Bishop outlines complexities in resolving scandal

I agree wholeheartedly that our faith community has suffered a serious and scandalous wound [as a result of the child abuse scandal], and we have yet to understand fully its true nature, depth and scope.

There is the two-fold scandal of the breach of sacred trust by individual priests and the way bishops like myself have mishandled such misconduct, because of ignorance, fear or the misguided attempt to protect the Church from scandal.

Indeed, this moral ineptitude in giving greater priority to the Church's image than to the protection of children has now become the scandal.

Laity's call

I join in the call for the laity to step up and assume their birthright as full, adult members and leaders in our faith communities. This has been a constant theme through my episcopacy; and, if there is a ray of light to emerge from this tragedy, I hope it will be an even more informed and active laity.

Such a development should result in a willingness to address seriously and constructively the important ecclesial issues addressed [at this symposium]: the nature of authority in the Church, the role of hierarchy and the discipline of celibacy. I am confident that such a candid discussion would bear rich fruit and be guided by the Spirit.

I pray further that this greater involvement on the part of laity will not only be related to this misconduct scandal itself, but also be about how to make our faith communities the dynamic and caring wellsprings of spirituality, love, justice and service God intends them to be.

Transparency

I would like to focus my remarks on some of the complexities involved in translating that vision to reality. For example, I concur with the call for transparency and accountability about the number of perpetrators, victims and costs associated with the scandal.

Here, I believe, is where the National Review Board, chaired by former Oklahoma Governor Frank Keating, can make an enormous contribution by ascertaining those figures.

The Albany Diocese embraces the principles of transparency articulated in the Charter. Since Dallas, our policy has been -- and continues to be -- the following:

* public identification of priests who have been removed or suspended;

* public reporting on the aggregate dollar value of settlements reached;

* public reporting on the costs of assessment and treatment of clergy offenders, counseling for victims and their family members, and legal and consultant fees; and

* public reporting on all of the programs in place to prevent sexual abuse from recurring and to create safe environments for children.

In conjunction with the study to be conducted this spring by the National Review Board, our Diocese is committed to releasing all the cost figures.

Challenges

But there are some practical challenges that must be addressed. Some still insist that the Church is hiding information when, for instance, we decline to identify individuals under investigation who are the subject of yet unsubstantiated allegations, or when we decline to reveal information shared by victims in confidential meetings.

The goal of transparency clearly is not to punish the innocent, traumatize victims or invade properly confidential meetings. The goal, as we see it, is to protect the community against abusers, and give the laity and the public access to information on -þ and, therefore, greater control over -- the Church's management of these matters.

In the Albany Diocese, we've taken the step of reviewing all allegations with the Diocesan Review Board; it is composed of nine members, seven of whom are laity, not in the employ of the Diocese. If an accused priest is believed to pose an imminent threat to the community or if the information provided by our investigator leads to the assessment that there are reasonable grounds to believe the abuse may have occurred, the priest is placed on administrative leave and that action is made known publicly.

In addition, we will send to the Board for review all proposed settlements with victims to ensure that they are fair and just to all parties. All of this comports with the Church's commitment to transparency.

Accountability

With regard to accountability, I believe the National Review Board can make an enormous contribution by commissioning scientific research on the data it compiles.

Catholics and other members of the public have raised legitimate questions about the underlying causes of sexual abuse by clergy. Those questions deserve answers based on careful research, not anecdotal evidence or preconceived assumptions.

In a presentation at this symposium, for example, one person hypothesizes that the problem of the sexual abuse of children is higher among priests. A well researched study would help to determine if that assertion is factually true; at the moment, it remains speculative. Hence, I welcome the results of studies, such as that of the John Jay School of Criminal Justice, which the National Review Board has already commissioned.

Media coverage

The media's coverage of the scandal is also marked by complexity. On the one hand, the media are to be credited for exposing the scandal and for pursuing it persistently.

On the other hand, media accounts often fail to provide context about where and when the problem occurred, how it was handled, and what has been done or is being done to address it.

Further, as Peter Steinfels of The New York Times has observed, many in the media consistently cite authorities or experts who have an advocacy position on this issue, but fail to offer the spectrum of opinions on a very complex subject.

Missing stories

More specifically, our Diocese has been making a concerted effort to respond to victims by:

* hiring a victims assistance coordinator and an investigator,

* expanding the membership of our diocesan review board,

* developing training programs for parish staff and volunteers, and

* arranging for criminal background checks for employees and volunteers.

Those efforts seek to build upon some long-standing policies and procedures relative to the screening and education of our clergy and programs for safe environments. Yet, most media attention continues to focus on allegations 20, 30 and 40 years old, and the legal action surrounding them. The Church's constructive response to victims is a vastly under-reported story.

Legalities

Another complexity involves the question of the Church's legal responsibility, and how it should participate in the process of determining the nature and extent of its liability.

As Mark Sargent, the dean of the Villanova University School of Law, observed in the June 2002 issue of Commonweal, legal responsibility must be disentangled from moral responsibility, because although certainly related, they are not coextensive.

Prof. Sargent says: "The Church's institutional and moral responsibility for the creation and perpetuation of this scandal is obvious. The integrity of the Church, and particularly of the hierarchy, will be measured by its willingness to respond to this profound moral crisis. Acceptance of that moral responsibility, however, does not mean that every Church institution must always accept the level of legal responsibility as defined by every plaintiff's lawyer."

We in the Diocese of Albany recognize and fully accept our moral responsibility to right the wrongs suffered by victims of clergy sexual abuse; but that does not mean that we naively accept the validity of every plaintiff attorney's claim about the abuse itself and its attendant circumstances, how a Church institution or individual within the Church were complicit in the abuse or negligent in dealing with it, and what level of compensatory and punitive damage is justified until such assertions are subject to thorough scrutiny.

To take this posture is not to deny that there was sexual abuse by clergy, but simply to recognize that not every claim is necessarily meritorious, or at least meritorious to the extent asserted, and that the Church may be justified in mediating or, if necessary, litigating some claims.

Lawsuits

There are many other important issues involving lawsuits stemming from clergy sexual abuse, which space does not permit me to address, and about which, quite frankly, there are no facile solutions.

For example, should current knowledge of "best practices" necessarily be the standard for determining legal liability for decisions made 20 or 30 years ago; or if liability is conceded how does one assess the monetary compensation?

Even among professionals in the field there is plenty of room for reasonable disagreement about how much even a just claim is worth.

Key question

In this latter regard, a speaker at this symposium states that "we must put the spiritual and personal welfare of those wounded ahead of everything else, including the welfare of our respective institutions."

Does that mean that leaders of a Diocese must be willing to sacrifice the welfare of the Church -- and all of the spiritual, academic, healthcare and social programs provided by the Church in society?

Bringing financial or institutional ruin to the Church, even in a well-intentioned attempt to right the wrongs, would deprive Catholics and the broader society of the Church's spiritual leadership and its humanitarian, healthcare, educational and social services.

What about the other wounded populations we serve? Do we abandon our work with children with AIDS? our advocacy programs for the developmentally disabled? our outreach programs for the victims of domestic violence? our housing programs for the homeless?

I would note also that the resources of the Church are far more limited than many may suspect.

Balance needed

What's needed, I believe, is practical guidance and counsel to Church leaders in striking the appropriate balance:

* How much of our resources should properly be devoted to providing a compassionate and comprehensive response to the crisis, including compensation to victims; and

* How much to continuing to support all of the other important Church programs that serve society in an uncertain economic climate characterized by increasing human needs, reduced philanthropic giving, and glaring budget deficit at the local, state and federal levels?

Trust

Similarly, it has been suggested that until the Church deals constructively with the misconduct scandal, its leaders are not in a position to exercise moral and spiritual leadership in our Church and society. It has been said to us, "Physician heal thyself before you speak of healing and salvation."

I agree that only by constructive action with regard to the sexual misconduct issue can Church leaders re-earn the trust of Catholics and the public.

In the meantime, however, I believe for the Church to go silent, to suspend its spiritual and moral leadership in other realms -- as a voice against the war with Iraq, for example, or as a champion for the poor in the face of the current government budget deficits -- would be wrong, and ultimately destructive to the mission of the Church; not a victory over sexual abuse but a victory for all who would eliminate spiritual, moral and ethical perspectives from the public square.

Here, again, I would suggest a balanced approach is necessary. The Church must re-earn its position of trust, in part, by continuing to be a voice of morality, hope and faith. Church leaders face the practical problem of finding the right balance.

I would welcome practical suggestions on how bishops and others in our Church might continue to assert the proper level of spiritual leadership while recognizing the natural skepticism/cynicism of some audiences due to the scandal.

Victims

A final complexity I would cite is the issue of treatment for victims.

Much to the shame of the Church, we too long denied or minimized the needs of victims and their families. This failure to reach out to those abused, and to provide psychological, pastoral and spiritual care led to disastrous consequences for many victims, including, as I can attest to from firsthand interaction with victims: free-floating anger...guilt...low self-esteem...alcohol and substance abuse...the loss of motivation for education or career advancement...the inability to form trusting, intimate relationships...and the loss of faith.

Fortunately, most Church authorities now recognize the need to provide professional and pastoral assistance to victims/survivors, and many have or are benefiting from such outreach. The guilt or stigma associated with having been abused is gradually being removed and victims are reclaiming broken dreams and shattered lives. This is certainly a great blessing, and both the press and survivor groups deserve much of the credit.

Adversaries?

Because of sad past experiences, however, and the lack of trust in authority figures, which is an understandable consequence of child sexual abuse, there has often developed an adversarial relationship between victim/survivor groups and Church leadership. At times, that makes a pastoral response on the part of the Church difficult, if not impossible.

I hope that, prospectively, ways can be found for Church leaders and members of victims' groups to work more cooperatively and collaboratively in the healing process.

The concept of restorative justice as the foundation for a process of healing and reconciliation may be an area where we can find common ground.

Many facets

In conclusion, in raising these issues of complexities, I am not trying to minimize the terrible harm that has been done by clergy sexual abuse, to absolve the Church of its responsibility, to deflect criticism, or, God forbid, to suggest I have the answers.

Rather, I am merely trying to point out that there are multiple facets to this issue which must be assessed and weighed carefully in developing and implementing appropriate responses.

Hopefully, through the type of presentations and respectful dialogue we have had today, we can find suitable mechanisms and solutions that will genuinely contribute to healing for victims and their families; to the protection of our most precious heritage, our youth; and to reform and renewal within the Church.

(The preceding is the print version of a talk given by the Bishop at a March 29, 2003, symposium on clergy sexual abuse, held at Siena College in Loudonville.)

(04-03-03)