ZERO-TOLERANCE POLICY STILL BASICALLY INTACT, SAY 2 U.S. BISHOPS

EWTN.com/Zenit.org ^ | 11-12-02 | Zenit.org

[Salvation]

ZERO-TOLERANCE POLICY STILL BASICALLY INTACT, SAY 2 U.S. BISHOPS

Revised Proposal on Clergy Abuse Builds on Dallas Norms, They Contend

WASHINGTON, D.C., NOV. 7, 2002 (Zenit.org).- The president of the U.S. bishops' conference contradicted widespread media reports alleging that the Holy See had rejected the policy suggested by the American bishops last June.

"Contrary to many news reports," Bishop Wilton Gregory said in a statement, "the Holy See did not reject or even 'soften' this work. In fact, it [remains] the foundation for what will become particular law in the United States."

In a letter dated Oct. 14 to Bishop Gregory, Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re, prefect of the Congregation for Bishops, said the norms approved in Dallas, Texas, last June "can be the source of confusion and ambiguity."

Yet, Bishop William Lori of Bridgeport, one of the four American bishops who participated in discussions of the proposed policy in Rome, agreed the revised proposal -- the product of a mixed U.S.-Vatican commission -- is not a retreat from the zero-tolerance position which came out of Dallas.

"No one remains in ministry who is a threat to children and young people," Bishop Lori said during a press conference Nov. 2.

Bishop Gregory summarized the effects of the law as follows: "This particular law will provide every diocese in the country with standards in canon law for protecting children and young people, reaching out to victims, assessing allegations against clergy, with the benefit of the advice of competent lay persons, and for keeping from ministry anyone who would harm children."

The updated policy calls for tribunals to hear the cases of accused priests and mandates that guilty clerics -- including those who committed offenses years ago -- be removed from Church work.

"Anyone who has committed even a single act of sexual abuse of children is permanently banned from ministry," Bishop Lori said.

Responding to criticisms from some quarters that the new policy would curtail the involvement of lay people in the disciplinary process, Bishop Lori said that lay sexual-abuse review boards would still participate in preliminary investigations of allegations of sexual abuse in an advisory capacity.

Furthermore, he said that the Church tribunals which in most instances would wield the ultimate decision-making power are made up of judges -- usually priests, canon lawyers and assessors -- who may or may not be lay people.

Bishop Lori characterized the revisions to the Dallas policy as a response to concerns from the Holy See about the lack of clear juridical procedure for handling allegations of sexual abuse by a priest.

Saying that the charter approved in Dallas had been drafted "rather hastily," Bishop Lori continued: "If you're going to go forward and deal with this, it's better to have clarity. And I think we now have a much greater degree of clarity. The zero-tolerance policy very much survives."

The revised norms will be presented to the U.S. bishops at their meeting next week.

[Salvation]

Currently streaming video on EWTN.com

Both speaking in support and in opposition to new additions to Charter and other issues.

[Salvation]

Catholic discussion ping!

Please notify me via Freepmail if you would like to be added to or removed from the Catholic Discussion Ping list.

[NewCenturions]

Our media is still in a feeding frenzy so no matter what the Church does, they will still report the negative. (of course they won't blame homosexuality)

[Desdemona]

Our media is still in a feeding frenzy so no matter what the Church does, they will still report the negative.

And twist the message to make it meet what they want it to be.

When I heard the outline ffrom Cardinal George last night, it sounded far tougher than anything civil law has. They just tightened up the whole thing.

[Salvation]

This outline?

Agenda

Items on the agenda include:

• Norms on implementing the Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People
• Report on the possibility of convoking a Plenary Council
• A document on a Catholic Recommitment to Overcome Poverty and Respect the Dignity of All God's Children
• Complementary norms from the Committee on Canonical Affairs which govern fundraising appeals, dollar limits which determine when a diocese must get approval from the Holy See to "alienate, or sell, property, and norms governing the leasing of church property
• Three items from the Committee on Liturgy: the translation of the ordination rite, the translation of the General Instruction on The Roman Missal, and the five-year review of the Lectionary
• A proposal for a new document in support of Catholic elementary and secondary schools
• A revised document on domestic violence
• An unprecedented joint statement from the bishops conferences of Mexico and the United States titled Strangers No Longer, A Pastoral Letter Concerning Migration
• A request for a new pastoral statement on stewardship addressed to young adults
• Diocesan Financial Issues, a new document which will assist dioceses in their accounting and financial reporting
• A Pro-Life statement on the 30th anniversary of Roe vs. Wade.

[Salvation]

Voting on amendments to Roe vs. Wade right now.

[Desdemona]

No, zero tolerance. But I'm glad they're addressing Roe v. Wade.

[Salvation]

Addressing pastoral statement on Misa en Espanol right now. Moving quite swiftly.

Stressing importance of welcoming Spanish speakers from Mexico into the Catholic Church here.

Evangelization emphasized.

Pro and con statements as I type.

Our Hispanic (at my church) ministry started with 50 people at the first Misa en Espanol in 1999 and has grown to over 285 as of last week.

[ninenot]

Yeah, it's tighter.

USCC expected to toss the hot potato to Rome and have Rome seriously weaken it. Instead, Rome simply asked for a few 'due process' items, which would be required under American civil-prosecution law anyway, and fired it right back.

That makes the Bishops really responsible for their actions, or lack thereof.

Not really what a sizeable number of American Bishops wanted...responsibility means accountability...

[Salvation]

My Archbishop (Vlazny) speaking in support of the statement on Misa en Espanol and evangeliztion to the Hispanics who come to America from Mexico and other Spanish speaking countries.

[ex-snook]

Zero tolerance sounds like the way to go still. Finding out how they entered the ministry and closing that door should be a priority. This can not happen again.

[Salvation]

Different regions meetings being announced. Does anyone know what region their Arch/diocese is in?

[Romulus]

But I'm glad they're addressing Roe v. Wade.

Are they? Last Friday my mom found herself shanghaied to an intimate luncheon with our archbishop, packed with ring-kissing local Catholic worthies, with her as the joker in the deck. When she cornered him and asked what he intends to say publicly about exposing (CINO) Mary Landrieu as a pro-abort before our Dec. 7 runoff for the US Senate, he said he has no plans to do anything at all.

[Salvation]

Yes, they voted on a statement.

[Salvation]

Raymond Arroyo now stating that tomorrow the discussion will be on the ammendment to the Charter.

Also commenting that he was surprised on a vote to issue a statement about Iraq. Talking about thw hawks and doves among the Arch/bishops.

[Salvation]

Bishops will have an executive session this afternoon after the regional meetings.

[longtermmemmory]

Zero tollerance must mean zero in all forms. The bishops seem to be tip toeing around the homosexual problem in their preisthood. Until they are serous about removing homosexuals then this "agreement" will just be a means to a coverup.

From what I saw last week the vatican made a pretty clear notion that homosexuality was not to be tolerated. What happened this group did not hear the pope?

All people have their mistakes to bear. Some big some small. Being homosexual means you can't be a priest. end of discussion.

[Coleus]

I'm against zero-tolerance policies. If it were in effect when Cardinal Bernadine was in office,he too would have been suspended. As it turned out, it was a FALSE accusation and the Cardinal was allowed to die in peace.

Also, as you look around America you see how idiotic these zero-tolerance policies are, i.e. boys getting arrested for drawing a picture of a gun, 1st-grade boy getting suspended for kissing a girl on the cheek, HS girl getting suspended for giving classmate a Midol pill for her cramps. It's ludicrous.

[Salvation]

**
From what I saw last week the vatican made a pretty clear notion that homosexuality was not to be tolerated. What happened this group did not hear the pope?**

Maybe that is what the bishops are discussing in their 'executive session'!

[Catholicguy]

I'm against zero-tolerance policies. If it were in effect when Cardinal Bernadine was in office,he too would have been suspended. As it turned out, it was a FALSE accusation and the Cardinal was allowed to die in peace.

<> Not the case, if I remember correctly. I think what happened was the gentleman that accused the Cardinal later dropped the suit saying his disease had effected his memory to such an extent he couldnt be sure of his accusations. I don't recall the gentleman saying he had falsely accused anyone<>