ERRATA: Title should read, Well, JUST SHOOT ME IN THE FOOT PLEASE!
Father Benedict Groeschel, American friar of the conservative Franciscan Friars of the Renewal, stated that teenagers act as seducers in some cases of sexual abuse by priests. Fr. Groeschel further stated that people have an image of a sexual abuser being a psychopath. He added that suppose a man have a nervous breakdown and a youngster pursues him. He stated that in such a case, the teenager is the pursuer, not the victim! I did not believe what I was reading! Now, the victim is the perpetrator-totally unbelievable!
Want to make it worse? He also said
"If you go back 10 or 15 years ago with different sexual difficulties — except for rape or violence — it was very rarely brought as a civil crime. Nobody thought of it that way... And I’m inclined to think, on [a priest's] first offense, they should not go to jail because their intention was not committing a crime."
This just shows how out of touch they are. They seem to think they have there own set of laws, well in fact they do that's how they keep getting away with it. 10 or 15 years ago it was a crime to have sex with a minor, does he think that does't apply to priests?
Are you saying it's entirely impossible for a young person to initiate a sexual relationship with an older person? Strikes me as quite plausible that in some (notice he didn't say all, or even many) cases, a young person could be the initiator of sexual relationship with someone older. I can see why you might not like the idea of that, but it doesn't make it any less true. That's not shifting blame (the law is still the law), it's just stating a difficult fact.
It is the adult who is oftentimes the sexual predator. Children in such situations are passive and innocent victims. There is no excuse for an adult to molest a child-NONE WHATSOEVER!
No one said there is, but the fact is that a young person can initiate a sexual contact with an older person. That doesn't change the legal position, because consent is not recognised below a given age, so it can't be used as an 'excuse' anyway. Regardless, it is a fact that an older person could, in certain circumstances, be more vulnerable than someone younger. I think this priest mentioned mental health issues for example. So it's nothing to do with blame. The point I think he is making is that every case isn't the same, it's not just black or white. There can be other complex issues involved. It's an emotive subject, but there's no point ignoring those issues and hoping they'll go away just because we don't like talking about them. Society needs to have these discussions.
WTF. He thinks the first time you bonk a child it's by accident or something?
I see a troubling trend beginning around the time of the Atkin's statement that if a sexual assault is REALLY (legitimate) rape against a female, implying that most are consensual, then the victim's reproduction system will shut down and the woman will not become pregnant. Many rape cases result in pregnancy.
Then we have the Romney-Ryan plan to criminalize ALL abortions, even for rape and incest cases -- An aunt of mine died from an illegal abortion before I was born and I never got to even meet her. A pregnant 11-year-old child went into labor in the lobby of the medical clinic in my adult education building a decade ago and I will never forget it - her mom on the phone refused to come get her, stating that no one ever helped her when she was very young and pregnant -- Incest and rape.
Next we have the damaging statements of Father Benedict Groeschel. Teenaged seducers?!? to me, that is clearly a misdirecting lie.
This trend is a horror against human rights, in my opinion.
Since his statements went public, he and the publisher have written a retraction-an apology to all readers. he back peddled and said he made a mistake in his remarks and shouldn't have blamed the victims. I bet that publisher and Frier caught hell for that piece!
Yes, and still I bet he continues to blame the victims.
What this shows us is who delusional the Catholic Church is. I've heard a similar argument a while back that stated the church didn't really think it was all that bad or even a sin. But you will notice they invest a lot to keep abusers out of jail. They pay people off and use there money and lawyers to fight for every dime. And when they do strike a deal with victims it's not the Vatican that pays, it's the parishioners of that particular diocese. I think he must have felt safe to say what he actually thinks because of who was interviewing him.
Not delusional, insidious. The Catholic Church KNOWS exactly what it is doing, they are protecting those abusive priests. Cardinals and above have known about this for decades but they prefer to "not to recognize such". Countless boys have been sexually abused by priests and they are now coming out and relating what occurred to them. When they inform their parents of the sexual abuse, many parents think that they are prevaricating as "priests do not do SUCH things." In the Catholic faith, priests and nuns are given God-like status i.e. they can do no wrong. The Catholic hierarchy is aware how they are viewed and use this status to further abuse their authority which includes the sexual abuse of innocent children.
I don't care if a girl does flirt with a priest, he is the one who decided to have sex with her against not only the law, but the tenants of his own faith, and his holy vows. That would be true even if she showed up naked in his bed with a vibrator in one hand and a feather duster in the other. She is a child, she is not your wife, and you are a priest. There is no grey area there.
Sure there's a gray area. Psychologists tell us that some people can't determine right from wrong, good from bad. Not sure I believe it, but that's what we're told.
These priests, responsible for teaching us right from wrong, obviously can't tell the difference themselves. They don't know what evil is or how to recognize it although they and the church will claim differently. With that kind of mental defect, so far from the norm, the proper term is insane.
That wasn't the point I hard him making. I heard him basically saying child molestation was no big thing especially the first offense or if the 'asked for it'. Which is just disgusting. Having sexual contact with a minor is pretty close to a black and white thing. It;s not like it typically happens by accident while reaching for an apple at Walmart.
Doesn't say anything about a first offence in the OP. It does in this article with the fuller comments.
Reading those fuller comments I get that he is suggesting not all these cases are just about predators praying on young people, and it would be wrong to assume that 100% of the time. He didn't say anyone was 'asking for it', that's a bit unfair. He's talking frankly about the motivations and thought processes of those involved, which I think is important. Shame he doesn't mention the practice of celibacy which forces priests to suppress a fundamental aspect of their personality. I wonder what effect it has on the issue. Overall he seems to be suggesting that we shouldn't automatically demonise, and asks a serious question about how much a persons intent should be taken into consideration when being punished for a crime. I think that's a discussion for society that's worth having. Shame he's going to be pilloried for raising it.
It is very common for child sexual predators to blame the victim. I know of a case where a man blamed a 4-year-old for sashaying around in front of him seductively. He said in his interview with law enforcement that the child was practically begging for it. Of course, this was all in the abuser's mind.
Makes me wonder about the priest in question.
by free4india7 years ago
It is just because of social issues that it is not done or is it really a cause for genetic deformities?
by Alan17 months ago
When a person says this:" Disbelievers will be given Hell & suffering for eternity. Have fear. "in a Question thread, yet says this: "Love to share! Sharing is caring!!"in his/her profile, can...
by theirishobserver.5 years ago
TODAY MARKS the 20th anniversary of the “X case”. On February 6th, 1992, a court order was granted to prevent a 14-year-old rape victim from travelling to England for an abortion. The order was based on Article...
by theirishobserver.6 years ago
Catholic Church and Irish State continue to conceal Child Rape -By -Theirishobserver8th October 2010 -Those of us who thought that the Ryan, Murphy and Ferns Reports into the Rape and abuse of children at the hands of...
by Justin Earick4 years ago
Sodom wasn't smited for homosexuality (false-idol worship, poor treatment of strangers and the poor, gang rape). Leviticus doesn't matter (old covenant, pork, lobster, tattoos, mixed fibers, period sex,...
by DennisBarker6 years ago
I havn't found anything in the bible which says yes, so has the catholic church got a well documented history of covering up child abuse?
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.