The Real Sin of Sexual Abuse by Clergy
It is not surprising that the recent movie, Spotlight, documenting the sexual abuse cover up in the Diocese of Boston won so many awards. By all standards the investigative reporting on which the movie is based and the movie itself is deserving of the awards. It is also not surprising that recently the grand jury in Altoona, Pa. heard evidence of “Two Catholic bishops who led a small Pennsylvania diocese helped cover up the sexual abuse of hundreds of children by more than 50 priests and other religious leaders over a 40 year period…”(Tampa Tribune, Wednesday, March, 2, 2016, p. 8).
It is not just the Roman Catholic church which has been exposed as covering up sexual abuse of those under their care, although it has certainly gotten the most attention and may have been the most systematic about the cover up.
The Roman Catholic church has responded to these revelation by:
1. Paying out huge amounts of money to those who suffered emotional, psychological, and spiritual damage as a result of the abuse.
2. Agreeing to turn over offending priests to law enforcement.
The goal seems to have been three fold:
1. Make amends for what has happened in the past.
2. Insure that civil legal system punish those who continue to abuse children.
3. Make sure that changes are made to prevent or greatly reduce abuse and cover up in the future.
Taking these one by one:
1. Make amends for what has happened in the past. Certainly the money, except where it covers the cost of psychological care, is largely symbolic. The payment of money awarded to victims of abuse and mistreatment for “pain and suffering” is one of the ways our culture “proves” that it is serious about being sorry for the abuse which has occurred or making the individual or organization responsible for the behavior pay for its sin/wrongdoing. If the money figure is high enough the person or individuals responsible will experience the pain of letting go of resources. The victim will have money not only for treatment of the effects of the abuse, but money to live on if they are unable to work as a result of the abuse.
2. Insure that the civil legal system punish those who continue to abuse children. This action has little to do with the spiritual goal of a Christian church. Punishment does not in and of itself curtail or change the behavior of an individual. The assumption of punishment is that the priest committing the abuse makes an informed decision that his needs are more important than that of the child or other person they abuse. Certainly I have met those who attempted to explain and/or make sense of their behavior by blaming the victim, the organization, or somehow attempt to convince themselves and others that the behavior was not abusive. Most of we humans want to believe that we have some control over our decisions in the future. Otherwise, it will seem as if we are saying that one cannot count on any of our behavior being rational, just, or consistent. If one cannot account for one’s behavior one is essentially saying that one can never be trusted and needs to be in a protective environment. In locations where I have previously worked, I had occasion to report sexual abuse to an official of a church. The official took immediate action to lovingly, but firmly, insist that the person go to a treatment program. In some cases the person was on a plane to a treatment center on the same day that I reported the problem. In most of those cases in which I was involved, the person responded to treatment. None of these were persons whose only or primary object of sexual desire was a pre-pubescent child. The psychological literature is very clear that when a person has a strong, compulsive sexual desire for pre-pubescent children, treatment is seldom affective. I have one current client, who was acutely sexually abused beginning when he was a very young child, whom I do think no longer desires sexual relationship with children. This was a man who, even when he did have such desires, had a very satisfying sexual relationship with his wife. He is also an older man who is very careful not to put himself in situations which could trigger such desires. It may be that if chemical castration (use of certain medication to significantly reduce or eliminate sexual desire) or other chemical options do not work to insure that children are safe from further abuse, that some true pedophiles may need to be in a protective environment as is true for any other mentally ill person who is a danger to themselves and others. This is not punishment. No one decides that they want to have this compulsive desire. No one wakes up one day and says, “Oh, in this life journey I want to have a strong desire to abuse others and not be able to exercise any control over my decisions to do or not do this abuse.” It is true that some people, very early in life, learn that sexual use of others who are not able to consent is normal. That is very sad. Their abusers probably learned it from their abusers. My point is that although I can understand that there was a lot of pressure on the Catholic church because of their frequent mishandling of sexual abuse cases, agreeing to punishment, in my opinion, it was not consistent with the teachings of Jesus or the church. Obviously pretending a problem does not exists is also not consistent with the teachings of Jesus or the church.
1. Make sure that changes are made to prevent or greatly reduce abuse and cover up in the future. The action taken has probably reduced cover up. I have a very limited knowledge of what is currently being done to identify and deal with current cases of abuse. In those few cases where I do have personal knowledge, the response of the officials of the church has been, to say the least, not very pastoral. There are some organizations which have worked to provide places of refuge from those who are defrocked or otherwise deprived of the medical, physical, and spiritual care of their diocese. I am not, however aware of the extent to which the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church or other religious organization are dealing with the sexual and psychological issues which have led to abuse. In addition to that limited number of individual clergy ( very limited in my experience and view) who truly fit the diagnosis of pedophile, there are many others who act out sexually because of:
Unresolved or ignored issues relating to sexual identity. The culture at large and some religious bodies have come to terms with the fact that gay, bisexual, lesbian, and transgendered clergy can be ordained and serve the church well. It is true that “one is only as sick as one’s secrets.”
Sexual addiction – a very treatable disorder.
Other addictive disorder such as alcoholism and other drug addiction which may result in the inability access one’s core moral values. Again, very treatable.
Untreated mental illness.
Insufficient acknowledgement of the extent to which we are sexual beings and not accepting that it may be the case that a relatively small percentage of people can successfully remain celibate for many years. The fact that many priests and other clergy have sexual relationships with other consenting adults of both sexes has not been widely acknowledged and addressed as far as I can tell.
I am aware that I have not, in this brief blog, addressed the fact that the Catholic Church has wittingly or unwittingly taught shame for behavior such as same sex behavior and caused more shame by covering up sexual abuse.
It seems as if it is always tempting for we humans to want to believe that important social issues are simple and, thus, have simple solutions. I do not believe that this is often the case and I certainly do not believe that it is the case with the issues of clergy sexual abuse. The ability of we humans to think that a we can simply ignore the problem and pretend it will go away may be understandable but clearly did not serve the needs of the victim, the perpetrators, or the religious organizations. Pretending that the solution is now just to pay off the victims and punish the perpetrators will not result in positive results either.
Written March 2, 2016
It is not surprising that the recent movie, Spotlight, documenting the sexual abuse cover up in the Diocese of Boston won so many awards. By all standards the investigative reporting on which the movie is based and the movie itself is deserving of the awards. It is also not surprising that recently the grand jury in Altoona, Pa. heard evidence of “Two Catholic bishops who led a small Pennsylvania diocese helped cover up the sexual abuse of hundreds of children by more than 50 priests and other religious leaders over a 40 year period…”(Tampa Tribune, Wednesday, March, 2, 2016, p. 8).
It is not just the Roman Catholic church which has been exposed as covering up sexual abuse of those under their care, although it has certainly gotten the most attention and may have been the most systematic about the cover up.
The Roman Catholic church has responded to these revelation by:
1. Paying out huge amounts of money to those who suffered emotional, psychological, and spiritual damage as a result of the abuse.
2. Agreeing to turn over offending priests to law enforcement.
The goal seems to have been three fold:
1. Make amends for what has happened in the past.
2. Insure that civil legal system punish those who continue to abuse children.
3. Make sure that changes are made to prevent or greatly reduce abuse and cover up in the future.
Taking these one by one:
1. Make amends for what has happened in the past. Certainly the money, except where it covers the cost of psychological care, is largely symbolic. The payment of money awarded to victims of abuse and mistreatment for “pain and suffering” is one of the ways our culture “proves” that it is serious about being sorry for the abuse which has occurred or making the individual or organization responsible for the behavior pay for its sin/wrongdoing. If the money figure is high enough the person or individuals responsible will experience the pain of letting go of resources. The victim will have money not only for treatment of the effects of the abuse, but money to live on if they are unable to work as a result of the abuse.
2. Insure that the civil legal system punish those who continue to abuse children. This action has little to do with the spiritual goal of a Christian church. Punishment does not in and of itself curtail or change the behavior of an individual. The assumption of punishment is that the priest committing the abuse makes an informed decision that his needs are more important than that of the child or other person they abuse. Certainly I have met those who attempted to explain and/or make sense of their behavior by blaming the victim, the organization, or somehow attempt to convince themselves and others that the behavior was not abusive. Most of we humans want to believe that we have some control over our decisions in the future. Otherwise, it will seem as if we are saying that one cannot count on any of our behavior being rational, just, or consistent. If one cannot account for one’s behavior one is essentially saying that one can never be trusted and needs to be in a protective environment. In locations where I have previously worked, I had occasion to report sexual abuse to an official of a church. The official took immediate action to lovingly, but firmly, insist that the person go to a treatment program. In some cases the person was on a plane to a treatment center on the same day that I reported the problem. In most of those cases in which I was involved, the person responded to treatment. None of these were persons whose only or primary object of sexual desire was a pre-pubescent child. The psychological literature is very clear that when a person has a strong, compulsive sexual desire for pre-pubescent children, treatment is seldom affective. I have one current client, who was acutely sexually abused beginning when he was a very young child, whom I do think no longer desires sexual relationship with children. This was a man who, even when he did have such desires, had a very satisfying sexual relationship with his wife. He is also an older man who is very careful not to put himself in situations which could trigger such desires. It may be that if chemical castration (use of certain medication to significantly reduce or eliminate sexual desire) or other chemical options do not work to insure that children are safe from further abuse, that some true pedophiles may need to be in a protective environment as is true for any other mentally ill person who is a danger to themselves and others. This is not punishment. No one decides that they want to have this compulsive desire. No one wakes up one day and says, “Oh, in this life journey I want to have a strong desire to abuse others and not be able to exercise any control over my decisions to do or not do this abuse.” It is true that some people, very early in life, learn that sexual use of others who are not able to consent is normal. That is very sad. Their abusers probably learned it from their abusers. My point is that although I can understand that there was a lot of pressure on the Catholic church because of their frequent mishandling of sexual abuse cases, agreeing to punishment, in my opinion, it was not consistent with the teachings of Jesus or the church. Obviously pretending a problem does not exists is also not consistent with the teachings of Jesus or the church.
1. Make sure that changes are made to prevent or greatly reduce abuse and cover up in the future. The action taken has probably reduced cover up. I have a very limited knowledge of what is currently being done to identify and deal with current cases of abuse. In those few cases where I do have personal knowledge, the response of the officials of the church has been, to say the least, not very pastoral. There are some organizations which have worked to provide places of refuge from those who are defrocked or otherwise deprived of the medical, physical, and spiritual care of their diocese. I am not, however aware of the extent to which the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church or other religious organization are dealing with the sexual and psychological issues which have led to abuse. In addition to that limited number of individual clergy ( very limited in my experience and view) who truly fit the diagnosis of pedophile, there are many others who act out sexually because of:
Unresolved or ignored issues relating to sexual identity. The culture at large and some religious bodies have come to terms with the fact that gay, bisexual, lesbian, and transgendered clergy can be ordained and serve the church well. It is true that “one is only as sick as one’s secrets.”
Sexual addiction – a very treatable disorder.
Other addictive disorder such as alcoholism and other drug addiction which may result in the inability access one’s core moral values. Again, very treatable.
Untreated mental illness.
Insufficient acknowledgement of the extent to which we are sexual beings and not accepting that it may be the case that a relatively small percentage of people can successfully remain celibate for many years. The fact that many priests and other clergy have sexual relationships with other consenting adults of both sexes has not been widely acknowledged and addressed as far as I can tell.
I am aware that I have not, in this brief blog, addressed the fact that the Catholic Church has wittingly or unwittingly taught shame for behavior such as same sex behavior and caused more shame by covering up sexual abuse.
It seems as if it is always tempting for we humans to want to believe that important social issues are simple and, thus, have simple solutions. I do not believe that this is often the case and I certainly do not believe that it is the case with the issues of clergy sexual abuse. The ability of we humans to think that a we can simply ignore the problem and pretend it will go away may be understandable but clearly did not serve the needs of the victim, the perpetrators, or the religious organizations. Pretending that the solution is now just to pay off the victims and punish the perpetrators will not result in positive results either.
Written March 2, 2016
RSS Feed