Vatican finds rampant abuse of nuns by priests in 23 countries

It's particularly widespread in African countries.

Quote :

The Catholic Church in Rome made the extraordinary admission yesterday that it is aware priests from at least 23 countries have been sexually abusing nuns.

Well, they were aware for decades that priests were raping little boys and girls...

Quote :

Most of the abuse has occurred in Africa, where priests vowed to celibacy, who previously sought out prostitutes, have preyed on nuns to avoid contracting the Aids virus.
...

In extreme instances, the priests had made nuns pregnant and then encouraged them to have abortions.

And then they turn around and condemn women who have abortions, for whatever reason... and condoms... and the Pill... and masturbation...

Remember, do as they say, not as they do.

Quote :

The US article was based on five documents, which senior women from religious orders and priests have presented to the Vatican over the past decade. They describe a particularly bad situation in Africa. In a continent devastated by Aids, nuns, along with early adolescent girls, are perceived by some as safe sexual targets. The reports said that the church authorities had done little to tackle the problem.

The Vatican reports cited countless cases of nuns forced to have sex with priests. Some were obliged to take the pill, others became pregnant and were encouraged to have abortions. In one case in which an African sister was forced to have an abortion, she died during the operation and her aggressor led the funeral mass. Another case involved 29 sisters from the same congregation who all became pregnant to priests in the diocese.

The reports said that the cultures in some African countries made it almost impossible for a young woman to disobey an older man, especially one seen as spiritually superior. There were cases of novices who applied to their local priest or bishop for certificates of good Catholic practice that were required for them to pursue their vocation. In return they were made to have sex. Some incidents of sexual abuse allegedly took place almost within the Vatican walls.

Quote :

O'Donohue wrote in her report how a vicar in one African diocese had talked "quite openly" about sex, saying that "celibacy in the African context means a priest does not get married, but does not mean he does not have children."

No, celibacy means not having sex. FFS.

And before anyone chimes in with "WELL IF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH JUST LET PRIESTS MARRY, DERP DERP", no, that really wouldn't solve anything. A married man who wants to rape someone is a married man who rapes. A married man who thinks he can get sex from any woman he wants because his entire culture aids and abets this goal is, well, just that.

Malganis wrote:

And before anyone chimes in with "WELL IF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH JUST LET PRIESTS MARRY, DERP DERP", no, that really wouldn't solve anything. A married man who wants to rape someone is a married man who rapes. A married man who thinks he can get sex from any woman he wants because his entire culture aids and abets this goal is, well, just that.

But if a man can have sex without having to keep it a secret, it takes away his motive for humiliating and shaming his victims to silence. Not saying it would completely solve the sexual abuse problems in Africa, they're far deeper-set than that, or that celibacy does anything to excuse this man's actions, but it would take away his possible motive for performing them in the first place. Yes, the priests in the US obviously had it in them to molest children but would they have had it in them if they hadn't been forced into celibacy, with years of frustrated sexual energy being left to stew and fester?

I'm not claiming I know the answer to that question (it's quite possible all of them were just sick fucks to begin with) but if priests didn't have to take vows of celibacy it would, if nothing else, take away their go-to excuse for this kind of nasty shit.

My favorite part:

Quote :

In one case in which an African sister was forced to have an abortion, she died during the operation and her aggressor led the funeral mass.

What a vile, vile man.

TheHedonist wrote:

But if a man can have sex without having to keep it a secret, it takes away his motive for humiliating and shaming his victims to silence. Not saying it would completely solve the sexual abuse problems in Africa, they're far deeper-set than that, or that celibacy does anything to excuse this man's actions, but it would take away his possible motive for performing them in the first place. Yes, the priests in the US obviously had it in them to molest children but would they have had it in them if they hadn't been forced into celibacy, with years of frustrated sexual energy being left to stew and fester?

Sexual urges can be addressed in other ways though (always speaking we accept the idea that men "forced into celibacy" [last I checked, THEY signed up for that!] can't make do with a Playboy/an assortment of videos and their hand). If you rape someone, be it a little boy or girl or adults, you're obviously not celibate anymore, either. Hire a "housekeeper" (aka keep a willing mistress - that's what the Catholic priest in my hometown did according to rumors) or something, I'm sure that, especially as a "Holy Man", you can probably get all kinds of consenting people banging down your door (screwing the "morally pure"/vibe of the forbidden etc.). Just about every sexually active teenager can tell you that "having secret sex" is not exactly rocket science, and I'd assume that keeping consensual trysts secret is probably easier than, y'know, violating someone and telling them, "BTW, if you tell anyone, you're gonna get it."

I'll agree with you that celibacy IS the go-to excuse for this kind of vile shit, but in the end, these pieces of shit are reprehensible monsters who abuse their authority in the most disgusting way possible, and who should not only be excommunicated from an organization which, after all, presumes to speak for both men AND women (although it egregiously fails at the latter), but jailed for life.

TheHedonist wrote:

Malganis wrote:

And before anyone chimes in with "WELL IF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH JUST LET PRIESTS MARRY, DERP DERP", no, that really wouldn't solve anything. A married man who wants to rape someone is a married man who rapes. A married man who thinks he can get sex from any woman he wants because his entire culture aids and abets this goal is, well, just that.

But if a man can have sex without having to keep it a secret, it takes away his motive for humiliating and shaming his victims to silence. Not saying it would completely solve the sexual abuse problems in Africa, they're far deeper-set than that, or that celibacy does anything to excuse this man's actions, but it would take away his possible motive for performing them in the first place.

Sorry, you'll have to show your work on that one. I don't know, maybe I'm a little fucked up or something, but I don't follow your logic.

Quote :

Yes, the priests in the US obviously had it in them to molest children but would they have had it in them if they hadn't been forced into celibacy, with years of frustrated sexual energy being left to stew and fester?

Yes. Normal adults who are sexually oriented to other adults don't start molesting children just because they can't have sex. If that were true, the love-shy board would be Child Molester Central. And whether they were "forced into celibacy" really depends on when they joined the priesthood and under what circumstances.

Allowing Catholic priests to marry, however, would make the Church less of a haven for paedophiles, because two of the big danger signs with paedophiles are a lack of interest in romantic/sexual relationships with adults, and a preference for spending time with children of a particular age and gender. In a Catholic priest, the first sign is something expected of him, and either his work (chaplain/teacher) or position of trust in society brings him into contact with children, often of a particular age and gender. It wouldn't pose a problem for the molesters who don't have a sexual fixation on children, but it would certainly be a start.

Cyberwulf wrote:

Yes. Normal adults who are sexually oriented to other adults don't start molesting children just because they can't have sex. If that were true, the love-shy board would be Child Molester Central. And whether they were "forced into celibacy" really depends on when they joined the priesthood and under what circumstances.

It's hysterical that the part of this that makes me agree with you is the part about love-shy. Excellent point.

What I want to know is how you could force a woman into having sex, get her pregnant, force her to have an abortion against her will (which kills her and unborn child), then stand over her dead body and mouth pieties. If ever there was a case for God striking someone dead where they stood, I think that qualifies.

I want to know how you manage to justify that not just to yourself, but to God. Because if your God allows you to do that sort of justification, I don't want to have anything to do with him.

You know, this isn't why I'm an atheist, but it's a damn good reason to remain one.

Rabid Badger wrote:

What I want to know is how you could force a woman into having sex, get her pregnant, force her to have an abortion against her will (which kills her and unborn child), then stand over her dead body and mouth pieties. If ever there was a case for God striking someone dead where they stood, I think that qualifies.

I want to know how you manage to justify that not just to yourself, but to God. Because if your God allows you to do that sort of justification, I don't want to have anything to do with him.

Being a priest doesn't make someone exempt from human nature; it's not like hypocrisy is a hard thing to find elsewhere. That's assuming he even gives a shit; not everyone takes an action because they can justify it, religious beliefs or not.

Also, as far as Africa being particularly bad about it, we're talking about a country where corrective rape happens on a regular basis, so this isn't really much of a stretch.

Part of the reason things like this constantly shock the world is that well-adjusted people tend to assume everyone else is well-adjusted. There are people who can dump a newborn baby in a dumpster and sleep fine at night, and there are certainly people who can do everything they devote their life telling others not to do for the sake of God without batting an eyelash.

Electron Blue wrote:

You know, this isn't why I'm an atheist, but it's a damn good reason to remain one.

"People are corrupt fools therefore there is no god of any sort."

Mally wrote:

This is rape culture

Rape culture?

THIS IS AFRICA!!1!

Didn't think you'd ever see another 300 joke again, did you?

Alhazred wrote:

Also, as far as Africa being particularly bad about it, we're talking about a country

NO.

Oops, sorry, meant "continent."

My question is, when the FUCK is the Vatican going to DO something about this? It just gets worse and worse.

It's very easy to be sadistic and hypocritical; it's not like people can blame the Vatican itself for unwittingly ordaining sadists, seeing as this world is so fucking full of them. But we CAN blame them for looking the other way and covering it up.

So come on, Vatican, FUCKING DO SOMETHING.

Quote :

Another case involved 29 sisters from the same congregation who all became pregnant to priests in the diocese.

I don't know much about the religion, but I’m pretty sure that there isn’t a large gathering of priests anyplace. Did they have a holiday were they went and raped the nuns or something?

I have a better idea church. Let’s go back to what you did before and create church owned brothels. That way the nuns don’t get raped, you can check for HIV, and everyone’s happy.

bleachedblackcat wrote:

Let’s go back to what you did before and create church owned brothels. That way the nuns don’t get raped

Yeah, the nuns won't get raped, those slutty "fallen women" will get raped instead.

Cyberwulf wrote:

bleachedblackcat wrote:

Let’s go back to what you did before and create church owned brothels. That way the nuns don’t get raped

Yeah, the nuns won't get raped, those slutty "fallen women" will get raped instead.

If you're paying someone to have sex with them it's not rape, right? Or is this assuming that all the woman in the brothels are going to be kidnapped or something?

bleachedblackcat wrote:

Cyberwulf wrote:

bleachedblackcat wrote:

Let’s go back to what you did before and create church owned brothels. That way the nuns don’t get raped

Yeah, the nuns won't get raped, those slutty "fallen women" will get raped instead.

If you're paying someone to have sex with them it's not rape, right? Or is this assuming that all the woman in the brothels are going to be kidnapped or something?

Did you seriously just say that prostitutes can't be raped? Because, uh, yes they can. Even after money has changed hands.

Cyberwulf wrote:

bleachedblackcat wrote:

Cyberwulf wrote:

bleachedblackcat wrote:

Let’s go back to what you did before and create church owned brothels. That way the nuns don’t get raped

Yeah, the nuns won't get raped, those slutty "fallen women" will get raped instead.

If you're paying someone to have sex with them it's not rape, right? Or is this assuming that all the woman in the brothels are going to be kidnapped or something?

Did you seriously just say that prostitutes can't be raped? Because, uh, yes they can. Even after money has changed hands.

No, I was just assuming that they would be doing it out of free will after getting the money(even if it was a free will choice between selling themselves or starving because the world's a fucked up place). Sorry.

If I'm reading her correctly, she's saying that not every time a prostitute has sex is rape. Sometimes it is a business transaction. This in no way indicates that prostitutes can't be raped. It also does not indicate that payment prevents it from being rape.

rae wrote:

If I'm reading her correctly, she's saying that not every time a prostitute has sex is rape. Sometimes it is a business transaction. This in no way indicates that prostitutes can't be raped. It also does not indicate that payment prevents it from being rape.

This has nothing to do with the exchange of money for sex. What she's saying is that prostitutes often get raped. Maybe a john doesn't feel like paying. Maybe after he pays, he feels he's entitled to something extra. Maybe he wants to do something the woman has explicitly refused to do and forces her into it regardless. Prostitutes get raped and beaten by clients on a regular basis; since their profession is illegal, they can't exactly go to the police and complain, now can they? They can't really take their client to court for non-payment of services rendered, either.

I was referring to bleachedblackcat, who had already clarified what she meant before I posted.

Usually it gives a warning that someone else has posted while typing a reply; this time it didn't, which is odd. O.o

bleachedblackcat wrote:

Quote :

Another case involved 29 sisters from the same congregation who all became pregnant to priests in the diocese.

I don't know much about the religion, but I’m pretty sure that there isn’t a large gathering of priests anyplace. Did they have a holiday were they went and raped the nuns or something?

I have a better idea church. Let’s go back to what you did before and create church owned brothels. That way the nuns don’t get raped, you can check for HIV, and everyone’s happy.

The case is probably a few priests, three, maybe four at the most, and quite a bit of nuns. Usually, there's just a priest, maybe a couple if it's a large congregation or several to take care of, and if there's a nun presence, quite a few of them. Nuns are usually seen as being responsible for the physical welfare of the community and priests for the spiritual, so you'd need more to run schools, hospitals, shelters, etc.

You know, a single man can impregnate more than one woman at the same time Of course he can't have sex with more than one woman at the same time but that goes without saying.

If these raping priests were the exception rather than the norm, why did the Vatican stay so quiet about it? But if there's a lot of them, they've got far more reason to cover it up.