Wednesday, August 15, 2018

Deflecting the homophobic attacks on the bishops after the Pennsylvania Grand Jury report.



Everyone seems to be protecting and or attacking everyone else over it.

I noticed on Facebook commentators already jumping on anyone who says 'it's a homosexual problem' and yelling back, 'how is paedophilia a homosexual problem?  That's like saying molesting little girls is a heterosexual problem.'  The point being of course, that paedophilia is paedophilia, a still damnable and jail able offense.  Their insistence distracts from the homosexual priest-brother-bishop-cardinal in the sacristy measuring altar boys pant lengths problem.  It's not only a distraction, it's a strategy to avoid offending LGBTQ supporters - a sort of reverse homophobia, if you will.

Believe it or not, homos and heteros really do know the difference between paedos and ephebos and homos.  Pederasts and ephebophiliacs who prefer male on male sex are definitely homosexuals, though they fit a new category of paraphilia called chronophilia.  They can be switch hitters as well as enjoy sexual relations with different ages, albeit preferring age before beauty, as it were.  I'm deliberately being confusing because this nitpicking of what choice of sexual deviancy one chooses doesn't really change anything - the clergy - the episcopacy is corrupt.  They lied, paid people off, molested and raped and wielded enough power to cover it all up.

Having said that, I'll share a story from my own life experience, involving secular persons - long before the workplace was protected from sexual harassment legislation, and so on.

The display manager who liked little boys.

One of my supervisors preferred sex with children, young boys.  Once I saw him carrying on about a boy as young as five years old.  We were doing windows and the boy and his mother were watching us.  I and the rest of the crew laughed, thinking he was just pretending to lust after him.  Later, one of the display guys, who was also his lover told me that he definitely liked very young boys.  I still couldn't believe a grown man could be turned on by a little boy.  (I had been molested, but I thought it was my fault back then.  I mention that to demonstrate the denial I was in.)

Long story short, the fellow had a reputation for his preference for little boys, although he had young men lovers, legal age - late teens to early twenties.  He was definitely gay, militant to some degree in the early 1970's, when I lost track of him.

The enablers.

Coworkers and management ignored his paedophilia, many in the display department as well as department store management were gay, in fact, one of the top management - the very top - was known to seduce high school boys in the Teen Dept. dressing rooms.  Others used the men's room, or more discreet hide away places such as the stairwells.  All gay men.  All seen in the gay bars every weekend.

Straight coworkers knew as well.  Some were disgusted, others refused to believe it, others just looked the other way.  Kind of like the bishops and superiors and brother priests in Pennsylvania.  They knew it was a gay problem, which was actually against the law at that time.

What I am saying here is that the men I worked with, gay men, some of them were attracted to very young boys, others were attracted to teens and young men, but most seemed to be in search of a lover their own age or older.  To split hairs in say, the McCarrick scandal and the bishops cover up scandal, and mince words about the priest scandal, is a strategy to deflect attention away from the homosexual problem of protection and cover-up and corruption.  If I had the time I could demonstrate how similar the clerical network-protection is to the department store system and HR covering-cooperating with the perpetrators.  They handled complaints very much the same as the bishops and chanceries did.

The cover up.

People wouldn't complain for fear of their jobs or getting promoted and getting raises.  Management was gay or gay friendly and to complain to them would signal a sort of lack of loyalty.  If you went to HR, they contacted your supervisor and manager to verify your complaint.  If you reported to security, the offender's manager was able to get the accusation dismissed.  Almost sounds like a 'gay network' doesn't it?

Yeah.  So it really is a homosexual problem from the top down - the corruption is systemic.

Call it by its name.

Gay people in the world and workplace are one thing - and everyone knows today these things must be reported under penalty of law.  Gay people in positions of power in the Church, whose leaders - bishops and priests - are consecrated and solemnly promise chaste celibacy, is quite a different situation all together.  They really are held to a higher standard and an old boys club of old queens covering up all sorts of sexual abuse and pay-outs can not be tolerated.

Lay people and clergy can rant all they want, but a closeted gay hierarchy is the seedbed of corruption, and they will even protect those few hetero-paedophiles who slip through the cracks.  They'll do anything to maintain their position, power, and the titles and honors they receive.

Just saying.


10 comments:

  1. "Lay people and clergy can rant all they want"

    I'm thinking we should protest this scandal much like the laity has done in South America. Pope Francis continues to remain silent without so much as a word in public for the innocent who suffered at the hand of so many in Pennsylvania.

    Why's that? Protesting, praying the rosary in public for all concerned, maybe that will rouse him to say something.

    "They'll do anything to maintain their position, power, and the titles and honors they receive."

    See, this is where my cynical, nasty ol'self kicks in and out it comes,

    "Your preconceived, precious notion of power and reputation will come to naught as you burn in hell."

    Lord Jesus Christ, cleanse your temple as only you know how. No one will escape your divine justice on the Last Day.

    I'm going to Mass to honor our precious Virgencita. I know she will help me to pray because on my own, I can't.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree with you - we must protest and demand accountability - when I said lay people and clergy can rant all they want I was speaking about those who deny the corrupt element of a homosexual culture directing and protecting the deviant behavior.

      Delete
    2. "an old boys club of old queens covering up all sorts of sexual abuse and payouts can not be tolerated"

      I read that many bishops are afraid to speak about the obvious homosexual element because they fear "offending" LGBTQ Catholics. I rolled my eyes at that line. Someone's opinion but made lots of sense to me because that's the one truth that seems to be missing.

      Mass tonight was beautiful. The Church was almost full. So much faith despite this onslaught.

      I cried when we all sang the Salve Regina.

      No matter how much damage has been done or is to be done, the little ones of the faith will endure to the end with Jesus as our salvation, Mary as our hope, Joseph as our protector.

      What was it the psalmist instructed the people of ancient Israel to do?

      "Hold fast. Trust in Him. Be stouthearted, and wait for the Lord!"

      Delete
  2. That whole “oh so you’re saying gay and pedophile is the same thing” is such a deflection it drives me crazy. No one I know is saying that. What we’re saying is that an environment that is *supposed to* include intimate male relationships that instead includes a bunch of guys cornholing each other tends to lead to certain types rising to the top. And those who have secrets would be loathe to reveal the secret lbs of others, and so on.

    Also, the pre-pubescent / pubescent thing really is an issue. Someone who prefers older teenagers or 18/19 year olds is not a pedophile, but what happens when such a person is in charge of seminaries, vocations, etc.?

    All the idiots who are imagining this is going to finally lead to the church “humbly” hamnging her teaching on sexual issues and become more “open” to other kinds of sexual relationships are wishful-thinking morons who don’t realize that their clerical allies are about to be in deep shit.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You have to realize the age thing is extremely fluid - I don't want to do into detail now - but homosexuals are very fluid and predatory. Don't fool yourself.

      Delete
    2. Oh, I know, Terry. What I find almost ... funny in all this is how both the Fr. James Martin gay-is-okay crowd and the Archbishop Raymond Arroyo Republican Rite Catholics all seem to think “the other side” is going to get its comeuppance. Both of these strains of American Catholicism have done so much harm to the Church’s witness, with our in some cases inept, in some cases evil prelates outdoing everyone. Holy shit.

      Delete
    3. I also think the terminology used is useful for legal classification and clinical diagnosis, if you will - as well as academic studies, nevertheless in the so-called 'gay-community' it is more fluid. Of course there are gay cultural terms which indicate sexual preferences and practice, but I don't know much about current usage. Anyway - I'm just trying to explain why the distinctions have no legitimacy when attempting to say 'man-boy love' is not gay. "They' used the John Jay Report to say it wasn't a homosexual issue - but McCarrick turned that claim on its head. McCarrick is an old queen who liked young men and teen boys.

      Delete
  3. So, the rumors of a homosexual network in the clergy is not a baseless conspiracy theory after all? I forced myself to read portions of the Pennsylvania Grand Jury report. It is horrifying. It is also historical in that it goes back 70 years. Two cases are in the past 10 years. Put this in historical perspective. Most, if not all, officials, both ecclesiastical and civil have no training or experience in how to deal with abuse of any kind, be it alcohol, physical, sexual or financial. The Bishops and their staff just keep moving people around. Then comes psychiatry which promises a cure. Finally removal of the priest from active ministry. In one Diocese, Erie Pa.,I read Bishop Trautman persisted for two priests to be laicized over Vatican denial. I am a little familiar with him. He confirmed my niece and as an Auxilary Bishop in Buffalo had a sterling reputation. In the context of the times no one, or at least only a few, in or out of the Church reported these crimes to authorities. It was considered too scandalous and too traumatic for the victim to be publicly revealed. So the Chancery went in circles trying to publically minimize and hide men who should have been defrocked. Serious and sinful mistakes took place and perpetuated the problem. The next phase is the homosexual network. This, as far as I can see is not exposed in the Grand Jury report. This is, I think, more recent, and, if possible, more incidious. In these cases you have men at all levels of authority actively living a homosexual lifestyle, recruiting boys and men wherever they are in contact with them. Parishes, schools, seminaries, etc. In these cases it is not that the Cardinal, Bishop, staff do not know what to do, but they do not want to do anything except hide and protect the predators. I fear this is the place we are in now. A few years back 60 minutes did a segment on gay priests in the Vatican. A gay priest told of getting up early to say Mass after a night of frolicking. I was shocked. After what we are seeing, and I fear will see more of, this does seem to be deeply embedded in the Church. On the radio today a Church historian repeated the sad fact that this is not new. He added the Bella Dodd story; that she was one of many who recruited men to undermine the Church in the 1950's as a Communist spy. This time though the story goes it was not communists she was after, but gay men. I still doubt that conspiracy story. I can only see this as a cleansing which may prove beneficial. I fear though that the damage, already so great, will get worse. It is time for a lay review board. Bishops, Cardinals, and priests cannot be trusted to police their own any more then any other group that needs public trust to function.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wallace, I suspect you’re right on the historical aspects of this. The “good old days” were a time when almost *no one* ever got punished for this kind of abuse, especially if the abuser was in a position of authority. The coverups in those days, evil as they were, may have been a function of how society worked. There does seem to be something g much more insidious that this develops into in the decades leading up to the 2002 shakeup. Let it all come to light.

      Delete
    2. Wallace, keep in mind that sexual abuse wasn't part of the criminal justice system until around 1990, before that, it was something taken care of by your dad and a shotgun.

      Also, pedophiles ho int od their way to be in positions of trust, so that their accusers aren't believed.

      And, when the bishops consulted an expert, who they didn't sue for fraud, he told them to move the perp along. This is what schools do to this day. That just gives the perp a new victim pool. The expert is now known to be a member of NAMBLA, doing what's best for his boyz.

      Granted, at the time, people thought it could be cured.

      Delete


Please comment with charity and avoid ad hominem attacks. I exercise the right to delete comments I find inappropriate. If you use your real name there is a better chance your comment will stay put.