The media continues to focus on celibacy as the source of all the trouble. This is so wrong. It implies, 1, that celibacy causes pedophilia, and 2, that marriage is the antidote. That makes celibacy pathological and marriage creepy.
I have my own opinions about celibacy, which I’ll discuss next post. Meanwhile, here’s what George Weigel has to say about it, in another article in this week’s Newsweek, following the Lisa Miller one I discussed last post. Weigel is a theologian on the conservative end of Catholicism. For example he’s against women in the priesthood and against the acceptance of gays. But he’s right about other things. Here’s an excerpt:
“Sexual abuse is indeed horrible, but there is no empirical evidence that it is a uniquely, predominantly, or even strikingly Catholic problem. The sexual abuse of the young is a global plague. In the United States, some 40 to 60 percent of such abuse takes place within families – often at the hands of live-in boyfriends or the second (or third, or fourth) husband of a child’s mother [and here I feel he’s blaming the mother for changing men. How does being her third boyfriend make a man more likely to be an abuser than the first?]; those cases have nothing to do with celibacy. The case of a married Wilmington, Dela., pediatrician charged with 471 counts of sexual abuse in February has nothing to do with celibacy. Neither did the 290,000 cases of sexual abuse in American public schools between 1991 and 2000, […..]. And given the significant level of abuse problems in Christian denominations with married clergy, it’s hard to accept the notion that marriage is somehow a barrier against sexually abusive clergy. (Indeed the idea of reducing marriage to an abuse-prevention program ought to be repulsive.) Sexual abusers throughout the world are overwhelmingly noncelibates.”
There. When he says it’s not uniquely a Catholic problem, he’s leaving out one of the most important aspects of the scandal, namely the cover-up. But to be fair, that isn’t uniquely Catholic either. Cover- up exists in those other arenas too, such as in families. How many victims of child abuse are expected to endure Thanksgiving dinners with the abuser for the rest of their lives? Not to mention daily living for the duration of their childhoods; living under the same roof while being required to pretend nothing’s happening; because we can’t turn Uncle Bob or Dad over to the police, now can we? And when those victims grow up, there’s no organization to sue, and no reporters interested in an exposée of Dad or Uncle Bob.
I have my own opinions about celibacy, which I’ll discuss next post. Meanwhile, here’s what George Weigel has to say about it, in another article in this week’s Newsweek, following the Lisa Miller one I discussed last post. Weigel is a theologian on the conservative end of Catholicism. For example he’s against women in the priesthood and against the acceptance of gays. But he’s right about other things. Here’s an excerpt:
“Sexual abuse is indeed horrible, but there is no empirical evidence that it is a uniquely, predominantly, or even strikingly Catholic problem. The sexual abuse of the young is a global plague. In the United States, some 40 to 60 percent of such abuse takes place within families – often at the hands of live-in boyfriends or the second (or third, or fourth) husband of a child’s mother [and here I feel he’s blaming the mother for changing men. How does being her third boyfriend make a man more likely to be an abuser than the first?]; those cases have nothing to do with celibacy. The case of a married Wilmington, Dela., pediatrician charged with 471 counts of sexual abuse in February has nothing to do with celibacy. Neither did the 290,000 cases of sexual abuse in American public schools between 1991 and 2000, […..]. And given the significant level of abuse problems in Christian denominations with married clergy, it’s hard to accept the notion that marriage is somehow a barrier against sexually abusive clergy. (Indeed the idea of reducing marriage to an abuse-prevention program ought to be repulsive.) Sexual abusers throughout the world are overwhelmingly noncelibates.”
There. When he says it’s not uniquely a Catholic problem, he’s leaving out one of the most important aspects of the scandal, namely the cover-up. But to be fair, that isn’t uniquely Catholic either. Cover- up exists in those other arenas too, such as in families. How many victims of child abuse are expected to endure Thanksgiving dinners with the abuser for the rest of their lives? Not to mention daily living for the duration of their childhoods; living under the same roof while being required to pretend nothing’s happening; because we can’t turn Uncle Bob or Dad over to the police, now can we? And when those victims grow up, there’s no organization to sue, and no reporters interested in an exposée of Dad or Uncle Bob.
Comments