(Okay, third times the charm, I hope. Thanks to Chrys for helping me clean this up. I really don’t like writing about abuse but…)
A recent issue of the National Catholic Register has an interesting, if sobering, article on the instances of sexual abuse of children (Revealing Statistics:Sexual Abuse of Children Runs Spectrum of Society) in the Catholic Church. What’s most interesting to me about the article is the statistical fact that Catholic priests do not sexually abuse children at a rate higher than the general US male population.
It is important to note that looking at a problem like this on a social level is not meant to excuse, minimize or justify such behavior in any way. Likewise, statistical analysis should not blind us to the much greater moral and spiritual consequences of a priest abusing his office for his own gratification. Indeed, Christ speaks most forcefully against any such abuse (Matthew 18:6).
Rather, statistical evidence may be of particular service because it can help us understand the social context of clergy sexual misconduct in order to be able to more effectively address it. We can also look to studies in suitable institutions to begin to identify precipitating factors in abuse. For example, if celibate clergy offended at the same or lower rates than married school teachers, we may reasonably rule out celibacy or seminary formation as potentially causal factors in the sexual abuse of children.
I must add, however, that while the data may suggest that there were not causes of the problem, it is also clear that these seminaries were not providing the formation needed to be an effective antidote to a culture that glorifies the passions in general and sexual immorality in particular, and turned a blind eye toward the devastation wrought by any form of abuse. It is this last concern – the vital need to provide sound formation – that is especially critical to the current and future pastoral life of the Orthodox Church.
Since both the Catholic and Orthodox Churches in this country are drawing their candidates for ordination from the same cultural pool, we must ask what, if anything, are our Orthodox seminaries doing to counter a corrosive culture in which nearly 8% of adult men molest children? (In the same way, what, if anything, are they doing to counter the corrosive influences of a culture in which promiscuity is rampant, divorce is commonplace, cheating is acceptable . . . ?)
As always, an effective prescription depends upon an accurate diagnosis. With that in mind, the article indicates that “there is no evidence that sexual predators gravitate to jobs like doctors or priests or volunteer posts like scout leaders or sports coaches, the better to find and groom victims.” If this is true (and I’ve seen no studies to contrary), it would suggest that the catalyst for moral collapse occurs after the candidate finishes seminary or professional education, or after they begin working with young people. Put another way, is it possible that some instances of sexual misconduct are maladaptive responses to the demands of ministry? And if so, what conditions might increase the likelihood that the clergyman would act out sexually? Even more important, are there any indications that a candidate is at risk for any kind of sexual misconduct, or any kind of abuse?
We may shed some light on the larger issue by looking at the findings from a 1994 study commissioned by the Presbyterian Church (PCUSA). The study found that between 10-25% of their clergy have had an inappropriate sexual contact “with [adult] parishioners, clients, employees, etc.” According to some studies I’ve read, the PCUSA study’s findings may actually be conservative. In another study, up to 60% of Evangelical pastors self-report at least one incident of inappropriate sexual contact with an adult congregant in the last 5 years after the person enters the profession, begins volunteering, or is ordained.
Unfortunately, other institutions charged with the care of our young fare no better. Thus we learn that a significant number of school children are themselves molested by teachers. One study funded by “the federal government indicates 7% of public-school students will be sexually molested by staff or teachers, or about 4.2 million victims, while the abuse of various sorts by fellow students will be greater.”
What are the implications of these studies?
First, none of these institutions has dealt with the issue well. One thing that I think both the Church and secular society have gotten terribly wrong is the tendency to stigmatize the victim. When we stigmatize the victim – either by minimizing his or her pain or by protecting the victimizer – we increase the likelihood that the victim will eventually become a perpetrator, acting out in sexually inappropriate ways.
Second, the problem is much more widespread than normally assumed – and thus far too pervasive for our seminaries to relegate the formation of our clergy to a secondary or even tertiary concern. (Yet how often does it even rise to that level?) If our parishes are to be able to pursue the high calling to which we are called, our members must be healed themselves before they can become leaders who faithfully fulfill the healing work of Christ.
But these are only initial thoughts, offered in the hope of beginning to address a deep wound in our society. I would encourage people to read the National Catholic Register article as well as a recent Newsweek article (“Mean Men“). And of course, and as always, I welcome your thoughts.
In Christ,
+Fr Gregory
Leave a Reply to Chrys Cancel reply