How do future child molesters get through seminary?

[PetraG]

I never claimed there was never abuse. You claimed there was (1) an epidemic (2) caused by celibacy. Its ridiculous and I will continue to mock it.

We don’t know how bad the problem was. The epidemic was secrecy, and I think we all know it. I believe it was meant well–that is, the person who seemed repentant wasn’t exposed to public shaming–but the problem is that the offenders were not kept from offending again. They were too often returned to a position of trust where they could offend again. Their offenses were also covered up in order to protect the reputations of their families, their churches, and their organizations. If they’d been caught stealing money, they wouldn’t have been returned to a job at a bank, but people had this idea that sexual offenders could reform.

 

[Rubee]

We don’t know how bad the problem was.

This is all I said in that debate: we don’t have the facts.

The epidemic we know about today we know from actual data. Moreover, there were changes in seminarian cultures 50 years ago that created protecting abuse rings in the church: so we can’t know that the ‘epidemic’ part of the abuse crisis wasn’t mostly because of this radical shift in moral expectations for candidates within seminaries. It might very well be that in the old days, abusers would avoid seminaries and monasteries because of the rigorous standards of life there were.

So maybe yes, there was a secret epidemic we’ll never discover because of a culture of secrecy, but it may also be there wasn’t an epidemic because there was also a culture of high moral expectations that might’ve discouraged many.

 

[Theo520]

Actually, during my training I recently learned that sometimes abusers actually will sign to allow a criminal background check assuming nobody will bother to look. People with criminal backgrounds actually have been caught trying to gain access to children by simply doing a criminal background check.

As I recall, around 90% of abusers don’t have a record that will trip alarms. The point they made is that don’t assume ‘safe’ just because someone passed.

Obviously, it is important to do the checks and catch the 10% with priors.

 

[PetraG]

So maybe yes, there was a secret epidemic we’ll never discover because of a culture of secrecy, but it may also be there wasn’t an epidemic because there was also a culture of high moral expectations that might’ve discouraged many.

It is hard to say, and I think it is probably safe to say that mileage varied. There were undoubtedly some places where the wariness level was low and optimistic and other places where the vigilance was higher and the appreciation of the frailties human nature were more realistic. There were undoubtedly some bishops who moved the “problems” around and others who sent them packing immediately.

There was, however, not the shortage of priests that might have put so much pressure on bishops to take more risks they would rather not take in order to preserve the numbers of priests in the ranks. There were probably also more devout men who did not have any way to support a wife and children and so did not think marriage was in the cards for them for financial reasons, as poverty was more widespread and there was no reliable governmental social safety net. The possibility of having to watch your wife and children grow thin or die because you couldn’t provide for them was very real.

I have to wonder, too, if there was not more of a belief in the 20th century that serious psychological issues were treatable if the subject was willing. It turns out that pedophilia is an extremely difficult inclination to eradicate. I sometimes wonder if bishops in the 20th century were not given an overly-rosy picture of the chances of amendment.

 

[Maximus1]

Substance abuse, gambling abuse, has its own profile and set of characteristics.
Sexuality is a whole different complexity. This is why my assertion was focused on the advantages of being a priest and therefore the propensity to attract pedophiles.
They have very practical concerns we don’t think about. If they are caught, it is rape, and in jail pedophiles don’t thrive.
One intending to live decades has a much better chance of survival with protections the church provided. And hopefully will never again.
A heterosexual man thinks none of these things. The Church does not motivate his vocation choice this way.
Marriage as an option, will increase membership who need not hide, or leave, or not apply in the first place.

 

[Nelka]

They aren’t born child molesters, they may even become so after seminary.

I worked with a woman in care in my last job who got there with references and such, she paraded herself as a saint etc but she abused a man (a few times) we cared for.

We aren’t clairvoyant.

Look at ten children and guess how many (and which ones) will steal a biscuit when your back is turned.

 

[Sarcelle]

I said it contributed I attracting those already pedophiles to the cloth.

A pedophile who wanted easy access to the victim would often date women who had young children. No, most don’t line up to take vows as Catholic priests.

I have a friend who worked as a cop and more often than not, the usual story is the children being sexually abused by the mother ‘s boyfriend.

If celibacy was a significant contributor to pedophilia, priests would be over represented among the ranks of pedophiles. I don’t think this is the case.

 

[Maximus1]

It is hard to eradicate ones sexual impulse. That I accept as true. It can only be controlled keeping in mind, the flesh is weak. ( Keeping in mind I terms of policy, not individual effort)

 

[PetraG]

They have very practical concerns we don’t think about. If they are caught, it is rape, and in jail pedophiles don’t thrive.

Actually, it turns out that in most prison systems pedophiles are not more likely to be victimized in prison than other inmates.

Again, though: Pedophilia can and does occur in persons who are heterosexual, homosexual, or bisexual. They can find opportunties both as husbands and as priests or as both at the same time.

I think you are right that pedophiles naturally seek out situations where they can identify and groom victims without suspicion. I would agree that this used to make the clerical state attractive, because ordained men were considered to automatically have high morals and trustworthiness. I do not think that is the case any more, because the Church has finally made it a priority to deny sexual predators opportunities to offend, whether the offender is a layperson or a priest. I would think that the most likely place a sexual predator would stake out now is private coaching in youth sports, to be blunt. The protocols to protect children are usually pretty lax and the opportunities to cultivate relationships and identify potential victims are relatively plentiful. It boggles my mind, sometimes. I think we will see that change in the next 10 or 20 years, but unfortunately because there will be victims who aren’t currently being protected who bring will win lawsuits against organizations who really have no excuse not to avoid exposing children to this terrible harm.

It hurts me to think about the children who ought to be protected now because of the hard lessons of the Catholic Church and the Boy Scouts and so on who are not being protected yet. When are people going to learn?

 

[jack63]

As I recall, around 90% of abusers don’t have a record that will trip alarms. The point they made is that don’t assume ‘safe’ just because someone passed.

Obviously, it is important to do the checks and catch the 10% with priors.

The thing is that at one point in time a few decades ago, they actually wouldn’t bother to do the criminal background check. That was part of the problem.

 

[Rubee]

It turns out that pedophilia is an extremely difficult inclination to eradicate.

I thank God that among my many derangements, pedophilia is not a problem I must deal with. God ’ favored me’ instead with anger, impatience, harshness, even pride. I know they are not better but I really am glad that a passion for sex with children is not a struggle I will deal with. Or a passion for killing people like serial murders. (I know God doesn’t give us our faults, peeps , don’t kill me. Just a manner of speaking.) It’s weird to think it’s someone’s chief struggle. I find my own faults near impossible to eradicate too

 

[PetraG]

I find my own faults near impossible to eradicate too.

No, I mean that there are psychological issues that often respond well to professional treatment and others that rarely do. This one is on the difficult end of the scale.

 

[Rubee]

No, I mean that there are psychological issues that often respond well to professional treatment and others that rarely do. This one is on the difficult end of the scale.

Very sad. I hope a radical conversion might allow grace to work where psychology fails.

 

[Bruised_Reed]

I think that is what some pedophiles who became priests were hoping fo.

 

[Rubee]

I think that is what some pedophiles who became priests were hoping fo.

Do they know what causes it and why it becomes so ingrained that nothing works? Maybe hurting a child curses you.

 

[Rubee]

I think pedophiles should be dedicated to St. Maria Goretti. I believe she cured her abuser (from heaven).

 

[PetraG]

Do they know what causes it and why it becomes so ingrained that nothing works? Maybe hurting a child curses you.

It isn’t so ingrained that nothing works, and by “it” I mean the underlying interest in children as fantasy objects of disordered acts, not the criminal behavior itself. Criminologists seem to believe that the criminal behavior probably has a lower recidivism rate than other crimes (after there is a conviction, that is).

The underlying condition isn’t impossible to treat, and in countries that don’t have mandatory reporting laws that require reporting people who self-report to get help, there has been some progress. Even there, though, the thinking is still that lifelong maintenance of treatment is the most realistic scenario.

Also, when we talk about how many people are sexually abused in childhood, keep in mind that not all sexual abuse of children is committed by pedophiles. Sometimes, these are acts of cruelty or humiliation or intimidation, not someone acting on sexual fantasies. That’s one way there can be maybe 3% of males with this inclination but perhaps 20% of children being victimized. Pedophilia is not the only motive for these crimes that lead to the statistics. (That is a bit off-topic, since I think the offenders in the clergy are typically pedophiles or else hebephiles, who are attracted to 11-14 year olds or so.)

 

[Rubee]

So pedophiles are only the ones who fantasize about children? Don’t the others have to fantasize too before they abuse them? Also, is it a mental illness? (The fantasizing about children). I’m glad to hear some treatment can work though.

 

[PetraG]

So pedophiles are only the ones who fantasize about children? Don’t the others have to fantasize too before they abuse them? Also, is it a mental illness? (The fantasizing about children). I’m glad to hear some treatment can work though.

No, I mean that some people who abuse others sexually do it for reasons that have nothing to do with sexual gratification. Pedophiles usually imagine they have a genuine fondness for children. They can even see what they want to do as something their victim would welcome. The other subset of this kind of crime are perpetrators like the victim’s peers or people just slightly older who want to intimidate or humiliate their victim for some reason. That kind is not even imagining that there is any kind of relationship going on and they definitely don’t imagine that the experience will be anything positive for their victim. (Again, though, it seems common for pedophiles or hebephiles to imagine that the victimization is something the victim wants or has even “asked for.” They are not operating in reality.)

But yes, from what I understand, having the fantasies alone is enough to confirm the diagnosis of pedophilia, if the fantasies are intense and have caused the pedophile significant distress or social impairment. A person doesn’t have to have ever victimized a child to be a pedophile. The person does have to be significantly older than the persons they fantasize about, as well, like an 18 year old who is obsessed with 11 or 12 year olds.

 

[Rubee]

They are not operating in reality.

That sounds like a mental illness to me. So the other child-abusers who aren’t classed pedophiles are deliberately trying to hurt a child whereas the ones classed pedophiles are beyond delusional. I do wonder if they’re crazy or just self-deceiving but deep down, still malicious.