Tuesday, August 21, 2018

Rod Dreher continues to look at that elephant in the Catholic abuse scandal

Gender of victims from the report on Catholic sexual abuse
Here.  As the initial shock of the PA Grand Jury release settles among Catholics, it's not surprising bona fide pedophilia, or it involved consensual sexual relations between adult priests or seminarians, the overwhelming majority has involved activity of a homosexual appearance.
that moderate, progressive, left wing, New Prolife, and of course pro-homosexuality Catholics are circling the wagons around one of the more inconvenient truths to reemerge: that most of the abuse scandal of the Church has been decidedly male on male.

That we are willing to say we care about the victims beyond all consideration - except for looking into the ties to homosexuality - says much. It's not surprising of course.  When the AIDS epidemic exploded onto the world stage, the initial reports centered it largely in the gay community.  When suggestions were made that SOP be followed where new, unheard of diseases were concerned - like quarantine or mandatory questioning - the world said no.  That could turn people against the homosexual community and somehow scapegoat them.

One of my cousins was in the medical field in those days.  He had never seen anything like it.  For the longest time, they couldn't even question a patient about the possibility of being infected, let alone do any other exploratory procedures to discover any infection.  Even when we didn't know the extent of how it was transmitted, the emphasis was on not violating the concerns of the gay community, not on finding out how to stop the disease.  If those working with them were harmed as a result?  Eh.  So the thought that we're suddenly concerned about the victims but only if it means not looking in the direction of homosexuality shouldn't be surprising.

Am I saying the decision to avoid the usual protocol where new, unknown diseases are typically concerned caused the deaths of tens of millions?  No.  I'm saying whatever the result was of not following the usual procedures had no bearing on the decision to do it.  The decision to forgo business as usual was for the sole purpose of protecting homosexuals and their sensitivities.  If it would or wouldn't lead to a global pandemic was not accounted for, or it was accounted for and it was found a risk worth taking.

The same is happening now.  There is something strange about an era that will bury everything - our understanding of biology, the central concept of sexual procreation, the importance of family, God, the nature of humanity, the potential for a global pandemic, the possibility of endless millions dead, and now the chance that innocents in the thousands could continue to be assaulted - all at the foot of the altar to homosexual normality.  That's quite a bill we're willing to pay.  And yet we seem quite willing to continue paying it.  From Church leaders, and Christian ministers, to almost the entire society outside of the Church walls, we've said we will stand on our libidos, or at least the sexual desires of non-heterosexuals; we can do no other, so help us whoever.

Where it will go, we'll have to see.  I've learned our modern age's ability to ignore all the warning signs and more is one of our most significant distinctiveness.


  1. I really wish someone would do an analysis of what proportion of accused priests are liberal/conservative/traditional, and how this compares to priests in general. There have been accusations made against the vocations director in the Diocese of Lincoln, so obviously this isn't a simple good conservatives vs. bad liberals situation, but beyond that it's currently impossible to say much of use.

    1. It would be interesting. I'd caution against the idea that being this or that thinking would have an impact in the long run, but it might be helpful to see if there is a trend, and how it could help. I'd say right now the only appropriate response is to be open to anything if it would help.


Let me know your thoughts