|
file under: it pays to surf blogs. im not for treating homosexuals like dirt or launching massive crusades against those who pursue that lifestyle. im a firm believer that each man is responsible for his own actions and that only God will judge the outcome. i want that to be crystal clear. last nite as i was jaunting around the net cross-referencing the usual blogs i stumbled onto the april 3rd post by dr. philip blosser on his blog musings of a pertinacious papist concerning how various american media have propogated an agenda to normalize homosexuality in the public conscience. in this fascinating entry i came across the name of a catholic investigative reporter - michael rose - who wrote a book preceding the recent catholic sex abuse scandal concerning the practices of a number of catholic seminaries with respect to ostrasizing orthodox seminarians in favor of more liberal minded and specifically homosexual candidates. roses book goodbye good men outlines these practices citing multiple american catholic seminaries and drawing from a base of over 150 seminarians who were directly affected by them. further - an article entitled killing michael rose has drawn from the book itself to make the assertion that one of the dominant reasons for the rcc sex abuse scandal among its priests in america derived from certain practices among catholic seminaries in the years preceding the scandal. heres a quote from the national review on the book itself: "Liberals who blame celibacy for the Catholic Church's pedophilia scandals are missing the real cause: seminaries that actively encourage homosexuality, moral laxity, and theological dissent all in the name of post-Vatican II "renewal." In Goodbye, Good Men, Michael S. Rose demonstrates that such seminaries are by no means rare. All over the country, gay priests and liberal nuns energetically recruit for the priesthood gay men and others of questionable moral character - while turning away heterosexual orthodox men." in light of all this ive become far more interested in reading not only the book but the plethora of editorials from both sides involved in this. the entire situation begs redress and stirs numerous thots - the most poignant and problematic being the possible implication that these priests who were paraded as heterosexuals when the scandal broke were in fact not heterosexuals at all but homosexuals who used the priesthood as a means of preying on young boys in their trust. this may not be the case but it cannot simply be swept aside as some ludicrous notion in light of the number of those cited whose individual testimonies all rang with such incredible similarity. that their allegations were sumarily dismissed by seminary leadership at the schools in question must surely give pause to anyone seeking the truth in this matter. ultimately - if true - this sheds a whole new light on the oft disputed link between pedophilia and homosexuality. and tho it may in the least sense result in verbal abuse from those who hold an interest in denying any link between the two it is a situation that simply must be addressed by anyone interested in truth.
|
