The Independent News Source
NCR on Kindle - NCR classifieds - YouTube - Twitter - Facebook - Email Alerts - RSS
PDF versionSecret sex in the celibate system
by A.W. Richard Sipe on Apr. 28, 2010
Viewpoint
Sexual behavior has a long and well-documented history. Even the current problem of sexual abuse of minors is neither new nor limited to clerics. It is a practice that crosses ethnic, cultural, religious and economic strata and custom. Incest (familial contact) is the most common. However, the sexual abuse of minors by declared celibate clerics poses special issues. There are three factors that draw special attention to the sexual practices of Roman Catholic clerics today.
The moral teaching concerning human sexuality, promulgated by the church, is clear and unequivocal. Catholic bishops and priests under the aegis of the pope hold themselves up as the teachers and arbiters of human sexual morality. Human failure is more remarkable in commanders and not as easily forgiven as transgressions among the troops.
The history of sexual violations of Roman Catholic clergy and church response has been well preserved in church documents from the Council of Ancyra in 315 to the 2001 document, De delictis gravioribus, authored by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI.
The Council of Ancyra demanded strict penalties: solitary confinement, fasts, isolation and supervision for any cleric caught having sex with a minor. Ratzinger’s document demands that all canonical cases of clergy sex abuse of minors be sent to his office under the requirement for strictest secrecy (forgiveness of a violation is reserved to the pope).
The complete historical record of knowledge of clerical sex provides an impressive body of evidence about transgressions. One of the most striking missives is the 1049 letter to Pope Leo IX from St. Peter Damian, the patron saint of church reform, in which he recommended zero tolerance. He taught that any priest having sex with a minor, mostly boys and young clerics at the time, should be stripped of his clerical office. All of his documents are explicit in their description of various sexual acts from sensual kisses on the mouth and mutual masturbation to anal penetration.
Celibacy was a voluntary ascetic practice of early Christian monks and some clerics, but not universally required of Roman Catholic priests until 1139.
Roman Catholic priests now are mandated to make a promise or vow of celibacy before they can be ordained. Clerical celibacy precludes absolutely any willful sexual release.
Questions about mandated clerical celibacy have bombarded general consciousness in light of the onslaught of reports of clerical abuse and its cover-up by church authority. It is fair to ask: What is the connection between the demand for cultic purity and abuse of minors?
NCR: February 3-16, 2012
Subscribe to NCR to get all the news and special features that aren't always available online. In this issue:
- US News: Bishops Host Conference on Immigration
Conference fields advocates' questions on law, policy
- Special Section: Deacons. Serving as parish administrator; roles of wives; and more
- Study: Black Catholics are more engaged
New study by Notre Dame researcher about parish involvement in America
The current crisis poses a serious challenge for church authority to answer that question.
To the average person, this demand of Canon Law 277 imposes a seemingly impossible task, namely perfect and perpetual continence. Although the church propagates the myth that bishops and priests are celibate, this is not based on fact. Several modern studies have used various methods to measure the degree of celibate observance. No researcher so far has assessed that more than 50 percent of Roman Catholic clergy at any one time are in fact practicing celibacy.
Sexual abuse of minors is only one type of clerical sexual activity. The 2004 John Jay Report concluded from a survey of church files that 6.5 percent of priests ordained between 1960 and 1984 were involved in sex abuse of minors. My study from ethnological data concluded that 6 percent from that same period were abusers.
It is nonetheless a significant symptom of pathology within clerical culture.
Questions about clerical celibacy have become prominent in discussions about the Catholic clergy sex abuse crisis for obvious reasons. What is the connection between this requirement of sexual abstinence and deprivation and sexual activity with minors? If one is going to be sexually active in defiance of a vow, why involve a minor?
Is mandated celibacy alone causal to sex abuse of a minor? As the single factor the answer is no. Vowed celibacy does not drive a bishop or priest to have sex with minors. The answer, however, is also yes. Required celibacy in concert with the clerical culture of entitlement and secrecy is a prominent element for some clergy seeking out minors as sexual partners.
Many priests who abuse minors were themselves abused as special friends of older priests or others. These kinds of liaisons are frequent in seminaries where solitary or mutual masturbation is looked upon as an “innocent” failure. Secrecy about all clerical sex is sacrosanct within the system.
Roman Catholic clerical culture favors doctrinal rigidity, conformity, obedience, submission and psychosexual immaturity, mistaken for innocence, in its candidates. These are the personality elements that lead to advancement and power in the clerical system. Single men are more easily controlled if their sexuality is secret. Double lives on all levels of clerical life are tolerated if they do not cause scandal or raise legal problems. Sexual activity between bishops and priests and adult partners is well known within clerical circles. The secret system forms a comfortable refuge for unresolved gay conflicts. There is a new emerging awareness of the systemic nature of sexual/celibate behavior within the Roman Catholic ministry that is increasingly destabilizing to the church.
Dire consequences will follow the exposure of this sexual system embedded in a secret celibate culture. Authorities who are or have been sexually active, although not with minors, are hard put to publicly correct clerics who are abusing minors. The need for secrecy, the cover-up, extends beyond defending criminal activity of a sex abuser. The power and control that holds the Roman Catholic church together depends on preservation of the celibate myth. The Vatican and Pope John Paul II declared its inviolability.
The truth about secret sex in the celibate system portends grave danger. The reality of celibate violations extends beyond priests who abuse minors and the bishops who hide them.
If celibate violations beyond minor abuse and cover-up are exposed, will the church fall like Humpty Dumpty? Or will the truth about clerical celibacy and its systemic corruption lead to a needed reformation?
[Richard Sipe is a mental health counselor and author who earlier spent 18 years as a Benedictine monk and priest.]
To say nothing about the
To say nothing about the age-old and still rampant heterosexual practices of our "celibate" clergy.
Don't you just love the
Don't you just love the hypocrisy of it all!!!! These priests are convinced that as "fourth" members of the Trinity, they make all rules for laity, and break all these rules among their own ranks. Doesn't everyone know that clerics are exempt employees of God? They can do whatever they want! Keep the clergy and its stupid rules out of our bedrooms and all other places where we exist. I am just constantly amazed that the clergy hasn't realized that many of us just aren't paying any attention to them. What would augment that better is that we all stop paying for the nonsense of the clergy. Let's start distributing our money to people who need it in various charitable organizations, and not give any money to the parishes and their outrageously stupid priests. I doubt that many of the clergy will realize what is happening until their parishes are shut down due to lack of funds! Poor stupid creatures.
Only through absolution can
Only through absolution can come atonement. The recognition that human frailty is at the seat of the throne is not new. The new model is cyberspace and the transmission of volumes across all borders, including the institution called Christianity. It is time to recognize that the 'big chief tablet and the #2 pencil' have not disappeared but have fallen into disuse. That is the life of the celibate vow.
Thus it always was since
Thus it always was since celibacy came with the job. One, maybe, of the Apostles was celibate. Young people,with no life experience were lured into seminaries in their early teens, kept media censored, not allowed friends, contact with women, and living in a closed environment from puberty to the mid to late twenties. How did such persons even know what they were promising?
Maybe in the orders, however
Maybe in the orders, however most diocesean priests have to try dating women in minor seminary, just to make sure they want the celibate life.
Thank You Richard. I find it
Thank You Richard. I find it interesting that the Church sponsored articles/statements on the abuse crisis or any other for that matter do not quote the words of Jesus who, it seems to me, ordered mortal punishment for any child abuser. Quite striking for a man devoted to Love and Forgiveness as He was/Is.
See Mark 9:42-48
42 “And if anyone causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to be thrown into the sea with a large millstone tied around his neck. 43 If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life maimed than with two hands to go into hell, where the fire never goes out.a 45 And if your foot causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life crippled than to have two feet and be thrown into hell.b 47 And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into hell, 48 where ‘their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched.’
This is pretty clear and very strict!!
I hope you are not advocating
I hope you are not advocating any of these as remedies of sin.
It is the truth that makes an
It is the truth that makes an individual free, and it will have the same beneficial effect on the Church! Sooner is better than later.
This is later unfortunately.
This is later unfortunately. The writer here might be more correctly named Snipe, not Sipe. It's interesting that he focused on sex with minors and other clerics (i.e. obvious wrong or deviant behaviour), linking it correctly to psychosexual immaturity, but omitting heterosexual relations. Obviously heterosexual activity could never originate from this kind of immaturity!! It is pretty clear from what he doesn't say thathe has no problems with this kind of transgression. Also, can someone show me where the "vow or promise of celibacy" is iterated because I can only find reference to vows of poverty, chastity and obedience, and chastity is not the same as celibacy.
Diocesean priests do not take
Diocesean priests do not take vows, they make promises. Vows are for members of religious orders.
oh yes it is, in the context
oh yes it is, in the context of the religious vows of poverty, chastity and obedience, celebacy is exactly what chastity is all about---your ignorance is showing...
I beg to disagree with
I beg to disagree with you...One can be chaste without being celebate. To be chaste, one must be innocent of IMMORAL sexual intercourse.
Celebacy is about not getting
Celebacy is about not getting married. Chastity is about not having sex.
A really shallow blog on Sipe
A really shallow blog on Sipe and sexuality.
This is very sobering
This is very sobering information. Some may regard this as scandalous but it seems to me we must expose truth no matter how uncomfortable it makes us feel. This begs the question, "If the clergy does it, does that mean it is not illegal?" The truth should set us free.
My hope/guess is that we will
My hope/guess is that we will one day be referring to Richard Sipe as St. Richard Sipe... a new day is indeed dawning... thank you for ushering in the change to come!
I seriously question your
I seriously question your instant canonization. I think "Wait and See" is wiser. This is not directly aimed at Mr Sipe; I do not know him. Are his numbers a bit inflated ?
Even IF the numbers are
Even IF the numbers are accurate, we see that roughly 60% of men at some point cheat on their wives. Sometimes humans commit sin. That is evil. But it does not make this a Catholic or a celibate problem.
I seriously question your
I seriously question your instant canonization. I think "Wait and See" is wiser. This is not directly aimed at Mr Sipe; I do not know him. Are his numbers a bit inflated ?
This is an enlightening
This is an enlightening article. Secret sex can be eliminated if the church consider changing the Canon law to allow priests to marry and have open sex with their spouses. It works in the protestant religion.
I'm afraid it does not work
I'm afraid it does not work for Protestants. It may help, but infidelity to vows of marriage, illicit relations, relations with other clerics, same-sex relations and relations with minors are common there too.
By definition not on the same
By definition not on the same scale as when ALL sex is prohibited by definition.
Do not be naive enough to
Do not be naive enough to think that allowing priests to marry will eliminate sexual deviance or scandal. While the headlines have not been as pronounced, all organized religions are having problems with the abuse of minors only a small percentage of them require celibacy.
The abuse of minors is not caused by celibates; it is caused by deviants. Marriage will not change this. In point of fact, your child is six times more likely to be abused in school by their married teacher than by a priest.
The point that is significant about this article is the revelation that abuse may have been hidden or overlooked by other priests, bishops, etc. not simply to avoid scandal for the Church but out of an individual fear that their own indiscretions might be exposed in retaliation. I do not know how often this mattered. It seems I have been reading an awful lot about hundreds of cases sent to the Vatican by Bishops only to have them stonewalled there.
I do not mean to have this be a debate over the value of celibacy but I am interested in naming the reality of the problem. It seems to me that the far greater issue is the way in which the Church hierarchy handles all issues that come to it; the abuse of minors being the most appalling. There is something wrong with the system of governance of the Church. Laying the blame at the foot of celibacy, when it really has little to do with it, does not help us break open the culture of secrecy and autocracy that allowed the abuse to continue in the first place.
Sexual abuse is not the only abuse in the Church.
If priests were allowed to
If priests were allowed to marry, then there might be more potential priests and less reason than ever to worry about depleting the existing group by getting rid of the deviant ones. I prefer to think that this concern over depleting the ranks rather than worry over having their own indiscretions exposed is what motivated the Church's leadership.
It's unfair, of course, to
It's unfair, of course, to blame celibacy for deviant sexual behaviour. It may be true, however, that young men who had deviant sexual tendencies (pedophiles for example) were drawn to the priesthood and celibate life as a way of running from or concealing their disorder. When the deviant tendencies inevitably reared their ugly head the results were devastating and destructive.
I am a male Catholic, but in
I am a male Catholic, but in my young Lutheran days I was the victim of a male Lutheran pastor, married with three children. Later on a high-ranking male Lutheran official, also married with three children, tried to get me drunk and molest me. 'If only we had married priests ... " Of course, based on real-life experience I find it impossible to believe that being married eliminates homosexuality or pedophilia.
Richard, thank you for
Richard, thank you for continuing to speak from your years of research and study on this subject. I agree with you that celibacy does not necessarily cause sexual abuse of minors. I also agree that reform is much needed.
Keep talking about this, keep writing, keep informing us. The church will probably start tumbling like a house of cards, if it already hasn't begun to do so. Unfortunately, it's this kind of thing that is causing us to change, but don't we always say that it takes a crisis for some people in power to sit up and take notice and do something.
"The church will probably
"The church will probably start tumbling like a house of cards." Good golly, you read my mind. That has been my prayer for years. I am sooooooooo tired of the baloney. Hubby and I are now Vatican II Catholics in exile and I would really like to come home to a newly birthed Catholic church. But our diocese is going the way of the dinosaur - power and control, shut up and do what what you're told, we know best, all that malarkey. It's so sad.
I agree entirely with you.
I agree entirely with you. Having travailed thro' Vatican ll and come finally to a resting place within the church, free of unnecessary dogma and only the Mass and Jesus filling our hearts, we are now confronted with a pre-Vatican ll idealistic C of E priest who calls me a Nazi because I refuse to become part of his extraordinary liturgy, one that oozes of his own infatuated and mis-judged, needy ego. I believe we are on the cusp of a new Schism. I will be on the side of Jesus.
Nancy, we need to know each
Nancy, we need to know each other. Try our Tuesday morning discussion group at CRC - a group of progressive christians. Yes, it is sad for our fundamentalist led diocesan Chancellor, etc., who wants to return to the pre VII days of marching in step/in obedience to Rome, not our rightly formed consciences. Their fear of loss of power and prestige is very apparent, and their avoidance of wearing the humble shoes of a servant leader is dismaying.
Leo IX set in play a grave
Leo IX set in play a grave situation for the Western Church. His determination to enforce celibacy was twofold. It meant to present clerics in the light of the Desert Fathers, but more importantly, it meant to ensure that there were no heirs to inherit so that the church controlled all property.
When the absolute decree enforcing celibacy was put in play in 1139 the church sold the wives and children of priest into slavery. This was also a safeguard against any claims of inheritance. (We are talking about the building of empire, not the sanctity of persons.)
We must note that this matter of forced celibacy came about not long after the Great Schism. Before that, it was normative for priests and bishops of both East and West to marry.
And history tells us that the it was expected for Jewish men to marry by their twentieth birthday in order to fulfill the primary obligation to one's parents - to raise up offspring in their name. Beyond that, a man could not teach children nor would children be considered safe in the company of an unmarried teacher/rabbi. Rabbis were married.
It appears that Jesus chose married men as his inner circle, and we note that they did not permanently leave their wives to follow him, as evidenced in the story of the cure of Peter's mother-in-law. (Why would we think that a ministry that is all about love would abandon the disciples' children and spouses to a life of destitution?)
We need to consider how the teachings that surround sexuality create a culture of hypocrisy in the church...
We rarely, if ever, see a dozen children going to communion with their parents; instead we see small families. Obviously, though some families still practice a sacramental faith, birth control is normative.
We expect the gay community to be entirely celibate because we deny them legitimacy in sacred union; so they must also publicly pretend to live out the lifestyle exacted of them by interpreting Genesis in a selective way rather than locating its true meaning in "It is not good for man to be alone" (Gen 2:18).
Culturally, we delay the marriageable age for the sake of achieving higher education, so we no longer recognize the biblical norm of marrying in one's early to mid teens as useful to a lived-holy life.
And our priests are being necessarily chosen from among the majority group of men who find it easy to avoid women - gays and pedophiles. And, if the priest is normally attracted to women, we find a high percentage of them living a life of duplicity with secret wives and priests' whores.
It is time we recognize that it is OK to be fully human and stop attempting to enforce a false dichotomy - a faith based upon what can only be described as dualism.
Really nice of you to blame
Really nice of you to blame homosexuals. John Jay College of Criminal Justice, chosen by the US Bishops to address the causes of the US abuse crisis clearly refutes your attribution.
There was no blame assignment
There was no blame assignment to gays.It is simply historically evident that a significant percentage of the priesthood has been gay. They are not the pedophiles, just part of that population.
You're a bit quick on the trigger with your anger.
Gays and pedophiles were not
Gays and pedophiles were not meant to be batched as one batch of people. Perhaps there should have been an "S" on 'group'. The point was to name those who could easily avoid intimate relationships with women who are their peers. (Is that an oxymoron --- women peers?)
Amen, Amen, Amen. Especially
Amen, Amen, Amen. Especially the part about gays. The norm to marry early changed as people lived longer, and that should be mentioned. Because in biblical times, well, if you made it to 25 you were REALLY doing well.
As I have been posting all
As I have been posting all along, this is about "power and control". It needs to fall like Humpty Dumpty and make room for true reform and spiritual leadership.
And MONEY provides the means
And MONEY provides the means to that power and control. Stop the money and the power an control fade away. Money sent to the Vatican from this country should be taxed. The Vatican has recently asserted that it is a foreign power and not subject to U.S. courts. Therefore funds sent to a foreign power should be taxed heavily.
I agree. Let's tax that
I agree. Let's tax that money heavily, and maybe it will stop gong to Rome.
This article supports the
This article supports the contention I have made before, in other blogs, that the main reason the Vatican is adamantly opposed to women's ordination is that women priests would not tolerate the subculture of active homosexual and heterosexual priests, including pedophiles, that exists in the clerical ranks and which the structural church has hidden for centuries. This is the elephant in the living room that even good priests are not willing or dare to talk about in public...
On what basis do you make
On what basis do you make this assertation? Female Episcopal Priests are just as prone to divorce, extra-marital affairs and such. Why, when an Episcopal Bishop can be in an openly gay relationship, be opposed to active homosexual or heterosexual priests? Please cite information to support your contention.
Over 70
I am also over 70 and make
I am also over 70 and make this assertion based on my own experience and observation as a nun for 11 years, as one who loves the Catholic Church but who is very sad (but not surprised) by what is now coming out. I know men who were abused by priests in their childhood; I know women who have had children fathered by priests, I know of women who had abortions at the insistence of and paid for by their priest-lovers. I am not talking about the fact that Episcopal priests, men or women, are "just as prone to divorce, extra-marital affairs and such"; I am talking about a clerical state that presents itself as celibate, but in fact, has a certain percentage who are not, and that THIS IS COVERED UP AT ALL LEVELS OF THE CHURCH. That is quite a different thing from the situation you allude to in the Episcopal Church.
No, I think the opposition to
No, I think the opposition to women's ordination is rooted in a very basic fear of women, and that doesn't necessarily have any foundation in non-tolerance of active homosexuality or heterosexuality. In their minds, we seem to have a power that these guys can't fathom, and that scares them.
What sane woman would want to
What sane woman would want to be ordained into this sick system. The entire system needs to die and new forms of spiritual leadership emerge.
Right! The entire (pope
Right! The entire (pope included) system needs to die. That won't happen in the near future. I seriously doubt that it will happen any time in the future either. It's because we still have lay people (and many wealthy ones) who will continue to do whatever the clergy says because they are buying their eternity (much to Luther's original insistence and complaint). These people as intelligent as they may be are totally superstitious about their Faith. We will live with that for a long, long time.
Are you kidding me? Almost
Are you kidding me? Almost every female Anglican bishop is part of the homosexual subculture!
There is nothing wrong with
There is nothing wrong with homosexuality at all. What is wrong is your seeming perverted drift about homsexuality and women. You seem to be hoping to put down both in one scummy inuendo.
I don't know about Anglican women Bishops or their sexual orientation. But if what you say is true so what. SO WHAT?
I don't know why you think
I don't know why you think women priests would not tolerate active homosexual priests.....many of the women clerics of other denominations are in openly gay relationships - why would it be different for us?
but you miss the
but you miss the point---those other denominations do not mandate celibacy as a condition of being a cleric, only the Catholic Church does that and what we are talking about here is a major cover-up of active sexual behavior by some of its members; to paraphrase, it's the COVER-UP stupid...and I do believe women in the clerical ranks would not tolerate the cover-up (or the activity either; they would push bigtime for mandatory celibacy)
This "testimony", seems to
This "testimony", seems to me, to be written by an ex-priest (as he at least admits) who has an ax to grind. His real 'religion' is of a piece with Freud and other psychologizers who believe man is reducible to his urges and that 'personality' is nothing more than the sum and consummation of these bodily and sensate parts. And as such he has no chance of overcoming the disordered, fallen urges which stem from our human nature. He writes as though Man has no soul - man is only his human nature and has no claim in the striving for nor ultimately in the sharing of the divine nature and life through the Mystical Body of Christ. We are taught and believe this to be the genuine truth of the Catholic Church. Articles like these convict me that the NCR is not just a voice of progressive Catholicism but is, in reality, a voice of hatred directed against the hope, faith and charity that the Church teaches. It's always the same - the power of the Church, never the witness of love, many times over through out human history, of many men and women celibates. The real scandal is the belief system that denies man any reach above his own nature.
Articles like these convict
Articles like these convict me
_________________________________
Yep, yep, yep, I bet they do! Not just your everyday Freudian slip eh Anon? The Holy Spirit made you say that.
Long Live the Holy Spirit!!!!
Has anonymous read anything
Has anonymous read anything about this scandal? He seems to be solving the problem by attacking the messenger. He should do his homework before attacking a man who is trying to help the Church realize the problems it REALLY has.
Dear Anonymous, Perhaps you
Dear Anonymous,
Perhaps you read a different article. I did not see any ax AND it would definitely seem that man IS reducible to his urges. Perhaps you have read about priests having sex with children - it has been in all the papers.
That is the REAL scandal of the century for the church.
Wait a minute. The point is
Wait a minute. The point is that celibacy should be a choice, not a mandate. Yes, many male and female celibates in history have done wonderful things. Many non-celibates have done wonderful things. There's an inequality to the mantra that clerics must be celibate. It's elevating sex to a level on which it does not deserve to reside, and making it mysterious and in the end, bad. Because we all know that the teaching is that clerics are superior to those of us who might engage in normal human interaction. Hope, faith, and charity are not the personal talismans of celibates. Peter, as an example. Remember, the guy whom Jesus chose to lead the whole thing? Your argument doesn't hold up.
And in the Sixth Book of the
And in the Sixth Book of the Hypotyposes [Institutions] Eusebius writes the following:
Peter, James, and John after the Ascension of the Savior, did not contend for the Glory, even though they had previously been honored by the Savior, but chose James the Just as Bishop of Jerusalem.
Eusebius also offers quotes of Hegesippus (c.90-180 CE); in his Fifth Book of Commentaries he quotes:
But James, the brother of the Lord, who as there were many of this name, was surnamed the Just by all from the days of our Lord until now, received the Government of the Church with the Apostles.
Wouldn't think that even a
Wouldn't think that even a conservative would sink to an ad hominum argument. I wonder if you have experienced clerical life. I spent 8 years in religious/clerical life. I left the seminary just before ordination to the sub-deaconate. I worked with and for a religious community for almost ten years frequently living in community life with them.
Those seminarians, priests and brothers I lived and worked with were very good men. To me, the fact of BEING homosexual is, in se, irrelevant to both priesthood and pedophilia. Pedophilia is a human weakness and/or an emotional or serious mental health issue for the abusers. I agree with Sipe, that in and of itself, celibacy is not a cause of pedophilia. There are a number of other components that come together to form a set of interconnected causes. Some current factors are the sexual immaturity of candidates (even among some middle-aged or previously married men), The inability to face issues related to sexuality in many houses of formation, the lack a cultural protection of priests (very few rectories with 3 or 4 priests, no older women to move in to seal off "Father" from young girls who go ga-ga over him or young boys who hero worship him). Much pedophilia is also a "crime of opportunity." Priests have always had more access to boys than girls. In my lifetime clerical superiors and lay people looked upon Priests/seminarians with men or boys as legitimate; except that the former once in awhile warned against "particular friendships" (whatever "they" were). Because of living in a male-only or male-dominated culture, the opportunity to be "friends" with male youngsters was always present. There are many other psychological, social, and cultural components that make up the complex of interconnected causes of sexual abuse. Many of these same elements combine to set the stage for other sexually "illegitimate" behaviors (as held by the institutional Church) related to clerical/religious life.
But, by far, the major factor in all of this has been the existence of the clergy as children dependent on the Father-Bishop; the root of a culture of power in the Church. I remember two illustrative examples from my own life. After tonsure we were told, "Now you belong to the bishop, just like the ash-can on his back porch." (Said only in jest?, I don't think so). I lived and studied under a rector who harassed seminarians unmercifully, except for the "few strong" guys that he grudgingly "accepted." That was the seminary where not even deacons could ordinarily leave the grounds. It was all part of teaching (blind) obedience and submission to "authority."
The "old Church?" Yes! But that is the mentality of many cardinals and bishops in positions of leadership today. Too often the breath of fresh air that blew in with Vatican II didn't really take root is many leaders and leaders to be. Those who talk about the systemic nature of an unhealthy exercise of power in the Church are right. It's just too bad that many more don't speak out about it (Bishop Geoffrey Robinson began to in "Power and Sex in the Catholic Church" was one of the first). I've seen it in operation, even in my own life. Now Dr. Sipe reveals the Church's documentation of sex abuse and the secretive way of dealing with it over hundreds of years. And it was prepared on Cardinal Ratzinger's watch. (BTW, I tend to agree with Mr. Allen, that Benedict XVI has the most comprehensive understanding of the issues and has tried to make positive changes. But he too must deal with the bureaucracy of power in the Vatican.
There is a final issue that some moral theologians have looked into and tried to enlighten for us, especially in light of Vatican II. That issue is the sad state of Catholic sexual ethics and the negative view of humankind that pervades our entire understanding of human sexuality. I have just finished one book and at present am reading two more on the history of moral theology, a review of hierarchical and theological positions on sexuality and body, and current thought based on the personal-relational theology of Vatican II. Without a deeper and better understanding of our theology of the body, sexuality and their connection to Christian life, we will continue to depend on "act-centered," "juridical" models of morality that could once again envision and create a new secretive power structure based on "absolute rules" and a secular for-profit model of bureaucracy.
I am seriously thinking about elaborating on these ideas in my blog (http://sebastiansfocus.blogspot.com) soon. If you love the People of God and treasure the Eucharist as much as I do, then I (we) must speak out, dialogue, and act to heal and improve things.
Kenneth Sanchagrin, thank you
Kenneth Sanchagrin, thank you for your excellent comments. Please do elaborate the ideas in your blog. You are giving a great service to the People of God.
Oh, what dribble you continue
Oh, what dribble you continue to spew all over these blogs! The one thing clear in what you have written here, Anonymous, is that you haven't read anything other than this article by Richard Sipes, because if you had you would not be making the foolish statements you are. You are ignorant of the fact that the article's author is not, as you allege, simply reducing the problem of sex abuse to one of having "no soul." But he certainly is moving us away from the "sin" model which has kept the institutional Church in denial, secrecy, and active abuse cycles that claim more and more victims and cuase increasing degrees of damage. And it is quite clear that the one who has an ax to grind is you, not Sipe. He bases his writings on solid scientific research that is examined through the lens of the faith and a history of service to the Church. And your qualifications are.....?
I can understand your not
I can understand your not wanting to take this on board......it's mind-boggling stuff and threatens your belief system, and begs the question - who is God for you????
The problem is that what the church teaches, its operatives are not doing, and when lapses come to light they are covered up ......seems all this is nothing new - is our knowledge a benefit of technology?
The clergy class seems to be a law unto itself...........seems to have overlooked Jesus-like servanthood....all the book learning in the world is no substitute for conversion of the heart...............
A friend from church sent me
A friend from church sent me this email. I thought it was just going to be a quick read but wow what an eye opener. I know something must be done to right the wrong-- no Jesus like people these days especially in churches where they should be.
The real scandal is the
The real scandal is the belief system that denies man any reach above his own nature
I think you need to read the
I think you need to read the article again. The author is writing about what has historically happened. The rest of that stuff? ....maybe you need to see someone about all that.
What percentage of our saints
What percentage of our saints were married? Oh,yes, the apostles. Any more? There are a few, of course. To me, saints and sex just don't cut in the "church."
"hope, faith and charity that
"hope, faith and charity that the Church teaches." However is seldom seen, in this instance to practice!
You should have "reached above your own nature" and left this unwritten. Your alb, and your catholicity, is showing Father! Truth hurts! Don't it?
James Edward
Granted, secret sex between
Granted, secret sex between adults in the church (which is apparently overwhelmingly gay sex) adds to the culture of secrecy and entitlement, which can create the circumstances in which criminal sexual contact with children can occur. But the homosexual contacts between consenting adults does not cause pedophilia, because homosexuality is not the same thing as pedophilia.
That is why gay sex between consenting adults is not a crime, and why sexual molestation on children is a very serious crime.
This author is at least trying to distinguish between consenting adult gay sex, on the one hand, and criminal sexual assault against children, on the other. He's also doing a reasonably good job of distinguishing between a culture and a sexual orientation. But he is also, I believe, setting up circumstances that could lead to an internal crusade against homosexuality. The reason for this is that the conservative Church leadership that has arisen in the last fifty years will be tempted to blamed pedophilia in the church on homosexuality--to conflate the two problems, implying that homosexuality is the main sin and the pedophilia in some way arises from it.
The Church will go that way because it needs a fall guy for its own criminal facilitation of pedophiles who harmed innocent children. Christianity has an inherent tendency to find scapegoats, and an unwillingness to face its own capacity for SYSTEMIC sin. Above all, the Catholic Church will take the route of sexual McCarthyism because it still considers gay sexual orientation a sin and a disorder, which the law and mainstream psychiatry--and common sense--now knows to be medieval superstition.
Just as the people of central Africa are making the gay man into a scapegoat for AIDS, most of which is disseminated by adulterous straight husbands, the Church will make a scapegoat out of gay men, for its own narcissism, self-hatred and medieval policies.
Or the Church knows full well
Or the Church knows full well the crisis in celibacy in the South is not a gay issue, it's a heterosexual issue and down south the pedophilia abuses can't be blamed on gay priests.
There is also the issue that Catholic sexual morality conflates all sexual transgressions to moral sins, with abortion being the unforgiveable sexual sin--again except for priests. When the Church teaches there is no moral distinction between masturbation and pedophilia, and priests routinely forgive the sin of masturbation, it's way too easy to lose your grip on the very real difference between a solo act and abusing another person.
Catholicism needs a morality of sex which is grounded in relationship, not in sexual acts.
Do not assume that all male
Do not assume that all male to male sex is the result of homosexual orientation. This is not so in any all male social atmosphere, e.g., prisons. Factor into the whole power and secrecy.
Isn't is ironic? The
Isn't is ironic? The Catholic Church purposely draw homosexual men into the priesthood, because She knows their won't be scandals about Her holy priests, "having sex with women," but on the otherhand, for the most part and for all outward purposes, She refuses to acknowledge their actual existence in the priesthood. Now one could logically assume that the Hierarchy would be filled with the same proportion of bishops, archbishops, cardinals, etc......... who also have a homosexual orientation, in the same proportion as Her priests. (I've heard guesstimates in the range of up to 40%!!!) I think that the reason why the bishops, archbishops and cardinals have failed to act on homosexuality in the priesthood is because they don't want to be "outed" themselves or blackmailed by members of the priesthood. The Catholic Church likes to pretend that She bases Her priesthood on the Jewish model of the priesthood, which is utterly ridiculous, because homosexual priests would never have been allowed to minister in the sanctuary. For the Jews, it would have been an abomination, but not for the Catholic Church; at least it's not a problem unless it is blatantly discovered and flaunted! I guess it's just a present day, "Catch-22." The Pope can proclaim and rant that homosexuality is "A Disorder," but everyone, above the age of reason, knows that in reality, homosexuality is simply ignored in the priesthood by the Hierarchy: It's a given fact, but the Church seems to think that most of us are morons, and that we simply believe Her!
If celibacy were no longer
If celibacy were no longer required of clerics, pedophelia would not evaporate. It would, however, be diminished. Why do we require clerical celibacy when it could be an option for those who feel a special call to celibacy. Is it that all the problems with a married clergy are so abhorent to the bishops that they are not willing to face that pandora's box? Yet, we lose good priests in droves over celibacy. A vast number of former priests are available in the wings if the bishops will ever advocate a married clergy. Why not? We had married clergymen during half of Church history. Why not return to the earlier practice?
JR
MONEY...that's why not... The
MONEY...that's why not...
The institutional church brought about celibacy due to a fear that a spouse could inherit church property. Same is true now. If a spouse sued for divorce, the spouse could sue the church. Make no mistake, it is all about money.
A pastor always likes parishoners with open wallets. Bishops promote priests who get parishoners to build churches and schools. "Follow the money."
Right on!
Right on!
Post new comment