# Has "Nice" New Pope Made Media Stop Caring About Pedophile Priests? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 27, 2014, 12:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-nice-new-pope-made-media-stop-caring-about-pedophile-priests/679837 "2014-01-27T12:15:04Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2014, 4:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-nice-new-pope-made-media-stop-caring-about-pedophile-priests/679837/81 "2014-08-27T16:23:43Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > What? > You are saying in the bolded section that it is better to turn loose a pedophile into the community without telling anyone about his predilection than it is to keep him in the organization where ha can, at least, be watched or tracked? What? You are saying that those are the only two possibilities you can think of? _That_ is silly. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2014, 4:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-nice-new-pope-made-media-stop-caring-about-pedophile-priests/679837/82 "2014-08-27T16:33:58Z")
Celibacy, by the way, appears to be something of red herring. When the first large-scale media reports broke, a number of critics of celibacy (generally on the religious political Left) mounted an immediate campaign of _if only those poor priests had been able to marry, they would not have gone to children for their sexual release._ Meanwhile, a number of people on the religious political Right immediately mounted a campaign saying _Vatican II has undercut the church with its lax rules and now the seminaries are filled with homosexuals preying on children when they get out._ Unfortunately for those respective camps, the rates of pedophilia among celibate Catholic priests closely matches the rates of pedophilia among married priests and ministers of other organizations while the rates for pedophilia among priests who entered the seminary after Vatican II are no higher, (and may be lower), than the rates for those ordained earlier. As with most discussions addressing problems, politics and personal beliefs tend to crowd out fact-finding when looking for solutions. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2014, 4:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-nice-new-pope-made-media-stop-caring-about-pedophile-priests/679837/83 "2014-08-27T16:40:33Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > What? > You are saying that those are the only two possibilities you can think of? > _That_ is silly. Back to matters of reading comprehension? Those are the two paths generally chosen, already. RTFirefly made a claim that one was better. I disagree with his claim. Clearly the better option for any organization who found a practicing pedophile in their midst would be to follow the two pronged approach of reporting the abuse and seeking help for the abuser. That has rarely been the practice in previous years. Given the poor choices made, claiming that it was better to send a pedophile back to society with no audit trail does not seem better, to me, than at least tracking his movements. Take the time to follow the discussion rather than drawing improper inferences. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2014, 4:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-nice-new-pope-made-media-stop-caring-about-pedophile-priests/679837/84 "2014-08-27T16:57:08Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > Back to matters of reading comprehension? > Those are the two paths generally chosen, already. RTFirefly made a claim that one was better. I disagree with his claim. > Clearly the better option for any organization who found a practicing pedophile in their midst would be to follow the two pronged approach of reporting the abuse and seeking help for the abuser. That has rarely been the practice in previous years. Given the poor choices made, claiming that it was better to send a pedophile back to society with no audit trail does not seem better, to me, than at least tracking his movements. > > Take the time to follow the discussion rather than drawing improper inferences. The _better_ option for any organization who found a practicing pedophile in their midst would be not to pretend that those were the only two options that should remain on the table, be more concerned with treatment for the abused than treatment for the abuser, _and taking said pedophile and all records collected on said pedophile and taking them directly to the nearest police station._ I have been following the conversation quite well, **tomndebb** , and I think that arguing which is the better of two bad choices is just a waste of time. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2014, 6:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-nice-new-pope-made-media-stop-caring-about-pedophile-priests/679837/85 "2014-08-27T18:03:51Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > I have been following the conversation quite well, **tomndebb** , and I think that arguing which is the better of two bad choices is just a waste of time. Then you should open a thread to discuss what you want instead of interrupting this one. The discussion, at this point, is over the issue of whether the RCC is particularly more culpable than other groups in its completed actions. That, of necessity, requires an analysis of completed actions. Muttering that there was a better action that neither group chose does nothing to resolve the issue of whether one group or another had historically made a better or less poor choice. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2014, 6:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-nice-new-pope-made-media-stop-caring-about-pedophile-priests/679837/86 "2014-08-27T18:15:42Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > Then you should open a thread to discuss what you want instead of interrupting this one. The discussion, at this point, is over the issue of whether the RCC is particularly more culpable than other groups in its completed actions. That, of necessity, requires an analysis of completed actions. Muttering that there was a better action that neither group chose does nothing to resolve the issue of whether one group or another had historically made a better or less poor choice. Was? I thought part of this conversation was whether the RCC _is_ more culpable than other groups at the present time, which means that their present actions are certainly still on the table. You say, > [@](#): > > The discussion, at this point, is over the issue of whether the RCC is particularly more culpable than other groups in its completed actions. , and I say that I am not satisfied that it’s actions are completed to my satisfaction. We cannot discuss what is done until it is actually done. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2014, 7:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-nice-new-pope-made-media-stop-caring-about-pedophile-priests/679837/87 "2014-08-27T19:45:46Z")
While there are probably still bishops who are hiding things, they are a shrinking number. The US Council of Catholic Bishops provided stricter guidelines in 1989 and, when several bishops ignored them, further guidelines in 2002. The Vatican further has issued stricter guidelines since that time. Nearly all the stories cropping up, now, are in regard to earlier situations that are now being exposed. Those guidelines are exactly the ones that I set forth and you echoed. So, barring new evidence that some bishops are continuing to ignore the several sets of rules, your interpolation into the exchange between RTFirefly and myself was pointless. ---
**Author:** ![CurtC](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ce73a5/32.png) [@CurtC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CurtC)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2014, 7:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-nice-new-pope-made-media-stop-caring-about-pedophile-priests/679837/88 "2014-08-27T19:55:57Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > Celibacy, by the way, appears to be something of red herring. When the first large-scale media reports broke, a number of critics of celibacy (generally on the religious political Left) mounted an immediate campaign of _if only those poor priests had been able to marry, they would not have gone to children for their sexual release._ Really? I didn’t see anyone saying that. I did hear talk that the celibacy could be a factor, in that a young man who is attracted to children sexually may be more likely to choose a life where he’s supposed to be celibate, possibly hoping to keep those demons bottled up. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2014, 8:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-nice-new-pope-made-media-stop-caring-about-pedophile-priests/679837/89 "2014-08-27T20:08:50Z")
> [@CurtC](#): > > Really? I didn’t see anyone saying that. > > I did hear talk that the celibacy could be a factor, in that a young man who is attracted to children sexually may be more likely to choose a life where he’s supposed to be celibate, possibly hoping to keep those demons bottled up. I made reference to a fairly common _meme_ that has circulated in Left leaning circles since the mid-1980s. (Just as I noted the _meme_ from the Right regarding lax seminaries and homosexuality in the priesthood.) Had someone in this thread made the specific claim, I would have quoted it. I have also heard comments similar to the idea you have expressed–along with similar remarks regarding homosexuality. Barring an actual psych study of seminarians and priests supporting those ideas, I doubt that either one has much to recommend it. (Maybe Greeley has done such a study.) They sound much more like pop psychology than a serious explanation. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2014, 8:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-nice-new-pope-made-media-stop-caring-about-pedophile-priests/679837/90 "2014-08-27T20:12:14Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > While there are probably still bishops who are hiding things, they are a shrinking number. The US Council of Catholic Bishops provided stricter guidelines in 1989 and, when several bishops ignored them, further guidelines in 2002. The Vatican further has issued stricter guidelines since that time. Nearly all the stories cropping up, now, are in regard to earlier situations that are now being exposed. Those guidelines are exactly the ones that I set forth and you echoed. So, barring new evidence that some bishops are continuing to ignore the several sets of rules, your interpolation into the exchange between RTFirefly and myself was pointless. So they’ve been reluctantly been fiddling around with the guidelines since 1989 and had to adjust them several times since then(and apparently it still hasn’t quite done the trick), and they have yet to get to the rather obvious “Molest a child and we turn your ass in to the police immediately. Help cover it up and we turn your ass in to the police immediately. Show that you knew in any way that it was being covered up in any way and you can find a new job that doesn’t involve wearing a collar.” It’s sweet that the guidelines have been tightened up, but the fact that some bishops are no longer hiding kiddie-diddlers or no longer know where kiddie-diddlers are being hid doesn’t dismiss the fact that they _used_ to hide kiddie-diddlers or _knew_ where kiddie-diddlers were being hid. You are telling me that the septic tank is no longer leaking into the basement as bad as it used to, that the tear in the tank is pretty much fixed for the most part. That’s fine…but when is somebody going to clean up this basement full of shit? ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2014, 8:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-nice-new-pope-made-media-stop-caring-about-pedophile-priests/679837/91 "2014-08-27T20:12:29Z")
> [@CurtC](#): > > Really? I didn’t see anyone saying that. > > I did hear talk that the celibacy could be a factor, in that a young man who is attracted to children sexually may be more likely to choose a life where he’s supposed to be celibate, possibly hoping to keep those demons bottled up. Another factor is indirect: in North America at least, the requirement that RC priests be celibate is at least partly responsible for the shortage of priests. > **[Priest shortage in the Catholic Church](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priest_shortage_in_the_Roman_Catholic_Church)** > > In the years since World War II there has been a substantial reduction in the number of priests per capita in the Catholic Church, a phenomenon considered by many to constitute a "shortage" in the number of priests. From 1980 to 2012, the ratio of Catholics per priest increased globally, with the number of Catholics per priest going from 1,895 to 3,126. > In 2014, there were 49,153 parishes in the world that had no resident priest pastor. Between 1970 and 2023, the number of priests declined from... This has lead to the reasonable assumption that the relative shortage of priests put instiutional pressure on the Church to retain priests, even in the face of sexual “improprieties”. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2014, 8:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-nice-new-pope-made-media-stop-caring-about-pedophile-priests/679837/92 "2014-08-27T20:31:02Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > So they’ve been reluctantly been fiddling around with the guidelines since 1989 and had to adjust them several times since then(and apparently it still hasn’t quite done the trick), . . . That certainly seems to be your unsupported opinion. You have evidence that the church is still hiding current pedophiles, (as opposed to stories that are coming to light of past offenses)? ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2014, 8:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-nice-new-pope-made-media-stop-caring-about-pedophile-priests/679837/93 "2014-08-27T20:41:31Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > That certainly seems to be your unsupported opinion. > You have evidence that the church is still hiding current pedophiles, (as opposed to stories that are coming to light of past offenses)? And you speak to me of reading comprehension problems? The pedophiles themselves are only rung #1 on the ladder of dung, as I thought I made clear in my posts. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2014, 9:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-nice-new-pope-made-media-stop-caring-about-pedophile-priests/679837/94 "2014-08-27T21:11:51Z")
The IMHO forum is four down. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2014, 9:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-nice-new-pope-made-media-stop-caring-about-pedophile-priests/679837/95 "2014-08-27T21:15:38Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > The IMHO forum is four down. Are you speaking as a moderator, or as a poster? ---
**Author:** ![Mighty\_Girl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7bcc69/32.png) [@Mighty\_Girl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mighty_Girl)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2014, 2:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-nice-new-pope-made-media-stop-caring-about-pedophile-priests/679837/96 "2014-08-28T02:47:45Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > That certainly seems to be your unsupported opinion. > > You have evidence that the church is still hiding current pedophiles, (as opposed to stories that are coming to light of past offenses)? How far back in the past? Because the case of the two Polish priests in the DR is fairly recent. When the cardinal received that letter, instead of going to the police (who was already investigating), his first reaction was to go to Rome to talk to his boss. Or maybe he wasn’t aware of the changes. ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2014, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-nice-new-pope-made-media-stop-caring-about-pedophile-priests/679837/97 "2014-08-31T21:01:10Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > Back to matters of reading comprehension? > Those are the two paths generally chosen, already. RTFirefly made a claim that one was better. I disagree with his claim. > Clearly the better option for any organization who found a practicing pedophile in their midst would be to follow the two pronged approach of reporting the abuse and seeking help for the **abuser**. That has rarely been the practice in previous years. Given the poor choices made, claiming that it was better to send a pedophile back to society with no audit trail does not seem better, to me, than at least tracking his movements. > > Take the time to follow the discussion rather than drawing improper inferences. (Bolding mine). I really hope that was a typo for “abused”, otherwise it’s a reprehensible view. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2014, 12:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-nice-new-pope-made-media-stop-caring-about-pedophile-priests/679837/98 "2014-09-01T00:38:02Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > (Bolding mine). > > I really hope that was a typo for “abused”, otherwise it’s a reprehensible view. Help for the abused was, in my mind, implicit in reporting the incident. I apologize for not making that more explicit. Help for the abuser, however, should also be a part of any response. (If your attitude is simply that such people should be summarily executed, go open a new thread to argue that point.) ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2014, 3:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-nice-new-pope-made-media-stop-caring-about-pedophile-priests/679837/99 "2014-09-01T03:34:46Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > Help for the abused was, in my mind, implicit in reporting the incident. I apologize for not making that more explicit. > Help for the abuser, however, should also be a part of any response. (If your attitude is simply that such people should be summarily executed, go open a new thread to argue that point.) Please point to anything that indicates so crass a “solution” as summary execution in anything Steophan has posted. ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2014, 2:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-nice-new-pope-made-media-stop-caring-about-pedophile-priests/679837/100 "2014-09-01T14:59:48Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Please point to anything that indicates so crass a “solution” as summary execution in anything Steophan has posted. Please point to any claim where he said it was. What he did say is that the abusers being helped is a reprehensible view. If they can’t receive help, then your choices are to lock them up forever or execute them. Otherwise you are letting them be amongst the populace without actually rehabilitating them. Saying they shouldn’t get help is the reprehensible view. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-nice-new-pope-made-media-stop-caring-about-pedophile-priests/679837.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-nice-new-pope-made-media-stop-caring-about-pedophile-priests/679837.md?page=6)