The Deetman commission is Holland that investigated sexual abuse has concluded that since 1945 between ten and twenty thousand children were sexually abused by Catholic priests and religious. This is in a country that currently has about five million Catholics.
The commission also suggested that homosexuality was a major factor in the abuse. FAZ reports:
Homosexuelle Subkultur ein entscheidender Faktor
Schilderungen der Kommission über sexuellen Missbrauch von Jungen speziell in Ordenseinrichtungen lassen indes darauf schließen, dass eine homosexuelle Subkultur ein entscheidender Faktor für Übergriffigkeit war und ist.
The descriptions of the commission of the sexual abuse of boys, especially in institutions run by religious orders suggests that a homosexual subculture was and is [my emphasis] a crucial factor for the abuse.
I have surveyed the press in the languages I know, and this seems to be the only article that mentions this conclusion of the report. I do not read Dutch, so I must rely upon this German report, but FAZ is generally accurate.
In the United States boys constituted the vast majority of victims abused by priests; in Germany it was more 50-50 boys and girls.
Homosexuals constitute less than 5% of the general population. One would therefore expect about 5% of the victims to be boys. But the percentage is much higher both in society in general and very much higher in the Church.
Why are boys disproportionately victims?
Some claim that pedophilia (sexual attraction to small children) has nothing to do with homosexuality or heterosexuality. Boys are more often victims because they are more accessible. Parents protect their daughters more than their sons.
But much of the abuse is not really pedophilia but rather pederasty, the type of relationship between an adult male and a pubescent boy by that the Greeks cultivated, and this is definitely a form of homosexuality, and was championed by the gay rights movement before they realized it was poison.
I think that one reason for the disproportion is the desire of young males to stay away from church as soon as they achieve some independence. Young women go to church, and provide adult targets for heterosexual priests; young men do not go to church. The young males in church are therefore boys and adolescents who are forced to go to church or attend church institutions. Young men, even in present in church, are also likely to react violently to unwanted homosexual overtures; boys are safer targets.
Men who entered the clergy in the past (less so in the present) used celibacy as a way to escape their homosexual desires, but celibacy is not a panacea for sexual problems. Their sexuality remained unconfronted and adolescent, and when they started acting out sexually they turned to adolescents.
In the United States experts who talk privately about the problem of immature, arrested-development homosexuals in the clergy will publicly claim that homosexuality has nothing to do with the abuse. It seems that the Deetman Commission was willing to raise the issue, but almost all of the hundreds of articles about that Commission’s report have ignored that conclusion. Some things, like homosexuality, are too sacred to call into question.
Brace yourself for a flame attack.
Look at the bishops in the U.S….even decades before Vatican II, active homosexuals were extremely powerful in the American church. People in the Vatican were protecting them and moving them to the top (e.g., Cardinal Spellman). The mainstream media completely ignore this sordid history, obviously for political reasons. Not all active homosexuals are pederasts, but I’m sure a very large percentage are.
I’ve always been a bit confused regarding the relationship between sexual orientation and predatory and abusive behavior.
When little girls are raped, do we chalk it up, even in part, to the heterosexuality of the predator? Or on the heterosexual subculture that is part and parcel of so many families in which sexual abuse of children is perpetrated?
Yet it certainly can’t be ignored that such a large percentage of sexual abuse of minors by priests was perpetrated by homosexuals on young boys. I can see how a homosexual culture may have led to a lot of cover-up of child abuse. When people have dirt–and the threat of being outed as a homosexual has long been a powerful threat indeed–on each other, cover-up abounds. And knowing that such a culture existed within the priesthood was probably attractive to homosexual men with predatory tendencies. And so it was a vicious cycle.
A gay former friend of mine did mention to me that pederasty is very much a part of the gay male subculture. Just find a few gay male magazines and you will find photos of boys. They don’t consider it nonconsensual sex. Gay bars have plenty of boy prostitutes waiting behind them that it is no wonder gay priests do not have far to leap from soliciting boys behind the bar on Thursday and Friday nights and the confessional on Saturday and the sacristy on Sunday.
Father Michael Koening
The Church in the Netherlands has been “running on low” for some years now. Some of my relatives there still go to Mass, but they’re a minority. This will certainly strike another big blow to credibility and attendance.
I’ll have to look up the report and see what it says in the original Dutch. I’d be surprised if any reference to homosexuality isn’t nuanced more than the translation you gave of the German was.
Tony de New York
Finally the truth is coming out.
Cardinal Spellman was definitely gay and he used to pick up young boys on Broadway in New York City in the theater district. I was abused several times in the minor seminary and attacked once in the Paracletes by homosexual priests. Several priests had pederast relationships with the young boys. Even in a Catholic Jesuit college in Denver, I was approached by a homosexual priest who was supposed to be my counselor.
CM is wrong. It is unfortunate that people can freely place all the homosexuals as pederasts. I have many friends that are open homosexuals and every single one of them can dispute CM’s “claim” or at least of his “former-friend” Interestingly as many people use the line a friend-of-mine excluding themselves from a personal statement.