sargentlard, you seem to fail to consider that these priests choose no to have sex. I might consider what you're saying to have real bearing on the situation if it were a forced issue, but the men involved in taking up the life of priesthood willingly accept that they will not be having sex ever in their life. It is premeditated, and if a person feels that their sexual drive is strong, then they shouldn't consider priesthood as a vocation. This is why I bring up the point that most of these cases are homosexual cases. It is because these men, being homosexual, feel that they priesthood is their only option, whether they have strong sexuality or otherwise. These men are getting into the priesthood for the wrong reason, and as a result they are unable to bear the strain of not having a proper sexual outlet. Men who are truly called to the priesthood are those kind who will be able to control their sexuality throughout their celibate life. Celibacy has nothing to do with it. It is simply the wrong men choosing a vocation that isn't right for them, most likely because they feel they have no other alternative.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
catholic sex offending priests
- Thread starter robtex
- Start date
beyondtimeandspace said:sargentlard, you seem to fail to consider that these priests choose no to have sex. I might consider what you're saying to have real bearing on the situation if it were a forced issue, but the men involved in taking up the life of priesthood willingly accept that they will not be having sex ever in their life. It is premeditated, and if a person feels that their sexual drive is strong, then they shouldn't consider priesthood as a vocation. This is why I bring up the point that most of these cases are homosexual cases. It is because these men, being homosexual, feel that they priesthood is their only option, whether they have strong sexuality or otherwise. These men are getting into the priesthood for the wrong reason, and as a result they are unable to bear the strain of not having a proper sexual outlet. Men who are truly called to the priesthood are those kind who will be able to control their sexuality throughout their celibate life. Celibacy has nothing to do with it. It is simply the wrong men choosing a vocation that isn't right for them, most likely because they feel they have no other alternative.
Interesting...I never approached it from that angle.
Does this happen a lot? That these men were homosexual to begin with? Doesn't the Chruch deny homosexuality of any kind? I mean why choose an institution which denies one's choice of life?
Even if they are homosexuals then that doesn't explain the involvement of peadophilia. Where does that come from?
I Am F_AQ2
Registered Senior Member
path
I think there is something seriously wrong with the idea that a man of the clergy must be celibate I mean this is what we are biologically made to do.
I honestly have to agree with this. If you truly think about it there are 2 base motive for just about anything: procreation and survival. If you take a persons ability to procreate they are going to have an adverse reactions to that, whether voluntary or not. How are they supposed to what they will feel like 20 years from when they sign up? What it will be like seeing nude commercials that show on TV every day, walking down the street past strip clubs or just simply meeting a nice girl and getting harmless, natural, and completely normal feelings yet not having the ability to act on them. That would really throw me for a loop!
know and help the clergy suppress it until there is a next victim and a next than they too are moral (though not legally I guess) responsible for the sex offender/priests actions.
I don’t actually think that is true. I believe that they are legally responsible as an accomplice simply because they failed to report the abuse. Then again it would have to be proven not to mention the preists seem to be legally immune anyway.
daphneeee
And btw..when we talk about these crimes....we should generally talk about all churches. These phenomena do not only happen in catholic churches so please be reasonable!
No they don’t but it is more prevalent especially here in USA because of the prevalence of Catholicism. This also seems a good time to point out that without the structure of the catholic clergy or the abstinence rules there does not seem to be as large a problem with the other forms of Christianity. Those religions are just as popular here but don’t have the same magnitude of molestation cases. If the abstinence is not part of the problem then what is the defining difference that is harassing the Catholics?
okinrus
In the strict sense the church is not the law system. If a priest should not work with children, then it's the state's responsibility to make sure. Because it is the state's responsibiliity, the state should have been checking up on these people, making sure they did not work with children. Hence, it's certainly the state's failing, because if they did not think that these people should be working with children, they should have done checks on the pedophiles, and if they did not think these people should be in the community, then they should have put them in a insane asylum or prison.
The church is the institution that is putting these priests in this situation and also attempting to cover up the allegations. When this whole thing started some years back I remember there was a priest that was moved to 3 different churches in order to doge the reports that molested children were giving to the church. While all the cases are not as bad there are some and more than likely there are cases like this we will not ever know about. It is the states responsibility to discover these cases but you cannot fault them completely. MUCH of the blame relies squarely on the shoulders of the church. However, I am VERY displeased that these sex offenders have not been persued with the fullest extent the law will allow. These people are in a position of power and responsibility that requires a higher standard and such abuse of their position should be punished as strongly as possible.
beyondtimeandspace
While these priests may have desecrated both the priestly integrity and dignity, the Church would not like to see it further desecrated, which will UNDOUBTEDLY occur if the priest were to be sent to public prisons. You may not consider this to be a sufficient answer, but this is because you do not believe as Catholics believe.
Whether I believe as Catholics do or not is not the point. The law is not supposed to be biased. It obviously is since the pedophiles are not being perused like they should. Furthermore, putting sick pedophiles in prison no matter their previous affiliation to the church does not desecrate anything. Supporting them, not perusing them and ultimately covering for them desecrates everything.
I think there is something seriously wrong with the idea that a man of the clergy must be celibate I mean this is what we are biologically made to do.
I honestly have to agree with this. If you truly think about it there are 2 base motive for just about anything: procreation and survival. If you take a persons ability to procreate they are going to have an adverse reactions to that, whether voluntary or not. How are they supposed to what they will feel like 20 years from when they sign up? What it will be like seeing nude commercials that show on TV every day, walking down the street past strip clubs or just simply meeting a nice girl and getting harmless, natural, and completely normal feelings yet not having the ability to act on them. That would really throw me for a loop!
know and help the clergy suppress it until there is a next victim and a next than they too are moral (though not legally I guess) responsible for the sex offender/priests actions.
I don’t actually think that is true. I believe that they are legally responsible as an accomplice simply because they failed to report the abuse. Then again it would have to be proven not to mention the preists seem to be legally immune anyway.
daphneeee
And btw..when we talk about these crimes....we should generally talk about all churches. These phenomena do not only happen in catholic churches so please be reasonable!
No they don’t but it is more prevalent especially here in USA because of the prevalence of Catholicism. This also seems a good time to point out that without the structure of the catholic clergy or the abstinence rules there does not seem to be as large a problem with the other forms of Christianity. Those religions are just as popular here but don’t have the same magnitude of molestation cases. If the abstinence is not part of the problem then what is the defining difference that is harassing the Catholics?
okinrus
In the strict sense the church is not the law system. If a priest should not work with children, then it's the state's responsibility to make sure. Because it is the state's responsibiliity, the state should have been checking up on these people, making sure they did not work with children. Hence, it's certainly the state's failing, because if they did not think that these people should be working with children, they should have done checks on the pedophiles, and if they did not think these people should be in the community, then they should have put them in a insane asylum or prison.
The church is the institution that is putting these priests in this situation and also attempting to cover up the allegations. When this whole thing started some years back I remember there was a priest that was moved to 3 different churches in order to doge the reports that molested children were giving to the church. While all the cases are not as bad there are some and more than likely there are cases like this we will not ever know about. It is the states responsibility to discover these cases but you cannot fault them completely. MUCH of the blame relies squarely on the shoulders of the church. However, I am VERY displeased that these sex offenders have not been persued with the fullest extent the law will allow. These people are in a position of power and responsibility that requires a higher standard and such abuse of their position should be punished as strongly as possible.
beyondtimeandspace
While these priests may have desecrated both the priestly integrity and dignity, the Church would not like to see it further desecrated, which will UNDOUBTEDLY occur if the priest were to be sent to public prisons. You may not consider this to be a sufficient answer, but this is because you do not believe as Catholics believe.
Whether I believe as Catholics do or not is not the point. The law is not supposed to be biased. It obviously is since the pedophiles are not being perused like they should. Furthermore, putting sick pedophiles in prison no matter their previous affiliation to the church does not desecrate anything. Supporting them, not perusing them and ultimately covering for them desecrates everything.
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm...u=/ap/20040927/ap_on_re_us/springfield_bishop
latest catholic sex offender to make the news here in the states:
yahoo news post:
Bishop Indicted on Child Rape Charges
1 hour, 45 minutes ago
Add U.S. National - AP to My Yahoo!
By ADAM GORLICK, Associated Press Writer
SPRINGFIELD, Mass. - Bishop Thomas Dupre, the former head of the Springfield Diocese, was indicted on child rape charges, accused of molesting two boys in the 1970s, the county prosecutor said Monday.
Photo
AP Photo
He becomes the first Roman Catholic prelate indicted in the sex abuse scandal within the American church.
Dupre, 70, resigned Feb. 11 after nine years as head of the diocese, one day after The Republican newspaper of Springfield confronted him with allegations he abused two boys while he was a parish priest. Dupre cited health reasons for his departure. He retains the title of bishop.
The indictment was handed up Friday by a grand jury but unsealed Monday, said Hampden County District Attorney William Bennett.
Dupre's lawyer, Michael Jennings, did not immediately return a call for comment. Mark Dupont, a spokesman for the Diocese of Springfield, said Dupre's successor, Bishop Timothy McDonnell, would have no immediate comment.
McDonnell took over the diocese in April with a promise to heal the wounds inflicted by the sex abuse scandal. Since McDonnell's installation, the diocese has reached a $7 million settlement with 46 people who say they were abused by priests.
There have been at least a dozen grand jury investigations involving how bishops dealt with abuse claims, and four other U.S. bishops have resigned after being accused of sexual misconduct.
Dupre's alleged victims, who also are suing the cleric and the diocese, have said Dupre sexually abused them for years and asked them to keep quiet about the abuse when he was made auxiliary bishop in 1990. He became bishop in 1995.
When he announced he was bringing the case to a grand jury, Bennett initially said the statute of limitations on the alleged abuse had likely expired. But Bennett later said charges were possible because Dupre allegedly tried to conceal the abuse recently.
After his retirement, Dupre went to St. Luke Institute, a private Catholic psychiatric hospital in Maryland where the Boston Archdiocese sent many priests for treatment after sexual abuse allegations were made against them. The institute treats priests with emotional, behavioral and psychological problems.
Dupre's whereabouts Monday were not immediately known.
One of the men, who immigrated to America in 1975, said the abuse began when he was 12 after his family was befriended by Dupre. The man claimed the abuse lasted until he began dating a girl in high school.
Dupre allegedly took him on out-of-state trips and to Canada, and bought pornography with the boy in Connecticut. Dupre is then accused of starting to abuse the other boy. The second victim says he was abused until he was about 20.
Four other U.S. bishops have resigned after being accused directly of sexual misconduct since the scandal erupted in Boston in early 2002.
Milwaukee Archbishop Rembert Weakland asked the Vatican (news - web sites) to speed up his retirement after it was learned that the archdiocese paid a $450,000 settlement to a man who said Weakland sexually assaulted him. Bishop J. Kendrick Williams of Lexington, Ky., resigned after he was accused of abusing two minors decades ago — allegations he denied. Bishop Anthony O'Connell of Palm Beach, Fla., quit after admitting he repeatedly abused a student at a Missouri seminary he led. Auxiliary Bishop James McCarthy of New York, who stepped down after admitting to affairs with women.
Roderick MacLeish, the lawyer representing the two men who accuse Dupre, has said one of his clients met with Dupre in December, and said he never wanted sexual relations with him. MacLeish said Dupre gave an unemotional apology, and told his client he wanted to remain friends.
The other client, who is gay, came forward with his claims after hearing Dupre speak out against the legalization of same-sex marriage.
MacLeish did not immediately return a call seeking comment on Monday.
latest catholic sex offender to make the news here in the states:
yahoo news post:
Bishop Indicted on Child Rape Charges
1 hour, 45 minutes ago
Add U.S. National - AP to My Yahoo!
By ADAM GORLICK, Associated Press Writer
SPRINGFIELD, Mass. - Bishop Thomas Dupre, the former head of the Springfield Diocese, was indicted on child rape charges, accused of molesting two boys in the 1970s, the county prosecutor said Monday.
Photo
AP Photo
He becomes the first Roman Catholic prelate indicted in the sex abuse scandal within the American church.
Dupre, 70, resigned Feb. 11 after nine years as head of the diocese, one day after The Republican newspaper of Springfield confronted him with allegations he abused two boys while he was a parish priest. Dupre cited health reasons for his departure. He retains the title of bishop.
The indictment was handed up Friday by a grand jury but unsealed Monday, said Hampden County District Attorney William Bennett.
Dupre's lawyer, Michael Jennings, did not immediately return a call for comment. Mark Dupont, a spokesman for the Diocese of Springfield, said Dupre's successor, Bishop Timothy McDonnell, would have no immediate comment.
McDonnell took over the diocese in April with a promise to heal the wounds inflicted by the sex abuse scandal. Since McDonnell's installation, the diocese has reached a $7 million settlement with 46 people who say they were abused by priests.
There have been at least a dozen grand jury investigations involving how bishops dealt with abuse claims, and four other U.S. bishops have resigned after being accused of sexual misconduct.
Dupre's alleged victims, who also are suing the cleric and the diocese, have said Dupre sexually abused them for years and asked them to keep quiet about the abuse when he was made auxiliary bishop in 1990. He became bishop in 1995.
When he announced he was bringing the case to a grand jury, Bennett initially said the statute of limitations on the alleged abuse had likely expired. But Bennett later said charges were possible because Dupre allegedly tried to conceal the abuse recently.
After his retirement, Dupre went to St. Luke Institute, a private Catholic psychiatric hospital in Maryland where the Boston Archdiocese sent many priests for treatment after sexual abuse allegations were made against them. The institute treats priests with emotional, behavioral and psychological problems.
Dupre's whereabouts Monday were not immediately known.
One of the men, who immigrated to America in 1975, said the abuse began when he was 12 after his family was befriended by Dupre. The man claimed the abuse lasted until he began dating a girl in high school.
Dupre allegedly took him on out-of-state trips and to Canada, and bought pornography with the boy in Connecticut. Dupre is then accused of starting to abuse the other boy. The second victim says he was abused until he was about 20.
Four other U.S. bishops have resigned after being accused directly of sexual misconduct since the scandal erupted in Boston in early 2002.
Milwaukee Archbishop Rembert Weakland asked the Vatican (news - web sites) to speed up his retirement after it was learned that the archdiocese paid a $450,000 settlement to a man who said Weakland sexually assaulted him. Bishop J. Kendrick Williams of Lexington, Ky., resigned after he was accused of abusing two minors decades ago — allegations he denied. Bishop Anthony O'Connell of Palm Beach, Fla., quit after admitting he repeatedly abused a student at a Missouri seminary he led. Auxiliary Bishop James McCarthy of New York, who stepped down after admitting to affairs with women.
Roderick MacLeish, the lawyer representing the two men who accuse Dupre, has said one of his clients met with Dupre in December, and said he never wanted sexual relations with him. MacLeish said Dupre gave an unemotional apology, and told his client he wanted to remain friends.
The other client, who is gay, came forward with his claims after hearing Dupre speak out against the legalization of same-sex marriage.
MacLeish did not immediately return a call seeking comment on Monday.