America's Catholic leaders have confronted the clergy sexual abuse scandal in two new reports. One is a statistical study - how many abusers since 1950, how many victims and the financial costs of abuse - conducted by the John Jay College of Criminal Justice. The other, an analysis of the causes and context of abuse and the church's failure to face and correct it, was conducted by a national review board of prominent lay Catholics. USA TODAY's Cathy Lynn Grossman looks at the reports' findings:
How extensive was the abuse?
The John Jay report found 4,392 priests allegedly abused 10,667 children and teens between 1950 and 2002. While most accused priests had only one allegation in church records (source of the data), 149 predator priests accounted for one in four of all victims.
The January 2002 trial of one such predator, the late ex-priest John Geoghan, triggered the nationwide scandal when Boston records revealed archdiocesan officials shuffled known pedophiles among unsuspecting parishes.
Why aren't the priests named?
Only individual diocesan bishops and heads of religious orders know their names. The board, the John Jay researchers and the national bishop's group never collected names. The John Jay study only quantifies how many priests were abusive and their characteristics such as age and year of ordination.
Some dioceses such as Baltimore released the names of accused priests, living and dead. Many bishops say civil law on personnel files prevents this, or their hands are tied by confidentiality requests by victims, or that it would be wrong to name accused priests who had no chance to defend themselves.
What has this cost the church?
In moral authority, the damage has been incalculable, the report says. In dollars, it adds up to well over $657 million. The John Jay report lists $572 million in settlements, not including an $85 million settlement reached in Boston and several other multimillion-dollar settlements in 2003.
Why didn't bishops see and stop this years ago?
The board's analysis, written by Washington lawyer Robert Bennett, sharply criticizes the nation's 296 bishops' "shameful" failings including: failure to grasp the problem, "unwarranted presumptions in favor of accused priests"; "excessive reliance" on therapeutic programs; greater concern for church legal and financial liability than for victims; and lack of accountability by bishops.
Only one bishop, Cardinal Bernard Law, former archbishop of Boston, has resigned for his role in the scandal.
What are the board's key recommendations?
Bishops should:
• Choose, train and monitor spiritually and psychologically mature priests.
• Personally reach out to victims rather than delegating this to others.
• Share information among the nation's 195 dioceses and the 140 religious orders (30% of U.S. priests).
• Correct each other firmly and promptly, although, under church law, each bishop answers only to God and the pope. Bennett's analysis says the board was "surprised and distressed" to hear bishops say "there's none of this networking (among bishops) going on."
What will bishops do now?
The review board urges bishops to release names. Gregory promises that the bishops will discuss this. The bishops must also re-examine their 20-month-old sexual abuse policy next year and revisit the special church law provisions, approved by the Vatican, that allowed them to remove every credibly accused priest from ministry.
Since June 2002, under that "zero tolerance" policy, bishops have removed about 700 of the allegedly abusive priests and deacons included in the John Jay report. Many others are dead, retired or in prison, or their whereabouts simply are unknown.
What about the Vatican?
Pope John Paul II has called clerical abuse of minors a sin and a crime. However, the Vatican has reservations about zero tolerance - raising concerns that it is unfair to priests whose abuse may have been one event decades ago and that it thwarts the church's obligations to care for priests who devoted their lives to its service. Sexual abuse by priests is a worldwide problem, but bishops from Ireland to Austria to Australia, where there were similar scandals in recent years, are not following the U.S. approach.
Did homosexual identity or the requirements of celibacy lead to abuse?
No, according to the John Jay study and the board's analysis. Board members and Bishop Wilton Gregory, head of the bishop's group, praised the overwhelming majority of priests who are faithful to their vows, regardless of their sexual inclination. (It is homosexual behavior, not inclination, which the church considers a sin.) The board report points out that most priests who break vows do so with other consenting adults, not children or young teens. That's still a violation of church law, but it is not a crime or a symptom of mental illness like pedophilia.
The pope firmly favors the church tradition of celibacy, so that is unlikely to change. However, there is discussion from Rome on down about whether to ban gay men from entering seminaries, regardless of exemplary behavior.
Is this the end of the scandal?
Bishops and the review board say it's the end of ignorance about the past and a commitment to prevention in the future. Whether the public will renew its trust in their priests and bishops remains to be seen. But even during the worst days of the scandal, surveys found most Catholics still cling to their faith and separate its teachings and joys from the failings of the institutional church.