COMMENTARY -
By RICHARD CRAVATTS
http://ledger.southofboston.com/articles/2007/07/26/opinion/opin02.txt
While the recent $660 million settlement overseen by Cardinal Roger Mahony,
archbishop of the Los Angeles diocese, to some 500 abuse victims has brought
closure to one aspect of the Catholic Church’s far-reaching child abuse
scandal, it still leaves unanswered - and troubling - questions about the
psychology of the perpetrators and those Church leaders who ignored and enabled
their criminal actions.
What is it about the Church that attracted the many priests who would go on
to sexually abuse hundreds of pre- and post-pubescent children? What moral
machinations, specific to the Church, could allow the serial complicity of the
church hierarchy who ignored wrongdoing and shuffled offending priests from
parish to parish, often over decades and frequently well after their sexual
transgressions were widely known?
A critical first question is whether the very process of accepting celibacy and
entering the priesthood at an emotionally immature age level predispose priests
to conflicting notions about human sexuality, whether, according to Gary Wills
in his insightful book, “Papal Sin,” “the celibate discipline for a whole class
of men (not just for the spiritually gifted individual) is a false, because
unrealizable, ideal.”
According to observers, these are real issues, precisely because these
individuals make immense decisions regarding their psychological and moral life
at an early age and these decisions are not necessarily based on realistic
expectations.
“Many priests entered seminary before they reached mature psychosexual
development,” says Donna Markham, Ph.D., president of Southdown Institute in
Coupled with the arrested emotional development of seminarians is the
powerlessness they experience in living within a structured, autocratic culture
of men in which they are not treated like fully developed adults.
As troubling as the developmental pathologies of some priests may be, just as
grave a concern is the not atypical failure on the part of Cardinal Mahony and others in the Church hierarchy nationwide to
protect children by keeping known abusive priests away from potential victims.
How could the Church leadership oversee such moral imbecility? Former priest
Tom Keneally thinks that the Church’s unswerving
belief in its own righteousness, and its self-granted ability to forgive and
redeem, gave its leaders, these men of perceived “invincibility,
invulnerability, omnipotence, omniscience,” a false sense of hope in
controlling the psychosexual behavior of some priests. “An ingrained unworldliness has... informed the church’s handling of the
abuse crisis,” Keneally recently wrote.
With this belief in the possibility of forgiveness and redemption, it was
possible for Mahony and others to overlook or forgive
seemingly unforgivable behavior on the part of their priests, believing
reports, generally from Church-hired professionals, that the abusing priests’
sexually abusive tendencies had been reshaped by faith and repentance.
Observers of the crisis act with horror at the apparent lack of concern by the
Church leaders for the real victims here - the abused children - not the “lost
sheep” priests who were repeatedly shielded by bishops, cardinals, and popes.
To Jason Barry, author of “Lead Us Not Into
Temptation,” a troubling saga of serial priest sexual abuse in
“Despite a noble history of voluntary celibacy,” Barry wrote, “too many
bishops - shut off from affective bonding, unlettered in the vocabulary of
child raising, swamped in homosexuality and pederasty, hiding behind lawyers,
mired in the muck of the media - were blinded by their flaw and disgraced the
People of God.”
Richard L. Cravatts, Ph.D., is director of
Copyright 2007 The Patriot Ledger
Transmitted