Repentence and Child Abuse

Ed Campion – They were just unprepared because the mind-set is to think of these things [the cases of child molestation by priests in the RCC] as a sin that could be forgiven rather than as a crime that should be punished and the victims cared for.

Part of Michael Vick’s public apology was a request for forgiveness and understanding as well as a statement that he had found Jesus and turned his life over to Christ.

It’s disturbing, but it seems that both Ed Campion and Michael Vick may think asking forgiveness and getting it means not having to pay any further penalty. Nothing could be further from the truth. A person is only really penitent when they accept the penalty assigned to their specific crime and/or sin. It doesn’t mean being happy about the punishment, it is quite possible for the penalty to be more sever than the offense warrants, but recognition of a sin calls for some attempt to make amends as far as is possible.

Since it is somewhere between hard and impossible to judge the heart of an individual, I’m not going to look at Vick’s case although I hope he embraces whatever penalty is imposed as a sort of penance. The case of child molesters, on the other hand, is something the church can’t afford to ignore. Since the penalty for child abuse of this sort has not yet risen to death or life in prison, we need to give some thought to how we are to care for them after they have paid their penalty. Why? Because the Good News has always been sent to the outcast and those for whom society offers no space, and in the US child molestation is one of the few crimes that can destroy a person’s life. Very few neighborhoods are inclined to knowingly tolerate a child molester living in them, very few work places are inclined to hire a child molester, and even in prison a child molester is one of the few types of people that have to be kept in a protected area because the other criminals are likely to try to kill them.

It is clear that, while looking for what sort of position a child molester can occupy, we cannot neglect to take extensive precautions to ensure that no children get molested by that individual in the future. I think that examining the precautions may be helpful in outlining where they can live and work. The fundamental goal of the precautions is to ensure that they are never alone around children. Thus they should not hold any position in a hospital, police department, fire department, retail store, parish priest, child welfare worker, or transport people by bus, train, or plane. They might be able to do public speaking (adult audiences only), give workshops (again, adult audiences only), or some other work in which they deal only with adults (bankruptcy lawyer or tax preparer, perhaps?). Work is only half the consideration, however. It’s risky for them to live alone, especially if they’re in a suburban setting where children will almost certainly be around, and they certainly should not stay at an ordinary hotel. The best that could be hoped for is probably that they live with someone else (family of some sort) who knows about their past and can help them avoid children; either out in the country away from children or isolated in some other way. Another alternative would be retreat houses or similar setups in which the guest has someone between them and the rest of the world. In some ways a monastic community would be an ideal situation, although both the community and the individual would have to agree to the arrangement.

Jon