In the majority of cases, it wasn't really pedophilia.

Understanding ephebophilia.
.
"If one tries to look up ephebophilia in the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, one will not find it. Several years ago that Association decided that a homosexual orientation is not a disorder. Officially, homosexual behavior is no longer deviant but a healthy alternative to heterosexual behavior. Thus ephebophilia, being a kind of homosexuality, has no place in the Association’s catalog of mental disorders.
.
As Rossetti says (88), pedophiles are not amenable to treatment because “psychotherapy usually cannot change one’s sexual orientation.” But, as he also points out (68): “Many times adults who are sexually aroused by minors may also be aroused by adults as well.” The vast majority of clerical sexual molesters have been involved with postpubescent youths, generally age 14 years and over. Other things being equal, they are, Rossetti says (88), “more amenable to treatment,” for they can learn to “develop satisfying relationships with age-appropriate peers.”
.
In other words, clerics who have engaged in criminal sexual behavior with adolescent boys and young men can learn to satisfy themselves with consenting adult males, because that change in their behavior involves no change in their sexual orientation. Such clerics simply are homosexuals who have found underage partners attractive and convenient. But unlike most homosexuals, these clerics have been willing to commit crimes against adolescents and young men. Expecting their bishops to be tolerant and protective, they no doubt hoped to get away with those crimes, and for a long time their bishops did not disappoint them.
.
The adolescents and young men were victims of abuse. But in most cases, sexual acts involving such young people are not only abuse. To be sure, in some cases, the youngster did not understand what was going on and/or was unable to resist, and in such cases he was simply a victim of abuse. But in very many cases, as the victims’ own statements usually make clear, they were troubled by the sexual activity in which they were involved yet were submissive partners with the cleric, whose dirty secret they kept because he had lured them into making it their own.
.
Thus, such young people cooperated in the sexual activity: they were seduced. Their guilt may well have been venial and may even have been none at all—only God knows—and their cooperation in no way mitigates their seducers’ guilt. Indeed, seducing the victims into sexual sins was far graver than the clerics’ own sexual sinning." - Source
.
Links (related topics):
.
It's the Homosexuals
.
Spanish Bishop of Tenerife suggests children cooperated in sexual abuse.  I need to thank Thom at Ad Dominum for originally posting on this.  I read the same news story.  If the reporting is accurate, the Bishop is misinformed, as the study I cite here suggests:  Though "such young people cooperated in the sexual activity: they were seduced. Their guilt may well have been venial and may even have been none at all—only God knows—and their cooperation in no way mitigates their seducers’ guilt. Indeed, seducing the victims into sexual sins was far graver than the clerics’ own sexual sinning." 
.
Likewise it could even have happened that a prematurely-sexualized young person (most likely abused at a very early age) initiated some sort of contact, made himself available, or indicated an overt curiosity and/or arousal - that does not mitigate the responsibility of the adult in question to resist, much less his culpability in the crime.  (The youth in question always falls into the category of 'vulnerable youth'.)
.
That said, it is shameful and  irresponsible to blame the youthful victim.
.
Photo:  Curious photo of an Islamic cleric kissing a boy.