Sex abuse settlement, the pope's visit and ecumenism: Cardinal Mahony speaks with NCR
Print Friendly Version| All Things Catholic by John L. Allen, Jr. | |
| Friday, November 30, 2007 - Vol. 7, No. 13 | |
Note: John Allen posted two stories this morning to the NCR web site about Pope Benedict XVI newest encyclical: Spe Salvi, or "Saved in Hope." The stories are:
Benedict XVI offers the second in a possible triptych of encyclicals: 'Saved by Hope'
Spe Salvi a 'Greatest Hits' collection of core Ratzinger ideas
* * *
Los Angeles is the capital of the world's entertainment industry, and since 1985 the Catholic church there has been led by a figure seemingly made for Tinseltown: Cardinal Roger Mahony, 71, perhaps the most media-savvy American bishop (among other things, Mahony is an Internet adept) and something of a cultural celebrity in his own right. The latest confirmation came earlier this month with the publication of a novel, billed as "reality fiction," by American Catholic writer Robert Blair Kaiser titled Cardinal Mahony. In the novel, the Los Angeles prelate is kidnapped by a group of liberation theologians from Latin America, put on trial in Mexico (after being spirited away in his own helicopter), and converted to the need for sweeping reform. The fictional Mahony apparently ends up leading American Catholics in demanding what the book's publisher describes as "citizenship in their church."
I bumped into Mahony in the Vatican's Synod Hall on Nov. 23, waiting for a meeting of the College of Cardinals with the pope. He said he had read most of the novel during his flight to Rome; asked for a reaction, he simply laughed.
As is often the case with celebrities these days, Mahony is also dogged by his share of controversy. Recently, the Archdiocese of Los Angeles concluded what will almost certainly be the largest single settlement related to the American sexual abuse crisis -- a $660 million payout, shared by the archdiocese, most religious orders sued in California (with the exception of the Salesians), and insurance carriers. That amount reflects not only the size and wealth of the archdiocese, but also a 2002 California law temporarily suspending the statute of limitations on civil lawsuits against private organizations whose personnel abused children. The settlement closes some 500 claims at roughly $1 million each. The process of collecting more than 700 signatures to finalize the settlement was completed in mid-November.
On Monday, Nov. 26, Mahony sat down in Rome for an interview with NCR to discuss the settlement, the legacy of the sexual abuse crisis, Pope Benedict XVI's trip to the United States in April 2008, and the consistory itself. The full text of that interview is available in the Special Documents section of NCRonline.org. The following are excerpts. I also filed daily reports during the consistory, which can be found here: http://ncrcafe.org/blog/2682
NCR: You've just concluded a $660 million settlement in Los Angeles designed to end your litigation related to the sexual abuse crisis. Do you feel a sense of relief?
Mahony: I don't look at it that way. Having met with dozens and dozens of victims, over 70 so far, I believe the closure of this is important for them. I didn't realize how much more they'd been through, even by filing lawsuits. They had to fill out claimant questionnaires and say all kinds of things about their personal lives. Their attorneys asked them to do videos of their experience. They've had to bare their souls, which for many of them reopened the past. Most of them see the settlement as the last time they'll have to go through all this.
Secondly, they see the settlement, as I do, as a ratification that they were harmed. This is a public acknowledgment that they were harmed. Even though the language of the settlement may not use the terms "fault" and "no fault," it is a ratification, an acknowledgement by the church, that you were harmed. While money doesn't resolve the past, it is an acknowledgement, and I think that's very important for them.
There are those who charge that you spent $660 million to save yourself the personal embarrassment of sitting in the witness box during a jury trial. How do you respond to that?
First of all, I respond with a very big smile. Part of our strategy, and our settlement judge knew this all along, is that the only way to get insurance companies to settle is if it would cost them more not to settle. The only way that can happen is to get a verdict from a jury. Therefore, we purposefully chose cases with huge coverage amounts and went to the court, more than a year ago, and got them set for trial. People say we're afraid of a trial? We're the ones who got the cases set for trial. We wanted them set for trial. It was that date approaching that broke things loose.
In fact, the day we had the formal presentation of the settlement in court -- Monday, July 16 -- was the date the first trial was to start. A week before that, the insurance guys wanted no part of this [settlement]. The judge met with them all and said, 'Well, if you don't want to participate and you want to go to trial next Monday, I would suggest you go home and get ready for trial. There's no sense sitting around here.'
The judge dismissed them and left the courtroom. They didn't leave. The bailiff came back later and told the judge, 'You know those guys you sent home? They're all still here.' He let them sit for an hour or two. In the end, they blinked.
Secondly, with respect to me testifying, 95 percent of the cases occurred before I came, and I would have very little to say. In fact, the first case concerned a fellow who was ill when I arrived and died within my first year. I wouldn't be able to tell them anything about it. Actually, I was looking forward to it, because I was going to use the opportunity to explain what we've done to make sure this doesn't happen again. I had no problem with testifying.
As matter of church law, alienation of property requires approval of the Holy See. Specifically, it goes to the Congregation for Clergy, and, for settlements related to sexual abuse, also Secretariat of State. What has your experience been in dealing with the Vatican?
They've been extremely supportive. Of our total settlement, we've only needed to get permission to alienate $200 million. [The rest of the $660 million will come from insurance companies, religious orders, and internal borrowing.] I've just come from a meeting in the Congregation for Clergy to discuss it.
Would you say the Vatican has been on a learning curve?
Some [in the Vatican] get it, and some don't. I would say that the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and the Congregation for Clergy people get it.
Perhaps it's because those two offices have been on the front lines of the crisis -- the CDF for the doctrinal and disciplinary issues, and Clergy for the money?
That's right. Cardinal Hummes particularly has been extremely helpful. [Brazilian Cardinal Claudio Hummes is Prefect of the Congregation for Clergy.] Cardinal Rodé also has been very helpful. [Slovenian Cardinal Franc Rodé is Prefect of the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life, popularly known as the Congregation for Religious.] He gave us the key principle this past May. He said the religious institutes must bear full responsibility for their members, and the dioceses for their members. He said that's the only formula that's going to work, and that's the formula we've been following.
Some of the other folks, in some of the other offices, the ones from whom we had the most skepticism, are now happily retired!
Shifting gears, what do you think the importance of Pope Benedict XVI's visit to the United States next April will be?
It will be the first time the American people see him a bit more up-close. Of course, it will depend in part on what he has to say.
What message will you be looking for?
I would hope that he would recognize the vitality of the church in the United States, particularly the vitality of parish life. I hope he'll talk about lay involvement, lay leadership, and lay ministry -- as a plus, a real plus … (laughs) as opposed to that document from the eight dicasteries! [The reference is to a 1997 Vatican document issued by eight Vatican offices raising concerns about lay ministry.] I hope he acknowledges that this is where the church is growing, and that we're going in the right direction. I maintain that this is why we're not Italy or France or someplace else, because we've been able to do that. John Paul II acknowledged that all the time, so I hope Benedict will emphasize that.
I think it's also important to acknowledge the faith of our people, especially during the six or seven years of this crisis. Our people have remained so faith-filled. They realize that the church is not about perpetrators of sexual abuse, it's about Jesus Christ and his abiding presence with the church. That's the core. It's not about us people along the way or various segments of history, it's the presence of Christ. I've been in awe of the faith of our people, the way that they've rallied around their priests and been so supportive of their priests in the parishes. … I think the Holy Spirit does that for us.
Do you think Benedict XVI will have to address the sexual abuse crisis?
Oh, absolutely. I think it's a unique opportunity for him to do that. He's got to. He cannot avoid that. Where he does it, I'm not sure. I would hope he says something in both his homilies to large gatherings of the Catholic faithful, not just the meeting of the bishops. That isn't going to be helpful. I think he needs to say something in the public arena to our people. I think he needs to make it clear that he understands.
I must say, I think he does [understand]. He was most helpful at the CDF in getting things changed that we needed changed. So, I'm hoping that in those two arenas, he'll say something. [Benedict XVI is expected to celebrate public Masses in Nationals Stadium in Washington, D.C., and Yankee Stadium in New York.]
You took part in the business meeting of the College of Cardinals with the pope, devoted largely to the issue of Christian unity. Did you hear anything new?
I thought that Cardinal Kasper's report was a good overview of where we are. … He pointed out where the obstacles and challenges remain. What I found fascinating was that the cardinals were all into this topic. I think at first some thought that Kasper would gave his report, then there'd be a comment or two, and then there would be other issues. Actually, basically the whole day, even the evening, was all on this.
As I listen to both ecumenical experts and bishops, it seems that a gradual shift has been taking shape away from focusing primarily on theological dialogue, toward more practical cooperation on socio-cultural concerns. Does that seem right?
Absolutely. Just to give you one vivid example in the archdiocese, in the inner city we have a large Central American parish, St. Thomas the Apostle. Right next to it is Santa Sophia, the Los Angeles cathedral for the Greek Orthodox. Recently we had an arson fire at St. Thomas the Apostle, and it was closed for almost a year. The fire was on Friday night, and the next Sunday I went to celebrate Mass in the parking lot with the parishioners. You know who was there? The [Orthodox] pastor from next door, along with the Greek Orthodox Archbishop from San Francisco, who came down for the Mass. They loaned their facilities to the parish. It was just phenomenal.
I joked with the archbishop, saying, 'If you and I wanted, we could just declare unity and let the folks in Istanbul and Rome figure it out. We could deal with them later!' The fact is, we do so much together on so many fronts.
How did you find the pope?
I found him very alert. As usual, the way he can sum up everything at the end of a session is just incredible. He listens, he's obviously taking notes. At the end of the morning and evening sessions, he gave a few points that captured the discussion well.
He didn't announce any new ecumenical initiative?
No. There were some suggestions from cardinals that perhaps we need another summit.
You mean like the inter-religious summits in Assisi under John Paul II, this time for other Christian bodies?
Yes, but nobody really thought we're ready for that at this point.
| Archives | Signup for Weekly E-mail |
Bill, you raise great
Bill, you raise great questions and concerns here. I don't know why I am trying to look at things from the Bishops point of few. Maybe a recent illness effected my brain, but here it goes.
a. I would hedge to guess that many victims were either discouraged or told by their lawyers not to meet with the bishop - legal reasons. I could also see a desire to protect files for the sake of innocent and to protect the identity and reputation of those questioned. There is a thin legal and moral line there. But, I could how this could come across.
b. I applaud the few bishops who have come out with support of abolishing state statutes of limitations. However, if I were a bishop trying to protect the assets of the diocese, I doubt if I would carry the rallying flag for this pastoral initiative at this time. I don't think the lawyers want to abolish the statute for pastoral reasons, I think it is financial. So I think the bishops are responding on that level.
c. Definitely agree with you on this. I took offense in my own diocese to the actions of the diocesan lawyers in their questioning of the victims in some of the cases. I paid dearly for my questioning - trust me. I was proud of the Bishop, and I think it was Mahony, who pleaded no contest to the charges.
d. Couldn't agree more. Seminaries are not preparing priest for pastoral service. They seem to be trining soliders in the war on the "Truth, injustice, and the Roman Way." They have brought back clericalism which to me is a big concern with correlation to sexual abuse of minors. (Abuse is always about power)
Maybe I feel a need to defend Mahony because he has been a champion of the "left" for many years in a episcopacy of the "right." I also think that after some of these guys (bishops) are retired, any memoirs or publications may reveal a different aspect of the abuse and the intense internal wrestling they had to do to make some difficult decisions.
In crisis is opportunity. The church does need to use this crisis to bring this issue of sexual abuse of minors to the larger civic stage. And it needs to do it by example.
I wouldn't go so far as to
I wouldn't go so far as to connect pedophilia with clericalism. Pedophiles are narcissistic. They are psychologically disordered. The reason pedophile priests were able to do what they did was because everyone around them virtually worshipped them and felt they were to be obeyed without question and given automatic respect. This is somewhat different from teaching priests to take their role as seriously, which I hope is what is meant by an emphasis on clericalism.
"An emphasis on clericalism"
"An emphasis on clericalism" is something very different than an emphasis on ministry and service, which is what priests should be formed to take seriously. Clericalism is actually defined as something like, ' A policy of supporting the power and influence of the clergy in political or secular matters', and is generally used similarly in terms of catholic life, as supporting the power and privilege of being in the role of a priest or bishop, etc., in other words, putting themselves forward as the focal role in being a follower of Jesus. Traditionalists express some 'ontological difference' in ordination which supports the power and privilege of all clergy, and which, on a practical level, suggests that we should--all the rest of us--stand in some awe of their personage.
Perhaps I should have
Perhaps I should have insisted that jstab offer evidence that clericalism has been brought back in seminaries. It's unlikely that seminarians are taking Clericalism 101, so its being brought back could only be a matter of indirectly instilling an attitude. Based on my experience of priests, it seems that we all would benefit were they more aware of their influence and power over people and events, rather than taking on a false humility and even taking offense at people's deference to them. One would hope that if they are being taught anything, they are being taught to use their influence wisely rather than oppressively.
Marie, we could all hope for
Marie, we could all hope for the same. Many professions, after all, do know ways of teaching how to know and use their associated power for the good of others. But your hope does not seem closely related to the news from the (seminary) front. The news does suggest the intended return to teaching (directly or indirectly) clericalism, oh, to build up the "identity" of priests so that more young men will want to be one again, and all those associated issues. We need to pray for the future..
AnnieO, Your comment on
AnnieO,
Your comment on another thread about mothers not pushing their sons into the priesthood has some connection to this image building thing, it seems to me. As the mother of two sons, there are a couple of things that I wish for them. One is that their employment be fulfilling. Another is that it be respectable.
The public image of the priesthood (as opposed to only the power structure of the Church) has suffered from the pedophilia scandal. It sometimes appears that people believe that all priests are potential child abusers. There are people who are so convinced of this that they become wary when they see a priest in any setting outside of his professional duties. One might even argue that this debate tying clericalism to the scandal is premised on the assumption that all priests have it in them, as if the clerical attitude would lead someone to become interested in having sex with sexually mature minors or with prepubescent children.
On the other hand, a properly formed "identity" would include identifying with the celibate state to the degree that those who do not see themselves that way would not become priests. I think this would be a bit different from the identity that was instilled in the days when sexuality was rarely, if ever, discussed and the identity was based on being more intelligent and educated than the average man.
With one son, I would
With one son, I would certainly agree that I want for him employment that is fulfilling and (pretty) respectable. I also would prefer that it carry the intensity of talent and energy that would have it be more profession and vocation. I also agree that the public image of the priesthood, as well as the power structure of the church, has suffered terribly with the pedophilia scandal. Although I don't feel this way, there are certainly people for whom the sight of a roman collar is a provocation rather than a comfort. Given some of the historical feelings about the church, it sure doesn't help anything. And I think that many people do believe that the church has developed a culture that even helps create and foster pedophilia. I do believe that there is a link with clericalism in the issue of power, which is one of the parts of the pedophilia issue.
I don't actually think that there is as much disagreement on that issue as you do, because I think that you think the definition of "clericalism" is related to being a "cleric" and things being "clerical". Actually,"clericalism" is itself defined as dysfuntion, not function. It is when things clerical get warped into dysfunction, tied to power and privilege, as in the definition I've already provided. Given that accepted definition (which I think you're not accepting, but came from the dictionary), power and privilege are then strongly linked in these discussions to such things as to arrogance, to an expectation of deference in all things, which many people actually do give to clerics. We have folks in the cafe who have expressed a willingness to accept the rightness of anything the pope might utter, including, I guess, his thoughts on the weather of the day, for instance. If he accepted that, that would be clericalism, to take it to a silly example. But clericalism is not silly. And some priests grow themselves on this warpedness, this dysfuntion, which that narcissism you speak of is likely to lead to. That's what people are talking about, not the mature man who chooses, perhaps struggles with, but lives out a commitment to celibacy for the sake of being a priest in the church and ministering to others. I think you're not hearing that the actual meaning of the words is different: "cleric" and "clerical" being okay as one thing and "clericalism" being the warping of the okay. Does that make sense in terms of just definitions?
A correlation is a
A correlation is a connection (the degree of which is dependent upon certain variables) and I believe one does exist between clericalism and sexual abuse of minors. My use of the term clericalism is what you describe as obedience without question, entitlement to respect, and preferential status (being worshipped).
Marie, with all due respect, you seem to contradict yourself. First you question the connection between pedophila and clericalism and then you go on to say it is the cause! Of course, as you noted, it all hinges on what one's definition of clericalism is. I associate it with the mentality you describe as the priest-king, with the priest being beyond question and commanding respect by virtue of ordination.
Further, be careful about simplifying pedophila. Truly it is a psychological disorder, but I don't think it necessarily falls under the DSM-IV criteria of axis two personality disorders although it may be a co-existing disorder. Additionally, I attempt to use "sexual abuse of minors" as opposed to "pedophila" because in many cases, teenage boys were the victims and technically that is not pedophila, but another disorder, the name of which I cannot spell properly (ephebophila?)
I think we are in agreement more than disagreement. We just understand or define "clericalism" differently.
You are right that we seem
You are right that we seem to understand clericalism differently.
I know people who sexually abused minors (as opposed to their being pedophiles) and they were actually quite pitiable and did not think of themselves as kings, beyond question, or commanding respect. I equate your use of the term clericalism with the term arrogance, and distinguish someone's attitude about his status from the attitudes of others regarding that person's status.
I don't think that I am saying clericalism is the cause, because I don't think that a worshipful attitude toward the priest can be defined as clericalism. In fact, it has been my observation that the more personable a priest is, the more likely he is to be worshipped, obeyed, and trusted without question.
It seems to me that making seminarians aware of their influence is being realistic and should be distinguished from giving seminarians a sense of entitlement--something I think you may be only assuming is happening.
We are more or less on the
We are more or less on the same page. Some times it takes dialogue to get through our prejudices or anger. When all is said and done, there are a lot of varities of clericalism and many different "types" of priests were perpetrators. I guess we all just got to work on our anger about the whole situation - the betrayal and mistrust. It has left a gapping wound in the psyche of the Church.
Your identification of
Your identification of pedophilia with narcissism is very helpful I have never met a priest I could identify as a pedophile, but I have met dozens of ordained narcissists. I remember one fellow who refused to say Mass with the music ministry present, becuase their leader said, "Now let us stand.." BEFORE he got a chance to ring the bell. While others have analyzed the abuse situation as seeing the priesthood as an attractive cover for those for whom adult sexuality is a threat, maybe the psychological screening at the seminary ought to weed out those with narcissistic and grandiose tendencies.
I think narcissists are
I think narcissists are particularly drawn to becoming clergy of all religions and denominations, but not all clergy are narcissists as technically defined in psychology. I think that without the presence of a certain degree of narcissism the amount of attention conferred on a clergy person likely would be unbearable for him or her.
Narcissism would not help
Narcissism would not help someone deal with the amount of attention that they receive as clergy. Self-esteem and maturity are the kinds of things that help with that. Narcissism is only more likely to warp the attention into greater self-absorption.
I wonder how many
I wonder how many accusations of sexual misconduct have been proven false. Given that it has been found that there is no difference between incidents of misconduct in the Church and in society, one would assume that there is also no difference in incidents of false accusations. I am aware of several cases where a preexisting mental illness caused false accusations of sexual misconduct--in contrast with mental illness resulting from actual abuse.
More reassurance that the
More reassurance that the hierarchy is starting to get it!
Confessing my disappointment and depression at the announcement of "Habemus Papam" upon hearing the name Joseph Ratzinger, I must say that, so far, I have been more encouraged than disappointed. Signs of Encouragement:
1. His two encyclicals, first on love, now on hope, have been inclusive, optimistic, and upbeat. They are very theologically based and rooted in Augustinian Spirituality.
2. His choice for key appointments, especially to the College of Cardinals, has been towards moderates. This will make for a more interesting speculation of the, yet to be named, "papabile" who will emerge as the months and years unfold given the Pope's health. I am still waiting for John Allen's assessment. I know he is still trying to figure it all out. Don't be gun shy, John, because you didn't even have Ratzinger on radar last time. That one surprised us all in the days leading up to the conclave!
3. The seemingly reconciled relationship between the German Prelates living in Rome, specifically Benedict and Kasper. I remember well the debate in America Magazine and the almost polar viewpoints of the two. I remember hearing rumors of visible despair from Kasper upon Benedict's election. The fact that Benedict has chosen him to be showcased in a consistory is truly a vote of confidence in him and reveals even a slight indication of one of the candidates Benedict may like to see as his successor. I know I would like to see it. Kasper was on my shortlist last time.
The interview with Cardinal Mahony, and I have to read it in its entirety yet, reveals an often overlooked scandal to the scandal that I had mentioned on a thread a few weeks ago. The victims have been victimized twice. Once by the Church, again by their lawyers. Mahony confirms, money is not the cure, but merely a recognition of damage that has been done both to the victim and to the Church.
Mahony (as well as McCarrick) have been the shining star Red Hats in the U.S. over the past decade or so. Candid, open, and approachable. I believe the new freshmen, Foley and DiNardo, as well as sophomore O'Malley, give hope to the church in the USA. I am a little disappointed that the Pope did not elect to visit Boston on his trip to the States. It doesn't reassure me that he will address the hurt of the church there and in the country when that stop was left out of his itinerary. He was ill-advised not to accept the invitation of O'Malley. I am not as confident as Mahony that the Pope will address the issue of the scandal during his trip here. Maybe not expecting these things and then seeing them happen at some level has given me some of the encouragement I've noted above.
HOPE!!!!
Cardinal Mahoney may very
Cardinal Mahoney may very well have inherited most of the abuse cases that his archdiocese just settled, but his record as Bishop Stockton and as Archbishop of Los Angeles on this issue is dismal. Passing himself off as a friend to the victims is an outrage. At least he didn't say the victims and their legal representatives were doing Satan's work as the bishop from Chicago claimed.
Interesting interview. Also
Interesting interview. Also appreciate the comments from jstab. But despite initial trends from B16 - Deus Caritas Est & Spe Salvi; excellenct recent episcopal appointments and appreciation for world church events in naming cardinals, I continue to have reservations about the ability of the Church to apply "Love" and "Hope" to itself.
In the interview with Cardinal Mahoney, I do not see any evidence of "hard" questioning. Mahoney states that the archdiocesan insurance companies had to be "forced" by court action in order to settle; that, in fact, he and others wanted to move forward. As much as I admire Mahoney's pastoral letters, religious education annual conferences, and stands on immigration and the eucharist (vs. Mother Teresa and EWTN), his answers to John Allen's questions raise disconnects.
Allow me to concisely outline a "Manifesto from a Church Mouse" -
a) recent LA settlement with 660 victims - yet he states that he has only met 70 victims over the years this has dragged out. Is this truly a pastoral outreach? why such reliance upon a legal settlement and why did he stonewall the release of files for years? During this delay, he built and paid for a new Cathedral at the cost of millions with resultant closures and cut backs on vast numbers of archdiocesan outreach efforts.
b) your recent summary of the US Bishops meeting and John Jay report points out that the Church pedophilia events are not much different than society's. If this is true, then why can't the Church and its leadership be different from the current culture and society? We say we want a Catholic identity - so, why can't our leadership take a gospel approach to things such as state limitations for victims; why can't they work with the courts and state governments to abolish limits and institue a pastoral approach that embraces victims while capping awards?
c) we have two issues going on here - pedophilia will happen; but leadership that stonewalls; is non-transparent; that blames priests without themselves being accountable; blames insurance companies seems to take the Church down to the level of society....it would be difficult for someone to say that the Church is countercultural when it comes to sexual abuse situations;
d) as long as we must live with connecting celibacy to the sacrament of orders, then we have issues around priestly formation. Too many disparate seminaries; untrained/unqualified staff; has there been any talk by the bishops conference on a small number of regional or national seminaries that would consolidate formation and excellent staffs, teachers, theological and pastoral training? Are bishops willing to allow religious orders (e.g. Vincentian, Sulpician, Jesuit) back to do what their original charism was - training priests rather than each diocese having control? Aah, the issue of control and power. The second of our two issues. Regional/National seminaries can continue to have candidates spend time in their dioceses - summers, internship years, etc. Regional seminaries could focus on certain significant pastoral needs e.g. Hispanic ministry; urban ministry; etc. It would have been interesting to hear Mahoney answer questions about his own college/theologate, St. John's, in Camarillo, CA. Certain ordination classes had a >50% pedophilia rates. So, across the US, the Church average may be like society's but how about specific ordination classes - how did this happen?
So, guess I was looking for Cardinal Mahoney to answer more difficult questions. To explain why legal avenues are used instead of pastoral and gospel values.