Homosexuality connection to abuse in church


I have no idea .



We have no way of knowing who goes to Hell and who doesn’t. God makes the judgement and doesn’t report back to us.

1 Like


Linden - NO one is saying child abuse isn’t a major issue and evil within the church. However, the reports of clinical pedophilla are in line with and sometimes even below the reported numbers of other religions, schools, etc.

One report of child abuse is far too many. However, this is a societal issue and not just a church one. We (as a society and as a church) are learning more today about this problem and how to better protect children.

And ONE of those ways to further eliminate the abuse is to eliminate it in the Seminaries, where the circle of sexual abuse and sexual scandal within the church is beginning.

For many years now, the seminaries have been good about kicking seminarians out who engage in sexual relationships with women. However, when a seminarian is found to be involved with sexual relationship with another man, many times he has NOT been expelled because the seminary doesn’t want to be labeled as hateful to homosexuals. This inconsistency creates a culture of secrecy and cover up of unchaste behavior.

It’s this culture of secrecy regarding unchaste behavior which trained priests to look the other way or cover up in proper behavior by priests. Whether the unchaste behavior is homosexual in nature or hetrosexual, the cover up of the unchaste behavior has created a culture of secrecy, which in turn has allowed the child abuse cover up to happen. The seminarian were taught (indirectly) that the sexual sins of the priests must not be make public, because it will hurt the Church.

So what did they do? They not only covered up adult sexual sins, but also sexual abuse & sexual crimes.

If we clean up sexual scandals in the seminaries, it will help to radically reduce (if not eliminate) sexual abuse in the future.

We can’t adequately address sexual abuse (esp child abuse) if we don’t stop young seminarians from being sexually abused by older seminarians, priests and bishops like McCarrick.

God Bless



What it is is pederasty, which has been around since ancient times. Many greeks and romans revered it, saw it as normal and desirable, and it obviously and unfortunately has persisted, even if in secret and without public approval. It needs to be stamped out, especially in the Church.



Because perversion begets perversion. Depravity is a spectrum that unless repented of will only continue to get worse.



This is the reason why homosexuality is a distraction in this issue… The abuse is predominantly male on male, but it is because underage males are more accessible than underage females. It is an act of domination in some form that is not particularly defined by gender, but its expression is gender defined because of cultural norms.

When women were considered the primary sexual target, a system was devised that isolated males from females. Ironically, these became known as seminaries, seed beds, using the word associated with male sexual production. Within that atmosphere, sexuality was expressed with males because that is all there was, but the motivation was usually power rather than gender. (Power is not quite right, but close enough here)

Excluding homosexuals from seminaries probably will not have much effect as long as developing individuals have to learn to deal with crushes, attachments, and transferences, and the directors have to deal with adulation, authority and transference. The mix of adolescence and repression is just too strong to be ignoree.



True. However, I think you are missing my point.

I don’t think homosexuals need to be necessarily excluded from the seminary. There are many holy, orthodox, & CHASTE priests who experience same sex attraction. Those men are totally fine and actually may even be a great asset to the Church. However, I strongly believe that UNCHASTE men need to be excluded from the seminary. Also, anyone who disagrees with Catholic morality needs to be excluded too - and this includes the Church’s teaching on sexuality.

The “homosexual problem” in the seminary isn’t that they experience same sex attraction. The issue is with the unchaste homosexuals who are not being expelled, while their unchaste hetrosexual counterparts are.

The other problem is that there are some sex predators in the seminaries and who teach at the seminaries who are preying upon the young men. There is also a lot of sexual harassment going on in a number of seminaries too.

This creates a culture of secrecy and begins the circle of abuse. For example: if you are sexually abused or harassed by upperclassmen or a formation director, you are more likely to abuse/harass others when you are in a position of power.

This is what the “homosexual problem” is. The problem is with UNCHASTE homosexuals allowed to remain in the seminary while unchaste hetrosexual men are expelled.

I pray this make sense.



What is your opinion of this excerpt from the an article about The Lollards?

"The Lollards, a pre-Reformation group in England, during the 1300s condemned celibacy in one of their Twelve Conclusions…The third conclusion asserts that the practice of clerical celibacy has encouraged sodomy among the clergy.”



I am not disagreeing with you. Unchaste individuals are the problem, and the system as set up does not deal with them appropriately. They may even handle heterosexual xhastity better than homosexual.

The issue with sexual abuse is people whose main attraction is not men or women, but power. Someone like McCarrick attracts people not particularly because he is male, but because he has power. To a certain degree, that is a good thing. But excess can lead to abuse and manipulation. Oher individuals can follow that example, particularly if they are in a situation where they are subject to authorities. They seek respect for their own authority, even adulation, even when they are in low esteem jobs, like assistant pastor. And again this can be abused.

This kind of abuse is not based on male to female attraction, or male to male, but powerful to weak. Abuse becomes sexualized, in part because that is the most private part of our lives. Sexual prowess is gratifying, quite apart from being attracted sexually. The weaker person does not really matter,not even their gender or sexuality.

That is an extreme statement of the case. Abuse is more than excessive sexual attraction, but is always tied up with sexuality. But the sins of relatively healthy adults with men or women has little to do with a priest or teacher molesting a child.

Chadtity has to be addressed with condidates for ordination. Perhaps homosexual chastity needs a special focus. But the abuse problem is much more than that, and it has to co with hierarchical interactions that are built into our systems.



It’s a stew of factors all working together. Most of the factors are not bad in themselves, but working together with a perverse general culture they are fertile ground for abusive persons who tend to be gay because of all the other factors. (married priests is a something that should be seriously considered)



I have no opinion.

What I am trying to say is that a focus on sex or gender is probably misguided today. It mght have been misguided in the 1300s. I don’t know. Feudal structures could have been the cause of sodomy, rather than celibacy.

If you lived in the 1300s, how would you respond to being a serf?



The late Richard Sipe believed that celibacy was the root cause of the sex abuse crisis. His study revealed that nearly half of all priests are celibate, fifty percent are homosexuals, and upwards of nine percent are pedophiles. The Lollards complained about celibacy and homosexuality two hundred years before the Reformation. The Catholic priesthood has become a haunt for sexual immorality over the centuries, not all priests, but enough to create a culture of abuse at the highest levels.

1 Like


A Must watch if you want to understand what happened.


The homosexual infestation of the priesthood.

1 Like

closed #35

This topic was automatically closed 14 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.