Bishops Adopt Abuse Policy
06/15/2002
U.S. Catholic bishops voted
overwhelmingly Friday to remove any priest guilty of child molestation from his
duties, no matter when the abuse happened, but they stopped short of mandatory
defrocking of those priests.
The charter also requires
bishops to report any child abuse accusations to civil authorities.
"From this day forward, no one known to have
sexually abused a child will work in the Catholic Church in the United
States," Bishop Wilton Gregory, president of the U.S. Conference of
Catholic Bishops, said after the vote of 239-13 was announced.
The bishops voted to make the "Charter for the
Protection of Children and Young People" immediately binding. They now will
seek endorsement from the Vatican, where some high-ranking officials have balked
at provisions, such as mandatory reporting.
"My understanding is that the Holy See
understands the situation in the United States and will accept what we
propose," said Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, archbishop of Washington, D.C.
The policy, which also applies to deacons, did not
go as far as some abuse victims and other advocates wanted – to require
defrocking of all priests who abuse minors. But it moved further than an earlier
draft that allowed some flexibility in restrictions on some priests guilty of a
single, long-ago abuse.
Some abuse victims called the bishops' plan an
accommodation for sexual predators. The Rev. Gary Hayes, president of the
Survivors of Clergy Abuse Linkup, shrugged when asked if the new policy could be
considered "zero tolerance."
"It's like a chocolate and vanilla swirl,"
he said. "It's not quite one or the other and it's both."
Said David Clohessy of the Survivors Network of
those Abused by Priests: "At the end of the day, the bishops are defining
this as a bad-apple problem. It's not a bad-apple problem. It's a barrel
problem."
The Dallas conference began Thursday with Bishop
Gregory rebuking some of his colleagues for shielding predator priests.
Afterward, the bishops faced harsh criticism from guest lay speakers and victims
of clergy sexual abuse. They urged disciplinary actions for bishops who had
mishandled cases and a greater role for laity in the church.
"This is a defining moment for us as
bishops," Archbishop Harry Flynn, head of the bishops' Ad Hoc Committee on
Sexual Abuse, said as Friday's session began, "a moment for us to declare
our resolve once and for all to put a plan in place ... to root out a cancer in
our church."
Sharp division
The bishops voted by secret ballot at 3:45 p.m.
after an arduous day of debate that pointed to sharp division in three areas:
What constitutes sexual abuse.
Whether all abuse allegations should be reported to
civil authorities.
Whether priests who had abused once in the past
should be allowed to remain in restricted ministry.
Under pressure from abuse victims and from Catholic
laity, the bishops opted for the strictest policies on the table. They also said
each bishop must adjust his diocese's policy to correspond with local civil laws
concerning abuse of minors. In addition, they called for an end to
confidentiality clauses in legal settlements, unless for grave reasons demanded
by victims.
The most controversial issue – and for many
bishops an emotional one – was removing priests involved in past allegations.
Under the charter, the priests are forbidden from any ministry, even in limited
ways in nursing homes, hospitals or other settings. They cannot wear clerical
garb, lead public worship or present themselves publicly as priests.
Some of those priests might be returned to layman's
status. The bishops are working to develop a process to expedite laicization.
'Common good'
"It hurts to say I support zero
tolerance," said Cardinal Anthony Bevilacqua of Philadelphia, who reflected
the sentiment of many bishops openly grieving the loss of abusive priests who
seemed to have rehabilitated their lives. "At the same time, in our present
crisis we must place the common good of our church first."
The bishops' vote came after an extraordinary six
months of clergy sex-abuse scandals that have led to the removal of more than
200 priests, three bishops and an archbishop. In April, Pope John Paul II
summoned top U.S. bishops and cardinals to Rome, where he said there was no room
in the priesthood for anyone who abuses children.
Members of religious orders do not fall under the
direct authority of the bishops and will not be affected by the policy. Cardinal
Roger Mahony of Los Angeles said bishops must push religious orders to adopt
similar standards.
"Otherwise, we find ourselves in the situation
that diocesan priests are called to one standard and religious priests are
called to another standard," he said. "We must keep in mind that half
the priests in the United States are religious priests."
Definition of abuse
The bishops agreed that their definition of sexual
abuse should not be equated with the definition in state laws, nor should it be
in opposition. Archbishop Justin Rigali of St. Louis sought to soften the
bishops' definition by removing a phrase he said was too vague:
"A child is abused whether or not this activity
involves explicit force, whether or not it involves genital or physical contact,
whether or not it is initiated by the child, and whether or not there is
discernible harmful outcome."
The voice vote after lengthy debate was too close to
call, so a count was taken.
The majority, including Dallas Bishop Charles V.
Grahmann and his coadjutor, Joseph Galante, favored the more stringent language.
The minority protested that the measure made priests vulnerable to accusations.
"The definition goes too far," said Bishop
John Yanta of Amarillo. "You're inviting a lot of frivolous allegations.
What if people don't like a priest who hugs? Hispanics and Italians are very
tactile people. They like to touch. Is that abuse?"
Archbishop Roger Schwietz of Anchorage, Alaska, a
member of the bishops' Vocations Committee, said bishops were split on whether
any allegation of child abuse should be reported to civil authorities.
"Some bishops didn't want to make the language
too strong for fear of not protecting priests," he said. "But other
bishops, including myself, felt a stronger document would elevate the reputation
of priests."
Some bishops said it's the job of law enforcement,
not bishops, to investigate child abuse. Cardinal Mahony argued that turning
over all allegations to civil authorities may be doing priests a favor.
"I've had two false accusations against me
within the past two months," he said. "I welcome the police
intervention because it helps you get it over with quickly."
Debate, then vote
At 3:10 p.m., the bishops finished amending the
document. They then spent 35 minutes arguing for its passage or defeat.
Cardinal Avery Dulles of New York, a theologian who
is not a bishop, said the document was gravely flawed for two reasons. He argued
that the definition of sexual abuse was too broad and left priests open to
"looks and touches" that might be interpreted by courts as sexual
molestation.
He also said the document established an adversarial
relationship between bishops and priests. "Priests won't confess their sins
and won't feel free to come to their bishops as their spiritual fathers,"
he said.
Bishop Grahmann of Dallas spoke in favor of the
charter's passage.
"I strongly support that, for even a single act
of sexual abuse of a minor, that the offending priest will not remain in
ministry or receive a future assignment," he said. "We owe this to the
church and to society."
After the vote was taken, the bishops stepped into
the hallway and ate ice cream bars as they waited for the final tally. A
two-thirds majority, or 190 votes, was needed to pass the charter. Although 284
bishops were eligible to vote, only 252 participated.
After the outcome was announced, the bishops stood
and applauded.
The conference ends Saturday, after a morning of
prayer.
Staff writer Jeffrey Weiss contributed to this
report.
|
|
 |
