Unfortunately, we know that the priesthood has been besieged by problems resulting from pedophilia and ephebophilia in its ranks. Although the Catholic church and its priests are usually associated with these issues most commonly, I see the same issue in other religious denominations that have restrictions on sexual preference, identity, and activity. Anyone who fails to acknowledge their sexuality and restricts their sexual development, whether from their orientation, a molestation, or "morality," is essentially declaring a moratorium on sexual maturity, and is at risk for these conditions.
To be clear about definitions, pedophilia is the sexual desire for pre-pubescent children. Ephebophilia is the desire for post-pubescent adolescents. In other words, ephebophiles are attracted to young people who are not yet adults, but have reproductive capacity. The problem with many clergy is actually ephebophilia, and it has been mislabeled pedophilia by our society and culture.
Ephebophilia is not considered a problem in many developing nations and cultures, because sexual capacity, or puberty, is the threshold for reaching adulthood, and as an adult, a teenager may theoretically enter into a consensual relationship. Not so in the developed world, where we understand that real emotional maturity occurs later, and our laws arbitrarily set the entry to adulthood variously from sixteen to twenty-one years of age for everything from driving a car, to voting, to drinking alcohol, to military service, and to consenting to a sexual relationship. Thus, we have a cultural problem concerning an adolescent's entry into sexual activity, especially when that activity involves an adult. But a crime is perpetrated by an adult who instigates such activity.
Sexual attraction and maturity obviously develop as we age and are exposed to sexual activity, in the media, and by one's own experience, both personally and vicariously. One's sexual sense-of-self is a part of identity, which is thought to begin developing around puberty and is somewhat set by early adulthood, according to developmental theorist Erik Erikson. At least, in "normal" development, this is what we expect. However, it is not unusual to find an under-developed sexual maturity in those who have, for one reason or another, refused to mature naturally. This immature sexual identity then can be accidentally incorporated into one's adult identity without insight and/or psychotherapy.
In the case of a homosexual person attempting to live within the bounds of a religious imperative that says homosexuality is evil and must be resisted, the child must deny their inner feelings to remain in the belief system that they are being taught. In many conservative cultures, the anti-gay sentiment is so virulent that the adolescent refuses to even acknowledge their sexual attraction to oneself. Thus begins the failure to mature sexually. For the same children who would choose to enter the priesthood or a ministry that demands that they not be homosexual, or at least not be sexually active if they are, they will try to deny themselves the pleasure of sexuality in an attempt to enter the profession. Once ordained, they must continue the moratorium on sexual development for life, if they want to have continued employment and career growth.
The problem is, as I see it, no one is actually asexual. Sex is an innate urge, and attraction can be denied and ignored, but it remains a biological component of who we are as humans. Therefore, sooner or later, a person who is attempting to deny their sexuality will eventually happen into a situation that they fail to resist. It may be an actual person, or it might be images such as pornography, but that unforeseen failure to suppress the urge in that situation will spawn an awakening, and that awakened sexuality will be about as mature as when the moratorium was declared on its development! Thus, a repressed homosexual will find his or her attraction to adolescents about the same age as when that person shut down their own development. Similarly, victims of child sexual abuse who never talked about it, risk finding the molestation they experienced eroticized when they stumble into such an awakening.
Beyond the awakening, this activity must almost always be kept secret to maintain the career, or outside of a church, per se, the image of a "normal" person. However, the secrecy creates a subjective reality, a loss of objectivity because no objective opinions on the activity are sought. The private, hidden activities of secret sex, or porn viewing, or whatever it is, becomes normalized after not getting caught in this activity for the years or decades that it occurs, and the secrecy is justified due to the brainwashed notions of unacceptable sexual desire. I believe that many of these people never actually cross a line of legality by taking advantage of a minor, but because of the subjective reality, a risk exists in their distorted judgement.
In the cases that receive publicity, where laws have been broken, we often learn of lonely, middle-aged or older people who want to believe that they are actually desirable to the objects of their affection, and in the worst of cases, think that there is actually love involved. In lesser cases, where their actions may be deemed lewd or lascivious, but not necessarily criminal, we still find these people disgusting or creepy, and we want to dispose of them by locking them up.
From my psychological perspective, we, as a culture, need to understand sexual development, maturity, identity development, and sexuality as a science. Then, when we see someone presenting themselves as asexual, we might have a chance at challenging their notions, or even challenging the notions of the institution that drove them to attempting to be asexual. We now know the etiology of pedophilia and ephebophilia, and it would serve our society well to attempt to treat it before we, as a society, find a need to punish it.
