The American Catholic Church's medieval morality play continues. Once again we learn that things are worse than we had imagined--even though we had already taken into account the fact that things are worse than we had imagined:
Boston Documents Show Failure to Oust Accused Priests: ...In one case, responding to a letter from a priest accused of sexually assaulting young women studying to be nuns, [Bernard Law] said, "Our recent conversation and your written reflection are a beautiful testament to the depth of your faith and the courage of your heart." Cardinal Law added, "It is important that all of us be reminded by the pain endured by those who have been accused."... The archdiocese sought late last month to delay the public release of the documents... but a judge denied their motion, strongly criticizing the church, saying it was trying keep information from public view....
Advocates for abuse victims said today that the documents were more troubling than the records released earlier this year on a handful of priests accused of abuse because they appeared to show a more consistent pattern of mishandling abusive priests. "What is striking to me about these documents is that it is very clear from them that Cardinal Law and other top archdiocesan officials knew far more, far earlier about far more priests and their abusive behavior than the officials have ever let on and yet did so very little," said David Clohessy...
In some cases, the documents suggest that archdiocese officials tried to discourage accusers of priests from filing lawsuits seeking compensation. In the case of the Ohio priest, Father Robert M. Burns, a memo from the Rev. John B. McCormack, now the bishop of Manchester, N.H., said he told a meeting with a family complaining of Father Burns's abuse: "I didn't think compensation would be helpful to their son. It is not what he needs." A spokesman for Bishop McCormack said he could not comment on any of the cases because he had not seen the documents...
Not seen the documents? Bishop McCormack has seen the documents: he wrote the documents.
Posted by DeLong at December 04, 2002 09:49 AM | Trackback“Not seen the documents? Bishop McCormack has seen the documents: he wrote the documents.”
Someone is not sufficiently cynical. There is a very good chance that the bishop has not read the documents! It is not unusual for a member of the hierarchy to merely rubber stamp anything put in front of him by his bureaucrats.
Many argue that the bishops are sinners like the rest of us. Unfortunately, this excuse does not fly. The vast majority of people would not hesitate to deal severely with child molesters. The Catholic Church may be structurally unable to adequately respond to this crisis due to it oligarchical underpinnings. Lay people are essentially perceived as second class citizens unworthy of serious consideration. Thus, there is are no real check and balance mechanisms to address the misbehavior of the clergy.
Posted by: David Thomson on December 4, 2002 11:23 AMDavid:
Interesting (to me at least) that you focus here on the lack of checks and balances, but are uncertain in your comment on the Padilla post as to whether checks and balances are needed. Why one and not the other? Under canon law there is no provision for outside oversight yet you think its necessary, but under the federal constitution there is an express requirement for judicial oversight yet you're willing to waive it.
Curious.
Posted by: FDL on December 4, 2002 04:13 PM"...but under the federal constitution there is an express requirement for judicial oversight yet you're willing to waive it."
I never renounced the need for checks and balances. The only question during war time is how we do best accomplish this task. Also, this dilemma has haunted our country long before 9/11. Has everybody forgotten a guy named Abraham Lincoln who suspended habeas corpus during the civil war?
Posted by: David Thomson on December 4, 2002 04:38 PM>>Has everybody forgotten a guy named Abraham Lincoln who suspended habeas corpus during the civil war?<<
Yes. And that precedent makes me very, very nervous. It was (probably) the right thing to do at the time, but its possible use as precedent has made us a weaker nation...
Brad DeLong
"...has made us a weaker nation..."
Better a "weaker nation" than no nation at all. We are often confronted with less than ideal choices. Robert Kaplan admirably deals with this theme in his "Warrior Politics."
Posted by: David Thomson on December 8, 2002 10:03 AM