The Catholic Church in America, in the 1960s and 1970s, welcomed homosexuals into their ranks, and, enamored by then current psychological theories about the origins of the sin, thought that to comfort and hide the offender was the most charitable policy. Consequently, once the homosexual lobby made entry into the Church and rose in the ranks, over the next decades they diligently sought out and welcomed each other to join seminaries and holy vocations, covered up each others crimes and abominations, and so on. Hence there was a plethora of homosexual activity with young men, some of them underage under the authority of gays in the priesthood and other positions of authority.
The resulting scandal humiliated the Church and continued to be flung in the face of the priesthood and laity as a curse to this day. (It is ironic to note that the proportion of such scandals is far less than found among schoolteachers.) Why homosexual diddling with young and fair-faced boys is a horror and a scandal in the Church, but welcomed and cheered in society at large, and considered a constitutional right it is bigotry to oppose, I leave for someone more able to unwind the labyrinthine convulsions of modern non-binary logic than I to explain.
20 comments
Oh, yeah, the RCC back in the day was all about the gay friendly. ... No, wait, no it wasn't. John C Wrong lives in his own parallel universe, one where pedophilia is welcomed and cheered by society at large. I wouldn't want to live there, myself.
I don't have it on very good authority, but I think the "pedophile priests" stuff actually predates the 1960s and 1970s, it's just that the victims started being more open about it in the 1980s, which would match Mr Wrong's time frame here.
I guess Mr Wrong just wants anything to be able to blame liberalism in the United States during the 1960s for all of society ills, or something.
If by "welcomed" you mean "didn't go on a witch hunt ferreting out anyone who might have once ever had a gay thought" then you might be right. But the Catholic church has never been gay friendly as far as doctrine, because the official stance is that having sex with anyone you're not married to is a sin, and since Catholicism doesn't recognize same sex marriage, homosexual acts are therefore a sin.
And yet again, I'm frustrated that I have to point out that homosexuality and pedophilia are not one and the same.
You think gay priests is a recent phenomenon? It used to be a convenient way for people to hide their sexuality, since priests are forced by doctrine to remain celibate.
The disconnect is astonishing.
Oddly enough, the RCC openly condemns any and all homosexual activity.
John, when you list the qualifications for priesthood, "no nooky" is right up at the top. This is unattractive to most heterosexual boys, so, by default, the priesthood became a place with a disproportionate number of closeted gays, choosing holy orders as an "atonement for their sins". That's been true for generations, not just since the 1960s.
However, since it's become more acceptable to come out of the closet, I suspect there will be an even greater shortage of new priests in the pipeline, just in time to coincide with the fewer number of churches that remain open.
The scandal highlights the danger of depriving someone of their sexual desires through celibacy. Many Catholic priests may well have been homosexual, especially if the rumours are true, but this most likely a consequence of them having to live a life of shame brought on by a homophobic religion. A promise of celibacy would initially, at least, lead them into thinking that they can escape what they see as sordid desires.
"I leave for someone more able to unwind the labyrinthine convulsions of modern non-binary logic than I to explain."
We could explain to you repeatedly that gays do not equal pedophiles, but you'll still fall back on to your straw men and feign misunderstanding to uphold your bigotry.
Ah, my asinine schoolmate is back at it again. I don't know anyone who thinks that it's only priests who should be called out on pedophilic behavior. And I sure as hell don't know anyone sane who thinks that the Roman Catholic Church is intentionally gay-friendly, even now, unless you start from the horrendous viewpoint that anything short of calling for active repression and death of gays is "gay-friendly." Which you probably do, John.
Bullshit. Bullshit, bullshit, bullshit. Your knowledge of recent history is even more pathetic than your knowledge of distant history, Johnny Wrong. The catholic church was not "welcoming" of homosexuals. Not unless your definition of "welcoming" is to tell someone that they're a disgusting abomination and that Satan will be there to welcome them to hell when they die. That they could no longer (usually) get away with straight-up murdering them does not man that they became more welcoming of them.
"I leave for someone more able to unwind the labyrinthine convulsions of modern non-binary logic than I to explain."
I will explain. It was pedophilia, not gay that brought down your church.
The Protestant Tony Alamo. The only way he's leaving jail for his kiddy-diddling is in a box .
He's straight .
Therefore John C., you are, as ever...:
image
Homosexuality is attraction to adults of the same gender.
Pedophilia is attraction to pre-pubescent children, regardless of gender.
As priests had easy access to altar boys, the boys became their main target. Had they had access to altar girls, it would have been just as many girl victims, if not more.
But sure, becoming a priest was definitely a more or less acceptable way to hide your homosexuality, way back when.
School teachers were allowed to marry, so no irony here.
Just lots and lots and lots of sexually frustrated men of the cloth, with easy access to persuadable children.
Who the f**k welcomes and cheers PEDOPHILE diddling of young boys in society?
You're not even able to unwind the difference between adult sexuality and child-molestations. Most pedophiles are heterosexual males.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.