I admit I haven’t dug deep in the John Jay report, but I wonder if they profiled the kinds of priests that were guilty of this. Lefties would contend that the abusers are probably “rigid and repressed” traditionalists unable to press down their sexuality indefinitely. Traditional catholics (I confess to this bias myself) probably assume that most of the abuse took place by priests of the “God loves you just as you are, so don’t let anybody judge you for what you feel or do” modernist type.
But is there a trend? Or is it messier than such simplifications?
It seems rather an obvious coincidence that the abuse rates were highest right at the time the Church plunged into a crisis of belief and creed via attempts to hijack the very meaning of Vatican II, questioning 2,000 years of moral theology, discipline and approach to the development of virtue instead of seeing the council as a further refinement and enhancement to what had gone before.