Wednesday, April 14, 2010

Continuation of Incomplete Analysis of Gay Scout or Gay Priest Issue = "Lying"

This post here is a continuation of the discussion in the “Incomplete Analysis” section.

I also used to think that the problem was that bishops just didn't want to deal with the problem because it is too emotionally wrenching.

But at this point it's not that simple.

Even after the lawsuits began to turn into a flood in the early 1980s, and the word spread among the bishops that THE basis of liability in the lawsuits was bishops shifting priest-wolves around to new, unwary flocks, THE BISHOPS CONTINUED SHIFTING PRIEST-WOLVES AROUND TO NEW, UNWARY FLOCKS.

MOST of the priests were being shifted MULTIPLE times. When the priest-shifting bishops look at the files following the priests being shifted, they know what the score is.

So, think: What is the difference between, on the one hand...

(a) a bishop shifting a priest, being followed by sexual predator accusations, to his third parish, with no warning to the new flock, aware that lawsuits are being filed, at that moment, to make money from the bishops decisions like that which abet other priests' sex acts;

...and, on the other hand...

(b) a bishop AGREEING WITH the predator priest, by a wink, to shift the predator priest to another location, SO THAT the predator priest will have access to a new group of innocents from which to solicit sex paid for with Church funds.

The difference is the space between these two lines...

//

...because in the first case there is no wink.

Stand back and look at the Church, panoramically.

Several years ago, to "come to grips with the problem," the Church paid for the John Jay Study.

What did the Study do? Look at available data, and use various investigative measures and statistical means to estimate the true dimensions of the problem?

No.

It counted beans.

The John Jay Study counted only:

(1) cases in which there had been an admission by the priest;

(2) cases in which there had been a criminal conviction of the non-admitting priest; and

(3) cases in which money was paid-out by the Church.

By doing this, the study found a little over 10,000 victims.

Yet, investigation after investigation by police and reporters have found that in the vast majority of cases, BISHOPS FAILED TO REPORT PARENTS' CLAIMS TO AUTHORITIES.

There are CLEARLY several tens of thousands of such instances generated by the mass production efforts of notoriously promiscuous priests. (Believe this, Tom: As I pointed out in a previous article here, the evidence is enormous that male homosexuals are innately promiscuous.)

The unreported cases were not studied at all. The bishops did not go to the John Jay people and say, "Listen, we are actually aware of about 3 times as many accusations as there are confirmed cases."

In effect, our current pope is accused of LYING about such cases.

Compare this NYT article...

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/27/world/europe/27pope.html

...with this admission by the Judicial Vicar of the Munich Diocese...

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/2010/03/26/2010-03-26_before_he_became_pope_benedict_told_german_priest_accused_of_pedophilia_hed_get_.html

The New York Daily News article says that RATZINGER CHAIRED THE MEETING WHICH TRANSFERED THE SEXUALLY-ABUSIVE PRIEST, WHO HAD BEEN PLACED WITH THE MUNICH ARCHDIOCESE FOR THE PRECISE PURPOSE OF RECEIVING PSYCHOTHERAPY TO TRY TO STOP HOMOSEXUAL-STYLE ANAL AND ORAL ABUSE OF BOYS BY THE PRIEST, TO FULL DUTIES IN A NEW MUNICH PARISH WITH NO WARNING.

In effect his defense, today, is, "I got behind the wheel of the car, but I did not touch the steering wheel, and I was not even AWARE OF the steering wheel -- so don't accuse me of driving the car into that crowd."

In effect, you are looking at no change.

In effect, after DECADES of lawsuits, the same attitudes seem to be prevailing.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not ready to quit the Church.

I love the Church.

But that's the point: I love the Church.

So, read these words carefully: EVEN OUR POPE HAS ENGAGED IN THE BEHAVIOR WHICH ENABLES HOMOSEXUAL PRIESTS, WITH ZERO SELF CONTROL, TO PREY UPON NEW AND UNWARY FLOCKS.

AND HIS PRESENT MODE IS REALLY AN EXTENSION OF THE SECRET TRANSFER POLICY: RUN AND HIDE.

Don't be discouraged. Pray. God always answers prayers.

But remember: Our nasty public criticism of such behavior may be part of the answer to our own prayers.

4 comments:

  1. I am enjoying watching the activities preparing for a papal visit to England (Dawkins/Hitchens trying to convince folks to have pope arrested if he touches English soil).

    I highly doubt their campaign would be effective.

    I think they used term 'crimes against humanity'. A bit over-emotionally charged.

    BUT, yes, perhaps this is what we are looking for. For those who would contniue this activity of transfer transfer transfer, don't deal with it . . . this giant punch in the face, having facts aired out in media, in court . . . the humiliation of it all, might just shock a few of these folks into taking immediate action.

    Perhaps the newspapers around the world need a picture of the pope being taken into custody headlining every paper in the world. Perhaps then they'd get the idea.


    Hey, are there any figures out there broken down this way? I can't find them. I think it matters, but no one is counting:

    Heterosexual male Priest-Pedophilia-same sex victim
    Heterosexual male Priest-pedophilia-opposite sex victim
    Heterosexual male Priest-ephebophilia same sex victim
    Heterosexual male Priest-ephebophilia opposite sex victim

    Homosexual male Priest-Pedophilia-same sex victim
    Homosexual male Priest-pedophilia-opposite sex victim
    Homosexual male Priest-ephebophilia same sex victim
    Homosexual male Priest-ephebophilia opposite sex victim

    Ratio of Gay priest to heterosexual priests?

    also

    % of Gay priests taking part in ephebophilia (%samesex and %opposite sex victims or willing participants)
    % of Gay priests taking part in pedophilia (%samesex and %opposite sex victims)
    % of Gay priests sexually active, not in above two categories

    % of Heterosexual priests taking part in ephebophilia (%samesex and %opposite sex victims or willing participants)
    % of Heterosexual priests taking part in pedophilia (%samesex and %opposite sex victims)
    % of Heterosexual priests sexually active, not in above two categories


    I'm sure we'd have to take the word of the perpatrators that were actually caught. I highly doubt that priests, perhaps guilty but not caught/accused would give straight answers to a questionaire on such matters

    And any best attempt at taking such studies and projecting that onto the general priest population to see what is still out there, not yet accused/caught/not involved . . .


    I see people generically quoting 'studies' that say its a gay problem. I see other outlets that say that homosexual priest no more likely than heterosexual priest to molest child (pedophile, but again, I'm sure they are including the ephebophilia behavior in there in the term 'molest a child'

    If I were to make claims without accurate figures, I'd be shooting from the hip.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The John Jay Study, paid for by the Catholic Church, in which they analyze as "what happened" that which the bishops admit to, which is only the cases they are forced to admit to, breaks-down the figures as you suggest.

    My recollection is that it's between 6-to-1 male-to-female and 10-to-1 male-to-female.

    There are also studies suggesting that homosexuals are about 100 times more likely to "do" minors than heteros.

    The word "ephebophile" was widely employed by the American press to avoid saying "homosexual" at the high-water mark of the lawsuit flood.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Tom, you might be interested in this...

    http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/apr/10042912.html

    It shows you how crazy and "homosexual" the priesthood is getting.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I've even heard interviews of people enrolled in some seminaries that were strongholds, and the behavior there was so abysmal and expected of you that it just drove people away, except those to whom this behavior was appealing.

    No one ever named those few establishments where the behavior was so open, it was rediculous.

    Given the filter effect and leaving a big void of positions that they go ahead and fill no matter the traits of the person filling that position (I don't mind a gay priest, I wouldn't mind if you told me that the priesthood was 50 gay, or 50 percent hetero), I suppose this is to be expected. It is nuclear. They filtered out the u238 (hetero) men and the u235s (gay) were able to gather in greater concentration and the scene went nuclear. the U235 men,
    unstable enough as it is, now in high concentration were sure to set off a reaction (thought you'd like this physics parallel)

    Again, I don't mind that my priest handing me communion is Gay or Straight. Each has their own sin type to deal with.

    I suppose the outrage of it is that in this situation, along with the fact that the gay group is violation a social norm in doing their sin (a norm/moray that is slowly falling, if not fallen), the scale of this situation gives it a flavor or unrepentance. Guess what the priest handing you the communion wafer was doing 12 hours before. Again, its an outrage whether it be hetero or gay.

    But with the high concentration of u235 in the room, the situation will precipitate much more easily and it will be a gay situation.
    This is all predictable (well, I'm doing some monday morning quarterbacking here, actually)

    Assuming a nice mixture of gay and hetero, to reflect the general population, this wouldn't happen. The sexual attraction neutron that may be thrown about in a room full of the U238 hetero men and a rare U235 will have no impact.

    An interesting figure might be gleened from this. If there is a 50/50 mix down in that dioceses, what is the molestation rate?
    It would be nice to get that figure out.
    Now how do we factor in or out the fact that
    each of those abberant priests are sharing goodies with each other and satisfying there tastes 12 hours before mass, I would wonder if the molestation rate would go down or up, given that they are satisfied through other means

    ReplyDelete