Toxic mix of clericalism and sex abuse is not unique to Catholicism

Monday, April 8th, 2024

In 2010, a sizable number of abuse cases in the Catholic Church in Germany became known for the first time. Since then, the Church has been striving to process these cases.

At their plenary assembly on September 25, 2018, the German Catholic bishops published a study documenting cases of abuse between 1946 and 2014.

At the end of 2020, the Protestant Church of Germany began research on sexual abuse in their Churches.

On January 25, 2024, this study was made public.

Similarities

What these two studies have in common is the role that clericalism plays in sexual abuse in Christian communities, local churches, religious congregations, and organisations.

In the area of sexual abuse, it is clear that listening to the testimony of those whom clergy have abused, religious and lay leaders, is central because their testimonies reveal general patterns of abuse related to psycho-sexual and psycho-social dysfunctions, most of which are related to a clericalist mindset.

Although these studies show a difference between the denominations regarding celibacy’s impact on abuse, they show a substantial similarity regarding clericalism.

Abuse patterns in Protestant congregations generally include enforced discussions about sexuality and the unfulfilled sexual desires of pastors in their own families.

Hence, there are many references to the influence of the social demands for sexual freedom and sexualised living as contexts of abuse.

The presence of the pastor’s family, while not completely removing the risk factor of abuse, does make the concealment of abuse more complex.

By contrast, in Catholic contexts, where for celibates, there is an absolute prohibition against sexual activity, the experience of sexualised abuse cannot be related to social phenomena like social promiscuity or social change in the 1960s or 1970s.

Consequently, where one can “blame” the outside world for the Protestant experience of abuse, the “blame” for the catholic experience must be sought within the Church itself.

The correlation of clericalism between both denominations could be summed up as follows:

“The institution comes first before everyone and everything else!”

For both denominations, those who administer the institution (diocese, local Church, parish, religious order/congregation, church business, and schools) of church work primarily to protect the institution’s reputation.

Evidence shows that the “geographical solution” of moving an offender from one parish to another, one diocese to another, and one school to another has been used to protect the institution’s reputation, not to heal the abused or address the offending.

The various reports expose the folly of this strategy; unfortunately, what the institutional leaders seek to protect—because it is sacred to them—becomes the thing most at risk of scandal.

Spiritual abuse, particularly prevalent in Catholic contexts, further complicates the issue, serving as a precursor to sexual misconduct.

This insidious form of manipulation highlights the power dynamics within the clergy and underscores the urgent need for reform.

However, this factor is almost irrelevant in cases within the Protestant context.

Consequently, although Catholic perpetrators often emphasise the intellectual and spiritual distance from their victims, Protestant perpetrators draw the affected into an overwhelming adult world of marital problems and sexuality and ask the victim to become the solution to these issues.

Catholic risk factors

Clericalism and celibacy are Catholic risk factors because:

they partly explain the phenomena of physical, sexual, and spiritual abuse,
they play a significant role in the formation of clergy and seminarians, and
they influence the structure and experience of clerical and religious life and parishes.

Because clericalism and celibacy ground the clerical and religious life, those who participate in these lifestyles become immersed in a “functional clericalism” that impacts how they live celibacy.

This functional clericalism is minimised by the cliché “Father knows best.”

Functional clericalism is evident, too, when Father absents himself from the reality of the contemporary world by retreating into a private world of piety and liturgical practices that face the past and not the present.

Another example of functional clericalism is the unwillingness of priests to consecrate enough hosts for the people at Mass so that all can be fed from the Eucharistic Table at the Eucharist they attend.

Instead, just before communion distribution, he trots off to the Tabernacle to bring pre-consecrated hosts from a week ago for the people. At the same time, he eats and drinks from the Eucharistic meal at which he is presiding.

This functional clericalism declares: “Father matters most: the people can have what’s left over.”

This functional approach to the liturgy then clericalises the laity, who also see no need to receive from the Eucharistic Table on a Sunday.

Generally, because the laity has seen the functional clericalism of their priests, they, too, become functional in their approach to Sunday Liturgy and do not bother with the Sunday Mass because communion from the Tabernacle is just as good and more practical.

This functionalism lay at the heart of the online masses streamed during COVID-19.

What is evident from research and various inquiries is that the Church sees both clericalism and celibacy as part of the sacred structure of Catholic priesthood and religious life.

Because these are sacred elements, those who administer them work to protect them.

Often, this approach plays badly into the hands of institutional thinking, which determines how clerics are formed and how, in turn, they and the laity respond to specific pastoral needs.

In short, clericalism and celibacy are two critical influences on how the Catholic Church is administered and two guiding principles for deciding for whom the Church exists.

These various reports make it clear that we must listen to the voices of survivors, whose testimonies shed light on the deep-rooted issues within clerical culture.

Study findings

All the studies underscore the disturbing impact of a clerical mindset, which prioritises the institution over individuals’ well-being.

This prioritisation manifests itself in protecting the Church’s reputation at the expense of justice and accountability.

While celibacy has been implicated differently in each denomination, with Protestant congregations citing the influence of societal shifts in the 1960s and Catholicism facing internal challenges, the common thread remains clericalism.

In both cases, the hierarchical structure of the Church perpetuates a culture where abuse can be swept under the rug, shielded by a facade of righteousness.

Clericalism and celibacy are not immutable aspects of the priesthood; they are human constructs that have contributed to our systemic successes and failures.

The Church must reckon with these realities and prioritise its members’ safety and well-being over preserving human traditions.

Functional clericalism perpetuates a harmful hierarchy that alienates both clergy and laity from the true spirit of the Christian community.

As we confront the sobering truths revealed by these studies, we must see reform as a continual and necessary imperative if the Church is to fulfil its sacred duty of ministering to the faithful.

It is time to dismantle the structures of clericalism that have allowed abuse to fester and embrace a vision of Christianity rooted in justice, compassion, and humility.

Dr Joe Grayland is a visiting professor at the University of Tübingen (Germany). He has been a priest of the Diocese of Palmerston North for nearly thirty years.