ShareThis Page
World

Bishops will delay votes on steps to combat sex abuse crisis

| Monday, Nov. 12, 2018, 10:57 a.m.
Cardinal Daniel DiNardo of the Archdiocese of Galveston-Houston, president of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, prepares to lead the USCCB’s annual fall meeting, Monday, Nov. 12, 2018, in Baltimore. (AP Photo/Patrick Semansky)
Cardinal Daniel DiNardo of the Archdiocese of Galveston-Houston, president of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, prepares to lead the USCCB’s annual fall meeting, Monday, Nov. 12, 2018, in Baltimore. (AP Photo/Patrick Semansky)

BALTIMORE — In an abrupt change of plans, the president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops opened the group’s national meeting Monday by announcing it will delay for at least several months any votes on proposed new steps to address the clergy sex abuse crisis that is rocking the church.

Cardinal Daniel DiNardo, of Galveston-Houston, said the delay was requested by the Vatican, which asked that the U.S. bishops wait until after a Vatican-convened global meeting on sex abuse in February.

DiNardo expressed disappointment but told the U.S. bishops, “I remain hopeful that this additional consultation will ultimately improve our response to the crisis we face.”

The bishops are meeting through Wednesday in Baltimore and had been expected to consider several steps to combat abuse, including a new code of conduct for themselves and the creation of a special commission to review complaints against the bishops.

At their meeting, which continues through Wednesday, the bishops may proceed with discussions of these proposals, which were drafted in September by the bishops’ Administrative Committee. But there will be no immediate vote.

Cardinal Blase J. Cupich, of Chicago, suggested that the bishops hold a special assembly in March to vote on the measures after considering the results of the global meeting in February.

Abuse scandals have roiled the Roman Catholic Church worldwide for decades, but there have been major developments this year in the U.S.

In July, Pope Francis removed U.S. church leader Theodore McCarrick as a cardinal after church investigators said an allegation that he groped a teenage altar boy in the 1970s was credible. Subsequently, several former seminarians and priests reported that they too had been abused or harassed by McCarrick as adults, triggering debate over who might have known and covered up McCarrick’s misconduct.

In August, a grand jury report in Pennsylvania detailed decades of abuse and cover-up in six dioceses, alleging that more than 1,000 children had been abused over the years by about 300 priests. Since then, a federal prosecutor in Philadelphia has begun working on a federal criminal case centered on child exploitation, and attorneys general in several other states have launched investigations.

DiNardo, in his address opening the bishops’ assembly, told survivors of clergy abuse that he was “deeply sorry.”

The church, he said, should not revictimize survivors “by demanding they heal on our timeline.”

Announcement of a delay in the voting drew skeptical reactions.

“We had this agenda, we were moving forward on these documents, this was our goal,” said Bishop Christopher Coyne, of the Vermont diocese of Burlington, and the communications chair for the three-day conference. “And now … it will look like we don’t have to come up with much.”

Coyne said he believed there were “no machinations” leading to the delay, but he had concerns about how it would be perceived outside the assembly hall.

“The Vatican just made a big mistake in asking U.S. bishops to delay their votes on clergy abuse protocols,” tweeted John Gehring, the Catholic program director at Faith in Public Life, a Washington-based clergy network. “The optics are terrible, and it sends a message, intended or not, that Rome doesn’t recognize the urgency of the moment.”

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

click me