| |
BOOK REVIEW
Church Ethics and Its Organizational Context: Learning
from the Sex Abuse Scandal in the Catholic Church
Edited by Jean M. Bartunek, Mary Ann Hinsdale, and James F. Keenan
Reviewed by Catherine McKeen, VOTF Long Island,
NY
As Voice of the Faithful emerged in 2002 in response
to the sex abuse scandal, it defined reform of church
structures as one of its major goals. Now four years
later, with an end not yet in sight, the case for reform
continues to be built.
Paul Lakeland, religious studies professor at Fairfield
University, puts it bluntly: “It is beyond dispute
that the scandal pointed to a crisis in the episcopacy.
Poor leadership in dealing with the scandal has led to
the kind of public scrutiny to which bishops are not
accustomed.”
That public scrutiny has been painful for everyone in
the church. But it has also inspired a number of high-level
conversations intended to help the Catholic community
map a way forward. The present volume adds to that effort.
It gathers together essays from 19 gifted scholars who
participated in a 2004 conference organized within the
Church in the 21st Century project at Boston College.
All participants were asked to explore the question of
professional ethics for church ministers.
Scholars who typically focus on theology or ecclesiology
were joined by experts in disciplines such as law, sociology,
history, organization studies, and other social sciences.
The essays make fascinating reading as the perspectives
shift, for example, from seeing the church as guardian
of sacred truths and apostolic legitimacy to seeing the
church as institution operating in a secular, democratic
environment.
Jean Bartunek, professor of organization studies at
Boston College, argues that faced with threats to image
and power, organization leaders typically resort to silence,
denial – and in the case of the Catholic hierarchy – refusal
to recognize or collaborate with laity. Michelle Dillon,
sociology professor at the University of New Hampshire,
describes the church’s response to claims of abuse
as more focused on the preservation of economic and legal
capital than on moral and pastoral truth. Several others
see the church’s mission as deeply compromised
by revelations about the inner workings of ecclesial
bureaucracy.
Another group of essays explores ethical standards and
training for ministers and church leaders. James Keenan,
Boston College professor of theological ethics, attributes
the abuse scandal and crisis to the lack of training
in professional ethics in seminaries, divinity schools,
and schools of theology and to a clerical culture bereft
of basic professional norms for due process, confidentiality,
or open discussion of problems. “The cultures that
form our leadership,” Keenan writes, “often
resist professional ethical standards.”
Other essays weigh in on the pros and cons of ethics
training and professional codes of conduct for church
ministers.
The essays that close the book examine what constitutes
an “ethical church culture.” James Post,
cofounder and former president of Voice of the Faithful
and management professor at Boston University, believes
the abuse scandal brought into the light a clerical culture
of secrecy, privilege, and power that shaped the behavior
of clergy and bishops and showed as well fundamental
disparities between clergy and laity about ethical conduct
in such situations. “In short,” Post writes, “the
entire scope of church life is ripe for reexamination.”
Patricia Chang, research professor in sociology at Boston
College, sees a professional code of ethics for priests
as “problematic” partly because of unequal
relations between diocesan priests and bishops and partly
because such a strategy would reinforce the idea of ordained
professionals as an insider group within the church.
Chang deplores an organizational culture which excluded
laity from the definition of the church’s primary
interests. What’s needed now, she argues, is a “relational
ethics that includes all the peoples of the church….
Only when the organizational culture shifts toward seeing
the laity as part of ‘us’ rather than ‘them’ will
the bureaucratic culture begin to reflect the interests
of the entire church rather than simply the ordained.”
These essays take us to yet another level in our understanding
of our church, and this is useful as far as it goes.
I would like to have seen an analysis of the chilling
effect of the Virtus Model Code of Pastoral Conduct designed
for the bishops by the National Catholic Risk Retention
Group, Inc. which most dioceses adopted in 2002. To protect
itself and its assets, a diocese may require everyone
in ministry – ordained, religious, lay volunteers
and employees -- to endorse a code of conduct. Still,
the Virtus model seems to exempt bishops from the same
requirements and certainly leaves untouched the smoldering
issue of their role in a scandal that will impact the
church’s mission far into the future. Here then
is matter for another conference.
|
