Potpourri Plus (2)

Tuesday May 27, 2008

Since the previous posting ‘Potpourri Plus’ I have received comments from website ‘subscribers’ relevant to the topic at hand. The first is from a subscriber, a former seminarian for a religious community in California. He is now living in the east. He is a remarkably insightful gentleman and has had several letters published over the last few years in the National Catholic Reporter. Shall we say he cuts to the chase?

Harvey: Let it run!

Fr. Lasch: Just by way of introduction, recall that we have been discussing the ‘grooming’ aspect of sexual abuse by clergy. Understanding this ‘phenomenon’ is crucial in order to appreciate the underpinnings of sexual abuse. It’s not the only underpinning but it is significant.

Harvey: I think you spent some time on this topic in the original “Harvey Interviews.”

Fr. Lasch: Yes, we did. At any rate, here is how this subscriber states it:

Subscriber’s Observations:

I enjoyed the column; I’m particularly intrigued that you’re beginning to nibble around the edges of the clerical life.

The word ‘clericalism’ gets bandied about a great deal but I honestly wonder sometimes if it’s starting to become a bit meaningless—when it is in fact quite meaningful.

I’d guess that 99.9% of the laity do not really know what it means. They probably associate it with ‘mean priests.’ You know, the ones who bawl you out in confession or give really condescending homilies.

To those of us more familiar with the “private lives” of the clergy, either by dint of having explored a vocation, worked in the church, or having lived in the ‘clerical state,’ it seems to me that it’s a bit like the five blind men describing an elephant, or like the judge constrained to come up with a definition of obscenity. “I can’t tell you, but I know it when I see it!”

Clericalism might be the Bishop of Belleville’s new vestments one day, and the coddling of John Powell S.J. another. Mostly, it seems to be a catch-all way of describing everything that’s wrong with the institution of priesthood and religious life.

Or is it?

Editor’s Note: The reference to the Bishop of Belleviille is to Bishop Braxton who purchased vestments with money donated to the missions. And he has been accused of other financial ‘improprieties.’

The reference to John Powell, SJ, noted author and retreat director back in the sixties and seventies, is about allegations of sexual misconduct against women. This case apparently was never finalized.]

Subscriber continued: Is it perhaps an easy way out, a way of avoiding actually articulating in some detail what is amiss with the psychosocial and psychosexual development or evolution of men and women living in the clerical state in the Church of Rome? Of dancing around the very real risks to their spiritual and mental health and adjustment?

In retrospect, as I approached the process of religious ‘formation’ into the Christian Brothers, it seems to me that there was a marked lack of honest introspection. Oh there was a great deal of ‘fronting.’ There were lively discussions of the implications (along with the ‘freeing’ aspects of celibacy in the common room; assurances that healthy personal relationships with members of both genders served to, for the most part, assuage the need for a life partner. Attempts to distill it down to “well the only thing you’re giving up is sex.”

In retrospect, those discussions always seemed to be about someone else. Never once doI recall one of the older brothers talk about, from time to time, being really lonely; or of seeing a young couple and wishing to hell he had what they had. Or of slipping up and pursuing a sexual relationship, and how he dealt with that.

It always seemed to be about someone else and bit of a new-age, humanistic version of “women are the occasion of temptation and sin” and “particular friendships” should be avoided.

To be sure, the message was radically different, but any personalism still seemed to be pseudo-personal.

I get the strong sense that there is a good deal of resistance in the clergy and religious to an actual examination of what takes place emotionally once the door of one’s own room is closed. Sipe’s famous essay on celibacy, I note, comes from somebody who has left the clerical state. But even among priests and religious who have left to marry, I can recall very little that exposes what life behind rectory or religious house doors is truly like, either socially or alone.

Which brings me to your mention of unconscious grooming of young people by clergy. It strikes me as a sort of revelatory break- through which could be the start of something—a glimpse of just one of the hazards of the profession that doesn’t get talked about, at least not outside of the clergy. And not, I suggest, within it either.

There is an analogy in psychoanalytic theory: The notion of transference and counter-transference.

It’s the latter that trips up the therapist. He or she actually begins to enjoy the emotional connection that the client develops for them, begins to reciprocate, and may unconsciously foster it in ways that interfere with the helping relationship. As the client be comes dependent upon the therapist, the therapist becomes dependent upon the client for emotional validation.

A very dangerous situation. Therapists are trained to recognize it, their therapists and clinical supervisors are trained to recognize it and there are some clear strategies to avoid it.

But one has to ask, how much more vulnerable to counter-transference is a priest, brother, or nun who may be starved for one-on-one, intimate relationships between them self and another, corporeal [sic] human being? Is there more risk of them ‘playing with fire,’ which is what therapists regard indulgence in counter-transference to be? Especially if they’re living in a situation where their relationships with their fellows are either superficial or dysfunctional? And where the only tools they’ve been given in formation are to pray harder and push the feelings down?

I think that these are the kinds of questions that the clergy don’t want to ask themselves and especially don’t want the laity asking because they may not like the answers. Since those answers may underline fundamental flaws both in the pre-screening of the people we bring into the clerical life and the formation process we put them through AND the realities (versus the ideal) of what really happens in the communities of priests and religious_.

Maybe the answer is “for most people called to ministry, celibacy won’t work going forward.”

And THAT has terrible implication for the clerical culture.

Which brings us back to ‘clericalism.’ Maybe ‘clericalism’ is in large part the need of the clergy to project some sort of Utopian ideal of a caste that is inherently superior to the rest of the society in the Church, both to the laity AND (which is arguably very dangerous) to themselves, with all that that implies.

I really hope you’ll keep exploring some of these ideas. The unconscious grooming notion may be quite telling in that: 1) It may explain other failures of mindfulness that have allowed some abusers to continue seemingly under the noses of their fellows and 2) it may just be the tip of the iceberg in terms of a (perhaps deliberate) lack of awareness and self-awareness about the real implications of life in the clerical state.

At some point, the priesthood (along with every religious order) are going to ask themselves: “what’s broken here?” and ask for help. It strikes me that the institutions may be too far gone down the road of dysfunctionalism to be able to help themselves re-invent themselves. They’re rather like the drunk who’s convinced himself that he can “get it together” without having to stop drinking.

Harvey: What did he say?

Fr. Lasch: He said a lot but you may have to re-read it with the mind of someone who has been down that road. This is not easy because when we were dropped off at the seminary doors and entered the clerical world, it was as if we had renounced our American citizenship and moved to China. In fact, retired Auxiliary Bishop Geoffrey Robinson, from Sydney Australia, uses that precise analogy in describing the difficulty in moving away from a clerical church to a church engaged in conversation with the real world. [cf. ‘Confronting Power and Sex in the Catholic Church—Reclaiming the Spirit of Jesus, Liturgical Press, Collegeville MN, 2008, www.litpress.org. A review of his book will posted as well as a commentary on his presentation to the No Jersey Chapter of VOTF on May 21, 2008 at St. Mark Lutheran Church in Morristown. For an interesting interview on ABC News, check out Faith Matters.

Harvey: In the light of all this, do you really believe the Pope will be able to get a handle on this even if he wanted to?

Fr. Lasch: It will not be easy because as Bishop Robinson has pointed out, the sexual abuse crisis is only a door opener and is paving the path to new questions that need to be addressed, questions about the very nature of the institution.

Harvey: Lay people are still uninterested.

Fr. Lasch: I disagree with you. Catholics in the ‘Diaspora’ know exactly what we are talking about. It is precisely for this reason that they no longer relate to a parish where clericalism dominates. As the ‘subscriber’ noted, they may not be able to define clericalism but they know it when they see it—and hear it!

What concerns me most at this time that in the absence at a hard look at clericalism, we will continue to have vocation programs that in subtle ways ‘groom’ men for the seminary who are like innocent lambs, some of whom will be seduced into a clerical culture that will brainwash them into thinking they are ‘special’ and untouchable or worse, seduce them into an a-sexual world in which legitimate sexual expression is suppressed in favor of illegitimate or illicit sexual expression. Not good.

Harvey: Any examples?

Fr. Lasch: Yes. There are priests who are presently serving as pastors who as seminarians seduced younger seminarians and in effect sexually abused them.

Harvey: You’re not serious?

Fr. Lasch: Get your head out of the sand, Harvey! Do you want me to give names and dates?

You see, this is the problem. The U.S. Bishops have people convinced that they have ‘fixed’ the problem but not only did they not fix the problem, they have used both Canon Law and Civil Law to cover up the real problem of priests preying on vulnerable teens and vulnerable adults. They see it merely as an moral offense against God that can be ‘absolved’ (forgiven) in the confessional when in reality it is a moral offense against another human being who may have to live with the damage for the rest of their lives.

Harvey: I assume the Jay Study will unpack a lot of this.

Fr. Lasch: I hope so but that depends on how broadly and how deeply this study goes.

Harvey: You know too much for your own good!

Fr. Lasch: Unfortunately, that’s true and I have paid a heavy price.

Harvey: I’m sorry.

Fr. Lasch: I’m not asking for pity or praise. As my therapist has told me more than once, I have been dealt a hand that I must accept but he called it a mission.

Harvey: You mentioned another ‘subscriber’ who responded to the previous postng (‘Potpourri Plus’).

Fr. Lasch: Yes. She is a wonderful woman from the Portland, Oregon. She is doing some marvelous work with victim/survivors in an effort to bring healing where there is despair. She’s a real modern day St. Francis. Moreover, her intent is not to ‘fight against’ the Church but to follow the advice of Bishop Robinson, to get bishops and pastors and all clergy to sit down at table and work toward healing. This is what she had to ‘say’:

Virginia:

I saw your thoughtful commentary on the Pope’s meeting with survivors. (Potpouri Plus)

You remember me, I am the woman who screened Hand of God, last September in Portland, Oregon.

I appreciated your opinions. I understand the anger and pain of SNAP survivors. I have felt disappointed time and again by the leadership and people of the Catholic Church. I have been confrontational. It won me no converts to the cause I cared about. I’ve had to do the slow work of supporting survivors in private, being available to depressed survivors on the phone, taking another survivors to court. Then Elizabeth and I do the work of bringing survivors together with other Catholics for mutual healing and understanding. We use the spiritual discipline of Compassionate Listening. Without that discipline setting the tone, Catholics tend to hurt survivors with their comments. But when we Catholics listen to survivors supportively, the results are amazing. We facilitated the reconciliation between my pastor who is a Santa Barbara Franciscan and a survivor of abuse by another Santa Barbara Franciscan. A family who was thinking of leaving the Catholic Church decided to stay after coming to be apart of our group. I have trouble getting people to come to our gatherings. They come one by one. Media coverage is hard to come by. The media looks for stars, not little people doing good work in private. The rewards are mostly the private thanks and praise I receive.

The path to healing the wounds we all carry from clergy abuse is the rocky, narrow path. The anger and pain of survivors is hard to listen to. The overt confrontation of leafleting and media stories survivors have been forced to resort to forces us Catholics to look at the dark places we don’t want to see. But too many Catholics inclined towards sympathy are frightened by confrontation. At the same time, the most wounding aspects of clergy abuse are the isolation survivors go through—the experience of being alone, uncared for, disbelieved.

We Catholics have to give survivors a safe place inside the Catholic Church to express their pain and anger uncensored. We have to give survivors a place of compassion and support inside the Catholic Church. And when we do, survivors begin the journey to forgiveness and reconciliation and we Catholics find ourselves transformed and uplifted and uplifted by the experience.

Harvey: What a nice woman!

Fr. Lasch: Yes, there’s a lot more to her. This is only a glimpse into her soul. Would that our Church could put on the same person of Christ. At the risk of overstatement, I have found more women who have the heart of Christ than men and women ‘of the cloth.’ Very, very sad. They act ‘in personal Christi’—in the person of Christ but are not allowed to preside at Eucharist at which the washing of the feet is a condition for validity, as it were! Truly amazing!

Harvey: I think we need another break.

To Be Continued

Recent Articles

Twentieth Sunday in Ordinary Time 'A'

All are invited—no exclusions. It’s a safe bet that every ‘objective’ historian writes with a bias. When I attended Catholic…continue reading...

Confronting Power and Sex in the Catholic Church

On “Confronting Power and Sex in the Catholic Church—Reclaimng the Spirit of Jesus” By Bishop Geoffrey Robinson. The Liturgical Press,…continue reading...

THE SURVIVAL OF THE SPIRIT

WHILE MIRED IN THE TOXIC WASTES OF THE ECCLESIASTICAL SWAMP Thomas P. Doyle, J.C.D., C.A.D.C. ANNUAL SNAP GATHERING…continue reading...

Feast of the Assumption

She made it; so can we! It’s a happy coincidence this is the patronal feast for our parish. It is also…continue reading...

Nineteenth Sunday in Ordinary Time 'A'

Prophets take courage! We are not born with inherent fear and certainly do not come into this world with water wings.…continue reading...