Expert: homosexuality clearly a factor in new priest abuse data

[Pax_et_Bonum]

Expert: homosexuality clearly a factor in new priest abuse data
BY KATHLEEN GILBERT
Fri May 20, 2011 20:17 ESTComments (27)Tags: Homosexuality, Sexual Abuse Crisis
NEW YORK, May 20, 2011 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A leading authority on the clerical sex abuse crisis has criticized those who conclude that new data has ruled out homosexuality as a significant cause in the scandal - even though the vast majority of priest abuse was perpetrated against adolescent males.

Dr. Richard Fitzgibbons, a top psychiatrist and expert in handling sexually abusive priests, says criminologists “crossed a line” by pronouncing on the psychological causes behind the data released May 18.

“Analysis of the research demonstrates clearly that the major cause of the crisis was the homosexual abuse of males,” said Fitzgibbons in an interview with the Catholic News Agency. catholicnewsagency.com/news/critics-say-new-study-misses-real-reasons-for-priest-abuse-crisis/

The new study, conducted by the John Jay College of Criminal Justice and commissioned by the U.S. Bishops, shows that nearly 80 percent of victims were post-pubescent and adolescent males. However, the study concludes that available data “do not support the hypothesis that priests with a homosexual identity … are significantly more likely to sexually abuse.”

The report marks the third such effort by U.S. Bishops to address the causes and manifestations of the clerical sex abuse scandal since it first erupted publicly in 2002.

The data also shows that less than 5 percent of abuse involved prepubescent children, contravening rumor that the scandal largely manifested as acts of pedophilia. But homosexuality, according to Fitzgibbons, was clearly the primary sexual aberration driving the bulk of abuse.

lifesitenews.com/news/expert-homosexuality-clearly-a-factor-in-new-priest-abuse-data

 

[Robertanthony]

Expert: homosexuality clearly a factor in new priest abuse data
BY KATHLEEN GILBERT
Fri May 20, 2011 20:17 ESTComments (27)Tags: Homosexuality, Sexual Abuse Crisis
NEW YORK, May 20, 2011 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A leading authority on the clerical sex abuse crisis has criticized those who conclude that new data has ruled out homosexuality as a significant cause in the scandal - even though the vast majority of priest abuse was perpetrated against adolescent males.

Dr. Richard Fitzgibbons, a top psychiatrist and expert in handling sexually abusive priests, says criminologists “crossed a line” by pronouncing on the psychological causes behind the data released May 18.

“Analysis of the research demonstrates clearly that the major cause of the crisis was the homosexual abuse of males,” said Fitzgibbons in an interview with the Catholic News Agency. catholicnewsagency.com/news/critics-say-new-study-misses-real-reasons-for-priest-abuse-crisis/

The new study, conducted by the John Jay College of Criminal Justice and commissioned by the U.S. Bishops, shows that nearly 80 percent of victims were post-pubescent and adolescent males. However, the study concludes that available data “do not support the hypothesis that priests with a homosexual identity … are significantly more likely to sexually abuse.”

The report marks the third such effort by U.S. Bishops to address the causes and manifestations of the clerical sex abuse scandal since it first erupted publicly in 2002.

The data also shows that less than 5 percent of abuse involved prepubescent children, contravening rumor that the scandal largely manifested as acts of pedophilia. But homosexuality, according to Fitzgibbons, was clearly the primary sexual aberration driving the bulk of abuse.

lifesitenews.com/news/expert-homosexuality-clearly-a-factor-in-new-priest-abuse-data

Why would a homosexual priest be vastly more likely to prey on adolescent males than his heterosexual fellow priests to prey on adolescent females? Is that an indication of the % of homosexuals in the clergy, or the mere fact that one is homosexual makes him more likely (again statistically speaking, we’re not talking huge numbers here) to be a predator? Thanks for any light you can shed on my questions.

 

[Holly3278]

Personally, I am not sure about this. Didn’t the USCCB or whoever it was that published the study say something about it not being a factor but that actually it had to do with the changing moral values of the time period in which most of the abuse cases took place or something to that effect? If not, I apologize. I may simply be confused but I thought that someone said that homosexuality was not a factor. Regardless, I wouldn’t doubt it if it it was since homosexuality is objectively disordered and since it became much more widely accepted in the past several decades.

 

[po18guy]

Why would a homosexual priest be vastly more likely to prey on adolescent males than his heterosexual fellow priests to prey on adolescent females? Is that an indication of the % of homosexuals in the clergy, or the mere fact that one is homosexual makes him more likely (again statistically speaking, we’re not talking huge numbers here) to be a predator? Thanks for any light you can shed on my questions.

While the picture is complex in nature, what does appear to be clear is that homosexuality was not screened for in the seminaries during the 60s-80s, a time frame which coincides with the “sexual revolution”. During that time frame, instances of tolerated sexual behavior between seminarians have also been demonstrated as being a factor. As well, much of it depends upon the basic differences between male and female sexuality. Male homosexuals are much more likely to have multiple sexual partners and a greater frequency of sexual activity. William Donohue, PhD, is president of the Catholic League, and a practicing sociologis. He has written a commentary on the John Jay report. He notes that some 81% of the abuse claims are homosexual in nature, and that a majority of victims were post-pubescent males, thus greatly reducing pedophilia as a factor, and increasing the prominence of homosexuality as the main factor in the abuses. Here is a link to Mr. Donohue’s response.

 

[RobbyS]

Why would a homosexual priest be vastly more likely to prey on adolescent males than his heterosexual fellow priests to prey on adolescent females? Is that an indication of the % of homosexuals in the clergy, or the mere fact that one is homosexual makes him more likely (again statistically speaking, we’re not talking huge numbers here) to be a predator? Thanks for any light you can shed on my questions.

My thinking is that a homosexual seminarian is likely to form erotic friendships with fellow seminarians and then as he gets older to look with fondness on youngsters who remind him of his former loves. He becomes a pederast, which historically is quite comon in societies where homosexualiyty is tolerated. Every new relationship reproduces his school experience except now he is the older party. It seems to have worked this way in all male English boarding schools. So it is a kind of arrrested development. Back in the '50s, a psychology professor explained it this way: all children under say 12 are “homosexual” in the loose sense of preferring their own sex to the other. As they reach puberty, they begin to be attracted by the other sex. BUT, crossing the “divide” is not easy for most of us, and some never do.

 

[Robertanthony]

While the picture is complex in nature, what does appear to be clear is that homosexuality was not screened for in the seminaries during the 60s-80s, a time frame which coincides with the “sexual revolution”. During that time frame, instances of tolerated sexual behavior between seminarians have also been demonstrated as being a factor. As well, much of it depends upon the basic differences between male and female sexuality. Male homosexuals are much more likely to have multiple sexual partners and a greater frequency of sexual activity. William Donohue, PhD, is president of the Catholic League, and a practicing sociologis. He has written a commentary on the John Jay report. He notes that some 81% of the abuse claims are homosexual in nature, and that a majority of victims were post-pubescent males, thus greatly reducing pedophilia as a factor, and increasing the prominence of homosexuality as the main factor in the abuses. Here is a link to Mr. Donohue’s response.

Thanks for the link. Thorough, in-depth analysis, very intellectually honest and rigorous. Found my answers and learnt about aspects I hadn’t considered (ex. mainly heterosexual priests who left the priesthood in the 60’s and 70’s thus increasing the proportion of homosexuals in the clergy).

 

[po18guy]

Thanks for the link. Thorough, in-depth analysis, very intellectually honest and rigorous. Found my answers and learnt about aspects I hadn’t considered (ex. mainly heterosexual priests who left the priesthood in the 60’s and 70’s thus increasing the proportion of homosexuals in the clergy).

An anecdote: Back in the 80s, a priest at my parish left the priesthood to get married, which was somewhat shocking news. But, even that is a result of the sexual saturation of our society. Since homosexual priests had, by their choice, opted out of marriage they, in greater proportion, remained in the priesthood. This is an extensive and complicated problem, with all facets of society being negatively affected, but the Catholic Church bearing the brunt of public condemnation.

 

[Pax_et_Bonum]

Why would a homosexual priest be vastly more likely to prey on adolescent males than his heterosexual fellow priests to prey on adolescent females? Is that an indication of the % of homosexuals in the clergy, or the mere fact that one is homosexual makes him more likely (again statistically speaking, we’re not talking huge numbers here) to be a predator? Thanks for any light you can shed on my questions.

Eighty-five per cent of all sexual abuse is upon post-pubescent boys and young men.Availability-altar boys.Same thing fort Scout Leaders,Karate Instructors,Big Brothers etc. Typical hebephile NOT pedophile behaviour.Men with these desires are known and generally despised in homosexual communities as Chicken Hawks.Google it.

Only a very small number of priests suffer from this affliction.Approximately 1.2 per cent,much lower in the general heterosexual population where the figure for PAEDOPHILIAC abuse is 4-5 per cent.I know two priests whom I suspect suffer from same-sex attraction but are so devout that I would trust my altar boy son with them anytime.

We should not demonize those sufferers of samer-sex attraction as hebephiles-only a tiny but unfortunately visible minority are.ALL priests suffer from this scandal greviously-my wonderful priest says he feels like he is whipped every day because of these sick predatory men.He will not wear the collar on his day off and out and about-the abuse he suffers from morons is soul destroying.

If you;d like I can provide you with the studiers or you can go directly to the Catholic League and access them.

 

[Pax_et_Bonum]

Personally, I am not sure about this. Didn’t the USCCB or whoever it was that published the study say something about it not being a factor but that actually it had to do with the changing moral values of the time period in which most of the abuse cases took place or something to that effect? If not, I apologize. I may simply be confused but I thought that someone said that homosexuality was not a factor. Regardless, I wouldn’t doubt it if it it was since homosexuality is objectively disordered and since it became much more widely accepted in the past several decades.

That is what criminologists said.This psychiatrist points out the absurdity of that conclusion.The USCCB and the CCCB are hardly bona fide experts in this area and it may stem from wishful thinking and (sigh)the desire not to “offend”.Lately these Bishops seem to be busy stamping out fires-the sex scandals,the Development and Peace scandal(Canadian)where funding from pew potatos ended up going to groups cotra indicative of Catholic teaching and pro-abortion agencies.I believe you Americans had EXACTLY the same problem with your equivalent to D+P.

85 per cent of the victims are post pubescent males and it’s not homosexual in nature?Please.

 

[Pax_et_Bonum]

Most of the priests who have been caught out are of as certain age 60 plus.Most entered the seminary directly from high school,some even completed High School in seminary.

According to a retired priest friend of mine he said his sexuality (hetero)was just surfacing and ANY kind of contact with girls his age was rigorously discouraged.Instead of being taught that celibacy was sacrifice and could ultimately be a joy when one realized the gift he was giving our Lord,sexuality was to be repressed denied and destroyed.

Any reading material that was considered suspect was destroyed publicly in front of the other seminarians to humiliate these poor young men…Sexual attraction to females was evil for them according to their instructors.To this day he feels sexually immature and he is 71(retired early due to stress)

I know also of a priest who was given dispensation to leave and marry-a nun in fact.This Priest was a missionary in Columbia and spent an entire day in the broiling sun with a pistol aimed at his head because he had the guts to confront a landowner who mistreated the Indian workers(slaves)on his plantation.He did his fair share for the Church and I would never think the less of him nor her for their decision.

 

[po18guy]

Perhaps what seminary should teach is that they will be under constant attack, and hated by the world for any and all reasons, just as Christ was. Yes, generations past had a lot of bad habits as far as teaching (humiliation, severe corporal punishment, etc), which was apparently over-compensated for with the ‘anything goes’ attitudes of the 60s onward. We are now paying for both excesses. Our priests badly need prayer on a daily basis.

 

[wisdomseeker]

It seems to me that pride has taking ove our hearts because we have embraced the world culture. i hardly see anyone Spiritually equipped now and days. it seems that we are going by scientific studies more htatn what God says. what is up wiht that?

 

[Pax_et_Bonum]

It seems to me that pride has taking ove our hearts because we have embraced the world culture. i hardly see anyone Spiritually equipped now and days. it seems that we are going by scientific studies more htatn what God says. what is up wiht that?

You hit the nail on the head.There is an excuse for everything.Sin?What;s that?.As Frances Kissling of the bogus “Catholics” For Choice lobby said,“We must get rid of the concept of evil”

 

[worldmed]

The political and historical context of the early Catholic Church has changed significantly. Once it was a prudent idea, that priest should not get married, but today I don’t think this way too much any more. If a priest wants to get married - God Bless him. Personally I garner better insight into my family and marriage talking with our married Deacon. He knows firsthand where I am coming from and often times he’s been there/done that. I have always studied the Bible but for me it did not truly come alive until I got married. Once I became a Daddy, well the illumination was blinding. I like the way the Orthodox Church approaches it… why can’t we be the same? It’s been said before, St. Peter was married, nuff said.

 

[laszlo]

O may be we shall consider the fact that males are much better witnesses for events 20 or so years earlier; and to accuse a priest with abuse in the past is lucrative business.

I knew personally a girl, whose father was a priest, and her mother was 17 years older than she. In today’s standard this would be executable sexual abuse. In that time the legal age in Hungary was 14 years, the girl received sufficient amount to be marry decently, and the case was closed. Sexual encounter with boy (instead of the mother) still would be problematic, because on that time the active homosexuality was crime in itself.

 

[po18guy]

The political and historical context of the early Catholic Church has changed significantly. Once it was a prudent idea, that priest should not get married, but today I don’t think this way too much any more. If a priest wants to get married - God Bless him. Personally I garner better insight into my family and marriage talking with our married Deacon. He knows firsthand where I am coming from and often times he’s been there/done that. I have always studied the Bible but for me it did not truly come alive until I got married. Once I became a Daddy, well the illumination was blinding. I like the way the Orthodox Church approaches it… why can’t we be the same? It’s been said before, St. Peter was married, nuff said.

Two things: First, the Church teaches discipline - the discipline of celibacy is based both upon the practical (Priests are routinely reassigned,etc.) as well as the teachings of Saint Paul, who taught that a married man’s priorities are divided. Secondly, I know of not one Priest who is upset about the discipline of celibacy.

Why are those who are not affected by celibacy upset, while those who live it are not?

 

[Inhimthroughher]

Why would a homosexual priest be vastly more likely to prey on adolescent males than his heterosexual fellow priests to prey on adolescent females? Is that an indication of the % of homosexuals in the clergy, or the mere fact that one is homosexual makes him more likely (again statistically speaking, we’re not talking huge numbers here) to be a predator? Thanks for any light you can shed on my questions.

A homosexual has is more at risk to commit a sexual crime.
The reason is that a homosexual is already sexually disordered. Homosexual activity and attraction are gravely disordered and contrary to nature. Hetrosexual attraction is natural and ordered just as chastity is. Sins against purity and chastity are against our nature as rational creatures and are often fallen into due to original sin.

A man or woman who is disordered at such a base level as sexual attraction will have a much more difficult time ordering their passions that are based on these disordered attractions.

Even a little error in the beginning leads to a great error in the end. Disorder at such a fundamental level will cause many more problems that one who is correctly ordered at the foundation of attraction.

 

[Barbkw]

Bill Donahue was on the “World Over” this week.

He’s written a 25 page critical analysis on the sexual abuse.

catholicleague.org/images/upload/image_201105230830.pdf

What follows is a critical analysis of the 2011 report by John Jay College of Criminal Justice, “The Causes and Context of Sexual Abuse of Minors by Catholic Priests in the United States, 1950-2010.”

 

[meltzerboy]

My thinking is that a homosexual seminarian is likely to form erotic friendships with fellow seminarians and then as he gets older to look with fondness on youngsters who remind him of his former loves. He becomes a pederast, which historically is quite comon in societies where homosexualiyty is tolerated. Every new relationship reproduces his school experience except now he is the older party. It seems to have worked this way in all male English boarding schools. So it is a kind of arrrested development. Back in the '50s, a psychology professor explained it this way: all children under say 12 are “homosexual” in the loose sense of preferring their own sex to the other. As they reach puberty, they begin to be attracted by the other sex. BUT, crossing the “divide” is not easy for most of us, and some never do.

In the 1950’s, psychology professors knew next to nothing about the origins and nature of homosexuality, or even heterosexuality. They know somewhat more today, but still have a long way to go. Back then, they were mainly under the influence of Freud’s theory of homosexuality as a form of arrested development. Freud is sharply intuitive in his theories, but there is virtually no empirical evidence to support them.

 

[Pax_et_Bonum]

In the 1950’s, psychology professors knew next to nothing about the origins and nature of homosexuality, or even heterosexuality. They know somewhat more today, but still have a long way to go. Back then, they were mainly under the influence of Freud’s theory of homosexuality as a form of arrested development. Freud is sharply intuitive in his theories, but there is virtually no empirical evidence to support them.

Is there ANY empirical evidence whatsoever on the causation of same-sex attraction other than the usual theories bandied about by both sides on this issue?I believe there has been medical research looking for a gay gene but nothing has been found.