Does being a Catholic priest in Ireland, make you more likely to be a paedophile?

DarkJager

Madam_X wrote: »

My uncle is a priest who sometimes minds his small great nieces/nephews. I must advise their parents to put a stop to it immediately, because the mere fact he's a priest indicates there's a strong chance he'll abuse them. The fact he minded me and my siblings/cousins when we were small, and he didn't abuse us, won't stand in the way of my hate-filled, nasty prejudice.

It's not prejudice, just caution. I'm sure most of those filthy bastards who abused children were all smiles and handshakes to society too. It's an organisation whose members cannot be trusted at all, regardless of whether you personally know them or not.

awec

In all seriousness, a life time of absolutely no sex is not normal. I don't think it's healthy to be removed from intimacy like that, and constant suppression of any sexual feelings.

The church needs to knock it's antiquated idea of celibate priests on the head.

I'm not sure if it makes you more likely, but those priests who did do it I have little doubt that their enforced celibacy had a huge part to play.

awec

Madam_X wrote: »

My uncle is a priest who sometimes minds his small great nieces/nephews. I must advise their parents to put a stop to it immediately, because the mere fact he's a priest indicates there's a strong chance he'll abuse them. The fact he minded me and my siblings/cousins when we were small, and he didn't abuse us, won't stand in the way of my hate-filled, nasty prejudice.

It never takes long before we hear this "hate-filled, nasty prejudice" crap when it comes to this subject.

God forbid anyone criticise an organisation like the church. Bigots! Bigots!

The church has this country sewn up, who else could get away with what it did and still have people defending it? It would be laughable if it weren't so serious.

AnonoBoy

Could it be that men who were paedophiles became priests because they knew it would be easier to prey on children in that position of trust?

So rather than stifled sexual urges resulting from celibacy turning them into paedophiles, it was a deliberate choice by them to enter the priesthood so they could abuse.

I'm not sure if that's true but it seems to me more likely than a good man being turned into an evil abuser through celibacy.

Royal Legend

DarkJager wrote: »

It's not prejudice, just caution. I'm sure most of those filthy bastards who abused children were all smiles and handshakes to society too. It's an organisation whose members cannot be trusted at all, regardless of whether you personally know them or not.

Thats a fairly ignorant statement to make.

Artful_Badger

Grayson wrote: »

There aren't a greater percentage of priests who abuse though. The number of priests who abused children is the same percentage per population as any other profession.

I find that hard to believe. The abuse in the catholic church is unparalleled in terms of the level of child abuse and it wasnt just a few priests. The cover up likely goes further than has ever been accounted for too with many many abuse victims never coming forward.

HondaSami

awec wrote: »

In all seriousness, a life time of absolutely no sex is not normal. I don't think it's healthy to be removed from intimacy like that, and constant suppression of any sexual feelings.

The church needs to knock it's antiquated idea of celibate priests on the head.

I'm not sure if it makes you more likely, but those priests who did do it I have little doubt that their enforced celibacy had a huge part to play.

It's only priests who choose to be celibate? there are many people who choose this life, shock horror married people abuse children as well.

DarkJager

Royal Legend wrote: »

Thats a fairly ignorant statement to make.

No it's not. This is a disgusting cult with a history of covering up and protecting child abusers we're talking about.

catallus

To say that abstaining from sex makes one more likely to be a pervert because it is "a suppression of natural urges" is a very small minded thing to say.

This idea that a man cannot be disciplined enough to be celibate without becoming a twisted abuser is bad enough. It is a sad capitulation to the very modern idea that a person cannot be whole without having sex.

I think the priests in Ireland and elsewhere have taken the brunt of the uncovering of the sexual abuse of children. It was so widespread in so many professions and communities and it was covered up in general by society, not least but not only in the church. Doctors and sports trainers and media professionals and the rest were part of the problem and the cover-up aswell.

The church has been used as whipping boy (not without some reason and justice) for the wrongdoings and shame of society at large.

awec

The apathetic nature of the population toward this issue is why there will never be justice done. So long as people are happy to defend the church and hide behind this convenient idea of labelling anyone a bigot who dares to criticise then nothing will change.

People just don't want to know the outcome of any proper investigation in to this, they'd much rather go down the route of what you don't know can't hurt you.

There will never be justice done in Ireland for those abused by the church, because the people don't want it. Much rather try and spin it to paint the church as some sort of victim, which to me is disgusting.

Madam_X

DarkJager wrote: »

It's not prejudice, just caution. I'm sure most of those filthy bastards who abused children were all smiles and handshakes to society too. It's an organisation whose members cannot be trusted at all, regardless of whether you personally know them or not.

Not dissimilar to "been a few cases of child abuse by swimming instructors too - I would therefore never leave a child alone to be trained by any swimming instructor ever..."

Grand. Enjoy blaming every priest for the actions of the minority if that's what you're into. Not like you'll be dealing with priests anyway - wonder would you actually say to a priest's face "Sorry, I don't want to leave my child to be minded by you". I wouldn't blame a priest (who isnt an abuser - silly that i feel compelled to qualify that) for being extremely upset/angry if they encountered something so horrible and hurtful.

One thing though: no need to put "good" in quote-marks - lots of them are good.
I would think the likelihood of abuse by clergy nowadays has dropped significantly due to priests being under the spotlight.

AnonoBoy

awec wrote: »

There will never be justice done in Ireland for those abused by the church, because the people don't want it. Much rather try and spin it to paint the church as some sort of victim, which to me is disgusting.

Where do you see people painting the church as a victim?

Personally I find the whole institution horrible because of the cover-ups and moving of abusers.

However I don't go along with the 'all priests are paedophiles' brigade because they're not.

I'm able to differentiate the individuals from the institution.

awec

AnonoBoy wrote: »

Where do you see people painting the church as a victim?

Read the post above mine.

awec

Madam_X wrote: »

Not dissimilar to "been a few cases of child abuse by swimming instructors too - I would therefore never leave a child alone to be trained by any swimming instructor ever..."

It's COMPLETELY different and you know it Madam_X, you are an intelligent person.

How many swimming pools do you know where there has been widespread abuse of children and then subsequently covered up?

Do you know of any where this went on for years?

Do swimming pools run schools in this country?

Terrible analogy.

Royal Legend

DarkJager wrote: »

No it's not. This is a disgusting cult with a history of covering up and protecting child abusers we're talking about.

Yes it was, it was aimed at the posters uncle, by labelling all Priests as peados, seriously, thats like saying all arabs are terrorists. I think there are good people in the Catholic church who are just as sickened as you are, people like Archbishop Martin are trying to change attitudes at the top and that imo is good to see.

AnonoBoy

awec wrote: »

Read the post above mine.

Fair cop guvnor.

crockholm

You could be celebate or not, but the one thing you would need is a sexualized image of children, if you dont have that idea of children you wouldnt molest them.

celebate priests have in the past been in clandestine relationships with men and women.

But it all goes back to whether a person see's children in a sexual sense or not, that is why I believe it would be a difficult thing to cure,as most people could not see children as sex objects, its the greatest taboo, therefore people must jump through many mental hoops to justify their evil actions.

Also,as an above poster mentioned, they would most likely enter the church in order to seek access to children.I saw a programme once which showed the pedophiles ring trying to gain access to things like dance schools etc, very deliberate and calculating.

Madam_X

awec wrote: »

It never takes long before we hear this "hate-filled, nasty prejudice" crap when it comes to this subject.

God forbid anyone criticise an organisation like the church. Bigots! Bigots!

The church has this country sewn up, who else could get away with what it did and still have people defending it? It would be laughable if it weren't so serious.

Misrepresent why don't ya. I'm an atheist and despise organised religion - but I don't like seeing innocent members of a group being blamed for what a minority, no matter how sizeable, of others in that group did.
Where did I object to criticism of the church? Oh yeh, I didn't. I objected to all priests being tarred with the paedo brush, which is not constructive criticism of the church, it's just hate-mongering.

Logical_Bear

S0crates wrote: »

Please explain in more detail why I am either trolling or an idiot,

here ye go

SOcrates wrote:

Perhaps not the correct forum so Mods please move this thread if necessary, I PM'ed an AH mod asking about it but got no reply.

I was recently having a discussion with a friend over whether being an ordained member of the Roman Catholic Church in Ireland made a man more likely to have become a convicted paedophile than if he, say for example, worked as a carpenter. It was my belief that if figures were available, statistics would show that there are many more convicted paedophiles (percentage-wise) who are priests than those from any other single profession.

My assumption is based on the fact that enforced celibacy makes a man more likely to turn to paedophilia. I believe this because the suppression of natural sexual urges for decades in a priest, is in my opinion unhealthy and makes the priest more likely to abuse children, as he cannot have open relations with adults and he believes he can swear a child to secrecy in order to fulfil his urges.

Am I making an unfair generalisation by imagining this? Are there any statistics that can provide an answer? What do you think?

15Pete

Logical_Bear wrote: »

here ye go

Oh aren't you clever!!!1! How does it feel to possess such dazzling wit???!?!! How we all wish we could be as funny and brainy as you are!!

Please state explicitly, reinforced by relevant factual evidence where necessary, which parts of my post are wrong and then, how someone stating their opinion on a matter which they admit they know little of -is automatically an idiot. Logically if you understand what that actually means?

Artful_Badger

Madam_X wrote: »

Misrepresent why don't ya. I'm an atheist and despise organised religion - but I don't like seeing innocent members of a group being blamed for what a minority, no matter how sizeable, of others in that group did.
Where did I object to criticism of the church? Oh yeh, I didn't. I objected to all priests being tarred with the paedo brush, which is not constructive criticism of the church, it's just hate-mongering.

Nobody is blaming anyone for anything they didnt do. The issue is the effect of suppressing sexual urges and how that may manifest itself as a tendency to use children to satisfy those urges. You simply cannot deny the scale of child abuse in the church nor can you discount the possible influence abstaining from sex may have had on the people who did it.

Its not in any way shape or form hate-mongering against the church or priests. Its a valid topic for discussion. As members of the RCC all priests must accept what that organisation and a lot of its members did and that it will reflect on their position. If they dont want to accept it then they shouldnt be members of an organisation like the RCC.

Mr Benevolent

S0crates wrote: »

Oh aren't you clever!!!1! How does it feel to possess such dazzling wit???!?!! How we all wish we could be as funny and brainy as you are!!

Please state explicitly, reinforced by relevant factual evidence where necessary, which parts of my post are wrong and then, how someone stating their opinion on a matter which they admit they know little of -is automatically an idiot. Logically if you understand what that actually means?

You're not really seeing the point of Socratic discussion, are you?

My assumption is based on the fact that enforced celibacy makes a man more likely to turn to paedophilia.

Please back this fact up with evidence. I hope you have plenty, because you've based your assumption on it.

Airitech

I can't seem to find any useful statistics about rates of offending in Ireland but I did find this on the US:

http://www.psychwww.com/psyrelig/plante.html and

http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2010/04/07/mean-men.html.

Both give the rate of offending among Catholic priests around 4%. The first study suggests this is around half the rate of the general male population in the US. They contend that rates of offending are in line with or lower than average rates.

They both seem to be from Catholic colleges, but they appear to be impartial.

From Wikipedia:
In a statement read out by Archbishop Silvano Maria Tomasi in September 2009, the Holy See stated "We know now that in the last 50 years somewhere between 1.5% and 5% of the Catholic clergy has been involved in sexual abuse cases", adding that this figure was comparable with that of other groups and denominations.[3]

A Perspective on Clergy Sexual Abuse by Catholic Dr. Thomas Plante of the Catholic Santa Clara University and volunteer clinical associate professor at Stanford University states that "approximately 4% of priests during the past half century (and mostly in the 1960s and 1970s) have had a sexual experience with a minor" which "is consistent with male clergy from other religious traditions and is significantly lower than the general adult male population which may double these numbers".[4][5] Additionally, according to an article written by a journalist and published in Newsweek magazine, the figure in the Catholic Church is similar to that in the rest of the adult population.[6] The article is based upon a study done by John Jay College which reported the approximately 4% of clergy have abused...was compiled solely from numbers provided by Catholic Bishops, leaders of the same institution which paid John Jay College to do the study[citation needed].

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Catholic_sex_abuse_cases_by_country#section_1

gallag

Airitech wrote: »

I can't seem to find any useful statistics about rates of offending in Ireland but I did find this on the US:

http://www.psychwww.com/psyrelig/plante.html and

http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2010/04/07/mean-men.html.

Both give the rate of offending among Catholic priests around 4%. The first study suggests this is around half the rate of the general male population in the US. They contend that rates of offending are in line with or lower than average rates.

They both seem to be from Catholic colleges, but they appear to be impartial.

From Wikipedia:
In a statement read out by Archbishop Silvano Maria Tomasi in September 2009, the Holy See stated "We know now that in the last 50 years somewhere between 1.5% and 5% of the Catholic clergy has been involved in sexual abuse cases", adding that this figure was comparable with that of other groups and denominations.[3]

A Perspective on Clergy Sexual Abuse by Catholic Dr. Thomas Plante of the Catholic Santa Clara University and volunteer clinical associate professor at Stanford University states that "approximately 4% of priests during the past half century (and mostly in the 1960s and 1970s) have had a sexual experience with a minor" which "is consistent with male clergy from other religious traditions and is significantly lower than the general adult male population which may double these numbers".[4][5] Additionally, according to an article written by a journalist and published in Newsweek magazine, the figure in the Catholic Church is similar to that in the rest of the adult population.[6] The article is based upon a study done by John Jay College which reported the approximately 4% of clergy have abused...was compiled solely from numbers provided by Catholic Bishops, leaders of the same institution which paid John Jay College to do the study[citation needed].

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Catholic_sex_abuse_cases_by_country#section_1

Nonsense, no way on avg 8% American men are child molesters??? Even 4% of priests sounds worryingly high.

Icemancometh

I don't think it does. I imagine it makes it more likely that the victim will come forward however (I think it would be harder to accuse, say, your father or uncle of abuse, than a priest). I did some googling to see if there is any figures, and I couldn't find anything definitive. This Newsweek article would seem to suggest that being a Catholic priest doesn't increase the chance of a person being a paedophile.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2010/04/07/mean-men.html

To my mind, the crime of the institutional church (as opposed to individual priests) was the protection of those priests who were abusers. Overall, I'd imagine that paedophile priests abused more children than other paedophiles, partly because of this protection, and partly due to access to more children, particularly vulnerable ones.

Artful_Badger

Airitech wrote: »

I can't seem to find any useful statistics about rates of offending in Ireland but I did find this on the US:

http://www.psychwww.com/psyrelig/plante.html and

http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2010/04/07/mean-men.html.

Both give the rate of offending among Catholic priests around 4%. The first study suggests this is around half the rate of the general male population in the US. They contend that rates of offending are in line with or lower than average rates.

They both seem to be from Catholic colleges, but they appear to be impartial.

From Wikipedia:
In a statement read out by Archbishop Silvano Maria Tomasi in September 2009, the Holy See stated "We know now that in the last 50 years somewhere between 1.5% and 5% of the Catholic clergy has been involved in sexual abuse cases", adding that this figure was comparable with that of other groups and denominations.[3]

A Perspective on Clergy Sexual Abuse by Catholic Dr. Thomas Plante of the Catholic Santa Clara University and volunteer clinical associate professor at Stanford University states that "approximately 4% of priests during the past half century (and mostly in the 1960s and 1970s) have had a sexual experience with a minor" which "is consistent with male clergy from other religious traditions and is significantly lower than the general adult male population which may double these numbers".[4][5] Additionally, according to an article written by a journalist and published in Newsweek magazine, the figure in the Catholic Church is similar to that in the rest of the adult population.[6] The article is based upon a study done by John Jay College which reported the approximately 4% of clergy have abused...was compiled solely from numbers provided by Catholic Bishops, leaders of the same institution which paid John Jay College to do the study[citation needed].

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Catholic_sex_abuse_cases_by_country#section_1

institution which paid John Jay College to do the study[/B][/QUOTE]

There's the trouble with that.

Icemancometh

gallag wrote: »

Nonsense, no way on avg 8% American men are child molesters??? Even 4% of priests sounds worryingly high.

Well, a minor could be a 17 year old, so it depends how you define it. I'm not surprised at the numbers though.

Logical_Bear

S0crates wrote: »

Please state explicitly, reinforced by relevant factual evidence where necessary, which parts of my post are wrong and then, how someone stating their opinion on a matter which they admit they know little of -is automatically an idiot. Logically if you understand what that actually means?

you want me to show you how to use google?:eek:

your OP is evidence of you either being an idiot or a troll,thats why i quoted it in reply to your query

Airitech

Artful_Badger wrote: »

institution which paid John Jay College to do the study[/B]

There's the trouble with that.[/quote]

Citation needed though, it's an uncited comment on Wikipedia. The second article has more info on why the study was commissioned.

The first study seems to come to the same conclusions though so I give it the benefit of the doubt.

It does seem to be difficult to get accurate figures on this subject though.

Airitech

gallag wrote: »

Nonsense, no way on avg 8% American men are child molesters??? Even 4% of priests sounds worryingly high.

Seems like 8% is considered a conservative estimate. This is from the second article I quoted:

Experts disagree on the rate of sexual abuse among the general American male population, but Allen says a conservative estimate is one in 10. Margaret Leland Smith, a researcher at the John Jay College of Criminal Justice, says her review of the numbers indicates it's closer to one in 5. But in either case, the rate of abuse by Catholic priests is not higher than these national estimates