A Wigwam for a Goose's Bridle

I’ve been feeling for a while now that I ought to write a blog post about the child sex abuse scandal within the Catholic Church. With Pell’s verdict and sentencing all over the news, and with friends asking me about it, I guess it’s time I got some of these thoughts into writing.

OK, here’s what we know:

There have been acts of abuse perpetrated by Catholic priests.  Most newsworthy are those related to paedophilia (both as direct “private” abuse of a child, and as pornographic distribution) and more recently information about abuse of nuns (although I’m obviously going to focus on the child sex abuse here).

There has been institutional cover up of these incidents.  The public likes to focus in here on the seal of the Confessional (which I’ll get to later), but holding that thought for a moment we know that there have been instances where multiple people were aware of what was happening or allegedly happening, from sources OUTSIDE of the Confessional, and conspired to keep this information secret, and did not make an effort to remove the perpetrators from roles/locations in which they could access children.

Multiple allegations have been made against Cardinal Pell for alleged child abuse acts from the 70s to the 90s.  Only one case was deemed to have sufficient evidence to be heard in court.  In its initial hearing, the jurors were unable to reach a unanimous verdict leading to a mistrial.  Finally, a jury delivered a verdict of “Guilty”.   The allegations relate to 2 episodes with 2 boys, only one of whom was available for the trial as the other had unfortunately died by suicide some time earlier, without ever having written or spoken of this issue, including denying it to his mother when she asked.  The story available to those who weren’t in the court room is that Pell found the two boys swigging altar wine in the sacristy after Mass, and… I don’t even want to type it out, it’s too horrible, and if you’re reading this I presume you already know.   Did he or did he not do it?  I don’t know, but there was at least enough evidence to convince a judge to proceed to trial, Pell was represented by one of Melbourne’s top criminal lawyers (who, for example, manages to get Underbelly-type people off), and in this second trial, 12 people were convinced enough to say they believe beyond reasonable doubt that he did it.

There have been suggestions in the media (including from sources such as the ABC which are actually typically very anti-Catholic, and the Sydney Morning Herald) that we might never know if this was a set up.  Pell has made a lot of enemies across the years, from his days of being vocal about homosexuality, to Australian politics, to his more recent role exposing financial corruption within the Church (potentially some very high powered enemies for this last one).  He maintains his claim to innocence.  Some are questioning the evidence, for example other priests are suggesting that the robes he would have been still in directly after Mass were not as easily moved aside as the claim suggests.

There is also the legal peculiarity of passing a verdict regarding his alleged actions towards the now deceased boy, relying solely on the witness of the other victim.

So what are my thoughts on this?

Child sex abuse is up there as one of the most reprehensible acts a person can commit.   Any individual who has perpetrated this deserves to be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.  Any individual who has been made aware of this outside of the Confessional and conspires to cover it up, and does not act to ensure future safety of minors around that person is equally reprehensible.  Any priest who has been made aware of this within the Confessional should do everything he can to attempt to remove the perpetrator from a position of potential abuse, without actually breaking the seal of Confession (again, more on this later).

The Catholic Church as an institution owes a large number of people an apology for the way these things have been handled, and moving forward, must carefully assess what can be done to safeguard against it happening in the future.

If Pell did it, he needs our prayers: that he may acknowledge his sin, repent, and attempt to make amends.

If Pell was set up, he needs our prayers: that he may remain strong in faith and peace.  IF he was set up, this would be a modern martyrdom in a way.  Public humiliation and death of reputation is a pretty big thing if it’s not true.

It does sadden me, although it does not surprise me, that this, even where we are certain that the priests involved did what was alleged, leads to increased public hatred of the Church.  But we were warned that as the world hates Him, so it would hate us (John 15:18-25), especially in end times, that the world would come mocking (2 Peter 3:3).

Does this shake my faith in God? Or my belief that the Catholic Church is the one He founded and the one I’m meant to be a part of?

No.

Humans are humans. We are all of us born with the stain of original sin, all of us ongoing sinners. No one ever said that priests were not also sinners. If Jesus died for me, He also died for them.   Look at Peter, the first Pope.  Enough of a sinner that he resorts to violence (cuts off the guard’s ear) and then denies Jesus 3 times.  Enough of a sinner that he tried to talk Jesus out of the act of redemption for which He came into the world (the harshest insult Jesus hurled at anyone in the Gospels is at Peter – He called him Satan!)  We were even warned that some within the Church itself would bring us problems: “just as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive opinions… even so, many will follow their licentious ways, and because of these teachers, the way of truth will be maligned…” (2 Peter 2:1-3) and we are also told that God will deal with such as these: “For if God did not spare the angels when they sinned but cast them into hell… the Lord knows how… to keep the unrighteous under punishment until the day of judgment – especially those who indulge their flesh in depraved lust…” (2 Peter 2:4-10).

Do I put any stock in the argument that these actions are the result of celibacy?

Again, no.  Celibacy has an important role in the priesthood.  Celibacy frees up the man to be as the bridegroom to the Church, and put Her needs first.  Whereas if he were married he would need to devote himself to his wife and his children and thus distract from his role in the Church.   Celibacy does not force him to perform any sexual act, whether alone, with a consenting adult, or with a non-consenting adult or child. And if he is prone to paedophilia, marriage would not necessarily prevent him from carrying out that horrible act!  And we know that institutional issues with paedophilia are not confined to the Catholic Church, nor indeed “just” to religions; hobby groups, schools, holiday camps…

Ok, I’ve left the “big one” till the end.  Is this a problem with the seal of Confession and should we change that?

Once again, no.

Firstly, I appreciate that an element of this argument is always going to be difficult to sell to a non-Catholic.  An understanding of the importance of the seal of the Confessional requires a degree of faith.  For the Confessional to be important, you need actually to believe that Jesus instituted this, as a deliberate choice on His part as an opportunity for us to receive His Grace and be reconciled with Him, the Church and ourselves.  Even some Catholics struggle with this dogma, although there is significant writing and Church tradition to back it up.  Jesus did indeed tell His disciples, the first priests, that those whose sin you forgive, they are forgiven (John 20:21-23 / Matthew 18:18), which is explained further in 2 Corinthians 5:18 – “All this is from God, who through Christ reconciled us to Himself and gave us the ministry of reconciliation.”

Why is the seal so important?  Do you like admitting your errors? to anyone? anywhere?  Would you actually go and tell someone you did something very wrong if they could go and tell other people about it?  The seal may feel a little problematic from a human justice perspective, but we Catholics need to remember to view it in a Godly justice perspective.  The seal allows us to be completely honest – this is important for eternal reconciliation and redemption, but may also be important for temporal justice here on earth as the priest within the Confessional may council about preventing future sin and making amends.

I know that some states in Australia are looking to legislate that the seal does not apply in certain situations.  From a civil liberties perspective, this is quite scary.  Once the state starts to try to legislate Faith, we are headed on a proverbial slippery slope.  Again though, while I am disappointed I am not surprised.  We have been fortunate in our religious freedom for a long time in the country, and it is to be expected that as end times approach we will not be so free.  From a Church perspective, I suspect this will never fly.  We are indeed told to obey the Law where it is not in actual opposition to God, but if it is then “we must obey God rather than men.” (Acts 5:29).  Further, that something had been known in Confession would be very hard to prove in a court of law.

What I do think the Church must address, however, is that there must be some way for a Confessor to use knowledge like this without actually breaking the seal.  I am hopeful that Pope Francis is working on this.

I also note that the Church in Australia is taking some steps already: all workers and volunteers must now have a valid Working with Children Check, and I believe that a lot of places are instituting rules about adults not being left alone with children.

In some sort of summary: Child sexual abuse is a horrible, terrible thing.  I am deeply saddened that this has occurred anywhere, anytime, but especially saddened that trusted, ordained men in a position of power and respect have abused their positions, harming both innocent children, the community, and indeed the reputation of the Church.  I fully support the law chasing down any they can find, and I am going to put my trust in the Australian justice system to continue to offer fair trials.  To those reading this who are not Catholic, I would urge you not to judge God and His institution of the Church on the actions of sinful men.  To those reading this who are Catholic, I would urge you to pray: pray for the innocent victims that they may find peace, and still find God, pray that there may be no further victims, pray that the men who have done this may be brought to justice here, but may also recognise their sin and repent, and pray that the Church may hold strong amidst the hatred.

Addit: Since I finished writing up the above commentary, I have just read more news headlines about the comments made today by Pell’s lawyer regarding a request for lenient sentencing and I feel I need to address these too.

1. Horrible, horrible, horrible comments to suggest that any form of child sexual abuse is not bad.  I feel like this lawyer has chosen very poor wording in this case.
2. Regardless of the terrible phrasing used, this is not an admittance of guilt.  This lawyer’s job is to advocate for his client, and at this point that means attempting to gain a more lenient sentence.  He cannot get up and argue that leniency should be granted based on Pell maintaining his innocence or on their planned appeal.  He has to make his argument within the available verdict, therefore as much as I feel he worded it incorrectly, it is actually logical that he would try to suggest that the crimes in question could have been worse.
3. I think he would have been better arguing more about the age and health of Cardinal Pell, and maybe the risk to his personal safety in prison.