(Shaw is a freelance writer from Washington, D.C. You can email him at RShaw10290@aol.com and purchase his books by clicking here. )
That seems to me entirely correct. There are no indications up to this time of massive defections as a result of the scandal. Collections are down some places — notably Boston — but are stable or even up in others. People are coming to church. Although deeply affected by recent events, most apparently mean to hang in there with the Faith.
But they're angry. Indeed, as I've learned from personal observation, “furious” might be closer to the mark.
Much of this outrage is focused squarely on the bishops. Horror stories of episcopal bungling, constantly repeated by the media, have turned some Catholic lay people against the hierarchy to an extent I've never witnessed — and I say that against the background of nearly two decades of media relations work for the American bishops in the 1970s and 1980s.
If there's any consolation, it concerns the fact that, with some exceptions, this anger is directed against an abstraction called “the bishops” rather than against “the bishop” — the local ordinary, that is. Generally speaking, people appear to like their own bishop reasonably well.
Building on that, it would probably be a good idea if more bishops got out into the grassroots and listened to what people have to say. Giving people opportunities to ventilate might help.
Still, any way you look at it the alienation of large numbers of Catholics from the leadership of their Church is deeply disturbing. In this context, it may be worth risking a politically incorrect remark or two.
One is that the bishops who booted the sex abuse problem around so badly in the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s are not by and large the bishops of today.
Look at the math. A dozen or so men are named to the hierarchy each year in the United States, replacing those who have died or retired. (In a recent year chosen at random, 1999, the number was 11.) This means that of the 300 or so active bishops in the country at present, around 40 percent became bishops only in the past 10 years.
Now, consider that a decade ago the bishops' national conference put in place voluntary guidelines for handling sex abuse. Some dioceses tragically didn't observe them. Most did. And (this is risky, but on the basis of what currently is known, it appears to be so) during the decade new incidents of clergy sex abuse dropped sharply.
Thus, in the years when the body of active bishops was experiencing a 40 percent turnover and sensible guidelines were in place, the dimensions of the problem significantly diminished.
This is not to whitewash things. Grave evil was done by some priests. Serious mistakes were made by some bishops. Nor is it clear that the new policy adopted by the hierarchy in Dallas last June is an improvement on the old.
But in the decade past the 300 or so men who are the active Catholic bishops of the United States on the whole did a creditable job of coping with a horrendous problem most did not create but only inherited.
Feeling angry? Furious? It's not hard to see why. But not indiscriminately, please.
