Posted on 03/08/2005 5:08:12 PM PST by dangus
The National Review Board of the United States Council of Catholic Bishops authorized in 2003 the publication of “The Nature and Scope of the Problem of Sexual Abuse of Minors by Catholic Priests and Deacons in the United States: A Research Study Conducted by the John Jay College of Criminal Justice.”
On Page 28, in chapter 2.3, the study included a graph showing the number of incidents of pedophilia (including ephibophilia) and the number of priests involved in such cases in each year, from 1950 through 2002. The results are strongly contradictory to many of the false notions perpetuated by critics of the Catholic Church of both the left and right. The numbers contained in this article are somewhat round because they have been read from a graph, rather than a table.
Many false notions have greatly damaged the reputation of present leaders of the Catholic Church during the so-called "pedophilia" crisis. While there is much blame to be found, these notions cloud the truth, preventing the best possible response. Without claiming to know what that response is, I will debunk some of the false notions:
Notion 1: The pedophilia crisis was a fruit of the alleged modernism of Vatican 2.
Truth: The crisis was in full bloom before Vatican 2. It is possible that several false expectations of the what the “spirit of Vatican 2” meant may have inspired a laxity of adherence to church laws may have abetted pedophiles, but the timing shows this could not have been a major cause. Vatican 2 went on from 1962 to 1965. By 1962, there were already about 390 incidents of abuse per year. In fact, the fastest growth in the number of incidents occurred between 1959 and 1960. Apparently the increase caught the attention of the Vatican: in 1961, the Pope issued guidelines recommending that homosexuals not be admitted into the priesthood because of the grave spiritual consequences of the burdens of celibacy on the sexually dysfunctional. (Please note that celibacy is much more than mere chastity.)
The number of abuse cases increased from 60 in 1952, to 360 in 1960, a 600% increase in eight years! Between 1960 and 1969, the number of cases increased slightly less than 100% in nine years. Between 1969 and 1980, the number of cases increased only about 10 percent. The vast majority of even these cases were perpetrated by priests who finished seminary long before Vatican 2 began.
[It is quite possible that the pedophilia crisis was much worse than we know in 1950. Any priest alive then would likely be dead by now, and their accusers may be reluctant to come forward to accuse someone when the perpetrator and most possible witnesses are dead.]
Notion 2: The Church failed to limit the pedophilia crisis until it was exposed by the media.
Truth: After 1980, the number of abuse cases dropped in nearly half in the next six short years. And in half again in the next five. And in half again in the next three. In fact, by 1994, the year the media was catching on to the story, the number of abuse cases had been cut by 90 percent. By 1987, there were fewer abuse cases than there had been in 1960. And by 1995, there were fewer abuse cases than there had been in any year in the 1950s.
Notion 3: The Pedophilia crisis was caused by the Catholic Church’s demands of chastity in the priesthood.
Truth: The amazing collapse of the number of annual pedophile cases demonstrates that the church can effectively maintain a celibate priesthood without resultant pedophilia. In 2002, there were still 30 reported incidents, and one may surmise that the number may drift up as new accusers step forward. Even one incident is not acceptable. However, that rate is far, far below rates of other non-celibate vocations that include substantial contact with children.
It is important to note that what is being called pedophilia in this context is not true pedophilia. While women in the general population are roughly three times more likely than men to have been sexually abused (citing Journal of the AMA, 278 (1997): 131-135), nearly four out of five cases of sexual abuse in this study were of boys. And most of the abuse was not of children, but of post-adolescent teenagers. Only 2% of victims were of children under age 5, nearly 80% were age 11 or older.
The second chapter of the introduction was supposed to be smaller type. It is a preliminary explanation, and is confusing to read in that it looks like it belongs to the main body of the article, not the preface. Can you please change it to font size=2?
What is ephibophilia? I tried two different dictionaries, and couldn't find definition.
probably because of misspelling. I think it's ephebephilia--sexual attraction to adolescents.
So this entire story is incorrect. The problem never was pedophilia, it was homosexual abuse. Chickenhawking. An integral part of the recruiting of the homosexual subculture.
The whole terminology of "pedophilia" was a media generated lie aided and abetted by a hierarchy overrun by active homosexuals.
This is supported by some of the 'allegations' now being raised in various dioceses by seasoned citizens. Unfortunately, the priests they accuse are now dead.
Catholic Ping - Come home for Easter and experience God’s merciful love. Please freepmail me if you want on/off this list
This cannot be repeated often enough. It was Vatican II that allowed victims to start coming forward. They were largely ignored, or threatened, as was the Episcopal custom, as they had always been. But the audit trail likely goes back a hundred or more years.
The helping professions have always attracted homosexuals. Thus it has been, and thus it will always be.
It's a new class of sexual deviant created for the "sexual abuse/pedophile" crisis. While the numbers indicate that this largely was not true "pedophilia" as most people see it (pre-pubescent children), calling it what it actually was, homosexuality, goes against the prevailing agenda in the fantasy world of pop-psych and the media.
Well, that's my opinion.
ephebophelia- the attraction to post-pubescent adolescents
pedophilia- attraction to pre-pubescent children
Easy to claim, but difficult to prove. Its likely the abuse peaked in the 60s/70s due to the libertine morals of the sexual revolution. Homosexuals were actively screened out of seminary up till the 40s and 50s. Its the following cohort that has the highest rates of abuse. Rates "going back a hundred or more years" are most likely miniscule compared to after they opened wide the windows to homosexuals starting in the late 50s (thus necessitating the 1961 Vatican reminder on the subject.)
ephebephilia, or ephebophilia are both correct spellings.
How do you know this? I think this is wishful thinking on your part.
Rates "going back a hundred or more years" are most likely miniscule compared to after they opened wide the windows to homosexuals starting in the late 50s (thus necessitating the 1961 Vatican reminder on the subject.)
Perhaps, but, like a wife who turns the other way while a child is abused by the husband, this has been a systemic problem in the Catholic Church, and other Churches as well, but the victims simply never reported anything to anybody (as children never reported abuse by a parent prior to the 1970s).
Who would believe a kid over a priest?
Homosexuals have always been in the priesthood, and will always be in the priesthood, no matter what the Vatican says or does.
Ephibophelia is a sexual attraction to post-adolescent boys.
How does it mean the article is incorrect? I agree entirely with your all your other statements, and expressed most of them in the article. In fact, I specifically noted that the headline was following the media's incorrect usage of the term.
Oops.. I mean post-pubescent boys.
Thanks for the ping.
Thanks for pointing that out. I would simply delete any references to "pedophilia", such as in your sentence,
"incidents of pedophilia (including ephibophilia)
Ephebophilia is NOT a subset of pedophilia; it has nothing to do with it. It is more appropriately termed pederasty. But nowhere should you use the term "pedophilia" in your own writing about the crisis, because it perpetuates the myth that it was EVER related to pedophilia. Catholics need to reject this notion and terminology out of hand. It was NEVER about pedophilia, though the USCCB consciously decided to use this deceitful term. It has always been about covering up the homosexual nature of the vast majority of the abuse.
Don't cooperate in that deception.
Sinkspur, you're trying to support the argument, but your endorsement is a walking ad-hominem attack. Unfortunately, Vatican II did NOT allow victims to come forward; they didn't start coming forward for thirty or more years after Vatican II. And I flatly reject the notion that the priesthood is inherently homosexual.
From talking with priests who are spiritual directors and priest psychologists and psychiatrists, as well as retired priests. They will all tell you how homosexuals were screened out of seminary in the first half of the 20th century.
I think this is wishful thinking on your part.
Think whatever you like.
That's the main stream media and predominant pop culture view, and serves their anti-Catholic agenda well, doesn't it? There is no proof it has been a systemicc problem with the exception of notoriuos periods of history, such as the recent 1950s to 1980s, and other well known historical periods in particular areas at particular times.
But to flatly state is is and always was a "systemic problem" is to buy into revisionist and anti-Catholic histories, something faithful Catholics should be loathe to do.
Homosexuals have always been in the priesthood, and will always be in the priesthood,
Yes, man has sinned since Original Sin, even priests. This is news?
no matter what the Vatican says or does.
Or at least that is the hope of AmChurch...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.