Religious Faith and Society

mubs

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Nov 22, 2002
Messages
4,908
Location
Somewhere in time.
In keeping with my habit of making posts that are not intended to be controversial, just thought-provoking, but nevertheless end up causing trouble for the webmaster, and sending some members here into a tizzy, here's another one. I had to fight the urge to cut-n-paste the whole thing, but that will probably violate copyright. So I urge you to read it. Need ID/PW, which you can obtain from BugMeNot.com (see, I even did the work for you).

Los Angeles Times: Faith

<snip>

...evolutionary scientist Gregory S. Paul, looks at the correlation between levels of "popular religiosity" and various "quantifiable societal health" indicators in 18 prosperous democracies, including the United States.

Paul ranked societies based on the percentage of their population expressing absolute belief in God, the frequency of prayer reported by their citizens and their frequency of attendance at religious services. He then correlated this with data on rates of homicide, sexually transmitted disease, teen pregnancy, abortion and child mortality.

<snip>
 

Mercutio

Fatwah on Western Digital
Joined
Jan 17, 2002
Messages
22,232
Location
I am omnipresent
Article on Salon.com this morning. Posted in its entirety.

I like the automatic assumption that priests who happen to be gay are the only ones who're boning altarboys.

-----------------------------------------------
Rome's latest witch hunt won't stop with gays
Under cover of the sex-abuse scandal, the Vatican is scapegoating homosexuals in order to purge all "wrong thinkers" from the American Catholic Church.


By Sara Miles

Oct. 3, 2005 | For anxious Catholic seminarians, teachers and priests, the disclosure that teams of Vatican inspectors will be visiting the more than 200 U.S. seminaries to "look for evidence of homosexuality" and investigate if seminaries have "a clear process for removing faculty members who dissent from the authoritative teaching of the church" set off a storm of speculation about a new witch hunt against gay men in the priesthood.

Archbishop Edwin F. O'Brien, the Vatican's coordinator of the investigative visits, told the National Catholic Register that "anyone who has engaged in homosexual activity, or has strong homosexual inclinations, would be best not to apply to a seminary and not to be accepted into a seminary," and said that the Vatican would be coming out with a document clarifying its 1961 position on homosexual seminarians and clergy.

The seminary investigations, and their impact on the lives and vocations of faithful Catholics, will be profound -- as will their shattering of a long-closeted church culture. If the visits become a witch hunt, says church historian and Catholic theologian Rev. Richard McBrien, "there will be gay seminarians, faculty, and already-ordained priests who will feel obliged to 'out' closeted gays in positions of ecclesiastical leadership who are facilitating the campaign."

Rev. McBrien, who teaches at the University of Notre Dame, believes that an "ultra-conservative minority is driving the investigations, not knowing that some of their favorite icons in the clergy and hierarchy are themselves gay."

"The days of the gilded clerical closet are gone," agrees Mark Lodico, a former Catholic with a master's in theology who now works as a psychologist in San Francisco. "We have to realize that the days of officials publicly professing horror and shock at the very thought of gay seminarians and clergy, while privately winking and smiling, are over."

Still, the practical and existential demands of the investigation are slippery enough to frustrate the most convoluted theological mind. How will investigators ferret out those to be purged? Will the Vatican try to ban homosexual "activities," homosexual "inclinations" or homosexual "persons"? Is desire identity? What about a seminarian who had a crush on his best friend in sixth grade? Is behavior the point? What about a totally celibate flaming queen who's taught theology for 30 years? What, in God's name, is a homosexual -- and how many of them can dance on the head of a pin?

But, as in other culture wars where the idea of homosexuality serves to draw boundaries, this battle is not primarily about gay people or gay behavior. The real battle is about power, and the attempt by Pope Benedict XVI to reassert central authority in the face of multiple and growing challenges to Vatican control -- particularly from the United States, long the source of headaches for Rome.

On that increasingly unmanageable terrain, lifelong Catholics cheerfully disobey church teachings on birth control, priests overlook church rules about divorce, the faithful openly tell pollsters that their bishops are wrong, and Catholic women -- hell, even the pusillanimous John Kerry -- talk back, as if faith were a matter of conscience and not of doctrine. The old purity codes don't hold; the lines of the law are blurred, and no amount of cash from arch-conservative Catholics can keep the pews full. Openly gay seminarians, theologians and priests are only one part of a larger fear for the Vatican: that even as official doctrine is given lip service, actual practice will create a different church on the ground.

This won't be the first time Rome has sounded an alarm about American heretics. At the beginning of the 20th century, under Pius X, the Vatican led a campaign to purge American seminaries of critical scholarship, replacing Modernists and demanding intellectual obedience to papal control. In the United States, troublesome seminary faculty were fired, and well-read, critical priests were replaced by new immigrants from Ireland and Italy -- generally poorer and less educated men who were willing to be obedient and play by the rules.

"The anti-Modernist campaign set back Catholic scholarship and intellectual life some 50 years," says Rev. McBrien. "It wasn't until the pontificate of John XXIII (1958-63) and the Second Vatican Council (1962-65) that the atmosphere changed for the better." More recent Vatican campaigns against liberation theologians, pro-choice Catholics, those advocating the priestly ordination of women, feminist scholars and dissenting theologians revived fear among liberal American seminarians and faculty of a new setback in Catholic intellectual life.

Still, the current seminary investigations are being presented to the faithful not as anti-intellectual reaction, nor as a power play, but as a good-faith effort to address the sexual-abuse scandal. Gay men abuse little boys, the argument goes, so getting rid of gay priests means that kids will be safe. Such linking of homosexuality with predatory pedophilia is an old and inaccurate myth, but it certainly holds political utility for a hierarchy that did its best, for decades, to cover up abuse, blame victims and attack those who sought justice. Like other political campaigns that invoke the horrors of homosexuality to rally followers behind a conservative agenda, this one has less to do with facts than with public relations.

The real connection between the sex-abuse cases and the seminary investigations is that the scandals intensified the Vatican's existing unease about the American church -- and convinced the hierarchy it was time to clamp down. The spectacle of an angry laity withholding money from the church, spilling parish secrets, publicly rebuking prominent bishops, and refusing to accept direction was profoundly upsetting to an organization that runs on order.

"It's more than order," says Rev. John Golenski, a gay Episcopal priest and medical ethicist in San Francisco, who spent 23 years as a Jesuit. "It's about money. If you took away the revenue from Cologne, Munich, Amsterdam and the United States, the Vatican would close down in seven days. The whole show is funded by these places -- so if they lose control of the mechanism of authority there, they lose it all. They need the levers of control to be top-down again."

Rev. Golenski thinks the Vatican has concluded that "the clergy in the United States cannot be reformed, but must be replaced." Rome, he adds, "is ready to purge not just homosexuals, but all wrong thinkers. It's a risky strategy for them. But otherwise the hierarchy fears it will irrevocably lose control."

The gamble is a big one for Pope Benedict XVI. Even if the Vatican were able to "cleanse" the American seminaries this time around -- leaving only the stupid, the obedient, the terrorized, the very good liars -- the risks seem great. The number of American priests has already dropped so precipitously that laypeople and "guest-worker" immigrant priests from places like Vietnam and the Philippines fill many jobs. As more American seminarians are driven out, more replacement priests will be needed. Earlier in the century, Irish and Italian priests ran parishes that shared their language and culture -- but the new immigrant priests may not be able to keep middle-class, non-immigrant American churchgoers in line. And though the Vatican has, to put it mildly, a great deal of experience in suppressing dissent, the world has changed irreversibly in terms of the ability of ordinary Catholics to share information outside of official channels -- and to make up their own minds.

"A lot has shifted in the culture of American parishes," notes Rev. Golenski. "God knows, most people have figured out their clergy are gay."

The human cost of the investigations is real: The seminarians, priests and teachers caught up in a witch hunt have much to grieve for, as do their families and parishioners. The institutional cost to the church seems great too: Although some Catholics will stay, and some conservatives will form political bonds with fundamentalist Protestants who take their side in the culture wars, many moderates will leave. Some may cross over to mainline Protestant denominations, or bland, friendly megachurches; others may just join the growing number of "recovering Catholics" with no church affiliation.

But, as the gay psychologist Mark Lodico points out, there is no going back to the days when the pope held absolute authority and gay Catholics were silent and invisible. "The gift of this investigation is that, painful as it is, it opens up the possibility of telling the whole truth," he says. "We should thank God for that."
 

jtr1962

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Jan 25, 2002
Messages
4,365
Location
Flushing, New York
Given that quite a few churches have altargirls now weeding out homosexual priests isn't going to completely solve the problem. And how on earth would they do that anyway? Plenty of homosexuals have gotten married to someone of the opposite sex, had kids, lived, and died without anyone ever having a clue they were different. I would imagine the gay priests would take similar steps to hide their orientation if they knew they were under scrutiny.
 

Fushigi

Storage Is My Life
Joined
Jan 23, 2002
Messages
2,890
Location
Illinois, USA
jtr1962 said:
...weeding out homosexual priests isn't going to completely solve the problem.
Of course not. Homosexuality is not the real problem; pedophilia is.

I still wonder about our society when the public is letting the church get away with sending these rapists (under age = automatic non-consent) to other places vs. sending them to the county lockup where they belong.
 

Howell

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Feb 24, 2003
Messages
4,740
Location
Chattanooga, TN
Fushigi said:
jtr1962 said:
...weeding out homosexual priests isn't going to completely solve the problem.
Of course not. Homosexuality is not the real problem; pedophilia is.

I still wonder about our society when the public is letting the church get away with sending these rapists (under age = automatic non-consent) to other places vs. sending them to the county lockup where they belong.

Indeed. Homosexuality is not illegal.
 

jtr1962

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Jan 25, 2002
Messages
4,365
Location
Flushing, New York
Fushigi said:
Homosexuality is not the real problem; pedophilia is.
Even that crosses a gray area because of our ridiculous age of consent laws (as high as 18 in some states IIRC whereas I believe it is around 13 in most other first-world nations). It might be technically illegal to have relations with a 14-year old in many states but it doesn't mean one is a pedophile either. That line is crossed if you're attracted to 5-year olds or 8-year olds. An adult being attracted to a 13 or 14 year old of the opposite sex is perfectly normal even if they can't legally act on those feelings in most states, at least to the point of having intercourse. Now I'm not condoning some 60-year old banging his neighbor's teenage daughter, but rather pointing out that they're not a pedophile if they do, just someone with very poor judgement.

From what I remember about many of the cases against the priests, quite of few of the "boys" in question were well past puberty, in which case the priests were just homosexuals who abused their authority rather than pedophiles. Yeah, I still find their conduct reprehensible, but not necessarily deviant. Ditto for teachers who have sexual relations with their teenage students (loads of those kinds of cases lately here in NYC).
 

Mercutio

Fatwah on Western Digital
Joined
Jan 17, 2002
Messages
22,232
Location
I am omnipresent
I think the more disturbing issue is the automatic assumption that a gay priest - a gay anybody - is automatically assumed to be at fault or more likely to abuse little kids. That's just deeply ignorant thinking. Maybe even more ignorant that banning a certain kind of priest for having a subset of thoughts that NO kind of priest can act on, anyway.

And the whole affair with American priests, along with what common knowledge about what happens to men in prison (I deleted a lengthy reference to salad-tossing here), makes me wonder at the wisdom of requiring anyone to abandon his (maybe her, too) sexuality.
Of course, in Euroland and South America, as far as I know, there isn't a priest abuse scandal. Does that just mean that other priests are better at covering it up? Or that those societies are more tolerant of those behaviors? Or that the sub-adults are simply seen as less credible when they make accusations?

Coming back to mubs' original point - My observation about people who loudly proclaim religious faith or decry "moral standards" is that they are the people whose behavior is most out of line... which is exactly what the article mubs linked to says. To me, the louder someone cries out about their faith and morals, the more I'm sure that person is doing something that's totally out of line with acceptable personal behavior.
 

Howell

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Feb 24, 2003
Messages
4,740
Location
Chattanooga, TN
Mercutio said:
I think the more disturbing issue is the automatic assumption that a gay priest - a gay anybody - is automatically assumed to be at fault or more likely to abuse little kids.

You find it hard to believe that a homosexual male would be more likely to desire to have sex with a young male than a non-homosexual male? Seriously.
 

Mercutio

Fatwah on Western Digital
Joined
Jan 17, 2002
Messages
22,232
Location
I am omnipresent
Yeah, actually.

Actual gay guys tend to like MEN. People with hair in places I don't care to think about, defined muscles and gruff voices. Those aren't exactly common traits in 12 or 14-year-olds.

Whereas, a pedophile probably isn't worried about sexual characteristics of his/her victim - kids up until about age 14 all pretty much look and sound the same.
 

jtr1962

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Jan 25, 2002
Messages
4,365
Location
Flushing, New York
Mercutio said:
And the whole affair with American priests, along with what common knowledge about what happens to men in prison (I deleted a lengthy reference to salad-tossing here), makes me wonder at the wisdom of requiring anyone to abandon his (maybe her, too) sexuality.
Yep, I've often wondered why have celibacy requirements for priests/nuns unless they're also willing to go the snippity-do-da route so as to all but eliminate their sexuality?

Of course, in Euroland and South America, as far as I know, there isn't a priest abuse scandal. Does that just mean that other priests are better at covering it up? Or that those societies are more tolerant of those behaviors? Or that the sub-adults are simply seen as less credible when they make accusations?
I'd say all of the above, but mostly that these societies simply accept behavoirs we don't in America. If you remember history, the Romans were quite accepting of both homosexuality and pedophilia. To the best of my knowledge there was no such thing as an age of consent. Even now, I believe most European and Asian countries have the so-called age of consent right around puberty, say 12 to 13 years. In quite a few places, at least in southeast Asia, there is no strictly enforced age of consent at all. Therefore, either the priests have "acceptable" outlets for their behavior besides altar boys in these places, or it simply is not reported because it isn't considered abnormal.

BTW, semi-relevant to the discussion in that it has to do with America's puritanical sexual mores is the FBI's crackdown on obscenity.

Whereas, a pedophile probably isn't worried about sexual characteristics of his/her victim - kids up until about age 14 all pretty much look and sound the same.
Then why does Michael Jackson only pick prepubescent boys to hit on? :mrgrn:
 

mubs

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Nov 22, 2002
Messages
4,908
Location
Somewhere in time.
One factor nobody's mentioned is the personal responsibility of the clergy. Having taken vows of celibacy, if a priest later finds he's attracted to somebody (regardless of gender, and pedophilia doesn't count - that's sickness), then one of two things should happen: either enough self-control to maintain the vow of celibacy, or exit the clergy and become John Doe in public again and do what you want. The problem comes with manifested desires inconsistent with stated and previously accepted objectives.

I know a few who actually did this; the attraction (in these cases, heterosexual) was so strong that they went throught the motions for a formal exit of their responsibilities as "holy" men, and now lead lives like us common folk. These people I have deep respect for; they did not violate the oaths they took, they did not violate the public trust in them, and they had the courage to acknowledge their desires and come out in the open about it.
 

Will Rickards

Storage Is My Life
Joined
Jan 23, 2002
Messages
2,012
Location
Here
Website
willrickards.net
I didn't read any of the thread really but thought I might relate a true story.
My wife and I were married in a catholic church by a priest who is a friend of the family. Actually his sister is Lara's grandmother's best friend. This has a special Italian-American name that I can't remember. So we aren't strictly related. Nobody wanted this guy to perform the ceremony except Lara's grandmother because he has a habit of droning on and on. He did. We met with him before the ceremony and this guy was a bit weird and seemed to want to hug us quite a bit more than normal.

Anyway, his name is Nicholas Cudemo. Scroll down a bit in that link to get the details. Or you can see even more details here. Our wedding was 6 years ago in 1999. After many of the alleged incidents. As we are coming up on our anniversary (10/16/1999), it is just something to think about.
 
Top