AP/Leslie E. Kossoff [20K]
BALTIMORE (AP) — Cardinal William Keeler apologized for the first time to those sexually abused by Roman Catholic priests and said he regrets reinstating a priest who was shot this week by an alleged abuse victim.
In an opinion piece published Friday in The (Baltimore) Sun, Keeler said he takes ``full responsibility'' for the decision he made in 1993 to reinstate the Rev. Maurice Blackwell after the priest spent three months undergoing psychiatric evaluations.
Blackwell remained a pastor until 1998, when he admitted having a consensual relationship with a teen-ager in the 1970s before he was ordained.
``In light of what has occurred and of what was revealed in 1998, I would not make the same decision today,'' Keeler said.
Dontee Stokes, then 17, accused Blackwell of sexually abusing him in 1993. Stokes, now 26, allegedly shot Blackwell on Monday.
His mother, Tamara Stokes, said her son became frustrated when Blackwell refused to apologize to him. Blackwell was listed in fair condition Thursday at a Baltimore hospital.
Keeler said in the piece that the 1993 allegations against Blackwell were credible. He said Stokes was offered treatment and counseling, a claim Stokes' family denies.
Ray Kempisty, a spokesman for the Baltimore archdiocese, said Keeler does not plan to apologize personally to Stokes or his family.
``We know that there have been painful breaches of trust, and have dedicated ourselves to seeking solace for victims and fair punishment for perpetrators, goals which we have pursued but have not always succeeded in achieving, for many years,'' Keeler wrote. ``I apologize for instances in which our efforts have failed.''
Police records show that investigators believed Stokes but didn't have enough evidence or any witness accounts to charge Blackwell. Keeler said he restored Blackwell to his post at the urging of parishioners at St. Edward Church, where Blackwell was pastor.
Blackwell was allowed to stay at the church under several conditions, which included him moving out of the rectory and in with his mother, not participating in ministry with young people and meeting regularly with a group of priests for supervision.
Blackwell also was told he would be fired if another abuse allegation against him surfaced. Keeler's reinstatement of Blackwell was criticized by an independent review board made up of Catholic and non-Catholic lay persons.
| top news | u.s. | world | business | sports | world cup | health | tech | arts | weather | politics | search
Copyright 2002 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. Comments and questions
Cardinal explains decision on Blackwell
By Cardinal William Keeler
May 17, 2002
THIS WEEK, Baltimore saw first-hand the tragic fallout from the sexual abuse issues facing our American society today. The Catholic Church and all segments of society face multiple challenges related to this painful concern. In any case of abuse, the individual abused suffers enormously, and, if there is a breach of trust involved, that suffering is magnified. We know that there have been painful breaches of trust, and have dedicated ourselves to seeking solace for victims and fair punishment for perpetrators, goals that we have pursued but have not always succeeded in achieving, for many years.
I apologize for instances in which our efforts have failed. What happened last Monday, when a young man shot a priest whom he had once trusted, underscores how grave the issue is for our community, both as a community of faith and as a part of the society in which we live.
We acknowledge, and the very public record of those days supports, that in 1993, Father Maurice Blackwell was credibly accused of abuse. The accusation was the center of media attention for days. In keeping with our policy, the young man who was the victim was offered treatment and counseling, and Father Blackwell was immediately placed on administrative leave and sent away for psychiatric and physical evaluation.
There was a huge outcry from his supporters in the parish, St. Edward's, where his ministry was much loved and appreciated. Meanwhile, his case was appropriately in the hands of the state's attorney and the Baltimore Police Department. In time, the authorities decided not to pursue charges.
Our pleas for other accusers to come forward received no response. Father Blackwell completed his stay at the mental health facility in Connecticut, and I received a lengthy report from the facility. The report echoed what visitors had told me, about how he had entered the program of personal reform and renewal, in both the psychological and spiritual arenas, with an unusual level of energy and commitment.
The report also concluded that Father Blackwell was not "a danger to young men in a sexually predatory fashion." When Father Blackwell returned to Baltimore, Bishop John Ricard and I met with him to discuss possible next steps. One option, clearly, was that he would not return to ministry. Our commitment as an archdiocese is to not put anyone in danger of harm from a person acting in the name of the church.
Father Blackwell, while again asserting his innocence, pleaded his commitment to living chastely and his great eagerness to minister to the people whom he deeply loved. His already existing peer group of priests, including pastors of the parishes surrounding St. Edward's, came forward with strong support for his return and committed themselves to be in regular contact with Father Blackwell, giving him personal and spiritual encouragement and bearing witness to his healthy ministry.
After extended discussion and consultation among ourselves, Bishop Ricard and I agreed that Father Blackwell might return to St. Edward's, where the accusation was well known, under the condition that he continue the psychological counseling and spiritual direction programs he had begun during his time away. We also stipulated that he would give up any direct ministry with minors and young adults, move from the rectory to reside with his mother, meet faithfully with the support group of pastors from neighboring parishes and report regularly to Bishop Ricard.
The Parish Council and other parish leaders were informed of this agreement, and Father Blackwell returned to his assignment. Also, I specified that, should further allegations arise, his assignment would be terminated.
Several months later, members of the Independent Review Board indicated in writing their disagreement with my decision. As they themselves said in their letter to me, they wrote without knowledge of the confidential report I had received from the treatment facility and without having met personally with Father Blackwell.
Although there was this disagreement from the review board, there had been wide public discussion of Father Blackwell's reappointment, and no relevant information was hidden from anyone. I contacted the treatment facility and received permission to refer publicly to the confidential report.
Also, I drafted a reply to the review board and invited Father Blackwell and the leader of his support group, Father Robert M. Kearns, now the superior general of the Josephite Fathers, to meet with me. Father Kearns and the parish council leadership volunteered additional letters to affirm publicly that any potential risks had been considered. These letters were published.
There have been no events involving Father Blackwell from September 1993 to the present, but, sadly, in 1998, another accusation from 20 years earlier surfaced. In light of the previous discussions with Father Blackwell, I immediately relieved him from his office as leader of a parish.
I take full responsibility for the decision I made in 1993 given the facts and circumstances before me; in light of what has occurred and of what was revealed in 1998, I would not make the same decision today.
To the Lord, I am grateful for the policy developed here over time and to other discussions in which I have participated. We grieve and pray for the victims of abuse, a situation underscored by comments to me from the many faithful and trustworthy priests I met with earlier this week.
We have no confusion among us that we must put first the safety of children, followed closely by outreach and pastoral care for the victims. God grant us the ability to translate into action this conviction, so well stated by Pope John Paul II: "People need to know that there is no place in the priesthood and religious life for those who would harm the young."
Cardinal Keeler is the archbishop of Baltimore.
Copyright © 2002, The Baltimore Sun
This is horribly troubling. And far more troubling is that NO ONE from the Church, including the abusive priest or the cardinal, could find it in themselves to apologize to this tortured soul at the time the accusations were brought to light. Again, the welfare of those molested boys is LAST, LAST, LAST on the Church's priority list.