Chris
McDonnell, UK
christymac733@gmail.com
Previous articles by Chris Comments welcome here
August
22, 2018
When
honesty comes at a price
We
happen to live in a time when honesty is lacking. Maybe that has always
been the case but in our own time through a wide variety of social media,
dishonesty has had a new airing. Being 'economical with the truth' has a
long political history, going back to Edmund Burke
In
the mid-80s, when Peter Wright published his book 'Spycatcher', the
then-UK cabinet secretary, Robert Armstrong used the phrase again and it
gained credence as a euphemism for telling a known lie.
Political
economy with the truth is with us, both in the manner in which the current
White House occupant conducts his business day after day and, sad to say,
in our own political climate where transparency is at a premium. Trust and
understanding of honesty are not only of value in the present tense but
contribute long term to the legacy we leave to future generations. In his
play 'All's well that ends well' Shakespeare has Marianna say that
"No legacy is so rich as honesty".
So
much for the public forum.
Richard
Sipe died earlier this month in La Jolla , California. And why should his
name get a mention here in a discussion about honesty? Because he was an
honest man who tried to shine a torch into dark places. Ordained as a
Benedictine monk, he left after eighteen years a priest and as a qualified
psychotherapist began his life's work of examining issues surrounding
abuse and celibacy in the Church.
He
did so fearlessly, not in an antagonistic spirit, but one of seeking truth
based on carefully gathered data and his vast experience. Over the years
he amassed documentation from both perpetrators and victims of abuse. What
he found time and again, was a cover-up, a desire to hide facts 'for the
good name of the Church'. It was the detailed background information that
Sipe was able to provide the 'Spotlight' reporters of the Boston Globe
that broke open the deep scandal affecting the Boston Diocese under the
guidance of its then archbishop, Cardinal Bernard Law. The recent film of
the same name won high acclaim for telling the story.
Time
and again, Richard Sipe tried to get the US hierarchy to listen to the
evidential data he had collected, urging them to take action. But to no
avail. Long before the current case of the retired Archbishop of
Washington DC, Cardinal McCarrick was finally publicly acknowledged and
his resignation from the College of Cardinals accepted by Francis, Sipe
had raised the issue based on the documented evidence he had of sexual
misbehaviour. But nothing was done.
As
with Watergate, the cover-up by those in authority allowed an unacceptable
pattern of behaviour to continue un-checked, those whose actions caused
such pain remained unchallenged. The cover-up became part of the story.
And
Boston was not alone. Across the US, a similar pattern of protecting
criminal practice occurred in other Dioceses, with the silence of victims
bought time and again with Diocesan funds and legal agreements of
confidentiality. Beyond the US, it is apparent that similar behaviour has
occurred, both in the UK and in many countries of Europe, South America,
Australia and elsewhere.
Who
is to blame? That is a net that must be cast far and wide. Certainly the
individuals directly concerned, but then also those in authority who knew
what was going on and did nothing to interrupt the cycle of damage. Maybe
too we should include the laity whose implicit trust in the authority
figures in the Church led them to act without question and show disbelief
for the stories as they began to emerge.
We
cannot continue in this way. Bishops and others have no right to exercise
their pastoral role in such an authoritarian manner, they must listen to
and work with the laity, especially when the laity have professional
expertise that they themselves lack.
Richard
Sipe had such expert knowledge and experience, he spoke and wrote from an
evidential base that was sound and secure, offering a professional service
to the Church that few were willing to accept. His actions came at a
personal price, the rejection of his honesty hurt, but he was persistent.
Only
two years prior to his death, in July 2016, he sent a long and detailed
letter to an American, Bishop McElroy. This is not the place to paraphrase
the discussion, it is publicly available on the Net. His words show
clearly the depth and extent of the problem.
That
is why the charge of being 'economical with the truth' damages the
credibility of the Church and so diminishes all of us.
Dishonesty
has only one legacy, a tainted view of the whole story and a trail of
broken, damaged people who walked the Journey of Faith together.
END
====