RIP Karol Wojtyla, Pope John Paul II

[so lacklustre]

Candy, thanks for guidance, however I have in the main been responding to the sanctimoniousness of others.

[selfmademug]

The only thing I'm going to say about this discussion (apart from, do watch that FRONTLINE I saw the other night) is that I hope it will at least make real the depth of feelings of personal anger and loss that many people feel in relation to the Catholic Church. It's not political knee-jerking. There are many people who feel they have been actively harmed by the Church, through abuse, loss of lives to AIDS, and many other things.

Yes the Pope was a moral leader, but if you passionately disagreed with his morals (I did with some, very much the opposite on others, personally) this is no less a time for "reflection". That's all I'm going to say.

Other than, really, MBA, the guy who wrote that play was named Shanley? Hard to believe! Is it only in Boston that the name Paul Shanley is on par with the Jack the Ripper?

[miss buenos aires]

I never heard of anyone else named Shanley, and I think this guy is a pretty accomplished playwright--I remember reading a profiles on him in the NY Times Magazine.

[selfmademug]

Paul Shanley, former Boston priest, currently serving time for two counts of child rape. Before those two particular charges came to court, he was the subject of dozens-- dozens-- of accusations, in many different parishes, because the Church's reaction to the accusations was always to move him elsewhere, and on to a new set of little boys.

[miss buenos aires]

Well, maybe John Patrick Shanley was very inspired by that particular current event, because that is exactly what happens in his play. I mean, if Father Flynn is guilty. Which we, the audience, do not know.

[Mr. Average]

With the full realization that any degree of concordance of my views with those of the thoughtful, witty, and insightful Ms. SelfMadeMug will likely induce the 'fight' portion of a full blown sympathetic (nervous system) response, I will say this:

The Boston area diocese, and the entire hierarchy of the Catholic Church (does anyone know for sure how far 'up' this went...was the Vatican ever alerted to Shanley's shameful repositioning) handled this case about as badly as any case can be handled. Attempts to excuse anyone in the chain who knowingly reassigned Shanley because of molestation issues are repugnant. As my wife and I left Mass last Sunday, we discussed this. Every priest who was proven rightfully accused, and any of their protectors in the clergy should be immediately defrocked and excommunicated, then submitted for full legal review, and finally relieved of all pension revenue, shelter, and safe harbor from the Church. Anything short of this is inadequate.

I concur with SelfMadeMug that the Boston situation, and others like it, were handled horribly and have rightly induced the ire of many Catholics and non-Catholics alike, all over the world.

[DrSpooky]

I saw a really interesting play last night called "Doubt," by John Patrick Shanley. It's about a parish priest and a nun who suspects him of molesting one of the students in her school. It's left purposefully open whether he did it or not. Definitely worth seeing, if you can get into New York.

I heard a story on this play on NPR and thought it might be interesting. It is nice to hear a review. The interviewee (Stanley?) said the actor playing the offending priest was deliberately chosen to be physically appealing and the nun was supposed to be crusty and hard to like.

Did he pull it off? What do you think?

In many ways, this is one of the toughest issues facing the Catholic Church right now.

[Copenhagen Fan]

But Cope...there's such a thing as forgiveness. I don't mean use that as an excuse, but we are human. I think the concepts of forgiveness and redemption and hope along with using one's "individual conscience" totally embraces what the whole (Catholic) religious existance is about.
If you believe in the higher power, I don't understand how you can actually live any other way. I mean, what's the use?.

Sweet Pear...I belive in a higher power 100% and I believe in forgiveness and redemption...believe me I do! I just don't belive in "SIN". I do believe that we have a responsiblity not to hurt others on purpose, but I don't think that a religion should set up a bunch of rules regarding human behavior that are outdated and then stigmatize them as sinners or less than.............

I for example, had anal sex last night.....should I be punished???! According to the Pope, yes.

[VonOfterdingen]

He he - no

[verbal gymnastics]

Cope - only you could bring an anal sex reference into a thread about the Pope!

[selfmademug]

In many ways, this is one of the toughest issues facing the Catholic Church right now.

Probably the toughest, in this country. It's an epidemic of abuse that's been going on in a widespread, sanctioned way for years. I recall reading a piece in The New Yorker maybe ten years ago about how common the national-level practice of "moving priests on" is. And in that or another piece there was a (to me) disgust-invoking description of the complicty of law enforcement in prominently Catholic ares, e.g., New Orleans, where the sheriff or D.A. or something was none other than Harry Connick Sr.

But world-wide, the crux is clearly the birth control question. The shit is clearly hitting the fan on the old over-population/poverty nexis. The condom issue makes this a one-two punch in many affected ares, adding AIDS to the over-poplulation. So as fighting poverty and sickness, and ministering to the poor and sick are among the Church's most crucial and beloved tenets, I suspect something has to give.

My four additional cents when I said I'd stick with 2....

[Mr. Average]

I'm curious, and I submit this because I just don't know the answer. Does anyone know the statistics associated with pedophilia in the general population, normalizing for socioeconomic class and culture. The presumption is (and it may very well be valid and documented for all I know) is that the incidence of pedophilia amongst Catholic Priests is astronomically high, compared to that of the general population, given the above parameters. Is that true?

If the incidence of pedophilia in the regular adult population (we better exclude rock and roll stars, because four noted performers immediately come to mind) occurs in 1% of the population, then was it double that in the Priesthood? Was it 5 times greater? 10 times the frequency? It is an important question NOT for the reason that you may think...that I might somehow use the balance of the percentage to say something like "hey, more than 90% of the Catholic Priests are good and without this transgression, and that ain't all bad!" No, I won't make that argument, because there is NO argument that can reasonably be made under any circumstances, or by any stretch of the imagination, to justify the handling of this issue by the church. The reason I do ask for comments is that if the incidence is 5-10 times greater, what does that say to the issue of the requirement for celibacy, and if that requirement was eliminated, would it make a difference.

I heard an argument made by a guy one night on some talk show that seemed very plausible to me, and it works because it applies to other noted pedophiliacs in history (and possibly, to Michael Jackson as well, although I haven't convicted him yet...).

The argument goes like this...when the priests with documented records of abuse made their commitment to become priests, most were either entering adolescence or they were pre-adolescent. They were channeled in by Grandma's vision or Mom's dreams of having a priest for a son. Their sexual 'growth' became, effectively, frozen at that point in time, and the stigma associated with ever, ever thinking, commenting, whacking off, or talking about it was too, too much...created such internal dissonance that the young priest-to-be internalized it. But the drive is so primal that it eventually becomes unleashed, or the repression is so strong and permanent that it represents either an entry into neurosis/psychosis, or the converse, a very few actually become so self-actualized to purpose that they truly reach a higher place where it becomes insignificant to the greater good of the mission. The abusive priests find that they suddenly return to the immature, preadolescent sneaky sex/sex is dirty level and this represents the primary driver for the aberrant behaviour. I mention MJ in this context because he seems to have justified his truly aberrrant behaviours that are dangerously close to pedophilia (if not outright) using the mentality of a 9 year old, and he seems to be completely comfortable with his justifications, oblivious to the reasonable fears of right thinking adults who find the behaviour sickening.

If you think I am making an excuse, you are dead wrong. I would really like to understand this sickness, and while I think there are many here with profound thoughts on this subject, I think most chose to avoid the topic in discussion. But just in case anyone has a thought or opinion, I would like to know.

[Who Shot Sam?]

The whole thing just disgusts me. For someone in a position of authority like that to sexually abuse a minor is the very lowest crime. Not that it's confined to the priesthood. There are I am sure plenty of pervy teachers and other assorted weirdos running around out there (especially in Belgium, which seems to be a sort of paedo paradise).

I once took a look at the sex offender registry for the Southern California neighborhood in which I grew up and it gave me a good scare. Good thing I'm not raising my kids there, though I'm sure our little town has its own share of sickos.

[SweetPear]

I'm curious, and I submit this because I just don't know the answer. Does anyone know the statistics associated with pedophilia in the general population, normalizing for socioeconomic class and culture. The presumption is (and it may very well be valid and documented for all I know) is that the incidence of pedophilia amongst Catholic Priests is astronomically high, compared to that of the general population, given the above parameters. Is that true?

According to the diocesan program "Protecting God's Children", that all volunteers and/or people in our Catholic schools and churches who come into contact with any children are required to complete, (and then they're registered and go through a background check) the incidence of pedophilia amongst the Catholic priests is no higher than that of the general population (I don't remember if they cited any specific percentages) and that priests are no more likely to abuse children than anyone else in any other occupation. Whether that's actually the case, I do not know. My doubt comes from the fact that this program is nothing more than damage control where they are merely protecting themselves from further payouts and litigation. Plus it makes it look like they are actively doing something about this problem.
Supposedly celibacy isn't the issue concerning pedophilia and that letting priests marry (which I think they most certainly should be able to do) would not affect the incidence of pedophilia among priests. Supposedly, pedophiles seek out scenarios and occupations where they have contact and access to children and the priesthood seems to be no exception.

*****THIS IS JUST A GENERAL PARAPHRASING OF SOME OF THE POINTS THAT WERE MADE IN THIS PROGRAM. I HAVE ABSOLUTLEY NO EXPERTISE ON THIS SUBJECT WHAT SO EVER****

I have always heard it stressed that the vast majority of priests are good people and that this is a very small group of men with this sickness. I agree, Mr. A, that that is absolutely no argument in justifying how the church has handled this issue.
As for the argument made by the person on the talk show, I say that sounds like dead on for Michael Jackson (Which has got me stumped. I just do not know what is true here but it does make a very plausible explanation for Jackson's strange behavior. I think he truly believes that he has done nothing inappropriate. Again, not excuses for anything....and then you have to also consider the money grubbing sickos who'd do anything to get a big pay-off. You have to admit that Jackson is a huge target there.)
I'm not so sure about the priests, although I would agree with the scenario as to how the young boys were groomed by their mothers and families in the hopes of having their son become a priest. I'm an Italian/Catholic and it was like that amongst the Irish/Catholics and us too. It was always said that a mother didn't want to give her son away to another woman, but it was more than okay to be "married to the church".

[pip_52]

There's also the theory that some young men who have grown up in the church and become aware that they are struggling with something that is considered wrong, like a tendency toward pedophelia, will join the priesthood thinking it will stave off temptation, since they have to take a vow of chastity. It just doesnt always work ...

[Who Shot Sam?]

One for you, so lack, from Christopher Hitchens' piece on slate.com (I often disagree with him, but this just about summarizes my feelings):

Unbelievers are more merciful and understanding than believers, as well as more rational. We do not believe that the pope will face judgment or eternal punishment for the millions who will die needlessly from AIDS, or for his excusing and sheltering of those who committed the unpardonable sin of raping and torturing children, or for the countless people whose sex lives have been ruined by guilt and shame and who are taught to respect the body only when it is a lifeless cadaver like that of Terri Schiavo. For us, this day is only the interment of an elderly and querulous celibate, who came too late and who stayed too long, and whose primitive ideology did not permit him the true self-criticism that could have saved him, and others less innocent, from so many errors and crimes.

[bambooneedle]

Well quoted, WSS.