It's Not About Celibacy
by Deal Hudson, Editor of Crisis Magazine
The recent pedophile problems in various U.S. Catholic dioceses, especially Boston, have led - predictably - to a new wave of questions about priestly celibacy. Let us be clear: There is no relation between the vow of priestly celibacy and the incidence of pedophilia among Catholic priests.
How do I know this? There is less likelihood that a Catholic priest will be a pedophile (0.3 %) than a married man.
This statistic comes from the best and most current study of this issue, Pedophiles and Priests by Philip Jenkins (Oxford University Press, 1996). Jenkins shows that true pedophilia, that is, sexual contact between an adult and pre-pubescent child, is very rare in the Catholic priesthood.
Jenkins also explains how the media artificially exaggerates these numbers in their reporting. One U.S. Cardinal told me recently that many of the reported incidents of "child abuse" are actually complaints going back many years about the forms of corporal punishments administered by clergy in days-gone-by. Data about actual sexual contact and routine spanking or paddling are being thrown together.
The whole argument against a celibate, male clergy based on the pedophilia problem is, at best, impressionistic and, at worse, totally disingenuous.
Catholic dissidents who advocate married clergy and women priests are trying to take full advantage of this present situation. Never once do they mention that if a priest is faithful to his vows sexual relations of any kind will simply never occur. Just how allowing clergy to marry, presumably members of the opposite sex, will reduce pedophilia, is never explained.
The media is scrutinizing the Catholic Church on this issue in a way they have never looked at other institutional leaders, such as public elementary schools teachers, for example. The mere fact that the statistical incidence of pedophilia is the less than married men with children should give the media pause, but it does not and will not.
I can't think of a single mainstream media outlet, with the possible exception of Fox News, that does not demonstrate a consistent bias against the Catholic Church. This is not to point a finger at every reporter and editor, but to underline the constant tone and drift of their reporting.
Why, for example, would MSNBC spend an evening inviting people to call in and vote on whether Catholic priests should be allowed to marry? Would MSNBC do a poll on whether Jews should be allowed to eat pork on their holy days?
As Bill Donohue of the Catholic League has shown for years, the media has no fear of offending Catholics because Catholics evidently don't care if their faith is put up for a vote.
A statistical defense of the Catholic clergy, however, is not enough to address the present crisis. There must be serious rethinking of how to identify potential pedophiles before they enter the priesthood, and how to deal with them once an incident occurs. It is clear such a priest can never again to be assigned to duties that put children at risk.
The Church will get its house in order without the help of those who want to knock it down and start again.
Thanks. I needed a good laugh to start the day.
Two points:
One: We are confusing the situation by conflating people who fantasize and act out with children-like the guy who murdered the little girl in San Diego-and the very common phenomenon among gay men about attraction to and seduction of teenage boys. I don't think they're the same thing, except that they are both crimes.
If you mean that the priesthood should screen out those with a sexual interest in five-year olds, I'm sure they already do that. If you mean that they should screen out those who like 14-year old boys, then I think they (and we) will have to be much more realistic about gay men. Perhaps this is what Fr. Navarro-Walls means.
Two: "What should be done with such priests". This is, IMHO, the root of why the Church is in such trouble over this. It's not a matter of "making sure they never work with children". What they have done is a grave sin, against the Church and against mankind. They need to face an ecclesiastical punishment at least as grave as what the Church metes out to the divorced: refusal of the eucharist.
The justification for the condemnation of the divorced and remarried is that Jesus said they are committing adultery. Fine.
Jesus also said that those who cause little ones to sin should have a millstone tied around their necks and be thrown into the sea. If the bishops were seen to be crafting metaphorical millstones for these priests, they would not have such a problem, again IMHO.
This study has been discussed repeatedly in this forum and shown to be incorrect. It's based on self-reported numbers from the Archdiocese of Chicago.
Dear fellow-Christians, my prayers for the Church and for you.
God bless you!
This thread will be saved on my HD for the future generations to ponder upon :)