POLITICS MARCH 26, 2010
-
Read Later
READ LATERAvailable only to subscribers. SUBSCRIBE TODAY
-
Listen
ARTICLE AUDIO
- Font Size

WASHINGTON -- How in the name of God can the Roman Catholic Church put the pedophilia scandal behind it?
I do not invoke God's name lightly. The church's problem is, above all, theological and religious. Its core difficulty is that rather than drawing on its Christian resources, the church has acted almost entirely on the basis of this world's imperatives and standards.
It has worried about lawsuits. It has worried about its image. It has worried about itself as an institution and about protecting its leaders from public scandal. In so doing, it has made millions of Catholics righteously furious and aggravated every one of its problems.
So instead of going away, the scandal keeps coming back, lately in a form that seems to challenge Pope Benedict XVI himself. It was sickening to read Thursday's New York Times story reporting that Vatican officials "did not defrock a priest who molested as many as 200 deaf boys, even though several American bishops repeatedly warned them that failure to act on the matter could embarrass the church."
In Germany, the pope's home country, more than 300 victims have come forward in recent weeks, and Chancellor Angela Merkel, whose party has Catholic roots, called the scandal "a major challenge for our society." In the case of the Rev. Lawrence Murphy, the Wisconsin priest who molested deaf boys, the Vatican did what every institution does in a scandal: It issued a statement putting the best face on its decisions.
"In light of the facts that Father Murphy was elderly and in very poor health, and that he was living in seclusion and no allegations of abuse had been reported in over 20 years," the Rev. Federico Lombardi, the Vatican spokesman, said, "the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith suggested that the Archbishop of Milwaukee give consideration to addressing the situation by, for example, restricting Father Murphy's public ministry and requiring that Father Murphy accept full responsibility for the gravity of his acts." Murphy, he noted, "died approximately four months later without further incident."
The statement is representative of what's wrong with the church's response. It is bureaucratic and self-exculpatory, even asking us to feel for this priest because he was "elderly" and "in very poor health."
The spokesman called the case "tragic," but tragic does not do justice to the outrage here. Yes, the statement included an acknowledgement of the "particularly vulnerable victims who suffered terribly from what (Murphy) did," and that he had violated his "sacred trust." Is this the best Father Lombardi could do?
During his visit to the United States in 2008, Pope Benedict started moving toward a better approach. He seemed genuinely pained and angered by the scandal. He repeatedly apologized and said he was "deeply ashamed" of the abusive priests who had "betrayed" their ministry.
But while this was a step in the right direction, apologizing for the misbehavior of individual priests will never be enough. The church has been reluctant to speak plainly about the heart of its problem: in handling these cases, it put institutional self-protection first.
The church needs to show it understands the flaws of its own internal culture by examining its own conscience, its own practices, its own reflexives when faced with challenge. As the church rightly teaches, acknowledging the true nature of our sin is the one and only path to redemption and forgiveness.
Of course this will not be easy. Enemies of the church will use this scandal to discredit the institution no matter what the Vatican does. Many in the hierarchy thought they were doing the right thing, however wrong their decisions were. And the church is not alone in facing problems of this sort.
But defensiveness and institutional self-protection are not Gospel values. "For whoever wants to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for me will find it."
The church needs to cast aside the lawyers, the PR specialists and its own worst instincts, which are human instincts. Benedict could go down as one of the greatest popes in history if he were willing to risk all in the name of institutional self-examination, painful but liberating public honesty, and true contrition.
And then comes something even harder: Especially during Lent, the church teaches that forgiveness requires us to have "a firm purpose of amendment." The church will have to show not only that it has learned from this scandal, but also that it's truly willing to transform itself.
E.J. Dionne's e-mail address is ejdionne(at)washpost.com.
E.J. Dionne, Jr. is the author of the recently published Souled Out: Reclaiming Faith and Politics After the Religious Right. He is a Washington Post columnist, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, and a professor at Georgetown University.
(c) 2009, Washington Post Writers Group
For more TNR, become a fan on Facebook and follow us on Twitter.
3 comments
Married priests now. It is not even against church doctrine since in the Eastern rites priests can get married. In 20 years nearly every priest will be married and will have a natural outlet for their sexuality (not that there won't be some adulterous priests, or closeted gays). Leave the pious Celibacy to the Monks in their cloisters.
- blackton
March 26, 2010 at 12:23pm
Blackton, I'm okay with the idea of married priests, but the real issue here is how the bishops understand their role and responsibility -- their priorities as leaders need to be realigned so that the victims of abuse come before sympathy for their brothers in the clergy or for the financial and reputational impact of the claims against them. I thought that the Church had figured this out but there are a lot of bishops and some of them are second rate or worse. So it may take some leadership changes as well as a stronger effort to establish the right priorities and practices. Neil
- purcellneil
March 26, 2010 at 2:08pm
Blackie: Father Murphy did not jerk off 200 deaf boys because he wasn't getting any at home. Paedophilia is a sickness of power and not one of sexual impulse - satiated or unsatiated. And the Church's problem has nothing to do with letting in women priests or married priests - it has to do with much the same thing that has afflicted the Church since the 1480s: power and money. What I have seen come out of the Vatican about the importance of silence and so on in the face of all the allegations is identical - practically a word for word translation - of the edicts of the Islamic Republic faced with revelations about the systemic use of rape as an instrument of oppression against student activists. God forbid (in their sense, literally) anyone say anything, lest the whole edifice of *power* comes tumbling down. This, after all, is the Church that has, in the words of Hitchens, given asylum to that odious Cardinal Law, instead of defrocking him and handing him over to the authorities. And now the rot is in the head of the Fish.
- icarusr
March 26, 2010 at 3:40pm