Bishops' Double Standard

Commonweal Magazine

October 10, 2003

By Bishop Thomas Gumbleton

Like the other letter writers in your September 12 issue, I am very pleased that you published the excellent article by Rembert Weakland ("Looking Forward," August 15).  I agree that "we cannot afford to lose the benefit of his wisdom and experience."

But what I cannot accept is the double standard we are following at the present time.  Bishops like Weakland, Bernard Law and many others who were guilty of grave mistakes, and even criminal actions, still function publicly.  On the other hand, priests, sometimes guilty of far less grave actions, some of which were single incidents and many years ago, are forced to resign, are not allowed to publicly celebrate Mass, or even to appear in clerical attire. "Zero tolerance" has been the cruel response rendered to priests by the bishops, while bishops escape such penalties even though it was they who constantly hid the grave problems by secretly moving guilty priests from one place to another.

I have found that nothing causes greater anger on the part of laypeople and greater loss of credibility in episcopal leadership than this double standard.  We can only hope that Voice of the Faithful and other lay groups will have the stamina to persist in their efforts to hold the bishops accountable and to bring structural reform to the church.