I think I used to be firmly on the "defense lawyer" side of things - innocent until proven guilty, better a thousand criminals go free than one innocent man behind bars, blah blah blah... until someone I love experienced the difficulty of approaching the legal system as a victim. There was a mountain of evidence of creepy behavior, but none of it rose to the level of a crime. But if this person's professional org had published list of "credibly accused", my loved one might not have wound up in the situation, because similar complaints had been made in the past. There's a big difference between "not guilty of any crime currently on the books" and "totally innocent, behavior has always been above reproach." In the whole podcast, I was wondering what "exonerated" meant, and if I saw that on a list of names, knowing what I know now, I would indeed still be wondering.
Related to what JD said re transparency, at least here in the US we have FOIA requests and people can see for themselves (if they know an investigation occurred) what evidence the investigation was working with.
Great episode. I'd be very curious if either of you think that there's an American diocese that's doing a really good job of balancing the need for transparency with the need for accused priests to receive due process. In other words, are there any dioceses that you think bishops should be looking at and taking notes?
There was a lot packed in here. With respect to the USCCB as a government contractor, I fully agree with JD’s point that if these services are promised to refugees who have been approved for entering the country, why not have Catholics be the ones administering the services, so they can do so in a way that respects the dignity of each person.
Up front, I come with the bias of thinking our American legal system is largely, procedurally a good system. (Admittedly supported by unwritten norms under extreme stress at present.)
That said, it seems the right answer lies in an analog to the criminal justice system. I can presently look up if a person was arrested, whether the investigation resulted in charges levied in court, and the outcome. I do not see every accusation, only those that reached a level of probable cause (not very high, but higher than not manifestly false or frivolous). But I can see them thru to the endpoint. That all seems reasonable to me, and transparent.
The problem is, that this is not the standard priests experience. It is not after they are charged that their name is "published", it is at the point of an accusation. If a person is accused of sexual harassment, an email to the "fact" does not go out to his colleagues, and he is fired.
I must say that this Pillar Podcast was very upsetting to me because I feel JD was being disingenuous in his argument. To say that "it's a boggy man" that priests have a difficult time returning to ministry after being exonerated is just absurd. As Ed had to point out, you personally have spoken to priests who have not been returned to ministry by their bishop after being exonerated, so what are you talking about? When Father is googled and the first thing that pops up is he has been accused of child abuse, I can assure you this will be a problem for a significant amount of people.
Why would the church not hold to a standard that our county is supposed to uphold, innocent until proven guilty? When payments are made with little or no investigation, there is a presumption of guilt!
Lets made this personal. If JD was coaching in a youth league, and 10 years later (JD now has deep pockets) one of the kids he had coached credibly accuses him of child abuse, (the only standard here is that he had actually coached the child), would he think it was justice for his name to be put on the township website, in their newsletter, on his parish website etc? To never be taken down, so that every time he applies for a job that is the first thing that pops up. You get my point. I don't think he, his wife or his kids would think that was just!
No one is more sickened by the depravity of some priests, and I want justice and healing for the victims of abuse. They have been harmed physically, emotionally and spiritually by the people that should be the light of Christ in their life. The damage to individuals and the church as a whole has been catastrophic!
We must really pray for the victims of abuse, priests who are innocent and the guilty. After all we preach of Gospel of God's mercy and love for sinners. Let's live it.
I think the fact of modern culture is that when an accusation is made, it's publicly known. It will be googleable, whether it's on the town website or not.
Given that fact, I would be edified if the town website to not only include my name, but also the fact that I was exonerated. It would be useful to me for that fact to exist.
What I said is a bogeyman is the false idea that a priest can't be returned to ministry after he is accused. He can. Bishops who think "I can't return this priest to ministry after an accusation" are being unjust to the man. And MORE INFORMATION, not less, provided by official channels, will make that more likely, more plausible, and more common.
This is a regular topic of discussion when priests are gathered together with their bishop. In my diocese, a deceased cleric only goes on the list if the diocese has already received multiple complaints which jive with one another. They are first listed as "under investigation." If more accusations come out, and the accusations are similar to one another, the priest moves to "credibly accused" (or whatever language my diocese uses).
I think I used to be firmly on the "defense lawyer" side of things - innocent until proven guilty, better a thousand criminals go free than one innocent man behind bars, blah blah blah... until someone I love experienced the difficulty of approaching the legal system as a victim. There was a mountain of evidence of creepy behavior, but none of it rose to the level of a crime. But if this person's professional org had published list of "credibly accused", my loved one might not have wound up in the situation, because similar complaints had been made in the past. There's a big difference between "not guilty of any crime currently on the books" and "totally innocent, behavior has always been above reproach." In the whole podcast, I was wondering what "exonerated" meant, and if I saw that on a list of names, knowing what I know now, I would indeed still be wondering.
Related to what JD said re transparency, at least here in the US we have FOIA requests and people can see for themselves (if they know an investigation occurred) what evidence the investigation was working with.
Great episode. I'd be very curious if either of you think that there's an American diocese that's doing a really good job of balancing the need for transparency with the need for accused priests to receive due process. In other words, are there any dioceses that you think bishops should be looking at and taking notes?
I meant my comment below to be a reply to your fine comment!
Ah I see. Cheers, man!
Sounds like a job for Brendan Hodge!
There was a lot packed in here. With respect to the USCCB as a government contractor, I fully agree with JD’s point that if these services are promised to refugees who have been approved for entering the country, why not have Catholics be the ones administering the services, so they can do so in a way that respects the dignity of each person.
Up front, I come with the bias of thinking our American legal system is largely, procedurally a good system. (Admittedly supported by unwritten norms under extreme stress at present.)
That said, it seems the right answer lies in an analog to the criminal justice system. I can presently look up if a person was arrested, whether the investigation resulted in charges levied in court, and the outcome. I do not see every accusation, only those that reached a level of probable cause (not very high, but higher than not manifestly false or frivolous). But I can see them thru to the endpoint. That all seems reasonable to me, and transparent.
Thanks AJ. That's where I'm coming from too.
The problem is, that this is not the standard priests experience. It is not after they are charged that their name is "published", it is at the point of an accusation. If a person is accused of sexual harassment, an email to the "fact" does not go out to his colleagues, and he is fired.
I must say that this Pillar Podcast was very upsetting to me because I feel JD was being disingenuous in his argument. To say that "it's a boggy man" that priests have a difficult time returning to ministry after being exonerated is just absurd. As Ed had to point out, you personally have spoken to priests who have not been returned to ministry by their bishop after being exonerated, so what are you talking about? When Father is googled and the first thing that pops up is he has been accused of child abuse, I can assure you this will be a problem for a significant amount of people.
Why would the church not hold to a standard that our county is supposed to uphold, innocent until proven guilty? When payments are made with little or no investigation, there is a presumption of guilt!
Lets made this personal. If JD was coaching in a youth league, and 10 years later (JD now has deep pockets) one of the kids he had coached credibly accuses him of child abuse, (the only standard here is that he had actually coached the child), would he think it was justice for his name to be put on the township website, in their newsletter, on his parish website etc? To never be taken down, so that every time he applies for a job that is the first thing that pops up. You get my point. I don't think he, his wife or his kids would think that was just!
No one is more sickened by the depravity of some priests, and I want justice and healing for the victims of abuse. They have been harmed physically, emotionally and spiritually by the people that should be the light of Christ in their life. The damage to individuals and the church as a whole has been catastrophic!
We must really pray for the victims of abuse, priests who are innocent and the guilty. After all we preach of Gospel of God's mercy and love for sinners. Let's live it.
Hi Teresa,
I wasn't being disingenuous.
I think the fact of modern culture is that when an accusation is made, it's publicly known. It will be googleable, whether it's on the town website or not.
Given that fact, I would be edified if the town website to not only include my name, but also the fact that I was exonerated. It would be useful to me for that fact to exist.
What I said is a bogeyman is the false idea that a priest can't be returned to ministry after he is accused. He can. Bishops who think "I can't return this priest to ministry after an accusation" are being unjust to the man. And MORE INFORMATION, not less, provided by official channels, will make that more likely, more plausible, and more common.
This is a regular topic of discussion when priests are gathered together with their bishop. In my diocese, a deceased cleric only goes on the list if the diocese has already received multiple complaints which jive with one another. They are first listed as "under investigation." If more accusations come out, and the accusations are similar to one another, the priest moves to "credibly accused" (or whatever language my diocese uses).