BishopAccountability.org
	How the Catholic Church Is Handling Clergy Sex Abuse Orthodox Reform [United States] June 5, 2007 http://orthodoxreform.org/cases/fr-nicholas-katinas/loumbas-catholic-lessons/ Angelo J. Loumbas, a practicing attorney, former prosecutor of child abuse and neglect cases in Illinois, and former altar boy for Father Katinas, had this to say in The National Herald regarding recent sexual misconduct allegations: As a former altar boy for Father Katinas when he served as the priest of Assumption Greek Orthodox Church in Olympia Fields, Illinois in the 1970' (though fortunately not a victim of his alleged misconduct) I, along with others from that parish, have struggled to grasp how a priest of such talent, ability and popularity, who was also a married father of five children himself, could have been committing such moral transgressions. Loumbas asks questions regarding our responsibility as stewards of our children: We have also been asking ourselves the classic "who knew what, and when did he know it" question. What information the Church had received about Father Katinas apparent problem in the 1970's is unclear. What is clear is that the Church's inability to deal with and recognize clergy who posed such a risk to minors during those years, whether negligent or intentional, appears to have resulted in more victims of such behavior. Parents today, who were children then, and grandparents today, who were parents then, must consider the wellbeing of their own children and grandchildren in a way they never thought they would have to. As a parent of two young children, I view my role with my children as that of a steward. In the biblical sense, a steward is a guardian of the affairs of God, and without question, every child's wellbeing is an affair of God for which all of us – parents, grandparents, friends, neighbors, clergy and laity – are responsible. The fact that Father Katinas was able to be a priest for about 40 years in three different parishes until he was finally suspended at the end of his long career, and after his retirement, for his alleged moral transgressions against children three decades ago calls much into question and is, without question, a failure of stewardship. While he was the priest at the Olympia Fields parish, and even until these revelations became public, virtually all of the parishioners of that church had much faith and trust that Father Katinas had faithfully and responsibly fulfilled his duties as priest. From my days as an altar boy for him, I went on to become a parish council president and treasurer of another Greek Orthodox Church in the Chicago area. Until last year, I would describe Father Katinas as a very good priest – one of the best I had ever known. In fact, at the Archdiocese Clergy-Laity Congress in Philadelphia in 2000, I had such high regard for him that I took my wife (who was then my fiancée) out of our way so that she could meet him personally. Now, she and I are struggling to come to terms with how to best raise our children as Greek Orthodox Christians while fulfilling our duty, as their primary stewards, to also provide for their safety and protection. To that end, it's clear that questions need to be asked – and answered – and much thought needs to be given to the process by which the Church in America deals with, and addresses, the issue of sexual misconduct by clergy. To be clear, most Greek Orthodox priests serving today pose no risk to children and are, in fact, positive influences in the lives of children in their parishes. But the questions which must be asked and answered concern faith and trust – faith and trust that every step will be taken and no stone left unturned in a transparent process which will instill in every parent, and every steward of children, a better sense of security that the children of the Church will not be exposed to those few priests who do not have their best interests in mind. Loumbas then looks to lessons from the Roman Catholic Church: When considering what improvements the Greek Orthodox Church can make in the way it handles and prevents incidents of clergy sexual abuse, a review and comparison of the procedures and policies adopted by the Roman Catholic Church is helpful because of the significant problems it has had with clergy sexual abuse. In particular, and unlike the Greek Orthodox Church, the Catholic Church has explicitly recognized that the problem of clergy sexual abuse affects the whole Church, and it has therefore established a system of investigating and handling these matters which is much more inclusive of lay people. The Catholic Church has also adopted an attitude of openness and transparency in this area, publicly releasing statistics about the number of incidents of clergy sexual abuse; the years in which such incidents occurred; and the cost to the Church of such incidents. Since 1992, the Catholic Archdiocese of Chicago has been actively, aggressively and, most importantly, openly dealing with the subject of clerical sexual abuse. These efforts have been successful, with no founded allegations of misconduct during the years 1991-2003, as opposed to over 50 founded allegations between 1961 and 1990. These statistics are available online in the "Ten Year Report on Clerical Sexual Abuse of Minors in the Archdiocese of Chicago, January 1, 1993 – January 16, 2003" (www.archchicago.org). Additionally, the Catholic Archdiocese, in the Ten Year Report, has publicly accounted for every dollar spent by the Church directly related to clerical sexual abuse of minors for the ten fiscal years since 1992, the year the Cardinal's Commission issued its report to Cardinal Joseph Bernadin (Ten Year Report, pages 9-11). The report also states that the costs associated with the sexual abuse will not be paid out of donations given either to a parish, or to the Catholic Archdiocese of Chicago. On June 15, 1992 a "Cardinal's Commission on Clerical Misconduct," established by Cardinal Bernadin, presented a report to the Cardinal which recommended the "establishment of comprehensive policies and procedures to deal with allegations and issues related to sexual abuse by clerics with minors" (Ten Year Report, Appendix i, page [1100]-1). These recommendations, per the direction of Cardinal Bernadin, became the basis for policies and procedures as "law" for the local Church. Then, in June 2002, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops approved a "Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People," which "addresses the Church's commitment to deal appropriately and effectively with cases of sexual abuse of minors by priests, deacons, and other church personnel" (Ten Year Report, Appendix i, page [1100]-1). Then, also in June 2002, the United Conference of Catholic Bishops decreed "Essential Norms for Diocesan/Eparchial Policies Dealing with Allegations of Sexual Abuse of Minors by Priests, Deacons, or Other Church Personnel," which in March 2003 became law for all of the dioceses and eparchies in the United States (Ten Year Report, Appendix i, page [1100]-2). Loumbas then considers the role of lay people: The efforts by the Catholic Church to deal with clergy sexual misconduct resulted in a series of "Policies for Education, Prevention, Assistance to Victims and Procedures for Determination of Fitness for Ministry," which is Appendix i of the Ten Year Report and which became effective July 15, 2003. In the Catholic Policies, the Catholic Church recognized that, when "a servant becomes abuser, the relationship of trust necessary for the ministry is diminished for all," and that sexual abuse "by a cleric with a minor affects the whole Church," and the "solution to the problem must involve the whole Church" (Ten Year Report, Appendix i, page [1100]-2). Several years after the Catholic Archdiocese of Chicago began the process outlined above, in 2000, the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America adopted a "Statement of Policy Regarding Sexual Misconduct by Clergy" (see www.goarch.org/goa/documents/misconduct_policy.asp). While this policy may be better than no policy at all, it has several significant differences from the Catholic Policies; these differences primarily concern the role lay people are given in the process of dealing with clergy sexual misconduct. The Catholic Church's policies significantly involve lay people; the Greek Orthodox Church's policies do not. For example, although both policies provide for the establishment of a board comprised of both clergy and lay people to assist each Church's respective Archbishop in the investigation process, the Greek Orthodox Church's policy establishing its "Advisory Board" provides that the board would contain a minimum of five people, including at least one bishop; at least one additional clergyman; at least one female; at least one licensed mental health professional; and at least one attorney. Such a provision allows the board to be comprised of a majority of clergy, as opposed to lay people, since there is no limit on the number of bishops or clergy who can be on the board. Contrast this with the Catholic Church's policy 1104.3.1, which provides that its "Review Board" shall be comprised of nine members, six of whom "shall be lay Catholics who are not employees of the Archdiocese, and three members shall be clerics" (Catholic Policies, page [1100]-16). Therefore, the Catholic Church's Review Board is made up of a finite number of people, a majority of whom have to be lay people; the Greek Orthodox Church's policies contain no such requirement and, in fact, provide enough flexibility that a majority of the members can be priests. Furthermore, the Greek Orthodox Church's Advisory Board has no direct role in investigating allegations of clergy sexual abuse. Instead, its role is to, and only as requested, "provide recommendations concerning policy matters such as: assistance for Victims, treatment for affected Clergy, contact with parish communities, ongoing education for Clergy and the Church community, and other issues involved in dealing with Sexual Misconduct." The Chancellor of the Archdiocese, a priest, is responsible for conducting the investigation. On the other hand, the Catholic Church's policy provides that its investigations of clerical misconduct will be conducted by a Review Board Administrator who, by definition, is a "lay Catholic professional who maintains appropriate qualifications and substantial experience in investigation and analyzing allegations of sexual abuse of children." (Catholic Policies, page [1100] – 21). Although the Review Board Administrator is appointed by the Archbishop, such appointment is made upon the recommendation of the Review Board. Finally, the Review Board Administrator is supervised by the Review Board. (Catholic Policies, pages [1100] 20 – 21). So, to summarize, investigation of accused clergy in the Greek Orthodox Church is explicitly handled by clergy, while in the Catholic Church it is explicitly handled by a lay person, experienced in investigating such matters, who is supervised by a board comprised of a majority of lay people. Loumbas points out the issues the Catholic Church had in 'hiding the problem': With respect to confidentiality, the Catholic Church has acknowledged that it used to request a confidentiality provision in settlement agreements signed by victims of clerical sexual abuse. The purpose of these provisions was to prohibit the abused from ever discussing the abuse, in exchange for whatever monies were paid by the Church as part of a legal settlement. In 2002, Cardinal George announced that such confidentiality provisions would not be enforced; furthermore, as a matter of policy, the Catholic Archdiocese has affirmatively stated that it "will not enter into confidentiality agreements, except for grave and substantial reasons brought forward by the victim/survivor and noted in the text of the agreement" (Catholic Policies, page [1100]-6). The Greek Orthodox Church's policy contains no such affirmative statement that the Church will not seek confidentiality provisions in settlement agreements with victims of clergy sexual abuse. Those victims who agree to accept settlement payments from the Greek Orthodox Church pursuant to settlement agreements which contain such confidentiality provisions will not be able to publicly discuss the abuse which occurred, because such confidentiality provisions will prohibit them from doing so. In the Preamble to the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People, it is noted that, in the past, "secrecy has created an atmosphere that has inhibited the healing process and, in some cases, enabled sexually abusive behavior to be repeated" (Revised Edition, see Ten Year Report, Appendix ii). Also, in his cover letter to Cardinal George accompanying the Ten Year Report, Catholic Archdiocese of Chicago Chancellor Jimmy Lago noted that the clergy sexual abuse issue had "caused many individuals to question the ministry of the priesthood and the bishop." Fortunately, the problems facing the Greek Orthodox Church do not appear to be as numerous as those that faced the Catholic Church, but the question is not one of quantity of morally transgressive priests, or of founded allegations of clergy sexual abuse, because even one moral transgression by a member of the clergy against a child is too many. Archbishop Demetrios and the other hierarchs of the Greek Orthodox Church should take the lessons learned by the Catholics to heart because a failure to involve the whole Church in this process will lead to a loss of trust which, as the Preamble continues to say, "becomes even more tragic when its consequence is a loss of the faith that… (the bishops) have a sacred duty to foster." As Orthodox Christians, and as stewards of all of the young Orthodox Christians whose wellbeing is among the most important affairs of God, we must call upon our Church and its leaders to disclose all of the important statistics, financial and otherwise, about clergy sexual abuse. Equally if not more importantly, our Church leadership needs to open up the process and dialogue about the serious matter of clergy sexual abuse and more actively, affirmatively and significantly involve the lay people – especially parents – so that our faith and trust in the Church, its bishops and its priests, which we desire to pass onto our children, does not further diminish.
Any original material on these pages is copyright © BishopAccountability.org 2004. Reproduce freely with attribution.