my praise to idols.
All the concerns, problems, violations, scandals and horrendous ef-fects of clerical malfeasance do not invalidate the good that clergy do and have done. But we are talking about a systemic infection, or a systemic dysfunction, cancer - call it what you will.
The ideal to be ‘like Christ’ who was thought to be celibate (based on tradition not biblical evidence) is an unquestionably noble goal. Celi-bacy can be lived in the service of humanity. Some men and women from the time of the Fathers of the Desert to the present have pursued the practice of celibacy with remarkable productive results. Celi -bate men and women in a number of (other) religious traditions have inspired many to live as fully as possible because they, the celibates, live fully. They serve unstintingly in parishes, missions and schools as teachers, scholars, artists, scientists and spiritual leaders pointing the way to spiritual realities and a righteous, reasonable life.
Roman Catholic leadership has, however, failed to deal credibly and openly with all of human sexuality. Although for them sex is all sin, a chronic problem with church pronouncements about sex, is their use of the idea of natural law as they define and apply it. The Vatican re-presents their interpretation of sexual human nature as an absolute determination. They isolate the idea and impose it as an instrument of control. This approach fails to acknowledge that natural law is also the inherent practical and reasonable guide to conscience indepen-dent of revelation.
Some behaviors labeled by the Church as ‘contrary to natural law’
(masturbation one instance among many) should be open for exami-nation and dialogue in the minds and hearts of many serious Catho-lics. According to Aquinas, grace builds on nature. i.e. the glory of God as man fully human. Many sexual abusers have words for the spi ritual, the mysterious and the mental-emotional-sexual dimensions of celibacy, but they do not practice it. They cannot tolerate the exa-mination of the reality of their humanity, sexuality or behavior. Much of their talk about mystery sounds good and can be useful in the men tal gyrations necessary for a man or woman to wrestle with - in Fr. Ro bert Barron’s words, 1999 - the “unreasonable, unnatural and exces-sive” expression of love that religious celibacy is meant to be.
Many Catholics use natural law as a road map to guide their sexual behavior. For instance natural law often trumps the dictates of Hum-anae Vitae in matters of family planning.
The patristic writers of the church often represented the demon of lust as woman. Medieval clerics and their predecessors extending through the Church fathers, finding much of their basis in St. Paul, were markedly anti-feminist and in reality, misogynist. For clerics, Eve was the archetypal human woman whose gluttony and pride caused man to be driven out of heaven.
The religion called Catholic Christianity, has an extensive history of in terpretation and re-interpretation of even its most essential theologi-cal aspects. Extending back to the early Church fathers, the superiori-ty of virginisuperiori-ty over marriage and chastisuperiori-ty in marriage to sexual activi-ty, were emphasized. Sex and sexuality were seen as evil in its nature and therefore, within a male-centered world the inability of these men to deal with their sexual desire was projected upon all women.
They painted an image of woman as insatiably sexual and thus, for them, all women became the epitome of evil. Based on this view, there are many writings which contain misogynist aphorisms, anec-dotes, parables and confessions within the canons of early patristic writings.
Important examples of misogynist rhetoric can be found in the wri-tings of Jerome and Tertullian. Tertullian addresses womankind, on behalf of Christianity, as follows: ‘Do you know that you are each an Eve? The sentence of God on this sex of yours lives in this age; the guilt must of necessity live too. You are the devil’s gateway; you are the unsealer of that forbidden tree; you are the first deserters of the divine law; you are she who persuades him whom the devil was not valiant enough to attack. You destroyed so easily God’s image upon man, so that on account of you the Son of God had to die’.
Many of the Early Christians, such as Epiphanius, believed that virgi-nity was the foundation of the church, or that only virgins could re-claim that angelic state, by which man becomes worthy of heaven;
sex was looked down upon by Jerome and others of his authority, ev-en for procreation. By the 6th Century the Church had settled into a set of moral teachings that expected virginity from all men and wom-en with a higher vocation, tolerating marriage only for less gifted be-lievers.
In general, the Church looked at marriage as a necessary evil, as an unavoidable reduction of perfection, which was virginity/chastity.
Jerome, in the same arguments advanced by Augustine, does not say that the Church condemns the institution of marriage, but that it sub-ordinates and regulates it – ‘the Church knows that in any great hou-se there are veshou-sels not only of gold and silver, but also of clay and wood’. Jerome states in no uncertain terms that for a Christian, ‘chas-tity is always preferable to the marriage state. That is why we say, while marriage fills the earth, virginity and chastity fill paradise’.
Thus, Jerome compares being chaste to the state of angels and any type of sexuality to the state of lowly beasts. Although the argument that the human race would die out if the principle of chastity was tru-ly implemented on a massive scale, Jerome called it absurd. In relati-on to virginity, he refers to Matthew 20:16, Many are called, but few are chosen, comparing chastity to salvation as an allusion to Scripture He also says, ‘There is no question that the Lord loves virgins more than others for the former have chosen willingly a way of life that was merely recommended; their free choice makes them superior’.
The natural idea that the sexual organs and the sexual relationship within marriage are to be enjoyed, would in traditional Christianity largely be seen as impious at the very least, probably as a sinful dev-iation from true Christian morality, for the body was of the devil. In comparing the virgin woman to the married woman Jerome wrote, ‘it becomes obvious that the only woman who is free from some of the corruption of her gender is the one who becomes a-sexual through chastity in aspiration to emulate the angels. Marriage indeed must end in death, but the life on which I have resolved is independent of sex. For me, virginity is consecrated in the persons of Mary and of Christ.
The understanding one gets form reading this traditional Catholic un-derstanding of human sexuality and its relation to religion as a social institution, is that there is a great spiritual and religious imbalance in Western Civilization.
The teachings of Christianity focus on the personal spiritual life, not the integrity of the Christian society as a whole. However, in its essen ce personal spiritual life is diverted by the poisons of misogyny, self-hatred and the guilt of being born originally sinful
The misogy- nist and homophobic Church authorities has exacerbated the culture of shame that has long compelled Catholics to hide from their sexual-ities. Fortunately, most Western Catholic and mainline Protestants have come to understand another great biblical truth: by their fruits you shall know them. In its latest moves, the Church has only further alienated itself from those who are seeking healthy, life-giving and honest expressions of their sexuality rather than the harmful, secreti-ve affairs that estrange us from ourselsecreti-ves, from one another and from God.
The newer generations of Catholics will not have inherited the chur-ch’s reign of sexual guilt that marked those who grew up Catholic 40 or more years ago. Until the church authorities begin to deal with our human, God-given sexuality in ways that propel us towards growth and greater wholeness, the relevance of the Vatican’s teaching autho-rity will only continue to dwindle within the generations to come’.
The co-re of it produces and promotes men who tend to sociopathy. The di-chotomy between the Church’s stated goals and values and its opera-tional methods and practices produces and encourages clerical hypo-crisy. Sociopaths (psychopaths) are not men who fail to know right from wrong; they are men who know what is right, but don’t care.
The altruistic agenda of clerical life makes it an exquisite cover for so-ciopaths and men vulnerable to narcissism. More broadly, clerical cul-ture produces in many men an acquired situational narcissism, char-acterized by a sense of entitlement, superiority, lack of empathy, imp-aired moral judgment and self-centeredness.
Identification with and incorporation into a powerful and godly insti-tution can confer a sense of grandiosity and moral justification for one’s personal behavior - qualities that can favor a man’s promotion within the clerical system. There are priests that aim at becoming bi-shops and they succeed. There are bibi-shops who don’t speak out bec-ause they know they will not be promoted to a higher see, or that it will block their candidacy to the cardinalate. This type of careerism is one of the greatest ills in the church today. It stops priests and bish-ops from speaking the truth and induces them into doing and saying only what pleases their superiors.
Vatican experts have written that it is easier to get promoted saying the right things (even employing sexual tactics) than being righteous.
Gregory Aymond, archbishop of New Orleans addressed a Vatican Congregation on the requirements for accreditation of seminary pro-grams. He counseled that training programs should assist the ongoing growth of candidates toward a healthy sexuality from the beginning as a foundation for celibate chastity. However, celibacy is neither well taught nor well observed by Catholic clergy. The prospect of contami-nation by the clerical culture, creates a world of imaginary superiority and importance.”
Notwithstanding current concessions about reporting clergy crimes to civil authorities, clerical power over sexual sin remains construct-ed. The concessions are executed with the conviction that the Chur-ch’s determination encapsulates God’s own knowledge and immuta-ble law about human sex.
Their conspiracy of secrecy is not only sinful but it is criminal and its cycle of pretense is pathological and pathogenic. Andrew Sullivan’s conclusion is stripped of all pretense when he says: ‘And when it's clear that at the center of this kind of pathological secrecy and shame is the current Pope, then it is (also) clear that the entire institution is corrupt from the top down.’ [Celibacy, Sex & the Catholic Church, Ri-chard Sipe],
‘The Christian faithful, conscious of their own responsibility, are bound by Christian obedience to follow what the sacred pastors, as representatives of Christ, declare as teachers of the faith and as lead-ers of the Church.’
In their estimation bishops still prevail as the final arbiters of their sexual behaviors despite bows to civil law and courts that function only according to man’s inferior laws. Grand Jury reports and deposi-tions of priests and bishops in civil cases of clergy abuse provide glar-ing examples of this attitude.
The church prides itself on its easily-given forgiveness and its highly- prized secrecy, but when the sexual abuse of youngsters by its priests and bishops are exposed, their excuse is that they merely sin like all other men.
Lies, denial, arrogance, selfishness and cowardice — such are the notes of the structure within which Catholic priests now live, however indivi-dually virtuous many of them nevertheless remain. Celibacy is that structure’s central pillar and must be removed. The Catholic people see this clearly and it is time for us to say so.’”
Romans 12:1-2, Eph-esians 3:5, 1 Peter 1:15-16 Hebrews 7:26.”
Romans 12:1-2, I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of