Pedophile Priests Pedophilia Crisis And The Rest of the Story

[djeter]

Recently in the discussion forum concerning an AP article on a sex abuse case that is playing out in Wilmington, Delaware I ran across in these forums some of the PC approved language regarding the priest scandal. It’s worthwhile to recall George Weigel’s cautionary note on this:

"Pedophile priests – in the classic sense of men who habitually abuse prepubescent children – are not the majority of cleric sexual abusers; they are, in fact, a small minority of malfeasant clergy, although they are arguably the most loathsome form of the clerical sexual predator. That the shorthand of “pedophilia crisis” was being used …months after even gay activists were conceding that the overwhelming majority of the abuses reported involved homosexual men molesting teenage boys or young males suggested that the moniker “pedophilia crisis” served agendas other than factual accuracy.

**Were the crisis of clerical sexual abuse to be described accurately – as a crisis whose principle manifestation was homosexual molestation – other questions about gay culture might well be raised."

I’ve also brought together some reading selections drawn from the study commissioned by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops “The Nature and Scope of the Problem of Sexual Abuse of Minors by Catholic Priests and Deacons in the United States” which deals with the facts of the case, which now seem obscured after all these years. Even Thomas Neuberger, a lawyer representing 88 purported victims in the Delaware case, had confused me so I decided to revisit all of it for my own edification.

What I found out is here:

payingattentiontothesky.com/2009/10/26/reading-selections-the-nature-and-scope-of-the-problem-of-sexual-abuse-of-minors-by-catholic-priests-and-deacons-in-the-united-states/

Regards,

dj

 

[DOShea]

This is all dancing around the head of a pin as it regards language. Maybe a clinician might make a distinction between a pedophile and a homosexual molester of teen boys, but the average ordinary person, IMO, would not.

Why not? Well, consider the legal charges brought against a person who is found to have indecent photographs of teenagers (<18 yo) on their computer… they aren’t charged with “teen pornography,” they get charged with child pornography. Thus if a photo is considered the image of “a child,” what then is the real distinction in the case of an illicit sexual relationship with the same child?

I believe that to the average person it does not make any difference at all. It’s a distinction without a difference.

 

[djeter]

This is all dancing around the head of a pin as it regards language. Maybe a clinician might make a distinction between a pedophile and a homosexual molester of teen boys, but the average ordinary person, IMO, would not.

Why not? Well, consider the legal charges brought against a person who is found to have indecent photographs of teenagers (<18 yo) on their computer… they aren’t charged with “teen pornography,” they get charged with child pornography. Thus if a photo is considered the image of “a child,” what then is the real distinction in the case of an illicit sexual relationship with the same child?

I believe that to the average person it does not make any difference at all. It’s a distinction without a difference.

Well another quote from George Weigel explains what is going on:

“The overwhelming majority of abuse cases was homosexual molestation. According to press reports, confirmed by the studies of reputable scholars, the most prominent form of clergy sexual abuse in recent decades has involved homosexual priests abusing teenage boys and young men.

It took editors, television personalities, and radio talk-show hosts approximately two and a half months to recognize what print reporters had, in fact, been uncovering for months: namely, that the overwhelming majority of cases of abuse did not involve prepubescent children, but rather teenage boys and young men, often in school or seminary settings.

While clinical distinctions (“Fixated ephebophilia,” “regressed” or “stunted” homosexuality) may be helpful for purposes of professional study and therapy, normal English describes such abuse as homosexual molestation.”

And the question becomes, why is the media doing the dance? Why is it NOT called the homosexual priest scandal? It’s a distinction with a HUGE difference. And Catholics need to start calling it a “homosexual priest scandal” and referring to “homosexual rape” and “homosexual molestation.” BTW gays routinely refer to pedophilia as a “hetero crime.”

dj

 

[Diane_Lynn]

Well another quote from George Weigel explains what is going on:

“The overwhelming majority of abuse cases was homosexual molestation. According to press reports, confirmed by the studies of reputable scholars, the most prominent form of clergy sexual abuse in recent decades has involved homosexual priests abusing teenage boys and young men.

It took editors, television personalities, and radio talk-show hosts approximately two and a half months to recognize what print reporters had, in fact, been uncovering for months: namely, that the overwhelming majority of cases of abuse did not involve prepubescent children, but rather teenage boys and young men, often in school or seminary settings.

While clinical distinctions (“Fixated ephebophilia,” “regressed” or “stunted” homosexuality) may be helpful for purposes of professional study and therapy, normal English describes such abuse as homosexual molestation.”

And the question becomes, why is the media doing the dance? Why is it NOT called the homosexual priest scandal? It’s a distinction with a HUGE difference. And Catholics need to start calling it a “homosexual priest scandal” and referring to “homosexual rape” and “homosexual molestation.” BTW gays routinely refer to pedophilia as a “hetero crime.” dj

Any sexual predication upon a child by an adult is pedophilia whether involving a heterosexual or a homosexual. A homosexual can defer it to the hetero community but that is simply ‘them, not us’ cover for themselves. I agree that it should have been referred to as a homosexual scandal since most involved male priests upon male students.

Perhaps what also should be stated is that only about 2% of the priesthood were involved and that does include those committing the acts and those who ignored and/or hid the issue whom I feel should be held equally responsible.

 

[manualman]

There are valid arguments on both sides of this issue.

On the one hand, it is extremely important that catholics NOT make this into a gay scapegoat issue. WE had/have a problem with a few (percentage wise) sexually abusive priests infiltrating the ranks and too many of our bishops being more interested in avoiding bad PR than in eliminating the predators from the priestly ranks. Whether said predators were hetero or homo predators is almost trivial in comparison.

But it IS a violence against the truth to call this a “pedophilia” problem. We should simply refer to it as a “child molestation” scandal. What’s more, the prevention programs should ESPECIALLY not dance around the truth. I was appalled when the Virtus training program summary sheet told me that the smallest children were the most at risk! That’s just plain ignorant of the facts. The facts (per the John Jay Report) show that teens and pre-teens are MOST at risk. If our primary goal is to protect the innocent, let’s at least try to focus our prevention efforts where they are most needed please!

 

[Diane_Lynn]

There are valid arguments on both sides of this issue.

On the one hand, it is extremely important that catholics NOT make this into a gay scapegoat issue. WE had/have a problem with a few (percentage wise) sexually abusive priests infiltrating the ranks and too many of our bishops being more interested in avoiding bad PR than in eliminating the predators from the priestly ranks. Whether said predators were hetero or homo predators is almost trivial in comparison.

But it IS a violence against the truth to call this a “pedophilia” problem. We should simply refer to it as a “child molestation” scandal. What’s more, the prevention programs should ESPECIALLY not dance around the truth. I was appalled when the Virtus training program summary sheet told me that the smallest children were the most at risk! That’s just plain ignorant of the facts. The facts (per the John Jay Report) show that teens and pre-teens are MOST at risk. If our primary goal is to protect the innocent, let’s at least try to focus our prevention efforts where they are most needed please!

Although I do have the same concerns about scapegoating I firmly believe it is not ‘child molestation’ which is more akin to abusing a child in a physical manner rather than a sexual deviance that would use a child to satisfy ones sexual urges all the while leaving with that child the lifelong memory of that ACT. Yes I said sexual and that is a bit more than molestation in its wider frame of reference.

We also need to fully understand that the church does not talk about the homosexual as the sinner but instead focus’ on the ACT itself. I am in league with the church on this position and will call a spade a spade when it comes to abusive ACTS by homosexual men who have been given our trust in keeping safe our children. This is not scapegoating but honest truth in dealing with behavioral issues within our church.

 

[rlg94086]

There are valid arguments on both sides of this issue.

On the one hand, it is extremely important that catholics NOT make this into a gay scapegoat issue. WE had/have a problem with a few (percentage wise) sexually abusive priests infiltrating the ranks and too many of our bishops being more interested in avoiding bad PR than in eliminating the predators from the priestly ranks. Whether said predators were hetero or homo predators is almost trivial in comparison.

Well, yes and no. Since it is something like 80% male adolescents as victims, I think orientation does have relevancy. I don’t know if hebophelia is more predominant among homosexually-oriented men in the general population, or if it is just among priests. However, such an imbalance in the gender of victims shows that homosexuality is a related issue. I’m sure this is why the Church laid down better criteria for the screening of homosexually-oriented candidates for the seminary.

On the other hand, maybe it is just because we are more vigilant about safeguarding our teenage daughters than we are about our teenage sons? The idea of letting your daughter spend a lot of private time with any man - priest or not - would be foreign to most people. It used to be that having your son spend time with a priest was considered a safe thing…I mean, after all, you want them to have positive, male role models. Unfortunately, some homosexual, predator priests have ruined that.

manualman:

But it IS a violence against the truth to call this a “pedophilia” problem. We should simply refer to it as a “child molestation” scandal. What’s more, the prevention programs should ESPECIALLY not dance around the truth. I was appalled when the Virtus training program summary sheet told me that the smallest children were the most at risk! That’s just plain ignorant of the facts. The facts (per the John Jay Report) show that teens and pre-teens are MOST at risk. If our primary goal is to protect the innocent, let’s at least try to focus our prevention efforts where they are most needed please!

Exactly. It isn’t about semantics. It is about solving the problem.

 

[djeter]

Exactly. It isn’t about semantics. It is about solving the problem.​

Well the point of my post was to push some of the salient points of the John Jay Report out there again and to show that “semantics” was part of the problem. You won’t get to the truth of any problem nor solve it when you obfuscate it with language that diverts the attention from the truth itself.

dj

 

[DebtHawk]

Is there anything that I can read that shows what the Church is doing about this problem? I am not Catholic, but I am being drawn to the Catholic Church. However, a big problem for me is that I could not allow my children to be alone with a priest.

 

[rlg94086]

Exactly. It isn’t about semantics. It is about solving the problem.​

Well the point of my post was to push some of the salient points of the John Jay Report out there again and to show that “semantics” was part of the problem. You won’t get to the truth of any problem nor solve it when you obfuscate it with language that diverts the attention from the truth itself.

dj

Right. We are in agreement, I was just pointing out that the semantics is not the reason, as some like to assert. There is a difference between a pedophile and a homosexual ephebophile.

 

[rlg94086]

Is there anything that I can read that shows what the Church is doing about this problem? I am not Catholic, but I am being drawn to the Catholic Church. However, a big problem for me is that I could not allow my children to be alone with a priest.

Hi DebtHawk,

Do understand that the vast majority of priests are completely safe. It is only a small minority that exhibited the problem. Your children are as safe alone with a priest as they are alone with a teacher or relative. Ah, you may say, doesn’t that depend on the teacher or relative? Of course, and that is my point.

As far as what the Church is doing about the problem, each diocese is tackling the issue by stepping up the vigilance of creating a safe environment for our youth. This is the site for the program in the Archdiocese I am in: seattlearch.org/sep/index.html

As far as future priests, the Vatican set out guidelines for discernment of men with homosexual tendencies in a document in 2005: vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccatheduc/documents/rc_con_ccatheduc_doc_20051104_istruzione_en.html

I encourage you on your journey to the Church. I made it myself, as did many converts who are on CAF. This is a great place to get questions answered.

 

[buffalo]

Homosexuality has bankrupted the Church in America!

 

[Marsha_Adams]

In the majority of states, sexual relations with someone less than 18 years of age is considered statuatory rape even if the individual is consenting. If my high school literature book can be believed however, Romeo and Juliet were 14 and 12 respectively. Also. if I recall coreectly, tradition holds that the Blessed Virgin was 16 when the power of the Holy Spirit came upon her and she conceived Our Lord. When I was in school (for all I know it may have changed since then), in the Sovereign State of Tennessee with parental consent one could marry at 13. My point is that sexually speaking, age varies from time to time and culture to culture in terms of what is acceptable.

Pedophilia involves prepubescent children, not anyone beneath the age of majority. It crosses all demographic lines. Now, here is the important part, 4% of the general population regardless of sex, sexual orientation, marital status, race, economic status, educational level, occupation, or any other grouping are pedophiles. If you went to school for 16 years and had a total of 80 teachers, 3 - 4 of them were most likely pedophiles. There are 1200 people working in my regional office, 48 of them are probably pedophiles. Look around you and then do the math.

Now look at the Priest scandal. According to the statistics that I have heard, the number of pedophilic priests is just about 2%. That is only half of the rate of the general population; Now I think that we are all agreed that even if it were .000000000000000002%, that would be way too high and that all pedophiles should be put down like rabid curs, BUT why is it that the media jumps on the priest scandal while you never hear boo about all the other pedophiles (nurses, school teachers, etc.)? Personally I think it is because they are Catholics.

 

[JimG]

I believe that the media tended to use the term pedophilia rather than the more accurate term ephebophilia to describe the problem both as a shortcut and as a way to minimize the essentially homosexual nature of the predation, although that was perfectly obvious in the nature of the complaints, and in the John Jay Report.

It should also be noted that one of the root causes of the problem was in a homosexual subculture that had existed in certain seminaries and in certain seminary ordination classes. That has largely been corrected. A good resource is the book “Goodbye Good Men,” which is hopefully now becoming more of a history lesson than a current affairs lesson.

 

[manualman]

Now, here is the important part, 4% of the general population regardless of sex, sexual orientation, marital status, race, economic status, educational level, occupation, or any other grouping are pedophiles.

I once would have dismissed claims like this as nonsense. And I still suspect it is a bit oversimplified (I highly doubt women are are likely to be child molestors as men)But I was shocked to recently learn that a 68 year old man I worked with for years was convicted for child porn 10 years earlier. I had no idea and would NEVER have guessed from working with him. Married guy, completely normal seeming, good social skills… NOTHING to help you suspect the evil that lurked inside. And think how unusual it is for such a person to get CAUGHT…

To the person considering catholicism, don’t believe the lie that this is a catholic problem and don’t believe the lie that this is a ‘gay’ problem. This is a sinful humanness problem and it is EVERYWHERE around us. Be watchful.

 

[rlg94086]

To the person considering catholicism, don’t believe the lie that this is a catholic problem and don’t believe the lie that this is a ‘gay’ problem. This is a sinful humanness problem and it is EVERYWHERE around us. Be watchful.

Within the Catholic priesthood, it is a ‘gay’ problem. Please don’t accuse those who have presented the very clear evidence of this of lying. When 80% of the cases are homosexually-oriented men preying on male teens, it is a ‘gay’ problem.

There is danger in jumping to the conclusion that such actions are more prevalent in homosexually-oriented people in the general population, but there is no reason to obfuscate the issue within the priesthood. Thankfully, the Church hasn’t, which is why the Vatican posted the discernment instructions in 2005.

 

[JimG]

I once would have dismissed claims like this as nonsense. And I still suspect it is a bit oversimplified (I highly doubt women are are likely to be child molestors as men)But I was shocked to recently learn that a 68 year old man I worked with for years was convicted for child porn 10 years earlier. I had no idea and would NEVER have guessed from working with him. Married guy, completely normal seeming, good social skills… NOTHING to help you suspect the evil that lurked inside. And think how unusual it is for such a person to get CAUGHT…

To the person considering catholicism, don’t believe the lie that this is a catholic problem and don’t believe the lie that this is a ‘gay’ problem. This is a sinful humanness problem and it is EVERYWHERE around us. Be watchful.

I suspect that porn has a lot to do with the increasing evidence of child sexual abuse. There are also more reports of females molesting males. In a small city in KS recently, a female teacher was charged with molestation of a 15 year old boy. And I have heard anecdotes about underage boys being seduced by older girls. One doesn’t hear about many cases in the public schools because at least around here, the school districts have limited legal liability for money damages. (The Catholic Church got hit hard partially because the dioceses had money to be obtained.) In a sex obsessed society, it is hard for anyone to escape such influences.

 

[Diane_Lynn]

Is there anything that I can read that shows what the Church is doing about this problem? I am not Catholic, but I am being drawn to the Catholic Church. However, a big problem for me is that I could not allow my children to be alone with a priest.

Deb,
I was born into the Catholic Faith and taught by nuns. In all those years and since I have never come across one single priest that I knew or suspected might be a pedophile. That is not to deny I may have met one without knowing but I am certain my brother who was a year younger and also went to the same grammar school as I did, (he, as were all the boys, were taught by brothers in the 7th and 8th years of grammar school and in high school also taught by brothers as well as Jesuit priests) would have told me if he was ever approached and he never did.

The reason why I tell you this is simply to emphasize that those guilty of that awful travesty upon children in their care were the rare few when you consider the vast numbers that are not at all like those who cast aside the trust offered to them. In my parish we have two priests and I would trust them both without any doubt in their care for children.

There was a report I read a while back that explained that surprisingly about the same percentile of protestant ministers were as guilty of the same crimes as Catholic priests. I have to suppose that we might find the same percentile in almost any profession or calling. I do agree that we Catholics are more on guard now and the priests know that what happened before will be treated much more severely if it ever happens again.

Hopefully my comments might ease your concern. God Bless!

 

[YADA]

We had problem with sexual misconduct in the Church …

1] A few [very few] horrendous cases involved a priest and pre-pubescient victims -

2] Most of the misconduct a pederasty [these cases included pubescient youth and young adults] problem with an underlying homosexual context … Some cases were purely cases of sexual predation [and awful event that can scar a person] by the priest on victims [who are truly hurt]

Then there are the other cases that are far less concrete …

In some instances these youth were over the “age of consent” … which ironically is viewed as an issue if the two persons involved are a priest and a youth 20 years later when the ‘deep pockets’ of the church are an issue - BUT - not in Kansas where an abortion can be obtained for the 26 year old man’s 14 year old girl friend …she gets an abortion without parental knowledge and that is not a crime …

And these cases even involve young adults - some even in their twenties … thus these cases included relationships similar in nature to Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinski … a person of power taking advantage of a person in their control … but - hey - what consenting people do is okay as long as one of those ‘consenting’ is not a priest

AND Sadly - some of the cases were pure works of fiction … that too is a scandal …

AND Sadly, some jusirsdictions are changing laws on statute of limitations - not to get justice for all victims of child sexual abuse … no but only for those victimized by catholic priests … if you are victimized by the local school teacher - well your victimization gets ‘short-changed’ in the ability to sue and recover co$t$ … so not only are all perpetrators not equal so too - all victims are not equal

And please do not lecture me on the evils of child sex abuse … I was abused by our landlord - at the ripe old age of two … I personally know what the pain to the victims is - I have lived it and the memories that last for years … I also know the repsonse of parents, law - enforcement, etc from the late 50’s early 60’'s when most of the crimes committed by the “Church’s scandle” occurred …

 

[manualman]

Within the Catholic priesthood, it is a ‘gay’ problem. Please don’t accuse those who have presented the very clear evidence of this of lying. When 80% of the cases are homosexually-oriented men preying on male teens, it is a ‘gay’ problem.

There is danger in jumping to the conclusion that such actions are more prevalent in homosexually-oriented people in the general population, but there is no reason to obfuscate the issue within the priesthood. Thankfully, the Church hasn’t, which is why the Vatican posted the discernment instructions in 2005.

The second part of your statement contradicts the first. It is far too easy to jump to conclusions based on the facts here, and I have certainly seen far too many people assert that somebody who is gay is far more likely to sexually abuse a child. THAT is what I meant by it being a lie that the catholic church had a ‘gay priest’ problem. The PROBLEM is that we had a sexual abuser priest problem. Many of them may have been gay. Many may have been equal opportunity abusers who simply had FAR more access to boys than girls. I don’t know, and statistics can’t tell the difference.

What I DO know is that abusers come in all flavors and the church is (finally) right to recommend that we guard against them all without bias in the training programs. Focusing only on gay abusers would be merely reactionary instead of forward looking.