This morning I was reading my home-delivered copy of the Toronto Star's front page article "The Price of Silence," changed to "Basilians say money was to help alleged victim heal" for the online version.
The pith of the article is as follows.
High school teacher Ted Holland laid a complaint with police that Basilian priest Rev. William Hodgson “Hod” Marshall, Holland's teacher and basketball coach in grade 9, sexually abused him three times between November and December of 1969, when he was 14. On one of these occasions another student was present who was also abused.
The abuse stopped after Ted Holland's father, a miner, visited the school and told the principal what had transpired. According to Holland, “My father told him what happened to me, and Father Lococo said, ‘Well, other teachers I’ve talked to said your son has a vivid imagination’ . . . so he turns it around to make me look like the bad guy. I don’t know if he believed me, but my father said (when they left Lococo’s office), ‘Just go to school, learn and don’t be a miner.’ ”
The Congregation of St. Basil offered Holland a cheque for $21,000 in 1998. Holland said he didn’t want the cheque and wouldn’t sue the religious order. He only wanted an apology. They offered him $30,000 a year later which latter Holland accepted and signed an agreement not to pursue the Basilians in court.
Father Marshall was sent to a professional treatment centre in the United States in 1996. Now 88, he is cooperative with the Basilians and the legal authorities.
A few things struck me while reading the article:
1. The Basilians offered a cheque for $30,000 which was accepted. The congregation's vicar general said this was "to offer financial assistance to cover any cost of psychological counseling or therapy required.”
2. Holland signed an agreement not to pursue the Basilians in court.
3. The response of the principal, Father Lococo, was worse than specious and definitely not Christian. He was basically saying,"So just try and take this further and we'll make you and your boy look bad."
4. Holland, it appears, is still waiting for an apology.
5. Holland says he doesn’t hate his abuser. “I’m not angry. He had good qualities. He was a great math teacher. Yes, I have forgiven him, yes. I have to.”
What disappoints me here is the continuous stress on the legal on the part of Catholic priests and religious when it comes to their own failings. We get these great sermons on the correct spiritual approach to confession, penance, repentance and seeking forgiveness. What we really need is some good example and modelling behaviour that moves from words to "Watch me. This is how you do it." My wife and wise mother to our five children, who does not pretend to be a theologian, speaks about "the 3 R's of repentance": remorse, resolve and restitution.
Remorse. Regretting what you have done and saying sorry to the person you have injured as well as to God. Remorse also means accepting the consequences of your actions, including the acceptance with a good heart of any punishment that is due. If the judge, formal or figurative, decides to mitigate punishment, that should be taken as undeserved largesse, not a right to be wheedled by bargaining or bribery.
Resolve. Making up your mind to stop and taking the necessary steps to ensure this does not happen again. As children we were taught "to avoid the occasion of sin." Adults who have care for children, officers in the army, superiors in religious congregations and others in authority such as bishops have a corresponding obligation to consider "the occasion of sin" when making assignments.
Restitution. If you steal something you have to give it back. If you damage something you must bear the cost of repair. If you injure somebody emotionally you must bear the cost of psychological counseling or therapy required. This is not to be confused with noble generosity. It is simply an obligation. Using restitution as a bargaining chip for avoiding consequential punishment vitiates such restitution and neutralizes the spirit of remorse.
I know that bishops, priests and vicar generals do understand this because they have preached this stuff to us ever since I can remember.
Pope Benedict said in his letter to the Church in Ireland, (para. 7), "You betrayed the trust that was placed in you by innocent young people and their parents, and you must answer for it before Almighty God and before properly constituted tribunals... God’s justice summons us to give an account of our actions and to conceal nothing. Openly acknowledge your guilt, submit yourselves to the demands of justice, but do not despair of God’s mercy."
My plea is that bishops, vicar generals and others in ecclesiastical authority just get on and DO what the pope has said, or do they think he was only speaking to the clergy in Ireland?
