Rod Dreher

Affirmative Action Forever

If Only Priests And Bishops Could Marry

By Rod Dreher • November 17, 2012, 8:24 AM

… Catholics wouldn’t have child molesters in the clergy. Oh, wait:

Police investigating allegations of sex abuse against a former bishop and a retired priest say 10 more people have alleged they were victims.

The Rt Rev Peter Ball, 80, a former Church of England bishop of Lewes and Gloucester, was arrested on suspicion of abusing eight boys and men.

He was arrested on Tuesday at his home in Somerset, over allegations relating the late 1980s and early 1990s.

Retired Church of England priest Vickery House, 67, was also arrested.

Police said since the arrests 10 more people had come forward alleging sexual offences were committed against them, seven by the former bishop and three by the former priest.

Posted in Christianity, Crime and Punishment, Sex and Sexuality. Tagged Anglican, Church of England, sex abuse.

21 Responses to If Only Priests And Bishops Could Marry

Bob Jones says:

November 17, 2012 at 9:43 am

When you consider that a significant portion, if not a majority, of acts of child abuse are committed by family members of the children, often fathers, uncles etc., and that in those cases the perpetrator is generally considered to be a heterosexual and married man, then thinking that allowing Priests and Bishops to marry would have prevented the abuse in the Church is really just wishful thinking.

I doubt that being married would have stopped the principal (a priest) at my old catholic high school from taking advantage of several teenage boys. The man was a predator, being married might have actually made it easier for him, as it would have provided even more cover for his behavior.
William Burns says:

November 17, 2012 at 10:01 am

Seems a bit of a straw man here–is anyone actually claiming that if priests and bishops could marry “Catholics wouldn’t have child abusers in the clergy”?
Charles Cosimano says:

November 17, 2012 at 11:33 am

I will confess as to wondering why a married man who molests boys would still be considered heterosexual. But the argument that pedophiles would be kept out of the Catholic priesthood is absurd on its face. Obviously a pedophile will be one even if married. In fact, a case can be made that married priests would even more likely to be pedophiles simply because it would make parents more willing to trust their offspring to them.
Surly says:

November 17, 2012 at 11:40 am

The clergy will always have pedophiles in their midst, as will any other organization that gives their employees/volunteers access to children and to families who may be in distress.

I highly recommend this article by Malcom Gladwell: “How Child Molesters Get Away with It.” http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/atlarge/2012/09/24/120924crat_atlarge_gladwell?currentPage=all
Coldstream says:

November 17, 2012 at 11:54 am

@William Burns

Yes, that’s an argument that’s been made by many. Here’s a selection of opinions from the Boston Globe:

http://www.boston.com/globe/spotlight/abuse/extras/celibacy.htm

I’m not sure how many of them actually believe it, and how many are simply using the crisis to advance their own preferences in regards to the priesthood.
David J. White says:

November 17, 2012 at 12:14 pm

Seems a bit of a straw man here–is anyone actually claiming that if priests and bishops could marry “Catholics wouldn’t have child abusers in the clergy”?

Speaking as a Catholic, I can assure you that the answer is “yes”. There are indeed people who make exactly this claim, and many of them are Catholic. I know because I’ve heard many of them say exactly that.
EliteCommInc. says:

November 17, 2012 at 12:22 pm

I am dubious about gthe entire Church scandal issue. Since men and women who not clergy, not catholic, protestant or any faith pracice for that matter engage in this behavior – however rare, and it is, I doubt a married clergy with this penchant would either.

But I think we have an over rated, over blown scenario, as usual with these types of sexual ‘sensations’.
Glaivester says:

November 17, 2012 at 12:59 pm

I remember a lot of people commenting that it seems as if all of the places with pedophilia cover-up scandals seemed to be the most homophobic places – as if somehow being sexual “unrepressed” would reduce the incidence of sexual deviancy that society still considers deviancy.

Considering Corey Feldman’s accusations against Hollywood and the recent BBC/New York Times scandal, one has to wonder if maybe the reason for this apparent correlation is that whenever their was a cover-up in a “sexually liberated” setting, the media was complicit because they were part of it.
Freedom says:

November 17, 2012 at 1:23 pm

There is no question it happens in churches where ministers can marry, but it happens a lot less often.
brians says:

November 17, 2012 at 1:58 pm

Bob J.,
The majority of child abuse is committed by mom’s boyfriend, not Dad.

Rod,
You’re mocking a straw man. Nobody asserts that there would be no abusers in a married clergy. If, though, happily married, sexually satisfied men were sought after for the priesthood, it might go a ways toward unfeminizing the culture of the office. The cover-up certainly wouldn’t have become so institutionalized if “fathers” were actual fathers.

Marriage was okay for the apostles, but not for today’s clergy? Even in the face of Paul’s epistles, which explicitly call for married elders & bishops? There’s a great deal of beauty and truth in the Catechism, but this one is a massive and foolish mistake.

[Note from Rod: For the record, I support married clergy. I just don't think that will solve the child abuse problem. -- RD]
Ivan K. says:

November 17, 2012 at 2:31 pm

On the other hand, if this man worked for PBS and spent his days with his hand up a furry red monster’s butt, his dalliances with adolescent males would be characterized by the media as a private matter between consenting adults.
EngineerScotty says:

November 17, 2012 at 4:16 pm

William,

There have been a few suggestions that the sex scandal in the Roman Catholic Church was aggravated by celibacy (and in particular, by the past practice of encouraging young gay men to join the priesthood as an alternative to a lifestyle regarded as sinful). I’m not a Catholic, so I have no opinion on whether or not priests should be permitted to marry… but there are a few things to consider:

* Faiths that do permit married clergy haven’t had as serious of a problem as the Roman Catholic Church has. This doesn’t mean the number of incidents is zero–as the above anecdote from the Anglican Church points out–but there doesn’t appear to be a systematic pattern of abuse by Anglican vicars, Mormon bishops, Methodist ministers, or Jewish rabbis.

* That said, the bigger scandal of the Catholic Church is not that abuse occurred–predators can be found in any institution where there are large numbers of children–but that it was covered up for so long. Jerry Sandusky was married (and presumed heterosexual), of course; but a big reason he was able to continue to molest children for years was that his superiors covered up his crimes (to protect the institution) rather than involve law enforcement. If any number of bishops (or Joe Paterno), had simply picked up the phone and called the police, how things would have been different…

* Celibacy does place additional burdens on people, especially when one considers that recruits to the priesthood are generally young men. (What if the RCC were to encourage more widowers to take up the cloth?)
MH - Secular Misanthropist says:

November 17, 2012 at 4:56 pm

I read the title and for a second mistakenly thought this was about priests marrying bishops.
Charles Cosimano says:

November 17, 2012 at 8:04 pm

Ok, first important thing to remember. Most clergy in the US are not Roman Catholic and they are married. Now, while there have been allegations and proof, proof being the operative word here, of pedophilia among all denominations, it seems that the heaviest load has been on the Roman Catholics. When people wonder why, the obvious answer is that the Catholic clergy are not married. But when the issue is looked at more closely, it seems that the problem is not married clergy at all, but rather the authority structure of the Church and its systemic denial of the issue. (At now there is a Baptist denomination going through a similar crisis so we can’t just blame the poor Catholics, much as we would love to.)

Now, that being said, it does seem that there are relatively few new allegations of pedophilia in the Catholic Church coming out that are not really old cases, like prior to 1975. If that is indeed the situation, then it is likely, much as I woud hate to admit it, that the Catholic Church has succeeded in getting a handle on the issue and what they are doing is working.

If that is the case, then the argument for a married Catholic clergy based on the pedophilia scandals is now dated and probably not very effective.
Solara says:

November 17, 2012 at 8:25 pm

“* Celibacy does place additional burdens on people, especially when one considers that recruits to the priesthood are generally young men. (What if the RCC were to encourage more widowers to take up the cloth?)”

I can answer this somewhat as a friend of mine, a nurse, belonged to a neighboring parish who had a pastor who was a widower. He had 5 children, all grown with families, when his wife died. After some time, he felt called to the priesthood and asked his children’s blessing, which they gave. He went through the seminary, became ordained, spent time as an associate pastor in various places in the archdiocese. When the pastor of the neighboring parish had to step down after 13 years (the archbishops in our archdiocese rotate the pastors after 6 or 12 years), this man became the pastor. The parishioners came to love him because he could relate to their concerns about family life. After a few years, he died from ALS. During the months suffering from the disease, he tried to continue his duties as pastor and parishioners helped him as much as possible (I know this because my friend was one of those caring for him).

While this is just one example and maybe not all widowers would make good priests, I think having widowers as priests would be a good idea.
Turmarion says:

November 17, 2012 at 8:50 pm

MH: I read the title and for a second mistakenly thought this was about priests marrying bishops.

Well, SSM is legal in an increasing number of states….

In regard to which, I direct all to this classic joke.
Mike Flanagan says:

November 18, 2012 at 4:58 am

I am a Catholic who was a footnote in blowing the whistle on pedophile/homosexual priests.
In 1998 my parish priest got 7 men together and showed us what might be construed as an underground film. I remember the speaker in the film was a father O Connor, not the cardinal.
The thrust was homosexual takeover in seminaries in the US and Canada leading to major dogmatic problems in the North American church. Amongst the several issues on violation of Roman Catholic teachings was active homosexual behavior leading to pedophile behavior in catholic institutions in the US and Canada.
It was not just the sexual behavior but the downplaying, almost contempt, for Catholic Dogma.
The Roman Catholic Priest’s vows are tough..they take enormous spiritual strength and we had been losing it.
Father Vincent Capadonno, Maryknoll, who kept the faith and ran the race comes to mind
Keep the faith,
Mike
JonF says:

November 18, 2012 at 7:40 am

Re: Even in the face of Paul’s epistles, which explicitly call for married elders & bishops?

There is no explicit commandment in Scripture that clergy MUST be married, though the English translation of certain verses can mislead one to that conclusion. In the original Greek what is said is not that clergy must have a wife, but that clergy are to have no more than one wife (i.e., not divorced or widowed and remarried, no concubines on the side etc.). There were some among the Apostles and other early church leaders who were married and some who were not. Peter of course was married; but Paul was not.
Likewise the verses that stipulate a clergyman’s children must be well-behaved do not require him to have children, only that if he does they should not be living scandalously.
David J. White says:

November 18, 2012 at 11:56 am

What if the RCC were to encourage more widowers to take up the cloth?

Picking up on Solara’s comment, I can confirm that this is indeed much more common than it used to be (before Vatican II, I think this was seldom if ever done). These are called “delayed vocations”. A good friend of my parents was such a priest. He and his wife were married for many years and had four children. Several years after his wife died of cancer, he discerned a religious vocation and, with the support of his children, entered the seminary. He served as a priest for several years until he died.

The irony is that, according my parents, who knew him when he was younger, as a young man he was pretty much the last man you would have expected to end up as a priest.

I agree that more men in this situation should be encouraged to consider a late-in-life religious vocation. In addition to having the experience of marriage and family, these men are generally already educated and have job skills, credentials, and experience that could be very valuable in their new vocation.
Siarlys Jenkins says:

November 18, 2012 at 10:16 pm

A more general speculation is that men (and women) who take vows of celibacy will be under constant temptation to break them. One of the original purposes of marriage was to channel and provide a social context for, and regulation of, sexual impulses that might spontaneously break out in near anarchy.

One way to relieve the tension, if not allowed to marry openly, would be to clandestinely molest vulnerable children, or young ladies, or whoever is available.

On that basis, the percentages might go down some if priests were allowed to marry, albeit, many married men (and women) play around, or molest vulnerable charges.

Priests were originally prohibited from marrying to prevent dynasties in the proprietorship of substantial properties donated to the church by conscience-stricken dying baron robbers. It had nothing to do with the speculative impact on their spiritual state.
Roger McCarthy says:

November 19, 2012 at 10:00 am

This particular Anglican ex-bishop was in fact a rather extreme Anglo-Catholic and the founder of a monastic order – so whether or not he could technically marry by C of E canon law is irrelevant and the problem is fundamentally still one of a celibate priesthood.