Molesting Priests and Rational Religion

Thousands of pages regarding shady priest reassignments within the Catholic Church are about to be released.  Earlier this week, the Supreme Court denied the appeal of the Connecticut Supreme Court decision ordering the release of more than 12,000 pages from 23 lawsuits against six priests.  These documents were sealed after the original trials and settlements.  A hearing next Monday will decide the timetable for releasing the documents.

The Diocese of Bridgeport attempted to argue that the Constitution prohibits the government from intruding into internal church decisions about priest assignments. The case is Bridgeport Diocese v. New York Times, 09-246.

In a statement, the Diocese said:

We continue to believe that the constitutional issues presented, including the First Amendment rights of religious organizations and the privacy rights of all citizens, are significant and important for the Court to consider.  This legal proceeding always has been about the future, not the past. The information and essential facts contained in the documents at issue stem from misconduct occurring primarily in the 1960s and 1970s.

The Church also said that there has been a “true culture change” since the widespread sexual abuse scandals that became public a few years ago.  The Church wants to dismiss cases that arose out of abuse in the 60s and 70s, and naturally wants to focus on the future, but they fail to recognize the need to analyze the past.  Luckily, the press, the courts, and the public recognize the need for honest discovery about the past, even the ugly past.

The Church has more healing to do than just counseling the thousands of victims and their families.  The John Jay Study reported that “the problem was indeed widespread and affected more than 95 percent of the dioceses and approximately 60 percent of religious communities.”  The public needs to know how religious authorities covered up the abuse, acting as enablers.

The label of “religion” and the outcry of “religious freedom” cannot be used to shield abusers and enablers from public scrutiny.

Americans too easily accept arguments predicated on supposed religious interests when those arguments should be scrutinized.  Lots of strange practices are allowed because we are overly anxious about appearing to infringe on religious liberty.  Europe is already much further ahead of the United States in its secular policies.  Europe is not intolerant of religion, but neither do they allow “religion” to be used as a backdoor to bypass normal reasoning and scrutiny.

Some things done in the name of religion border on child abuse. Millions of children are taught to believe in the inherent superiority of their beliefs over the beliefs of others.  Countless adolescents who realize they have same-sex attractions are told that they are “struggling” with them and must either change their attractions, suppress them, or be celibate for life.  Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972) allowed parents to deprive their children of high school education in the name of religion.

Other things done in the name of religion would otherwise be considered hate speech.  Extremist statements about race, sexual orientation, and other religions are always subject to intense public scrutiny – unless the speakers cite religious justifications.

Religion still has a place in the modern world.  The Catholic Church is still very important to millions of people.  But religious arguments must be based on reason to be acceptable to the public.