26 June 2019

Sexual Abuse and celibacy.

The news got out, over the weekend, that Bishop Peter Ball, formerly Bishop of Lewes (a suffragan see of the diocese of Chichester) and then of Gloucester, has died. Apparently, his death occurred last Friday, 21 June.

I knew him fairly well; I remember him as one of the most sinister people I have ever had dealings with. Eventually he did time for his career of sadistic sexual abuse of young men (one of whom he drove to suicide). He was the protected darling of the British Establishment; Prince Charles, an Archbishop of Canterbury, Judges, Public School heads ... they were all taken in by his 'charismatic' manner and his skilfully crafted persona of ascetic sanctity.

I have, of course, said Mass for the repose of his soul. I pray that, before his death, he was able to attain the clarity and humility of contrition for the evil he did. Please God, may I, and every reader of these words, die penitent and absolved.

Only a little while ago, the Independent Inquiry into the Sexual Abuse of Children published its report into the Anglican diocese of Chichester; just last week, the RC Archdiocese of Birmingham had its turn. Neither 'case study' makes pleasant reading, but it seems to me that things were by far the worse in the diocese of Chichester and in the Church of England.

Sometimes, foolish people suggest that the Catholic Church would not have had its Paedophile Priest scandal, were it not for the law of clerical celibacy.

The Church of England has never, since 1559, had a law of clerical celibacy. This lack did not preserve the diocese of Chichester from the vileness of Bishop Ball and its other clerical paedophiles, some whom ... I know you are wondering this ... were married.

5 comments:

Tony V said...

I do think it's a matter of degree. Yes, children, teens and young men have been molested by married men (be they C of E bishops, Scout leaders, teachers, and so forth). But is this more (or even less) likely to happen in an officially celibate environment?


Perhaps it's an inevitable consequence of man's fallen nature, but it does seem that putting groups of males together without female company results in a certain incidence of unnatural acts. The Royal Navy has been famously described as 'rum, sodomy, and the lash', and--allowing for a change of beverage--historically I understand the all-male British public school was much the same. (It's no coincidence that the infamous homosexual 'marriage' bill was foisted on the UK by an Old Etonian.) Then there's prisons...

Celibacy has a definite value, if Jesus and Paul knew what they were talking about. This was also recognised in certain pagan and some ancient Jewish traditions as well. But at the same time it's worth considering whether the eastern churches have been onto something.

Albrecht von Brandenburg said...

As I said elsewhere, the REQUIREMENT of celibacy was the open door that the communist homosexual infiltrators (cf. Bella Dodd's testimony) walked through ...

There was a causal link between the requirement and the abuse, albeit a remote or mediate, and indirect one. The direct cause, was, as always, the decision to engage in such acts.

AvB

Gaius said...

I do think it's a matter of degree. Yes, children, teens and young men have been molested by married men (be they C of E bishops, Scout leaders, teachers, and so forth). But is this more (or even less) likely to happen in an officially celibate environment?

The best estimates for clerical abuse in the US (where there have been more prolonged enquiries into the matter, and so presumably more accurate data) suggest that around 4% of Catholic priests have committed abuse of some kind, which is approximately in line with that of other Christian denominations (though it's hard to tell, since few of them have been subject to the same sort of scrutiny as the Catholic Church has). By way of comparison, it's estimated that around 5-7% of US schoolteachers have committed abuse.

(Source for all this: https://www.psychologytoday.com/gb/blog/do-the-right-thing/201808/separating-facts-about-clergy-abuse-fiction )

Perhaps it's an inevitable consequence of man's fallen nature, but it does seem that putting groups of males together without female company results in a certain incidence of unnatural acts. The Royal Navy has been famously described as 'rum, sodomy, and the lash', and--allowing for a change of beverage--historically I understand the all-male British public school was much the same. (It's no coincidence that the infamous homosexual 'marriage' bill was foisted on the UK by an Old Etonian.) Then there's prisons...

Those were all cases where women were completely physically absent, though, which isn't the case with the average priest (who'll have regular interaction with his female parishioners, the barmaid down the local pub, the woman who works at the hairdresser's, etc., etc.).

Tony V said...

Can someone give me a reference (chapter and verse) that demonstrates where and when Bella Dodd claimed communists were planted in the seminary and hierarchy, and how many?

I've read an online version of School of Darkness with much interest, but I didn't find it there. And I know she testified before the House Un-American Activities Committee, but so far I can't find it there either.

Apparently I'm not the only one who's come up blank--see here.

Documentation, please.

Tony V said...

@ Gaius

Those were all cases where women were completely physically absent, though, which isn't the case with the average priest (who'll have regular interaction with his female parishioners, the barmaid down the local pub, the woman who works at the hairdresser's, etc., etc.).

Gaius makes a valid point. However, I suspect (though I don't know for sure) that most Catholic priests began their training at a fairly young age (eg, their 20s) and have not been well socialised with women.

The Psychology Today column is, um, interesting but ultimately it's a tertiary source. The author may be right that statistically Catholic priests aren't any more likely to molest children than various other professionals, but even if he is, somehow I think the rate for priests should be zero. His column also contains this whopper: we know that sexual orientation is not a risk factor for pedophilia. We know nothing of the sort: that statement is patently absurd and untrue.

Still wondering if anyone can substantiate the claim that Bella Dodd wrote or testified that communists had been planted in the clergy.