From Mea Culpa to Nostra Culpa: A Reparative Apology from the Catholic Church?
In 2013, filmmaker Alex Gibney released Mea Maxima Culpa, a film documenting the case of sexual abuse of deaf children in a Catholic residential school in Milwaukee, Wisconsin and, perhaps more importantly, the alleged involvement of members of the Church hierarchy right up to the Vatican in the prolonged protection of priests who committed abuse. When, just a few days after the release of the film, Pope Benedict XVI made the unprecedented move of resigning, Gibney suggested that the resignation was ‘inextricably linked to the sexual abuse crisis’.1 His conjecture may or may not have been true, but the tide of evidence and disquiet about the history of sexual abuse in the Church is without doubt precipitating a demand for a far more comprehensive response than has been seen.
KeywordsSexual Abuse Child Sexual Abuse Collective Responsibility Deaf Child Rome Statute
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 3.For our purposes, I am defining transitional justice as that field of inquiry and institutionalisation developed to attend to systematic and institutionally sanctioned human rights violations committed by or in the name of nation states and to assist both victims and the perpetrating states to move forward. See Ruti Teitel, Transitional Justice (New York: Oxford University Press, 2000).Google Scholar
- 6.Frawley-o’dea refers to this as an ‘omertà’ in the priesthood. Mary Gail Frawleyo’dea, Perversion of Power: Sexual Abuse in the Catholic Church (Nashville: Vanderbilt University Press, 2007), 182.Google Scholar
- On the jurisprudence of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in relation to moral reparations see Ignacio Alvarez et al., ‘Reparations in the Inter-American System: A Comparative Approach’ (Conference Report), American University Law Review 56 (2007): 1375–1468.Google Scholar
- 15.Vivek Dhareshwar, ‘Self-Fashioning, Colonial Habitus, and Double Exclusion: V.S. Naipaul’s The Mimic Men’ in Reading with a Difference: Gender, Race, and Cultural Identity, ed. Arthur F. Marotti, Jo Dulan, and Renata R. Mautner-Wasserman (Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1994), 339.Google Scholar
- 18.Karl Jaspers, The Question of German Guilt, trans. E. B. Ashton (New York: Fordham University Press, 2001).Google Scholar
- All references to Jaspers are from this text. Hannah Arendt, ‘Guilt and Responsibility’ in Essays in Understanding, ed. Jerome Kohn (New York: Schocken, 2005).Google Scholar
- 19.Hannah Arendt, ‘Introduction’, in Auschwitz: A Report on the Proceedings against Robert Karl Ludwig Mulka and Others before the Court at Frankfurt, ed. Bernd Naumann (New York: Frederick A. Praeger, 1966).Google Scholar
- 20.Even corporate criminal liability rests on this logic insofar as liability exists through the intention and action of an employee of the corporation committing illicit acts within the scope of her employment and where the corporation has provided authority. Cynthia E. Carrasco and Michael K. Dupee, ‘Corporate Criminal Liability’, American Criminal Law Review 36 (1999): 445–473.Google Scholar
- 22.John Stuart Mill articulated the classical form of the logical refutation at work here when he wrote: ‘[H]uman beings in society have no properties but those which are derived from, and may be resolved into, the laws of the nature of individual man’. (A System of Logic, Ratiocinative and Inductive: Being a Connected View of the Principles of Evidence and the Methods of Scientific Investigation ( London: Longman, Green, and Co., 1925), Book 6, Chapter VII, section 1.)Google Scholar
- 23.Joel Feinberg, ‘Collective Responsibility’, in Doing and Deserving: Essays in the Theory of Responsibility, ed. Joel Feinberg (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1970), 247.Google Scholar
- 24.Larry May, Sharing Responsibility (Chicago: University of Chicago, 1996), 46.Google Scholar
- 29.For a discussion of prosecutorial options see Laura Russell, ‘Pursuing Criminal Liability for the Church and its Decision Makers for Their Role in Priest Sexual Abuse’, Washington University Law Review 81, no 3 (2003): 885–916.Google Scholar
- 30.The watershed case in the US was against the Boston archdiocese for sexual abuse committed by Father John Geoghan. For a discussion, see Timothy D. Lytton, ‘Using Tort Litigation to Enhance Regulatory Policy Making: Evaluating Climate-Change Litigation in Light of Lessons from Gun-Industry and Clergy-Sexual-Abuse Lawsuits’, Texas Law Review 68 (2008): 1837–1876.Google Scholar
- 32.Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission [HREOC], Bringing Them Home: Report of the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from Their Families, Sydney: HREOC, April 1997, recommendation 5a.Google Scholar
- 35.The distinction was made by Austin in J. L. Austin, How to Do Things with Words (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1962).Google Scholar
- 41.Christian Duquoc, ‘Real Reconciliation and Sacramental Reconciliation’, in Concilium Religion in the Seventies Volume 61: Sacramental Reconciliation, ed. Edward Schillebeeckx (New York: Herder and Herder, 1971), 36.Google Scholar