Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Vatican to Check U.S. Seminaries on Gay Presence
NY Times ^ | 9/15/05 | Laurie Goodstein

Posted on 09/15/2005 12:07:00 AM PDT by Crackingham

Investigators appointed by the Vatican have been instructed to review each of the 229 Roman Catholic seminaries in the United States for "evidence of homosexuality" and for faculty members who dissent from church teaching, according to a document prepared to guide the process. The Vatican document, given to The New York Times yesterday by a priest, surfaces as Catholics await a Vatican ruling on whether homosexuals should be barred from the priesthood.

In a possible indication of the ruling's contents, the American archbishop who is supervising the seminary review said last week that "anyone who has engaged in homosexual activity or has strong homosexual inclinations," should not be admitted to a seminary.

Edwin O'Brien, archbishop for the United States military, told The National Catholic Register that the restriction should apply even to those who have not been sexually active for a decade or more.

American seminaries are under Vatican review as a result of the sexual abuse scandal that swept the priesthood in 2002. Church officials in the United States and Rome agreed that they wanted to take a closer look at how seminary candidates were screened for admission, and whether they were being prepared for lives of chastity and celibacy.

The issue of gay seminarians and priests has been in the spotlight because a study commissioned by the church found last year that about 80 percent of the young people victimized by priests were boys.

(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Extended News; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: heteroculture; homosexualagenda; homosexuality; homosexualpriests; homosexuals; pedophiles; priesthood; romancatholic; seminaries; vatican
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-89 next last

1 posted on 09/15/2005 12:07:00 AM PDT by Crackingham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

Long overdue, but bravo anyway.


2 posted on 09/15/2005 12:08:05 AM PDT by thoughtomator (Gentlemen may cry, "Peace! Peace!" -- but there is no peace. - Patrick Henry)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #3 Removed by Moderator

Comment #4 Removed by Moderator

To: Crackingham
Badly thought out policy. The seminaries' problem is not that they are attracting homosexuals but that they're attracting pedophiles just like coaching and teaching jobs tend to do. The article doesn't seem to suggest any distinction made between homosexual adult relationships and propensity towards pedophilia which is their actual problem.

The catechism says that homosexuals are called to chastity and unjust discrimination should be avoided. Obviously the Church is contented with lumping all homosexuals (even ones with no sexual behavior for a decade) with pedophiles. This is a practice doomed to fail.

2358...They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.

2359 Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.

5 posted on 09/15/2005 1:11:18 AM PDT by newzjunkey (CA Freepers, HELP Enforce Our Border: http://www.CaliforniaBorderPolice.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

This looks like discrimination. What about homosexual rights and the Boy Scouts? They've been hounded from pillar to post over this. Will the Catholic Church have to...er...back down?


6 posted on 09/15/2005 3:07:40 AM PDT by hershey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #7 Removed by Moderator

To: Crackingham

Let's see, for years the Vatican ignores what anyone on FR can find out in one hour, then there finally begins a highly formal, elephantine investigation. Many words can describe the RCC but nimble doesn't seem to be among them.


8 posted on 09/15/2005 3:12:05 AM PDT by drlevy88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: newzjunkey

Almost all the victims were post-pubescent teenage boys,
which doesn't fit the description of "pedophilia".
If this were truly a "pedophilia" problem involving pre-pubescent children, which it is not, then heterosexuals would be as likely to offend as homosexuals. Since post-pubescent teen boys were overwhelmingly the victims, nearly all the wayward priests involved were homosexuals. The church has a particular problem with homosexual priests.

You site the catholic catechism saying that homosexuals are called to chastity and that unjust discrimination should be avoided.

The church calls everyone to stop sinning, and says no one should be unjustly discriminated against.

But priests are justly called to a higher standard than laity. The celibacy vow poses an extra challenge. The bible explicitly details quite a high standard for Bishops, one much higher than that for the laity.

Alcoholics are called to sobriety, and the church also feels they should not be unjustly discriminated against. Keeping them out of the priesthood is not unjust, doing so protects both the Church and laity. (Bishops could make an exception for an inspiring repentant one they had great confidence in). High standards are a good thing. Protecting our teenage children from sexual abuse is not unjust, and being a priest is not a right.

A few seminaries may have been particularly wayward in tolerating ongoing homosexuality. The situation might not only involve those trying and succeeding to be repentent.


9 posted on 09/15/2005 3:41:20 AM PDT by Mount Athos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

bump


10 posted on 09/15/2005 3:50:21 AM PDT by sneakers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

Benedict is turning out to be an even better Pope than JPII.

IIRC, there was something about JPII's experiences in WWII that made it difficult for him to accuse people of homosexuality. Benedict does not have these scars, and can thus give the church a much needed house cleaning.


11 posted on 09/15/2005 4:03:39 AM PDT by kidd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mount Athos

Respectfully agree.
Pedophilia has lately been miss-applied to any deviance involving Older/Younger liasons. Just as older men are attracted to younger girls, the wayward HOMOSEXUAL priests were attracted to younger boys. Clinically, genuine pedophilia is an extremely rare affliction.


12 posted on 09/15/2005 4:27:14 AM PDT by Paisan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: newzjunkey
Badly thought out policy. The seminaries' problem is not that they are attracting homosexuals but that they're attracting pedophiles just like coaching and teaching jobs tend to do. The article doesn't seem to suggest any distinction made between homosexual adult relationships and propensity towards pedophilia which is their actual problem.

I don't think this is correct. Pedophilia is attraction to children--prepubescents. Maybe attraction to boy children is different than homosexuality--frankly, I am skeptical that this is a rationalization; but I will accept that it might be true.

However, pedophilia is irrelevant to the catholic church molestation scandal. As I understand it, the vast bulk of the molested boys were post-pubescent teenagers. Attraction by a man to a sextually mature teenage boy is homosexuality and the attempt to hide that by calling it pedophilia is mendacious. I got hit on by homosexuals (unsuccessfully for the record) when I was a teen and involved in semi-pro drama and I assure you, they were treating me like a sexually mature potential sex-partner who was a young man.

What is mendacious about this argument is that it deliberately uses the word pedophilia in two different senses for the purpose of concealing the homosexual problem in the church. It uses 'pedophilia' in the popular sense to mean sex with any underage person to get the reader agreeing that pedophilia is the problem. Then, without informing the reader, it uses 'pedophilia' in the technical sense (meaning sex with prepubescent children) when quoting the 'experts,' thereby suggesting that the catholic church's problem is not a homosexual problem. It is.

13 posted on 09/15/2005 4:50:30 AM PDT by ModelBreaker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: newzjunkey
The seminaries' problem is not that they are attracting homosexuals but that they're attracting pedophiles just like coaching and teaching jobs tend to do.

"Pedophile" is the wrong term, newzjunkey. The vast majority of abuse that occurred was between priests and POST-pubescent boys. Thus, the victims were not children but on their way to becoming men. Consequently, allowing homosexuals, whose attraction to other men is contrary to nature, to become priests poses considerable problems.
14 posted on 09/15/2005 5:20:38 AM PDT by hispanichoosier
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: newzjunkey
2358...They must be accepted with respect,

The scriptures clearly disagree with this one. Apparently a homo-promo wrote it.

"... knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them. Romans 1:32.

15 posted on 09/15/2005 6:22:12 AM PDT by aimhigh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham
Sounds great to me! I'm generally more optimistic about these things, and I didn't expect them to even start with objectives that sound this good.

Of course the application will almost surely fall short of the goals, but setting blunt, pointed standards is a great starting point.

16 posted on 09/15/2005 7:43:43 AM PDT by JohnnyZ (I'm marrying a woman before they make gay marriage mandatory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aimhigh

It's not approving of the practice or the lifestyle, but their being a human being, a child of God.

There are people and there are sins. Practicing homosexuality is a sin. But so is all sorts of other things. Encouraging anyone to sin is wrong. Encouraging anyone, including a person who once did homosexual practice to not sin is good.

St. Paul didn't kick out people who had in the past practiced homosexuality. He told them don't do it any more, and encouraged them.

So Catholics are encouraged to hate the sin, not the sinner.


17 posted on 09/15/2005 7:50:38 AM PDT by Knitting A Conundrum (Act Justly, Love Mercy, and Walk Humbly With God Micah 6:8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: aimhigh; newzjunkey
but also approve of those who practice them.

The full quote from the catechism makes it clear that those who have a homosexual inclination must be accepted with respect, as opposed to approving of "those who practice" homosexual sex.

The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect ....

And then goes on with

"homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered."142 .... Under no circumstances can they be approved.” CCC 2357

18 posted on 09/15/2005 7:53:21 AM PDT by JohnnyZ (I'm marrying a woman before they make gay marriage mandatory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham
The Vatican has already spoken, 2 February 1961 to be exact. What we need are obedient Bishops who implement Vatican policy and a purge of those who don't.

"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."

19 posted on 09/15/2005 8:03:58 AM PDT by A.A. Cunningham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

The Inquisition, what a show.
The Inquisition, here we go.


20 posted on 09/15/2005 8:05:35 AM PDT by numberonepal (Don't Even Think About Treading On Me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kidd

Both the Nazis and the Communists used to accuse people of being homosexual to discredit them, as a propaganda tool. So JPII's experience had him inclined to view people accused of homosexuality as victims of a hideous smear campaign. How times have changed -- now telling people you're a homosexual is a sign of moral superiority. / sarcasm


21 posted on 09/15/2005 8:06:11 AM PDT by justanotherfreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: kjenerette

...reading file.


22 posted on 09/15/2005 8:49:55 AM PDT by Van Jenerette (Our Republic...If We Can Keep It!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

They're also going to close the barn doors now that all the horses have escaped.


23 posted on 09/15/2005 9:31:35 AM PDT by NewJerseyJoe (Rat mantra: "Facts are meaningless! You can use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: newzjunkey
Badly thought out policy. The seminaries' problem is not that they are attracting homosexuals but that they're attracting pedophiles ...

My impression is that the Catholic church is suffering from a pederast priest problem. Most victims are pubescent males. There may indeed be some small percentage of victims who are pre-pubescent, but the overwhelming majority are not prebies (prepubies?).

2359 Homosexual persons are called to chastity...

We are told by the homophiles that homosexuals, because they are born that way, cannot (or should not) change. Just as alcoholics should not frequent bars, pederast priests should not be involved with oversight of young males. Even the Boy Scouts understand this.

24 posted on 09/15/2005 10:49:38 AM PDT by nonsporting
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: JohnnyZ

Thanks for the further information.


25 posted on 09/15/2005 12:12:42 PM PDT by aimhigh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: aimhigh

No a homo-promo did not write this. It is the official text of the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Have a little respect.


26 posted on 09/15/2005 10:11:05 PM PDT by The Cuban
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Mount Athos

Well said.

I do not believe that not allowing a homosexual into the priesthood is unjust. As you said, you do not have a right to be a priest, it is a privelage that should be given to those most Holy and whose lives and souls closely mirror that of Christ's.

What do people want from the catholic church? They are trying to solve the problems that are currently going on in the Church. They have admonished the Bishop's responsible for the cover-ups, and now they are trying to weed out potential victimizer's.

Let us step back and look at the situation at hand. The children being assaulted are mostly boy's(teenage), and they are being assaulted by the priest's not the nun's. There is a real problem in the clergy when it comes to those with homosexual tendencies be it latent or outright.

You cannot argue that "celibacy" is the root cause of the assault's because as I said, the victim's are boy's assaulted by men, not girl's assaulted by men.


27 posted on 09/16/2005 6:43:29 AM PDT by Mrs. Frogjerk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

a newspaper with a significant number of homosexuals in their employ, the NYT, objects to the church purging homosexuals from the priesthood.


No wonder that homosexual denomination is advertising so much on TV.


Who wants to bet the "source" for the NYT is another homosexual.


28 posted on 09/16/2005 6:46:29 AM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: newzjunkey

the pedophiles WERE homosexuals.

In the priesthood, the homosexuals ARE the pedophiles.

Homosexuals do not belong in the priesthood in ANY capacity.


29 posted on 09/16/2005 6:48:45 AM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham; nickcarraway; sandyeggo; Siobhan; Lady In Blue; NYer; american colleen; Pyro7480; ...
Catholic Discussion Ping!

Please notify me via FReepmail if you would like to be added to or taken off the Catholic Discussion Ping List.

30 posted on 09/16/2005 6:52:22 AM PDT by Salvation (†With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham
for once the NYT did not have this story first!

Vatican to Start U.S. Seminary Evaluations
Apostolic Seminary Visitation To Begin This Fall
U.S. Bishops to Begin Inspecting Seminaries
Prelate Says Gays Shouldn't Be Ordained
American overseeing Vatican evaluation of US seminaries says gays should not be ordained

Vatican to Check U.S. Seminaries on Gay Presence

31 posted on 09/16/2005 6:54:06 AM PDT by Salvation (†With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham; Salvation

As Cardinal, Benedict had already started pushing for this, as well as for a cleanup of the idiocy at some of the "Catholic" universities. Good News!


32 posted on 09/16/2005 6:58:54 AM PDT by pissant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aimhigh

The problem here is the ambiguity of the word "homosexual." The Church teaches that homosexual acts ar alwsys immoral, but that a homosexual personality tendency is a disorder which leads to morally dangerous temptations, which the homosexual is morally obliged to reject.

Thus, people with a same-sex orientation deserve respect (just like people who struggle with any temptation); but they who PRACTICE perverted sex (the key word in the scripture quote) are condemned.


33 posted on 09/16/2005 7:01:17 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (As always, striving for accuracy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: numberonepal
This is no "Inquisition." It's a matter of pastoral sensitivity toward people who are striving for holiness, as I would hope any candidate for the priesthood would be.

Everyone struggles with sin. A "struggler" could be one who struggled with homosexuality, or the more typical kinds of lust, or alcoholism, or any other moral difficulty. It DOES include everybody: even Jesus was "tempted in every way that we are" and is even said to have "suffered" from it (See 2 Corinthians 1:3-5.)

I guess it could be argued that since we're all strugglers, then men who struggle with homosexual tendencies shouldn't be excluded from consideration as potential priests, any more than any other man who struggles with "commonplace" lust, or alcohol (the Venerable Charles de Foucauld comes to mind on both counts) or any other besetting weakness.

On the other hand, the priesthood is a confraternity of men who often live together in close circumstances: in the seminary, for sure; in the monastery if they are in religious orders; and even in the rectory, where priests may live together in 2's or 3's or more, for years on end. This would present a life-long exposure to temptation, and thus (severe) suffering and (severe) moral risk, for a man who experienced acute emotional and sexual urges toward other men.

In all justice, you don't put a same-sex oriented man in a seminary, or an alcoholic in a brewery, or a carb-addict (like me) in a retail Krispy Kreme.

Not if you love him, respect him, and care for his soul's salvation.
34 posted on 09/16/2005 7:11:03 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (As always, striving for accuracy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

I think this pope sees homosexuality as a BEHAVIROR CHOICE and the PC police have been pushing the propaganda lie that homosexuality is "born" via some gene. (no science just propaganda BS)

Seems to be that he has cut through the spin is is looking to a real solution. The fact he is looking should also discourage homosexual advocates from looking to the priesthood as a job.


35 posted on 09/16/2005 7:14:58 AM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

WOOHOOO!!! Go get 'em, Benedict!


36 posted on 09/16/2005 7:21:57 AM PDT by al_c
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: newzjunkey
Badly thought out policy. The seminaries' problem is not that they are attracting homosexuals but that they're attracting pedophiles just like coaching and teaching jobs tend to do.

"and for faculty members who dissent from church teaching" covers a broad spectrum of behavior.

37 posted on 09/16/2005 7:23:19 AM PDT by al_c
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

All good points, but apparently you missed the humor in my post.


38 posted on 09/16/2005 7:24:00 AM PDT by numberonepal (Don't Even Think About Treading On Me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: newzjunkey
you are incorrect. homosexuality is the problem, NOT pedophilia. have you read this book?


39 posted on 09/16/2005 7:28:03 AM PDT by xsmommy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham
From the CCC:
2359 Homosexual persons are called to chastity

This is precisely the issue. A person who has engaged in homosexual practices, which may not include a physical act with another person, is unfit for Public Ministry because they did not make the mundane calling of celibacy with respect to people of the same sex.

To turn it around, a womanizer would also be a unwise choice as a priest, as the risk to begin womanizing again would be too great! It is irrelevant that they may now repudiate that lifestyle which is just as sinful as any other deviant lifestyle, the fact remains that the ex-womanizer would be at risk to take a job as a public minister of God.

Most pedophilia cases were actually cases of pedastry, not actual pedophilia, and pedastry falls into the modern homosexual lifestyle, as was mentioned earlier. It is correct to say homosexuals are not pedophiles, per se, even though pedophiles may be homosexuals. However, many homosexuals do seek out younger males, just as older men and women like to meet younger members of the opposite sex.

It is also abuse when a Priest has having sex with a vulnerable woman from his Parish, or when a Doctor would have sex with patients. The betrayal of a sacred trust is what is at stake here.
40 posted on 09/16/2005 7:52:08 AM PDT by Dominick ("Freedom consists not in doing what we like, but in having the right to do what we ought." - JP II)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham
"You could have somebody who's been in the seminary for five or six years and is planning to be ordained and the rector knows they're a homosexual," said Father Reese, now a visiting scholar at Santa Clara University in California. "What are they going to do, throw them out?

Yes.

41 posted on 09/16/2005 7:54:40 AM PDT by frogjerk (LIBERALISM - Being miserable for no good reason)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

bttt


42 posted on 09/16/2005 8:19:30 AM PDT by trisham (Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham
Next they are going to say that this will worsen the shortage of priests. Even if that were true, I'd be happy to drive 50 miles to mass every Sunday, knowing that the Church has been cleansed of this evil filth.

I also believe that absent the homosexual culture in the seminaries, many good men will return to the ranks of the priesthood.
43 posted on 09/16/2005 8:30:55 AM PDT by ElkGroveDan (I'm sick and tired of being sick and tired!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dominick
However, many homosexuals do seek out younger males,

Absolutely. If you have the stomach for it, flip through one of their magazines or go to one of their websites. Their ENTIRE filthy culture centers around targeting youth and innocence.

44 posted on 09/16/2005 8:33:24 AM PDT by ElkGroveDan (I'm sick and tired of being sick and tired!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: xsmommy

"Goodbye, Good Men"

I mentioned this book to a priest the other day and he agreed with it. I was surprised at how matter-of-factly he stated it. He was ordained in 1990.

The 'sex-abuse' problem won't be solved till they sweep out the seminaries...


45 posted on 09/16/2005 8:58:26 AM PDT by CatQuilt (GLSEN is evil)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: newzjunkey
The issue of gay seminarians and priests has been in the spotlight because a study commissioned by the church found last year that about 80 percent of the young people victimized by priests were boys.

Can you read?

46 posted on 09/16/2005 9:00:30 AM PDT by CatQuilt (GLSEN is evil)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham
I grew up Catholic. One thing I've debated with my father since Santorums comments is this: I disagree with Santorum. It was not "liberalism" that caused the Catholic church's problems. In fact, I'd say kinda the opposite. Here's my take: agree or disagree?

Most priests I know are at least 70 or 80 years old. Sure some are younger, but the MAJORITY of priests today, I'd say are old. Back when they joined the priesthood, homosexuality was a social NO NO. Your options in the 50s and before were to get married or become a priest. Therefore MANY closeted homosexuals went into priesthood because they could "hide" their sexuality.

Thing is, priests take the vow of chastity. Doesn't matter if they are hetero or homosexual, priests shouldn't be having sex - PERIOD. That is the vow they took.

Anyhow, now that being gay is more accepted today, I don't see it being as big of an issue.

And I think where the church messed up was letting these men stay in the priesthood. They broke their vows. PERIOD.
47 posted on 09/16/2005 9:11:25 AM PDT by mosquitobite (What we permit, we promote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CatQuilt

exactly. it is as simple as that. not only will the sex abuse problem be solved, but the priest shortage will miraculously be solved also.


48 posted on 09/16/2005 9:13:23 AM PDT by xsmommy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: mosquitobite
It was not "liberalism" that caused the Catholic church's problems

you are absolutely incorrect. read the book. "Goodbye, Good Men." period.

49 posted on 09/16/2005 9:14:37 AM PDT by xsmommy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: newzjunkey

Uh, most of the cases involved 15 and 16 year olds. That's not pedophilia. It is well documented that many seminaries are dominated by homosexuals. I had many "Father Liberaces" at my high school in my youth.


50 posted on 09/16/2005 9:16:02 AM PDT by Clemenza (What's Puzzling You is Just the Nature of My Game)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-89 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson