Posted on 05/18/2011 7:49:52 AM PDT by Grunthor
It’s the white collars...yeah...that’s it...the white collars...oh...and the sun got in their eyes...yeah...that’s it.
Aren't we seeing history repeat itself here? I stopped reading right after this sentence, scratched my head and wondered why the Roman Catholic bishops commissioned anybody to tell them what caused the scandal. This really bothers me because it suggests that after this saga has dragged on intermittently for almost a decade with hundreds if not thousands of cases, they still don't know why this disaster was visited on the Church.
Isn't this a repetition of the worldly, nonspiritual reasoning which caused this problem to snowball in the first place? Wasn't it the clueless bishops who swallowed hook, line and sinker the modern psychobabble handed down by so called "experts" that the molesters and perverts could be counseled, cured and rehabilitated by shrinks and other practitioners of pseudo-medical cures? Wasn't it this that led them to place these men back in ministry after their ticket had been punched by the appropriate rehab center? Yet they're still running after these secular "experts" and asking "duh.........what went wrong??"
You went wrong, you clueless apparatchiks!! When are you going to get it?? This scandal was caused principally by one thing and one thing only and you are the culprits. It was caused by the wholesale failure of Catholic bishops and seminary rectors to follow the directives of their own Church about who may be admitted to seminaries and ordained to the priesthood. You were warned repeatedly.........homosexuality is disordered and men who suffer from this disorder should not be ordained!!
Yet here you are, still asking for more studies, still drinking in the Kool-Aid provided by "experts", still hanging on their every word and swallowing their shtick uncritically.
What a total waste of money!
And rain doesn’t make the crops grow.
I find it amazing that the report avoids saying what is obvious when you read the report. It alarms me that homosexuality has found such an inroad that speaking any truth about it is feared.
True pedophiles are attracted to children who have not yet reached puberty. They are less likely to be attracted excusively to one sex. The majority of clergy who committed abuse abused boys.
I don’t want to read bull hockey like the only reason there were more male victims is because of the easier access to males. So does that mean our sexuality is not fixed in childhood as so many liberals claim. Or does it support their claim that sexuality is fluid ? Yes contradiction I know but we are speaking of libs.
Bottom line the majority of victims were not very young children and they were male. Which implies those who abused them were sexually attracted to preteen and teen age males. What group of people are attracted to othe males? Homosexuals. QED.
I think your viewpoint on this situation sounds extremely reasonable. I also think homosexuals used the ministry as a convenient place to go in which to avoid questions of their sexuality, and once there some gave into even more deviant temptations which presented themselves. Bishops failed terribly in their response and showed a miserable understanding of the causes and their own duties to their flock. I wonder though whether there wasn’t, in some cases, more than mere institutional defensiveness in their machinations. I can think of one bishop that protected abusive priests who was himself involved in a pretty nasty homosexual scandal. Maybe some were protecting people they sympathized with themselves? But, I will also concede I may be way off-base with that myself.
The report will not spell it out. But that poor seminary training was specifically the acceptance of the lies of the sexual revolution and the liberation of sexual morality from the teachings of the Church.
I agree with you. To be sure, the monosexual environment of the seminary is likely to turn the boy’s sexuality toward other boys and to older males. Which is why the Church seems to have abandoned the minor seminaries. Arew they saying.however, that the seminaries were likeprisons and sailing ships, where copped up men turned to other men to get their jollies from sexual objects of second choice? One theory I haqve seen in evidence is that the disappearnce of nuns from the scene removed monitors who could be counted on to keep father from hitting on the young ones? Or the emptying of the rectories after VII left just one or two priests with inadequate supervision?
I agree with you. To be sure, the monosexual environment of the seminary is likely to turn the boy’s sexuality toward other boys and to older males. Which is why the Church seems to have abandoned the minor seminaries. Arew they saying.however, that the seminaries were likeprisons and sailing ships, where copped up men turned to other men to get their jollies from sexual objects of second choice? One theory I haqve seen in evidence is that the disappearnce of nuns from the scene removed monitors who could be counted on to keep father from hitting on the young ones? Or the emptying of the rectories after VII left just one or two priests with inadequate supervision?
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.