POLITICIANS AND PUNDITS are now likening Bernard Cardinal Law, the archbishop of the Archdiocese of Boston, to Bill Clinton after Monica Lewinsky, Gary Condit after Chandra Levy, and Kenneth Lay after Enron. Like these tarnished figures, Law has been forever sullied by his biggest mistake: his and his underlings’ acknowledged cover-up of charges of child molestation by defrocked priest John Geoghan and scores of other clergymen.
Ever since Law staged his dramatic apology on January 9 — during which he admitted his "tragically incorrect" mistakes in handling the Geoghan matter — calls for his resignation have grown louder. Though such calls have been limited to the newspapers — from the city’s big-foot daily columnists to a scathing January 18 opinion piece in the normally conservative Wall Street Journal — the absence of support for Law from prominent Catholic political leaders speaks volumes. Only former Boston mayor Raymond Flynn, who also served as US ambassador to the Vatican, has mounted a vigorous defense, blasting the Boston Globe in a January 17 statement for "attacking" Law and "blaming him for the despicable behavior of a sick former priest." But as the scandal has grown, Flynn’s initial impulse to defend the cardinal has reportedly waned. Last Monday, the day after news broke that Law had ousted two more priests accused of sexual misconduct, Flynn told the Boston Globe that he’s come to regard Church officials as separate from his Catholic faith.
On Beacon Hill, where the religious and secular worlds often coalesce, the fallout from the clergy-sex-abuse cases has just begun to register. When Law gave the invocation at the State House during Governor Jane Swift’s State of the State address on January 8, he was surrounded by a miasma of unease. Many legislators — religious and otherwise — whispered about the appropriateness of his public appearance just one day after the Geoghan story had blown wide open. Even his high-profile apology has yet to assuage legislators.
On January 16, the Geoghan affair also haunted Law’s appearance at an awards ceremony honoring him for his leadership in establishing the UMass Center for Adoption Research. As the cardinal accepted the award, apologizing again for his and the archdiocese’s flawed policies and asking for forgiveness, a deafening silence fell over the room. That silence registered the shock the audience felt not only about Law’s acknowledgement that the Church had engaged in a massive cover-up, but also about the fact that he’d appeal for forgiveness on such a celebratory occasion. "I didn’t sense outright anger," says State Representative Kevin Fitzgerald (D-Dorchester), a Catholic legislator who attended the event. "But some people clearly seemed indifferent to the cardinal’s remarks."
Which, of course, raises an important question: does this sprawling and sordid scandal mean that the Catholic Church will lose its influence at the State House? Probably not. After all, the Church’s stature in Massachusetts politics has already declined over the past few decades. But does it mean that Cardinal Law’s personal influence on the Hill will fade? Probably. The torrent of media coverage — which is sure to continue through Geoghan’s second criminal trial in Suffolk County later this month — has had the immediate effect of shattering Law’s credibility. And this damage could spill over into the public-policy arena, where Law has voiced his opinion on everything from affordable housing and social services to capital punishment. It may be too early to determine the scandal’s implications for the cardinal’s political clout. If Law defies the calls to resign, as he has said he will, he faces mandatory retirement when he reaches age 75 in five years. In that time, he could re-establish his credibility. But one thing is certain: it will be months, if not years, before Law can speak on any issue with the authority that he enjoyed even two months ago.
Should the cardinal resign? Respond here in the Phoenix Forum.
