How do future child molesters get through seminary?

[po18guy]

How do men and women with serious self-control issues graduate a police academy and carry badge and gun? The human inclination among superiors is to pass them through, hoping that employment and societal pressures will keep their behavior in check.

It is not lmited to priests - not by any means. In 31 years, I saw a litany of unqualified persons obtain positions of authority, only to later fail - sometimes spectacularly. The cities of Miami and Los Angeles substatially lowered standards in the 80s to fill their ranks.

What they got, in quite a few cases, were gangsters carrying badge and gun. There were assaults, robberies and even homicides. No, lowering the standards is never the solution and ultimately creates many more problems.

Raising the standards, even if painful, is one part of the solution, but only one part.

 

[EnglishTeacher]

The vast majority of the abuse happened several decades ago. In the “old days,” there wasn’t much screening to get into seminary; you just needed to be a member of a parish and needed a letter of recommendation from your pastor. That was pretty much it, according to a couple of elderly priests I have talked with.

Nowadays, the screening of seminarians and potential seminarians is incredibly rigorous. In the last few decades Church has completely overhauled how we prevent abuse and handle it if it does happen.

 

[lil_user]

How do future child molesters get through seminary?

Not sure about the medical aspect, but I don’t think people are born or are always aware of this? It may be something that comes in much later?

Otherwise, the question really is the same problem that in the field of security (computer or physical) you have with insider threat. If they are clever enough to pass by the filters (assuming there are any) then they just try to blend in and maybe team up with the like-minded (if any).

 

[lil_user]

the screening of seminarians and potential seminarians is incredibly rigorous

May God hear you on this and make it so if it isn’t.

 

[EnglishTeacher]

Look into it yourself if you don’t believe me. . I worked for the Church and know many priests, including several young priests only a few years out of seminary. They have talked about how rigorous the process is, and how the older priests comment on how much easier it was to become a seminarian back in their day many decades ago.

 

[lil_user]

Oh I am not questioning it. I just hope it’s ever more so in as many places as possible.

 

[jack63]

@Joegrane …on of the more interesting posts I’ve read here on CAF. Thanks for posting!

It is rather interesting and striking that for a couple of the men you went to seminary with you had a gut feeling something was off, and they ended up having to leave the ministry because of sexual misconduct. May I ask why this wasn’t noticed by your superiors in seminary?

 

[Neithan]

I’ve wondered about this too (I’m sure we all have). Apparently in the mid-20th century orthodoxy went out of vogue and a lot of seminaries actively cultivated dissent, in faith and morals. It was an evil time and I don’t think we’re entirely clear of the rot.

 

[otjm]

Then how is it that we had this problem in the 1940’s, 1950’s and 1960’s when porn we nowhere near as available as it is now?

 

[otjm]

There are more than the two kinds you mention. It is nowhere near that simple.

 

[otjm]

As long as people are human, I doubt we will ever get to zero. close, but not zero.

 

[commenter]

When my parents got married in the 1940s, the “marriage prep” consisted of a handshake between my dad and my mom’s pastor, "so you are Catholic?, then scheduling the date. But most of those marriages lasted, despite the “screening”.

In later years marriage prep and screening got more involved, yet the failure rate skyrocketed. The problem is that we are dealing with a much weaker population of Catholics (or Protestants, for that matter) than in my parents’ time, or even in my time.

The same is true of the population of potential priests. When I worked in child welfare, half the foster and adoptive homes we were certifying would not have been approved 20 years earlier. When people complained, the Homefinding unit said they have to supply so many homes.

 

[CilladeRoma]

Is is troubling that this is not repeated more. The Bisops were following advice from people who were professionals. The thinking of the time prior to the late 1980s was that theae men could be cured. Sadly it was wrong, but there was no malicious intent.

 

[whatistrue]

But I also don’t claim to understand the psychological process of how a person who was abused goes on to become an abuser.

At its most basis, a child displays the behavior that is modeled for him/her. What they go through a during their development becomes “what is normal”. Some reasons that more abused don’t become abusers are that the abuse may have been short-lived and not during a critical developmental stage or that it was found out and the child saw the abuser caught and punished and got appropriate therapy to get past (not over) it.

 

[Joegrane]

May I ask why this wasn’t noticed by your superiors in seminary?

I did not know those priests when they were in the seminary. They were ordained in the crazy late 1960s or 1970s. That was a crazy time in the church. Strangely it is rarely mentioned that priests who committed sexual misconduct broke their ordination day promise. They bought into some of the most LIBERAL sexual views out there instead of being faithful to scriptures and church teaching. Then the liberal media spins this to pretend that this is a natural consequence of the church’s life and teaching. It is actually the result of the godless “sexual revolution” of the 1960s, 70s and beyond.

 

[Victoria33]

Though, it is an idea that needs fine tuning and it could be unpopular, I mean some people become priests at a very young age, they enter seminary very young but in general, I’ve wondered, what if Priests had to be older? 35 and over? If they have a problem, surely, most could be vetted ahead of time. If a priest is 35 or older, if they had a problem, chances are, it could have shown up by then, disqualifying them. Just my 2 cents.

But that means older priests too and I don’t think that is so good.

My brother visited a Seminary when he was right out of Junior High, that is really young. I"m not sure if Priests are in “formation” at a very early age or if at that point, the Seminary was a bit like a “prep” school. It was in San Antonio.

 

[EnglishTeacher]

Interesting idea, but I think that would reduce vocations even further. By the time a man is 35, he will be more likely to be settled in life and less able to upheave everything to become a priest; as opposed to if he has been on track for the priesthood since college or shortly thereafter. (Some men of course do respond to a vocation later in life, but I think it would be a mistake to make this mandatory.) Plus, the youngest a man is ordained normally is 26-27. While that is young, it is not problematically young. I mean, we aren’t ordaining 18-year-olds and putting them in charge of a parish.

My brother visited a Seminary when he was right out of Junior High, that is really young. I"m not sure if Priests are in “formation” at a very early age or if at that point, the Seminary was a bit like a “prep” school. It was in San Antonio.

Junior seminaries like this seem to have been more common in the past. They may have been more like prep schools, and I believe the idea was to start boys on the path to priesthood young. There were problems with this approach, though.

 

[jack63]

I’ve wondered, what if Priests had to be older? 35 and over? If they have a problem, surely, most could be vetted ahead of time. If a priest is 35 or older, if they had a problem, chances are, it could have shown up by then, disqualifying them. Just my 2 cents.

But that means older priests too and I don’t think that is so good.

Actually, I think this idea is likely the closest idea to what is presented in scripture.

a bishop must be irreproachable, married only once, temperate, self-controlled, decent, hospitable, able to teach, not a drunkard, not aggressive, but gentle, not contentious, not a lover of money. He must manage his own household well, keeping his children under control with perfect dignity; for if a man does not know how to manage his own household, how can he take care of the church of God? 1 Timothy 3:2-5

FYI: I don’t believe celibacy directly causes abuse, nor do I believe that just making sure men are married will prevent abuse. I do believe that looking at the entire picture of a married man, as St. Paul does, would be a valuable indicator of whether he could play the role of a priest.

 

[commenter]

FYI: I don’t believe celibacy directly causes abuse, nor do I believe that just making sure men are married will prevent abuse. I do believe that looking at the entire picture of a married man, as St. Paul does, would be a valuable indicator of whether he could play the role of a priest

When I was a sex abuse investigator, the majority of child sex abusers had previous or current relationships with women, married or more likely cohabitation, often had children of their own.

Marriage is not far removed from celibacy, it’s the renouncing of all partners except one, and renouncing of self-sin, as with the celibate.

The partial breakdown of marriage gets far less attention than the partial breakdown of the priesthood, but it hurts the Church and individuals far more.

The same problems that cause a lack of good raw material for priests and religious, also affect raw material for good husbands and wives.

 

[goout]

jack63:

FYI: I don’t believe celibacy directly causes abuse, nor do I believe that just making sure men are married will prevent abuse. I do believe that looking at the entire picture of a married man, as St. Paul does, would be a valuable indicator of whether he could play the role of a priest

When I was a sex abuse investigator, the majority of child sex abusers had previous or current relationships with women, married or more likely cohabitation, often had children of their own.

Marriage is not far removed from celibacy, it’s the renouncing of all partners except one, and renouncing of self-sin, as with the celibate.

The partial breakdown of marriage gets far less attention than the partial breakdown of the priesthood, but it hurts the Church and individuals far more.

The same problems that cause a lack of good raw material for priests and religious, also affect raw material for good husbands and wives.

These are clerical culture problems. That clerical culture is a stew of factors. There are many factors.
Celibacy is a factor, whether we want to stare it in the face or not. It is a factor. That doesn’t mean the celibacy is to blame. It’s simply part of the overall stew of factors that compose the culture.
And it is a factor that is subject to Church discipline.

The discipline of celibacy needs to be examined and considered thoroughly. And if the times we live in call for change, that should be considered. Is that advocating for a change in the discipline? No. It’s having common sense. Only a fool ignores factors that can be legitimately discerned. Christ does not call us to be fools.

What disturbs me is the number of Catholic commentators who reflexively and almost fearfully reject the consideration of this Church discipline.

I also hear that clerical culture can be inoculated from things like pedophilia and homosexuality by more rigorous vetting. Good luck with that. I hope it works, but pedophiles for instance, are deceptive by nature. That’s how they get into situations to prey on others. They are liars.

Rather than a defensive inoculation, which is part of the answer but impossible in any absolute sense, we ought to consider leavening. Allowing healthy married men could leaven the priesthood to a great degree, by changing the culture for the better. It should at least be thoroughly considered. And I’m not sure what the fear is about from otherwise good Catholic sources.