What to do with errant priests?

2002-08-04 11:43

New York - When America's Roman Catholic bishops decided any priest guilty of molesting a youth should be ousted from active ministry, they left a major loose end hanging - what to do with those priests.

During the June meeting where they approved a toughened clerical sex abuse policy, bishops remarked that erring priests could be assigned to live in special "houses of confinement" or monasteries.

However, both ideas are problematic. The few "houses" in existence can take only a handful of men, and religious orders say monasteries are simply off limits.

The Reverend J Cletus Kiley, the abuse specialist for the US Conference of Catholic Bishops, said there have only been "some preliminary conversations" about assignments for such priests, but "it is a challenge, and it's one of the things we have to face."

One problem, he says, is nobody knows how many men might need special housing.

About 300 of the roughly 46 000 US priests have resigned or been taken off duty this year over abuse allegations, including at least 50 since the Dallas meeting. What happens next to those men now falls into three categories:

'Cumbersome procedures'

An abuser can request "dismissal from the clerical state," commonly known as defrocking.

Each case requires Vatican approval, but under the current circumstances bishops expect this will occur readily. Since this is the simplest solution, bishops hope many molesters will leave voluntarily.

The bishop can forcibly dismiss an abuser from the priesthood without his consent.

That leads to cumbersome procedures involving American and Vatican church tribunals. Since 1989, the US bishops have wanted Vatican permission for a streamlined administrative process and may revisit this topic at their November 11-14 meeting in Washington.

A molester can be barred from functioning as a priest without dismissal from the priesthood. The June policy says this will apply especially "for reasons of advanced age or infirmity" and such men will lead "a life of prayer and penance."

With either voluntary or involuntary dismissal, a man "no longer has any priestly obligations to the church or the church toward him," says Monsignor Francis Maniscalco, spokesperson for the bishops' conference. But those in the final category are still priests, and thus the church's responsibility.

Religious orders have insisted that monasteries cannot serve as dumping grounds.

The Reverend Canice Connors of Rensselaer, New York, president of the Conference of Major Superiors of Men, explains that a man needs a vocation and the right personal characteristics to live under the regimen of a monastic community and "a vocation doesn't come from being an offender."

'Houses of confinement'

"Monasteries simply won't be open to such things," he says. "It would wreck the monastic structure."

The other option is special long-term residences, sometimes called "houses of confinement," for those, as Kiley puts it, who are "removed permanently from ministry" and yet want "in some way to live their life out as priests."

Connors says five religious orders co-operated in the 1990s on a small, experimental residence for their own members near Washington, DC, but shut it down after three years.

The house didn't work and had low morale because of insufficient planning, he says. In particular, "we have to do a lot more research on activities for the men to feel useful," he says. The major superiors will discuss the need for such institutions during their annual meeting in Philadelphia next week.

Kiley says the Chicago Archdiocese operates a retreat house where it put recently removed priests, and other dioceses might make use of retreats or priests' retirement homes. He says there have been initial talks about providing a special wing for permanent residents at St Luke's Institute, a Maryland therapy centre.

The best-known example of long-term housing, Kiley says, is provided by the Servants of the Paraclete at Jemez Springs, New Mexico, an order founded in 1947 to help priests in trouble.

'Ecclesiastical jail'

Jay R Feierman, a psychiatrist who started working at Jemez Springs in 1976, says the facility "used to be called an ecclesiastical jail because it was the end of the road for priests who had serious problems," usually alcoholism.

Feierman introduced professional therapy, and gradually the facility treated an increasing number of priestly molesters. But bishops and religious superiors returned many patients to active ministry against the advice of therapists, Feierman says. After a spate of lawsuits, the Paracletes shut down the programme in 1996.

The facility was then converted to Villa Louis Martin, a long-term residence for troubled priests. The Paracletes operate a similar house at the Vianney Renewal Centre in Dittmer, Missouri, but shut a third house in Cherry Valley, California, last year.

The Reverend Raymond Gunzel, a Paraclete priest, says that some residents cannot leave unaccompanied. The daily regimen consists of worship and private prayer, group meetings, upkeep of the house and grounds, reading, writing and exercise.

The two Paraclete houses are small, providing for 10 men or so, which hardly begins to meet the potential demand.

Kiley notes that it's difficult to plan new institutions until the bishops and religious orders find out how many men will want to remain priests even though they're unable to function in the role. And no one knows how long it will take the church to come up with those numbers. - Sapa-AP

- SAPA