Catholicism, especially its priesthood, has a warped attitude to sexual morality and we are surprised that it covers up child sex abuse!

 

"Numerous studies and observations by priests and other professionals portray a clerical landscape filled with a majority of psychically underdeveloped men with the proportion of mal-developed equaling the developed—about 8%. Thus spoke the 1972 Kennedy/Heckler psychological study of priests commissioned by the US Bishops. That is a reliable piece of work and supported by other observations. A psychiatrist, Dr. Conrad Baare addressed the Pope and Catholic Bishops in November 1971 at the Synod in Rome and sketched a pattern similar to the Kennedy/Heckler report. Psychosexual immaturity predominates in the ranks of the priesthood. No study has ever countermanded that conclusion. Additional studies merit attention and duplication"  by Richard Sipe

Catholic morality is riddled with hypocrisy which is why the Church as a faith has to take the blame if a priest abuses a child sexually.

 

The Church's boast that only a small number of clerics abused children is just an empty boast.

 

Many cases have not been proven though they happened.

 

Many cases are not reported.

 

Many priests want to abuse children but do not - perhaps they cannot groom them.

 

Many paedophile priests prefer fantasy and porn that degrades children to actually abusing a child.

 

The boast is disgusting when the problem is how the bishops and the mothers of the victims covered up the crimes for the glory of the Church.

 

St Alphonsus Ligouri declared that a cleric who is secretly having sex with a married woman may kill the husband in order to safeguard his reputation if the husband catches them in the act. He said it is mere self-defence. Even worse, this doctrine is justified in the still authoritive book by Ryder, Reply to Littledale's Plain Reasons. See page 165 and the book can be found online. The Church's attitude to its own reputation has led to its pretending that child sex abuse by clerics does not matter or does not happen.
 
The Roman Catholic Church has been bankrupted in many parts of the world due to its failure to protect children from its predatory priests and bishops. When complaints were made, the culprit was moved to another area to continue the abuse. The Church also created decrees and vows of secrecy to help facilitate the protection of these men. The laity were complicit in the crimes of the Church. The evil done by the priests to children was an open secret. Parents and victims knew how being abused sexually as a child leaves the child with something to torment her or him forever - her or his life may be completely ruined. The priests and bishops knew the effects because they had insider knowledge of families and communities and from the confessional and then pretended that they didn't comprehend the damage such abuse does. They wanted people to think, "They didn't understand the problem and meant well when they let the paedophile priests run riot".
 
The Church teaches that at ordination a man receives special power from God to be righteous and good and that the priest is to be regarded as Christ himself and is a different kind of human person from any other. He is ontologically changed. All this means that as a priest is sacred, there should be more scepticism if an allegation is made against him than there should be if it is an ordinary person. There should be more celebration if a layman is convicted and handed over to justice than if a priest is.
 
One thing the Church loves to state is that if a priest is under investigation, he has the right to be assumed innocent until proven guilty. Why not treat him as innocent until proven guilty? That would be better. Then you are not assuming anything. He certainly cannot have the right to be presumed innocent until proven otherwise. To assume he is innocent means to assume the victims are accusing him falsely. The Church vehemently denies this. The Church logic is like the logic of the following parable.
 
A man and his wife go to bed for sex. His wife starts using a sex toy during their activities. The man feels insulted. Most people today think the man is the one with the problem. They would say she is only using it for fun and to help achieve orgasm and it is not a substitute for him. But if he is not enough for her and can't help her reach orgasm then it is a substitute for him - some of the time. Like the man is asked to pretend that his wife is not treating him as a love dud rather than a love god, so the Church asks us to pretend that assuming innocence for accused priests is not assuming malice or deception or delusion in relation to the alleged victims of the priest. If you say God chooses some people for Heaven, that is saying he chooses some for Hell. Same principle.
 
We can treat the priest as an innocent man without assuming he is innocent. Assuming is what you do if you want to bias yourself in favour of believing his innocence. People who make up their minds about you without facts are assuming. They end up biased and often they cannot see that they are wrong about you. People who assume innocence often refuse to believe the verdict of guilty. They hypnotise themselves.
 
Even if we should assume that accused priests are innocent we cannot say that the priest has a right to be presumed innocent. Rights are based on justice. To say we must presume innocence for it is the priest's right is to say that it is fair to the priest that we presume innocence. But it is not fair if he is guilty. The priest cannot have the right. He may have the privilege. A privilege is an advantage given. It is just given. It is not about rights but about kindness. It is giving something just to give it and not because it is deserved or is a right. A privilege refuses to create any bias in favour of his innocence or to risk such a bias.
 
The Catholic Church calls itself one and holy and Catholic and apostolic. The boast that it is holy insults religions that did less or no harm or even piles of good to children. Paedophiles do not become priests but priests become paedophiles. A paedophile who wanted to have sex with children would be more likely to become a teacher or a father than a priest for it gives them better access to children. There is something about the Catholic faith that causes priests to become paedophiles. It certainly encourages priests who develop paedophile inclinations to actualise them and practice. The culture of secrecy about such matters that protects the abusing priest and demonises the victim makes the temptation too great for them.
 
The popes of course are at the top and ultimately responsible for making an environment conducive to clerical child abuse. People like to pretend the popes mean well. But until a pope fights for church property to be sold to feed the poor and lives like a poor man and binds up the wounds of the wounded that assumption is unwarranted. It is Catholics merely being too bigoted to see the truth.