This is a reprint from the website of the Catholic Theological Society of America

Introduction

Along with millions of our fellow Catholics, the members of the Catholic Theological Society of America have been saddened and troubled by the clerical sexual abuse of children that came to light in early 2002 and by the ways in which many bishops dealt with it. Therefore, Peter Phan (Catholic University of America), then President of the Society, asked Professors Lisa Sowle Cahill (Boston College), Richard Gaillardetz (University of Toledo), and Ladislas Orsy (Georgetown University) to prepare a paper that could serve as a focal point for discussion at the CTSA's convention in June 2002. Members' comments and suggestions were then used to prepare a revised version of this paper. This version is given below.

"The 'Crisis in the Church': A CTSA Proposal for Reflection and Reform" is not an official document, much less a position paper, of the Society. Rather, the Board of Directors decided to post the text on the CTSA website and to send it to the Society's sixteen member bishops as one contribution to the discernment process now underway within the U.S. Roman Catholic Church. As of this writing, the CTSA continues to explore ways in which it might most effectively promote the healing, reconciliation, and reform that are so urgently needed.

A CTSA Proposal for Reflection and Reform
In the year 2002, the Roman Catholic Church in the United States experienced a crisis of proportions unparalleled in the history of the church in this country. Following a series of reports in the Boston Globe about the repeated and longstanding sexual abuse of young boys by the former priest, John Geoghan, the quickly mounting turmoil has hardly been limited to the initial problem of pedophilia. In the wake of the initial revelations, hundreds of priests and several bishops were implicated in the cover- up of a variety of kinds of sexual abuse of minors, leading to wider questions about sexuality, homosexuality, celibacy, sexual formation of priests, married clergy and ordination of women, and perhaps most importantly, about the nature, structure, and governance of the ecclesial body within which these events transpired.

In 1992-93, the U.S bishops had begun to address cases and accusations of sexual abuse (which had been publicly raised since at least 1985) by recommending that dioceses respond to charges promptly and in full cooperation with civil law; that those credibly and reasonably charged with perpetrating abuse be suspended from active ministry and referred for treatment; that victims and their families be treated compassionately; and that the issue be dealt with openly. While some bishops implemented these principles fully and aggressively, many did not. An ongoing sexual abuse crisis was a huge focus of media attention, both nationally and internationally, in the first half of 2002. The U.S. cardinals were called to Rome for a special meeting with the pope and Vatican officials, and the U.S. bishops are now faced with the challenge to develop both short-term and long-term responses. A first step in this direction was made in June 2002, when the American bishops met in Dallas and approved a Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People. The resolution of the crisis ultimately will demand concerted efforts of both the local and universal church, clergy and laity.

Members of the Catholic Theological Society of America claim theology as their vocation and expertise, through the exercise of a calling within the church, in academic institutions, and in scholarship. The Church has a public voice (e.g., the social encyclicals) through which it addresses issues that affect the common good, not Catholics only. Similarly, Catholic theologians are concerned with the interface of Catholic identity and public responsibilities, and advocate special concern for the most vulnerable members of society. In keeping with its ecclesial, scholarly, and professional missions, the CTSA proposes to identify salient theological issues requiring further discussion if the present crisis is to be met with faith, humility, courage, repentance, forgiveness, reconciliation, reform and hope.

The crisis we are experiencing today is precisely a "church" crisis. According to the Second Vatican Council, the church is a "communion of life, love and truth (LG # 9)" which makes manifest "the mystery of God's love for humanity (GS # 45)." More recently, Pope John Paul II has written of the church as "the home and the school of communion (NMI # 43)." This ecclesial perspective rightly puts the accent on the church as a relational reality, as a community of persons grounded in communion with God in Christ by the power of the Holy Spirit. Within this ecclesial communion all church relationships presuppose the equality of the baptized and are to be characterized by openness, collaboration and reciprocal accountability. Herein lies the crux of our present crisis, for what we are experiencing today is nothing less than a failure of church leadership to honor the demands of authentic ecclesial communion. When the most vital bonds of trust are betrayed, when leadership decisions appear to be dominated more by secrecy, clerical privilege and the protection of the church's public image than by a commitment to compassion and truthfulness, then the church's life of communion is thereby diminished. The scandals facing the church today have led us to conclude that a thorough-going church reform is both legitimate and necessary. Such reform must go beyond a fear of further litigation or a pragmatic concern for the image of the church to attend to those church structures and vital ecclesial relationships that exist for the very purpose of preserving the life of ecclesial communion.

Twelve years ago this theological society, in its statement, "Do Not Extinguish the Spirit," raised vital questions regarding the procedures for appointing bishops and the appropriate exercise of church leadership by individual bishops and episcopal conferences. Many have challenged the secrecy with which bishops are selected, and the lack of accountability of bishops both to the members of their dioceses and the national bishops' conference. As new information emerges daily regarding disturbing patterns of pastoral negligence on the part of episcopal leadership, these questions seem even more pressing today than they were then. Public outrage has been directed not just toward the instances of clerical sexual abuse themselves but toward church leadership's systemic failure to maintain, even minimally, the kind of open communication, consultation and participative decision-making that ought to characterize the church as communion.

Bishops, cardinals, and Vatican officials employ terms like regret, conversion, forgiveness and reconciliation without having fully acknowledged culpability for wrongs they have done or having initiated decisive changes in policy and practice. In Dallas, bishops' conference president Wilton Gregory apologized for wrongdoing on behalf of his brother bishops, critics were invited to speak openly, and a "zero tolerance" policy was adopted to bar any priest who has abused a minor from functioning as a priest. Remaining tasks are ensuring that all bishops adhere to this policy, that equal accountability is expected from the bishops themselves, that the policy is implemented in a way that is fair to priests, and that protection of children becomes the top priority.

This may be a time of opportunity in which the worldwide church and the local churches can productively explore the possibility of creating new canonical structures and procedures to further facilitate collaboration and participation. The present commitment of central and regional church leadership to such a venture seems doubtful, however. Even under existing canon law, many more forms of cooperative decisionmaking by clergy and laity together are available than are typically employed, even in the U.S. Catholic church, grounded though it is in a culture in which pluralism and democracy are customary.

Canon law requires each bishop to establish a presbyteral council, composed of priests, which is to advise him, and which he is required to consult in serious matters; and a finance council, accountable to the faithful for proper use of goods contributed, which the bishop must consult on important matters, and must obey in matters of grave importance. Canon law also recommends the establishment of a diocesan pastoral council, composed of clerics, religious, and other lay persons, which would offer the bishop practical, pastoral recommendations. Yet just over half of the U.S. dioceses have done so to date. Similarly, if bishops deem it opportune, the law allows as well for the creation of pastoral and finance councils within local parishes. The factor leading to the very different roles these bodies serve around the country is that they are established under the authority of the pastor or bishop, and are granted only a consultative voice. It has been the prerogative of the pastor or bishop to determine membership criteria, to convene these bodies, to set their agendas, and to decide how much responsibility will be delegated to them. Similarly, canon law permits a diocesan synod to be convened when the bishop determines that it is warranted. Lay members of the synod are to be selected according to procedures determined by the bishop; and the synod has only a consultative role in producing any legislation that may result from the synod at the decision of the bishop. These opportunities for limited lay consultation in church decision-making have been explored unevenly in the United States, and in some cases, presbyteral, pastoral, and finance councils have atrophied into uselessness, whether through benign neglect or deliberate suppression.

According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, "Lay believers are in the front line of Church.. Therefore, they in particular ought to have an ever-clearer consciousness not only of belonging to the church, but of being the Church.. They are the church" (899/432). Inspired and encouraged by the possibility of greater participation in the church to which they are committed, many priests and lay persons have in recent months sought out opportunities for a greater voice, whether within existing structures or by creating new ones. Some Catholics have demanded greater control over the disposal of their monetary contributions, even refusing to contribute to the diocese, if not the local parish. Others have approached their bishops and initiated work toward a diocesan synod. Parish councils have conducted "listening sessions" with distressed parishioners, including victims and their families. In Boston, a new Priests' Forum for mutual support has attracted over 200 priests and pastors, and a lay organization of 1400 persons, called Voice of the Faithful, has met weekly on church property to explore needed changes. Remarkable characteristics of these movements for change are that they are working within, not outside or alongside, local church structures; and that they are joining clergy and laity in a broad and spirited process of grassroots renewal. Survivors of clerical sexual abuse also belong to the heart of the church, and are seeking not only justice but the renewal of a Catholic spiritual life that was in many cases severely damaged by their experience of abuse.

Part Two: Ordained Ministers (Bishops, Presbyters, Deacons)

The current crisis has certainly put the ministry of priests under the spotlight. It will not be enough, however, to focus on problems raised by the sexual behaviors of individual priests. The place of ministry in the church and the responsibility and accountability of bishops are equally important issues. The pastoral crisis we face requires a full-scale reconsideration of the system and culture of priestly and episcopal ministry, a reconsideration of the concrete relationship between all ordained ministers and people that too often still manifests itself in a culture of deference marked by paternalistic attitudes and power inequities. In fact, the laity often expects or demands roles for ordained ministers that contribute to clericalism, and create unrealistic expectations of ministers. In turn, many dioceses lack precedents and structures for frequent, meaningful consultation and mutual support among bishops, priests, and laity.

More cooperative and reciprocal working relationships are needed. On priesthood specifically, we must ask whether our view of priestly ministry matches the vision of the council that saw the ordained priesthood as existing, never for its own sake, but always in service of the priesthood of the baptized (LG # 10; PO # 9).

Finally, we must raise difficult questions regarding the canonical and even doctrinal strictures that severely limit who is permitted to respond to the call to priestly ministry.

Direct correlations between a male only, celibate priesthood and clerical sexual abuse are too simplistic. But is it possible that an all male, celibate priesthood has contributed, if only indirectly, to our current crisis? We must consider the possibility that these strictures, insofar as they function as defining characteristics of the nature of the priesthood, contribute to a clerical and elitist "closed system" that distorts the authentic character of priestly ministry, inhibits necessary accountability to the whole church and artificially reduces the pool of candidates to the priesthood. Any reform that does not attend to these issues will, rightly, be viewed as merely cosmetic.

Many suggestions have been voiced about the screening and education of candidates for the priesthood. Certainly better psychological screening of candidates for ordination is in order, as is a thorough grounding in the Catholic ethical tradition on responsible sexuality. Clearly seminarians must be prepared to make a mature and faithful commitment to live celibately. Other issues which have received less attention, however, may be important elements in a healthy formation for ordained ministry. A significant number of seminaries are moving toward an educational experience in which priests are prepared to minister collaboratively with others by being educated with others.

Ordination candidates receive their theological education in situations in which they study and work with men and women who are preparing for other forms of ministry and whose calling is not to celibacy. Some diocesan seminaries still follow a traditional model in which students receive theological education and spiritual formation in institutions in which there are no other students or in which other students are kept in separate degree tracks. As a society of persons dedicated to the study, development and teaching of Catholic theology, it is important that we note a concern about the state of theological education in seminaries. Education of seminarians in a more open setting is a positive trend. However, many seminaries that educate ordained ministers alone are understaffed, underfunded, and have too small a number of students to provide a healthy and challenging environment for theological reflection and ministerial training. Although seminary faculties may sincerely attempt to form candidates as ministers who will collaborate with others in serving the community of God's people, the question must be raised whether seminaries maintained at great expense by dioceses for the education of a very small number of persons does not convey to seminarians a sense of entitlement and reinforce precisely the clerical culture which has been so destructive. If formation for ministry is an integrative process, the preparation of ordination candidates for a celibate lifestyle cannot be divorced from these other educational concerns.

Part Three: Sexuality

Clerical celibacy, the sexual formation of priests, and the tragedy of clerical sexual misconduct should be understood within the larger Catholic perspective on sexuality, sexual orientation, marriage and celibacy.

In the New Testament, marriage and family appear as good human institutions established by God, within which disciples may experience sanctification by loving God and neighbor as part of a community of believers. Faithfulness in marriage is affirmed by Jesus in all four gospels, but the faith is not passed on primarily through family traditions, but rather through personal conversion. Thus the goods of marriage, family, and producing heirs are relativized for disciples of Christ, in comparison to their key importance, both religiously and politically, in Jewish and Greco-Roman culture. For Christians, celibacy can be a special calling, gift, or vocation, as suggested by the example of Jesus. Celibacy is commended by St. Paul as freeing one from the distractions of the household and demands of one's spouse, and enabling "singlehearted devotion to the Lord" (1 Cor 7).

Although singleness of purpose seemed especially urgent to Paul in view of his expectation that the Lord would return within a generation, the value of celibacy has always been affirmed as a special vocation for Christians. Tinged as the prizing of celibacy may have been historically with denigration of the body and hostility toward sexual passion, celibacy can nevertheless serve as the basis of a lifestyle of radical commitment. A life of celibate service challenges social norms that channel goods and power through kinship and for one's mate and children, and can witness to an "option for the poor."

Celibacy only gradually became mandatory for Catholic clergy in the Western Church. The history of celibacy in Christianity is complex, involving both ascetical and monastic forms. Calls for clerical celibacy, not universally heeded, go back to the Spanish Council of Elvira (300). By about the fourth century, priests had to be unmarried in order to become bishops. The Eastern church has continued the ancient practice in which priests and deacons can undertake marriage prior to ordination. In the Middle Ages, the Gregorian reforms of the eleventh century aimed to enforce a rule of celibacy for all clergy. This was confirmed in 1139 at the Second Lateran Council. In the Protestant Reform of the sixteenth century, a main point of critics of Catholic practices was that celibacy is a vocation meant only for the rare few, and that mandatory clerical celibacy had led to widespread abuse.

Celibacy has also gone hand- in-hand with an all- male priesthood, though historical precedent for the latter is certainly more clearly established and universal than the former. Early arguments against the ordination of women depended in large part on a general cultural bias against the equality of women, though these arguments have been repudiated in recent church statements on the topic. The prohibition of women's ordination was reasserted as recently as 1994 in the apostolic letter Ordinatio Sacerdotalis. In 1976, the Pontifical Biblical Commission had concluded that there is no decisive biblical warrant against the ordination of women. The two most important remaining arguments against the ordination of women are thus the unsuitability of women to represent the male Christ on the altar or as the "bridegroom" of the Church; and historical precedent. Whatever the merits of these arguments, or for that matter, the interest of women in participating in the institution of priesthood as the Catholic Church presently knows it, it is evident that the exclusion of women from any consistent and formal role in higher governance has contributed to the "clerical culture" that many increasingly deplore. Beyond the question of women's inclusion in ordained ministries, we ought also to note that a growing number of canonical studies have concluded that there is no canonical obstacle to including laypersons, male and female, in church governance.

In response to the current crisis in the church, many have noted that the ordination of married persons would certainly not eliminate the problem of pedophilia or other forms of sexual abuse. There is, however, reason to wonder whether mandatory celibacy does not sometimes foster a "clerical culture" in which, because he does not have a relationship to a spouse and to children, the priest's primary focus of loyalty becomes the institutional structure of the church. This seems to be a factor leading to the appalling insensitivity to the plight of victims of sexual abuse, and to the "cover-ups" which have so scandalized the faithful. "Love of the church" can become love for the ecclesiastical system rather than for the community of God's people. Celibacy can foster true pastoral zeal and charity. All too clearly, however, it can also promote careerism. A shortage of priests also encourages the retention and advancement of ordained ministers with less than optimal qualifications.

The current crisis also raises issues of sexual orientation. Certainly, the teaching of Christianity as historically presented is that sexual relationships belong in the marriage of a man and a woman, and should be linked to procreation. Heterosexuality has been the presumed norm for human sexuality. On the basis of the modern social and psychological sciences, however, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in 1975 distinguished between a homosexual orientation and homosexual acts, declaring that only the latter and not the former is a sin. On this basis, homosexual men who are committed to a celibate vocatio n may be ordained to the priesthood. Any priest who engages in a sexual relationship violates his vow or promise of celibacy, whether he is homosexual or heterosexual; any priest who is chaste fulfills his celibate vocation no matter what his sexual orientation. No persuasive evidence has been presented that homosexuals are as such more likely to become sexual predators than heterosexuals.

It has been suggested, but is far from proven, that dissent from Catholic sexual teaching has contributed to an atmosphere that makes clerical sexual abuse more likely. Yet recent disclosures of sexual abuse have involved figures representing a broad range of theological and ethical viewpoints. Furthermore, dysfunctional or compulsive sexual behavior is more likely to be rooted in psychological factors than in moral theories. A serious and pressing issue, of course, is education in healthy sexual self-awareness and mature commitment to a celibate way of life for all those who have chosen this path. Catholic teaching on sex, marriage and parenthood must continue to strive to communicate the importance of love and commitment as the appropriate context for sexual relationships for all persons, and to integrate celibacy and priesthood (not necessarily to be equated) into a broader, more inspiring vision.

Conclusion

In summary, in response to the current "crisis in the church," the CTSA proposes several important areas for theological exploration:

1. Church: the nature of authentic ecclesial communion; the reform of church structures, especially structures of power and accountability; respect for diversity in experience of church and Catholicism in different cultural settings; the inculturation of the church in democratic societies; the renewal of authentic leadership ; the enhancement of participatory government by local bishops' conferences, dioceses and parish councils, lay ministers and leaders, and the faithful in general, especially women; the appreciation and development of positive initiatives and energies that have already emerged within the church in the U.S. in response to the crisis; honest, sincere, compassionate and adequate responses to victims of wrongdoing, including appropriate forms of compensation.

2. Ordained ministry: the vocation and function of ordained ministry; the criteria for identifying candidates for ordination; the formation and education of priests; the assignment and supervision of all ordained ministers, including bishops; continuing support for deacons, priests, and bishops; intervention, rehabilitation, possible reassignment, and spiritual healing of ordained ministers who have fallen short of or betrayed their calling; comparable treatment of all ordained ministers who are guilty of sexual abuse or its unjust concealment; the integration of ordained ministers with other ecclesial ministries.

3. Sexuality: the moral, psychological, and spiritual significance of human sexuality and sexual behavior as an integral part of human life; the married, celibate and single vocations; the value of religiously dedicated celibacy; the dynamics and morality of sexual orientation and sexual relationships based on different sexual orientations; the recognition of coercive or violent sexual contact as the most grave moral evil in the sexual sphere; power imbalances and vulnerability in sexual relationships as a form of coercion; the causes of and appropriate responses to sexual misconduct and immorality, especially in the forms of violence and abuse of minors. In response to this crisis as a whole, the protection of children and the creation of transparent and responsible church structures must be the dominant concerns of all Catholics and of Catholic leadership.