Attorney in U.S. challenges abuse lawsuits
The Vatican never barred bishops or other clergy from notifying civil authorities if they learned a priest was sexually abusing a minor, the attorney for the Holy See, Jeff Lena, said in a motion to dismiss filed Monday, May 17, in federal court in Kentucky.
The closely watched case could determine whether the Holy See, and not just individual dioceses, could be held liable for the sexual abuse of minors by priests.
Next week, Lena will oppose plaintiffs' wide-ranging discovery requests, including an attempt to take the pope's deposition.
"The questions before the judge in this case are unique in the history of American jurisprudence, and so it may be some time before the judge reaches a decision,” Lena told Catholic San Francisco.
Attorneys for the victims of clerical sexual abuse claim that a 1962 Vatican document dictated that bishops should not report sexual abuse crimes by priests to law enforcement. The document, "Crimen Sollicitationis," explained how bishops should canonically handle certain cases of abuse of children by priests, cases where sex is solicited in the confessional, and cases of homosexuality and bestiality.
In papers filed May 17 in U.S. District Court in Louisville, Ky., Lena cited canon law expert Edward Peters, whose declaration submitted in support of the Holy See noted the 1962 Vatican document never barred clergy from reporting other priests to law enforcement for crimes against minors. Lena also argued that U.S. courts have no jurisdiction over the Vatican because diocesan bishops are neither “employees” nor “officials” of the Holy See.
The pope does not exercise any day to day control, pay salaries, or taxes or exercise control over major decisions made by bishops, Lena noted. Being an “employee” or “official” are two prerequisites for the U.S. courts to further consider the case, Lena wrote.
Lena also said there is no evidence the “Crimen” document was ever used by the Louisville archbishop in handling the sexual abuse of minors by the three priests in the lawsuit, and said that the plaintiffs’ attorney had known that all along, but filed the lawsuit based on “Crimen” anyway.
Lena also cited the Church’s dogmatic constitution Lumen Gentium, noting that many, including members of the Church, might not realize that “diocesan bishops are neither the vicars nor agents of the Pope.”
While Lena maintained canon law supports his view on employment, he urged the court to avoid wading into Catholic Church law because the First Amendment prohibits state interference in matters of religion.
“Plaintiffs’ attempt to use broad characterizations of the Catholic Church’s religious doctrine, structure of governance and polity to prove that the Holy See employs bishops would not only embroil the Court in a religious and theological dispute of historic proportions; it would also violate the rule that civil liability cannot be based upon religious doctrine,” the Vatican filing states.
The lawsuit by Louisville attorney William F. McMurry is believed to be the first clergy sexual abuse suit that names the Vatican as the sole defendant. A federal appeals court ruled in 2008 that the suit can move forward. The case involved three men who claimed to have been sexually abused when they were children by priests in the Archdiocese of Louisville.
The lawsuit seeks unspecified damages, claiming a 1962 directive from the Vatican instructed church officials in Louisville to remain silent about sex abuse complaints against clergy in the archdiocese. The document became public in 2003 and the lawsuit asserts that it makes the Vatican responsible for crimes committed by clergy whose misdeeds were covered up because of the instruction.
McMurry also represented 243 sex abuse victims who reached a settlement with the Louisville Archdiocese for $25.3 million in 2003.
The appeals court upheld a 2007 ruling by U.S. District Court Judge John G. Heyburn II that allows the three men to pursue a claim that church officials should have issued warnings that members of the clergy had been accused of sexual abuse.
But the court dismissed the portion of the lawsuit that challenged the constitutionality of the U.S. Foreign Sovereign Immunity Act, which grants immunity to foreign nations from nearly all civil lawsuits. The lawsuit claimed the Holy See was a religious institution that was separate from the Vatican City State, which is recognized by the U.S. as a country. The ruling holds that the Vatican is a country and not a separate religious institution.
By Valerie Schmalz
From May 21, 2010 issue of Catholic San Francisco
(Catholic News Service contributed to this story)
