Confidentiality – protecting the guilty?

There are media who make much of the fact that the Church does not automatically and immediately come forward about abuse cases, especially when a bishop is involved, but only when asked about it. It is seen as an attempt of hiding the facts, something that the Church has indeed been guilty of in decades past. This conclusion is understandable, but not accurate, however. From the start of the abuse crisis, the issue of confidentiality has played an important part in the question of how to deal with accusations, victims and perpetrators. On the one hand, it was out of the question that proven abuse be hidden or even denied. On the other, there was the obligation that both victim and accused be protected from unwanted attention. Until proven guilty, the accused is, obviously, considered innocent. The victim often deals with intensely personal and very emotional and painful experiences that he or she often only wants to share with the world when they deem it necessary or helpful, if at all.

The complaints commission established by the Church to collect and resolve all complaints of sexual abuse explains that confidentiality is import for three reasons:

It lowers the threshold

Victims seek recognition and compensation, but to tell their story after an often long period of silence is very difficult and confrontational. Confidentiality makes this easier. Likewise, it allows perpetrators to sooner admit their guilt and persons in authority to recognise the abuse.

Plausibility comes first

The complaints procedure deals with recognition and compensation for the victim. Public indictment or punishment for the victim are beyond its scope. The accusation must be plausible and certain facts need to be correct, mostly about the accused, the place where the abuse took place and the year. This plausibility is considered enough to recognise the victims and the abuse.

The accused are generally deceased

Most accused parties can not defend themselves. That is why their rights, nor the feelings of fellow members of religious orders, fellow priests and family members, can not be ignored.

To ensure this confidentiality, certain measures are taken:

Procedures take place out of the public eye

This allows maximum opportunities for both parties to come to a solution.

All advice is published anonymously

No names are mentioned on the website of the Meldpunt Seksueel Misbruik RKK. This allows openness about the cases dealt with, the criteria used and the reasoning for allowing financial compensation. The abuse is made completely public, but the identity of all parties involved is protected.

All employees of and persons involved with the commission are bound to secrecy

It is clear that not everyone agrees with this. Many would welcome full  openness with names, dates and locations. However, in a society that protects the rights of individuals, especially those who can not defend themselves, this is not an option. The victims, whose needs always come first in these procedures, may at some point reveal more details. But that is theirs to decide, and many will not want to. We should never demand they tell all about what happened to them, unless they decide to do so. And if they don’t, we must respect that choice.

And as for the perpetrators: if they are dead, there is not much more that can be done. A dead man can’t be put on trial. If he still lives, but his crimes are subject to the statures of limitations, the law is powerless. The Church should not be, however, and once a priest, bishop or other worker in the Church is proven guilty, there must be a form of punishment. However, no punishment will please everyone…

If the perpetrator lives and the crime took place recently enough, the police must be informed and this person must be tried. This is something the Church does now, but the fact remains that these cases are a small minority. Most abuse took place decades ago, and many perpetrators are no longer alive.

Another bishop falls

niënhausI guess we could have waited for it. But to find the likely truth is nonetheless painful. Following the plausibility of accusations of sexual abuse by the late Bishop Joannes Gijsen, another deceased Dutch bishop has accusations against him determined to be plausible.

Bishop Jan Niënhaus, who died in 2000, is deemed to likely be guilty of four cases of sexual abuse which took place before he was appointed as auxiliary bishop of Utrecht in 1982. Cardinal Wim Eijk, the current archbishop, followed the advice of the complaints commission to declare the accusations plausible. The archdiocese issued the following statement:

“Cardinal Eijk, archbishop of Utrecht, took notice of four advisory statements from the complaints commission for sexual abuse in the Catholic Church to declare plausible these complaints regarding sexual abuse by Msgr. Niënhaus (1929-2000), auxiliary bishop emeritus of the Archdiocese of Utrecht.

The complaints commission determined that it is likely that Msgr. Niënhaus was guilty of sexual abuse in these cases, which took place in the period before he became auxiliary bishop. Cardinal Eijk adopted the advice of the complaints commission regarding the plausibility of these complaints. Cardinal Eijk is sad that this abuse took place and hopes that their determination of plausibility may help in the process of healing for the victims.”

Adding insult to injury for the victims, once he was appointment as bishop, Msgr. Niënhaus held the portfolios for education & catechesis, as well as youth (!), in addition to others. The bishop retired for health reasons in 1999 and died the next year at the age of 71.

It makes me wonder… who’s next? There are complaints against at least one more late bishop, as far as I understand… What on earth was in the water in that time for these men to do what they did? I simply can’t get my head around it…

Easter message – Bishop Heiner Koch

Bishop Heiner Koch of Dresden-Meiβen suggests we should be like Christ on the road to Emmaus towards the people around us whose hearts do not burn at Easter.

koch“Did not our hearts burn within us as he talked to us on the road and explained the scriptures to us?” (Luke 24:32). That is how the disciples asked each other about their encounter with Jesus on the road to Emmaus. Here in Saxony, we live in a land in which Christians find that at Easter the hearts of eighty percent of their neighbours do not burn in the least. They do not want anyone to explain the Scriptures to them. Not that they don’t value the Church and Christians. I am under the impression that they do so more than in the dioceses of former West Germany. But God? “Stay away from me with that phantom”. That makes Easter for them an unrealistic and meaningless history. There is no reason to believe in the Resurrection of Jesus or hope for our own resurrection, but the infinite love of God which leaves no one, not even in the hour of our death, alone. Infinite: even in our death it knows no boundaries. The good-hearted Lord remains true to us. That is the heart of the eve of Easter, without which it becomes crippled, a celebration of hares and hidden eggs.

How happy and grateful should we be when our heart burns at Easter, when we remember the the love of God through the fire of Easter, which does not go out for any of us!

And when we see that for so many people around, there is no spark jumping from the fire, even this Easter, which is for us so important? Than nothing remains but to do as little or as much as Jesus did for the disciples on the road to Emmaus: before he opened the Scriptures for them, he walked with them, listened to them and asked them questions, and he remained with them when they stood in sorrow. Perhaps that is the service of the pascal faith which we are called to perform, today and perhaps even longer, in the name of Jesus, also here in Saxony.

I wish you and all that are yours a happy and blessed Easter,

Yours,

+ Dr. Heiner Koch
Bishop Dresden-Meißen

Original text