Eye popping statistics on priest molestation cases

Remove all ads!

The 4,450 accused priests represent about 4 percent of the 110,000 priests who served during the 52 years covered by the study.

I realize this is a relatively old subject that's been beat on in the past, but this recent survey, if accurate, is pretty shocking.

I always tried to keep an open mind about the Catholic Chuches "little problem," figuring it was just a couple of bad eggs getting a lot of publicity - but this is crazy.

Why does the Catholic Church have so many abusers? Does anyone know of any other religions that have this level of miscreant activity bottled up inside?

 

Reminder: Accusation does not equal conviction. Some cases are a little bogus: someone complaining that a priest touched them when in fact the priest was sedating them during a tantrum.

 

Ok, that was unexpected.

Could you elaborate (seriously) on that? I was unaware that priests had any sort of duties in regard to sedating people... what kind of tantrum are we talking about here? How often are priests called on to sedate kids?

What exactly are they sedating them with?

 

This was from one of those cases in an orphanage. The child had a tantrum and was in such a fit of rage he was endangering the other orphans. A priest had to sedate the child (or at least hold them) but in the process touched the child in a place he did not wish to be touched.

Years later the child, now a man, remembers this incident, is spurred by the accusations of priests and their molestation of chior boys and looks for some

 

As a Catholic I would have to say that the root of this problem began with Vatican II. If you look at the demographics of the offending Priests you will see that most of them were ordained in the 70's...meaning that they entered seminaries in the late 60's or early 70's.

Vatican II was enacted in 1965 in most American Parishes, and the changes were subtle for the average Parishioner (except for Mass rites), but for the Priesthood it was immediately significant.

An attitude of acceptance of willingness to serve was substituted for a devotion to Celibacy. Celibacy became another option of carnal existence...instead of a higher and more challenging (yet rewarding) way of life. Men were accepted into the Priesthood who were unsuited for the calling...but were still allowed in due to the attitude of acceptance fostered by Vatican II.

This current Catholic Priest crisis is temporary. The seminaries are full of a "few good men" who truly understand that a life of Celibacy is not a sacrifice...but a higher calling. This is a complicated subject, and difficult to fully address under the constraints or a forum such as this...but it can be.

I hope I have answered your questions, Art.

[edit] wow...kind of scary that I am siding with Abomination (in an offhand way) on a subject.

 

Hmm. Great feedback so far.

I can definately see where some of the claims will be false, especially in such a huge number of reported cases, but that still doesn't change the fact that there is something big and creepy going on in the clergy.

@Hacken Slash: interesting piece of information there. I hadn't heard that, but it does sort of tie in with another theory I'd heard.

During the 50's during the McCarthy hysteria in the U.S., an enourmous number of homosexuals took refuge in the clergy, where they wouldn't be looked upon suspiciously for not taking on a wife and having a typical family. "Untraditional" behavior at that time could be greeted with being blacklisted and more-or-less publicly ruined.

Tal, hard to say how long its been an issue really. If no one reported it, it could have started at the foundation of Catholicism, or it could have started on the first recorded accusation, very difficult to say. I do agree with you though that it is not a temporary issue.

 

ArteChoke, I cant imagine you claiming that being gay in any way relates to being a pedophile and an abuser?

A pedophile is abuses children, not male children or female children but just plain children. Of course they have preferences but there is no such thing as a "gay" pedophile or a "straight" pedophile. A pedophile is a pedophile.

 

Yes, Artie - you might be on shaky ground with that comment, PLUS we don't want to get onto that topic that has been bashed to infinity elsewhere. Stick to the issue, which is the level of alleged child abuse in the Catholic church.

All I plan to do in the future is teach my kids what their rights are and then leave it at that. The problem with this issue is that it makes life difficult for all the genuine priests out there (and Scout leaders, school teachers, janitors, or anyone who deals with kids). They all end up being tarred with the same brush, which is really unfortunate for them. Someone I know is a janitor at a school and they have been told that they can never touch a kid, even if a kid falls over and gets hurt, they can't go and pick them up or anything.

When it gets like that, it has all gone too far.

 

There is truth in this statement, but I think the stunning, widespread cases of "creep" Priests is endemic to these particular circumstances. Under normal times the percentage of Priests who fondle children...or steal from the poor box...or who get hammered on the un-consecrated wine...is likely the same or less than that element of society who are pedophiles, thieves or drunks.

The sins of Priests are particulary staggering since, whether you are Catholic or not, they occupy a position of trust. Falling from trust is always a shattering event.

Remember, Priests are human too and are no less subject to the temptations of sin than anyone else. The degree to which these crimes are "swept under the carpet" will vary much from Diocese to Diocese...our local Phoenix Diocese an example to the extreme BAD side.

Any Priest who truly accepts his vows of Celibacy should actually be LESS prone to sexual sin, as the fleshly, carnal influences are gone from their life. It is hard to properly understand Celibacy from the outside looking in...but if you view it as some kind of sacrifice or abnormality then your understanding is flawed from the begining.

 

I now know who Hacken Slash is.... Mel Gibson!

 

and

etc

No offense guys, but... screw that. It *IS* the issue. I asked why things are the way they are, and that is a theory. If you don't want the discussion to turn into whether homosexuals are pedaphiles or not then don't turn it into one. That wasn't my point.

I didn't invent the theory, it was something I'd heard discussed. So I opened it up, I displayed it for discussion. You didn't see me ever say that I believe it or subscribe to that theory, its merely there.

Honestly I didn't expect the, "Oooh! He said the "G" word!!" response...

Grow up.

In any case, yes I can see someone running to the shelter of the church from a McCarthiest state, forced to put up an act for years and going over the edge, through lonliness or frustration or whatever.

Merely opening it up for discussion, not starting a witch-hunt.

 

Woah, no need to get so defensive. Joacquin and I were just responding to what seemed to be a suggestion that homosexuals were more likely to be paedophiles. This sounded (to me) like a fairly tenuous idea that was likely to raise the same response(and the same circular debates) as we have seen on other threads. OK - it was just a theory, and it wasn't your theory - but you posted it and our default assumption was that you supported it (well, Joacquin did ask if you were suggesting that).

I like Hacken Slash's idea that the % of offenders in the church may in fact be no different than the rest of the community, in which case, there would be nothing to explain.

 

I'm tempted to agree, however, if that survey is correct 4% seems like a HUGE percentage of all people who engage child molestation.

To me, if that were the case, you'd be hearing about rabbis, politicians and teachers much, much more often. I do realize it does happen, but if its just as much as the Catholic Church, then why do they get all the negative attention? It seems to me that there has to be something else at the root of the matter.

 

Maybe:
1) The Catholic Church is very big and centrally organised so therefore more visible and classifiable (maybe it's also 4% of Christian Scientists but we just don't hear about them)
2) Non-religious people like me get mixed up between different religions so just lump all clergy molestation claims as being 'priests'
3) We hear so much about abusive parents that we have blocked out hearing any more about it but it may actually be a huge huge problem as well
4) We just be more shocked when it turns out to be a priest.

It may be a combination of both these 'human perception' factors AND some underlying issue with the population of Catholic clerics.

 

I do think the number is as high, for every false accusation I am convinced that there is one that never got put forward which wasnt false.

I think it is a combination of celibacy, priest interacting with many children, tradition and that I can imagine many religious people who are inclined to be pedophiles seek out the church and become priests in a hope that it will purify them and remove their wicked urges. Sadly it doesnt work like that.

ArteChoke, I was asking you whether you did stood behind that statement cause it didnt rhyme with your regular ones, so I didnt accuse you of anything. And for the record, I was discussing the subject. I gave my opinion on it and my opinion is that pedophilia is a whole own sexual "denomination" just like homosexuality is one and heterosexuality is another.

 

Damn, my cover is blown.

I am actually Shralp and Chevalier also.

Speaking of Chev...he should be popping in on this thread any time now.

Under normal circumstances the percentage of "bad" Priests is the same as or less than the percentage of "bad" people. I think we are experiencing an elevated number of "bad" Priests now for the reasons I had previously cited, perhaps Arte's reason, and probably the false alarms and ambiguities cited by others. A combination of all effects thrown in together.

The thing is, you can be a Priest whether your "thing" is women, men, boys, sheep or NPC Henchmen...so long as FIRST you are Celibate and Chaste. Actual orientation matters not when you live a vow of Celibacy.

Unfortunately, in the Post Vatican II era of acceptance, openly (or nearly so) gay men were allowed into seminaries for fear of unfair exclusion. Now please...I am not equating Homosexuality with Pedophilia, it's just that the same openess that allowed gay men of questionable intent to live a vow of chastity to enter the Priesthood...allowed Pedophiles of questionable intent to live a vow of chastity in also.

I do not go against the changes of Vatican II. I am not a schismatic...but I can see how some of the good that came from the reforms brought some bad with it.

 

Well the theory goes like this...

The vast majority of abuse cases are against young boys...not young girls as is the norm in child molestation cases. Priests usually enter celebacy around the age of nineteen or even younger. For example, the priests whom are 70 years old or so became celebic at around the age of 14 or so. Thirteen to eighteen is a difficult age for young men. This is the time when sexuality is explored and defined. A rather large majority of young men whom are heterosexual as adults have homosexual experiments during that period. A trying-out stage if you will. The problem with the priests is that DURING this time...they stop having future sexual experiences. For the rest of their lives, their sexuality is defined by the experiences of their childhood.

In short, if you want priests to stop raping young boys...let them see just how amazing sex with a full grown woman can be. Some horizontal dancing with some #1 trim will recalibrate them right-quick.

 

Cool - can I pretend to be want to become a priest, but abandon the cloth just AFTER Thinker's "great sex enlightenment" stage?

This idea would do wonders for the numbers of prospective priests.

 

There are actually some married Priests, we have one in our Diocese...here's how it happens...

Most Catholics are Roman Rite, but there is also a large group who are Eastern (or Byzantine) rite. Romans and Easterns are in full fellowship with each other and you can attend Mass at either one, it's just that there are some outward differences in worship. Probably the biggest is that Eastern Rite priests can Marry.

Every now and then you get an Eastern Priest who decides to join the Roman Rite. If they are already married...they stay married (let no man put assunder) but are fully consecracted as Roman Catholic Priests

Kinda odd to think of a Priest walking in his front door and saying

"Honey, I'm home!"

(No off color remarks please )