On consecutive days, Public Disclosure recently published my essay Canon Law Should Be Changed to Make Catholic Bishops Accountable and Father William Dailey's Church and State in a Time of Scandal. I've never met Father Bill, but we've developed one of those internet friendships that increasingly characterize our social lives these days. They make an interesting compare and contrast, I think.
Father Dailey argues that:
When it comes to clerical sexual abuse, the primary question for the Church must be how best to keep children safe and deal justly with wrongdoers.
Well, yes, but. The difficulty I have with this position is not that it is true but that it addresses only part of the problem of priestly sexual misconduct. There are three forms of sexual misconduct on the part of priests (and deacons and seminarians) that are problematic: sexual contact of any sort with children, nonconsensual sex with adults, and consensual sex with adults. To be sure, the latter is rarely if ever criminal, but it is a serious violation of canon law.
Consider, for example, the allegations against Cardinal McCarrick, which involved repeated instances in which he abused his position to obtain sex from seminarians and other young but nevertheless adult men. In my view, the Church cannot continue to sweep this sort of abuse under the rug.
Father Dailey further argues that:
Many faithful Catholics have expressed the sentiment that recent events show that “nothing has changed.” In fact, some things have changed, for the better, although other urgent matters remain to be addressed.
Children are far safer in today’s Church, thanks to policies such as zero tolerance for those against whom charges of abuse have been substantiated, child protection education programs, and strict rules about church workers’ interaction with young people. While there is always the possibility of hidden abuse, today’s cautious new environment and highly protective rules, which have represented a sea change in the day-to-day life of the Church, have made children vastly safer from predators.
I agree completely. The Church doesn't get enough credit for the steps it has already taken. Although frankly that's because the Church hierarchy so often shoots itself in the foot.
Next Father Dailey posits:
At the same time, the November USCCB meeting in Baltimore highlights that there is still much work to be done. The Church must find ways to hold bishops accountable when they themselves have sinned either by committing abuse or by failing to appropriately address abuse committed by others.
I agree completely. Hence, I. argued in my essay that:
The Dallas Charter currently provides that each diocese should have a review board with a majority comprising independent lay persons, but it limits the board’s function to being “a confidential consultative body to the bishop/eparch.”
The events of summer 2018 call into question the effectiveness of such bodies and have severely undermined the public’s trust in the current review process. Even some bishops acknowledge that the laity—and society at large—have lost confidence in them to do the right thing. The absence of such confidence seriously undermines the external credibility of the Church and discourages an internal culture of compliance.
The time has come to take responsibility away from Church tribunals and diocesan bishops. Instead, each diocese should install a committee with at least a majority composed of independent laity with exclusive power to review charges of sexual misconduct, take internal disciplinary measures, and notify civil authorities. These diocesan review boards would replace the existing Church tribunals as the final authority over sex abuse cases within a diocese.
Given the considerable powers possessed by a diocesan bishop and the extent to which the bishops were involved in covering up misconduct, the diocesan review bodies should be supplemented by a new national committee under the auspices of the USCCB that would hear cases in which the alleged misconduct was committed or enabled by a sitting bishop.
Father Dailey cautions that:
... the faithful should be wary of embracing innovations such as suspensions of statutes of limitations, which were not invented to deal with clerical sexual abuse and should not be jettisoned in haste when tempers are running high.
I agree. See my memorandum on the case against extending statutes of limitation.
Anyway, it's a great essay. I recommend it highly.
