BishopAccountability.org
	New Vatican Guidelines: Church Still Doesn't Get It The Chronicle-Herald May 23, 2011 http://thechronicleherald.ca/Editorials/1244779.html THE VATICAN appears to still think it's above the law. Secular law, that is. Last week, the Catholic Church issued new guidelines for bishops worldwide, calling for them to implement firm policies to deal with sexual abuse of minors by May 2012. The problem, which victims' groups and other critics of the Holy See's long-time — and continuing — mishandling of this tragic issue immediately pointed out, was that the Vatican left inappropriate discretion in the hands of the very local Church authorities who have failed to protect so many children from preying priests in the first place. Yes, bishops have now been clearly told by the Vatican they "should" report sexual abuse cases to secular authorities, but as critics have rightly noted, that is a recommendation, not a command. And if they don't? There appear to be no clear penalties spelled out. There's no question stronger Church policies for abusive priests are welcome. But this is not just a Church matter. When a priest sexually abuses a minor, anyone aware of that crime — from bishop to church janitor — has a primary responsibility to immediately tell law enforcement and then get out of the way. Sexual abuse of minors is first and foremost a secular matter, not a situation requiring bishops' discretion and investigation beforehand. The Vatican, however, doesn't appear willing to accept that its law comes second — and must come second — to secular law when minors are being sexually abused by its priests. So the Holy See's latest guidelines solve nothing. Moreover, critics charge, they say little about sanctions for the bishops who cover up such crimes, which has fuelled a large part of the outrage. Meanwhile, a new study released last week, commissioned by U.S. bishops, claimed the sex abuse scandal had little to do with pedophelia and was, in large part, fuelled by the confusion of priests reacting to the loose morals of the 1960s and 1970s. The study contains some questionable and self-serving conclusions and definitions. Among other things, it sets a younger maximum age, 10 not 13, than used by psychiatrists to define prebuscence, which skews pedophilia statistics. Also, the report again focuses on priests, not on the duties of those above them. Contact: edits@herald.ca
Any original material on these pages is copyright © BishopAccountability.org 2004. Reproduce freely with attribution.