Home
Our Mission
Our Goals
Who We Are
Where We Are
Child Protection
Survivor Support
Clergy Support
Prayerful Voice
Positions
Statements
Educating Ourselves
Coming Events
History
Site Index
Contact Us
Links |
Sean O'Conaill, acting Irish co-ordinator for Voice of the Faithful,
expresses the hope that in the document 'Towards Healing' there is the
seed of a genuine and full acceptance by the bishops of Ireland of the
need to make the Irish church fully inclusive of all of its members. This article was
first published in Doctrine and Life in the summer of 2005.
The Document Towards Healing, from the Irish bishops' conference,
arrived at an important moment (February 2005). As a Lenten reflection
it struck a welcome and conciliatory note of repentance. It included
also a powerful appeal for the pooling of the resources and compassion
of the whole church community to address the plight of all who have
suffered abuse in Irish society.
Moreover, it stated the intention of the bishops' conference 'to publish
further reflections on other aspects of this painful and complex
reality'. It would therefore be both uncharitable and unwise to dismiss
the document on the grounds of incompleteness. Far better to place
oneself in the same Lenten spirit of repentance and humility, and
respond from there - with a view to informing whatever future documents
lie in store.
In that spirit we all need to accept fully that the vast majority of
those who have been abused on this island have not been abused by
Catholic clergy or religious. The scale of the problem of abuse
generally, and many of the most lurid media-reported instances, tell us
emphatically that power over others is misused by a depressing
proportion of all who exercise it - including parents, employers, work
colleagues - and adults generally in relation to children.
Moreover, in Ireland's 'culture wars', instances of clerical child
sexual abuse have been placed on a special plane of obloquy by
commentators anxious to denigrate the Catholic Church as a body, and to
deny due respect to the many selfless clerics and religious whose lives
are entirely exemplary. The fond and naïve theory that if we can but
banish all Catholic belief and personnel from Irish society, all evils
will be banished also, has driven many a tendentious media event in
recent years.
At the same time, however, it would be an inadequate response to the
specific issues of Catholic clerical child abuse, and of the hierarchy's
too frequent administrative failings in dealing with it, if we were not,
as church members, to address the fact that abuses of power have
occurred in our church also - and to do all in our power to understand
and to prevent these.
It is regrettable, therefore, that this document does not repair the
failure of all Catholic church pronouncements on this issue so far to
state the most important facts about Catholic clerical child abuse. (By
'important' here I mean in the context of dealing most effectively with
the problem, and of making Catholic children as safe as they should be.)
First, the power exercised by the abusing priest is too often connected
with the special status of the priest in relation to the Catholic
family, by virtue of the clerical church's own typical representation of
the priest as an iconic moral exemplar. To put this more simply, the
child or young person has typically been taught to see the priest as an
unquestionable moral authority – as, indeed, the final authority on
right and wrong. The Catholic child's, and young person’s, special
vulnerability in relation to the priest has therefore been inseparable
from the priesthood of the priest - and acknowledgement of this is long
overdue. It is vitally important that Catholic children are taught, for
their own protection, that Catholic clergy must not be thought of, or
represented to children as, incapable of abusing power and trust, and
that all adults must observe the same boundaries in relation to
children.
As our most streetwise teenagers now know this anyway, it is foolish of
our hierarchy to stop short of saying it. Surely they should explicitly
advise that this practical wisdom be systematically taught in Catholic
schools, and by parents to their children – in the context of separating
due respect for clergy from the malady known as clericalism.
Second, while 'Towards Healing' applauds the media for 'bringing the
sexual abuse of children into the public arena' it does not seize the
opportunity to acknowledge fully the hierarchical church's own
historical tendency to do the very opposite - systematically, and even
as a matter of principle, to conceal the phenomenon, often at the
expense of other children who might otherwise have escaped
life-challenging injury. True repentance requires a full acknowledgement
of error, and future documents on this issue must surely fully address
this particular error - the error, and sin, of secrecy in the church.
It is difficult to see how the church leadership can do this without
acknowledging the reason that lay Catholics must still typically look to
the secular media, and to other secular institutions, for a full
revelation of the abuse problem within the church. This is the absence
of structures of accountability within the church itself, of personnel
empowered and employed to represent solely the interests of those to
whom clerical power will inevitably sometimes represent a danger - that
is, the Catholic laity, and, especially, Catholic children.
In light of the four-decade failure of the church leadership to
implement what was clearly implied by the documents of Vatican II, this
is an especially serious shortcoming in 'Towards Healing'.
To establish this we need only quote Lumen Gentium Article 37:
Like all Christians, the laity have the right to receive in abundance
the help of the spiritual goods of the Church, especially that of the
word of God and the sacraments from the pastors. To the latter the laity
should disclose their needs and desires with that liberty and confidence
which befits children of God and brothers of Christ. By reason of the
knowledge, competence or pre-eminence which they have, the laity are
empowered - indeed sometimes obliged - to manifest their opinion on those
things which pertain to the good of the Church. If the occasion should
arise this should be done through the institutions established by the
Church for that purpose and always with truth, courage and prudence and
with reverence and charity towards those who, by reason of their office,
represent the person of Christ.
Mustn't the repentance of our hierarchy fully address a failure that has
turned out to be a critical factor in the development of all Irish
church scandals since 1992: the absence of non-clerical agencies within
the church that could have fully and effectively represented the
interests of lay people and their children? Wasn't it essentially the
absence of such structures that ensured that it was solely to external
secular structures that Catholic laity could look - and must still look
- to seek full disclosure and redress?
There is another overpowering reason for making this point now. The call
from our bishops in 'Towards Healing' for a massive effort from the
whole church community on behalf of the abused represents an enormous
organisational challenge. What is the scale of the problem of all kinds
of abuse in every diocese? How are we to determine this? What resources
are already available? What will be the implications of a continuing
decline in numbers of ordained clergy in addressing the issue? What new
skills and aptitudes will be required? What educational resources will
need to be deployed? How should this impact upon Catholic education and
culture generally? Who is to co-ordinate all of this?
These and many other questions now demand attention. The absence of
church fora in which these, and other issues could be discussed by 'the
whole church community', is a stark inhibiting circumstance right now.
The arguments for permanent diocesan and national synods or conferences
are now more than compelling - they are irresistible.
Hopefully, a new administration in Rome will take the opportunity to
address this problem immediately. Pope John Paul II’s call in September
2004 to American bishops to establish “better structures of
participation, consultation and shared responsibility” should be seen as
a green light in Ireland also, where relations between laity and
hierarchy have suffered an almost equal shock over the very same issue –
the maladministration of clerical child abuse.
To continue to ignore or deny the need for radical organisational change
in the church would be to raise the most serious questions about the
sincerity of the so-welcome spirit of repentance in 'Towards Healing'.
It would be another disaster if the document turned out to be nothing
more than a diversionary stratagem, designed to blur and fudge the
issues with which it deals, and to postpone addressing the issue of
accountability within the church. Disillusionment over that too would be
an even greater tragedy than everything that has happened so far.
To obviate any suggestion that ‘Towards Healing’ seeks to distract the
focus of Catholic concern away from clerical child abuse, the Catholic
hierarchy must surely also make a far greater effort to show their
concern for those whom it has alienated, especially victims of such
abuse. It is not reassuring that when in February of this year (2005) I
asked the Catholic Communications Office if Irish bishops had any idea
of the scale of that alienation, or the proportion of those abused who
had been reconciled with the church, I was given an answer that implied
that the victims’ need for privacy precluded any such assessment, and
paralyses even our ability to poll our members. Future documents on this
theme, and the proposed whole church response to abuse in Irish society,
must surely address the need to convince the ‘whole church community’
that we care deeply about , and hope someday to be reconciled with, our
alienated brothers and sisters. At present it would be difficult to find
conclusive evidence that our church leadership has not simply preferred
to forget them.
It is not reassuring either that Irish bishops still appear unable to
discuss such issues freely with their people. For over a decade now no
Irish bishop has felt able to come before a representative gathering of
his flock to answer questions on these issues. A shepherd who is
patently wary of his flock cannot inspire confidence and trust – and
this inevitably impacts upon his authority also.
It follows inevitably that while 'Towards Healing' must be welcomed as
setting a new direction for the Irish church, many lay people remain to
be convinced that Irish bishops generally possess the corporate will,
and the clarity of thought, that are needed to lead us emphatically out
of the present wilderness. It will take more than a single aspirational
document to move the Irish church out of its present, dangerous,
inertia.
However, the coincidence of ‘Towards Healing’ with a change of pope
presents an unprecedented opportunity to address all of these issues –
and especially to accord to Irish lay people the dignity of full
partnership in restoring the moral prestige of the Irish Catholic
Church. It is an opportunity that must not be wasted.
|
VOTF™
Mission Statement
To provide a prayerful voice, attentive to the Spirit,
through which the Faithful can actively participate in the governance
and guidance of the Catholic Church.
Our Goals
1. To support
survivors of clergy sexual abuse.
2. To support priests of integrity
3.To shape structural change within the Catholic Church.
|
