Report spreads blame for Catholic sex...

Report spreads blame for Catholic sex abuse

There are 23 comments on the www.religionnews.com story from May 19, 2011, titled Report spreads blame for Catholic sex abuse. In it, www.religionnews.com reports that:

Nearly a decade after revelations of widespread sexual abuse of minors rocked the Catholic Church in the U.S., a comprehensive report on the scandal is set for release on Wednesday , hoping to provide answers about a crisis that has raised myriad questions despite years of attention.

Was celibacy to blame for the abuse? Gays in the priesthood? The social revolution of the ‘60s, or the benighted seminary education of the repressive 1950s?

The truth turns out to be far more complex, according to a copy of the report by researchers at John Jay College of Criminal Justice that was provided by a church leader who believes the findings accurately reflect the causes of the church’s sexual abuse crisis, for good and for ill.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at www.religionnews.com.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last

“God made in the image of man”

Since: May 07

Sausalito, CA

#1 May 19, 2011
A cleverly engineered attempt by these christians to minimize their own culpability in this whole distasteful affair.

I'll believe they are sincere (insofar as their contrition over this scandal is concerned) when they abolish their arbitrary celibacy laws and publicly accept the latest scientific facts about the diversity of human sexuality. No more lies and coverups.

Hypocrites.

“The Buybull is innerrrent.”

Since: Jun 08

Silver Spring, MD

#2 May 19, 2011
A misogynistic, sexually disordered, authoritarian institution is bound to have many instances of abuse of power, only one example of which was the sexual abuse of power that went on for decades and was covered up for decades.

It had nothing to do with sexual orientation per se, nor with pedophilia in the majority of known cases, but with the power imbalance between clergy and (teen) parishioners.

Par for the course in a shame based, sexually unhealthy, authoritarian institution. In fact, there's no other outcome possible in such an environment but abuses of power in many forms.
EastsideJim

Cleveland, OH

#3 May 19, 2011
If you read the article very closely, you'll see that the definition that they use for pedophile is very "restrictive". When they say of the priests, that "less than 4 percent could be considered pedophiles", they must be using the medical definition of pedophile... as in "a primary or exclusive sexual interest in prepubescent children (generally age 13 years or younger". The question then becomes who did the other 96% of the priests abuse?? But if you include the more general understanding of pedophile that includes 11–14 year old pubescents and mid-to-late adolescents (15-19), it has to equal close to 100%... After all if the nearly 6,000 priests accused of abuse didn't abuse the other two groups WHO did they abuse?

“The Buybull is innerrrent.”

Since: Jun 08

Silver Spring, MD

#4 May 19, 2011
In most states the age of consent is 16 or so. Absent the abuse of power aspect in a teacher or clergy person boffing one of his or her charges, sex with teenagers is not even close to pedophilia, nor is it illegal in many places and in many instances.

I think they are using the word correctly. I also think that four or five percent of the known abusers being pedophiles in the narrow sense is a much higher prevalence compared to what you'd see in the general population.
Too Many Hypocrites

United States

#5 May 19, 2011
WTF

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#6 May 19, 2011
writewingproxycontin wrote:
In most states the age of consent is 16 or so. Absent the abuse of power aspect in a teacher or clergy person boffing one of his or her charges, sex with teenagers is not even close to pedophilia, nor is it illegal in many places and in many instances.
I think they are using the word correctly. I also think that four or five percent of the known abusers being pedophiles in the narrow sense is a much higher prevalence compared to what you'd see in the general population.
From what I have read elsewhere, the definition of pedophilia as used in the report is being roundly criticized. Setting the age at those 10 and younger is counter to the reality that most 11-13 year old children are prepubescent, which is the generally accepted definition of the term and the one used by the major medical and psychological organizations. It isn't being portrayed as a deliberate attempt by the researchers to downplay the role of pedophiles in the scandal, but merely a failure to fully explore it. By eliminating those who were 11-13 out of the group who may have been victimized by true pedophiles, they have shifted out the largest single group of victims without any real basis for doing so.

Since: Dec 08

Toronto, ON, Canada

#7 May 19, 2011
They say these guys were NOT pedophiles, NOT fed up with celibacy, and not gay.

So what are they? The whole thing makes absolutely no sense and is just another attempt by an evil nest of rats to defer blame, since they couldn't get away with pinning it on gays

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#8 May 19, 2011
JohnInToronto wrote:
They say these guys were NOT pedophiles, NOT fed up with celibacy, and not gay.
So what are they? The whole thing makes absolutely no sense and is just another attempt by an evil nest of rats to defer blame, since they couldn't get away with pinning it on gays
While the study was funded largely by the USCCB, it was done independently of them.

I get what the report is saying, that there is no one size fits all explanation for the nature of the problem. What they found was a large number of emotionally and mentally ill-equipped Priests, who had been brought in in a much different era and who were unprepared for the changes in the society around them, who ended up acting out sexually, not out of any sort of paraphilic attraction to their victims or natural same sex attraction, but simply because they were there. The fault lies with the individual Priests and the nature of the Church when this was largely happening, not because the Priesthood had drawn in any significant numbers of any particular group.
St Reformed

Stillwater, OK

#9 May 19, 2011
“But if the Hebrew prophets could see the hand of God at work in the attacks on ancient Israel from the Assyrian empire, then Catholics ought to be able to espy the workings of divine providence when the media bring to light crimes that should have been made public from the beginning.”
“For that sin, the Church is now paying a heavy price, and deservedly so. But the revelations of these crimes, both of commission and of collusion, have also unleashed, particularly lately, another campaign of vilification against the Church…”
--- from homily of Fr. Edward Oakes, S.J.(University of St. Mary of the Lake)

“The Buybull is innerrrent.”

Since: Jun 08

Parksley, VA

#10 May 19, 2011
Rick in Kansas wrote:
<quoted text>I get what the report is saying, that there is no one size fits all explanation for the nature of the problem.
Completely predictable abuse of power in an authoritarian, misogynistic, sexually shaming institution.

Also fits the endemic rape of females at the U.S. military service academies and in the posted ranks, sexual hazing in frat initiations, and so on.

“I hate watermelon!”

Since: Dec 10

Stroudsburg, PA

#11 May 20, 2011
JohnInToronto wrote:
They say these guys were NOT pedophiles, NOT fed up with celibacy, and not gay.
So what are they? The whole thing makes absolutely no sense and is just another attempt by an evil nest of rats to defer blame, since they couldn't get away with pinning it on gays
They tried to blame homosexuals but it didn't work because gays were not the cause of the trouble. They're simply denying, and desperate to put the blame on anybody but their own clergy.
The Answer

Minneapolis, MN

#12 May 20, 2011
EastsideJim wrote:
If you read the article very closely, you'll see that the definition that they use for pedophile is very "restrictive". When they say of the priests, that "less than 4 percent could be considered pedophiles", they must be using the medical definition of pedophile... as in "a primary or exclusive sexual interest in prepubescent children (generally age 13 years or younger". The question then becomes who did the other 96% of the priests abuse?? But if you include the more general understanding of pedophile that includes 11–14 year old pubescents and mid-to-late adolescents (15-19), it has to equal close to 100%... After all if the nearly 6,000 priests accused of abuse didn't abuse the other two groups WHO did they abuse?
The common denominator is that the perpetrators are queers and the victims are minors, obviously targeted because they are of the same sex as the pervert-pedophile-queer-child- molesters.
Common sense and common knowledge.
Everyone knows queers will do anything to have access to children so they can rape them.

“I hate watermelon!”

Since: Dec 10

Stroudsburg, PA

#13 May 20, 2011
The Answer wrote:
<quoted text>The common denominator is that the perpetrators are queers and the victims are minors, obviously targeted because they are of the same sex as the pervert-pedophile-queer-child- molesters.
Common sense and common knowledge.
Everyone knows queers will do anything to have access to children so they can rape them.
You obviously have not studied the research that has been done. If you blame homosexuals, you're as irresponsible about these tragic cases as the church is - they just don't want to own up to what their clergy has done. Pedophilia and homosexuality are not one and the same. Educate yourself, you're in desperate need of doing that. With your attitude, the abuse will continue to be covered up and you'll be part of the terrible problem.
The Answer

Minneapolis, MN

#14 May 20, 2011
Sheryl 1 wrote:
<quoted text>
You obviously have not studied the research that has been done. If you blame homosexuals, you're as irresponsible about these tragic cases as the church is - they just don't want to own up to what their clergy has done. Pedophilia and homosexuality are not one and the same. Educate yourself, you're in desperate need of doing that. With your attitude, the abuse will continue to be covered up and you'll be part of the terrible problem.
If responsible adults had the guts to teach children the truth, that queers are sick perverts who will rape and hurt them, this would never have happened.
You are part of the problem, trying to defend queer pedophiles so you can feel politically correct while looking the other way as your queer pedo buddies infect little kids with AIDS with wild abandon.
Face the facts.
Queers want access to kids for all the obvious reasons that people have always known. Queers don't know right from wrong, they only care about their next orgasm. Believe them when they say they are no different from other dumb animals who operate on pure instinct.

“I hate watermelon!”

Since: Dec 10

Stroudsburg, PA

#15 May 20, 2011
The Answer wrote:
<quoted text>If responsible adults had the guts to teach children the truth, that queers are sick perverts who will rape and hurt them, this would never have happened.
You are part of the problem, trying to defend queer pedophiles so you can feel politically correct while looking the other way as your queer pedo buddies infect little kids with AIDS with wild abandon.
Face the facts.
Queers want access to kids for all the obvious reasons that people have always known. Queers don't know right from wrong, they only care about their next orgasm. Believe them when they say they are no different from other dumb animals who operate on pure instinct.
I'm not part of the catholic problem as I'm no longer catholic. You're being irresponsible by not accepting the fact that homosexuals have always been, and will always be, part of our population. YOU could have a gay child or grandchild; I tell that to all homophobes.

And you don't know much about the facts. Most homosexuals would NEVER molest a child. Pedophilia and homosexuality are two entirely different things, how can you not know that? A HUGE part of the problem is that catholic clergy in authority positions have covered up these crimes for decades, showing how little regard they have for young kids. I hope the lawsuit fines wipe out their coffers.

“God made in the image of man”

Since: May 07

Sausalito, CA

#16 May 20, 2011
Sheryl 1 wrote:
<quoted text>
They tried to blame homosexuals but it didn't work because gays were not the cause of the trouble. They're simply denying, and desperate to put the blame on anybody but their own clergy.
... or on the institution's distorted teachings on human sexuality.

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#17 May 20, 2011
The Answer wrote:
(nothing worth repeating)
The reality of the matter is that "The Answer" is wrong. The researchers at John Jay College have been investigating the causes and nature of the abuse within the Catholic Church for several years now and what they found was that what you are telling here is nothing but a malicious and dangerous lie. While there were some "Gay" Priests involved in the abuse, they were merely a small percentage of the problem. The vast majority of the men who were engaged in such abuse were heterosexuals, including those who victimized young boys. These were by and large crimes of opportunity having nothing to do with sexual attraction towards the victim, just children who found themselves in the wrong place, at the wrong time in the company of a man who had no concern for their well being. In the Church abuse scandal the victims were overwhelmingly young boys due to the simple fact that it was young boys who primarily would be left alone in the company of those who committed the abuse. The abuse that took place by those in the Church reflects something which has been known about child sexual molestation and pedophilia for years, the perpetrators of such acts are overwhelmingly heterosexual, even those who abuse children of their own sex. Someone who is homosexual is no more likely to molest a child than someone who is heterosexual and since there are far more heterosexuals than heterosexuals in the population, it is heterosexuals who are at the greatest risk to offend. The ONE man in ANY child's life, boy or girl, who is the most likely to victimize them sexually, is the man who is having sex with their mother. Your clearly irrational hatred of homosexuality has clouded your judgment until the point that all fact, logic and reason have vanished and has resulted in this dangerous lie that it is only the big, bad, Gay boogieman that is out to get young boys and that is nowhere even close to the truth.

“I hate watermelon!”

Since: Dec 10

Stroudsburg, PA

#18 May 20, 2011
Umninimuzi wrote:
<quoted text>
... or on the institution's distorted teachings on human sexuality.
Right - good post. The church CLAIMS we're above the animals, yet teaches that all sex acts in marriage must be open to procreating - like the animals :)

“The Buybull is innerrrent.”

Since: Jun 08

Silver Spring, MD

#19 May 20, 2011
The Answer wrote:
<quoted text>If responsible adults had the guts to teach children the truth, that....
You're a crazed, rapture waitin, mouth breathin, sexually disordered freeek.

Most sexual abuse of children occurs within the (extended) nuclear family. That's fact. Why don't you teach it, you fantasy dwelling, anti rational, Christshariahn numbnuts?

If we want to tar entire groups based on a sampling of offenders then we should certainly lock up all str8 men, so damn many of whom rape women violently.

Praiz!

“I hate watermelon!”

Since: Dec 10

Stroudsburg, PA

#20 May 20, 2011
writewingproxycontin wrote:
A misogynistic, sexually disordered, authoritarian institution is bound to have many instances of abuse of power, only one example of which was the sexual abuse of power that went on for decades and was covered up for decades.
It had nothing to do with sexual orientation per se, nor with pedophilia in the majority of known cases, but with the power imbalance between clergy and (teen) parishioners.
Par for the course in a shame based, sexually unhealthy, authoritarian institution. In fact, there's no other outcome possible in such an environment but abuses of power in many forms.
It's enough to drive a person to oxycontin, isn't it? Kidding you :) Your post makes a lot of sense.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

City University of New York Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News First lady Obama takes swipe Trump, says lives ... Jun 20 d pants 162
News The Professional Burdens of Being a 'Model Mino... Jun 9 SeanOsorioLee 5
News Rebuilding black-Jewish relations? (Feb '09) May '16 Wakeup 102
News Poll: Was the 'big dump' a result of global war... (Feb '11) Apr '16 litesong 11
News Watch Entire Footage Of Bernie Sanders' Coney I... Apr '16 Suezanne 1
News For some immigrants, an easier path to professi... Mar '16 tomin cali 1
News Lesbian teens experiment with men, have riskier... Feb '16 Mitt s Baptism of... 9
More from around the web