Top Story

Young Journalists Use Facebook Ads to Reach Prospective Employers

1.	AP stories are back on Google News again 7:21 PM Feb. 9, 2010
2.	Foursquare partners with New York Times for Olympics 4:39 PM Feb. 9, 2010
3.	Glitches, Delays Disrupt Plans for Virtual Border Fence 11:33 AM Feb. 9, 2010
4.	Young Journalists Use Facebook Ads to Reach Prospective Employers 5:20 AM Feb. 9, 2010
5.	What Great Bosses Know about 'No Surprises' 4:20 PM Feb. 8, 2010
More Recent Articles

Most E-mailed

Article Feedback

View all Abuse Tracker feedback

Priest files show limits of celibacy
(Read the Article)
Post Feedback | Feedback Guidelines | Report Feedback Abuse

Sorting options:	most recent	\| author
Display options:	expand all	\| collapse all

Page 1 of 1

Celibacy is a crock
Posted by John Sacco 3/12/2003 6:35:20 PM

I can really respect all of the opinions here on this issue with exception of Annette, who will never see past the wool in front of her eyes.

Let us not forget that Celibacy was instilled only to accumulate property and money, so the argument really has little merit. Manmade rules to control money and more power.

The harm done is obvious to victims of clergy sexual abuse, only when they reach the adult ages and then some, about the real harm that was done to their spirit. A victim has but one life to live and it has been forever tarnished by the Institution that is above the laws of the land. It is about to be argued in the courts if one is capable of withstanding the onslaught from the Church Collusion with the Judicial System and the victims own lawyers who �Sell them out� from the deep cash cow of the church�s unaccountable tax evasion. Only the few that have reached past the corruption can attest to the futility that is before them. The healing will never end and prayers alone will never be enough. This church will never do enough to repair the damages done to victims because their motto is �Maximizing Profits�.

There is an average of about 200 victims for the average pedophile, not including ephebophiles, if you want to make the distinction. Just multiply those Pedo numbers by at least 1500 priests presently with allegations in the news and you will see that there are so many victims that have not been healed by the Church that professes to be the �Moral Fabric of Society and the Protectors of its Children�. What a sham that is when they can�t have on their radar screen one iota of an idea of how to help victims. They reach out where, when, how and when? Healing mass and prayer is their answer. Another day of worship for the men that are involved in the big scam is not comforting to one single victim.

Whose ax is being gored?
Posted by Paul Trouve 3/12/2003 2:42:21 PM

I'm not surprised that someone would jump on that comment but it needs to be taken in context. I specifically referred to sexually active 15 year olds. Do all "victims" fit this description?

I've been accused of being in different centuries (12th, 14th, 16th) but I know what's (unfortunately) going on in this society.

And if I know that there are teenagers out there who actually enjoy having sex w/ adults then why are you more modern & enlightened people so shocked at what I say?

According to an article I read in TNYT on this issue, there are at least a certain number of people who would never reveal their priest-lovers. Not everyone who has had illicit sex w/ an adult as an adolescent considers himself a victim or a survivor.

The only honest way to address this issue is to lay all the cards on the table, not to withhold some cards based on a form of "victim/survivor" political correctness.

"...especially when the kid keeps coming back to the cookie jar for more." !!
Posted by Tom Barnes 3/12/2003 1:22:36 PM

Yikes !

This comment is a very good example of the canyon-wide divide between those of us who have been abused sexually and physically by Religious and clergy and those who have not....I could not have made the point more clear myself.

I guess that I can understand the total lack of understanding here on the part of someone who is in pain because the Church is under attack by the abused. Something S/he loves is being dragged through the proverbial mud. And I can even understand an abuser crying out (in one way or another) for understanding from all of us....even the ever-present arguements that seem to split hairs over and over, ad infinitum, in the traditional way of Vaticani. But I think it is telling that someone who has followed this story closely for over a year and half would describe a 15 year old boy sexually abused by a clergyman many times over as 'asking to more'. THIS is my point entirely; there really is no gut-level understanding of this thing unless one has actually been traumatized by it. It is no one's fault, it is just a fact of life. Paul, you have done us all a great service by your comment. You cannot possibly know how deeply that comment affects the abused.

I am seriously considering forming a Religious Society of Christians (all Christian denominations) based on Taize Le principles that has ONLY the abused as members. Our spiritual Father might possibly be John of the Cross, the Carmelite who was imprisoned and beaten by his superiors for many years. We would do many things, but one of our
primary life-missions would be prayer for the abusive and abusers in the clergy in the Christian Church. Perhaps the Spirit of God would move us to Reform this Church that is so out-of-touch that a comment like the "cookie jar" comment would come so easily to the educated and informed. I am beyond shock. I am deeply sad.

God bless all of you.

no such word?
Posted by Paul Trouve 3/12/2003 11:24:48 AM

s: Well, all I can say is excuse my ignorance! I came across the infamous "e" term about 10 or 12 years ago when this crisis actually first surfaced in the American Catholic Church. And I followed what Cardinal Bernardin did to address this issue (to his credit) in Chicago. I'm no psychologist so I guess I can be forgiven for thinking that a term I came across in more than one psychology journal didn't really exist. And actually if you go to the website for the USCC, you can find all of these different orientations set out in one article.

Now I know you and others want to say that there is no difference if an errant priest has sexual contact w/ a 6 year old or a 15 year old. But in today's society, there are 15 year old boys and girls who are not sexually innocent. Kids that age can receive condoms from clinics in their local high school in many cases and other places like Planned Parenthood. The average 6 year old would not be able to do this. That is one distinction. Another is that the average 15 year old boy who murders or rapes will generally be tried as an adult. The average 6 year old would not be able to do this. So I think there is a distinction to be drawn between a 6 year old and a 15 year old.

I'm not excusing a Catholic priest who breaks his vows and has sex w/ anyone. But I do believe that there is a gradation in his sin (and sometimes a crime) based upon the age of his sexual contact. It's mortally sinful (objectively speaking - the 3 conditions of will need be present)
in any scenario but the gravity of the sin
will vary w/ the age of person involved w/ the priest.

Now when the sexual contact is a child under 12, this is the worst of the sexual sins BUT it is also a sin of violence (Fifth Commandment). And sins of violence are always worse than non-violent sexual sins. I do not believe that the sin of violence applies to a sexually active teenager of at least 15, especially when the kid keeps coming back to the cookie jar for more!

A letter to the Future
Posted by s philipp 3/12/2003 10:41:15 AM

Paul, we are confused. Is your argument with survivors or w/the Church as it currently exists? Survivors are sick but the Church is sicker?

There is no such thing as "ephebophilla" --it is an invention of pro-pedophile "treatment" programs & consultants, several of whom have been hired by the Church who seem to feel that it is more acceptable to abuse a 13 yr-old than a 6 yr-old. That is a distinction that only those w/an excessive concern for the abuser would make--neither the law nor a victim would ever make that distinction.

Who cares about the "orientation" or preferences of child abusers? Studies & crime reports indicate that, married, "celibate," or neither, almost all child sexual abuse of both boys & girls is committed by straight males.

The horrors reported from Ireland, Quebec, Anglo-Canada, & Australia would indicate that if anything, the pre-Vatican II Church was often a horror chamber, especially for orphans & "illegitimate" children. Is that what you want to return to?

I know many other survivors, from Trinentine monks to those who have left the Church of their abuse altogether & they all agree that they want justice & they want it now, though it appears that the way we will get it is to take it.

No one in the future will be able to say that they didn't know or that it didn't happen or that it didn't hurt that much. Those individuals & institutions who betray the trust of a child deserve the strongest sanctions a society can take. We are sending a message to the future, "Here, in this place and at this time, we are saying that these things were done to us. However painful it is, we will tell the full story. We demand and will get a full accounting and acceptance of responsibility by those who did this. We are especially concerned withpersons and institutions who by either omission or commission minimized and covered up these crimes. Evil prevailed because these good people did nothing."

return to a discipline & order
Posted by Paul Trouve 3/11/2003 4:30:15 PM

The history of the Church is one of sinners & saints where celibacy was observed more in the breach than in fact in many eras. But the period of time which followed the Council of Trent was one of remarkable stability. This was broken by Vatican II. Children were safe w/ priests in the Tridentine Church in a way that many unfortunately have not been in the present Conciliar Church.

If the issue here is child safety, then the answer, it seems to me, is to return to a Church of discipline, faith, virtue, law, order & discipline.

There probably will always be a small percentage of pedophiles who manage to get into the priesthood but they will not have the cover of what Andrew Greeley has referred to as the lavendar rectories.

The epidemic of ephebiophilia that has plagued the Church since the Council is the result of admitting too many homosexuals into the priesthood, specifically those who have neither the ability nor the inclination to live a chaste life. And I'm not referring to priests who may have a homosexual orientation, yet live good and holy lives. I'm sure there are many priests who are in this category.

AN UNHOLY TROIKA OF HOMOSEXUALS, FEMINISTS AND LIBERALS ?
Posted by Tom Barnes 3/11/2003 1:39:17 PM

Wow ! And I thought I was dramatic !

Celibacy is a very different and difficult concept for the modern Occidental mind to grasp I would think....getting connected to God through self-denial and discipline is counter-intuitive to all of our consumer minded and capitalist grounded paradigms in the West....but MANY religions have done this sort of thing throughout the Ages and Christianity is only one of them. What I think differs with us in the West is the idea of impermanence and less-than-perfect adherance. It somehow drives us bonkers....as Americans we find it incomprehensible to recieve only "half a loaf" of celibacy in our Religious....it's a cultural thing. I think Europeans are stunned by our naivete on this issue.

Vatican II did not bring weak celibates into the Church, it only gave the laity the opportunity to finally see these people for what they are....people, with all of their blemishes and warts. ANY serious reading of Church history going all the way back to the beginning will be replete with stories of weak flesh being constantly regimented by disciplined spirit. Names like Augustine of Hippo, Ignatious Loyolla and various steadfast medieval popes will testify to the weakness of the flesh in a human lifetime...that is off the point. Vatican II did not create this problem....in fact, Vatican II made it possible to finally SEE this problem with clear and human vision.

I strongly suspect that celibacy has always attracted the psycho-sexually twisted individual along with the truly called. There is probably no way to cull them out except by the Fire of a life lived in the Spirit....or without Him. The terrible molestations and rapes of our day are no different than those of a thousand years ago....except that NOW we are empowered to CHANGE the Church as never before. And THAT is the blessing that comes from this horror. THIS time, the laity can use this evil pain and suffering to bring Christ back into the clergy. Amen.

celibacy is obligatory
Posted by Paul Trouve 3/11/2003 11:36:53 AM

Priests are human beings like everyone else and therefore they too are sinners. "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone (at an errant priest)".

But it must be seen how deeply they fall into serious sin when they break their oath of celibacy. Not all priests have a sacred vow of chastity, only those who belong to religious orders do. But every priest (diocesan & religious) makes a sacred promise to his bishop at the time of ordination to live a life a perfect continence.

And when they actually have sex w/ kids they violate this vow in an especially egregious way. According to Christ himself, it would be better for an adult who does such a thing to have a millstone tied to his neck and to be thrown into the sea.

Obviously a life of celibacy is not for everyone. The Church teaches that those TRULY called to the religious or priestly life are given a special charism or gift of celibacy from God. They live this life w/ joy.

The problem in the Church today, after the Council which led to the abuse problem by priests is that many false vocations came into the seminaries. There they were taught false doctrine by dissenters. They had a lax environment in seminary training as well. In some seminaries, homosexuals literally took over, arm in arm w/ feminists who actually ran these seminaries. One of the worst priest abusers Kos, had the former Rev Shanley give workshops on homosexuality in his seminary. "The blind leading the blind."

Those people who were truly victimized or seduced by errant priests should know that the abuse problem would never be this bad if the Catholic Church in America hadn't been taken over by an unholy troika of homosexuals, feminists & liberals, working in tandem w/ each other. This problem will end cold turkey when the Catholic Church undergoes a Second Counter Reformation and not before!

disguised attack on the church
Posted by annette cwik 3/11/2003 9:54:31 AM

i believe catholics enthusiastically support the press when they expose the molestation of young boys by our homosexual priests. however they will get their just desserts if they cross the line into catholic bashing. i hope journalists are following the stories in maryland and nevada when legislators tried to "break" the seal of the confessional. catholics view molesting children and adult affairs differently - as they should.

This has always been understood in Rome....I don't think we understand that in the USA.
Posted by Tom Barnes 3/11/2003 7:56:00 AM

As a former Roman Rite seminarian I can assure all of my fellow Americans that Rome has always understood celibacy to be an ideal, not usually a reality in the lives of most priests. We, being Americans with that particularly peculiar Puritanical streak in us, have never quite grasped that. It is meant to be a target to shoot for, not an extant reality to wrestle with.

Even in 1969 when I entered the seminary at 16 years old, this was openly admitted to us by our spiritual directors. Celibacy was to be taken seriously, as seriously as marriage. But it was not to be obsessive to the point of inhumanity. When a priest failed in his vows, just like a sinful spouse, he was to ask forgiveness and rededicate himself to his "marriage" to the Church. A sexless life as a priest was seen as possible and even preferrable, but any priest I knew in 1969 in the Marist Seminary I first entered in Pennsylvania (I later entered a diocesen seminary) saw celibacy for what it was, an ideal. I have no problem with a fallen priest attempting to be celibate.

I have a real problem with a sexual deviant using the shroud of celibacy to hide his/her deviant behaviour and perhaps even "sanctify" it.

Celibacy, as we were taught in seminary, is supposed to be a QUIET life of prayer, study and service. QUIET is the operative word here. It is NOT supposed to be some sort of psycho-sexual gymnastic exercise that takes an already psychologically frail and twisted individual and makes him/her even more dangerous and even more available to people whom S/he can hurt with elevated social status welded to a twisted psyche. Celibacy ONLY works where it is understood for what it is supposed to be, an ideal that human beings possessing NORMAL psychological capabilities and drives can shoot for, a way to take NORMAL sexual energies and sublimate them for greater spiritual depth and service to man in the Christ. THIS IS IMPOSSIBLE outside of a very disciplined environment. End of story.

Page 1 of 1

View all Abuse Tracker feedback

See All Jobs

Add Your Resume

Post Your Job

Become a Member

More media jobs

Article Feedback

Latest Poynter Blogs (See All Blogs)