|
Bishop question war { November 15 2002 } Original Source Link: (May no longer be active)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A56479-2002Nov14.htmlhttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A56479-2002Nov14.html
Bishops Question Grounds for War
Prelates Fear Scandal Drowning Out Voice
By Alan Cooperman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, November 15, 2002; Page A02
As the United States moved toward a possible war with Iraq, the leaders of America's largest religious denomination this week questioned the ethical grounds for a preemptive attack. Yet the statement by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops was all but drowned out by the church's sex abuse scandal.
It was a matter of deep frustration among the approximately 280 Roman Catholic bishops who gathered in Washington that, at a time when the country might have looked to them for moral guidance, they were struggling to regain their moral credibility instead.
"Everything else we say and do is now seen through the prism of the sex scandal," lamented Cardinal Francis George of Chicago. "But we're going to continue to say and do it, because that's what the church does."
In their three-page statement, the bishops outlined the traditional Christian criteria for a "just war" and said they feared the Bush administration had not met those conditions.
"Based on the facts that are known to us, we continue to find it difficult to justify the resort to war against Iraq, lacking clear and adequate evidence of an imminent attack of a grave nature," they wrote.
Some bishops had argued for a sharper warning against unilateral military action. Others had wanted to "acknowledge at least the difficulties the president is taking care of," said Archbishop Philip Hannan, a former military chaplain and retired head of the Archdiocese of New Orleans. But the most common concern after the 228 to 14 vote Wednesday was whether anyone was listening.
"I think we've lost the very strong voice that we had before," said the Most Rev. Richard J. Garcia, auxiliary bishop of Sacramento.
"Of course the bishops feel the loss of their status to speak on these issues. We all feel it," said the Rev. Canice Connors, president of the Conference of Major Superiors of Men, which unites the Jesuits, Franciscans and other religious orders. "That's the big loss from this scandal."
Susan Archibald, president of the Linkup, a nationwide support group of about 3,000 victims of clerical sex abuse, said that as a Catholic, she, too, wants the church to have a strong voice on social justice issues. But Archibald said she can't stand to hear bishops "complaining that people just pay attention to the scandal."
"It really sums up the arrogance of the bishops that they think the church does so many good things that the fact that a few people are abused shouldn't matter so much," she said.
During the bishops' four-day meeting, which ended yesterday, they also issued statements on domestic violence, the treatment of Mexican immigrants, the persistence of poverty and the 30th anniversary of the Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade. Yet most of their energy went into revisions sought by the Vatican to the sexual abuse policy they passed last summer in Dallas.
"I understand why we have to spend so much time on this, and I understand the media's focus on it," said Bishop Matthew Clark of Rochester, N.Y. "But it's a shame that so many other issues of importance have to be put in abeyance."
Several prelates expressed confidence that this week's meeting would be a milestone toward regaining public trust. In speeches, news conferences and interviews, the bishops stressed that they were keeping the central promise they made in Dallas: that no priest who has abused a child would remain in public ministry.
"I think people will say, the bishops did it. They promised they would do it, and Rome got involved, but they still did it," said Washington Cardinal Theodore E. McCarrick said.
Bishop Thomas G. Doran of Rockford, Ill., one of the most experienced canon lawyers in the United States, pleaded for patience, saying it would take at least a year to set up the church tribunals that are to judge priests under the revised policy.
More than 325 priests have been removed from ministry this year, but it is unclear how many of them are contesting the allegations and eventually will go before tribunals. In Washington, two priests -- Monsignor Russell Dillard and the Rev. Paul Lavin -- have been placed on administrative leave. But McCarrick said only Lavin has indicated he will appeal his removal.
Some bishops said they feared that scores of trials would quickly create a backlog that could take years to clear. Chicago's Cardinal George, who headed a delegation of four U.S. bishops that hammered out the revisions with the Vatican, said Catholic universities could be enlisted to help prepare enough canon lawyers to staff regional or national tribunals within a few months.
But George was not optimistic that the bishops would soon mollify their critics, particularly victims' groups. "For some groups, no matter what you do, the answer is the same," he said. "And that's understandable. People are deeply wounded."
© 2002 The Washington Post Company
|
|
