The Bishop Writes

(From the Jan. 16, 2003 edition of the Inland Register)

An important part of our Christian journey is to reflect on our past. In my own instance, I often think of the image of rowing a boat. I remember as a young kid my father teaching me how to row our fishing boat. The wake of the boat always told you from where you had come and it was never a straight line. I remember trying to make the path as straight as possible, but it was never perfect. I did get better as the years progressed. Also, it was always very important to turn around to see where you were going to make sure you were headed in the right direction.

At this time of the beginning of a new year we all know how significant 2002 was. It is very important that we reflect on what has happened.

For me personally, in all of my years of ministry, there has never been a year like 2002. I have learned much. Clearly, we must assess what happened and move into the future with a greater sense of responsibility and accountability with and for one another. If ever there was a prophetic ring to the words of St. Paul, who reminds us that “all that matters is that one is created anew (Galatians 6:15),” it has been this past year.

So what has 2002 taught me? Five lessons stand out.

First, I learned about the immediacy of the pain of abuse, no matter how long ago that abuse may have occurred. Although sexual abuse has been going on for centuries, hardly anyone except the victims and their families realized the hurt, pain and traumatic impact of such abuse. At times there has been criticism of why victims and/or their families did not come forward more quickly after the abuse occurred. Guilt, shame, fear of not being credible, or the reality of not being taken seriously were all obstacles. Sometimes, it has taken years for victims to realize what had really happened to them.

Through meetings with victims and their families I came to understand better that time does not heal such wounds, that the pain is as intense today as when it first occurred, and that only through counseling, sharing and the love of Christ can one begin to overcome such trauma, begin to heal.

Second, I also came to understand better that there really is no such thing as a supposed consensual sexual relationship between any adult and a minor, between an authority figure and one who is in a subordinate position or between a counselor and a client. By listening to victims I found out that sometimes a person who was vulnerable found himself or herself in situations of entrapment from which they found it very difficult to remove themselves. Only later did they understand the dynamics of the situation, that they were truly abused and taken advantage of. Again, there is no such thing as a consensual sexual relationship with a minor of any age with a priest. Every such relationship is immoral. The priest is a father figure and the one in authority no matter what the circumstance, and it is his responsibility to maintain the appropriate boundaries.

A psychiatrist who spoke to the U.S. Catholic bishops in Dallas drew the parallel between incest in a family and abuse by the clergy. Like incest, sexual abuse of minors is a primal prohibition in all cultures through time. In both instances, devastating impact to the victim occurs. That’s why developing sensitivity and listening are critical skills needed as we address the journey of victims. And that is why I continue to reach out to victims and their supporters and to look for more ways to avail myself of their experience to help ensure such abuse never happens again in our church.

The norms for handling situations of sexual abuse of minors for the U.S. Catholic Church have now been approved by the Holy See. This legal procedure backs up the Charter approved by the bishops in June, and gives clear direction as to how we are to proceed in the future. Increased use of review boards involving the laity both on the local and national level are and must be utilized to assure the best wisdom, responsibility and accountability in addressing this very complex and real problem.

So, a third lesson I have learned this past year is the importance of increasing the involvement of laity in substantive and authentic ways in the administration of a diocese, especially when it comes to the critical challenge before us all to restore faith and trust in the Church. I believe deeply that the time has come for bishops to figure out more practical and binding ways to share the authority that implicitly and explicitly resides within the office of “the bishop.”

A fourth lesson I have relearned is the truth of the old adage about hindsight being 20/20: when rowing the boat it is easy to see where we have come from, not so easy to see the zigs and the zags from an uneven pulling on the oars. As I look back over my own ministry as a young bishop over 20 years ago, I handled a case in consultation with professionals using the best wisdom of the time. There was a priest in the diocese of Yakima who reported himself for having sexually molesting a minor. I immediately ordered him into counseling. I allowed him to continue in ministry until later when I received the recommendation from his counselors that he receive more intense therapy in a residential program. During those times there was discussion about whether an outpatient program or one of residential therapy would be the best. Even though I judged he could not return to the ministry in Yakima, the residential therapy program suggested that he work in another diocese with appropriate supervision and a follow-up program. We know today we can no longer take this approach. To the best of my knowledge nothing occurred following the first report.

However, even as the U.S. Catholic bishops approached the Dallas meeting in June, the draft charter indicated that after only one incident of abuse, a priest with therapy and with the approval of the review board could possibly be returned to ministry. That suggested procedure was not approved, and now, as you well know, even one incident of abuse of a minor, no matter how long ago, precludes a priest from ministry. The bishops decided that they wanted to assure that ministry in the Church be conducted in an atmosphere of maximum safety for children and youth, that this was paramount, that there could be no compromises when it came to insuring that children as well as the weak and vulnerable are safe from being victimized by any church staff member.

Finally, the fifth lesson I learned is the importance of continuing communication between me and the parishioners within the diocese, especially in this ongoing effort of addressing the poor handling by some of abuse and the victims of abuse by members of the Church hierarchy. We need to restore faith and trust. We need to restore confidence. We need the best wisdom of all of us as we move into the future, and to garner that wisdom I came to better understand that I had to do a better job of communicating directly with you in order to ensure that I truly understood your thoughts, feelings, needs, hopes and fears.

This moment provides for us as Church a new opportunity for learning about and handling not only these tragic instances of the past but also learning about how we can listen, care for and respond to each other in more Christ-like ways. We must not allow ourselves to be captured by cynicism, fear, anger or disillusionment. As we begin a new year, may we all search for greater wholeness in our Church knowing that it is the Lord who gives life, who will give us the grace we need and whose Holy Spirit continues to teach, guide and transform us.

May God bless all of you with much peace and joy this 2003.

Home