Maryland probe finds 158 pedophile priests in Archdiocese of Baltimore’s past 80 years

[sting in the rafters]

Source

An investigation by Maryland’s attorney general identified 158 Roman Catholic priests in the Archdiocese of Baltimore who have been accused of sexually and physically abusing more than 600 victims over the past 80 years, according to court records filed Thursday.

Attorney General Brian Frosh announced that his office has completed a 463-page report on the investigation, which began in 2019. He filed a motion in Baltimore Circuit Court to make the report public. Court permission is required because the report contains information from grand jury subpoenas. It’s unclear when the court will make a decision.

While the court filing noted that more than 600 victims were identified, it also said “there are almost certainly hundreds more, as the Department of Justice’s Annual Crime Victimization Report has demonstrated that most incidents of sexual assault go unreported.”

Both boys and girls were abused, according to the court filing, with ages ranging from preschool through young adulthood.

“Although no parish was safe, some congregations and schools were assigned multiple abusive priests, and a few had more than one sexually abusive priest at the same time,” the court filing said. “One congregation was assigned eleven sexually abusive priests over 40 years.”

In the court filing, Frosh argues that “publicly airing the transgressions of the Church is critical to holding people and institutions accountable and improving the way sexual abuse allegations are handled going forward.”

This one always hits close to home. My childhood pastor, a man whom my parents personally welcomed to bless the home my brothers and I took our first steps in, is the sole ranking church official to serve prison time related to child abuse in the USA. The Maryland AG’s report describes horrors all too familiar for the cornucopia of Catholics, devout, Christmas, lapsed, or otherwise, which populate the Mid-Atlantic. Perhaps the church should lift the restriction on marriage; clerical celibacy only become widespread in the 11th century to ensure inheritance returned to the church. At any rate survivor advocacy remains important as we otherwise may never know the extent of suffering the Catholic Church has perpetrated upon our communities.

[Enduro]

Jail all of them. (If it's true, likely is, but let's make sure)

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

The modern (as in, post-Trent, not necessarily post-Vatican II or even post-Vatican I) theology of the priesthood, and all the more the cultural norms surrounding the priesthood and devout laypeople's reflexive deference to it, is rotten to the core and needs to be jettisoned into a black hole.

ETA: Wasn't John Geoghan shanked in prison? PennLive might be defining "Church official" more narrowly than "priest" since it seems like Lynn had an official role at the diocesan level for a while, which Geoghan never did.

[sting in the rafters]

ETA: Wasn't John Geoghan shanked in prison? PennLive might be defining "Church official" more narrowly than "priest" since it seems like Lynn had an official role at the diocesan level for a while, which Geoghan never did.

Good call, edited my original post for accuracy. The article distinguishes Lynn as the diocese's secretary. Forgive my laziness in parroting a false factoid I've heard uttered around my locale.

[jojoju1998]

Some thoughts.

The modern (as in, post-Trent, not necessarily post-Vatican II or even post-Vatican I) theology of the priesthood, and all the more the cultural norms surrounding the priesthood and devout laypeople's reflexive deference to it, is rotten to the core and needs to be jettisoned into a black hole.

ETA: Wasn't John Geoghan shanked in prison? PennLive might be defining "Church official" more narrowly than "priest" since it seems like Lynn had an official role at the diocesan level for a while, which Geoghan never did.

Two parts here. 1. The Theological aspects of the priesthood, transubstation, the priesthood of Jesus Christ, those things were not rejected by Vatican 2 at all. in fact they were strengthed. But the Second Vatican Council, also included a broader view of the overall universal priesthood that has lay involvement. If that makes sense.

Source

An investigation by Maryland’s attorney general identified 158 Roman Catholic priests in the Archdiocese of Baltimore who have been accused of sexually and physically abusing more than 600 victims over the past 80 years, according to court records filed Thursday.

Attorney General Brian Frosh announced that his office has completed a 463-page report on the investigation, which began in 2019. He filed a motion in Baltimore Circuit Court to make the report public. Court permission is required because the report contains information from grand jury subpoenas. It’s unclear when the court will make a decision.

While the court filing noted that more than 600 victims were identified, it also said “there are almost certainly hundreds more, as the Department of Justice’s Annual Crime Victimization Report has demonstrated that most incidents of sexual assault go unreported.”

Both boys and girls were abused, according to the court filing, with ages ranging from preschool through young adulthood.

“Although no parish was safe, some congregations and schools were assigned multiple abusive priests, and a few had more than one sexually abusive priest at the same time,” the court filing said. “One congregation was assigned eleven sexually abusive priests over 40 years.”

In the court filing, Frosh argues that “publicly airing the transgressions of the Church is critical to holding people and institutions accountable and improving the way sexual abuse allegations are handled going forward.”

This one always hits close to home. My childhood pastor, a man whom my parents personally welcomed to bless the home my brothers and I took our first steps in, is the sole ranking church official to serve prison time related to child abuse in the USA. The Maryland AG’s report describes horrors all too familiar for the cornucopia of Catholics, devout, Christmas, lapsed, or otherwise, which populate the Mid-Atlantic. Perhaps the church should lift the restriction on marriage; clerical celibacy only become widespread in the 11th century to ensure inheritance returned to the church. At any rate survivor advocacy remains important as we otherwise may never know the extent of suffering the Catholic Church has perpetrated upon our communities.

I have nothing against celibacy if someone freely chooses it. To force it however at a young age as these priests probably had to go through if that makes sense, when they entered the Seminary at a young age ( around 14-15) is psychologically damaging and not pastorally helpful. It's why part of the " Dallas Charter Reforms " is a shift towards more mature seminarians, men who have gone to college or had a job of some kind.

The admittance process is also far more stricter these days. Psychological tests. Interviews. Exams. Background Checks. Back then you can get in with just a paper note. When I volunteered at Vacation Bible School at my church a few months ago, I had to undergo a fingerprint scan myself.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Some thoughts.

The modern (as in, post-Trent, not necessarily post-Vatican II or even post-Vatican I) theology of the priesthood, and all the more the cultural norms surrounding the priesthood and devout laypeople's reflexive deference to it, is rotten to the core and needs to be jettisoned into a black hole.

ETA: Wasn't John Geoghan shanked in prison? PennLive might be defining "Church official" more narrowly than "priest" since it seems like Lynn had an official role at the diocesan level for a while, which Geoghan never did.

Two parts here. 1. The Theological aspects of the priesthood, transubstation, the priesthood of Jesus Christ, those things were not rejected by Vatican 2 at all. in fact they were strengthed. But the Second Vatican Council, also included a broader view of the overall universal priesthood that has lay involvement. If that makes sense.

I'm aware and that wasn't really what I was saying. I was just clarifying that by "modern" here I don't mean "post-Vatican II."

[afleitch]

This one always hits close to home. My childhood pastor, a man whom my parents personally welcomed to bless the home my brothers and I took our first steps in, is the sole ranking church official to serve prison time related to child abuse in the USA.

Jesus wept.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

I have nothing against celibacy if someone freely chooses it. To force it however at a young age as these priests probably had to go through if that makes sense, when they entered the Seminary at a young age ( around 14-15) is psychologically damaging and not pastorally helpful. It's why part of the " Dallas Charter Reforms " is a shift towards more mature seminarians, men who have gone to college or had a job of some kind.

The admittance process is also far more stricter these days. Psychological tests. Interviews. Exams. Background Checks. Back then you can get in with just a paper note. When I volunteered at Vacation Bible School at my church a few months ago, I had to undergo a fingerprint scan myself.

One of the sad realities of safeguarding is that it is a lot harder to flag predators who haven't already been caught in the past. All the background checks in the world won't help if there is no "background" as far as the law is concerned, which is why additional provisions like making sure at least one other adult is always present and severely punishing attempts at retaliation against accusers are absolutely critical and not just nice extras.

[Associate Justice PiT]

The modern (as in, post-Trent, not necessarily post-Vatican II or even post-Vatican I) theology of the priesthood, and all the more the cultural norms surrounding the priesthood and devout laypeople's reflexive deference to it, is rotten to the core and needs to be jettisoned into a black hole.

ETA: Wasn't John Geoghan shanked in prison? PennLive might be defining "Church official" more narrowly than "priest" since it seems like Lynn had an official role at the diocesan level for a while, which Geoghan never did.

     Would you consider mandatory celibacy to be a factor in this? Every church has sex abuse scandals, but it's not a novel idea to suggest that the mandatory celibacy of the Roman Catholic clergy has led to it becoming a refuge for people who are not suited to marriage for whatever reason.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

The modern (as in, post-Trent, not necessarily post-Vatican II or even post-Vatican I) theology of the priesthood, and all the more the cultural norms surrounding the priesthood and devout laypeople's reflexive deference to it, is rotten to the core and needs to be jettisoned into a black hole.

ETA: Wasn't John Geoghan shanked in prison? PennLive might be defining "Church official" more narrowly than "priest" since it seems like Lynn had an official role at the diocesan level for a while, which Geoghan never did.

     Would you consider mandatory celibacy to be a factor in this? Every church has sex abuse scandals, but it's not a novel idea to suggest that the mandatory celibacy of the Roman Catholic clergy has led to it becoming a refuge for people who are not suited to marriage for whatever reason.

I think there are good and bad ways to suggest mandatory celibacy is a factor. What I absolutely won't accept is the idea (obviously immoral when spelled out but disturbingly common in coded form) that if only priests had approved "outlets" in the form of wives then they wouldn't feel the "need" to additionally groom and rape children, vulnerable adults, penitents, etc., as if people who are married to clergy in other churches or other religions are the thin red line separating their spouses from transmogrifying into Humbert Humbert. What I think DOES have merit is, as you put it, the idea that the Catholic priesthood has allowed itself to become a "refuge" for men who already had deep psychic and moral wounds relating to sexuality to begin with. In that sense, yes, I think allowing married priests on a wider basis would open up the pool of potential priests to much healthier and safer personalities.

[afleitch]

After doing a little math, there were 650 priests in the Archdiocese in 1950 and just under 400 as of 2020.

That means, that at any given moment, at least one in four active priests have been identified as sexual predators.

One in four.

And given the relatively stable composition since then, the equivalent to one in each parish.

[Torie]

What is the supply and demand ratio for Catholic priests in the US these days? Presumably it is a less attractive job for pedophiles now, but on the other hand, the bulk of Catholic churches seem to be closed, and the ones that are open seem largely empty. One of two remaining Catholic churches in Hoboken, the major one, that is next to the dog park, had 30 people in the pews with room for 500 or more at its main Sunday service. The music was piped in, and the whole scene seemed depressing. And I didn't notice any alters boys.

[jojoju1998]

What is the supply and demand ratio for Catholic priests in the US these days? Presumably it is a less attractive job for pedophiles now, but on the other hand, the bulk of Catholic churches seem to be closed, and the ones that are open seem largely empty. One of two remaining Catholic churches in Hoboken, the major one, that is next to the dog park, had 30 people in the pews with room for 500 or more at its main Sunday service. The music was piped in, and the whole scene seemed depressing. And I didn't notice any alters boys.

In the Diocese of Sacramento, where i live, mass attendence is relatively high. My Parish has over 6,000 registered families, the church itself holds up to 1,200 people, 4 of the masses on the weekends are packed. And there's only one priest on staff. ( Granted, some of the retired priests come out to help as well ). But there's only one priest.

The South, and the West are booming with converts, and migrants, but the demand is outstripping the supply. The Diocese of Sacramento has relied on priests from other countries to meet the needs; Africa, the Phillpines. Mexico.  There's 11 seminarians in this diocese. Which isn't bad. But it's certainly not enough.

[jojoju1998]

The modern (as in, post-Trent, not necessarily post-Vatican II or even post-Vatican I) theology of the priesthood, and all the more the cultural norms surrounding the priesthood and devout laypeople's reflexive deference to it, is rotten to the core and needs to be jettisoned into a black hole.

ETA: Wasn't John Geoghan shanked in prison? PennLive might be defining "Church official" more narrowly than "priest" since it seems like Lynn had an official role at the diocesan level for a while, which Geoghan never did.

     Would you consider mandatory celibacy to be a factor in this? Every church has sex abuse scandals, but it's not a novel idea to suggest that the mandatory celibacy of the Roman Catholic clergy has led to it becoming a refuge for people who are not suited to marriage for whatever reason.

I think there are good and bad ways to suggest mandatory celibacy is a factor. What I absolutely won't accept is the idea (obviously immoral when spelled out but disturbingly common in coded form) that if only priests had approved "outlets" in the form of wives then they wouldn't feel the "need" to additionally groom and rape children, vulnerable adults, penitents, etc., as if people who are married to clergy in other churches or other religions are the thin red line separating their spouses from transmogrifying into Humbert Humbert. What I think DOES have merit is, as you put it, the idea that the Catholic priesthood has allowed itself to become a "refuge" for men who already had deep psychic and moral wounds relating to sexuality to begin with. In that sense, yes, I think allowing married priests on a wider basis would open up the pool of potential priests to much healthier and safer personalities.

I have nothing wrong with Mandatory Celibacy as i said, as long as, as long as it's older more mature men with secular college or life experience.

The problem with sex abuse, isn't that psychic and morally wounded men entered, it's that the seminary formation itself was damaging. These were 14 year old kids basically entering a isolated closed off enviroment, with no access to the outside world. And there wasn't any healthy conversations about sex, celibacy. It was just never talked about.

Your brain doesn't fully develop until age 26.

The high school seminaries have since closed. And most dioceses today are more cautious about admitting men into the priesthood. Most seminarians today that i know of at least, are far more integrated, mature, and happier. They also have tons of life experiences. The priest at my church dated for a while, had a job, and felt like he could do something better for himself, so he broke up with his girlfriend and entered the seminary. And he was like what 38, when he was ordained ?

Another priest at my church worked for big Agriculture for 2 decades before entering the Seminary. He was a priest for just 11 years before dying of Cancer. May he RIP.



Regarding Married Priests : Are we talking about diocesan priests only ? Because Religious order priests take vows of poverty, chasity, and obedience to fulfill their order's charisms and needs, like Pope Francis.

Do we need to raise Salaries to help fund a family ?

[Beet]

Sinead O'Connor tried to warn people first, she was booed offstage at Madison Square Garden.

[Associate Justice PiT]

The modern (as in, post-Trent, not necessarily post-Vatican II or even post-Vatican I) theology of the priesthood, and all the more the cultural norms surrounding the priesthood and devout laypeople's reflexive deference to it, is rotten to the core and needs to be jettisoned into a black hole.

ETA: Wasn't John Geoghan shanked in prison? PennLive might be defining "Church official" more narrowly than "priest" since it seems like Lynn had an official role at the diocesan level for a while, which Geoghan never did.

     Would you consider mandatory celibacy to be a factor in this? Every church has sex abuse scandals, but it's not a novel idea to suggest that the mandatory celibacy of the Roman Catholic clergy has led to it becoming a refuge for people who are not suited to marriage for whatever reason.

I think there are good and bad ways to suggest mandatory celibacy is a factor. What I absolutely won't accept is the idea (obviously immoral when spelled out but disturbingly common in coded form) that if only priests had approved "outlets" in the form of wives then they wouldn't feel the "need" to additionally groom and rape children, vulnerable adults, penitents, etc., as if people who are married to clergy in other churches or other religions are the thin red line separating their spouses from transmogrifying into Humbert Humbert. What I think DOES have merit is, as you put it, the idea that the Catholic priesthood has allowed itself to become a "refuge" for men who already had deep psychic and moral wounds relating to sexuality to begin with. In that sense, yes, I think allowing married priests on a wider basis would open up the pool of potential priests to much healthier and safer personalities.

     I agree that there is a risk of that being taken the wrong way, and celibacy does have a legitimate place. In the Orthodox Church, priests are allowed to be either married or celibate, and in the United States 90-95% of parish priests are married. St. Paul speaks of some being called to marriage and others to celibacy, and he implies that the former are far more numerous than the latter. Considering that there are many men who enter the Roman Catholic clergy that are attracted because of sexual issues and not because of a genuine calling, I wonder furthermore whether they would be able to recruit enough men to serve who are suited for the position while maintaining a celibate clergy. That ventures into the realm of the unknowable, but it could serve to explain why so many predators end up being Catholic priests.

[jojoju1998]

The modern (as in, post-Trent, not necessarily post-Vatican II or even post-Vatican I) theology of the priesthood, and all the more the cultural norms surrounding the priesthood and devout laypeople's reflexive deference to it, is rotten to the core and needs to be jettisoned into a black hole.

ETA: Wasn't John Geoghan shanked in prison? PennLive might be defining "Church official" more narrowly than "priest" since it seems like Lynn had an official role at the diocesan level for a while, which Geoghan never did.

     Would you consider mandatory celibacy to be a factor in this? Every church has sex abuse scandals, but it's not a novel idea to suggest that the mandatory celibacy of the Roman Catholic clergy has led to it becoming a refuge for people who are not suited to marriage for whatever reason.

I think there are good and bad ways to suggest mandatory celibacy is a factor. What I absolutely won't accept is the idea (obviously immoral when spelled out but disturbingly common in coded form) that if only priests had approved "outlets" in the form of wives then they wouldn't feel the "need" to additionally groom and rape children, vulnerable adults, penitents, etc., as if people who are married to clergy in other churches or other religions are the thin red line separating their spouses from transmogrifying into Humbert Humbert. What I think DOES have merit is, as you put it, the idea that the Catholic priesthood has allowed itself to become a "refuge" for men who already had deep psychic and moral wounds relating to sexuality to begin with. In that sense, yes, I think allowing married priests on a wider basis would open up the pool of potential priests to much healthier and safer personalities.

     I agree that there is a risk of that being taken the wrong way, and celibacy does have a legitimate place. In the Orthodox Church, priests are allowed to be either married or celibate, and in the United States 90-95% of parish priests are married. St. Paul speaks of some being called to marriage and others to celibacy, and he implies that the former are far more numerous than the latter. Considering that there are many men who enter the Roman Catholic clergy that are attracted because of sexual issues and not because of a genuine calling, I wonder furthermore whether they would be able to recruit enough men to serve who are suited for the position while maintaining a celibate clergy. That ventures into the realm of the unknowable, but it could serve to explain why so many predators end up being Catholic priests.

I would argue that the unhealthy formation of the past created the predators, not the predators are attracted to the priesthood.

[Associate Justice PiT]

The modern (as in, post-Trent, not necessarily post-Vatican II or even post-Vatican I) theology of the priesthood, and all the more the cultural norms surrounding the priesthood and devout laypeople's reflexive deference to it, is rotten to the core and needs to be jettisoned into a black hole.

ETA: Wasn't John Geoghan shanked in prison? PennLive might be defining "Church official" more narrowly than "priest" since it seems like Lynn had an official role at the diocesan level for a while, which Geoghan never did.

     Would you consider mandatory celibacy to be a factor in this? Every church has sex abuse scandals, but it's not a novel idea to suggest that the mandatory celibacy of the Roman Catholic clergy has led to it becoming a refuge for people who are not suited to marriage for whatever reason.

I think there are good and bad ways to suggest mandatory celibacy is a factor. What I absolutely won't accept is the idea (obviously immoral when spelled out but disturbingly common in coded form) that if only priests had approved "outlets" in the form of wives then they wouldn't feel the "need" to additionally groom and rape children, vulnerable adults, penitents, etc., as if people who are married to clergy in other churches or other religions are the thin red line separating their spouses from transmogrifying into Humbert Humbert. What I think DOES have merit is, as you put it, the idea that the Catholic priesthood has allowed itself to become a "refuge" for men who already had deep psychic and moral wounds relating to sexuality to begin with. In that sense, yes, I think allowing married priests on a wider basis would open up the pool of potential priests to much healthier and safer personalities.

     I agree that there is a risk of that being taken the wrong way, and celibacy does have a legitimate place. In the Orthodox Church, priests are allowed to be either married or celibate, and in the United States 90-95% of parish priests are married. St. Paul speaks of some being called to marriage and others to celibacy, and he implies that the former are far more numerous than the latter. Considering that there are many men who enter the Roman Catholic clergy that are attracted because of sexual issues and not because of a genuine calling, I wonder furthermore whether they would be able to recruit enough men to serve who are suited for the position while maintaining a celibate clergy. That ventures into the realm of the unknowable, but it could serve to explain why so many predators end up being Catholic priests.

I would argue that the unhealthy formation of the past created the predators, not the predators are attracted to the priesthood.

     I would suspect pedophilia is more inborn than acculturated, though I am not familiar with evidence pointing one way or the other. I will say that either way, high school seminaries were always a mistake and it is a good thing for them to close. A clerical calling is not a discernment a teenager can make.

[sting in the rafters]

I think there are good and bad ways to suggest mandatory celibacy is a factor. What I absolutely won't accept is the idea (obviously immoral when spelled out but disturbingly common in coded form) that if only priests had approved "outlets" in the form of wives then they wouldn't feel the "need" to additionally groom and rape children, vulnerable adults, penitents, etc., as if people who are married to clergy in other churches or other religions are the thin red line separating their spouses from transmogrifying into Humbert Humbert.

Maaaaaan I want you to be right but I know too much ab straight dudes temporarily going gay while in prison to not think we potentially got a similar situation going on here.

[LabourJersey]

The modern (as in, post-Trent, not necessarily post-Vatican II or even post-Vatican I) theology of the priesthood, and all the more the cultural norms surrounding the priesthood and devout laypeople's reflexive deference to it, is rotten to the core and needs to be jettisoned into a black hole.

ETA: Wasn't John Geoghan shanked in prison? PennLive might be defining "Church official" more narrowly than "priest" since it seems like Lynn had an official role at the diocesan level for a while, which Geoghan never did.

     Would you consider mandatory celibacy to be a factor in this? Every church has sex abuse scandals, but it's not a novel idea to suggest that the mandatory celibacy of the Roman Catholic clergy has led to it becoming a refuge for people who are not suited to marriage for whatever reason.

I think there are good and bad ways to suggest mandatory celibacy is a factor. What I absolutely won't accept is the idea (obviously immoral when spelled out but disturbingly common in coded form) that if only priests had approved "outlets" in the form of wives then they wouldn't feel the "need" to additionally groom and rape children, vulnerable adults, penitents, etc., as if people who are married to clergy in other churches or other religions are the thin red line separating their spouses from transmogrifying into Humbert Humbert. What I think DOES have merit is, as you put it, the idea that the Catholic priesthood has allowed itself to become a "refuge" for men who already had deep psychic and moral wounds relating to sexuality to begin with. In that sense, yes, I think allowing married priests on a wider basis would open up the pool of potential priests to much healthier and safer personalities.

Yeah, this is a big reason why I find clerical celibacy to be problematic, especially in societies where marriage is so heavily encouraged otherwise.

A lot of people historically did not become clergy solely because they were called by God to do so. Most of them did feel that way, but they also joined (and join still) because there is some benefit to that life beyond what you can have by just being a devout layperson. Losing the expectation of having a spouse is a very big benefit for those who are not suited for marriage, like PiT said.

This extends beyond sexuality too. The number of anecdotes that I've heard from family, literature etc about heavy-drinking or alcoholic priests makes me wonder if those with addictive personalities that would otherwise have troubles in married life are also often attracted to the priesthood.

[jojoju1998]

The modern (as in, post-Trent, not necessarily post-Vatican II or even post-Vatican I) theology of the priesthood, and all the more the cultural norms surrounding the priesthood and devout laypeople's reflexive deference to it, is rotten to the core and needs to be jettisoned into a black hole.

ETA: Wasn't John Geoghan shanked in prison? PennLive might be defining "Church official" more narrowly than "priest" since it seems like Lynn had an official role at the diocesan level for a while, which Geoghan never did.

     Would you consider mandatory celibacy to be a factor in this? Every church has sex abuse scandals, but it's not a novel idea to suggest that the mandatory celibacy of the Roman Catholic clergy has led to it becoming a refuge for people who are not suited to marriage for whatever reason.

I think there are good and bad ways to suggest mandatory celibacy is a factor. What I absolutely won't accept is the idea (obviously immoral when spelled out but disturbingly common in coded form) that if only priests had approved "outlets" in the form of wives then they wouldn't feel the "need" to additionally groom and rape children, vulnerable adults, penitents, etc., as if people who are married to clergy in other churches or other religions are the thin red line separating their spouses from transmogrifying into Humbert Humbert. What I think DOES have merit is, as you put it, the idea that the Catholic priesthood has allowed itself to become a "refuge" for men who already had deep psychic and moral wounds relating to sexuality to begin with. In that sense, yes, I think allowing married priests on a wider basis would open up the pool of potential priests to much healthier and safer personalities.

Yeah, this is a big reason why I find clerical celibacy to be problematic, especially in societies where marriage is so heavily encouraged otherwise.

A lot of people historically did not become clergy solely because they were called by God to do so. Most of them did feel that way, but they also joined (and join still) because there is some benefit to that life beyond what you can have by just being a devout layperson. Losing the expectation of having a spouse is a very big benefit for those who are not suited for marriage, like PiT said.

This extends beyond sexuality too. The number of anecdotes that I've heard from family, literature etc about heavy-drinking or alcoholic priests makes me wonder if those with addictive personalities that would otherwise have troubles in married life are also often attracted to the priesthood.

Perhaps the case then.

But since the Dallas Charter Reforms of 2002, the quality of priests have gotten better. Work to be done ? Sure. But I know alot of seminarians, they're far more psychologically intergrated and mature.

And they want to become priests, because of the call itself. It's totally different. Sure not all are perfect. But the next generation of priests I think are happier.

[LabourJersey]

The modern (as in, post-Trent, not necessarily post-Vatican II or even post-Vatican I) theology of the priesthood, and all the more the cultural norms surrounding the priesthood and devout laypeople's reflexive deference to it, is rotten to the core and needs to be jettisoned into a black hole.

ETA: Wasn't John Geoghan shanked in prison? PennLive might be defining "Church official" more narrowly than "priest" since it seems like Lynn had an official role at the diocesan level for a while, which Geoghan never did.

     Would you consider mandatory celibacy to be a factor in this? Every church has sex abuse scandals, but it's not a novel idea to suggest that the mandatory celibacy of the Roman Catholic clergy has led to it becoming a refuge for people who are not suited to marriage for whatever reason.

I think there are good and bad ways to suggest mandatory celibacy is a factor. What I absolutely won't accept is the idea (obviously immoral when spelled out but disturbingly common in coded form) that if only priests had approved "outlets" in the form of wives then they wouldn't feel the "need" to additionally groom and rape children, vulnerable adults, penitents, etc., as if people who are married to clergy in other churches or other religions are the thin red line separating their spouses from transmogrifying into Humbert Humbert. What I think DOES have merit is, as you put it, the idea that the Catholic priesthood has allowed itself to become a "refuge" for men who already had deep psychic and moral wounds relating to sexuality to begin with. In that sense, yes, I think allowing married priests on a wider basis would open up the pool of potential priests to much healthier and safer personalities.

Yeah, this is a big reason why I find clerical celibacy to be problematic, especially in societies where marriage is so heavily encouraged otherwise.

A lot of people historically did not become clergy solely because they were called by God to do so. Most of them did feel that way, but they also joined (and join still) because there is some benefit to that life beyond what you can have by just being a devout layperson. Losing the expectation of having a spouse is a very big benefit for those who are not suited for marriage, like PiT said.

This extends beyond sexuality too. The number of anecdotes that I've heard from family, literature etc about heavy-drinking or alcoholic priests makes me wonder if those with addictive personalities that would otherwise have troubles in married life are also often attracted to the priesthood.

Perhaps the case then.

But since the Dallas Charter Reforms of 2002, the quality of priests have gotten better. Work to be done ? Sure. But I know alot of seminarians, they're far more psychologically intergrated and mature.

And they want to become priests, because of the call itself. It's totally different. Sure not all are perfect. But the next generation of priests I think are happier.

That's a good caveat. I do think the crops of modern priests are emotionally healthier than previous generations. A general relaxing of the societal demand to have a wife, as well as mental health being more recognized have all made the situation better than it used to be. And those reforms do seem to have probably made things better.

But it doesn't negate the damages done, unfortunately.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

I think there are good and bad ways to suggest mandatory celibacy is a factor. What I absolutely won't accept is the idea (obviously immoral when spelled out but disturbingly common in coded form) that if only priests had approved "outlets" in the form of wives then they wouldn't feel the "need" to additionally groom and rape children, vulnerable adults, penitents, etc., as if people who are married to clergy in other churches or other religions are the thin red line separating their spouses from transmogrifying into Humbert Humbert.

Maaaaaan I want you to be right but I know too much ab straight dudes temporarily going gay while in prison to not think we potentially got a similar situation going on here.

Situational sexuality is absolutely real (in addition to prisons and mental institutions it also shows up in single-sex schools, militaries in general and navies in particular ("rum, sodomy, and the lash"), and, yes, monasteries and convents), and I think it explains some of the weird relationships and situationships we see amongst priests and amongst seminarians--some of which are themselves abusive in nature; McCarrick primarily abused seminarians and young priests rather than minors, although he did abuse minors as well--but I think abusing children is on a different order and tends to be caused by much deeper issues in someone's personality.

What I think the existence of situational sexuality does work very well as an argument against is the belief held by some, including unfortunately the new USCCB President, that if only we could turf out all the homos from the seminaries and populate them with straight-shootin' turbo-cishet John Wayne types then all our troubles would be over. Many of those men would not stay straight-shootin', turbo-cishet, or John Wayne-like for very long.

[Statilius the Epicurean]

I'm not very well informed on the specifics of the abuse scandals in the Catholic Church, but my general prior is that child abuse will always be a danger where people who aren't imprinted parents are given unchecked authority over children. So Nathan's take that abuse stems from a cultural problem in the role of the priesthood seems prima facie right to me.

Again I genuinely don't know if it's at all equivalent, but we have had recently uncovered child abuse scandals in the Church of England here (where clergy are of course not celibate).

[afleitch]

I think there are good and bad ways to suggest mandatory celibacy is a factor. What I absolutely won't accept is the idea (obviously immoral when spelled out but disturbingly common in coded form) that if only priests had approved "outlets" in the form of wives then they wouldn't feel the "need" to additionally groom and rape children, vulnerable adults, penitents, etc., as if people who are married to clergy in other churches or other religions are the thin red line separating their spouses from transmogrifying into Humbert Humbert.

Maaaaaan I want you to be right but I know too much ab straight dudes temporarily going gay while in prison to not think we potentially got a similar situation going on here.

Situational sexuality is absolutely real (in addition to prisons and mental institutions it also shows up in single-sex schools, militaries in general and navies in particular ("rum, sodomy, and the lash"), and, yes, monasteries and convents), and I think it explains some of the weird relationships and situationships we see amongst priests and amongst seminarians--some of which are themselves abusive in nature; McCarrick primarily abused seminarians and young priests rather than minors, although he did abuse minors as well--but I think abusing children is on a different order and tends to be caused by much deeper issues in someone's personality.

What I think the existence of situational sexuality does work very well as an argument against is the belief held by some, including unfortunately the new USCCB President, that if only we could turf out all the homos from the seminaries and populate them with straight-shootin' turbo-cishet John Wayne types then all our troubles would be over. Many of those men would not stay straight-shootin', turbo-cishet, or John Wayne-like for very long.

Situational sexuality is usually a sign of psychological distress at the situation someone finds themselves in, not necessarily a conscious choice. It's, as noted, often wrapped up in hierarchical/power systems.