If this were any other organization that the church, the higher-ups who shielded the criminals would be in jail.

The actions of the church to shield these criminals should result in criminal prosecutions for "aiding and abetting", "conspiracy" or whatever other charges one can make stick.

The Goddess writes: Well, how lovely for you, Mr. Priest. I'm sure your "repentence" has done wonders for the kids you molested.

Is there anything he could do that would do wonders for the children he molested?

He could give up livong rent free and getting his medical care paid for by church goers for starters.

Then he can die in the street horribly and painfully

I am utterly disgusted by this whole thing. But honestly, are we really THAT surprised by it? The Catholic Church has been covering for kid touching priests for decades and will likely continue to do so.
I am all for foriveness, but I am also all for justice. My heart really goes out to those now adults who he put through hell. They will never get the justice they deserve.

Your concience is between you and God. Your punishment is between you and society, and society shouldn't give a damn about your repentence.

ANd yes, the church higher-ups who sheilded them should be in jail too.

As a practical matter, the priests and the American bishops are subject to American law.

As an independent state, the Vatican is another matter entirely. If you think the Pope is going to suffer for this, look for Obama in line behind you at the ER.

Didn't you hear? Only God can fire the Pope.

This sickens me to no end. He should have gone to jail along with EVERY SINGLE PERSON who helped cover this up. And yes, I know it's not going to happen.

Just one more reason I am a non-practicing Catholic.

I find it amusing that Andrew Sullivan and other left-wing commenters think that the solution to predatory gays in the priesthood to is allow heterosexuals in the priesthood to marry.

It's a perfect example of a non sequitur, but just as a leftist's answer to any social problem is "more government regulation!", a leftist's answer to any religious problem is "less tradition / less doctrine / more leftism!".

I guess my question is, didn't these happen mostly in the 50s? What was the standard procedure back then? What did non-catholic schools do if they found out a teacher was a pedophile?

The complaints about the whippings I don't take too seriously, as corporal punishment was the norm back then.

I dunno, it seems that there are just SO MANY allegations... can they really all be true?

I remember one of them was "He put his hand on my butt as he was helping me out of the pool". Um... that is not molestation, nor is footbal butt-slapping.

I dunno. It seems like maybe some people are jumping on the bandwagon. I'm sure the initial accusations were true, and many accusations were true, but I'm a bit skeptical.

I'm not Catholic and have no desire to be so I don't have any particular bias in favor of the Church.

It just seems... suspect.

I find it amusing that Andrew Sullivan and other left-wing commenters think that the solution to predatory gays in the priesthood to is allow heterosexuals in the priesthood to marry.

The one positive to this could be that priests might be less likely to protect their own when "their own" are posing a threat to their families. When you create an insular group of people that depend on no one but each other, you're going to get some shady behavior.

first off TJIC, homosexuals arent attracted to children, pedophiles are.

Secondly most pedophiles are heterosexual

ummmm, I am pretty sure Andrew Sullivan is a memeber of the log cabin republicans, very far from a left winger. I suspect some homophobia going on here.

lujp may be correct in the assertion about pedophiles in general, but the number of girls claiming to have been molested here is small to nonexistent.

Tribute must be paid to political rectitude, but reality here is different.

I'm pretty sure Andrew Sullivan drummed himself out of the Republican party when Bush supported the Defense of Marriage Act. I admit I could be wrong, he still called himself a Catholic despite some disagreement with church doctrine. The proper word is heretic, but I have no dog in his fight.

I typed "child molester behavioral analysis" into Google search and got NC70.pdf, a report entitled "Child Molester Behavioral Analysis" available from the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children.

From page 50: [Characteristics of pedophiles]

"Older Than 25, Single, Never Married By itself this indicator means nothing. It has
significance only when combined with several other indicators. Because they have
a sexual preference for children, pedophiles often have some degree of difficulty
in performing sexually with adults; therefore, they frequently are not married
or are married for only brief periods of time. [...]"

It appears that the Catholic Church may be a way for some men who cannot function sexually with adults to appear "respectable" (and perhaps avoid being suspected of being gay) while remaining unmarried. Allowing married men to become Catholic priests would reduce the odds that the church is hiring a pedophile.

The report defines the terms it uses and does distinguish, among other things, that some married men do have sex with children, some married men are pedophiles, and not every man (or woman) who has sex with a child is a pedophile.

"not every man (or woman) who has sex with a child is a pedophile."

???

I'll bet that "sex with children not a pedophile" definition comes from the viewpoint they were with 16+ "victim" were semi-consensual. Or they were in "distress"/ "shock"/ etc. and only ever did it once and were and lives with the regret.

TJIC: I find it amusing that Andrew Sullivan and other left-wing commenters think that the solution to predatory gays in the priesthood to is allow heterosexuals in the priesthood to marry.

Fuck you.

Someone who has sex (or wants to) with prepubescents is a pedophile.

Someone who has sex (or wants to) with mid-to-late adolescents is an ephebophile.

Understand, by the way, I'm not defending the guy. I just found Amy's comment interesting about how his repentance does nothing for the children he molested. It left me realizing that there's really nothing he can do to make things better for the children he victimized.

Is he really repentant? Good. Glad to know that. However, he should still register for the sex offender registry. After all, anyone can claim that he's repentant. And I'm still not going to trust him around children.

God might have forgiven him. And if He has, let that be his consolation prize. But society has not, and for now, that's who he's going to answer to.

> just as a leftist's answer to any social
> problem is "more government regulation!",
> a leftist's answer to any religious problem
> is "less tradition / less doctrine / more leftism!".

Yes. Stop by more often.

One thing I like about the Internet is that there are so many stimulating people with well thought out positions; quite often I find myself convinced by their rigorous arguments.

For example:

TJIC: I find it amusing that Andrew Sullivan and other left-wing commenters think that the solution to predatory gays in the priesthood to is allow heterosexuals in the priesthood to marry.

Fuck you. -- Posted by: Patrick at March 27, 2010 7:42 AM

Well said, Patrick; I now realize that I was wrong and you are right.