Protecting God's Children?

As a condition of being employed as a teacher in a Catholic school, I had to go through the process of a criminal background check.  Though I had gone through such a check in connection with prior teaching in the public school system, fingerprinting had become digitized, and I therefore had to repeat the process.  (It’s always seemed to me that the “convenience” of new technology is something of a zero sum game.)  I once again cleared the background check, but still had one more hurdle over which to jump – Protecting God’s Children.

The website of the National Catholic Risk Retention Group, Inc. (aka VIRTUS) states:

Child sexual abuse is a worldwide public health issue. Child abuse, particularly child sexual abuse, is reprehensible—especially when the wrongdoer is affiliated with the Church. The VIRTUS® programs assist the Church in being a safe haven for children and a messenger for preventing child sexual abuse within the Church and society in general. We seek to achieve this lofty goal through our child sexual abuse prevention program: Protecting God's Children.

While one may be hard-pressed to disagree with the content of the above paragraph, the cynic in me can’t help but think that the “lofty goal” of protecting children and the Church would have been better met if bishops had not covered up for predator priests and, furthermore, if men known to be homosexuals had been kept out of seminaries in the first place.

I suspect that anyone reading this is already painfully aware of the sordid details of the Church’s sex scandals, and this article is not an attempt to revisit those.  However, a recent experience within my own parish brought Protecting God’s Children to the fore of my mind, and I am genuinely curious as to whether anyone has had any similar experience.

About a year or so ago, as I entered the rear of the church for Mass, I was asked by a woman whether I might be willing to help out with the offertory collections.  I later learned that this woman is the head of the “ushering ministry,” a role I had not even realized existed.  For better or worse, I agreed to assist and, as a result, soon found myself added to the email list of parish ushers.  (I couldn’t receive texts since I don’t own a phone – something that the head of the ushering ministry found quite incredible.)  And, so, every now and then, I would be asked to walk up and down with the wicker basket and collect the envelopes from my fellow parishioners – not my favorite thing to do, but a small sacrifice in the grand scheme of things.

About two weeks ago, all of the ushers, myself included, received an email from the parish office secretary.  The message was to inform us that all ushers would need to undergo the Protecting God’s Children training, or else forfeit their role in that particular “ministry.”

Upon reading the message, my first thought was, “This is an easy way out of something I never really wanted to do in the first place!”  And while that was true, still the idea that volunteers who assist with collections during Mass should be required to undergo sexual abuse training just seemed absurd.  Though perhaps I should have resisted, I replied to the office secretary and let her know my thoughts on the matter.

The next day, a reply to all ushers came from the parish priest.  In his somewhat lengthy message, he defended the necessity of subjecting ushers to the training by detailing hypothetical situations that an usher might encounter.  For example, an usher, while escorting someone to the restroom, might be informed by that person that he’s been the subject of some form of abuse.  Without the proper training, how would a well meaning but naive usher know how to handle the situation?  An inadequate response might leave him and the parish subject to litigation and prosecution.  One of the ushers, an attorney, upon the mention of potential legal consequences, promptly resigned from his ushering role.

There are really two matters here with which I have an issue…

Firstly, ushering is not a “ministry.”  I know that many of my fellow faithful will disagree with me on this, and perhaps there is some rational argument to be made to the contrary.  However, it strikes me that we, in the modern democratic era, are perhaps too hung up on the ideas of ministry and participation.  One of the things I respected about one of our former pastors was that he did away with so many of the so-called “ministries” of our parish – including that of “eucharistic ministers.”  (Sadly these are back in full force, the majority of them being women.)

Secondly, even if ushering is regarded as a “ministry,” it does not involve regular interaction with minors – certainly no more than anyone sitting in the pews interacts with them.  Out of curiosity, I had contacted the diocese about the matter and, as it turns out, there is no mandate at the diocesan level for ushers to undergo the training.  The decision was made by the pastor.  The reasons and timing remain something of a mystery.

In the larger scheme of things, Protecting God’s Children serves as a bitter reminder that the laity are paying the price for the sins of pervert priests and weak bishops.  I also question the effectiveness of the program to achieve its stated aims.  Is a would-be predator less likely to stalk and act owing to having viewed the program’s video (a video that depicts only lay people, not clerics, as potential perpetrators)?  It might even be argued that the video could provide some ideas that might not have hitherto occurred to said potential perpetrators.

It is a bit sad to say that the cynic in me can’t help but wonder, is it really about protecting God’s children, or rather about covering our assets?