Cardinal's words on gay priests surprise scholars

The Philadelphia Inquirer ^ | Fri, May. 03, 2002 | JIM REMSEN

[SkyPilot]

It was over the top.

My apologies.

[ThomasMore]

Cardinal Anthony M. Bevilacqua's sweeping rejection of gay men becoming priests

He da man!!!

[ThomasMore]

The Rev. Richard McBrien, a theology professor at the University of Notre Dame and a former president of the Catholic Theological Society of America, said Cardinal Bevilacqua's outlook seemed to be based on "a fundamentalistic interpretation of Scripture" that "no one with any serious scholarly credentials in the field of biblical studies" shared.

This a$$hole, pardon my french, needs to be defrocked and excommunicated. I personally don't give rat's spit for what McBrien has to say. He's been a heretic on the scale of Arius ever since I've known of him. He's a disgrace to the roman collar and a near occassion of sin to unsuspecting Catholics. I pray for his repentance and his removal and for forgiveness for the anger his name invokes in me.

[ThomasMore]

For the sake of Cardinal Bevilacqua ping...

He is one of the few cardinals we have whose fidelity to the Magisterium is well known.

[american colleen]

I don't care if homosexuals or pedophiles or 'horny heterosexuals who simply found the altar-boy handy' did .1% or 99.9% of the molestations -- I want to hear the Church talk about what they're going to do with 100% of the molesters. All the rest of it is a dodge.

So, you don't believe priests molest girls, or you're ok with that?

About "all the rest of it is a dodge" - so, we shouldn't be proactive? Our only problem is the priests we know are molesters? That is just plain one dimentional thinking. First off, all known molesters names are now in the hands of the law. They will decide the fate of those molesters, not the Catholic Church. Second, what about the possiblility of molesters coming up from the seminaries and their effect on the future of children? Shouldn't we address that problem and go to the root cause?

Now, due to the GREATLY OVERWHELMING number of young male victims, due to the number of priests dying of AIDS (much higher than the general population) what does that lead you to believe? That is evidence that, guess what? Most of the abusing, evil priests are HOMOSEXUALS.

Where are all the abused girls? Not that it doesn't happen, but where are all the abused girls???

Time for you to read "Goodbye! Good Men" - but I bet you won't.

[saradippity]

However,Clintonian usage of the word "celibate"is the very thing that has permitted rampant homosexual priests to continue on in their life style.They cleverly say that celibacy means marriage and they are not married and they can't marry and since they have slyly manaaged to avoid speaking from the pulpit about sins of the flesh(to be more pastoral)wink,wink,they are keeping their vows. That is how they rationalize giving communion to "homosexual couples"too. And,that is why making any changes in the requirement right now would be disastrous. This is why I shudder every time they talk about "love". It is just to reprogram people into an acceptance of their "special love".

I have written letters asking that they talk about "agape",which is what Jesus Christ had for us and what the Father had for us and what we are to have for one another. I believe the Bible used love to mean that transcendent love of humanity as well as brotherly love.The Greeks had several words for it,when the scriptures speak of love they are not talking about "eros",but in our feel good saturated society,every homily about love usually just affirms for the "sinner" a scriptural affirmation of the goodness of "eros" and their own little loving relationship,cause few in our dumbed down,government educated populace know the difference.

I am not dismissive of "eros",it has a place in many of our lives,but it should never be primary.

[ThomasMore]

a homosexual celibate does not have any "bad sexual habits."

YET!

[american colleen]

I chuckle at those who say we should use "psychological testing" to screen out homosexuals, when some of those same posters, on another thread, said it was modern psychology which has gotten us into the current mess.

Ironic, isn't it? However, I do think that the pyschology practiced by Fr. Groeschel is a bit different than say the psychology practiced by Hans Kung.

[american colleen]

The Rev. Richard McBrien, a theology professor at the University of Notre Dame and a former president of the Catholic Theological Society of America, ...

And you forgot to mention a graduate of St. John's Seminary in Brighton, Massachusetts (1962) - among the alumni are Geoghan and Shanley.

[Hibernius Druid]

Bevilacqua's strange theology is contradicted by Cardinal Francis George of Chicago

I understand Francis Cardinal George is in charge of the largest seminary in the United States, located northwest of Chicago in the town of Mundelein.

Among local residents this multi-diocesan seminary has the reputation of having a quite large and conspicuously gay seminarian population. Do you or any other Freepers have any information on the seminary at Mundelein?

[RobbyS]

Careful you are not being tainted by egalitarianism. The clergy is a higher order. One can says that being a noncom is just as good as being an officer, but officers have greater rights than noncoms. Likewise a priest has more rights than a lay brother.What do ypu think ordination means? Clericalism is an abuse of authority, and it tendss to come when the clergy identify with the ruling orders in secular society rather than their brothers in Christ. Since in our society the majority of the ruling elite are liberal, that is the the bishops have got in trouble by trying to conform with the thinking of liberal theologians and academics. Law thinks he is "hot s...." because he was on the right side of the civil rights movement. Despite his reputation as a conservative, he has tried to hard to accomodate people who will always hate the Catholic Church until the Church becomes as docile as the Episcopal Church.

[RobbyS]

McBrien reminds me of the liberal abbes such as Sieyes who played such a great role in the French Revolution...on the wrong side.

[american colleen]

There was quite a bit of discussion on Mundelein in Goodbye! Good Men. Sounds like Mundelein is/was sort of a "den of iniquity".

"Goodbye! Good Men"

[saradippity]

I think as do most Catholics on these threads,that all sexual abuses either sex,should be treated the same.i.e.If a priest rapes a boy or a girl he should pay the same penalty.

That said,I think we need to demand statistics that are accurate. Then as in any reasonable organization its time for risk assessment. If it turns out that 98% are man-boy abuses,then an analysis needs to be made.There are statistics of significance or deviation from the norm,that can be applied. If the abusers are found to be homosexual {and they will be found to be IMHO)then it means that the Church needs to determine objective criteria,act to remove them from the priesthood and take great pains to not admit them to the seminaries.

Great care will need to be taken to assure that a priest who inappropriately touched someone over their clothing is not lumped in with a sodomizer when doing risk assessments.For instance, Cardinal Mahoney's well orchestrated accuser should not be used to swell the statistics of man-woman abuse. Does anyone know how Cardinal Mahoney is?

[american colleen]

I just did a search on the "LATimes" and only found info from May 1 that said he'd be in the hospital a few days more and is recovering.

[Ohioan]

I congratulate any Catholic friends, who may be under Cardinal Bevilacqua jurisdiction. In these times, when so many are issuing what seem to this outsider to be very confused statements, the Cardinal appears to have a clear grasp of what is right.

Frankly, is there anything in Catholic doctrine, which would suggest that a Priest who does not really understand the most basic forces that drive his flock, would be competent to serve as a Priest? Most of my Catholic friends are quite down to earth, family oriented people, to whom the traditional mating quest is a fundamental part of what they see for their own children. Even apart from the compelling moral issue, how could a Priest with deviant orientation be expected to represent the Church's role in guiding those children's spiritual development?

Am I, a non-Catholic, missing something; or is the Cardinal being assailed by people who have some sort of sick axe to grind?

William Flax Return Of The Gods Web Site

[JoshGray]

No, you shouldn't be "proactive" while dodging the real issue. The real issue is child-molesting priests, not chaste homosexual priests or priests who physically "counsel" distraught wives.

CHILD abusers.

all known molesters names are now in the hands of the law

Wanna buy a bridge in Brooklyn?

You heard the Cardinals: serial and notorious, i.e. more than one victim and the public has to know about it, and doing a female while drunk just ain't that big a deal, goshdarnit. No, I don't believe "all known" abusers names have been turned over because they waved a shiny object in front of certain people and it suddenly became a need to "purge all the homosexuals!"

And yes, I am concerned about the future and the priests coming out of the seminaries: where's my assurance that their victims aren't going to be paid off while they get shuffled from parish to parish? WHERE THE HELL IS THAT ASSURANCE? I'm not Catholic; I don't give a rat's ass who gets ordained and who gets defrocked -- WHEN ARE THEY GOING TO DEAL WITH THE CRIMINALS?

Where are all the abused girls?

Paid-off and/or hiding in seminaries for being evil sluts and misleading those poor defenseless priests.

I'm sure I don't need to tell you that a teenage girl who enters into what she thinks is a consensual relationship with a man is going to have a lot easier time with her future sexuality than a teenage boy who does the same.

I don't know where they are -- they exist and I want to know that they won't in the future.

Now, if you Catholics want to get rid of homosexuals AFTER ASSURING ME THAT FUTURE CHILD MOLESTATIONS WON'T BE HIDDEN AND PAID OFF, then fine. Have at 'em. Ban those dog-named-Spot owners too, for all I care.

DEAL WITH THE CRIMINALS NOW AND IN THE FUTURE.

[SuziQ]

Cardinal Anthony M. Bevilacqua's sweeping rejection of gay men becoming priests diverges from mainstream thinking by U.S. Catholic theologians and policymakers, a range of church scholars said in interviews this week.

GOOD for Cardinal Bevilacqua! Those theologians and policy makers are part of the reason for the problems we're having right now. For the last forty years they've blurred the lines around the teachings of the Church so much that you can hardly get the same answer from two or three different priests these days when you ask a question about a particular teaching. Of course, some priests don't even THINK about looking it up in the Catechism, or suggesting that any Catholic can do that for themselves!

[ELS]

Thanks for posting a link to the transcript of last Sunday's Meet the Press.

[JoshGray]

I think as do most Catholics on these threads,that all sexual abuses either sex,should be treated the same

I would like to think so, but I don't. I believe some people, both lay and clergy, would be satisfied with whatever decrease in abuse they get from banning known homosexuals from the priesthood.

"95%" "98%" were teenage boys -- ban homosexuals! I'm not hearing anything about the 2-5% that aren't teenage boys -- a stat I'm not quite believing anyway simply because of the number of pre-teen boys we're hearing about.

I'm not hearing anything about future molestors, and they will exist even if all the known homosexuals are gone. "Serial and notorious" -- what the heck does that mean? 5? 6? More than one per parish? The victim doesn't accept the pay-off and goes to the press?

No more paying off victims, no more hiding the accused, and law-enforcement investigates accusations, not the Church.

Give me that and you can go ahead and discuss and set whatever internal policies you want.