Adjusting the Focus

Sex abuse. I have the image of everybody adjusting the focus of his or her own camera to see more clearly a solution to one aspect of the crisis: bishops who abuse or cover up.

At the end of the USCCB meeting, Cardinal Blase Cupich of Chicago proposed that metropolitans (archbishops with rarely-used authority over a group of bishops in their region) be empowered to examine accusations against those bishops and report their conclusions to the Vatican. In NCR Joshua McElwee gathers reactions from various sources to this idea. My reaction is, “MORE Hierarchy”? Rather than changing church structures to expand the role of the laity, this proposal draws on the medieval past to put a layer of authority between bishops and pope. Isn’t that what hierarchy is?

A non-hierarchical interpretation of this proposal is based on the principle of subsidiarity: the decisions would be made locally, not at the Vatican. It is not easy for you to find out who the your Metropolitan is, unless you have an archbishop. There are some states where there are not even dioceses, like Idaho and North Dakota; there must be a map somewhere.  

In this plan, the diocesan clergy abuse review boards, required by the 2002 Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People, are also to receive these accusations against bishops, which go directly to the Pope now. I am not clear what authority these local boards would have over the bishop except to report to local law enforcement and maybe even media. Accountability and transparency, in other words, which they are responsible for now in cases of clergy abuse.

Under the Dallas charter, a National Review Board of lay people examine accusations against priests and church workers and issue long reports annually based on what the diocesan boards report. This year they went further and suggested that their mandate be expanded to include bishops. Francesco Cesareo, the chair of the board, laid it on the line at the November meeting: bishops have to be accountable or the church won’t survive.

A non-hierarchical suggestion discussed at the USCCB meeting is a nonprofit commission to investigate accusations against bishops. I include a comment against it reported by Andrea Tornielli on theVatican Insider website, quoted by Catholic News Service, for you to decipher:

Tornielli reported that the Vatican believed the proposal on standards of accountability for bishops “goes beyond both civil and canon law” and the Vatican raised concerns”regarding the generic nature of some passages; it could occur that a bishop does not know he is violating these standards of behavior but in the future could be brought before a national commission called to judge him.”
 
“Another problem,” Tornielli said, “regards some incoherence between the contents of the document regarding the national commission on the responsibility of bishops and the Code of Canon Law. In the draft given to the Vatican, the commission is described as a nonprofit institution without having a juridical and canonical figure, but it is able to exercise a power of judgment on bishops.”

I had to eat lunch before I could make sense out of this. Maybe clarity is lost in translation. Paragraph 1: A significant thread in the self-justifications of those identified in the #MeToo movement is that the standards are higher now than they were. “I didn’t know what I did was offensive.” Paragraph 2: Under canon law now nobody but the Pope is able to judge bishops.

The “nonprofit” characterization fascinates me. I assume it is to differentiate it from anything under the auspices of the church, as the National Review Board is now. So this is the opposite of a hierarchal solution, a genuine reform of the structure, and open to a lot of objections.

What else will happen? The American bishops will implement by next July a toll-free number and website to receive “allegations of misconduct by prelates.” They will gather in January in Chicago to pray over the crisis and their role in it.

Then in February the stage shifts to the Rome. The Pope has scheduled “a crunch summit,” according to Christopher Lamb of the Tablet. Heads of bishops conferences, religious orders,  and Vatican offices will attend a meeting planned by four clerics and two women:

In a scandal dominated by the misdeeds of men, Francis has also drafted in women to assist with the preparations: Dr Gabriella Gambino, a mother of five, and Dr Linda Ghisoni, a mother of two, both of whom are senior female Vatican officials with impressive legal expertise. 

On the organising committee, two of the most credible Church anti-abuse experts have been appointed. These include the Archbishop of Malta, Charles Scicluna, a longtime Church prosecutor who is now the Pope’s point man in handling abuse cases, and Fr Hans Zollner, the Jesuit priest who runs the Centre for Child Protection at the Pontifical Gregorian University in Rome. 

They will be assisted by the Cardinal Archbishop of Chicago, Blase Cupich, and the Cardinal Archbishop of Bombay, Oswald Gracias.

Is it charming or sexist that Lamb characterizes the “impressive” women as mothers? The Cardinals as “assisting”?

More and less detail is provided by John Allen in Crux who interviews Gracias to make a point about how “Western” the committee is. Oh, nothing is perfect. The meeting itself will not be Western. It is another change to normal operating procedures for Vatican synods or councils. Having world-wide participation at a conference planned by experts from where the crisis has been more studied and transparent will internationalize it if all are allowed to contribute their own experience. So is this hierarchical because it’s controlled by the Vatican, or not, because it’s a different model which might be truly representative, at least geographically?

But now I feel that I am wandering into territory I don’t really know and shouldn’t comment on. In response to the sex abuse crisis, the most hopeful people talk about “structural reform.” The most pessimistic talk about the collapse of the church. The difficulty of anything new being added to the structures that exist is clear from this discussion. The disaster of this international institution disintegrating is impossible to imagine.

It’s much better to focus the camera on the survivors and the victims. It’s so easy to lose them when the big picture is taken.