Achbp O"Brien On Ordinations

[Fortiterinre]

Along with the Paracletes in New Mexico, St. Luke’s is definitely one of the big treatment centers. I do not think Fr. Rosetti is advocating that homosexual priests be sexually active with other adults. Friday morning he was on Morning Air on Relevant Radio talking about his new book–I would be astonished if Relevant Radio would make a mistake that big.

I think sexual involvement with older teens is clearly a big issue, but I also think sexual involvement with pre-teens is a combination of several big issues. Ignoring the ages of these YOUNG kids is foolish in my view. This is hardly any kind of defense of priests being anything but celibate.

 

[Fortiterinre]

I just double-checked, and Fr. Stephen J. Rossetti of St. Luke’s Institute is the author of The Joy of the Priesthood, the new book he was discussing on Relevant Radio Friday.

 

[fix]

The article I posted spoke of Rosetti’s opinions. The author agreed with some of Rosetti’s opinions and disagreed with others. I think the author makes valid points.

I was disagreeing with the assertion that the scandal is not predominatly a homosexual one.

 

[fix]

I do not understand why you are quoting me here. Do you mean that Stephen Rossetti is citing only 20% of abusers were clinical pedophiles? That was from a smaller study as he says. The figures from the John Jay study of all reported abuse victims are:

"Victims’ ages: 5.8 percent under 7; 16 percent ages 8-10; 50.9 percent ages 11-14; 27.3 percent ages 15-17.

Victims’ gender: 81 percent male, 19 percent female."

81% homosexual is an overwhelming majority, but 73% of victims age 14 or younger is too. I am saying there are TWO problems at work here, not JUST homosexuality.

That these homosexual oriented men abused 11-14 year olds does not mean they do not have relations with older males as well. That is why it is not accurate to claim it is not a homosexual issue.

 

[Fortiterinre]

fix:

That these homosexual oriented men abused 11-14 year olds does not mean they do not have relations with older males as well. That is why it is not accurate to claim it is not a homosexual issue.

I did not claim that it is not a homosexual issue. I said that it is a homosexual issue AND an issue of child abuse. I used all caps, and you actually quote me when I say that the homosexual majority was “overwhelming!”:banghead:

 

[fix]

Fortiterinre:

I did not claim that it is not a homosexual issue. I said that it is a homosexual issue AND an issue of child abuse. I used all caps, and you actually quote me when I say that the homosexual majority was “overwhelming!”:banghead:

You want to separate the disorder of same sex attraction into categories that claim as a subset those that are only attracted to minors, correct? I disagree.

It is not about a pure attraction to “children”. It is about homosexual attraction.

While heterosexuals have deviations that may include an attraction to “children”, I am saying that the attraction to the same sex is a disorder in and of itself and that disorder, among men, is to young males in particular.

The attempt to claim that most of the cases in question are some subset of homosexuals is to shift the blame.

 

[fix]

I want to quote the article again so no confusion exists:

The majority of perpetrators are involved with postpubescent children. All things being equal, they are more amenable to treatment. One of their goals is to develop satisfying relationships with age-appropriate peers.

Thus, in contrast with pedophiles, Rossetti describes ephebophiles: “There are others who are ephebophiles, i.e., sexually attracted to postpubescent children” (67).

Melvin C. Blanchette, S.S.S., and Gerard D. Coleman, S.S.S., “Priest Pedophiles,” America, 25 April 2002, claim that ephebophilia is one of “five basic sexual orientations.” They define it as follows:

A fixated ephebophile possesses a primary sexual desire toward children between 14 and 17, with the adolescent victim being at least five years younger than the perpetrator. This category becomes especially complicated when the victim is a 14- to 17-year-old boy, and the adult male’s attraction might be one of homosexuality rather than ephebophilia.

I****n fact, there are two reasons to doubt whether an adult male’s sexual interest in adolescent boys or young men often, if ever, manifests a basic sexual orientation distinct from homosexuality. First, if one looks for “ephebophilia” in the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, one does not find it. Second, as Rossetti says (88), pedophiles are not amenable to treatment because “psychotherapy usually cannot change one’s sexual orientation.” But, Rossetti also points out (68):** “Many times adults who are sexually aroused by minors may also be aroused by adults as well.”** Other things being equal, Rossetti says (88), ephebophiles are “more amenable to treatment,” for they can learn to “develop satisfying relationships with age-appropriate peers.”

In other words, men who have engaged in criminal sexual behavior with adolescent boys and young men can be treated effectively, because no change in sexual orientation is necessary. Such men generally, and perhaps always, simply are homosexuals who have found underage partners attractive and conveniently available, and have been willing to commit crimes. With treatment, they can stop committing crimes and enjoy “satisfying relationships with age-appropriate peers.” “Age-appropriate” is a telling expression. Priests should and usually do enjoy satisfying *nonsexual *relationships with many of their spiritual children, from the cradle to the grave. Only unchaste relationships must be limited to age-appropriate peers—to consenting adults. Rossetti apparently considers that limitation a successful treatment outcome.

 

[Fortiterinre]

I’m still not sure what article you are quoting, but I just want to establish that I am in no way minimizing the problems you discuss. We definitely disagree that homosexuality in general includes an attraction to 10-14 year-olds; there is simply no empirical evidence for anything like this, and I don’t think the moral teachings of the Church are well served when we adopt arguments that contravene the evidence. To this way of thinking, I would assume that the faithful men of Fr. Harvey’s Courage group are are also liable to molest ten year-olds, and only by an act of self-conquest of the will do they prevent this. Again, I just don’t see it. One problem I see with PRIESTS is that if anything recent formation has been on the leading edge of cultural indicators; ironically many of the PRIESTS are probably as driven by the gay pride agenda as the open gay activists. Rather than creating subsets of the sexual orientation, I think the priests who fraudulently obtained ordination are the real subset.

 

[otm]

Fortiterinre:

There is still a misunderstanding. “Empirical” means based on repeated observations, with logical deductions from the observations. I would expect a normal man to notice a 16 or 17 year-old high school cheerleader in a short uniform. I would expect a male homosexual to notice a 16 or 17 year-old high-school football player in uniform. I would not expect a normal man to notice a skinny 6th grade cheerleader. She may be post-pubescent, but she would not have nearly enough secondary sexual characteristics to catch the notice of an average man unless she were far advanced beyond normal development. Likewise the typical male homosexual would not be expected to notice a gawky 6th grade cub scout. He may be post-pubescent–he has BEGUN adolescence–but if he is normal for his age he does not have many secondary sexual characteristics. Young children entering adolescence in middle school age simply have not developed enough for most adults to have even purient interest in them. Those that do are not TYPICAL, whether homosexual or not. The pathology of pedophilia is a sexual attraction to someone who is not yet sexually developed. The disturbing gray zone is this alarming attraction to those ENTERING sexual development; this is empirically speaking a statistical anomaly. God knows kids are growing up faster and faster, but adolescence still takes years.

It seems that you are making the presumption that a homosexual would have “normal” sexual desires, except for the fact that they have same sex attraction.

However, they approach sex as a self-seeking activity, not as ;something bonding between two adults. That, perhaps at its core, can explain why homosexulas who are active have so many sexual partners in any given time span; the rate is significantly higher for male homosexuals than it is for male heterosexuals.

Because their sexual activity is so totally self centered, and they seek multiple partners, often in an evening, I fail to see why you would presume that they would have “normal” sexual attraction.

Their sexual attraction is not normal to begin with; and there is a clear and distinct subset within the homosexual community that definitely is attracted to young boys. You may wish to learn a little bit more about NAMBLA.

Please note that I am not trying to say that all male homosexuals are attracted to young post pubescent boys. However, the sub-set is much higher than you seem to be aware of.

 

[Guar_Fan]

otm:

However, they approach sex as a self-seeking activity, not as ;something bonding between two adults.

Other than a high rate of promiscuity, do you have any reason for saying this?

That, perhaps at its core, can explain why homosexulas who are active have so many sexual partners in any given time span; the rate is significantly higher for male homosexuals than it is for male heterosexuals.

I think the reason that male heterosexuals have a lower rate of promiscuity is because female heterosexuals will not allow them to get away with multiple partners. Some guys idea of paradise would be to have 72 female partners.

 

[otm]

Guar Fan:

Other than a high rate of promiscuity, do you have any reason for saying this?

I think the reason that male heterosexuals have a lower rate of promiscuity is because female heterosexuals will not allow them to get away with multiple partners. Some guys idea of paradise would be to have 72 female partners.

If you are familiar at all with the activity around what was called steam baths, the answer should be fairly evident.

I know of no equivalent in the heterosexual world; but perhaps I am nust naieve.

 

[Guar_Fan]

otm:

I know of no equivalent in the heterosexual world;.

But only because of lack of female interest!

I think promiscuity is a male behavior - gay or straight.

 

[Orionthehunter]

fix:

The abuse was almost exclusively male on male. Homosexuality is a central issue in this scandal.

In light of what we have just experienced, it is prudent for the Church to adopt this policy to prevent or mitigate the chances of further sexual abuse of minors doesn’t occur. However, I’m not convinced that this will necessarily get at the heart of the problem.

1. While 80% of the victims were male, 20% of the victims were female. We still need to be diligent to make sure our daughters are protected.
2. I think that sexual abuse of minors is less about sex and more about power. Conventional psychiatric wisdom believes rape isn’t about sex but is about the perpetrator lusting for power over the victim. In my humble (but untrained) opinion, sexual abuse of minors seems to more parallel rape than sex. If it was about sex, there would have been alot less risky places for a Priest to engage in his sin than with his own altar boys.
3. If the premise above has merit, the disproportionate male victims could be because the predators had greater access to young boys than young girls and isn’t about homosexuality. Thus, we may be chasing the wrong psychological defect.

 

[fix]

Orionthehunter:

1. While 80% of the victims were male, 20% of the victims were female. We still need to be diligent to make sure our daughters are protected.

I agree, but one would be remiss to overlook that the majority of cases were male on male.

1. I think that sexual abuse of minors is less about sex and more about power. Conventional psychiatric wisdom believes rape isn’t about sex but is about the perpetrator lusting for power over the victim. In my humble (but untrained) opinion, sexual abuse of minors seems to more parallel rape than sex. If it was about sex, there would have been alot less risky places for a Priest to engage in his sin than with his own altar boys.

Power is one aspect, but these issues are fairly common in the homosexual culture. Teen males are highly sought after and in the cases we speak of were easily available and we do not know these men may very well have been having “relations” with older males as well.

1. If the premise above has merit, the disproportionate male victims could be because the predators had greater access to young boys than young girls and isn’t about homosexuality. Thus, we may be chasing the wrong psychological defect.

I reject that theory. The males who were abused were post pubescent. What heterosexual male seeks out post pubescent males to abuse?

 

[Orionthehunter]

I agree, but one would be remiss to overlook that the majority of cases were male on male.

I’m not dismissing the raw percentage. I recognize that the predominance of the abuse were homosexual acts. I’m just trying to raise the perspective that the focus on homosexuality might be the wrong focus. In my mind these are primarily acts of predation because Priests are at least 25 when they are ordained and while they age, the predators still focus on people with whom they have power over.

Power is one aspect, but these issues are fairly common in the homosexual culture. Teen males are highly sought after and in the cases we speak of were easily available and we do not know these men may very well have been having “relations” with older males as well.

I admit that I’m rather naive on the “culture”. The last conversation I had with someone I knew was homosexual was 25 years ago and even then I didn’t talk to him about his sex life much less the “culture” At the same time, when I contemplate the entire thing, it seems like it is more about power. If it was about the sex, the homosexual would pursue relationships in places where there would be less chance of getting caught.

Additionally, if a H.S. teacher has sex w/ a female student, we’d focus on the predation as we send the predator to jail. I’m having a hard time why understanding why the primary focus is on the homosexuality in this selective situation (sexual abuse of minors by Priests).

I reject that theory. The males who were abused were post pubescent. What heterosexual male seeks out post pubescent males to abuse?

This response appears that you aren’t grasping my point. If scandal is primarily a case of predation and not same sex attraction, we may be focusing on the wrong defect. Prison rape isn’t about homosexuality but about power and exerting that power on those who are vulnerable. Upon release, virtually none of the prison rapists live a homosexual lifestyle and unless rape was their original crime return to prison as a rapists. It could be that the only reason there is a preponderance of male victims in the abuse scandal is access and vulnerability.

I’m raising this as an alternative view and perspective of the abuse scandal to be considered. I recognize that there is an underground “society” of homosexuality in the seminaries and priesthood (its magnitude is unknown runs the gamut) and believe this needs to be rooted out. I just fear that to some degree and possibly to the point of excluding the primary cause of the scandal we may be looking at the wrong defect. I don’t want us to discover in 10 years that the abuse is still going on because we focused exclusively on homosexuality as the issue and not predation.

 

[felra]

fix:

I agree, but one would be remiss to overlook that the majority of cases were male on male.

Power is one aspect, but these issues are fairly common in the homosexual culture. Teen males are highly sought after and in the cases we speak of were easily available and we do not know these men may very well have been having “relations” with older males as well.

I reject that theory. The males who were abused were post pubescent. What heterosexual male seeks out post pubescent males to abuse?

Figuring out the clinical classification, etiology, course and prognosis of the different symptom behaviors is needed to develop and formulate a long term protocal in screening seminary candidates and assist in managing/treating offending priests.

Howevere, the immediate solution is to enact and enforce that SSA is a rule out for priestly ordination. Period. The whole priest sex scandal is primarily a homosexual (same sex) phenomenon of predation, abuse, violation by an adult [priest]upon vulnerable minors entrusted to their care.

Until more sophisicated assessement tools are developed to determine degree of pathology, risk assessment, therapy recommendatiopn, … IMO the Church (those responsible for screening semionarian candidates) should error on the side of caution. This is the only truly compassionate response to that individual struggling/history of SSA, fellow seminarians, and the Church flock.

 

[fix]

Orionthehunter:

I’m not dismissing the raw percentage. I recognize that the predominance of the abuse were homosexual acts. I’m just trying to raise the perspective that the focus on homosexuality might be the wrong focus. In my mind these are primarily acts of predation because Priests are at least 25 when they are ordained and while they age, the predators still focus on people with whom they have power over.

I admit that I’m rather naive on the “culture”. The last conversation I had with someone I knew was homosexual was 25 years ago and even then I didn’t talk to him about his sex life much less the “culture” At the same time, when I contemplate the entire thing, it seems like it is more about power. If it was about the sex, the homosexual would pursue relationships in places where there would be less chance of getting caught.

Additionally, if a H.S. teacher has sex w/ a female student, we’d focus on the predation as we send the predator to jail. I’m having a hard time why understanding why the primary focus is on the homosexuality in this selective situation (sexual abuse of minors by Priests).

This response appears that you aren’t grasping my point. If scandal is primarily a case of predation and not same sex attraction, we may be focusing on the wrong defect. Prison rape isn’t about homosexuality but about power and exerting that power on those who are vulnerable. Upon release, virtually none of the prison rapists live a homosexual lifestyle and unless rape was their original crime return to prison as a rapists. It could be that the only reason there is a preponderance of male victims in the abuse scandal is access and vulnerability.

I’m raising this as an alternative view and perspective of the abuse scandal to be considered. I recognize that there is an underground “society” of homosexuality in the seminaries and priesthood (its magnitude is unknown runs the gamut) and believe this needs to be rooted out. I just fear that to some degree and possibly to the point of excluding the primary cause of the scandal we may be looking at the wrong defect. I don’t want us to discover in 10 years that the abuse is still going on because we focused exclusively on homosexuality as the issue and not predation.

Please see post #47.

 

[fix]

felra:

Figuring out the clinical classification, etiology, course and prognosis of the different symptom behaviors is needed to develop and formulate a long term protocal in screening seminary candidates and assist in managing/treating offending priests.

Howevere, the immediate solution is to enact and enforce that SSA is a rule out for priestly ordination. Period. The whole priest sex scandal is primarily a homosexual (same sex) phenomenon of predation, abuse, violation by an adult [priest]upon vulnerable minors entrusted to their care.

Until more sophisicated assessement tools are developed to determine degree of pathology, risk assessment, therapy recommendatiopn, … IMO the Church (those responsible for screening semionarian candidates) should error on the side of caution. This is the only truly compassionate response to that individual struggling/history of SSA, fellow seminarians, and the Church flock.

Yes, that is reasonable, but I can’t buy the notion that there is a group of men who are seeking out post pubescent males that is some sub-category of homosexual inclination that is so unique we need to screen just for them, while ignoring the attraction to same sex in general.

The dissection of these things is usually more art than science. Why parse it out when we really have no strong evidence parsing it out “works”?

The opposing argument goes back to the premise the abuse is not homosexual, but pedophilia.

 

[Guar_Fan]

fix:

I can’t buy the notion that there is a group of men who are seeking out post pubescent males that is some sub-category of homosexual inclination that is so unique we need to screen just for them, while ignoring the attraction to same sex in general.

The dissection of these things is usually more art than science. Why parse it out when we really have no strong evidence parsing it out “works”?

If we don’t parse it out, the only alternative is to condemn an entire class of people. This was wrong when it was done to Jews, it was wrong with it is done to blacks, and it is wrong when it is done to gays.

 

[fix]

Guar Fan:

If we don’t parse it out, the only alternative is to condemn an entire class of people. This was wrong when it was done to Jews, it was wrong with it is done to blacks, and it is wrong when it is done to gays.

No one is condemning anyone. The “class” of people are men who suffer from an affliction that deserve our prayers, medical support and should be treated with love. None of that means ordination should be conferred.

Not to mention no one has cited any authoritative reference claiming there is a classification for men only attracted to teen males and no other same sex attraction.