Ruling hurt victims of church abuses
By Paul T. Kendrick
Copyright 2003 Blethen Maine Newspapers Inc.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR Paul T. Kendrick (e-mail: kendrickpt@aol.com)
of Cumberland is co-founder of Maine Voice of the Faithful, a
Catholic lay group concerned about church issues.
April 2, 2003 - Former Maine Supreme Court
Chief Justice Daniel Wathen recently stated that had a case where
he ruled that the Roman Catholic Church was protected from civil
suit by the First Amendment (Swanson v. Roman Catholic Bishop)
involved child sexual abuse, his opinion might have been different.
With all due respect to Wathen's view, the case
before the court had nothing to do with whether or not the plaintiff
was an adult or a child. The issue before the court was whether
Bishop Joseph Gerry could be held liable for negligently supervising
a member of his clergy. In a 4-2 vote, the court ruled out the
possibility of any legal claim against the bishop, regardless
of the particular facts of the case.
My objection to Wathen's recent appointment to
head a diocesan review board advising the bishop on sex abuse
cases is very specific. Victims of clergy sexual abuse have a
legitimate concern about being betrayed by people who are supposed
to be looking out for them.
That's one of the damages of sexual abuse, the
feeling of betrayal and conspiracy. Victims know firsthand a child's
desolation and broken trust wrought by abusing priests. They know,
too, the added insult that "good Catholics" today inflict by failing
to become engaged and rising up en masse to demand redress.
In the majority opinion, however, Justice Wathen
wrote: ". . . imposing a secular duty of supervision on the church
and enforcing the duty through civil liability would restrict
its freedom to interact with its clergy in the manner deemed proper
by ecclesiastical authorities and would not serve a societal interest
sufficient to overcome the religious freedoms inhibited."
These words are haunting in light of the scandal
that has ripped through my church. The cover-up of criminal acts
of sexual abuse of children by Catholic bishops is at the core
of the cancer in my church.
In April 2002, the attorney who represented Bishop
Gerry in several sex abuse cases stated, "The ordinary rules of
employee supervision shouldn't apply to churches. Denominations
base their practices on their religious teachings and churches
decide how to train or discipline ministers based on their interpretations
of specific passages from the Bible."
Again, haunting words. Bishop Gerry continues to
fight to maintain his immunity from prosecution in civil lawsuits,
including litigation that could prove he knew that one of his
priests was committing criminal acts of sexual abuse against a
child.
In June 2002, Bishop Gerry was dismissed as a defendant
by a Superior Court justice in the civil suit of Fortin v. Melville.
Michael Fortin alleged that Rev. Raymond Melville sexually abused
him over a seven-year period, beginning in 1985, when Fortin was
13.
Fortin also alleged that Bishop Gerry knew there
were sexual abuse complaints about Melville during the time in
which Fortin says he was being molested, and Gerry allowed Melville
to continue serving as a priest. Why was Gerry dismissed from
the case? The ruling in Swanson protected the bishop from liability.
The victim's charge against him was silenced.
Victims must believe that they can trust the members
of the review board to advocate on their behalf for justice and
accountability. Victims have spent decades being ignored, not
believed, shamed, admonished and ostracized for bringing the truth
of their sexual abuse to their bishops.
These same victims have been silenced with secret
cash settlements and confidentiality agreements. They watched
as their bishops continued to transfer abusive priests, placing
more children in harm's way. Yet, the courts of Maine have barred
any such victims here from pursuing full justice.
Wathen's ruling suggests to any such victims that
it is OK with him that they are not entitled to a full measure
of justice in the legal system. It is OK with him that bishops
cannot be held legally accountable for the complacency, arrogance
and carelessness that permitted horrific crimes of sexual abuse
of children.
It's all about perception. The perception that
counts is in the eyes and ears of the victims.
- Special to the Press Herald