pedophiles, using as much resource information as possible. "We need to separate the issue (of pedophilia) from homosexuality," she said.

"Generally speaking, as catechists (and) pastoral leaders, it's important for us to try and deal with our own feelings of bigotry and bias around homosexuality…. There are homosexual people in our midst and some of these homosexual people do now, and have in the past, served this God in this church," said Gordon.

Workshop participant Patricia Mathews, 55, said the church is "opening up channels of compassion" by talking about homosexuality. As a relative of a homosexual family member, Mathews said she saw how the gay teenager experienced misunderstanding in school and at home. "Having sessions like this provides a venue for people to talk about their injuries," Mathews reflected."

Well then, there are fewer pedophiles than there are homosexuals in the priesthood, and most of the sandal that has cost the Church a billion dollars and the closing of churches and cut backs in services is a scandal of homosexuals not pedophiles. Archbiship Weakland didn't resign over a pedophile scandal but a relationship with an adult seminarian.

The Congregation for Clergy has sent this Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments your Excellency's letter, asking us to clarify the possibility that men with homosexual tendencies be able to receive priestly ordination.

This Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, conscious of the experience resulting from many instructed causes for the purpose of obtaining dispensation from the obligations that derive from Holy Ordination, and after due consultation with the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, expresses its judgment as follows:

Ordination to the diaconate and the priesthood of homosexual men or men with homosexual tendencies is absolutely inadvisable and imprudent and, from the pastoral point of view, very risky. A homosexual person, or one with a homosexual tendency is not, therefore, fit to receive the sacrament of Holy Orders.

Yours sincerely in Domino Your Most Reverend Excellency Jorge A. Card. Medina Estévez Prefect

The Washington Timeswww.washingtontimes.com

Gay priests cited in abuse of boys

By Julia Duin
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Published February 28, 2004

    Eighty-one percent of sex crimes committed against children by Roman Catholic priests during the past 52 years were homosexual men preying on boys, according to a comprehensive study released yesterday on the church's sex abuse crisis.
    The John Jay study was commissioned 20 months ago by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) in response to hundreds of sex-abuse accusations that were made in nearly every U.S. Catholic diocese. It covered the years from 1950 to 2002 and found 10,667 cases of abuse.
    The USCCB formed a 12-member review board of Catholic laity to conduct its own investigation. The board report was issued jointly with the John Jay study.
    Revelation of the homosexual priest abuse was made at a crowded news conference where Washington lawyer Bob Bennett gave a lengthy summary of the review board's report.
    Mr. Bennett, a review board member, blamed seminary officials and bishops for not flagging at-risk homosexual seminarians.
    There are "many outstanding priests of a homosexual orientation who live chaste, celibate lives," Mr. Bennett said, "but ... more than 80 percent of the abuse at issue was of a homosexual nature."
    "There's an incredibly incongruity of a man of the cloth engaging in this type of conduct. How did they get into the priesthood?"
    Seminaries, he said, allowed in "many sexually dysfunctional and psychosexually immature men," and did not prepare clergy to survive "particularly in our oversexualized society."
    The study also found that during the same 52-year period, at least $572 million in church funds were spent in lawsuits or treatment for erring priests. Investigators said this amount was low, as 14 percent of 195 dioceses -- about 27 -- did not report dollar figures, nor was a recent $85 million settlement against the Archdiocese of Boston included.
    The review board does not advocate barring homosexuals from the priesthood, he said, but "given the reality that a [seminarian] is entering what is essentially male culture, it is important care be taken in the selection and formation of seminarians so that every priest may honor his commitment to live a chaste and celibate life."
    "A litmus test would be inappropriate but we must look at the reality of what we are doing."
    The report itself went further by calling for "a more searching inquiry" of homosexual seminarians. "For those who choose to ordain homosexuals, there appears to be a need for additional scrutiny and perhaps additional or specialized formation to help them with the challenge of priestly celibacy," it said.
    Matthew Gallagher, executive director for Dignity, a Catholic homosexual caucus, called the findings "discrimination in the name of God."
    "Bishops are scapegoating gay priests and this is just a way for bishops to deflect tension from their inability to protect children in their care," he said. "Bishops are not using modern thinking when they say a gay man is more prone to having sex than a straight man."
    The John Jay study was praised as the first of its kind to study sexually abusive practices among a category of the American populace. The priests involved -- 4,392 -- constituted 4 percent of the 109,694 clergy who were working in the Catholic Church from 1950 to 2002.
    The peak year for sexual abuse by the clergy was 1970, according to the report, which said sexual acts against children, defined as those under the age of 18, were often perpetrated over many years. Seventeen percent of the victims had siblings who also were abused.
    The year 1970 was also the peak when abusive clergy were ordained, the report said, adding that more than 10 percent of all priests ordained that year were accused of sexual abuse.
    Abuse was most likely to occur in a priest's home, in the church, in the victim's home or in a vacation home. Researchers sorted abuse into 20 categories, ranging from touching beneath the subject's clothes (57 percent) to anal sex (25 percent).
    The largest group of abusers -- more than 40 percent -- were between 30 and 39 years when they first preyed on children. Seven percent of these priests said they themselves had been abused physically, sexually or emotionally as children, and 19 percent had alcohol or drug addictions.
    In Baltimore, there were 226 child-abuse victims and 83 priests were credibly accused; Arlington reported 11 victims abused by nine priests and the District reported 119 victims abused by 26 priests.
    Also, 19 percent of the 10,667 children abused by the priests were girls, a reversal of child-abuse statistics in the general population, according to the John Jay study.
    Police have investigated more than 615 priests because of abuse charges, or 14 percent of the total. Criminal charges were filed in 220 instances, 138 priests were convicted and 100 served prison time.
    Representatives from the Survivors Network of Those Abused by Priests said yesterday many abusive priests are still at large. They released a statement with names of several clergy convicted of sexual crimes, along with the names of their bishops.
    "The John Jay document is not a study, not a thorough accounting, or God forbid, not an investigation," said Barbara Blaine, president of the survivors network. "It's a self-survey [of bishops]. Period. No independent corroboration, no spot-checking, nor verification, no third-party involvement."
    She called on bishops to establish a database of credibly accused priests so Catholics could determine if such a priest worked with their children.
    Mr. Bennett also blamed bishops for "putting their heads in the sand."
    "Many bishops -- certainly not all -- breached their responsibility as pastors, breached their responsibility as shepherds of the flock," he said. Many "could not comprehend the extent of the damage. Many bishops didn't speak to victims because, unfortunately, their lawyers told them not to."

Religiosorum Institutio

30. Those To Be Excluded; Practical Directives
Advantage 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.

Additionally, for any interested -a Vatican statement more recent than "Religiosorum Institutio" the 1961 document. Relevant article I read a while ago:

Clear Vatican Statement against Ordination of Homosexuals

-excerpt:

VATICAN, Dec 5, 02 (CWNews.com) -- A leading Vatican official has confirmed the Church's position that men with homosexual tendencies should not be ordained.
In a letter dated May 16, 2002, Cardinal Jorge Medina Estevez-- who was, at the time, the prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship-- said: "Ordination to the diaconate or priesthood of persons with homosexual tendencies is absolutely unadvisable and imprudent, and from a pastoral point of view, extremely risky." The letter by Cardinal Medina Estevez, which was a response to a query from a bishop, has now been published in the November-December edition of a bulletin put out by the Congregation for Divine Worship.

If a homosexual is not a pedophile, he would be, even in instances of abuse, gravitation to men, not children. You don't see priests having sex with other priests, you see it with the molestation and rape of children, and boys at that.

To separate the too is to further put children at risk. I know I know, but with the left, I wouldn't rule anything out. Nothing is beneath them. Perhaps we should call them on their willingness to let thousands die from age, even encourage it to happen.

I can't seem to get away from this feeling that the activists on the left are inciting riot, inciting hate, in the right wing, intentionally so, hoping we will be the bad guys to end all this. Leaving them to spout compassion and keep the votes on their side. Funny how things come to you in watching the West Wing, with it's left wing wacko's. What other possible explanation is there to all this? They put our children at risk, (maybe thinking we won't stand for that for long) They refuse to do anything to curtail the spread of HIV/AIDS, they refuse to let the information out on this deadly disease, what are they trying to do, kill off the homosexuals?

I sound like a tin foil hat person, but think about it.....Byrd, who is one of the biggest leftest going, was once grand poobah for the KKK. How do you go from a supremacist to advocating for perversion and perversion of helpless children?

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.