Pedophilia by definition means prepubescent victims. Not getting into the age of consent thing. It's probably too high in most countries but a line has to be drawn somewhere. The issue with priests and other authority figures is that they exploit their regal position which really makes these crimes much worse. I don't care if these sex abuser priests are repressed gay men or not. If they exploit their power to seduce underage victims, they should be prosecuted under the law like anyone else. I might have human compassion for them but that doesn't excuse their behavior.

Sorry if I gave a wrong impression. I had no intention to exonerate the gay priests. What they did was very wrong, and they deserve the punishment the law has meted out to them. But they are human beings, and I think it is right, where we can, to find out the reason (note: NOT the excuse!) why they went wrong.

I think the age of consent is relevant; the priests Toibin knew abused teenagers, who may or may not have been pubescent. As far as I know (and I don't pretend to be a lawyer), all children below the age of consent are treated alike under the law relating to sexual abuse.

Age of consent laws vary across the world and many countries also have different classes of offenses based on age (including Thailand). So of course age of consent matters. But a priest shouldn't exploit his authority regardless of age.

Fortuitously, I came across a passage today from Colm Toibin, an Irish gay writer born in 1955, and educated as a Catholic. The following are quoted from his account.

"Between the ages of 15 and 17, I went to a diocesan school run by priests, which had a seminary attached. From that time I know five priests who have been (accused of sexual crimes).

In the case of four of them, it never occurred to me when I first knew them that they were gay. Even with the fifth, it seemed an impossible idea. I believe that they joined the Church sincerely; perhaps the idea that they had no sexual interest in women made them feel they had a vocation..... there was no one to tell them otherwise; these things were not discussed.

It is probable that had they not been gay they would not have joined the seminary. When they joined the seminary, no one talked about homosexuality; in the society around them it was a great taboo, and still is. I know how long the evenings must have been for them. I know how long they must have denied it, and when they gave in to it, how afraid they must have been."

I spent the years between 11 years old and 18 years old near a seminary that was mainly Irish seminarians. Every Saturday evening there were a lot of very drunk seminarians in the village, the Sunday services must have been very interesting.

My mother used to put it down to their Irishness, but I often wondered if it was repressed urges, one way or the other. I left in 1855 to do National Service and never went back to live, so I cannot comment on any further developments.

" It sounds like you are trying to equate pedophilia with adult consensual homosexuality. Is that REALLY your opinion? If so, that's about as logical as equating pedophilia with adult consensual heterosexuality. Sex crimes against children happen with girl and boy victims. No doubt with the Catholic church it is mostly boys but in the wider world it is mostly girl victims." (quote from Jingthing)

Part of the reason for the increased concern with paedophilia in the Church (yes, mainly with teenage boys) is the change in attitudes towards the age of consent. While homosexual acts were criminal anyway, there wasn't all that distinction made between sex with a 14-year-old, and sex with a 20-year-old.

Fortuitously, I came across a passage today from Colm Toibin, an Irish gay writer born in 1955, and educated as a Catholic. The following are quoted from his account.

"Between the ages of 15 and 17, I went to a diocesan school run by priests, which had a seminary attached. From that time I know five priests who have been (accused of sexual crimes).

In the case of four of them, it never occurred to me when I first knew them that they were gay. Even with the fifth, it seemed an impossible idea. I believe that they joined the Church sincerely; perhaps the idea that they had no sexual interest in women made them feel they had a vocation..... there was no one to tell them otherwise; these things were not discussed.

It is probable that had they not been gay they would not have joined the seminary. When they joined the seminary, no one talked about homosexuality; in the society around them it was a great taboo, and still is. I know how long the evenings must have been for them. I know how long they must have denied it, and when they gave in to it, how afraid they must have been."

Maybe this quotation will help some people to be somewhat less condemnatory.

ENDQUOTE

Since very few of us have priests amongst our circle of close acquaintances, and perhaps still fewer gay priests ro paedophiles, surely it is a joy for us to be able to condemn others without understanding or consideration?

SC

The only Catholic priests I have ever "known" are gay Catholic priests.

The only Catholic priests I have ever "known" are gay Catholic priests.

But I don't think that we hould condemn all Catholic priests just because some might be gay.

SC

Who said there is anything wrong with gay Catholic priests!?!

I sure hope people aren't confusing gay with pedo.

Who said there is anything wrong with gay Catholic priests!?!

I sure hope people aren't confusing gay with pedo.

I think you will find that some are.

Remind me.... which known criminal?

The Pope himself for a start. Plenty of documents released during the LA inquiry which show he had knowledge of crimes but instead of reporting the crimes to the police he simply moved the offenders and told everyone to keep quiet. Another letter by him came to light in Ireland where he told priests etc. that they would be excommunicated if they informed the proper authorities. The former was put down to him (pre Pope) being too busy to read everything he signed while the latter I have never heard any reason given. Speaking of no reason given... In 2011 there were 3 attempts made to get the ICC to act offering truckloads of evidence but they refused, and too this day have never said why.

Thank you, Naam, for holding up to ridicule the suggestion that Benedict XVI can, or could, be prosecuted for not taking quick enough or firm enough action against paedophiles. He may have some responsibility in a moral sense, but not in law.

The paedophile scandal first came to light in a big way towards the end of John Paul II's papacy. John Paul was a very sick man, and let it lie.... on Cardinal Ratzinger's desk. The latter at that stage knew more about it than anybody, because he had reports from several dioceses. When he was chosen as the next Pope, he is known to have been unwilling, but I suppose he regarded it as his duty to accept the papacy.

Then what did he do? I think most people will agree, not enough Two American cardinals lost their jobs, but one, bizarrely, will still be in the conclave to elect Benedict's successor.

One thing people seem reluctant to realise is that it is a Christian belief that repentance is possible even at the very last moment (cf. the thief on the Cross). As a priest, it was Benedict's duty to see that the delinquent priests were given every last chance for repentance. Benedict had to act according to the beliefs of his Church.

Surely the subject of paedophilia in the Catholic Church has been known for generations? This didn't just 'come to light' in the seventies, this was the time that the mass media first had the idea of exposing the practice, as a part of the 'luvvie' sect's determination to break down society as it has been established in the Western world. Before that it was swept under the carpet by said society as 'a sin without a name'. Which meant that it could proceed uninterrupted by any condemnation from society.

Since the legalisation of homosexual acts between consenting adults in 1956 (in the UK) there has been an attempt to differentiate between homosexuality and paedophilia by the media - whereas the assault on small boys by adults (whether priest or layman) is still a homosexual act - it may also be a paedophilic act but it is same sex still. Just another facet of an 'abomination', as stated in Leviticus.

This should be condemned loudly by all Christian churches, if they believe that the societal laws in the Bible are still just and justified. Otherwise toss out the Bible and stop calling themselves Christian.

Homosexual acts were legalised in England and Wales (not the UK) in 1967 not 1956. As far as Leviticus is concerned:

Laura Schlesinger is a US radio personality, who dispenses advice to people who call in to her radio show. She recently said that, as an observant Orthodox Jew, homosexuality is an abomination, according to Leviticus 18:22, and cannot be condoned under any circumstances. The following response is an open letter to Dr. Laura which was posted on the Internet.

Dear Dr. Laura:

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I have learned a great deal from your show, and try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination... End of debate.

I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some other elements of God's Laws and how to follow them.

1. Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness - Lev.15: 19-24. The problem is how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

4. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord - Lev.1:9. The problem is, my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

5. I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath.Exodus 35:2. clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself, or should I ask the police to do it?

6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination - Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this? Are there 'degrees' of abomination?

7. Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle- room here?

8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev. 19:27. How should they die?

9. I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev.19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? Lev.24:10-16.

Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair, like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)

I know you have studied these things extensively and thus enjoy considerable expertise in such matters, so I am confident you can help. Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.

Pope benedict resigned after being handed report into gay sex and corruption in the Vatican.

Says newspaper.

http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/world/pope-benedict-resigned-after-being-handed-report-into-gay-sex-and-corruption-in-vatican-says-newspaper/story-fnd14032-1226583285843

Pope benedict resigned after being handed report into gay sex and corruption in the Vatican.

Says newspaper.

http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/world/pope-benedict-resigned-after-being-handed-report-into-gay-sex-and-corruption-in-vatican-says-newspaper/story-fnd14032-1226583285843

I don't know what sort of a reputation La Reppublica has, but it will be interesting to see what major world newspapers pick the story up.

My initial reaction is to think that, if it were true, Benedict could not have resigned; he would have felt compelled to stay on and fight it.

Faith does funny things to reason.

I don't know what sort of a reputation La Reppublica has, but it will be interesting to see what major world newspapers pick the story up.

My initial reaction is to think that, if it were true, Benedict could not have resigned; he would have felt compelled to stay on and fight it.

those with some knowledge of Italian should check the headlines of La Repubblica.

I don't know what sort of a reputation La Reppublica has, but it will be interesting to see what major world newspapers pick the story up.

My initial reaction is to think that, if it were true, Benedict could not have resigned; he would have felt compelled to stay on and fight it.

those with some knowledge of Italian should check the headlines of La Repubblica.

I checked the Guardian to see what it had to say, and it sounded like a somewhat garbled rehash of the Vatileaks scandal. Anyway, how could anyone know when he made his decision (unless he actually told them)?

I think it is documented that he had been thinking about the issue of Popes quitting and his own quitting for a long time. So yes I agree there is no way to confirm reading that report was the motivating factor unless he says it was, which he won't. He will now fade away, alive or dead.

I think it is documented that he had been thinking about the issue of Popes quitting and his own quitting for a long time. So yes I agree there is no way to confirm reading that report was the motivating factor unless he says it was, which he won't. He will now fade away, alive or dead.

I hope he does. The worst thing he could do is to try to be a back-seat driver for the new pope!

Hugh Heffner and Charlie Sheen have put in for the job....apparently.

The Hoff might be more popular than Heff.....they could do with a movie star sheen on things too.

Tough choice for this uber democratic church!

The Roman Catholic Church is a rancid, politicized and opportunist organization that was undone by the invention of the printing press. I can't be bothered going through the entire history of this most disgraceful blight on mankind, however it's beyond farce, beyond parody, it is easily the most cancerously successful sect in human history.

The tragedy is, that it has sucked in so many gentle loving people to it's lie. The current Pope is a vicious bureaucrat that spent decades suppressing the truth about paedophilia in the modern day church, he was an ecclesiastical assassin, an enforcer on behalf of the previous Pope.

He'll have to face St Peter with the wails of raped children ringing in his ears, as he had the knowledge at hand and ability, to call in the police to investigate abuses of the Church, and rather than do that he silenced people. I do believe the report as posted by Tuky, I've seen other reports which confirm his virtual mental collapse when he heard of the fighting and evil doing of the man that directly surround him. It has always been thus in the Vatican.....always full of evil men.

This is what happens when you give weak men respect they don't deserve. As far as I'm concerned this current Pope has realized the game is up, he can Hail Mary till his hearts content, but no one of this earth can absolve him of his failure to protect the children.

A Pope that wilfully failed to protect children? He deserves nothing but contempt.

Surely this resignation pushes them into choosing a younger man?

Perhaps the current pontiff understood he can't modernise and this needs a generational push.....!

Surely this resignation pushes them into choosing a younger man?

Perhaps the current pontiff understood he can't modernise and this needs a generational push.....!

Somewhere along the line here this Pope tripped over his conscience and said to himself, " What have I done? "............

Too late Jojo, you had the ability to save the children from further abuse, you chose to bury the facts. Shame on you, shame, shame, shame on you.

Time for a woman to do the job.

But not just any woman.

Angelina.

Reports are coming out ( forgive the pun ) of gay encounters in a sauna linked to the Vatican.

The sexual repression of the Catholic Church has much to answer for. In the last couple of days the Scottish Cardinal ( I can't be bothered remembering his name ) has called for priests to be allowed to marry.

I say de-mystify the Church, take down the pagan idols ( did they not read the story of the Ten Commandments? ), and reverse the Middle Age mistake of enforced celibacy. That includes allowing gay priests, as the Word Of The Lord and yhe Truth Of The Word is not restricted to hetrosexual single men sworn to celibacy. The whole idea is a reactionary farce, a reaction against the excesses of the Borgias Empire.

a critical over reaction I would say.....Jesus never preached celibacy to my knowledge, this is a mistake by a mortal man thst has to be corrected.

Preach The Word........not division and hatred.

Time for a woman to do the job.

But not just any woman.

Angelina.

Reports are coming out ( forgive the pun ) of gay encounters in a sauna linked to the Vatican.

The sexual repression of the Catholic Church has much to answer for. In the last couple of days the Scottish Cardinal ( I can't be bothered remembering his name ) has called for priests to be allowed to marry.

I say de-mystify the Church, take down the pagan idols ( did they not read the story of the Ten Commandments? ), and reverse the Middle Age mistake of enforced celibacy. That includes allowing gay priests, as the Word Of The Lord and yhe Truth Of The Word is not restricted to hetrosexual single men sworn to celibacy. The whole idea is a reactionary farce, a reaction against the excesses of the Borgias Empire.

a critical over reaction I would say.....Jesus never preached celibacy to my knowledge, this is a mistake by a mortal man thst has to be corrected.

Preach The Word........not division and hatred.

so are you asking me to believe that the Catholic church is the Only church with hidden agendas, corrupt practices and inflated self worth? IMO faith does not need to be labeled as a matter a fact what is with labels that make certain groups feel secure and validated?

Time for a woman to do the job.

But not just any woman.

Angelina.

Are you permanently gagged CCC.....PM us if you like....or try channelling....my lines are open.

In this day and age....who the hell needs to believe in fairy tales.

The Pope on a Rope Soap sells well within the Vatican walls...apparently.

The most senior Catholic priest in the UK has been accused of 'inappropriate behaviour' by a number of men.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/feb/23/cardinal-keith-o-brien-accused-inappropriate

The most senior Catholic priest in the UK has been accused of 'inappropriate behaviour' by a number of men.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/feb/23/cardinal-keith-o-brien-accused-inappropriate

Although nothing was said for thirty years.

Worse things happened to me 65 years ago. I put it behind me and got on with life.

If one does not report assaults at the time of the event, or soon thereafter, does one condone the act(s)?