Although the recent disclosures in Pennsylvania and New Jersey have fanned the flames of controversy about abuse by clergy in the Catholic Church, it must be admitted that the Archdiocese of Washington has suffered the most serious blunt of the scandal. One of our cardinals faces censure under a Vatican investigation and the other stepped down after criticism of his efforts to stem abuse were judged insufficient and as lacking transparency. Given the situation, Washington may be the one “hot potato” local church that no bishop will want. Unlike other archdioceses, our numbers are modest and the prominence of the church here is due to the status as the nation’s capital. There are also particular problems with this jurisdiction given that many politicians from other states and dioceses live and work here. Can the ordinary of Washington establish censures or regulations over parishioners that conflict with the rules held by their proper bishops? This is one of the reasons acknowledged why pro-abortion politicians are not refused Holy Communion in Washington. Some national bishops refuse to take such measures and others have dictated this policy to their priests. Of course, it can be argued that there is no middle-ground because a lack of a prohibition already takes sides. Cardinal McCarrick often spoke about this, saying that he did not want to force confrontations at the altar. However, matters were exasperated when he befriended the late Senator Ted Kennedy over protests from organizations like the American Life League. When challenged about it, he argued that the archdiocese and “the Church” needed these politicians to support us on other issues. While only a parish priest, my objection was that if a child is destroyed, for that human person there are no more issues. It also seemed to stand in stark contrast from the guidance given by Cardinal Ratzinger who later became Pope Benedict XVI. Under Cardinal Wuerl, the policy of not withholding Holy Communion became official. The only possible exception would be when the communicant was deliberately inciting a controversial confrontation, as with wearing pro-abortion shirts and hats in church.
It must be said that with speeches and rallies, both cardinals were on the record as pro-life and as opposed to abortion. The issue was about tactics or measures. Why would I mention this in a post that centers on the abuse scandal? The reason is this— abortion is the ultimate form of child abuse. Those that lament and parade the sins of churchmen are duplicitous and silent when it comes to the torture and murder of millions of children in the womb. Along with the eroticism that saturates contemporary society, the issue of child abuse is exasperated by a culture of hedonism and death.
This past Tuesday, Cardinal Wuerl apologized for a “lapse in memory” about allegations of abuse against Cardinal McCarrick. My heart sank when I read his letter to the priests. At a time when people have little or no trust in the Church, we did not need this. Cardinal Wuerl was regarded as the most proactive in removing credibly charged clergy from ministry. He is not just one bishop among many.
The upset can be summarized as having a two-fold source:
- The acts of abuse perpetrated by clergy; and
- Efforts to deny and/or to conceal these criminal acts.
Cardinal McCarrick has been ordered by Pope Francis to pursue “a life of prayer and penance.” I suspect that many Catholics want more than this. Many want an explanation and an end to deflection and excuses. What have we gotten instead? Despite evidence and multiple charges and victims (adults and youth), Cardinal McCarrick has denied the allegations.
The problem cannot be resolved until the homosexual underpinnings are acknowledged. Falsehood cannot be remedied by silence or even just by penance; it requires a cleansing in the waters of truth. How could a man unfaithful to his promise of celibacy find himself promoted to the cardinal’s hat— which is the shortlist for papal candidates? People want explanations and solutions. They want transparency in the present and reliable assurances about the future. They want their clergy to be holy men who seek not to harm or to exploit but to bring healing and mercy. They do not want princes but servants.
Filed under: Catholic, Right to Life, Sexuality, Sin |
Blogger Priest 
Leave a Reply