Fr. Mark Gruber / Archabbot Douglas Nowicki
Posted on 12/09/2009 6:35:52 AM PST by NYer
.- Catholic priest Fr. Mark Gruber, a professor at St. Vincent College in Latrobe, Pennsylvania has been removed from ministry and barred from campus after accusations were made that he downloaded pornography to his computer. Some of his colleagues and friends are defending him, claiming his computer was tampered with.
Fr. Gruber, 53, is a Benedictine monk who teaches anthropology and is an authority on the Coptic Christians of Egypt. He is reportedly a popular retreat leader in the U.S. and Canada and is known for his theological orthodoxy.
The pornography investigation began after an email was sent in the middle of the night last July to some St. Vincent faculty, the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette says. The email, which was critical of the college administration, was sent in the name of another faculty member who denied having anything to do with it and asked for an investigation.
College technicians said the email originated on campus and that Fr. Gruber’s computer was one of two active at the time. A search of the computer uncovered visits to several pornography sites, a state police report says.
A college technician also reported that software had been used to erase evidence of the visits to the sites. According to St. Vincent spokesman Don Orlando, the priest used his own user name and password to access the sites.
State police were called because child pornography was suspected. They found no evidence that the pictures were of minors and found that other people used the computer and apparently had email accounts on it.
They declined a request from the college to discover who had viewed pornography and who owned the other email accounts because “neither of those acts was a crime.”
One source at the university, who asked to remain anonymous because of the sensitivity of the case, told CNA that local police also believe Fr. Gruber’s computer most likely had been tampered with.
According to the Post-Gazette, state police asked Fr. Gruber whether he had used his computer to view child pornography but he did not “answer the question directly.”
Instead, the police report says, Fr. Gruber remarked “I would be surprised to know that Web sites contained child pornography.”
The priest was also asked whether he had used the computer system to look at young boys. He replied “I don’t think that is a relevant question.”
Archabbot Douglas Nowicki and Bishop of Greensburg Lawrence Brandt have revoked Fr. Gruber’s priestly faculties.
Another confidential source informed CNA that friends of Fr. Gruber have filed a defense before the Apostolic Signatura in Rome, which is headed by the former Archbishop of St. Louis Raymond Burke.
St. Vincent spokesman Don Orlando said the college remains “confident” that its actions were appropriate, the Post-Gazette reports. The priest was removed from ministry pending a final decision from the Vatican because “the Church holds its educators of young people to a higher standard.”
Fr. Gruber’s attorney, Sharon Smith, said the priest is “very upset” by the accusations.
“This is overwhelming and very stressful. He's not doing well physically or emotionally. This has taken everything he's worked for and destroyed it.”
She blamed a virus for the pornography. She argued that Fr. Gruber could not have installed software to conceal his alleged actions because he wasn’t a systems administrator.
Orlando said that anti-viral software showed “no evidence” of any virus or malware. He also disputed the police report’s description of the computer’s location as a “large open room” in a “common area.” Orlando said the room is a reception area for an inner office that “has a door to the hallway that only he would have access to.”
Archabbot Douglas Nowicki has forwarded the case to Rome for a final verdict. Fr. Gruber’s attorney, Sharon Smith, reported that the priest may sue if he is not restored as a priest and professor.
“The last thing Father Gruber wanted to do is take this matter into civil courts, which we haven't done yet. We're really trying to work this out" said Smith. "My client has been damaged severely by them labeling him a pedophile, when the police said there was no crime, no child porn."
This narrative details the events of his life while he lived among the Coptic monks of Egypt for a year doing research for his doctoral dissertation in Anthropology. However, this is by far more than a story of just his life. It is a story of grace, faith, and coming to know God more through our world. Through all of his experiences in Egypt, Father Gruber's faith was strengthened. The Copts, contemplating God and loving him whole-heartedly, taught Father Gruber not only about their customs and theology but also showed him a living example of true faith in God.
Please offer up prayers for Fr. Gruber and all involved, that the truth will be revealed.
The priest was also asked whether he had used the computer system to look at young boys. He replied “I don’t think that is a relevant question.”
Based on that answer alone he should be removed IMHO.
“According to the Post-Gazette, state police asked Fr. Gruber whether he had used his computer to view child pornography but he did not ‘answer the question directly.’
“Instead, the police report says, Fr. Gruber remarked ‘I would be surprised to know that Web sites contained child pornography.’”
If these allegations prove true, that he said these things, then for the purposes of the Church’s investigation, Fr. Gruber should voluntarily submit to a complete and open investigation, including polygraph tests where he answers these and related questions.
If he doesn’t wish to answer these questions, then the Church may wish to judge the accusations as “not proved,” but remove him from active ministry and teaching anyway. He should then be assigned to a life of prayer in a monastery without contact with the outside world.
Many folks serving in some capacity in the Church, both lay and clerical, are required to pass background checks. The standard here, to be permitted to serve the Church, is not one of proof beyond a reasonable doubt of guilt, but rather, reasonable proof of innocence.
BTW, it is certainly possible to quite inadvertently stumble upon a site that contains pornography. I have done so myself: for example, once when I was looking up an article on Louisa May Alcott for my niece, I googled the words "Little Women" and landed in a pile of degrading crap. It's all over the Internet.
Very strange. Other people use the computer and the police don’t think it was tampered with. The organization is comfortable with how it has handled this. Most people don’t know how to answer police questions in a way that doesn’t incriminate them. His answers sound evasive- or angry or arrogant. It could also be that he knows who did it and doesn’t want to say. Or it could have been him. It’s also not clear if it was a few hits or a pattern of hits.
If he’s innocent and wrongly accused, he needs our prayers.
If he’s guilty of a few hits out of sinful curiosity, he’s probably been punished enough, and could use some prayers.
If he’s guilty of regular viewing of porn, he certainly needs prayers.
We’ve all done foolish and sinful things so I can’t condemn him for that. No one is perfect and most of us have done something we are deeply ashamed of in our lives. It’s what we do AFTER that that matters.
There isn’t enough factual information in this article to form an opinion, in my opinion!
I agree. Very good post, all of it.
I agree. I also agree that many people just aren't aware that their comments to the police can be misconstrued, or when looked at, out of the context of the question, can be damaging.
If that computer is available to others, it can also be that someone else viewed it, but the priest didn't want to get someone else in trouble.
We gave my husband's brother, so is Pastor of a med. size Parish, a computer, and it was in his rectory, but he moved it from the public room for just that reason. He didn't want someone else possibly downloading stuff, and him get blamed for it. He doesn't even have a personal e-mail account anymore. If I want to send him an article, or a flight itinerary or something, I send it to the Office Manager, and she prints it out for him.
Apparently there wasn’t any actual child porn, but his answers sure were evasive. Certainly is a sad situation.
While I have never met Fr. Gruber, I enjoyed his book 'Journey Back to Eden' immensely. It has proven to be an excellent source of material for quiet reflection and meditation.
Normally I would not post an article of this nature but given the fact that he his appeal will be heard by the Apostolic Signatura, I felt it important to appeal for prayers. That tribunal would not accept such a case unless there were sufficient evidence to support Fr. Gruber's testimony. I am also reminded that throughout the history of the Catholic Church, many saints were falsely accused of various misdeeds. Take for example St. Vincent de Paul.
Vincent chose to board, out of humility, in a modest lodging in the area of St. Germain. It was owned by a Judge of the Tribunal, Monsieur de Sore. Vincent was so happy, but his peace was to be short-lived. One day, when Vincent was sick in bed, with a fever (from an illness contracted in Africa), the Judge entered the room and, as was his custom, placed a large sum of money in the safe. But in a hurry and somewhat distracted, instead of leaving the key in a safe place, he left it on the server. Later the delivery boy from the pharmacy brought medicine to Father Vincent. Upon seeing him sound asleep, and noticing the key, he opened the safe and stole all the contents. On his return, the judge seeing the safe ajar and his money gone, accused Vincent.
Although Vincent calmly protested he was innocent, he was not able to prove it; he was not believed and was to bear the stigma of being a thief for six years. During the six long years, without friends, and anyone who believed in him, he never endeavored to defend himself. He just bore the scandal, resignedly repeating over and over again, "God knows the truth." Finally six years after the fact, the truth always surfacing, the criminal was arrested for another crime and, wanting to clear his conscience, confessed to the crime Vincent had been accused of.
Read More
I don't trust the media accounts; they love nothing more than to twist and malign information to attract a larger readership. The media have served Satan well in his attempts to tear down the Catholic Church that he despises so much. If Fr. Gruber is innocent then that is known to God and I feel confident that Archbishop Burke will unravel the knots. In the meantime, let us pray for Fr. Gruber whose reputation has been sullied, perhaps forever. What a cross to bear!
Forgot to include you on my post #12.
Remember though that there is a difference between not having the allegations against you proven, and reasonably proving that you're innocent of them.
Fr. Gruber’s elliptical answers to the police do not represent sufficient evidence to prove that he's done something wrong, but they also tell against the proposition that he is entirely innocent, as well.
The priest has a right to due process. I believe that in canonical proceedings, folks have a right not to be compelled to testify against themselves. This right must be respected, and should not lead to an assumption of guilt.
Nonetheless, Fr. Gruber apparently is involved in the formation of young folks, including prospective priests. This is a privilege, not a right. To maintain this privilege, Fr. Gruber will have to go beyond merely obtaining a judgment that guilt isn't proven. He will have to also make a reasonable demonstration of his actual innocence, which means in part, not giving elliptical answers to questions about whether or not he used the computer to view child porn.
It's much the same for those of us who are LAITY and wish to serve in analogous roles. It doesn't take a formal criminal conviction to get one barred from many service roles.
sitetest
this article has been pulled from CNA, should probably be deleted here as well. CNA should’ve known better than to have mentioned the Apostolic Signatura, which likes to keep its involvement in individual cases more secretive so that it can more effectively and impartially impart justice.
Myself and many other students and former students are of the opinion that his evasive answers are meant to protect the seal of confession. The police report (available on the article “Protecting a Punished Professor” on the site of Inside Higher Education) says the police wanted to interview him alone, but he insisted upon the archabbot being present (we believe because he hoped the archabbot would note his evasion and understand there might be an issue of the seal of confession)
If he had knowledge of something on the computer from someone else (and I can attest, tons of students were always using that computer, and many many students often sought him to confess to.. he pretty much always had a stole with him... only place he probably didn’t carry one with him would be when he went plain-clothes to American Anthropological Association conferences to present papers), his answers to the questions make perfect sense.
There are over 1100 students, former students, and alumni supporting him in the facebook group “Friends of Father Mark”... and the group just keeps growing (it’s only existed for a few days)
anyway, I believe it would be the wish of CNA, and probably of the Apostolic Signatura itself, that the article be deleted here as well.
“this article has been pulled from CNA, should probably be deleted here as well.”
I cannot disagree with you more or more vehemently.
If the Church wishes to conduct its investigations quietly, nothing we do here prevents that.
But we have learned very bitterly and at great cost that the hierarchy has not been trustworthy in these matters. The hierarchy often did not protect us or our children (including children sent off to become priests themselves) from predators in the priesthood.
They do not enjoy nor do they deserve our trust in these matters now.
We should endeavor to keep cases like this in the sunlight, as it is a wonderful disinfective.
Jesus commanded us to obey them in matters of faith and morals, but not to emulate them. If they wish to conduct their investigations in the dark, so be it. But we should continue to shine the light on this matter.
This priest should not be returned to his position unless it is reasonably shown that he is actually innocent, not merely free from the certainty of guilt.
sitetest
Fr. Gruber was the retreat master and was simply superb. Very orthodox, very holy, and completely willing to tackle the hard sayings, like contraception.
On the other hand, this in very disturbing:
Instead, the police report says, Fr. Gruber remarked “I would be surprised to know that Web sites contained child pornography.”
The priest was also asked whether he had used the computer system to look at young boys. He replied “I don’t think that is a relevant question.”
The current president of St. Vincent's University has been fighting to reintroduce orthodox Catholicism there and has been bitterly opposed by some of the professors. Its been ugly, and the president is resigning in the spring. The archabbot is turning 65 in the spring and may not be reelected.
Fr. Gruber may be a victim of collateral damage in the struggle for the future direction of St. Vincent's. I would not be surprised if he was not guilty of that which they claim, but out of duty is staying silent.
Pray for him, as well as the rest of the Benedictines there (our pastor is an OSB from this archabbey) and the future of their university and seminary!
On the one hand, the hierarchy has earned our active distrust on matters of homosexuality, pr0n0r@phy, and sexual abuse. We cannot tolerate these things, and we cannot allow the hierarchy ever again to brush them under the rug.
On the other hand, malefactors can abuse our zealous self defense, by leveling false accusation and fabricating evidence against those whose real 'offense' against the malefactors is being an actual, believing, practicing, faithful, orthodox Catholic.
Consequently, we must be as vigorous in pursuing action against false accusers as we are in pursuing action against perverts.
Protecting a Punished Professor November 30, 2009 Inside Higher Ed
When most of Saint Vincent College's tenured faculty members voted last year to criticize President James Towey's management of the Benedictine college, most professors were so nervous about retribution that few were willing to discuss their concerns in public. The Rev. Mark Gruber was an exception, and he may be paying a price for that outspokenness now.
The Benedictine monk and professor of anthropology has been stripped of his teaching duties and barred from the college and from all interaction with students, punished amid accusations of sexual misconduct that were initiated last summer by Towey and the archabbot at the affiliated Saint Vincent Seminary. Towey and Archabbot Douglas R. Nowicki called state police to Saint Vincent last summer to investigate charges that Father Mark had downloaded child pornography onto a campus computer -- allegations that the police deemed to be unfounded, because they found no images on the computer of men under the age of 18, and because the computer was in a common area and many people had access to it.
But Saint Vincent officials punished Father Mark in September, reportedly after concluding that he had violated church law by viewing online images of nude men on the college computer.
The actions against Father Mark have drawn the attention of the American Association of University Professors, which in a letter warns that the actions against the monk may violate his rights under the college's faculty handbook and urges the college and the archabbey to "rescind [the] actions that bear on [his] professorial status."
Officials at Saint Vincent and at the archabbey did not respond to requests for comment. But a college spokesman told the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, which reported on the situation Friday, that the actions taken by the archabbey are outside the control of Saint Vincent administrators, and Archabbot Nowicki told the newspaper that "because Father Mark's conduct potentially involves the violation of church law, the matter has been referred" to the Vatican.
Father Mark, who was on sabbatical before the recent events unfolded, could not be reached for comment, and his lawyer did not return a message seeking a response about the case.
But the story told by various documents in the case -- notably a report filed by Pennsylvania State Police in August -- suggest an aggressive attempt by Saint Vincent officials to discover wrongdoing by Father Mark. He vocally criticized Towey -- and, by extension, Archabbot Nowicki, with whom Towey is closely allied -- last year. "The tenured faculty took the lead, fortunately, but there are a lot of other people who share their views, and who are tired of the overriding of collegial discourse, the discounting of the consensus way of decision making, and what I see as the obfuscation of our Catholic mission," he told Inside Higher Ed last year. Towey has announced that he plans to leave Saint Vincent at the end of the current academic year.
The report filed by State Trooper Glenn Bard said that he and another officer were called to the Saint Vincent campus on July 23 and met by Towey, Archabbot Nowicki, and two other officials. Towey told the officers that Saint Vincent administrators "had reason to believe that [Gruber] was utilizing a college computer to view child pornography." Saint Vincent officials provided the officers with a list of Web sites that they asserted Father Mark had visited, and gave the officers permission to seize the computer, which was situated in a common area outside Father Mark's office at the college.
The police report said that the monk declined to directly answer whether he had used the campus computer system to look at child pornography. "I don't think that is a relevant question," Father Mark told the officers.
Bard's review of the materials on the computer, he wrote in the police report, found "images, videos and links to nude young men, but none could be identified as under the age of 18 years of age," as would have been required to charge him under the state's "sexual abuse of children" statute. Bard wrote that an e-mail analysis also revealed that "the computer system was being used by more than just Gruber. I found several e-mail accounts on the computer system that appeared to belong to other students, or faculty members."
After Bard shared his findings with prosecutors, they agreed that "no prosecution should be sought" against Father Mark, he wrote.
When Bard told Towey and others on August 4 that the "full investigation" had failed to find evidence of a crime, the Saint Vincent officials asked him to investigate further "to determine who was looking at pornography," the officer wrote. Because that was not a crime, Bard said, he told them that "no further analysis would be completed." He filed the report on August 30, concluding: "Due to lack of evidence that a crime has occurred, this investigation to be closed."
But Saint Vincent officials did not let the situation rest there. According to the AAUP's October 23 letter to Towey, Archabbot Nowicki wrote letters to Father Mark on August 19 and September 8 "notifying him that his faculties for priestly ministry had been revoked and his assignment to teach in the college withdrawn, and that he was barred from the campus and from all further contact with students. These actions have had the effect of summarily suspending Professor Gruber from his tenured faculty position," wrote B. Robert Kreiser, associate secretary of the AAUP.
The Tribune-Review article quoted a Saint Vincent spokesman, Don Orlando, as saying that Father Mark had gained access to the pornographic sites. "Because of the graphic nature of the pornographic Web sites repeatedly visited, it is a matter of grave concern vis-a-vis church law," the newspaper quoted Orlando as saying. He did not respond to Inside Higher Ed's requests for comment.
In those and other statements, Saint Vincent officials appear to assert that the Benedictine abbey's punishment of Father Mark under church law trumps any rules or guidelines that might protect him as a tenured professor. And indeed, Saint Vincent's faculty policies -- which generally align with those recommended by the AAUP -- include an exemption from due process and other standards for monks and priests who are found not to be in good standing with church law, AAUP officials acknowledge.
But that “Benedictine Dismissal for Cause,” the AAUP wrote, "does not appear to apply in the case of Professor Gruber," since he remains a Benedictine monk at the Saint Vincent Archabbey.
This is confusing to me. Maybe I'm just slow on the uptake.
1. Many attest that Fr. Gruber is a good and holy priest, orthodox, good teacher, wonderful spiritual director and retreat giver.
At least to me, this, at the very least, implies that he is a good, orthodox Catholic priest and teacher.
2. You attest that President Towey is a good and decent guy, that he's beeng “doing good things there, earning the animosity of liberal and atheistic faculty,...”
Apparently, President Towey, like Fr. Gruber, appears to be one of the good guys.
3. The article states that President Towey and Archabbot Nowicki are closely allied, which implies that the archabbot is ALSO a good guy, a good Catholic, trying to do good things at the school.
4. But the article that you posted states that Fr. Gruber was an outspoken critic of President Towey, and by implication, of Archabbot Nowicki, and that perhaps the entire scandal is payback.
That doesn't make sense to me.
Help!
sitetest
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.