1. Sexual scandals and abuse: an attempt at interpretation

The well-known events, capable of occupying first place in the attention of  the media in the last weeks, even though they relate mostly to N.A. clergy and seem fairly connected with that socio-cultural reality, impel us to make some reflections and ask ourselves some questions around some fundamental passages of the formation journey, both initial and ongoing. 

1.1-           The real problem, first of all, seems to be tied to the difficulty of managing sexuality in a modern culture, and to the progressive process of trivializing and devaluing sexuality, ever more disconnected from love and ever more an expression of misunderstood freedom, in its turn disconnected from responsibility.  So much so that the true problem does not even seem to be the difficult management of sexuality, but its outright non-management.  It is not a Church problem, it seems, verifiable by the fact that the same phenomenon is found, and even in greater proportion, in other categories, and in recalling that most cases of sexual abuse happen within the family circle.

1.2-           This does not console us nor is it to be used as an argument in defense, but it permits us to take a realistic look at the problem.  Returning to the internal life of the Church in recent years, this is shown also by the fact that the same problems have been notably experienced also in other socio-ecclesial contexts. I think you will recall, even though it did not get much prominence, the document reserved to the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life, and then made public a couple of years ago, in which some not-infrequent episodes of violence came to light, in which some women religious, especially African, and to a lesser extent Oriental, were victimized at the hands of priests and religious men, a truly disconcerting and upsetting fact.  Among other things, the document discredits the idea that there would be certain cultures (in that case African) in which the observance of celibacy would be impossible. Celibacy, in so far as it  requires a certain type of renunciation of the exercise of an instinct deeply rooted in human nature, will always be, therefore, a choice that is demanding and culturally (and sociologically) “dissonant.”

1.3-           Some might say that the cause of all of that is celibacy (“the law of celibacy”), or, a celibacy imposed and not chosen, undergone and not loved, cause and at the same time effect of hard compromises between instinct that pressures and values that “draw” less and less.  We cannot exclude that hypothesis absolutely, but there are two observations to be made in that regard.

1.3.1-      The first, in the psychological order, teaches that sexuality has the characteristics of

 plasticity and all-invasiveness, so that, concretely, problems that arise in any area of

 the personality sooner or later will affect the area of sexuality; moreover, sometimes

they are vented precisely there; they find that area a type of safety valve, an exit route, obviously creating problems and disturbing the normal affective-sexual life of the person.  Consequently, the problems in the affective-sexual life often do not have an affective-sexual origin; they are born elsewhere and therefore are to be “treated” elsewhere (that is why many times matrimony has not resolved the problems of the ex-priest¹). That is why we must be very cautious before establishing automatic connections between an affective crisis and the celibacy norm.

1.3.2-  Second observation:  it is obvious that a society like this one in which there is not an

intelligent and orderly management of sexuality, directed by and to love and managed

with responsibility (“have sex with whom you wish, how you wish, when you wish”), creates serious problems for someone who wishes to live a celibate life plan independent from the cultural context and from the economic conditions (and this is interesting, too!).  It is clear that in this context it has become more difficult to be virgin for the kingdom of heaven. But to say this does not mean to conclude that it has lost its meaning or is less meaningful.

1.4-           Another clarification regarding the N.A. events: it is not correct to speak generically of pedophilia, as though most of the accusations of sexual abuse were to be recorded as pedophilia cases, because the exact  opposite is true. Pedophilia cases are in a clear minority, while most of the sexual disorders of the N.A. clergy relate to homosexual relationships with adolescents².  But precisely this has a sort of explanation.  For some time the N.A. culture has assumed a very favorable attitude toward the homosexual condition, as though it was a completely normal condition. Obviously such a mentality will have penetrated subtly also into the believing community, also into the seminaries, to the extent of creating a corresponding attitude, that is very possibilist, even in the admission criteria to orders.  I am not debating for now, on whether or not such an attitude is legal, but it is quite natural that this mentality be assumed, perhaps even unconsciously or implicitly, also by the individual with this type of problem (less and less considered as such). This in turn results in a lowering of defenses and a consequent diminishment of one’s ability to control. The cases of homosexuality now exploded in a dimension so troublesome must be connected with this cultural, social and church phenomenon.  If for some time it has been preached that homosexuality is a simple variation of the sexual tendency (according to this approach, homosexuals would be the equivalent of “left-handed” in sexual orientation”, there’s nothing to be amazed at, if bit by bit the idea spreads that… a transgression in that sense is not so serious, then; or perhaps there is nothing wrong with it.  Often, we know well, one’s conscience only seeks-finds reasons for confirming its conduct, almost as though it was one of its epiphenomena (or to justify its inability to keep some internal tendency under control).

1.5-           A legitimate question to ask is how much the N.A. situation is applicable also to other socio-ecclesial contexts.  For some persons it would be just the beginning of a process of emergence of a hidden reality, that many other local-national Church realities are involved.  I think that in some contexts it may be that way, not everywhere (hoping not to be contradicted by facts, or numbers, and without any presumption and naiveté) ³.  But there are also some who talk about America as that socio-cultural context which is always “one step ahead”, and in some way anticipates what will happen elsewhere later.  It is more important for us to ask ourselves if what happened in N.A. also involves religious life: we do not yet have precise and final data at hand, but certainly also religious life seems party to the case in all these happenings, in which also religious institutes or individual religious would be compromised. One more reason to try to understand and store up what has occurred there.

1.6-           It is even more interesting in fact, to ask ourselves what indications might come to us, to our idea of virginity, as such, and as celibacy in connection with the presbyterate,  of our practices of formation and of formation for celibacy and for affective-sexual maturity, of our formation itineraries. Deep down, this disruptive crisis stands to tell us some very precise things, which relate especially to vocation discernment and the quality and specificity of initial and ongoing formation.  It seems evident, from the American crisis, that vocation discernment for admission to orders (or to vows) is not always done wisely (if even persons with pedophile tendencies can be ordained). It is licit to ask ourselves this question: does there exist a real and proper formation to affective-sexual formation in our formation houses, an education for the virginal choice, a verification, possibly not waiting for the diaconate to see if the young man in question has received the charism of celibacy and is able to grasp its beauty and live it, without taking for granted that if there is, or seems to be, a call to the priesthood there will also be the interior readiness to live celibate?  Is there an ongoing formation in that sense, so that the religious in difficulty or in affective crisis knows whom to turn to and does not have to go seeking the necessary help who knows where, and maybe even feels marginalized at home, without waiting for the crisis to degenerate and become irresolvable?

It appears to me that that there must be a conversion first of all regarding the idea of celibacy for the reign, and I think that it is worth while going and reviewing precisely that idea, in order to define correctly the meaning of the option for virginity and to point out at least a few passages of an authentic formation itinerary in that direction.  Here we will see only one of these passages or phases: that of looking at the condition, or that basic and indispensable criterion, especially from the psychological point of view, for a choice of celibacy for the kingdom of heaven, and which permits us to understand also the qualifying content on the exquisitely spiritual plane.