The McCarrick Report Tests the Catholic Church’s Accountability

National Catholic Register, 13 November 2020

The ideal remedy for trust abused is trust restored. But if trust has been abused for too long and too grievously, the more likely remedy is trust abolished.

The McCarrick Report is, independent of its substance, an astonishing new reality. It lifts the veil on the long career of Theodore McCarrick — with hundreds of previously confidential details published — and on an entire ecclesial culture.

That culture of clerical privilege led to gross abuses being tolerated. The revelation of those abuses, especially over the last 20 or so years, broke down the trust between the faithful and their bishops, as the former were betrayed by the latter, especially those who were victims of known predatory priests. 

The chosen remedy — first adopted in Dallas by the American bishops in 2002 but then extended throughout the world — also broke down the trust between priests and bishops. Now the reforms aimed at correcting the McCarrick mistakes will break down the trust between bishops themselves, and between bishops and the Holy See. 

The McCarrick Report illustrated where the Church was and where she is now.

A note about the very unusual nature of the McCarrick case: While his strange behavior of sharing a bed with young men was known — and conceded by McCarrick himself — his sexually abusive behavior was not confirmed by anyone with the authority to stop him until quite late in the day. After the severity of his behavior was confirmed, what earlier appeared odd took on a sinister reality that could no longer be passed off as imprudent but potentially innocent. 

Most clerical abuse cases are not quite so complex; the offending behavior is clear, and the question is whether the cleric did it or not. McCarrick was skilled at using the complexities and ambiguities of his case to his advantage. Nevertheless, as unusual as the McCarrick case is, the light that the report sheds on the culture that enabled it is of great value, for it explains more than just the career of Theodore McCarrick.     

There is much to analyze, but perhaps the most urgent question — “How did McCarrick rise so high when there were so many rumors about him?” — now has something of an answer. That answer, namely clerical culture, also indicates how much has changed since McCarrick was appointed archbishop of Washington, 20 years ago this month.

The episcopal culture of that time held that, short of incontrovertible proof, a bishop was to be believed. He was not given the benefit of the doubt as much as doubts were not entertained until an almost criminal standard of evidence was gathered.

That is the report’s summary finding. He was promoted to Washington by Pope St. John Paul II because McCarrick denied accusations of sexual misconduct and the Vatican didn’t have incontrovertible evidence otherwise. Also, the now-deceased New Jersey bishops who had fielded actual allegations from victims of McCarrick’s abuse did not present them to the Vatican when asked for “any factual information … relative to any serious moral weaknesses shown by Archbishop McCarrick.” 

McCarrick remains responsible for his abuse and his lies. He lied brazenly to the Holy Father. The New Jersey bishops who were asked are responsible for their own lies and omissions. Yet the culture of the time trusted those lies.

Continue reading at the National Catholic Register.