Cardinal Rodriguez’s role

48 comments

• Ip:comment_date_gmt>
  Too bad the DMN couldn’t handle this news reporting without all the hoopla and breathless excitement.  It makes it seem less objective when it is sensationalized.  I guess they are in business to sell papers though.

• Technically, all cardinals are eligible for the papacy, and those thought most likely candidates are seldom elected. 

  The only conclusion I can come to from reading these articles is that these men simply don’t understand the nature of children—their vulnerability even in their teen years, and their difficulty with rejecting an authority figure even when they suspect what the authority figure is proposing might be wrong.  To prey upon that innocence is unconscionable.  And yet the Pope does nothing to prevent such acts.  I find that incomprehensible given his fondness for young people that he has once again demonstrated in Switzerland.  It totally undermines his credibility for me.  When I see pictures of him interacting with young people, I’m filled with disgust and revulsion.  Even criminals in prison instinctively know this is a terrible wrong.  How can he be so indifferent?  And how do I hold onto respect for him when he is?  As more evidence that he knew comes to light, this problem grows more significant for me.

  He is the leader of the Church founded by Christ.  If there is a priest on earth who acts in personna Christi, it is him.  Yet he brings none of Christ’s compassion to the victims.  Of all the scandals we are witnessing, that is the greatest one for me.  And if I find that I can’t hold onto my faith in the midst of this scandal, it will largely be because of what I know about the papacy.

   

   

• What “hoopla and breathless excitement”? By saying that Cardinal Rodriguez is one of those most often mentioned as papabile? But that’s true. I mean, Dom could be correct and Rodriguez may not have a real strong chance, but there’s no question that in the past few years, whenever there has been speculation about who might fill JP2’s shoes, Rodriguez’s name has come up consistently. I remember not long ago talking to one or two of the guys working on the series, and they were mentioning how they’d checked with religion reporters and editors to see where Cdl. Rodriguez stood on the papabile front, and they (the reporters) were startled to get back from several sources who were in a position to know that Rodriguez is on the short list. Seriously, Google around on this topic, and you’ll find his name keeps popping up.

  Perhaps that speculation was ill-informed. In any case, Rodriguez is probably not on anybody’s list after today. Good.

• Carrie,  it isn’t true that “even criminals in prison *instinctively* know this is a terrible wrong.”  Many of them have been molested and that’s why they are so clear on the idea.  The Pope’s writing on the theology of the body is the best chance we have of really teaching people to cherish others and understand this damage. 

• Carrie,
  I understand your frustration. Keep in mind, though, that the Church has been through much worse, much, much worse, with popes, clergy, and religious living in open concubinage, fathering children, corrupt and greed-ridden (e.g., 13th century, the time of St. Francis of Assisi). But the Church survived, and will continue to survive. There was a reason the Reformers left the Church in the 15th & 16th centuries—the Church was littered with corruption. But there were the faithful who remained and would rather suffer with her and for her, and even die for her (look at St. Catherine of Siena), rather than abandon her in her hour of need.

  We follow Christ, our Head. Those who make up the Church here below are sinners. I was a schismatic for 11 years, and I am not interested in returning to that wilderness. I hope, with God’s grace, that I will remain with the Church, no matter how bad things get, believing in Christ’s promise that “the gates of hell will not prevail against it.”

• I’ll agree that some people are hoping for Rodriguez’s elevation, but in my experience that doesn’t come from people who are seasoned Vatican watchers.

  In any case, as you say, he who enters a conclave as pope seldom exits as one.

• Carrie, I feel for you because I’ve been where you are, and I fight hard not to despair amid new revelations. This has permanently altered my view of John Paul, who must shelter some blame for what has befallen us. I don’t for a second believe he has ever willed anything bad to happen to a child. But I believe he has willed away evils that he preferred not to face, and for that he must bear moral responsibility. He has apologized for the Inquisition, for the persecution of Jews and others, and all manner of evils the Church has wrought in the past … but has not had the courage to face up to one of the gravest evils the Church in the current era commits. There is no getting around that. I desperately wish it weren’t true, but it is. He is and will always be one of our greatest popes. But that doesn’t make him flawless.

  Nevertheless, don’t let the miserable example of our Church’s leadership in the current crisis drive you out of the Church. To do so is to accept the clericalism that seems to animate the hierarchy today (recall Abp. Chaput’s question to me, wondering why, if I didn’t trust the bishops to fix the situation, I would remain Catholic). The Church is so much more than the bishops and the clergy. For that matter, the clergy are so much more than the wicked and the faithless ones. If there were brave men and women in ages past who stood by the Church in spite of the corruption of the clergy—and there were, else we wouldn’t have the Church today—then I choose to stand with them, to guard this precious legacy for a better time that descendants of mine will only live to see as Catholics if I—if we—keep the faith. In fact, that’s why we should fight this corruption: to preserve the integrity of the faith for our children and their children.

• This quote from Rodriquez in the article says it all:

  “For me it would be a tragedy to reduce the role of a pastor to that of a cop. We are totally different, and I’d be prepared to go to jail rather than harm one of my priests,” he said at a 2002 news conference in Rome. “We must not forget that we are pastors, not agents of the FBI or CIA.”

  Note “WE ARE TOTALLY DIFFERENT”.  That’s the problem in a nutshell.  I think most bishops, and priests believe this.

  Carrie, don’t despair.  99% of the time I feel the same way you do.  In addition to all of the scandals uncovered, the most shocking thing to me is that a good portion of those in power believe in heterdoxy.  The Pope is responsible.  I think many in the curia feel the same way that Rodriquez feels so maybe the Pope doesn’t get all the proper information, or maybe he thinks it’s being handled.  Either way, by now, he should have concluded that something big was happening and gotten personally involved, if it is physically possible.  That’s how I see it.  But we have to hold on for the future.  We pretty much know how the Church will be in our lifetime.  But the seeds planted by the faithful may result in true reform after our lifetime.  That’s what we have to pray for anyway.

• This Cardinal shouldn’t be on anyone Father’s Day.  But the previous Sunday it had been half empty as well.  Not a good sign if it continues!

  The only thread I cling to as these revelations come out is my knowledge of the occult world.  The Catholic Church is being mocked so hideously in the occult community, that it has to be an indication She is the One True Church.  Otherwise Her enemies would not be spending all that energy trying to defeat Her.  That’s what I keep coming back to, and some days it’s the only thing that reconnects me with God.

  The scandals would be easier to cope with if they were not following on nearly half a century of heresy in the ranks, that has been ignored by the Pope.  I’ve just this morning looked at yet another community of nuns on the web teaching from occult material.

• The Cardinal is not willing to “harm one of my priests”.  Does he think enablling them to commit grave sins with children is not harmful?  If his statement were a reflection of Christian charity, it would be his explanation for why he turned over his priest to legal authority…so as not to harm them by allowing them to continue in a life of sin.  Enabling sin is harmful.  And a Cardinal, of all people, should know that! 

• Did anyone look into why the Prosecutors or Police are not pursuing this matter with more dilligence. The DMN has rightly focused on abusing Priests and the Bishops who shuffle them from country to country. However, they are strangely silent on role of Prosecutors or Police who at the very least where asleep at the wheel.

  That’s a good question. Many of us know of “good Catholic” cops who have kept things quiet and let things slide out of deference to the bishop. I can even tell you from personal experience of a newspaper executive (not at the DMN) who killed an investigation I was pursuing about abuser priests back before the scandal broke big, at the personal request of the bishop. There is complicity to spare here. But I don’t see how that gets those most responsible for this evil—the hierarchy and heads of religious orders—off the hook.

  I guess it is more simple for you to just blame the church and priests then have to focus on other causes of this problem. Besides, here in Belt-Buckle of the Bible Belt nothing plays beating all Catholics wether they are guilty or not.

  Who’s beating “all Catholics”? Where is the Bible Belt anti-Catholic persecution you claim to see? I live here too, and I don’t see it. If you believe that there are lots of Protestants here who think poorly of the Catholic Church and its claims, well, yeah. That’s like saying there are Catholics in Palermo who think poorly of the Baptist Church and its claims. But I have seen no evidence of Catholic-bashing in this community. You are crying wolf. And as I’ve said before, your insistence that the only reason the DMN has done this series is to pander to anti-Catholic bigotry is as pitiful as it is baseless.

  P.S.: THE GLOVES HAVE COME OFF!!

  P.S. Woo.

• You gotta admit that this Cardinal has inherited more than his share of chutzpah from the Judaeo- side of the Judaeo-CHristian tradition.

  His responsibility as a citizen, let alone as a Churchman, is to seek justice—-without which (as we are continually reminded) there will NEVER be peace.

• Greetings,

  I totally disagree the Pope is to blame for this. To me thatwork, research and the ability to realize that this crime is not the result of one cause but of many which need to be seen. As for Anti-Catholic examples in this area I have emailed him many examples which he has chosen to ignore or does not think qualifies as Anti-Catholic bias. Fr. Andrew Greeley, a man who rarely says much I agree with, said when I asked him why Catholic leaders refuse to speak out about Anti-Catholicism in this society, “The reason they do not speak out is because they do not want to make trouble.” Perhaps that is the reason why many of you refuse to acknowledge the existence of Anti-Catholicism in this society and would literally need the KKK burning a cross outside your parish before you saw a problem. I prefer to react before it comes to that. 

• Jonathan, I don’t respond to your e-mails because you have a semi-hysterical one-note agenda that has very little to do with the actual work of journalism. All journalists hear from folks like you all the time, on various issues. From your e-mails, I get the impression that you could have a gaggle of sozzled cardinals spanking the bare bottoms of altar boys on your back patio, and you’d be on the front porch screaming bloody murder about the Protestants down the street to avoid having to go back there and take care of the problem.

• Would someone respond to the following comment
  Why is it that the names of the Catholic cops or Judges who obstructed justice never make it to paper. What about the Protestant, Jewish or various other law enforcement agencies that basically sat on their buts while this was going on. Does this make the paper? Of course not! It is simpler to just focus on the abuses that the church leaders or priests have done then to look at the whole picture of what lead to this. Sure, this account sell papers and gets people aware of abuses in the church but not of much else. That would involve work, research and the ability to realize that this crime is not the result of one cause but of many which need to be seen. You need to look at the whole picture not just one piece of it I you are to fight abuses.

• Jonathan,

  I am not sure I am following your reasoning. Are you saying that the media is to blame for the actions of our faulty clergy?

• “I am not sure I am following your reasoning. Are you saying that the media is to blame for the actions of our faulty clergy?” No the media is not responsible for our faulty clergy. You also have to talk about the names of the Catholic cops or Judges who obstructed justice never make it to paper. What about the Protestant, Jewish or various other law enforcement agencies that basically sat on their buts while this was going on. Does this make the paper? Of course not!  This would make people aware that there are more people who through their neglegience allowed this to happen than just the priests, or bishops.

• I thought Jonathan was saying that the media uses a microscope when it comes to scrutinizing the RC Church, but is non-plussed at the failings of other organizations and individuals, like the criminal justice system. 

  That’s a fair point, but unfortunately, it doesn’t do much to explain the failings of many of those in authority in the Church. 

  Even so, I’d like to see the psychiatric establishment get a little of the probing and roasting that the Church has been submitted to over the last couple of years.  It’s not like their hands are clean, or are they presumed to have had children’s interests at heart all along?

• I see, so you want to show that others could have helped, but did not. Fair enough, but they are not the proximate cause the scandal. The bishops and priests are the ones who have the most blame.

  The the homosexual scandal is just the symptom of a greater problem in the Church. The real issue is shown in this thread. It is clericalism and uncecked dissent and heresy.

• In some cases they may be the proximate cause of the scandal and others they may not. For instance, why didn’t the Austalian authorities try to warn people in Somoa about this “Father Klep.” Or why didn’t there Ambassador or someone try to seek a treaty with Samoa to extradiate this pervert. This needs to be asked.

• Why did not the bishops, or Rome, do more to weed out those in charge of seminaries from taking homosexuals? Why have the bishops not cracked down on dissent? Why have the bishops not done more to teach the faith? These measures would have helped keep active homosexuals out of the priesthood and given comfort to others who wanted to reform the Church.

  Secular authorities have always given deference to the Church authorities and in the past I would have agreed that was a good idea. Today, to correct the many problems facing the Church we need to focus accountability on the Church leaders.

• “Secular authorities have always given deference to the Church authorities and in the past I would have agreed that was a good idea.” You sure about that?
  History shows the deference we have received has been rare. Take a look at Mexico during its history it had a violent war against anyone who was Catholic. It is called the Cristero War between the people who were loyal to the church and the Secularists of the then President Calles. Many people lost their lives just for being Catholic and many more where forced across the border.  Do you think this country gave the same defference to Catholics. In Texas there was a time when Priests where rountinely tarred and feathered and other Catholics murdered for just being Catholic. Catholics literally had to fight for their faith. Justice Thomas wrote an article in the LA Times which said the modern doctrine of Seperation of Church and State is rooted in Anti-Catholic bigotry. Based on this I must conclude that any deference given was seldom and that some of these prosecutors and cops could have gone after them if they did not sit on their buts.

• I am referring to modern America. Yes, deference has been given many times. There has always been anti Catholicism and always will bigotry. Are you telling me arch bishops and bishops have not been treated with deference in modern times in the USA? Perhaps not in every single circumstance, but on average, yes they have.

  Your argument is a bit circular anayway. First you claim the media should not focus so much on the Church hierarchy because all these others secular folks are to blame because they gave the Church a pass, and then you claim they are anti Cathloic and gave no deference to the hierarchy. Which is it?

  In the end, if you want less anti Catholic bigotry, then demand the bishops act like Catholics. If they do, then our society will see a Christ like witness and be more open to the faith.

• I am sympathetic to Jonathan’s concerns, BUT, we should not forget that it is the CHURCH who is supposed to be the Light of the World!  How can we expect cops, journalists, prosecutors, etc. to do their part when the Church fails to do hers?

  What about all the brother priests who had to know what was going on, but failed to turn their buddies in?  What about all the lay people who knew, but did nothing?

  Jonathan, don’t you think that people in all these other professions would have been more likely to do their part if the bishops and priests and lay people had done theirs?

• These priests should be held to account Maddog. Yes I think they would have done their jobs even when corruption existed in the church. Not all of these people care a lick about what the church says or does, they just would not move unless the evidence is staring them in the face. That is why you also need to demand that they do their jobs with as much zeal as you do the Bishops and Priests do theirs. That will curb the abuse. Some of the countries where this occured do not have a great relationship with the church and would use it as an excuse to crack down. The problem some of the law enforcement people are just as lazy as this Cardinal from Honduras. This can help no one and must be told.

• Hardhead, 

  “Why did not the bishops, or Rome, do more to weed out those in charge of seminaries from taking homosexuals? “

  That statement is not helpful (to say the least).  I’ve known many, many gay priests that were living chaste honorable lives.  They’ve done wondrous things and ministered to thousands.  We need to weed out predators, both heterosexual and homosexual.  (Incidentally statistically there is a much higher rate of heterosexual pedophilia than homosexual)

  I hope you meant to say predatory or active homosexuals.  Then I would agree and add the caveat of active heterosexuals as well.  If its a blanket statement against all gay priests, chaste or otherwise, then I disagree completely.

• (Incidentally statistically there is a much higher rate of heterosexual pedophilia than homosexual)

  That may be true in the wider context, but that vast majority of abuse in the Scandal was homosexual men with teen boys. And that’s not pedophilia (pedophilia is sex with pre-pubescents).

• Not disagreeing on your statement at all Mr Bettinelli.  However, the vast majority of lay ministers (youth ministers, music ministers, etc) that have been engaged in this behavior has been largely heterosexual.  (Sorry splitting hairs again)

  Getting rid of all the predators in ministry is something I’m completely behind.  Excluding chaste homosexuals from priesthood… not so much.  Just looking for some clarification from hardhead on his opinion

• Nope, I intended to say homosexual. They have no place in the priesthood, or certain occupations in general. 100% of the cases where teenage boys were abused were by a homosexual priests.

  Please do not spread the gay gospel that homosexuality is just a variation of normal, like having blue eyes. It is a disorder and the bishops who allowed these men, and in some cases recruited them, are to blame.

  As I said before, the real problem is dissent and heterodoxy. Those who advocate error or allow others to disobey Christ in the hierarchy are to blame. This dissent is the basis for so many crises in the Church today.

• (Incidentally statistically there is a much higher rate of heterosexual pedophilia than homosexual)

  That is the standard propaganda line from the homosexual lobby. Unfortunately, fields like psychology are filled with credentialed misfits that shape public opinion. Take a peek at the advice the bishops received from that group of so-called professionals. The same folks who tell us homosexual sex is natural, masturbation is good, transgender surgery is great, contraception is a must, euthanasia is mercy… I could go on and on.

  No sir, SSAD is an affliction that deserves treatment and compassion, but not something that should be embraced in the priesthood.

• Spreading the gay gospel?  First time I’ve been accused of that one.  So if you don’t want any gay priests, what’s your logic Hardhead, if your gay you’re probably going to molest?  What logic would you give to suggest that a chaste gay man can’t be a priest?

• Jonathan, my point is simply that it is up to the Christians of this world to set the standard, and for the leaders of the Christians (i.e., bishops & priests) to be exemplary in that.  Once we Christians get our house in order, the rest of society will pretty much fall into place.  That’s how the “economy of salvation” works.

  So let’s get the plank out of our own eye first, and then we’ll see clearly to get the speck out of our brothers’.

  If you think history demonstrates that I’m being naive in saying that the rest of society will pretty much fall into place, let me simply paraphrase someone famous (was it Chesterton?):  It’s not that Christianity has been tried and found wanting, it’s that Christianity has never been tried!

  The fact of the matter is that we can’t expect the rest of the world to act in a Christian manner when the Church herself isn’t!  So I think it’s pointless to boo hoo about how those who hate the Church are disingenuous in their reporting, or outright hostile to the Church.  We have a profound crisis in the Church, and the first step to fixing it is to be a saint.  It’s not to throw the real or perceived hipocracy of the Dallas Morning News back into their faces.

• “However, the vast majority of lay ministers (youth ministers, music ministers, etc) that have been engaged in this behavior has been largely heterosexual.”

  I must have nodded off during the Great Lay Minister Heterosexual Abuse Scandal.  BTW, where and when did that take place again?

• The Vatican said no homosexuals in the priesthood in 1961.

  First, I reject the term gay. That is a political word that carries a specific meaning. Those who suffer from SSAD can be chaste whith God’s grace and therapy and prayer, but that does not mean they should be priests.

  The priesthood is all male. Why should these homosexual men want to place themselves in an all male environment? Homosexuality is not normal. The Church has a right and an obligation to weed out any man that could be a problem.

• PMC

  In the late 80’s and early 90’s there was, in fact, widespread scandal among lay ministers.  Was it as publicized as this?  heck no.  But there were enough national stories to make it nearly impossible to work within the church.  Diocese were requesting that windows be installed in all offices, no one could be in the office after hours, etc.  Why?  Because their were men working in ministry that were sexually abusing minors (yes both sexes) . 

  If I need to look up resources on the scandal, I’ll add it to my list. (But I think there may be a long time church worker or two that remembers) I need to find out when the last time SSAD was actually a term that was used in an actual clinical sense.  (1940…?)

• “So if you don’t want any gay priests, what’s your logic Hardhead, if your gay you’re probably going to molest? “

  Yep, that is part of it. Homosexual men desire teenage boys in a way that is beyond disordered. I understand pop culture tries to desensitize us to the horror of homosexual acts, but I am buying it. They need help, compassion and prayers. They do not need to be priests.

• “I need to find out when the last time SSAD was actually a term that was used in an actual clinical sense.  (1940…?) “

  It is accepted as often the words like sin, heresy, hell, sacrifice and non serviam are used today. That is infrequently and it is a shame so many reject the truth. But, it does not matter if the majority reject the truth because it is still the truth.

• Incidentally the Marriott hotel I stayed at last week did actually have the homosexual lobby there.  And it was the most tastefully decorated lobby I’ve ever seen!! 

  As silly as that statement is, it doesn’t compare to what I’m supposed to respond to. (Heavy sigh)

  Hardhead, the one thing I’m glad about is that you are stating these things as opinion and not as fact.  So I’ll respect it.  Disagree with it.  (HUGELY disagree with it) But ok. 

  I am intrigued by the “Yep that’s part of it” statement.  There’s more? I would think that would be enough for you..

• Jaime,

  Have you heard of the Catholic group courage? Check out their website, then get back to me.

  Your joke about the lobby is telling. You are a product of pop culture.  Active homosexuality is seen as cutesy and chick instead of deadly and disordered.

  I realize your views are only uninformed opinions that come come mostly from secualr sources and I will pray you come to accept the truth.

• Jaime and Hardhead,

  I have to agree with Hardhead that admitting homosexuals to the priesthood is not acceptable.  They simply do NOT belong there.  Those who are already ordained (and who are living chaste lives) should not be disturbed—but NO MORE should be admitted, if at all possible.

  Jaime, I can tell you story after story about male choir directors and female choir members (all adults, of course.)  In about 95% of those cases, it was consensual.

  If you’re trying to tell us that heterosexual abuse is statistically more significant than homosexual abuse, you’re not exactly spreading news:  homosexuals are only 5% (at most) of the population.

  So let’s get to cases:  are you trying to tell us that hetero abuse is TWENTY TIMES homosexual abuse?

  I don’t think that claim will hold up, Jaime.

• OK

  First of all, my joke was not telling, cutesy or chic (notice proper spelling)  it was smart a**.  Biiiiiig difference Hardhead!! 

  I was all happy to be respectful of your opinion.  However I see that ain’t the case coming back towards me.  Here’s the fascinating thing about your ability to discuss an issue.  Instead of dealing with my statements or opinions directly, you take the cheap route by calling me uninformed and a product of pop culture.  I believe the proper response to such a well thought out argument would be the “I’m rubber your glue” retort. 

  The Simpsons, Fox News and Tivo are products of pop culture.  You have no idea, about my education, my experience or what sources I draw upon. 

  Here’s the uninformed pop truth my friend.  Homosexual priests (or any homosexuals) ain’t the issue.  The issue is the abuse of power.  Gay straight or stupid.  It doesn’t matter.  The issues of rape, molestation of minors or anyone is incredibly disordered.  ( In many ways that I don’t have the time or inclination to reference here)  But the mental disorders are based primarily on the needs of the dysfunctional person to assert their authority over someone else.  NOT on the sexual orientation of the individual. 

  Yes I realize my rather “uninformed” rant will go largely unheard.  But oh well.  You start talking truth Hardhead, here’s one you cannot avoid.  If you get rid of all homosexual priests, you will not get rid of the problem. 

  Oh and back off the cheap shots

• I’m wracking my brain and the only big lay minister scandal that comes to mind is the Christopher Reardon scandal of a couple of years ago. Pastor of the parish used to see Mr. Reardon with young boys and he did nothing. Found out later that the housekeeper used to find used condoms under the priest’s bed – turns out that the priest liked other men.

• Sorry Jaime, but I have to disagree with you. I’ve seen dozens of cases of abuse cataloged one after the other, and the vast majority of them weren’t about power. They were an adult homosexual male trying to live out his youthful sexual fantasy. It’s not about power (what’s in the head), it’s about something else, much lower.

  And the fact is that homosexuality, as a psychological disorder, is more inclined to leading those who suffer from it to inappropriate relationships and activity. Ask an honest homosexual about the reality of the gay “dating” scene. I had a friend who is an ex-gay. The mild stories would disgust you. That’s all I will say on that subject.

  Yes, some small percentage of the clergy sex abuse scandal was pedophilia, i.e. classic power over small children scenarios. But the vast majority were the homosexual equivalent of the adult male lusting over the Olsen twins, except for some reason the homosexual adult was less likely to restrain himself. (Once again, just look at the John Jay figures for age and sex of the victims.)

• You pose a great argument Mr Bettinelli.  I will refrain from arguing about “homosexuality: the psychological disorder” since this is not the forum or the topic.  (Also I’ve acquiesced on the pedophilia point)  However let me address the point of power v youthful sexual fantasy.  The Olsen twin example is a great one.  But power and youthful sexual fantasy are not mutually exclusive.  In fact they are very much intertwined.  When anyone is working with teens, they are in a position of power.  While many in the position may find a teen sexually attractive, acting out on it is at its core, a power issue.  When Priests, lay ministers, teachers etc.  “seduce” a minor, it is manipualtion from a position of authority. The adult who acts upon it is fundamentally lacking somewhere in his sexual maturity.  This is true for both hetero and homo sexuals.  While you may argue that its much more prevalent in homosexuals, I would disagree.  I need to do some research to back that up.  But for now I would leave it as opinion. 

  Again I would point out that the dating scene you refer to is a male homosexual dating scene and is starkly different in with homosexual females.  Objectively it begs the question “Is it a homosexual problem or is it a male problem?”

• [CDATA[

  ” But when you throw out statements like “weed out all the homosexuals in the seminary” and that homosexuals are most likely going to molest, I feel the need to respond.”

  Respond as you wish. Active homosexuality is a serious threat and problem in our society today. It is one of the few sins listed in Scripture that call out to heaven for justice.

  Homosexuality is being explained away as some variation of normal. It is being equated with heterosexuality. There is a force driving this fraud and much of the fraud is supported by the scientific community which is largely composed of pagans and out right anti Christian forces.

  I say again, this thread is a good example of what the “crisis” in the Church is about. It is largely about dissenting bishops who reject the truth and allow others to spread error.

• just to clarify, by using “shoot” and then putting in “chute” in the same sentence,  I “added a homonym” 

  No grammar problems Rod

• Pedophiles, pederasts, and at least some homosexuals seem to have control issues. They feel they are controlled by sexual desires that they never wanted. They therefore seek to assert their power to control others by manipulating them into sexual activity. If it were simply sexual activity the abusers desired, they would not risk exposure by seeking ever new victims, and they would not keep voluminous records of their crimes. Clearly the abusers are more than sexual sinners; a deeper disorder, and perhaps a deeper sin or at least sinfulness is at work in the. The human race has many dark corners

• “If it were simply sexual activity the abusers desired, they would not risk exposure by seeking ever new victims, and they would not keep voluminous records of their crimes”

  But that’s not true of all.  Clearly, it’s true of the worst and most publicized, but there are many, many others who did not continually seek out “ever new” victims and keep voluminous records.

  I think some simply desired sexual activity with boys.  Plain and simple.