Will Rome Say "No"?

Here are the two official documents produced by the bishops' meeting: Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People and Essential Norms for Diocesan/Eparchial Policies Dealing with Allegations of Sexual Abuse of Minors by Priests, Deacons, or Other Church Personnel. (The dioceses in the Eastern Churches are called eparchies.)

Canonist Pete Vere is already saying that Rome will not approve the "Essential Norms", and he explains why:

.... So what's gonna happen with a zero-tolerance administrative procedure? Bishops will end up abusing this administrative procedure. Basically, it will be stretched to expell any troublesome priests from the ministry by shoe-horning the issue into sexual misconduct, whether it fits or not, so that they can avoid the time and expense of going through a formal judicial procedure in which the rights of the accused are safeguarded. Rome, of course, will say no....

Rome knows the temptation of bishops to use "zero-tolerance" administrative procedures in order to get rid of problems for which these procedures were never intended. This is why removal from the excercise of order (or forced laicization) requires a long, drawn-out, judicial procedure — to insure the rights of the accused. Simply put, once the media circus blows over in a few months, zero-tolerance will come to mean one thing for a priest unpopular with his bishop who gives a consentual hug given to a little old lady after Mass, and something more Clintonesque with regards to definitions for the priest popular with his bishop who is part of the good-ol'boys network. Rome's answer, of course, will probably be no. What is needed, therefore, is the will to enforce what is contained within canon law, when the issue becomes a problem, and not years later when the media becomes a problem....

(Thanks Mark.)

I wrote a little bit about this in my April 1st column:

Though the Church is not a government (in which there may be checks and balances between branches), theology, practice, and law have developed in response to varying circumstances over the centuries to hinder the abuse of autocratic authority. One of the developments is the recognition that a parish pastor has a right to a stable ministry: neither he nor his parish and parishioners is well-served if he is subject to removal willy-nilly by the bishop. (There are situations, however, in which a pastor may be appointed for a limited “term of office”.) Though a bishop may suspend a priest from exercising his ministry if he thinks there is just cause, he cannot do so indefinitely if the priest objects: there may very well be a trial, which may very well result in appeals. An entire section of the 1983 Code of Canon Law deals with The Procedure for Removal or Transfer of Parish Priests.

If Rome rejects the proposed "Essential Norms", remember that you heard it first from Catholic bloggers. And that they told you why. Of course, if Rome rejects the norms, mainstream media will never tell you the real reasons why: they will paint it (in collusion with Catholic subversive traitors) as one more way in which Rome is "out of touch", when in fact it will be because Rome understands some things better than America does.

Lane Core Jr. CIW P — Sat. 06/15/02 09:06:04 AM
Categorized as Classic.