If you follow mainstream news coverage of clergy sexual abuse cases in the Catholic church, you know that there are two common errors that journalists keep making when dealing with this hellish subject.
First, there is the timeline issue. Many editors seem convinced that the public first learned about this crisis through the epic Boston Globe “Spotlight” series that ran in 2002.
This may have been when Hollywood grasped the size of this story, but religion beat reporters and many other journalists had been following the scandal since the Louisiana accusations against the Rev. Gilbert Gauthe, which made national headlines in 1984. Jason Berry’s trailblazing book “Lead Us Not Into Temptation” was published in 1992. Reporters covering the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops chased this story all through the 1980s.
Does this error matter? I guess it only matters if editors care about accuracy and they truly want readers to understand how long these horrors have poisoned life for many Catholics. After all, the cover-ups are as important as the crimes.
Thus, it’s disappointing to dig into the new USA Today feature on this topic — “The Priest Next Door” — and hit the following summary material:
During its nine-month investigation, the USA TODAY Network tracked down last known addresses for nearly 700 former priests who have been publicly accused of sexual abuse. Then, 38 reporters knocked on more than 100 doors across the country, from Portland, Oregon, to Long Island, New York, with stops in Philadelphia, Chicago, Indianapolis, Miami and more. They talked with accused priests, as well as neighbors, school officials, employers, church leaders and victims. They reviewed court records, social media accounts and church documents in piecing together a nationwide accounting of what happened after priests were accused of abuse, left their positions in the church and were essentially allowed to go free.
Since the scandal first exploded into public view in Boston almost 20 years ago, the church has financially settled with thousands of victims, claimed bankruptcy at parishes across the country and watched disaffected congregants flee its pews. The church has promised change, with parishes posting guidelines aimed at protecting children and dioceses releasing names of credibly accused priests — many of whom were defrocked, or laicized, meaning they no longer work with the church.
The second problem that keeps showing up in stories of this kind? That would be covering sexual-abuse scandals among Catholics without mentioning that similar issues exist in other religious flocks — as well as in public schools, sports programs, nonprofit agencies (think Scouting) and other secular settings.
This becomes crucial when journalists probe the motives of Catholic leaders who oppose “statute of limitation reform legislation” that would make it easier for victims to sue Catholic clergy long after their crimes were alleged to have taken place.
Yes, there are Catholic who oppose these laws — period. But there are many other Catholic leaders who oppose laws that make it easier to sue the church, but do not apply the same standards to crimes in public schools and other secular settings. Remember that New York Times story earlier this year that buried the fact — 22nd paragraphs down — that Catholic leaders dropped their opposition to a New York reform law when a crucial change was made? Here is that short, buried reference in the Times report:
The state’s bishops later declared that they would support the Child Victims Act so long as it applied equally to public and private institutions — a provision that the bill’s sponsors readily adopted.
The USA Today feature basically ignores this issue altogether. There are hints that there is opposition to these laws outside the Catholic church, but who needs to know the details?
Consider this passage about the work of Pennsylvania state Rep. Mark Rozzi, himself a victim of clergy sexual abuse in a Catholic school. A priest “used McDonald’s, beer and pornography to befriend him, before raping him in the shower one day in 1984.” Therefore:
Rozzi, 48, is currently working on statute of limitation reform legislation that has passed the Pennsylvania House, and is awaiting action in the Senate. Meanwhile, attorneys general in 21 other states have launched official investigations into sexual abuse that took place in the Catholic Church.
Reform has been met with plenty of resistance, much of it from the Catholic Church itself.
In 2014, California passed a bill authored by state Sen. Jim Beall that allowed victims to file criminal charges until they turn 40. (Previously, they had to be 26 or younger.) Beall said private organizations including the Catholic Church spent “millions of dollars lobbying against my bill,” with bishops and priests around California speaking out against it directly — including at the parish his mother attends.
On Oct. 13, California passed legislation that raises the civil statute of limitations to 40 years old, too.
In New York, the Child Victims Act went into effect Aug. 14, giving victims a one-year period to file civil lawsuits from abuse that happened decades ago. By lunchtime that day, nearly 400 lawsuits had already been filed.
Read that carefully. What are the names of some of the other organizations that oppose laws of this kind?
What are the key issues that prevent passage of these laws?
How would readers know that the Catholic church is not the only institution struggling with this issue? That many Catholic leaders support these laws — or drop their opposition to them — when the legal language doesn’t single the church, while ignoring crimes elsewhere (especially in public schools)?
To its credit, the USA Today team did include this commentary from a solid secular source:
Since New York passed its law, Donna Lieberman, executive director of the New York Civil Liberties Union, has been outspoken about the need to balance justice for victims with justice for the accused. She touts statutes of limitation as “critical cornerstones of the legal system,” pointing to issues such as fading memories and disappearing witnesses – which can impede someone’s right to a defense.
“Criminal exposure 20 years after the fact makes it close to impossible to defend against allegations,” Lieberman said.
As one would expect, this new USA Today piece contains almost zero information from sources inside the church, including those working for justice in these cases. Also, little or no attention is given to a challenge that is at the heart of the story — the fact that it is next to impossible for the church to trace where men go and what they do after they have been removed from the priesthood. What are the legal issues there?
The story, predictably enough, settles for one short paragraph from a PR person:
“The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops does not maintain a list of accused priests, as we do not oversee the dioceses,” said Chieko Noguchi, public affairs director of the organization that represents the top Catholic leaders in the United States.
So what does the USA Today story get right?
The shoe-leather parts of the story work quite well, with case after case of former priests coming face to face with reporters and offering excuses and justifications for their actions in the past and present. It’s important to know that these former priests are slipping through cracks in the legal system and, often, ending up in contact with children and young adults.
But there is that issue again: Does this only happen with Catholic priests? How about school teachers, coaches, Scouting leaders, etc.?
The problem addressed in this story is very real and it was important to take on this topic. But why do many journalists continue to pretend that this is a problem in the Catholic church — alone?