Papers in Pedophile Case Show Church Effort to Avert Scandal

              Papers in Pedophile Case
              Show Church Effort to Avert
              Scandal

                   OSTON, Jan. 24 — The Roman Catholic
                   archdiocese here seemed more preoccupied
              with avoiding a scandal involving a pedophile priest
              than making sure the priest had no further contact
              with children, documents released today suggest.

              The documents — depositions, letters and
              memorandums from 84 civil lawsuits against the
              priest and the archdiocese — reveal in detail that
              the church knew of the priest's pedophilia, but
              moved him from one parish to another for 30
              years.

              The revelations prompted Boston's cardinal, Bernard F. Law, to apologize for the second time this month for
              the archdiocese's handling of the priest, John J. Geoghan, 66, who was convicted last week of molesting a
              boy in a youth club pool and faces two more criminal trials on similar charges.

              More than 130 people in half a dozen parishes here said Mr. Geoghan, who was defrocked in 1998,
              molested them as children in incidents that occurred from 1962 to 1995. The church has settled about 50
              lawsuits for a total of more than $10 million.

"I made a mistake in assigning John Geoghan," Cardinal Law said. "I regret that assignment, and I have
attempted to learn from that mistake."

In a departure from longstanding church policy, the cardinal also announced that he would require clergymen
and officials of the archdiocese to report to the authorities past accusations of sexual abuse by priests.

"We will be going to public authorities with the names of all priests that we
are aware of that have abused minors," Cardinal Law said.

He also said he was convening a panel of medical experts to study ways to
prevent child abuse and deal with victims.

              The 10,000 pages of new documents include depositions by bishops who
              were aware of Mr. Geoghan's problem, notes from psychiatrists who
              evaluated him, letters from parishioners complaining of church inaction and
              letters from the two cardinals during Mr. Geoghan's tenure, the late Cardinal
              Humberto Medeiros and Cardinal Law.

              The Boston archdiocese has long tried to keep the documents sealed, and
              they became public only after The Boston Globe filed a request to see them
              and a judge ordered the records opened last year. The Globe published
              excerpts and an analysis of the records today.

              In one deposition, Bishop Thomas V. Daily, now leader of the Brooklyn
              diocese, was asked if it were archdiocesan policy "to avoid scandal where
              possible."

"And were these events types of events that would cause scandal for the church?" Bishop Daily was asked.

              In a 1982 letter, Margaret Gallant, a relative of seven boys molested by Mr. Geoghan, wrote to Cardinal
              Medeiros complaining that Bishop Daily had "suggested that we keep silent." Her relatives, Mrs. Gallant
              wrote, "never as much as received an apology from the church, much less any offer for counseling for the
              boys."

              In reply, Cardinal Medeiros wrote, "While I am and must be very sensitive to a very delicate situation and one
              that has caused great scandal, I must at the same time invoke the mercy of God and share in that mercy in the
              knowledge that God forgives sins and that sinners indeed can be forgiven."

In the documents, church officials, including Cardinal Law, often treated Mr. Geoghan as a sinner who had
repented and recovered.

              "It is most heartening to know that things have gone well for you and that you are ready to resume your efforts
              with a renewed zeal," Cardinal Law wrote to Mr. Geoghan in 1989, when the cardinal allowed the priest to
              return to St. Julia Parish in suburban Weston after treatment.

The documents released today deepened the anger that Boston Catholics already felt over the church's
handling of the case.

              "Even the ones who raised the red flag, they raised it as scandal, they said they didn't want scandal to come to
              the church," said Thomas H. Groome, a professor of religious education at Boston College. "That the crime
              had caused extraordinary damage to the parishioners and their children was not in their consciousness."

              Some parishioners and a few priests have called on Cardinal Law to resign. But today the cardinal, who is
              considered close to the pope and is one of the country's most influential Roman Catholic leaders, dismissed
              that possibility.

"The solution to this problem as I see it does not include my resignation as archbishop," Cardinal Law said.
"You don't walk away when the problem is difficult."

              Two weeks ago, in his first apology, the cardinal announced a policy of zero tolerance of future sexual abuse
              of children by priests and required clergymen to report evidence of such abuse to the state authorities. This
              followed a Vatican order requiring all archdioceses to report accusations of pedophilia to the Vatican.

But this week, the Senate in this heavily Roman Catholic state voted to go beyond Cardinal Law's actions,
passing an amendment that would require reporting of evidence of past sexual abuse.

              "In a state like Massachusetts, in a city like Boston, I think that's a considerable turnaround," said Thomas H.
              O'Connor, the university historian at Boston College. "The general perception was that the Legislature would
              do pretty much what the cardinal said, but they can't afford to take that position any longer."

In response to the Legislature, the cardinal revised archdiocese policy to require reporting of past abuse as
well.

              In his first apology, Cardinal Law said he relied on psychiatric evaluations that suggested Mr. Geoghan could
              be safely reassigned to parishes. The newly disclosed documents contain a number of positive evaluations of
              Mr. Geoghan. But they also include negative ones, including notes that Bishop Robert J. Banks took from a
              conversation he had with one of Mr. Geoghan's psychiatrists in 1989, saying "you can't afford to have him in a
              parish," and "you better clip his wings before there is an explosion."

              Later that year, Mr. Geoghan was removed for treatment and then allowed to return to St. Julia Parish. Soon
              after Mr. Geoghan's reinstatement, the documents show, Bishop Banks wrote to doctors at the treatment
              center, who had written that Mr. Geoghan had "atypical pedophilia, in remission" and "mixed personality
              disorder with obsessive-compulsive, histrionic and narcissistic features."

              In his note, Bishop Banks said that he was disappointed by the evaluation and that he had been given oral
              assurances by the center that "it would be all right to reassign Father Geoghan to pastoral ministry." The
              bishop asked for a letter confirming that, and he received a note from the doctor saying it was "quite safe" to
              reinstate Mr. Geoghan in the parish and "the probability that he would sexually act out again is quite low."

The documents make little mention of Mr. Geoghan's victims and give little indication that the church offered
the victims counseling or comfort.

Today, several people who say they were molested by Mr. Geoghan as boys said the documents destroyed
their trust and respect for the church.

"I believe in the Catholic religion, but I can't go to church," said Anthony Muzzi Jr., 47, who said he was
molested over two years, sometimes while Mr. Geoghan was "blessing us in the bedroom."

"I've lost my faith in the church," Mr. Muzzi said. "I have to say my prayers in my vehicle going to and from
work."

Ending priestly celibacy for parish priests would go a long way toward fixing the problem the church now faces. The problem isn't just the pedophile priests it's the church hierarchy that has been protecting them. They protect them because there is a shortage of priests and a protect your own mentality in the upper levels of the priesthood. In the Boston case Cardinal Law himself. Some of the letters he wrote to the scum passing himself off as a priest were completely out of touch with the severity of the situation (and I'm putting this nicely). Law instead of stepping down has done the Clinton thing and decided to prolong this by trying to keep his office. Placing his own vanity and lust for power over the good of the church.

Now with a strong non-celibate community of priests these losers who are after their own sick gratification would be exposed sooner rather than later. With married priests who have another career to fall back on, they could easily put up with the kind of treatment whistle blowing usually incurs. Will it be perfect? No. But I can only see it as a major improvement over the way things are now.

You need to stop thinking of it as an agenda. If a Protestant Minister was accused of pedophilia, both protestant and Catholic would condemn the guy, but whenever it is a Priest, only Protestants seem to condemn the guy, while the Cathoilics seem to say, "LEave Us Alone!"

It gives more than an impression that the RCC is covering up for the actions of these perverts. If the majority of RCC on this site would post something that said, "WE SHOULD HANG THIS PERVERT BEFORE HE MOLESTS AGAIN" typ response, maybe you wouldn't get spammed.

Instead, what do we read? "Every Pastor does it, All religions do it, Not as many as you think do it...", and that is the language of a coverup just like the Clinton's did it.

If there were 3 pedophile Pastors in the Baptist denomination GARBC in a 2 year period, there would be an outrage within the church, arrests made, and a public shaming of that pastor.

But why is it when a priest is accused of pedopilia, he isnt arrested, he is transferred?? Dont you see how the RCC is giving people a reason to condemn the RCC by their own actions?? Release the names of the pedophile priests and have them arrested just like the Baptists would, then I will believe in the sincerity of the RCC.

The number of teachers/educators that are molesters is much higher than clergy.

That may be true, but when did you ever hear of a school board hiding the teacher from the public and then transferring the teacher to another school district so they can molest again?? That teacher would be arrested immediately, and probably fired before the charges were handed down in court, let alone wait for a trial. If that teacher was a Priest, he would be just transferred, not arrested.

If if that is wrong in history, show me, because I never heard of it.

You are confusing our request for the intersession of someone born without original sin and who has been assumed into heaven body and soul with praying to that person.

You are misinterpreting our love and respect for the innocence and perfection of Mary and call it direct prayer to her.

On the contrary, many Catholics who want to follow Mary's path to heaven ask her, as the loving matron she is, to help us formulate our prayers to God, in an attempt to thoroughly please the only entity to whom we pray, Jesus Christ.

Last time I looked, the Catholic church is still the only church in Christianity where divorce isn't acceptable.

There's a sad point I have to agree with almost. In many fundamental churches, divorce is not considered when someone comes forward for membership. However, in Baptist churches, there is no such thing as annulment, either, so there are two sides to that coin. A Marriage is a marriage, period.

You are misinterpreting our love and respect for the innocence and perfection of Mary and call it direct prayer to her.

I don't believe in this case it is a matter of misunderstanding. I believe in this case it is a matter of intentional twisting of the facts. Without her saying that we bypass Jesus and/or God in our prayers, she would have no argument to stand on.

"That teacher would be arrested immediately, and probably fired before the charges were handed down in court, let alone wait for a trial."

Not true. I had an associate who spent the majority of his time fighting (successfully) to ensure that teachers who molested their students were allowed to continue teaching.

Secondly, don't you recognize that the people most disgusted and mortified about molestation of any kind at the hands of priests are Catholics, who in many cases have children who could have been the objects of that molestation?

Please take the time to reflect on the number of times the subject of molestation by priests is mentioned on this site and the number of times any of the threads do NOT resort to bashing the Catholic Church.

I don't lie or play the cover-up game made so popular and effective by our perverted/impeached former president of our nation. But I am very sensitive to a blanket indictment against the Holy Catholic Church based on the criminal, immoral, despicable behavior of a few members of our hierarchy.

Why do you think JMJ333 made a sincere request for prayers for our Church to be more proactive in identifying and culling morally devoid "human beings" who also happen to be priests. And how was JMJ333's humble request answered.........with mockery and sarcasm, which provides more evidence that many seek not a solution, but a forum to spew their hatred of the Catholic Church.

I do have to admit, this thread has more RCC people talking against the priests and their actions concerning pedophilia than I remember before, I concede that!

You also have to admit you'd have kicked the a&& of that guy I was setting you up in the boxing match with.

I'm just a Don King wannabee with no exclamation-point hair.

IMHO, I believe there is a simple explanation for more Catholics not speaking out on this subject, particularily on this forum.

1. The feeling of shame they feel when a member of the Catholic clergy commits such a horrendous act(s) and....

2. The knowledge that the thread turns rapidly from a discussion of the topic posted to a venemous tirade against the Catholic Church in general.

An analogy I offer is that honorable and honest members of the law enforcement community despise dishonest, corrupt, brutal cops more than anyone could ever imagine.

I know many of them do, but not on this forum for the reasons stated. A more effective means is personal contact with Church hierarchy to demand action and pursue this demand to desired fruition.

I would hope that Fundamentalists would say AMEN to this rational approach to the solution of this problem and pray for and with us that we Catholics prevail in our endeavor.

The last fight I was in was the Pre-Olympic Trials in 88 for Tae Kwon Do,

Oh, sure, hype yourself after the main attraction is cancelled.

We got a lot to teach you about hyping a fight, son.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.