www.byzcath.org Forums General Discussions Town Hall Cause of Sex Scandal in RCC

Part 1: The Real Issue Behind the Scandals in U.S.
According to Gladys Sweeney of Institute for the Psychological Sciences

ARLINGTON, Virginia, JUNE 6, 2002 (Zenit.org).- The key problem involving scandals with priests in the United States isn't what the media generally lead us to believe, says a Catholic psychologist.

Dr. Gladys Sweeney, president and dean of the Institute for the Psychological Sciences, gave her insights into what lies behind the scandals that have rocked the Church in America.

Sweeney formerly held a faculty appointment at the Division of Child Psychiatry and Department of Pediatrics at Johns Hopkins Medical School. The second part of this interview will be published next Thursday, June 13.

ZENIT: From a psychological standpoint, what is the nature of most of the sex abuse scandals involving priests in the United States? Is it pedophilia? or something else?

Sweeney: The major thrust in the reporting of the scandal has focused on cases of pedophilia, that is, attraction of adults to pre-pubescent children. However, upon careful study of the reports, it is clear that the major problem of the current scandal is homosexual ephebophilia -- the attraction of adults to same-sex adolescents.

We are talking in this case about a great problem with homosexual behavior. There is some reluctance on the part of the media to emphasize this fact.

Tolerance for homosexual behavior across all levels of society is highly encouraged as a principle to be promoted and valued. It is easier to focus on the cases of pedophilia, which elicit strong emotional reaction, rather than on the problem of homosexual behavior. Homosexuality, however, is at the root of this problem.

Professor John Haldane, a philosophy professor at the University of St. Andrews who is holding the Royden Davis Chair for Humanities at Georgetown University, distinguishes between homosexual orientation, disposition, and habitual action. Haldane states: "If one has a certain orientation this need not lead to active sexual practice, and whether it does or not depends on the development of inhibition of dispositions."

According to Father Richard John Neuhaus, there have been priests, later canonized as saints, who would meet today's criteria as having a homosexual orientation. According to Neuhaus, the issue then is not the "nature of the temptations resisted, but the fidelity of the resistance."

Psychologically speaking then, the issue is to help establish a barrier so as to inhibit the occurrence of the activity, a barrier that follows the orientation, because by the time the dispositions are developed, there is a high likelihood that the activity will be expressed.

An 18-year-old candidate for the seminary experiencing homosexual temptations and who is not sure how to handle them is quite different from a 25-year-old that has had homosexual experiences.

Even in the case of homosexual orientation in the absence of past experiences, it is important for a formation director to discern whether the individual in question can handle the environment. Prudence is of utmost importance. Let me explain.

If someone were struggling with heterosexual temptation, it would not be wise to place him in a situation where he would be in daily close contact with women, eating together, praying together, having recreation together, doing apostolate together, without carefully following the stress engendered by that situation. The same is true for someone with a homosexual orientation.

The implications are profound. They include seminaries dedicating great effort to cultivate sexual asceticism; taking an active role in guiding seminarians to discipline their dispositions, whether homosexual or heterosexual; and paying particular attention to the spiritual formation of the candidates with an emphasis on fidelity and on the sacramental life.

Q: What are the psychological factors at work behind the scandals? What would prompt a man to commit such acts?

Sweeney: In the cases of pedophilia, it is a sexual addiction problem -- a disordered inclination and aberrant behavior that carries with it an addictive and obsessional quality.

The causes of pedophilia are not completely understood; however, early sexual trauma, aggravated by compulsive masturbatory behavior accompanied by fantasy later in life, have been associated with the disorder.

H.S. Kaplan noted in a 1996 work that early sexually arousing experiences have a tremendous influence in shaping subsequent sexual desires and fantasies. D.R. Laws and W.L. Marshall believe that the effect of early imprinting are then maintained and reinforced by fantasy arousal during masturbation.

Pedophilia has been associated with high rates of concomitant psychopathology, particularly mood, anxiety and substance-abuse disorders. M.P. Kafka and R.A. Prentky found that approximately two-thirds of pedophilic patients were diagnosed with mood disorders, about 50% with anxiety disorders, and about 50% with alcohol or substance-abuse problems.

The recidivism for this disorder is high. Father Thomas Nelson, executive director of the Institute on Religious Life and professor of philosophy at the Norbertine seminary in Orange, California, states that fewer than 2% of priests have been involved in pedophilia, as compared to 4% of married people and 7% of the general lay population. The statistics show that the problem of pedophilia is no greater among priests than among the general population.

At the root of the present scandal is not pedophilia, but homosexuality.

Homosexuality as a psychiatric diagnosis has been removed from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, and is now considered as an alternative lifestyle.

The genetic nature of homosexuality has been emphasized by the media as an immutable and deterministic fact of nature, which people have no control over. However, a review of the research literature on homosexuality indicates that the genetic etiology of homosexuality has not been confirmed.

Many of the earlier studies -- Billings and Beckwith, 1993; Bailey and Pillard, 1995; LeVay, 1991 -- after being evaluated, revealed problematic methodologies. There were confounding factors in the research and clear bias even before the data was collected.

For the sake of argument, let's assume that there is a genetic component -- it does not need to be deterministic. One cannot deny that there is some degree of genetic influence in nearly all human behavior. Alcoholism is known to have genetic basis, yet some people with this predisposition can learn to cope with their weakness by avoiding alcohol dependence.

On the other hand, there is a robust body of literature that shows that environmental factors have a great influence over homosexual behavior. D.M. Fergusson, L.J. Horwood and A.L. Beautrais noted in their 1999 study on mental health and sexual orientation, that youth classified as gay, lesbian or bisexual differed from other youth in having had more frequent parental changes, such as divorce, parental death, separation, remarriage, etc.

W.C. Holmes and G.P. Slap noted in 1998 that the sexually abused man, when compared with the non-abused man, experiences more gender-role confusion and fear about intimate relationships with both men and women. All of this seems to support the role of psychosocial factors in the development of homosexuality.

Research in the last past years has shown that there seems to be a strong relationship between homosexuality and other major psychiatric disorders, suicidal thoughts and suicide attempts, indicating increased risk factors associated specifically with homosexual behavior.

Some researchers have come to believe that the "homophobic" explanation alone is not sufficient to explain the relationship between homosexual behavior and major dysfunctions. If anything, the media and the culture have exerted a great influence on increasing people's tolerance toward homosexual behavior, with no seeming effect in its connection to risk factors.

Summarizing, I believe that at the core of the Church's scandal today is a problem of homosexuality, which although not any longer considered a psychiatric diagnosis by the American Psychiatric and Psychological Association has been linked to other major diagnoses. It may be the end product of influential psychosocial events, in some cases interacting with genetic predispositions.

Oh what bunk!

Let take it small bits:


Parish priests (one hopes) are in regular close contact with all of their parishioner of both genders. Those who are not are unworthy of pastoral ministry.

Certainly it is not a homosexual problem. If it was, we would be seeing this same crisis among society in general and, one would assume, to greater degrees where homosexuality had more social approval. Why have not gay organizations have these same scandals with their employees and leaders?

It is clearly a problem of certain individuals committing a personal sin and of their superiors (the bishops) not taking appropriate action.

The Catholic Church is already in a crisis. Spreading this type of diddly is only going to get it roughed up even more.

Message to Cardinal Law: Stop blaming others and take responsibility for your own behavior. RESIGN.

Axios
Who was in a good mood a little while ago


[ 06-13-2002: Message edited by: Axios ]

Axios,

You are generally a fair minded person except on this issue. There is no escaping the nature of this problem. The society has been convinced the homosexual behavior is normal and natural and some have even been convinced that it is a gift of God.

But the basic issue here is homosexual predators corrupting young men. The complicity of the bishops is obvious but it began when they allow active homosexual to use the priesthood as their playground.

Get rid of all of the bishops who have covered up this scandel as well as all of the active homosexuals in the clergy.

Dan Lauffer

But then you won't be satisfied, because there might still be limp-wristed, lispy, effeminate yet CELIBATE, CHASTE, HOLY priests around. And you won't like that, either! So what then?

I think that from this extract of the article, it is clear, Lemko, the issue is not getting rid of priests who have an orientation towards homosexuality, but those as Dan mentioned, active homosexual priests. There is a huge difference. From what I have learned, many devout Christians, even saints as the article mentions, knowing their sexual inclinations lived chaste lives recognizing that the behavior that such inclinations support is against the teachings of Christ and His Church.

In monasteries, homosexual activity has occurred throughout the ages and the proper authorities of the church made efforts to stop such behavior when it occurred.

I thought this article interesting becasue, it was not taking one side over the other but trying understand the problem for what it was/is:

Not so much pedophilia, but more cases of homosexual ephebophilia.


I believe that this is a accurate statement about what has occurred in the Church and the mainstream media's representation of it. Most of the assualts involve acts on adolescent boys and the media labels this as cases of pedophilia, which is not accurate according to clinical/psychological terminology.

I would hope that this discussion could foster honest and respectful dialogue. And I would appreciate an absence of homophobia and also what I see as a tendency to label anyone who questions homosexuality as a "homophobe". I am not a homophobe. That being said, I do believe that Homosexualtiy is an unnatural occurence in nature.
I also know that the Catholic Church teaches that active homosexual behavior is considered deviant and against God's intended purpose for sexuality. How can the Churches teaching be misunderstood to mean anything else? Homosexual urges and desires are not sinful. They may be infirmities, but that is altogether an overcomable tendency, just as is alcoholism, with the right spiritual tools .

So is homosexuality primarily a genetic, or enviromental condition? Or is it a combination of both? The article questions the studies that argue in favor of genetic factors and supports arguments that favor more enviromental factors which lead to homosexual lifestyles.

Can genetic factors alone validate the behavior? After all, it is common knowledge that nature has a tendency to produce abnormalities.

I think these questions are worthy of discussion. Society or the Church will change. How does a practicing homosexual also espouse to be a practicing Catholic, or Orthodox Christian without some degree of pain, or uncertain duality?


In Christ,
ALity

[ 06-14-2002: Message edited by: ALity ]

There is the article, and there is Mr. Lauffer. If you've paid attention to him in the past, he has alluded to the "fact" that he sees sexually active homosexual priests all around him in the Byzantine Catholic Church (except his own, of course). He has repeatedly claimed that our Byzantine Catholic bishops have completely ignored the principle that homosexual men should not be ordained.

So who is going to determine who the sexually active homosexual priests are? Interviews, with an expectation of true answers from one knowing that he'll be booted out of his pastorate and probably the clergy? Granted, one would hope that any sexually active "celibate" priest would have the integrity to either be true to his promise of celibate life, or be honest and leave the priesthood voluntarily.

So once this forced-exit process is completed, how are the paranoiacs going to react when they meet a priest whom they deem to be less than "manly"? Of course they're going to think that the forced-exit process "missed one"... so they'll call the bishop who will be forced to investigate. Sounds like a witch hunt to me.

Sounds like paranoia to me . . .

If you act out as a homosexual and are a priest you are gone.

If you do not act out as a homosexual, then you are not kicked out.

You can have a homosexual orientation and not act out. And you can be a good celibate priest!

I do not know what Dan talks about, as you mention. I have seen him get attcaked for not agreeing with homosexuality. I have not been around him on such topics online where I have seen him say hateful things towards gays.

My point of the article being posted was to talk about the article at hand, not bring up old issues.

Question: Is being an active homosexual wrong? (Christian teaching) If you are acting out as a homosexual and are an ordained celibate priest, should you be booted from the clergy?

The same goes for those who break their vow of chastitiy as hetersexual priests, whether celibate or married.

The bishops will need integrity and prudence among other things. There are looneys in every church who will jump at the chance for a witch hunt. It is the bishops job to have the common sense . . . alas but that is another thread altogether.



ALity

Slava Jesu Kristu,

I am inclined to agree with Axios. I don't agree with the article because it is attempting to trace the problem to some group or orientation. As I have stated before, regardless of orientation, sex is sex and all the sin that goes with it. A priest who abuses a minor (whether 6 or 16, male or female) must not be tolerated in any way. Even if you drained the Priesthood of all the homosexual priests 30 years ago, I am certain we would still be haveing this problem today. Why? Because the Devil doesn't care what your orientation is. He will find your weakest point and us it against you. Current American society and sexual permissiveness makes it an easy task. Personnaly, I prefer to pray for the Holy Church and put Her in God's hands. He can solve this mess much better than we can.

Dmitri

Dear Axios,

I didn't understand the last quote in your post.

I take it it is something someone else said about this Forum.

While I agree liberals are represented here, I am not a liberal and I know others here who aren't either.

We both agree in the principle of courteous, mutual exchange of points of view in a spirit of charity and seeking of deeper spirituality.

That's what makes this Forum NUMBER ONE.

If I were you, I wouldn't even visit sites like, much less cross-post from, the one where you got that quote from where the above principle is so obviously not respected.

To quote St John of the Ladder: "War against us is proof we are making war!" (Step 4).

Alex

[ 06-14-2002: Message edited by: Orthodox Catholic ]

This topic is very complex and delicate. I think that controlling oneself sexually must be done through reflextion and prayer. One must think of the sin and the betrayal before God and the consequences that comes after the sin.
Lauro

Dear Ipreima,

I also find hard, physical work and cold showers to be helpful too!

St Francis of Assisi once experienced a temptation of the flesh and threw himself on a thorny rose-bush.

The thorns fell off and the bush continues to grow without them to this day.

Also, here's a quote from the Ladder of Divine Ascent, Step 5:

"I have watched impure souls mad for physical love but turning what they know of such love into a reason for penance and transferring that same capacity for love to the Lord. I have watched them master fear so as to drive themselves unsparingly toward the love of God. That is why, when talking of that chaste harlot, the Lord does not say, 'because she feard,' but rahter, 'because she loved much' she was able to drive out love with love' (Luke 7:47)."

Alex

[ 06-14-2002: Message edited by: Orthodox Catholic ]

I think there are some very keen insights here. First, the foremost problem is a lack of Chastity to the given state of life you find yourself in. Whether married, or celibate, the virtue of Chastity, WHOLENESS, in it's original intended meaning, must be diligently observed.

But the issue is one, primarily of ephebophilia, predominantly of a homosexual orientation. That is the facts of the situation. And the Church teaches that homosexuality is wrong, not because they are homosexuals, but because it is a deviant use of the intended purpose of sex and sexuality that God intended for humanity (This is my understanding of the current teaching on homosexuality in the Catechism of the Catholic Church). Please correct, or instruct me if I am wrong. How can the Church ignore this, especially when Bishops, like Archbishop Weakland, also endorse and practice homosexual activity?

Axios affirms that homosexual are not affected with similar scandals:


Is is a matter that they do not have these scandals, or they are not reported by the media, OR are they not considered scandalous? I have been to and read up on NAMBLA's website (NORTH AMERICAN MAN/BOY LOVE ASSOCIATION) and I can't say that I whole heartedly aggree with Axios.

The main intent, I guess as I continue to reflect on this discussion is:

Ought homosexuality to be considered normative, or abnormal? Is the Church correct in her teaching, or do we believe that she is in error?
And if so, what steps must be taken to correct the situation?

In Christ,
ALity

[ 06-14-2002: Message edited by: ALity ]

I think you all should read, "Good Bye Good Men".

God Bless

Dan,

You must understand neither I nor anyone I know disagrees with your statement that the Catholic Church should "get rid of all of the bishops who have covered up this scandel as well as all of the active homosexuals in the clergy."

My only disagreement is that by ommission, your statement might seems to suggest that fornicating heterosexual priests do not deserve the same actions.

NAMBLA, of course, is wholely outside and rejected by the gay community. It co-founder and most noted proponent is, of course, a man praised by Cardinal Law and shunned by the gay community.

By now, we know the bishops have made their decision and wisely and Christianly decided not to attack the gay community at their meeting. Instead (maybe not fully or perfectly), they are willing to take responsibility themselves.

One can only appreciate how painful this must be for them and wish them a good resolution of the crisis they allowed to happen.

Axios

What kind of a comment is this?

Please, explain yourself.

ALity