Let's Focus on the Problem at Hand

By Mary Beth Bonacci
HERALD Columnist
(From the issue of 5/16/02)

The rest of the world keeps talking about it, so I’ll keep talking about it. Not that I’m wild about the idea of turning my column into the "scandal column." But as the coverage unfolds, and as pundits "hijack" this awful situation to promote their own agendas, I see far too many misconceptions and distortions of Catholic teaching passed off as fact. It scares me to think of average Catholics in the pews actually buying into any of this nonsense. So I’m grateful I have a forum to do whatever I can to help correct this rampant misinformation.

First of all, to recap for those who haven’t read my last several columns – I consider this "scandal" a mixed blessing. It’s important to recognize that rates of sexual abuse among the clergy are really no higher than they are among the general population. The myth of huge percentages of pedophile priests is just that -- a myth. If the press were to turn the same level of attention to the average school district, they would probably find similar percentages. However, priests are – rightly – held to a higher moral standard than the general population. They are alter Christus – Christ’s presence on earth. It makes me sick to think of any man with a collar using that trust to abuse children. Even one child-molesting priest is one too many. If all of this attention keeps these predator "priests" away from children, then I say keep it coming.

But back to the accompanying misinformation. Most of it seems to revolve around celibacy. I wrote last time about the ludicrous – but currently common -- notion that celibacy somehow leads to pedophilia, and that if we eliminated priestly celibacy, we’d take care of the problem. But as the coverage continues, I see more and more misunderstanding about the purpose – the reason priests take a vow of celibacy in the first place. I thought that was a topic worth examining.

At a party a few weeks ago, a friend of mine made the comment that priests shouldn’t be expected to abstain from sex because, "Just because he doesn’t have sex, that doesn’t make him any better than I am." I wrote it off as the misunderstanding of a non-Catholic. But then last night, I saw a prominent priest (who shall remain unnamed) on television, saying the same thing. He (incredibly) said that the purpose of priestly celibacy is to "show people that the priest is better than everybody else," and that the vow should be eliminated.

Does anybody really believe that the Church Fathers sat around asking, "How can we make our priests look better than anybody else? I know – we’ll have them abstain from that dirty, no-good sexual activity"? Hardly.

To understand the purpose of celibacy, one must understand the purpose of human sexuality. Sexual union speaks a language – the language of, "I give myself to you forever." John Paul II calls it "self-donation." In giving their bodies to each other, a husband and a wife give themselves to each other in a very concrete, exclusive way. Everything about sexual union is oriented to that permanent self-gift – the bond between the spouses, the procreation of children. It’s all about forever, exclusive, self-giving love.

Priestly celibacy isn’t about denying the gift of human sexuality. It’s about affirming it. It’s simply another way of speaking the same language. In taking the vow of celibacy, the priest is consecrating himself to God. He’s giving himself, consecrating his sexuality and indeed his whole being, in the same way that a husband gives himself to his wife. This is why priests don’t consider themselves single men. They are married to the Church. As alter Christus, they take the Church as bride just as Christ does.

It makes sense for an alter Christus to be celibate. After all, Christ was celibate. He didn’t give Himself to one woman in particular. He came to give Himself – every last drop of Himself – to all of us. A priest, in the same way, is understood to give himself – his all – to the Church in general, and not to any one woman in particular. Celibacy frees him to do that.

Priests tell me that celibacy leaves a space in their hearts – a space which, if they are honestly living their vocations and following Christ, is filled by the Holy Spirit, creating a very special intimacy with God. It’s a difficult discipline to live, but they find the fruits very rewarding.

Unfortunately, a culture which doesn’t value the goodness and holiness of sexuality is not likely to recognize the goodness and holiness of celibacy. And that is the predicament in which we find ourselves today. If sex is just another "thing" we do, why shouldn’t priests be able to do it as well?

Personally, I find the theology of celibacy very beautiful. I think we should talk about it more, so that people can understand what it really means. I’m sure it’s easy, for an outsider, to get the impression that the Church must think sex and marriage are bad, if her highest officials must renounce them. But the exact opposite is true. Celibacy is based on the goodness and the holiness of sexuality. Why would a priest consecrate something dirty to God?

Of course, celibacy is a discipline of the Church. It’s not doctrine. It could, theoretically, be changed. Personally, I hope it’s not. I think we would lose something precious and beautiful. But whether it is to be changed or not is a completely separate issue – and a separate discussion -- from the scandals at hand. To tack such an agenda onto these horrible, horrible abuse situations is, in my mind, to abuse the victims all over again.

Let’s just focus on solving the problem at hand.

Bonacci is a frequent lecturer on chastity.

Copyright ©2002 Arlington Catholic Herald.  All rights reserved.