Rest assured!
Here are two things we learned from the Bishop's meeting this week.
1) Homosexuality had nothing to do with the fact that the overwhelming percentage of priestly sex abuse victims were post-pubescent boys. These abusers I guess were equal opportunity abusers and would have been willing to abuse girls as equally as boys and it was just a target of opportunity thing doncha know.
CCHD is just fine and any grumblings and facts otherwise are just "outrageous claims." Rest assured CCHD gives no money to groups involved in the Culture of Death or other things at odd with the truth of Church teaching. I feel so much better now and so relieved I can finally support CCHD. Hey just because the problematic groups they did finally drop was due to outside pressure and reports from an outside group means nothing. Just because they did nothing to investigate the groups they contributed to and had for years given money to groups that supported abortion, contraception, homosexual marriage is no big deal and again if you hear otherwise it is an "outrageous claim."
It is I guess an outrageous claim that CCHD still gives money to groups not sympathetic to Church teaching like L.A. Community Action Network, Women's Community Revitalization Project, San Francisco Organizing Project, Preble Street, Faith in Community, People Organized for Westside Renewal, Coalition L.A., Justice Overcoming Boundaries in San Diego County, Nuestra Casa, San Francisco Organizing Project, Time for Change Foundation (a.k.a. All of Us or None). Just drop your money in the basket this weekend for CCHD, because there is no problem - just move along.
Remember a couple of years ago it was shown Catholic Charities was giving money to one group that was promoting and distributing contraception and the official replay was pretty much denial.
When the South American bishop's complained to the Canadian bishops conference to stop giving money to groups in South America that supported the Culture of Death we got a reply from an angry Canadian bishop complaining about bloggers.
Nice to know there is a siege mentality within bishop's conferences and Catholic organizations that can't even manage a sly wink and say "I'm shocked, shocked to find that gambling is going on in here!" Aren't you confident that every thing is being done to prevent future problems?
Known as 
[This space reserved for reddog's closeted-priest detraction/calumny spam]
On the CCHD. Funny how progressives are always painting the pre-V2 Church as "Pray, pay, obey", and yet here they are certainly insisting on the pay part.
Are the bishops out of their ever-loving minds?! Homosexuality has little to do with the sex abuse crisis? 70% of the abused are post-pubescent teen boys and homosexuality has little to do with it? No wonder people like reddog go apoplectic ! THe CCHD doesn't still go to predominantly leftist causes? I don't need my coffee to wake me up this morning.
Are the bishops out of their ever-loving minds?! Homosexuality has little to do with the sex abuse crisis? 70% of the abused are post-pubescent teen boys and homosexuality has little to do with it? No wonder people like reddog go apoplectic ! THe CCHD doesn't still go to predominantly leftist causes? I don't need my coffee to wake me up this morning.
The CCHD doesn't give to any Catholic organizations either. Their grantee list is chock full of "Community Organizers".
Homosexuality has little to do with sex abuse!!! You need to step out of the box and read the statistics.
Most people are sexually abused, especially rape victims are abused by "happily married heterosexual men".
I have dealt with many victims over the years and overwhelminly the abusers have been heterosexual men!
Homosexuality has little to do with sex abuse!!! You need to step out of the box and read the statistics.
Most people are sexually abused, especially rape victims are abused by "happily married heterosexual men".
I have dealt with many victims over the years and overwhelminly the abusers have been heterosexual men!
Elleblue,
Individuals from the 1 to 3 percent of the population that is sexually attracted to the same sex are committing up to one-third of the sex crimes against children. So numerically heterosexual men commit the most abuse, but homosexual commit a higher percentage of abuse for their population.
Elleblue, you are comparing apples to oranges; in the case of sexual assault as a whole, what are the breakdown of the gender of the victims of sexual assault committed by married men? The overwhelming amount of the assaults are on female victims, regardless of the age of the victim. Were gender attraction a constant, logically the numbers of victims broken down by gender would be roughly the same, although an argument could be made for availability of victims, but even that shouldn't have skewed the numbers so wildly in the other direction. I am not saying homosexuality is the sole culprit in choice of victim, but it is a player in the selection of post-pubescent victims. As someone who is on the inside, there is not anywhere near the problem Fr Cozzens or reddog say there is in as far as percentage of clergy who are actively homosexual (or who posses the attraction), there has been a subculture which I have seen both in the seminary when I was in college and in the priesthood itself. From the pool of people I knew that had same sex attractions, more than half had to leave because of either adult same sex relations they were engaged in, or because of sexual assaults committed against minors. I happen to live in a diocese that was 0 tolerance before it became national policy, so I am aware of what has happened. I personally think that those who committed such crimes should serve prison time and those who knowingly abetted (emphasis on knowingly) should be their bunkmates. A lot of young lives were permanently scarred by these men who were supposed to be protecting them.
I'm a little skeptical about the homosexual claims as well. What they actually said was that the abusers didn't identify themselves as homosexual. Whatever that means.
Regarding CCHD, complain to your local Bishop. The Bishop picks the local CCHD office, who recommends the groups to get funding. The Bishop also approves the funds after the national group does it's minimal investigation. So while the national CCHD office may be incompetent and corrupt, the first and final decision is really up to the local Bishop. If you check the controversial groups funded, and look up whose diocese they are in, it'll make more sense.
The problem with CCHD, as opposed to Catholic Charities, is that the money raised for CCHD is pooled nationally then redistributed. My understanding is that Catholic Charities is mostly a local affair. So even if your Bishop is spotless, you may end up supporting the shenanigans in another diocese' CCHD office. Whereas if your Bishop is on the up and up, your Catholic Charities money mostly stays in town, except for whatever assessment they have to send to the National office to pay for all their lobbying and hobnobbing with the rich and powerful.
Homosexuality has little to do with pedophilia, because pedophilia actually concerns the attraction of an adult to a PRE-pubescent child.
In many sexual abuse cases regarding priests, the "boys" had already hit puberty, and thus looked more like adults even though they are minors. This is where the homosexual aspect comes in. A pedophile would not be attracted to post-pubescent boys, but a homosexual man would.
I'm laboring (slowly) through Peter Brown's AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO. I can't imagine S.A. would give any of us much slack, but can you imagine what he might say to the Conference!
Jeff doesn't believe the bishops any more than I do. The question is, why believe them about anything? I guess that's where Jeff and I differ.
One of the most basic rules when hiring a consultant is to make sure you know what the conclusions and recommendations are BEFORE you commission the study. It appears that this rule was surely invoked in the case of the John Jay study.
Fr Bill wrote:
I personally think that those who committed such crimes should serve prison time and those who knowingly abetted (emphasis on knowingly) should be their bunkmates
20 years ago in Canada a priest named Lahey was known to have possessed child porn depicting boys. A priest named Molloy reported this to his bishop named Penney.
Lahey recently resigned as bishop when the police busted him for having child porn on his laptop (they were targetting men travelling alone to asia).
Are you saying that Penney and/or Molloy should face prison time? This is the first I've heard of clergy saying that anyone other than the Lahey was at fault - Molloy said that he assumed Penney took care of it (by letting him become a bishop?!?), that he wasnt sure if it was regular porn, that child porn wasnt illegal back then.
Oh well, even the best kings of Judah and Israel were unable to tear down the Asherah poles. Perhaps we expect too much from the bishops. I certainly wouldnt want to have to answer to Our Lord for turning a blind shepherd's eye to this sort of thing.
So then the offenders were actually bisexuals rather than gay???? The bishops are trying to portray the offenders as normal in order to defend the non offending clergy as normal...but they are introducing a whole new ball of wax inadvertently instead...bisexuality. Society in general however knows what happened by now and that it was a small percent of priests...while it was a large percent of deficient supervisory decisions by auxiliary Bishops etc. in many dioceses and the Church ought to study that and whether such shunting and covering up is traceable to the letter of John XXIII (online) about keeping silence on such matters under pain of severe penalties if the seductions are involved in any way with the sacrament of Confession. John XXIII sought to protect the sacrament but could abusers have used deliberately that Penance aspect of his letter as they seduced so as to cloak it in secrecy by simply asking the child if he wanted to go to confession. And did administrators lean toward secrecy due to the tone that that letter gave off? I don't know but I would think some Church office should study whether there was such a Vatican related reason why so many Church authorities sought to cover these acts with silence while part of their mind had to know such things eventually will be in the media and in the light of day.
BM, If the law of the land makes him liable for prosecution, then yes. If the law of the land does not, then no. The problem is that so many bishops played CYA while not addressing the problem at hand. If they knowingly and willingly allowed even tacitly behaviors of a criminal nature, then it is my understanding that this is what is known as aiding and abetting (I could be wrong) which is a prosecutable offense. Reddog, your logic is faulty. Are you telling me if your child proves untrustworthy in one matter you would not trust them on any matter? Given that train of thought, I hope you don't ever trust anything that comes form our political arena. You see, the actual teachings of the Church never permitted the behavior they engaged in, in fact, it asked for the opposite. You discredit the teachers if you wish, but to discredit the teachings is a logical disconnect.
second collection ? never give never worry.
I loved the reference to my favorite movie. "If he gets a word in edgewise it will be a major Italian victory"
The kind of thinking you propose, Fr. Bill, leads Catholics to allow those who say they are celibate and that their actual sexual orientation doesn't matter, to lead the Church, molest the children and institute monstrous inequities. At the same time, these Catholic "leaders" call for a lesser degree of civil right and protection under the law, for those who accept their sexuality and seek only to live openly, in secular life outside the church, neither preying on nor proselytizing others.
Do you also also propose a lesser degree of civil liberty and entitlement for atheists, Jews, Muslims or Hindus? How about those that decline to marry and simply cohabitate? Those that use artificial birth control? Those that divorce? Anyone that violates your so called, "natural" laws? Would you put them in prison if you could? Would you burn them at the stake? Catholics have sought to do this in the past. I see no reason to trust they will not in the future.
We are all sexual beings. Confronting the reality of our own sexuality and expressing it openly, in accepted ways, within society, is the way to best minimize predatory and secretive behavior. The suppression or denial of the sexual imperative, heterosexual or homosexual, is a sure path to criminality. It is a path the Catholic priesthood is on and seeks to lead the laity down as well. Shame on them.
I actually never said nor implied orientation didn't matter. But your statements do not jibe with reality. The vast majority of sexual crimes and assaults are committed not by celibates but by those who are married or single and have made no vows to celibacy. The vast majority of sexual assault is committed by those who have not sworn off physical sexual activity. Statistically, the majority of offenders are heterosexual men, though the numbers are disproportionately higher for homosexual men. To use your logic, marriage would be a much more risky lifestyle than celibacy. But as is atypical of certain psychological camps you view attempts at self-control of one's passions to be really repression; Christianity and elements of the psychological community radically differ on their conclusion based on radically different anthropologies. You come from a prospective that man is really a highly developed animal whose faculties are little more than that of any other mammal, an accidental creation of evolution with no higher purpose than one's self-fulfillment. Thus self-control of one's passions is seen as detrimental and even harmful. Christian anthropology comes from a prospective that man comes about created intentionally and purposefully (don't care if took 6 day or 6 billion years)and that we have a capability higher than that of the animal kingdom in that we can freely choose and therefore can reign in our passions. In this viewpoint, human sexuality's only end is not the physical manifestation solely, but is a a much more profound element that effects our ability to do everything from find friends to procreate. that you limit human sexuality to merely physical activity shows you have no understanding of human sexuality, let alone what might be the value of the proper use of sexuality and the value of restraining the physical expression of one's sexuality for the sake of a higher purpose. My guess, is since there is no higher purpose than self-fulfillment in your book, that altruism is seen as weakness. Take a good look at our society and tell me how the pursuit of self-fulfillment has served us well...because I tell you, from a psychological, sociological, moral and theological standpoint...what you advocate is more at the heart of priests who molest and those who cover it up than anything else.
Jeffrey:
Thank you for uncovering this new MEGA-SCANDAL for Catholics world wide.
This is a copy of my letter to Cardinal Cipriani:
Fina atención de su secretario privado el R.P. Andrés Carpio. Muy Reverendo Cardenal Cipriani:
Me permito felicitarlo por la valiente protesta de los obispos peruanos contra la Conferencia Episcopal Canadiense, que con monumental cinismo se ha quejado de los blogueros Católicos.
Al respecto me es grato mandarle copia de cómo la USCCB (Conferencia USA), pasa por paños tibios (o excusa):
1) Esta sátira: los curas abusadores de menores chibolitos, 'tenían igual oprtunidad para abusar de las chibolas', según su estudio, 'pero no fue tan grande el abuso' (sic).
2) Las organizaciones con abiertas 'simpatías' pro-abortistas y esterilizadoras: L.A. Community Action Network, Women's Community Revitalization Project, San Francisco Organizing Project, Preble Street, Faith in Community, People Organized for Westside Renewal, Coalition L.A., Justice Overcoming Boundaries in San Diego County, Nuestra Casa, San Francisco Organizing Project, Time for Change Foundation (a.k.a. All of Us or None). continuarán recibiendo plata de Catholic Charities.
Ojalá que las Conferencias Ortodoxas hagan oír su voz en ROMA!!!
Por favor, le ruego, recemos por nosotros AMGD.
(Translation) I point out: 1)"These abusers I guess were equal opportunity abusers" 2)Pro-abort: L.A. Community Action Network, Women's Community Revitalization Project, San Francisco Organizing Project, Preble Street, Faith in Community, People Organized for Westside Renewal, Coalition L.A., Justice Overcoming Boundaries in San Diego County, Nuestra Casa, San Francisco Organizing Project, Time for Change Foundation (a.k.a. All of Us or None)will continue to receive money from Catholic Charities.
Please do something in ROME!!!
Fr. Bill:
You resort to the new, lowest common denominator, we priests aren't any worse than anybody else, defense. Fine, I'll go along with that. Priests aren't any worse than regular homosexuals. So why single out for persecution regular, old, living next door to you and trying to live a decent life, homosexuals and if you personally find homosexuality worthy of special censure and persecution, you should start first with the ones that practice it in cassocks, living and deriving sustenance within your own community and leave the ones living open, secular lives, free to enjoy the same rights and responsibilities as other members of the larger community.
Perhaps you believe you have some special right, Father Bill, by virtue of your ordination, to decide which of your fellow citizens is worthy of extra persecution and punishment under the law of the land, being as it's a Judeo-Christian country and you are a certified Judeo-Christian, celibate Mojo man.
At least in Canada the bishops , in spite of the inadequate report, faced a little reality - mostly thanks to Archbishop Collins of Toronto.
Actually I didn't say nor infer that. Actually I said that they should be treated like anyone else. Second, the church does not permit any group to be singled out and persecuted these days. To say an action is wrong is not persecution. Nor did I say that the ordained deserve special rights, in fact, had you bothered to read what I actually wrote, then you would have saw where I wrote that those who are guilty both of the sexual molestation and knowingly aiding and abetting said molestation should be prosecuted (twice at least in this thread). I am afraid that you are so blinded by your own hatred of the Church that you are cherry-picking what is said to bolster a pre-determined outcome. Go back and read my post and please show me where any of your accusations about what I am saying hold true. As far as not trusting the bishops on this one, we're in agreement on this one.
reddog,
Your comments are normally inflammatory, but you're crossing the line when you directly attack a priest, in this case Fr. Bill, who has done nothing but engage you in argument.
"Celibate Mojo Man," if I were the blogmaster, would be an immediate ticket to ban-city. Jeff is clearly more merciful than me.