How serious is the 'predator priest' problem?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Soutane
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Soutane

Guest
How serious is the ‘predator priest’ problem
DAY OPINION

On Religion

Faith. Religion. Spirituality. Meaning.

In our ever-shrinking world, the tentacles of religion touch everything from governmental policy to individual morality to our basic social constructs. It affects the lives of people of great faith — or no faith at all.

This series of weekly columns — launched in 2005 — seeks to illuminate the national conversation.

By Philip Jenkins
The U.S. Catholic Church is still shuddering from the effects of the sexual abuse crisis. Most Catholics are still critical of the church’s handling of the matter, and one in 10 are considering leaving the faith altogether. Some believe that clerical celibacy is at the core of the crisis, while others blame the all-male character of the priesthood. Reading such accounts, though, it’s easy to forget that we have not the slightest idea how serious the abuse problem is among Catholic priests as opposed to other professionals dealing with children.
That statement may sound outrageous — of course Catholic priests have a huge abuse problem! But why do we think that? News stories frequently note similar cases involving members of a wide range of professions, not just clergy of all denominations but also scoutmasters and secular schoolteachers. So how do their rates of abuse compare with those of priests? We have precisely no evidence on the issue.

No reputable scholar has ever conducted a survey of the abuse problem as it affects any other profession, in a way that would allow us to make direct comparisons with the Catholic clergy. If anyone believes that priests offend at a higher rate than teachers or non-celibate clergy, then they should produce the evidence on which they are basing that conclusion. I know of none. Saying “everybody knows” does not constitute scientific methodology.

Beyond question, though, the abuse issue affects non-Catholic settings. Particularly eye-opening is the detailed report on " Educator Sexual Misconduct" that Hofstra University professor Charol Shakeshaft compiled for the U.S. Department of Education in 2004. Among other findings, we read that about 10% of secular school pupils in grades eight to 11 report having been at the receiving end of such sexual misconduct, broadly defined. That does not mean that 10% of teachers misbehave, rather that a tiny number offend frequently, and egregiously: very much the same situation, in fact, as among Catholic priests.

Why, then, do we hear so much about Catholic cases? What is different about the Catholic Church is the manner in which its problems have come to light, and this involves both the nature of the institution itself and the workings of the law. As a result, the church is much more open to civil litigation than any other institution. These lawsuits allow the exposure of numerous cases that would never have surfaced if the perpetrators were not priests.

usatoday.com/news/opinion/forum/2010-06-07-column07_ST_N.htm
 
Has anyone ever noticed how bad the predator teacher problem has become? Here in NJ/NY area we.ve had 7 cases in 4 months with teachers sexualy abusing chidren. News coverage been at minimum. The teachers union has also been moving some of these teachers around or keeping them in holding areas away from kids but with full pay everyday.
Just like with priest there are more good ones then bad; but just like with the priest who have abused, these predator teachers also need to be called out.
But for some reason the news media seems to not want to cross the teachers union lines in reguards to this growing problem in our school sytems. Maybe it becuase The Communication Workers Union does not want to go against one of it’s union brother or sisters.
I ask everyone to Just do a search online of “teacher charged with sexualy abusing” and see how many hits you get, how many stories of teachers abusing children pop up.
I wish we’d worry about this as much. Also, maybe parents should be the ones who hire teachers and not the unions. That’s just my take, but I think it’s worth a look.
 
The reason we hear about the Catholic priest abuse MORE then the teacher abuse crisis is because of the fact that WE, Christians, should be ABOVE reproach… and when one of us fails it becomes an easy target for those against the church to hit.

And let’s face it, the majority of society is against the Church because we attempt to tell others they shouldn’t be hedonistic and because, quite frankly, we are the enemy.

sigh It’s VERY sad that people think that allowing marriage of the clergy, or female priests would solve the issue. To me that’s saying; no man can control himself so we have to give them outlets. If we don’t give them outlets they’ll abuse children!

What GREAT logic. rolls eyes And what a great plan by the enemy to try and discredit the Church.
 
I think that people forget that a large part of the scandal is not abuse by priests, but the coverup in various dioceses. The Church is more open to lawsuits because it has a centralized structure. Each Baptist church, for instance, stands on its own.
 
The reason we hear about the Catholic priest abuse MORE then the teacher abuse crisis is because of the fact that WE, Christians, should be ABOVE reproach… and when one of us fails it becomes an easy target for those against the church to hit.

And let’s face it, the majority of society is against the Church because we attempt to tell others they shouldn’t be hedonistic and because, quite frankly, we are the enemy.

sigh It’s VERY sad that people think that allowing marriage of the clergy, or female priests would solve the issue. To me that’s saying; no man can control himself so we have to give them outlets. If we don’t give them outlets they’ll abuse children!

What GREAT logic. rolls eyes And what a great plan by the enemy to try and discredit the Church.
First, I’d like to address the erroneous belief that married priest will prevent sexual abuse. That is not the issue of why those of us who condone a married priesthood at all. It is really about giving men, who obviously feel the need for some sort of support system that is his own. Like my family preachers that have been married all their life, they seem much more at ease with themselves and are more likely to defend the faith they believe in spite of how congregants or opponents feel. The other men feel more comfortable about approaching them over their own personal issues. We’re talking about an ancient practice that was not always the norm. Sure, it’s a beautiful vow, but I firmly believe that there are far too many men who feel called to the priesthood and would make wonderful priests if it were not for the discipline. But this is up to PaPa. He has the authority to remove the discipline requirement. I often wonder if these recent cases are evidence from God screaming at us to open your doors people. I want to restate the married priesthood to its glory once again. It’s not up to you its my choice and you are being stubborn about changing it. In other words, I think God may be behind the reduction in the numbers to the priesthood and is forcing the hand of the Church to change the rule of discipline.
 
First, I’d like to address the erroneous belief that married priest will prevent sexual abuse. That is not the issue of why those of us who condone a married priesthood at all. It is really about giving men, who obviously feel the need for some sort of support system that is his own. Like my family preachers that have been married all their life, they seem much more at ease with themselves and are more likely to defend the faith they believe in spite of how congregants or opponents feel. The other men feel more comfortable about approaching them over their own personal issues. We’re talking about an ancient practice that was not always the norm. Sure, it’s a beautiful vow, but I firmly believe that there are far too many men who feel called to the priesthood and would make wonderful priests if it were not for the discipline. But this is up to PaPa. He has the authority to remove the discipline requirement. I often wonder if these recent cases are evidence from God screaming at us to open your doors people. I want to restate the married priesthood to its glory once again. It’s not up to you its my choice and you are being stubborn about changing it. In other words, I think God may be behind the reduction in the numbers to the priesthood and is forcing the hand of the Church to change the rule of discipline.
That’s interesting. In my experience the scandals I have seen in Protestant churches have come FROM ministers who were married.

I know of at least four just in my lifetime whose wives had affairs, who had affairs themselves and who tore churches APART because of divorce.

Many of the ‘television’ evangelists who end up in the news end up in the news because of infedility in their marriages.

I’m just saying that marriage does not make a man more holy, nor does it allow for him to serve God better. I daresay being wholly devoted to God and not having mixed loyalties because of family obligations is the better choice.
 
I think that people forget that a large part of the scandal is not abuse by priests, but the coverup in various dioceses. The Church is more open to lawsuits because it has a centralized structure. Each Baptist church, for instance, stands on its own.
The issue you state is exactly that, the real scandal. The lack of pastoral care goes way up the chain and why it caused me to lose my faith in the Church many years ago. I’m listening to canon lawyers talk about this very issue and it angers me so much I’ve been ranting over it. Example:
Second, what is meant by the term minor? Since the delict committed by a cleric against the sixth commandment must be against a minor, the law defines what constitutes a minor. In the 1917 Code of Canon Law, a minor was defined as a one who had not yet completed the sixteenth year of age. This same definition was continued in the 1983 Code of Canon Law. In 1994, a derogation (a case in which a later law replaces or cancels a former law) was issued for the United States which changed the age of what constitutes a minor. The law was changed to read that all minors are those who have not completed their eighteenth year of age. This norm was later applied to the universal church in 2001.5
Had this law been in effect when I was abused I may have been able to seek real justice against my perpetrator and he would not have been moved 2 years later as the Pastor over a small community in rural America in the same Diocese. He had molested boys in a Catholic school and moved to the seminary where he taught my class and became my spiritual director. Using that relationship to his advantage and the fact he was from my diocese it wasn’t clear to me what role he played and I thought an innocent invitation to go sailing was some sort of a test or sign to show me that priests get to have fun. He knew of my love for boating, particularly sailing, and then after it became late invited me to stay with him in a large apartment that used to be the bishops quarters. There were staff around and unsuspecting innocent / naive me said okay. Then he insisted I sleep in a bed rather than the uncomfortable furnature. I made it clear several times that I was not of that sort and he insisted it was just to sleep. I woke up to him doing his thing to me. I froze for a moment and jumped up. I went back to the seminary and after regaining my orientation of what was happening because of preparing for finals I called the vocation director after turning him into my school officials.

They buried me and accepted my withdrawal from the seminary, which is not what I really wanted. I saw very clearly they had no intentions of doing anything and later found out that the vocation director was recruiting gays and trying to recruit other men to the homosexual life style. I guess he thought I might be gay. I had to prove to myself afterwards that was not true and entered a sinful life for a while scared of priests for many years to follow and determined to reenter the seminary 5 years later worked and prayed about it while serving my country. That’s when I fell prey to proselytizing Christians that convinced me with the Church’s history of it not being the real Church founded by Christ. I’m back after 18 years but my heart is broken for life. I’ve failed to get my life together ever since and have felt even more worthless now than ever before. At least when I practiced as a bible only Christian I could easily justify condemning the bishops and priests for their homosexual desires and lies. Now I have to search really hard for charity to get through this disgusting mess that still haunts me over and over and over. I have never received any help or restitution for my ruined life and have basically been told there is no way to receive it because of statutes of limitations, my age and all kinds of trash. End of rant for now.
 
First, I’d like to address the erroneous belief that married priest will prevent sexual abuse. That is not the issue of why those of us who condone a married priesthood at all. It is really about giving men, who obviously feel the need for some sort of support system that is his own. Like my family preachers that have been married all their life, they seem much more at ease with themselves and are more likely to defend the faith they believe in spite of how congregants or opponents feel. The other men feel more comfortable about approaching them over their own personal issues. We’re talking about an ancient practice that was not always the norm. Sure, it’s a beautiful vow, but I firmly believe that there are far too many men who feel called to the priesthood and would make wonderful priests if it were not for the discipline. But this is up to PaPa. He has the authority to remove the discipline requirement. I often wonder if these recent cases are evidence from God screaming at us to open your doors people. I want to restate the married priesthood to its glory once again. It’s not up to you its my choice and you are being stubborn about changing it. In other words, I think God may be behind the reduction in the numbers to the priesthood and is forcing the hand of the Church to change the rule of discipline.
The overwhelming majority of the sexual abuse by priests was of the homosexual variety. Unless you are also endorsing same sex marriage for the priesthood, marriage is NOT a solution.
 
The overwhelming majority of the sexual abuse by priests was of the homosexual variety. Unless you are also endorsing same sex marriage for the priesthood, marriage is NOT a solution.
You’ve missed my point. I would have to write a book to show my justification for the married priesthood. But rather than do that, study the Eastern Catholic rites, that ought to provide you with more information as to where I am coming from. I know this subject much better than you I believe. It’s been the downfall of my vocation to the priesthood and I am still battling depression because of the life ruining aspects of my offense and seeing what these monsters have done to many others I know. The priest that offended me is now married. You assume so much that may not be completely true. Men will seek sex with other men if they can’t get it from women if they have a problem. But a married priest is much easier to determine stability than a single one. Why? Because by canon law must show he has a stable marriage first. If he is managing his personal life well he may be more likely to be able to manage the priestly life as well. Read scripture for requirements set out in 1 Timothy 3:1-13 and Titus 1:5-9.
 
You’ve missed my point. I would have to write a book to show my justification for the married priesthood. But rather than do that, study the Eastern Catholic rites, that ought to provide you with more information as to where I am coming from. I know this subject much better than you I believe. It’s been the downfall of my vocation to the priesthood and I am still battling depression because of the life ruining aspects of my offense and seeing what these monsters have done to many others I know. The priest that offended me is now married. You assume so much that may not be completely true. Men will seek sex with other men if they can’t get it from women if they have a problem. But a married priest is much easier to determine stability than a single one. Why? Because by canon law must show he has a stable marriage first. If he is managing his personal life well he may be more likely to be able to manage the priestly life as well. Read scripture for requirements set out in 1 Timothy 3:1-13 and Titus 1:5-9.
You may very well know more than me on the subject but that, to me, is irrelevant. What is relevant is the Roman Rite’s stance on marriage. I, of the Roman Rite, am called to obey; so I do.

I’m sorry for your experiences. The priest who married me an baptized my daughter spent time in prison and is no longer a priest for abusing boys.

A priest does not abuse boys unless he is homosexual. Marriage will never solve that.

My prayers are with you and the cross you bear.
 
You may very well know more than me on the subject but that, to me, is irrelevant. What is relevant is the Roman Rite’s stance on marriage. I, of the Roman Rite, am called to obey; so I do.

I’m sorry for your experiences. The priest who married me an baptized my daughter spent time in prison and is no longer a priest for abusing boys.

A priest does not abuse boys unless he is homosexual. Marriage will never solve that.

My prayers are with you and the cross you bear.
I’m sorry to hear about your priest. But I know that you do not understand the celebate priesthood as most cradle Catholics still do not know. It is a discipline, not a doctrine. It was instituted on a wider scale much later in the Church. Over 90% of priests in the Eastern Church rites are married. I am not saying that we should do away with the celibate priesthood because that would be against sacred tradition and just plain wrong. You’ve missed my point and seem belligerent to even try to understand why I stated such a thing. I say I believe that God [key word here, so pay attention] MAY be calling the Church to reestablish the married priesthood, NOT do away with the celibate priesthood. In fact, all bishops in the Eastern Church rites are required to be from the celibate priesthood. In fact all clergy are required to be celibate after their spouses pass away. I never said it would solve the homosexual problem. My reasons are far more extensive than what you may realize. Having been a seminarian gave me access to the life much more than the actual lay person. My status as former seminarian gives me certain rights that lay persons do not typically have. In fact, studying the priesthood and the particularly the diaconate now gave me insight to come to a better understanding of the discipline of the celibacy among the clergy and the requirement for them to remain celibate after spouses die. I am now seeking the diaconate as a deacon, not a priest. I don’t even want to go there because under the current rule I am not only not allowed but should not be allowed because of the intact discipline. I do believe it is being considered under our noses and the first evidence is the opening the door to married priests from other communities coming home to the Catholic Church. My goal here is to educate people, like you, who don’t seem to understand the discipline but rather accept it blindly, which is fine. But when you take unecessary stands agains someone without full knowledge of what you’re speaking about it is rather difficult to have an intelligent conversation on such a topic.

I too have a mission now to educate people that the abuses are not nearly as vast as people say. But that the cover up is the worst sin here, not the abuse itself. The coverup enabled the offenders to prey more on young adults, even if it was homosexual in nature. What difference does that make? If he had sex with mostly girls it would be just as evil don’t you think? 🤷
 
I’m sorry to hear about your priest. But I know that you do not understand the celebate priesthood as most cradle Catholics still do not know. It is a discipline, not a doctrine. It was instituted on a wider scale much later in the Church. Over 90% of priests in the Eastern Church rites are married. I am not saying that we should do away with the celibate priesthood because that would be against sacred tradition and just plain wrong. You’ve missed my point and seem belligerent to even try to understand why I stated such a thing. I say I believe that God [key word here, so pay attention] MAY be calling the Church to reestablish the married priesthood, NOT do away with the celibate priesthood. In fact, all bishops in the Eastern Church rites are required to be from the celibate priesthood. In fact all clergy are required to be celibate after their spouses pass away. I never said it would solve the homosexual problem. My reasons are far more extensive than what you may realize. Having been a seminarian gave me access to the life much more than the actual lay person. My status as former seminarian gives me certain rights that lay persons do not typically have. In fact, studying the priesthood and the particularly the diaconate now gave me insight to come to a better understanding of the discipline of the celibacy among the clergy and the requirement for them to remain celibate after spouses die. I am now seeking the diaconate as a deacon, not a priest. I don’t even want to go there because under the current rule I am not only not allowed but should not be allowed because of the intact discipline. I do believe it is being considered under our noses and the first evidence is the opening the door to married priests from other communities coming home to the Catholic Church. My goal here is to educate people, like you, who don’t seem to understand the discipline but rather accept it blindly, which is fine. But when you take unecessary stands agains someone without full knowledge of what you’re speaking about it is rather difficult to have an intelligent conversation on such a topic.

I too have a mission now to educate people that the abuses are not nearly as vast as people say. But that the cover up is the worst sin here, not the abuse itself. The coverup enabled the offenders to prey more on young adults, even if it was homosexual in nature. What difference does that make? If he had sex with mostly girls it would be just as evil don’t you think? 🤷
If I came across belligerent it was not my intention. However, you have, so far, called me uninformed, told me I don’t have full knowledge of what I speak and stated that I do not understand the celibate priesthood; all in 2 posts! Who’s being belligerent?🤷

My point about obedience is that, if more people followed doctrines AND disclipines mandated from Rome, we would have less problems.

If you have decided that God MAY be directing you to do something that the church says is incorrect then I would say the devil MAY be the actual director.

My point in stating the FACT that most abuse was homosexual is that marriage will NOT help the situation. NOT allowing homosexual men into the priesthood WILL help the situation.
 
If you have decided that God MAY be directing you to do something that the church says is incorrect then I would say the devil MAY be the actual director.

My point in stating the FACT that most abuse was homosexual is that marriage will NOT help the situation. NOT allowing homosexual men into the priesthood WILL help the situation.
This is exactly why I am saying you don’t know what your talking about. I never said anything of this sort and you should be ashamed of yourself for twisting my words to mean that sort of thing. Were you in a religious order? I bet not. Talking about and living the life are 2 completely different things. You don’t know what I mean and I won’t take the time ot teach you because of this uncharitable attitude you have. Leave you to God and hope for the best. It is a matter of obedience. And I am obedient to the bishop. This forum is for talking about our faith and practices in our faith. I said something that contraditcts your wishes and you are going off the wall. How log were deacons left out of the picture? A very long time. But they were brought back. Why? Not just because the Holy See thought of it but because the Church was guided by the Holy Spirit to do so. I was merely talking conversation.

You are acting just like the jerks that made me shut up when I tried to talk about what happened to me while a seminarian. You are not very charitable and with that I’ll place you on my ignore list. You agenda is quite exhausting to deal with here. I do not have a desire to change the celibate rule I am saying that it will always be with us and that an outward view looking into things seems to point to many clergy also desiring the rule to change. It’s not just me that thinks it might be a good idea. I also believe that diocesan priests, not married, should belong to a religious order for the community they need. It would also provide them with someone to watch over them and especially anyone of them that might step out of line or be prone to step out of line.

If you’ve listened to the recent conference on the subject you’d know that I’m not too far off of what is being discussed behind the scene. I am in a deacon program and NOT a priest formation program. I desire to become a deacon, a servant, not a priest now. I was saying that if that door ever opened and I then felt called to it with the support of my wife then I would consider it, not just assume. You’re very rude.
 
One last thing. My story should NOT shake your faith but strengthen it. After 18 years away from the Catholic Church believing all of you were bound to hell I slowly kept finding catholic sounding scriptures that kept pointing me back. Ultimately I ran across the ancient church fathers that show me just how wrong I was and I came back home totally humiliated. All, not some, of the priests said they understood why I left and why I thought what I did. But they explained what was going on back then and about the clergy back then as well. Most everyone I speak to about this says the same thing. Priests in their 50’s and 60’s are about as odd as can be because they are part of the “lost generation” of Catholics and remain as such. I know priests that are no longer priests for other reasons than my perpetrator. If I can come back home and attempt to be part of the solution, unlike you by remaining part of the problem for lack of charity and resistance to change that may be coming down the pipe then anybody can come back. If you mind was in the right place you’d see how a heart felt story such as mine can bring people to a better understanding about the Catholic faith that they never learned. Obedience does not mean not talk about it. It means that we should obey whatever the bishop tells us. And that my friend is exactly what I say to other people who are pushing for change. I do not push for that kind of change. I feel sad that we may lose it. But just like the Jews who lost things in the past our stubborness as a people may cause us to lose a beautiful vocation of celibate men to the priesthood. But I would gladly trade celibate priesthood for an increase in religious orders who are very inspiring to be around if they are truly faithful, which I see happening in our society again. I pray that God will open your heart, like he did mine, to understand better what I’m actually saying and stop trying to twist my words to mean what you want them so say so you can throw stones at me.
 
This is exactly why I am saying you don’t know what your talking about. I never said anything of this sort and you should be ashamed of yourself for twisting my words to mean that sort of thing. Were you in a religious order? I bet not. Talking about and living the life are 2 completely different things. You don’t know what I mean and I won’t take the time ot teach you because of this uncharitable attitude you have. Leave you to God and hope for the best. It is a matter of obedience. And I am obedient to the bishop. This forum is for talking about our faith and practices in our faith. I said something that contraditcts your wishes and you are going off the wall. How log were deacons left out of the picture? A very long time. But they were brought back. Why? Not just because the Holy See thought of it but because the Church was guided by the Holy Spirit to do so. I was merely talking conversation.

You are acting just like the jerks that made me shut up when I tried to talk about what happened to me while a seminarian. You are not very charitable and with that I’ll place you on my ignore list. You agenda is quite exhausting to deal with here. I do not have a desire to change the celibate rule I am saying that it will always be with us and that an outward view looking into things seems to point to many clergy also desiring the rule to change. It’s not just me that thinks it might be a good idea. I also believe that diocesan priests, not married, should belong to a religious order for the community they need. It would also provide them with someone to watch over them and especially anyone of them that might step out of line or be prone to step out of line.

If you’ve listened to the recent conference on the subject you’d know that I’m not too far off of what is being discussed behind the scene. I am in a deacon program and NOT a priest formation program. I desire to become a deacon, a servant, not a priest now. I was saying that if that door ever opened and I then felt called to it with the support of my wife then I would consider it, not just assume. You’re very rude.
I never called you uninformed, told you that you did now what you were talking about or called you belligerent, but I’m rude?

In fact, I stated I would pray for you and the cross you bear. Good day.

Pot…meet kettle.:rolleyes:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top