|
Church
and State – The New Anti-Catholicism
by Ryan McMaken
by Ryan McMaken
The
New Anti-Catholicism
by Philip Jenkins
Oxford University Press, 2003
The
unmitigated rage that has abounded on the American Left since Abe
Foxman’s buddies stole a copy of Mel Gibson’s "The Passion
of the Christ" should hardly produce anything more than a shrug
from anyone who has spent any significant amount of time observing
the treatment of Christians and Christianity in public universities
and among journalists and "public" philosophers.
While
there once was a time when the intellectual classes could be relied
on to side with Protestant Christian groups against Catholics and
the Catholic Church, now even the most watered down versions of
Christianity have become repugnant to virtually all media and mainstream
intellectual outlets who view Christianity not as a preserving force
of civilization, but as a retrograde tyranny standing in the way
of the equality and multiculturalism promoted by those that Thomas
Sowell calls the "the anointed." In an interesting passing
of the torch of sorts, the American Left has adopted the old tools
of anti-Catholicism once so cherished by a few right-wing anti-Catholic
groups in centuries past, and have become most enthusiastic in unleashing
age-old prejudices and "black legend" stories against
Catholics at even the slightest provocation.
In his most recent book, The
New Anti-Catholicism, religious studies scholar Phillip
Jenkins examines how old myths about Catholics and their Church
have persisted since before the Reformation, but are now being recycled
and rehashed not by wild-eyed right-wing nativists, but by the allegedly
enlightened classes of academics, journalists, left-wing clergy,
and "social activist" types who never seem to tire of
repeating the most horrible stereotypes about Catholicism no matter
how outlandish or how tenuous the connection to established facts.
As
the controversy over "The Passion" has made clear, the
Left’s ire over Christianity is hardly reserved for one group. Indeed,
even the Gospels themselves have been dragged through the mud for
allegedly being hateful and anti-Semitic with numerous calls to
rewrite Christian doctrine itself to be little more than a tale
about a secular Left-wing revolutionary killed for his very enlightened
ideas about equality and socialism. Nevertheless, merely by virtue
of being the largest single group of Christians, and being a highly
organized hierarchical group that preserves (when it does its job)
a cultural tradition visibly different from secular American society,
the Catholic Church proves to be the central target of anti-Christian
propaganda that reliably degenerates into specifically anti-Catholic
tales of lurid sexual misconduct, political intrigue, and murderous
conspiracy.
According
to Jenkins, much of the Left has actually been helped along by angry
Catholic groups themselves who have never tired of propagating stereotypes
and rumors that might help their causes along. It was the liberal
Catholics of the National Catholic Reporter, after all, who invented
the phrase "pedophile priest" in an attempt to promote
their own agenda of ordaining women and eliminating the celibate
priesthood. Angry conservative Catholics hopped on the bandwagon
as well, with some groups happily repeating virtually anything they
could find about seminaries being ruled by predatory homosexuals
as long as the stories proved that the Church has been ruined by
liberal reformers.
Over
time, the "pedophile priest" label has probably stuck
better than any other Catholic-generated libel against the Church,
and the image has been devastating. Jenkins has done considerable
work on this topic, and is author of Pedophiles
and Priests, a 1991 book examining the roots of the scandals
and their effects on the Church. Being the most timely and persistent
issue, Jenkins devotes a significant portion of The New Anti-Catholicism
to examining the facts of the scandals, and then examining how
already-existing stereotypes have been magnified by the scandals
and have worked their way into not only biased news-reporting of
the scandals, but into film, literature, and political activism
that consistently portrays the Church as nothing less than "The
Perp Walk of Sacramental Perverts."
At
the heart of the controversy has been the image of the pedophile
priest, the older man preying on pre-pubescent children in the confessional.
As Jenkins explains, however, the term "pedophile" applies
in precious few of the cases of sexual abuse, and that the sexual
relationship occurring between priests and parishioners are almost
invariably between teenagers and priests, or even adults and priests.
In one 2002 case, the news media reported a relationship between
a Catholic Bishop and a 30-year-old man as "abuse." Jenkins
also notes how the term pedophilia is also generically applied to
long-time consensual relationships between adult females and male
priests:
The language
of abuse and victimization is used just as loosely in cases of
heterosexual misconduct. When in 2002, a group of women convened
a panel to discuss their abuse by Catholic priests, some of the
victims were reporting sexual advances made to them when they
were eighteen or older, and in some cases, consensual sexual relationships
continued through their twenties and thirties. The priestly behavior
was reprehensible, but it meets no standard definition of child
abuse, still less pedophilia. Nevertheless, the media reported
these events in terms of the "female victims of priests."
Admittedly,
there have still been disgracefully numerous cases of genuine child
molestation, yet these numbers are never compared to any other institution
of similar size of mission. Protestant churches, heavily decentralized,
keep no records that can be subpoenaed, and itinerant preachers
and ministers who may abuse children in one place and then move
on are never recorded, nor are their movements followed by any kind
of central institution. As Jenkins notes, this could easily explain
away the discrepancies between Catholic records of abusive priests
and the non-records kept by everyone else. This hasn’t kept American
intellectuals and activist groups from contending that there is
something ingrained in Catholicism that produces pedophiles, though.
Long-time anti-Catholic author James Carroll explains the problem
as being one of "a corrupt, misogynist…clerical elite,"
fitting nicely with Terrance Sweeney’s claims that "If there
were women priests and women bishops and married bishops, the likelihood
of this [abuse crisis] happening in the first place would be close
to nil." "Clearly," Jenkins responds, "Sweeney
has not examined conditions in the U.S. Episcopal Church or its
British Anglican Counterpart."
Jenkins
notes that, appropriately, an issue that the media has been virtually
silent on is the fact that children are far more likely to be abused
by public school teachers than by Catholic priests, and that school
districts transfer suspected pedophiles and abusers from district
to district in a fashion far more alarming than that done at the
height of the scandals by Catholic dioceses. Thanks to the paucity
of media attention, the problem of pedophile teachers has received
none of the reforms that have been pushed by the church in the wake
of the scandal, and the abuse in public schools continues with not
a peep from the New York Times.
Jenkins
covers other territory about anti-Catholic activism as well, addressing
the numerous "black legends" of history such as the Inquisition
and the perennial accusations surrounding the "Nazi Pope"
Pius XII. Many of these images find repeat usage within American
films and literature where priests can regularly find themselves
as symbols of perversion, corruption, and greed, with American audiences
taking little notice of the sheer repetitiveness of the images.
Indeed, such stereotypical images have become so tired and ubiquitous,
that Jenkins considers them to be on a par with portraying Jews
as greedy money-lenders with big noses.
Whether
the Church is being denounced as homophobic or misogynistic or simply
perverted, the suggested solution is virtually always the same –
subject the Church to more control by the more "enlightened"
authorities of the state. In America, at least, the criticisms of
the Church have never really changed. The Church is always identified
as either an outdated organization impeding the progress of the
American people, or simply as an alien organization filled with
people torn between true patriotic fervor and loyalty to a despot
in Rome.
At
the root of the charge is the fact that the Church has always functioned
independently of mainstream American culture, insulated both from
mainstream secular trends and from the passions of nationalist zeal.
The impassioned reaction to such separation means that ultimately,
the battle will be over whether the Church in America can function
independently, or if it will forced to subject itself to the dictates
of modern notions of equality and tolerance. The institution that
will enforce this dissolution of independence, and indeed has always
enforced it rather enthusiastically, will be the State. As examined
by Martin Van Creveld in The rise and Decline of the State, the
Catholic Church has been fighting a losing battle against the State
for centuries. The Western world has come a long way since the days
of Thomas Becket when Church authorities could demand that clergy
be tried for crimes only by other clergy, and the Church was exempt
from state taxes.
Consequently,
the triumph of the State over the minds of Americans has been so
complete that even many Catholics would say that of course the Church
should pay State taxes, and that members of the Church should be
subject not to their own laws, but to the laws of the State. Even
among its own members, Churchmen are less trusted than government
officials, and there is little acceptance of any way of thinking
outside the State doctrine that the government must have final control
over all institutions within its borders.
This
did not happen by accident. Just as institutions that generate wealth
in the free market are forced to submit to predation by the state,
so too must all social, religious, and cultural institutions do
the same. In the words of Murray Rothbard, "it is precisely
a molding of opinion that the state most desperately needs."
And it does this by working constantly to subvert, co-opt and seize
all institutions that might provide a philosophy that may regard
the state as irrelevant or even undesirable. In these efforts, the
purveyors of multiculturalism have been largely successful. Thanks
to the Leftist attacks on the Church, the days may not be far off
when even the minutiae of church administration will have to be
approved by government officials in the name of protecting the children,
or promoting equality, or preventing hate crimes.
For
some individuals, this day has already arrived. In the case
of Dr. Cheryl Clark, a Christian
ex-lesbian sharing custody of her daughter with her former partner.
The judge has forbidden her from taking her daughter to any churches
that promote "homophobic" teachings. Although he will
undoubtedly decide for himself after the fact, the judge has declined
to provide a list of what churches are officially acceptable and
what churches are officially verboten. But the message is clear
– all must be subject to the dictates of the State, and it will
abide no organization that might pollute the minds of its subjects.
It’s unlikely we’ll see any Leftists protesting this gaping
hole in the sacred "wall of separation."
For
these reasons, Jenkins sees no end to anti-Catholicism on the Left
no matter how many liberal reforms might be adopted. As long as
the Church exists as an independent international organization that
is only partially subject to the will of the American multicultural
State, it will always be seen as a threat to their agenda.
In
the end, the competition between the Church and the State can only
be resolved to the State’s satisfaction when Churches like
individuals are regulated in every aspect of their everyday
workings. Just as private businesses may not hire and fire whom
they please, and schools may not educate as they please, so too
it must be with the Church. This conflict is at the heart of what
Albert Jay Nock and Murray Rothbard called the contest between state
power and social power. By its very nature, the State cannot rest
until it has control over all the "fruits of man’s creative
powers, confiscated and perverted to its own aims."
April
9, 2004
Ryan
McMaken [send him mail]
is a regular columnist for LewRockwell.com.
Copyright
© 2004 LewRockwell.com
Ryan
McMaken Archives
|