Extent of abuse cases staggering, official says [Pilla to release "shocking" numbers]

Cleveland Plain Dealer ^ | 01/20/04 | Joel Rutchick and James F. McCarty

[Akron Al]

Extent of abuse cases staggering, official says 01/20/04Joel Rutchick and James F. McCarty Plain Dealer Reporters The top financial officer of the Cleveland Catholic Diocese has warned church leaders to expect "shocking" numbers when local figures are released as part of a nationwide report on the extent and cost of child sexual abuse. The findings from the past 52 years are contained in a survey of the 190 U.S. dioceses conducted by the John Jay College of Criminal Justice. The results of the survey, commissioned by the nation's bishops, are scheduled to be announced Feb. 27. Many bishops around the country already have publicly disclosed the findings for their dioceses, and Bishop Anthony Pilla is expected to provide an advanced look at the Cleveland diocese's numbers in the next several weeks. At a meeting last month of the Catholic Charities Corp.'s board of trustees, Chief Financial Officer Joseph H. Smith said the millions of dollars the diocese spent on settlements with victims, their treatment and legal fees will be disturbing and larger than any figures yet reported in the media, according to people who were there. "People are going to be shocked," one board member said Smith told the group. Smith, reached at home on Monday, did not deny the reports. But he declined to speak specifically about the Cleveland diocese's numbers. Smith said he had been working on the study when he was suspended by Pilla on Jan. 6 after questions of financial wrongdoing were raised against him. Diocesan spokesman Bob Tayek would not speculate on the impact the report may have. "I wouldn't put [the numbers] in any category," Tayek said Monday. "We'll do that when we reveal them." Some of the factors that contributed to Cleveland's financial burden are already known. In December 2002, Cuyahoga County Prosecutor Bill Mason concluded a seven-month investigation of the diocese that found more than 1,000 people claimed to have been victimized as children by priests and church figures. He also found evidence of accusations against nearly 500 possible sexual offenders, of whom 145 were priests. Those numbers are among the highest in the country. In the Boston Archdiocese, considered the epicenter of the scandal, more than 500 people had come forward with clergy-abuse claims by the end of 2002. The archdiocese recently agreed to an $85-million settlement with 540 alleged victims. Last June, the diocese in Louisville, Ky., settled 243 sex-abuse lawsuits for $25.7 million. And the totals for Boston and Louisville could be even higher. Neither diocese has released its final tally of the cost of the sex-abuse scandal. Smith's gloomy assessment for the Catholic Charities board included warnings that donations are in decline and church attendance has waned in the wake of the sex-abuse scandal, several members said. But Smith also reported to the board that all of the diocese's costs related to sex abuse have been covered by insurance and accounting procedures. Smith said no money from Catholic Charities or the diocese's general fund was used to pay sex-abuse-related bills, which are expected to be among the highest in the country. Critics are skeptical about the accuracy of the study. "We think the numbers will be underreported," said David Clohessy, national director of the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests. "By announcing the results early, the bishops get to say, Look how open we're being,' and they get to put their spin on the numbers. But how do we know they're telling the truth?" Clohessy asked. Plain Dealer news researcher Jo Ellen Corrigan contributed to this story. To reach these Plain Dealer reporters: jrutchick@plaind.com, 216-999-4829 jmccarty@plaind.com, 216-999-4858 © 2004 The Plain Dealer. Used with permission. Copyright 2004 cleveland.com. All Rights Reserved.

[johnb2004]

Sorry, I do not follow your reasoning at all. Perhaps you could explain more? Keep in mind I have never assisted at a Latin mass. My point was that I never read about Rome intervening in "liberal" heterodox issues, or seldom anyway. I have read plenty where a "conservative" heterodox issue brings the full force of the Church upon it.

[Cap'n Crunch]

I live in the Cleveland Diocese. Things sure are 'progressive' here. It has been a burden.

Though I wonder when the media is going to start revealing numbers on public school teachers who carry on with students.

I was listening to the radio the other day and they said in Ohio the numbers were quite high. They cited our city where three teachers in 2 years (at one high school) have either resigned, gone to prison or as the last one did about two weeks ago, committed suicide.

Somehow I don't think the media will be as vigilant when it comes to these abuses.

[Maximilian]

I don't know about the recent publicity about the lone remaining good priest. Can you fill me in?

What I meant was, that in this one parish there had already been several abuse allegations, including one priest committing suicide. Then the remaining priest from that era who had not yet featured in the scandal, recently was the subject of a lengthy Plain Dealer article featuring credible and admitted allegations of abuse.

[american colleen]

Somehow I don't think the media will be as vigilant when it comes to these abuses.

A couple of weeks ago a young male teacher from the town next to mine was arrested and is awaiting a trial date for the rape and repeated abuse of a teenaged boy. Turns out this guy was fired from a Catholic HS a couple of years ago for being "innappropriate" (verbally, not physically) with teenaged boys at the school. There was nothing to prosecute him with - he broke no laws and didn't touch anyone. The Catholic HS (Jesuit!) did all it could do... but there is a very large loophole in the lawbooks as this guy was legally allowed to roam around and find other victims in a setting condusive to his unnatural and unchecked sexual whims.

BTW... although this story was fairly well reported most of the stories didn't mention the sex of the victim and only one account related his firing from a Catholic HS.

[ninenot]

My point was that I never read about Rome intervening in "liberal" heterodox issues, or seldom anyway

There have been a few cases where Rome has stepped in, emphatically: e.g., the 'banning' of the priest/nun wackos from "New Way Ministries," the squashing of "liberation theo," etc. But Rome does not act in the American way, with press releases describing her actions. They really prefer to treat people with some dignity. There have been all KINDS of actions taken, resembling those of Bp. Burke--a letter is sent, but we NEVER know about it unless it becomes clear that the letter/condemnation/whatever MUST be made public for the sake of the Faithful (in Burke's case, the letter was made public through the press, which found one through an open-records request; subsequently, another letter-recipient admitted on direct questioning that he, too, had received the letter.) Needless to say, recipients of letters/admonitions from Rome are typically interested in keeping it quiet.

[saradippity]

My mistake,I assumed you were asking why Rome takes action against priests offering the Tridentine Mass and can't do anything about getting rid of corrupt priests.

My answer only attempted to show that corrupt,abusive priests act in secret,usually affect one victim at a time and lie.If the Tridentine Mass was done in the same situation;that is,in secret,for one person at a time and tnen denied by the priest,Rome would not act on it either.

OTOH,if the abusive,corrupt behavior was going to be offered to all to partake of and publisized,as would happen if the Tridentine Mass was offered,Rome would be down on the offenders in a nano second.

One action is hard to discover and confirm,the other by it's very nature is verifiable.

On rereading your post I think you were questioning the non-action on liturgical abuses in the New Order mass via a vis action to those who offer the Tridentine against the bishops wishes.Even in that case it seems to me Rome is not at fault but instead it is the fault of the amchurch bishops AND the nutso concept of collegiality AND the gighjscking of the top of the USCCB pyramid by nonCatholic infiltrators who impose their agenda on the body of bishops.

[ArrogantBustard]

#2357:Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity,141 tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered."142 They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.

If you have trouble with the term "intrinsically disordered", I'll translate for you: "wrong".

[johnb2004]

Let me say first that I consider myself a loyal Catholic and am a great fan of the Pope. I do believe things are improving, but I do not see anything wrong in the trying to understand the perplexing way Rome has acted the past few decades. Many fair minded and loyal folks have wondered why Rome does not act in a more forceful manner.

Now, I understand that there are times when things happen behind the scenes, but one whould be hard pressed to make a case that Rome has done as much as they could in stopping abuses of all types. I am not referring to the sexual scandals alone. As I have said many times here, one can go into a McDonalds anywhere in the USA and know what one is getting, the same is not true of a Catholic parish. One may get a licit faithful mass and instruction or one may get material heresy and illicit masses.

We all know that the bishops are to blame in many respects, but one can't make a case that Rome is not aware of the tremendous dissent that has occurred. Why are some made bishops or cardinals when they defy Church teachings for example?

I see nothing wrong with the faithful urging Rome to act in a more direct and clear manner to stop error.

[Desdemona]

Part of the problem with what Rome can do is how the channels are set up and how information is disseminated.

Where I see positive change (read: orthodox tradition and sticking to the rubrics of Mass) is where the laity are holding the clergy's feet to the fire, if they can and if they know that it is their right to do so. (Some clergy are rather strong willed about things.) A good part of the problem is that when a directive is sent out, it is sent to the chanceries and it is up to the bishop to communicate and implement it. This is where things get sticky. There are those who would never think to look anywhere but the bishop for what was said. If the directive is ignored or communicated completely wrong, then it is up to the laity to research and find out if the bishops are correct and there are more than not who just won't expend the energy.

[saradippity]

Last year I recommended any Catholic who was having trouble understanding what had happened to the Church and wondered how it could be stopped,read a good book on guerilla warfare.The Church was infiltrated and subverted by guerillas,using their age old techniqes and will be rescued by counterinsurgents,using unceasing prayer and clear voices,speaking out in truth,in season and out of season.

We can use all of their techniques except the lie but to counterbalance that we can call on all the saints in heaven to supplement our army.

[johnb2004]

What you say is true. My point is that when the laity offer evidence that abuses or error are intentionally tolerated or propagated why does Rome not use more forceful methods than the usual directive which is ignored? Here is my question and I am not being sarcastic. Which is of greater value a so-called pastoral approach which treads lightly on the prelates involved or the immortal souls of the faithful who may be lead to perdition by such prelates who advocate error?

[johnb2004]

We all need a conversion. We all could be more faithful and speak the truth with charity more often. With that said I see no reason why Rome can't act with more authority. It would be welcomed. I have heard no arguments to support Rome's inaction that are satisfactory. The only one that makes sense is that it is God's will to purge the Church.

At this point I can't accept the nuancing of some who claim the Vatican has done as much as it could. Too many have gone without proper catechesis.

[NeoCaveman]

I may begin a "countdown to Pilla's forced-retirement" calendar...

Hi neighbor

I think it is 3 years and 9 months until he is 75.

[saradippity]

Please answer this question. Who is more culpable,those who know the Truth and reject it,or those who have been told lies instead of Truth by those they have been taught to trust,and believe what they have been told?

[ninenot]

I am sympathetic to your complaint.

Only guess I have is that Rome was so full of termites when JPII came to town (and he knew it) that he couldn't be TOO active without some problems.

And I think that the biggest potential problem he faced then was that if he started shooting, the bad guys would shoot back with "outings", naming-the-Masons, and finding a few other little skeletons here, there, and everywhere.

That sort of nuclear war would be intolerable. Sure, the Church would be left standing--but if it cost several million Faithful who left in disgust, cui bono??

It's clear to you and me that saving one's soul is up to oneself. No Cardinal or Bishop can do it for you; we can't phone it in. It's also worth remembering that a mis-catechized individual does not necessarily bear total responsibility for sins they have objectively committed.

This is not an argument for flaccidity, by any means, and it is obvious that JPII's appointments in the recent past in the USA demonstrate that he knows who's who.

OTOH, the Torquemada Gentlemen's Club is still taking members. If you have skill with building fires, or tracking down perps, or cross-examination, feel free to join.

[johnb2004]

My point is Rome is aware of those who are spreading lies. That is why I do not understand the lax way things are handled.

Those who are lied to deserve the truth. That of course does not mean they are off the hook. We live in a very educated culture and are required to form our consciences appropriately, but that is another discussion.

[johnb2004]

I accept your argument. I want to clarify one point. I was trying to make clear that if Rome is being too gentle by not excommunicating and such that they may be placing more souls in jeopardy than by trying to avoid a schism. Perhaps I am wrong. I am open to correction.

BTW, some on EWTN have made the point that Torquemada was a holy priest and badly misrepresented by historical revisionists.

[ninenot]

I think JPII took over when the Vatican was full of termites, and he knew it.

It is entirely likely that if he started a cleanup campaign, they would have fired back with "outings," 'naming-the-Masons', and other dirt; it would have turned into a nuclear war.

That would have benefitted only one party: Satan--it most likely would not have been worth the millions of scandalized/lost members of the Faithful.

While I am no advocate of flaccidity, the last Canon in the Canon Law is '...to save souls...' Recall that mis-catechized people do NOT bear total culpability for objective sin--and in the end, that saving one's soul is our personal responsibility--no Bish or Cardinal can do it for you.

Feel free to join the Tomas Torquemada Gentleman's Club. If you are good with building fires from wood, at skip-tracing, or cross-examination, we are accepting new members. One never knows when Rome will call us into action.

[ninenot]

Seems as though the FR server is straining--accounting for my post #78...

That's a prudential judgment call. Is it better to publicly excommunicate a Cardinal/Bishop or to write a letter privately reminding them of obedience?

I don't know.

[Salvation]

Thank you for keeping us posted on the latest news.