Fruits From a Summit?

This week’s Vatican abuse scandal summit, which ends on February 24, may be expected to produce big solutions to the Church’s greatest crisis since the Reformation, but those who entertain such hopes will be disappointed.

Whatever the outcomes of the summit, which brings together the presidents of the world’s bishops’ conferences, no such quick-fixes are intended, even in an age that demands quick-fixes.

Whatever the outcomes of the summit, which brings together the presidents of the world’s bishops’ conferences, no such quick-fixes are intended, even in an age that demands quick-fixes.

Still, the mere reality of such a summit, unprecedented and imperfect as it is, indicates a willingness in principle by the Church to confront itself.

We have been told that the summit will not yield new sets of rules, regulations and procedures.

“There can be no one-size-fits-all guideline for the whole Church, because our languages do not translate certain concepts, the law systems are completely different, the political and social situations are very diverse,” according to Fr Hans Zollner SJ, a child protection expert and co-organiser of the summit.

But it is also self-evident that if a member of the Church’s personnel has committed a crime — be it sexual or financial — the only proper response is to immediately engage the civil authorities, besides following the appropriate internal procedures.

This may be so in the details. But it is also self-evident that if a member of the Church’s personnel has committed a crime — be it sexual or financial — the only proper response is to immediately engage the civil authorities, besides following the appropriate internal procedures. There can be no ambiguity about that, and very little room for interpretations.

The summit will need to define what the Catholic Church, universally, understands by sexual abuse. While such a definition may be influenced by differences in local cultures, a consensus of basic principles should be possible to achieve.

The summit must produce a strong message that the Church unequivocally understands that the abuse scandal is mostly about the mishandling of allegations within an institutional culture that fostered silence and tolerance for evil in order to protect its reputation (and in the process ruined that reputation).

The spectacle of some veteran bishops feigning to be shocked, shocked, that there were cover-ups going on is a troubling show of disingenuousness.

The spectacle of some veteran bishops feigning to be shocked, shocked, that there were cover-ups going on is a troubling show of disingenuousness.

When Cardinal Bernard Law of Boston, the symbol of cover-ups 17 years ago, was given exile by the Vatican, was anyone truly oblivious about the true nature of the scandal? And if these men really were that indifferent to the obvious truth, what business do they have to be leaders in the Church?

The summit must make it clear that those who use the abuse scandal to conduct ideological warfare within the Church — as we see it so clearly, especially in the United States — are exacerbating the abuse by using survivors’ abuse as pawns in a toxic game.

Above all, the summit must issue an unbreakable commitment to accountability and transparency, in terms of the past, the present and the future.

Bishops who failed to protect the young and the vulnerable from predator priests — through arrogance, apathy, panic or ineptitude — must be held appropriately accountable for their actions.

Bishops who failed to protect the young and the vulnerable from predator priests — through arrogance, apathy, panic or ineptitude — must be held appropriately accountable for their actions.

If this means that shadows will be cast over popular names, then this must be the price for the systemic institutional failure.

In that respect, we repeat our call from last year for Truth and Reconciliation Commissions on abuse to be held, in the Vatican and at conference levels.

There must be full transparency in determining the past failures of bishops (including those of Rome) as well as in on-going cases. Nothing less will do.

There must be full transparency in determining the past failures of bishops (including those of Rome) as well as in on-going cases. Nothing less will do.

It should also be seen as indispensable, as far as civic law permits, that sanctions against abusers, including their dismissal from the clerical state, be made public — for the sake of transparency, and for the sake of reassuring the public that the Church is doing something to stop abuse.

This week’s summit will not produce a resolution to the scandal, and it can’t be expected to. Indeed, for substantial results, it may be necessary to call an extraordinary synod of bishops.

What we need from the summit are signs of hope that the Church is genuinely grasping the nature and seriousness of the scandal, that its leadership is prepared and equipped to deal with abuse — past, present and future — and that child-safeguarding is a top priority.

And let there be heard at the summit an unambiguously genuine, unqualified and clear mea culpa which then must be echoed in all the countries to which the conference presidents will return — mea culpa for the actions of those priests who committed so much evil, and mea culpa for the Church’s abject failure to stop them.