I’ve had sex with a Mormon priest
Doesn’t that sound deliciously scandalous? In just about every religion except Mormonism, a “priest” is a person of some authority among the clergy, so when they’re accused of wrongdoing it’s big news. Those who know little about Mormons probably think that a headline such as “Woman’s suit alleges abuse by Mormon priest” (Web Cite) means bad news for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Oh, and this post is now going to get a million hits from perverts looking for nasty stories about sex with Mormons—welcome to the blog, pervs! Why don’t you have a seat over there…
In any case, my post title refers to the fact that my husband is a Mormon and since all Mormon males of a certain age are “priests” as per Mormonism’s lay ministry, I have had sex with a Mormon priest. Exciting, eh? Well, yes and no. The sex was exciting, but my husband is no one of note within the LDS church. He’s 27 years old and served a two-year mission to France which makes him an “elder” in the church, just like every other Mormon male who is 18 years of age or older, but he has not held any callings of interest or notable authority, like bishop or stake president. In fact, while all Mormon males of a certain age hold the priesthood, the only ones who hold the office of “priest” are 16-18-year-old teenagers, and I married my husband when he was 22. So maybe I haven’t had sex with a Mormon priest. Darn.
Back to the headline about the woman who says she was abused by an “ordained priest of the [Mormon] church.” (Web Cite) The woman, Markeisha Kite, alleges that her adopted father, Christopher W. Kite, sexually abused her between the ages of 4 and 14 (from 1991 to 2001). And since her adoptive father was an “ordained priest of the church” and some of the abuse happened at an LDS facility, she’s naming the LDS church as a defendant.
I’m not a lawyer, but Spencer Macdonald is, and he had this to say over at MADB:
The claim against the LDS Church (that Kite was “an ordained priest of the church” and “under direct supervision and control of the church”) will, I think, not succeed. The LDS Church does not have professional clergy (which is what “ordained priest” normally means). Moreover, Kite’s access to the victim was not through his status as an “ordained priest,” but rather as the victim’s father. I think the inclusion of the LDS Church as a defendant is an attempt to go after a deep pocket.
Makes sense to me. My own observations:
1) I find sexual abuse appalling. I also find it appalling when innocent parties get blamed for it and have their good names sullied because of it. So far none of the press releases I’ve seen have provided a good reason for why the LDS church should be held responsible for this. The “Mormon priest” link is so specious it’s laughable. Her lawyer and the press are counting on public ignorance of how LDS clergy works to generate outrage, and I hope the LDS church does not give her a dime.
2) The fact that some of the abuse took place at an LDS ward facility is tragic, but I would need to know more to be convinced that the LDS church bears responsibility in that. It’s understandable that people would not pay much attention to a father going somewhere alone with his daughter. Did local leaders have some way of knowing about the abuse but turned a blind eye?
3) The Chicago Tribune states that they are not naming the woman “because she says she was a victim of sexual abuse,” but her attorney already published her name in his own press release. Is there something I’m missing here?
4) Markeisha is a stupid name.
H/T: BCC
Categories:
Comments
I’ve had sex with a Mormon priest — 19 Comments