As I See It: Position of Diocese Doesn't Fit with Reality

By David Clohessy
Telegram and Gazette
November 6, 2015

http://www.telegram.com/article/20151106/OPINION/151109456/101505

Soon, millions across the US will see "Spotlight," a highly-acclaimed film that shows how dogged Boston Globe reporters, with the help of courageous abuse victims, unearthed horrific clergy sex crimes and cover-ups in the Boston archdiocese and beyond.

In anticipation of the movie, and the distressing picture it paints of complicit Catholic officials, Worcester church staff are disingenuously distancing themselves from both their neighboring diocese and their own indefensible track record of abuse. It’s smart public relations. But it doesn’t correspond with reality.

In a recent Telegram op-ed (Nov. 4), Judge Edward Reynolds claims the local Catholic hierarchy is “protecting children today by implementing nationally accepted protocols.” That’s wishful thinking.

Judge Reynolds and his colleagues should be promoting vigilance instead of complacency. They should take off their rose-colored glasses, look hard at the evidence, and admit that what church spin-doctors pass off as progress is really “smoke and mirrors” designed to mollify the flock, not actually safeguard the vulnerable.

Judge Reynolds was hand-picked by Bishop Robert McManus for an essentially meaningless abuse panel that is primarily “window dressing” mandated by a weak, vague national church policy. Judge Reynolds means well, no doubt. But he’s being fooled and exploited by church officials who continue to put their comfort and careers ahead of kids’ safety.

Here’s the clearest evidence of this. Bishop McManus, Judge Reynolds and their colleagues refuse to take the most simple and effective way to protect kids from child molesting clerics -- posting their names, photos and work histories on diocesan and parish websites.

About 30 U.S. bishops have done this. Not Bishop McManus, however. None of those 30 bishops have expressed regret for having taken this easy, quick prevention step. It’s common sense: if a cleric is too dangerous to keep in a parish, then the public should be warned about him.

Here’s more evidence: Across Massachusetts, bishops were able to play hardball with victims and keep their public in the dark because archaic, predator-friendly statutes of limitations gave virtually no victim the chance to expose clerics who committed or concealed child sex crimes in court. Gradually, more and more states are reforming or repealing these dangerous deadlines. But in nearly every case, this progress happens despite vigorous opposition from bishops on civil reform. Massachusetts has lifted the statute of limitations in criminal cases, but only extended it in civil litigation.

More evidence: As "Spotlight" clearly shows, bishops hid abuse largely because they could. Each Catholic prelate is essentially the lord of his own kingdom, answerable to virtually no one. Without any real supervision or “checks and balances,” these monarchs continue to pledge reform but practice secrecy, recklessness and callousness in clergy sex cases. That was true three decades ago, when America’s first pedophile priest case attracted national attention. And it remains just as true today.

Sadly, the recent church abuse panels, like the one Judge Reynolds has been on, are only “advisory.” They have no power. And almost always rely only on information from church bureaucrats in their deliberations.

Judge Reynolds touts church policies, protocols and procedures. But kids weren’t hurt and crimes weren’t concealed because of inadequate policies, protocols and procedures. They were hurt by deliberate, repeated, selfish decisions by Catholic officials who have never been exposed or punished and are largely still on the job now.

And for internal church abuse guidelines to have clout, employees who violate them must suffer consequences. But can you name even a single Catholic worker -- from custodian to Cardinal -- who has lost even one day’s pay for breaking church policies, stonewalling district attorneys, misleading parishioners, destroying files, hiding evidence, or transferring predators? I can only think of two -- a Missouri bishop and a Philadelphia monsignor. Both, however, were punished by our secular courts, not by their church supervisors in this country or in Rome.

Forty-one Worcester priests have been publicly accused. Dozens of their church supervisors and colleagues knew of or suspected these crimes and ignored or hid them. No words on paper, regardless of how impressive they may sound, will change this. Only exposing and punishing those who commit or conceal child sex crimes stops this horror. But Bishop McManus and his colleagues continue to keep a tight lid on this cover-up, while clerics who perpetuated it are still on the job, often winning promotions and continuing their complicity. Only four U.S. bishops have resigned over their role in mishandling abuse allegations.

Instead of patting themselves on the back, Worcester church officials should be begging anyone who sees, suspects or suffers clergy sex crimes to call law enforcement. Instead of making self-serving reassurances, they should be warning parents about known predators. Until that happens, the disturbing and self-serving patterns of prelates so accurately and movingly portrayed in "Spotlight" will continue to be the norm, not the exception, in the Catholic church.

David Clohessy of St. Louis is a former Boston resident and the long-time director of SNAP, the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests. The priest who he said abused him said he subsequently spent time in a Worcester-area church treatment center. No charges were brought due to statute of limitations issues.