fides' Jack Posted August 31, 2012 Share Posted August 31, 2012 You're right, but that's exactly my point. Fr. Groeschel doesn't deserve the response he's gotten. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mortify Posted August 31, 2012 Share Posted August 31, 2012 Fr Groeschel was speaking on his [i][u]personal knowledge[/u] [/i]of Priests involved in abuse cases when he said, [i][color=#0000FF][b] "A lot of the cases, the youngster — 14, 16, 18 —is the seducer"[/b][/color][/i] This is certainly politically incorrect but is there any truth to what he is saying? It seems to me the priests Fr Groeschel met were psychologically broken individuals who according to him were taken advantage of. I'm not siding with him but catamites are a historical reality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmotherofpirl Posted August 31, 2012 Share Posted August 31, 2012 High school girls come on to young male teachers quite frequently, you can't tell me they don't know exactly what they are doing.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
To Jesus Through Mary Posted August 31, 2012 Share Posted August 31, 2012 [quote name='fides' Jack' timestamp='1346440392' post='2476806'] 16 isn't exactly a child. In New York, you're no longer a minor at 17 (I believe). So, what's the difference between 16 years 364 days and 17 years? [/quote] Emotional maturity. So then following your logic what is the difference between 16 and 15 besides 364 days or 14 or 13. "Age ain't nothing but a number" is a lie. 16 is still a minor and a 50 something guy preying on that. Still not ok. Say a 16 year old girl hits on a 50 year old man. Is their relationship ok? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
To Jesus Through Mary Posted August 31, 2012 Share Posted August 31, 2012 [quote name='cmotherofpirl' timestamp='1346443264' post='2476831'] High school girls come on to young male teachers quite frequently, you can't tell me they don't know exactly what they are doing.... [/quote] It doesn't matter if they know what they are doing. The ADULT should still be more responsible then that. We are not controlled by our hormones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhuturePriest Posted August 31, 2012 Share Posted August 31, 2012 [quote name='cmotherofpirl' timestamp='1346443264' post='2476831'] High school girls come on to young male teachers quite frequently, you can't tell me they don't know exactly what they are doing.... [/quote] I am inclined to agree. I do think that some of the young men (NOT children, young men of sixteen or seventeen) could have seduced the Priests and have known exactly what they were doing. I'm fifteen and if I came onto a female teacher I would know exactly what I was doing. It's not like you are mentally handicapped until you reach the magical age of eighteen. I do believe the universally accepted age of culpability is seven (Of course not in sexual cases, but culpability begins then). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhuturePriest Posted August 31, 2012 Share Posted August 31, 2012 [quote name='To Jesus Through Mary' timestamp='1346443425' post='2476834'] It doesn't matter if they know what they are doing. The ADULT should still be more responsible then that. We are not controlled by our hormones. [/quote] When did she ever defend the Priests and what they did? Grown adults get seduced. Priests are men with weaknesses as well. It doesn't make it right, but they are. I think this is an obvious fact people need to realize a little more often. Being ordained doesn't make you free from temptation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Basilisa Marie Posted August 31, 2012 Share Posted August 31, 2012 [quote name='mortify' timestamp='1346442376' post='2476827'] Fr Groeschel was speaking on his [i][u]personal knowledge[/u] [/i]of Priests involved in abuse cases when he said, [i][color=#0000FF][b]"A lot of the cases, the youngster — 14, 16, 18 —is the seducer"[/b][/color][/i] This is certainly politically incorrect but is there any truth to what he is saying? It seems to me the priests Fr Groeschel met were psychologically broken individuals who according to him were taken advantage of. I'm not siding with him but catamites are a historical reality. [/quote] I've seen plenty of situations where teens or other parishioners "come on" to a priest. I'm not surprised that some priests feel like they're the ones being seduced. The thing is, though, the number of cases where a priest is actually "seduced" by a teen is far smaller than the number of cases where priests are the ones instigating the activity. Bringing up these "exceptions" really only serves to distract from the real issue of abuse by clergy. But even if we're going to talk about these exceptions, the fact still remains that a priest is in a position of authority, and has an obligation to withstand any "seductions." Placing the primary blame on the young person instigating the activity starts us on a dangerous path of eventually blaming victims of sexual abuse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lil Red Posted August 31, 2012 Share Posted August 31, 2012 if teenagers/children are acting out in sexual ways, it's most likely because they've been conditioned (abused) to behave that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
To Jesus Through Mary Posted August 31, 2012 Share Posted August 31, 2012 (edited) [quote name='FuturePriest387' timestamp='1346443436' post='2476835'] I am inclined to agree. I do think that some of the young men (NOT children, young men of sixteen or seventeen) could have seduced the Priests and have known exactly what they were doing. I'm fifteen and if I came onto a female teacher I would know exactly what I was doing. It's not like you are mentally handicapped until you reach the magical age of eighteen. I do believe the universally accepted age of culpability is seven (Of course not in sexual cases, but culpability begins then). [/quote] You make it sounds as if they put a spell on the priest. The priest had free will to say no. It is illegal for a reason. FP most teenagers (despite thinking they know everything) do not have a complete grasp to know why what they are doing is immoral. And more over an individual who would "seduce" a much older person is most likely wounded and that person would have an even lesser grasp. But what age do you think should be the cut off??? Edited: misspelling- meant cut off Edited August 31, 2012 by To Jesus Through Mary Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmotherofpirl Posted August 31, 2012 Share Posted August 31, 2012 Years ago Red that may have been true, but not today. They probably grew up learning it watching network TV. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lil Red Posted August 31, 2012 Share Posted August 31, 2012 (edited) [quote name='cmotherofpirl' timestamp='1346443777' post='2476843'] Years ago Red that may have been true, but not today. They probably grew up learning it watching network TV. [/quote] i don't see how we disagree. many youngsters are being conditioned by what they read & watch. some are conditioned by IRL relationships. some are conditioned by early exposure to porn (which a lot of experts are saying is truly damaging the younger you view it). Edited August 31, 2012 by Lil Red Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhuturePriest Posted August 31, 2012 Share Posted August 31, 2012 [quote name='To Jesus Through Mary' timestamp='1346443681' post='2476841'] You make it sounds as if they put a spell on the priest. The priest had free will to say no. It is illegal for a reason. FP most teenagers (despite thinking they know everything) do not have a complete grasp to know why what they are doing is immoral. And more over an individual who would "seduce" a much older person is most likely wounded and that person would have an even lesser grasp. But what age do you think should be the but off??? [/quote] I agree these acts were bad. Never do I defend the acts or the Priests. I am simply trying to put this in perspective. I realize not all teenagers grasp everything they do 100% (I myself question why I get into debates every time I do), but I would have a good grasp of what I was doing if I came onto somebody. I would understand twelve to maybe even early fifteen, but sixteen and seventeen is a little much. Abuse has a lot to do with these cases of seduction by the young men and I do not deny that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmotherofpirl Posted August 31, 2012 Share Posted August 31, 2012 [url="http://chnm.gmu.edu/cyh/primary-sources/24"]http://chnm.gmu.edu/cyh/primary-sources/24[/url] Notice the dates Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mortify Posted August 31, 2012 Share Posted August 31, 2012 Question is was Fr Groeschel right about the cases he knew? Were young adults whether male of female often the seducer? Were the priests in a psychologically vulnerable state? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now