Beliefnet News

Beliefnet News


Bishops leave abuse policies largely intact

By DANIEL BURKE
c. 2011 Religion News Service

BELLEVUE, Wash. (RNS) The nation’s Roman Catholic bishops on Thursday (June 16) overwhelmingly voted to maintain current church policies on the sexual abuse of children, making only minor tweaks to policies that critics say contain large loopholes.

The bishops voted 187-5, with four abstentions, to make only slight revisions to their Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People, a set of guidelines adopted in 2002 as the clergy sex abuse scandal spread nationwide.

The bishops are expected to continue discussing their sexual abuse policies in private sessions through Friday, when the assembly ends. For the most part, though, they argue the current rules are effective, pointing to a sharp decline in new incidents of abuse since 2002.

But victims’ advocates say recent reports of ethical lapses by church leaders in Philadelphia and Kansas City, Mo., prove that the nonbinding church policies are weak and unenforceable.

“Despite revelations in numerous dioceses showing that abuse has been continuing under the bishops’ current abuse policy and that the policy needs to be overhauled, the bishops … chose to rubber-stamp a nearly identical policy for the future,” said the watchdog website BishopAccountability.org in a statement.

“This is a squandered opportunity and a disaster for children.”

Most of the revisions approved here bring the U.S. bishops’ policies in line with Vatican norms issued in 2010, which equate child abuse with abusing the mentally disabled, and make the acquisition, possession, or distribution of child pornography a church crime.

The bishops also adopted two revisions proposed by Boston Cardinal Sean O’Malley. One requires bishops to follow civil laws about reporting sexual abuse accusations against fellow bishops to civil authorities, just as they are expected to do for priests.

O’Malley’s other amendment accords the bishops’ guidelines with federal statutes that outlaw pornographic images of children under the age of 18. A previous bishops’ proposal had included only children under age 14.

“Without this change, we will likely experience much criticism and diminished confidence by way of providing exceptions for some circumstances of offenses with minors,” O’Malley wrote in proposing the revision.

The bishops rejected an impassioned plea from Archbishop Francis Hurley, the former head of the diocese of Anchorage, Alaska, to drop their “zero tolerance” policy, which permanently bars credibly accused priests from ministry.

“In the mind of most people, and in my own mind, when we say reconciliation and forgiveness, we mean the embrace of that person back into the community and the fold. We are not doing that with the priests and the priests feel that very much,” Hurley said.

As a retired bishop, Hurley does not have a vote at the bishops’ semiannual sessions, but his comments will “probably color our subsequent debate,” said Archbishop Timothy Dolan of New York, president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. No bishop, however, took up Hurley’s amendment.

Bishop Blase Cupich of Spokane, Wash., who chairs the church committee dedicated to protecting minors from sexual abuse, said the “zero tolerance” policy is essential to preventing child abuse, restoring trust in church leaders and demonstrating compassion for victims.

“I would find it very difficult as a diocesan bishop to go to a community and say, ‘I’m going to assign as your pastor or associate pastor, a priest who has abused a minor.’ I can tell you that my judgment would be questioned and that priest would not be accepted,” Cupich said.

Cupich said the bishops may again revise their guidelines in the next few years, after a church-appointed review board considers recommendations from a recent sweeping study on the “causes and context” of the scandal.

Cupich also said he is confident the Vatican will adopt mechanisms to ensure that bishops actually follow their own guidelines. The lack of penalties for bishops who break the rules creates a large loophole in current policy, according to victims’ advocates.



Advertisement
Comments read comments(6)
post a comment
JeannieGuzman

posted June 17, 2011 at 6:38 pm


My response to the following statement is So WHAT!!!! (Bishop Hurley’s comment) “In the mind of most people, and in my own mind, when we say reconciliation and forgiveness, we mean the embrace of that person back into the community and the fold. We are not doing that with the priests and the priests feel that very much,” Hurley said.

I couldn’t believe it when I read it. Rather than being concerned for innocent parishioners, who have paid dearly in the Priest Pedophilia Scandal by having human services in their parishes cut up to loosing churches that their immigrant forefathers paid for, Bishop Hurley is concerned about Pedophile Priests being hurt because of Zero Tolerance. Evidently, neither is he concerned for the Survivors of the Priest Pedophilia Scandal, who were molested, raped and sodomized by deviate Priests with Psycho-Sexual Problems! If this bishop shakes his head, it probably rattles! Hurley is from Alaska: Also, look at the thousands of abuse cases, up in Alaska, of Native American Children. Their stories are heartbreaking, and yet this bishop from Alaska would propose the ridiculous idea of allowing priests, who often sadistically abused Native American Children, as well as your normal rank and file Pedophile Priest to come back into the ministry. He “floated” the idea not once, but twice. So you can rest assured he’ll bring it up again!



report abuse
 

pagansister

posted June 17, 2011 at 8:06 pm


IOW nothing has changed—including the punishment of molesting priests. St. Louis anyone?



report abuse
 

Goodguyex

posted June 20, 2011 at 10:47 am


There should be relatively little difficulty in both affirming basic civil and constitutional rights for priests (or anyone else for that matter) and also protecting children and teens.

This is not a contradiction.

Anybody who thinks otherwise is either foolish, ignorant, or a bigot with an agenda.



report abuse
 

cknuck

posted June 20, 2011 at 12:16 pm


agreed Good, most folk don’t know what to do with their hate.



report abuse
 

Allan

posted June 20, 2011 at 1:55 pm


As an ex-Catholic, I know that the priests and bishops tend to be very protective of each other; on the other hand, I know that, because of the deep pockets of the Roman Church, they are more likely to be subject to false allegations.

Wouldn’t it be nice if everyone just told the truth for a change?



report abuse
 

Patrick O’Malley

posted July 9, 2011 at 8:34 am


Parents – keep your children away from Catholic priests.

Catholic bishops continue to prove that they don’t care about child rape. Priests have raped over 10,000 children in the United States alone in the last 60 years, yet Archbishop Francis Hurley

thinks these pedophiles ought to be forgiven and returned to ministry.

You KNOW that means he’s already done this in his diocese, and is yet another bishop that has covered up for yet another pedophile priest. Cardinal O’Malley passes a provision that says that they will comply with civil laws. Really? So it has been an option all along to comply with civil laws?

There should be a grand jury investigation into every diocese, and they should use the same RICO statutes to prosecute the Catholic church for organized rime, where the crime is raping children and concealing it from the law. We’re not all as “cool on child rape” as the Catholic church.



report abuse
 

Post a Comment

By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.



Previous Posts

Hispanics turning evangelical, Jews secular
Worship service attendance is up in New York City, but down among young adult Jews, according to recent studies. On the other hand, fewer Spanish-speaking teens are attending Catholic mass, but more are showing up at Evangelical churches. [caption id="attachment_12343" align="alignleft" width="48

posted 3:10:30pm Nov. 05, 2013 | read full post »

Billy Graham: I know where I'm going
“Daddy thinks the Lord will allow him to live to 95,” said Franklin Graham recently. It was not a prophecy but a hope, Franklin explained, that he would live to see the beginning of a Christian re

posted 10:02:01am Oct. 24, 2013 | read full post »

Are All These Christians' Complaints of Persecution Just So Much Empty Whining?
The headlines are alarming: “Catholic-Owned Company Wins Religious Freedom Court Decision,” “Death Toll Rises to 65 in Boko Haram Attack on Students,” “Little Sisters Catholic Charity Victimized By Obamacare,” “Christians Sought Out, Murdered in the Kenyan Mall Massacre,” “Judicial

posted 2:41:26am Oct. 07, 2013 | read full post »

How can Christians defend themselves against today's random violence?
So, a crazed gunman opens fire and you’re caught in the middle. How can you survive? Heroes come in all sorts of packages. And they wield all sorts of defensive weapons. Such as guns and Jesus. Sometimes both at the same time. [caption id="attachment_12246" align="alignleft" width="480"] Ant

posted 2:53:48pm Sep. 27, 2013 | read full post »

Does Sunday Morning Church Really Need All This Glitter, Showmanship and Gimmickry?
What’s wrong with church today? Are we in danger of turning worship into a flashy concert? Of watering down the message so nobody is offended? Of forgetting the simplicity of the Gospel? I grew up with a preacher’s kid. He was a fake following in the footsteps of his flimflamming father who d

posted 11:26:20am Sep. 20, 2013 | read full post »




Report as Inappropriate

You are reporting this content because it violates the Terms of Service.

All reported content is logged for investigation.