Reconsidering issues about Church scandals
By Conor Dugan
Notre Dame Law School
I agree with Robert Davidson's Dec. 2 letter that stated that homosexuals should not be blamed for the Church scandals. I also agree with him that our bishops have failed to act as true shepherds and have been complicit in grave evil.
That being said, I found his letter a bit troubling for a number of reasons. First, we can agree that homosexuals are not to blame for the current crisis in the Church, without disregarding the facts as they exist on the ground.
As a descriptive matter, the sexual abuse involved in the current scandals has been predominantly homosexual. The victims have been largely young teenage males. Whether this indicates that homosexuals are more apt to abuse is a different question. Nevertheless, we should not allow a false notion of tolerance to cloud our vision to the actual facts as they stand. The abuse involved in this crisis has been primarily homosexual.
Second, though his words indicate differently, to be charitable to a young man studying to serve our Church as a priest, I assume that Davidson takes seriously the Church's teaching on sexuality and homosexuality in particular. Those who experience same-sex attraction are experiencing desires which are objectively disordered. That is, they desire something which is by its very nature disintegrative. If the Church's teaching is true, which Davidson and I believe it to be, then such desires might make one more apt to engage in disintegrative behavior including the abuse at issue in the current crisis.
Third, it is true that if the Church had been more faithful to her teachings, this scandal would not be gripping the Church. But Davidson's analysis seems to be way off the mark. He cites Vatican II's push for decentralization. Though such a push might be found in the pages of the National Catholic Reporter and the writings of Father McBrien, it is unclear where the impetus for such structural reform is in the actual documents of that Council.
Pope John Paul II, incidentally a father of the Council, has been offering an authoritative interpretation of Vatican II for these last 24 years. That interpretation is one that promotes a radical service to the truth and the laity on the part of the priesthood and the episcopacy, a flowering of lay movements, an understanding that every Catholic is called to holiness, a realization that Christ reveals to us our true path which is radical service to God and others, and a deepening sense of Christ's presence in everyday life.
Our bishops have failed to remain faithful to that authentic vision. By acting as corporate CEOs protecting their turf and failing to act as fathers, they have truly failed Christ and us all.
Our priests have committed grave sin and failed to live their sexuality as a positive gift to the Church. The human carnage left in the wake of these failings is almost unbearable. But, note that none of this has to do with failing to decentralize or to give up "power." It has everything to do with a failure to realize that authority is not synonymous with authoritarian or power but rather with radical service.
Fourth, Davidson makes bald assertions with absolutely no backing. Banning homosexuals from the priesthood will lead to more repressive seminaries according to his argument. Repressive seminaries caused the present crisis. Here Davidson falls into the quick and pat assumptions for which he criticizes Mr. Sanchez. I have a feeling that the current roots of the scandal are much more complex than either of these quick answers.
Finally, it is a valid theological question, to ask whether self-identifying homosexuals can be priests. Here one must differentiate between those who identify as homosexual and those who experience same-sex attraction. If one cannot see oneself or understand oneself as spouse and father, it might well be impossible to be a priest. For that is truly what a priest is: a spouse to the Church and a father to his flock.
Can homosexuals see themselves as married to the Church and as fathers? I do not know. But we need to ask these and many more questions if we are to get the real roots of the crisis. The facile answers to which Mr. Davidson rushes certainly make for good, bombastic prose. They do not, however, lead us any further toward getting to the roots of the crisis and to finding a solution to it — a solution which will only come from being open to the truth and letting him lead us wherever he desires.
Conor Dugan
Notre Dame Law School
off-campus
Dec. 5
All Viewpoint Stories for Friday, December 6, 2002
