By David Virtue
News Analysis
May 4, 2010
http://www.virtueonline.org/portal/modules/news/article.php?storyid=12510
Gene Robinson, the Bishop of New Hampshire has written an "open letter" to the Pope telling him in no uncertain terms that the sex abuse scandal in the Roman Catholic Church is about pedophilia and that he has it all wrong about homosexuals. He accuses the Pope of being "misguided and [says it is]wrong for gay men to be scapegoated in this scandal."
Robinson wrote his letter as a part of his program as a part-time senior fellow at the Center for American Progress.
He wrote, "As a gay man, I know the pain and the verbal and physical violence that can come from the thoroughly debunked myth connecting homosexuality and the abuse of children. In the media, representatives of and advocates for the Roman Catholic Church have laid blame for sexual abuse at the feet of gay priests. These people know, or should know, that every reputable scientific study shows that homosexuals are no more or less likely to be child abusers than heterosexuals. Psychologically healthy homosexual men are no more drawn to little boys than psychologically healthy heterosexual men are drawn to little girls.
 |
"Sexual activity with children or teenagers is child abuse, pure and simple. Meaningful consent is impossible, by definition, for the underaged. You will not rid your church of sexual abuse by throwing homosexuals out of your seminaries or out of the priesthood. Homosexual priests have faithfully and responsibly served God throughout Catholic history. To scapegoat them and deprive them of their pulpits is a tragedy for the people they serve and for the church. Yours is a problem of abuse, not sexual orientation."
Robinson has it all wrong.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church describes homosexuality as "objectively disordered" http://www.vatican.va/archive/catechism/p3s2c2a6.htm The writers of the catechism say this under the banner: Chastity and homosexuality
"Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered." They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.
"The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God's will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.
"Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.
"Explicit treatment of the problem was given in this Congregation's "Declaration on Certain Questions Concerning Sexual Ethics" of December 29, 1975. That document stressed the duty of trying to understand the homosexual condition and noted that culpability for homosexual acts should only be judged with prudence.
"At the same time the Congregation took note of the distinction commonly drawn between the homosexual condition or tendency and individual homosexual actions. These were described as deprived of their essential and indispensable finality, as being "intrinsically disordered", and able in no case to be approved of.
"As in every moral disorder, homosexual activity prevents one's own fulfillment and happiness by acting contrary to the creative wisdom of God. The Church, in rejecting erroneous opinions regarding homosexuality, does not limit but rather defends personal freedom and dignity realistically and authentically understood." http://tinyurl.com/4rsyc
As a result of Robinson's consecration, the Roman Catholic Church broke off ecumenical discussions with The Episcopal Church, as did the Russian Orthodox Church.
Truth be told, Robinson's consecration has cost TEC dearly with tens of thousands of people leaving The Episcopal Church including whole dioceses. A new Anglican Church has been formed in North America, which the Roman Catholic Church may yet recognize.
What sort of credibility does Robinson think he has with the pope? Bear in mind that he was once married to a woman, had two children, then announced after several years of marriage that he was a homosexual, divorced his wife, then met a man on a Caribbean Island, moved in with him and then "married" him according to the secular laws of the state of New Hampshire.
The truth is those group of priests who molest mostly young men ARE homosexuals or more accurately ephebophiliacs, adult men who have a sexual preference for mid-to-late adolescents, generally ages 15 to 19.
The term "ephebophilia" was originally used in the late 19th to mid 20th century. It is one of a number of sexual preferences across age groups subsumed under the neologism of "chronophilia". Ephebophilia strictly denotes the preference for mid-to-late adolescent sexual partners, defined as a sexual preference for girls generally 14–16 years old, and boys generally 14–19 years old.
Some authors define ephebophilia as a sexual preference for pubescent and adolescent boys. These Roman Catholic priests fall exactly into that category. They are not pedophiles as they did not go after small children...their sexual interests lay in seducing young adolescent boys whose sexuality had not been fully formed and who were open to manipulation by older men, including a number of priests in the Roman Catholic Church.
As Catholic League president Bill Donohue observed on the statistics of sexual abuse in the Roman Catholic Church, "As reported in 2004, between 1950 and 2002, 81 percent of the victims were male; in 2005, it stayed the same; in 2006, it dropped to 80 percent; in 2007, it climbed to 82 percent; in 2008, it jumped to 84 percent; and in 2009, it stayed at 84 percent. In other words, even though priests have less access to males, homosexual priests are molesting them at a higher rate [than females]. It's time to end the gay cover-up once and for all."
Not to put a too fine point on it, a gay Episcopal activist, Frank Lombard, a Duke University official was arrested in Raleigh, NC on pedophile charges he molested his own children. He claimed that he was a "fan of New Hampshire Bishop V. Gene Robinson."
Or what about the case of the convicted pedophile Episcopal Priest Lynn C. Baumann who was allowed to host a spiritual retreats with Presiding Bishop's blessing!
In an exchange of correspondence with David Clohessy, National Director of Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests (SNAP), Mrs. Jefferts Schori, through her Pastoral Development Officer Bishop F. Clayton Matthews, said Baumann could function as a spiritual retreat master on the understanding that "Mr. Baumann's contact (is) to adults only".
One should point out to Robinson that despite all the fine talk about how high the standards are now for sexual abuse being spotted and dealt with in TEC, as recently as February of this year, an 82-year old Episcopal priest in the Diocese of Central New York was charged with multiple counts each of involuntary deviate sexual intercourse, indecent assault, and corruption of a minor. He got away with it for years.
Stories VOL wrote at that time suggested a possible cover-up of the priest's sexual activities by Episcopal Bishop Gladstone (Skip) Adams. Why did we hear nothing from Robinson about these cases when they erupted in the press?
I wrote at the time, "The truth is the bishop (Adams) should be investigated by the national church. He should face the same charges brought against the now inhibited and deposed former Bishop of Pennsylvania, Charles E. Bennison who was forced to step down following a trial and conviction on charges that he covered up his brother's sexual abuse of a female minor. The story began in 2006..."
The truth is Robinson's advice to the Pope is ill advised and his misinformation staggering. He should get his sexualities (LGBTQ) -- he says there are more -- better lined up before he proceeds to tell the leader of one billion Catholics worldwide what it is he would like us to believe about sex outside of marriage between a man and a woman.
Roman Catholic leaders did a very poor job in getting rid of homosexuals. Many of the leaders were fooled. Homosexuals over ran their seminaries. In many cases, they took over parishes and fooled bishops and those higher up in the church. They became deeply entrenched as the "pink mafia". The Vatican finally sent a team of high-level persons to clean the homosexual infestations out of the seminaries.
The Roman Catholic Church has now said there will be no more cover-ups, no more peddling of sexually abusive priests around to different parishes. Every case will be turned over to the authorities immediately. We shall see. Institutional loyalty still reigns.
The difference of course between the Roman Catholic Church and the Episcopal Church is that TEC has rolled over to the culture and not stood up against it. TEC has caved while the RCC has not.
Robinson thinks that by giving vent to his sexual preferences and endorsing sodomy in the name of "justice" that this will resolve the problem and people will come flocking back to TEC in the name of inclusivity and diversity. He is dead wrong. It is not happening. TEC is slowly dying. The Roman Catholic Church grew in America last year, admittedly through immigration, despite the awful things a handful of their priests did.
The Roman Catholic Church has put in place higher standards for those applying to the priesthood. Homosexuals will be hard pressed to get past the battery of psychological tests they must now undergo.
It is not without its significance that leading British homosexual Peter Tatchell has advocated for the legal age of sexual consent to be lowered to 14 http://tinyurl.com/36hp463 and Stonewall, the chief gay campaigners in the United Kingdom, publicly advocates 16 as the legal age of consent for sexual activity with children http://tinyurl.com/337slhh Why would they do that if they didn't want fresh young vulnerable boys to seduce?
Most of those who abuse children (and 14 is a child, to my mind) are unmarried men who abuse boys rather than girls. The conclusion seems glaringly obvious to anyone. It is also becoming clearer, based on the best psychological evidence, that male predators are drawn and attracted to their victims because it seemingly fulfills a bottomless yearning for father-son bonding and nurturing that was denied the predator for whatever reason.
Perhaps, Mr. Robinson should take a long hard look in the mirror.
*****
The following is the letter Bishop Robinson wrote to Pope Benedict XVI.
Amid abuse scandal, advice from Episcopal Bishop Gene Robinson to Pope Benedict
By Bishop V. Gene Robinson
Sunday, May 2, 2010
Your Holiness,
Though our churches differ in many ways, we believe in the same God. As your brother in Christ, it pains me to see Catholics struggle with your response to recent allegations of sex abuse by priests. Since my denomination has also battled these demons, I want to share with you what I have learned as a bishop of the Episcopal Church.
About 20 years ago, our church became aware of sex abuse by our clergy here in the United States. To our shame, we learned of it in lawsuits filed by victims alleging that some of our bishops had minimized the seriousness of the abuse and/or swept their claims under the rug. Some cases were related to the abuse of children; others involved male clergy who took advantage of their pastoral relationship with vulnerable women to manipulate them into sexual relationships. These men violated the sacred trust placed in clergy to focus on parishioners' needs and to separate those needs from their own. To prevent further such abuses of power, we moved quickly for the good of the victims and of our church.
Whether or not civil courts recognize a statute of limitations, the church must hold its clergy members accountable to their vows to be faithful shepherds of their people. In 1994, the Episcopal Church opened a two-year window of opportunity to hear complaints about priestly abuse of the pastoral relationship with adults. Just because an event occurred many years ago did not make it any less egregious, especially since perpetrators rarely have only one victim. We addressed all complaints through our canonical disciplinary process.
As for instances involving children, we have no statute of limitations on reporting abuse. Those suspected of committing child abuse are immediately reported to the civil authorities for investigation.
Rather than refusing to acknowledge our transgressions, we sought to change our church's culture -- an effort that took no small amount of courage. In my diocese in New Hampshire, and across the Episcopal Church, we perform a thorough background check on every bishop, priest or deacon who serves under my authority. We correspond with every employer the clergyperson has ever had and every bishop under whom the clergyperson has ever served to determine whether there is a history of complaints.
While procedures vary from diocese to diocese, we here in New Hampshire require six hours of abuse-prevention training for clergy, all other employees of the church (organists, parish administrators, maintenance workers), youth workers and elected parish leaders. A refresher course is required every five years. Events with and for children may never be conducted without two adults present and always in view of each other. This protects children from abusive behavior and protects adults who might be falsely charged. Many of our parishes have installed windows in the clergy office doors, so that no activity -- even private counseling -- may go unobserved.
We want many pairs of eyes watching for signs of abuse. We want everyone to know how to report suspected abuse of children and abuse of the pastoral relationship between clergy members and parishioners. We want to keep the issue before our church -- clergy and laity alike -- and to keep the conversation going.
But the thing victims most want to hear from the church, especially its leadership, is: "I am so sorry. This should never have happened to you, especially here. We are going to do everything in our power to see that nothing like this happens again." Victims live with their horrific experiences and know that their abuse can never be undone. And so they seek assurance that the church will change the system that allows abuse to go undetected and take action to hold perpetrators accountable. Child abusers do not deserve protection; they must be reported immediately to civil authorities and prosecuted.
The Christian church -- like any institution -- is as capable of sin as any individual. We have been wrong before, from the Inquisition and the Crusades down to our defense of slavery (using scripture) and our denigration of women. Over time, the church has repented for these sins and sought to change its ways. The discovery of sexual abuse by clergy is another situation that calls for the church's repentance and reform.
I would not presume to instruct you. That would be arrogant. Nor would I impose upon you advice you've not sought. But I do offer you the benefit of my experience as you seek to deal responsibly with these challenges to the integrity of your church. Your letter to the faithful in Ireland and your meeting in Malta with victims were a good start. I hope the future will bring more truth telling, which will make your church a better, safer place.
However, I believe it is misguided and wrong for gay men to be scapegoated in this scandal. As a gay man, I know the pain and the verbal and physical violence that can come from the thoroughly debunked myth connecting homosexuality and the abuse of children. In the media, representatives of and advocates for the Roman Catholic Church have laid blame for sexual abuse at the feet of gay priests. These people know, or should know, that every reputable scientific study shows that homosexuals are no more or less likely to be child abusers than heterosexuals. Psychologically healthy homosexual men are no more drawn to little boys than psychologically healthy heterosexual men are drawn to little girls.
Sexual activity with children or teenagers is child abuse, pure and simple. Meaningful consent is impossible, by definition, for the underaged. You will not rid your church of sexual abuse by throwing homosexuals out of your seminaries or out of the priesthood. Homosexual priests have faithfully and responsibly served God throughout Catholic history. To scapegoat them and deprive them of their pulpits is a tragedy for the people they serve and for the church. Yours is a problem of abuse, not sexual orientation.
I will pray for your church and for you, as I hope you will pray for my church and for me. In Luke 12:2-3, Jesus tells us: "Nothing is covered up that will not be uncovered, and nothing secret that will not become known. Therefore whatever you have said in the dark will be heard in the light, and what you have whispered behind closed doors will be proclaimed from the rooftops."
And may God have mercy on our souls.
Your brother in Christ,
Gene Robinson
Any original material on these pages is copyright © BishopAccountability.org 2004. Reproduce freely with attribution.