In 2014, Pope Francis established the Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors, an autonomous advisory body meant to "promote the protection of the dignity of minors and vulnerable adults" in the wake of the Catholic Church's clergy sexual abuse scandals. Marie Collins, an Irish clergy abuse survivor, was appointed to serve on the commission that year. On March 1st, Collins announced her resignation from the commission, having grown frustrated with an intractable Vatican Curia.
In a statement posted at the National Catholic Reporter, Collins listed several "stumbling blocks" that impeded the work of the commission, including "lack of resources, inadequate structures around support staff, slowness of forward movement and cultural resistance", as well as "reluctance of some members of the Vatican Curia to implement the recommendations of the Commission despite their approval by the pope." She condemned members of the Vatican Curia for failing to work alongside the commission and implement its recommendations, including its suggestion that Vatican officials respond to all clergy abuse victim correspondence.
"The reluctance of some in the Vatican Curia to implement recommendations or cooperate with the work of a commission when the purpose is to improve the safety of children and vulnerable adults around the world is unacceptable. Is this reluctance driven by internal politics, fear of change, clericalism which instills a belief that 'they know best' or a closed mindset which sees abuse as an inconvenience or a clinging to old institutional attitudes? I do not know the answer but it is devastating in 2017 to see that these men still can put other concerns before the safety of children and vulnerable adults. The last straw for me, on top of the refusal to cooperate on the Safeguarding Guidelines, has been the refusal, by the same dicastery, to implement one of the simplest recommendations the Commission has put forward to date. Last year at our request, the pope instructed all departments in the Vatican to ensure all correspondence from victims/survivors receives a response. I learned in a letter from this particular dicastery last month that they are refusing to do so. I find it impossible to listen to public statements about the deep concern in the church for the care of those whose lives have been blighted by abuse, yet to watch privately as a congregation in the Vatican refuses to even acknowledge their letters! It is a reflection of how this whole abuse crisis in the Church has been handled: with fine words in public and contrary actions behind closed doors. When I accepted my appointment to the Commission in 2014, I said publicly that if I found what was happening behind closed doors was in conflict with what was being said to the public I would not remain. This point has come. I feel I have no choice but to resign if I am to retain my integrity."
In response to Collins resignation letter, Cardinal Gerhard Muller, prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, rejected the idea that the Vatican could reply to every piece of victim correspondence. According to the National Catholic Reporter, Cardinal Muller told Italy's Corriere della Sera newspaper that it was a "misunderstanding" to assume that his department "could deal with all the dioceses and religious orders in the world." Local clergy should respond to victim correspondence, he explained, claiming that a Vatican response would undermine "the legitimate principle of diocesan autonomy and subsidiarity".
Melanie Jula Sakoda, East Bay Director of the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests (SNAP), expressed the organization's frustration with the Vatican in a March 1st press release.
"We share Marie Collins’ justifiable frustration with the “shameful resistance” of Vatican officials to changes in procedures that would protect children. Instead, of implementing changes that would have a direct effect on curtailing the abuse crisis, the Curia continues to set up roadblocks. While we admire Ms. Collins’ generous offer to continue to work with the Vatican to educate Church leaders on abuse, we believe that the clear answer to eradicating this crisis remains outside of the Church hierarchy. Victims, witnesses and whistle blowers need to continue speaking out publicly, and police, prosecutors and secular authorities need to continue holding Church officials accountable for both criminal conduct and for the cover up of those crimes."
Collins' resignation from the Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors, as well as revelations that Pope Francis reduced church sanctions against sexually abusive priests, is leading many to question how seriously the Vatican is taking clergy abuse. The Catholic Church has had years to implement policies meant to protect children, with no shortage of input from survivors and professionals, but it continues to drag its feet.
Was the Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors meant to bring about change, or was its creation all for show? When will the Vatican finally get serious about protecting its congregants and holding clergy perpetrators accountable?
NOTE: Many of the articles cited below contain disturbing content. Trigger warning!
In the span of a few weeks, the Catholic Church has been dealt a triple whammy.Oscar awards for Spotlight, the eruption of a massive clergy abuse scandal in Pennsylvania, and Cardinal George Pell's testimony have brought child sexual abuse front and center into public consciousness again.
Spotlight Wins at the Oscars
The 2015 film Spotlight, starring Mark Ruffalo and Michael Keaton, tells the story of the Boston Globe reporters who unearthed child sexual abuse and cover-ups in the Boston Archdiocese. Spotlight director Tom McCarthy told PRI that he hopes the film will inspire new journalists to undertake "strong investigative journalism" on a local and national level.
To the delight of advocates who support clergy abuse victims, Spotlight won Oscars for Best Picture and Best Original Screenplay at the 2016 Academy Awards. According to PIX 11 News, Fox 2 Now, and WHO 13 News, more clergy abuse victims and whistle blowers have sought out the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests (SNAP) since the Oscars.
A Clergy Abuse Scandal Erupts in Pennsylvania
Pennsylvania was left shaken when the state Attorney General's office released a damning report accusing the Altoona-Johnstown Diocese of rampant child sexual abuse by clergy. The authors of the report described the document as an effort "not to slander a religion but expose the truth about the men who hijacked it for their own
grotesque desires."
According to the investigating grand jury report released by the Pennsylvania Office of the Attorney General, hundreds of children were sexually abused by clergy in the Altoona-Johnstown Diocese. Moreover, the report states that Bishops James Hogan and Joseph Adamec failed to report predators to the police, choosing instead to protect the predators instead.
According to the report, special agents of the Office of the Attorney General found overwhelming "evidence of an institutional crisis" in the diocese' files in form of clergy abuse victim statements, letters from victims, and internal correspondence related to offending priests. The grand jury documented child sexual abuse by at least fifty priests and religious leaders in the Altoona-Johnstown Diocese. The bishops' reported inaction resulted in impunity for predatory priests. Bishop Adamec in particular behaved in a callous manner when confronted with abuse in his diocese, according to the report.
"The [FBI's] Behavioral Assessment Unit characterized Bishop Joseph Adamec's approach to sexual child abuse as "laissez-faire." [Supervisory Special Agent] Isom and the group noted in particular that Adamec was mailed an anonymous letter stating that Joseph Bender had sexually abused children. When Adamec interviewed Father Bender he stated he hadn't done anything like that for 20 years. Adamec's bold effort to protect the children of the Diocese was to return Bender to ministry reasoning that if it had been serious the writer would have signed the letter.
The FBI noted other incidents where even the accused priests were alarmed that Adamec wasn't taking notes when interviewing them regarding the allegations. Adamec's statement that he would "write down what he needed to remember" would have only furthered the accused's belief that the allegation alone must be insufficient or not important.
While the Grand Jury found it was not Bishop Joseph Adamec's practice to call the police when dealing with allegations of sexual child abuse, the FBI noted ... how little Adamec seemed to be concerned with the wellbeing of the children of his Diocese ..."
Adamec reportedly crafted a payout chart that he used to determine how much payout money would be given to clergy abuse victims, according to Pennlive. "Level 1 abuse", such as fondling over clothes, was assigned a diocese payout of $10,000 to $25,000. "Level 4 abuse", which included penetrative abuse, was assigned a payout of $50,000 to $175,000.
Adamec responded to the grand jury report with a statement claiming that "the Grand Jury was not provided with a full and balanced set of facts based on all the materials and information that were available ... As a result of this failure, the above Report contains criticism of Bishop Adamec that is unfounded." The statement insists that Adamec "always adhered to a standard process for investigating, evaluating, and addressing allegations of abuse." (Hat tip to Pennlive.)
After the release of the report, the Altoona-Johnstown Diocese apologized. In a March 3rd statement, Bishop Mark Bartchak offered a 'heartfelt and sincere apology" to the victims, their loved ones, and the people of the diocese. Bartchak promised to publish a list of priests who had been subjects of "credible allegations" as well as their current status.
The Pennsylvania Attorney General's Office launched a hotline for those who wanted to report more clergy abuse accusations. The hotline was immediately flooded with calls, according to the Associated Press and Pennlive.
In the wake of the scandal, SNAP director David Clohessy urged Pennsylvania's Catholic leaders to aggressively battle clergy abuse.
"We urge Catholic officials in central Pennsylvania to use church websites, parish bulletins and pulpit announcements to aggressively seek out anyone who may have seen, suspected or suffered crimes by these clerics and beg them to call police. This is the very least that church officials should do.
All too often, when clergy sex crimes emerge, church staff pretend to be powerless. They are not. They have both the resources and the duty to spread the word and actively help police and prosecutors build a strong case against predatory preachers."
Pennsylvania's current statute of limitations prevents many of the diocese's victims from seeking justice. Under Pennsylvania law, sexual abuse victims have until age 30 to sue and age 50 to seek criminal charges, reports CBS 21. The Pennsylvania Coalition Against Rape
(PCAR) lamented that so many cases of child sexual abuse in the Altoona-Johnstown Diocese went unpunished because the statute of limitations expired. Like the authors of the grand jury report, PCAR advocated for the removal of the statute of limitations for sexual assault cases, calling the current statute "outdated and ineffective
legislation".
Australian Cardinal George Pell Testifies
Australia's Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse was created in 2013 with a mission to investigate institutions that failed to protect children from sexual abuse or to respond appropriately to reports of abuse. Among the institutions investigated by the Royal Commission was the Diocese of Ballarat in Victoria.
Evidence shows that at least 130 claims of child sexual abuse have been made against the Ballarat diocese since 1980, with as many as 14 priests accused of abusing children, reports the Guardian. Those who testified before the Royal Commission accused Ballarat Diocese leaders of respondinginappropriately to abuse reports, moving predatorypriests from parish to parish, blaming and belittling victims, and trying to bribe at least one victim into silence.
Last month, former Ballarat Bishop Ronald Mulkearns told the Royal Commission via video link that he was sorry for failing to halt the "problem with priests", according to the Sydney Morning Herald. Cardinal George Pell, who served as a consultor to former Bishop Mulkears, served in the Ballarat Diocese alongside some of the priests who were accused of abuse. (To boot, Pell himself is no stranger to abuseaccusations.) Pell would later serve as Archbishop of Sydney and Archbishop of Melbourne before rising to the rank of cardinal.
After mounting pressure to testify and the release of a satiricalsong, Pell agreed to deliver testimony via video link to the Royal Commission. Fifteen survivors of clergy abuse flew to Rome to hear Pell's testimony at Hotel Quirinale, their travel expenses raised through crowdfunding, according to 9 News and the Age. The Guardian reported that a journalist was allegedly punched and a cameraman was shoved by security personnel when they tried to film Pell outside the Hotel Quirinale.
According to Al Jazeera, Pell also denied offering a bribe to a clergy abuse victim in exchange for the victim's silence. Pell also told the commission that rumors of clergy abuse he heard as early as the 1970s were not his responsibility to investigate. He was also inclined to believe priestly denials of abusive behavior. "I must say in those days, if a priest denied such activity, I was very strongly inclined to accept the denial," he said, according to the Associated Press.
Pell admitted feeling apathy toward Gerald Ridsdale's alleged abuse of children. "It’s a sad story and it wasn’t of much interest to me ... I had no reason to turn my mind to the extent of the evils that Ridsdale had perpetrated," he told the Royal Commission, according to the Guardian. Pell's lack of curiosity when confronted with possible abuse in the church forced columnist Andrew Bolt to conclude that he was either lying or "dangerously
indifferent", reports the Guardian.
Pell admitted that clergy abuse is "indefensible", adding that "the church has made enormous mistakes", report the Guardian and Al Jazeera. It was a "disastrous coincidence" that so many predators were present in the Ballarat Diocese, he said, according to ABC News (Australia), and denied that they might have been placed together intentionally.
Pell's laughable claims that he could not remember details of important events and that he was kept in the dark by other clergy angered some observers. According to Reuters, the clergy abuse survivors who flew to Rome faxed a message to Pope Francis that read, "This is about children. Children who were abused and damaged in the past. ... We would like to request a meeting to discuss the commitment to the children of the past and children of the future, to implement systems so that this is never repeated again."
Pope Francis did not meet with the clergy abuse survivors. Upon their return to Australia, the group urged Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull to support a national redress scheme for abuse survivors, according to the Guardian.
These three events show us that public awareness of clergy abuse has growing by leaps and bounds. Victims, entertainers, and authorities refuse to stay silent about clergy abuse, and are instead demanding accountability from the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church, for its part, can no longer deny the problem without revealing its own callousness and incompetence.
To read additional commentary, visit the following links.
In a prior post, I expressed dismay at how little attention Pope Francis gave to clergy sexual abuse during his U.S. visit. I may have spoken too soon. This weekend, Pope Francis had much more to say about the clergy abuse crisis plaguing the Catholic Church, but was it enough?
On September 27th, Pope Francis met with five survivors of childhood sexual abuse at St. Charles Borromeo Seminary in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, according to Huffington Post. Pope Francis met with the survivors for 30 minutes and delivered a message of remorse.
"Words cannot fully express my sorrow for the abuse you suffered. You are precious children of God who should always expect our protection, our care and our love. I am profoundly sorry that your innocence was violated by those who you trusted. In some cases the trust was betrayed by members of your own family, in other cases by priests who carry a sacred responsibility for the care of soul. In all circumstances, the betrayal was a terrible violation of human dignity.
For those who were abused by a member of the clergy, I am deeply sorry for the times when you or your family spoke out, to report the abuse, but you were not heard or believed. Please know that the Holy Father hears you and believes you. I deeply regret that some bishops failed in their responsibility to protect children. It is very disturbing to know that in some cases bishops even were abusers. I pledge to you that we will follow the path of truth wherever it may lead. Clergy and bishops will be held accountable when they abuse or fail to protect children."
Pope Francis also touched on clergy abuse during a Sunday speech to clergymen, according to Huffington Post. During a September 27th address to American bishops at the St. Charles Borromeo Seminary in Philadelphia, he grieved over the harm causes by clergy abuse. "God weeps", he told the audience, assuring them that perpetrators would be held accountable.. "The crimes and sins of sexual abuse of children can not be kept secret any longer."
David Clohessy, director of the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests (SNAP), was unimpressed. "Is a child anywhere on earth safer now that a pope, for maybe the seventh or eighth time or ninth time, has briefly chatted with abuse victims? No," he wrote in a September 27th statement.
"Almost every survivor cares most about prevention. That’s also what helps us heal best: knowing that our pain prompts action that might spare even one child a lifetime of devastation from sexual violence.
Francis and his colleagues, however, refuse to take that action. Brave and bold on other topics, here Francis plays it safe and timid. He and his underlings prefer to talk ‘healing.’ It’s safer, easier, less controversial and more comfortable than the hard work of prevention. (The more skeptical would also point out that it’s more self-serving to talk ‘healing’ than initiate reform.)
Kids are safer when we acknowledge that every day, several boys and girls are being sexually assaulted by Catholic clerics. Every day, thousands of Catholic officials selfishly sit on secrets about child molesting clerics that police and prosecutors could use to pursue and prosecute these criminals.
So we beg Francis to stop acting like the abuse and cover ups are over and that only healing is needed. That’s disingenuous and dangerous."
Pope Francis shares kind words abundantly, but time will tell if he is serious about holding clergy perpetrators accountable. Were his Sunday talks merely good PR, or will he back up his words with concrete action?
Pope Francis' visit to the U.S. has been full of positive messages and happy gatherings. However, the clergy abuse crisis still looms over his church. As Reuters noted, Pope Francis is visiting a country where the Catholic Church has lost members and money in the wake of countless clergy sexual abuse cases.
The Catholic Church's long history of sexual abuse by clergy is well-known. Too often, the church has responded to child sexual abuse with cover-ups and silence, traumatizing victims in the process. To add insult to injury, some Catholic diocese have adamantlyopposedlegislation that would extend the statute of limitation for childhood sexual abuse. Rather than cherish children as its savior did, the Catholic Church has all too often chosen to protect itself at the expense of childhood abuse victims.
The world noticed. In 2014, the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child and the United Nations Committee Against Torture came down hard on Vatican representatives during twohearings on clergy abuse. Concluding Observations on the Second Periodic Report of the Holy See, a report issued by the U.N. Committee on the Rights of the Child, criticized the Catholic Church for covering up clergy abuse at the expense of victims.
To be fair, the Catholic Church has taken steps to address clergy abuse. The Vatican's Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors, Ireland's Hussey Commission, and and the USCCB's Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People are examples of church efforts to address the clergy abuse crisis. In 2013, the Vatican announced plans to create a commission that would advise Pope Francis on how to counsel clergy abuse victims and prevent future abuse, according to the New York Times. This summer, Pope Francis launched a new tribunal section that will hear cases of bishops who failed to take action against clergy abuse. How successfully the tribunal will address clergy abuse remains to be seen, however.
While Pope Francis did touch upon the clergy abuse crisis during his
U.S. visit, many observers feel that he did not go far enough. During a September 24th speech at St. Patrick's Cathedral in New York, Pope Francis alluded to the clergy abuse crisis. While Pope Francis acknowledged the suffering caused by the scandal, he did not explain how the Catholic Church would confront the problem.
"I know that, as a presbyterate in the midst of God’s people, you suffered greatly in the not distant past by having to bear the shame of some of your brothers who harmed and scandalized the Church in the most vulnerable of her members ... I accompany you at this time of pain and difficulty, and I thank God for your faithful service to his people."
The Pope's praise for American bishops in the wake of the clergy abuse scandal gave some people pause. During a September 23rd address to Catholic bishops at the Cathedral of St. Matthew the Apostle in Washington D.C., Pope Francis praised the bishops for supposedly helping clergy abuse victims heal.
"I am also conscious of the courage with which you have faced difficult moments in the recent history of the Church in this country without fear of self-criticism and at the cost of mortification and great sacrifice. Nor have you been afraid to divest whatever is unessential in order to regain the authority and trust which is demanded of ministers of Christ and rightly expected by the faithful. I realize how much the pain of recent years has weighed upon you and I have supported your generous commitment to bring healing to victims – in the knowledge that in healing we too are healed – and to work to ensure that such crimes will never be repeated."
How could Pope Francis be so naive? How could he ignore the countless bishops who covered up clergy abuse and abandoned victims? Where was the call for accountability, the acknowledgement of unethical behavior?
Advocates for clergy abuse victims were unhappy with Pope Francis' remarks. In a September 23rd statement, SNAP president Barbara Dorris was disappointed in Pope Francis over his praise for U.S. bishops.
"We're sad that Francis claims US bishops have shown "courage" in the abuse crisis. Almost without exception, they have shown cowardice and callousness and continue to do so now. They offer excuses, exploit legal technicalities and hide behind expensive lawyers and public relations professionals, hardly the marks of courage.
We're also sad that Francis can't bring himself to call this crisis what it is - not "difficult moments in recent history," but the continuing cover up of clergy child sex crimes by almost the entire church hierarchy."
SNAP director David Clohessy accused Pope Francis of minimizing the clergy abuse crisis in a September 25th statement.
"We’ve long sought better papal actions more than better papal words. We still do. But this degree of insensitivity is hurtful. It deters victims, witnesses and whistleblowers from reporting child sex crimes, known and suspected. When in 2015, even this pope minimizes and mischaracterizes this crisis - calling it “difficult moments” for instance – where’s even the hope, much less the evidence, of change? Why bother speaking up if even Francis sees the scandal only through the eyes of clerics?"
John Salveson, president of the Foundation to Abolish Child Sex Abuse, told the Washington Post that the Pope's comments to American bishops were "bizarre".
"In reality, the American church hierarchy has treated clergy sex abuse victims as adversaries and enemies for decades ... His concern about how the abuse crisis has weighed on the bishops’ spirits, and his hope that all of their good deeds will help them heal from the crisis, reflects a profound misunderstanding of the role the church has played in this self-inflicted crisis."
Several lawmakers gave Pope Francis the opportunity to show his commitment to stamping out clergy abuse. For example, Capital New York reported that New York Assemblywoman Margaret Markey urged Pope Francis to convince New York's bishops to support a bill that would eliminate the statute of limitations for child sexual abuse.
Additionally, District of Columbia Councilman David Grosso urged the Catholic Church to support a statute of limitations reform bill. Earlier this year, Grosso introduced the Childhood Protection Against Sexual Abuse Amendment Act of 2015, which would eliminate the statute of limitations for the recovery of damages related to childhood sexual abuse. In a statement at the SNAP website, Grosso called on Pope Francis to hold bishops accountable for clergy abuse.
"In his prayer meeting with U.S. bishops yesterday, Pope Francis spoke of a 'generous commitment to bring healing'- this stance must extend to those who have suffered sexual abuse. I am calling on the Pope to hold the bishops of the Catholic Church accountable for abuse committed on their watch. It is past time for the Church to support better laws that protect children, expose predators, and punish enablers.
Earlier this year I introduced the 'Childhood Protection Against Sexual Abuse Amendment Act' to give child victims of sexual abuse more time to file a civil lawsuit against perpetrators. Our current laws unjustly protect predators, and too often the Church has opposed legal reform. If the Catholic Church is truly committed to healing and forgiveness, then it will support this legislation and efforts to protect children from harm."
Clergy abuse victims deserve more than a few kind words from Pope Francis. The Pope's U.S. tour represents a squandered opportunity to address the clergy abuse crisis in the Catholic Church. The Pope's visit could have been an opportune time to publicly acknowledge the church's failings and demonstrate remorse to victims. Understandably, victims and advocates are disappointed.
9/27/15 UPDATE: On September 27th, Pope Francis met with childhood sexual abuse survivors and discussed clergy abuse in an address to American bishops. For more information, click here.
To read additional commentary, visit the following links.
Vatican Radio reports that Pope Francis has launched a new tribunal section that will hear cases of bishops who failed to protect children and vulnerable adults from clergy sexual abuse. The Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors recently presented a plan to Pope Francis and his advisers that included the creation of the new judicial section. According to Vatican Radio, the new section will exist within the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and will examine cases of bishops who failed to report crimes perpetrated by priests under their authority. (Hat tip to Religion News Service.)
The creation of the new panel comes at a time when clergy abuse scandals are making headlines across the globe.
Australia's Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse has held public hearings about clergy sexual abuse of children at five Catholic institutions in Ballarat. Observers and victims have accused Australian Cardinal George Pell of covering up abuse at the Ballarat institutions, according to the Guardian.
In Ireland, a national watchdog group was alerted to 184 new allegations of physical, emotional, and sexual abuse by Catholic clergy in the past year, according to the Irish Examiner.
Here in the U.S., the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis has been criminally charged after reportedly failing to protect children from clergy abuse, reports Minnesota Public Radio.
This spring, Pope Francis accepted the resignation of Bishop Robert Finn, the head of the Diocese of Kansas City-St. Joseph, Missori. According to Newsweek, in 2012, Finn pleaded guilty to a charge of failure to report suspected abuse by one of his priests.
Is the new panel a good faith effort to hold corrupt bishops accountable, or merely a PR stunt? Advocates for clergy abuse victims have voiced a wide range of opinions on the new measure.
Terence McKiernan, president of Bishop Accountability, called the new panel "an obvious next step", according to the Washington Post. He hoped that victims "“will be treated more respectfully and their cases acted upon if there are people dedicated to this topic...". However, he also told the Washington Post that the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith usually lacks transparency with regard to its investigations, calling it a "black box".
Voices from the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests (SNAP) were more wary. In a June 10th statement, SNAP director David Clohessy accused Pope Francis of inaction while urging supporters to withhold judgment on the new panel.
"...The pope has virtually limitless power. By now, he could have sacked dozens of complicit bishops. He has, however, sacked no one. Nor has he demoted, disciplined or denounced even one complicit church official – from Cardinal to custodian. None of his predecessors did either. No prelate on the planet has even found the courage to say “Archbishop John Nienstedt shielded child molesting clerics.”
So in the face of this widespread denial, timidity and inaction, let’s be prudent, stay vigilant and withhold judgment until we see if and how this panel might act."
Clohessy also reminded readers that church committees and bureaucracy are not substitutes for moral bravery within the church.
"Kids need a courageous church culture, not another church committee.
Kids need brave behavior by church officials, not more bureaucracy.
Kids need church members and staff to bring evidence to prosecutors, not to Vatican officials."
Becky Ianni, Virginia/Washington D.C. area SNAP leader, also stated that it's "just too early to tell" how well the panel will respond to clergy abuse cover-ups. In a June 10th statement, Ianni argued that moral courage on behalf of church leaders, not new investigative processes, is needed.
"The problem has never been a lack of Vatican officials with the specific “process” to investigate their complicit colleagues. The problem has been, and is, a lack of Vatican officials with the courage to investigate their complicit colleagues. Sadly, no words on paper can give timid, career-focused, self-serving monarchs the courage to do what’s right – expose the corrupt colleagues.
Let’s be clear: we never asked for a new “process” to discipline bishops who endanger kids, protect predators, stonewall prosecutors, shrewd evidence, and mislead parishioners. We just asked that it be done. And it hasn’t been done.
[...]
A “process” can be used or abused. We fear this one will be used to mollify distraught parishioners and generate nice headlines. We hope to be proven wrong. If this “process” leads to complicit bishops being ousted and cover ups being deterred, we’ll be thrilled. But we’re not counting on it.
A new process can lead to prevention or to complacency. It’s just too early to tell. And it’s best to stay vigilant, especially given the troubling track record of church abuse bodies."
SNAP president Barbara Blaine has little faith in the new measure. In a June 10th statement, Blaine expected little from the new panel, pointing to ineffective church measures of the past.
"At best, most church abuse panels have been ineffective distractions. At worst, they’ve been manipulative public relations moves We suspect this new one won’t make a difference either.
Throughout this decades-long crisis, church panels, procedures, protocols and promises have been plentiful. They’ve also been irrelevant. As long as clerics are in charge of dealing with other clerics who commit and conceal child sex crimes, little will change.
Church officials should join us in reforming secular abuse laws so that clerics who hurt kids and hide predators will be criminally charged. If that happens, we'll be encouraged."
I have to side with SNAP on this matter. The Catholic Church's responses to clergy sexual abuse have been disappointing, and while I want to believe that the new panel will make a difference, I'm not hopeful. If the new tribunal section demonstrates its trustworthiness, I'll be pleased. However, until the Catholic Church proves that it is serious about reforming church culture, making amends to victims, punishing clergy perpetrators, and cooperating with secular authorities, I will remain wary of measures such as this.
Bill Gothard, founder of the Basic Life Principles ministry and a supporter of Christian homeschooling, is embrolied in a sexual harassment scandal. Recovering Grace, a website dedicated to helping those who have been negatively impacted by Bill Gothard's teachings, has posted statements from multiple women accusing Gothard of sexual harassment. Last month, Religion News Service reported that Gothard had resigned from the Institute of Basic Life Principles, a week after he had been placed on administrative leave.
Gothard's ministry was popular among Quiverfull Christians and respected by the Duggar family, according to Religion News Service and No Longer Quivering. Radar Online reports that Megan Lind, one of the women who accused Gothard of sexual harassment, wrote an open letter to the Duggars urging them to reconsider their endorsement of Gothard's ministry.
The Survivors Network of Those Abused by Priests (SNAP) expressed concern over allegations that Bob Jones University officials helped Bill Gothard cover up sexual harassment allegations against Gothard's brother. In a March 27th statement, SNAP urged Bob Jones University to hire an outside firm to investigate these claims, arguing that "it's best to err on the side of protecting the vulnerable and wounded, not the accused and the powerful."
Now, Gothard has finally commented at length on the scandal. In a statement at Bill Gothard's website, which was previously withheld "in order to honor the request of the Board of Directors to wait until an initial review has taken place", Gothard sent mixed messages. On one hand, Gothard admitted to inappropriately touching young women at his organizational headquarters. However, he insists that none of this touching was sexual in nature or intent.
"My actions of holding of hands, hugs, and touching of feet or hair with young ladies crossed the boundaries of discretion and were wrong. They demonstrated a double-standard and violated a trust. Because of the claims about me I do want to state that I have never kissed a girl nor have I touched a girl immorally or with sexual intent."
I found Gothard's excuses flimsy. How on earth does an old man touch the hair and feet of young women without sexual intent? What about accusations of more extreme harassing behaviors? Libby Anne at Love, Joy, Feminism also finds Gothard's excuses hard to swallow.
"Does Gothard honestly expect anyone to believe that a 50 or 60-year-old man could play footsie with a 16-year-old girl, hold and stroke her hands for long periods of time, caress her hair, etc., all without any “sexual intent”? Especially a 50 or 60-year-old man who leads a religious empire and teaches his followers that couples should not touch or have physical contact before marriage? Why in the world, if not with “sexual intent,” would Gothard touch these girls like this, violating not only his own rules but also the girls’ consent and their parents’ trust?
Honestly, Gothard’s claim that he never “touched a girl . . . with sexual intent” sounds rather like Clinton’s wrangling about the definition of “sexual relations.” He’s lawyering, and transparently so. He’s not being completely honest, complete transparent. He’s still making excuses and trying to wheedle out of what he did. He’s still trying to find the least offensive crime to confess to so that he can get out of responsibility for the whole that happened."
Much like the scandal involving Vision Forum's Doug Phillips, the Bill Gothard scandal demonstrates that cults of personality, misogyny, and fundamentalism make for a toxic brew. Religious insularity and patriarchy protect no one; to the contrary, they may have played a role in Gothard's alleged behavior by rendering young women even more vulnerable. Should it be any surprise that such allegations are being lobbed at a man whose organization promotes callous attitudes toward sexual abuse survivors? Whose so-called "umbrellaofprotection" gives men unfair power over women and authority figures unfair power over subordinates? As more information about the Doug Phillips and Bill Gothard scandals becomes available, let's hope that their followers begin to question the hollow promises of Christian Patriarchy and fundamentalist homeschooling.
To read additional commentary, visit the following links.
As discussed in a prior post, the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child grilled Vatican representatives about clergy abuse in the Catholic Church during a January 16th hearing in Geneva. Following that hearing, the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child issued a hard-hitting report on the Vatican's shortcomings in upholding the UN Convention of the Rights of the Child. Concluding Observations on the Second Periodic Report of the Holy See has much to say about clergy abuse of children, priests' offspring, and LGBTQ issues.
"The Committee appreciates the numerous activities undertaken at grass-roots level and funded by Catholic churches, foundations and organisations worldwide to support and protect children in the most vulnerable situations and to provide them, among others, with education opportunities, health, social, care and other family support services. The Committee however notes the absence of a comprehensive child-rights based approach to the allocation of resources to children and the lack of a system to track the spending on children by the Holy See, as well as by church related organizations and institutions, in other States parties where the Holy See has influence and impact."
Regarding sexual abuse, the report acknowledges the Vatican's steps toward accountability while adding that more needs to be done to monitor religious institutions and individuals under the Catholic Church's authority.
"The Committee notes that a Special Office was established in August 2013 to oversee the implementation of international agreements to which the Vatican City State is a party and that the Commission created in December 2013 will be empowered to receive children’s complaints on sexual abuse. The Committee is however concerned that the Holy See has not established a mechanism to monitor respect for and compliance with children’s rights by individuals and institutions of a religious nature under the authority of the Holy See, including all Catholic schools, as well as in the Vatican City State."
The report pulled no punches with regard to the Catholic Church's protection of abuse perpetrators at the expense of child victims.
"The Committee is particularly concerned that in dealing with
allegations of child sexual abuse, the Holy See has consistently placed
the preservation of the reputation of the Church and the protection of
the perpetrators above children’s best interests, as observed by several
national commissions of inquiry."
The UN Committee on the Rights of the Child slammed the Catholic Church for not acknowledging the extend of child sexual abuse perpetrated by its clergy, for transferring priests accused of abuse, and for forcing clergy to remain silent on the scourge.
"The Committee nevertheless expresses its deepest concern about child
sexual abuse committed by members of the Catholic churches who operate
under the authority of the Holy See, with clerics having been involved
in the sexual abuse of tens of thousands of children worldwide. The
Committee is gravely concerned that the Holy See has not acknowledged
the extent of the crimes committed, has not taken the necessary measures
to address cases of child sexual abuse and to protect children, and has
adopted policies and practices which have led to the continuation of
the abuse by and the impunity of the perpetrators ... Well-known child
sexual abusers have been transferred from parish to parish or to other
countries in an attempt to cover-up such crimes, a practice documented
by numerous national commissions of inquiry ... Due to a code of silence
imposed on all members of the clergy under penalty of excommunication,
cases of child sexual abuse have hardly ever been reported to the law
enforcement authorities in the countries where such crimes occurred. On
the contrary, cases of nuns and priests ostracized, demoted and fired
for not having respected the obligation of silence have been reported to
the Committee as well as cases of priests who have been congratulated
for refusing to denounce child abusers ..."
Another skeleton in the church's closet -- children secretly fathered by priests -- was brought to light by the report, which urged the Holy See to "assess the number of children born of
Catholic priests, find out who they are and take all the necessary
measures to ensure the rights of these children to know and to be cared
for by their fathers, as appropriate." The report expressed concern over confidentiality agreements that the mothers of these children have been compelled to sign in exchange for financial support.
"The Committee is concerned about the situation of children born of
Catholic priests, who, in many cases, are not aware of the identity of
their fathers. The Committee is also concerned that the mothers may
obtain a plan for regular payment from the Church until the child is
financially independent only if they sign a confidentiality agreement
not to disclose any information."
Ireland's infamous Magdalene Laundries, in which girls and women were incarcerated, forced to perform unpaid labor, and even abused, came up in the report. The committee called for justice for victims of the Magdalene Laundries, which had ties to the Catholic Church.
"The Committee is concerned that the Holy See has not taken the
necessary measures to protect and ensure justice for girls arbitrarily
placed by their families, State institutions and churches in the
Magdalene laundries of Ireland run by four congregations of Catholic
Sisters until 1996."
Finally, the report frowned upon the Holy See's position on LGBTQ rights, criticizing its homophobic statements and calling for greater church activism toward LGBTQ equality.
"While also noting as positive the progressive statement delivered in July 2013 by Pope Francis, the Committee is concerned about the Holy See’s past statements and declarations on homosexuality which contribute to the social stigmatization of and violence against lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender adolescents and children raised by same sex couples ... The Committee also urges the Holy See to make full use of its moral authority to condemn all forms of harassment, discrimination or violence against children based on their sexual orientation or the sexual orientation of their parents and to support efforts at international level for the decriminalisation of homosexuality."
The Catholic Church and its defenders were unhappy with the report, accusing the committee of challenging its religious freedom and doctrine. The Holy See responded to the report with a February 5th press statement, in which it stressed its "commitment to defending and protecting the rights of the child." However, the statement also criticized the report for allegedly trying to interfere with Catholic doctrine.
"The Holy See does, however, regret to see in some points of the Concluding Observations an attempt to interfere with Catholic Church teaching on the dignity of human person and in the exercise of religious freedom."
Vatican Radio reports that Father Hans Zollner of the Institute of Psychology at the Gregorian University in Rome and Centre for the Protection of Minors, stated that the report was “harsh in parts but recognises that the Holy See and the Church as a whole has made steps forward.” Regarding committee observations on LGBTQ issues and contraception, Zollner complained that "it looks as if some people ... just wanted to make their point".
Finally, in a post at USCCBlog, Sister Mary Ann Walsh defended the Catholic Church, insisting that it has "certainly done more than any other international organization to face the problem [of child sexual abuse] and it will continue to lead in doing so." However, she was disappointed that the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child criticized the Catholic Church for its stance on LGBTQ issues and contraception, framing their criticism as an affront to religious liberty.
"A report from the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child highlights the problem of sexual abuse of minors by clergy. Unfortunately the report is weakened by including objections to Catholic teaching on such issues as gay marriage, abortion and contraception. This seems to violate the U.N.’s obligation from its earliest days to defend religious freedom. In 1948, the organization adopted its Universal Declaration of Human Rights that declared that "everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion." Certainly the U.N. charge to defend religious freedom includes defending the Church’s right to determine its own teachings. Defense of religious freedom is no small matter in a world where people, including children, get murdered for simply going to church. That’s what happened last September when militants killed 81 people, including children, attending Sunday school at a Christian church in Peshawar, Pakistan."
Clergy abuse victims' advocates condemned the Vatican's response and applauded the report. Barbara Dorris, outreach director of the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests (SNAP), blasted the Catholic Church for deflecting attention away from the abuse-related content of the report.
"The vast bulk of the United Nations panel's findings have nothing to do with birth control, homosexuality, abortion or doctrine. But the church hierarchy ignores this because deep down, they know they cannot defend the indefensible – their consistent, deliberate, and selfish decisions that safeguard their own reputations and hurt their own flocks.
It's disingenuous for Catholic officials to trot out the “religious freedom” canard when confronted with uncontroverted evidence of massive wrongdoing."
Katherine Gallagher, a senior staff attorney at the Center for Constitutional Rights, welcomed the report. "This day has been a long time coming, but the international community is finally holding the Vatican accountable for its role in enabling and perpetuating sexual violence in the Church," she said, adding that the "whole world will be watching" to ensure that the Catholic Church protects children from clergy abuse.
The new report by the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child is a powerful call for church accountability. A major human rights body has made a public statement on the world stage, urging the Vatican to work more diligently to tackle its child abuse scandals and anti-gay statements. As much as the Catholic hierarchy and its defenders may try to divert the public conversation surrounding the report toward religious freedom and doctrinal orthodoxy, the report's observations still stand.
To read additional commentary, visit the following links.
On January 16th, Vatican representatives appeared before the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child to answer questions about sexual abuse in the Catholic Church. The hearing was part of the committee's 65th session in Geneva, scheduled for January 13-31 in Geneva, Switzerland. According to the New York Times, the Geneva hearing was meant to explore the Vatican's failure to uphold the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. The committee will issue final recommendations on February 5th.
CCR and SNAP submitted a supplemental report to the committee in December 2013 in advance of the hearing, accusing the Holy See of neglecting its responsibility to address clergy abuse. "[T]he acts and omissions of its agents have clearly produced effects that resulted in the violation of the rights of children to be free from sexual exploitation and violence," the report argues. Specifically, the document slams the Holy See for claiming that its jurisdiction is limited to Vatican City rather than to its clerical representatives around the globe.
"We note that the Holy See’s response goes to great length to confine its obligations and liabilities under the Convention to the territory of Vatican City State, where it acknowledges citizenship and/or residence of 31 children. The Holy See seeks to redirect responsibility for widespread and systemic violations of the Convention and OPSC occurring in other sovereign territories that were committed, abetted, facilitated or covered up by Catholic officials acting under its authority to other States ... This representation by the Holy See is particularly disingenuous in light of the all-too-numerous accounts of efforts by bishops, archbishops, cardinals and other Church officials around the world to cover up these crimes and subvert the course of justice in other States, further compounding the harm to victims."
Representing the Vatican at the January 16th hearing were Bishop Charles J. Scicluna, former Vatican chief sex crimes prosecutor, and Msgr. Silvano Tomasi, Vatican representative to the United Nations. In a transcript of his presentation posted at the Vatican website, Msgr. Silvano Tomasi told the committee that the Holy See has taken concrete steps to address clergy abuse.
"Confronted with this reality, the Holy See has carefully delineated policies and procedures designed to help eliminate such abuse and to collaborate with respective State authorities to fight against this crime. The Holy See is also committed to listen carefully to victims of abuse and to address the impact such situations have on survivors of abuse and on their families."
The UN panel pulled no punches with Vatican representatives. "Why is there no mandatory reporting to a country's judicial authorities when crimes occur?" asked committee member Hiranthi Wijemanne, according to the Christian Science Monitor. The New York Times reports that committee vice president Sara de Jesús Oviedo Fierro asked Vatican representatives about efforts to cover-up sexual abuse cases. “It is not the policy of the Holy See to encourage cover-ups. This is against the truth," Scicluna insisted. When asked why the Holy See does not mandate that local diocese report sexual abuse to civil authorities, Scicluna replied that, "Our guidelines have always said the domestic law of the country needs to be followed."
Tomasi deflected responsibility away from the Vatican, arguing that the Holy See is not responsible for the actions of clergy abroad, as its jurisdiction is limited to Vatican City. Priests, he argued, are "not functionaries of the Vatican but citizens of their countries and fall under the jurisdiction of their own countries," according to the Christian Science Monitor.
Following the meeting, SNAP expressed its disgust. Shortly after the hearing, SNAP and CCR leaders offered commentary during a live webcast. SNAP president Barbara Blaine praised the hearing as a historic milestone at the 5:35 mark.
"Today, it was a historic day. It's the very first time ever that Vatican officials were called to task or that they had to answer questions ... What gives me hope at this point is that I know that there's going to be a report, and then there's going to be standards by which the Vatican will be judged. And hopefully this is the beginning, and now maybe other international bodies will begin to question the Vatican as this Committee on the Rights of the Child did today."
At the 6:40 mark, Barbara Blaine claimed that Vatican representatives failed to give satisfactory answers to questions at the hearing, adding that Pope Francis needs to take more action against abuse.
"I'm extremely disappointed in the response of the Vatican ... Bottom line is that they didn't answer any new questions, and they're giving more of the same. They're giving lofty statements without any action, and we think that Pope Francis should be taking action that will protect children by turning over evidence of sex crimes to police and by punishing bishops who have enabled and who covered up for and shielded predators from police."
In a January 16th press release, SNAP national board member Mary Caplan criticized Vatican representatives for their anemic testimony. "We are disappointed that Catholic officials ignored those questions or answered them poorly," she wrote
"Two high-ranking Catholic officials today basically told a United Nations panel that the Vatican has little real power to stop bishops from hiding clergy sex crimes. We’re very saddened that such a huge and powerful church bureaucracy continues to pretend it’s powerless over its own officials.
These clerics said some nice things today in Geneva. But unfortunately, the encouraging public words today by Catholic officials differ radically from the actual and distressing private behavior of Catholic officials. Before the cameras, the church hierarchy often denounces predators and thanks victims. But behind closed doors, the church hierarchy often protects predators and rebuffs victims.
The Catholic officials today repeatedly cited vague, new and unenforced internal church abuse guidelines. But these are meaningless because no one is ever punished for breaking church abuse guidelines.
And many of the guidelines focus on child molesting clerics while ignoring the bigger problem: corrupt church officials who are still endangering kids, moving offenders, stonewalling law enforcement and deceiving parishioners and the public."
Pam Spees, senior staff attorney at the Center for Constitutional Rights, lamented that the Holy See has "consistently refused to accept responsibility for its role in perpetuating rape and sexual violence against children in the Church and further enabling it by protecting offending priests." In a CCR statement, Spees expressed disappointment in the Vatican's response to clergy abuse but admitted that the hearing was a positive step.
"The Vatican attempted to relegate the issue to the past and claim it is a new era, that they now ‘get it,’ but they continue to refuse to turn over records for prosecution, punish higher-ups that covered up the crimes, or provide any real evidence that they are now putting the safety of children above the reputation of the Church. Nonetheless, today’s hearing is a milestone in calling for an end to these days of impunity. The international community is demanding answers, and that is the first step toward true accountability and, we hope, an end to the widespread violence against children.”
SNAP and CCR have every right to be disappointed. Clergy sexual abuse has left too many children traumatized, and cover-ups by church leaders have impeded justice. The Catholic Church is obliged to take responsibility for clergy abuse if it wants to be seen as a moral authority instead of a corrupt, callous institution. Deflecting responsibility and protecting abusers was immoral in the past, and it continues to be immoral now.
However, SNAP's Barbara Blaine was correct when she called the hearing "historic". The UN Committee on the Rights of the Child held the Vatican's feet to the fire on a global stage, drawing international attention to clergy abuse. If the Vatican understands that it will be held accountable before a global audience, it may take its moral duty to address abuse more seriously.
To read additional commentary, visit the following links.
In California, a proposed bill that would extend the statute of limitations for childhood sexual abuse victims has encountered fierce resistance from Catholic Church leaders and its allies. California Senate Bill No. 131 would extend the statute of limitations for recovery of damages suffered due to childhood sexual abuse. However, the Los Angeles Times reports that SB 131 failed to secure enough votes to leave the California lower house appropriations committee and go to the Assembly floor. The panel reportedly plans to take up the bill again next week. If passed, SB 131 would be a boon for clergy abuse victims seeking redress from the Catholic Church, allowing them more time to seek justice in the courts.
Joelle Casteix, western regional director of the Survivors' Network of Those Abused by Priests (SNAP), stressed the importance of legal recourse for victims of childhood sexual abuse. "The best way to expose child predators, help victims heal and keep kids safe right now is by opening up the courtroom doors to victims of child sexual abuse," she told the Orange County Register.
Unfortunately, the Catholic Church has been fighting SB 131 tooth and nail. According to the Los Angeles Times, a group affiliated with the church has recruited five lobbying firms to neutralize SB 131. Large California diocese and allied groups have accused SB 131 of targeting religious and nonprofit organizations while ignoring sexual abuse in public schools.
The Archdiocese of Los Angeles has been particularly vocal in its resistance to SB 131. An action alert on the Archdiocese website urges congregants to fight SB 131 as part of "faithful citizenship". Furthermore, it criticizes SB 131 because the bill allegedly "fails to protect all victims of childhood sexual abuse, discriminates against Catholic schools and other private employers, and puts the social services and educational work of the Church at risk." Los Angeles Archbishop Jose H. Gomez framed the fight against SB 131 as a religious freedom issue, telling parishioners, "Let's pray for our religious freedom … and let's exercise that freedom by contacting our legislators about SB 131", according to the Los Angeles Times.
The California Catholic Conference (CCC) also blasted SB 131. In a May 7th statement, the CCC complained that SB 131 " will do nothing for the overwhelming majority of victims and shockingly little to most abusers." The CCC has issued an action alert on the bill to Catholic churches, urging citizens to pressure their lawmakers into voting no on the bill.
Various Catholic parishes and individual churches in California have
joined the attack on SB 131, echoing the rhetoric of the CCC and the Los
Angeles Diocese. (See here
for an example.) Dutifully, they claim that the bill unfairly
targets Catholic institutions and ignores children abused in public
schools.
At times, the rhetoric against SB 131 becomes acerbic. The Media Report posted a vicious commentary on SB 131 last month, blaming the bill on "anti-Catholic zealots" and "cash-hungry contingency lawyers" who stand to win "humongous settlements" if it passes. The commentary demonized SNAP as an "anti-Catholic group" with a "notorious Church-suing lawyer" in tow. The commentary painted SB 131 supporters as malicious, claiming that "the fact that not all dioceses have been bankrupted is what seems to bother those who want to see the passage of the unfair SB 131 the most."
However, some observers are unimpressed with such machinations. John Lovell, a lobbyist for the California Police Chiefs Association,
dismissed claims that the bill would harm Catholic schools. "I feel the
argument that this bill will result in the diminution of Catholic
schools to be offensive and disingenuous," he said, according to the Los Angeles Times.
Professor Marci A. Hamilton of Yeshiva University's Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law has spoken in favor of statute of limitation reform for abuse victims. In an August 8th commentary at SOL Reform News, Professor Hamilton observes that California's Catholic Church is using the same strategy to obstruct statute of limitation reform used by other dioceses. She argues against the church's claims that SB 131 is anti-Catholic and biased against nonprofits.
"This is the same playbook that was first conjured up by now-Philadelphia Archbishop Charles Chaput when he was the Archbishop of Denver, Colorado. The main idea is that, once SOL reform is proposed in the legislature, the bishops then mobilize their parishioners against it, with messages that misrepresent the actual impact of such legislation, and then play a false anti-Catholic card to really get their parishioners out of the pews and onto their computers and phones. The trouble is that neither claim is true, nor is either truly in the spirit of Catholic teachings."
Unfortunately, she's right. The Catholic Church has a long history of resisting legislation that would expand the statute of limitations for sexual abuse victims. In many states, the church and its lobbyists have pressured legislators to water down bills and encouraged congregants to sway their lawmakers, according to the New York Times and Philadelphia Weekly.
Professor Hamilton chides church leaders for betraying Catholic principles regarding justice and trying to bar sexual abuse victims from the justice system. "What religious values sanction the bishops’ fabrication of arguments against victims’ access to justice?" she asks.
"For the Catholic Church, the sexual abuse of children, and their continued endangerment, however, are not acts sanctioned by theology. And, while the bishops have observed in the past a theologically-based “rule against scandal,” which led them to shield abusers to protect the reputation of the Church, they now say that they are engaging in “zero-tolerance” of abuse, and “cooperating” with authorities. They are also committed, we are told, to transparency.
So, what religious values are served by their opposition to victims of childhood sexual abuse? I am told that Catholic theology does embrace the pursuit of justice. While the Church litigators fighting the victims of the Catholic hierarchy and priests in court frequently intone Canon Law to avoid discovery and liability, the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC), which John Paul II issued in 1992, is also part of their theological system ... Where are these values in the public relations-fueled campaign against victims’ access to justice? Nowhere. Instead, the plea to parishioners tells them that SOL reform is about money, or more specifically, about putting services and schools at risk."
Victims of sexual abuse, including clergy abuse, deserve the right to seek redress in a court of law. By obstructing efforts to make legal redress easier for victims, the Catholic Church is behaving dishonorably. Is the church hierarchy more worried about lawsuits and monetary losses than justice? Is it more concerned about deflecting from its systemic clergy abuse problems than making amends to victims? People of conscience need to call out Catholic leaders for their obstructionism and demand fairness for clergy abuse survivors.
Is the new Pope prepared to address clergy sexual abuse in the Catholic Church? Maybe not. A March 18th article in the Washington Post explores Pope Francis' anemic response to clergy sexual abuse during his time as the head of the Buenos Aires Archdiocese.
Before the papal conclave elected Pope Francis (formerly Archbishop Jorge Mario Bergoglio) as the new pontiff, he held authority over Father Julio Cesar Grassi in the Archdiocese of Buenos Aires, Argentina. Grassi, celebrated for his anti-poverty and education initiatives, established the Felices los Niños ("Happy Children") foundation to help underpriviliged youth. However, Grassi was later convicted of sexually abusing a child and sentenced to 15 years in prison. In June 2012, a court rules that Grassi should be released from house arrest, according to the Buenos Aires Herald. Grassi was reportedly never ejected from the priesthood.
According to the Washington Post, Archbishop Bergoglio refused to meet with Grassi's victims or the victims of other clergy under his authority. Even when offending clergy were arrested and incarcerated, he did not apologize to victims or offer financial restitution. The article stressed that while there is no evidence Bergoglio covered up clergy abuse, he did not act swiftly or take strong action to protect children. To boot, the Associated Press reports that Grassi is currently free pending his appeal, due in part to the Argentine church's court filing on his behalf.
Similarly, after another Buenos Aires Archdiocese priest, Father Mario Napoleon Sasso, was accused of sexually abusing children, he was sent to the La Domus Mariae clergy rehabilitation center. Sasso was convicted in 2007, sentenced to 17 years in prison, but later paroled. Families of Sasso's victims reportedly asked to see Bergoglio, but never received a response.
Observers have expressed outrage and disappointment in Bergoglio's response. In a March 19th press release, the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests (SNAP) demanded accountability from Pope Francis on the Grassi case.
"History, psychology and common sense suggest that Fr. Grassi is guilty, that Pope Francis is wrong, and that kids are at risk in Buenos Aires. It feels very much to us like this is yet another of the thousands of cases in which powerful Catholic officials use their vast influence to help a proven predator, rather than suffering victims and vulnerable kids."
According to Voice of Russia, Anne Barrett Doyle of Bishop Accountability said that Bergoglio was "very unsympathetic towards victims" in two priests' cases.
"What seems to have happened here is very serious. Cardinal Bergoglio seems to have basically put children in harm’s way by facilitating the freedom of Father Grassi. And first of all he has to undo the harm he has done. But also he has violated what is becoming recognized worldwide as a best practice of catholic bishops which is – to remove from the ministry any priest whose guilt has been established in child sexual abuse case. It is absolutely shocking that Cardinal Bergoglio was so reckless and irresponsible. And we also urge him to put pressure on the current Buenos Aires Archbishop to release the records of all the credibly accused priests in Buenos Aires, to release a list of their names as it was done here in the United States."
Writing at Friendly Atheist, Sara Lin Wilde lamented that Bergoglio's response to clergy sexual abuse was all too similar to that of other Catholic leaders.
"Since the problem of molester priests is only beginning to come to light in South American Catholicism, he could have done a great deal of good by confronting it directly, setting the stage for leadership and moral clarity in those under his care. Instead, he has upheld the traditional approach: burying his head in the sand and showing reluctance to address a moral issue that should be profoundly unambiguous."
Clergy sexual abuse is a serious issue that has plagued the Catholic Church for decades (if not centuries). The Catholic Church desperately needs a pope who is willing to hold clergy perpetrators accountable and make systemic changes to prevent abuse. Given what is known about Pope Francis' response to clergy abuse in Argentina, however, I'm not holding my breath.
For additional commentary, visit the following links.
