On clerical culture and the sex abuse crisis

Philadelphia Magazine has a very insightful and appalling article on the priest sex abuse situation in that city. It profiles the current archbishop and his predecessor and tries to explain why the church-as-institution seems incapable of dealing with this problem.  See http://www.phillymag.com/articles/catholics_in_crisis_sex_and_deception_in_the_archdiocese_of_philadelphia/


A key observation:  


"The Church’s protection of priests who sexually abuse children is a testament to its completely insular control and power apart from civil society. The Church takes care of its own, in other words, and that fact leads to a cruel bottom line: Maintaining the institution’s standing in the world is more important than taking care of victims of sexual abuse."

Further:
"And the crisis has spread beyond parishioners, because many priests in the archdiocese are just as enraged at how Church leadership has mishandled the scandal, and the awkward position it has put all of them in. It’s a very sad day when walking down the street wearing your collar has become a questionable decision."

And speaking of bishops and clerical culture:  

“The only virtue is obedience,” says Richard Sipe, a psychotherapist and an ex-priest who has spent the past few decades trying to understand the collision of sex and power in his church. “As long as you’re obedient to the Church, as long as you protect and embrace it, you are justified.” Obedience is drilled into young seminarians from day one. “You are not beholden to charity or truth or anything else. Everything can be sacrificed to obedience.”

Read the full article, it is well worth your time.

Interesting press coverage...

An article in Slate reports a study that roughly half of college educated gays and lesbians pretend to be heterosexual in their workplace.  See http://slatest.slate.com/posts/2011/06/22/gay_worker_study_center_for_work_life_policy_finds_48_percent_of.html


The lead investigator on the John Jay study on child sex abuse in the Catholic Church tries to correct the record about what the report actually says. It seems that many media sources reported on something they had not really read and rushed to judgment.  See http://www.salon.com/news/catholicism/?story=/politics/war_room/2011/06/23/catholic_sex_abuse_report

Notes from a homily on the 6th Sunday of Easter, belatedly posted

I know a really good man. He is smart, and he tries always to be kind. He works hard. He has had many important jobs, and has borne many responsibilities. He has helped people with material assistance, and with spiritual comfort. He has labored long and well in the vineyard of the Lord. There is just one problem, one little problem. He is sure that he knows just what others should do. He knows what the eucharistic ministers should do. The lectors. The musicians. Other pastors. The lady in the fourth pew. The local baker and dry cleaner. And let's not even mention how he knows just what bishops and politicians should do. And he is not shy about telling everyone what they should do.   It isn't surprising that his friends sometimes call this man "Father Should."

I'm sure you know the type. Maybe you know someone just like him. Maybe you are just like him? ( no, certainly not!). I suspect there is a bit of "Father Should" in all of us.

How different is the position assumed in today's second reading from the first letter of St. Peter!    After telling us to "Sanctify Christ" in our hearts - that is, make our hearts centered on Christ and bless Christ - after we do that and only after we become Christ centered - will we be ready to "give an explanation to anyone for the reason for our hope." 

Now that requires that we do have hope - and faith - and know what we believe and why. Learning about the faith is necessary, because we can't share what we don't know, we can't give something we don't have. We have a responsibility to learn and to grow in our faith and in our willingness to share it.

But notice, I left out a a couple of words when I said "give an explanation to anyone for the reason for our hope." The line really is: give an explanation to anyone who asks you for the reason for our hope."

Now, I don't think that this forbids us to initiate the conversation. Far from it. But it does throw a caution flag down, doesn't it? It seems to assume that if Christ is in our hearts, people will notice. And if they notice it, the time will be right sometimes to share, and that sharing our faith will often be a matter of answering a question or two.  

For example, if this week at work, someone asks about your weekend, you might mention that you went to Church. That person may then say they don't go, or don't believe, or they might ask why you do go. And the conversation will go on naturally from there, as long as you know what you believe and why. 

But if Christ is not fully in your heart, or if you are ashamed or embarrassed by going to church, well, you just are not going to include it when you answer about how your weekend went. 

But there is more advice from this letter: give an answer, it says,  "with gentleness and reverence" (pause, repeat).  the letter says that if we do so, and are attacked anyway, well, that is the attackers sin, not ours. If we fail to give reasons for out faith and hope, or do it in an insulting or harsh manner, that is our sin, not someone ele's.

When I was in seminary, a fellow seminarian and I went  to the Right to Life march in Washington, DC on January 22. At the end of the march, there were some counter protesters, people who favored abortion. Walking away at the end of the march, we wound up talking to two of them them, a mother an daughter. It started out well enough, but my friend lost his cool.  ...... PRAY! He shouted. Now how wrong was that?  He had let his emotions get the better of him. He was badgering, insulting. Worse, he was using sacred language to do it. Condemnation was in his heart. And he was telling these poor, sincere, tired women exactly what they should do. I'm sure they remember the encounter years later. But not fondly. And having been yelled at to PRAY!!!! makes it less likely that they would do so.

There is in the US right now an ardent lay Catholic who claims to be the head of an organization, but many people think the organization may consist of only himself, a secretary, a computer and a fax machine. He is famous for telling other people - Catholics and non-Catholics alike - what to do. Most of his pronouncements basically start with the idea that they are wrong and have to be stopped, and all this is shouted. Does this really help?  This man - and his name is not important to the story - is convinced he's right and others are wrong, and he may in fact be right. 

But he is far from gentle in his words and attitude, and he does not reverence the people he shouts at. Those people, even the really awful and wrong and sinful people, are made in the image and likeness of God, and need to be treated as such.  Our faith teaches us that Jesus came to redeem us all, each one of us. The nasty scoundrel who sins publicly is just as much loved by God as we are. Jesus came for him as much as he came for us.

Bringing this home, if we find ourselves arguing with family members because we go to church and they don't, or because we believe one thing and they believe another, well, we may be on the wrong track. Better to give a good example and wait for them to notice than to tell them what's wrong with them.

If we find ourselves praying more for the conversion of others than we pray for our own conversion, well, maybe we need to work on ourselves more. After all, we can only change ourselves. We can't force anyone else to change; we can only influence them to change. And we influence people not by telling others what they should do, but by living as we should, and by loving them.

Start with love. Obvious, caring, reverential love. If people know that you love them, then they will pay attention to your actions, and might even listen to your words. But if they don't know that you love them and respect them - or worse, if you do not love and respect them - then no amount of words will convince them to reflect on what they believe and do. All the logical arguments in the world will be ignored. People listen to people who are interested in them, who listen to them, who love them.


And if you find that you are mistreated, called names, or dealt with unfairly in all this, do not fall into the trap of treating others poorly or using your antagonists words or style. Rejoice and be glad, because you have been treated badly in the service of Christ. And commit yourself anew to reverencing the person who you think is disrespecting you.


Do as Jesus did. When someone gave a wrong answer, the gospel says "and Jesus looked on him with love." That look, that glance, changed lives. That look invited people to risk asking a question. Criticism, especially public criticism, just hardens people in their positions. 

The Father has sent the Son to love us and to teach us how to love one another, to love even those who are wrong-headed, opinionated, pig-headed and ignorant. Especially them. That is the Easter message, and it is how we are called to share the Easter message. Go and do as Jesus did.

On the marriage debates.

While faithful lay Catholics sit in shock at the abuse and misuse of sexual words and sexual actions by the bishops and some priests, the hierarchy makes in increasingly clear that they have only empty bromides to hurl at the LGBT community. There is no real theological engagement on the issues of sexual diversity, nor even on the subject of developing a coherent political theology. The hierarch's side of the debate consists of statements that are assumed but not argued, couched in inflated hyperbole that is designed to inflame. Can anyone name one straight marriage in the six states that permit gay marriage that has been harmed by allowing gays and lesbians to marry? I sincerely doubt it. Can anyone name any gay and lesbian couples who have been harmed by being unable to marry legally in their home states? Yes, there are many. Couples are denied tax and inheritance and joint property and social security and health insurance benefits under the law. Children's lives are less secure socially and economically because the two loving adults who are raising them cannot legally marry. These are real people, who are really hurting.


For legislators, they must answer a question that is not, fundamentally, a theological issue. It is a political issue. The legislatures are not deciding on Church marriage rules, which have always varied from civil marriage law. The legislatures are faced with one question, really. Are there two sets of laws that apply, one to couples of two genders, and another to the disadvantage of couples of the same gender, or are all consenting adult couples equal under the law?


For the hierarchy, they need to understand that if they act like politicians they will be treated with all the respect and deference the American people give to their politicians, which is to say, almost no respect and deference. Their task, which they have failed to accept, is to encourage theological discourse that will help develop an understanding about how the Holy Spirit is working in the lives of the faithful, in our times, and how the tradition of the Church can be informed by the signs of these our times. This must reflect the best of modern science, philosophy, and anthropology, as well as current scripture scholarship.  Facile language about the resemblance of the NY State legislature to totalitarian regimes is inappropriate, and beneath the dignity of the episcopal office.