Bishops walk fine line on abuse policy

At the same time, the changes bring the policy firmly into conformity with church law, and would remedy concerns Vatican officials apparently had that too much deference was being paid to both laity and civil authorities in the process.

Rather than the firm pledge to report "any allegation of sexual abuse of a minor" to civil authorities, the revision calls simply for complying "with all applicable civil laws." Only about half the states currently have laws requiring clergy to report sexual abuse.

Instead of a review board with a lay majority responsible for "the assessment of allegations of sexual abuse," which would advise the bishop and communicate the assessment to the victim and accused, the new plan calls for a review board that acts as a "confidential consultative body to the bishop in discharging his responsibilities."

"Unfortunately, the Vatican has chosen to significantly diminish the scope of review boards," which is "a momentous departure from the spirit of Vatican II," says Steve Krueger, interim executive director of Voice of the Faithful, a Catholic lay group with membership in many states.

While disappointing critics, the policy clearly remedies the confusion many priests felt about their rights, and to some extent the concerns of canon lawyers.

Under the new proposals, the process after an allegation of abuse would go as follows:

1. The bishop would carry out a preliminary investigation immediately and comply with civil reporting laws; he would refer the case to a review board, and if evidence is sufficient that abuse has occurred, the priest would be suspended from ministry, with care to protect his reputation.

2. The bishop would inform the Vatican office of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which deals with all abuse cases worldwide. If the case is past the statute of limitations, the bishop can request an exemption from the Vatican.

3. The Vatican could choose to hold hearings in Rome or have it handled by a US church tribunal. Unlike civil courts, the trial is closed, and the judges ask most of the questions.

4. If found guilty, a priest could appeal to the Vatican.

5. When a single act of abuse is admitted or established under the process, the offending priest or deacon will be removed permanently from public ministry, and could be removed from the priesthood if the case warrants.

There is also the provision that "at all times," the bishop has the executive power through an administrative act "to remove the offending cleric from office, remove or restrict his faculties, and to limit his exercise of priestly ministry." This would not extend to removal from the priesthood.

While these provisions would seem to point to zero tolerance, skeptics of the policy worry that much will be left at the discretion of individual bishops or the Vatican – from reporting allegations to deciding to handle the statute of limitations.

This situation, they say, gave rise to the uneven and grossly inadequate handling of abuse cases in the past.

Page: 1 | 2