Please, someone explain why celibacy in the Catholic Church is a greater threat to our children than the “right” of sexual predators to wallow in virtual child pornography.
Here are the contradictions of a society unhinged: First, swearing to a lifetime of abstinence now is regarded as a reason that the Catholic clergy is laced, if not riddled, with pedophiles and other sexual monsters. Therefore, the church must end celibacy. Second, the U.S. Supreme Court recently decreed that under the 1st Amendment, Congress may not ban child pornography created by computer imaging or by youthful-looking adults. The court rejected the commonsensical idea that viewing child pornography can shove a pedophile toward behavior that endangers children. The court also rejected the idea that predators can use virtual child pornography to lure children into sexual activity. So, a virtue–celibacy–is now regarded as a vice. And a vice–viewing child pornography that is convincing enough to look like the real thing–is enshrined by high judicial wisdom as a protected right, if not a benign pursuit. If there is a reason that sexual predators are cheering and leering today, it isn’t because the church harbors predators, but because the Supreme Court has enshrined their right to gorge themselves on all the pretend child pornography they want.
As angry as I am at the church for covering up child abuse, as much as my heart goes out to the victims, as much as I believe that abusive priests must face criminal prosecution, as pleased as I am that the outcry has led church authorities to finally do something, I still am troubled: Where is the anger over the “right” of pedophiles to feed their lust with child pornography? Surely, that is at least as great a cause of child sexual abuse as the Catholic clergy. While the news of the sexual abuse by a fraction of the Catholic clergy has become the dominant news (as it should), where is the sense of moral equivalency about the dangers that are lurking on the Internet and elsewhere?
This problem is complicated by the contemporary view of child sexual abuse. It holds that child sexual abusers have an incurable disease. Once a pedophile, always a pedophile. Whether by nature or by nurture, some people have it, the rest don’t. Hence, even after a convicted pedophile serves his prison term, he can be confined in an institution if deemed necessary. He also must register with the government so that everyone can know where he is, forever. It is an extraordinary tag to carry.
So, if being a pedophile is a predetermined condition that cannot be ameliorated, the next question is: Can pedophilia be worsened? Can you feed it, like an addiction? And if it is a “condition” that can be worsened, then shouldn’t we, as a society, be doing everything we can do to stop it from becoming worse? Shouldn’t we be angry that so may people say, “Oh well, for the sake of free speech we have to accept some difficulties? Victimized children is just the price we must pay.” Shouldn’t we be at least as angry at turning children into sacrificial lambs as we are at the Catholic Church?
For some reason, the popular wisdom is at war with itself when it comes to such questions of predetermination. On one hand, some things about people are givens: Sex abusers are born, not made. So they can’t be unmade. Same goes for sexual orientation. Homosexuality also cannot be unmade. On the other hand, so much social policy is based on the premise that we can choose who we are and who we will be. It is the egalitarian doctrine that everyone is not only created equal, but that we also must construct “level playing fields” to smooth out any disparities that come along.
The problem for the Catholic Church is that it believes that no one’s fate is pre-ordained. That every person is endowed with a free will and given sufficient grace to make the right choices freely. These, it believes, are necessary conditions for redemption, or as we might say today, rehabilitation. How the church balances its redemptive mission with its obligation to protect children is its great test today. As for secular society, the Supreme Court has spoken: The children don’t need protecting.
More Top Picks Best Tuckpointing Grinders For Mortar Restoration
———-
E-mail: [email protected]