My OperaYou need to be logged in to post in the forums. If you do not have an account, please sign up first.
How to Save the Catholic Church
http://tinyurl.com/y4aa22zThe Wall Street Journal
OPINION: DECLARATIONS APRIL 15, 2010, 7:02 P.M. ET
How to Save the Catholic Church
The Vatican badly needs new blood--and a woman's touch.
By PEGGY NOONAN
The great second wave of church scandals appears this week to be
settling down. In the Vatican they're likely thinking "the worst is
over" and "we've weathered the storm." Is that good? Not to this
Catholic. The more relaxed the institution, the less likely it will
reform.
Let's look at the first wave. Eight years ago, on April 19, 2002, I
wrote in these pages of the American church scandal, calling it
calamitous, a threat to the standing and reputation of the entire
church. Sexual abuse by priests "was the heart of the scandal, but at
the same time only the start of the scandal": the rest was what might
be called the racketeering dimension. Lawsuits had been brought
charging that the church as an institution acted to cover up criminal
behavior by misleading, lying and withholding facts. The most
celebrated cases in 2002 were in Boston, where a judge had forced the
release of 11,000 pages of church documents showing the abusive actions
of priests and detailing then-Archbishop Bernard F. Law's attempts to
hide the crimes. The Boston scandal generated hundreds of lawsuits,
cost hundreds of millions of dollars in settlements and judgments, and
included famous and blood-chilling cases--the repeat sexual abuser
Father John Geoghan, who molested scores of boys and girls and was
repeatedly transferred, was assigned to a parish in Waltham where he
became too familiar with children in a public pool; Cardinal Law
claimed he was probably "proselytizing."
In the piece I criticized Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, then archbishop
of Washington, who had suggested to the Washington Post that the
scandal was media-driven, that journalists are having "a heyday." Then
came the it-wasn't-so-bad defense: The bishop of Joliet, Ill., Joseph
Imesch, said that while priests who sexually abuse children should lose
their jobs, priests who sexually abuse adolescents and teenagers have a
"quirk" and can be treated and continue as priests.
Really, he called it a quirk.
Does any of this, the finger-pointing and blame-gaming, sound familiar?
Isn't it what we've been hearing the past few weeks?
At the end of the piece I called on the pope, John Paul II, to begin to
show the seriousness of the church's efforts to admit, heal and repair
by taking the miter from Cardinal Law's head and the ring from his
finger and retiring him: "Send a message to those in the church who
need to hear it, that covering up, going along, and paying off victims
is over. That careerism is over, and Christianity is back."
The piece didn't go over well in the American church, or the Vatican.
One interesting response came from Cardinal Law himself, whom I ran
into a year later in Rome. "We don't need friends of the church turning
on the church at such a difficult time," he said. "We need loyalty when
the church is going through a tough time."
I'd suggested in the piece that the rarefied lives cardinals led had
contributed to an inability to understand the struggles of others and
the pain of those abused, and soon Cardinal Law and I were talking
about his mansion outside Boston. He asked me how it would look if he'd
refused to live there. I told him it would look good, but more to the
point, the church was going to lose the cardinal's mansion to trial
lawyers, and it should sell it first and put the money in schools.
Soon enough the mansion was gone, sold to pay the plaintiffs. Cardinal
Law's successor, Archbishop Sean O'Malley, lives in an apartment in
Boston's South End.
John Allen of the National Catholic Reporter once called Cardinal Law
"the poster boy" of the American scandal. He has also became the poster
boy for the church's problems in handling the scandal. And that has to
do with its old-boy network, with the continued dominance of those who
grew up in the old way.
In December 2002, Cardinal Law left Boston just hours before state
troopers arrived with subpoenas seeking his grand jury testimony in
what the state's attorney general, Thomas Reilly, called a massive
coverup of child abuse. The cardinal made his way to Rome, where he
resigned, and where he stayed with Archbishop James Harvey, a close
friend and, as head of the pontifical household, the most powerful
American in the Vatican. Within a year Archbishop Harvey, too, was
implicated in the scandal: The Dallas Morning News reported the Vatican
had promoted a priest through its diplomatic corps even though it had
received persistent, high-level warnings that he had sexually abused a
young girl. The warnings had gone to Archbishop Harvey.
Cardinal Law received one of the best sinecures in Rome, as head of the
Basilica of Saint Maria Maggiore and a member of the Vatican office
tasked with appointing new bishops and correcting misconduct.
These stories are common in the church. Cardinal Angelo Sodano, a
former Vatican secretary of state and now dean of the College of
Cardinals, was a primary protector of the now disgraced Father Marcial
Maciel, founder of the Legion of Christ, described by a heroic
uncoverer of the scandals, Jason Berry, in the National Catholic
Reporter, as "a morphine addict who sexually abused at least twenty . .
. seminarians."
I know this from having seen it: Many--not all, but many--of the men
who staff the highest levels of the Vatican have been part of the very
scandal they are now charged with repairing. They are defensive and
they are angry, and they will not turn the church around on their own.
In a way, the Vatican lives outside time and space. The verities it
speaks of and stands for are timeless and transcendent. For those who
work there, bishops and cardinals, it can become its own reality. And
when those inside fight for what they think is the life of the
institution, they feel fully justified in fighting any way they please.
They can do this because, as they rationalize it, they are not fighting
only for themselves--it's not selfish, their fight--but to protect the
greatest institution in the history of the world.
But in the past few decades, they not only fought persons--"If you were
loyal you'd be silent"--they fought information.
What they don't fully understand right now--what they can't fully wrap
their heads around--is that the information won.
The information came in through the cracks, it came in waves, in
newspaper front pages, in books, in news beamed to every satellite dish
in Europe and America. The information could not be controlled or
stopped. The information was that something very sick was going on in
the heart of the church.
Once, leaders of the Vatican felt that silence would protect the
church. But now anyone who cares about it must come to understand that
only speaking, revealing, admitting and changing will save the church.
The old Vatican needs new blood.
They need to let younger generations of priests and nuns rise to
positions of authority within a new church. Most especially and most
immediately, they need to elevate women. As a nun said to me this week,
if a woman had been sitting beside a bishop transferring a priest with
a history of abuse, she would have said: "Hey, wait a minute!"
If the media and the victims don't keep the pressure on, the old ways
will continue. As for Cardinal Law, he should not be where he is, nor
mitred nor ringed.