#330: We Still Don't Know--Part II

EXCERPT:

The Impact of Mandatory Celibacy.:

Features and characteristics of the Catholic Church, such as an exclusively male priesthood and the commitment to celibate chastity, were invariant during the increase, peak, and decrease in abuse incidents, and thus are not causes of the “crisis.”

This statement ignores any link between “changing” social values and “invariant” celibacy. The 1970s and 1980s saw a simultaneous drop in the number of seminarians and a rise in priests leaving to marry. This suggests the obvious: in changing times, an “invariant” celibacy became increasingly difficult for young men to accept—it kept some men from joining and kept others from staying. Those who did remain found celibacy harder to sustain. How can the study ignore this clash between the secular culture and the Church’s culture? Absent this difficulty (e.g. If celibacy had been optional) fewer priests might have left--and fewer might have abused.

Many accused priests began abusing years after they were ordained, at times of increased job stress, social isolation, and decreased contact with peers. Generally, few structures such as psychological and professional counseling were readily available to assist them with the difficulties they experienced.

After 40 years working professionally with priests, I have no doubt about the high stresses of their work and lifestyle. For more than 30 years, I have called rectories “the loneliest places in the Church.” How can the authors of this study not connect priests’ isolation with celibacy? Diocesan priests are men who, unlike laity, give up family and, unlike religious, do not get community as an alternative. They are isolated by design, by the very culture of their priesthood. The study seems blind to that culture and its impact. Moreover, declining numbers have left priests even more isolated than before—many today are living in empty rectories.

Priests who lacked close social bonds, and those whose family spoke negatively or not at all about sex, were more likely to sexually abuse minors than those who had a history of close social bonds and positive discussions about sexual behavior. In general, priests from the ordination cohorts of the 1940s and 1950s showed evidence of difficulty with intimacy.

Again the report fails to grasp the impact of mandatory celibacy. My 40-years experience working with thousands of priests teaches me that the institution of celibacy was especially appealing to men who were (1) socially isolated, (2) afraid of intimacy, or (3) gay. All three groups found the culture of celibacy an attractive haven, a safe “closet” to hide in. This skewed the demographics of the entire priestly population, which has disproportionate numbers of isolated men, gay men, and men afraid of intimacy (especially intimacy with women). Over the years, many of these men have struck me as people who simply missed adolescence.