Print Issue: November 21, 2002

New Statement Addresses Bishops' Role In Dealing With Abuse Of Minors

By Gretchen Keiser, Staff Writer

WASHINGTON, D.C. - After the Dallas bishops' meeting, a stinging criticism was that the church had passed a charter and norms for priests, deacons and lay employees, but did not hold the bishops accountable who had reassigned priests they knew had a history of sexual abuse.

The explanation was that only the pope has the authority to sanction bishops, not other bishops.

At their Washington meeting, however, as a follow-up to the discussion in Dallas, the bishops debated and adopted a statement of accountability to one another, strengthening it after several bishops said it had to include a straightforward apology for the mistakes of the past and "our role in the suffering this has caused."

When presented by Bishop Robert Brom of San Diego, bishops said the document was fatally flawed unless it included an apology addressing the fact that bishops in some notorious cases failed to remove priests who abused minors from ministry, but gave them new parish assignments, where more children and adolescents were abused.

"I am one of them," said Archbishop Elden Curtiss of Omaha. "It was a mistake. I apologized then and I apologize now. There is nothing in this statement about bishops who made mistakes. We need to say something. I don't understand (why it isn't in the statement) and I'm sure our people won't."

Archbishop Alexander Brunett of Seattle agreed, saying, "We have said nothing at all about our own accountability. They are waiting to hear that. I don't know the format to do this (but) our people are waiting for some kind of sign . . . There is a deeper issue raised time and time again by the faithful."

Cardinal Bernard Law of Boston, whose cases of reassigning priest abusers precipitated the national scandal, said, "It is essential for us to both apologize and ask forgiveness."

Sent back for revision, the document that was adopted 231-5 includes a paragraph stating, "In particular we acknowledge our mistakes in the past where bishops have transferred priests who had abused minors from one assignment to another. We recognize our role in the suffering this has caused, and we apologize for it. As we expressed in the Charter, we 'take responsibility for dealing with this problem strongly, consistently and effectively in the future.'"

The document, which is called a "statement of episcopal commitment," states that bishops have a collegial and moral responsibility with and for each other and commits them to work with the other bishops in their geographical Provinces to "interpret correctly and implement" the "Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People."

"In cases of an allegation of sexual abuse of minors by bishops, we will apply the requirements of the charter also to ourselves, respecting always Church law as it applies to bishops," the statement says.

The bishop who is the Metropolitan for the region (as Archbishop John F. Donoghue is for the Atlanta Province) will be informed of an allegation of sexual abuse of a minor against another bishop in the Province; if the Metropolitan is the one facing an accusation, the senior bishop in the Province other than the Metropolitan will be informed.

If financial demands for settlements are made, whether they involve sexual abuse of a minor or "allegations of any sexual misconduct by bishops," the Metropolitan will be informed, or the senior bishop in the Province, if the demand has been made regarding a Metropolitan.

The statement commits bishops to a relationship of "fraternal support, fraternal challenge and fraternal correction" and to ongoing mutual reflection with other bishops in their Province on the exercise of their ministry as bishops and their commitment to holiness of life.