Click, click, click. I follow a link to the Huffington Post, and I find a story about a Franciscan Friar who has some interesting ideas about sexual abuse.

“People have this picture in their minds of a person planning to — a psychopath,” Groeschel said. “But that’s not the case. Suppose you have a man having a nervous breakdown, and a youngster comes after him. A lot of the cases, the youngster — 14, 16, 18 — is the seducer.”

I read this aloud to LP.

She looked quizzical. “He really said in a lot of the cases?”

I read the sentence again.

LP: “That’s just another rape apologist argument. If they’re underage, they can’t consent. It doesn’t matter who’s the ‘seducer’. Basic ethics.”

Me: “It’s always the priest’s responsibility.”

She went upstairs, then reappeared, braiding her hair thoughtfully. She raised an eyebrow.

LP: “But you know when a dude is having a nervous breakdown, it’s kind of understandable to have sex with kids. You can’t really blame him.”

Me: “Yes, some people take anti-psychotic medication; some take anti-depressants; some have sex with adolescents.”

The mood became more serious for a moment.

LP: “Why don’t they just let priests get married and stuff?”

Me: “That would be too easy.”

LP: “Yeah, that would be a lot better, because they couldn’t rape their wives.”

And then she smiled, wickedly.