The Linacre Quarterly

The reports The Nature and Scope of Sexual Abuse of Minors by Catholic Priests and Deacons in the United States 1950–2002 and the Supplementary Data Analysis, and The Causes and Context study (2011) by the John Jay College of Criminal Justice, commissioned by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, concluded that the childhood and adolescent sexual abuse committed by clergy was totally unrelated to homosexuality. The latest John Jay attempt to explain the deliberate homosexual predation and abuse of adolescent males, the primary victims in the crisis, as a crime of opportunity ignores the severe psychological conflicts and grooming behaviors in priests who offended against minors. This article discusses why the studies used to support the view of the abuse of minors as being not related to homosexuality are not applicable to the problem of clergy childhood sexual abuse. The data in the John Jay reports strongly suggests that homosexual abuse of adolescent males is at the heart of the crisis. The psychological causes of homosexual attraction in men to adolescent males are presented. A number of well-designed studies have found that men with SSA are more likely to have psychiatric and substance abuse disorders and STDs than heterosexual males, and are more likely to have a positive attitude to sexual relations between adult and adolescent males. Competent mental-health professionals should offer a second opinion about the causes of the crisis in regard to the psychological conflicts in the priests. Also, priests and seminarians with deep-seated homosexual tendencies have a serious responsibility to pursue appropriate treatment and spiritual direction in order to protect adolescent males, in particular, and the Church from further damage.

Data on the age of the preferred partner of same-sex attracted men show that the abuse of minors by priests and deacons is primarily a question of “ordinary” homosexuality, and secondarily of homosexual pedophilia (not just unspecified “pedophilia”). This points to the substantial over-representation of homosexually inclined men among seminarians and priests, which in turn is related to a process of “homosexualization” (and feminization) in the Church. The general dissent from the moral doctrine on sexuality and marriage (as set forth in the encyclical Humanae vitae) has paved the way for this process. A few suggestions are discussed for the prevention of the abuses of the past decades: (a) improved screening of candidates for the priesthood as well as for the office of bishop on masculine personality maturity, which includes normal heterosexuality and fatherhood qualities; (b) a spiritual regime for seminary students and priests that is demanding on the self and directs the battle for holiness; (c) appointment of bishops and seminary regents who are active apostles of Humanae vitae and Evangelium vitae.

In his recent interview published as the book Light of the World, Pope Benedict XVI noted that the Vatican has repeatedly stated that men with a homosexual orientation should not be admitted to the priesthood even if they performed no homosexual acts. He stated that he did not want celibacy to be an excuse to attract people with a homosexual orientation. There are several reasons for this stance.

The priesthood is not a denial of the spousal meaning of the body which underlies marriage. This spousal meaning entails the fact that since man is a composite of body and spirit, the body is the physical self by which the gift of the soul which characterizes married love is finally ratified. The giving and receiving of sperm and ova expresses physically the prior giving and receiving of soul. This gift of self to another, for those who are called to it, can also be realized by the gift of self to God as is the case with virgins and religious.

Though celibacy is a discipline, because of the all-encompassing concentration of forces necessary for the priesthood, realized especially in the consecration of the Eucharist, it is a fit means for carrying out this spousal meaning of the body. As a result, a priest must have the same ability to give the gift of himself totally as a married man does; only his gift is to the whole Church.

There is an argument as to whether homosexuality is a result of nurture or nature. In either case, as long as this condition remains, the total dedication of self required of the priest would not be possible. If this is the result of nature, this cannot be changed; and the person could not contemplate a priestly vocation. If this results from nurture, then it could be changed; in which case after a person has changed it, he could pursue the priesthood.

The article examines recent comments by Pope Benedict XVI in Light of the World regarding the recent Vatican instruction Concerning the Criteria for the Discernment of Vocations with Regard to Persons with Homosexual Tendencies in View of Their Admission to the Seminary and to Holy Orders, which deals with homosexuality and the priesthood. This article demonstrates that Pope Benedict XVI's comments are consistent with the “fractures” in the understanding of sexual morality which he identified in The Ratzinger Report. As sexual mores have changed, attempting to “normalize” homosexuality, gradually the Church has developed norms and guidelines for seminary formators, culminating in the instruction.

The best-established facts in relation to homosexuality point to developmental-psychological, not genetic or physiological, causation. The efforts of the last few decades to find evidence to support a biological theory have made it more doubtful than ever that such evidence will be found. In contrast, many studies have shown that the most significant factor which correlates with homosexuality is “gender nonconformity” or same-sex peer isolation. Another factor closely associated with homosexuality is an imbalance in parent-child interaction, notably forms of over-influence of the opposite-sex parent in combination with a deficient relationship with the same-sex parent. The third well-established correlation is with inherent, rather than discrimination-produced, “neuroticism” or emotional instability/immaturity.

Structured around this pivotal evidence from statistical as well as clinical research, homosexuality is explained here as a character neurosis. Characteristics of this neurotic character syndrome include personality immaturity, self-victimization, and self-centeredness. This syndrome affects not only the emotional but also the moral and spiritual dimensions of the psyche and if indulged leads to generalized personality deterioration. Therapeutically, a holistic approach, simultaneously addressing the emotional, moral, and spiritual components of the psyche, offers the best opportunity for overcoming homosexuality. De-egocentrization and personality maturity, including the development of mature manhood/womanhood, are the goals of therapy.

The sexual abuse crisis in the Church, in which the primary victims were adolescent males, highlights the importance of the 2005 document from the Vatican's Congregation for Catholic Education on the selection of candidates for priesthood and religious life in regard to homosexuality. A thorough in-depth clinical interview that focuses on masculine identity and an evaluation of the development of a positive masculine identity through secure attachment relationships with the father, male peers, and a brother, as well as a positive body image and thorough psychological testing, can distinguish clearly between deep-seated homosexual tendencies and transitory same-sex attractions in candidates for priesthood.

The lack of secure, accepting, and positive relationships with the male peers, the father, and a brother can result in weaknesses in male confidence, sadness, and anger which are major unconscious factors in the development of same-sex attractions. The process of resolving transitory same-sex attractions in candidates and in seminarians is also described in this article. The implementation of this Vatican document is important in the protection of minors from sexual abuse and of the Church from further shame and sorrow.