Clicking on banner ads enables JWR to constantly improve
Jewish World Review March 26, 2002 / 13 Nisan, 5762

John Leo

John Leo
JWR's Pundits
World Editorial
Cartoon Showcase

Mallard Fillmore

Michael Barone
Mona Charen
Linda Chavez
Ann Coulter
Greg Crosby
Larry Elder
Don Feder
Suzanne Fields
Paul Greenberg
Bob Greene
Betsy Hart
Nat Hentoff
David Horowitz
Marianne Jennings
Michael Kelly
Mort Kondracke
Ch. Krauthammer
Lawrence Kudlow
Dr. Laura
John Leo
David Limbaugh
Michelle Malkin
Chris Matthews
Michael Medved
Kathleen Parker
Wes Pruden
Sam Schulman
Amity Shlaes
Roger Simon
Tony Snow
Thomas Sowell
Cal Thomas
Jonathan S. Tobin
Ben Wattenberg
George Will
Bruce Williams
Walter Williams
Mort Zuckerman

Consumer Reports

Of rage and revolution | Cardinal Bernard Law of Boston was on CNN last week talking about his feelings in the wake of the scandal over sexually abusive priests. He feels vulnerable, weak, pained. Another report claims the cardinal hopes to ride out the storm the way Teddy Kennedy rode out Chappaquiddick. But nobody cares about Law's feelings or his prospects for a personal comeback. That is the sort of inward-looking clerical thinking that produced the crisis in the first place. Catholics care about the church's complicity in sexual assaults on their children, some of them repeated assaults that went on for years. And they are repelled and enraged by the protective clericalism that rallied around accused priests and did little or nothing for their victims.

The church commits its moral authority (correctly, in my view) to the protection of the most vulnerable among us, the not yet born. Yet it clearly failed to protect the vulnerable victims here. "If this isn't a pro-life issue, then there are no pro-life issues," said Eugene Kennedy, a prominent Catholic psychologist.

The sad truth is that church officials have treated sexual assaults as if they were administrative problems or celibacy violations to be covered up by offering hush money and shifting priests from parish to parish. It doesn't seem to have occurred to them that they have committed classic "sins of omission" in Catholic terms and possible coverup crimes in the eyes of the state. Last year, a Catholic bishop in France was convicted of such a coverup. He drew a three-month suspended sentence.

This is Round 3 of the debate over sexually abusive priests, with very little positive change despite the explosions of scandal that hit the media in the mid-1980s and again in the early 1990s. But the bishops still have no coherent national policy to deal with clerical sex abuse.

Two problems. The church has not even defined the crisis correctly. The church's "pedophile priest" problem is actually two problems blurred into one. True pedophiles are rare. Most sexual victims of priests are teenage boys—perhaps 95 percent, according to one estimate. A study of Chicago's 2,200 priests identified 40 sexual abusers, only one of whom was a pedophile. Abusers of teens are generally treatable. Pedophiles aren't. But the church is reluctant to mention the distinction, most likely because opening up the issue of sexually active gay priests is itself explosive, even apart from charges of abuse.

That distinction should be part of the debate—and should inform any actions the church takes. But it is hard to focus on this complex issue when stories of abuse keep pouring out. Here in New York last week, a priest accused of raping an altar boy five years ago, and allegedly on leave, turned up in the city saying mass and filling in occasionally as a teacher in a Catholic school. A suit accuses him of blackmailing the boy into more sexual encounters, but the church appears to be keeping him on active duty. In another report last week, a former altar boy who allegedly was abused more than 100 times said the church promised to keep his abuser away from children. The priest was later discovered doing youth work in Westchester.

Amazingly, the bishop of Palm Beach, Fla., named to clean up the sex abuse scandal of his predecessor, turned out to be an abuser himself. The fact that he accepted this role of the reassuring reform bishop in 1999, only three years after his own molestation case was settled, is just mind-boggling. So is the Hartford Courant's recent report on New York's Cardinal Edward Egan. While Egan was bishop of Bridgeport from 1988 to 2001, the Courant said, he permitted priests who were suspected abusers to maintain contact with children and didn't investigate complaints against them.

The rage sweeping through the church over stories like these is likely to have a profound impact. Confidence in the integrity and basic honesty of church officials is suddenly gone. "We are witnessing the unraveling of the clerical culture," said the Rev. Donald Cozzens, a Cleveland priest and author of The Changing Face of the Priesthood. He means the assumption that the church leadership is an elite corps, exempt from criminal proceedings, working in secrecy, with the expectation of silent deference from the lower clergy and from ordinary Catholics who pay the bills. He thinks the church is entering a painful meltdown of the old order, with priests gradually learning to speak respectfully but firmly to their bishops, and lay Catholics insisting on an accounting of how their money is spent and how their priests perform. At a meeting in Boston, some very vocal Catholics protested Cardinal Law's handling of abuse by priests and insisted he resign. "It sounded like a call to revolution," said one woman who attended the meeting. Maybe it was.

JWR contributor John Leo's latest book is Incorrect Thoughts: Notes on Our Wayward Culture. Send your comments by clicking here.


John Leo Archives

Copyright ©2002 Universal Press Syndicate

  Click here for more John Leo