Pennsylvania Priest Caught in Sex Scandal

[Sarabande]

All those multi-syllable terms would do is confuse the issue for the public. A person has sex with a child, for most people, they understand that as pedophilia. These fine distinctions are useful perhaps for professionals treating offenders - NOT for safeguarding the public by increasing awareness of these incidents.

I don’t know… I think it might be beneficial to have these specific terms more widely known. I would give, though, that hebophilia is and has been a debatable term because of the age range given. When most people I know think of a pedophile, they only think of younger children, not teenaged children. I’ve never met a person (and this includes other child sex abuse survivors I know) who considers a pedophile as someone who likes to have sex with teenagers, for instance.

The other problem with only using the one commonly known term is that too many people actually don’t really think there is anything “too wrong” when a teenager is having sex with an older person, except for the fact that the law says it is illegal. More often than I would like to say have I heard plenty of men make comments at how lucky an older man is when they were able to land a younger woman. I remember as a 17-year-old at a wedding, having a drunk 28-year-old man come up to me and tell me that I was legal in three states. I was so naive that I didn’t really understand what he meant. I ignorantly thought he meant that I was just legal to go on a date. I didn’t even think about the sex part, but when I told my parents about what he said, it was then when my eyes were open. An even better example is how acceptable it is when a teenaged boy is seduced by an older woman. Most people I know think nothing of it. In fact, during a show I listened to in regards to a 20-something teacher who was arrested for having sex with a teenaged boy, many men called up saying that they wished they had a “hot” teacher like her to show them the ways. There was even a mother who called up, with a story about her teenaged son who was seduced by an older 20-something woman and thought it was the best thing she could have ever done to him because he became more confident and came out of his shell.

I’m wondering if education was made on these terminologies and people saw that there is actually a psychological condition called ephebophilia, how many more people would take these situations more seriously, rather than just saying, “Well, it’s not like he was with a child.”

But then, there is all of this grey area with teens and adults. How often do we see 16 or 17 year olds dating and having sex with 20-year-olds? I mean both of my grandmothers married men who would have been considered “ephebophiles” or even sex offenders today. My one was 14 when she married my 21-year-old grandfather, and my other was 16 when she married my 19 year-old grandfather, although they actually didn’t get to consummate the marriage until she was 18 because he went away to war and couldn’t get a priest to convalidate their marriage until he came home. They were all happily married, yet technically, they might have been considered ephebophiles or pedophiles by those who may consider it as such.

That said, there is also the chance that with these different terminologies people could use it to lessen the horrific acts, as I’ve seen it implied before with the priest sex abuse scandals. I can’t abide by that.

 

[SaintAugustine]

All those multi-syllable terms would do is confuse the issue for the public. A person has sex with a child, for most people, they understand that as pedophilia. These fine distinctions are useful perhaps for professionals treating offenders - NOT for safeguarding the public by increasing awareness of these incidents.

Let’s not confuse the public by giving them a detailed explanation. It’s much better to make them think that priests are pedophiles, when they aren’t.

 

[SaintAugustine]

I don’t know… I think it might be beneficial to have these specific terms more widely known. I would give, though, that hebophilia is and has been a debatable term because of the age range given. When most people I know think of a pedophile, they only think of younger children, not teenaged children. I’ve never met a person (and this includes other child sex abuse survivors I know) who considers a pedophile as someone who likes to have sex with teenagers, for instance.

The other problem with only using the one commonly known term is that too many people actually don’t really think there is anything “too wrong” when a teenager is having sex with an older person, except for the fact that the law says it is illegal. More often than I would like to say have I heard plenty of men make comments at how lucky an older man is when they were able to land a younger woman. I remember as a 17-year-old at a wedding, having a drunk 28-year-old man come up to me and tell me that I was legal in three states. I was so naive that I didn’t really understand what he meant. I ignorantly thought he meant that I was just legal to go on a date. I didn’t even think about the sex part, but when I told my parents about what he said, it was then when my eyes were open. An even better example is how acceptable it is when a teenaged boy is seduced by an older woman. Most people I know think nothing of it. In fact, during a show I listened to in regards to a 20-something teacher who was arrested for having sex with a teenaged boy, many men called up saying that they wished they had a “hot” teacher like her to show them the ways. There was even a mother who called up, with a story about her teenaged son who was seduced by an older 20-something woman and thought it was the best thing she could have ever done to him because he became more confident and came out of his shell.

I’m wondering if education was made on these terminologies and people saw that there is actually a psychological condition called ephebophilia, how many more people would take these situations more seriously, rather than just saying, “Well, it’s not like he was with a child.”

But then, there is all of this grey area with teens and adults. How often do we see 16 or 17 year olds dating and having sex with 20-year-olds? I mean both of my grandmothers married men who would have been considered “ephebophiles” or even sex offenders today. My one was 14 when she married my 21-year-old grandfather, and my other was 16 when she married my 19 year-old grandfather, although they actually didn’t get to consummate the marriage until she was 18 because he went away to war and couldn’t get a priest to convalidate their marriage until he came home. They were all happily married, yet technically, they might have been considered ephebophiles or pedophiles by those who may consider it as such.

That said, there is also the chance that with these different terminologies people could use it to lessen the horrific acts, as I’ve seen it implied before with the priest sex abuse scandals. I can’t abide by that.

I don’t think using the terms would lessen the acts, but they are helpful in identifying the problem. Also, as you explained, the ephebophile designation does have some gray area. When my 19-year-old started dating a 31-year-old widower, I found it creepy. Upon knowing him, though, I don’t see any sign that he has any kind of psychological issues. Someone acting like the 28-year-old man you mentioned would really be creepy.

 

[larsont7]

A pedophile preys on pre-pubescent children. A hebephile preys on post-pubescent children (usually 11-14 range). Ephebophiles are interested in adolescents (usually 15-19 range), aka teenagers.

It is true that the term pedophilia is sometimes commonly applied to sexual acts with someone below the age of consent (16-18 in the US, depending on location), but they are totally different issues, psychologically. Personally, I think it really does matter, because the sexual preference in hebephiles and ephebophiles are generally consistent (i.e. same sex OR opposite sex, but not generally both), whereas pedophiles are not. So, when you are talking about a group like priests, it does make a difference to know whether you are dealing with a pedophile or a homosexual ephebophile.

Referring to all the victims as children and all the perpetrators as pedophile is simplistic and doesn’t really tell us much about the actual issue. It’s more of an emotional appeal.

^^^This. And the reason these terms matter is to get to the root cause of the problem. The majority of the world (thanks to the media) think of the priest abuse problem as mainly a pedophilia issue rather than an ephebophilia issue, which I believe more than 70% of the cases have been.

No one is condoning ephebophilia by any stretch of the imagination, but it does highlight why homosexuality in the priesthood is a big part of the problem, and the media does not want to admit that. When the media keeps spewing the term pedophile out there, it totally downplays the dangers of a homosexual priesthood.

 

[SaintAugustine]

^^^This. And the reason these terms matter is to get to the root cause of the problem. The majority of the world (thanks to the media) think of the priest abuse problem as mainly a pedophilia issue rather than an ephebophilia issue, which I believe more than 70% of the cases have been.

No one is condoning ephebophilia by any stretch of the imagination, but it does highlight why homosexuality in the priesthood is a big part of the problem, and the media does not want to admit that. When the media keeps spewing the term pedophile out there, it totally downplays the dangers of a homosexual priesthood.

I think it is very intentional.

 

[Sarabande]

^^^This. And the reason these terms matter is to get to the root cause of the problem. The majority of the world (thanks to the media) think of the priest abuse problem as mainly a pedophilia issue rather than an ephebophilia issue, which I believe more than 70% of the cases have been.

No one is condoning ephebophilia by any stretch of the imagination, but it does highlight why homosexuality in the priesthood is a big part of the problem, and the media does not want to admit that. When the media keeps spewing the term pedophile out there, it totally downplays the dangers of a homosexual priesthood.

It’s a lot of sensationalism. The media looks for the juiciest stories and bends the truth where it can. As someone who trained as a journalist, I’m often second-guessing what is reported, whether it comes from a conservative or liberal news outlet.

A part of me suspects ignorance on the part of most journalists when it comes to differentiating pedophilia, hebophilia and ephebophilia. The other part of me also suspects intentional misuse of the terminologies, because a man having sex with boys is treated as something worse than men having sex with girls. It’s much more scandalous. In general, more females are victims of child sexual abuse than males. It’s 1 in 5 females as opposed to 1 in 10 males. If the general public were truly just as scandalised by the girls who are also abused, you’d be hearing more about it as well. But we’ve got older males on younger males. That is more disgusting than older males on young females. And they are all minors… children in the eyes of the law. On top of that, they are men of the cloth who should be practicing celibacy and practicing what they preach. My, oh, my, don’t we have a great news story.

All abuse is abhorrent. I don’t care how young or old the person is. If an older man is truly sexually abusing a 15-year-old boy, that is just as horrific and disgusting as a man abusing a 5-year-old boy. One is ephebophilia and the other is pedophilia, but both acts of sexual abuse are equally abhorrent. If the media actually cared about the victims, they would want to write about all abuse with an unbiased eye. They would do their homework and educate the public so that they can see and understand clearly rather than be confused.

 

[NeedsMercy]

Maybe I’m missing something here. You can debate all you want about the definitions of pre- or post- pubescent children but the story is that a priest was arrested for a crime and the Church covered it up. Our Church COVERED IT UP! Who in the heck do we have in the Catholic hierarchy? What’s going on? I cringe every time someone takes a shot at our faith because of pedophile priests, but, hey, where there’s smoke there’s fire. They should arrest the whole darn diocese and then some, because covering up a crime is also a crime.

Saint Michael the Archangel, defend us in battle; be our protection against the wickedness and snares of the devil. May God rebuke him, we humbly pray and do thou, O Prince of the heavenly host, by the power of God, thrust into hell Satan and all the evil spirits who prowl about the world seeking the ruin of souls. Amen.

 

[GraceSofia]

Maybe I’m missing something here. You can debate all you want about the definitions of pre- or post- pubescent children but the story is that a priest was arrested for a crime and the Church covered it up. Our Church COVERED IT UP!

No. You certainly are missing something. The Church did NOT cover it up.
From the article linked in the OP:

Paulish has been removed from his post at the Prince of Peace parish and has been suspended from acting in the capacity of a priest, according to a statement released by the Diocese of Scranton.

The diocese pledged its cooperation with the investigation, and it called on anyone who “may have been sexually abused by Father Paulish or any member of the clergy” to notify the district attorney’s office.

“I wish to acknowledge how unsettling this is to me personally and to countless others, that yet again a priest has been involved in such inappropriate, immoral and illegal behavior,” the Bishop of Scranton, the Rev. Joseph Bambera, said in the statement.

 

[seekerz]

Let’s not confuse the public by giving them a detailed explanation. It’s much better to make them think that priests are pedophiles, when they aren’t.

That has been exactly my point all along. So teachers or coaches who do this would be ‘pedophiles’ in common parlance, but priests would be this weird-sounding, ill-defined word. Because who can simply look at children and immediately know where they all are on the puberty scale…?

Is this incident somehow BETTER than pedophilia? Are priests who offend this way not actually WORSE-behaved because of their positions of trust in the Church and in society?

THANK YOU, THANK YOU very much for exposing this convoluted thinking which seeks to minimize those offences. That is exactly what I’ve been driving at. IMO, all it does is make us as a Church appear hypocritical - whether or not that was the intent.

 

[seekerz]

No. You certainly are missing something. The Church did NOT cover it up.
From the article linked in the OP:

It doesn’t look like they covered it up. The only covering up that I’m aware of is this after-the-fact parsing. Well, you know, he didn’t actually…because, he isn’t actually…and to be more accurate…

 

[webmiesterph]

I was referencing a real academic study done by a Catholic priest. According to the priest, his studies suggested “up to 60 percent of Catholic priests are gay,” and that percentages were even higher for younger priests. The study I am referencing is in the link below. That a significant number of priests may be gay/Same-sex attracted does NOT mean they are actively engaging in behavior that is against current Church doctrine.

As Pope Francis reminded us, “if someone is gay and he searches for the Lord and has good will, who am I to judge?”

usnews.com/news/articles/2013/07/29/catholic-priests-its-empirical-fact-that-many-clergy-are-gay

I read the link. I didn’t see the study, it stated estimates but not the basis of such estimates. It would be just as accurate as if I made my own numbers and claim them to be my estimates. Also, it is difficult to judge what “gay” means to the writer. It can mean a ton of things. It can mean someone who might find other men attractive at any point in time which may not necessarily define “gay” for others. It may mean someone who lives with other men, or someone who speaks or walks like a gay.

 

[seekerz]

^^^This. And the reason these terms matter is to get to the root cause of the problem. The majority of the world (thanks to the media) think of the priest abuse problem as mainly a pedophilia issue rather than an ephebophilia issue, which I believe more than 70% of the cases have been.

No one is condoning ephebophilia by any stretch of the imagination, but it does highlight why homosexuality in the priesthood is a big part of the problem, and the media does not want to admit that. When the media keeps spewing the term pedophile out there, it totally downplays the dangers of a homosexual priesthood.

You read these posts and think the media is the problem? I will pray for all of us. Get back to me when you show what difference it makes to the solution to call an offender a pedophile or an ehebo-whatever. Both are sick, both need to be dealt with by the justice system, by medical professionals and by the Church.

How does making this a problem of homosexuality solve anything? If homosexuality is the problem are there not enough homosexual adults out there to proposition? You say yourself that its a big problem in the priesthood. So why kids? Priests would get kicked out for an adult relationship but they wouldn’t get thrown in jail, so your distinctions explain nothing. Homosexual or heterosexual, what difference in handling such crimes - that’s what none of these posts seem to address.

 

[webmiesterph]

Maybe I’m missing something here. You can debate all you want about the definitions of pre- or post- pubescent children but the story is that a priest was arrested for a crime and the Church covered it up. Our Church COVERED IT UP! Who in the heck do we have in the Catholic hierarchy? What’s going on? I cringe every time someone takes a shot at our faith because of pedophile priests, but, hey, where there’s smoke there’s fire. They should arrest the whole darn diocese and then some, because covering up a crime is also a crime.

Saint Michael the Archangel, defend us in battle; be our protection against the wickedness and snares of the devil. May God rebuke him, we humbly pray and do thou, O Prince of the heavenly host, by the power of God, thrust into hell Satan and all the evil spirits who prowl about the world seeking the ruin of souls. Amen.

Are we sure that the crime happened? We are immediately making assumptions just because it was in the news. Even Jesus was falsely accused and he was crucified for it,and it can happen to any priest as well. Let us not conclude that the church covered up a crime because the crime is not yet proven to have been done. Unless you were there and saw it yourself, it might be prudent not to conclude at once that the crime happened and the church is covering it up. The church also needs to conduct its own internal investigation before acting.

 

[SaintAugustine]

That has been exactly my point all along. So teachers or coaches who do this would be ‘pedophiles’ in common parlance, but priests would be this weird-sounding, ill-defined word. Because who can simply look at children and immediately know where they all are on the puberty scale…?

Is this incident somehow BETTER than pedophilia? Are priests who offend this way not actually WORSE-behaved because of their positions of trust in the Church and in society?

THANK YOU, THANK YOU very much for exposing this convoluted thinking which seeks to minimize those offences. That is exactly what I’ve been driving at. IMO, all it does is make us as a Church appear hypocritical - whether or not that was the intent.

Complete misrepresentation, as usual. I never said that reporting on teacher sexual abuse should be treated differently. I have not tried to minimize the offenses. They are still horrific. People in positions of power, preying on young people, or adults for that matter, are committing horrific crimes. That said, pedophiles are absolutely more horrific than ephebophiles, and ephebophiles are worse than a sexual predator who targets adults.

 

[seekerz]

Complete misrepresentation, as usual. I never said that reporting on teacher sexual abuse should be treated differently. I have not tried to minimize the offenses. They are still horrific. People in positions of power, preying on young people, or adults for that matter, are committing horrific crimes. That said, pedophiles are absolutely more horrific than ephebophiles, and ephebophiles are worse than a sexual predator who targets adults.

I misrepresented nothing. A person who preys on children is what people think of when they hear the word pedophile; anything else is less likely to get the attention or the remediation that is necessary to protect our kids. The ‘worse than’, ‘better than’ arguments are like straining out a gnat so we can swallow a camel.

 

[SaintAugustine]

I misrepresented nothing. A person who preys on children is what people think of when they hear the word pedophile; anything else is less likely to get the attention or the remediation that is necessary to protect our kids. The ‘worse than’, ‘better than’ arguments are like straining out a gnat so we can swallow a camel.

The way to protect the kids varies by age group and type of predator. Lumping all cases as the same is just sensationalism without a desire for solutions. I’m sure that’s what many in the media are interested in. You seem to be in favor of keeping the public uninformed, which is a dangerous thing.

 

[Sarabande]

I don’t think using the terms would lessen the acts, but they are helpful in identifying the problem. Also, as you explained, the ephebophile designation does have some gray area. When my 19-year-old started dating a 31-year-old widower, I found it creepy. Upon knowing him, though, I don’t see any sign that he has any kind of psychological issues. Someone acting like the 28-year-old man you mentioned would really be creepy.

Yes and no. I do think there have been people using the different designations to imply that one is not as bad as the other perhaps not on this thread, but in other threads that involved the priest abuse scandal. That is the danger of using the different terms. That said, as a child abuse survivor, I have grown very much in favor of complete education regarding the sexual abuse of minors. That includes the knowledge and the use of the proper terminologies. For instance, many people I know wouldn’t think an adult finding a teenager sexually attractive is a pedophile, but a bit creepy and taboo. Some of them have even argued with me that a teenager knows exactly what they are getting themselves into when they engage in a sexual encounter with an adult, no matter who or what the adult is. I have contended that, yes, there are teens who do know what they are getting themselves into (we’ve all known the few girls or boys who were like that), but have also argued that there are also teens who really don’t know or understand what was happening to them. Some may have been abused as younger children and have continued on as a teen with different people because their previous perpetrators have screwed up their heads so much. These people who don’t think anything of adults on teen sexual activity, might think a little more deeply about it if they realized that it actually would be called ephebophilia and not some “All men are dirty old men” mentality or that there’s nothing wrong with a hot, sexually experienced, 20-something-year-old teacher showing the ropes to a 16-year-old boy. People don’t like to be labeled, especially with terms that sound sick.

When you know the information in full, you can make better informed opinions about the subject. It will also help stop the stigma I and so many other survivors suffer throughout our lives because of the ignorance of most of the public regarding this subject. I realized this during my VIRTUS training. Most people have very little knowledge on sexual abuse and that is because no one feels comfortable talking about it or reading about it…even those who are aware due to family members or friends who have been abused as young children or teenagers. They always just want to sweep it under the carpet and pretend it didn’t happen.

 

[Sarabande]

Complete misrepresentation, as usual. I never said that reporting on teacher sexual abuse should be treated differently. I have not tried to minimize the offenses. They are still horrific. People in positions of power, preying on young people, or adults for that matter, are committing horrific crimes. That said, pedophiles are absolutely more horrific than ephebophiles, and ephebophiles are worse than a sexual predator who targets adults.

I would have to disagree with you here. They are all equally horrific.

 

[SaintAugustine]

I would have to disagree with you here. They are all equally horrific.

Really? So a man who preys on a 6-year-old is just as horrific as a man who entices a 17-year-old or a 20-year-old to have sex? I don’t see it that way.

 

[Sarabande]

Really? So a man who preys on a 6-year-old is just as horrific as a man who entices a 17-year-old or a 20-year-old to have sex? I don’t see it that way.

If it is abuse, yes. If a man or a woman preys on anyone at any age using physical or emotional force and abuse, it’s equally horrific.