By JASON BERRY, April 3, 2002, New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/04/03/opinion/03BERR.html
NEW ORLEANS — The crisis facing
the Catholic Church is a tragedy that has been decades
in the making. It was to conceal sexual activity in a culture of celibacy that
many cardinals and
bishops resorted to deception and dishonesty, even about crimes committed by
priests. Only
recently has the church been forced by the public and the victims to acknowledge
this record of
abuse. The larger truth about the sexual revolution tearing at the church,
however, has barely
begun to unfold.
Celibacy does not cause
pedophilia. But celibacy has given rise to a secretive culture in which
sexual behavior in any form must be hidden. In such a context, homosexual
activity is something
to be ashamed of. Under Catholic teachings, it is considered a sin.
The problem, of course, is that
pedophilia is not just a sin, it is a crime. But the same secrecy
and shame that hides homosexuality in the church produces an atmosphere that has
concealed
acts of pedophilia. Just as bishops like Cardinal Bernard Law of Boston
tolerated pedophiles in
their midst, they have largely failed to reckon with the development of a
complex culture of gay
priests. One narrow strand of this culture consists of those priests who have
molested teenage
boys.
No reliable survey has been done
to determine how many priests are homosexual. But a
growing literature on the issue underscores the crisis. The priesthood is
becoming a gay
profession, the Rev. Donald B. Cozzens, a respected former seminary rector,
wrote in his
recent book "The Changing Face of the Priesthood." As the Rev. Andrew
M. Greeley wrote in
1989: "Blatantly active homosexual priests are appointed, transferred and
promoted . . . .
National networks of active homosexual priests (many of them church
administrators) are
tolerated. Pedophiles are reassigned."
Of course, there is a distinction
between celibate homosexual priests and sexually active gay
priests. But the celibate homosexual priest is made to feel guilt over his
sexual orientation
because of the official teaching of the church that homosexuality is a
"moral disorder." Last
month the pope's spokesman, Joaquín Navarro-Valls, voiced his opinion that
"people with these
inclinations" should not be ordained.
It needn't have turned out this
way. The crisis dates to the reform-minded Second Vatican
Council of the early 1960's. As priests voiced misgivings about celibacy, the
influential Jesuit
theologian John Courtney Murray predicted the law would soon be changed.
Instead, Pope
Paul VI issued his 1967 encyclical upholding celibacy as the church's
"brilliant jewel" —
psychologically and clerically.
Soon after, an exodus began. In
the last four decades, the number of priests in the United States
has dropped from 60,000 to 40,000 (with 7,000 retired), even as the Catholic
population has
grown to an all-time high of 63 million. Over the last three decades, an average
of 1,200 men
have left the priesthood annually, most of them to marry. The aging clerical
culture has failed to
foster a successor generation. Since Vatican II, seminary enrollment has dropped
75 percent.
In this drama of attrition, the proportion of gay priests rose. With the
celibacy law restricting the
pool of candidates, bishops grew desperate to attract unmarried men. The
Catholic News
Service, a division of the United States Catholic Conference, reported last
month that the
Vatican is concerned about "the negative effects of homosexuality within
the priesthood." Yet it
has taken no action.
The problem is the power
structure. Obsessed with secrecy, the bishops have denied the
implications of the changes in ecclesiastical culture. In 1992 I published a
book on sexual abuse
by priests, with a long section on the gay clergy. Much of my research was based
on lawsuits
filed by abuse victims. In scores of sworn depositions I read, the plaintiffs'
legal strategy was
clear: to show that a hierarchy that allows priests to break its own
ecclesiastical rules would also
shelter those who violated state criminal laws.
I interviewed several dozen gay
priests across America. With assurances of anonymity (lest their
bishops punish them for coming out of the closet), they promptly began
discussing their sex
lives. I asked why, if they could not practice celibacy, they didn't leave the
priesthood. Most
saw themselves as leading the church toward the reform of outdated moral
teachings —
including celibacy.
Many Catholics believe that some
of the church's rules are archaic and should be changed. Yet
we also expect priests not to lead closeted lives of sexual activity.
Most liberal Catholics find it difficult to call attention to this situation for
fear that criticism of any
dimension of gay culture is homophobic. But the issue is hypocrisy, not
homophobia.
Conservative Catholics,
meanwhile, should recognize that celibacy is a failure, practically and
morally. They should also acknowledge that homophobia is immoral. Conservatives
and liberals
alike should acknowledge that sexual secrecy is destroying the church, and one
way to save it
would be to make celibacy optional.
The requirement of celibacy is
not dogma; it is an ecclesiastical law that was adopted in the
Middle Ages because Rome was worried that clerics' children would inherit church
property
and create dynasties. (Now the church is selling property to pay for the abuse
scandal.) A
history of monastics and desert ascetics provided a celibate spirituality. But
the requirement
could be changed by a stroke of the papal pen.
Pope John Paul II, so brilliant
on the geopolitical stage, so visionary in fostering a dialogue with
Jews, has shut off internal reform. His failure to confront the pathology of
sexual secrecy is his
papacy's deepest flaw.
Jason Berry is the author of
"Lead Us Not Into Temptation: Catholic Priests and the
Sexual Abuse of Children."