And you shouldn't be, either.
In a recent AP story, it has come out that the number of priest-abuse cases is higher than the bishops or Rome expected or predicted.
Last year, Cardinal Ratzinger asserted that "less than 1 percent of priests are guilty of acts of this type."
Not to fault the Cardinal, who, after all, didn't have statistics or studies at hand, but it looks like the percentage is going to be significantly higher than that:
A draft of the survey viewed by CNN said 4,450 of the 110,000 U.S. clergy who served since 1950 were accused of molesting minors. That would mean roughly 4 percent had been accused of abuse, although not all the claims are likely to be deemed credible in the final report, due out next Friday.
Why am I not surprised?
Well, let's see... What happened in the 60's, 70's, and even into the '80's in seminaries in the U.S.?
Oh yeah, that's right... bishops and seminary rectors began allowing homosexuals into the seminary in unprecedented numbers. It got so bad that places like St. Mary's in Baltimore and St. Meinrad's in Indiana acquired reputations as "Pink Palaces".
It took pressure from the Holy See to get the bishops to start cleaning up the mess in the late 80's and early '90's.
So, when the bishops allow homosexuals into the seminaries in numbers greater than the percentage in society as a whole, it doesn't surprise me that it turns out the percentage of homosexual abusers is higher than society as a whole. Not only is it not surprising, I would expect it.
And the fact is, the problem is primarily not pedophilia. The problem is homosexual recruitment and seduction of teenage boys. And that's the elephant in the living room that the bishops still refuse to face.
Many of those homosexuals ordained in the 70's and 80's are active, and are still out there, serving in parishes. They're time bombs, waiting to go off. And in many dioceses, it's not a secret who they are, and what they're up to. But many bishops refuse (or are afraid) to act.
What they do is deflect: they have abuse prevention programs (which may be good in and of themselves) but somehow avoid using the word "homosexual" in the context of preventing abuse. They promised at Dallas in 2002 that they were going to investigate and "clean up" the seminaries (what ever happened to that visitation, anyway?), knowing full well that the seminaries, by and large, aren't the locus of the problem anymore. They're like a landlord who promises to come and paint your apartment, when the problem is that the toilet is backed up.
The problem is active homosexuals in the priesthood. And that's the problem the bishops have to face up to and deal with.