Cover
story Post-Dallas: Theologian: Despite high marks for charter, bishops
exhibit horrible moral failure
By TOM KELLY
Toledo, Ohio
A Toledo, Ohio-based theologian gives the U.S. bishops high marks
on the by and large very positive document they approved in Dallas
to protect children from clergy sex abuse. But he marks them down on three
points.
Richard R. Gaillardetz is the Murray/Bacik professor of Catholic
Studies at the University of Toledo. He is the author of five books, including
three on the magisterium and church authority. Gaillardetz, a systematic
theologian, says the document rightly stresses protection of children and
a preferential option, as it were, for the concerns of the victims of
clerical sexual abuse. He also lauds the documents call for
diligence in cooperating with civil authorities and the creation of a national
review board.
However, Gaillardetz said the bishops exhibited a horrible
moral failure in advocating a policy of zero tolerance and in not
addressing the need for punitive measures directed at themselves.
His other criticism is that the bishops uncritically support the
proposal to have American seminaries investigated for their treatment of
chastity in priestly formation.
He acknowledged that the bishops were in a difficult position in
Dallas, due to the pressure from the media and the strong public opinion that
deluged them. These voices created a kind of interpretative template for
assessing what the bishops were going to do. By that I mean the success or
failure of the bishops meeting -- even before they met -- was going to
stand or fall on whether they went for so-called zero tolerance.
Gaillardetz said that was unfortunate, and he contends that even
after the documents release too much attention was placed on that
particular element in the charter. He said the case of Toledo priest
Robert Fisher is a good example of why the bishops policy went too far in
removing from ministry any priest guilty of even a single case of sexual
abuse.
I think that aspect of the charter was very much motivated
by external public pressure, and as a result, the bishops policy glossed
over some important distinctions between priests who are serial offenders and
priests who have committed an offense one time in the distant past and have
dealt fully with the consequences of their action, civilly, ecclesiastically
and spiritually. It would seem that some of these priests could be placed in a
carefully monitored setting where parishioners would be fully informed of the
priests past.
Gaillardetz, who is married and the father of four young sons,
cited the prior treatment of Fishers case as a good example of how
you do it right: You inform people of the individuals past and the way in
which it has been dealt with, and you let the people decide if they want to
trust this priest in this situation.
Another significant shortcoming of the charter, he said, was the
bishops decision to adopt such a strict policy on priests behavior
while not addressing at all the need for punitive measures directed
toward bishops guilty of shuffling around priests they knew had questionable
records.
I find that unconscionable, Gaillardetz said. I
just dont understand how you can hold the priest to such a strict
standard and in no way address bishops culpability.
He acknowledged that the difficulty is, in part, canonical: The
episcopal conference doesnt have the authority to remove bishops. But he
says the charter could have at least called for the creation of a Vatican
policy for removing bishops who were grossly negligent in the way they handled
the reassignment of known sex offenders.
If the priest is removed from a ministry for a past act of
abuse, and the bishop was guilty of reassigning this priest or of covering up
his deeds, then that bishop should be removed as well. I just dont see
any way around it, Gaillardetz told NCR.
He is also critical of the bishops approval of a proposal
made at the earlier Rome meeting between the American cardinals and Vatican
officials. The cardinals proposed that upcoming apostolic visitations of
American seminaries focus on investigating the moral formation of seminarians
in chastity.
This suggests that this whole problem is to be laid at the
feet of seminaries or is to be reduced to individual moral failings, he
said.
A far more fruitful investigation would explore the ways in
which current church structures and policies have artificially limited the pool
of candidates for the priesthood and have sustained and encouraged a clerical
culture that inhibits the accountability of priests and bishops to the whole
people of God.
Tom Kelly is a Toledo freelance writer.
National Catholic Reporter, July 5,
2002
|