The school systems didn’t band together to protect the abusers though, like the Catholic Church did. Of course there are going to be individual abusers/rapists spread out throughout the population but the church took it to a whole new level of evil.
Yeah, they hid it and like juggled the predators around which gave them fresh new victims. I absolutely blame the leadership of that system for doing that, but the idea that school teachers aren’t surpressed to hide their sexuality or who they are… it’s still not true, sadly. Hell women can get fired for wearing a perfectly legal bikini from jobs like that.
Eh… you ever hear about Penn State?
And Gym Jordan.
Yeah, they got a dude that helped cover it up elected to Congress.
Those are different schools. All the Catholic schools and churches are under the same leadership. A mass cover up of thousands of abuse and rape cases.
There’s no evidence that celibacy causes priests to become sexual predators, and thinking it does is usually nothing more than irrational discomfort with a cultural practice you happen to not understand.
Around 4% of priests in America between 1950 and 2002 were accused of sex abuse. That’s way too many, and there are many multivalent causes of that shameful statistic (the most egregious being the callous and self-serving tolerance and cover-up of misconduct on the part bishops and other church leaders). But given that 30% of sexual abuse takes place within families, you could make a stronger case that marriage or parenthood causes sexual abuse.
The church has a lot to be ashamed of, and surely it needs to continue to reform how it deals with abusers and with bishops who avoid accountability. But anyone who wants to opine about the church’s policies or practices should first familiarize themselves with the problem. Although it has been (and deserves to be) repeatedly in the news since the turn of the millennium, a huge percentage of alleged incidents are far in the past, predominantly in the 1960s and 1970s. Currently, incidents are more consistently reported and acted on and transparency is higher, and rather than there being more reported cases, there are far fewer cases. A Catholic school is now a far safer place for children than a public school. No one would ever say the problem is “solved,” but the crisis period is over–what needs to be fixed now is doing what can be done to make victims whole and punishing those who dodged responsibility and protected abusers and themselves over the years.
You do not require specific studies to know that suppressing important parts of yourself will cause various problems. That’s just common sense.
Obviously, it doesn’t automatically lead one to become a sexual predator, but it sureĺy doesn’t help prevent it, either.
I would rather saw my own leg off than putting a person I hold dear in the care of someone who acts against their own nature, for no reason other than transcendant bollocks.
Not necessarily because I would fear sexual assault, but because I don’t know people I would trust less than those who voluntarily deny themselves.
Now, I don’t have much of a problem with protestant priests. At least they can live a life with a significant other, with all the psychological advantages that entails, including getting the relief that everyone (non-asexual, anyway) needs.
And at least where I lived (Germany & Finland), that even includes the rainbow spectrum (in some parts, the church is more open about gay marriage than the state, go figure).
I’m not quite sure what you’re getting at here. What sexuality were they suppressing? A desire to molest children? If so, then they were already sexual predators. If not, then suppressing their sexuality didn’t cause them to want to molest children.
If it is the case that there is/was a higher rate of would-be child molesters in the priesthood, then you’ve got the causality backwards: they chose the priesthood to get access to kids, not became molesters because they were priests.
The church failure is the coverup, in particular the fact that the coverup so often meant simply transferring the pedophile to another post where they could repeat their crimes. That’s monstrous.
No more pontifical secret in cases of sex abuse. Speaking as a Roman Catholic: about time.
No kidding. Also, wtf? 15-17 didn’t count I guess.
The Pope also changed the Vatican’s definition of child pornography, increasing the age of the subject from 14 or under to 18 or under.
What is the term for “jailbait” in Ecclesiastical Latin?
cibus vincula
According to Google, anyway…
Yeah, that would make a pretty nice character name in some games, wouldn’t it?
I thought it was “boyus altarum” but my Latin’s a bit rusty.
To be halfway fair, there is still a pretty big chunk of the planet where getting married and starting a family at 16 is fairly routine.
Exactly. A worldwide organization like the Catholic Church has to be very careful not to alienate 1/4 of the membership by listing as naughty practices that some cultures think are just fine. Hell, just a 100 years ago in the rural US the average marriage age for women was pretty low if I remember correctly.
By catholic church standards, the current Pope’s initiative to clamp down on kiddie-abuse practices is happening with great zeal and furious speed.
I think this a fair assessment, but it’s worth noting most of the changes began before Francis. I think Francis’ biggest contribution (and the previous papacy’s biggest failure) is going to be dealing with bishops–either those who abused and got away with it because of their station, or those who allowed abuse to continue by covering it up. We’ve yet to see if he’ll be effective on that front.
The Papacy decided to bump the thread by doubling down on the whole “culture of child rape” thing.
A lone priest has a stupid idea (and should have no right to retain his congregation if that’s the way he thinks). But yeah, the papacy.
It’s an institutional issue. are you saying the church don’t have this policy? didn’t appoint him? aren’t responsible for disciplinary? aren’t responsible for a culture of paedophile denial and anti-choice?