09/28/2005
Vatican "Witch Hunt" Begins
The questioning of 25 candidates for priesthood has begun at Aquinas Institute of Theology in St. Louis following the Vatican's orders that not even celibate gays will be allowed to be ordained into the Catholic church.
"Is there evidence of homosexuality in the seminary?" and "Are there signs of particular friendships?” are just two of the questions that must be answered by the holy hopefuls.
The President of Aquinas Father Charles Bouchard objects to the probe but will let it continue: "Some people do feel homosexuality would disqualify a student. I hope we can provide evidence that should not be the case. We don't want to make it look like it's just a question if someone is gay or straight. But whether they have the ability to live celibate and be effective ministers. I think it might be relevant in as much as that it answers some people's question that possibly there is a link between homosexuality and pedophilia. I don't think that link exists, so I'm not afraid of that question."
The seminary, located on the campus of St. Louis University, is the first of 229 to be vetted in the next nine months.
Aquinas Seminary is First for Scrutiny [st. louis today]
Gay Inquisition Begins at Missouri Seminary [365gay]
Posted 11:56 AM EST by Andy Towle in Current Affairs, Religion | Permalink
Like it?
Subscribe to FREE Towleroad daily headlines with our RSS feed!
RECENT STORIES:
Comments
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
Isn't this somehow illegal? Surely this must violate some law?
Posted by: Barry | Sep 28, 2005 12:17:01 PM
I think most civil courts would defer to the religous rules on this. It is a private members only club.
Posted by: Donald | Sep 28, 2005 12:25:22 PM
Well, you know - it took 'em a few hundred years to get on the whole "the earth is round" bandwagon. Tune in in 2405 and we'll see.
Posted by: david | Sep 28, 2005 12:28:02 PM
Probably not, Barry. Missouri doesn't have any state law prohibiting antigay discrimination, and of course there's no federal law. Even if there were, most such laws exempt religious institutions anyway.
Posted by: Glenn | Sep 28, 2005 12:28:08 PM
The Catholic Church is annhilating itself, and really, I could care less.
I'm sorry, but if you are gay, don't be catholic. Your faith and love to God is all that God really cares about. I doubt he wants much of anything to do with the Pope and the evils of the Catholic Church.
Sometimes it is okay to abandon a sinking ship.
Posted by: Rob (lrdarystar) | Sep 28, 2005 12:49:26 PM
just what the catholic church needs: fewer priests. this and the past pope are damning the church into irrevelency...
Posted by: joe in SF | Sep 28, 2005 1:11:04 PM
The only reason the church has for excluding Gay men from the priesthood is the fear of molestation of children by priests. The truth is: The vast majority of pedophiles and child molesters are heterosexual males. The other truth is that CELIBATE priests, gay or straight, don't molest anyone.
Dr. William C. Holmes, Assistant Professor of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, authored a study in the December 1998 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association that reports that 98% of all male perpetrators who had sexually abused boys were identified in their families and communities as heterosexual.
"The belief that homosexuals are particularly attracted to children is completely unsupported by our data… In our twelve years of work with child molesters, we have found… the child offender who is also attracted to and engaged in an adult sexual relationship is heterosexual. The adult heterosexual male constitutes a greater risk to the underage child than does the homosexual male."
Perhaps the greatest misconception that perpetuates this myth is the confusion around the term sexual orientation. "Orientation refers to feelings, self-concept, and social identity. Persons may or may not express their orientation through behaviors."
"Sexual abuse of male children by adult men is often referred to as 'homosexual molestation,' which implies that the perpetrator is himself gay or has a homosexual orientation. Usually, however, the adjectives 'homosexual' and 'heterosexual' really refer to the victim's gender in relation to that of the perpetrator, not to the perpetrator's sexual orientation."
Child sexual abuse is a serious problem. It's crucial that parents have accurate information regarding this issue. "A child is 100 more times more likely to be molested by a family member than by a homosexual."
"The vast majority of offenders are heterosexual men. Male offenders who abuse young boys maintain adult heterosexual relationships."
Further reading on this subject may be done at the NGLTF site.
http://www.thetaskforce.org/downloads/childsexualabuse.pdf
Posted by: Jay Croce | Sep 28, 2005 2:38:05 PM
I would sincerely hope that my gay brethern are smarter than to want to become ministers for a church that teaches hate, discrimination, and judgementalism in direct opposition to the teachings of its founder. If not then they need to be culled from the ranks of the stupid anyway.
I was raised Catholic, and considered entering the seminary myself, but decided against it for many reasons other than sexually-oriented ones.
Gay persons would make exceptional ministers, but those interested in ministry need to find a religion that is worth their dedication, and leave the Xtian religions to the hets.
I recommend finding a religion that is not based on blame, shame, hatred, and fear. Look for one that does not "promise" an eternity of divine servitude as opposed to an eternity of torture. Aside from economic factors, we are not a slave-based civilization and we do not need to find a better "mastah".
Posted by: Mort | Sep 28, 2005 3:00:00 PM
What the heck is the celibacy thing about anyway? And are homos less likely to keep vows than hetro? The Pope really pooped on this one.
www.savvy101.blogspot.com
Posted by: brown | Sep 28, 2005 5:21:51 PM
Que Mel Brooks,
(enters singing) "It's the Inquisition,...."
Posted by: Ted B. | Sep 28, 2005 5:23:18 PM
Interesting... Dictator Benny, a former Hitler Youth, wants to "purify" his church of gay priests. What's next: pink crosses? I'd hesitate to accept an invitation to shower at the Vatican.
Posted by: elrey | Sep 28, 2005 10:03:25 PM
Jay Croce: Re the statistics you cite: Those are true in general, but the stats for the Roman Catholic child sex abuse scandals are rather different.
Specifically regarding abuse by Roman Catholic priests, the surveys of reported cases and other studies that I have seen estimate that from 70%-95% of the victims were males, with the majority of those being pubescent or post-pubescent. (It has also been suggested based on existing data that if all states had 16 as the age of consent for homosexual sex, the number of "pedophilia" cases (in fact, ephebophilia in this instances, not pedophilia) cases would drop significantly, since so many involve males 16-18 years old. (Still a terrible abuse of authority, but certainly something different in level of evil than abusing, say, a 6 year old or 10 year old or 13 year old.))
I'm certainly not arguing that the spin placed on this data by the Right and by the RC Church -- i.e., that therefore this all means it's a "gay" problem -- is correct. But I *am* arguing that the general statistics about child sexual abuse don't apply here, and it's disingenuous and intellectually dishonest to not face the fact that boys were and are abused by priests far more frequently than priests have and do abuse girls. (It's been argued that this is just because young males are more accessible to them than young females, and I'd buy that argument as to any priest abusing pre-pubescent kids, but not with those who are drawn to post-pubescent teens, where it seems less opportunistic and more gender-driven.)
For example:
>> The report found that 4,392 priests had been accused of sexually abusing minors between 1950 and 2002, or about 4 percent of the 109,694 priests in active ministry during that period. Of the 10,667 reported victims, 81 percent were male, the report said, and more than three-quarters of the victims were postpubescent, meaning the abuse did not meet the clinical definition of pedophilia.
Instead, most fell victim to ephebophiles, men who are sexually attracted to adolescent or postpubescent children.
Karen Terry, the principal investigator for the team of academics from John Jay College of Criminal Justice that carried out the research in the other quantitative report, said the average age of victims was 12.6 years, but the most common category of victims was a boy between 11 and 14. That category accounted for 40 percent of all victims, she said.
The report found that 51 percent of victims, including females, were between 11 and 14; 27 percent were between 15 and 17; 16 percent were from 8 to 10; and nearly 6 percent were under 7. Male victims tended to be older than female victims, Terry said.
The only age group in which girls accounted for more victims than boys was ages 1 to 7, when they made up 58 percent of victims. In the 8-to-10 age group, boys made up 71 percent of victims. Boys accounted for 85 percent of victims in both the 11-to-14 and 15-to-17 age categories. The report found that 3.6 percent of abusive priests abused both boys and girls of all ages, while 22.6 percent abused only females and 64 percent abused only males. In nearly 10 percent of the reported cases, the gender of the victim was unknown. <<
http://www.boston.com/globe/spotlight/abuse/stories5/022804_victims.htm
So let's face up to the truth: Most abuse by priests does appear to be of boys. The Church's response to the data is insane, but not quite as farfetched as the true statement that "In society in general, most sexual abusers of children are men who molest girls" would suggest.
Posted by: David | Sep 28, 2005 11:31:20 PM
The great catholic witch-hunt of 2005 has begun. The inquisitors go first to St. Louis University’s seminary in St. Louis, Missouri, where they will ask "Are you now, or have you ever been.... a faggot?" That question will set in motion the seminarians’ purge and then they'll move on to rectories nationwide where many priests will no doubt be ill-treated.
Hearing they’re about to be knifed by the pope one gay priest said that he “…. couldn't believe that after centuries of either explicit or implicit welcoming of celibate gay clergy that the church would turn its back on them." Why the shock? Herr Ratzinger, now der pope, got his first knife when he pledged absolute personal loyalty to Adolph Hitler. (Young Nazi’s were given ceremonial knives upon initiation to the Hitlerjugend.) Now that he’s in power he’s imitating his Fuehrer's "Night of the Long Knives", a putsch in which the (often) homosexual leaders of the SA were murdered so that Hitler could distance himself from them. When the previous pope wanted some particularly dirty work done to ‘cleanse’ the organization of people alleged to be rational, he’d send Ratzinger, who earned the name ‘God’s Rottweiler’ because he so obviously enjoyed his work – purging, excoriating, spurning, rebuking, accusing, humiliating, etc.
However, irrespective of Ratzingers Nazi past and his current personality disorders, he is simply coming to grips with clerical sexualitybased on the astounding doctrines of his church about sexuality, which blend nigh on psychotic anti-sexual, anti-female and anti-gay hysterics intermingled with heavy dollops of superstition straight from the Dark Ages. It’s the same gobbledygook priests have shoved down the throats of the ‘faithful’ for centuries. For them it's as reasonable that gay men can’t be priests as it is that demons would trouble themselves to possess nubile teenyboppers or that virgins give birth. (If most of us can’t grasp the subtle intelligence behind this theological gibberish it’s because we’re preoccupied leading productive lives.)
What's actually at stake here is the Vatican's urgent need for a scapegoat to distract attention from the worldwide fury about priests raping children. (The repeated insertion of adult male genitalia into the anal canals or vaginas of seven or eight year old children is not ‘abuse’ or molestation, its rape.) However for the church it's not about the semantics of social-sexual morals, it’s all about the money. The group Voice of the Faithful estimates the US church will have to cough up about $3 billion and equivalent figures are mounting for Europe, Latin America and other priest besotted regions. They want to go to court pleading “Mea Culpa, it wasn’t us. It was those nasty queers. So please, just don’t take our money.”
Nevertheless many pedophiles become priests, going, as the song says, “Where the Boys Are”. Even non-pedophile priests occasionally express their repressed sexuality by raping children. (As do many breeder males, who commit almost all rapes of children, which occur in a family setting.)
The only sure answer to this widespread and persistent outrage is chemical castration before ordination plus providing armed guards for altar boys. That solution flows directly from their own uniquely absurd and non-viable 'celibate' lifestyle and their creepy dogmas about sex. They shouldn’t have a problem with accepting it. Priests have the innate capacity to believe at least twenty bizarre things at any given time so they can rationalize this as an exorcism of the libido or a sort of super-penance.
Is that solution embarrassing, extremist or mean-spirited? Is it mean-spirited to attack gay sexuality and maliciously humiliate unmarried pregnant women? Absolutely. Is it extremist to cause unwanted births and back alley abortions or to condemn uncountable thousands to HIV infection by opposing condom use? Unquestionably. Is it embarrassing to view “The Exorcist” as a documentary, a training film? Duh!
Gay or straight, celibate, pedophile - priests are all unapologetic freeloaders who spend their idle lives promoting reactionary politics, superstition and bigotry. Turnabout is fair play. If seminarians knew that castration was just around the corner maybe the seminaries would dry up. Now that would be heavenly!
Posted by: Bill | Oct 2, 2005 3:28:47 PM
As a "recovering Catholic" I am deeply saddened by the attempt of Cardinal Ratzinger (HE IS NOT MY POPE) to shift the focus from the basic 'disconnect' within the church regarding all the priest/child abuse cases to something the media and all "right of center" Christians can self-righteously condemn..GAY MEN BECOMING PRIESTS...God Forbid.
Too bad a similar bigoted and callous comparison of Ratzingers qualifications weren't raised by the fact that he is German and EVERYONE knows he might have been exposed to some evil Neo-Nazi propoganda by being German...Hey Ratzi..."it saws both ways"....
Saint Peter is probably just shakin his head and wondering whats going on.Man oh man....I just remembered ole Petie was a Jew to begin with and you know how Jews are!!
Guess the Catholic church has deleted "tolerance" from its lexicon......
Posted by: George | Oct 7, 2005 4:45:33 AM