A Question of Justice

South African Catholics will have been disturbed, in one way or another, at the latest round of articles in newspapers taking up the sensitive subject of sexual abuse by clergy and the way allegations of these have been handled.

Whatever the merits or demerits of the cases recently covered in the secular media, the Church cannot escape acknowledging that among our many exemplary priests there have been a few who have committed deplorable acts that violated the trust placed in them by the faithful, their brother priests, their bishops and, above all, the people they abused.

It is Church policy that there can be no place in the active ministry for priests who have committed acts of sexual abuse.

At the same time, these priests are not abusers only. Many of their friends  laypeople, fellow priests, bishops associate such priests with their own experience of them, with positive qualities of friendship and an accumulated body of good works.

Sometimes such loyalty can get in the way of holding an offender fully answerable for his actions.

In other instances, as we learned from the sad experiences of the Church in the United States, bishops sought to cover up clerical abuse in a misguided attempt to preserve the good name of the Church, doing it appalling damage in the process.

Either way, it is important that the Church show its genuine concern primarily for the welfare of survivors of sexual abuse. They must be treated with respect.

It goes without saying that, as with all crimes, justice must be done, and be seen to be done. A priest who has committed acts of sexual abuse must be held accountable, his otherwise good character notwithstanding. The punishment must be proportionate to his crime.

Likewise, priests who have been falsely accused and there have been some cases of this as well (the baseless and vengeful accusations against the late Cardinal Joseph Bernardin of Chicago being perhaps the most famous example) deserve full and public rehabilitation.

All this presumes that the mechanics that ensure justice and accountability are working.

The recent newspaper reports imply that the Churchs protocol process has been shown to be flawed. The Church must address these charges, which were made by complainants.

If in the past the process or its implementation has shown defects, the Church must deal with this openly. If the current protocol governing allegations of sexual abuse, which was last revised in 2004, is showing failings in its application, then it must be revised further to perfect it.

The public must be reassured that the Church sincerely seeks justice even if it involves its clergy and is capable of delivering it.

Not much is gained by presuming that the scandal of sexual abuse (which the Mail & Guardian has emphasised is not unique to the Catholic Church) is being used as a stick with which to beat the Church even if this perception may not always be without foundation.

Nevertheless, the Church is well-advised to follow the recommendation of Archbishop John Foley, prefect of the Pontifical Council for Social Communications: to be open and honest, even to hostile media, and acknowledge the truth when applicable. Little is to be gained by equivocation or confrontation.

The Church must seek to engage the secular and Catholic media in a dialogue to persuade the public that sexual abuse is a crime which Catholics will not tolerate, and that justice for accuser and accused alike is a fundamental principle.