Posted on 04/15/2002 5:27:52 PM PDT by jrherreid
Sunday, April 14, 2002
By Andrew M. Greeley
Anti-Catholicism is as American as apple pie a la mode, chocolate malts, Diet Pepsi and silly nostalgia at the beginning of the baseball season.
No Catholic who has to work in the higher media, the upper academy, or the New York publishing world has any doubts about its existence.
Most American Catholics rarely encounter it in their daily lives. Hence, they do not take it seriously. Not enough Catholics suffer because of it for there ever to be a serious battle against it. Therefore, anti-Catholicism will persist in American life indefinitely, giving the lie to the claim that Americans have left prejudice and discrimination behind.
It lurks beneath the surface of American culture and raises its ugly head only on occasion — as it now is doing on the sexual abuse crisis.
As someone who has denounced child abuse by priests and cover-ups by the hierarchy for 16 years, I defend neither. If there has been a new outburst of anti-Catholicism that the country has not seen since the John Kennedy election, one must admit candidly that the leadership of the church has provided much raw material for the Catholic haters.
The current feeding frenzy goes far beyond the stupidity and the arrogance of Catholic leadership. The argument one hears and reads over and over that celibacy is the cause of sexual abuse is a vicious anti-Catholic lie, even if it comes from columnists and editorial writers who claim to be Catholic. In an ABC news poll, 6 percent of Catholics and 6 percent of other Americans said that there had been a sex abuse case in their congregation, a finding that shows the problem is not just celibate or Catholic.
Most child abusers are married men (and in some cases married women). Their abuse results from deep emotional problems. If a priest with these proclivities marries, then he will be a married sex abuser. No clinician disputes that truth. The alleged link between celibacy and sexual abuse is specious.
Is there no historian of anti-Catholic nativism who will rise up and shout that attacks on the celibate priesthood have been an integral part of anti-Catholic bigotry for two centuries? Historically, the bigots insist that the priest is either a slimy character looking for young people or nuns to assault or something less than a real man.
Some few resigned priests make that argument, in effect, today against those of us who have tried to keep our promise of celibacy. Those who accept the argument as though it were unquestionable truth are de facto anti-Catholics. Somehow the fact these loudmouths now sleep with a woman seems to constitute prima facie evidence that they are more real men than we are and uniquely qualified to criticize our inadequacies. That, too, is anti-Catholic bigotry and should be labeled as such.
Moreover, the mode that the media use to report the reaction of Catholics to the abuse and the cover-up — "faithful shaken by abuse charges" — is also anti-Catholic. It assumes, as do most Americans, that Catholics are clinging weakly to a faith and a heritage and a church that can barely survive one more crisis. In fact, Catholics remain Catholic because they like being Catholic. They like their heritage, their communalism, their sacraments, their sense of God's presence in the world, their stories, their images, their rain forest of metaphors. They should give that up because their clergy fail to be what they should be and because some of their leaders are idiots?
Gimme a break!
Do the bigots really think that Catholics were in the churches on Easter because of the priests?
Yet that is the paradigm that permeates American society and the only one which the media seem capable of using.
How about "Catholics are angry, but not leaving!" Then how about a serious discussion of why they're not leaving — as the present paradigm suggests they should. And, finally, a discussion of the historic hatred for Catholicism that has generated such a paradigm.
The tradition of celibacy is part of that heritage, a dispensable part, perhaps, but still understandable within the parameters of the heritage. Intelligent discussion about it should begin with respect for its purposes and accomplishments and not sweeping assumptions about sexual perversion and abnormality.
Do Americans really want to do away completely with men such as Father Damian or M. Vincent or Father Kino or Joe Bernardin because the self-serving diatribes of a few resigned priests fits so neatly our culture's anti-Catholicism?
Andrew M. Greeley is a Roman Catholic priest, author and sociologist. He teaches at the University of Chicago and the University of Arizona. His column on political, church and social issues appears each Sunday in the Daily Southtown. Father Greeley's e-mail address is Agreel@aol.com and his home page, which includes homilies for every Sunday, is www.agreeley.com.
Catholic Nun Ran My Husband Off the Road
04/15/02 | mo4bush
Posted on 4/15/02 4:47 PM Pacific by mo4bush
Hello Fellow Freepers, On February 25, 2002 my husband was involved in an accident. A Catholic nun violated his right of way and he was forced to lay down his motorcycle at 60 mph on the freeway. He suffered a fractured hip and broken elbow. He was in the hospital for two weeks and rehab for one week. He can't walk (without a walker) until June 1st. My question to you. Does anyone know if the Order of Nuns that this nun belonged to carries liability coverage for her? Would the Diocese cover her actions? My friend/Priest says it would but I would like confirmation. Her limit on her personal policy is 100K, our underinsured motorist is 100K and the hospital bills are over 170K with Medicare first in line for any award. This is my first request for help and I would appreciate any input. Thank you, Mo4Bush
Now, I am not a Catholic so I don't want to make recommendations for a church I don't belong to, but I do think that a logical case can be made that when traditional priestly celibacy was hit by the sexual revolution, straight guys became less likely to enter the priesthood while homosexual guys MAY have become more likely to (the second part's a guess, but I think it's a reasonable guess). While it's possible that the church can somehow once again start attracting sufficient numbers of heterosexual men to the priesthood with celibacy retained, I must say that I rather doubt that that will happen.
Many seminaries now (conservatively oriented) are full of applicants and students. The much talked about shortage of priests was nothing more than a man-made crisis and fulfillment of liberal agenda. Thanks again though.
Of course, I am from the Protestant tradition and am comfortable with a married clergy so my perspective on the subject is obviously quite different from that of the Catholic Church. As I said, I don't presume to try to make the rules for an organization of which I am not a member.
No of course not!
These men would be who they are with or with out the Catholic Church.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.