The Chicken or the Egg

[pushbrk 12,103]

ABOARD THE PAPAL PLANE - Pope Benedict XVI said Tuesday he was "deeply ashamed" of the clergy sexual abuse scandal in the Roman Catholic Church and will work to make sure pedophiles don't become priests.

Please don't take this as a condemnation of Priests or the Roman Catholic Church, or make it one.

I just read this little sound bite and thought to myself, "Which comes first?" I always had it in my head that at least as many pedophiles become so, based on their environment over time. Sure, there may be some male pedophiles that seek to become priests but isn't it just as likely that their environment and associations after becoming Priests contribute greatly to developing the deviance?

Again, I'm not saying there's something inherent about vows of celebacy or homosexual tendancies that "causes" one to become a pedophile (Heterosexuals are pedophiles too.) or that the Catholic church's religious beliefs about the celebacy of Priests is wrong or evil. I'm just wondering about the chicken or egg issue. Surely in this context one comes first roughly as often as the other. As such, I'd prefer the Church address both the chicken and the egg. I have no suggestion as to how.

[Mononoke28 134]

Once a pedophile, always a pedophile no matter what they choose to become later on in life, whether it's a priesthood, a high school teacher, a sales person, what have you. I'm sure the Catholic church is not the only religious entity who has had pedophiles in their system, but it is the one who has been put on the spotlight.

Diana

[DeadPoolX 9]

Well, if I recall correctly, Catholic priests weren't always required to be celibate. Many hundreds of years ago, priests could have sex with anyone they wanted and even marry. The problem was that they ended up fathering illegitimate children. Since the Catholic Church was a known seat of power and wealth for many years, these ####### progeny came looking for "daddy" not so much because they wanted to meet their father, but because they wanted money.

In the end, the Catholic Church realized that their priests's sexual adventures were costing them far too much and so then made a new rule -- they must take a vow of celibacy upon entering the priesthood. Since priests can only be male, it didn't take too long before homosexual encounters began occurring. First, this was among the priests themselves, but it slowly spread to younger males, such as alter boys and other members of the church.

Much of the child molestation cases in the Catholic Church today could probably be alleviated by once again allowing priests to have sex (with men or women) freely and openly. Unfortunately, given today's litigious society, if any children were fathered out of wedlock -- as is often the case nowadays -- I can only imagine the lawsuits that would follow. Of course, that sort of negative publicity for the Catholic Church wouldn't be nearly as bad as having the media report, yet again, that another priest raped a prepubescent boy.

Edited April 15, 2008 by DeadPoolX

[SnowyTater 0]

Besides the issue of celibacy and even of homosexuality (though I don't go with that at all), I think the "nurture" argument might find more support by looking at how traditional Catholicism is, in general. My understanding is that it's a very orthodox, long-standing form of religion and worship with lots of emphasis placed on ceremony. Tradition is upheld and maybe revered more than it would be in other denominations, and I think maybe that slots people (including the priests) into a more narrow and defined social role that they must play.

My train of thought here is that if Catholicism is still deeply rooted in stuff going back to the Romans, then associated with that is still the idea of pederasty (not just as pedophilia but as an older man "teaching"/training a younger man), of hierarchy of not only God but also man (aka, man is above woman; maybe it's hard for a man in such a fixed traditional mindset to be attracted to a woman, if he doesn't consider her equal), and of certain people holding a level of power within the Church. I think the issue of 'male-male' sex or pedophilia man-boy sex here isn't so much to do with homosexuality as we understand it today, or of pedophilia as we understand it today, but more just the tradition of "men are higher and more powerful beings; we must teach each other and initiate each other into the 'brotherhood'" or something. It's a big chain of male power: maybe the pedophilic priest had the same thing done to him as a child, so when he gets older he 'returns the favor' onto another kid. Not saying there's not still Freudian sexual perversions there or anything, just that I think it also has a lot to do with image and tradition.

Nothing against Catholic church in general though. Care.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Once a pedophile, always a pedophile no matter what they choose to become later on in life, whether it's a priesthood, a high school teacher, a sales person, what have you. I'm sure the Catholic church is not the only religious entity who has had pedophiles in their system, but it is the one who has been put on the spotlight.

Diana

That's true. I read somewhere that there have been more cases of abuse among other religions, but the Catholic Church's fiasco had more to do with how it handled the cases - like transfering the priest to another parish where he found new victims (not to mention villifying the accusers). There was a lot of ignorance about pedophilia by the Church, which thought of it more as a sinful act than a mental illness.

[Chica Yeyé 41]

Once a pedophile, always a pedophile no matter what they choose to become later on in life, whether it's a priesthood, a high school teacher, a sales person, what have you. I'm sure the Catholic church is not the only religious entity who has had pedophiles in their system, but it is the one who has been put on the spotlight.

Diana

That's true. I read somewhere that there have been more cases of abuse among other religions, but the Catholic Church's fiasco had more to do with how it handled the cases - like transfering the priest to another parish where he found new victims (not to mention villifying the accusers). There was a lot of ignorance about pedophilia by the Church, which thought of it more as a sinful act than a mental illness.

I wonder if it was ignorance of plain ol' denial. the Catholic Church is really good at it.

[✿Ice Rain✿ 0]

both came from GOD. i dont know which is which is the first though.

I'm just wondering about the chicken or egg issue. Surely in this context one comes first roughly as often as the other. As such, I'd prefer the Church address both the chicken and the egg. I have no suggestion as to how.

[pushbrk 12,103]

Once a pedophile, always a pedophile no matter what they choose to become later on in life, whether it's a priesthood, a high school teacher, a sales person, what have you. I'm sure the Catholic church is not the only religious entity who has had pedophiles in their system, but it is the one who has been put on the spotlight.

Diana

That may be true and I tend to believe there would be few or any exceptions but the statement only addresses the chicken and not the egg. Once a pedophile one remains so, does not address when or how one becomes so. I'm suggesting that not only do pedophiles choose to become Catholic Priests but that Catholic Priests who were not pedophiles when they entered the Priesthood sometimes become pedophiles later. In other words, there is a "becoming" not a "born as". As such the becoming can occur before or after entering the Priesthood. So, the Church needs to address both issues, not just the first.

Edited April 15, 2008 by pushbrk

[*JG* 2]

Once a pedophile, always a pedophile no matter what they choose to become later on in life, whether it's a priesthood, a high school teacher, a sales person, what have you. I'm sure the Catholic church is not the only religious entity who has had pedophiles in their system, but it is the one who has been put on the spotlight.

Diana

That's true. I read somewhere that there have been more cases of abuse among other religions, but the Catholic Church's fiasco had more to do with how it handled the cases - like transfering the priest to another parish where he found new victims (not to mention villifying the accusers). There was a lot of ignorance about pedophilia by the Church, which thought of it more as a sinful act than a mental illness.

I wonder if it was ignorance of plain ol' denial. the Catholic Church is really good at it.

It's not denial so much as moving very slowly on things.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Once a pedophile, always a pedophile no matter what they choose to become later on in life, whether it's a priesthood, a high school teacher, a sales person, what have you. I'm sure the Catholic church is not the only religious entity who has had pedophiles in their system, but it is the one who has been put on the spotlight.

Diana

That may be true and I tend to believe there would be few or any exceptions but the statement only addresses the chicken and not the egg. Once a pedophile one remains so, does not address when or how one becomes so. I'm suggesting that not only do pedophiles choose to become Catholic Priests but that Catholic Priests who were not pedophiles when they entered the Priesthood sometimes become pedophiles later. In other words, there is a "becoming" not a "born as". As such the becoming can occur before or after entering the Priesthood. So, the Church needs to address both issues, not just the first.

How did you draw that conclusion? What's the difference between a Boy Scout Leader, coach or teacher who is a pedaphile? A convicted sex offender cannot get a teaching license either so that's a false assumption - to conclude a correlation between entering the priesthood and becoming a pedophile.

[pushbrk 12,103]

Once a pedophile, always a pedophile no matter what they choose to become later on in life, whether it's a priesthood, a high school teacher, a sales person, what have you. I'm sure the Catholic church is not the only religious entity who has had pedophiles in their system, but it is the one who has been put on the spotlight.

Diana

That may be true and I tend to believe there would be few or any exceptions but the statement only addresses the chicken and not the egg. Once a pedophile one remains so, does not address when or how one becomes so. I'm suggesting that not only do pedophiles choose to become Catholic Priests but that Catholic Priests who were not pedophiles when they entered the Priesthood sometimes become pedophiles later. In other words, there is a "becoming" not a "born as". As such the becoming can occur before or after entering the Priesthood. So, the Church needs to address both issues, not just the first.

How did you draw that conclusion? What's the difference between a Boy Scout Leader, coach or teacher who is a pedaphile? A convicted sex offender cannot get a teaching license either so that's a false assumption - to conclude a correlation between entering the priesthood and becoming a pedophile.

I'm not making a correlation, just stating an order of events. After, not because of. I do believe "becoming" a pedophile is a result of how one reacts to environmental factors but not suggesting entering the Priesthood or becoming a scout master is a cause of pedophilia. There are many potential environments in which sexual deviance can flourish. I'm not condemning the environments but rather suggesting that since the Catholic Priesthood is among those environments, the Church needs to address the not only the admitance issues but the "becoming" part of the process as well.

You've committed the most common of all logical fallacies. See this link.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_hoc_ergo_propter_hoc

Since you brought up the Boy Scouts, I actuallly do have some ideas about how BSA can and may be addressing both the admittance and becoming issues. Careful screening and continuous monitoring, are the general kinds of things that are needed. I would think something similar would work for the Church but again, they must address both issues, not just one.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Once a pedophile, always a pedophile no matter what they choose to become later on in life, whether it's a priesthood, a high school teacher, a sales person, what have you. I'm sure the Catholic church is not the only religious entity who has had pedophiles in their system, but it is the one who has been put on the spotlight.

Diana

That may be true and I tend to believe there would be few or any exceptions but the statement only addresses the chicken and not the egg. Once a pedophile one remains so, does not address when or how one becomes so. I'm suggesting that not only do pedophiles choose to become Catholic Priests but that Catholic Priests who were not pedophiles when they entered the Priesthood sometimes become pedophiles later. In other words, there is a "becoming" not a "born as". As such the becoming can occur before or after entering the Priesthood. So, the Church needs to address both issues, not just the first.

How did you draw that conclusion? What's the difference between a Boy Scout Leader, coach or teacher who is a pedaphile? A convicted sex offender cannot get a teaching license either so that's a false assumption - to conclude a correlation between entering the priesthood and becoming a pedophile.

I'm not making a correlation, just stating an order of events. After, not because of. I do believe "becoming" a pedophile is a result of how one reacts to environmental factors but not suggesting entering the Priesthood or becoming a scout master is a cause of pedophilia. There are many potential environments in which sexual deviance can flourish. I'm not condemning the environments but rather suggesting that since the Catholic Priesthood is among those environments, the Church needs to address the not only the admitance issues but the "becoming" part of the process as well.

You've committed the most common of all logical fallacies. See this link.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_hoc_ergo_propter_hoc

Since you brought up the Boy Scouts, I actuallly do have some ideas about how BSA can and may be addressing both the admittance and becoming issues. Careful screening and continuous monitoring, are the general kinds of things that are needed. I would think something similar would work for the Church but again, they must address both issues, not just one.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you're saying that you believe that the environmental factors of being in the priesthood can have an effect on such deviant behavior as pedophilia, yes? Do you believe that someone who otherwise would not engage in pedophilia, would do so under environmental factors such as entering the priesthoold or becoming a Boy Scout Leader? Please explain how you are coming to whatever conclusion you are making.

[Chica Yeyé 41]

I don't see how one "becomes" a pedophile; as I don't see how one "becomes" heterosexual. I do not condone pedophilia, but I don't think it is a chosen behavior --- same used to be said about the gay community.

[pushbrk 12,103]

Once a pedophile, always a pedophile no matter what they choose to become later on in life, whether it's a priesthood, a high school teacher, a sales person, what have you. I'm sure the Catholic church is not the only religious entity who has had pedophiles in their system, but it is the one who has been put on the spotlight.

Diana

That may be true and I tend to believe there would be few or any exceptions but the statement only addresses the chicken and not the egg. Once a pedophile one remains so, does not address when or how one becomes so. I'm suggesting that not only do pedophiles choose to become Catholic Priests but that Catholic Priests who were not pedophiles when they entered the Priesthood sometimes become pedophiles later. In other words, there is a "becoming" not a "born as". As such the becoming can occur before or after entering the Priesthood. So, the Church needs to address both issues, not just the first.

How did you draw that conclusion? What's the difference between a Boy Scout Leader, coach or teacher who is a pedaphile? A convicted sex offender cannot get a teaching license either so that's a false assumption - to conclude a correlation between entering the priesthood and becoming a pedophile.

I'm not making a correlation, just stating an order of events. After, not because of. I do believe "becoming" a pedophile is a result of how one reacts to environmental factors but not suggesting entering the Priesthood or becoming a scout master is a cause of pedophilia. There are many potential environments in which sexual deviance can flourish. I'm not condemning the environments but rather suggesting that since the Catholic Priesthood is among those environments, the Church needs to address the not only the admitance issues but the "becoming" part of the process as well.

You've committed the most common of all logical fallacies. See this link.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_hoc_ergo_propter_hoc

Since you brought up the Boy Scouts, I actuallly do have some ideas about how BSA can and may be addressing both the admittance and becoming issues. Careful screening and continuous monitoring, are the general kinds of things that are needed. I would think something similar would work for the Church but again, they must address both issues, not just one.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you're saying that you believe that the environmental factors of being in the priesthood can have an effect on such deviant behavior as pedophilia, yes? Do you believe that someone who otherwise would not engage in pedophilia, would do so under environmental factors such as entering the priesthoold or becoming a Boy Scout Leader? Please explain how you are coming to whatever conclusion you are making.

Happy to. But first I must reject again the premise I'm making a cause and effect statement. I'm simply not doing so. Please read again the opening statement of the thread.

I'm saying people who have already engaged in pedophilia join the priesthood and become scouts leaders and that also people who have not and may not have even considered such behavior begin engaging in it after becoming Priest and Scout leaders and perhaps entering countless other environments.

Pedophilia is a behavior. Regardless of how it comes to be, regardless of whether one believes the cause is genetic or environmental, the behavior requires a certain certain environmental factors be present, even if the only critical factor is a source of victims. The pedophile may either seek a favorable environment after or find themselves in a convenient one before engaging in the behavior.

[DeadPoolX 9]

I don't see how one "becomes" a pedophile; as I don't see how one "becomes" heterosexual. I do not condone pedophilia, but I don't think it is a chosen behavior --- same used to be said about the gay community.

I suppose both homosexuality and pedophilia could be chosen behaviors in a sense. What I mean is... what if there were no other opportunities for intimacy? Say you were essentially "locked away" from the outside world, with only the same sex or underage individuals. What do you think might eventually occur?

I'm not suggesting this is "acceptable" behavior by normal societal standards; however, if someone were in that sort of situation, it would be an unusual circumstance. It would be difficult to expect people to remain completely chaste for the rest of their lives, even in the face of what may considered either morally or legally reprehensible.

As I said, that would be a highly unusual scenario. I'd be hard pressed to find very many people who're secluded to such a degree that they have no contact with anyone else, but... they're also in the company of their own gender and/or children, so they end up changing how they think and behave. I'd say that would be a very, very rare situation for someone to find themselves in, no matter who they are. But my point remains that if such were to happen, someone who was not normally a homosexual or a pedophile may eventually become one.

That's a very scary thought, isn't it?

Edited April 15, 2008 by DeadPoolX