Pope's pedophilia advisor caught arranging for sex with boys

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Tapes show Italian priest lured teenage boys for sex, paid them with cocaine

Investigators examining tapped cellphone conversations between a Moroccan drug dealer and 51-year-old Father Riccardo Seppia (shown at left, in the red robe) found evidence of arranged sexual encounters with young boys, some of whom were paid for sex with cocaine.

"I do not want 16-year-old boys but younger," Seppia is accused of having said on the tapes. "Fourteen-year-olds are O.K. Look for needy boys who have family issues."

Seppia is a priest in a the archdiocese of one of the top advisers working with Pope Benedict XVI "on reforms to respond to prior scandals of pedophile priests." He is said to have boasted in the recorded cellphone conversations that local shopping malls were the best place to pick up boys for sex.

Investigators are also examining three confiscated computers: the priest allegedly looked for partners via chat as well.

[Bella Fortuna]

apes show Italian priest lured teenage boys for sex, paid them with cocaine

Those stinkin' apes!!!

[Pappa]

I should be shocked and surprised but I'm not.

[cowiz]

The Pope knows his people and clearly hired an expert to advise him. You can't argue with his hiring policies.

[Animavore]

I should be shocked and surprised but I'm not.

No. Just

[tattuchu]

Well now you know why he's an sexpert on the subject

[Gawdzilla Sama]

I couldn't help commenting the other day when a person said "They don't know what the lower levels of the priesthood is doing." I pointed out that all the upper levels had once been lower levels, and right at the heart of the problem. I said that the reason the lower levels get away with is that the upper levels are just as guilty as anybody in the system. One lady there said, "Well, my priest isn't like that." I laughed in her face.

[Svartalf]

At least we know that the pope wisely chose an advisor who knows the problem inside and out.

[apophenia]

Tapes show Italian priest lured teenage boys for sex, paid them with cocaine
...
Seppia is a priest in a the archdiocese of one of the top advisers working with Pope Benedict XVI

(italic text reformatted to conform to arbitrary prejudice)

Feh. The connection to upper levels is kinda weaksauce. Akin to saying an FBI agent was the brother of the friend of Oswald's barber, so, the government was definitely involved in JFK's assassination.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Tapes show Italian priest lured teenage boys for sex, paid them with cocaine
...
Seppia is a priest in a the archdiocese of one of the top advisers working with Pope Benedict XVI

(italic text reformatted to conform to arbitrary prejudice)

Feh. The connection to upper levels is kinda weaksauce. Akin to saying an FBI agent was the brother of the friend of Oswald's barber, so, the government was definitely involved in JFK's assassination.

I couldn't help commenting the other day when a person said "They don't know what the lower levels of the priesthood is doing." I pointed out that all the upper levels had once been lower levels, and right at the heart of the problem. I said that the reason the lower levels get away with is that the upper levels are just as guilty as anybody in the system. One lady there said, "Well, my priest isn't like that." I laughed in her face.

[charlou]

Tapes show Italian priest lured teenage boys for sex, paid them with cocaine
...
Seppia is a priest in a the archdiocese of one of the top advisers working with Pope Benedict XVI

(italic text reformatted to conform to arbitrary prejudice)

Feh. The connection to upper levels is kinda weaksauce. Akin to saying an FBI agent was the brother of the friend of Oswald's barber, so, the government was definitely involved in JFK's assassination.

Colourful description, but I don't agree that it's an apt analogy. I think that'd be more along the lines of Oswald being an advisor to the government on matters of presidential appropriateness.

Welcome to the forum.

[apophenia]

Tapes show Italian priest lured teenage boys for sex, paid them with cocaine
...
Seppia is a priest in a the archdiocese of one of the top advisers working with Pope Benedict XVI

(italic text reformatted to conform to arbitrary prejudice)

Feh. The connection to upper levels is kinda weaksauce. Akin to saying an FBI agent was the brother of the friend of Oswald's barber, so, the government was definitely involved in JFK's assassination.

Colourful description, but I don't agree that it's an apt analogy. I think that'd be more along the lines of Oswald being an advisor to the government on matters of presidential appropriateness.

Thank you for the gracious welcome. Hope I can contribute.

Quoting a commenter on the story (it's in print, so it must be true!): Link

You need a correction. Seppia is just a parish priest. It's his archbishop, Bagnasco, who is working with the pope on guidelines for dealing with abuse.

Gawdzilla entertained me with the following tale....

I couldn't help commenting the other day when a person said "They don't know what the lower levels of the priesthood is doing." I pointed out that all the upper levels had once been lower levels, and right at the heart of the problem. I said that the reason the lower levels get away with is that the upper levels are just as guilty as anybody in the system. One lady there said, "Well, my priest isn't like that." I laughed in her face.

Thank you for that glorious repetition, my brain apparently didn't soak up enough of its goodness the first time through. Besides being a walloping good example of the genetic fallacy with legs, the original poster's point seemed to be a mix of steamy innuendo, burlesque and guilt by association. The representative frequency of past or present abusers at upper levels won't be settled by smirking about it. My hunch is that priests that are identified are likely protected, true, but unlikely to be promoted. Just as business doesn't promote the unfit, the business of saving souls likely doesn't either. But there is a more basic question to be answered here and that is whether the base rate of abuse in the clergy differs significantly from the general population, or relative to professionals who by virtue of a fiduciary or other relationship to the public and clientele, are held to a higher ethical standard on account of their position and responsibility. Talking about individual cases without some context doesn't seem to further understanding of the problem. (A further question which takes us even farther afield is the question of rates of general moral culpability; sexual abuse by priests is heinous, but then so is cops looking the other way when they are on the take, or preferentially treating whites better than blacks; an interesting further question, what is the base rate of sexual misconduct among dentists, therapists and other health professionals?) Anyway, taking a fair and impartial examination of the problem of moral abuses requires more than focus on the sensationalism of individual cases because you find them titillating and comforting to your sense of moral superiority. Real questions deserve real answers with real data -- not humorous anecdotes.

[charlou]

The thread title is certainly misleading.

But there is a more basic question to be answered here and that is whether the base rate of abuse in the clergy differs significantly from the general population, or relative to professionals who by virtue of a fiduciary or other relationship to the public and clientele, are held to a higher ethical standard on account of their position and responsibility.

Do you have any information regarding base rates? A hunch doesn't really cover it.

A key concern is institutionalised/encultured pedophilia and hypocrisy among so-called community mentors and leaders. Piety and celibacy are a crock of shit. Heirarchy. Immunity to scrutiny. Resistence to change. Imposition of faith and credulity. Abuse of trust. Wherever it happens.

[Rum]

The thread title is certainly misleading.

But there is a more basic question to be answered here and that is whether the base rate of abuse in the clergy differs significantly from the general population, or relative to professionals who by virtue of a fiduciary or other relationship to the public and clientele, are held to a higher ethical standard on account of their position and responsibility.

Do you have any information regarding base rates? A hunch doesn't really cover it.

A key concern is institutionalised/encultured pedophilia and hypocrisy among so-called community mentors and leaders. Piety and celibacy are a crock of shit. Heirarchy. Immunity to scrutiny. Resistence to change. Abuse of trust. Wherever it happens.

Dead right. Additionally there *is* an extra burden on those who hold up high moral standards backed up and underwritten by an invisible god and who insisted that they could be trusted with the care of not only the souls of children but the physical well-being. There is lots of evidence of abuse and whether it is higher than the 'base rate' is irrelevant. They betrayed trust in the way a parent who abuses betrays trust..possibly more so given where they say their authority comes from.

Welcome Apophenia by the way!

[Pappa]

I've read previously that the Church has claimed that the rate of abuse cause by priests is less than the base rate for the population as a whole. I have no idea if this is true, but even if it is, it's merely twisting the facts for propaganda. The rate of abuse among priests should be compared to the rate among other professions who have easy access to and influence over children, such as teachers. The Church doesn't have the same stringent vetting and monitoring procedures that are applied to teachers. It's shameful that they're unwilling to put these kind of procedures in place and instead keep trying to either cover it all up, or spin it out as unavoidable.