An Advocate.com exclusive posted April 30, 2002 

The priest came to see me because nobody else wanted him. 

I had grown up Catholic and had studied for the priesthood, but I became a psychologist instead. It was still odd to think that I would be counseling a priest, but that was what this priest was here for—clinical help. He was referred to me because several psychologists he had interviewed with decided this was a case beyond their ability and—knowing that I am Catholic—thought I would be inclined to take the case. But I didn’t know the real reason they had referred him to me until halfway through the session, when he announced that he had been directed to seek counseling for having sexually abused a minor. 

This priest did not seem at all bothered by the activity he had engaged in with the 15-year-old son of a family in his parish with whom he had become especially close. At first, he offered that he was helping the boy “become a man” by teaching him what to do when trying to communicate special feelings for someone. These “lessons” took place over the course of 18 months at a retreat center in the mountains about two hours’ drive from the parish. The contact involved massaging, oil rubs, fondling, and fellatio. 

The young man didn’t see them as lessons. He stopped going to church, and when the priest would come to his house, he would try to run away. His parents, unaware of what was going on, encouraged the overnight trips with the priest and perceived the teenager’s erratic behavior as adolescent angst. After all, it was the 1980s and everybody had angst. They forced him to go on the trips, thinking that it would help settle his behavior, which was distressing, as he had never been a problem before. 

This young man attempted suicide five times over the course of 10 years. When he was first hospitalized, he told the doctors what had happened to him. The medical staff thought it was displacement of anger and never reported anything to the authorities or the church. It was when he was hospitalized the third time for attempting suicide that a nurse called the police and the investigation started. The reaction from the church and the parish was so hostile that the family had to move to another county. The young man was blamed for the family’s situation, and this increased his tendencies toward suicide and self-harm. 

Meanwhile, the priest who had violated him was submitted to brief therapy and a retreat, then moved to a new parish. 

This proved to not be a solution. The activity started again, in the same fashion as before. 

This is how the victims recognize one another—the story is exactly the same for each. Now there are over 15 of them for this one priest. During his therapy, the priest announced, in his defense, that he did what he did because he was oppressed by the church’s teachings on sexuality, especially homosexuality. Because he had discovered in the seminary that he was gay, he said, he had nowhere to turn but to those young men who he believed were going through “a similar self-discovery, without any way of exploring it fully.” 

This priest professed that he was providing a service. 

This story is not unlike many that are part of recent daily news. There is a crisis going on, and not just within the church. Although it started with reports in the 1980s that priests had been sexually abusing minors for decades, the recent discussion has affected many, many others, Catholic or not, practicing in the church or not. As a psychologist, I see priests, gay and straight, who are as shocked and outraged as anyone else about their brother priests’ actions; they are demoralized and in the throes of depression because they must fight daily against common misperception people have: “Could he be a molester?” 

Many priests fear for their safety when wearing their collars in public. 

I also work in the gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender community in Southern California, and I have witnessed disastrous conversations that perpetuate myths and misinformation. Every crisis has a period of hysterical reaction, and this is no different. But given the greater need for healing and survival, we must move forward, and the GLBT community has an opportunity to lead the way in the healing.

 To do so, we all need to understand a few basic concepts and make some distinctions. 

In psychological terms, pedophilia is a strong attraction toward prepubescent children, including sexual arousal. Ephebophilia is a strong sexual attraction toward adolescent youths up to age 18, including sexual arousal. Sexual abuse of a minor occurs when a person under age 18 is exploited for the sexual needs and desires of the perpetrator, whose actions are typically rooted in an inability to develop intimate relationships with adults and a lack of basic coping skills for even the slightest stress; the actions may also serve to resolve a psychosexual development problem.

 There are people who meet the definition of pedophile or ephebophile who do not sexually abuse minors. And there are abusers who do not meet the clinical criteria for pedophilia or ephebophilia. Sexual identity—as healthy adults understand it—doesn’t necessarily play a part in these behaviors, except as it comes to play in issues of psychosexual development and the person’s perception of their own personhood. 

In any given case, there are many contributing factors as to why somebody sexually abuses a minor. It is important to remember that the factors that cause this behavior can be neither simplified nor generalized, nor can any one factor stand as the sole explanation in any single case. The behavior can be explained to some degree through thorough psychological investigation of the perpetrator, but it is not be excused. 

That said, some psychological commonalities can be identified. The abuser typically perceives that he and his victim “connect.” The resulting impulse toward sexual abuse meets the perpetrator’s codependent needs, and it speaks to issues of intimacy that the abuser feels are not being addressed. Many priest abusers regret that they were never fully able to meet their own needs for intimacy—sometimes because people don’t believe they have such needs—nor are they able to satiate their needs through their abusive actions. They are often trapped in a bottomless pit of narcissistic woe. They feel no empathy for their victims and seek to exploit only those whom they perceive will offer little if any resistance. Some pursue their victims aggressively, using the cloak of authority to extract what they want; some groom their victims through enticement and cajoling. Since it is usually adolescent males to whom priests have access, the abuse requires grooming to ensnare their victims without putting the abuser in immediate danger of being revealed. 

As we see in the news and I see in my clinical practice, a plurality of these cases are adult men who abuse teenage boys. Therefore, it’s important to consider what part a homosexual sexual identity plays in these cases and how the GLBT community can lead the way in healing. 

Psychologists agree that same-sex abuse occurs primarily because of the sex of the person accessible. In the case of priests, we must remember that until recently altar servers in the Roman Catholic Church have all been male. When a priest’s homosexuality does come into play, it’s involved because the individual perceives that the church’s teachings about homosexuality condemn his feelings. The priest may have no ability to combat the negative messages and no official representative of the church to clarify the muddle. 

Traditionally, the church has no forum for discussion regarding how to be a sexually healthy celibate, no formal structure to help priests learn how to connect intimately and develop deep friendships without romance or sexual activity. It is presumed that priests have resolved the celibacy conflict prior to entering seminaries, and human sexuality is not taught as part of seminary curricula. The result is a host of assumptions, misperceptions, and presumptions, which contribute to a developmental disaster for some priests. Many priests, obviously, overcome these problems—we have many healthy celibate priests, gay and straight, who can testify to this. 

Whether a gay priest can deal with the twin pressures of celibacy and the church’s disapproval of homosexual inclinations depends on each person’s ability to cope and whether or not he finds healthy outlets for his intimacy needs. Though this is not the only dividing line, it is an important one, as the failure to achieve adult intimacy is a common element among the perpetrators of sexual abuse of minors. 

Again, psychologists agree that sexual orientation does not determine whether a person will be inclined toward abusing minors. One credible study found that 23% to 25% of the active priest population is gay, while about 3% have tendencies toward sexual abuse of minors and 0.3% are pedophiles. 

In my continuing evaluation of the major problems in the education and training of priests, I see clearly that the existing system is not perfect. A pervasive neglect of priests’ sexuality is inherent in the seminary system. Yes, there are many priests serving who have been disadvantaged in their training but are still making do. But still the church needs to realize that the current system can be improved and should implement a program that integrates education about human sexuality into priests’ training. 

But what can the GLBT community do now? We have an opportunity to serve the healing process wonderfully. The community has experienced decades of misperceptions, innuendo, scapegoating, misrepresentation, and the violence that comes from misunderstanding. Standing with the victims—as individuals and as a society (everybody is affected by this crisis)—the GLBT community is able to voice the pain that is being felt and to illustrate that one does not need to go through this alone. When victims are able to be heard and trust that those who hear them will respond compassionately, the inherent dignity of each person is preserved. 

This is what the GLBT community did when HIV/AIDS exploded in the 1980s: We made the experience human and thereby enabled so many poignant responses. It is time to do this again. The center of the debate may be a Catholic priest who abused a minor years ago, but is all of us who are being affected today, especially the GLBT community. We must not turn away. 

We must not shy away from confrontation as we attempt to educate the public about the reality of these cases of abuse. The lessons we teach are real lessons, for we have lived them. What the GLBT community teaches everyone is: Human dignity cannot be compromised. Compassion for the victim must be the first response. And policies that protect against future violations must be found. A healthier seminary experience—based upon a nonpresumptive, intelligent, and comprehensive approach to human sexuality—is the beginning of the answer to the problem. 

The priority for all of us must be not to seek a scapegoat, assign blame, or waste time and energy in covering up the problem. GLBT wisdom seeks to hold the perpetrator accountable but also to examine the factors contributing to the abuse, respond compassionately to the victim, educate society, and move toward true healing. 

It may have been providence that brought that one priest to my door seeking psychotherapy. Many others have followed. When other therapists were unable to help, it was through an eager ear, listening with the wisdom of the GLBT spirit, that a solution was found. We must all work to remove the obstacles to healing: scapegoating, lack of knowledge, and fear that we cannot respond. The GLBT community has long led the world in the healing process for other global crises, and the sexual abuse of minors by priests shouldn’t be any different.

Back to Idle Thoughts Are Often True