A reader writes in to suggest that the Catholic cardinals’ original not-quite-zero tolerance policy issued in Rome may have been intended to prevent the possibility of a single — quite possibly false — accusation being able to sink the career of a good priest — a false accusation leveled in spite, revenge, or simple sickness on the part of the accuser.
False accusations of child sexual abuse are not simply a theoretical matter. It’s a very serious issue; they’re often abetted by over-zealous or uninformed prosecutors; and it does happen — as the notorious McMartin case tragicomically demonstrated.
Still this doesn’t seem to be the issue at play in the cardinals’ original statement coming out of Rome. I think we all agree that when we say one instance of abuse and you’re out we don’t mean one accusation. Beyond a reasonable doubt is probably not the standard for the Church to apply when investigating accusations of abuse against priests, but presumably we mean a single accusation that by some fair, orderly and regular investigative process is found to be true.
