BishopAccountability.org
	US Bishops Seek to Retain Abuse Rules By Michael Paulson Boston Globe [Boston MA] May 15, 2005 (Clarification: A headline on yesterday's Page One story regarding Catholic Church rules on priest abuse was unclear on the procedure for retaining the rules. The US Conference of Catholic Bishops will debate proposed changes to the policy at a meeting next month in Chicago; any changes approved by the bishops will then have to be approved by the Vatican.) A key group of US bishops is recommending that the Roman Catholic church retain its policy of removing from ministry all sexually abusive priests, despite concern from critics that the policy is too harsh. The policy, approved by the bishops in the spring of 2002 and adjusted later that year when the Vatican demanded changes to protect priests' rights, requires that any priest who had committed even a single act of abuse, no matter how long ago, be barred from saying Mass publicly, from administering the sacraments, from wearing clerical garb, or from presenting himself publicly as a priest. The priest is then asked to lead a life of "prayer and penance." The policy was approved overwhelmingly while the church was under intense public pressure in the midst of the sexual abuse crisis. Some bishops and priests have criticized the policy as inflexible and as contrary to Christian teaching about the possibility of forgiveness and redemption. Most notably, Cardinal Avery Dulles, a member of the faculty at Fordham University and the most prominent American Catholic theologian, wrote last year in America magazine, the Jesuit weekly: "There is no reason to think that the protection of young people requires the removal from the ministry of elderly or mature priests who may have committed an offense in their youth but have performed many decades of exemplary service. Such action seems to reflect an attitude of vindictiveness to which the church should not yield." But there now appears to be little appetite in the United States and in Rome to revisit the zero-tolerance policy, which has led to the removal of hundreds of priests. The bishops conference said last year that 700 priests and deacons had been ministry from 2002 to 2004. "I used to say that the policy was not good, but the longer I've lived with it and the more I've pondered it, the more I think for the sake of the priesthood it's probably appropriate," said the Rev. Robert J. Silva, president of the National Federation of Priests' Councils, an organization that advocates for priests. The zero-tolerance policy, put in place after the sexual abuse crisis that erupted in the Catholic Archdiocese of Boston in January 2002, was initially approved for a two-year test period; it expired in March. But the expiration date was extended to allow the bishops to debate the policy's renewal at their annual spring meeting, set for next month in Chicago. Two groups of bishops, the members of an Ad Hoc Committee on Sexual Abuse and the members of a delegation that negotiates US church abuse rules with the Vatican, have proposed a series of changes to the policy, called norms. These, they say, are largely technical, and do not affect the zero-tolerance policy that requires all abusive priests to be permanently removed from the ministry. "There was no move to throw the norms out," said Monsignor Ronny E. Jenkins, an assistant professor of canon law at the Catholic University of America and a consultant to the US Conference of Catholic Bishops. "There is no question in my mind that the spirit and the purpose of the norms are retained." Cardinal Francis E. George of Chicago, who led negotiations with the Vatican, was out of the country late last week and could not be reached for comment; Archbishop Harry J. Flynn of Minneapolis and St. Paul, chairman of the abuse committee, did not return calls seeking comment. The zero-tolerance policy is expressed in the norms with the phrase, "when even a single act of sexual abuse of a minor by a priest or deacon is admitted or is established . . . the offending priest will be removed permanently from ecclesiastical ministry." The church can also dismiss an abusive cleric from the priesthood, an action that requires approval of the pope. The current norms were approved by the Vatican in December 2002, 11 months after a nationwide church crisis began with reports in The Boston Globe about the Archdiocese of Boston's failure to remove sexually abusive priests from the ministry. The bishops confirmed the seriousness of the problem after commissioning a study that found that nationwide 4,392 priests, about 4 percent of all priests, had been accused of abusing 10,667 individuals from 1950 to 2002. After the scandal erupted, the bishops promised to notify law enforcement of all credible allegations against priests and deacons. The norms define a separate, internal church process for determining whether a priest or deacon accused of abuse should remain in the ministry. The norms require bishops, in every case in which there is "sufficient evidence that sexual abuse of a minor has occurred," to notify the Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. That office can then order that the diocese determine the credibility of an accusation, or it can handle the case in Rome. Most cases are being adjudicated in Rome, and that process has proven to be quite slow, to the frustration of many American bishops; earlier this year the bishops said that 256 priests and deacons were still suspended from the ministry while awaiting resolution of their cases in Rome. Archbishop Sean P. O'Malley of Boston has been a supporter of the zero-tolerance policy and has said he thought any effort to weaken it would be a mistake. In response to a question from the Globe about his expectations for the meeting next month, O'Malley's office issued a statement: "Archbishop Sean looks forward to the June meeting where he and the members of the conference can have a frank and open discussion about the way the charter and norms have worked and will work." The statement added: "The archbishop and the church of Boston remain committed to doing everything in their power to protect children." Advocates for the victims said their concern is not with the text of the norms, but with the implementation, particularly of a provision that calls on bishops to reach out to those who have been abused. "As best we can tell, there's no effort at all, even perfunctory, to strengthen the norms, which we find disappointing," said David Clohessy, executive director of the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests, the largest victim-support organization in the country. Clohessy said that his organization had not been asked for its views as the bishops contemplated changing the rules and that there has been no official contact between the bishops and the victims' group for three years. "We fundamentally believe it's a weak and vague document that's only sporadically enforced, so that it borders on meaningless in the day-to-day world," Clohessy said. "We think every bishop should go to every parish where a proven, admitted, or credibly accused predator worked and emphatically and publicly beg witnesses and victims to contact law enforcement, and they should release and prominently post on their websites the names of proven, admitted, or credibly accused priests." The proposed changes to the norms, which were recently mailed to all bishops, are largely technical, but they may be the subject of some debate in Chicago. One change affects how the bishops will handle accusations stemming from events that took place long ago. Canon law, which establishes a criminal justice system within the church, provides a statute of limitations for such crimes, but the norms currently require that bishops apply for a waiver of that statute for abuse allegations. The proposed revisions end that requirement and instead say that bishops may apply for such a waiver. That change, Jenkins said, "is a recognition of the legal fact that a bishop must be free to exercise discretion." But, Jenkins said, the change would not affect the bishops' promise to remove abusers from ministry, which the bishops can do through their executive power, without a canonical trial. The revisions also propose to drop a detailed definition of sexual abuse, choosing instead simply to describe abuse as a violation of the Sixth Commandment, which prohibits adultery and is understood in Catholic theology to bar all forms of sexual misconduct. Jenkins said that change would more clearly allow a broader application of the policy, for example against priests who are found to possess child pornography. The proposed revisions include a phrase stating: "During the investigation the accused enjoys the presumption of innocence." This, Jenkins said, was a response to a concern raised by a number of critics who said the initial norms had been tilted toward a presumption of guilt. Jenkins pointed out that most civil legal systems, including the US standard, grant a presumption of innocence to the accused.