Diocese of Dallas defends priest's transfer

Officials of the Catholic Diocese of Dallas said this week they were stunned that parishioners of St. Thomas Aquinas Catholic Church appeared to be "making a martyr" of their priest while vilifying the officials for taking a tough stance on child abuse.

In a rare joint interview, Bishop Charles V. Grahmann, Coadjutor Bishop Joseph Galante and Chancellor Mary Edlund offered a fuller explanation for the Rev. Stephen Bierschenk's reassignment for failing to do criminal history checks on church employees and volunteers.

"The puzzle is why the people aren't rising up in anger that this priest was not looking after the protection of their children," Bishop Grahmann said. "You know very well that if there had been any sexual abuse, people would be saying we hadn't done enough to prevent it."

Bishop Galante said: "The parish reaction is a throwback to the old days when dioceses protected priests and institutions before children. Well, those days are gone."

Father Bierschenk acknowledged Thursday that he hadn't fully instituted the diocese's 4-year-old safe environment policy. When he learned of his reassignment last week, he initially accepted the decision. But after a show of support from parishioners, he decided to contest the transfer.

"I have rights as a priest, and my goal is to protect them," he said. "They're trying to make an example out of me. It's completely unfair."

He said the transfer was illegal under canon law. With the help of an attorney from his parish, Father Bierschenk has filed a formal complaint with the bishop.

If the bishop doesn't reverse his decision, the complaint can be forwarded to the Vatican.

Father Bierschenk is the second priest this month to be reassigned for failing to implement the sex abuse policy. Earlier, the Rev. Efren Ortega was removed from St. James Catholic Church in Oak Cliff.

No other diocese in the country has taken similar steps against priests. U.S. bishops are promoting the Dallas policy as a national model.

Diocesan officials said statements made by Father Bierschenk to national media prompted them to speak out. The priest said he had been overworked, understaffed and made a simple mistake. He also said he received no warning that his 13-year post at the parish of 10,000 members was at stake.

Officials said the priest, who had several years to implement the policy, was minimizing his mistakes and offered some documentation as proof:

• Last fall, the bishops informed priests in writing that failing to implement the policy was a failure to live up to their pastoral duties. Father Bierschenk said Thursday that he remembered the letter but didn't make the policy a priority.

• Last fall, priests were told that Praesidium, an independent company in Arlington, would conduct audits of the diocese's 66 parishes and 35 schools to ensure the policy was being followed. Father Bierschenk said he was aware an audit but thought the diocese would help him correct problems.

• On Sept. 4, Father Bierschenk signed a document stating that all church employees and volunteers were completing criminal background checks though that wasn't the case. The priest also indicated to the diocese that he didn't need help putting the policy into place. Father Bierschenk said Thursday that he didn't read the document carefully before signing it.

• Officials said Father Bierschenk attended only one of four meetings about the policy mandated for clergy. He failed to notify the bishop as to why he missed two of the meetings.

• At a Jan. 24 clergy meeting attended by Father Bierschenk, Bishop Grahmann said he warned priests that there would be serious consequences – even the reassignment of priests – for failing to implement the policy. Father Bierschenk said he didn't remember any such discussion.

• Father Bierschenk said he told diocesan officials last week that he had not read the policy closely and didn't know he needed to screen all employees.

"After all the years of work and communication we've made around this policy, it was upsetting to hear he didn't know what his responsibility was," Ms. Edlund said. "He was unable to provide any explanation other than, 'I'm busy and it's not a priority.' "

The large outpouring of support for Father Bierschenk from his parish has outraged some child molestation victims of former priest Rudolph "Rudy" Kos and members of the parishes that he served. Mr. Kos was handed a life sentence in prison five years ago, and the diocese unveiled its policy the following year.

"It shocks me that a priest who lived through the pain of what happened in this diocese before would be so cavalier today," Bishop Galante said.

"The punishment doesn't fit the mistake," said Sam Zurawel, 31, who is part of a coalition of supporters. "He should have been given time to correct the issues."

Other parishioners said the priest should step down quietly. "He made a mistake, and we forgive him," said Sharon Gibney, a parishioner for 10 years. "But we also need to back our bishop for finally doing what needed to be done for our children."

A March 19 audit showed the church offered no documentation of interviews, screening forms, reference contacts or screening forms for employees and volunteers, including religious education teachers and a youth minister on staff for a year. The diocese and the priest are at odds over the number.

Father Bierschenk said he didn't think some people needed screening since they were longtime friends. The diocese's policy mandates screening for all employees as well as volunteers who work with children and vulnerable adults.

Hundreds of people rallied in support of Father Bierschenk at the church this week. Others are gathering nightly for prayer. Stacks of pre-printed letters protesting the transfer are being handed out to parishioners.

Father Bierschenk will remain a pastor but at a much smaller congregation: St. Michael's in McKinney. The transfer is effective May 3.

Bierschenk lied and got caught, plain and simple. Someone that "sloppy" doesn't belong running a parish.

Again, you have misinterpeted my words. Father is not being dismissed for his failure to complete ALL of the background checks. He is being dismissed because they want his parrish. They conveniently waited until Msgr. John was in an assisted-living facility before they moved in. The pastor at another North Dallas Catholic church complained to his secratary about not being able to get the finger print ink off his fingers, TWO DAYS AGO. He is not in full compliance. Will he be shown the door also? No he won't because he's not one of those 'stinking' traditional priest's. I would suspect that many pastors right now are running like banshee's to finish it all up.

How dare you infer that our good pastor is anything less than honest. We knew that he would have to move on someday, but we NEVER, NEVER thought that his reputation would be soiled in such a way. Here he is being lumped in with the likes of Rudy Kos. You should be ashamed of yourself. How can you even remotely think that you are defending the Church when you allow one of Christ's faithful pastor's to be spoken of in such a way?

By the way, we have so much respect for our pastor that we do not call him 'Steve'.

Father did not need any help at all in completing his checks. He is on record for getting rid of people who have any sort potential for abuse. He doesn't pass them on to other parrishes like this diocese in on record for doing. 31 million bucks Dallas has had to pay. Quite unlike our good Father.

How dare you infer that our good pastor is anything less than honest.

The newspaper accounts bear out that he was less than truthful when he said that everybody was checked. In addition, it seems that the auditing firm can find NO PAPERWORK from ANYBODY.

Here he is being lumped in with the likes of Rudy Kos.

He is NOT being lumped in with Rudy Kos. He is being lumped in with Fr. Efren Ortega, another Dallas priest who didn't do background checks on everybody.

How can you even remotely think that you are defending the Church when you allow one of Christ's faithful pastor's to be spoken of in such a way?

I'm defending the Church in Dallas' practice of requiring background checks, and demanding that every priest comply. Nobody skates because he's the pastor of the cash cow for the diocese.

By the way, we have so much respect for our pastor that we do not call him 'Steve'.

I knew him as Steve in the seminary.

Tempted though I always am to side with a traditionalist priest, isn't a vow of obedience part of the tradition? If the bishop is a jerk, he is still the bishop. Your parish may be a separate corporation from the diocese, but I would bet it is structured to give the bishop control. If your priest does not obey in all things moral even a liberal bishop, how do you expect to see an actual Catholic bishop bring liberal pastors to heel.

These fights are going to wind up in civil courts which have no absolutely no business telling us what Catholicism is or how it shall be run, even according to the secular laws of the United States.

If, in fact, the pastor failed to take seriously a demand from the bishop for background checks on all personnel in any diocese much less in one like Dallas which has been hammered so hard, he ought to have anticipated consequences.

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.