Corporal punishment from priest

When I was 12 my mom and stepdad started sending me to counseling with our parish priest every other Saturday at 11 am because of some problems I had in school that year. The routine was almost always the same with my mom or next door neighbor Judy dropping me off just before 11..I was usually dressed in shorts and a t shirt only as father told me to come in comfortable attire.

I was and still am an avid barerooter. When you entered fathers house he has a big desk and several paddles hanging on the wall behind him. You see father was also the headmaster at the Catholic school I attended and students were sent over to see father to receive a paddling. So we would sit down and talk about my week, whether I was paddled at school or home etc, then he would walk me over to the church next door and hear my honest confession.

You know I knew honesty was going to get me a paddling or more but I was always honest. After my confession depending on what I had done I would receive anywhere from 3 swats with a paddle up to 15 licks with the strap completely naked tied to a bench. This went on for over 7 years. Kisses Laura

The priest tied you to a bench naked and beat you with a belt? Are you sure? CPS should have been called if this were really the case. Yikes!

This is odd.

You would confess your sins to this priest, who would then beat you with a paddle or a strap. Not just a prescription for 3 Hail Marys or to pray a rosary, but an act of corporal punishment.

Naked. AND tied.

And your mom dropped you off for this on a regular basis.

I would REALLY like to have a discussion with your mom on this one. I would love to find out her level of awareness as to what was going on & what she thought of it.

The Priest was a "PERV!!!!!" No Hits,no Runs, no errors and no one left on base as Bud Blatner would say at the old "Fallstaff Game of the week" Baseball game on sat morning with Dizzy Dean! You were the subject of "HIS Perversion !!!!!"

Just callin' the Game the same way Diz' and Bud did,

highwater

Sorry, calling BS.

Went to Catholic school and yes they were thee meanest, most awful people, and some priests were pervs, but this is over the top.

Maybe a fantasy.

Sorry, calling BS.

Went to Catholic school and yes they were thee meanest, most awful people, and some priests were pervs, but this is over the top.

Maybe a fantasy.

My take as well and I've been in catholic schools on two continents. Sounds more like one of the anti-clerical polemics Voltaire might have dreamed up.

On the lighter side of child molestation, see this.

The whole Louis C.K. monolog on SNL is hilarious, but the part relevant to this thread starts at 6:45 and goes to 8:30.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yzh7RtIJKZk

I might actually turn catholic if I thought confession ended in a proper bare butt punishment.....

I might actually turn catholic if I thought confession ended in a proper bare butt punishment.....

You can find priests who would be discreet & into that 😉

You can find priests who would be discreet & into that 😉

Yes, it's only the ones that aren't discrete that you hear about. I'm sure there are a good number of kinky priests and nuns out there who are hidden and protected by their church.

While this isn't directly related to corporal punishment, it is an interesting read and gives you a sense of how freaky some of these priests can get:

http://archive.boston.com/globe/spotlight/abuse/stories/030602_bc_spotlight.htm

Now in all honesty, wrestling in just a jockstrap (as this priest made his students do) actually sounds like a lot of fun to me! But I'm not a high school kid that was ordered to strip to his strap so that he could wrestle the kinky priest that way. And to think that these perverted guys are teaching our children. Amazing.

Pretty much for as long as I can remember the RC faith practised secretiveness in their personal dealings. Whenever it appeared that one of their own had attracted attention it was a simple matter of transferring them to another Diocese & successfully suppressing any forthcoming investigation.

Headmasters & their immediate deputies of the time worked "hand in hand" with Senior members of the clergy exercising complete control over both their charges. Punishments metered out for both real & perceived indiscretions were carried out as they saw fit . .Which could mean behind closed doors as well as a public (classroom) display of their authority

The Nuns were just as diligent in keeping order & equally as capable at suppression

Yes, it's only the ones that aren't discrete that you hear about.

That, or they just happened to choose the wrong young male to pursue. perhaps by finding enough that were okay with it, eventually they'd stumble upon one who wasn't.

I've had chats with several guys who are now in their late 60's & 70's who shared stories with me of how they got involved with priests in their teens, but were never really adversely affected by it. They were ok with it, and a few even seemed to look back on their experiences somewhat fondly.

Several of their accounts would reveal the origins to be from doing odd jobs around the rectory, like mowing the lawn, etc. Which may have led to a shower in the rectory afterwards with the priest, which led to touching, and so on.

I started to get the impression that those who later felt scarred by what happened to them were in the minority, but that because that's all the media learns about, the media then in turn only exposes society to the times when someone is harmed in some way by the actions. When in reality, there are possibly many more who remain discreet and do not feel harmed at all by what they experienced.

Not harmed by it? Are you for real? The reason that there are so many suits is because people were harmed by it. I suggest you see Spotlight if you think this was benign. As for the OP, I call bullshit.

Not harmed by it? Are you for real? The reason that there are so many suits is because people were harmed by it. .

Right, and for all of those who were harmed by it, there are all the other guys who were not harmed by it who have never said anything & remained discreet that society does not find out about because they remain discreet and the media never learns of it.

You're the classic example of a member of society whose mind has been shaped by what the media feeds you, and not by conducting your own independent research to realize what goes on beyond the limited information the media has. Hence your attempted attack on me. "Am I for real ?" Well, let's just say I've learned some things the media is not aware of, and therefore am not shaped solely by what the media feeds.

Oh I see. It's alternative facts now like someone's complaint of fake news. Were I you I'd read this. There is never an excuse for pederasty and sexual or other abuse.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=2&ved=0ahUKEwji_7jD7-HTAhWpsVQKHajkAjkQFggNMAE&url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.m.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FCatholic_sex_abuse_cases_in_the_United_States&usg=AFQjCNGzSowNcMtsih8dIAO-T8XMgCY8wA&sig2=-AsyOWac5bC11REw3TCwEA

See ? You present me with media news. Meanwhile, I've gone beyond media and chatted with real people who have had personal experiences.

Real people with personal experiences is not fake news.

That may be the case for the subset you talked to but it's anecdotal evidence. You need to have a larger sample size. Unless you actually do an unbiased, double blind study yourself, what you say is merely anecdotal. Dismissing articles because they're of the media is actually anti intellectual. Some politicians of note dismiss the media too.

See ? You present me with media news. Meanwhile, I've gone beyond media and chatted with real people who have had personal experiences.

Real people with personal experiences is not fake news.

To add to the discussion with my own anecdotal personal experience, while my experience at being what would now be called molested was at the YMCA, not with priests or nuns, I have to say that I never really felt scarred or traumatized. I can't say I look back on it fondly, but overall it doesn't bother me. I have far worse memories of nuns and school in general, things that really get my blood cooking if truth be told, things that I perceived even when young as injustices.

Of course I never told parents about what happened or anyone else for that matter, I knew enough instinctively that it was something elders would freak out over, but it was never anything I obsessed over myself or really worried about. It was just another one of those things that happen to youngsters who have no control over their lives anyway.

So, I too approach media news, especially when it contains elements of sexuality, with a large grain of salt. It is so easy for the media to get carried away and over-dramatize everything. And I am sure that JTMac is correct when he says that for all those who were traumatized, there are probably just as many who were not. Statistical probabilities alone would almost guarantee that. And I have my own experience as example, however anecdotal it is ...

Thinking on this further, I am surprised no one makes a connection with the many accounts we have here on the site of member's spanking punishments and corrections. Some of the stories, especially those involving nudity in front of step-parents or neighbors, with genitals fully in view, often erect for males and then being spanked or hit with paddles or belts, really strike me as obvious cases of abuse, sexual abuse coupled with physical abuse. All quite horrid stuff.

And yet, so many who recount these memories, add that it made them a better person, that it was for their own good, that it (secretly) made them feel (sexually) good, that it formed an essential part of their personality that they apparently have no regrets over.

So, if we take these accounts at face value, and accept that those on the receiving end of these type of punishments also ended up accepting it as more or less the normal way of things, then I'm sure we can conclude the same for what JTMac states: namely that not everyone was traumatized by these experiences.

I don't believe there is ever an excuse for molestation of a young child by an older person. The older person, especially a person that is considered to be "in authority" (like a priest, nun, teacher, etc) has the duty to act in the best interest of the child. That's because the child is immature and inexperienced and may not yet know right from wrong.

That being said, I can see how all of the experiences that a child has while they are growing up help to form what they later become as a person. And that includes the good and the bad experiences. I'm not saying it's right, but for some people, in some circumstances, they may look back honestly at even the bad experiences and realize that those experiences made them what they are today. And today, they may be a perfectly fine person, albeit with a few fetishes and kinks.

I don't believe there is ever an excuse for molestation of a young child by an older person. . . . .

Apparently there is.

Nice smooth skin, no hair, easy to dominate, the innocence of the recipient, no anal skin tags or hemorrhoids, the excitement of putting your dick where no dick has gone before and in general, just how GREAT it feels!

Apparently there is.

Um, OK. How about "no LEGITIMATE excuse"?

Let's see now. They take a bunch of horny men, tell them that once they take their official vows they can no longer have any kind of sexual contact with anyone, tell them that they're married to the church, make them live together in convents, rectories (God I do really love that name!!!), etc. Then naturally they put them in a position of authority over a bunch of horny, teenage boys (and girls too) who are taught to always trust them and do whatever they say because they represent the authority of the church.

This is a textbook example of what NOT to do! And then when you hear about a priest molesting some young boys in the rectory (there's that word again), overseeing their nude swimming lessons, watching over them in the shower, making them wrestle each other (and you) while wearing just a jockstrap -- you simply move them to another parish without any punishment.

Seriously, what did they expect would happen in this situation?

I guess we need a bazinga or sarcasm emoji ! ! !

I guess we need a bazinga or sarcasm emoji ! ! !

Apparently so. I have to admit that sometimes I'm a bit dense and don't realize that comments are meant to be sarcastic. Which is really strange since I tend to be sarcastic about 95% of the time.

You should take a look at my post above #7

On the lighter side of child molestation.

with the link to Louis CK's monolog.

You should take a look at my post above #7

Yeah, I watched that and remember it when I saw it live the first time. Funny, disturbing and profound all at the same time. It does make you think a little bit. Very little.

Appreciate your story!,

is it really true?

And then when you hear about a priest molesting some young boys in the rectory (there's that word again), overseeing their nude swimming lessons, watching over them in the shower, making them wrestle each other (and you) while wearing just a jockstrap -- you simply move them to another parish without any punishment.

And what is the intrinsic difference when this is done by a priest as opposed to the same things happening when youngsters are in the care of supervisors or a sports coach? The accounts I have read here about sports coaches indicates that they too oversee their nude swimming lessons, supervise their showering, check foreskins, give naked physical punishments ...

And yet, they often seem to be cut more slack ...

And what is the intrinsic difference when this is done by a priest as opposed to the same things happening when youngsters are in the care of supervisors or a sports coach? ...they often seem to be cut more slack

I agree with you that molestation by other people in authority is probably just as prevalent. However, I think there are a couple of differences:

1) They're a damn priest! They're a self-professed "man of the cloth", that is supposed to be a "holy" and "reverent" man that follows the teachings of Christ. Shouldn't they be held to a higher standard than your local soccer coach? I'll repeat: They're a damn priest!

2) When the local soccer coach does this same sort of thing and is discovered, they usually aren't simply moved to the next town, village, county or city. More often than not, they're actually punished. No, I don't agree with your premise that they are cut more slack (generally speaking).

Shouldn't they be held to a higher standard than your local soccer coach?

Not talking about a soccer coach - which in and of itself in American terms is considered to be something of a wimpy sport. I was referring to a sports coach, the big masculine, he-man guy, who for instance leads prayer sessions before football games asking to eviscerate the opposing team (a bit of a cross-over into a priest's territory, no? ... ha ha).

And as a point of doctrine, priests are not supposed to be holy. They are supposed to be intermediaries between the Deity and Mankind. Let's irreverently say they are supposed to broker deals between the spiritual realm and the earthly realm.