Philadelphia Priest scandal unfolds
September 21, 2005 9:16 AM Subscribe
Philadelphia Priest scandal unfolds The Philadelphia Archdiocese concealed sexual abuse by priests for four decades, but no criminal charges can be brought against the church or its priests because of the constraints of state law, according to grand jury findings released Wednesday. With 63 confirmed and as many as 170 suspected - all accused of multiple acts, Priests in the city of brotherly love are making a mockery of the city's moniker. It's being reported that Both Cardinal Bevilacqua and Cardinal Kroll not only ignored the abuse but were complicit in preventing the abuse from being reported to the police.
Wonder what the Hon. Rick Santoro will say about this.
posted by jsavimbi at 9:20 AM on September 21, 2005
posted by jsavimbi at 9:20 AM on September 21, 2005
Another day, another priest bangs an alterboy.
People use their authority to abuse other people all the time. The most effective way to prevent it is to screen people who are being placed in positions of authority for a predisposiiton to such behavior. Cops are already screen for being psychopaths. We should expand that practice to CEOs, politicians, and high ranking government employes. [1] Why not require it for priests as well? My guess is the priests and the cardinals are latent psychopaths too.
posted by jeffburdges at 9:39 AM on September 21, 2005
People use their authority to abuse other people all the time. The most effective way to prevent it is to screen people who are being placed in positions of authority for a predisposiiton to such behavior. Cops are already screen for being psychopaths. We should expand that practice to CEOs, politicians, and high ranking government employes. [1] Why not require it for priests as well? My guess is the priests and the cardinals are latent psychopaths too.
posted by jeffburdges at 9:39 AM on September 21, 2005
Why not require it for priests as well?
If you had to screen potential priests for mental illness you wouldn't have any priests at all.
posted by Optimus Chyme at 9:43 AM on September 21, 2005
If you had to screen potential priests for mental illness you wouldn't have any priests at all.
posted by Optimus Chyme at 9:43 AM on September 21, 2005
When justice is miscarried, doesn't that mean the populance is supposed to turn out in an angry mob and tear the offenders limb from limb?
jp hung, are they making a mockery of the city's motto or are they embracing it a little more directly than intended since we're all "brothers"? Maybe Philly should change its motto to the City of Child Loving?
posted by fenriq at 9:45 AM on September 21, 2005
jp hung, are they making a mockery of the city's motto or are they embracing it a little more directly than intended since we're all "brothers"? Maybe Philly should change its motto to the City of Child Loving?
posted by fenriq at 9:45 AM on September 21, 2005
The Archdiocese of Philadelphia has issued its rebuttal, which a reporter just waved around on the local TV news. It isn't posted on their web site.
posted by fixedgear at 9:50 AM on September 21, 2005
posted by fixedgear at 9:50 AM on September 21, 2005
sohcahtoa: "What was that third link supposed to be?"
Yeah, the markup is awesome:
<a href="With" 63="" confirmed="" many="" as="" 170="" suspected="" -="" all="" accused="" multiple="" acts="" priests="" of="" brotherly="" love="" are="" taking="" city="" moniker="" a="" bit="" too="" seriously="" it="" s="" that="" both="" bevalaqua="" and="" cardinal="" kroll="" not="" ignored="" but="" were="" complicit="" in="" preventing="" abuse="" from="" being="" reported="" to="" the="" police="" _base_href="http://www.metafilter.com/">
This stuff is part of the reason I find organized religion so ridiculous. (Organized religion, not belief-in-a-higher-power in general).
posted by Plutor at 9:55 AM on September 21, 2005
Yeah, the markup is awesome:
<a href="With" 63="" confirmed="" many="" as="" 170="" suspected="" -="" all="" accused="" multiple="" acts="" priests="" of="" brotherly="" love="" are="" taking="" city="" moniker="" a="" bit="" too="" seriously="" it="" s="" that="" both="" bevalaqua="" and="" cardinal="" kroll="" not="" ignored="" but="" were="" complicit="" in="" preventing="" abuse="" from="" being="" reported="" to="" the="" police="" _base_href="http://www.metafilter.com/">
This stuff is part of the reason I find organized religion so ridiculous. (Organized religion, not belief-in-a-higher-power in general).
posted by Plutor at 9:55 AM on September 21, 2005
Another day, another priest bangs an alterboy.
Sad, but true.
posted by DrDoberman at 9:58 AM on September 21, 2005
Sad, but true.
posted by DrDoberman at 9:58 AM on September 21, 2005
No suprise, at all. There were at least a couple of priests who "left" my parish throughout the 1980s. They need to drop names...pronto.
posted by rzklkng at 10:11 AM on September 21, 2005
posted by rzklkng at 10:11 AM on September 21, 2005
Don't go to church... you'll get a dick in your ass/mouth.
posted by BobFrapples at 10:12 AM on September 21, 2005
posted by BobFrapples at 10:12 AM on September 21, 2005
Don't go to church... you'll get a dick in your ass/mouth
Isn't that the Holy ATM?
posted by jsavimbi at 10:16 AM on September 21, 2005
The Episcopalian church runs its prospective priests through psychological tests (and a couple of university degrees). I bet the Catholic church is doing the same thing these days, and these are the old timers who are getting busted. Does anyone here know about the discernment process for Catholic priests?
posted by small_ruminant at 10:20 AM on September 21, 2005
posted by small_ruminant at 10:20 AM on September 21, 2005
Optimus,
I would like to offer as some small bit of counter evidence that not ALL priests are lunatics and scumbags, Daniel Berrigan. That having been said no child of mine will ever be left alone in a room with a priest. That's just the way it goes, sorry Catholicism, ya done fucked up too many times.
posted by Divine_Wino at 10:24 AM on September 21, 2005
I would like to offer as some small bit of counter evidence that not ALL priests are lunatics and scumbags, Daniel Berrigan. That having been said no child of mine will ever be left alone in a room with a priest. That's just the way it goes, sorry Catholicism, ya done fucked up too many times.
posted by Divine_Wino at 10:24 AM on September 21, 2005
Holy Crap !!!1 (pun intended), they did drop names! I especially appreciate how they moved so many after they were moved from Parishes with elementary schools so they could prey on young high school males.
posted by rzklkng at 10:27 AM on September 21, 2005
posted by rzklkng at 10:27 AM on September 21, 2005
Is this pattern of child sexual abuse as common with Catholic priests outside the US?
posted by alumshubby at 10:33 AM on September 21, 2005
posted by alumshubby at 10:33 AM on September 21, 2005
Nope, they send all the shorteyes to America, but Peru gets all the shoplifters and bedwetters, so it evens out in the end.
posted by Divine_Wino at 10:37 AM on September 21, 2005
posted by Divine_Wino at 10:37 AM on September 21, 2005
Cute...but I wasn't fishing for snarks. I'm seriously asking, is there something about Catholic priests or the Church in general in America that's conducive to this kind of misbehavior, or is this happening elsewhere but with less notoriety?
posted by alumshubby at 10:41 AM on September 21, 2005
posted by alumshubby at 10:41 AM on September 21, 2005
The RCC of yesteryear and now is totally different. For example:
"The procedures, including psychological testing, that we employ at the seminary prior to admittance have been reviewed and the Rector has seen to it that we use every known instrument to determine any proclivity to such behavior. Such persons are not admitted to the seminary. Every seminarian, after admittance, goes through at least five years of preparation during which they are under very close professional assessment and evaluation prior to ordination."
You must remember that the whole Catholic culture, in the US at least has changed dramatically. There are still a lot of pre-Vatican II priests left who came from very sheltered lives. Any thoughts of pedophilia were probably repressed and thought to be cured through the church (there's a large through Christ we can overcome vibe running through the whole RCC). Also in the old days sex was, as we know, never talked about and dirty, etc. No pedophile would have been caught and the benign seminarian loving little children was probably thought of as purely platonic. Keep in mind all those pictures of Jesus with little kids on his shoulders and all around.
Now through the years of scandals (wrongly covered up) the Church is extremely picky about who they pick in the USA to become a priest. I have a feeling in 30 years this will be all but non-existent amongs the priestly population, or at least not these recurrent abuse cases.
The church, like any other large closed heirarchy, protects their own. This doesn't excuse the church by any means but explains the actions.
Though I have to say when I was in grade school in the 80s the big scandal were straight priests going after high school girls. I'm surprised that these much more consensual cases were made such a big deal (the priest I remember got kicked out and outed fairly viciously) but pedophilia got kept underwraps. Denial, not just a river in Egypt?
posted by geoff. at 10:42 AM on September 21, 2005
"The procedures, including psychological testing, that we employ at the seminary prior to admittance have been reviewed and the Rector has seen to it that we use every known instrument to determine any proclivity to such behavior. Such persons are not admitted to the seminary. Every seminarian, after admittance, goes through at least five years of preparation during which they are under very close professional assessment and evaluation prior to ordination."
You must remember that the whole Catholic culture, in the US at least has changed dramatically. There are still a lot of pre-Vatican II priests left who came from very sheltered lives. Any thoughts of pedophilia were probably repressed and thought to be cured through the church (there's a large through Christ we can overcome vibe running through the whole RCC). Also in the old days sex was, as we know, never talked about and dirty, etc. No pedophile would have been caught and the benign seminarian loving little children was probably thought of as purely platonic. Keep in mind all those pictures of Jesus with little kids on his shoulders and all around.
Now through the years of scandals (wrongly covered up) the Church is extremely picky about who they pick in the USA to become a priest. I have a feeling in 30 years this will be all but non-existent amongs the priestly population, or at least not these recurrent abuse cases.
The church, like any other large closed heirarchy, protects their own. This doesn't excuse the church by any means but explains the actions.
Though I have to say when I was in grade school in the 80s the big scandal were straight priests going after high school girls. I'm surprised that these much more consensual cases were made such a big deal (the priest I remember got kicked out and outed fairly viciously) but pedophilia got kept underwraps. Denial, not just a river in Egypt?
posted by geoff. at 10:42 AM on September 21, 2005
alumshubby,
Sorry, I should have prefaced or concluded that by saying, it's hard to say, the church tends to cover things up pretty well as these articles point out, I don't think it's more prevalent in the US, or even that pedophilia is more than a few points higher in the priesthood than in the general population, it just get's covered up for a long time, then the dam breaks and it makes for more lurid news because priests have/had such a position of trust. I've certainly heard about it in other countries.
posted by Divine_Wino at 10:47 AM on September 21, 2005
Sorry, I should have prefaced or concluded that by saying, it's hard to say, the church tends to cover things up pretty well as these articles point out, I don't think it's more prevalent in the US, or even that pedophilia is more than a few points higher in the priesthood than in the general population, it just get's covered up for a long time, then the dam breaks and it makes for more lurid news because priests have/had such a position of trust. I've certainly heard about it in other countries.
posted by Divine_Wino at 10:47 AM on September 21, 2005
Oh and to those who are commenting about the Catholic church perhaps attracting, for one reason or another, pedophiles are around 2-3 percent for the general population and I believe this was the number for RCC priests. The difference is that regular pedophiles usually get away with it but due to the influence of priests they get to do it for years and years with hundreds of children before getting caught.
I think Jenkins who wrote Pedophiles and Priests gave an actual lower number (~1%) of pedophiles who are priests, much lower than the general populace -- but his thesis was also the coverup factor increased the number of abused cases.
posted by geoff. at 10:47 AM on September 21, 2005
I think Jenkins who wrote Pedophiles and Priests gave an actual lower number (~1%) of pedophiles who are priests, much lower than the general populace -- but his thesis was also the coverup factor increased the number of abused cases.
posted by geoff. at 10:47 AM on September 21, 2005
I was an ugly child. An altarboy for seven years and the only hard-on I felt in church was mine.
posted by biffa at 10:51 AM on September 21, 2005
posted by biffa at 10:51 AM on September 21, 2005
I should also point to this Christian Science Monitor article that points out that Protestant churches are just as bad (actually worse if you consider that more abuse cases come from being that there are more Protestant churches in America). I know it's a lame defense many Catholics put up when this gets in the news, but more and more I think the media has an anti-Catholic bent. Of course the Catholic Church is a huge target, a lot easier to pick up than some small Protestant congregation in Indiana.
posted by geoff. at 10:55 AM on September 21, 2005
posted by geoff. at 10:55 AM on September 21, 2005
The Archdiocese of Philadelphia has issued its rebuttal, which a reporter just waved around on the local TV news. It isn't posted on their web site.
posted by fixedgear at 12:50 PM EST on September 21 [!]
No doubt the Inky will give that rebuttal as much press as possible. I've rarely seen a newspaper so cozy with the CC.
posted by Rothko at 10:55 AM on September 21, 2005
posted by fixedgear at 12:50 PM EST on September 21 [!]
No doubt the Inky will give that rebuttal as much press as possible. I've rarely seen a newspaper so cozy with the CC.
posted by Rothko at 10:55 AM on September 21, 2005
I was an ugly child. An altarboy for seven years and the only hard-on I felt in church was mine.
There, there. Perhaps you were worshipped from afar by some very shy pedophile. For all you know, he has an entire room plastered with photos of you!
posted by sonofsamiam at 11:00 AM on September 21, 2005
There, there. Perhaps you were worshipped from afar by some very shy pedophile. For all you know, he has an entire room plastered with photos of you!
posted by sonofsamiam at 11:00 AM on September 21, 2005
alumshubby, I read somewhere that in Ireland, every single parish has had at least one Catholic priest removed for "alleged" (no proof allowed) child molestation. So I guess it's not just America.
Not all Christians require their priests to be celibate like the Catholics do. That definitely doesn't help the Catholics.
There again the Methodists aren't great, either.
Or the Presbyterians.
Not all Jewish Rabbis seem to have this issue sorted, either.
And how about this stunning Jewish advice on why child abuse is wrong?
Islam doesn't seem likely to help much.
It seems to me that once you've started down the path of teaching children lies about God (such as book-worshipping monotheistic religion), then teaching them that God wants them to play with your penis is just a hop, skip, and a jump away.
Anyone who promotes Christianity, Judaism, or Islam to children is promoting child abuse, in my view, and should urgently reconsider what they're teaching their children.
(biffa: I feel for you. Perhaps counselling would help?)
posted by cleardawn at 11:03 AM on September 21, 2005
Not all Christians require their priests to be celibate like the Catholics do. That definitely doesn't help the Catholics.
There again the Methodists aren't great, either.
Or the Presbyterians.
Not all Jewish Rabbis seem to have this issue sorted, either.
And how about this stunning Jewish advice on why child abuse is wrong?
Islam doesn't seem likely to help much.
It seems to me that once you've started down the path of teaching children lies about God (such as book-worshipping monotheistic religion), then teaching them that God wants them to play with your penis is just a hop, skip, and a jump away.
Anyone who promotes Christianity, Judaism, or Islam to children is promoting child abuse, in my view, and should urgently reconsider what they're teaching their children.
(biffa: I feel for you. Perhaps counselling would help?)
posted by cleardawn at 11:03 AM on September 21, 2005
I would like to offer as some small bit of counter evidence that not ALL priests are lunatics and scumbags, Daniel Berrigan.
Huh. He's a bad-ass with a heart of gold.
posted by Optimus Chyme at 11:05 AM on September 21, 2005
Huh. He's a bad-ass with a heart of gold.
posted by Optimus Chyme at 11:05 AM on September 21, 2005
Chef: Hello there, children.
Stan: Chef! What would a priest want to stick up my butt?
Chef: Goodbye.
posted by Gamblor at 11:06 AM on September 21, 2005
cleardawn: Buddy, not all Jews, Xtians, and Muslims are so authoritarian. It's a big world with a lot of genuinely spiritual people. They are just underrepresented in hierarchical organizations, understandably.
posted by sonofsamiam at 11:07 AM on September 21, 2005
posted by sonofsamiam at 11:07 AM on September 21, 2005
The Catholic Church orders its priests to maintain an unnatural, marriageless, sexless lifestyle and then wonders why shit like this keeps happening.
Not that that excuses any of this behavior, but it sure as hell is the main reason it's happening. Fucking clueless idiots, top to bottom.
posted by wakko at 11:07 AM on September 21, 2005
Not that that excuses any of this behavior, but it sure as hell is the main reason it's happening. Fucking clueless idiots, top to bottom.
posted by wakko at 11:07 AM on September 21, 2005
cleardawn: Buddy, not all Jews, Xtians, and Muslims are so authoritarian. It's a big world with a lot of genuinely spiritual people. They are just underrepresented in hierarchical organizations, understandably.
Secular Amen brother!
The Catholic Church orders its priests to maintain an unnatural, marriageless, sexless lifestyle and then wonders why shit like this keeps happening.
Well they could be fucking adults, no? I'm not sure I agree that the no sex thing is why there is child abuse within the priesthood.
posted by Divine_Wino at 11:10 AM on September 21, 2005
Secular Amen brother!
The Catholic Church orders its priests to maintain an unnatural, marriageless, sexless lifestyle and then wonders why shit like this keeps happening.
Well they could be fucking adults, no? I'm not sure I agree that the no sex thing is why there is child abuse within the priesthood.
posted by Divine_Wino at 11:10 AM on September 21, 2005
I have to post this here, in a spirit of awe. It is the most batshit insane article I have ever read, anywhere. I share it in that spirit. Not suitable for, well, anywhere, really.
posted by cleardawn at 11:13 AM on September 21, 2005
posted by cleardawn at 11:13 AM on September 21, 2005
alumshubby, It is common to all priests of all religions. Those actually treating the victims of clerical sexual abuse believe it is distributed equally among protestants and catholics. Among authoritative professions, abuse levels do corrolate with screeening procedures, and priests are much more liekly to abuse than psychologists, social workers, teachers, cops, etc. As the major churches implement better screening procedures, we should start to see a higher precentage of the abuse coming out of the evangelical churches.
posted by jeffburdges at 11:21 AM on September 21, 2005
posted by jeffburdges at 11:21 AM on September 21, 2005
Divine_Wino >>> "Well they could be fucking adults, no? I'm not sure I agree that the no sex thing is why there is child abuse within the priesthood."
They could, yes, but there are all sorts of reasons why not. (None of these are excuses, mind you). A priest who goes out and has sex with an adult (and I've encountered one or two) has to immediately face the fact that he has broken his vows. Children 'don't count', I suspect. In addition, children can (often) be counted on to say nothing, especially male children, due to the stigma still associated with homosexuality.
Beyond that, there's the obvious power dynamics of the situation, and we all know that power is an intense aphrodisiac. A priest can't have the same sort of control over an adult. And, indeed, many adults the priest would have access to (in his congregation, I mean) would say "No, Father! What are you doing?"
posted by dirtynumbangelboy at 11:24 AM on September 21, 2005
They could, yes, but there are all sorts of reasons why not. (None of these are excuses, mind you). A priest who goes out and has sex with an adult (and I've encountered one or two) has to immediately face the fact that he has broken his vows. Children 'don't count', I suspect. In addition, children can (often) be counted on to say nothing, especially male children, due to the stigma still associated with homosexuality.
Beyond that, there's the obvious power dynamics of the situation, and we all know that power is an intense aphrodisiac. A priest can't have the same sort of control over an adult. And, indeed, many adults the priest would have access to (in his congregation, I mean) would say "No, Father! What are you doing?"
posted by dirtynumbangelboy at 11:24 AM on September 21, 2005
cleardawn, Amen!
posted by jeffburdges at 11:28 AM on September 21, 2005
posted by jeffburdges at 11:28 AM on September 21, 2005
Dirtynumb,
I agree with your points, but I still don't fully buy that chastity leads to pedophilia, I think it is a factor sure, but I still suspect that the conditions of the priesthood, the secrecy and the insularity merely highlight pedophilia within the ranks and that it is not "much" more prevalent or caused (as opposed to made worse) in some way by the Catholic clergys practice of celibacy. I'm not sure that any of this matters except in a CSI kind of way because they are clearly out there buggering kids, I sure do hope the screening system is better.
On a way nuttier note:
MEDICAL ALERT MEDICAL ALERT
"A CHANGING OF THE HUMAN CONDITION"
THE SOY BEAN
Medical research now shows that homosexuality and gender identity disorder may be caused by SOY TOXINS and environmental poisons! Are you choosing your child's sexuality for him/her?
-
From the International Organization of Heterosexual Rights, cleardawns link. So the way I see it, and the good sane folks at inoohr wouldn't lie to us, get off the bean or you will have mindblowing gay anal sex and you can never go back from that.
posted by Divine_Wino at 11:35 AM on September 21, 2005
I agree with your points, but I still don't fully buy that chastity leads to pedophilia, I think it is a factor sure, but I still suspect that the conditions of the priesthood, the secrecy and the insularity merely highlight pedophilia within the ranks and that it is not "much" more prevalent or caused (as opposed to made worse) in some way by the Catholic clergys practice of celibacy. I'm not sure that any of this matters except in a CSI kind of way because they are clearly out there buggering kids, I sure do hope the screening system is better.
On a way nuttier note:
MEDICAL ALERT MEDICAL ALERT
"A CHANGING OF THE HUMAN CONDITION"
THE SOY BEAN
Medical research now shows that homosexuality and gender identity disorder may be caused by SOY TOXINS and environmental poisons! Are you choosing your child's sexuality for him/her?
-
From the International Organization of Heterosexual Rights, cleardawns link. So the way I see it, and the good sane folks at inoohr wouldn't lie to us, get off the bean or you will have mindblowing gay anal sex and you can never go back from that.
posted by Divine_Wino at 11:35 AM on September 21, 2005
So let's see...I'm promoting child abuse by having my son attend Sunday school? I'm sorry, did someone use the phrase "batshit insane"?
posted by alumshubby at 11:55 AM on September 21, 2005
posted by alumshubby at 11:55 AM on September 21, 2005
Divine_Wino >>> "I agree with your points, but I still don't fully buy that chastity leads to pedophilia"
I wouldn't say that chastity necessarily leads to pedophilia, but I would suggest there's definitely a non-trivial link. For a (somewhat) related example, I'd look at incidence of homosexuality in prisons (male and female) and in the Navy.
posted by dirtynumbangelboy at 12:02 PM on September 21, 2005
I wouldn't say that chastity necessarily leads to pedophilia, but I would suggest there's definitely a non-trivial link. For a (somewhat) related example, I'd look at incidence of homosexuality in prisons (male and female) and in the Navy.
posted by dirtynumbangelboy at 12:02 PM on September 21, 2005
dirtynumb,
More than fair enough.
alumshubby,
There are a bunch of people who go around denouncing any kind of religion or religious people as negative, since most of them are self described liberal humanists, this is frankly hilarious and more than a little sad, also totally self defeating. I'm sure you know that actually. I say this as a person who does not go to church and never does anything that a religious authority tells me to do.
posted by Divine_Wino at 12:08 PM on September 21, 2005
More than fair enough.
alumshubby,
There are a bunch of people who go around denouncing any kind of religion or religious people as negative, since most of them are self described liberal humanists, this is frankly hilarious and more than a little sad, also totally self defeating. I'm sure you know that actually. I say this as a person who does not go to church and never does anything that a religious authority tells me to do.
posted by Divine_Wino at 12:08 PM on September 21, 2005
Yes but pedophilia is not homosexuality. In the Navy and prisons genders are kept separate and all they have is each other. Priests have had access to parishes of men and women of post-pubescent age. They are not alone on a ship with access to women. I'm sure a good percentage of priests have sexual relationships of the consensual homosexual and heterosexual variety.
posted by geoff. at 12:09 PM on September 21, 2005
posted by geoff. at 12:09 PM on September 21, 2005
cleardawn's link also provided me with the phrase "rampant lesbianism," which just sounds so damn fun...
springbreakWOOO!
posted by Coda at 12:16 PM on September 21, 2005
springbreakWOOO!
posted by Coda at 12:16 PM on September 21, 2005
On JRun what geoff says.
before JRun this:
On second glance:
For a (somewhat) related example, I'd look at incidence of homosexuality in prisons (male and female) and in the Navy...
I know you don't mean to conflate homosexuality with pedophilia(I don't mean that in the oh no you didn't way, but in the I know you way) however, so I'm still not sure a little bit. the above is any port in a storm behavior, while pedophilia is a serious mental illness. I've heard the whole priests go after children because to them it is somehow less of a violation of their vows idea, but holy shit, kid fucking is a pretty big taboo in most of the world and way more generally enforced as such than chastity among priests. Just spitballing here though, I'm edging closer to pretty good agreeance with you.
posted by Divine_Wino at 12:17 PM on September 21, 2005
before JRun this:
On second glance:
For a (somewhat) related example, I'd look at incidence of homosexuality in prisons (male and female) and in the Navy...
I know you don't mean to conflate homosexuality with pedophilia(I don't mean that in the oh no you didn't way, but in the I know you way) however, so I'm still not sure a little bit. the above is any port in a storm behavior, while pedophilia is a serious mental illness. I've heard the whole priests go after children because to them it is somehow less of a violation of their vows idea, but holy shit, kid fucking is a pretty big taboo in most of the world and way more generally enforced as such than chastity among priests. Just spitballing here though, I'm edging closer to pretty good agreeance with you.
posted by Divine_Wino at 12:17 PM on September 21, 2005
rothko said: No doubt the Inky will give that rebuttal as much press as possible. I've rarely seen a newspaper so cozy with the CC.
My mom, who is something of a holy roller and daily church goer thinks the Inquirer is 'anti-cathloic.' I think this will be front page above the fold tomorrow.
posted by fixedgear at 12:23 PM on September 21, 2005
My mom, who is something of a holy roller and daily church goer thinks the Inquirer is 'anti-cathloic.' I think this will be front page above the fold tomorrow.
posted by fixedgear at 12:23 PM on September 21, 2005
"kid fucking is a pretty big taboo in most of the world"
That hasn't always been the case, though. In many cultures it was just fine with everyone, notably the Romans and Greeks.
IIRC, around the time that the Catholic Church was founded, it was par for the course and expected... so perhaps a concept of "kids don't count" has been, in a way, "institutionalized" in the church for a long time. Sort of like eating fish on Friday because it's not "meat," but of far greater significance of course.
posted by zoogleplex at 12:25 PM on September 21, 2005
That hasn't always been the case, though. In many cultures it was just fine with everyone, notably the Romans and Greeks.
IIRC, around the time that the Catholic Church was founded, it was par for the course and expected... so perhaps a concept of "kids don't count" has been, in a way, "institutionalized" in the church for a long time. Sort of like eating fish on Friday because it's not "meat," but of far greater significance of course.
posted by zoogleplex at 12:25 PM on September 21, 2005
Sorry about the shitty philly link. I was busy saying the rosary and must have just mis-copied a link. Anyway, here is the official report from the D.A. (they are all pdf's links on this html page)
posted by j.p. Hung at 12:27 PM on September 21, 2005
posted by j.p. Hung at 12:27 PM on September 21, 2005
So you're saying they got rid of saying mass in Latin but managed to secretly hold onto a culture of underage sodomy?
I know about discubere et beborum in manourem Graecorum, but I don't buy that either.
I also would like to go on record as saying that I have many many beefs with the Catholic church and their kid fucking, poor robbing and nazi enabling tendencies, I don't have a dog in this race, I just suspect some of the whys are not totally right here.
posted by Divine_Wino at 12:32 PM on September 21, 2005
I know about discubere et beborum in manourem Graecorum, but I don't buy that either.
I also would like to go on record as saying that I have many many beefs with the Catholic church and their kid fucking, poor robbing and nazi enabling tendencies, I don't have a dog in this race, I just suspect some of the whys are not totally right here.
posted by Divine_Wino at 12:32 PM on September 21, 2005
Divine_Wino "I agree with your points, but I still don't fully buy that chastity leads to pedophilia"
i don't think it's that the chastity leads to pedophilia, it's that pedophiles are attracted to the job because it (a) gives them an excuse to not have relationships with other adults, and (b) puts them in a position where people trust them with children (well, probably not as much anymore). plus, they're an authority figure so kids are likely to be intimidated -- i knew kids growing up who would have probably gotten in trouble if they had dared to suggest that a priest would do such a thing.
posted by clarahamster at 12:39 PM on September 21, 2005
i don't think it's that the chastity leads to pedophilia, it's that pedophiles are attracted to the job because it (a) gives them an excuse to not have relationships with other adults, and (b) puts them in a position where people trust them with children (well, probably not as much anymore). plus, they're an authority figure so kids are likely to be intimidated -- i knew kids growing up who would have probably gotten in trouble if they had dared to suggest that a priest would do such a thing.
posted by clarahamster at 12:39 PM on September 21, 2005
clarahamster,
That sounds much more right to me.
posted by Divine_Wino at 12:44 PM on September 21, 2005
That sounds much more right to me.
posted by Divine_Wino at 12:44 PM on September 21, 2005
geoff. >>> "Yes but pedophilia is not homosexuality. In the Navy and prisons genders are kept separate and all they have is each other. Priests have had access to parishes of men and women of post-pubescent age. They are not alone on a ship with access to women. I'm sure a good percentage of priests have sexual relationships of the consensual homosexual and heterosexual variety."
Yes, I'm sure they do. And the priests I've known who have gotten some on the side have been exclusively homosexual, though I've heard some pretty crazy stories about certain parish priests and how popular they were with certain lady members of the congregation.
Bear in mind, too, that 'all they have is each other' covers a fairly broad spectrum. Take the human sex drive, and then stifle it. It's going to come out in some way, and is likely to follow the path of least resistance. That would often be, as I pointed out, children. I have no citations at the moment, and only fuzzily remember where I read this (I believe it was a book about the BSU at the FBI), but pedophilia is broadly divided into two categories for the purposes of treatment and profiling: preferential, that is people who simply (for whatever reason) prefer sex exclusively with children; situational, that is people (and this usually occurs amongst teenagers, as well as celibate clergy) who act out (teenagers) or simply take the nearest/easiest available option (clergy). As I recall, the theory is that the two types are fairly evenly distributed amongst pedophilic members of the Catholic clergy.
Divine_Wino >>> "I know you don't mean to conflate homosexuality with pedophilia(I don't mean that in the oh no you didn't way, but in the I know you way) however, so I'm still not sure a little bit. the above is any port in a storm behavior, while pedophilia is a serious mental illness. I've heard the whole priests go after children because to them it is somehow less of a violation of their vows idea, but holy shit, kid fucking is a pretty big taboo in most of the world and way more generally enforced as such than chastity among priests. Just spitballing here though, I'm edging closer to pretty good agreeance with you."
See above, really. And you're right, I meant no conflation. Though in the case of Catholic clergy, there's a huge intersection between homosexuality and pedophilia, though I suspect that will grow to be less and less as fewer Catholic boys think that the only recourse for their 'unnatural' feelings is to enter the priesthood.
posted by dirtynumbangelboy at 12:46 PM on September 21, 2005
Yes, I'm sure they do. And the priests I've known who have gotten some on the side have been exclusively homosexual, though I've heard some pretty crazy stories about certain parish priests and how popular they were with certain lady members of the congregation.
Bear in mind, too, that 'all they have is each other' covers a fairly broad spectrum. Take the human sex drive, and then stifle it. It's going to come out in some way, and is likely to follow the path of least resistance. That would often be, as I pointed out, children. I have no citations at the moment, and only fuzzily remember where I read this (I believe it was a book about the BSU at the FBI), but pedophilia is broadly divided into two categories for the purposes of treatment and profiling: preferential, that is people who simply (for whatever reason) prefer sex exclusively with children; situational, that is people (and this usually occurs amongst teenagers, as well as celibate clergy) who act out (teenagers) or simply take the nearest/easiest available option (clergy). As I recall, the theory is that the two types are fairly evenly distributed amongst pedophilic members of the Catholic clergy.
Divine_Wino >>> "I know you don't mean to conflate homosexuality with pedophilia(I don't mean that in the oh no you didn't way, but in the I know you way) however, so I'm still not sure a little bit. the above is any port in a storm behavior, while pedophilia is a serious mental illness. I've heard the whole priests go after children because to them it is somehow less of a violation of their vows idea, but holy shit, kid fucking is a pretty big taboo in most of the world and way more generally enforced as such than chastity among priests. Just spitballing here though, I'm edging closer to pretty good agreeance with you."
See above, really. And you're right, I meant no conflation. Though in the case of Catholic clergy, there's a huge intersection between homosexuality and pedophilia, though I suspect that will grow to be less and less as fewer Catholic boys think that the only recourse for their 'unnatural' feelings is to enter the priesthood.
posted by dirtynumbangelboy at 12:46 PM on September 21, 2005
Oh, and on postview, what clarahamster said, definitely. Repeated studies have shown that (active) pedophiles gravitate towards occupations that put them in contact with children.
Well, most of the time. I know a man who, over thr course of one long drunken conversation, confessed to me that sure, he enjoys sex with women, it feels ok. But what he really and truly desires is sex with little girls. He's never done anything--and I believe him--and never will. He works construction, and had a vasectomy shortly after he realised that this was how he was and wouldn't change. He goes out of his way to avoid contact with children, and is in therapy to try and handle things. He doesn't even have net access at home, so he doesn't get tempted. I can't imagine the kind of strength it must take him to resist such a primal urge. Er... point being, not all pedophiles are evil. Just 99.9% of them.
posted by dirtynumbangelboy at 12:52 PM on September 21, 2005
Well, most of the time. I know a man who, over thr course of one long drunken conversation, confessed to me that sure, he enjoys sex with women, it feels ok. But what he really and truly desires is sex with little girls. He's never done anything--and I believe him--and never will. He works construction, and had a vasectomy shortly after he realised that this was how he was and wouldn't change. He goes out of his way to avoid contact with children, and is in therapy to try and handle things. He doesn't even have net access at home, so he doesn't get tempted. I can't imagine the kind of strength it must take him to resist such a primal urge. Er... point being, not all pedophiles are evil. Just 99.9% of them.
posted by dirtynumbangelboy at 12:52 PM on September 21, 2005
Well all my old Irish relatives always sent the favorite into the clergy, the fact that the favorite was often a "quare fella" as well, a nice quiet boy stayed home wit his mother, not out chasing after this one and that one, never raised an eyebrow. Repressive cultural traits are the best, no?
posted by Divine_Wino at 12:57 PM on September 21, 2005
posted by Divine_Wino at 12:57 PM on September 21, 2005
I was just positing a possible contributing factor, D_W.
However, note that saying the Mass in languages other than Latin is a good way to expand your church, good marketing, whereas sex with children is not something you'd generally want to publicize these days. Just sayin', I'm certainly not promoting myself as authoritative.
I managed to avoid both church and buggery as a child, for which I'm very grateful.
posted by zoogleplex at 1:44 PM on September 21, 2005
However, note that saying the Mass in languages other than Latin is a good way to expand your church, good marketing, whereas sex with children is not something you'd generally want to publicize these days. Just sayin', I'm certainly not promoting myself as authoritative.
I managed to avoid both church and buggery as a child, for which I'm very grateful.
posted by zoogleplex at 1:44 PM on September 21, 2005
You do have a point.
posted by Divine_Wino at 1:49 PM on September 21, 2005
posted by Divine_Wino at 1:49 PM on September 21, 2005
Anybody seen a "backwards collar" lately? I've seen only one in the past umpteen years and it was hard not to stare. I had to fight the urge to walk up to the guy and ask "are you a child molester"?
posted by telstar at 2:35 PM on September 21, 2005
posted by telstar at 2:35 PM on September 21, 2005
What Divine_Wino said.
I grew up (in the 50s) in a devout Irish Catholic home. Priests were always revered authority figures. Although I was an altar boy for at least 10 years, not even once was anything improper said to me by a priest, let alone anything in the way of scandalous behavior.
It is clear, however, that the Sexual Revolution of the Fabulous Sixties has grievously affected the quality of the individuals who have directed themselves to the priesthood: it has become an all-but-exclusive refuge for men who are constitutionally disinterested in women, which inescapably means there is a homosexual orientation, acted upon or not. Repressed at an early age by the harshest sort of Catholic upbringing and conditioned to think of the priesthood as their vocation, inserted into the even harsher religiosity of the all-male seminary at a young age. . . .this is not a climate that produces well-adjusted heterosexuals who "offer up" their celibacy.
It is a fact that many "hetero" priests have elected to leave the Church and marry. In many cases, these priests "go Prod" after marriage, electing to become Anglo-Catholics, Episcopalians, where the doctrnal differences are nugatory and their marital status is welcomed rather than scorned. This "brain drain"--many are the Jesuits who have gone this route--has drastically undercut the quality of "good" priests of my age grade. Prior to the 1960s, such priests would never have contemplated "switching sides."
As homosexuality has (justly, of course) become socially acceptable in a way it was not before, the paradox deepens for the remaining gay-oriented priests. It is obvious that a conspiracy of silence at the episcopal prelate level has attempted to "keep the lid" on priestly misconduct: the NAMBLA scandal in Boston is archetypical, if rather more sordid than most instances of the Diddling Padre. For immature indivduals of repressed, "gang stage" orientation (Cf. Michael Jackson) making sexual approaches at their own emotional level is far less frightening than cruising for rough trade down at the Glory Hole Bar. Thus adolescent boys--and even preadolescents, sad to say--become the targets of opportunity for such individuals. So, to keep the parishes staffed in the face of a clerical shortage, and in keeping with the trditional Catholic tolerance for sin, the affected bishops--almost certainly gay-oriented themselves--were willing to absolve expressions of sexual weakness on the part of priests who sought sexual contact from Catholic boys. I am not saying it is right by any means, but it is explicable given the peculiar institution that the Catholic priesthood has become in the Twenty-first Century.
The mad Catholic attitude towards sexual expression drove me from the Church when I became old enough to understand how utterly dysfunctional was a doctrine that consigned every young wanker to eternal damnation and demanded that each priest counsel parishioners as to sexual matters he knew nothing about. There is nothing divine about it, and the Church is reaping the whirlwind. In pre-EU, poverty stricken Ireland, the seminary offered a chance for poor young men with brains and initiative to escape grinding poverty. Thousands of clerical "Wild Geese" flew the Irish coop and ended up in the US and elsewhere. No similar cadre will replace them when they pass away. Unless the Church is willing to accept married priests, it will condemn itself to a future priesthood of homosexual orientation--with a healthy crop of perverts in the bargain.
posted by rdone at 3:59 PM on September 21, 2005
I grew up (in the 50s) in a devout Irish Catholic home. Priests were always revered authority figures. Although I was an altar boy for at least 10 years, not even once was anything improper said to me by a priest, let alone anything in the way of scandalous behavior.
It is clear, however, that the Sexual Revolution of the Fabulous Sixties has grievously affected the quality of the individuals who have directed themselves to the priesthood: it has become an all-but-exclusive refuge for men who are constitutionally disinterested in women, which inescapably means there is a homosexual orientation, acted upon or not. Repressed at an early age by the harshest sort of Catholic upbringing and conditioned to think of the priesthood as their vocation, inserted into the even harsher religiosity of the all-male seminary at a young age. . . .this is not a climate that produces well-adjusted heterosexuals who "offer up" their celibacy.
It is a fact that many "hetero" priests have elected to leave the Church and marry. In many cases, these priests "go Prod" after marriage, electing to become Anglo-Catholics, Episcopalians, where the doctrnal differences are nugatory and their marital status is welcomed rather than scorned. This "brain drain"--many are the Jesuits who have gone this route--has drastically undercut the quality of "good" priests of my age grade. Prior to the 1960s, such priests would never have contemplated "switching sides."
As homosexuality has (justly, of course) become socially acceptable in a way it was not before, the paradox deepens for the remaining gay-oriented priests. It is obvious that a conspiracy of silence at the episcopal prelate level has attempted to "keep the lid" on priestly misconduct: the NAMBLA scandal in Boston is archetypical, if rather more sordid than most instances of the Diddling Padre. For immature indivduals of repressed, "gang stage" orientation (Cf. Michael Jackson) making sexual approaches at their own emotional level is far less frightening than cruising for rough trade down at the Glory Hole Bar. Thus adolescent boys--and even preadolescents, sad to say--become the targets of opportunity for such individuals. So, to keep the parishes staffed in the face of a clerical shortage, and in keeping with the trditional Catholic tolerance for sin, the affected bishops--almost certainly gay-oriented themselves--were willing to absolve expressions of sexual weakness on the part of priests who sought sexual contact from Catholic boys. I am not saying it is right by any means, but it is explicable given the peculiar institution that the Catholic priesthood has become in the Twenty-first Century.
The mad Catholic attitude towards sexual expression drove me from the Church when I became old enough to understand how utterly dysfunctional was a doctrine that consigned every young wanker to eternal damnation and demanded that each priest counsel parishioners as to sexual matters he knew nothing about. There is nothing divine about it, and the Church is reaping the whirlwind. In pre-EU, poverty stricken Ireland, the seminary offered a chance for poor young men with brains and initiative to escape grinding poverty. Thousands of clerical "Wild Geese" flew the Irish coop and ended up in the US and elsewhere. No similar cadre will replace them when they pass away. Unless the Church is willing to accept married priests, it will condemn itself to a future priesthood of homosexual orientation--with a healthy crop of perverts in the bargain.
posted by rdone at 3:59 PM on September 21, 2005
Ordaining women wouldn't hurt, either.
posted by alumshubby at 4:09 PM on September 21, 2005
posted by alumshubby at 4:09 PM on September 21, 2005
If a person wants to fuck children, no better choice can be made than to enter the Roman Catholic Church as clergy: it's a get-out-of-jail-free card!
Absolutely the safest means by which to get one's kiddydiddling jollies.
It seems obvious to everyone except the higher-ups in the RCC that this is a dire mistake they've made.
posted by five fresh fish at 4:30 PM on September 21, 2005
Absolutely the safest means by which to get one's kiddydiddling jollies.
It seems obvious to everyone except the higher-ups in the RCC that this is a dire mistake they've made.
posted by five fresh fish at 4:30 PM on September 21, 2005
This is in no way limited to the Catholic church - we have had an almost identical situation played out in Australia with the Anglican church - priests abusing children, the abuse being covered up, priests being moved around the place once suspicions were peaked, even paedophiles being helped to flee the country rather than face discipline. I really don't know what it's all about, or what the hell church leaders thought they were doing. And Anglican priests are allowed to be married!
posted by Jimbob at 8:37 PM on September 21, 2005
posted by Jimbob at 8:37 PM on September 21, 2005
I suspect the structure of the heirarchy is part of the big problem. The whole private law thing.
posted by Smedleyman at 1:02 PM on September 22, 2005
posted by Smedleyman at 1:02 PM on September 22, 2005
« Older The Everyman Photo Contest 2005 | Sorry Pepsi, Dow got there first. Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by j.p. Hung at 9:18 AM on September 21, 2005