Seven Months Into Scandals...Priests Disappear And Lay Church Emerges

Seven Months Into Scandals...Priests Disappear And Lay Church Emerges

By PAUL LIKOUDIS

Seven months into the greatest public crisis the Catholic Church in the United States has endured in its 200-year history, occasioned by shocking revelations of decades of clerical sex abuse, episcopal cover-ups, and hush-money settlements, one fact is asserting itself with more and more clarity: Amchurch’s lay-run church is emerging into the daylight.

And priests are being let out to dry, both the guilty and the demoralized innocent.

As politicians, judges, district attorneys, and tort lawyers force their way into Church archives, previously sealed court settlements, and broken confidentiality agreements, lay confidence in their Catholic priests and the sacraments they administer continues in free-fall.

Meanwhile, as bishops remove from parishes an increasingly substantial percentage of their remaining priests, Amchurch’s bishops and bureaucrats appear strangely unfazed by mounting lawsuits, unmoved by the loss of confidence they have suffered in the eyes of the faithful and the American public, and determined to press on with a declericalizing agenda instituted in the 1960s.

Two vignettes, among many available, illustrate the growing lack of respect for bishops:

After the recent bishops’ meeting in Dallas, one prominent Catholic layman (fired from a Catholic university for reporting the habitual sexual abuse of coeds by a priest at a west coast university) wished aloud that President George W. Bush would send federal marshals to Dallas to round up all the bishops and load them on an airplane and deport them to Rome.

Such sentiments, unthinkable by most Catholics a year ago, are becoming more frequent.

In San Francisco, at a recent Confirmation, a layman approached Archbishop William Levada and bluntly told him as he stood in a crowd of well-wishers that he should "clean up his sybaritic seminary," i.e., St. Patrick’s in Menlo Park.

Across the country, lay anger has shifted dramatically from abusive priests, polls show, and is now centering on bishops individually and collectively. Catholic laity, joined by many editorial writers for major newspapers, radio talk show hosts, and TV talking heads, want bishops to resign en masse, are demanding jail for those who protected abusers, and are balking at providing money to bishops and their bloated bureaucracies.

One major survey of nearly 500 self-identified Catholics, reported USA Today on June 25, found that 90% of the faithful want bishops who protected molesting priests to be removed. A Washington Post survey a week earlier found similar sentiment.

When USA Today published the findings, the number of priests resigned, suspended, or "retired’ was approximately 250 within the past six months.

But in the past week, that number has mushroomed, with many dioceses announcing the sudden departures of a half-dozen to a dozen priests at a time, from points across New England to Albany to Detroit to Chicago, to Amarillo and beyond.

While bishops seek to placate riled Catholics and the public, the trend now is for judges and prosecutors to press for more archival material that will only soil bishops’ reputations further — while politicians — such as occurred recently in California — extend the statute of limitations and lower the standards for prosecutions, thus opening up more cases for discovery, depositions, and document demands.

In San Diego, where 23 priests have been accused in recent weeks, the county district attorney has ordered the Diocese of San Diego to turn over all information, including allegations unsubstantiated upon investigation, of sexual abuse by priests dating back to 1936, on the theory that Church officials are not now, and presumably never were, competent to investigate allegations of sex abuse.

San Diego is following the lead of San Francisco, where District Attorney Terence Hallinan ordered the Archdiocese of San Francisco to turn over to him all information pertaining to sex abuse by clerics.

On Sunday, June 30, Hallinan — one of the city’s more prominent Catholics — participated in the city’s Gay/Lesbian/Bisexual/Transgendered Pride Parade, under the theme: "Be Yourself, Change the World."

In Rhode Island, Judge Robert Krause "punctured the secrecy" — as the Providence Journal-Bulletin’s Scott MacKay put it — "surrounding personnel decisions by the Roman Catholic Church, ruling that top officials of the Diocese of Providence must open their records of what they knew and what they did about priests who were accused of sexual abuse.

"Judge Robert D. Krause said the diocese’s claim that such information was protected under the ‘clergy-penitent’ privilege was wrong. Krause ordered the diocese to turn over such documents as internal church investigations, complaints against abusers from other priests and parishioners, and medical reports from psychiatric programs in which pedophile priests were enrolled.

"The ruling came in a lawsuit filed against the diocese by more than 30 victims of abuse from Roman Catholic priests. Named in the lawsuit are Bishop Robert Mulvee, former Bishop Louis Gelineau, and former Auxiliary Bishop Kenneth Angell, who is now bishop of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Burlington, in Vermont."

The "Law legacy" in Boston is now engulfing New England, and threatening bishops across the country, who should anticipate an expanding dragnet.

A major component of many stories of clerical sexual abuse, which have come to light in recent weeks, is the abuse of the new rites of Baptism and Confession, with victims charging that they were abused during "reconciliation" or in the baptismal pool.

Allegations that the sacraments were used to abuse of unwitting and vulnerable children (and even adults) raise concerns that some postconciliar innovations provided opportunities for sexual predators.

Indeed, the July 7 edition of Our Sunday Visitor includes a report, "Clergy Re-Examine Confessional Design," which revisits the issue of personalized, face-to-face Confessions in "reconciliation rooms" — not only for penitents’ protection, but also for priests’.

But in the midst of this crisis, many bishops appear isolated and oblivious.

For example, just days after Bishop Howard Hubbard of Albany removed six priests from active duty — including his longtime secretary, Fr. Edward Pratt; the nationally prominent leader in the charismatic movement, Fr. John Bertolucci; and Fr. James Rosch — the winnowing of the presbyterate — in some instances — is being celebrated as a positive fulfillment of Vatican II’s call for more lay responsibility.

On June 30, the Troy Record — the Albany region’s second largest newspaper — interviewed Sr. Kathleen Turley, chancellor of the diocese, and asked her how the drastically declining number of priests serves Bishop Howard Hubbard’s vision of Vatican II as a call for a lay-run church.

Reporter Anne C. Fullam opened: "In a room hung with prints of medieval cathedrals, Sr. Kathleen Turley explained the twin dilemma of modern-day American Catholicism: Fewer priests and more parishioners.

"Like the period when the spires of the great European cathedrals rose, the church is undergoing tremendous change.

"But the change is almost a complete reversal of what occurred during the Middle Ages and through the mid-20th century, when the church started to diminish as the major route to education and power for those born into Catholicism.

"In America today, Catholics are mainstreamed.

"No longer do they need to take lifelong vows of chastity and obedience to get an education. No longer do they need to rely on a pastor for his/her education. They have their own. No longer do they need immigrant churches on every corner of major cities. No longer do they need to envision a better life in the hereafter. They have one now."

Sr. Turley’s office, Fullam continued, is where "the rubber meets the road" — the aspirations of the faithful for more power and Bishop Hubbard’s desire to involve more lay people in "ministry."

"Prior to Vatican II, the church was known for its stability," Turley explained. "Since then, the church is known for its changes. And the pace of change is going to accelerate in the new millennium. . . . The most significant change is in the staffing of priests. What we were used to was one full-time resident pastor in every parish. Today, 54 parishes share a pastor."

Turley, and Fullam, explained to the readers of this once-heavily Catholic region — which once supplied most of the nation’s railroad steam engines — that for the past ten years, St. Bernard’s Institute has produced nearly 1,000 lay ministers to staff parishes, so Albany is more than sufficiently prepared for the dearth of priests — though Turley did admit that St. Bernard’s might lower some standards for more students.

The priest shortage, in Albany and elsewhere, also provides a way to advance feminist mythology concerning the history of the early Church. For example, Fullam quotes Turley explaining that in the early Church, women were ordained.

Of the diocese’s 192 priests, serving an estimated 400,000 Catholics, 75 will retire within the next four years, and another 30 will be eligible to retire.

These 105 retiring priests will be replaced by ten, if the current crop of seminarians remains until Ordination.

To Sr. Turley, this dire situation is an opportunity to "look at different models of staffing," and to help the Church evolve from a hierarchical to a more democratic structure.

"We live as Jesus did, we’re trying to be of service to others and each other," she said. "We’re more about developing community than building buildings. We need to have adequate facilities that will help us implement that vision, but the emphasis is on the qualities Jesus had in his life and how he served people in his time and how he listened to them.

"Today, we’re called ever more to listen to one another and to hear people’s stories and be with them in their pain and their joys as well," she said.

Turley, Albany Catholics inform The Wanderer, stands in as Hubbard’s surrogate church-closer. When parishioners meet after being informed their church is to be closed, or no longer staffed by a priest, Turley is said to harangue parishioners for not accepting the plan.

"She just doesn’t hear our voices or pain," one said, "or share our faith."

With hundreds of priests removed from ministry, many of them elderly and without means of support — many of whom were never convicted of crimes and never will be, given the standards of criminal prosecution — the bishops are flailing around, searching for gimmicks that will win them some public approval.

One of the most nonsensical was floated by Bishop Gerald Gettelfinger of Evansville, Ind., who suggested the establishment of a national directory of abusive priests.

Such registries already exist, and are operated by such clergy-abuse victims’ groups as Link-Up and SNAP.

But Gettelfinger said such a registry would protect the public.

"I’ll do what I can do keep predators off the street," Gettelfinger said after the meeting in Dallas.

In the midst of the crisis, meanwhile, this country’s Catholic bishops continue to refuse to accept responsibility for the sexual abuse of children; but even more important, there are no signs on the horizon that the bishops will address any of the scandals in other areas of Church life, starting with liturgy, catechesis, sex education, seminary formation, and vocations recruitment.

And as time passes, it seems more and more that those attempting to build a lay-run church are making ample use of the clergy sex abuse crisis.

San Diego is following the lead of San Francisco, where District Attorney Terence Hallinan ordered the Archdiocese of San Francisco to turn over to him all information pertaining to sex abuse by clerics. On Sunday, June 30, Hallinan — one of the city’s more prominent Catholics — participated in the city’s Gay/Lesbian/Bisexual/Transgendered Pride Parade, under the theme: "Be Yourself, Change the World."
First, the "gay" Catholics do their darndest to subvert the Church's moral teaching that homosexual acts are intrinsically evil by recruiting predators like Shanley to set up Dignity. Then when the bad tree bears bad fruit, Shanley's progeny do their darndest to distance themselves from the scandal, claiming that homosexuality is totally unrelated to clerical abuse of minors.

To see just how disingenuous their argument really is, first click the "Other Links" on Dignity/San Francisco's homepage, then go to the bottom of the page and check out the LYRIC After School Program calendar of events. Note the "Drop in group for 18 & under" listings. LYRIC is an acronym for Lavender Youth Recreation & Information Center, and is youth recruitment, plain and simple.

If being "gay" has nothing to do with clerical abuse of minors, why does Fr. Mike of Dignity/San Francisco allow Dignity/San Francisco's website to link to "gay" programs for kids 18 & under?

I'm totally convinced of the complicity of bishops on issues like these. Their passivity is telltale.
I've concluded from my research that the bad bishops and the good bishops share the same M.O. -- they send out surrogates to do the dirty work for them. For example, Bishop Pilarczyk of Cincinnati is sending out auxiliary bishop Moeddel to address the NACDLGM conference this coming September, just as Cardinal Egan sent out Msgr. Clark to preach about homosexual practices in St. Patrick's Cathedral while Egan was on his way to Rome with the other U.S. cardinals to meet the pope.

As hard as they try to keep their hands clean, the fact remains that they bear ultimate responsibility for what is taught -- by word or example -- within their jurisdictions. The buck stops with the bishops. And it's up to us to hold their feet to the fire.

Now they're rubbing their hands together gleefully, thinking that they're finally going to get their way, unopposed.

Honestly, I don't think too many of those bitter aging radicals are too gleeful at this point. My theory as to what precipitated this scandal finally going national was a perceived conservative/traditionalist movement among the Catholic laity and the Vatican. Perhaps the dissenter crowd felt that this was their last and strongest card in their attempts to radically change the Catholic Church before a reaction set in. They're certainly attempting to play it to the hilt, but their credibility is pretty thin at this point, particularly after some of their leaders have gotten knocked off already.

We've got to keep on them. Based on their responses to my letters, emails, and posts, they're defensive, frustrated, demoralized, and in some cases running scared.

Maybe we should start by trying to determine in which dioceses the priests dying of Aids came from. When we find some with a high frequency we should approach the bishop on his own ground;the natural world and the primacy of a self developed conscience.

I imagine letters to them saying'"dear bishop,it seems to me that you have had many of your priests die of Aids,you claim you are compassionate,loving and forgiving and we should be too." "Yet you permit men who behave in ways that are very hurtful,to themselves and to those they have infected,to their families,who mourn their untimely deaths and to society in general,who must pick up the monumental costs to pay for research,treatment and education for those so afflicted,to enter seminaries and be ordained priests." "I do not know if you ever had Faith,or if you lost the Faith somewhere along the way,or if you still believe and are confused or intimidated so I won't appeal to the "sensus catholica" a good Bishop should have."

"No,I will just ask that you look at the facts with hard,cold eyes and recognize that if you think you are an enlightened, man of reason,you are not;reason would have forced you to speak out about the connection between homosexuality and Aids." "Or maybe,you believe that you are a compassionate,loving person who believes that tolerance and non-judgementalism will cause us to feel that emotional 'high',that little fuzzy faith feeling,that is god.Well,you are not that either,look at the suffering and pain you have caused".

"In conclusion,I just want to say that it seems you have lost your Faith in God and instead think man's intellect or emotion can replace Him".Well,you have demonstrated that sans Faith,brains or heart,nothing works."If you are too busy you don't have to take the time to respond,I would rather you think about what I have said and do something to right your relationship with God and man.Thankyou."

This is pretty rough but I think that since the clergy will not speak out to society in general with the truth,we may have to bring it to their attention.We are fortunate in that we can pray and call on all the angels and saints to implore the Triune God to help us.Any thoughts?

The first consideration when writing to a dissident bishop should be to be know the result one wants to achieve. Form follows function. IMO, there is little to be gained by a righteously indignant screed beyond the temporary satisfaction of venting.

As to identifying the dissident bishops, certain "gay-friendly" bishops are easy to spot, like Keeler of Baltimore, Pilarczyk of Cincinnati, Mahoney of Los Angeles; however, most carry on their mischief under cover. There are various ways to spot them, such as your suggestion for the incidence of AIDS among the priests under their jurisdiction, but I'm much more inclined to coax them into revealing themselves by eliciting a response from them directly.

This approach also makes the most sense to me from a long-term perspective: If a given bishop is incorrigibly permissive as regards notoriously unchaste behavior among the priests under his jurisdiction -- and I think the lavendar triangles, rainbow flags and in-your-face, "we're here and we're queer" mantra of the secular "gay" activists with whom the "gay" clergy have joined ranks is aptly characterized as notorious -- the ultimate remedy as per Mt18:15-17 is going to be taking the matter up with the Church -- that is, seeking canonical relief through the ecclesiastical courts. What better evidence to present to the court at the end of the day than the bishop's own words in writing?

Thus, I would recommend making the purpose of correspondence with the bishops probitive rather than confrontational, written in such a way as to elicit a response, not a toss to the circular file. JMO.

Saradippity, beloved of God, sadly I believe that your diplomacy and rationality (which would normally be persuasive with people who are struggling with a moral dilema and uncertain as to what course of action to take) in this case are pearls cast before swine.

These people are not stuggling with any moral dilema. They forsook whatever morals they had decades ago and are now engaged in subversion and a criminal coverup. Their motivations at this point are pure survival and control. Their hearts are about as hardened as you'll find.

eastrider:
IMO, there is little to be gained by a righteously indignant screed beyond the temporary satisfaction of venting.

I'm much more inclined to coax them into revealing themselves by eliciting a response from them directly.

Their responses may be:
- perjurious, which can be used against them later
- explanatory, which implies awareness, possible culpability
- pre-emptive 'we already have a plan', in which case you have them on record as a plan being needed and now you can pursue learning what the plan is...and have proof or greater culpability if it is learned they lied and have no plan.

There is also the danger of alerting them to your scrutiny. A safe 1st step might be to identify freepers sympathetic to your effort in a given diocese, and have them surreptitiously uncover what any 'remedial plans' might be. It is usually best to know what the answers ought to be before you ask the questions. That way you'll not loose much info if you spook them, and you'll be in a better position to detect lies.

the ultimate remedy as per Mt18:15-17 is going to be taking the matter up with the Church -- that is, seeking canonical relief through the ecclesiastical courts. What better evidence to present to the court at the end of the day than the bishop's own words in writing?

Yes. I was curious myself about how a canonical suit would be brought, so I started looking and found this Any thoughts?

I believe you're closer to the mark, but how to elicit any useful response is tricky. Best case might be to verify the known homosexuals and their activities in a given Bishop's diocese and then confront them with their failure to address it in violation of the 1961 encyclical against ordaining homosexuals.
Certainly, the content of a letter to a bishop like Mahoney with a known track record of dissidence concerning the Church's teaching regarding homosexual practices -- and there are clues all over the place -- will be different in terms of specific talking points from a letter to a bishop like Bruskewitz with a known track record of orthodoxy. And while we don't want to shy away in our letters from known abuses, we also don't, as you say, want to spook our targets. I concur that the 1961 encyclical concerning the ordination of homosexuals is one of several excellent talking point to be raised -- in the context of eliciting the bishop's position on that document and others.

I was curious myself about how a canonical suit would be brought, so I started looking and found this Any thoughts?

Not being a canon lawyer, my thoughts on whether the canon law you recite would be an effective theory under which to sue are merely opinion, although I do have the intuitive sense that only Catholics within the dissident bishop's diocese have the standing to bring a suit. I am presently pursuing a few leads concerning canon lawyers and will share anything of value that I learn.

I think that contacting priests who were "sacrificed" by their bishops is a very good idea.

With regards my original thoughts,I probably should have added that I would have prefaced the letter with the facts and figures concerning the priests who died of Aids in his diocese. And then gone on to include the commonly accepted figures on how many parties they probably infected with the disease,then continued with a cost analysis and concluding that part with a short commentary on the effects of premature death on families and friends.

My next section would address the very close connection with homosexuality and Aids.Included in this section would be a little statistical information about the comparative frequency of sexual encounters between persons with same sex proclivities and those attracted to persons of the opposite sex.

Then I would follow that with my "screed"(which was not)pointing out that they lead without faith,without reason and without charity.And the fact is,that I don't believe they could defend their oversight of the flock and don't think they could do much anyway except resign or apologize,so I would not want to tax them with thinking a response is expected.

My purpose is more to alert society and the hierarchy to the the folly and the tragedy that is implicit in this acceptance of behaviors that are contrary to nature and sinful.To assure at least a little thiinking about the problem I would send courtesy copies to the Papal Nuncio and the Secretaries of the Congregations of Priests,of Bishops,and,of the Doctrines of the Faith.I would probably also copy my pastor,a couple of other pastors that might need a morale boost and a couple that might need to know what people are thinking.Then I would copy the Director of the diocesan Stewardship department and the Diocesan Charitable Appeal Fundraiser and the priest in charge of the Priestly Ministry to homosexuals and lesbians.

You know my most fervent hope is that the Church will be what Jesus Christ intended it to be,a light in the darkness,a leaven to society,the purveyor of Truth,a shelter from the turbulence and all the wonderful things it has been for me through some terrible times.It will take quite a while for that to happen since they tossed so much out the window when they let the spirit in,but in the meantime they must recognize what a diservice they do to all society by not addressing the one thing they can address,the genesis of the present "scandal" and that is the acceptance of a lifestyle that is dangerous,often criminal and always sinful.

Maybe I will just use the figures that the National nonCatholic Reporter used and generalize and send it to all bishops. In that way,I won't be accusatory to anyone person but a general "if the shoe fits wear it" kind of thing.

Again my motivation is to wake up everybody,that hasn't already thought about this and argue from the position that not speaking the truth about the matter is wrong whether the silence is based on Faith,or reason or charity.

As I so often say,I practice on you guys and I appreciate all criticism and thoughts you have.Thanks.

Could the following information be assembled on at least one diocese, if not more?

- names of victims ignored/settled by diocese
- names of priests accused/convicted of abuse
- names of priests dead/diagnosed with aids
- names of priests removed as per Dallas policy
- number of times each/any of the above were transferred
- number of priests total transferred by this diocese
- seminaries from which above priests graduated
- seminaries from which Bishop graduated
- dioceses were Bishop previously served
- homosexual ministries/seminars/workshops sponsored or funded by the diocese

Maybe start with whatever diocese you think would be easiest in terms of collecting as much info as possible.

See what kind of story is built up. If you get it for several dioceses, a picture of their influence by certain seminaries may emerge as well.

Based on your judgement, some info may need to be discarded after you deem it unrelated to homosexual problems (i.e. innocent transfers, retirements, etc)

Ultimately, your 'letter' would ask for an explanation of the story uncovered in light of encylical's and criminal law to the contrary. That story (if factual) and its 'explanation' (if implausible) could set a numbers of things in motion.

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.