"gay priests are no more likely than straight clergy to sexually abuse minors."

[hedgehog]

Still, some bishops gathered here Nov. 16-18 for their semi-annual meeting said it is premature to say whether the church leaders who had asserted such a link were wrong.

Researchers from New York's John Jay College of Criminal Justice on Tuesday (Nov. 17) presented initial findings from their multi-year study of the clergy sexual abuse scandal, which has resulted in some 14,000 claims of abuse and cost the U.S. Catholic Church about $2.6 billion in settlements since 1950.

The study, which is due to be completed next year, was commissioned by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops after the scandal overtook the U.S. church in 2002.

http://ncronline.org/news/praise-report-gay-priests-and-sex-abuse

[Matilda]

1. That bears out what I've read.

There's such a lot of hysteria attached to this issue, reflected in many websites and blogs (especially those run
by and for conservative christians).

I did find this excellent piece - quite a bit of reading, but it's very informative and well-presented:

http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/HTML/facts_molestation.html


There are many things we need to bear in mind when discussing the issue of clergy who've abused children, and one
is the disproportionate number of gay men in the Catholic religious communities, as compared to the population as
a whole. I can only speak about priests I've known over the years, and there have been a good number, but I have
to say that the majority are gay - they may not be obvious, they certainly may not be practising, but their sexual
orientation is obviously gay. Some priests come across as rather asexual beings, but very few I've know appear to
be straight.

The reasons, I think, are fairly obvious - one is that many straight religious men are put off joining the Church
because of its ban on married clergy; they might consider the priesthood, but they also want marriage and family,
so either they don't follow their vocation, or in some cases, they may join the seminary but leave after a year
or two because of the celibacy rule.

The other reason is that up until about thirty years ago, it was difficult for gay men to come out openly, except
in the arts communities, and I think many gay men fled to the priesthood because they simply couldn't cope with
their sexuality in the outside world. Many of the cases we're hearing about now date back many decades, and the
perpetrators came from those generations of men who couldn't face their own sexuality and tried to hide from it.

It's also a fact that there are child abusers who aren't necessarily gay, but simply are attracted to children.
Whether their target is male or female may simply be a matter of opportunity - many abusive priests were teachers
in boys' schools, or their prey were the altar boys, back in the days when girls couldn't serve.

In other cases, it's a matter of power - a child is easier to intimidate than an adult. Rape is also often a matter
of power, or frustration at the lack of it. Some people take out their rage and frustration at the world in general
by raping; this happens in war, when men will loot and rape simply because they can, and they feel powerful by
doing so. Some of the cases I've heard about in Australia, particularly those involving orphanages and schools run
by the Christian Brothers, seem to have been more about power than lust - boys were as likely to be beaten by the
brothers as raped by them.

Abuse is a matter of psychology, not sexuality alone, and the Church would be very foolish if it tried to ban gays
from becoming priests. The Vatican would be empty, for a start.