Don’t downplay role of homosexual activity in abuse issue

Re: “Abuse” (Letters to the Editor, Dec. 9-15).

A recent letter challenged the contention that the major problem with the priest sexual abuse scandal was male homosexuality predation by citing the USCCB-sponsored John Jay College of Law study, which stated “that ‘celibacy and homosexuality’ were not the cause of this crisis.” That statement ignores the study’s own data that found that “81 percent of the victims [between 1950 and 2002] were male,” and that 78 percent were post-pubescent. Pedophilia accounted for less than 5 percent of the cases.

The ethos at that time, and even since, has been promoted that homosexual activity is OK, and even to be promoted and sanctified. Clearly, the Church fell prey to that in its selection and formation of priests during the period from the 1960s to 1980s.

In the more recent Pennsylvania report, 75 percent of the cases involved male homosexual activity (Catalyst, September 2018). And the McCarrick sexual abuse appears to be all male homosexual predation too. Yet most media coverage casts this issue as being pedophilia. Clearly, the issue was male-on-male sexual predation. Without knowing and acknowledging this, we find ourselves in the current morass groping for a solution.

You can debate why this occurred, but it is not debatable what the issue was.

A.F. Kertz, St. Louis, Missouri


Re: “America’s Split Response to Migrant Caravan” (News Analysis, Nov. 18-24).

Father Pat Murphy and his brother priests and bishops have misplaced compassion for the “invaders.”

They appear to be mostly men with angry faces, raised fists, and carrying flags of the nations they say they are fleeing.

They stormed a sovereign nation’s borders (Mexico), broke down fences and barriers, threw rocks and attacked police. When offered asylum in Mexico, they refused and continued to the United States border.

As “shepherds,” we hoped to see priests and bishops accompanying these groups, attending to their spiritual needs on such a “worthy journey.” Where are they? Where are the rosaries and novena prayers being said, roadside Masses and Marian songs? Pictures like that would definitely soften the vision and make us less apprehensive.

When arriving at our southern border, the grateful, happy groups rushed at the gates, throwing rocks, bottles, and debris at law enforcement officers.

When our uninvited “guests” do get across the border and into our land, how do we know what diseases they bring with them?

They come with no identifying papers nor health history. Why are they not medically processed? As years ago, when all immigrants were kept on Ellis Island, before being allowed into the U.S.

Are we not allowed to protect our own children without being made to feel guilty by our religious leaders?

We are the most generous country in the world. Why are we derided as selfish in defense of criminals who come to destroy us?

Sandra A. Fischer, Valley City, Ohio

Scripture interpretation

Re: “Parable as a veil” (Opening the Word, July 16-22, 2017).

In his article, Timothy O’Malley says that Bible scholars today believe what Jesus meant by the parables were added later.

I believe too many scholars are picking the Bible apart way too much. This is why some people believe that Matthew and the other Gospel writers did not actually write the Gospels. Or we have heads of religious orders such as the Jesuits saying that we don’t know what Jesus meant or said. Or people feel that the Gospels were exaggerated.

I think we need to stop with this type of Bible scholarship.

And also only Catholic scholars who truly believe in what Christ taught should be used.

John P. Glackin, via online comments
Top-Viewed Stories
The most popular stories on this week included: