男性气质,关系和背景:儿童性虐待和天主教会

M. Keenan
{"title":"男性气质,关系和背景:儿童性虐待和天主教会","authors":"M. Keenan","doi":"10.21427/D77T5J","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper provides background to the sexual abuse crisis in the Catholic Church in Ireland and outlines the particular Irish dimensions to the problem. It argues that a systemic perspective offers best promise to conceptualise the problem of sexual abuse in the Catholic Church and outlines. In turning to how the problem has been investigated by statutory and church commissioned inquiries and commissions of investigation (Murphy, 2009; Ryan, 2009) it becomes apparent that how the past is investigated and framed is not merely a neutral matter, but one that is complexly interwoven with present politic and changing social conditions. In offering a critique of the Murphy Report into the Handling of Abuse Complaints in the Archdioceses of Dublin (Murphy, 2009), as one example of a statutory commission of investigation in Ireland, some significant legal and methodological issues are raised that give cause for concern regarding some of the findings and judgements made. What cannot be disputed however is the fact that thousands of children were abused by Catholic clergy in Ireland and worldwide. We owe it to them to get to the full truth of what occurred and to prevent its re-occurrence. In considering a way forward for the church, victims of clergy must be placed at the centre of the church’s response, other key actors must be brought together in dialogue and the church must deal with the systemic genesis of the problem in a spirit of institutional reform and transformation. Introduction My interest in Roman Catholic clergy who had perpetrated child sexual abuse developed when I, along with two colleagues, set up a community-based treatment programme for child sexual offenders in Ireland in 1996, which attracted a large number of Catholic clergy for treatment (see Keenan, 2012). Apart from offering treatment, I was interested in understanding how priests and religious brothers who had sexually abused minors understood those aspects of their lives that had contributed to their sexual offending. Usually people join the ranks of Catholic clergy for a number of reasons, and while there is no evidence to suggest that the main reason for joining is the betterment of the human race, my experience of working with clergy in Ireland for over two decades had led me to believe that the motivation for many was to be of service and to help others. Therefore I wanted to know what had gone so terribly wrong. Irish Journal of Applied Social Studies 65 The most comprehensive research ever carried out on sexual abuse by Catholic clergy, conducted by researchers in the United States (John Jay College of Criminal Justice, 2004, 2006, 2011), reports that whatever else formed the priests’ motivation for joining, gaining access to children to abuse them was not part of it. My own experience confirmed this. The more I met with the clerical men who had abused, the more intrigued I became. Put simply, I was not in the presence of “monsters”, nor was I in the presence of individuals who had an “illness”. I began to think there must be more to the abuse problem than “simply” individual psychopathology, and I began to inquire into the situational and institutional dimensions of the abuse problem, which became more apparent to me the more I engaged with the Catholic Church. While many organizational factors have emerged that indicate the significance of gender, power and organizational culture in the genesis of this problem and in the response to it, no research has ever suggested that the church attracts a particular “type” of individual that will be subsequently abusive. My research suggests on the contrary that the problem develops systemically and that seminary experience and the ways in which clerical masculinity is fostered and adopted is significant in how this problem comes to be. As has now become evident from the wave of disclosures of sexual abuse by Catholic clergy throughout the Western world, as well as the actual offending there was another dimension to the abuse problem: the handling of abuse complaints by the church hierarchy. The lack of adequate response to abuse complaints by the church leaders has become apparent in almost every country in the world in which sexual abuse by clergy has come to light. In considering the international situation I am of the view that the actual abuse problem and the response to it by the church leadership are not two unrelated problems, but in fact that they are interlinked. Put simply, both sets of men were part of the same institutional culture. While within this culture not all priests were abusive (indeed as the data suggests, they are a small minority of clergy with 4 – 9 % of Catholic clergy having abuse allegations made against them (see Keenan, 2012, pp 59)), the pattern of response by the church hierarchy showed remarkably similar patterns. The extent to which the institutional and organizational culture of the Catholic Church played a role in the sexual abuse situation had to be empirically addressed and that has been the focus of much of my work while not neglecting the role of individual action and choice. However, in this paper I begin by suggesting that an individualist perspective is a limited one in helping to understand the clerical perpetrator and instead I propose a masculinity relational perspective as a more elaborate conceptualization of the problem. I suggest that those clerical men who adopted a way of “doing” clerical masculinity that was built on an idea of celibate perfection were more likely to become the child abuse perpetrators. Drawing on Goffman’s (1996) typology of adaptation strategies for managing life in total institutions (such as the Catholic seminary) I suggest a way to theorise why some priests became sexually abusive, while others did not that is not based on individual psychopathology. I then turn to inquiries and commissions of investigation into the church’s handling of abuse complaints in Ireland and argue that how a problem is framed will (and in the case of the Commission of Investigation into the Handling of Abuse Complaints in the Archdioceses of Dublin (The Murphy Report) (Murphy, 2009)), did influence the commission’s findings. I offer a critique of The Murphy Report (Murphy, 2009), to raise some important scholarly considerations. 66 Masculinity, relationships and context: Child sexual abuse and the Catholic Church Sexual abuse in the Catholic Church: Moving away from individual perspectives Although there are exceptions (such as Adriaenssens, 2010; Deetman, 2011; John Jay College of Criminal Justice, 2004, 2006, 2011) much work on sexual abuse in the Catholic Church focuses on the assumed psychopathology of the perpetrator and much popular writing and Government commissioned work focuses on the failures of named individuals who were in positions of authority in their mis-handling of abuse complaints (Murphy, 2009). There is a need to move from individualistic perspectives to a relational perspective, which incorporates cultural, theological and organizational factors in our attempts to explain and understand the sexual abuse by Catholic clergy in all its dimensions. I believe that it is possible to identify a number of features of sexual abuse within the Catholic Church that have a determining influence, not only on how the priests came to abuse, but on how the church leaders responded as they did. Factors such as the continuum of the sexual underworld of “normal” clergy; an inadequate theology of sexuality and the absence of a relational sexual ethics for clergy; the churches theology of scandal; clericalism, and deficits in a moral education that is overly intellectualised must all be considered (see Keenan, 2012 for a full discussion). In this paper I focus on two other significant dimensions to understanding the clerical offender: the interplay of power and powerlessness and the construction of clerical","PeriodicalId":30337,"journal":{"name":"Irish Journal of Applied Social Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Masculinity, relationships and Context: Child sexual abuse and the Catholic Church\",\"authors\":\"M. Keenan\",\"doi\":\"10.21427/D77T5J\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper provides background to the sexual abuse crisis in the Catholic Church in Ireland and outlines the particular Irish dimensions to the problem. It argues that a systemic perspective offers best promise to conceptualise the problem of sexual abuse in the Catholic Church and outlines. In turning to how the problem has been investigated by statutory and church commissioned inquiries and commissions of investigation (Murphy, 2009; Ryan, 2009) it becomes apparent that how the past is investigated and framed is not merely a neutral matter, but one that is complexly interwoven with present politic and changing social conditions. In offering a critique of the Murphy Report into the Handling of Abuse Complaints in the Archdioceses of Dublin (Murphy, 2009), as one example of a statutory commission of investigation in Ireland, some significant legal and methodological issues are raised that give cause for concern regarding some of the findings and judgements made. What cannot be disputed however is the fact that thousands of children were abused by Catholic clergy in Ireland and worldwide. We owe it to them to get to the full truth of what occurred and to prevent its re-occurrence. In considering a way forward for the church, victims of clergy must be placed at the centre of the church’s response, other key actors must be brought together in dialogue and the church must deal with the systemic genesis of the problem in a spirit of institutional reform and transformation. Introduction My interest in Roman Catholic clergy who had perpetrated child sexual abuse developed when I, along with two colleagues, set up a community-based treatment programme for child sexual offenders in Ireland in 1996, which attracted a large number of Catholic clergy for treatment (see Keenan, 2012). Apart from offering treatment, I was interested in understanding how priests and religious brothers who had sexually abused minors understood those aspects of their lives that had contributed to their sexual offending. Usually people join the ranks of Catholic clergy for a number of reasons, and while there is no evidence to suggest that the main reason for joining is the betterment of the human race, my experience of working with clergy in Ireland for over two decades had led me to believe that the motivation for many was to be of service and to help others. Therefore I wanted to know what had gone so terribly wrong. Irish Journal of Applied Social Studies 65 The most comprehensive research ever carried out on sexual abuse by Catholic clergy, conducted by researchers in the United States (John Jay College of Criminal Justice, 2004, 2006, 2011), reports that whatever else formed the priests’ motivation for joining, gaining access to children to abuse them was not part of it. My own experience confirmed this. The more I met with the clerical men who had abused, the more intrigued I became. Put simply, I was not in the presence of “monsters”, nor was I in the presence of individuals who had an “illness”. I began to think there must be more to the abuse problem than “simply” individual psychopathology, and I began to inquire into the situational and institutional dimensions of the abuse problem, which became more apparent to me the more I engaged with the Catholic Church. While many organizational factors have emerged that indicate the significance of gender, power and organizational culture in the genesis of this problem and in the response to it, no research has ever suggested that the church attracts a particular “type” of individual that will be subsequently abusive. My research suggests on the contrary that the problem develops systemically and that seminary experience and the ways in which clerical masculinity is fostered and adopted is significant in how this problem comes to be. As has now become evident from the wave of disclosures of sexual abuse by Catholic clergy throughout the Western world, as well as the actual offending there was another dimension to the abuse problem: the handling of abuse complaints by the church hierarchy. The lack of adequate response to abuse complaints by the church leaders has become apparent in almost every country in the world in which sexual abuse by clergy has come to light. In considering the international situation I am of the view that the actual abuse problem and the response to it by the church leadership are not two unrelated problems, but in fact that they are interlinked. Put simply, both sets of men were part of the same institutional culture. While within this culture not all priests were abusive (indeed as the data suggests, they are a small minority of clergy with 4 – 9 % of Catholic clergy having abuse allegations made against them (see Keenan, 2012, pp 59)), the pattern of response by the church hierarchy showed remarkably similar patterns. The extent to which the institutional and organizational culture of the Catholic Church played a role in the sexual abuse situation had to be empirically addressed and that has been the focus of much of my work while not neglecting the role of individual action and choice. However, in this paper I begin by suggesting that an individualist perspective is a limited one in helping to understand the clerical perpetrator and instead I propose a masculinity relational perspective as a more elaborate conceptualization of the problem. I suggest that those clerical men who adopted a way of “doing” clerical masculinity that was built on an idea of celibate perfection were more likely to become the child abuse perpetrators. Drawing on Goffman’s (1996) typology of adaptation strategies for managing life in total institutions (such as the Catholic seminary) I suggest a way to theorise why some priests became sexually abusive, while others did not that is not based on individual psychopathology. I then turn to inquiries and commissions of investigation into the church’s handling of abuse complaints in Ireland and argue that how a problem is framed will (and in the case of the Commission of Investigation into the Handling of Abuse Complaints in the Archdioceses of Dublin (The Murphy Report) (Murphy, 2009)), did influence the commission’s findings. I offer a critique of The Murphy Report (Murphy, 2009), to raise some important scholarly considerations. 66 Masculinity, relationships and context: Child sexual abuse and the Catholic Church Sexual abuse in the Catholic Church: Moving away from individual perspectives Although there are exceptions (such as Adriaenssens, 2010; Deetman, 2011; John Jay College of Criminal Justice, 2004, 2006, 2011) much work on sexual abuse in the Catholic Church focuses on the assumed psychopathology of the perpetrator and much popular writing and Government commissioned work focuses on the failures of named individuals who were in positions of authority in their mis-handling of abuse complaints (Murphy, 2009). There is a need to move from individualistic perspectives to a relational perspective, which incorporates cultural, theological and organizational factors in our attempts to explain and understand the sexual abuse by Catholic clergy in all its dimensions. I believe that it is possible to identify a number of features of sexual abuse within the Catholic Church that have a determining influence, not only on how the priests came to abuse, but on how the church leaders responded as they did. Factors such as the continuum of the sexual underworld of “normal” clergy; an inadequate theology of sexuality and the absence of a relational sexual ethics for clergy; the churches theology of scandal; clericalism, and deficits in a moral education that is overly intellectualised must all be considered (see Keenan, 2012 for a full discussion). In this paper I focus on two other significant dimensions to understanding the clerical offender: the interplay of power and powerlessness and the construction of clerical\",\"PeriodicalId\":30337,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Irish Journal of Applied Social Studies\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Irish Journal of Applied Social Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21427/D77T5J\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Irish Journal of Applied Social Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21427/D77T5J","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本文为爱尔兰天主教会的性侵犯危机提供了背景,并概述了爱尔兰问题的具体方面。它认为,一个系统的视角提供了最好的希望,以概念化天主教会的性虐待问题,并概述。在转向如何通过法定和教会委托的调查和调查委员会调查这个问题(墨菲,2009;Ryan, 2009),很明显,过去是如何调查和框架不仅仅是一个中立的问题,而是一个复杂的交织与当前的政治和不断变化的社会条件。作为爱尔兰法定调查委员会的一个例子,在对都柏林大主教管区处理虐待投诉的墨菲报告(Murphy, 2009)提出批评时,提出了一些重要的法律和方法问题,这些问题引起了人们对一些调查结果和判断的关注。然而,无可争议的事实是,在爱尔兰和世界各地,成千上万的儿童受到天主教神职人员的虐待。我们有责任查明所发生事件的全部真相并防止其再次发生。在考虑教会的前进道路时,必须将神职人员的受害者置于教会回应的中心,其他关键角色必须聚集在一起进行对话,教会必须以制度改革和转型的精神处理问题的系统性根源。1996年,我和两位同事在爱尔兰建立了一个以社区为基础的儿童性犯罪者治疗项目,吸引了大量天主教神职人员接受治疗,这让我对犯下儿童性侵犯的罗马天主教神职人员产生了兴趣(见Keenan, 2012)。除了提供治疗之外,我还想了解那些性侵未成年人的牧师和修道士们是如何理解他们生活中导致性侵犯的那些方面的。通常人们加入天主教神职人员的行列有很多原因,虽然没有证据表明加入的主要原因是人类的进步,但我在爱尔兰与神职人员一起工作了二十多年的经历让我相信,许多人的动机是服务和帮助他人。因此,我想知道是什么出了这么严重的问题。美国研究人员对天主教神职人员的性虐待进行了最全面的研究(约翰杰伊刑事司法学院,2004年,2006年,2011年),报告称,无论牧师加入的动机是什么,接触儿童并虐待他们都不是其中的一部分。我自己的经历证实了这一点。我与那些施虐的神职人员接触得越多,我就越感兴趣。简单地说,我既没有面对“怪物”,也没有面对患有“疾病”的人。我开始认为,虐待问题一定不仅仅是“简单的”个体精神病理,我开始探究虐待问题的情境和制度层面,随着我与天主教会的接触越来越多,这一点对我来说变得越来越明显。虽然已经出现了许多组织因素,表明性别、权力和组织文化在这个问题的起源和对它的反应中的重要性,但没有研究表明教会吸引了一种特定的“类型”的个人,这些人随后会滥用。相反,我的研究表明,这个问题是系统地发展起来的,神学院的经历以及培养和采用神职人员男子气概的方式对这个问题的产生有着重要的影响。现在,从整个西方世界天主教神职人员性侵事件的曝光浪潮以及实际侵犯事件来看,性侵问题还有另一个方面:教会高层对性侵投诉的处理。在世界上几乎每一个神职人员性侵事件曝光的国家,对教会领袖的性侵投诉缺乏足够的回应已经变得很明显。在考虑国际形势时,我认为实际的性侵问题和教会领导层对性侵问题的反应并不是两个不相关的问题,实际上它们是相互联系的。简单地说,这两种人都是同一制度文化的一部分。虽然在这种文化中,并不是所有的牧师都有虐待行为(事实上,正如数据所显示的那样,他们是神职人员中的一小部分,有4 - 9%的天主教神职人员被指控虐待(见基南,2012,第59页)),但教会等级的反应模式显示出非常相似的模式。 本文为爱尔兰天主教会的性侵犯危机提供了背景,并概述了爱尔兰问题的具体方面。它认为,一个系统的视角提供了最好的希望,以概念化天主教会的性虐待问题,并概述。在转向如何通过法定和教会委托的调查和调查委员会调查这个问题(墨菲,2009;Ryan, 2009),很明显,过去是如何调查和框架不仅仅是一个中立的问题,而是一个复杂的交织与当前的政治和不断变化的社会条件。作为爱尔兰法定调查委员会的一个例子,在对都柏林大主教管区处理虐待投诉的墨菲报告(Murphy, 2009)提出批评时,提出了一些重要的法律和方法问题,这些问题引起了人们对一些调查结果和判断的关注。然而,无可争议的事实是,在爱尔兰和世界各地,成千上万的儿童受到天主教神职人员的虐待。我们有责任查明所发生事件的全部真相并防止其再次发生。在考虑教会的前进道路时,必须将神职人员的受害者置于教会回应的中心,其他关键角色必须聚集在一起进行对话,教会必须以制度改革和转型的精神处理问题的系统性根源。1996年,我和两位同事在爱尔兰建立了一个以社区为基础的儿童性犯罪者治疗项目,吸引了大量天主教神职人员接受治疗,这让我对犯下儿童性侵犯的罗马天主教神职人员产生了兴趣(见Keenan, 2012)。除了提供治疗之外,我还想了解那些性侵未成年人的牧师和修道士们是如何理解他们生活中导致性侵犯的那些方面的。通常人们加入天主教神职人员的行列有很多原因,虽然没有证据表明加入的主要原因是人类的进步,但我在爱尔兰与神职人员一起工作了二十多年的经历让我相信,许多人的动机是服务和帮助他人。因此,我想知道是什么出了这么严重的问题。美国研究人员对天主教神职人员的性虐待进行了最全面的研究(约翰杰伊刑事司法学院,2004年,2006年,2011年),报告称,无论牧师加入的动机是什么,接触儿童并虐待他们都不是其中的一部分。我自己的经历证实了这一点。我与那些施虐的神职人员接触得越多,我就越感兴趣。简单地说,我既没有面对“怪物”,也没有面对患有“疾病”的人。我开始认为,虐待问题一定不仅仅是“简单的”个体精神病理,我开始探究虐待问题的情境和制度层面,随着我与天主教会的接触越来越多,这一点对我来说变得越来越明显。虽然已经出现了许多组织因素,表明性别、权力和组织文化在这个问题的起源和对它的反应中的重要性,但没有研究表明教会吸引了一种特定的“类型”的个人,这些人随后会滥用。相反,我的研究表明,这个问题是系统地发展起来的,神学院的经历以及培养和采用神职人员男子气概的方式对这个问题的产生有着重要的影响。现在,从整个西方世界天主教神职人员性侵事件的曝光浪潮以及实际侵犯事件来看,性侵问题还有另一个方面:教会高层对性侵投诉的处理。在世界上几乎每一个神职人员性侵事件曝光的国家,对教会领袖的性侵投诉缺乏足够的回应已经变得很明显。在考虑国际形势时,我认为实际的性侵问题和教会领导层对性侵问题的反应并不是两个不相关的问题,实际上它们是相互联系的。简单地说,这两种人都是同一制度文化的一部分。虽然在这种文化中,并不是所有的牧师都有虐待行为(事实上,正如数据所显示的那样,他们是神职人员中的一小部分,有4 - 9%的天主教神职人员被指控虐待(见基南,2012,第59页)),但教会等级的反应模式显示出非常相似的模式。 天主教会的体制和组织文化在性侵犯事件中发挥了多大的作用,必须从经验上加以解决,这是我大部分工作的重点,同时也不能忽视个人行动和选择的作用。然而,在这篇论文中,我首先提出,个人主义的观点在帮助理解牧师犯罪者方面是有限的,相反,我提出了一个男性关系的观点作为一个更详细的问题概念化。我认为,那些采用了一种建立在完美的独身观念上的“做”牧师男子气概的神职人员更有可能成为虐待儿童的肇事者。根据Goffman(1996)的适应策略类型学,管理整个机构(如天主教神学院)的生活,我提出了一种方法来解释为什么有些牧师变得性虐待,而另一些则没有,这不是基于个人精神病理学。然后,我转向对爱尔兰教会处理虐待投诉的调查和调查委员会,并认为问题的框架将(以及在都柏林大主教管区处理虐待投诉调查委员会的情况下(墨菲报告)(墨菲,2009年))确实会影响委员会的调查结果。我对墨菲报告(Murphy, 2009)进行了评论,以提出一些重要的学术考虑。66男性、关系和背景:儿童性虐待和天主教会天主教会中的性虐待:从个人角度出发尽管也有例外(如Adriaenssens, 2010;Deetman, 2011;约翰·杰伊刑事司法学院,2004年,2006年,2011年),许多关于天主教会性虐待的工作都集中在假定的犯罪者的精神病理上,许多流行的写作和政府委托的工作都集中在那些处于权威地位的人在处理虐待投诉方面的失败(墨菲,2009年)。有必要从个人主义的角度转向关系的角度,在我们试图解释和理解天主教神职人员性侵犯的所有方面时,关系的角度将文化、神学和组织因素结合起来。我相信,有可能在天主教会内找出一些性虐待的特征,这些特征不仅对牧师如何进行性虐待有决定性的影响,而且对教会领导人如何应对他们的行为也有决定性的影响。诸如“正常”神职人员的性黑社会的连续性等因素;性神学的不足和神职人员关系性伦理的缺失;教会的丑闻神学;教权主义,以及道德教育中过度知识化的缺陷都必须加以考虑(参见基南,2012年的完整讨论)。在本文中,我着重从另外两个重要的维度来理解文书罪犯:权力与无力的相互作用和文书建构 天主教会的体制和组织文化在性侵犯事件中发挥了多大的作用,必须从经验上加以解决,这是我大部分工作的重点,同时也不能忽视个人行动和选择的作用。然而,在这篇论文中,我首先提出,个人主义的观点在帮助理解牧师犯罪者方面是有限的,相反,我提出了一个男性关系的观点作为一个更详细的问题概念化。我认为,那些采用了一种建立在完美的独身观念上的“做”牧师男子气概的神职人员更有可能成为虐待儿童的肇事者。根据Goffman(1996)的适应策略类型学,管理整个机构(如天主教神学院)的生活,我提出了一种方法来解释为什么有些牧师变得性虐待,而另一些则没有,这不是基于个人精神病理学。然后,我转向对爱尔兰教会处理虐待投诉的调查和调查委员会,并认为问题的框架将(以及在都柏林大主教管区处理虐待投诉调查委员会的情况下(墨菲报告)(墨菲,2009年))确实会影响委员会的调查结果。我对墨菲报告(Murphy, 2009)进行了评论,以提出一些重要的学术考虑。66男性、关系和背景:儿童性虐待和天主教会天主教会中的性虐待:从个人角度出发尽管也有例外(如Adriaenssens, 2010;Deetman, 2011;约翰·杰伊刑事司法学院,2004年,2006年,2011年),许多关于天主教会性虐待的工作都集中在假定的犯罪者的精神病理上,许多流行的写作和政府委托的工作都集中在那些处于权威地位的人在处理虐待投诉方面的失败(墨菲,2009年)。有必要从个人主义的角度转向关系的角度,在我们试图解释和理解天主教神职人员性侵犯的所有方面时,关系的角度将文化、神学和组织因素结合起来。我相信,有可能在天主教会内找出一些性虐待的特征,这些特征不仅对牧师如何进行性虐待有决定性的影响,而且对教会领导人如何应对他们的行为也有决定性的影响。诸如“正常”神职人员的性黑社会的连续性等因素;性神学的不足和神职人员关系性伦理的缺失;教会的丑闻神学;教权主义,以及道德教育中过度知识化的缺陷都必须加以考虑(参见基南,2012年的完整讨论)。在本文中,我着重从另外两个重要的维度来理解文书罪犯:权力与无力的相互作用和文书建构
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Masculinity, relationships and Context: Child sexual abuse and the Catholic Church
This paper provides background to the sexual abuse crisis in the Catholic Church in Ireland and outlines the particular Irish dimensions to the problem. It argues that a systemic perspective offers best promise to conceptualise the problem of sexual abuse in the Catholic Church and outlines. In turning to how the problem has been investigated by statutory and church commissioned inquiries and commissions of investigation (Murphy, 2009; Ryan, 2009) it becomes apparent that how the past is investigated and framed is not merely a neutral matter, but one that is complexly interwoven with present politic and changing social conditions. In offering a critique of the Murphy Report into the Handling of Abuse Complaints in the Archdioceses of Dublin (Murphy, 2009), as one example of a statutory commission of investigation in Ireland, some significant legal and methodological issues are raised that give cause for concern regarding some of the findings and judgements made. What cannot be disputed however is the fact that thousands of children were abused by Catholic clergy in Ireland and worldwide. We owe it to them to get to the full truth of what occurred and to prevent its re-occurrence. In considering a way forward for the church, victims of clergy must be placed at the centre of the church’s response, other key actors must be brought together in dialogue and the church must deal with the systemic genesis of the problem in a spirit of institutional reform and transformation. Introduction My interest in Roman Catholic clergy who had perpetrated child sexual abuse developed when I, along with two colleagues, set up a community-based treatment programme for child sexual offenders in Ireland in 1996, which attracted a large number of Catholic clergy for treatment (see Keenan, 2012). Apart from offering treatment, I was interested in understanding how priests and religious brothers who had sexually abused minors understood those aspects of their lives that had contributed to their sexual offending. Usually people join the ranks of Catholic clergy for a number of reasons, and while there is no evidence to suggest that the main reason for joining is the betterment of the human race, my experience of working with clergy in Ireland for over two decades had led me to believe that the motivation for many was to be of service and to help others. Therefore I wanted to know what had gone so terribly wrong. Irish Journal of Applied Social Studies 65 The most comprehensive research ever carried out on sexual abuse by Catholic clergy, conducted by researchers in the United States (John Jay College of Criminal Justice, 2004, 2006, 2011), reports that whatever else formed the priests’ motivation for joining, gaining access to children to abuse them was not part of it. My own experience confirmed this. The more I met with the clerical men who had abused, the more intrigued I became. Put simply, I was not in the presence of “monsters”, nor was I in the presence of individuals who had an “illness”. I began to think there must be more to the abuse problem than “simply” individual psychopathology, and I began to inquire into the situational and institutional dimensions of the abuse problem, which became more apparent to me the more I engaged with the Catholic Church. While many organizational factors have emerged that indicate the significance of gender, power and organizational culture in the genesis of this problem and in the response to it, no research has ever suggested that the church attracts a particular “type” of individual that will be subsequently abusive. My research suggests on the contrary that the problem develops systemically and that seminary experience and the ways in which clerical masculinity is fostered and adopted is significant in how this problem comes to be. As has now become evident from the wave of disclosures of sexual abuse by Catholic clergy throughout the Western world, as well as the actual offending there was another dimension to the abuse problem: the handling of abuse complaints by the church hierarchy. The lack of adequate response to abuse complaints by the church leaders has become apparent in almost every country in the world in which sexual abuse by clergy has come to light. In considering the international situation I am of the view that the actual abuse problem and the response to it by the church leadership are not two unrelated problems, but in fact that they are interlinked. Put simply, both sets of men were part of the same institutional culture. While within this culture not all priests were abusive (indeed as the data suggests, they are a small minority of clergy with 4 – 9 % of Catholic clergy having abuse allegations made against them (see Keenan, 2012, pp 59)), the pattern of response by the church hierarchy showed remarkably similar patterns. The extent to which the institutional and organizational culture of the Catholic Church played a role in the sexual abuse situation had to be empirically addressed and that has been the focus of much of my work while not neglecting the role of individual action and choice. However, in this paper I begin by suggesting that an individualist perspective is a limited one in helping to understand the clerical perpetrator and instead I propose a masculinity relational perspective as a more elaborate conceptualization of the problem. I suggest that those clerical men who adopted a way of “doing” clerical masculinity that was built on an idea of celibate perfection were more likely to become the child abuse perpetrators. Drawing on Goffman’s (1996) typology of adaptation strategies for managing life in total institutions (such as the Catholic seminary) I suggest a way to theorise why some priests became sexually abusive, while others did not that is not based on individual psychopathology. I then turn to inquiries and commissions of investigation into the church’s handling of abuse complaints in Ireland and argue that how a problem is framed will (and in the case of the Commission of Investigation into the Handling of Abuse Complaints in the Archdioceses of Dublin (The Murphy Report) (Murphy, 2009)), did influence the commission’s findings. I offer a critique of The Murphy Report (Murphy, 2009), to raise some important scholarly considerations. 66 Masculinity, relationships and context: Child sexual abuse and the Catholic Church Sexual abuse in the Catholic Church: Moving away from individual perspectives Although there are exceptions (such as Adriaenssens, 2010; Deetman, 2011; John Jay College of Criminal Justice, 2004, 2006, 2011) much work on sexual abuse in the Catholic Church focuses on the assumed psychopathology of the perpetrator and much popular writing and Government commissioned work focuses on the failures of named individuals who were in positions of authority in their mis-handling of abuse complaints (Murphy, 2009). There is a need to move from individualistic perspectives to a relational perspective, which incorporates cultural, theological and organizational factors in our attempts to explain and understand the sexual abuse by Catholic clergy in all its dimensions. I believe that it is possible to identify a number of features of sexual abuse within the Catholic Church that have a determining influence, not only on how the priests came to abuse, but on how the church leaders responded as they did. Factors such as the continuum of the sexual underworld of “normal” clergy; an inadequate theology of sexuality and the absence of a relational sexual ethics for clergy; the churches theology of scandal; clericalism, and deficits in a moral education that is overly intellectualised must all be considered (see Keenan, 2012 for a full discussion). In this paper I focus on two other significant dimensions to understanding the clerical offender: the interplay of power and powerlessness and the construction of clerical
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
26 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信