Retired pope’s new letter on sex abuse raises serious questions

Marie-Jo Thiel, a medical doctor and theology professor at the University of Strasbourg, recently wrote a “masterful” study on the causes of the Church’s sex abuse crisis. In this exclusive interview with La Croix’s Céline Hoyeau she voices concern over a new letter that Benedict XVI has issued on the topic.

La Croix: Following the summit on abuse in the Church, Benedict XVI has made public a document “to help (the Church) deal with this difficult moment.” In particular, he lays blame on the 1968 Revolution. What do you think of this?

Marie-Jo Thiel: Church history shows that abuse by clerics is not a recent phenomenon. The councils of Elvira and Ancyra held during the early centuries of Christianity condemned abuse of young boys and these condemnations also targeted clerics.

The document Crimen Sollicitationis, which was published by the Vatican in 1962, draws on a 1922 document that itself recalls Sacramentum Penitentiae by Pope Benedict XIV in 1741!

At the same time, studies clearly show that there was a peak in the abuse by priests between 1960 and 1980.

It is true that society in the 1960s was characterized by a crisis of authority and sexual permissiveness. However, this context does not suffice to fully explain the crisis.

Benedict XVI has remained within the perspective of obedience to norms, particularly in the field of sexual and family ethics.

Why did this ethical perspective, which priests were meant to transmit, fail in its application? It seems to me that the Church was focused on a post-Tridentine sacralized image of the priest, which failed to provide him with the resources necessary for dealing with his own sexual life.

There is also the issue of formation as well as the need to consider the contribution of human sciences, both of which are astonishingly absent from this document.

Was the sex abuse crisis not due to contamination from a relativistic atmosphere?

In ethics, in order to discern, one needs to take into account the law, the individual who is discerning and the situation.

Isolating the norm leads to legalism. Isolating the individual leads to subjectivism. Isolating the situation leads to situationalism.

So it is important to consider the three elements together in order to discern drawing on the resources offered by faith and the human sciences.

In this context, certain perspectives may still be unjustifiable, e.g. rape or assassination. However, at the same time, it is also my conscience that tells me whether these particular acts are wrong in every case.

For a norm to function in practice, it needs to be recognized by the conscience as relevant.

If the norm is purely extrinsic, which is the perspective of a certain kind of neo-thomism, it is easily to transgress.

This is one of the reasons that there were so many abuse cases during those years.

Fundamentally, in the view of Benedict XVI, pedophilia is due to a loss of the sense of God. What do you think of this?

If pedophilia is due to a lack of faith, why then are there so many priests among the abusers? Why are there so many great founders of the new communities that Pope John Paul II never ceased to hold up as examples?

Why didn’t Benedict XVI grasp Pope Francis’ analysis, including during the abuse summit in February?

Why not consider the systemic aspect of the crisis?

He does not seem to perceive the overall problem, i.e. the link with abuse of power and conscience which does not appear at all in the document.

In fact, the document raises many questions.