Talk at the Metropolitan Club on April 8, 2019

Thanks for the invitation to return here to the Metropolitan Club and speak with you once again.  After giving a talk anywhere, I always say, “Hey, invite me back!”  Usually they don’t.  You did!  Thanks!  I feel at home here.

You are aware from the gracious introduction that I was born and raised in St. Louis.  My idol growing up was not a priest, or even a saint – – although I certainly admired our priests and loved the saints – – but “Stan the Man Musial,” one of the greatest baseball players ever.  When Pope Benedict XVI named me a cardinal seven years ago, Stan sent me an autographed St. Louis Cardinal baseball hat inscribed, “Here’s the red Cardinal’s hat that really counts!”

In later years I got to know Stan well, faithful Catholic that he was.  A second generation Pole, he often came to Rome when I lived there to visit his hero, Pope St. John Paul II.  Once, over cannelloni at pranzo, I told Stan of my awe at his lifetime batting average of .331.

“Thanks,” Stan replied in his usual “awe shucks” style.  “But that only means that for every hundred times at bat, I failed to get a hit sixty-seven times.’”

You have patiently sat through my past conversations with you as I have spoken of the times when the Catholic Church “got a hit” – – our schools, charities, services for the homeless and hungry, welcome of refugees, healthcare efforts, our cathedral, advocacy for kids, babies, – – born and pre-born – – the poor, families, our elders.

So, as I’ve discussed with you before the good we’ve done, honesty moves me to talk about the bad:  the sexual abuse of minors by clergy.

Can I begin with the obvious?  I mourn the grave damage that many victims – – we count over 300 brave victims who have come forward – – and their families have endured.  I repent for the sins and crimes of the priests – – almost all of whom are deceased, and those living permanently removed from ministry – – who have abused, and for my predecessors in the past who did not always act with the rigor justice requires in removing these perpetrators.  It has brought about not only deep wounds in the survivors and their families, but has seriously hurt our faithful people, and our loyal priests, – – the towering majority of whom have led virtuous, faithful lives, – – and has damaged the credibility of the Church in the wider community.

Lent,this season of repentance, provides me a fitting opportunity to renew thecontrition we feel.  There can be noexcuses.

In the past, Church leaders did not alwayssee what was uncomfortable to see, nor listen to voices of victims, parents,brave virtuous priests, sisters, and sensitive lay people that yearned to beheard about dangerous clerics.

In the past, some offending priests wereat times transferred to yet another parish, or left in their assignment, onlyto tragically reoffend;

Back then, law enforcement officialswere not always informed of the crime for which an offender should have beenarrested;

Back then, there were rarely anybackground checks or safe environment training.

Back then, I am also afraid to admit, wewere not always as open and up front as we should have been with our people.

In the past, the Catholic Church was not the example of the vigilant,professional approach prioritizing the safety of young people at all costs thatwe should have been.

For me to say this in front of you causes me sorrow and shame, just as it does on occasions when I meet with victims and their families, as I often do.

Imentioned earlier how this expression of shame and sorrow is appropriate as wecommence the penance and intense prayer of Holy Week beginning this Sunday,Palm Sunday.

Ourelder brothers and sisters in the faith, our Jewish neighbors, will also then observePassover, and their belief reminds us convincingly that God can indeed rescueus from darkness, sin, and death, as He indeed did save the Hebrews inEgypt.  God can guide us to renewal,reform, a new land.

Myicon, Stan the Man, told me that each of the 67 out of a hundred times hefailed to get a hit, he analyzed what had gone wrong, and resolved to improvethe next time at bat.

Thatis what we are doing in the Church.  Itold you before how things were done backthen.  What about now?

Onlythree instances of substantiated sexual abuse have been alleged to haveoccurred in the archdiocese since 2002. John Jay College of Criminal Justice, at the request of the bishops,conducted a comprehensive independent study of clergy abuse in the United States,and found that the annual number of incidents of sexual abuse by priests peakedin the late 1970s and early 1980s, and then declined sharply after 1985.  One incident is way too many, but the sharpdrop in the past three decades reflects changes in attitudes and policies thatwere terribly slow to come, but are now firmly in place.

InJune 2002, the United States Conferenceof Catholic Bishops adopted the Charterfor the Protection of Children and Young People, usually called TheDallas Charter, which affirms the Church’s commitment to sustain andstrengthen a safe environment for children and youth.  Under Cardinal John O’Connor and CardinalEdward Egan, my predecessors, our diocese had already enacted a number ofprotective measures.  The Charter was the starting point for allthat followed.  It set out a series ofpractical and pastoral steps to which the archdiocese remains deeply committed.

Now, whenever the archdiocese receivesan allegation of abuse – – and as I have said the vast majority of currentcomplaints relate to conduct that occurred over 30 years ago or more – – it isreferred automatically to the appropriate District Attorney.  We have memorandaof understanding in place with the District Attorneys in each of the tencounties in the archdiocese, and they have our commitment to full cooperation.

Now, when we receive an allegation ofabuse, the victim is immediately offered counseling by a professional of thevictim’s choosing.  The counseling is atthe archdiocese’s expense, as it should be, and for as long as the victim feelsit is needed.

Now, if a District Attorney’s Officedetermines that the allegation is credible, but that it cannot bring a criminalcharge because the conduct is time barred, which is almost always the case, itturns the matter back to the archdiocese, and we contract an independentinvestigation from an outside forensic agency made up of mostly former FBIagents.  A criminal conviction requiresproof beyond a reasonable doubt; protecting children does not.  While this independent investigation is goingon, the priest steps aside and his parish is notified.

Now, after this independentinvestigation is concluded, that data is presented to a Review Board todetermine if the allegation is more likely than not true.  The board is comprised of a majority of laypeople, – – judges, lawyers, a psychologist, parents, teachers, – – and apriest and a nun.

Now, if the Board determines that thecomplaint is substantiated as more likely true, I accept their recommendationand remove the priest from active ministry, and his current and former parishesare notified.  If the allegation is foundnot to be substantiated, the priest is returned to ministry.

Letme read you a part of the letter that I send to parishioners when we receive anallegation, regarding their priest, which the DA has deemed credible:

“Iwrite to share some unpleasant news concerning [your priest].  Although you will undoubtedly find this newsdisturbing, as do I, I know you would prefer to hear it from me directly . . .[T]he archdiocese was informed that an allegation of sexual abuse of a minorwas made against [your priest] and the district attorney has deemed itcredible.  The archdiocese will nowfollow its policy and protocols which includes having an independentinvestigation and referral to the Review Board . . . [Your priest] has deniedthe allegation, but will step aside while the matter is investigated.  Might I request your prayers for the personwho brought this allegation, and for [your priest].  We will keep you posted.”

Similarletters then go to members of past parishes where the accused priest has beenassigned.  We ask other victims to comeforward.

Writingsuch a letter is not easy.  Not writingit would be far worse.

Permitme one more example of our current practices. Now, the archdiocese has a Safe Environment Program that requirestraining for anyone who works with children, including clergy, employees andvolunteers.  Now, we require background checks that must be renewed every sixyears.

Allof what I have said so far involves our handling of abuse complaints, andreflects our commitment to diligence and honesty.  But the Church also has an obligation to makeamends to victims of past abuse, and we are committed to doing that as well.  Three years ago, the archdiocese created an Independent Reconciliation and CompensationProgram  (IRCP) to assess claims ofpast abuse and give compensation to those who were abused.  Since then a number of other dioceses havefollowed our lead and created their own compensation programs.  The IRCP is led by Kenneth Feinberg andCamille Biros, who administered the compensation funds for the victims ofSeptember 11, and those of the Boston Marathon bombing, and who are recognizedexperts in the field.  To date, the IRCPhas awarded $60 million in compensation to 314 victims.  That number is heart-breaking, but the factthat there is an effective, autonomous procedure in place to hear complaintsand provide some resolution is an important step toward healing, as victimshave testified.  We continue to invitepeople to come forward.

Youshould also know that this past September I asked Barbara Jones, a widelyrespected former federal judge, to review all of our policies, look into ourpractices, and make recommendations for their improvement.  I want her to let us know whether or not weare indeed keeping the promises we have made. There is always room for improvement.

BeforeI close today, I want to say a few words about the Child Victims Act, which the New York Legislature passed and thegovernor signed into law on February 14, 2019. Most significantly, the act extends the statute of limitations incriminal and civil cases so that victims of child abuse can seek justice.  In his State of the State Address, GovernorCuomo suggested that the “opposition of the Catholic Church” had been animpediment to the law’s passage – that the Church was somehow indifferent toabuse.  Maybe it was good theatre, but itwas less than accurate, and hardly fair.

To besure, in the past, the Church had publicly supported robust reform in the lawson the abuse of minors, but had expressed concerns about one part of the actrepealing the statute of limitations retroactively, but we were hardly alone inthat caution.  Before the Governor spoke,however, we had publically dropped our opposition.  We had asked only that the so-called “publicloophole” – – a loophole that denied victims abused at public institutions,where abuse is regularly documented, equal access to the courts – – beclosed.  Sexual abuse is not limited toone institution, and while legislation should include the Church, we should notbe singled out.  The legislation that wasenacted this year covers all organizations, private and public, religious andsecular.  It therefore had oursupport. 

Jesustaught that the kingdom of God belongs to the children.  For years, the Church was at times sadly lessthan strict in protecting those young people. No more.  Children need safeplaces to grow, to learn, to play baseball, to thrive, to pray, to prepare forlife.  As Dr. Paul McHugh, of JohnHopkins University, a leading expert in the abuse of the young, has stated“Children are today very safe in the Catholic Church.”

Awise historian said that those who forget the past are doomed to repeatit.  I will not forget.

Ithank you for inviting me to speak today, and very much appreciate yourattention to my remarks.  A blessed HolyWeek and Passover!