Confront sexual abuse, don't manage it

Bp Robinson is not infallible – and that, he finds, is cause for thanksgiving. “One of the rights I treasure most greatly in my life is the right to be wrong – the right to say ‘Sorry, I was mistaken.’ ” He adds, “Far too often the Catholic Church has believed that it had such a level of divine guidance that it did not need the right to be wrong.”

These sentences come from The Prison of the Past, chapter 12 of his frank and courageous book, CONFRONTING POWER AND SEX IN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH RECLAIMING THE SPIRIT OF JESUS, a book that has won acclaim for its plain speaking, not only about the sexual abuse crises in the Catholic Church (how we mis-behave) but also about the basis of our Catholic and Christian belief. The confrontation of the title is only the beginning of the challenge of this book; after all, many individuals and institutions have confronted the Church over the past few years. The Bishop’s views on our need to think deeply about Jesus’ message and to consider afresh how we, the Church, accept and align with the Gospel revelation forms the real meat of this gripping book.

Bp Geoffrey Robinson writes from his own experience of Catholic living, and very coherently expresses the misgivings and objections that so many of us have long felt but have not found it easy or politic to express. This book would be good written by anyone; its value is enhanced by the fact that it is the work of a Bishop who is not afraid to raise his head above the parapet and articulate a case for reform. How can we the Church confront abuse of any kind without deep reform? Otherwise we are “managing” the problem, which is the sin and the institutional failure to believe and live as faithfully as we could and should in accordance with the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Bp Robinson wrote this book after resigning as Auxiliary Bishop in the Sydney Archdiocese – an office he had held for 20 years. At the end of the introduction he expresses gratitude for the assistance he has received but does not name those involved. “It says much about the need for change that, in the atmosphere that prevails within the church, I would be creating difficulties for them if I gave their names.”

All the more reason to read what the Bishop is saying. But you don’t have to take my word for it – here’s a quote from NCR

"Bishop Geoffrey Robinson told NCR that he sees a fractured church with a major division between the “proclaimers of certainties and the seekers after truth,” with the proclaimers of certainties seeming to be in the favored position.

“This has left many people feeling a sense of alienation, of being marginalized, of no longer quite belonging to the church that had given them much of their sense of belonging, meaning and direction throughout their lives.

“In writing the book I became aware that I was writing a book for these people, that I was trying to tell them that there is a church for them and that it is fully in accord with the mind of Jesus. I was telling them that there are basic certainties, but there is also abundant room for search, for taking personal responsibility and growing through that process to become all we are capable of being, all God wants us to be.

“I became aware that it was important for many people that there should be a bishop saying these things. At moments I felt that the needs of these many people were so great that it is perhaps true that I have never been more of a shepherd, I have never been more justified in carrying around a pastoral staff, than I have in this.”
-- Penny Edman

National Catholic Reporter, September 14, 2007 "

Dennis gives an online reference to the Book launch speech – but take a look at the long string of comments below that report. That’s how important this book is for Catholics. The Australian publisher John Garratt air-mailed my copy, and the book is now available from the Irish reprinters Columba Press, and listed by amazon.co.uk. Presumably also in USA? If not, why not? If not now, when?

Englishwoman

Confront Sexual Abuse, don’t manage it.

No kidding. And what is so frustrating is the band-aid reeks with the germs that will continue contaminating the wound, the wound where some granulation of new, healthy tissue could be seen.

One needs to go as deep into the wound in search of infected tissue, to excise it, as William Cleary has done when he wrote his article for CORPUS Reports:

“The End of Celibacy
Written by William Cleary

Mary Pat Fox, head of Voice of the Faithful (VOTF), JUST MADE NEWS BY CALLING FOR A NEW STUDY OF CELIBACY (New York Times, June 24, 2007). But more research on it is inevitable partly because the connection of celibacy to clerical sex abuse hovers indistinctly in the background of the puzzle. How do we begin to explain the link or non-link?

The Adelphi University scholar, Virginia Goldner, a clinical professor of psychology and founding editor of Studies of Gender and Sexuality, states an arresting opinion of her own about the priest abuse of Catholic children in a newly published book-length study from Analytic Press, Predatory Priests and Silenced Victims. On page 14, Goldner says that, in looking for a root cause of all this, it is not celibacy, even mandatory celibacy (certainly not homosexuality), that’s to blame. “Rather it is the Catholic idealization of celibacy as a heroic sacrifice inoculating against sexuality, and in particular heterosexuality, that has prepared the ground for the sexual misconduct.” How can this be? It seems like hair-splitting. Is Goldner serious?

When you parse her words, they amount to a radical critique of the way Catholics think of clerical celibacy itself. Yet it is taken for granted, as a rule, that Catholics never would say that clerical celibacy can’t be a healthy path for at least a few.

But Goldner seems to be saying just that. How “prepare the ground for sexual misconduct?” By the Catholic idealization of celibacy as a heroic sacrifice, she says. That is what we must not allow. Private celibacy would not be relevant or in question. The “glorification” is the problem. In a layman’s view, one might say “because it gives the wrong message, it turns the world upside-down.”

It is fascinating to note here that Zen Buddhism in Japan amazingly forbids religious celibacy and has done so for 100 years. The long argument over this matter is told in Neither Monk Nor Layman by Richard Jaffe from Princeton University Press several years ago. Those in charge of Zen shrines are no longer monks (which implies the single state) nor really laymen: but they are clerics.

However, special honorific robes and roles are forbidden. The explanation given to this state of affairs is complicated with cultural considerations beyond our Western appreciations, but in effect the reasons they state are that celibacy is really both virtually impossible and socially undesirable. Said the decision-makers in Japan at the time: “The subtle function of the universe resides in the power of the husband-and-wife union.” “Sexual union,” they said, is “the fulfillment of a heavenly principle.”

Clearly someone in the Church knows what needs to be done, as shown in the following quote from the above cited article:

"One must ask, Where is the papal statement addressed directly to victims, with the word ‘sorry’ proclaimed clearly? Where is the papal promise to investigate every possible source of abuse and ruthlessly to eradicate it? Where is the request to those institutes especially set up to treat offending priests to present their findings on the causes? Where is the request to the bishops to coordinate the studies in their territory and report to Rome? Where is the document placing everything on the table for discussion, including such things as obligatory celibacy and the selection and training of candidates? With power go responsibilities. The pope has many times claimed the power and must accept the corresponding responsibilities."

Perhaps the US bishops will one day come together to demand this kind of response from their superior.

I know it is wrong, but I can't help to laugh at the most recent scandal of the msgr. at the Office for the Congregation of the Clergy and his defense that he was pretending to be gay to understand this sin that eats away at the church and its priests. Just another example of the duplicity of the church for failing to recognize its humanity. I bet this guy was (is) one of the biggest condemners of homosexuality - probably got his position for stance on it - only to get condemned by his own actions.

God does have a sense of humor - smile, you're on candid camera!