发现长袍下的记录:波士顿大主教管区秘密档案的规范保护和民事复活

Q2 Arts and Humanities Journal of Information Ethics Pub Date : 2010-04-01 DOI:10.3172/JIE.19.1.86
A. Pike
{"title":"发现长袍下的记录:波士顿大主教管区秘密档案的规范保护和民事复活","authors":"A. Pike","doi":"10.3172/JIE.19.1.86","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A Brief History of Clergy Sexual Abuse and the Mandates of Canon LawSex crimes have been prevalent within the Roman Catholic Church for centuries. It is a long-standing, recurring, and widespread problem existing throughout the entire history of the Catholic Church. As early as the 305 A.D. Council of Elvira, official church records document an institution absorbed in regulating the sexual conduct of its clergy-revealing not only immoral behavior, but also criminal (Doyle, Sipe, & Wall, 2006, p. 295). Through the early medieval period to today, the Catholic Church has been regulating sexual behavior and thoroughly documenting the clergy's sexual violations. Despite evidence of violations, there was no official system of law to address this problem within the Church until the early twentieth century (Doyle & Rubino, 2004, p. 562). At this point, sexual abuse continued, but the new mandates of Canon Law enforced an elaborate system of documentation to record allegations, investigations, and other related activities regarding sexual abuse.All cases concerning sexual violations in the Church, recent and past, have been well documented within the records of the institutional church, described as the \"single most powerful element in proving its pattern and practice of protecting abusers, concealing offenses from those who had a right to know, neglecting to warn and protect parishioners, and failing to report crimes\" (Doyle et al., 2006, p. 217). Not only did the church maintain thorough and detailed accounts of sexual misconduct, the Code of Canon Law enforced a veil of secrecy so great that these records were intentionally concealed to protect the reputation of the Church at the risk of perpetuating patterns of abuse.Canon Law distinguishes between two record types: the diocesan archives and the secret archives. The diocesan archives are considered ordinary, secular, and public by nature. Specific record types include priests' files, containing \"seminary records, transfer indications, letters of commendation and complaint, and other related matters\" (Doyle et al., 2006, p. 134). Regarding access to these collections, \"Canon 487 states that only the bishop and chancellor may have keys to the archives and permission for entry must be obtained from the bishop, the moderator of the curia, or the chancellor\" (Doyle et al., 2006, pp. 134-135). Despite these measures of security, it is important to note that the records held in the diocesan archives are unrestricted due to their secular nature.A parallel set of restricted records is kept within the secret archives, and these are \"mandated\" to be kept \"completely closed and locked, from which documents cannot be removed\" (Cafardi, 1993, p. 96). For as long as recordkeeping has existed within the church, dioceses were expected to maintain these secret collections, with the practice that the \"documents placed in the secret archives have no secular use or existence\" (Cafardi, 1993, p. 97). Furthermore, because they are restricted collections, \"only the bishop is to have the key to the secret archives\" (Doyle et al., 2006, p. 135). The motivation for maintaining documents in secret may be influenced by the power and authority of the records themselves, and these secret collections reinforce the hierarchical power structure of the Church.The climate of secrecy surrounding these archives is so powerful that \"the canons do not describe in detail what is to be kept in the secret archives\" (Doyle et al., 2006, p. 135). James O'Toole, former archivist of the Boston Diocesan collections, notes that at worst, he thought the secret records contained \"problem priest\" files, perhaps documenting alcohol abuse (O'Toole, 2007). It is often assumed that archivists have full access to their holdings, and that \"it is logical to assume that they will discover illegal activities, wrong-doing, and ethical lapses as soon as [or before] anyone else\" (Cox, 2008, p. 1132). …","PeriodicalId":39913,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Information Ethics","volume":"19 1","pages":"86-98"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Discovering Records Beneath the Robes: Canonical Protection and Civil Resurrection of the Boston Archdiocese Secret Archives\",\"authors\":\"A. Pike\",\"doi\":\"10.3172/JIE.19.1.86\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"A Brief History of Clergy Sexual Abuse and the Mandates of Canon LawSex crimes have been prevalent within the Roman Catholic Church for centuries. It is a long-standing, recurring, and widespread problem existing throughout the entire history of the Catholic Church. As early as the 305 A.D. Council of Elvira, official church records document an institution absorbed in regulating the sexual conduct of its clergy-revealing not only immoral behavior, but also criminal (Doyle, Sipe, & Wall, 2006, p. 295). Through the early medieval period to today, the Catholic Church has been regulating sexual behavior and thoroughly documenting the clergy's sexual violations. Despite evidence of violations, there was no official system of law to address this problem within the Church until the early twentieth century (Doyle & Rubino, 2004, p. 562). At this point, sexual abuse continued, but the new mandates of Canon Law enforced an elaborate system of documentation to record allegations, investigations, and other related activities regarding sexual abuse.All cases concerning sexual violations in the Church, recent and past, have been well documented within the records of the institutional church, described as the \\\"single most powerful element in proving its pattern and practice of protecting abusers, concealing offenses from those who had a right to know, neglecting to warn and protect parishioners, and failing to report crimes\\\" (Doyle et al., 2006, p. 217). Not only did the church maintain thorough and detailed accounts of sexual misconduct, the Code of Canon Law enforced a veil of secrecy so great that these records were intentionally concealed to protect the reputation of the Church at the risk of perpetuating patterns of abuse.Canon Law distinguishes between two record types: the diocesan archives and the secret archives. The diocesan archives are considered ordinary, secular, and public by nature. Specific record types include priests' files, containing \\\"seminary records, transfer indications, letters of commendation and complaint, and other related matters\\\" (Doyle et al., 2006, p. 134). Regarding access to these collections, \\\"Canon 487 states that only the bishop and chancellor may have keys to the archives and permission for entry must be obtained from the bishop, the moderator of the curia, or the chancellor\\\" (Doyle et al., 2006, pp. 134-135). Despite these measures of security, it is important to note that the records held in the diocesan archives are unrestricted due to their secular nature.A parallel set of restricted records is kept within the secret archives, and these are \\\"mandated\\\" to be kept \\\"completely closed and locked, from which documents cannot be removed\\\" (Cafardi, 1993, p. 96). For as long as recordkeeping has existed within the church, dioceses were expected to maintain these secret collections, with the practice that the \\\"documents placed in the secret archives have no secular use or existence\\\" (Cafardi, 1993, p. 97). Furthermore, because they are restricted collections, \\\"only the bishop is to have the key to the secret archives\\\" (Doyle et al., 2006, p. 135). The motivation for maintaining documents in secret may be influenced by the power and authority of the records themselves, and these secret collections reinforce the hierarchical power structure of the Church.The climate of secrecy surrounding these archives is so powerful that \\\"the canons do not describe in detail what is to be kept in the secret archives\\\" (Doyle et al., 2006, p. 135). James O'Toole, former archivist of the Boston Diocesan collections, notes that at worst, he thought the secret records contained \\\"problem priest\\\" files, perhaps documenting alcohol abuse (O'Toole, 2007). It is often assumed that archivists have full access to their holdings, and that \\\"it is logical to assume that they will discover illegal activities, wrong-doing, and ethical lapses as soon as [or before] anyone else\\\" (Cox, 2008, p. 1132). …\",\"PeriodicalId\":39913,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Information Ethics\",\"volume\":\"19 1\",\"pages\":\"86-98\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2010-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Information Ethics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3172/JIE.19.1.86\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Information Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3172/JIE.19.1.86","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

几个世纪以来,性犯罪在罗马天主教会内一直很普遍。这是一个长期存在的、反复出现的、普遍存在的问题,贯穿了整个天主教会的历史。早在公元305年的埃尔维拉会议上,官方的教会记录就记录了一个专注于规范其神职人员性行为的机构——揭露的不仅是不道德的行为,而且是犯罪行为(Doyle, Sipe, & Wall, 2006, p. 295)。从中世纪早期到今天,天主教会一直在规范性行为,并彻底记录神职人员的性侵犯行为。尽管有违法行为的证据,但直到二十世纪初,教会内部还没有正式的法律体系来解决这个问题(Doyle & Rubino, 2004, p. 562)。在这一点上,性虐待仍在继续,但《教会法》的新任务要求建立一套详细的文件制度,以记录有关性虐待的指控、调查和其他有关活动。最近和过去的所有与教会性侵犯有关的案件都在机构教会的记录中得到了很好的记录,被描述为“证明其保护施虐者的模式和做法,向有权知道的人隐瞒罪行,忽视警告和保护教区居民,以及未能报告犯罪的唯一最有力的因素”(Doyle等人,2006年,第217页)。教会不仅对不当性行为进行了详尽而详细的记录,而且《教会法典》(Code of Canon Law)对这些记录实行了严格的保密,以至于这些记录被故意隐藏起来,以保护教会的声誉,以免这种虐待模式延续下去。教会法区分了两种记录类型:教区档案和秘密档案。教区档案被认为是普通的、世俗的和公开的。具体的记录类型包括神父档案,其中包含“神学院记录、转学指示、奖状和投诉信,以及其他相关事项”(Doyle et al., 2006, p. 134)。关于这些收藏的访问,“教规487规定,只有主教和议长才能拥有档案的钥匙,并且必须获得主教、教廷主持人或议长的许可才能进入”(Doyle et al., 2006, pp. 134-135)。尽管有这些安全措施,但重要的是要注意,由于其世俗性质,在教区档案中保存的记录是不受限制的。另一套受限制的记录保存在秘密档案中,这些记录被“授权”保存为“完全封闭和上锁,不能从中取出文件”(Cafardi, 1993年,第96页)。只要记录保存在教会内部存在,教区就被期望保存这些秘密收藏,其做法是“放在秘密档案中的文件没有世俗用途或存在”(Cafardi, 1993, p. 97)。此外,因为它们是受限制的收藏,“只有主教才能拥有秘密档案的钥匙”(Doyle et al., 2006, p. 135)。秘密保存文件的动机可能受到记录本身的权力和权威的影响,这些秘密收集加强了教会的等级权力结构。围绕这些档案的保密气氛是如此强大,以至于“教规没有详细描述秘密档案中应该保存的内容”(Doyle et al., 2006, p. 135)。波士顿教区的前档案保管员James O'Toole指出,在最坏的情况下,他认为这些秘密记录包含了“问题牧师”文件,可能记录了酗酒行为(O'Toole, 2007)。人们通常认为档案保管员对他们的藏品有充分的访问权,并且“他们会比其他人更快或更早发现非法活动、不法行为和道德失误,这是合乎逻辑的假设”(Cox, 2008, p. 1132)。…
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Discovering Records Beneath the Robes: Canonical Protection and Civil Resurrection of the Boston Archdiocese Secret Archives
A Brief History of Clergy Sexual Abuse and the Mandates of Canon LawSex crimes have been prevalent within the Roman Catholic Church for centuries. It is a long-standing, recurring, and widespread problem existing throughout the entire history of the Catholic Church. As early as the 305 A.D. Council of Elvira, official church records document an institution absorbed in regulating the sexual conduct of its clergy-revealing not only immoral behavior, but also criminal (Doyle, Sipe, & Wall, 2006, p. 295). Through the early medieval period to today, the Catholic Church has been regulating sexual behavior and thoroughly documenting the clergy's sexual violations. Despite evidence of violations, there was no official system of law to address this problem within the Church until the early twentieth century (Doyle & Rubino, 2004, p. 562). At this point, sexual abuse continued, but the new mandates of Canon Law enforced an elaborate system of documentation to record allegations, investigations, and other related activities regarding sexual abuse.All cases concerning sexual violations in the Church, recent and past, have been well documented within the records of the institutional church, described as the "single most powerful element in proving its pattern and practice of protecting abusers, concealing offenses from those who had a right to know, neglecting to warn and protect parishioners, and failing to report crimes" (Doyle et al., 2006, p. 217). Not only did the church maintain thorough and detailed accounts of sexual misconduct, the Code of Canon Law enforced a veil of secrecy so great that these records were intentionally concealed to protect the reputation of the Church at the risk of perpetuating patterns of abuse.Canon Law distinguishes between two record types: the diocesan archives and the secret archives. The diocesan archives are considered ordinary, secular, and public by nature. Specific record types include priests' files, containing "seminary records, transfer indications, letters of commendation and complaint, and other related matters" (Doyle et al., 2006, p. 134). Regarding access to these collections, "Canon 487 states that only the bishop and chancellor may have keys to the archives and permission for entry must be obtained from the bishop, the moderator of the curia, or the chancellor" (Doyle et al., 2006, pp. 134-135). Despite these measures of security, it is important to note that the records held in the diocesan archives are unrestricted due to their secular nature.A parallel set of restricted records is kept within the secret archives, and these are "mandated" to be kept "completely closed and locked, from which documents cannot be removed" (Cafardi, 1993, p. 96). For as long as recordkeeping has existed within the church, dioceses were expected to maintain these secret collections, with the practice that the "documents placed in the secret archives have no secular use or existence" (Cafardi, 1993, p. 97). Furthermore, because they are restricted collections, "only the bishop is to have the key to the secret archives" (Doyle et al., 2006, p. 135). The motivation for maintaining documents in secret may be influenced by the power and authority of the records themselves, and these secret collections reinforce the hierarchical power structure of the Church.The climate of secrecy surrounding these archives is so powerful that "the canons do not describe in detail what is to be kept in the secret archives" (Doyle et al., 2006, p. 135). James O'Toole, former archivist of the Boston Diocesan collections, notes that at worst, he thought the secret records contained "problem priest" files, perhaps documenting alcohol abuse (O'Toole, 2007). It is often assumed that archivists have full access to their holdings, and that "it is logical to assume that they will discover illegal activities, wrong-doing, and ethical lapses as soon as [or before] anyone else" (Cox, 2008, p. 1132). …
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Information Ethics
Journal of Information Ethics Arts and Humanities-Philosophy
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Diversity Matters: Economic Inequality and Policymaking During a Pandemic A Survival Guide to the Misinformation Age: Scientific Habits of Mind Intellectual Privacy: Rethinking Civil Liberties in the Digital Age Hate Crimes in Cyberspace We Believe the Children: A Moral Panic in the 1980s
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1