Priestly sex abuse: Blaming the hippies

Karen Terry, the principal author of a 142-page report prepared for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops on clerical sexual abuse, has concluded that priestly celibacy "was not a cause" of priestly sexual abuse, and consequently "the abuse scandal was not a compelling reason for the Catholic Church to lift its celibacy requirement for clergy."

Quite the contrary: Since the 1960s, "the increased deviance in society at large intersected with the vulnerabilities of some priests." Apparently focusing only on the 90% of "known" cases that occurred before 1990, Terry and her researchers conclude that the incidence rose steadily in the 1960s (the onset of the "free-love" era), a decade that launched "a tumultuous time for American morality in general."

With these words, Terry lays the groundwork for an apologia that sets the blame for clergy sex abuse in America to a failure of American morality, not to an abject failure of the U.S. Catholic Church to protect its youngest and most vulnerable worshippers from a class of men who enter the clergy with the seed of pedophilia already within them.

This small American study was carried out with blinders as to what caused priest sex abuse in Italy, Ireland, Belgium and other countries far from American shores and long before the report's designated "tumultuous time for American morality."

Men of faith

My own abuse occurred in 1949, when I was five, by Edward Kosinski, in the mother superior's office at St. Hedwig's Church on the Benjamin Franklin Parkway, where the Park Towne Place Apartments now stand. (To read my my account, click here.) Many cases now just coming to light occurred prior to that. The history of illicit and furtive sexuality of every stripe reaches far back in the history of the Catholic Church. So why pick a 30-to-40 year time-span to study what is in fact not a phenomenon, but a standard practice within the Church?

Terry's study notes that these patterns of abuse were typical of sexually abusive men in general. Whether they were priests, Protestant ministers or laymen, these sexual abusers often turn out"“ at least on the surface "“ to be men of faith. So let's lay the blame where it belongs: On the specious teachings of a society of men who twisted healthy, loving sexuality between consenting adults into ugly, dirty, unloving, abusive, overpowering syndromes that caused the commitment of crimes that should have been prosecuted in the secular world instead of covered up in the secretive world that is religion.

After all, you could argue that the 1960s— "that tumultuous time for American morality in general"— were the best thing that ever happened to victims of clerical sex abuse. Those years shed light on human sexuality, allowing adults to examine it and embrace it. Each of us became freer to seek our own sexual truth and to fulfill it with others of like mind.

Leaving the Church

Eons of sexual abuse caused by repressive religious precepts began to fall away as people experimented openly and shared our experiences— if not physically, then verbally and aurally, so that we began to understand that sex was not a dirty word. Sex came out of the closet and into the sunshine. It pervaded our songs, our clothes, our makeup, our hair, our books, films and plays.

For those imprisoned in religious vocations, the sexual revolution— a term the study avoids— must indeed have posed a challenge. Many priests and nuns, rather than become predators, simply left the Church for the satisfactions of intimate relationships.

Role of therapy

Several positive conclusions do arise from the study, suggesting areas for the Church to address in the future:

— Those who were sexually abused in childhood were also likely to seek sexual gratification from children.

— Psychologists and therapists took an "optimistic" view of therapy's ability to mend an abuser's ways.

— Diocesan leaders responded by focusing on the priests instead of the victimized children.

Starved for affection

Growing up in a Polish-American family in Fairmount, I witnessed, or nearly witnessed, several incidents of abuse of my sisters and school friends by Catholic and Protestant clergy, as well as by at least two drunken uncles whose wives had long before ceased performing their Catholic wifely duties. These men were so starved for any sort of physical manifestation of love one uncle even had a dog who would lick his genitals as he sat in his La-z-Boy.

We family members knew about these incidents— in the latter case because the uncle was confronted hysterically by his wife, who walked in on him— and they became hush-hush topics at family gatherings. Usually the child— or, in the one case, the dog—became pariahs as well as the perpetrators. The withholding women remained saints.

Alcoholism, too

The onslaught of divorce that occurred with what we called the sexual revolution caused much pain to families and children. But it also allowed people to escape from loveless, sexless marriages and to seek healthier liaisons, within or without marriage. I suspect the institution of marriage is stronger for it. People— gay as well as straight— still want marriage. They just want it within their own comfort zone.

Most major religions have long staked out a vested interest in preventing lay people from discovering and finding joy in our sexuality. Consequently, much of humanity remains in a state of sexual infancy. But as religions go, the Roman Catholic Church isn't even at a fetal stage at this point.

Priestly celibacy, which the laity perceives as a condemnation of sexuality, was also instituted to protect church property from being inherited. The Church must address issues like that— as well as heterosexuality, homosexuality and alcoholism— if it hopes to remain relevant into the 22nd Century. Blaming hippies and flower children for the systemic moral failure of the Church's priests is hardly a promising start.♦


To read a reply, click here.