Papers in Pedophile Case Show Church Effort to Avert Scandal

The New York Times | January 25, 2002

[JMJ333]

Lurkers: Yes, there are some bad people who have gotten into the Catholic church. Are they representative of the Church at large? Here is a study done regarding the priesthood.

This accusation usually comes up in the context of Protestants suggesting that we Catholics should do away with priestly celibacy. I haven’t taken the time to edit it, so please understand I don’t think all of the words apply here, just the statistics.

If priests were allowed to marry, like Rabbi's or Lutheran ministers, the problem would go away.

Actually, you are dead wrong. From Pedophiles and Priests the only scholarly review on the issue I know of:

1. How widespread is pedophilia among priests?

Commentators have suggested between 5 and 10 percent. That figure has been presented by various "experts" and widely used by the media. However, true pedophilia--sexual contact between an adult and pre-pubescent child--is extremely rare in the priesthood. The best estimate is "0.3 percent of the whole body of clergy." (p 82) The most extensive study which considered 2,252 priests over a thirty year period found only one case of pedophilia. It involved a priest-uncle with two six-year-old nieces. The number of pederasts or ephebophiles (priests involved, usually homosexually, with an adolescent minor) was much larger, but still less than two percent. Jenkins traces how those figures were blown up and presented without nuance in the media. 3. Does the celibacy requirement increase the likelihood that a priest will be a sex offender? Jenkins details how the media accounts of clergy sex abuse emphasized not only "cover up" but the celibacy factor. The view presented repeatedly was that the type of formation around this unrealistic requirement contributed to the supposed widespread sex abuse among priests. However, the difficulty with the argument is that there is no proof the problem is greater among priests than Protestant ministers—or even other service professionals, like teachers or physicians. It is worth noting that while the case involving former priest James Porter received massive media attention, the equally scandalous case of Protestant minister Tony Leyva got only limited coverage.

The difference in coverage and the emphasis on the celibacy requirement cannot wholly be blamed on anti-Catholic bias in the secular media. In fact, as Jenkins documents, much of the fuel came from division within the Catholic Church. Those advocating married clergy and women priests jumped on this crisis to promote their cause. On the other side conservatives pointed out that most of the cases went back to the 60's, a time when the Church began to absorb the general laxness in sexual morality. Also since most of the cases involved homosexual activity, they questioned the wisdom of ordaining men with a gay orientation. However, as Jenkins shows, the conservatives had little success in promoting their view. The crisis was inevitably seen as a failure of a bankrupt all male hierarchy, repressive seminary formation, moral rigidity, anti-woman bias and other bete noires of liberal Catholics.

The suggestion that pedophilia is more widespread among the clergy is propaganda. However, some people are determined to believe otherwise.

[Cold Heat]

As usual, the coverup is worse than the crime. But let's not lose sight of the fact that this problem has been going on for a long time. In fact for hundreds of years.

Many believe it is the policy of marrying a priest to the church instead of a woman. I believe it is that society has sick people and they are difficult to weed out. Hell, we can't even keep pedofiles out of the Boy Scouts. It is always said, "no body knew!"

They are always found after it's too late. At least we can say we try.

[tiki]

In our diocese everyone who does anything more than go to Mass (ie volunteer of any kind) has to go to a sex abuse workshop.

I don't think it would stop a pedophile but you know the signs to look for.

[JMJ333]

Yep, we have some bad apples. Does that negate the message and doctrine of the church founded by Christ? Not one damn bit. I'm sick of your agenda. Maybe you should start your own list. "Catholic_bashers" sounds appropriate.

[JMJ333]

That is a fine idea and I support it. It still frosts me that the same group of people can't debate doctrine, but instead try and tear us down by attacking the priesthood. Those of us who practice true Catholicism understand we need reform and that there are pagans masquerading as catholics, a rare disgusting pedophile, etc , but that has nothing to do with the foundation on which the church was built. They can attack Jesus' church all they want but it won't fall-- And they can take that to the bank.

[pt17]

Yep, we have some bad apples. Does that negate the message and doctrine of the church founded by Christ? Not one damn bit. I'm sick of your agenda. Maybe you should start your own list. "Catholic_bashers" sounds appropriate.

Maybe you're missing the point here. I suspect most are not out to bash the church. Rather, they are bashing the coverup and the degenerate people who were parties to the coverup. And, IMHO, well they should!

[JMJ333]

I agree with you on exposing and ridding the Catholic church of people who don't belong in it. That said, FR is a Catholic bashing haven. Faith_j has an agenda, and it isn't to help Catholics. There are a group of posters on this forum whose every post has something negative and denegrating to say about my Church. I'm sure they'll slink along soon, and tell you how the pope is actually the anti-christ and that my church is actually the "whore of Babylon." Both terms are used frequently to describe my religion, so you can understand why I feel the need to defend against petty minded *haters* whose mission in life it is to destroy the Catholic church.

[ikanakattara]

This Boston situation (and all the other pedophile cases from all the other dioceses in the US) have *nothing* to do with "doctrine." Most of us here are on the same page regarding sex with children. We agree it's wrong. But the Catholic Church in this country is NOT helped by people sticking their heads in the sand and yelling "Catholic bashing!" every time these stories break.

As someone linked above, there are possibly more than 50 priests who have potentially been involved in *child* sex abuse in the Boston archdiocese *alone.* This is a shocking number, especially as male-homosexual pedophilia is considered to be far rarer than the heterosexual kind (men abusing girls.)

[tiki]

I agree 100%, after all, we're not in Heaven yet.

[JMJ333]

Sorry, but I know an agenda when I see one. There are certain people here at FR, who have one thing on their minds every time they post. I've already explained on this thread that I support the effort to rid the Church of any criminal we have lurking within our community. I am not, though, going to sit by and let these same posters continually trash Catholics and let their agenda go without trying to expose them for the haters that they are. If you need me to link you to some examples I will.

[EODGUY]

"As someone linked above, there are possibly more than 50 priests who have potentially been involved in *child* sex abuse in the Boston archdiocese *alone.* This is a shocking number, especially as male-homosexual pedophilia is considered to be far rarer than the heterosexual kind (men abusing girls.) "

Would you deem it logical to draw conclusions based on the "questionable specificity" of your post?

I wouldn't.

[teresat]

But what about all the teachers who molest their students? The number of teachers/educators that are molesters is much higher than clergy. You're very fixated on the problem with priests maybe you should concentrate on the bigger problem of teachers who molest their students.

[EODGUY]

I don't think that would fit his/her agenda.

[onyx]

You're fighting the good fight, but it's like spitting into the wind with the Catholic-haters. They DO have an agenda, and it's u-g-l-y.

[EODGUY]

Great to hear from you, onyx. Seen any talking fish lately?

:)

[unamused]

The Roman Catholic archdiocese here seemed more preoccupied with avoiding a scandal involving a pedophile priest than making sure the priest had no further contact with children, documents released today suggest.

No shit....

[JMJ333]

Welcome back bump!