Sex Abuse in Catholic Church was Homosexual Problem, not Pedophilia: Vatican

[rlg94086]

What is the difference if a priest and or member of the clergy sexually abused a child was:

A: A homosexual or
B: A pedophile??

This doesn’t make any difference, they are both guilty as they are an adult and they are abusing a young person under the age of 18.

Already explained. Please re-read my post. The difference is in the scope of the problem and how to solve it. While the act is still wrong, they are different acts. Let me see if I can help you with this…

I think I am correct that you are in favor of hate-crime legislation, correct? If not, I apologize, but for sake of argument, let’s say you are. If I were to find that 80% of aggravated assaults in an area were made by white people against black people, would you only be concerned with the fact that violent assaults were committed? Or, would you be looking at the assaulters to determine whether there is a white-power group in the area of the assaults?
joe clark:

And the answer being given is: There’s more of them in Public school. Where did this study come from? Unlike private school, public school has parents in the faces of the administration and the teachers. The ACLU has represented students, parents get lawyers and public schools afford rights that you sign away in private schools. I went to private and public schools in the 60’s and 70’s and if you are going to get away with abuse, it’s not going to be in the public schools.

No, that is not the answer given. The question was not homosexual vs. pedophile. The question was is the Catholic Church doing enough. That is where the other institutions answer came in. The UN is focusing on the Catholic Church, and Archbishop Tomasi is saying that they should be focussing efforts on other areas of greater abuse.

“The Holy See has been heavily implicated for decades in covering up cases of child abuse carried our by its clergy and religious orders, in obstructing justice, and in failing to deal appropriately with abusers,” said Roy Brown, IHEU Main Representative at the UN Geneva.

“Yet for too long it has been given a free ride by the international community because of its presumed moral leadership. Our report is the first to bring the issue to the attention of the Council. We shall be referring to our report in the plenary of the Human Rights Council next week.”

Tomasi, however, defended the Church’s record, saying that “available research” showed that only 1.5 to 5 per cent of Catholic clergy had been implicated in abuse allegations, and suggesting that some of the focus ought to be shifted to other organizations that are plagued by accusations of sex abuse.

joe clark:

I still don’t understand what position people are taking here? Is this an attempt to diffuse an uncomfortable subject?

No. It isn’t an attempt to diffuse an uncomfortable subject. It is an attempt at clarity, so the problem can be solved. The Church is making progress, and I pray that they continue.

 

[rlg94086]

A pedophile is someone who sees children in a sexual way and acts on it. A homosexual is attracted to adult members of the same sex. I suggest that if you find a sixteen year old member of your gender sexually attractive then you are not a pedophile, but a homosexual. Paul Shanley of the Boston Scandal is gay, broke his vows of celibacy, but is not a pedophile. I know when I was sixteen if a man made an advance at me it wouldn’t be welcome nor reciprocated. Children are mostly powerless against the advances of an adult. These would be the differences.

One thing to be careful about is the assumption that a teenager who “welcomes” or “reciprocates” such advances has deep-seated, homosexual tendencies. The Church recognizes that some adolescents are in a “transitory” state (see quote below - link is here.) They haven’t matured yet, and are confused. This is why it is still a heinous act to prey on a minor, even though it is not pedophilia. BTW…it is also a reason why society’s growing, relativistic approach to homosexual relationships is evil. Rather than mature properly, some teens are being lured into homosexual acts and being told it is “normal” (which according to relativism means “good”).

Different, however, would be the case in which one were dealing with homosexual tendencies that were only the expression of a transitory problem - for example, that of an adolescence not yet superseded. Nevertheless, such tendencies must be clearly overcome at least three years before ordination to the diaconate.

 

[estesbob]

What is the difference if a priest and or member of the clergy sexually abused a child was:

A: A homosexual or
B: A pedophile??

This doesn’t make any difference, they are both guilty as they are an adult and they are abusing a young person under the age of 18.
?

It makes a huge difference if the Church had decided the solution to the problem was to concentrate only on screeing out pediophiles ffrom the ministry. Such a policy would have elminated about 10% of the abuses over the years. The rest were homosexual rape of adolecent boys. We simply can not try to downplay the homosexual component to the abuse when looking for solutions.

 

[Holly3278]

Finally someone states the obvious! It’s about time! The Church never should have ordained homosexuals to begin with.

 

[MeghanEmber88]

One cannot abuse the “Truth”, for it is inviolable. I stand by what I wrote. Your opinions regarding the nonexistence of Hell and belief that the prospects for mercy exist for chiuld rapists have been duly noted. I, respectfully, disagree with your perspectives.

I understand and respect your convictions. Although, Truth is involable, but it can be abused. You can see it in any rationalization of sin, and by anyone who uses Scripture in a “pick-and-choose” attitude to justify their claims rather than embracing the whole entireity of Christ.

I know the existence of Hell. But the Church does not teach that any human being is there. Please do not misunderstand. I did not ever say anything about “nonexistence.” I’m responsible for being obedient to the Bride of Christ, and her teaching the truth of her Divine Spouse, before anything else.

Peace in Christ,
MeghanEmber88

 

[jrwaiss]

Some have taken the story to scapegoat homosexuals for the Church’s problems. Usually these same people scapegoat the Church’s teaching on celibate clergy for the problem. What the story is trying to address are the facts for the sexual abuse scandal.

To properly address the issues, we need to understand those with same-sex attraction and those who live the gay and lesbian life. This is why I wrote my book, Born to Love, to help faithful Catholics understand and respond to those with same-sex attraction and those living a gay life. Let me know if you find it helpful.

Fr. John Waiss

 

[TLM08]

Regarding homosexual men in the priesthood:
Whenever you place a celibate man with homosexual tendencies into a confessional box to listen to hours of admissions of the sin of masturbation (number of occurrences & details included) and all sorts of other impurities you are asking for trouble.

 

[jrwaiss]

1. Homosexuality is/was a major problem in the seminaries irrespective of whether it was linked to child abuse. One priest I know who attended the Beda College in Rome (a college for mature candidates to UK diocese) told me that it was quite open and tolerated when he was a student there in the mid-90’s and that it would be more harmful to speak out against it than to keep quiet.

For some, the seminary was “safer” than having to explain why they didn’t want to date or were not attracted to girls. For others, the attraction of being the center of attention at the altar was very strong. Some found the experience of wholesome male fraternity quite satisfying. Still others, it may have been a desire to cover over the shame of the dirty and sinful feelings they had with homosexual attraction: if I could be accepted into the holy institution of the priesthood, then maybe I could feel good about myself and all these evil desires would disappear. Of course, the problems and temptations don’t go away with ordination. To make matters worse, priests ordained with these particular tendencies were often attracted to be seminary professors and administrators, high school teachers, etc.

Now that we know the problem better, we can and ought to address it.

Fr. John R. Waiss
Author of Born to Love

 

[joe_clark]

Finally someone states the obvious! It’s about time! The Church never should have ordained homosexuals to begin with.

Homosexuals have absolutely nothing to do with why children ages 8 to 17 that were being sexually molested in schools, churches and in their private residences, by ordained priests, lay people, clergy, Rabbi’s, reverends, ect. This goes way overboard. A pedophile as described above is someone who sees children in a sexual way and acts on it. Age and gender make no difference to a pedophile. Pedophiles can be crossing guards, lunch parents, ushers, policeman, fireman, candy store owners, landscapers ect. In the GRand Jury report there were the nuns that were found to sexually abuse young boys. Sounds heterosexual to me, but still pedophilia.

A homosexual is attracted to adult members of the same sex and as far as I can tell from available info, do not attempt to go after small children for sexual encounters. They don’t need to. I do not condone homsexuality, but it should not be used as an escape hatch by others. Children are not adults and were being preyed on by adult priests hiding behind God himself. I believe that it was not intentional, but the church leaders that shuffled the priests in question from one parish to another, did not help but accelerated the abuse.

In the Philadelphia Grand Jury report it found that when a victim initally made a complaint in the 60’s / 70’s, it was met with scepticism and indifference. I understand this point only. As the facts started to pan out, Irish Catholic law enforcement (policeman/detectives first attempted to persuade the victim from persuing the matter, especially if it was founded. Instead, they tried to talk to the victim to make it all “go away”. Why, because their religious upbringing and their faith was colliding with reality that a catholic priest molested a young child. Their minds couldn’t and didn’t want to handle such a thought. This line of thought continued throughout the line of adults in charge. It simply was easier not to believe and act like it didn’t happen. This made a bad situation worst. Some saw this as a way to attempt to minimize sexual abuse and or deflect from the Church.

Then their were the people in charge, at the top that knew the abuse was real and continued on the path of denial, hoping against hope…that no one would find out. This is not the way in Christ.

A pedophile is someone who according to the mental health profession is sick and in need of help. As for the leaders in charge, it was worse, they knew and kept silent. Homosexuality is a problem that can be addressed in the seminaries but pedophiles are linked to child abuse and is an immediate threat to all.

Evil is more powerful if kept hidden and silent.

 

[JimG]

Homosexuals obviously have something to do with the problem if 80% of the abuse cases reported in the comprehensive John Jay report were of a homosexual nature. The great majority of cases reported were abuse of adolescent post-pubescent males.

 

[joe_clark]

Homosexuals obviously have something to do with the problem if 80% of the abuse cases reported in the comprehensive John Jay report were of a homosexual nature. The great majority of cases reported were abuse of adolescent post-pubescent males.

The 2004 John Jay Report was commissioned by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops was based on surveys completed by the Roman Catholic dioceses in the United States. The Report determined that, during the period from 1950-2002, a total of 10,667 individuals had made allegations of child sexual abuse.

Methodology
The study was based on surveys completed by 97% of the Catholic dioceses in the United States. The surveys provided information from diocesan files on each priest accused of sexual abuse and on each of the priest’s victims. That information was filtered, so that the research team did not have access to the names of the accused priests or the dioceses where they worked. The report presents aggregate findings. The dioceses were encouraged to issue reports of their own based on the surveys that they had completed.

The John Jay study found that, “Like in the general population, child sex abuse in the Catholic Church appears to be committed by men close to the children they allegedly abuse.” According to the study, “many (abusers) appear to use grooming tactics to entice children into complying with the abuse, and the abuse occurs in the home of the alleged abuser or victim.” The study characterized these enticements as actions such as buying the minor gifts, letting the victim drive a car and taking youths to sporting events. The most frequent context for abuse was a social event and many priests socialized with the families of victims. Abuses occurred in a variety of places with the most common being the residence of the priest.

Factors contributing to the abuse problem: Failure by the hierarchy to grasp the seriousness of the problem. Overemphasis on the need to avoid a scandal. Use of unqualified treatment centers. Misguided willingness to forgive.
Insufficient accountability.

Profile of the victims
An overwhelming majority of the victims, 81 percent, were males. A majority of the victims were post-pubescent adolescents with a small percentage of the priests accused of abusing children who had not reached puberty.[5]

The John Jay Report determined that just under 6% of victims were 7 years of age or younger. 16% of the victims were between age 8 and age 10.[2]

In the John Jay report, some sources have asserted that most of the victims were between the ages of 16 and 17, making the sexual abuse instances of hebephilia rather than pedophilia. These sources argue that, by failing to make this distinction, the media has fostered a misconception of the problem. The vast majority of the victims (78%) were between age 11 and age 17. Only 15 percent of the victims were 16 to 17 years of age; 51 percent were between the ages of 11 and 14.

---

So because they assert most of the victims were between the ages of 16 and 17, no pedophila was involved. I’m sorry, but it does not hold much weight, because this is an indefensible position where young underage children by law and by conscience were preyed upon by an adult, and that adult happen to be a priest. I can appreciate the John Jay study, but law enforcement Grand Jury findings all around the country beg to differ. They did not use surveys. They interviewed victims and perpatrators and to most readers will find a more accurate account.

 

[JimG]

Just a word about grand juries. Grand juries are controlled by the prosecution, which can bring any evidence it chooses or withhold any evidence it chooses. No defense attorneys are allowed, and the rules of evidence applicable to trials do not apply to grand jury presentations. Thus the saying among law enforcement people that a prosecutor can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich.

That said, I haven’t see any stats nationwide on the breakdown of grand jury indictments or criminal convictions. Can anyone provide statistics as to the percent of homosexual abuse cases referred out for indictment by grand juries vs the number of heterosexual abuse cases, with respect to Catholic priests? I haven’t seen any numbers.

In any case, the John Jay report is much more comprehensive. It even breaks down the instances of abuse by decade. Reviewing the report, one finds that most of the abuse cases originated in the 1960’s and 1970’s. Recent decades show a dramatic decline.

 

[estesbob]

Homosexuals have absolutely nothing to do with why children ages 8 to 17 that were being sexually molested in schools, churches and in their private residences, by ordained priests, lay people, clergy, Rabbi’s, reverends, ect. .

80% of the abuse was homosexual rape of adololescent boys. It has everything to do with homosexuals and almost nothing to do with pediophilia.

 

[Darryl1958]

…Profile of the victims
An overwhelming majority of the victims, 81 percent, were males. A majority of the victims were post-pubescent adolescents with a small percentage of the priests accused of abusing children who had not reached puberty.[5…]

If homosexual means ‘good’ by definition, then I guess any male on male action that does not fit into the current societal understanding of ‘good’ is ergo bad and therefore not homosexual, by definition—because homosexuality is of course ‘good’ according to current Liberal theology…

See how that works. And around and around we go.

 

[Melissa]

Homosexuals have absolutely nothing to do with why children ages 8 to 17 that were being sexually molested in schools, churches and in their private residences, by ordained priests, lay people, clergy, Rabbi’s, reverends, ect. This goes way overboard. A pedophile as described above is someone who sees children in a sexual way and acts on it. Age and gender make no difference to a pedophile. Pedophiles can be crossing guards, lunch parents, ushers, policeman, fireman, candy store owners, landscapers ect. In the GRand Jury report there were the nuns that were found to sexually abuse young boys. Sounds heterosexual to me, but still pedophilia.

A homosexual is attracted to adult members of the same sex and as far as I can tell from available info, do not attempt to go after small children for sexual encounters.

It is not minimizing the wrongness (which it seems you think is the case) to make a clear distinction regarding the physical maturity of the child, because it does make a difference. When you hear ‘pedophiles’ the immediate (and correct understanding) thought is that the victims are young pre-pubescent children. But the majority of the cases did not involve such pre-pubescent children, but rather post-pubescent (i.e., despite their youth and other lack of maturity, children who have their adult bodies–I was 12 years old when I attained the figure that I maintained until my 30s [when I gained a lot of weight that I’m now losing]; my oldest son at 16 looks and sounds like a man [and has for the past 2 years])–a pedophile would be ‘turned off’ by the appearance of me at age 12 or my son today; other predators would be attracted to these ‘children in the bodies of adults’ because the adult appearance is what attracts, and the immaturity *might * give a greater chance of successful advances.

So calling it rape (whether homosexual rape or heterosexual rape) is far more accurate when the victim is pubescent or post-pubescent, and accurately knowing what we must defend against is better than having an inaccurate picture.

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

80% of the abuse was homosexual rape of adololescent boys. It has everything to do with homosexuals and almost nothing to do with pediophilia.

Yo are correct that this is not a question of pedophiles since the victims were mostly teenagers. However, there is still a difference between a homosexual predator and a homosexual. Just as there’s a huge difference between the average heterosexual man who seeks relations with adults and the abnormal heterosexual man who seeks to victimize teenage girls.

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

I know when I was sixteen if a man made an advance at me it wouldn’t be welcome nor reciprocated.

That’s a major misunderstanding of the issue of predatory sexual behavior. Predators pick on teens they know they can intimate into keeping quiet. They also tend to prey on teens from broken homes or who have psychological problems or even drug/alcohol problems. If a predator was under the inkling that a teenager is going to say no or tell then the predator will not chose that teenager.

 

[rlg94086]

Yo are correct that this is not a question of pedophiles since the victims were mostly teenagers. However, there is still a difference between a homosexual predator and a homosexual. Just as there’s a huge difference between the average heterosexual man who seeks relations with adults and the abnormal heterosexual man who seeks to victimize teenage girls.

Perhaps, but since the numbers show 80% are homosexual predators, it would make sense for the Vatican to be more concerned with discernment of same-sex oriented men than heterosexual men.

 

[joe_clark]

Quote:
Originally Posted by NewEnglandPries
Yo are correct that this is not a question of pedophiles since the victims were mostly teenagers. However, there is still a difference between a homosexual predator and a homosexual. Just as there’s a huge difference between the average heterosexual man who seeks relations with adults and the abnormal heterosexual man who seeks to victimize teenage girls.
QUOTE]

Yea, they are called pedophiles. Why is this a problem? Why can’t people face the possibility that the priests and the nuns who harmed, molested and sexually abused male and female children were not homosexuals or lesbians? Tuff pill to swallow? I still think the J report is about minimizing, deflecting and evading. Let’s face it, It’s easier with PR, media and the faithful to believe or led to believe, if a HOMO did it. The problem and the danger with all this is getting busy making clasifications of abused and abusers, while ignoring the problem. Imagine the problem if a pedophile is not a homosexual?

Please read The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) which is published by the American Psychiatric Association and provides diagnostic criteria for mental disorders. It is used in the United States and in varying degrees around the world, by clinicians, researchers, psychiatric drug regulation agencies, health insurance companies, pharmaceutical companies and policy makers. In the The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) there no link between Homosexuality and Pedophilia.

B]Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text

Sexual and Gender Identity Disorders > Introduction > Paraphilias >

302.2 Pedophilia

Topics Discussed: pedophilia.

Excerpt: “The paraphilic focus of Pedophilia involves sexual activity with a prepubescent child (generally age 13 years or younger). The individual with Pedophilia must be age 16 years or older and at least 5 years older than the child. For individuals in late adolescence with Pedophilia, no precise age difference is specified, and clinical judgment must be used; both the sexual maturity of the child and the age difference must be taken into account. Individuals with Pedophilia generally report an attraction to children of a particular age range. Some individuals prefer males, others females, and some are aroused by both males and females. Those attracted to females usually prefer 8- to 10-year-olds, whereas those attracted to males usually prefer slightly older children. Pedophilia involving female victims is reported more often than Pedophilia involving male victims. Some individuals with Pedophilia are sexually attracted only to children (Exclusive Type), whereas others are sometimes attracted to adults (Nonexclusive Type). Individuals with Pedophilia who act on their urges with children may limit their activity to undressing the child and looking, exposing themselves, masturbating in the presence of the child, or gentle touching and fondling of the child. Others, however, perform fellatio or cunnilingus on the child or penetrate the child’s vagina, mouth, or anus with their fingers, foreign objects, or penis and use varying degrees of force to do so. These activities are commonly explained with excuses or rationalizations that they have “educational value” for the child, that the child derives “sexual pleasure” from them, or that the child was “sexually provocative”—themes that are also common in pedophilic pornography. Because of the ego-syntonic nature of Pedophilia, many individuals with pedophilic fantasies, urges, or behaviors do not experience significant distress. It is important to understand that experiencing distress about having the fantasies, urges, or behaviors is not necessary for a diagnosis of Pedophilia. Individuals who have a pedophilic arousal pattern and act on these fantasies or urges with a child qualify for the diagnosis of Pedophilia.Individuals may limit their activities to their own children, stepchildren, or relatives or may victimize children outside their families. Some individuals with Pedophilia threaten the child to prevent disclosure. Others, particularly those who frequently victimize children, develop complicated techniques for obtaining access to children, which may include winning the trust of a child’s mother, marrying a woman with an attractive child, trading children with other individuals with Pedophilia, or, in rare instances, taking in foster children from nonindustrialized countries or abducting children from strangers. Except in cases in which the disorder is associated with Sexual Sadism, the person may be attentive to the child’s needs in order to gain the child’s affection, interest, and loyalty and to prevent the child from reporting the sexual activity. The disorder usually begins in adolescence, although some individuals with Pedophilia report that they did not become aroused by children until middle age. The frequency of pedophilic behavior often fluctuates with psychosocial stress. The course is usually chronic, especially in those attracted to males. The recidivism rate for individuals with Pedophilia involving a preference for males is roughly twice that for those who prefer females…”

 

[estesbob]

Yo are correct that this is not a question of pedophiles since the victims were mostly teenagers. However, there is still a difference between a homosexual predator and a homosexual. Just as there’s a huge difference between the average heterosexual man who seeks relations with adults and the abnormal heterosexual man who seeks to victimize teenage girls.

When you have a situation where 80+% of the abusers are homosexuals you have to take homosexual behavior into account when screening men for the priesthood. That is what the Church is now doing. we paid the price for a permissive entrance policy that allowed open homosexuals into our seminaries.