Defending Catholic bishops – Part 1

There is no point defending the indefensible. So I won’t.

Collectively, Catholic bishops have been an abysmal failure for the last two generations.

They have failed society by allowing scandalous sexual abuse to hide and flourish inside the Church.

They have failed Catholic politicians.

And they have failed Catholics who love the faith.

As a Catholic, it is the worst possible truth that I could write. But it is true.

There can be no doubt that paedophilia has been protected inside the Church. It may not be as bad as the portrayal in the media. But it may also be worse.

I cannot censure those in society who hate the Church and point this out. And it is completely understandable why so many have left the Church in disgust. The bishops can blame no-one but themselves for this situation.

People aren’t stupid.

The problem with paedophilia inside the Catholic Church stems from the fact that the Church hierarchy have failed to weed out those who live perverted sexual lives.

The evidence pointing to rampant homosexuality within elements of the clergy is overwhelming.

The new Pope has recently admitted this, as did the last. In fact, in 2005 the Vatican issued orders forbidding homosexuals from admission to seminaries. What is astounding is the fact that this order was even required.

How can someone who engages in sexual activity that is condemned by the Church possibly be considered for a leadership role? Or given responsibility to uphold the Church’s teaching or provide an example to the faithful?

They can’t.

The truth is that if authorities are interested in finding clergy who have abused children or covered it up, then they should start by investigating the homosexual clergy.

I’m not saying that all child-abusing clergy are inclined towards homosexuality. However, it would seem that most are.

The facts speak for themselves.

Wikipedia might not be a completely accurate source, but that doesn’t mean it’s always wrong either. In any case, it’s a good place to start.

And the overwhelming number of incidents listed on the Wikipedia page dedicated to sexual abuse inside the Catholic Church in Australia show that the abused were boys.

Yes, it’s possible to argue that’s because priests were mainly working with boys. It’s possible to argue that they were the only available target.

But that is an assumption. And it is tenuous, to say the least.

Catholic reforms have long been co-ed. Schools have long been co-ed. And there are have been altar girls for a long time.

But it seems that has not changed the target.

So, if anyone is really interested in getting to the bottom of sexual abuse in the clergy, they must ask the question: why so many boys?

I would suggest the answer is obvious. But I am not conducting the investigation.

The real test for our governments and institutions is whether they’ll ask that question. And I would also suggest that failing to do so would be nothing more than assisting in a new cover-up.

Author: Bernard Gaynor

Bernard Gaynor is a married father of eight children. He has a background in military intelligence, Arabic language and culture and is an outspoken advocate of conservative and family values.

Share This Post On

7 Comments

  1. Please look at the stats.
    **More priests abuse girls than abuse boys.**

    I’ll repeat that. More priests abuse girls than abuse boys.

    More boys are abused though. This may be because priests are given far more opportunity to rape male children than female ones. We don’t know. All we know from Vatican sources is that most such child abusers prefer to rape girls, and that, by and large, only about 1 in 20 to 1 in 60 priests are rapists or murderers. A minority.

    Post a Reply
    • Zoe says: ” …by and large, only about 1 in 20 to 1 in 60 priests are rapists or murderers.” 1 in 20 to 1 in 60 priests are MURDERERS”? Gee, Zoe, you’d better get on to the media pretty quick smart – they’ve missed this juicy little news item. Where are all the bodies? As there are tens of thousands of priests around the world, that means there are a lot of murdered bodies being stashed away in dark corners somewhere. Grow a brain, Brain – and stop peddling mindless garbage that is as offensive as it pointless as it is untrue. NEWSFLASH: Only about 1 in 20 to 1 in 60 people named Brain are rapists or murderers. A minority.

      Post a Reply
    • Doc, a study completed in the United States found that just over 80% of the victims of clerical abuse in that country were male. The problem is not celibacy. The problem is the number of homosexual priests and brothers with paedophilic tendencies. It is not fair to say that all homosexuals are paedophiles or potential paedophiles. But it is true to say that 80% of the paedophiles (at least in this instance) were homosexual. Weed out the gay clergy (who shouldn’t be practicing homosexuals anyway) and most of the problem goes away.

      The celibacy issue is a red herring. The majority of child abuse cases are perpetrated by family members or close family associates who have no such vow of celibacy.

      Post a Reply
  2. Bernie – surely the ridiuculous rule that priests must abstain from all sexual activity is one of the major causes for the abuse. it’s 100% unnatural.

    Post a Reply
    • Doc, the call to live a chaste life does not turn heterosexual men into rampant boy assaulting homosexuals. Celibacy in itself does not prevent a priest from engaging in sexual activity. It is a vow that prevents him from getting married. The requirement to live a chaste life is a consequence of that vow. If a priest decides to forget about chastity he has ample opportunity to do so with women and many have. He doesn’t need to assault boys. In any case heterosexual men do not commit homosexual assaults or participate in homosexual acts. Homosexual men do. That’s why they are called homosexual. The victims of assaulting priests have overwhelming been adolescent boys. The offenders are not clinical paedopohiles, they are pederasts, by far the most common variety of homosexual in history. Finally, a question for you. Just suppose celibacy could make a heterosexual man inclined to commit homosexual acts. Where would that leave the claim that homosexuals are born, not made? Hmm?

      Post a Reply

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Pin It on Pinterest

Shares