|
 Taking
the Schiltz Challenge
By
John Horvat II
If anyone should know about the sexual
abuse scandals, it is Prof. Patrick Schiltz. While in private
practice from 1987-1995, he represented various churches in
hundreds of clergy abuse cases. He now holds the St. Thomas
More Chair in Law at the University of St. Thomas in Minneapolis
and is still a consultant in abuse cases.
In the article, “Not All the News
is Fit to Print,” in the August 15 issue of Commonweal,
Prof. Schiltz grills the media and formulates a series of
challenges that make a lot of sense. He suggests that maybe
the whole story is not being told.
Summarizing the main points of the
article, the challenges might be listed as follows:
Challenge #1: Cite a single major
element in the present sexual abuse scandals that was not
widely reported a decade ago.
Dr. Schiltz notes that although new
names of priests and victims have appeared, the fact that
several hundred priests were involved in abuse and bishops
failed to act upon it is not new but rather old news. These
subjects received unrelenting front-page coverage in the late
1980s and early 90s when many of these scandals first surfaced.
He also notes that never in the history
of American journalism has a story covered so thoroughly in
the past received so much coverage for months on end.
Challenge #2: Cite recent cases
of child sexual abuse by clergy.
The biggest story of them all is ignored:
sexual abuse of children by clergy over the last decade has
practically disappeared.
Dr. Schiltz invites anyone to read
every article about clerical sexual abuse reported by any
major newspaper over the last two years. Almost none will
deal with cases that occurred over the last decade.
The professor explains that after the
spate of lawsuits in the 80s and early 90s, the churches did
take action. Hundreds of offending pastors were removed from
active ministry. New training and screening procedures were
introduced. Churches invested millions of dollars in combating
sexual misconduct.
The results of these policies are reflected
in the dearth of new and recent abuse cases.
A significant example of this is in
Boston. Despite all the exhaustive and thorough investigations
carried out by the media and the attorney general of Massachusetts,
not a single recent case was found. Similarly in Louisville,
among the 185 lawsuits filed against the Archdiocese of Louisville,
The Louisville Courier-Journal found only one that happened
since 1990!
Challenge #3: Explain why no
new victims come forward.
Many victim advocate groups will object
to the above challenge explaining that recent victims will
only appear after a long period of time due to the trauma
and difficulty of reporting the experience. Dr. Schiltz does
not accept that excuse.
He notes that, even in the past, some
victims immediately came forward despite all obstacles. Yet
today, almost none are doing so.
Moreover, Dr. Schiltz says that while
such objections may have had some validity in the past, today
the climate has changed entirely. Now it is easier not harder
for victims to report abuse. Parents, teachers or parishioners
are hyperalert to abuse symptoms. There should be more cases
rather than less cases appearing.
Yet the media do not even question
the mysterious lack of cases.
Challenge #4: Explain why no
psychologists have been condemned by the media.
Part of the scandals consists of the
fact that bishops returned priests to the ministry after receiving
treatment. Dr. Schiltz notes that in most cases, the bishops
relied on the bad advice of psychologists who either told
the bishop that problematic priests did not abuse children
or that the problem was under control. This had horrific consequences
for the victims and the Church as a whole.
The media have ignored this fact and
rarely will you find the psychologists taking the heat for
their bad advice. These were supposed to be among the most
respected professionals in their field. No one is calling
for the resignations of these “experts.” No one
is publishing exposes on their errors or naming them in multi-million
dollar lawsuits.
No, the media are strangely silent
in finding fault with them.
Challenge #5: Explain why the
Catholic faithful are being made to pay for the damages.
The courts have consistently ruled
against awarding damages where innocent victims are made to
foot the bill. In the case of the Church, it is not the bishops
or abusive priests that pay, but the faithful.
Dr. Schiltz cites several cases where
courts struck down punitive damages against municipalities
since the damages would be paid by innocent taxpayers. Labor
unions have been protected in the same way. However, such
protection of the innocent is not being applied to Catholic
dioceses.
“To my knowledge,” Dr. Schiltz
notes, “this is the first time in history in which punitive
damages are routinely being inflicted upon the victims –
or at least those completely innocent – of wrongful conduct.”
This extraordinary and newsworthy fact merits nary a mention
in the media.
Indeed, as Dr. Schiltz points out,
not all the news is fit to print. The media seem to have covered
up a few points of their own. Moreover, the climate created
by such reporting only serves to help those intent upon changing
Church structures.
Next time, you are confronted by angry
activists who lash out against oppressive Church structures,
calmly ask them to take the Schiltz Challenge. The silence
might be deafening.
|
