BishopAccountability.org
 
  Celibacy and the Story of Eve

By Connie Veneracion
Manila Standard Today
July 17, 2007

http://www.manilastandardtoday.com/?page=connieVeneracion_july17_2007

Philippines — Yesterday, this paper ran an Associated Press story on the largest payout made by the Roman Catholic Church in history to sexual abuse complainants. The $660 million dollars will be split among some 500 complainants and the average amount that each will receive is $1.3 million.

The story said that the settlement included the release of confidential priest personnel files.

Allegations of sexual abuse committed by Catholic priests are not new in the Philippines. There is no documentation of the number of instances of sexual abuse committed by priests during the past 150 years but considering that Jose Rizal was executed for writing a novel with a sexually abusive Padre Damaso as one of the main characters, the fiction must have hit too close to home.

In 2003, scandal after scandal rocked the Roman Catholic Church of the Philippines. The backlash led to the resignation of a bishop after his exposure as the father of a parishioner's two children. The scandals were not even limited to acts of adultery per se. There were allegations of homosexual misconduct as well.

In November of the same year, the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines released a set of guidelines on sexual misconduct among priests. The Sun Star reported ("Catholic Church sets sex guidelines for priests," Nov. 19, 2003):

"Under the guidelines priests found to have fathered a child would not be automatically defrocked but those with two would be immediately asked to leave the Church.

"Those found committing homosexual acts would be sent to a rehabilitation center run by the church, but if the offense were repeated they would be expelled at once, the guidelines said."

The same report also said that "the Church admitted that some 200 priests had been investigated for sexual misconduct over the past 20 years. Some were dismissed, while most resigned voluntarily."

Granting that the misdeeds of some do not necessarily define the institution to which they belong, it is still pertinent to ask if all those instances of sexual abuse could have been prevented if the Church had done away with the rules on celibacy long ago. Many who say that celibacy is NOT the direct cause of sexual abuse committed by priests argue that sexual deviance happens every day outside the Church and among people who are free to engage in consensual sex anyway. In short, there seems to be no direct proof that the ban on sex—including masturbation and "impure thoughts"—is what drives these priests to sexual abuse.

But sexual abuse committed by priests is not one-dimensional. Think of sexual harassment in an office where a woman feels helpless to repel advances made by her boss for fear of losing her job. Think of a child who is too scared to say no to her father or uncle or older brother. A priest represents himself to be a moral authority. His relationship with his parishioners is one of leader to his followers. In short, any sexual advances that he instigates reeks of abuse of authority and it places the victim in a situation where he or she is torn between the lesser evil—to deny a "man of God" or to give in even as he or she knows that a priest has taken a vow of celibacy. It is this lopsided power relationship that makes sexual abuse committed by priests even more reprehensible in the eyes of society.

The funny thing, of course, is that to this very day, the Catholic Church insists that celibacy is essential to priesthood; that it is following the example set by Jesus who was "married" to the Church; that chastity is the superior way of life. Ironically, history shows that, based on actions taken by popes as well as religious writings, celibacy was borne out of a combination of chauvinism and the male's fear of the power of women, anchored on the belief that women, including wives, are the very reason for the downfall of man—shades of Eve and the forbidden fruit. More significantly, it may be directly related to attempts to expunge women from positions of authority within the Church hierarchy.

Future Church (www.futurechurch.org), a national coalition of parish-centered Catholics in the US, has a very good outline on the history of celibacy in the Catholic Church. Below are some highlights:

"First Century: Peter, the first pope, and the apostles that Jesus chose were, for the most part, married men. The New Testament implies that women presided at eucharistic meals in the early church.

Fourth Century: 352-Council of Laodicea: women are not to be ordained. This suggests that before this time there was ordination of women.

Fifth Century: 401-St. Augustine wrote, 'Nothing is so powerful in drawing the spirit of a man downwards as the caresses of a woman.'

Eighth Century: St. Boniface reported to the pope that in Germany almost no bishop or priest was celibate.

Ninth Century: 836-Council of Aix-la-Chapelle openly admitted that abortions and infanticide took place in convents and monasteries to cover up activities of non-celibate clerics.

Eleventh Century: 1074-Pope Gregory VII said anyone to be ordained must first pledge celibacy: 'priests [must] first escape from the clutches of their wives.'

1095-Pope Urban II had priests' wives sold into slavery, children were abandoned.

Fourteenth Century: Bishop Pelagio complains that women are still ordained and hearing confessions."

You may read the rest at www.futurechurch.org/fpm/history.htm.

Nothing is so powerful in drawing the spirit of a man downwards as the caresses of a woman?? Priests must escape from the clutches of their wives?? Women are not to be ordained?? Complaints that women are still ordained and hearing confessions?? What the heck...??

What is it about women that scare men? It's as though when around women, men can't think straight and can't do their jobs right. The implied power that women wield is flattering but I think it's really a case of men being unable to control their libido—and that's not the fault of women. In the case of exclusion, why should women be punished for man's weaknesses? Really, men just need to grow up, that's all—individually and as a class.

While I don't see anything good in lifting the rule on celibacy IF the only effect is to grant a license to priests to abuse their moral authority even more, I see every positive thing in discarding the rule to allow priests to marry and have families. The obvious objection against such an idea would be the detraction from the "holy" image of the priest as marriage and family will make him appear every inch more human. But what's so bad about that? To my mind, a priest, as some sort or advisor, will be in a much better position to understand real problems of real people if he has the benefit of experiencing the most fundamental of all social institutions—the family. He'd be happy to enjoy legitimate sex too.

The author blogs at http://houseonahill.net

 
 

Any original material on these pages is copyright © BishopAccountability.org 2004. Reproduce freely with attribution.