Institutional scandals deploy moral disengagement mechanisms across multiple organizational levels simultaneously.

Evidence

In a landmark case in the United States, Monsignor William Lynn, a supervisory priest in Philadelphia, was charged with conspiracy to conceal sexual molestation of minors by priests and exposing children to sexual abuse. Testimony from his trial provides a glimpse of how morality was put on hold at the archdiocesan level to cover up the abuse (Eckholm & Hurdle, 2012). Concealing and minimizing the crimes, displacement and diffusion of responsibility, discrediting informers, disparaging victims, and indifference to them all contributed to the self-exoneration. Lynn, who was responsible for investigating allegations and overseeing priest assign-ments, reported the offenses to his superiors but felt it was the responsibility of the Philadelphia archdiocese to deal with the problems. Rather than being removed, some offending priests were reassigned to active ministry in other parishes where they could continue the sexual abuse. On orders from his superior, Lynn did not explain to parishioners, why priests were removed and reassigned. “I was given the directions what to do,” he explained (Warner, 2012a). A nun working in one of the parishes reported concern that a priest was receiving child pornography in the mail. She was branded a troublemaker who was trying “to stir up conflict” and accused of having suspect motives. — Albert Bandura, Moral Disengagement, 495

Categorization

• ADDENDUM: The criminal priests were reassigned rather than removed, mirroring the displacement and diffusion of responsibility mechanisms central to moral disengagement theory. Combines with ‘On Sacrifice’ interest in institutions that protect themselves at members’ expense.
• SHARE: Send to anyone who follows clergy abuse coverage: the detail that a nun reporting a priest receiving child porn was herself branded a troublemaker with suspect motives is the whole moral disengagement story in one anecdote.