It has happened again in Chicago. Accusations of abuse have resulted in the removal of priests from their parishes. Criminal charges have been filed in one case, for these are current charges.

But is an accused priest ever "innocent until proven guilty", or is he "guilty, and never permitted to be proven innocent"?

Due process does not apply to priests accused of molesting kids and it never has, according to both a priests advocacy group and critics of the Catholic church.

For different reasons, both priests and church critics say due process hasn't been observed when it comes to allegations against priests.

Priests say they're practically guilty upon accusation. Critics say the church for too long gave accused priests a pass and simply transferred them to other assignments without adequately investigating or addressing the problems.

Recent abuse allegations against Chicago clergymen show that in the court of public opinion, "innocent until proved guilty" stops at the church doorstep. "I don't know of any priest who is not afraid," the Rev. Robert Silva said.

Silva is president of the National Federation of Priests' Councils, an advocacy group that represents 26,000 of America's 43,000 priests.

"Anyone can accuse them, and they'll have to step down," Silva said.

"How do you restore people's confidence? How do you restore your reputation if you get accused?"

And that is a question that needs to be asked. Are some charges -- perhaps even most -- true? Yes, beyond all question. But are some false? Undoubtedly, whether due to different interpretations of events or malicious falsehood.

But for the innocent, the stigma stays. Ask my old mentor, Father Dan, who was accused of misconduct in the mid 1980s. The charge was reported, investigated by both the church and the state, and found to be unfounded. Several years later, in the mid 1990s, when an unrelated scandal broke in the diocese, he was abruptly yanked from his parish and subjected to an extended investigation by the diocese and the local prosecutor under the theory that any old accusation needed to be reinvestigated as a matter of due diligence. Cleared a second time, he was suspended and reinvestigated again, after the nation's bishops adopted their sex abuse investigation standards nearly a decade later. He was cleared again -- but was targeted for a civil suit by a disgruntled parishioner who had a history of mental instability. I don't doubt that when he finally is called home to the Lord, the first paragraph of the local paper's obituary will highlight the false accusations, not his years of faithful service as a priest.

This reality bothers me, for as a teacher I am in another field where accusations are easy to make and hard to defend.

It offends me, because good men are destroyed by a process that often does not give them a reasonable chance to defend themselves.

And it worries me, because I know that false accusations happen.

And because this time, one of the priests suspended in Chicago is an old friend, another Father Dan, who was a year ahead of me during my time in the seminary. I don't know whether or not he is guilty, and I don't pretend to know. If the charges are true, I hope that justice is truly and righteously done. But if the charges are not true, if Father Dan is not guilty, I hope that justice is also truly and righteously done -- and that he can return to active ministry without being forever branded as "the priest who was accused".

The article raises that issue.

Today, in the public's mind, [Father Dan] McCormack already is guilty, many say: Even if he were acquitted, one priest said, McCormack could never return to St. Agatha.

He probably can't come back to Chicago. His name is now forever linked to crimes he is accused of committing.

When it comes to priests accused of sexual abuse, attorney Frederic Nessler said, "Ruining lives is not a priority issue, because I feel they've ruined so many children's lives."

Nessler has represented nearly 100 victims of clergy abuse.

"In my opinion, (offending priests) should be given very little quarter," he said.

While I agree that the guilty should be given no quarter, I think that Nessler and those like him need to rethink their position that because of the failings of the Church as an institution in the past, that concerns about ruining the lives of innocent priests should be given low priority. After all, while a diocese or archdiocese is an ongoing entity that can be held accountable over time for the actions of its leadership, justice is not done when individual priests are falsely accused and destroyed for crimes they did not commit on the theory that "they've ruined so many children's lives." That is the mentality of the lynch mob, not the honest searcher for justice.

Posted by: Greg at 02:33 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 827 words, total size 5 kb.