Study: Homosexuality, celibacy didn't cause abuse

[JHow]

I really don’t understand the argument of “access”. Were all or most of the victims altar-servers? Did Priests have no other opportunities to meet/abuse children in their Parish? Is the narrative that these men were so poorly trained in how to deal with celibacy that when the sexual revolution hit they didn’t know how to handle themselves, so they went out and had sex with the most accessible minors around, and that happened to be altar boys?

My suspicion is that the New York times has lost some of the nuance of the report. I wish they had just released the study to everyone, not just major news outlets.

 

[Tytus_de_Zoo]

I will repost my opinion on the matter from a topic, not yet merged to this one.

Sounds like the study is shifting blame from one thing to another. First it was homosexuality, now it’s social upheaval of the 1960s and poor seminary training.

I have a hard time believing that the major changes in society in the 1960s caused priests to suddenly become pedophiles and molesters. The fact remains that these individuals didn’t enact these disgusting crimes because African-Americans, Women, Students, Peaceniks were marching or getting assaulted by the National Guard/Police or that the War in Vietnam had suddenly turned the clergy into deviancy.

I don’t doubt that a proper support network for psychological and emotional issues did not exist. Considering psychology and emotions have only become a norm to discuss in today’s society. At the same time, the culpability of those who stood by and did nothing is undoubtedly a shame of all those involved whether they committing crimes or not. However, blaming the post-war rigidness and the upheaval of the 1960s as somehow the major factors in why pedophiles were allowed into the priesthood in the first place is ludicrous.

I similarly find this a bit hard to believe. Especially in the case of such profound amount of pedophiles committing these heinous acts, they somehow didn’t come to a single shared characteristic, even amongst the majority of those who molested? The problem is, that those who molest tend to have been molested in the past themselves, and generally share a trait. They are on average not normal Joe Plumber. They fit certain psychological characteristics, with a certain upbringing which lead to a recipe of depravity and deviancy. At least, that’s what I’ve learned from a handful of courses and general interest in psychology. I would safely say that 7/10 pedophile molesters do not suddenly decide to molest overnight. It’s something which has been brewing in them for a long time.

Personally, the failure of these scandals is a general lack of psychological understanding of both the perpetrators and unfortunately in some cases the victims themselves.

If anything, I think it must be understood why good priests did nothing to say about these scandals. The Inter-War generation in the United States and around the world grew up having lived through the Great Depression. A World War, where millions of people both combatants and non-combatants died. That inter-war generation which filled the ranks of the clergy along with all other walks of life, had been on the verge of the last generation which did not speak out, kept to themselves, mild-mannered, they did what they thought needed to be done and did not talk about it. Growing up in a world, where families often did not talk about emotions and other related issues, would have been detrimental in the upbringing of both those who were guilty of having committed the crimes and those who were culpable in not bringing them to the attention of others.

I really, don’t think the 1960s was a time that somehow redefined the priesthood when it came to debauchery and impropriety. If anything, the generation of people who participated in mass eventually began to change. However, the effects of the generation which spoke out against violence and intolerance did not always trickle down as quickly as possible to the children who were the victims of select few pedophiles, who abused the trust of people because of their status as Priests.

If anything, the 1960s changed the way the world began to view sexual relations it didn’t give pedophiles who thought they ought to become priests, the capacity to suddenly molest. Even than, it took almost another twenty years for the concept of sexual harassment in the workplace to come into major effect in ending violation of individuals rights from harassment.

The culture where harassment finally began to be addressed, was a watershed for many of the victims of pedophiles who hid behind the clerical collar. Even than, many were not able to come forth because their dignities had been violated, and their trust for these individuals destroyed.

Personally, I think this study is flawed. It states clearly that because they could not connect to a general background of what a pedophile pretending to be a priest will look like, they can’t technically be screened out of the seminary before they become priests. Considering psychological analysis of individuals in the world outside of the priesthood and their characteristics, it would seem that for a scandal of such sheer size, a pattern could be made.

 

[The_Rock]

Only a tiny percentage of the accused priests — less than 5 percent — could be technically defined as pedophiles, meaning adults with a primary, intense attraction to children who have not yet gone through puberty. The bulk of victims were ages 11 to 14. That finding was criticized by victims and others as minimizing the problem, since the American Psychiatric Association defines pedophilia as an attraction to children age 13 or younger.
David Finkelhor, who leads the Crimes Against Children Research Center at the University of New Hampshire, said nitpicking with the researchers over their criteria for abuse was pointless, since it’s clear that the overwhelming majority of guilty priests were not pedophiles.** Half of the victims were age 13 or older when they were molested.**

. “Even some offenders who abuse pre-pubescent kids are not pedophiles,” Finkelhor said.

The current politically correct terminology is maddening… Lets separate the molesters into a multitude of groups based on their “primary” age attraction. Half of the victims were under 14 yet the researcher says “the overwhelming majority of guilty priests were not pedophiles”??? The researchers seem think that homosexuality and pedophilia are mutually exclusive groups. If anything, the abuse crisis totally contradicts that assumption. Sexually deviant behavior is sinful. Unrepented repeated sexually deviant behavior leads the person into more serious sexually deviant sin. We all know what, or rather who, is the root cause is of all this sin. The evil one did not completely destroy the Church!

 

[LemonAndLime]

The study said there was no single cause of the abuse and concluded that few of the abusive priests were paedophiles, as their victims were not all pre-pubescent.

Less than 5% of the abusive priests could be defined as paedophiles because the majority of victims were aged between 11 and 14.

“There’s no indication in our data that priests are any more likely to abuse children than anyone else in society,” said lead researcher Karen Terry.

But the finding was criticised by victims because the American Psychiatric Association defines paedophilia as an attraction to children aged 13 or younger.

The researchers added that their vow of celibacy did not make priests any more likely to become sex offenders. Nor was homosexuality to blame as the victims were of both genders.

The authors said the majority of abusive priests were “generalists” – sex offenders who do not specialise in a type of victim by age or gender or other characteristics.

Terry said this was exemplified by the case of the founder of the Legion of Christ religious order, the late Reverend Marcial Maciel, who sexually abused young seminarians and also fathered three children.

The Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests dismissed the report as “garbage in, garbage out” because the bishops providing much of the funding for the report.

guardian.co.uk/world/2011/may/19/us-catholic-church-sexual-abuse-report

 

[LemonAndLime]

Reposted because the Mods deleted another thread discussing this newstory.

If this thread gets deleted too I would like to receive a PM explaining why we are censoring a story which is making headlines.

 

[PerfectTiming]

I’ve always held the opinion that these things are probably caused by individuals with these urges perhaps choosing priesthood because they want to resist their urges but fail, or people with these urges who choose occupations that may give them access to such children, such as priesthood or teaching or whatever.

 

[Catholic_Press]

A $2 million study commissioned by the U.S. bishops is not likely to put to rest questions about the causes of the sexual abuse crisis in the priesthood.

More…

 

[Joan1969]

I’ve always held the opinion that these things are probably caused by individuals with these urges perhaps choosing priesthood because they want to resist their urges but fail, or people with these urges who choose occupations that may give them access to such children, such as priesthood or teaching or whatever.

Hi Perfect,

This may be true, but I have my own hunch that the abuse of minors, especially post-puberty minors, is pretty much scattered evenly across all professions. Those whose professions do not give them “access” to kids probably make less of a media splash, and they may stick to family members and the kids of friends and aquaintances.

Perhaps “serial” abusers take more effort to seek out jobs or volunteer work that provides them contact with lots of kids.

I think it is 100% legitimate to blame the “sexual revolution” for the rise in sex abuse of many different stripes.

God Bless,
Joan

 

[Eliza10]

If its deleted and you get a PM, please PM me because I want to understand, too! Or maybe the mods could tell just us now what the rules are for this particular discussion.

I tuned into CAF this morning to find some discussion on this topic because I read this story in my local paper and I was confused. I have heard repeatedly, from what I thought were reliable sources, that the vast majority of priest sex abuse was homosexual priests with adolescent boys (a kind of hebephilia? Although that term seems to be circumvented in the U.S. Bishop’s study – its not mentioned in the article I read)…

So I wonder why the disparity between what I have always heard is the case, and now this study that seems to say something completely different?

I wonder what the facts are. I don’t need to read the opinions of the conclusion of the study as interpreted by the U.S.Bishops - which is all the article in the paper told me. I wonder what the facts of the study are. Its easy enough to come to your own conclusions when you know the facts. I am wondering about the validity of the study. This can be scientifically measured - and I think some group does this for studies. And as to the study’s conclusions, is it possible that the people who funded the study influenced how the results are interpreted?

 

[Robert_Bay]

INFORMATION

Multiple threads on the same topic clutter the forum and are confusing for members as they try to balance commenting on all the different threads.

Therefore we have merged a number of threads and removed others on this topic because of redundancy.

This is the thread to use to discuss the recent sex abuse study.

PM me if you have a question, please do not comment on moderator action on the threads, it also distracts from the conversation and is against forum rules.

 

[irishpatrick]

Even as a Gen X fellow with a number of axes to grind on the Boomers, I must wonder how this can be largely their fault. Who ran the seminaries at the time the predators slipped through? Not Boomers. Who were the ones that organized the great rebellions against the authority of the Church in the late 1960’s? Not Boomers, they didn’t have the clout yet.

No, the cancer started MUCH earlier and just culminated in the Boomer prime years. Too simplistic a scapegoat. (Unless we’re asking “Who’s gonna wipe out Social Security?” Then Bullseye, baby).

Baby Boomers encompass the group of people born between 1946-1964…that is an 18 year span. The boomers were given every possible advantage and it is largely (I never said solely) the fault of the Boomers that we find ourselves in the state we experience today.

While you might think my view is too simplistic, you failed to note that I never said the Boomers’ were the only reason for our fall, I just contend they are the major reason. They were/are a spoiled and entitled generation that lead the 60s and 70s backlashes against tradition and against this nation. They rushed in the drug culture, the free sex culture, the abortion and contraceptive cultures, and the culture of “me above all things” culture. They did not do that in a vacuum, but they sure did embrace the rampant decadence.

Let us also not forget that the sexual abuses of minors increased greatly in the 70s and then peaked in the 80s, and after that the abuse steadily dropped off. Most of the Priests accused were ordained in the 70s and some in the early 80s. They were products of the Woodstock, anti-government, anti-USA, anti-traditional faith systems, pro-drug, pro-make love not war generation. Those Priests reflected the culture at large and that culture was substantially formed by the BABY BOOMERS.

While it is true that the majority of Boomers were obviously taught and formed by the previous generation (that is how things work), they were NOT given teachings for what they did. The Boomers created a new path into depravity and sin…they were NOT taught that path.

Today, many Catholics hold hope in our youth because many young people today see how truly lost the Boomer generation was and they no longer want that path. That is a very good thing.

Baby Boomers = Worst generation in USA.

Let us hope our young can repair the decades damage done by the Boomer generation…the world needs it desperately.

So, regarding the topic at hand, I think it is obvious that the depraved nature of the Boomer generation certainly contributed to the horrific abuse of minors and children. I cannot see how anyone could argue otherwise (and yes I concede there are other factors in addition to those I mentioned here).

 

[irishpatrick]

You make me laugh.

The absolute worst generation?

Worse than the generation of Germans who came of age during the Nazi regime?
Worse than the generation of Spanish who depopulated the Carribean Islands through their slave taking and brutal abuse towards the natives?
Worse than the generation of White South Africans that established their racist and ruthless regime?

Baby Boomers = the worst generation in USA history…not in world history.

[btw, you can name on one hand the cultures who have killed/slaughtered over 50-million innocents through war or any other means]

 

[irishpatrick]

The lives lost to contaception?

So avoiding pregnancy is the same as abortion?

Well if we assume abortion is murder (as Catholic theology does) then nuns are guilty of murder due to their vow of celibacy. Of course we can get pregant women without sex now (some of them almost certainly modern day virgin births), but I understand that that is a sin too

Contraceptives outside of birth control drugs are not abortifacient, those include the so-called barrier methods: the condom, diaphragm, cervical cap, and anti-sperm methods such as the sponge, jellies, foams and creams. These methods prevent sperm from fertilizing an egg.

However, the most widely used form of BC are the various BC drugs, and most of those are abortifacient. They typically have three active elements:

1. Prevent ovulation (no loss of life there).
2. They change the lining of the cervix, making it more difficult for sperm to pass through (also not a loss of life).
3. They prevent the implantation of a newly conceived/fertilized human life from implanting in the lining of the woman’s womb. **That leads to the death of that life. **

Therefore, there are certainly many cases in which women actually conceive a life, just to have it kiilled by the BC drugs they are taking. The vast majority of women have no idea that is a possibility.

Think about it: the millions who use BC drugs. The millions who engage in sex using the BC drugs, and then contemplate just how many times every cycle a woman might have this happen and then multiply that by the number of women taking the drugs.

 

[lazydaisy67]

I’m surprised that anybody cares what the “causes” were at all. If Joe Blow down the street had sex with your kid, would you be interested in a study to find out if he grew up in the 60’s or was a homosexual or hadn’t had a good enough education? How does that change the fact that each individual who molested a child, whether they were 14 or 8, had a CHOICE to act immorally and illegally or not. They made the wrong choice, hurt kids, and then when too much scandal started to surface, they got quietly moved to a different place where nobody knew them and it started all over again. It’s not even so much that it occurred in the first place (which is bad enough as is) but that those in authority covered it up, and, in fact perpetuated it, which in turn looks to the world as if they were condoning it.

 

[irishpatrick]

The report only addressed the issues in the USA. It didn’t even attempt to address the root causes of issues in Ireland.

Ireland and much of Europe followed the same paths the USA took during the 60s, 70s and 80s. It is no surprise that other nations had similar horrific abuse problems.

I do agree with whomever said that this still falls at the feet of the Church and the Church must continue to improve its stand against these horrors. However, it is always important to understand how things happen so the Church can properly focus on prevention.

 

[irishpatrick]

I’m surprised that anybody cares what the “causes” were at all. If Joe Blow down the street had sex with your kid, would you be interested in a study to find out if he grew up in the 60’s or was a homosexual or hadn’t had a good enough education? How does that change the fact that each individual who molested a child, whether they were 14 or 8, had a CHOICE to act immorally and illegally or not. They made the wrong choice, hurt kids, and then when too much scandal started to surface, they got quietly moved to a different place where nobody knew them and it started all over again. It’s not even so much that it occurred in the first place (which is bad enough as is) but that those in authority covered it up, and, in fact perpetuated it, which in turn looks to the world as if they were condoning it.

In the micro view, it does not matter at all.

In the macro view, trying to discover why depraved activity happens is critical to creating a means to prevent it from happening in the future.

 

[irishpatrick]

Really?

The Baby Boomers were** worse** the the slaveowners of the 19th and 18th centuries, or those who prosecuted genocidal wars against Indian tribes during the first centuy of U.S. history?

Yes, as a group they were very much worse.

Remaining on topic here, for I have strayed a bit and need to keep myself on the OP’s thread points, I will simply say that the abuse happened under the watch of the Boomers and was largely brought to us by that generation–that MUST be studied in depth so we can learn from it and make changes for the future. Within that study we cannot be blind to just how bad the Boomers really were (I say that with sadness because I am a Boomer and I hold much shame for my own peer group of citizens).

Of course, we must also remember (and I believe this is why the Boomers failed), that every human being from birth to death is in a spiritual battle, which means every person is capable of sin. We must fight against sin and we must realize that our real battle is of a spiritual nature. Sadly, most of those real truths were cast aside by the Boomers for other more worldly notions that replaced God’s truths (example: John Lennon and his sadly famous and quite popular song “Imagine”).

 

[colmywaykurtz]

Baby Boomers encompass the group of people born between 1946-1964…that is an 18 year span. The boomers were given every possible advantage and it is largely (I never said solely) the fault of the Boomers that we find ourselves in the state we experience today.

While you might think my view is too simplistic, you failed to note that I never said the Boomers’ were the only reason for our fall, I just contend they are the major reason. They were/are a spoiled and entitled generation that lead the 60s and 70s backlashes against tradition and against this nation. They rushed in the drug culture, the free sex culture, the abortion and contraceptive cultures, and the culture of “me above all things” culture. They did not do that in a vacuum, but they sure did embrace the rampant decadence.

Let us also not forget that the sexual abuses of minors increased greatly in the 70s and then peaked in the 80s, and after that the abuse steadily dropped off. Most of the Priests accused were ordained in the 70s and some in the early 80s. They were products of the Woodstock, anti-government, anti-USA, anti-traditional faith systems, pro-drug, pro-make love not war generation. Those Priests reflected the culture at large and that culture was substantially formed by the BABY BOOMERS.

While it is true that the majority of Boomers were obviously taught and formed by the previous generation (that is how things work), they were NOT given teachings for what they did. The Boomers created a new path into depravity and sin…they were NOT taught that path.

Today, many Catholics hold hope in our youth because many young people today see how truly lost the Boomer generation was and they no longer want that path. That is a very good thing.

Baby Boomers = Worst generation in USA.

Let us hope our young can repair the decades damage done by the Boomer generation…the world needs it desperately.

So, regarding the topic at hand, I think it is obvious that the depraved nature of the Boomer generation certainly contributed to the horrific abuse of minors and children. I cannot see how anyone could argue otherwise (and yes I concede there are other factors in addition to those I mentioned here).

If one insists on talking about whole generations the same way one would speak of individuals and their culpability, a strong case can be made against the boomer’s parents’ teachings, too. Hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of male members of the “Greatest Generation” were off screwing around on wives and sweethearts in Europe in Asia during lulls in the fighting (and after!), and I believe there arose from this a pervasive culture of telling “rooster stories” among WWII vets after the war, in civilian life—when the women weren’t around, of course. Probably a lot of young male boomers overheard these and clued in that it was something exciting and forbidden.

And it wasn’t boomers on Madison Avenue that fed them a sex-saturated media culture in movies, magazines, clothing style, etc. It wasn’t their parents, but it was people of the same generation.

Like it or not, the boomers were, to a significant degree, products of their upbringing, the same as anyone else.

 

[irishpatrick]

If one insists on talking about whole generations the same way one would speak of individuals and their culpability, a strong case can be made against the boomer’s parents’ teachings, too. Hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of male members of the “Greatest Generation” were off screwing around on wives and sweethearts in Europe in Asia during lulls in the fighting (and after!), and I believe there arose from this a pervasive culture of telling “rooster stories” among WWII vets after the war, in civilian life—when the women weren’t around, of course. Probably a lot of young male boomers overheard these and clued in that it was something exciting and forbidden.

And it wasn’t boomers on Madison Avenue that fed them a sex-saturated media culture in movies, magazines, clothing style, etc. It wasn’t their parents, but it was people of the same generation.

Like it or not, the boomers were, to a significant degree, products of their upbringing, the same as anyone else.

I will not argue that Boomer parents did not play a role, yet not as much as you think (imo). The Boomers were unique in USA history. They flagrantly went against the teachings and wishes of their parents–that was PRECISELY what they were known for and what they were most proud of. They had the anti-parent, anti-authority, anti-God, anti-tradition, etc., mantras built into nearly everything they did. Woodstock was a huge poke in the eye of theur parents–they rejected Leave it to Beaver, and Church and faith, and zillions of good things their parents handed down to them. They were a generation who thought they were above all other generations–they wanted to literally sweep their parents generation away with a make love, not war ideology that was intended to replace everything that had come before.

Even regarding Vietnam to this day the Boomers brag about how they stopped that war–and they did. Yet, they never look back at what happened afterwardss, and the several million people who died there because the USA left under the pressure of the Boomer generation.

The Boomer parents were the ones who fought World War II and the Korean War–they in large measure held their faith and handed it down, along with most cultural and family traditions. The Boomers spit on all that and rejected it all outright, to the horror and dismay of their parents. Then later, when the Boomers woke-up, they became bitter and turned into being the greedy ones on Wallstreet and in business just as we all know so well today.

When a generation decides that, parents, God and Tradition means nothing, there can be no surprise that things for the nation will go poorly–**including in the seminaries and in our Churches.

I think the report has a great deal of merit.**

 

[djeter]

It was George Weigel who pointed out that “pedophile priest” was a media term invented to divert attention from the real problem, i.e. homosexual assaults on children. By twisting definitions (pedophile is now age 11 and under in the study) and redefining the meaning of “homosexual,” (No, it’s not male on male sex) the study has miraculously concluded that the real culprit was the permissive society of the 60’s – a conclusion that is also reasonable and obvious in many ways – not to mention insidious in its ability to divert attention from the truth.

The background to sin is always the permissiveness of an enveloping culture: blame the Nazis on the failures of Weimar and punishment of the German State and oppressive requirements of the Treaty of Versailles, etc. etc. ANYTHING to avoid the obvious conclusion here which is the sinful actions of a number of priests and their bishop protectors, homosexual in nature (if male on male sex is homosexual).

Whether it be the AIDS crisis or any other challenge to homosexuality as normalcy, the lesson here is not to challenge homosexualism (the promotion of homosexuality as normalcy). Although it is a tad dated, the conclusions of Dr Jeffrey Satinover in his landmark work on AIDS and the coming ascendancy of homosexualism in our culture is worth looking at again.

Gay activists, working closely with mental health professionals for the past twenty years, have successfully shaped and promoted a new consensus on homosexuality that is a potent political force. This consensus is composed of three key propositions that fit the so–called “bio–psycho–social” model of mental functioning that is now in vogue. As the propositions have slowly spread throughout society, people use them to demand that all sectors of society – including religious institutions morally opposed to homosexual practice – treat practicing homosexuals in exactly the same way as active heterosexuals.

I think the report is a reaction to the implicit (and correct) criticism of gay priests and their bishop protectors who brought this terrible stain on our Catholic Church in the first place. Blame it on the pedophiles? Didn’t work. OK lets double track back and blame it on the culture – ANYTHING to divert attention from the Politics of Truth that Dr. Satinover stated so simply a few years back.

dj