Bishops' child protection officer looks to church's next steps on abuse
WASHINGTON (CNS) -- Teresa Kettelkamp anticipates that over the next few years every article in the U.S. bishops' 2002 "Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People" will come to be viewed as the commonly expected practice in dioceses, parishes, schools and other church organizations. Catholics will say, "This is what we do."
The bishops adopted the charter during a 2002 meeting in Dallas after reports of sexual abuse of minors by priests swept the nation.
"If complacency and issue fatigue don't take over, which is a problem in any organization, what I anticipate seeing is an integration of the charter articles into the culture of the church," Kettelkamp said in a May 13 interview. She is executive director of the Secretariat of Child and Youth Protection at the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.
Today, nearly nine years after the charter's adoption, there is "no tolerance" in the church for the sexual abuse of minors, Kettelkamp emphasized.
In the nine years ahead, however, if not much sooner, Kettelkamp hopes Catholics will become so "used to" what the charter demands that they "will have the expectation" that youth ministers receive safe environment training and background checks, and that the church has a code of conduct for those working with minors.
Among its 17 articles, the charter mandates policies and procedures for responding to abuse allegations. Also mandated are clear standards for those in the church in regular contact with minors, as well as safe environment programs for children and adults aimed at preventing abuse.
Assessing the effectiveness of each charter article remains important, but the next step is for this effectiveness to become routine, Kettelkamp said.
The real reason for doing "what we do in the charter" is not simply because this is required, but because "we are Christians, Catholics," she said.
There is no single cause of the sexual abuse of minors, Kettelkamp said. "It's a huge, complex issue." In her opinion, very rarely "are things this big caused by one thing."
She acknowledged that this makes addressing the problem "more complex." If there were a single cause, "we could assess whether we've gotten rid of the cause," she explained.
The interview with Kettelkamp took place just before the release in Washington of a long-awaited report on a major study of the causes and context of clergy sexual abuse of minors. The study was commissioned by the National Review Board, a lay, consultative body created in 2002 under the bishops' charter.
Without discussing details of the report, she said the U.S. bishops wanted to know "what caused this crisis" in order to "look at the charter" and ask, "Are we doing what needs to be done, and if we're not doing what needs to be done, what needs to be fixed?"
But "if we're doing things that are right, we need to know that too," she said.
The causes and context study will be "totally put to use," according to Kettelkamp. "This is not just something so that the bishops can say we did this, check and close the book." She added, "The National Review Board would never allow that."
"We do not have a sexual abuse crisis in the church at this time," Kettelkamp said. The bulk of clergy abuse incidents took place in the 1960s and 1970s.
However, in accenting the "historical" nature of the crisis, Kettelkamp said she in no way wanted victims of abuse in the 1960s and 1970s who might yet find the courage to come forward to be "minimized or dismissed."
Though a situation of "no tolerance" for sexual abuse of minors has developed in the church, Kettelkamp said work remains to be done. "I'm not saying we're where we need to be," she said.
With the new study's findings in hand, Kettelkamp's office will work at "ascertaining the effectiveness of each article" of the bishops' charter. She said it is "one thing to have policies and procedures," but there is a need to assess whether they are working.
There always will be some sexual abuse of minors, Kettelkamp said. But she believes the "learning level" in the church today is "much higher than it was" 10, 20 and 30 years ago. "We really have a good grasp, I think, on how to keep children safe," she said.
Copyright © 2011 Catholic News Service/U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops
Historical indeed
By ex catholic (not verified) on Thursday, May 19, 2011"We do not have a sexual abuse crisis in the church at this time," Kettelkamp said.
Actually, this highly flawed and self serving study proves beyond a doubt that you do have an abuse crisis. Not just sexual abuse, but abuse of the truth, and abuse of power within the leadership.
Just this March it took a Grand Jury to flush out the sewer in Philadelphia. And this is where the true solutions reside. The Bishops obviously cannot be trusted, as this study clearly shows. Secular law enforcement, Grand juries etc., must be allowed full access to all Church personnel, documents and property to finally get control of this situation. The Foxes can no longer be allowed to guard the henhouse.
The "it was the 60's" defense is a particularly aggravating insult to anyone's intelligence BTW... pathetic.
who is going to hold the bishops to...
By Helen Welter (not verified) on Friday, May 20, 2011Setting a policy for their diocese to deal with child abuse? Presently their are 2 docese that do not participate. What if the bishops of those 2 diocese choose not to set a policy and if they do, will they be mandated to allow an audit? This whole thing is based on the bishops policing themselves. And we know how well that has worked in the past.
I think the best advice has been given-Parent, don't leave your child alone with a priest and don't even let them look at a bishop!
Most "ex" Catholics are
By Anonymous (not verified) on Thursday, May 19, 2011violently anti-Catholic; much more so than most Protestants. Why? Because they're trying to somehow justify their apostasy from the one, true Church. They troll around Catholic websites and blogs, screaming against the Church which they left.
Anyway, the Church in the U.S. has had an average of only 8.3 credible accusations per year since 2005 among its 40,000 priests. Sounds to me like they have a better handle on this problem than any other institution, bar none. Zero would be best, but that's not realistic. The Church doesn't have a Gestapo organization to spy on all the priests. And people now feel much freer to go to the police, which they should do, rather than the bishop.
The vast majority of priests are good, holy men, serving God and Church. To broad-brush them all as guilty is nothing short of "Bearing false witness against thy neighbor."
The crisis I see here is with regard to your eternal salvation, "ex" Catholic.
Wrong about Ex-Catholics
By Anony (not verified) on Friday, May 20, 2011I've seen this quote around here on Ex-Catholics before. There are many here (or at least many aliases) who make incredibly false assumptions and state them as fact. It doesn't make them so. Ex Catholics, at least in my experience, are not the angry ones, are not the ones trying to rationalize and justify.
I am an EX-ex-Catholic. During my year-long hiatus a couple of years ago, I was quite calm and comfortable with my decision. I felt no need or desire to 'scream against the Church'. As a cradle Catholic, however, I missed Mass, I missed my community. I finally decided to go back but if I was going to do it, I would try hard to have a more well-formed conscience. I began studying Church teaching again and following events surrounding the Church.
I am now a practicing Catholic and NOW I'm angry.
Don't bother to proselytize. I won't respond. I'm only here to factually invalidate your false assumption.
Good point
By Anonymous (not verified) on Friday, May 20, 2011If I wasn't hanging on I wouldn't care half as much about the Church. I'd be like my 86 year-old mother and sister who left the Church and have barely any interest in it. My mother says that what the bishops say has no effect on her so she just ignores them. They are both very sure of their decision to leave the Church over the sex abuse scandal and its treatment of women. They suffer no angst or regret. Meanwhile I who still call myself Catholic am seething. Maybe I should follow their lead.
I like this quote: "The vast
By Anonymous (not verified) on Friday, May 20, 2011I like this quote:
"The vast majority of priests are good, holy men, serving God and Church. To broad-brush them all as guilty is nothing short of 'Bearing false witness against thy neighbor.'"
I agree completely.
While we should not tolerate priests who abuse children, but to classify all priests as abusers or potential abusers is most unfair.
If all priests are abusers, or potential abusers, by default because they are priests and priests have been found guilty of abusing children, then all teachers are abusers or potential abusers and you should not send your child to school. And coaches, they are notorious, don't let your kid play sports. And dentists, and doctors, and the list goes on of people who have molested children. We should all keep our children home, in doors, and under the supervision of close relatives you can trust. Oops, the most notorious of child abuses are fathers, stepfathers, and uncles. So we can't leave them with any male relatives. That leaves female relatives. But.....
I think when we start saying things like "don't even look at a bishop," we're getting a bit paranoid.
While I pray every day for the victimized children, I think the larger group of victims of this scandal are all of the good, worthy, holy priests who go about their lives, doing the job they were called to by God, who are now maligned and distrusted because they answered that call.
No wonder young men don't want to become priests.
Potential abusers
By Anonymous (not verified) on Friday, May 20, 2011Teachers, coaches, doctors, dentists, scout leaders etc are potential abusers same as priests, same as any adult. Kids should not be kept home locked behind closed doors. But they should not be alone with an adult who is not their parent or a family member. Yes, I know, most abuse happens within the family but I can think of no way to prevent it other than vigilance and investigation. There is no way to keep children from being alone with their own family members. But there is a way to prevent them from being alone with non-family members. I was a boy scout leader for 18 years. In response to its own abuse scandal the BSA instituted new rules in the 80's that prohibited any adult from being alone with a child who is not his or her own. Scout leaders who for years took scouts on campouts alone took offense and some quit. It was a huge change and is often a huge pain in the neck. Now the absolute minimum of adults required on a campout is two and if one needs to leave for any length of time the whole group does. The one remaining adult cannot lead the trip by themselves. The practical minimum is three adults. In many troops it is VERY hard to get enough adults to volunteer for campouts. The policy is known as "No one on one contact", "The Rule of Three" and other names. It goes so far as to require one adult in addition to a scoutmaster to be present when a scout is meeting with the scoutmaster for a final review of a rank even if the meeting takes place in an open field within view of others. No one on one contact, even talking.
Youth protection policies
By Anonymous (not verified) on Friday, May 20, 2011These rules are to protect scouts from abuse and adults from false accusations or misunderstandings. Is it foolproof? No, two adults could both be abusers or one could cover for the other as bishops did for priests. But it is better than nothing and unfortunately necessary. Most dioceses have a similar youth protection policy with a noted exception for priests who are allowed to be alone with minors during confession. This includes being alone with a kid in the Reconcilliation Room, a small closed room with one door. Right away there should be a rule that penitants need to be 18 or over to use the Reconcilliation Room. It's probably a good idea to get rid of them completely as some parishes have done. Some parishes have confession in full view near the altar with others kept in the back of the church. Even with voices unheard that limits privacy but it limits the possibility of abuse. The BSA would say not enough, thus the second adult in the scoutmaster conference. Unfortunately there's no way to do that in confession because of the Seal of the Confessional. But it's better than nothing. My sister is a teacher and always makes sure to leave the door open when meeting with a student. Doctors can't do that but there are usually staff nearby. It's a shame that we need to even think about this but its necessary to limit opportunities for predators to abuse kids. It won't eliminate abuse but it will put a roadblock in place and an indicator of abuse. If an adult doesn't follow the policy it throws up a red flag. If abuse is discovered the abuser must be exposed and arrested. We can't go back to the days of not worrying about this stuff, not in the Church or anywhere.
Yes, and may be it is a big
By Anonymous (not verified) on Friday, May 20, 2011Yes, and may be it is a big plot by those who want to ordain women to get rid of all the potential pedophiles (all male priests) and replace them with female priests.
Not.
Get real. Men don't become priests because they want to marry. Until we have married priests, the number of priests will decrease.
Will it end sexual abuse?
Will having an all female priesthood end child abuse either?
Hard to say.
Only one person knows and he isn't talking.
Considering that
By Anonymous (not verified) on Friday, May 20, 2011most sexual abuse of children takes place in the home, by far, married priesthood won't solve anything. Married men are the biggest abusers of children.
Next biggest abuser group of children is teachers.
Also, the number of priests has been on a slight increase lately. See the article at this link:
http://www.christiantoday.com/article/catholic.priest.numbers.increasing...
And there will never be women priests. It is impossible. Even if a rogue bishop were to lay hands on a woman, go through all the ceremony, say the right things, etc., nothing would happen. She'd still be a lay person. Same would happen if a priests decided to consecrate oreos and milk at Mass. He could say the right words of consecration, but nothing would happen. The laity would just get a sweet snack rather than Jesus in the Eucharist. In both cases, proper matter must be used to confect the Sacrament. Proper matter for the Eucharist is bread and wine. Proper matter for the Sacrament of Holy Orders is male human beings.
U.S. Catholic insists on a civil and respectful dialogue on our website, following our Comment policy. Comments should be charitable, on topic, and brief. U.S. Catholic reserves the right to delete comments deemed inappropriate. Links are not allowed and comments with them will be moderated or deleted. We encourage you to choose your words wisely.

