Vatican U.N. observer lashes out at critics

[telemann.livejournal.com]

The Vatican's observer to the United Nations, Archbishop Silvano Tomasi has lashed out at criticism over its handling of its paedophilia crisis by saying the Catholic church was "busy cleaning its own house" and that the problems with clerical sex abuse in other churches were as big, if not bigger. In a defiant and provocative statement, issued following a meeting of the UN human rights council in Geneva, the Holy See said the majority of Catholic clergy who committed such acts were not paedophiles but homosexuals attracted to sex with adolescent males.



The Holy See launched its counter–attack after an international representative of the International Humanist and Ethical Union, Keith Porteous Wood, accused it of covering up child abuse and being in breach of several articles under the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

Porteous Wood said the Holy See had not contradicted any of his accusations. "The many thousands of victims of abuse deserve the international community to hold the Vatican to account, something it has been unwilling to do, so far. Both states and children's organisations must unite to pressurise the Vatican to open its files, change its procedures worldwide, and report suspected abusers to civil authorities."

Representatives from other religions were dismayed by the Holy See's attempts to distance itself from controversy by pointing the finger at other faiths. Rabbi Joseph Potasnik, head of the New York Board of Rabbis, said: "Comparative tragedy is a dangerous path on which to travel. All of us need to look within our own communities. Child abuse is sinful and shameful and we must expel them immediately from our midst."

A spokesman for the US Episcopal Church said measures for the prevention of sexual misconduct and the safeguarding of children had been in place for years. Of all the world religions, Roman Catholicism has been hardest hit by sex abuse scandals. In the US, churches have paid more than $2bn (£1.25bn) in compensation to victims. In Ireland, reports into clerical sexual abuse have rocked both the Catholic hierarchy and the state.

The Ryan Report, published last May, revealed that beatings and humiliation by nuns and priests were common at institutions that held up to 30,000 children. A nine-year investigation found that Catholic priests and nuns for decades terrorised thousands of boys and girls, while government inspectors failed to stop the abuse.



I'm not sure why the Catholic church has always been slow to react to clerical abuse, but it doesn't shock me that under the current Bishop of Rome, his spokesman would try to blame other faiths, and homosexuality for its troubles. Of course, Archbishop Tomasi's statement doesn't address any of the impediments the church has thrown in the way of civil investigations, or addressing the issue historically.

Source 1 & & Source 2.

Comments

[reflaxion.livejournal.com]

the Holy See said the majority of Catholic clergy who committed such acts were not paedophiles but homosexuals attracted to sex with adolescent males

Either there's some sort of bizarre translation nuance here, or this is like that whole "banging other dudes doesn't make you gay" shtick.

[policraticus.livejournal.com]

Pedophiles are attracted to pre-adolescents. You can be attracted to a under-age boy or girl and have no particular pathology other than being a douchebag.

[reflaxion.livejournal.com]

Okay, so technically it's not true because adolescents aren't technically children. But they're not really adults either, so it's still sex with someone too young to be an adult, which is still the same idea in practice.

[policraticus.livejournal.com]

Not really. Why do you think so many models start at 14 and 15? Because people don't want to have sex with them? Why do you think the dominant ideal of beauty involves slim hips, thin arms and legs?

None of this excuses anything these men did, it was despicable. But is was not pedophilia. Pedophilia is something specific, a pathology that involves children who are pre-adolescent.

[reflaxion.livejournal.com]

There are so many teen models because a lot of companies target teens with their ads, not because they're trying to get adult males to have sex with their models.

Furthermore, skinniness isn't restricted to adolescence. Most models continue to stay slim throughout their 20s. Granted, they probably don't have the best of eating habits, but I'm sure that the teen models you're talking about don't either.

I already agreed with you that the technical definition of pedophilia involves pre-adolescents. You can stop mentioning that. But I still assert that sex with adolescents is virtually the same thing, by virtue of the second party not being a fully mature adult.

[policraticus.livejournal.com]

Karl Lagerfeld and Christian Lacroix are pitching $10,000 dresses to teens? Who knew? I just think you are being disingenuous here. 15 year old Brooke Shields wasn't saying "Nothing comes between me and my Calvins," because that was what other teen girls thought was cool, it was done to be sexually provocative.

Skinniness isn't restricted to adolescence, but it is a characteristic of adolescence. That is why a lot of models torture themselves with diet and exercise, to keep up a 15 year old's profile.

It isn't virtually the same thing. What makes pedophilia pathological is not the disparate amount of power between the partners or even the psychological maturity of the individuals. If that were the case I bet a quarter of all sexual acts are pathological. It is the fact that children that young are not phyiscally able to engage in the acts or process them when they happen. In not too distant times people married at 15 or a little younger. Even today people that young routinely engage in sexual acts with other teens. I'm not saying that is a good thing, but it happens. No culture ever advocated sexual relationships with 7 year olds.

[reflaxion.livejournal.com]

I'd say you're the one being disingenuous here. I'm sure you know full well that Karl Lagerfeld and Christian Lacroix do not make up anything near the vast majority of teen models, who tend to find a lot of work for major clothing chains like The Gap, or Abercrombie & Fitch, or whatever the hell the kids are wearing these days. And yes, they use sex appeal, because teenage girls tend to want to appeal to teenage boys, who according to a scientific study also happen to have hormones.

Skinniness and adolescence don't have that sort of cause-effect relationship. If anything, biologically, people tend to gain weight just before puberty as the body prepares itself for sudden growth changes. The reason some adolescents tend to be very skinny is because the models they try to look like are also very skinny, not the other way around. The fact that eating disorders are so prevalent in adolescent girls serves as evidence that the "skinny adolescent" is not a natural state.

It's true that people married at a younger age not too long ago, but the average lifespan was also much lower back then, and the culture was drastically different, especially in regards to women's rights. It wasn't until 1920 that women in the U.S. were even granted the right to vote - why should it be a surprise to anyone that people weren't very concerned with whether girls who were sent off to be married were fully mature or not?

[mcpreacher.livejournal.com]

it's part of the "homos are basically all pedophiles" thing that's still so popular

and of course the catholic church has decided it has lost the edge in being THE premier evil religion

[kinvore.livejournal.com]

I think if they try really hard they can get that title back.

[mcpreacher.livejournal.com]

they have to really make up hard for modern jesuits being pretty cool guys

[sgiffy.livejournal.com]

I think they should just stand up and say "Come on guys, this really the worst we've done? You've stuck with us though mass slaughter, is a little buggery really going to change things? Ya got no where else to go, now come have a cracker."

[kinvore.livejournal.com]

Wow they just don't get it, do they? "We're not the only ones, and it's the gays' fault!"

[mcpreacher.livejournal.com]

from springheel_jack: "the Vatican's permanent observer to the UN, defended its record by claiming that "available research" showed that only 1.5%-5% of Catholic clergy were involved in child sex abuse.

As a defense, it's so fucking innumerate. Half a second of googling (and seven grams of carbon I need to offset) reveals that there are about 400,000 Catholic clergy worldwide. I think we may not be unjustified in taking the high-end number, since this is the Church Universal and Triumphant's own datum, the one that's meant to minimize the problem. 5% of 400,000 is 20,000 molesting priests. That's a god damn army."

[prog-expat.livejournal.com]

So basically, misdirection and "everybody else is doing it". Where the fuck did these assholes learn morality? Oh, right.

Render unto Caesar...

[sophia-sadek.livejournal.com]

Nice frock on that graphic. Is that the kind of clothing Jesus wore back in the day?

Michel de Montaigne tells in interesting story from his visit to Rome. He was informed that the Church had just burned eight or nine monks in Portugal for same-sex marriage inside the monastery.

And the beat goes on...

Re: Render unto Caesar...

[telemann.livejournal.com]

Ya, just as long as you don't spill blood, burning people was A-Ok with the Bishop of Rome.

Re: Render unto Caesar...

[sophia-sadek.livejournal.com]

Yup, "Don't spill his blood" was the code phrase for "Burn him to a crisp."

[fizzyland.livejournal.com]

I'm going to stick with my general position that Vatican City should be turned into a library and women's center for the next 2,000 years and the RCC's worldwide holdings liquidated.

[telemann.livejournal.com]

kgbman wouldn't approve.

[fizzyland.livejournal.com]

He would be what we'd call an Enabler.

[root-fu.livejournal.com]

I don't understand why they don't just allow priests to get married.

I think the rule is married men can become priests. But, single men who become priests, cannot get married. So, if you're a priest and catholic, AND single, you're pretty much screwed.

[a-new-machine.livejournal.com]

Married Episcopalian converts can become priests, provided they were married before conversion. Married men who wish to enter the clergy can become deacons, but not full priests, and are required to take a vow not to remarry if their wife dies before them. Otherwise, married men are disqualified from becoming priests.

[a-new-machine.livejournal.com]

The Church seems to be ignoring the basic problem. It's not that there are pedophile priests. There are pedophiles in all walks of life, unfortunately. The problem is that they knew about these pedophiles, and rather than report them to the police, they shuffled them around in an active attempt to cover up their crimes. Having gone to a Catholic school where one of the teachers turned out to be a pedophile, I've witnessed the reluctance to investigate these allegations firsthand. Some people are more concerned about the image of the Church than the kids who could be hurt, and that's the thing that has people up in arms.

Also, if the Vatican has evidence of abuse in other religions, they should share it with the world.

[prog-expat.livejournal.com]

The statement said that rather than paedophilia, it would "be more correct" to speak of ephebophilia, a homosexual attraction to adolescent males. "Of all priests involved in the abuses, 80 to 90% belong to this sexual orientation minority which is sexually engaged with adolescent boys between the ages of 11 and 17."

*Screams and leaps at Silvano Tomasi*

pædophilia — sexual preference for pre-pubescent children. Considered a disorder
hebephilia — sexual preference for young adolescents (roughly 11—14). Considered a disorder
ephebophilia — sexual preference for older adolescents (roughly 15—19). Not considered a disorder
teleiophilia — sexual preference for adults. Not considered a disorder (as, obviously, it's the most healthy and normal state)

Two-and-a-half things: 1) He's conflating the age ranges for hebephilia and ephebophilia, and using the term for the one that's not even a disorder, and 2) homosexuality is not a prerequisite for hebephilia (or any of these) — guys that prefer thirteen year-old girls are hebephiles just as much as guys that prefer thirteen year-old boys.

Getting beyond my pedantic ranting, the official response amounts to "uh... uhhhhhh.... LOOK! GAYS, WHO ARE THAT WAY BY CHOICE BECAUSE THEY'RE JUST ALL-AROUND PERVERTS, AND OTHER RELIGIONS! *flees*". Seems the systematic protection of these monsters will continue.