Paedophilia 'not a criminal condition', says Cardinal Napier

[Lion_IRC]

If my child were a victim of abuse I would call the police before I called the Church, makes no difference what kind of a job the abuser has!

People who try to circumvent their civic and parental responsibility by throwing the ball to the Church or Synagogue baffle me. Talk to the cops, then let the cops talk to the clergymen.

I am SO GLAD you said that!


If someone has horrific allegations to make about a serious criminal offence - RAPE / SEXUAL ASSAULT, that allegation needs to be formally made to the appropriate legal authority.

We should not have to wait until the year 2013 to test evidence which should have been presented by witnesses in 1973 or 1983 or 2003 and which should have been presented to the POLICE and to THE COURTS.

If the police disbelieve the allegation or have insufficient evidence to mount a successful prosecution, that is a secular problem.

If the police are hindered in their criminal investigations by certain individuals, then surely our legal system already has a remedy for that. It’s called obstruction of justice, hindering a police investigation, attempting to pervert the course of justice, being an accessory after the fact…and these are, themselves, crimes which the police can and do prosecute.

 

[Lion_IRC]

Father of three daughters tells Australian clergy pedophile inquiry…

Mr Foster has told the Victorian parliamentary inquiry into child sex abuse that it should be mandatory to report any allegations of abuse to a state authority.

YA THINK? !!!

Full story here.

 

[VivienneJ]

Father of three daughters tells Australian clergy pedophile inquiry…

YA THINK? !!!

Full story here.

I do not know how the legal system in Australia works, nor the legal system in the USA for that matter. In South Africa, which is where Cardinal Napier is from and therefore where he knows the legal system. The police can only investigate a charge laid by the person who has been wronged. Cardinal Napier said nothing different about this from what you are saying, the parents must take every step to have the perpetrator prosecuted.

I know that even as a teacher, reporting suspected child abuse or neglect to Child Welfare required (in the '80s and '90s) a huge amount of evidence before they would even begin to investigate the matter - this may have changed more recently.

 

[Lion_IRC]

What do you make of markomalleys claim that ‘‘The Archbishop is absolutely 100% correct in that pedophilia is not a crime.’’

 

[markomalley]

Thats not what law makers say. Thats not what atheists attacking the clergy say. Thats not what the victims say.

What if all they want to do is masturbate while looking at a naked child? Is that disordered? Is that ‘‘sexual relations’’?

Please define ‘‘acting on’’.
Is adultery immoral if I only commit it in my heart?
What if I merely look at child pornography but dont ‘‘act on’’ the fantasy is that a sin?
Maybe Jesus was mistaken at Matthew 5:27-29

I would be interested to see the scientific research which absolves child molesters of culpability by proving that they lack free will…moral agency. If child rapists can plead mental incapacity to stand trial as a legal defence, why cant criminals who rape adult victims also claim that they are afflicted with a disease they cant control?

First, you have to understand that the **desire **is disordered. I am not in any way condoning any kind of action (be it downloading kiddie porn…thus materially cooperating with the evil of when the kiddie porn was produced…or something live and in color) associated with that. Those actions are evil, criminal, and must be punished (as I said in my post above).

Also, in my post above, I said that people who are afflicted with that desire, out of mercy **both **toward them **and **their potential victims, should never be placed in a position that would provide them any kind of temptation.

If the civil authorities want to lock people up based upon desires, that is their privilege (but that opens up a whole HUGE can of worms). Minority Report, anybody?

But we have to speak of these things as Catholics. We have to bring the Divine Physician to people so that He can bind their wounds. Again, let me stress that I am not suggesting mental therapy for pedophiles who have actually abused children, collected kiddie porn, or anything else. Justice demands that they be dealt with.

But we have people coming through the doors of the Narthex all the time who are wracked with temptation. Whether that temptation is a temptation for homosexuality, pedophilia, depression, suicide, theft, alcoholism, drug abuse, abortion, rage, or whatever…those people need to learn the teachings of Christ. Yes, to hear that those things are wrong. Gravely wrong. But also to hear the teachings of Christ on how to get out from under the rock of their temptations. And to receive the graces from the Sacraments. Including if they have sinned (perhaps especially if they’ve sinned).

You know, somebody who has lived with the cross of horrible temptation for years…particularly if that person hasn’t managed to fall under the weight of that cross…deserves some praise. A crack addict who hasn’t lit up a rock in 10 years (relying upon God’s grace instead) deserves praise. A person with homosexual tendencies who remains chaste deserves praise.

Again, justice requires that a person who acts upon (see above) the condition of pedophilia be dealt with. To restore right order and to protect victims.

But should a person who resists those desires not receive the same praise as person who resists the desire of homosexuality, a person who resists the desire of drugs, and so on?

I guess those people are beyond redemption, right? (/sarc)

 

[VivienneJ]

What do you make of markomalleys claim that ‘‘The Archbishop is absolutely 100% correct in that pedophilia is not a crime.’’

merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pedophilia : sexual perversion in which children are the preferred sexual object

I do not want to speak for markomalley, but looking at the above definition this would seem to say that pedophilia is not a crime - but, and I think mark goes on to say that - acting on that sexual perversion is a crime.

We could be tripping over words and what each listener/reader thinks at first hearing/looking. Again, if Cardinal Napier’s interview is read, there is an issue about words and contexts.

Not to say that there has not been a huge problem and that it has been badly handled in many cases, but Cardinal Napier had something different to say from what is implied from snippets taken from what he said in what appears to have been a deliberate ‘ambush’ by the press.

Edited to add: while I was thinking and looking up the definition, markomalley was speaking for himself.

 

[Lion_IRC]

‘‘Put to death, therefore, whatever belongs to your earthly nature: sexual immorality, impurity, lust, evil desires and greed, which is idolatry. Because of these, the wrath of God is coming’’
Colossians 3:5-6 (NIV)

Does the pedophile who has not ‘‘acted on’’ their disordered desire have anything to feel guilty about?

Does that desire itself constitute sexual immorality as per Colossians 3:5 ?

 

[VivienneJ]

‘‘Put to death, therefore, whatever belongs to your earthly nature: sexual immorality, impurity, lust, evil desires and greed, which is idolatry. Because of these, the wrath of God is coming’’
Colossians 3:5-6 (NIV)

Does the pedophile who has not ‘‘acted on’’ their disordered desire have anything to feel guilty about?

Does that desire itself constitute sexual immorality as per Colossians 3:5 ?

No more or less guilt than anyone of us suffering from whatever ‘disorders’ are our particular burden. The desire of itself is a burden, the sin is acting on that desire, whether it be to eat too much, drink to the point of incapacitation, sink into and remain persistently stuck in depression, fornicate, become violently angry, commit adultery, steal, and whatever else.

What needs to be ‘put to death’ is indeed any desire for sinful behaviour so that it is not acted upon thereby becoming a sin.

 

[Lion_IRC]

OK. Let me rephrase the question.

Does the pedophile who has not ‘‘acted on’’ their disordered desire have anything to feel guilty about?

(sexual immorality, impurity, lust, evil desires…)

 

[VivienneJ]

‘‘Put to death, therefore, whatever belongs to your earthly nature: sexual immorality, impurity, lust, evil desires and greed, which is idolatry. Because of these, the wrath of God is coming’’
Colossians 3:5-6 (NIV)

Does the pedophile who has not ‘‘acted on’’ their disordered desire have anything to feel guilty about?

Does that desire itself constitute sexual immorality as per Colossians 3:5 ?

OK. Let me rephrase the question.

Does the pedophile who has not ‘‘acted on’’ their disordered desire have anything to feel guilty about?

(sexual immorality, impurity, lust, evil desires…)

It may be that I’m more tired than I thought I was, but I fail to see where you have rephrased your question? You have repeated one and left another out altogether.

Makes absolutely no difference to my answer. And if I rephrased your question like this: Does the sinner who has not acted on their sin have anything to feel guilty about?
What would your answer be?

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

OK. Let me rephrase the question.

Does the pedophile who has not ‘‘acted on’’ their disordered desire have anything to feel guilty about?

(sexual immorality, impurity, lust, evil desires…)

Do I seriously believe that someone who has pedophile has not ACTED upon it in some way??? NO! Because I live in the real world where 1 in 4 girls are sexually abused and 1 in 8 boys are.

 

[VivienneJ]

Do I seriously believe that someone who has pedophile has not ACTED upon it in some way??? NO! Because I live in the real world where 1 in 4 girls are sexually abused and 1 in 8 boys are.

And that in no way proves that someone who has pedophilia has not acted on it.

 

[markomalley]

OK. Let me rephrase the question.

Does the pedophile who has not ‘‘acted on’’ their disordered desire have anything to feel guilty about?

(sexual immorality, impurity, lust, evil desires…)

Did the individual in question consent to the temptation or not? That’s the issue. It is the same thing with any kind of temptation. You can have a temptation on occasion and deal with it **appropriately **and not have anything to feel guilty about. If you have a temptation and have a hard time getting it out of your mind quickly, a short ejaculatory prayer should be of assistance (saying a quick Memorare or the like), If something doesn’t help, I would suggest that the person seek some counsel from their confessor or spiritual director.

None of the above implies consenting to the temptation.

If, on the other hand, the person willingly cogitates on that temptation or worse, voluntarily brings up the thought on his/her own without external stimulus and then dwells on it…that’s when the person is consenting to the temptation. That’s when it crosses over to being sinful and that is when a person should feel guilty (as opposed to having concern over something…there is a difference).

That is talking about temptation in general, regardless of what the temptation is.

In my humble opinion, if the temptation is pedophilia (versus almost ANY other temptation), I would say that the thresholds go WAAAAAAAY down as far as taking deliberate spiritual action, devoting oneself to prayer, seeking spiritual counsel, etc.

For example, if person gets angry when being cut off on the freeway during rush hour (a temptation to rage), I wouldn’t think that a person would necessarily need to go seek out spiritual counsel if that anger is for just a moment. And I wouldn’t think that the person would need to feel guilty unless he voluntarily dwells on how exactly he is going to take revenge upon the next slob that cuts him off in the morning.

If, on the other hand, a kindergarten teacher ever, even for a moment, has a flash of a thought about one of the children in her charge, I would think she would be well advised to immediately seek out spiritual counsel. And if she dwells on the thought at all, I would think that it would be entirely appropriate for her to feel guilty. (And, if under spiritual counsel, she is not able to get those thoughts under control, I would think it would be very appropriate to remove herself from the near occasion of sin, by the way)

The process is the same…the thresholds of concern are just different.

 

[VivienneJ]

So well said Mark!

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

And that in no way proves that someone who has pedophilia has not acted on it.

No…but the one time they do…it is EXTREMELY damaging! There is a large group of psychologist trying to get this unclassified as a mental illness…saying that these people just have a preference for young children…and really that there is no harm. BALONEY!!!

So…while just because someone has those thoughts is not a crime…this isn’t like cutting someone off in traffic. That one slip has VERY GRAVE consequences…for the VICTIMS!

 

[Lion_IRC]

I’m sticking to my claim that to desire and lust after (adulterous) sexual contact with a child is a Colossians 3 sin.

And to then act on that immoral lust with external physical deeds is equally a sin - an additional sin.

Of course, if a person has no free will volition or control over their thoughts, and therefore their actions, they cannot be said
to have ‘‘mens rea’’ unlawful mental intent.

Such a person presumably does not know the difference between right and wrong in respect to Gods Law regarding sexual immorality. Hopefully such a person would not make it through the seminary, unless they were a pathological liar and willing to ignore God’s punishment of evil. (atheist?)

mens nostra concordet voci nostrae.
(Our minds must be in accord with our voices)…and our deeds.

…especially and particularly if one has taken a vow of chastity.

 

[markomalley]

Do I seriously believe that someone who has pedophile has not ACTED upon it in some way??? NO! Because I live in the real world where 1 in 4 girls are sexually abused and 1 in 8 boys are.

And that in no way proves that someone who has pedophilia has not acted on it.

No…but the one time they do…it is EXTREMELY damaging! There is a large group of psychologist trying to get this unclassified as a mental illness…saying that these people just have a preference for young children…and really that there is no harm. BALONEY!!!

So…while just because someone has those thoughts is not a crime…this isn’t like cutting someone off in traffic. That one slip has VERY GRAVE consequences…for the VICTIMS!

So, Annabelle, are you proposing that a thought crime be created? Pre-crime, as it were?

Are you going to employ pre-cogs to predict that somebody is going to commit it?



Or, rather, would you modify the law to demand that mental health professionals turn over the names of anybody who has come to them for assistance for assistance regarding this problem (even if nothing has happened)?

Would you require confessors turn in penitents who confess feelings? The State is already trying this in a couple of places for actions (here, here). You would expand that to thoughts?

(Please note that this is not an attack…I am asking if you would do the above, not accusing you of wanting to do so)

 

[Lion_IRC]

markomalley, the problem with your Minority Report / precogs analogy is that;

1. We are talking about deliberate crime/sin, not involuntary…cant help myself…behaviour.
2. The crime IS seeded in the original intent. The movie shows this. The thought crime is real.
3. The crime CAN actually be prevented by going back to the source and thats a GOOD outcome. Justifying the lustful immoral intent of pedophiles as merely a wistful, victimless desire would give the precogs nothing to prosecute - no crime to prevent.
4. The film deals with science fiction but highlights the ‘supernatural’ reality that an all-seeing God (imitated by the precogs) REALLY DOES see into our hearts and thoughts. And He sees sinful thoughts and deeds.

 

[Lion_IRC]

I confess to almighty God and to you, my brothers and sisters, that I have greatly sinned, in my thoughts and in my words, in what I have done and in what I have failed to do, through my fault, through my fault, through my most grievous fault; therefore I ask blessed Mary ever-Virgin, all the Angels and Saints, and you, my brothers and sisters, to pray for me to the Lord our God.

Note the red highlighted section.

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

So, Annabelle, are you proposing that a thought crime be created? Pre-crime, as it were?

Are you going to employ pre-cogs to predict that somebody is going to commit it?

https://imgur.com/qXyro0a

Or, rather, would you modify the law to demand that mental health professionals turn over the names of anybody who has come to them for assistance for assistance regarding this problem (even if nothing has happened)?

Would you require confessors turn in penitents who confess feelings? The State is already trying this in a couple of places for actions (here, here). You would expand that to thoughts?

(Please note that this is not an attack…I am asking if you would do the above, not accusing you of wanting to do so)

Really…because it certainly feels like an attack. Although only unless you have been a victim of this can you TRULY understand how damaging it is.

But no, I would no advocate breaking the seal of confession. But I’m not advocating being all nambe pamby with these people. “Oh…it’s not your fault…you have a disease…” That type of thinking makes me sick. If they act on it ONCE…It’s a CRIME! Let’s not be soft about it. It’s not “oh they slipped…” It’s they acted on it and destroyed a life. But most people can’t truly understand how it is to be…let’s say 3 years old and the man who is supposed to be raising you…and teaching you about life is violating you.

And child porn just adds fuel to their fire…why is it even allowed? And regular porn that dresses up women as young kids… It starts a very dangerous fuel/fire.

Are you say that God created men to desire young kids? And they have no control over it?

It’s hard…but yes I believe my abuser has the right to reconciliation with God in the confession–without that seal being broken. In fact it’s what I pray for him (and it’s about all I can pray for him).

But what I don’t advocate is this soft approach to it…has that helped any? Really? When we let people know that those thoughts are gravely disordered…that if you have them you HAVE to seek help immediately. Only then will we get the seriousness of this across. And then maybe get these statistics to drop.