Mind and Meaning: the Rise and Fall of Clerical Sex Abuse

By Patricia Casey
Irish Independent
June 4, 2012

http://www.independent.ie/health/mind-and-meaning-the-rise-and-fall-of-clerical-sex-abuse-3126757.html

When an epidemic appears during specified dates it is important to ask why did it happen at this time and not at another?

This question is relevant now in relation to The Child Safeguarding and Protection Service (CSPS) of the Archdiocese of Dublin. Its annual Child Protection Update provides statistical information on child sexual abuse by priests in the Dublin Diocese.

The figures show that since the late 1980s there has been a fall-off in abuse.

? 2pc of these priests are alleged to have abused in the 1940s

? 4pc of these priests are alleged to have abused in the 1950s

? 23pc of these priests are alleged to have abused in the 1960s

? 27pc of these priests are alleged to have abused in 1970s

? 34pc of these priests are alleged to have abused in the 1980s

? 9pc of these priests are alleged to have abused in the 1990s

? 1pc of these priests are alleged to have abused in the 2000s

These figures differ from the date when allegations were made, and the peak for victims coming forward to the authorities was, according to the Murphy Report, in the 1990s.

A question that the CSPS raises is why sexual abuse rose so much between the 1960s and the 1980s and declined thereafter.

A number of possible explanations spring to mind.

One possibility, although probably unlikely, is that many of those who were abused in the 1940s and 1950s have yet to come forward. Some of these would be elderly now.

The age at which the priests entered the seminaries and the approaches to suitability assessment at that time might enlighten also.

It is possible that larger numbers of young men were becoming priests in the 1940s, 50s and 60s with little by way of evaluation of any aspect of their psyche.

It is possible that at least some who were attracted to children opted for the priesthood either because of the opportunity for contact with children or because the celibate way of life was seen as some kind of insurance policy against temptation.

Were seminaries teaching that sexual attraction to children was sinful, or had the Kinsey mantra that sexual attraction was variable been taught?

If this was the case then this would have been in breach of church teaching since two separate documents on dealing with child sexual abuse were promulgated by the Vatican and it was regarded as an "offence against nature", for which the 1917 code of canon law specified deprivation of office or expulsion from the priesthood.

The Visitators who came to investigate sexual abuse in Ireland pointed to deficiencies in the seminaries and they recommended greater isolation from secular students, more attention to spiritual development and preparation for the requirements of priestly life.

That the "therapy culture" coupled with a desire to protect the name of the institutional church seems not to have been considered.

It is easy to be beguiled by psychobabble and from the 1960s on, psychotherapy was increasing in popularity.

Reading the Murphy Report now, it is clear that almost all of the 46 priests, whose case histories were detailed, were referred for various therapies.

The optimism that their proclivities were amenable to therapy may have deterred the church authorities from acting in accordance with Canon Law.

It is possible that what was seen as a disorder was felt by some not to be deserving of punishment but requiring of treatment and care.

This probably suited the church's wilful desire to protect its reputation.

Are there other less obvious explanations for the increase in abuse during those decades such as the loss of the priest's live-in housekeeper? Mrs Doyle figures no longer resided in the parochial house.

And clerics had become less remote figures and more accessible "ordinary guys". As young men better educated than their parishioners prior to the 1960s, their flock were now educationally on a par with them and contact was much easier.

The explanation for the explosion in child sexual abuse by clerics from the 1960s onwards is not known. This requires further study. It is one the Archdiocese of Dublin could usefully undertake.