COMMENTARY: The After-Dallas Disorder

c. 2004 Religion News Service (Eugene Cullen Kennedy, a longtime observer of the Roman Catholic Church, is professor emeritus of psychology at Loyola University in Chicago and author of “Cardinal Bernardin’s Stations of the Cross,” published by St. Martin’s Press.) (UNDATED) It may be hard to believe but it is only two years since America’s […]

c. 2004 Religion News Service

(Eugene Cullen Kennedy, a longtime observer of the Roman Catholic Church, is professor emeritus of psychology at Loyola University in Chicago and author of “Cardinal Bernardin’s Stations of the Cross,” published by St. Martin’s Press.)

(UNDATED) It may be hard to believe but it is only two years since America’s Catholic bishops gathered in Dallas to adopt measures to respond to the sex abuse crisis that had exploded in January of that year.


Even the most optimistic of them understand that the results of that pressured gathering have been, at best, mixed.

To them, Dallas seemed to be the bottom of the ninth inning. Convinced that Catholics expected them to deal rather than just debate, they adopted a policy of “zero tolerance” for sexual offenses by clergy _ their famous “one strike and you’re out” decree.

They also established a National Review Board of distinguished Catholic lay persons to investigate the dimensions and causes of the scandal. They funded a National Office for the Protection of Children to monitor compliance by a yearly census of diocesan cooperation.

Individual dioceses set up similar offices and, in a broad move, the bishops invited the civil and criminal law into the institution to search the records, examine present personnel, and to uncover and take actions on child sexual abuse, something they seem suddenly to have realized was a crime to be punished rather than an indiscretion to be dealt with discreetly.

Then the bishops exempted themselves from their own policies.

The bishops have now all but repudiated the National Review Board and, while they are trying to remedy the bad impression they gave by a massive effort to let its work die through neglect, they have dealt its continuing work a serious blow.

By initially deferring discussions of the Office for Child Protection until November, the bishops effectively derailed the ongoing census of diocesan cooperation in reporting sex abuse problems. They claim this is not their intention and they will get it back on track.

Their program of zero tolerance was aimed directly at priests, demoralizing rather than reassuring the thousands of fine and faithful priests. By exempting themselves, the bishops gave the appearance of making scapegoats of their already overburdened priests.


It also led to the dismissal and virtual defrocking of dozens of clergymen, sometimes on nothing more than a phone call or on the basis of a vague 30- or 40-year-old accusation, many never proven. The failure to offer these men due process has been questioned by the Vatican and a group, Justice for Priests and Deacons, has been established by the Rev. Michael Higgins in San Diego, Calif., to dramatize the situation and defend those accused.

The civil and criminal law have entered the church with a vengeance, resulting in large-scale programs in which diocesan files have been opened and all employees must be fingerprinted and have their names entered into a criminal database as a condition of working for the church.

This is the most under-reported effect of Dallas. The naivete of the bishops is evident in the “we didn’t know it was loaded” tone of an American cardinal’s complaint to the pope: “The scandal … has brought … a more overt expression of the anti-Catholicism which has always marked American culture. … Courts and legislatures are more ready to restrict the freedom of the church to act publicly and to interfere in the internal governance of the church. … Our freedom to govern ourselves is diminished.”

Exactly. The bishops looked to the law to save them and do their work for them. Once in your life, the law never leaves. That is the unintended consequence of Dallas, and the bishops, not the butler, did it.

This isn’t A.D.; it is A.D.D. _ the After Dallas Disorder.

DEA/RB END KENNEDY

Donate to Support Independent Journalism!

Donate Now!