The Dispatch: More from CWR...

Missouri bishops go against the grain in pointed letter to USCCB

“A culture of silence and cover-up by the hierarchy has brought the Church to this moment of crisis.”

St. Louis Archbishop Robert J. Carlson is seen Sept. 19, 2017, at Kiener Plaza in downtown St. Louis. The archbishop said Aug. 23 that he invited Missouri's attorney general to conduct a review of the archdiocese with regard to clergy sexual abuse. (CNS photo/Teak Phillips, St. Louis Review)

The statement by all five bishops in Missouri is direct and blunt. So is their cover letter to Timothy L. Doherty. Doherty, bishop of Lafayette in Indiana, is the chairman of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops Committee for the Protection of Children and Young People.

Their letter expresses open skepticism that whatever is being cooked up about sex and bishops by Cardinal Daniel DiNardo, USCCB president, and Pope Francis will be of little if any help in restoration of trust among the laity.

The Missouri bishops blame the bishops, stating, “A culture of silence and cover-up by the hierarchy has brought the Church to this moment of crisis.”

The letter and statement were sent to Doherty October 6. They made it public November 12, after DiNardo announced the Vatican’s request to avoid voting on any proposals dealing with abuse by priests and bishops.

The U.S. bishops were meeting in Baltimore until the 15th, and adjourned without taking any action.

DiNardo, archbishop of Galveston-Houston, according to reports, said that the three days of the USCCB fall assembly were “a sign of hope for me, not a disappointment.”

“What we have done here is a sign of hope for me, not a disappointment,” he’s quoted by reporters. “We leave this place committed to taking the strongest possible action at the earliest possible moment.”

This, as the Missourians pointed out earlier, is something of the problem. It will be too late and too little, summarizing a key assertion made by the Missouri bishops:

. . . We fear these measures will not be enough in either substance or timeliness to meet the demands that this pastoral crisis presents. . . . We are heartbroken over the abuse of power which is at the center of the sexual abuse scandal of our Church. . . . Transparency, accountability, and genuine reform in the way in which the Church handles issues of the abuse of power by the hierarchy are required.

The Vatican-delayed proposals the conference was slated to take up would have established a bishops’ code of conduct and created a body of independent investigators to take complaints against bishops.

Distrust of the hierarchy erupted over the McCarrick episode is the heart of it. “This breach of trust is already catastrophic,” the bishops wrote, “and endangers the very communion of the Church. . . . The very credibility of the Church has already been seriously damaged by a persistent silence and inaction over many decades.”

Some of the drifting reports from the now-concluded conference say the question of who investigates whom is a sticking point. A laity-led review panel for miscreant bishops met opposition. “We deserve to be evaluated by a jury of our peers,” one bishop is quoted. “There’s no one who understands a bishop more than another bishop.”

That works, until a public prosecutor steps in.

The Missouri bishops signing the letter are: Bishop James V. Johnston, diocese of Kansas City-St. Joseph; Archbishop Robert J. Carlson and Auxiliary Bishop Mark S. Rivituso, Archdiocese of St. Louis; Bishop W. Shawn McKnight, Jefferson City; and Bishop Edward M. Rice, Springfield-Cape Girardeau.

If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!

Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.

About Russell E. Saltzman 16 Articles
Before entering seminary and becoming a Lutheran pastor (before becoming Roman Catholic), Russell E. Saltzman was a newspaper reporter, press secretary to a member of Congress, and deputy secretary of state of Kansas.


  1. Still more BS. Doesn’t address active homosexuals in the priesthood, nor does it address active homosexuals or homosexualists in the hierarchy, nor does it offer any thoughts of how to deal with the clerical rapists protectors. When I read the headline, I thought, “Hey, five bishops with cajones.” Wrong.

  2. Bishops cannot rein in other bishops. Only the pope can do so, and he is not willing to do it. Cardinal Burke and Fr. Gerald Murray proposed the real solution in Raymond Arroyo’s program, a complete Apostolic Visitation to all U.S. dioceses which would examine all the aspects with the help of experienced investigators and financial experts. Those investigated would have to make sworn declarations and face canonical penalties if the perjured themselves. That would take some time, but only the pope can order it.

  3. This statement is nothing. It is another attempt to change the subject. It states, over and over again, that the problem is “sexual abuse”

    So, if two homosexual priests are having consensual sex, or these bishops are having consensual sex with grown up priests or seminarians, or if all their seminariams are homosexuuals then EVERYTHING IS FINE,according to these bishops

    The letter is an attempt to change the subject to sexual abuse, when the problem is homosexuals in the priesthood.

    The letter is an attempt to trick the faithful and to make them take their eye off the ball. It is an attempt to fog the issue, to fool us.

  4. I read it. Then had second thoughts. The statement is off target. On purpose? Maybe yes, Maybe no.
    The problem is a large network of sexually agressive homosexual priests. Deny that and you are completely wasting your time.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

All comments posted at Catholic World Report are moderated. While vigorous debate is welcome and encouraged, please note that in the interest of maintaining a civilized and helpful level of discussion, comments containing obscene language or personal attacks—or those that are deemed by the editors to be needlessly combative or inflammatory—will not be published. Thank you.