Columnist Sandy Thompson: Policy on errant priests is disappointing

Sandy Thompson

Friday, April 26, 2002 | 5:15 a.m.

APRIL IS Child Abuse Prevention Awareness Month. Isn't it sad that we have to set aside a time to remind people not to abuse children?

It's disturbing that we have to tell parents not to burn their children with cigarettes or beat them until they're black and blue.

It's troubling that adults have sex with children, and even more troubling that it took the Catholic Church hierarchy all these years to determine that such actions are a sin and against the law.

But last week -- ironically during Child Abuse Prevention Awareness Month -- church officials stopped short of truly doing something about the problem that has been plaguing the priesthood. According to New York Times reporter Laurie Goodstein, who covered the special meeting at the Vatican, while the cardinals "plan to enforce 'zero tolerance' for priests who are notorious serial predators, those priests who sexually abused a child once or twice may conceivably continue in ministry if there have been no subsequent complaints."

What kind of message is that? Does it mean that it's OK to molest a child once or twice. Does it give priests a green light to molest one or two children in the future? And what does it say to the rest of society? If a coach molests a young boy on his team, he is charged with a crime and is removed from the sports league. Shouldn't the same standards apply to a priest?

Why do we tend to protect children after something happens? Why do we bend over backwards to protect the rights of perpetrators (adults) rather than those of the innocent victims (children)? There is a caveat, though: Some molestation allegations are false. Before any action is taken, an allegation must be proven.

The Catholic Church traditionally has been pro-child. It opposes abortions. (How about the church protecting a real child as vigorously as it does a fetus.) When I was growing up, church policy was that if complications during childbirth threatened the mother and baby, the doctor must sacrifice the mother to save the child.

Can you believe some clerics' hair-splitting comments after the meeting at the Vatican? They contended that the boys who were molested weren't "children," they were "adolescents." (Does that distinction in terms make them consenting adults?) Sorry, that doesn't wash. Any adult who takes advantage of a minor in a sexual or abusive manner is wrong, wrong, wrong.

I was raised Catholic and remember the respect we had for priests. Although they are human, they are held to a higher standard by the faithful.

The Catholic Church is out of touch with reality on this one. Oh, officials have enough wherewithal to hire public relations specialists. And, of course, they are paying out beaucoup bucks to the stream of victims who are suing the church. Maybe if the church had addressed this problem earlier, we would have less divisiveness and, more importantly, fewer victims of emotional trauma.

How a priest could continue in his ministry after it has been determined that he molested a child "once or twice" is beyond me. The actions of the cardinals were disappointing. And I don't put much faith in a scheduled June meeting of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops where a national policy is expected to be worked out.

The entire Catholic Church should not be condemned because of some errant priests. But if this is the cardinals and bishops' response to the problem, the church will need more than a massive public relations campaign to regain the respect and trust of many Catholics and others.

An update: A Norwegian mother has been reunited with her two young daughters. A Texas court agreed with a Nevada Supreme Court decision earlier this month that the girls should be returned to Cisilie Vaile in Norway. They had been living with their father, Scotlund, in Texas after he obtained a Clark County Family Court order granting him custody although neither he, Cisilie nor the girls ever lived in Nevada. Disputing previous claims by Cisilie and her attorney, Scotlund said he did pay child support when the girls were living with Cisilie.